A Mutual Understanding

October 28, 2020

by Nicholas Molodyko for The Saker Blog

They need to understand that we know. We need to understand that they are human.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn at Harvard University, 1978 © YouTube
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn at Harvard University, 1978 © YouTube

Cancer Ward

From my youth I had a strong connection to Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, but I did not know precisely why. His name was mentioned in our house. His friends were friends of my parents.

Solzhenitsyn was supposed to spend a summer in the late 1970s with our family in Alaska. That was the plan, one that excited me. In preparation, I attempted to read Cancer Ward, the semi-autobiographical novel Solzhenitsyn completed in 1966, a dissection of the cancerous Soviet police state. I was 12 years old. I was unprepared for such a thing. It would be a long time before I had the maturity.

Solzhenitsyn in that spring of 1978 gave the famous commencement speech at Harvard, where he publicly shamed the country’s elite, to an America unprepared to accept such a thing. And it would be a long time before the country even had the maturity to understand and could really do so.

Solzhenitsyn did not visit us in Alaska that year.

Now, I’m over forty years older, Donald Trump is America’s 45th President, and the country is revisiting the prophet’s words. Because President Trump is up against the same angry Harvard crowd.

Under a False Flag

From the earliest days in the build up to the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution, as part of a purely political strategy, Vladimir Lenin attacked Tsar Nicholas II for his alleged mistreatment of Jews and publicly denounced not only all manifestations of antisemitism but everything but the kitchen sink that could be associated with it.

After the Revolution, when Lenin took power in Russia, he endorsed the establishment of special departments for Jewish affairs in both the ruling Communist Party and in the relevant ministry, the Commissariat of Nationalities, headed by Joseph Stalin. Lenin had taken note of the higher percentage of Jews in the revolutionary movement than their proportion in the population, and he initiated the promotion of Jews to higher positions in the state and party apparatus. Lenin essentially took from Oliver Cromwell’s playbook. And, voilà, an elite Jewish politburo was born.

“With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders,” said Sir Winston Churchill referring to the Soviet government.

The Bolsheviks claimed power on November 7, 1917 and two days later the fledgling government issued its famous “Decree on Peace.”

The Balfour Declaration, a letter dated November 2, 1917 from British Foreign Secretary Lord Arthur Balfour to Lord Walter Rothschild, a leader of the British Jewish community, for transmission to the Zionist Federation of Great Britain, was then published on the very same day as Lenin’s “Decree on Peace.”

This was kept secret, because in 1917 the British government, through international bankers, offered a national home for Jews in Palestine, at the expense of the land and future of the Palestinians.

The promissory note to Lord Rothschild for the Zionist Federation, the Balfour Declaration, partly drafted by Associate Justice of the Supreme Court Louis Brandeis, and underwritten by U.S. Congress has cost and continues to cost American taxpayers billions of dollars a year.

The year 1917 was a very big year, indeed. A revolutionary one. A transparent cabal of British and American financiers backed Vladimir Lenin and the so-called Jewish “Bolsheviks” set out to destroy Russia and murder tens of millions of Christians, at very same time the Balfour Declaration backed by a secret cartel was signed to establish a Jewish state in the Middle East where Palestinians would be mass murdered, as if by Biblical design.

In “Under a False Flag,” Lenin described a three-phase development of capitalism, culminating in reactionary and militarist imperialism, sustaining itself through super-profits used to secure the support of an aristocracy. It is a Biblical account of opportunism. Then, in “The Deception of the People by the Slogans of Equality and Freedom,” Lenin warns about the elaborate false flag operations and deception perpetuated under the disguise of democracy.

“The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves,” said Vladimir Lenin.

The Politburo

On June 8, 1978, an exiled Russian author spoke out against the malign media and its suppression of independent thought during a commencement speech at Harvard University, in Cambridge, Massachusetts. He was in the belly of the elite beast that controls America, and he knew it.

Much has been written about that event. Much has still gone unsaid. I plan to say some of the unsaid things.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was a writer in the grand 19th century Russian literary tradition who represents our plight today to defeat violence and lies, the twin pillars of 21st century  authoritarianism, in America. The twin pillars of the totalitarianism in the East in the 20th century that Solzhenitsyn warned us from that day forth.

On that day at Harvard in the 20th century, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s words had the same effect as the preaching of John the Baptist. Both had a sharp message to deliver to an audience they believed had grown complacent and morally decadent.

Solzhenitsyn tried to shake up the exact people he believed were responsible for the decline of the West and installation of a politburo, the shrill war mongers in Washington DC. Similarly, John the Baptist denounced the moral depravity of King Herod and his politburo. The politburo was the principal policymaking committee in the former Soviet Union, founded in 1917, to oversee the violence and lies of the state. It is the most appropriate word.

For his prophetic word, John the Baptist was thrown into a dirty dungeon. Then, on September 11th of that year, to be exact, his head was offered on a platter as a gift from Herod to his equally depraved daughter, Salome. In 1978, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was banished from the intellectual set in America. Harvard, the New York Times and DC’s politburo put his head on a metaphorical cocktail tray.

When the most influential group of American intellectuals, liberals and Neoconservatives alike, united against one man, a Russian refuge in a New England town, there was unquestionably a John the Baptist vibe. Both prophets were dismembered, dismissed for saying too much.

Speaking of prophets, the esteemed Palestinian scholar Edward W. Said wrote that “American Orientalism” is unique because it is seen almost entirely thru the prism of Israel. To be precise, the Zionist Israel of the Ashkenazi European Jews. He’s been dead for nearly 17 years. But the British are pathologically relentless in their perverse cruelty and continue to this day post mortem to brutally smear Edward Said for saying too much. He has been dismissed by the Zionist powers even in death.

Today, we simply cannot dismiss the most uncomfortable part, the distinct roles that atheist Jews have played in empire and in the installation of a suzerain or politburo in the Holy Roman, Habsburg, Russian, French, British, and American Empires, and in the outcomes of the Israel project via the World Wars and the British Zionist enterprise today. But, let’s get one thing straight. Capisce? We are talking about a policy making minority of white, liberal, atheist, intellectual elites, not Jews, in general. Not by a long shot. John the Baptist and Solzhenitsyn were warning us about the conspiracy of identity politics, not about Jews. They were warning us about rich, atheist oppressors. They were not fingering religious Jews.

I think Zionism in America today is best understood as what is left of the politburo —decades of clandestine operations of a rogue network of military-industrial complex officials and intelligence agents involved in an invisible government supporting a British enterprise. Zionism has more in common with a corporation than a religion or even a political ideology. Zionism has got little to do with religious Jews. In fact, Zionism is opposed to Judaic dogma and is thus heretical. Not to mention that Zionism is next level schismatic.

The Schismatics

Let’s start at the beginning. There are three Abrahamic religions, a group of Semitic-originated religions that claim descent from the Judaism of the ancient Israelites and the worship of the God of Abraham. According to the Hebrew calendar, this is the year 5,781. Christianity was founded 2,020 years ago, and Islam 1,450 years ago. Each religion was originally a whole one. Over time, each has encountered schism.

A schism is a division between people, usually belonging to a religious denomination. The word is most frequently applied to a split in what had previously been a single religious body, such as “the Great Schism” of Christianity in 1054 between Orthodoxy (true faith) in the East and the Roman Catholic Church in the West. Then, the Western Church became highly political and split into a million pieces.

A schismatic is a person who creates or incites schism in an organization or who is a member of a splinter group. Schismatic as an adjective means pertaining to a schism or schisms, or to those ideas or policies that are thought to lead towards or promote schism. In religion, the charge of schism is distinguished from that of heresy, since the offense of schism concerns not differences of belief or doctrine but promotion of, or the state of, division.

However, schisms frequently involve heresy, but it becomes the matter of a political point of view rather than a church law. For instance the Orthodox Church considers the Roman Catholic Church heretical but the Catholic Church says that the Orthodox Church is schismatic. Because the Orthodox Christian Church is not a political organization.

While Christianity was intended as a beautiful religion of peace, some of the schismatic pieces are heretical, politically aggressive and even war-like.

Orthodox Christianity is one of three original true Abrahamic faiths —Orthodox Christianity, Orthodox Judaism and Orthodox Islam. Each has suffered schisms and with each spilt, like cancer cells, the divisions have increased toxicity, chaos and conflict and decreased full unity and peace.

As breaks in a religion increase and church laws or canons are broken in favor of a new branch, the least canonical branches become the most political. While, there are several formal branches of Jewish faith (Reform, Conservative, Orthodox and Reconstructionist Judaism), Zionism is purely political but has somehow retained a religious imprint. This is because Zionism is a product of the British Empire, namely Western intelligence services.

The schisms within Orthodox Christianity today are regional and related to the Catholic Church, such as what has been going on in Ukraine —all orchestrated by Western intelligence services such as America’s CIA and Britain’s MI6. A schism in Orthodox Islam emerged into public consciousness at the end of the 1970s —the Sunnis and Shias. In 1978, the Islamic revolution in Iran, orchestrated, once again by the CIA and MI6, brought politics front and center.

This political strategy of cancerous attack on a faith, religious metastasis, is a fundamental aspect of atheist philosophy as it is applied in the ideologies of Nazism, Bolshevism, and Neoconservatism. It is the basic principle of divide and rule, but applied to a sovereign religion, not a sovereign state.

Zionist Ze’ev Jabotinsky, co-founder of the Jewish Legion of the British army in World War I in Poland, was a journalist who died as Vladimir Jabotinsky in 1940, near Hunter, New York. He founded the militant Zionist Revisionist movement that played an important role in the establishment of the State of Israel. During the 1920s and 1930s, Jabotinsky and his movement were frequently called fascist.

Polish Zionist Jabotinsky and his buddies implemented a staggering number of permutations that did divisive harm to Judaism. At the same time, the permutations enabled Polish Zionism to appeal to a broader base of supporters than any other Jewish political movement. This created an elite leadership that was vastly out of touch with the majority of Jewish people.

Sound familiar? It should. Because Zionism is the living definition of identity politics. It is a perversion. Like “angiogenesis” in a cancer, which is perversion of a normal cellular process, a perversion that is an essential requirement for the development of cancer. Thus, attempts to stop the spread of a cancer in a human body that can easily result in killing the person. The Western intelligence services attack in a political war-like fashion the immune systems of the peaceful Abrahamic religions.

The Transparent CabalIsraeli Prime Minister Golda Meir with Sen. Henry “Scoop” Jackson during a reception at Israeli Ambassador to the United States Yitzhak Rabin’s residence in Washington, D.C. © Moshe Milner/GPO

Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir with Sen. Henry “Scoop” Jackson during a reception at Israeli Ambassador to the United States Yitzhak Rabin’s residence in Washington, D.C. © Moshe Milner/GPO

In his 2008 book, The Transparent Cabal: The Neoconservative Agenda, War in the Middle East, and the National Interest of Israel, Stephen J. Sniegoski describes in great detail how Neoconservatives were the driving force behind the Bush administration’s war in Iraq, their motivation was based on their belief that American interests in the Middle East are virtually identical with the Israeli Likud party’s beliefs about Israeli interests in the region, and these mutual interests lie in destabilizing Israel’s adversaries and reconfiguring the environment rather than in the traditional American policy of stabilizing the Middle East.

They began to see McGovern and Carter Democrats and the Nixon and Ford Republicans as insufficiently devoted to anti-communism, military strength, interventionism and Israel and gravitated first to Senator Henry Jackson (D-WA) and then to the Reagan Republicans.

Sniegoski argues that, while the Neoconservatives were the driving force for the war with Iraq in 2003, the basic idea of offensive war to weaken Israel’s neighbors, induce regime change and reconfigure the region has been an element of Zionist thinking since Vladimir Jabotinsky in the 1920s.

The barbaric Zionist Jews that caused the Great Terror remained in power in the Soviet Union until Joseph Stalin had to purge (murder) them. Consequently, U.S. Senator Jackson went on to become the patron saint of those outcasted Soviet Jews and his legacy, while mostly clandestine, can be glimpsed at briefly through the Henry Jackson Society, a Transatlantic foreign policy think tank based in London. Its purpose is “the promotion of liberal democracy across the world,” and it is currently focused primarily on “supporting global democracy in the face of threats from China and Russia.” Importantly, the Henry Jackson Society in England is the sister organization to The Atlantic Council in America, a den of vipers.

“Senator Henry Jackson, the Solzhenitsyn Affair, and American Liberalism,” by Jeff Bloodworth (2006) provides a sanitized version of how Jackson exploited Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn with his anti-communism campaign. Clearly, the CIA was heavily involved and poached Solzhenitsyn as its asset. And it did not go well.

For his “defense of the rights of the Jewish people,” in 1983 an international panel selected the late Senator Henry Jackson as a recipient of the first “Jabotinsky Prize: Shield of Jerusalem” award.

Identity Politics

There is a unique historical relationship between capitalism and Jews that is crucial to understanding America. Why Jews have tended to be disproportionately successful in capitalism, the Jewish role in the development of capitalism, and the role of capitalism in the fate of Jews. In a way, Jews unknowingly were the early agents of globalization.

Like today’s web strategists and technologists, Jews were keen on building networks across national borders. And like today’s high-tech entrepreneurs, the global Jewish diaspora managed to utilize this network for their benefit. Who wouldn’t? The relationship is best understood in the context of identity politics and the function of  conspiracy inherent to capitalism.

Identity politics in America began in 1973, the year the first volume of Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipeilago was published in the West. In fact, if you take a look at the “Solzhenitsyn affair” which involved Neoconservative U.S. Senator Henry Jackson, President Nixon, Vice President Gerald Ford, the birth of “human rights,” the Helsinki Commission, and the emigration of millions of Soviet Jewry to America, you get a much better understanding of the people who consider themselves to be the elite in U.S. today.

In response to Republican President Nixon, it was Democrat Senator Jackson and House Representative Charles Vanik who passed a bill in 1974 denying the Soviet bloc most favored nation trading status unless it granted Jews freedom to emigrate. The first piece of U.S. legislation inspired by the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” the Jackson‐Vanik amendment has acted as a catalyst in hastening Soviet Jewish emigration policies.

Since the mid-1960s, nearly half a million Jews from the former Soviet Union have settled in the United States. They constitute the largest single group of Jewish immigrants to enter the U.S. since the 1920s. Although they share kinship ties with the many American Jews whose roots are also in the pre-communist Russian empire, their lives have been shaped by different forces: the Bolshevik revolution and life in a communist state. Like American Jews, contemporary emigres are distinguished by high levels of skill and education, are urban and disproportionately professionals. Unlike most American Jews, they have had minimal exposure to formal Jewish training and Jewish religious life, and no experience with a highly organized Jewish community.

This is a tremendous piece of American history. Soviet Jews have been steadily streaming into the U.S. for decades, to the point of even insulting Israel, which campaigned hard on their behalf and had hoped to populate itself with the Jewish emigres. The U.S. has long had an open policy to Jews, which continued even after the Soviets cracked open their borders. Soviet Jews were not forced out due to war, famine or natural disaster and didn’t seek refugee status. This is an important point today. Because some may have been fleeing prosecution for crimes against humanity during the Great Terror.

Enormous resources were invested in this immigration of Soviet Jews by the U.S. Government. Accordingly, Soviet Jews in the U.S. created an ecosystem of prosperity around themselves and the Jews who mass migrated to Israel.

According to Pew, after the fall of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, Israel’s largest wave of Jewish immigrants arrived from Russia and other former Soviet republics. These immigrants far outnumbered those from other countries since Israel achieved statehood. According to Pew, Soviet Jews brought a secular mindset to Israel, and more than two decades later, Jews who were born in the FSU continue to be noticeably less religious than Israeli Jews overall. Secular means atheist: 81% FSU-born Jews in Israel self-identify as secular. Importantly, 25% of Israel’s population is made up of Jews from USSR and these Soviet Jews are running Israel’s Likud government.

We must insert Canada here. Throughout the 1990s and early 2000s, Canada has been one of the most active centers of former Soviet Jewish immigration. Toronto has attracted disproportionate numbers of immigrants: over 47% of all new immigrants to Canada have settled in Toronto in the late 1990s. About 70% of former Soviet Jewish immigrants to Canada reside in Toronto. According to the 1996 Canadian census, nationally there were about 16,000 Jews born of Russian/Soviet parents, mostly refugees – arrivals of the 1970s and 1980s.

Toronto is the most Zionist community in the world.  Toronto is also an international hot spot for all types of bigotry and heinous hate crimes. Toronto is important to our story for one reason. Zionist operatives there are complete morons, so much so that they exposed with their own incompetence the biggest subversive cultural revolution in the history of the world.

The anti-religious enthusiasm that once galvanized the secular Jews of Russia produced long-lasting results for Jewish immigrants. The religious Jew became “the other.” Thus, identity politics is yet another underhanded attempt to install policies of white supremacy via the tactics of British East India Company, predicated on the “representation” of approved minority individuals who appear as part of the elite class —educated, monied, brainwashed.

Identity politics as a school of thought is Hitler’s racist ideology with a fresh coat of paint. The paint comes from an exclusive manufacturer that gives each paint color the thoughtful name of a Pantone pedigree which can used across global industries with ease.

Zionism is Slippery

Zionism is an especially slippery one, and that is its most marked characteristic.

On November 10, 1975 UN Resolution 3379 passed which defined Zionism as a form of racism and racial discrimination. The Soviet Union originated the idea leading up to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. What national consensus influenced the Soviet Union to take such a step?

Remember, Zionists Jews played a highly disproportionate and probably decisive role effectively dominating the Soviet terror regime during its early years and in a genocide of tens of millions of Christians.

In 1975, the UN General Assembly adopted resolution 3379, which “determine(d) that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination.” Fifteen years later, on December 16 1991, that resolution was revoked. The UN had defined Zionism as a racist ideology. It was repealed in 1991 when Israel and the U.S. initially refused to participate in the Madrid Peace Conference.

The Madrid Peace Conference, held from October 30 to November 1, 1991, marked the first time that Israeli leaders negotiated face to face with delegations from Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, and, most importantly, with the Palestinians.

The year 1991 was also the year that communism fell. That year and the George H.W. Bush legacy in the Middle East —the Gulf War and the Madrid peace conference— continue to shape U.S. policy in the region a quarter century later.

Most people do not seem to understand that Jewish is not a race. However, how Jewish today is applied has subversively made it one. Jews come in all sizes, shapes and colors including black. A Jew is not just a willow thin white lady with a Harvard degree and a Park Avenue apartment full of Chanel suits who works as a staff writer at the New York Times. The Manhattan doyenne is literally the racist version.

Zionism dictates racial and religious supremacy. Israel, a state built on ethnically cleansed land, thus operates under the veil of a democracy in which the Jewish population is the exclusive beneficiary of the democratic process. However, Israel’s Jewish population is itself stratified within an ethnic hierarchy, where prosperous Ashkenazi (white Jews of European descent) dominate the economy, media and politics. In comparison, Mizrahi and Sephardi (Jews of MENA descent) suffer socio-economic hardship.

If you have ever been to Jerusalem, you know what I am describing. The disparity is shocking. It is like going to the Jim Crow South in America. It is a type of white supremacy. It is racism. It is apartheid, but even worse. It is severe brutality, communist strength brutality. This type of racism means that white lady at the New York Times can write about everybody else and decide on their narratives. Moreover, like anti-Semitism, racism is part of the racket of the Zionist Cultural Revolution.

Racism is all too evident in Israel. Ruling class Zionists cause the hardship that the Mizrahi and Sephardi suffer. Through rhetoric and vitriol they’re able to redirect anger toward African migrant communities who’re victims of greater oppression themselves. It’s a mess, but you never hear about it. The media, the Jerusalem press corps, sees to that.

Zionism is a white, Ashkenazi phenomenon, based on the denial of the Orient and the rights of both Mizrahi Jews and the Palestinians, “the other.” You could call it white supremacy and you’d be right. Solzhenitsyn detailed it in the banned book, 200 Years Together, which documents the mutual understanding between Russians and Jews of the Soviet Union. Solzhenitsyn could have easily been writing about Neoconservatives in America.

The Zionist Cultural Revolution

There’s an uncomfortable similarity between the Zionist Neoconservatives in America —and their dedicated “intelligence community” such as the CIA and the NSA— and the Zionist Bolsheviks who ran the early Soviet terror agencies that committed all of the atrocities: NKVD, Cheka, KGB, and GRU —80% of Stalin’s Soviet government, from bottom to top. Zionists were responsible for The Great Terror and the genocides of tens of millions, “The New Martyrs” —all of those who were martyred in the years of severe persecutions against the faith and the Orthodox Church, which continues in the world for over 70 years in the 21st century.

The persecution started immediately after the 1917 October Revolution, when the Bolsheviks took over. The persecution against the faithful was purposeful and long, and surpassed in cruelty all the previous persecutions against the Church, including those by the Roman emperors in the first, second, and third centuries. The Bolsheviks created an antihuman and criminal ideology to guide rulers for decades. This ideology led to millions of victims, the people of different beliefs and social status. They began with the class struggle against the nobility and merchant class followed by the dispossession of well-to-do peasants, then resettlement and destruction of whole ethnic communities. One destruction campaign followed another and these criminal actions continued for several decades. The Russian Orthodox Church was only one of the targets of that suicidal campaign waged by the authorities against their own people.

The number is unknown, whether it was tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands or millions, because the whole truth about those years will never be revealed. Not all the archives will ever be opened so that the records could reveal who remained faithful to the end and who stumbled. Besides, there are many forgeries in the transcripts of interrogation we use to restore the story of a given new martyr. Some recorded as having renounced their faith did not actually do that.

Revolutions are always atheist in nature. The Zionist cultural revolution is the revolution of revolutions. In fact, it seems to have been modeled on the fall of Byzantium. Atheist revolutionaries spread religious disunity and divide the majority of people as a means to gain political or territorial advantage for a minority of atheists. A revolution can manifest as an inner enemy which appears within the bowels of society to break its spirit, turning the majority into a helpless victim of the minority or suzerainty as it did in Byzantium after nearly twelve hundred years of peaceful living.

I wrote this a year ago: “I am not going to go into detail about the Neocons because there’s really not too much to say beyond the salient fact that they are a deliberately constructed social group, almost like a secret society, that has only one unifying principle: to make money and do it anyway they desire, because when you are morally bankrupt the world is your oyster of possibilities. Neoconservatives identify themselves as whomever is paying them to do so. In layman’s terms, we would call them con artists.”

From a policy perspective, the reference that makes most sense to the Neocons and racist Zionist Jews, in general, is the one instance in our country’s history of American authoritarianism — the one party terror state that was the Jim Crow South — was built on minority rule. The degree of discrimination against blacks under Jim Crow was unparalleled. Yet elite opinion at the time sanctioned it as legally-mandated white supremacy. This is exactly the same kind of warped thinking and public manipulation we see among Neocons today.

The “intelligence community” believes the U.S. was built on this superiority of white men. Their professional culture was shaped by that system. Slavery and Jim Crow may be behind us, and attitudes have no doubt become more open and tolerant over time, but they remain unchanged.

Racist Neoconservatives have run Washington DC this way. The Zionist elite minority and their cult-like war machine. Their think tanks, in particular, should all be abolished like slavery and then segregation was.

What is the difference between the oppressors in the U.S. “intelligence community” and the infamous oppressors of Nazi and Soviet secret police? Nothing. The slightly longer answer to that question is that the Americans are clumsy to the point of incompetence and even more arrogant than the Germans and Russians.

“Stalin’s terror” is, in fact, Zionist terror. Anti-Jewish sentiment is widespread among people of the former USSR because Jews played a highly disproportionate and probably decisive role effectively dominating the Soviet terror regime during its early years. In turn, Neoconservatives carried this torch to America and along with the fabricated “war in Iraq” in 2003, lied their way to achieve nearly every war since World War Two.

The use of terror to revolutionize society is an historical precedent established by the Bolsheviks. We need to talk about the bullies in America’s politburo. We need to talk about their exploitation of religion. We need to talk about the British Zionist enterprise —The Saker (Andrei Raevsky) calls this the “AngloZionist Empire” —in relation to America’s alliance with Israel. We need to look at racial trouble in the U.S. and issues like “cancel culture” with respect to the Zionist Cultural Revolution.

U.S. President Trump has encouraged these conversations. You just were not aware that this is part and parcel of “draining the swamp.” He’s turned the British Zionist enterprise upside down. He’s called their bluff. Donald Trump is essentially “containing” Zionism to use a word that the Neocons understand. The Zionism he seeks to contain is the toxic part, the white supremacist ideology. For example, Trump is pushing back against the rising tide of Marxist critical theory. He’s quietly containing the Zionist cultural revolution in America. In order to contain today’s cultural threats, the oppression must be eliminated.

At the same time, Israel is rejecting that political Zionism. Slowly. It’s a process. A very slow one. Apartheid in South Africa was not resolved over night. Apartheid is a cancer in the body politic of the world. One of the largest Christian denomination, the Dutch Reformed Church (NGK), used Christian theology to argue a theological support for the Apartheid regime. The Dutch Reformed Church, with 3 million Christian members, remained the “official religion” of the Apartheid-supporting National Party.

How the Zionist regime and settler colonialism will be brought to an end is an important question to discuss. The clearest and most practical vision to date seems to be that, as in South Africa, the Zionist state will have no choice but to capitulate.

How the Zionist cultural revolution will be brought to an end is the question we all must face if we want to stop the chaos in the world. We need a mutual understanding of the answer.

Live Not By Lies

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn wrote the essay “Live not by Lies” in 1974 on the same day in February that year that secret police broke into his apartment and arrested him. The next day he was exiled to West Germany.

Everybody today knows that the media is a horrific problem. The extent of lying in the press is simply out of control. Now we need to better understand why journalists gesticulate wildly on social media, wave their arms in the air at the New York Times, shout at the crowd from CNNand MSNBC, invent things in the Washington Post, and try to attract the fame and attention they feel they deserve in The Atlantic.

All those years ago, Solzhenitsyn attempted to inform the world that the Bolsheviks committed the greatest human slaughter of all time. And he said the fact that most of the world is ignorant and uncaring about this enormous crime is proof that the “fourth estate” —the press, the media, and the profession of journalism— is in the hands of the Bolshevik perpetrators. He was warning that the “fourth estate” is the “fifth column.” Today the media is visibly filled with the “intelligence community.” Simply turn on CNN; former intelligence agency officials are now political commentators.

Julian Assange reported that nearly every war that has started in the last 50 years has been a result of media lies. The “intelligence community” has him locked up in a British prison.

The Balfour Declaration was only considered to be a first step that would enable the British Government to entreat the sympathies of world Jewry, for the Entente war effort and a British Palestine. To that end, the Government quickly embarked upon an elaborate and extensive propaganda campaign. This endeavour was undertaken with the ever present advice and work of Britain’s Zionist supporters in London. Together, British officials and Zionists sought to create and disseminate the myth that the Jewish nation was about to be reborn in Palestine under British auspices, which would capture the Jewish imagination but would in no way commit the Government to anything beyond the vague terms of the Balfour Declaration.

This was the sum of British policy towards the Zionist movement for the remainder of the war and the extent of the Anglo-Zionist alliance, as it was originally conceived by the British Government. Journalism has been a British military strategy since 1917.

Journalism in America today is, in fact, Zionist “hasbara” and therefore, by design, is intended to hide the truth. Hasbara is the Israeli word for how Zionists explain to the world through the Jerusalem press corps their slaughter of Palestinians. It is almost never the truth. Zionist propaganda and the most ridiculous lies. The sole purpose of Zionist hasbara is to side step conspiracy.

For example, maybe the biggest historic example, in fact, whenever there’s an attempt to discuss ancient Christianity and its legacy of Eastern Orthodox Christianity —iconoclasm, persecution, martyrdom, and subsequently a massive, Holocaust-like, genocide of Christians— it is shut down in the same manner that Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and others were when speaking of Jews as perpetrators.

Simply put, the Orthodox Christian Church is not a political organization. While the Church is a global body, it does not function like a transnational corporation. Any “power” has been decentralized. Inasmuch as there is no PR, marketing, or even a spokesperson to be found, the Orthodox Church is even without the Madison Avenue language necessary to express the concept of the “New Martyrs” in secular terms.

Christianity has always been anti-imperialistic. Of the currently existing autocephalous Orthodox Churches the most ancient are the Jerusalem, Alexandrian and Antiochian Churches founded by the Holy Apostles. Later, Byzantium, in 330 AD which was pretty peaceful for nearly twelve hundred years. And the ideology of pre-1917 Russia might be described as a kind of “Orthodox monarchism.”

In other words, Christian imperialism exists in the West today in the person of the Pope. In the East, it was and remains a temptation. Orthodox Christianity peacefully held the nations of Byzantium together for twelve hundred years, not imperialism. Since 1453 and the fall of Constantinople, anti-Christian forces worldwide, and destructive forces inside the broader Christian Church itself have carried out the real imperialistic plans.

Christians are the victims of worldwide persecution and this does not minimize the Holocaust nor demonetize Islam. The untold story of the 20th century is the murder of over 50 million Christians, mostly at the hands of communist and Islamic regimes. Christian genocide has continued into the 21st century. In an era when we get get statistics for nearly anything at our fingertips within seconds, some how the number of Christian lives lost to terrorism, war, genocide and mass murder is strangely missing.

It is estimated that the number of Christian martyrs during the 20th century far exceeds that of all the martyrs who died for Christ during the first three centuries of Christianity. Simply combine Christian mass murders worldwide.

The political scientist, adviser and academic who spent more than half a century at Harvard University, Samuel P. Huntington has been credited with forecasting the cultural and religious context in which a 9/11-type incident could emerge. In 1993 Huntington argued that with the collapse of communism, ideological rivalries would no longer drive global affairs. Conflict would occur between groups defined by culture, religion and identity. His thesis was propped up amid NATO’s fresh attacks on the Slavic (Orthodox Christianity) fraternity.

Huntington is the Zionist cult scholar who inspired “Israel Lobby” book by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt. Another Zionist cult political scientist Zbigniew Brzezinski (the father of corporate media maven Mika Brzezinski), back in 1997, in his book The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives wrote: “After the victory over communism, we need a split of Orthodoxy and the breakdown of Russia, and Ukraine, where betrayal is the norm of public morality, will help us in this.”

When Zionist Brzezinski died, Zionist Radek Sikorski, the former foreign minister of Poland and “a distinguished statesman at the Brzezinski Institute on Geostrategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies” wrote a very telling love letter to “Zbig” in the Washington PostZionist Sikorski is married to an American columnist, Zionist Anne Applebaum. Applebaum and her husband serve as British foreign agents of influence. Lucas is British. Are Sikorski and Applebaum the Julius and Ethel Rosenberg of the 21st century? Communists? Maybe not, but they have not been playing for Team USA. Applebaum has spent the better part of her dreadful writing career trashing the conservative Catholic majority of Poland, which is literally all of Poland. The country is at least 93% Roman Catholic in faith. Also, Anne Applebaum heavily plagiarized Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (several books worth) and censored out the parts incriminating the cabal of atheist Jews and the Anglo-American “intelligence community” or their unspeakable crimes in Soviet Russia, so there’s that.

According to U.S. President Jimmy Carter’s National Security Adviser, Brzezinski, after the collapse of communism, the Zionist West’s main opponent became the Orthodox Christian Church. The Balkan wars manufactured by NATO in the late 1990s were a manifestation of this concept. Samuel Huntington peddled an international conspiracy theory that became the cornerstone of NATO after the fall of the USSR.

I wrote this a year ago and it has taken me that long to get the full depth and vastness of the terror: “Remember, the true religions prevent the New World Order, that is the crux here. With that in mind, you should know, if you don’t already, that Orthodox Christianity is the truest form of Christianity. It just is. Don’t argue with me, just accept it. Here comes the worse part. After the devastation that NATO caused in Serbia in the 1990s people started to notice a pattern with NATO operations after the second World War, specifically that the Alliance was bombing Christians. For a person like me, I don’t normally think in such terms so that before the recent crisis in Ukraine, I myself brushed it off as a conspiracy theory. Well, guys, it is not.”

If you turn your eyes to a think tank (read shit hole) in DC, the Center for European Analysis(CEPA), which is a National Endowment for Democracy (NED) spinoff and initially directed by Zbigniew Brzezinski and Madeline Albright, you can arrive at the current day. You will find Ben Hodges at CEPA. Also, Anne Applebaum and CEPA’s Edward Lucas crowned themselves the king and queen of “disinformation” when the crisis in Ukraine broke out. It’s a small world, huh?

Zionist Albright spelled out the first two decades of the new millennium in 1998: “As we prepare to undertake NATO’s first post-Cold War expansion next spring, prior to the Summit, the Alliance is considering its vision for the future, and initiatives critical to preparing NATO for the 21st century.” The transparent cabal have focused on so-called “disinformation.” Check out Albright’s speech at the Atlantic Council in 2017 regarding the alleged threat of “digital disinformation.”

Life is full of disinformation, it’s called lying.

Tintin in the Land of the Soviets

The very first adventure of one of the world's most beloved cartoon characters.

The very first adventure of one of the world’s most beloved cartoon characters.

If someone would give me a handsome book deal, I’d love to do a children’s book or even young adult franchise in tribute to 1929 publication, “Tintin in the Land of the Soviets” and Belgian cartoonist Hergé, where Tintin discovers the truth about the Bolsheviks, specifically the theft of the country’s wealth by its leadership.

Listen, Vladimir Lenin was a grifter who exploited the Jews. This is a simple and easily understandable message that we ought to convey broadly. In fact, in the original book, Tintin stumbles upon the secret cache of riches that Stalin, Lenin, and Trotsky have stolen from the Soviet people.

Armed with this knowledge, Tintin flees Russia with his faithful dog called Snowy returning safely to Belgium and is greeted with great pomp by the rapturous public. The ending to my book would be just as magnificent as the original. Because in my book the pathological hatred for President Trump, the Neoconservative fifth column and their think tanks in our nation’s capital would be really explosive.

I would update the story for 2020 in America and my character would visit “the Land of the Neoconservatives.” Because the Bolsheviks —Stalin, Lenin, and Trotsky— were a British cabal in Russia just like the Neoconservatives are today in America. A sneaky fifth column of total frauds supported by the same dark financial structure in the City of London, in the interest of the global elite. I might even use the phrase “Davos Man” Samuel P. Huntington penned in a paper about elites and “an emerging global superclass” of “Davos men” or “gold-collar workers.”

I am actually quite serious. The mutual understanding is one that we ought to be teaching kids as soon as they can understand that conspiracy is a part of modern life. Importantly, convey the message that conspiracy aims to divide us and is a most always blamed on the victim.

No, the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917 was not a Jewish plot. In fact, kids ought to learn about the function of economic conspiracies and the political perversion of the religions so they don’t grow up to be adults who fall for hate propaganda and deceitful intellectual ideologies.

To find unity, let’s bring conspiracy out of the shadows.

While Solzhenitsyn’s work was a significant contribution to such mutual understanding, many were offended by his suggestion that some Jews also need to come to terms with their sins. I take a different stand, maybe because I have the benefit of hindsight and luxury of progress. I say we need to look at ourselves. Look within U.S. foreign policy. Look at the trillions of dollars that America has sent in aid to fund the Israel project. Don’t blame the “Jooz.”

I believe that we are at an important crossroads of knowledge. It is time for everybody to take a closer inspection in the mirror to reflect on how we arrived here, in order to fully shift the understanding internally. The mirror reveals it all, crystal clear, if we’re willing to look.

There are plenty of other people who understand the depth and breath of Solzhenitsyn’s message. Kim R. Holmes, the Executive Vice President, at The Heritage Foundation is one of them. Read his excellent article, which sort of dovetails my own. And read writer (and Jazz saxophonist) Gilad Atzmon regarding the U.S. military-industrial complex.  “America is willing to sacrifice its young soldiers and national interests and even its economy for Israel,” writes Atzmon. Also, get familiar with the plight of the Torah Jews. They are my team! Finally, always read Andrei Raevsky (The Saker), and here is one he wrote for The Unz Review.

Spiritual Awakening

Our awareness of Alexander Solzhenitsyn seems to have been awakened following Ukraine’s coup d’état in 2014 that was backed by Washington, when several Russian-language publications decided to revisit Solzhenitsyn’s statements about the two neighboring countries made throughout his life. After all, he foretold today’s Ukrainian crisis.

The veil of the mutual understanding was lifted in Ukraine. Did Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn change the course of either the East or the West? Maybe not back then. But his words have had residual impact since the Harvard speech, for certain, and we are only now really starting to appreciate them as we should, four decades later.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn spoke of a “moral revolution” that would move beyond the excesses of modernity, yet without returning to the spiritual despotisms of the past. Because he instinctively knew that the so-called “intelligence community” was up to no good and was scheming to split peaceful religions and society, in general. The Bolsheviks had relied on those covert actions. And ascetic religions were and are the enemy of the “intelligence community,” back then and now, because these religious practices allow a man to take control of himself in a powerful way, to think for himself.

Thus, the immediate threat to American national security is our military-industrial complex and specifically its intelligence agencies that pervert religions around the world. Alexander Solzhenitsyn said it all those years ago at Harvard. But he used words we did not understand at the time. Because we were not prepared to hear them.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn understood that spiritual genocide, a cancer resulting from a system, like communism, can be not only be difficult to recognize—and many people are entirely unaware that this type of terror even exists.

Let’s try internal realization instead of finger pointing. When we seek knowledge about the world’s damaged bullies through compassion and understanding, we will eventually come to a state of full unity through mutual understanding. This is what Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn tried.

They need to understand that we know. We need to understand that they are human.

Solzhenitsyn sought to encourage a mutual understanding between Russians and Jews. He even cooperated with the CIA until it became clear that they like the Jewish politburo in the Soviet government were equally as perverted, equally as corrupted from their original course.

The mutual understanding is that the peaceful religions have been been perverted for the purpose of terror. We only now can begin to understand all of this. Because we are finally having a spiritual awakening in America.

On a policy level, this leads to better decision making. Because humility fosters critical thinking. It is also important in ending wars and in conflict resolution. It enables a policy where a nation is more likely to accept that it wrongfully provoked war. And this kind of public policy starts with education of the very young.

“It’s a universal law — intolerance is the first sign of an inadequate education. An ill-educated person behaves with arrogant impatience, whereas truly profound education breeds humility,” said Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.


Nicholas Molodyko is a writer in Chicago who writes about Western popular culture and politics in relation to the secret history of the Eastern religions. After writing professionally in the fields of public health research and international development, while working in Europe, Asia and Africa, he is now writing independently at Mediapart in France.

من يزيل العراقيل أمام التحقيق المالي الجنائي؟

بشارة مرهج

لماذا، حتى اللحظة، يمتنع حاكم البنك المركزي الأستاذ رياض سلامة عن تقديم كلّ الوثائق والبيانات التي تطلبها شركة الفاريز – مارسال للمضيّ قدُماً في عملها المتعلق بالتدقيق المالي الجنائي؟ فإذا كان الحاكم واثقاً من نفسه ومن أوراقه وحساباته فينبغي عليه تقديم كلّ ذلك بسرعة وقبل غيره لمعرفته بأنّ ذلك هو عين العقل ومن شأنه أن يعزز الثقة بالبنك المركزي ويساعد على وقف التدهور في مرحلة اهتزت فيها الثقة في مجمل مؤسسات الدولة اللبنانية.

أما إذا افترضنا أنّ الحاكم يمتنع ويماطل في تقديم الوثائق والبيانات العائدة للبنك المركزي للشركة المعنية بانتظار حلول موعد انتهاء العقد، أو أنه يفعل ذلك بانتظار تشكيل حكومة جديدة تسلك طريق التغطية والتعمية على كلّ الحسابات والمحاسبات، فذلك أمر مثير للشكوك والتساؤلات مما يستدعي الإصرار على معرفة الحقيقة الضائعة في ثنايا المخالفات الكبرى التي أدّت الى تبديد الثروة الوطنية وتجويف الليرة اللبنانية وإفقار ملايين المواطنين. وهنا بالتأكيد لا تقع المسؤولية على البنك المركزي وحده وإنما أيضاً على المنظومة الحاكمة التي خالفت وتجاوزت واستهترت وملأت جيوبها من المال الحرام.

وإذا كان الحاكم، في ما يخصّه، يغطي موقفه السلبي باعتبارات قانونية، نشأت بسبب الغموض الذي يكتنف كتاب التكليف الحكومي لشركة التدقيق المالي الجنائي، فإنه ملزم معنوياً ومهنياً بتقديم كلّ المعلومات اللازمة انطلاقاً من مبدأ الشفافية الذي حاضر فيه مراراً أمام الرأي العام، كما انطلاقاً من واجباته القانونية في الحفاظ على سلامة الليرة اللبنانية وقدرتها الشرائية.

إلى ذلك فإنّ قانون السرية المصرفية الذي يتلحف به الحاكم للإفلات من الإجابة على أسئلة شركة التدقيق المالي لا يغلق الباب تماماً أمام معرفة الحقيقة بدليل أنّ هيئة التحقيق الخاصة التي يرأسها الحاكم نفسه تعاونت في هذا الصدد مع مدّعي عام التمييز بحيث أصبح لديها جدول بالتحويلات المالية التي جرت قبيل 17 تشرين 2019 حتى 14 كانون الثاني 2020. ويمكن لها الانطلاق من ذلك لإجراء التحقيقات اللازمة والتأكد من قانونية هذه التحويلات وسدّ الثغرة القانونية التي تمنع شركة التدقيق المالي الجنائي من الاطلاع على الحسابات المصرفية.

أما في ما يتعلق بحسابات المصرف المركزي نفسه فالرأي العام ليس مقتنعاً على الإطلاق بالحجة التي يتمسك بها حاكم البنك المركزي للتمنع عن تقديم المعلومات المطلوبة. فإذا كان صحيحاً أنّ شركتين عالميتين (ديلويت وأرنست اند يونغ) تدققان في حسابات المصرف المركزي وتصدران تقريراً سنوياً عن ذلك فإنّ تدقيقهما لا يكفي لأنه يطال ظاهر الحسابات – بحسب المحامي بول مرقص – في حين أنّ التدقيق المالي الجنائي يدقق في الباطن للكشف عن جرائم الاختلاس وإساءة الأمانة، وهذا هو المطلوب بالضبط.

والحاكم الذي ذكر مراراً أنه ليس لديه ما يخفيه من أسرار، من حقه كما من واجبه تسهيل عمل شركة الفاريز – مارسال للاطلاع على كلّ حسابات البنك المركزي دون الإخلال بالسرية المصرفية. وذلك يمكن تأمينه بمجرد كتاب يوجهه الحاكم وأعضاء المجلس المركزي الحالي والسابق بالتخلي عن امتياز السرية المصرفية الذي يشملهم كأشخاص فيما يملأ مدّعي عام التمييز وهيئة التحقيق الخاصة الفراغ القائم بما يفتح الطريق أمام تطورات إيجابية تنتظرها الأسواق بفارغ الصبر.

ويبقى أن نسجل أنّ المجلس النيابي المهتمّ حالياً بقضايا التدقيق المالي لم يصدر القانون اللازم الذي يجعل من هذا التدقيق أمراً ممكناً ومجدياً من كلّ جوانبه وكأنه يلاقي الحكومة في توقيعها للعقد الملتبس مع شركة التدقيق المالي.

هذا اللقاء المفترض بين السلطة التشريعية والسلطة التنفيذية بدلاً من ان يعزز الطريق نحو الحقيقة والشفافية فإنه يعزز الشكوك والمخاوف من أن تكون نتيجة التحقيق الذي تقوم به شركة (الفاريز – مارسال) مخيّبة للآمال ومعاكسة لجوهر المبادرة الفرنسية التي على أساسها «يجري» تشكيل الحكومة العتيدة.

ـــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ

*نائب ووزير سابق

Maduro: Venezuela Has Right to Buy Weapons from Any Country, Even US

Maduro: Venezuela Has Right to Buy Weapons from Any Country, Even US

By Staff, Agencies

Venezuela can buy weapons from any country that wants to sell them, even the United States, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro told reporters.

During a press conference, broadcast on Twitter, Maduro was again asked to comment on the words of Colombian President Ivan Duque, that Venezuela bought missiles from Iran.

“Venezuela can buy bullets, weaponry, tanks, planes and missiles from a country that wants to sell them, be it the United States, Colombia, Iran, Russia, China, India – any country”, Maduro said.

Maduro also said Venezuela and Iran had long-term relationships in many sectors.

“Duque said that Venezuela had bought missiles from Iran. And I replied that this was not true, but it seemed to me a very good idea”, he said, adding that if necessary, Venezuela would consider such an issue.

The political situation in Venezuela worsened in January 2019, when opposition lawmaker Juan Guaido illegally proclaimed himself interim president in a bid to oust reelected President Maduro from power.

Guaido was quickly endorsed by the United States and its allies in Latin America, while Russia, China, Turkey and several other nations only recognize Maduro as the legitimate president of Venezuela. Maduro himself has characterized the events in the country as an attempted coup so that the US could take control of Venezuela’s rich resources, especially oil.

Since then, the Trump administration has been extending support to Guaido, while slapping Caracas with a set of sanctions, the most painful of which turned out to be the freezing of the country’s accounts in Europe and the blocking of assets and interests of the oil and gas company PDVSA within US jurisdiction.

صراع مُستعرٌ بين الفرنجة والعثمانيين على التهام العرب؟

د. وفيق إبراهيم

هذه معادلة تعيد الى المشهد السياسي للمنطقة العربية الصراع العثماني، الاوروبي الذي يعمل على السيطرة على المنطقة العربية منذ ستة قرون متواصلة وسط «غربة» كاملة من اهل المنطقة.

فما الفارق بين سليم الاول ووريثه المعاصر الرئيس التركي رجب طيب أردوغان على مستوى المشروع السياسي؟ وهل هناك من تغيير جذري في السياسات الاميركية – الاوروبية المعاصرة عن الاحتلال البريطاني الفرنسي منذ القرن التاسع؟ وهل هو مختلف عن حروب الفرنجة التي احتلت الشرق العربي 192 عاماً ولم تتركه إلا بعد هزيمة تلقتها من المماليك، على الرغم من أن صلاح الدين سبقهم في ضربها في معركة حطين، لكن أولاده أعادوا تسليم المنطقة الى الفرنجة.

بذلك ينتقل هذا الشرق من احتلال عسكري الى سيطرة اقتصادية ملتزماً صمت الضعفاء والمساكين في إطار معادلة قوامها تحالف الخارج الغربي او التركي مع أنظمة الداخل لقهر شعوب هذه المنطقة. والهيمنة عليها اقتصادياً فتصبح جزءاً من النفوذ الجيوبوليتيكي الخاص بأي منتصر.

التاريخ هنا مستمر بأسماء جديدة وبالمعادلات القديمة نفسها، سليم الاول يعود متسللاً من مرج دابق نموذج 1516 الى سورية عبر إرهابيي الاخوان المسلمين وسراج ليبيا واخوان العراق واليمن ومصر متسربلاً بقناع الرئيس التركي أردوغان انما مع المشروع التاريخي نفسه.

وها هو الرئيس الفرنسي ماكرون يستعمل حادثة قتل مروّعة قتل فيها اسلاموي شيشاني مدرساً فرنسياً، ليؤسس فرصة تاريخية لإعادة تنظيم الفرنجة الجدد، هؤلاء بحاجة الى ايديولوجيا تختبئ المصالح الاقتصادية في زواياها؛ الامر الذي دفع بماكرون الى توجيه اتهامات الى الاسلام باعتبار انه يجتاز ازمة تاريخية على حد قوله وكانت كافية لتحريض الشارع الفرنسي أولاً والأوروبي ثانياً والغربي عموماً في دفاع عنيف عن طروحات ماكرون بدت وكأنها مشابهة للتحريض الذي أطلقته المراكز الدينية في الغرب لاستيلاد فكرة «الفرنجة» الأوروبيين الذاهبين الى الشرق لتحرير «الصليب» كما كانوا يزعمون.

بدورهم رفع العثمانيون شعار الخلافة الإسلامية كتبرير لاحتلالهم للشرق وشمال افريقيا مهددين اوروبا بإدراكهم أسوار فيينا العاصمة النمساوية.

هذا الصراع انحسم لمصلحة الغرب في القرن التاسع عشر بعد هيمنة تركية دامت أربعة قرون ونيف.

لكنه يعود في هذه المرحلة عبر الصراع على البحر المتوسط وسواحل بلدانه المليئة بالغاز، فكان لا بد من شعارات تبريرية وجدها أردوغان التركي في الدفاع عن هجمات غربية مفترضة على الإسلام. ودخل فيها ماكرون الفرنسي فريقاً أوروبياً يرى أن الإسلام اصبح يشكل ازمة عالمية.

اما أصحاب المنطقة وهم الغرب فيلوذون في صمت المذعورين، موجهين رفضاً ضعيفاً لهجوم ماكرون على الإسلام ومنتقدين الأداء التركي لمحاولاته احتلال مناطق عربية.

على المستوى العملي، لا يساوي موقف الدول العربية شيئاً، لأن الطرفين المتقاتلين يعبثان بأمن العالم العربي لأسباب تتعلق بنهجيهما الاستعماريين، فلا ماكرون عائد لاستعادة الصليب ولا أردوغان يريد حماية ديار الاسلام.

هناك اذاً إصرار من الطرفين على التهام العرب بالتبريرات التاريخية وما يؤكد ذلك هي تلك الاندفاعة الهجومية من مستشارة المانيا ورؤساء النمسا وفنلندا ورئيس وزراء بريطانيا باتجاه تأييد موقف ماكرون وكأن المرحلة مماثلة لمراحل تشكيل الفرنجة قبل تسوية قرون تقريباً.

ان ما يشجع هذه الدول على التستر بغطاء ديني، هي تلك الدول العربية التي لا تعمل إلا لحماية عائلاتها المالكة ورؤساء جمهورياتها على حساب المصالح الفعلية للدول.

وسد النهضة مثال على الانكسار العربي الراهن، لأنه يحتجز 74 مليار متر مكعب من مياه النيل في هذا السد الاثيوبي متسبباً بقطع اكثر من ثلاثين مليار متر من حصة مصر من هذا النهر البالغة 55 مليار متر مكعب تشكل 90 في المئة من المياه في مصر، وتهددها بضرب 70 في المئة من قطاعها الزراعي.

للتوضيح فإن اثيوبيا ابتدأت ببناء السد منذ تسعة عشر عاماً وخاض معها عهد الرئيس السيسي مفاوضات عميقة، تبين فيها أن إثيوبيا كانت تستعمل لعبة تقطيع الوقت لاستكمال السد، وهذا ما حدث على حساب الأمن الوطني المصري المهدد بشكل فعلي وسط لامبالاة عهد السيسي.

هناك اذاً معوقات امام العرب، تحتل فلسطين رأس لائحتها الى جانب الصراعات الدولية والإقليمية الأميركية والاوروبية والتركية والاسرائيلية على مواردها والتخلف الاقتصادي العميق، والديكتاتوريات والخلافات الداخلية، هذه عوامل تؤسس لأكثر من عثماني جديد وآخر من الفرنجة مع استمرار التموضع الاستراتيجي الاميركي في عشرات القواعد على اراضي العرب.

لا بد أيضاً من لفت النظر الى أن التذرع الغربي بالإرهاب الإسلاموي هو ذريعة لتبرير الاستعمار الغربي لأن هذا النوع من الاسلام هو غربي التأسيس يرقى الى الدعم البريطاني للوهابية في مطلع القرن العشرين، والاستثمار الاميركي في منظمة القاعدة في سبعينيات القرن الماضي بالاشتراك مع المخابرات السعودية.

كما يعود الى الاستثمار الاميركي – الاوروبي التركي في منظمات داعش وأشباهها في افغانستان والعراق وسورية وليبيا ومصر.

فهل يمكن للعرب مجابهة هذه المشاريع؟

وحدها سورية القادرة على تشكيل جبهة قوية في وجه الإرهاب الذي هزمته في ميادينها اكثر من مرة ولم يعد موجوداً إلا في مناطق السيطرة التركية والأميركية.

هي اذاً سورية التي يستطيع العرب دعمها لتواصل حملة التصدي للإرهاب الذي يكمن خلفه الاميركيون والاتراك المسنودون حالياً من الفرنجة الجدد.

وكما رحلوا بالقوة قبل ثمانية قرون، فلا بد أنهم راحلون مع مشاريعهم بقوة التضامن السوري بين الدولة والجيش والشعب.

فيديوات متعلقة

مقالات متعلقة

Why Propaganda is Vital In Upholding The Illusion of a Democracy

The Saker

October 29, 2020

Why Propaganda is Vital In Upholding The Illusion of a Democracy

By Cynthia Chung for the Saker Blog

“Whenever the government of the United States shall break up, it will probably be in consequence of a false direction having been given to public opinion. This is the weak point of our defenses, and the part to which the enemies of the system will direct all their attacks. Opinion can be so perverted as to cause the false to seem true; the enemy, a friend, and the friend, an enemy; the best interests of the nation to appear insignificant, and the trifles of moment; in a word, the right the wrong, the wrong the right. In a country where opinion has sway, to seize upon it, is to seize upon power. As it is a rule of humanity that the upright and well-intentioned are comparatively passive, while the designing, dishonest, and selfish are the most untiring in their efforts, the danger of public opinion’s getting a false direction is four-fold, since few men think for themselves.”

-James Fenimore Cooper

Democracy is something that has been completely taken for granted here in the West. There is an ongoing triumph over past laurels, without paying heed to the road we have strayed from. We criticize others for failing to uphold a standard we consider ourselves the leaders of, but democracy is not something simply “acquired” and subsequently “retained,” it is not a “possession.” This is because a system of democracy is at every moment of its existence defined by the character of its citizenry. Democracy only exists if it is upheld, and if a citizenry fails to do so, it renders itself defenseless to an ever-creeping tyranny.

For such a “creeping tyranny,” control is conditional to whether the citizenry is satisfied with an ever-growing “illusion of democracy.” Such a construct needs to give its subjects the impression that they have “free choice” in what shapes their future and their way of life, including: who will be their “friends” and who will be their “foes.”

And thus, War has always depended on a reliable system to spread its propaganda.

The Arthashastra written by Chankya (350-283 BCE) who was chief advisor to the Emperor Chandragupta (the first ruler of the Mauryan Empire) discusses propaganda and how to disperse and apply it in warfare. It is one of the oldest accounts of the essentialism of propaganda in warfare.

Propaganda is vital in times of war because it is absolutely imperative that the people, who often need to make the greatest sacrifices and suffer the most, believe that such a war is justified and that such a war will provide them security. To the degree that they believe this to be true, the greater the degree of sacrifice and suffering they are willing to submit themselves for said “promised security”.

It is crucial that when the people look at the “enemy” they see something sub-human, for if they recognise that said “enemy” has in fact humanity, the jig is up so to speak.

And thus we are bombarded day after day, hour after hour of reminders as to why the “enemy” is not human like us, not compassionate like us, not patient, just and wise like us.

No doubt, war has been a necessary response when tyranny has formed an army to fight for its cause, but I would put forth that most wars have been rather unnecessary and downright manipulated for the design of a small group of people.

During WWI, on Dec 25th 1914, something rather unexpected occurred and a series of widespread unofficial ceasefires along the Western Front took place between the French/British soldiers and the German soldiers. Some even ventured into “no man’s land”, given its name since none left it alive, to mingle with the “enemy” and exchange food and souvenirs. There were joint burial ceremonies and prisoner swaps. A game of football took place as well. It is said that these truces were not unique to the Christmas period but that they were much more widespread during the holiday season.

These fraternisations would understandably make it quite difficult to return to combat against one another…for no apparently good reason. Some units needed to be relocated since they had developed friendships with the opposing side and now refused to fight them.

The lesson was quickly learned and propaganda was heavily pumped down the throats of the Allied countries, and by the course of just a few years, they no longer viewed the Germans as human.

The Battle For Your Mind

“Politicians, Priests, and psychiatrists often face the same problem: how to find the most rapid and permanent means of changing a man’s belief…The problem of the doctor and his nervously ill patient, and that of the religious leader who sets out to gain and hold new converts, has now become the problem of whole groups of nations, who wish not only to confirm certain political beliefs within their boundaries, but to proselytize the outside world.”

– William Sargant “Battle of the Mind”

Mass propaganda is the very reason why in this so-called “age of information”, we are more confused and divided from each other than ever…

It had been commonly thought in the past, and not without basis, that tyranny could only exist on the condition that the people were kept illiterate and ignorant of their oppression. To recognise that one was “oppressed” meant they must first have an idea of what was “freedom”, and if one were allowed the “privilege” to learn how to read, this discovery was inevitable.

If education of the masses could turn the majority of a population literate, it was thought that the higher ideas, the sort of “dangerous ideas” that Mustapha Mond for instance expresses in “The Brave New World”, would quickly organise the masses and revolution against their “controllers” would be inevitable. In other words, knowledge is freedom, and you cannot enslave those who learn how to “think”.

However, it hasn’t exactly played out that way has it?

The greater majority of us are free to read whatever we wish to, in terms of the once “forbidden books”, such as those listed by The Index Librorum Prohibitorum (1). We can read any of the writings that were banned in “The Brave New World”, notably the works of Shakespeare which were named as absolutely dangerous forms of “knowledge”.

We are now very much free to “educate” ourselves on the very “ideas” that were recognised by tyrants of the past as the “antidote” to a life of slavery. And yet, today, there is a fear of that very thing, that to “know” will label you an outcast from a “healthy” society. That the simple desire to know is the beginning of rebellion.

It is recognised, albeit superficially, that who controls the past, controls the present and thereby the future. George Orwell’s book “1984”, hammers this as the essential feature that allows the Big Brother apparatus to maintain absolute control over fear, perception and loyalty to the Party cause, and yet despite its popularity, there still remains today a lack of interest in actually informing oneself about the past.

What does it matter anyway, if the past is controlled and rewritten to suit the present? As the Big Brother interrogator O’Brien states to Winston, “We, the Party, control all records, and we control all memories. Then we control the past, do we not? [And thus, are free to rewrite it as we choose…]”

Of course, we are not in the same situation as Winston…we are much better off. We can study and learn about the “past” if we so desire, unfortunately, it is a choice that many take for granted. And thus, by our failure to ask the right questions and seek the appropriate answers, we find ourselves increasingly in the unsettling position of a Winston…we are enslaved by the very lack of our own will.

In Orwell’s “1984”, there are three main super states in the world: Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia that are in one combination or another constantly at war with each other and have been so for the last 25 years.

In the case of Winston, he has only known Oceania (the British commonwealths and U.S.), he knows essentially nothing of either Eurasia or Eastasia, except that sometimes Oceania is at war with Eurasia and sometimes it is at war with Eastasia. In fact, even this memory, that the enemy is not constant, is not something Winston is supposed to recollect or acknowledge. Just by doing this very thing, he is committing a “thoughtcrime”.

Winston’s experience begs the questions, if one were born into a fascist, totalitarian state would they know it? Of course, the state itself would not describe itself as such. How would you be able to compare your “freedom” with the “oppression” of the enemy, when all you were given was what the state chose to give to you?

How do you know that what has come to shape your convictions, your beliefs, your fears really belong to you, and were not placed there by another?

We are all very sensitive to this unsettling question because ironically, that has also been placed in us. It was what started this whole business of “mind control”, you see, it had to be done…for our “protection”.

Warfare in the 21st Century

For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the pinnacle of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the pinnacle of skill.

– Sun Tzu

There a many different forms of warfare, but namely there is warfare that exists in the physical domain of aggression vs defense and warfare that exists in the mental domain of ideas.

The majority of tyrants from the ancient times to present day, have always had a network of powerful people behind them (whether they were aware of it or not) that opened up a path for them to sit on the throne so to speak. For example, we now know that there was a very direct support of Hitler coming from the Bank of England amongst other very influential institutions. That is, Hitler did not arise to power ‘naturally’ or by his mere merit.

The desperation of that economic environment in Germany was predictably formulated as a direct consequence of the Treaty of Versailles which was essentially a death sentence to the German people. And Hitler who had started to make a small name for himself was selected and endorsed as the ‘face’ of what had already been decided would be the fate of Germany.

Wars have almost always been the result of funding and organising from powerful groups with geopolitical interests, often of empire, who create an environment of disinformation and desperation amongst the people through economic and military warfare along with color revolutions.

However, once there was the creation of nuclear bombs, geopolitical warfare was changed forever.

Though we still use much of the same old strategies today, war is ever more located on the plane of ideas, and along with this the ever increasing focus on the manipulation of information and the populace’s perspective of who is good and who is bad.

The war that needs to be fought against the present tyranny is thus increasingly a mental war. In the case of the populace, all together they hold more power than they realise. The real crisis of today’s western thinking is that the people have forgotten how to think. Attention spans have gone down drastically along with a functional vocabulary. People are becoming more and more dominated by image based messages rather than content that requires more than a 10 minute attention span. Articles in the news keep getting shorter and shorter because people seemingly cannot be bothered with too much reading. Along with the serious decline in reading in replacement for quick entertainment (more successful than any book burning in history), people no longer bother to work for a comprehensive viewpoint. Information becomes an annoying barrage of ad campaigns, each yelling louder and more frequently than the other.

The solutions to our problems such as the oncoming economic collapse (in case you haven’t noticed we are doing everything the same as pre-2008), have their solutions in what Russia and China are presenting.

The initiation of war has almost always been presented as a false ‘necessity’, that is in response to the dominating geopolitical ‘balance’, which is basically meant to service the present system of empire, and the erroneous belief in zero sum game.

However, the idea that humans exist in a zero sum game, doomed to battle forever over a diminishing return of resources, was disproven time and again in modern history through the application of successful principles of national political economy. Notable examples of which include Colbert’s dirigisme of France’s 17th century (later revived during the presidency of Charles De Gaulle), the Hamiltonian system of America as exemplified by Abraham Lincoln’s Greenbacks, FDR’s New Deal, and JFK’s space program as well as its most recent expression of China’s Belt and Road Initiative.

This system understands that fast money is parasitical and acts in direct opposition to the long-term investments required for projects that will revolutionise a nation’s infrastructure, including science-driver programs.

That debt for such long-term projects is not qualitatively the same as the present debt we see accruing today, and that debt towards investing for the future will always yield a higher return than the cost over time. This is why debt towards long-term investment on infrastructure and science driver projects, such as space exploration, will always be sustainable with a massive return quantitatively and qualitatively. Whereas, the gambling of fast money will very predictably lead to a collapse as was clearly indicated by the 2008 financial crisis, and which insanely has yet to be addressed with a serious bank reform.

The higher battle ground is being fought on the plane of ideas and which proposed ‘new system’ will replace the current collapsing one we are presently in. On the one side the hegemonic rule of a one world government who thinks that they can use force and oppression to rule and on the other side a multi-polar system of cooperating nation states committed to progress that will offer a real qualitative return for the future.

The Art of Doublethink

“WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH”

George Orwell’s “1984” (Big Brother Mantra)

A truly immersive system of propaganda, which necessarily will be full of contradictions to the truth, absolutely requires that its subjects are compliant with “doublethink,” that is, the ability to accept two contradictory thoughts in your mind without acknowledging that they are in fact opposites.

Orwell identifies this under two forms of “doublethink”, which are “crimestop” and “blackwhite”. “Crimestop” meaning the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of a dangerous thought.

Orwell further states “It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments…and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop in short, means protective stupidity.”

“Blackwhite”, is the act of contradiction of plain facts, applied to an opponent. And when applied to the Party, it is the willingness to say black is white when the Party discipline demands it so.

As Orwell describes it “it means the ability to believe that black is white, and more, to know that black is white, and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary. This demands a continuous alteration of the past…The alteration of the past is necessary for two reasons…The subsidiary reason is that…he must be cut off from the past, just as he must be cut off from foreign countries, because it is necessary for him to believe that he is better off… [the precautionary reason] by far the more important reason for the readjustment of the past is the need to safeguard the infallibility of the Party.”

Orwell continues “The splitting of the intelligence which the Party requires of its members, and which is more easily achieved in an atmosphere of war, is now almost universal, but the higher up the ranks one goes, the more marked it becomes. It is precisely in the Inner Party that war hysteria and hatred of the enemy are strongest.”

That is, it is the Inner Party members who are the most indoctrinated, the best at inducing “mind control” or “doublethink” on themselves, and at the same time believe that it is the best and right thing to do.

Orwell describes “doublethink” thus: “The process has to be conscious , or it would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and hence guilt…To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies – all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink.”

What many fail to grasp when reading “1984” is that Orwell is not only the character Winston, he is also the character O’Brien. He is the Outer Party member-turned-revolutionary, and he is the Inner Party disciplinarian.

He is simultaneously the tormentor-programmer as well as the tormented-programmed.

Winston eventually breaks and releases the one thing that kept him human, his love and loyalty to Julia. In the end, an announcement is made that Oceania is ever nearer to winning the war and Winston looks up at a large poster of Big Brother and cries gin-filled tears of joy and relief, for he had finally come to love Big Brother.

He had become O’Brien.

So Who is the Said “Enemy”?

The enemy is our lesser selves.

Our most base fears, desires and obsessions. The voice that whispers in our ears telling us not to believe in anything genuine or honest, that the world we live in will ultimately destroy itself and thus it is all about looking out for number one. That it is our fate to be the playthings of higher powers.

This is the voice of a prisoner of Plato’s cave, neck shackled and looking at only shadows on a wall. This is not reality. This is the voice of someone who has been enslaved for most of their life. The voice of someone who has become so disempowered that they wholly accept whatever ugly condition is imposed upon them and will even work to defend it as necessary.

There is a way out of all of this, but you will have to become an optimist in order to see the solution.

“We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory will swell when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.”

– Abraham Lincoln

Footnote:

  1. The Index Librorum Prohibitorum was a list of forbidden books, which were judged to be dangerous to the faith and morals of Roman Catholics, and had a suspicious gravitation towards works by platonic humanists. Among the banned works would include those of Dante, Erasmus and all of Machiavelli’s books. For more refer to my paper on this subject.

The author can be reached at cynthiachung@tutanota.com

Al-Kaabi: US Only Understands Language of Force – We Will Witness Definitive Destruction of ‘Israel’ In Any Future War

Al-Kaabi: We Will Witness Definitive Destruction of ‘Israel’ In Any Future War

Al-Kaabi: We Will Witness Definitive Destruction of ‘Israel’ In Any Future War

By Staff, Agencies

In a meeting with Ali Akbar Velayati, a Senior Advisor to Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Secretary-General of Iraq’s al-Nujaba resistance movement Sheikh Akram al-Kaabi emphasized on the strong relationship with the Palestinian Islamic Resistance groups and stressed that the Zionist regime will mark its end if it enters any war.

Al-Nujaba’s Communication and Media Affairs Center reported that Sheikh al-Kaabi met with Imam Khamenei’s advisor on international affairs in Tehran on Tuesday.

Al-Kaabi pointed to the pressure of the electoral campaign of US President Donald Trump, on regional governments regarding compromise with the Zionist regime, saying “This anti-Islamic and humiliating wave has even reached Iraq to such an extent that some Daesh [the Arabic acronym for ‘ISIS/ISIL’] and mercenary politicians have taken up the issue of normalizing Baghdad-Tel Aviv relations and created a virtual embassy for ‘Israel.’”

In this regard, the Iraqi resistance leaders stressed that “the Iraqi Islamic Resistance and al-Nujaba will stand against the policy of normalizing relations with the Zionist regime. We have strong ties with Palestinian groups and al-Quds is the key to our resistance. Therefore, we will not withhold any help or support from the Palestinians.”

Explaining the movement of Zionist delegations to Iraq undercover as citizens of the United States, Sheikh al-Kaabi stated: “It is a clear threat to Iraq, Iran, the region and Muslims that some security elements of the Zionist regime arrive at Baghdad International Airport with Western passports, travel freely in the country and meet with personalities.”

He then emphasized the weakness and declining nature of the Zionist regime: “We believe that if ‘Israel’ enters any war, it will end with a strategic mistake and the Islamic Resistance groups of Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq and Iran will reach al-Quds, and then, just as the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution has promised, we will pray in al-Quds.”

He also underscored the destructive role of the Saudi and Emirati regimes in the region and Iraq, noting, “The Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Muhammad bin Salman, is waging war in Yemen, creating sedition in Lebanon, and supporting Daesh and other terrorist groups in Iraq and Syria. The case of Iraq has also been handed over to Muhammad bin Zayed, the Crown Prince of the United Arab Emirates, by the President of the United States, who has a mission to use the intelligence services to foment divisions and instability in Iraq.”

Al-Kaabi further warned that “We see the hand of the United States and ‘Israel’ behind the evil acts of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates and the flame of all these riots and seditions will eventually fall on the lives of their troops.”

He finally described the blood of the martyrs as a bright beacon of the path of struggle: “Due to the blessings to the blood of martyrs like Haj Qassem Soleimani, the Islamic Resistance Front has united and expanded. Now, the Islamic Resistance is not limited to one country, and its seeds have grown in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Pakistan, and so on.”

US Only Understands Language of Force

Iraq’s Nujaba Leader: US Only Understands Language of Force

By Staff, Agencies

The Secretary General of Iraqi resistance movement al-Nujaba, Sheikh Akram al-Kaabi, said the United States only understands the language of force, noting that resistance will end the US presence in Iraq.

In a press conference held at Mehr News Agency headquarters, Sheikh al-Kaabi said the US is responsible for the economic crisis in Iraq and Washington plunders Iraq’s oil and natural resources.

The Iraqi resistance leader went on to say that the US and the Saudi Arabia are the source of unrest in Iraq and are taking advantage of people’s demands.

He further maintained that Lt. General Soleimani had repeatedly stated that he wished to be martyred in an Iraqi territory and finally achieved his goal.

Sheikh al-Kaabi further called for the implementation of Iraqi parliament’s resolution regarding the expulsion of US forces.

“The US only understand the language of force, and if they do not leave Iraq, the resistance will end their presence in the country,” he added.

Related Videos

التطبيع” في التفاوض اللبناني” Updated

ناصر قنديل

يستمر البعض على طريق اللبن الأسود بالإصرار على توصيف مجرد التفاوض القائم بصيغته الراهنة لترسيم الحدود نوعاً من التطبيع، فيقطع الطريق على المطلوب فعلياً لمنع التطبيع عبر مراقبة التفاصيل التي يمكن أن تشكل رسائل تطبيعية مرفوضة يجب فتح العين عليها، من خلال التمييز بين تفاوض لا يتضمن تطبيعاً وتفاوض يفتح باب التطبيع.

التلطي وراء البيان الذي أعلن بموجبه اتفاق الإطار والإصرار على تقديمه كنص لبناني يلغي صفة العداء لكيان الاحتلال، يعبر عن سذاجة وعناد سخيف وقد صار معلوماً ان النص هو نص اتفاق متعدّد الاطراف يستحيل ان يكتب بلغة الفريق اللبناني وقد تمّت الصياغة برعاية الأميركيين، كما حصل تماماً مع نص تفاهم نيسان وبمفرداته ذاتها التي يتجاهلها المنتقدون.

المهم أن لا يترتب على العدمية واللغة العبثية تضييع الطاسة فيصير الرأي العام محايداً في النقاش حول ما يمكن أن يتسلل عبر التفاوض من أخطاء او سلوك متعمد يقع في دائرة التطبيع، فيصير أي كلام ترويجي للتطبيع او أي تصرف تقني او إداري يمكن ان يوحي بسلوك تطبيعي تفصيلا يضيع في مناخ التشكيك والخلط بين الوقائع ومقاربتها.

نقطة الانطلاق في النقاش العلمي هي التسليم بأن التطبيع والاعتراف هما نيات سياسية وسلوك إعلامي لا يتحققان بإعلان إنكارهما، وأن الإنكار بذاته عندما يصير نصاً رسمياً وقراراً دبلوماسياً ويتحوّل الى شرط تم تثبيته في اطار التفاوض، يشكل أعلى المستويات القانونية لرفض التطبيع وعدم الاعتراف، فالقيمة القانونية للموقف اللبناني تتأتى من ذاته بالإعلان الرسمي عن التمسك بتفاوض غير مباشر سواء في غرف منفصلة او في غرفة واحدة من دون مصافحة ومن دون تخاطب مباشر مع وفد الكيان، وهذا ليس أمراً شكلياً، لأن تثبيت هذه القاعدة بموافقة الراعي الأممي والوسيط الأميركي وارتضاء وفد الكيان للتفاوض وفق هذه الضوابط، يعني تسليماً بقبول تفاوض مع طرف متمسك بعدم الاعتراف ورفض العلاقات الطبيعية كأساس للتفاوض. وهذا ما يتجاهله العدميون والعبثيون وفقاً للمفاهيم القانونية للتفاوض وللتطبيع وللاعتراف.

أن يصدر في اتفاق الإطار نص على أن التفاوض غير المباشر هو الذي سيكون، هو إنجاز لبناني قانوني كبير تمّ تضييعه في معمعة الاتهامات والبروباغندا الرائجة، لأن التطبيع والاعتراف هما عمل سياسي وإعلامي لا يخدمهما نص يقوم على تثبيت رموز تؤكد نقيضهما، والخطر هو في تضييع هذه القيمة والقول إن كله تطبيع وكله اعتراف فينتقل التفاوض غير المباشر الى تفاوض مباشر.

في اتفاق الهدنة وقع لبنان على هدنة طرفها الآخر جيش الاحتلال وتضمنت التزامات متبادلة، لكن الأهم فيها كان تأكيد المفاوض اللبناني وتضمين تأكيده في النص، أن خط الحدود سيبقى الحدود الدولية للبنان إذا اختلف عن خط الهدنة، أي ان خط الهدنة لا ينشئ حقوقاً تمس بالحقوق التي تثبتها الحدود الدولية للبنان.

في اتفاق الإطار تبقى أهم فقرة هي تلك التي تؤكد ان التفاوض غير المباشر هو المعتمد لما تختزنه هذه الجملة من معانٍ تبطل مفعول أي إيحاء او ثقافة تطبيعية وتقطع الطريق على اعتبار قبول التفاوض نوعاً من الاعتراف.

بعض الكلام الساذج الهادف للتنمر يسأل لماذا لا يكون التفاوض مع السلطة الفلسطينية وهو يعلم أن السلطة قامت وتقوم على قاعدة الاعتراف بكيان الاحتلال وتسلّم له بشرعية سيطرته على الأراضي المحتلة عام 48 التي يدور التفاوض اللبناني حول نقاط تتصل بها.

مثل هذا الكلام الساذج والعبثي كلام آخر عن اعتبار الترسيم بذاته إعلاناً لحدود آمنة لكيان الاحتلال، وهو نص خطير يجب الانتباه لعدم تضمينه في نهاية التفاوض لعمليات الترسيم، لأن الترسيم يجب أن يبقى بالنسبة للبنان هادفاً ومحكوماً بالسعي لتظهير الحدود الدولية البحرية للبنان وإيداعها كخرائط ومحاضر لدى الأمم المتحدة، وليس السعي لإنهاء التفاوض بمعاهدة دولية ولو سميت بمعاهدة ترسيم حدود، وهذا هو الفارق الذي يجب أن يبقى الرأي العام مستنفراً لمتابعته وتدعيم موقف المفاوض اللبناني المتمسك بهذا الفارق. وخطورة العبثية والعدمية أنها تسقط الاستنفار السياسي والإعلامي الواجب حضوره لمراقبة أي دفع نحو تخطي هذا الفارق، واعتبار الأمر سيان، فيكون العدميّون قد أسهموا بتثبيت مفهوم الحدود الآمنة لكيان الاحتلال لأنهم يرفضون التوقف أمام التفاصيل ذات القيمة، ويعتبرون الأمر سيان.

بعض السذاجة ترد في تنمّر مشابه يقول لماذا لا يذهب لبنان بدلاً من التفاوض إلى التحكيم الدولي القانوني او الى محكمة العدل الدولية في لاهاي، فيرسمون لدى الرأي العام أسئلة تشكل غباراً فكرياً وقانونياً، والواجب معرفته هنا هو أن اول شروط التحكيم والتقاضي وفقاً للقواعد المعمول بها في غرف التحكيم وفي محكمة العدل الدولية، هو الاعتراف المتبادل بين الدول المتخاصمة صاحبة طلب التحكيم او التقاضي.

الأهم أن لا يختلط الحابل بالنابل في هذا النقاش المطلوب وطنياً، وأن لا يضيع كون لبنان انتزع موافقة نادرة في زمن التطبيع على تفاوض غير مباشر، وأن لا يضيع أن لبنان انتزع موافقة معاكسة لكل الحركة الأميركية في المنطقة، القائمة على محاصرة المقاومة وسلاحها، فالتفاوض غير المباشر يجيء في ظل التسليم بأن هذه المقاومة حاضرة هي وسلاحها في خلفيته، كشريك رادع هو الذي فرض التفاوض، بينما كانت رغبة كيان الاحتلال وضع اليد على الثروات اللبنانية وفقاً للخرائط المزورة التي أقرها وقرر اعتمادها، لولا تهديدات المقاومة التي غيرت معادلات قانونية واقتصادية، جعلت الاستثمار مشروطاً بالتفاوض، وفقاً للشروط اللبنانية.

بعض السخافة والتفاهة هي في الهدايا المجانية اللبنانية لكيان الاحتلال الآتي من موقع ضعف، ليحتفل بوهم قوة، مستعيداً كلاماً لبنانياً من هنا وهناك عن رغبة بالسلام وعدم رفض للتطبيع.

فيديوات متعلقة

مقالات متعلقة

Israeli Army Drills Infantry Troops to Confront Hezbollah

Check This Video

The Israeli army carried out major annual drills, named the “Lethal Arrow’ in simulation of a military confrontation with Hezbollah.

The Chief of Staff Aviv Kovhavi insisted on conducting the drills despite the coronavirus threat, considering that the Zionist army must be able to defeat Hezbollah in a very short time to prevent it from expand its missile fire.

The infantry troops must undergo the military training to be able to cause a massive destruction in Lebanon during the war in order to defeat Hezbollah, according to Kochavi.

According to the Zionist media, Kochavi intended to boost the army’s morale in light of the report issued by the military ombudsman, Isaac Brick, who confirmed that the Israeli forces are unable to face Hezbollah.

The enemy’s defense minister, Benny Gantz, inspected the military maneuvers, highlighting the threats which endanger the occupation entity on the northern and the southern fronts.

Gantz viewed positively the Lebanese voices which are pleading ‘peace’ with ‘Israel’, saying that Lebanon will pay the price of any attack launched by Hezbollah on the occupation entity.

Source: Al-Manar English Website

Related Videos

Related News

US Sanctions: Shooting Blanks Against the Resiliency of Targeted Nations

By Stephen Lendman

Global Research, October 27, 2020

As explained many times before, Security Council members alone may legally impose sanctions on nations, entities and individuals.

When used by countries against others, they breach the UN Charter, how the US, NATO and Israel operate time and again.

The Charter’s Article II mandates all member states to “settle…disputes” according to the rule of law.

US/Western sanctions are weapons of war by other means — used to pressure, bully and terrorize targeted nations into submission.

Though widely used, most often they fail to achieve intended objectives.

US sanctions war and other hostile actions against Cuba for 60 years, Iran for 40 years, Venezuela for 20 years, and against countless other nations largely shot blanks.

Most often, they’re counterproductive.

Hardships imposed on people in targeted nations fuel anti-US sentiment — blaming Washington, not their governments, for what they endure.

Under international law, nations are prohibited from intervening in the internal affairs of others.

Military action against an adversary is only legal in self-defense if attacked — never preemptively for any reasons.

Hardcore US bipartisan policy targets all independent nations unwilling to subordinate their sovereign rights to its interests.

That’s what US hostility toward China, Russia, Iran, and other targeted countries is all about.

Since WW II, no nations threatened the US militarily or politically.

Like all other empires in world history now gone, a similar fate awaits the US — because of its counterproductive geopolitical policies, over time making more enemies than allies, weakening, not strengthening, the state.

Last week in response to US sanctions on Russia’s Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline to Germany, Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said the following:

“(T)his unfriendly and destructive policy of constant introduction of various restrictions in relation to us, our economic operators, our economy, unfortunately, this has already become an integral part of unfair competition, undisguised hostile takeover competition on the part of Washington.”

Last month, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova slammed the US, saying:

“We condemn (US) calls for forging a certain coalition against the pipeline, wherein German and other companies have already made multi-billion dollar investments.”

In response to EU sanctions on Russia over the Navalny novichok poisoning hoax, its Foreign Ministry demanded to know “who is behind the anti-Russian provocation,” adding:

“In response, we get aggressive rhetoric and outright manipulation of the facts” — by the EU in cahoots with the US.

Sergey Lavrov slammed Berlin for being in breach of its international obligations for failing to provide Moscow with information it claims to have about the Navalny incident — because none exists.

In mid-October, protesters outside the US embassy in London accused Washington of attempting to “strangle” Cuba’s economy by a virtual blockade on the island state.

The so-called Rock Around The Blockade solidarity campaign called for breaking the illegal action, chanting “Cuba si! Yankee no! Abajo el bloqueo/Down with the blockade!”

Despite annual UN General Assembly measures against US blockade of the island state, it’s been in place for decades without success because of Cuban resiliency.

Trump regime Office of Foreign Assets Control threatened to sue “anyone who trades with Cuba” or has property in the country.

Despite decades of US war on Cuba by other means, aiming to regain imperial control over the island state, policies of Republicans and Dems consistently failed.

US war on China by sanctions and other means widens the breach between both countries.US Sanctions: Weapons of War by Other Means on Targeted Nations

On October 21 in a Foreign Affairs article titled “How China Threatens American Democracy” (sic), Trump regime national security advisor Robert  O’Brien invented nonexistent threats.

Instead of fostering productive bilateral relations with all nations, policies of both right wings of the US one-party state go the other way against nations Washington doesn’t control — how the scourge of imperialism operates.

China fosters cooperative relations with other nations, threatening none — polar opposite longstanding US policy, seeking dominance over planet earth, its resources and populations.

Undeclared US initiated Cold War against China, Russia, and other targeted nations threatens to turn hot by accident or design — especially in East Asia, the Middle East, and near Russia’s borders.

On Sunday, O’Brien expressed frustration, saying:

“One of the problems that we have faced with both Iran and Russia is that we now have so many sanctions against these countries that we have very little (opportunity) to do anything about it,” adding:

“But we are looking at all possible deterrent measures that we can apply to these countries, as well as others…”

Last Thursday, the US Treasury Department announced new sanctions on Iran’s IRGC, its Quds Force, and Bayan Rasaneh Gostar Institute “for having directly or indirectly engaged in, sponsored, concealed, or otherwise been complicit in foreign interference” in US November 3 elections.

Fact: Throughout US history, no evidence showed that any foreign nations ever interfered in its electoral process — a US specialty against scores of nations throughout the post-WW II period.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh slammed the hostile action, saying:

Its government “strong(ly) reject(s) baseless and false claims” by the US, adding:

“(I)t makes no difference for Iran who wins the US election.”

On core domestic and foreign policy issues, both right wings of the US one-party state operate largely the same way.

Rare exceptions prove the rule.

On Monday, Pompeo announced more illegal sanctions on Iran — part of longstanding US war on the country by other means.

Tehran’s “Ministry of Petroleum and Minister of Petroleum, the National Iranian Oil Company, the National Iranian Tanker Company, and 21 other individuals, entities, and vessels” were targeted for unjustifiable reasons.

Iran, its ruling authorities, and entities foster cooperative relations with other countries — hostile actions toward none, except in self-defense if attacked, the legal right of all nations.

US imperial policy targets all countries, entities and individuals not subservient to its rage to rule the world unchallenged.

US maximum pressure on Iran and other nations is all about wanting them transformed into vassal states.

Separately on Monday, convicted felon/US envoy for regime change in Iran and Venezuela Elliott Abrams said the following:

“The transfer of long-range missiles from Iran to Venezuela is not acceptable to the United States and will not be tolerated or permitted,” adding:

“We will make every effort to stop shipments of long-range missiles, and if somehow they get to Venezuela they will be eliminated there.”

Was the above threat a possible US declaration of hot war on Venezuela, on Iran as well?

Last week, Pompeo announced new US sanctions on “the State Research Center of the Russian Federation FGUP Central Scientific Research Institute of Chemistry and Mechanics (TsNIIKhM).”

He falsely claimed the research institute conducts “malware attacks (that threaten) cybersecurity and critical infrastructure (sic).”

No evidence was cited because none exists, including alleged Russian malware against “a petrochemical plant in the Middle East,” along with “scann(ing) and prob(ing) US facilities.”

Pompeo falsely accused Russia of “engag(ing) in dangerous and malicious activities that threaten the security of the United States and our allies (sic).”

The above is what the US and its imperial partners do time and again — falsely blaming others for their own high crimes.

The Trump regime also imposed unlawful sanctions on Iran for supplying Venezuela with gasoline — the legal right of both nations to conduct bilateral trade relations.

Last month, former Trump regime acting DNI Richard Grenell met secretly with Venezuelan Vice President for Communications Jorge Rodriguez in Mexico, according to Bloomberg News.

It was a futile attempt to get President Maduro to step down ahead of US November 3 elections, Trump seeking a foreign policy success to tout that failed.

US war on Venezuela by other means, notably by Trump, imposed great hardships on its people alone — failing to achieve regime change.

US-designated puppet-in-waiting Guaido’s involvement in the scheme made him widely despised by the vast majority of Venezuelans.

Separately, Russia’s US embassy responded to unacceptable tightening of visas for its journalists by the Trump regime, creating “artificial barriers (that impede) their normal work,” adding:

“In particular, the limitation of the period of stay for foreign media employees to 240 days (with the possibility of extension up to 480 days) will not allow them to consistently cover local events.”

Journalists “will have to leave the United States for a considerable time to obtain a new visa.”

This new policy flies in the face of what “freedom of speech and equal access to information” is supposed to be all about.

On Monday, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova slammed US accusations of alleged Moscow cybersecurity threats, calling them “unfounded,” adding:

“(T)his time (the US outdid itself) in anti-Russia rhetoric with extremely harsh statements occasionally bordering on bizarre rudeness.”

“Such an approach will not benefit the State Department and is indicative of the fact that they treat the culture and norms of state-to-state communication with disdain.”

Businessman Trump sought improved relations with Russia — the aim thwarted by surrounding himself with Russophobic hardliners.

The same holds for US hostility toward China, Iran, and other countries on its target list for regime change.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Award-winning author Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Featured image is from podur.orgThe original source of this article is Global ResearchCopyright © Stephen Lendman, Global Research, 2020

The Empire Has Collapsed

October 28, 2020

The Empire Has Collapsed

by Paul Craig Roberts, cross-posted by permission

Paul Craig Roberts

The Saker has written another interesting article in which he gives us the date of the collapse of the AngloZionist or American Empire:  January 3, 2020, the day when Washington did not retaliate against Iran for Iran’s retaliation against Washington for murdering General Qasem Soleimani.

You can read The Saker’s case and make up your mind:  https://thesaker.is/when-exactly-did-the-anglozionist-empire-collapse/

An equally good case could be made that the American Empire collapsed on September 11, 2001.  This was the day that two symbols of American power—the World Trade Center and the Pentagon—were successfully attacked, according to the US government itself, by an old and dying Osama bin Laden and a handful of Saudi Arabians armed with box cutters.  This unlikely group was able, according to Washington, to overcome the entire intelligence networks of the United States, NATO, and Israel’s Mossad, and deliver the most humiliating blow ever suffered by a ruling Superpower.

It was the day when nothing in the National Security State worked.  US Airport Security failed four times on the same morning, allowing four US airliners to be hijacked. The US Air Force was unable to put fighters in the air to intercept the hijacked airliners, and two of them were flown into the World Trade Center towers and one into the Pentagon itself, while the Great Superpower was unable to defend itself from an old man in a cave in Afghanistan and a handful of young Saudis.

September 11, 2001, was the day that the world realized that the emperor had no clothes.  If Osama bin Laden and a handful of Saudis could defeat the United States, anyone could.

I think The Saker is wrong about Donald Trump. Trump wanted to save American influence by ceasing its fruitless attempts to impose hegemony on the world.  Trump wanted to bring the US soldiers home from the Middle East and to normalize relations with Russia.  This was a major threat to the power and budget of the military/security complex and to the zionist neoconservatives’ desire to use American military power to make the Middle East into Greater Israel.  If 9/11 did not end the American empire, the attack on President Trump from within the government did.  The internal demonization of the American president called to mind the internal conflicts that destroyed the Roman Empire.

I agree with The Saker that the Empire is finished.  Even if Trump wins and manages to be inaugurated, what can he do?  He faces the same powerful forces that stymied his first term. If the crook Biden and the anti-white racist Kamala win, The Camp of the Saints will continue to unfold in the US as the majority white population is demonized, its memorials and history erased, and its power exterminated.

No white American will fight for a government that has demonized him, torn down his statues,  and erased his people’s history.  An army of feminists, transgendered, Hispanic immigrants, disaffected blacks, and displaced Muslims will not fare well against Russian, Chinese, and Iranian forces.  Such a collection is not imbued with pride of country, a requirement for a fighting force.

More than the empire is dead. The country itself is dead.

Trump is trying to resurrect America, but are the people too far gone to respond?  We will soon know.

Lebanese Delegation Insists on Regaining All National Rights during Second Round of Indirect Negotiations to Delineate Maritime Borders with Zionist Enemy

Capture

October 28, 2020

The second round of indirect negotiations between the Lebanese and Israeli enemy delegations, under the auspices of the United Nations and with US mediation, has ended, amid tensions caused by the Zionist rejection of acknowledging Lebanon’s rights regarding the positions of the demarcation of the marine borders.

Al-Manar reporter said that after the end of the break at 1;30 p.m., the UN and US representatives surprisingly ended the session after it was scheduled to continue till 3:30, adding the tension which dominated over the first session is expected to be behind winding it up.

The two delegations are set to resume discussions over the delineation of maritime borders tomorrow (Thursday) at 10:00 am at the UNIFIL headquarters in Ras Naqoura.

During today’s meeting, the Lebanese delegation carried maps and documents showing points of disagreement. Meanwhile, Naqoura and its outskirts witnessed a wide deployment of Lebanese Army troops conducting joint patrols with the UNIFIL.

On another level, the Lebanese Army organized a field tour for journalists in Naqoura, mainly in the region in which indirect negotiations took place a kilometer away from the headquarters, where naval signs could be seen as placed by the Israeli enemy in Ras Naqoura sea off B1 point.

Source: Al-Manar English Website and NNA

Related Videos

Related News

وزيرة الدفاع الفرنسيّة إلى موسكو للبحث في ملف الفرنسيّين العائدين من سورية

باريس – نضال حمادة

قالت مصادر صحافية فرنسية إنّ وزيرة الدفاع الفرنسي فلورانس بارلي سوف تتوجه في الأيام القليلة المقبلة برفقة وفد أمني الى موسكو للبحث مع القيادة الروسية في ملفات أمنية تتعلق بالجهاديين الفرنسيين المتواجدين في سورية، خصوصا أولئك الذين عادوا منها إلى فرنسا او يحاولون العودة الى بلادهم الأصل.

وسوف تبحث وزيرة الدفاع الفرنسية في موضوع الجالية الروسية الشيشانية في فرنسا والتي قام أحد أفرادها بقتل أستاذ فرنسي بسبب عرضه صور كاريكاتور مسيئة للرسول محمد.

المصادر تحدثت عن سعي من فرنسا للحصول على معلومات استخبارية من سورية حول الحهاديين الفرنسيين الموجودين الذين يقاتلون مع الجماعات المسلحة في الشمال السوري، وسوف تطلب الوزيرة الفرنسية من الجانب الروسي التدخل لدى سورية للحصول على معلومات عن الجهات التي اتصل بها في سورية الشاب الشيشاني قاتل الأستاذ صاحب الكاريكاتور.

فرنسا الباحثة عن معلومات من الدولة السورية تمنع عنها شر مواطنيها العائدين من الحرب السورية التي طالما كانت داعمة للجماعات التي يقاتل هؤلاء الفرنسيون في صفوفها، تعلم الشروط السورية للتعاون في هذه الملفات وأولها إعادة فتح السفارة الفرنسية في دمشق وتطبيع العلاقات ووقف الحملات الإعلامية ضد النظام في سورية، فضلاً عن التوقف عن دعم الجماعات السورية المعارضة التي تتخذ من باريس مقراً لها. وتشير المصادر إن الجانب السوري كان قد قال لوفد نيابي فرنسي زار دمشق قبل سنوات عدة أن سورية لديها جبال من الملفات الأمنية حول مجمل المسلحين الذين يقاتلون الجيش السوري، خصوصاً حاملي الجنسيات الأجنبية منهم، وليس من المعقول أن تقدّم دمشق معلومات لجهات دولية تتعاون مع المسلحين الذين يقاتلون الجيش السوري

Nuking Itself… How Russophobia Led the U.S. to Bomb its Own Citizens

Finian Cunningham October 26, 2020

Generations of countless Americans have been contaminated and sickened by the first-ever atomic bomb test. The Trinity explosion on July 16, 1945, was carried out in the New Mexico desert. Three weeks later, two A-bombs were dropped on Japan, killing up to 200,000 people.

But the number of American victims caused by radiation fallout from the Trinity test is reckoned to be also imponderably high. The American government conducted the explosion in secret, unbeknownst to the population of New Mexico. That was in spite of warnings from Manhattan Project scientists of a high risk to public health from the extreme radiation. Without a warning to the public and because of a cover-up about the event, countless Americans were exposed to carcinogenic radiation.

In a recent interview with Karl Grossman, New Mexican resident Tina Cordova tells how her community has been campaigning for decades to find out the truth behind the Trinity test and to seek reparations from the federal government. Incredibly, there has never been a federal investigation into establishing the human health impact from that atomic test explosion. But Cordova and her community estimate that the number is huge. She is the fourth generation in her family to have suffered from cancer. Countless others tell of high numbers of infant mortality over the decades and other morbidities that stretch across the entire state of New Mexico.

A combination of factors conspired to wreak a heavy toll on the people of New Mexico. It is one of the poorest states in the U.S., with large numbers of native Americans and Latinos. In selecting the test site for the A-bomb, there was a tacit racism among planners in Washington who viewed the area and its population as expendable. By not warning the people of the explosion, local populations were given no chance to take protective measures such as evacuation or avoiding consumption of contaminated water and food produced from the soil. The people were deceived into continuing their livelihoods as normal following the explosion, drinking contaminated water and breathing radioactive air. The New York Times was instrumental in the cover-up, issuing reports that the explosion was due to a conventional munitions incident. It was only after the horrific bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 an 9 that the people of New Mexico realized what had really happened at the Trinity site. Even then they were kept in the dark by Washington stonewalling about the event for decades to come.

Still another factor that maximized the damage on public health was the rush by the American government to weaponize the A-bomb technology. As Karl Grossman points out, the rationale behind the Manhattan Project was said to be to preempt Nazi Germany. But by July 1945, Nazi Germany was defeated and imperial Japan was on its knees. The inescapable implication is that President Harry Truman and the Pentagon wanted to display the new awesome weapon of mass destruction to the Soviet Union in what would be a chilling demarcation of the postwar globe according to American power.

Truman eagerly awaited the news of the Trinity test while attending the Potsdam allies’ conference in Germany along with Britain’s Winston Churchill and the Soviet Union’s Josef Stalin. On receiving news of the successful explosion, Truman immediately adopted a more strident attitude towards Stalin. In that moment, a new Cold War was born.

Thus, it was Russophobia among the American ruling class that rushed the Trinity A-bomb explosion, even though that event would lead to generations of American citizens stricken with fatal diseases from the fallout. In a very real and frightening way, the U.S. rulers took a decision to “nuke” their own people such was their obsession with confronting the Soviet Union.

Subsequent U.S. nuclear weapons testing in the 1950s and 60s was conducted in remote areas of Nevada and in the Pacific Ocean. Those tests also took a deadly toll on the environment and local populations on Pacific islands.

But the recklessness and callous conditions of the New Mexico test is unparalleled in the toxic exposure it imposed on unsuspecting populations.

The stone-cold willingness to, in effect, bomb its own citizens by the federal government is a shuddering testimony as to the nefarious lengths the planners in Washington were prepared to go in their obsessive Russophobia.

When we survey the relentless fixation today in Washington and the U.S. political class with blaming Russia for all sorts of alleged malign intent, one can easily discern that this endemic Russophobia among America’s rulers has not waned.

The barbarity of what happened in New Mexico 75 years ago is alive and well. If it can be inflicted without apology on American citizens, then what does that say about the danger to the rest of the world?

American Militarism Marches On: No Discussion or Media Coverage of Washington’s War Against the World

Philip Giraldi October 22, 2020

Nearly everyone has heard the comment attributed for former Clinton consigliere Rahm Emanuel that one should never let a good crisis go to waste. The implication of the comment is that if there is a major crisis going on the cover it provides permits one to do all sorts of things under the radar that would otherwise be unacceptable. That aphorism is particularly true in the current context as there are multiple crises taking place simultaneously, all of which are being exploited to various degrees by interested parties.

One of the more interesting stories carefully hidden by the smoke being generate by civil unrest, plague and personal scandals is the continued march of American militarism. The story is particularly compelling as neither main party candidate is bothering to talk about it and there is no discussion of foreign policy even planned for the final presidential debate. Last week eccentric multi billionaire Elon Musk announced that he and the Pentagon are developing a new 7,500 m.p.h. missile capable of delivering 80 tons of military cargo nearly anywhere in the world in under an hour. It would undoubtedly be a major advanced capability catering to those military planners who envision continued U.S. intervention worldwide for the foreseeable future.

Meanwhile, agreement on a new START treaty that would limit the proliferation of some hypersonic weapon systems is stalled because the White House wants to include China in any deal. Beijing is not interested, particularly as Donald Trump is also claiming that Beijing will pay for the multi-trillion dollar stimulus packages that the United States will ultimately require to combat the coronavirus “… because this was not caused by our workers and our people, this was caused by China and China will pay us back in one form or another. We’re gonna take it from China. I tell you now, it’s coming out of China. They’re the ones that caused this problem.”

Indeed, China and Russia continue to be the boogeymen trotted out regularly to scare Americans. Last week Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s State Department issued a statement warning that “some foreign governments, such as those of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Russian Federation, seek to exert influence over U.S. foreign policy through lobbyists, external experts, and think tanks.” Why the statement was issued at this time, so close to elections is unclear, though it is possibly an attempt to line up possible scapegoats if the electoral process does not produce results acceptable to whomever loses. In fact, Russia and China hardly find a place on the list of those who fund lobbyists and think tanks.

Also of interest is another story about how Washington has chosen to interact with the world, one involving both enemy du jour Iran and Venezuela. Readers will undoubtedly recall how the United States seized in international waters four Greek owned but Liberian flagged tankers loaded with gasoline that were bound for Venezuela. The tankers were transporting more than a million gallons of fuel to economic basket case Venezuela, a country which is in its sad condition due to sanctions and other “maximum pressure” imposed by Washington, which has also sanctioned Venezuela’s own oil industry. The fuel was seized based on unilaterally imposed U.S. sanctions on Iranian sale or export of its own petroleum products, a move intended to strangle the Iranian economy and bring about an uprising of the Iranian people. As the sanctions imposed by Washington are not supported by the United Nations or by any other legal authority, the seizure is little more than exercise of a bit of force majeure that used to be called piracy.

Even though foreign and national security policy has not really been discussed in either the Biden or Trump campaign, there is general agreement in both parties that Venezuela is a rogue regime that must be replaced while Iran is an actual, tangible threat due to its alleged misbehavior in the Middle East. It has been dubbed by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo the “number one state sponsor of terrorism in the world.” Saner voices have observed that neither Venezuela nor Iran threaten the United States in any way and that the U.S. and Israel continue to kill many more civilians than Iran ever has, but they have been drowned out by the media talking heads who constantly spout the established narrative.

Well, the alleged Iranian fuel has arrived in New Jersey and a legal battle for custody of it has begun.  The fuel had been removed from the Greek tankers and transferred to other tankers for removal to the United States but the complication is that the Trump administration must now prove its case for forfeiture before the oil can be sold. The U.S. justification for seizing the cargoes is the claim that the fuel was an asset of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which the Treasury, Justice and State Departments have conveniently designated a foreign terrorist organization. But that contention is disputed by the cargoes’ owners, who claim to have nothing to do with the IRGC. They include other energy exporters and shippers in the Middle East, namely Mobin International Limited, Oman Fuel Trading Ltd and Sohar Fuel Trading LLC FZ. They have filed a motion for dismissal and are seeking return of the fuel plus additional compensation for the losses they have suffered. One has to hope they win as it is the United States that is in the wrong in this case.

The entire saga of the tankers and the fuel is symptomatic of the undeclared economic warfare that the United States now prefers to use when dealing with adversaries. And there is considerable evidence to suggest that Washington is trying to goad Iran into responding with force, providing the U.S. government with a plausible rationale for responding in kind. President Trump has directly threatened Iran in an October 9th public statement in which he promised the Iranians that “If you fuck around with us, if you do something bad to us, we are gonna do things to you that have never been done before.”

So, Washington’s aggression directed against much of the world continues with a national election less than two weeks away but no one is talking about it. That would seem odd in and of itself, but the sad part is that it is deliberate collusion on the part of government and media to make sure the voting public remains unaware the extent to which the United States has in reality become a pariah, a full-time bully in its foreign relations.

The ‘Third Way’ Scam

The ‘Third  Way’ Scam

October 27, 2020

By Francis Lee for the Saker Blog

Historically speaking “left” ‘’right,” and ‘centre” has been the political configuration dating from the French Revolution. In the 1789 French National Assembly, the nobility and high clergy sat to the right of the chair, while the third estate and lower-status clergy sat on the left. The benches in the middle became associated with political moderation.

Over the next century-plus, most European polities allowed for a “centrist” presence. Even the design of the European parliaments where the seating arrangements were horseshoe shaped and still are, except that is for the British parliament where the contending parties sit directly facing each other; initially Tories and Whigs but from the 20th century onwards Labour and Conservative. There were the cross-benches where the minor and generally ineffective parties sat. But Centrism will likely be distressed to learn that the first recorded appearance of the word “centrist,” according to the Oxford English Dictionary, was an 1872 insult from London’s Daily News correspondent in France, who assailed “that weak-kneed congregation who sit in the middle of the House, and call themselves centrists.’’

In the UK the centre was traditionally moderate, providing a seating space for a small Liberal party, until that is, the late Celtic arrivals of Irish, Welsh and Scottish militant nationalists – Sinn Fein, Plaid Cymru and the Scottish National Party who began to make their presence felt.

But it was the European party structures and their Parliamentary expression that led invariably to coalition governments; this was the case even in Nazi Germany where Hitler had to form an alliance with the Zentrum Liberal party to get an absolute majority in the Reichstag. This was quite different from the Anglo-American two party systems where the Government could de facto be elected on a one-party vote.

Nonetheless, centrism had its more forthright defenders. In the US at the dawn of the Cold War, liberal historian Arthur Schlesinger celebrated political moderation as a vigorous “Third Force” in his 1949 book The Vital Centre. Rather than left or right, he wrote, the real conflict was “freedom vs. totalitarianism.” The United States’ goal presidential election — which saw the resounding defeat of George McGovern in 1972 — occasioned a rightward shift in centre-left parties. Smarting from defeat and the Nixon triumph Democratic elites moved to retake control for a new direction for the party. And it was this that set the tone, not merely for the United States but also in Europe. In 1992 the man of the moment William Jefferson Clinton had arrived. But there was much work to be done. The sabotage of the tools that had underpinned the prosperity of the Golden Age of Capitalism (1945-75) also created unprecedented challenges for the political parties of the ‘soft’ left. Infused with what were thought to be new ideas they now began to look for new paths forward less hostile to finance and big business.

‘’We have moved past the sterile debates between those who say that government is the enemy, and those who say that government is the answer, said Clinton who, along with his wife Hilary had studied at Yale school during the 1970s, and Bill had an unfinished stint at Oxford as a Rhodes scholar in the late 60s (1) ‘My fellow Americans we have found a ‘Third Way’

THE INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF THE THIRD WAY

The ‘Third Way’ was a rather slippery and nebulous concept. In purely policy terms, however, the Clinton reforms were a mixed bag and differed from the postulates laid down by the former Reagan administration. In his 1992 presidential campaign Clinton promised that, if elected, he would bring about the “end of welfare as we know it.” This catchy election pledge aimed to address middle class concerns about so–called welfare dependency while also arguing that the government had an important role to play in fighting poverty and unemployment. Clinton’s Third Way position, at best, offered a way out of the liberal/conservative impasse on how to effectively reform America’s welfare system. At worst, Clinton’s position undermined the concept of welfare entitlements that the Democratic Party had established in America at an earlier period. In 1996 during the lead up to that year’s presidential election, President Clinton signed into law the most significant federal welfare Act since the 1960s. However, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) that Clinton signed had largely been drafted by congressional Republicans. Then came NAFTA, the bitterly contested policy which still rankles.

But possibly the most politically significant piece of legislation authorised by the Clinton administration was the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933. This Act had prevented ordinary commercial banks owning excess of certain types of dubious and dangerous financial companies, which had been considered so useful that it had survived until it was repealed in 1999 under Clinton and his Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, the former Goldman Sachs banker.

Of course this was manna from Heaven for the banking and financial fraternity, and it indicated the President’s choice of policies which had little in common with his professed ‘Third Way’ beliefs. In conclusion the failure of Clinton’s Third Way welfare agenda opened the way for more conservative reforms. This experience is illustrative of the pitfalls of Third Way politics with its mix of post–entitlement welfare policies and hard–nosed electoral positioning.

That being said the US economy began to move into high-gear during the 1990s and even managed a budgetary surplus. Alas, however, as with all upturns comes the downturns and the long-run, dot.com blow-out of 1999/2000, the US boom of the roaring 90s turned into a secular decline, and this was followed by even deeper economic crises in 2008 and now in 2020.

It could be argued in terms of cyclical political movements that there exists a rough correspondence between political and economic phases. In political terms this is usually a cyclical period between progress and reaction, movement, and order, conservative or radical, revolution and restoration. The great German social and political theorist, Max Weber, (1864-1920) would have argued that the Clinton restoration being based upon the Reagan/Thatcher ascendency was an example of charismatic authority that was superseded by legal-rational authority. In broad illustrative terms the MaoZedong period in China was followed by Chou En Lai, Trotsky was followed by Stalin, Napoleon by Louis XVIII, Cromwell was followed by the reinstallation of Charles II. As day follows night Revolution is followed by Restoration. But the restoration is never complete, and there can be no turning back to the status quo ante. But the strange thing was that during the second half of the 20th century a reactionary right-wing movement, best illustrated by Reagan and Thatcher was replaced by a milder ‘Third Way’ version of the same theory. The ‘Third-Way’ was beginning to take on rather familiar social and political forms, although its proponents would argue otherwise.

THE THIRD WAY CROSSES THE BIG POND

By 1997 the Clinton ascendancy – the Third-Way – had come to the attention of an ambitious young man who was trying to find an occupational niche for himself in the London milieu. Anthony Charles Lynton Blair, who preferred to be called ‘Tony’ (of course) and described himself as a ‘regular kind of guy’ (goes without saying) was the son of a barrister, Blair attended Fettes College in Edinburgh (a school often viewed as ‘‘Scotland’s Eton’’) and Saint John’s College of the University of Oxford, where he combined the study of law with interest in religious ideas and popular music. But he displayed little enthusiasm for politics until he met his future wife, Cherie Booth. He graduated from Oxford in 1975 and was called to the bar* the following year. While specializing in employment and commercial law, he became increasingly involved in Labour Party politics and in 1983 was elected to the House of Commons to the safe Labour parliamentary seat of Sedgefield, a tight-knit former mining district in north-eastern England. His entry into politics coincided with a long political ascendancy of the Conservative Party (from 1979) and Labour’s loss of four consecutive general elections (from 1979 through 1992). He stood as leader of the Labour party and won an overwhelming victory (1997) over a divided, dispirited and out-of-ideas, Conservative party.

Blair was one of those archetypal politicians – unfortunately one of many – who didn’t have a political notion in their heads; and as a complete opportunist he was, as was the case with Clinton, able to latch on to some of the fashionable threadbare and dubious political and economic ideas current at that time. One of those fashionable notions was the ‘Third Way’ in politics.

In fact the ‘Third Way’ was a pretty simple idea.

‘’It was an attempt by the parties of the left to stake out a new middle-ground in politics. Fuddy-duddy socialist ideas were considered distinctly de trop. Globalization as its proponents would argue, was considered inevitable, so countries should embrace it and adapt to it, hitching a ride on the growth of global financial markets, then shaving off globalizations rough edges with progressive social policies and dollops of good old-fashioned redistribution. As Blair and Germany’s Gerhard Schröder summarised it in a joint declaration in 1998, the Third Way stands out not only for social justice but also for economic dynamism and the unleashing of creativity and innovation.

But this third way was always an offshore model, a recipe for countries effectively to turn themselves into tax havens in order to prosper in rough, globalizing seas. The model was, in turn, driven by the competitiveness agenda, the notion or ideology, that states must be ‘open for business’ constantly dangling enticements to large multinationals and banks and to rootless global money – for fear that they will decamp to more hospitable or ‘competitive’ places like Dubai, Singapore or Geneva. (2)

THE IDEOLOGICAL ASSIMILATION OF THE OLD LEFT

But behind the rhetoric of a new golden age which awaited the electorates on both sides of the pond was the familiar sound of disappointment among the loyal supporters and believers who were somewhat sceptical about the new order – with good reason. The newly entrenched and consolidated Third-Way involved strict de-regulation of labour markets and only light-touch regulation – if at all – of financial markets. In the meantime financiers, were still relatively untouched by the pseudo-rhetoric of globalization. The whole dreary neo-classical credo was trotted out namely that that if left alone, financial markets would reward efficient firms and punish inefficient ones which would go out of business. Meanwhile financiers could help with mergers and transfers of ownership of the more efficient. This reasoning also bolstered demand for the privatisation of state enterprises, which was soon embraced with almost as much enthusiasm by social democratic parties as by their right-wing opponents – witness the French socialist government of Lionel Jospin and the renamed ‘New Labour’ government of Tony Blair.

The period of debt-financed growth got into gear in the early 80s during which it was sustained up until the start of the 21st century. That time bore witness not only to economic issues but also to political and ideological questions and concepts; a reactionary milieu established itself where decadence had become de rigueur. The presence of rampant individualism, obsession with self, contempt for failure was contained in Ayn Rand’s view of life. Doyenne of the new age Ms Rand’s rise in popularity coincided with the widest gap between rich and poor in the history of the US. Her books are today actually more popular than when she lived, and attempts are being made by very wealthy parties to sell her ideology as the philosophy of our era.

Ms Rand has been accused of Vulcanism, that is of exhibiting an attitude of pure logic unbalanced by empathy and humanity like the character Spock from Star Trek, who is from planet Vulcan. When people of high intelligence lack human empathy, they can be intellectually arrogant, even narcissistic.

One of the major criticisms of Ayn Rand is that all her heroes are self-centred sociopaths, as she is: they are concerned only with themselves, with their own purpose and ambition, and they are entirely unconcerned with others.

Rand also ignores context in her assessment of reality: the persistence of her logic leads to places where philosophy gets utterly divorced from common sense and reality. Philosophical materialists must contend with the facticity that we are woven into in its entirety, even with those aspects of our facticity that are what she would view as not heroic, like the hunger of the masses.

Okay it can be generally agreed that the idiosyncratic Ms Rand is a little bit over the top, but her generalisations roughly ring true with today’s ailing social and moral societal collapse.

But as Emile Durkheim (1858-1917) once noted:

‘If, in activities that almost completely fill all of our days, we follow no rule save that of our own self-interest, as we understand it, how then can we acquire a taste for altruism, for forgetfulness of self and sacrifice? Thus the lack of any economic discipline cannot fail to produce damaging social effects that spill over beyond the economic sphere, bringing with it a decline in morality.’’(3)

One wonders whether or not Ms Rand actually believes in her virulent anti-social messages, or, what I rather suspect, she is simply out to shock the more gullible by voicing what are in essence simply crackpot outpourings.

That being said she certainly has a following particularly among those well-heeled denizens who seem intoxicated with these rantings.

IT’S THE ECONOMY STUPID

Turning to economics the situation goes from bad to worse. This is hardly surprising since the attempt to abolish the trade cycle, a rather eccentric and fashionable notion since the early 1980s, was bound to result in an economic nemesis. It has been argued that:

‘’Whilst all capitalist systems are premised on the monopolisation on the gains of growth by the people who own the assets, under finance led growth these dynamics become more extreme. Rising private debt might conceal this fact during the upswing of the economic cycle, but when the downturn hits it becomes clear that finance-led growth is based upon trickle-up economics, in which the gains of the wealthy come directly at the expense of ordinary people. This is because financialization involves the extraction of economic rents from the production process – income derived from the ownership of existing assets that does not create any new value. (4)

Paper currency is not value, it is a claim on value, a promissory note. Value is produced in the production process, whereas economic rent – rent on land, titles of future ownership claims (stocks, shares, bonds) monopolistic pricing, patents – is produced in the extractive process. It is fictitious capital. The financial economy is essentially parasitic on the productive economy.

When corporations generate ‘growth’ it should be understood that the Central Bank enables this ‘growth’ when it showers the same corporations with QE monies who simply buy-back their own shares/stocks and become richer! In the same manner when large corporations buy other smaller businesses – through mergers and acquisitions M&A, they also become ‘richer’ but in fact no new wealth has been created, what has occurred is a shift of wealth from one sector of the economy to another, this is a zero-sum game where the central bank determines the winners and losers in this rigged fixture: the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Another side of this process is the increasing market concentration with the growth of monopolies/oligopolies and the monopoly rents that go with it.

Having painted itself into a corner the economics institutions, both public and private, seem unable to extricate themselves from an ever-tightening process of slow economic and political strangulation.

In summation we may say without reservation that the ‘Third-Way’ was a rather transparent con-trick reminiscent of the second-rate magician in Thomas Mann’s allegorical novel Mario and the Magician. In this particular work the sorcerer, Cipolla, is analogous to the fascist dictators of the era with their fiery speeches and rhetoric designed to hoodwink his political audience into believing that what appears to be real is in fact not real. In our own time this simulacrum is the product of modern advertising techniques designed to mask the reality behind a stream of psychological manipulation and conditioning of the audience. How long this process and phenomenon will last is problematic. Western civilization seems standing at the crossroads without a plan B.

It’s rather like Gerald Celente always says: ‘‘When everything else fails, they take you to war.’’

NOTES

(1) As the 2016 presidential campaign closed in on the finish line, the Washington Post published  an eleven-year-old tape of Republican nominee Donald Trump’s making controversial remarks about women. The inevitable partisan rancour that ensued largely targeted the behaviour Bill Clinton, husband of Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, including the repetition of rumours that he had been expelled from Oxford University in 1969 for raping English classmate Eileen Wellstone.

The allegations weren’t new — Republican opposition research strategist Roger Stone had tweeted about them a year earlier:

The backdrop for these rumours was that just prior to his graduation from Georgetown University, Bill Clinton won a prestigious Rhodes Scholarship to study at University College, Oxford, for two years and headed off to England for the 1968-69 academic term — but he returned to the United States (under a pall?) before finishing out the full two-year course of study.

There was additionally the Lewinsky affair. Yes, Mr Clinton certainly had a penchant for the ladies.

(2) Nicholas Shaxson – The Finance Curse – Chapter 5 fn 10 – p.97) In the words of Peter Mandelson, Blair’s Svengali and his co-author Roger Liddle in their book – The Blair Revolution – the main aim of the Third Way project was to ‘… overcome Britain’s continued slide into international competitiveness … based upon partnership or private and public sectors and create a more equal and cohesive society.

(3) Emile Durkheim – The Division of Labour in Society – p.xxxiv.

(4) Grace Blakeley – Stolen – p.14.

* ‘Called to the Bar’ This has nothing to do with going for a drink in a licensed establishment! It is a term used by the legal profession signifiying the entrance of the candidate into the legal profession and practising of law thereof.

تحرير كامل فلسطين يقترب بسرعة والأوهام لن تحمي كيان العدو!

محمد صادق الحسيني

إنّ كلّ ما يحكم سلوك وتصرفات قادة العدو، السياسيين والعسكريين هو الأوهام والذعر من المستقبل القاتم، الذي ينتظرهم.

فها هو نتن ياهو يحاول ان يبيع جمهوره أوهام انتصاراته الفارغة بتوقيع اتفاقيات مع الإمارات المتحدة والبحرين والسودان. لكن هذا الجمهور يواصل التظاهر ضدّه يومياً مطالباً باستقالته ومحاكمته بتهم الفساد وتلقي الرشى. أما وزير حربه، الجنرال بني غانتس، الأكثر قدرة من نتن ياهو على قراءة موازين القوى العسكرية في المنطقة، فقد هرع الى واشنطن، ليس لتأمين التفوق العسكري «الإسرائيلي» الشامل كما ادّعى أمام وسائل الإعلام في واشنطن، وإنما لاستجداء الإدارة الأميركية لحماية كيانه من المرحلة الاخيرة، من الهجوم الاستراتيجي لقوات حلف المقاومة، والذي يتوقعه هو وأركان حربه بعد الانتخابات الرئاسية الأميركية.

وهو الأمر الذي اضطر، رئيس أركان الجيش الصهيوني، الجنرال أڤيڤ كوخافي، قبل أيام قليلة، الى تنفيذ المناورة التشبيهية على الحدود الشمالية، والتي ستستمرّ حتى ‪يوم الخميس المقبل، حيث كانت قد تأجلت مرتين قبل ذلك بحجة وباء كورونا، على حدّ زعم كوخافي، بينما حقيقة الأمر تقول بغير ذلك. اذ انّ سبب التأجيل الحقيقي هو خوف الأركان الصهيونية من استفزاز قوات المقاومة في لبنان ويجعلها تردّ على تلك الاستفزازات.

وهذا ما يؤكده البروفيسور افرايم إنبار، رئيس معهد القدس للاستراتيجيا والأمن، في تصريح له نشره موقع «جيروساليم بوست» الالكتروني، بتاريخ 26/10/2020، حيث قال انّ «عمليات التطبيع ربما تدفع حزب الله لشنّ حرب على إسرائيل»، أيّ انّ مناورات جيش الاحتلال ليست روتينية وإنما هي انعكاس للهلع، الذي يسود أوساط القيادتين السياسية والعسكرية، من اقتراب موعد تنفيذ قوات حلف المقاومة للمرحلة الأخيرة من هجومها الاستراتيجي، والذي سينتهي بتحرير كامل فلسطين وعاصمتها القدس.

وهذا ما يعترف به، بشكل غير مباشر، الناطق العسكري للشؤون الدولية (الإعلام الخارجي) في الجيش الصهيوني، العقيد جوناثان كونريكوسنقصد الاعتراف بالهلع والذعر، الذي يعتري القيادات العسكرية الصهيونية، حيث قال في تصريح له نشره موقع «جيروساليم بوست» الالكتروني، بتاريخ 26/10/2020، «إنّ حزب الله يشكل الخطر الداهم على المدنيين الاسرائيليين»…!

وهذا بالضبط ما يترجم خوفاً وهلعاً، لن ينفعهم في مواجهته لا محمد بن زايد ولا محمد بن سلمان، المدمنين على تعاطي المخدرات واللذين خضعا للعلاج من هذه الآفة، في بلد غير عدو للعرب، من دون تحقيق نتائج إيجابية…!

وعلى من يشك في هذه الحقيقة أن يتابع حركة أنف كلّ منهما، عند ظهورهما على شاشات التلفزة، وهي الحركة التي لا يمكن للمدمن التحكم بها والمتمثلة في تحريك الأنف يميناً ويساراً من دون لمسه…!

ورغم ذلك كله فإنّ تقارير مستعجلة وردت الى دوائر صنع القرار في عدد من عواصم محور المقاومة الذي يتسع رغم انبطاح هؤلاء الأتباع والأذناب، تفيد بانّ احتمالات إقدام العدو الصهيوني وبدعم من بعض أجنحة الدولة العميقة في أميركا على القيام بعمليات انتقامية او ردعية بهدف او ذريعة منع إيران من التموضع في سورية او منع حزب الله من الصعود الى الجليل، او ايّ ذريعة أخرى، على وقع تصاعد حدة الانتخابات الأميركية وتسابق الحزبين في خدمة العدو الصهيوني…!

لهؤلاء ولكلّ من تبقى من أمراء حرب صغار في تل أبيب بعد انقراض ملوك «اسرائيل» نقول:

«إسرائيل» سقطت ليس فقط عندنا، في قلوبنا وأنفسنا وأذهاننا وعقولنا نحن جيل العرب والمسلمين المتحررين من نظام التبعية والانقياد للهيمنة الأميركية والرجعية العربية، بل وسقطت أيضاً في الجبهة الداخلية لبيت العنكبوت الذي بدأ يحيط بكم من كلّ جانب أيها الصهاينة الجبناء. وهذا وصف صحافتكم ونخبكم التي بدأت تتحدث علناً عن الخراب الثالث…!

ايّ حماقة سترتكبونها ستحمل في طياتها نهايتكم، فنحن في جهوزية شاملة وكاملة، وسنردّ لكم الصاع بعشرة مما تعدّون…!

وسيكون مصيركم يشبه مصير أسيادكم الذين فروا من العراق في العام 2011 بكفالة الجنرال الحاج قاسم سليماني الذي استقبل يومها مبعوثاً أميركياً خاصاً من داخل العراق، يتوسّل اليه الاستفادة من موقعه المعنوي لدى قوات المقاومة العراقية ليوقفوا عملياتهم ليخرجوا بسلام من داخل العراق (وتوسلاتكم موجودة بالصوت والصورة لدى قيادة المحور لمن قد يشكك بذلك من الكتبة المأجورين وأبواق المتزلفين لكم لا سيما الجدد منهم)!

فحذار حذار أيها الصهاينة من اللعب بالنار في سورية او لبنان، ولا يغرّنكم تشجيع بعض الدوائر الاميركية لكم، فقد تكون تخبّئ إرادة التضحية بكم بعد أن أصبحتم ثقلاً كبيراً على كاهلهم (كما تفيد تقارير مؤكدة لدينا)!

لقد أعذر من أنذر، احجزوا تذاكر العودة الى مواطنكم الأصلية، أو تعلموا السباحة سريعاً قبل فوات الأوان!

بعدنا طيبين قولوا الله…

Capitalism is Double-billing Us: We Pay from Our Wallets only for Our Future to Be Stolen from Us

October 26, 2020

Air pollution in London. (Photo: File)

Here is a word that risks deterring you from reading on much further, even though it may hold the key to understanding why we are in such a terrible political, economic and social mess. That word is “externalities”.

It sounds like a piece of economic jargon. It is a piece of economic jargon. But it is also the foundation stone on which the west’s current economic and ideological system has been built. Focusing on how externalities work and how they have come to dominate every sphere of our lives is to understand how we are destroying our planet – and offer at the same time the waypost to a better future.

In economics, “externalities” are usually defined indifferently as the effects of a commercial or industrial process on a third party that are not costed into that process.

Here is what should be a familiar example. For decades, cigarette manufacturers made enormous profits by concealing scientific evidence that over time their product could prove lethal to customers. The firms profited by externalizing the costs associated with cigarettes – of death and disease – on to those buying their cigarettes and wider society. People gave Philip Morris and British American Tobacco their money as these companies made those smoking Marlboros and Lucky Strikes progressively unhealthier.

The externalized cost was paid – is still paid – by the customers themselves, by grieving families, by local and national health services, and by the taxpayer. Had the firms been required to pick up these various tabs, it would have proved entirely unprofitable to manufacture cigarettes.

Inherently Violent

Externalities are not incidental to the way capitalist economies run. They are integral to them. After all, it is a legal obligation on private companies to maximize profits for their shareholders – in addition, of course, to the personal incentive bosses have to enrich themselves, and each company’s need to avoid making themselves vulnerable to more profitable and predatory competitors in the marketplace.

Companies are therefore motivated to offload as many costs as possible on to others. As we shall see, externalities mean someone other than the company itself pays the true cost behind its profits, either because those others are too weak or ignorant to fight back or because the bill comes due further down the line. And for that reason, externalities – and capitalism – are inherently violent.

All this would be glaringly obvious if we didn’t live inside an ideological system – the ultimate echo chamber enforced by our corporate media – that is complicit either in hiding this violence or in normalizing it. When externalities are particularly onerous or harmful, as they invariably are in one way or another, it becomes necessary for a company to obscure the connection between cause and effect, between its accumulation of profit and the resulting accumulation of damage caused to a community, a distant country or the natural world – or all three.

That is why corporations – those that inflict the biggest and worst externalities – invest a great deal of time and money in aggressively managing public perceptions. They achieve this through a combination of public relations, advertising, media control, political lobbying and the capture of regulatory institutions. Much of the business of business is deception, either making the externalized harm invisible or gaining the public’s resigned acceptance that the harm is inevitable.

In that sense, capitalism produces a business model that is not only rapacious but psychopathic. Those who pursue profit have no choice but to inflict damage on wider society or the planet, and then cloak their deeply anti-social – even suicidal – actions.

Psychopathic Demands

A recent film that alludes to how this form of violence works was last year’s Dark Waters, concerning the long-running legal battle with DuPont over the chemicals it developed to make non-stick coatings for pots and pans. From the outset, DuPont’s research showed that these chemicals were highly dangerous and accumulated in the body. The science overwhelmingly suggested that exposed individuals would be at risk of developing cancerous tumors or producing children with birth defects.

There were huge profits to be made for DuPont from its chemical discovery so long as it could keep the research hidden. So that’s exactly what its executives did. They set aside basic morality and acted in concert with the psychopathic demands of the marketplace.

DuPont produced pans that contaminated its customers’ food. Workers were exposed to a cocktail of lethal poisons in its factories. The company stored the toxic waste products in drums and then secretly disposed of them in landfills where they leached into the local water supply, killing cattle and producing an epidemic of disease among local residents. DuPont created a chemical that is now everywhere in our environment, risking the health of generations to come.

But a film like Dark Waters necessarily turned a case study in how capitalism commits violence by externalizing its costs into something less threatening, less revelatory. We hiss at DuPont’s executives as though they are the ugly sisters in a pantomime rather than ordinary people not unlike our parents, our siblings, our offspring, ourselves.

In truth, there is nothing exceptional about the DuPont story – apart from the company’s failure to keep its secret hidden from the public. And that exposure was anomalous, occurring only belatedly and against great odds.

An important message the film’s feelgood ending fails to deliver is that other corporations have learned from DuPont’s mistake – not the moral “mistake” of externalizing their costs, but the financial mistake of getting caught doing so. Corporate lobbyists have worked since to further capture regulatory authorities and to amend transparency and legal discovery laws to avoid any repetition, to ensure they are not held legally liable, as DuPont was, in the future.

Victims of Our Bombs

Unlike the DuPont case, most externalities are never exposed. Instead, they hide in plain sight. These externalities do not need to be concealed because they are either not perceived as externalities or because they are viewed as so unimportant as to be not worth factoring in.

The military-industrial complex – the one we were warned about more than half a century ago by President Dwight Eisenhower, a former US general – excels in these kinds of externalities. Its power derives from its ability to externalize its costs on to the victims of its bombs and its wars. These are people we know and care little about: they live far from us, they look and sound different to us, they are denied names and life stories like us. They are simply numbers, denoting them either as terrorists or, at best, unfortunate collateral damage.

The externalities of the west’s war industries are opaque to us. The chain of cause and effect is nowadays obscured as “humanitarian intervention”. And even when war’s externalities come knocking at our borders as refugees flee from the bloodshed, or from the nihilistic cults sucked into the power vacuums we leave behind, or from the wreckage of infrastructure our weapons cause, or from the environmental degradation and pollution we unleash, or from the economies ruined by our plunder of local resources, we still don’t recognize these externalities for what they are. Our politicians and media transform the victims of our wars and our resource grabs into, at best, economic migrants and, at worst, barbarians at the gate.

Snapshots of Catastrophe

If we are entirely ignorant of the externalities inflicted by capitalism on victims beyond our shores, we are gradually and very late in the day waking up to some of capitalism’s externalities much closer to home. Parts of the corporate media are finally admitting that which can no longer be plausibly denied, which is evident to our own senses.

For decades politicians and the corporate media managed to veil two things: that capitalism is an entirely unsustainable, profit-driven, endless consumption model; and that the environment is being gradually damaged in ways harmful to life. Each was obscured, as was the fact that the two are causally connected. The economic model is the primary cause of environmental damage.

People, especially the young, are slowly awakening from this enforced state of ignorance. The corporate media, even its most liberal elements, is not leading this process; it is responding to that awakening.

Last week the Guardian newspaper prominently ran two stories about externalities, even if it failed to frame them as such. One was about micro-plastics leaching from feeding bottles into babies, and the other about the toll air pollution is taking on the populations of major European cities.

The latter story, based on new research, specifically assessed the cost of air pollution in European cities – in terms of “premature death, hospital treatment, lost working days and other health costs” – at £150 billion a year. Most of this was caused by pollution from vehicles, the profitable product of the car industry. The researchers admitted that their figure was an under-estimate of air pollution’s true cost.

But, of course, even that underestimate was arrived at solely on the basis of metrics prioritized by capitalist ideology: the cost to the economy of death and disease, not the incalculable cost in lost and damaged human lives, and even less the damage to other species and the natural world. Another report last week alluded to one of those many additional costs, showing a steep rise in depression and anxiety caused by air pollution.

The other story, on baby bottles, is part of a much bigger story of how the plastics industry – whose products are derivatives of the fossil fuel industry – has long been filling our oceans and soil with plastics, both of the visible and invisible kind. Last week’s report revealed that the sterilization process in which bottles are heated in boiling water resulted in babies swallowing millions of micro-plastics each day. The study found that plastic food containers were shedding much higher loads of micro-plastics than expected.

These stories are snapshots of a much wider environmental catastrophe unfolding across the planet caused by profit-driven industrialized society. As well as heating up the climate, corporations are chopping down the forests that don’t burn down first, ridding the planet of its lungs; they are destroying natural habitats and soil quality, and they are rapidly killing off insect populations.

These industries’ externalities are, for the time being, impacting most severely on the natural world. But they will soon have more visible and dramatic effects that will be felt by our children and grandchildren. Neither of these constituencies currently has a say in how our capitalist “democracies” are being run.

Perception Managers

Capitalism isn’t only harming us, it’s double-billing us: taking first from our wallets and then depriving us of a future. We have now entered an era of deep cognitive dissonance.

Unlike a few years ago, many of us now understand that our futures are at grave risk from changes in our environment – the effect. But the task of today’s perception managers, like those of yesteryear, is to obscure the main cause – our economic system, capitalism.

The increasingly desperate effort to dissociate capitalism from the imminent environmental crisis – to break any perception of a causal link – was highlighted early this year. It emerged that counter-terrorism police in the UK had included Extinction Rebellion, the west’s main environmental protest group, on a list of extremist organizations. Under related “Prevent” regulations, teachers and government officials are already required by law to report anyone who they suspect of being “radicalized”.

In a guide explaining the purpose of the list, officials and teachers were told to identify anyone who speaks in “strong or emotive terms about environmental issues like climate change, ecology, species extinction, fracking, airport expansion or pollution”.

Why was Extinction Rebellion, a non-violent, civil disobedience group, included alongside neo-Nazis and Islamic jihadists? A whole page is dedicated to the threat posed by Extinction Rebellion. The guide explains that the organization’s activism is rooted in an “anti-establishment philosophy that seeks system change”. That is, environmental activism risks making apparent – especially to the young – the causal connection between the economic system and damage to the environment.

Once the story broke, the police hastily rowed back, claiming that Extinction Rebellion’s inclusion was a mistake. But more recently establishment efforts to decouple capitalism from its catastrophic externalities have grown more explicit.

Last month England’s department of education ordered schools not to use any materials in the curriculum that question the legitimacy of capitalism. Opposition to capitalism was described as an “extreme political stance” – opposition, let us remember, to an economic system whose relentless pursuit of growth and profit treats the destruction of the natural world as an uncosted externality.

Paradoxically, education officials equated the promotion of alternatives to capitalism as a threat to free speech, as well as an endorsement of illegal activity, and – inevitably – as evidence of antisemitism.

Suicidal Trajectory

These desperate and draconian measures to shore up an increasingly discredited system are not about to end. They will get much worse.

The establishment is not preparing to give up on capitalism – the ideology that enriched and empowered it – without a fight. The political and media class proved that with their relentless and unprecedented attacks on Labour opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn over several years. And Corbyn was offering only a reformist, democratic socialist agenda.

The establishment has also demonstrated its determination to cling on to the status quo in its relentless and unprecedented attacks on Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, who is locked away, seemingly indefinitely, for revealing the externalities – the victims – of the west’s war industries and the psychopathic behavior of those in power.

Efforts to end the suicidal trajectory of our current “free market” system will doubtless soon be equated with terrorism, as the Prevent strategy has already intimated. We should be ready.

There can be no escape from the death wish of capitalism without recognizing that death wish, and then demanding and working for wholesale change. Externalities may sound like innocuous jargon, but they and the economic system that requires them are killing us, our children and the planet.

The nightmare can end, but only if we wake up.

– 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). Visit his website www.jonathan-cook.net. He contributed this article to The Palestine Chronicle.

هل أسقط أردوغان سياساته التنسيقيّة مع الروس والإيرانيّين؟

 د.وفيق إبراهيم

اقتربت سياسات تركيا التوسعية من إصابة مصالح روسيا وإيران في أكثر من مدى. وتتوجّه الى التسبب بأذى داخلي لهما في علاقتيهما ببعض أقلياتها الدينية والقومية.

هذا يؤدي فوراً الى تصدّع التنسيق المعتمد بين البلدان الثلاثة انطلاقاً من ميادين سورية. وهو تنسيق كان يتطوّر لإدارة الازمة السورية دافعاً نحو ايجاد حلول عميقة لها.

بذلك يضع الرئيس التركي أردوغان بلاده في مواجهات قوية مع روسيا وإيران، ليس في الساحة السورية فقط، بل يتمدّد حكماً نحو ناغورني قره باغ بين ارمينيا واذربيجان وقد يتطور نحو آسيا الوسطى والقوقاز وأذربيجان الايرانية.

فهناك من يعتقد ان الاتراك يعملون لإعادة احياء الدولة العثمانية وذلك عبر اثارة العصبية التركمانية في الجزء الإيراني من اذربيجان واذربيجان المستقلة وذوي الأصول العثمانية التركية، في القوقاز ودول آسيا الوسطى وبعض جمهوريات الداخل الروسي، وأقلية الايغور الصينية، هذا دون نسيان بعض السوريين والعراقيين والليبيين من اصول تركمانية ايضاً.

فيبدو ان السياسة التركية الحالية تبذل جهوداً واسعة لتعبئة تراجعات النفوذ الاميركي وتسعى لحيازة دور أكبر مما تؤديه عادة الدول الاقليمية.

فهل نسي أردوغان أن للأميركيين والحلف الاطلسي قواعد عسكرية ونووية في بلاده؟ وهذه ليست من صفات الدول العظمى؟ وهل نسي ايضاً ان روسيا دولة عظمى يفصله عنها البحر الأسود، وايران دولة اقليمية لديها تحالفات عميقة في الشرق الاوسط والعالم الاسلامي؟

كان بإمكان الروسي والإيرانيين الاكتفاء بأسلوب المناوشات لو بقي الجشع التركي عند حدود البلاغة الخطابية العثمانية، لكنه اصبح يمتلك دوراً عسكرياً واسعاً في ناغورني قره باغ وأذربيجان «باكو» وآليات ثقافية واسعة مع اعلام دقيق يتوجه لاستثارة التركمان في اذربيجان الايرانية وآسيا الوسطى وبعض جمهوريات روسيا، متوجهاً اليها بما يشبه الدعوة الى التحرر من الاحتلالين الروسي والايراني، كما تقول الدعاية العثمانية.

ان هذا الانسداد في العلاقات بين روسيا وايران وتركيا، ظهر بوضوح في حركتين متتابعتين: الاولى القصف الجوي الروسي بالتنسيق مع الجيش السوري على موقع لفيلق الشام في منطقة الدويلة في ريف إدلب السورية المحتلة قتل ثمانين إرهابياً وجرح المئات.

والمعروف هنا أن الجيش التركي يحتل هذه المنطقة ويعتبر منظمة فيلق الشام الارهابية حركة عثمانية اخوانية صرفة تلعب دور إسناد للسياسات التركية من سورية الى ناغورني قره باغ وصولاً الى باكو اذربيجان.

هناك اذاً علاقات بنيوية بين السياسات التركية وفيلق الشام بما يكشف ان قصفه من قبل روسيا هو رسالة روسية علنية للسياسات العثمانية التركية، بضرورة تنفيسها لمرض التاريخ والرؤوس الحامية والعودة الى الالتزام بموازين القوى.

ماذا عن الحركة الثانية؟

تتسم السياسة الايرانية مع تركيا بمبدأ الواقعية السياسية الذي يعتبر الجوار الجغرافي بينهما ضرورة لمنطق الممكن من التسويات انطلاقاً من ان إيران مستهدفة من الاميركيين وحدودها البحرية مع الخليج والاحتلال الاميركي للعراق، الامر الذي يشجعها على تحسين العلاقات مع الاتراك، هذا ما يحدث في سورية من جهة وبتعاملها المتشابه مع الأقليات الكردية في المنطقة. يكفي ان حدود البلدين لم تشهد أي توتر او صدام منذ نصف قرن تقريباً.

هذا لا يعني وجود حالة تحالفية بينهما، وانما ضرورات تنسيقية جغرافية من جهة ولوجود مكونات قومية متقاربة في البلدين، فإذا كان الاتراك يراهنون على توتير الاوضاع العرقية في اذربيجان الإيرانية ذات الجذور التركمانية فهناك نحو 15 مليون علوي تركي مع أعداد من الشيعة بالإمكان الاعتماد عليهم للجم العثمانية الطورانية.

هناك اذاً مشروع تركي لتصديع ايران وآسيا الوسطى عبر تحريك العصبيات التركمانية فيها، ما أدى الى تحريك قطعات عسكرية إيرانية نحو الحدود مع باكو اذربيجان بما يشبه إنذاراً أخيراً للأتراك وأقلياتهم التركية بأن الجمهورية الاسلامية لن تتردد من اللجوء الى الأسلوب العسكري لوقف محاولات تغير الخريطة السياسية للقوقاز وآسيا الوسطى وناغورني قره باغ.

كان هناك تعويل تركي على انتماء باكو اذربيجان التركمانية الى المذهب الشيعي بشكل يفرض على طهران تأييدها او الصمت في أسوأ الاحتمالات.

لكن إيران الخبيرة في الاساليب العثمانية استوعبت الموقف بسرعة وقرأته على انه محاولة لتجديد دولة بني عثمان على اساس العصبية التركمانية. وهذا يؤذي الجمهورية الاسلامية في تعدديتها القومية ودورها السياسي الإقليمي.

وهذا ما استشعر به الروس الذين لاحظوا ميلاً تركياً لدفع باكو أذربيجان الى خرق كل وقف لإطلاق النار مع الأرمن مع مواصلة الحرب وسط خطاب تركي عنصري، يحاول تصوير المعركة أنها بين تركمان وأرمن من جهة وبين مسيحيين ومسلمين من جهة ثانية.

لذلك يحاول أردوغان تقديم بلاده على انها نصيرة الإسلام في وجه الرئيس الفرنسي ماكرون الذي أساء إليه واي محاولة اخرى.

هناك انعكاس سريع مرتقب للتدهور بين الروس والإيرانيين وبين الأتراك في ميادين سورية. وهذا يهدّد التنسيق القائم بينهم والمستمر منذ أربع سنوات تقريباً.

فهل سقط هذا التنسيق الثلاثي أو أنه في الطريق التدريجي اليه؟

لم يعد لدى الاتراك إلا العودة الى اتفاق آستانا وإلغاء الورم التاريخي الذي ينتابهم على قاعدة الانسحاب من إدلب مع منظماتهم الارهابية، او الاستمرار في أساليب المراوغة وهذه تدفع بدورها نحو دور روسي حربي عميق مع الجيش العربي السوري ينفذ خطة القضاء التدريجية على كامل المنظمات الإرهابية من إدلب وعفرين.

يبدو أن الاتراك يترقبون عودة أميركية بعد الانتخابات الرئاسية تدعمهم في سياساتهم التركمانية، اما اذا لم تتم هذه العودة فإن تركيا في طريقها للتراجع عن مشاريعها في القوقاز واذربيجان على اساس الاكتفاء فقط بمطامعها في البحر المتوسط والسعي الى اقتطاع ادوار عبر الروس في سورية والاميركيين في العراق.

Resistance Ready to Confront Any Aggression, US Sanctions Can’t Overcome Hezbollah, Open to Steps Towards Government Formation: Hezbollah Deputy SG.

Hezbollah Deputy Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem
Sheikh Qassem Underlines Resistance Military Readiness to Confront Any Aggression: US Sanctions Can’t Overcome Hezbollah

 October 26, 2020

Hezbollah Deputy Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem expressed hopes for a speedy cabinet formation in Lebanon, recalling the party’s stance a year ago when the S.G. Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah rejected the government resignation.

Sheikh Qassem added that after one year all the parties are resorting again to the same solutions, including the reform paper, reinforcement of the judiciary, political cooperation, and fight against corruption.

His eminence stressed that there are two main causes of corruption in Lebanon–the state corrupts and  the US-backed vandals who pervade anarchy and disrupt the national productivity.

“USA devotes its capabilities, pressures, funds, media campaign and sanctions against Hezbollah; however, it will never be able to overcome it.”

Sheikh Qassem emphasized that Hezbollah tries to cope with the socioeconomic problems in Lebanon, adding that it simultaneously confronts the occupation forces and protects the nation from any aggression.

Hezbollah Deputy Secretary General also called on the political leadership in France to avoid the anti-Islam performance, adding that it cannot gain from this approach.

Source: Al-Manar English Website

Hezbollah Deputy SG: We Are Open to Steps Towards Government Formation

By Staff

Hezbollah Deputy SG: We Are Open to Steps Towards Government Formation

Hezbollah Deputy Secretary-General His Eminence Sheikh Naim Qassem strongly condemned France’s encouragement of insults directed at the Messenger of mankind.

He said that such posturing exposes a state of hostility towards the other and underscores the weakness of the argument against the nobility and greatness of the teachings of Islam. Sheikh Qassem called on the French authorities to change course, warning that they stand to gain nothing from this approach.

During his patronage of the celebration of the birth of the Prophet and the week of Islamic unity hosted by Hezbollah’s second district, His Eminence said that “Hezbollah’s victories are the result of jihad, steadfastness, and guidance from God Almighty.”

“These victories are based on clear objectives, safety, and positions of integrity,” Sheikh Qassem added.

The Deputy Secretary General further highlighted that: “Hezbollah succeeded in its resistance against ‘Israel’, which is the focal point of global American injustice, and that is why the US is utilizing all its capabilities, pressures, money, media, and penalties against the party. But it will not defeat it.”

“The resistance has become an approach and a way of teaching for the free youth in our world and the emerging generations, and the falsehood of the American model as well as its racism have been exposed inside the US. Its crimes have also been exposed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, and Syria, along with its support for ‘Israel’ against Palestine, Lebanon and the countries of the region,” Sheikh Qassem said.

Addressing Washington’s $10 billion package to support its groups and agents in Lebanon, the senior Hezbollah official said that “this is evidence of Lebanon’s level of resilience and steadfastness, which expelled the humiliated ‘Israeli’ occupation in 2000 and achieved victory in the face of the aggressive international mobilization in the July 2006 war via the trio: the people, the army, and the resistance.”

“Some say that America is restricting Lebanon because of Hezbollah, what did the party do?” Sheikh Qassem asked. “It is defending the land and dignity and wants independence, while America wants Lebanon as a backyard to legitimize the ‘Israeli’ occupation and resettlement. So, our rejection of American policies is a rejection of aggression against our country and subordination.”

He recalled how “Hezbollah publicly said last October that it was against the resignation of the Hariri government, and that the rescue paper prepared by his government at the time required strenuous work to address the economic and social crises and hit back at the system of corruption.”

“We also warned against wasting time,” Sheikh Qassem stated. “Sayyed Nasrallah frankly rejected the idea of the resignation due to its repercussions, but what was the result? The steps of the solution are the same, even if the main title and some partial details changed. We must put an end to two types of corruption, the corruption of the exploiters of power in their different posts and the corruption that America sponsors through its groups using bribery, chaos, inciting strife, and disrupting our country’s production capabilities.”

His Eminence concluded by expressing “hope that the government will be formed as soon as possible and win the confidence of the widest segments and parliamentary blocs.”

“We are positive and open to steps that accomplish the formation of the government on the basis of an economic, social, and financial rescue program that puts an end to the exchange rate hike and curbs the high prices, opens horizons for job opportunities for young people, benefits from international support in the context of reform, puts an end to corruption, punishes the corrupt; recovers looted and smuggled money, gives depositors their rights, and addresses the health crisis fueled by the coronavirus.”

Related Videos

Related News

The Sleeping Giant Awakes And Reveals “The West” as Lilliput

Source

The Sleeping Giant Awakes And Reveals “The West” as Lilliput

October 27, 2020

This comment was chosen by moderator SA from the post “Weekly China Newsbrief and Sitrep”.Comment by Ahino Wolf Sushanti

I’m from Malaysia. China has traded with Malaysia for 2000 years. In those years, they had been the world’s biggest powers many times. Never once they sent troops to take our land. Admiral Zhenghe came to Malacca five times, in gigantic fleets, and a flagship eight times the size of Christopher Columbus’ flagship, Santa Maria. He could have seized Malacca easily, but he did not. In 1511, the Portuguese came. In 1642, the Dutch came. In the 18th century the British came. We were colonised by each, one after another.

When China wanted spices from India, they traded with the Indians. When they wanted gems, they traded with the Persian. They didn’t take lands. The only time China expanded beyond their current borders was in Yuan Dynasty, when Genghis and his descendants Ogedei Khan, Guyuk Khan & Kublai Khan concurred China, Mid Asia and Eastern Europe. But Yuan Dynasty, although being based in China, was a part of the Mongolian Empire.

Then came the Century of Humiliation. Britain smuggled opium into China to dope the population, a strategy to turn the trade deficit around, after the British could not find enough silver to pay the Qing Dynasty in their tea and porcelain trades. After the opium warehouses were burned down and ports were closed by the Chinese in ordered to curb opium, the British started the opium I, which China lost. Hong Kong was forced to be surrendered to the British in a peace talk (Nanjing Treaty). The British owned 90% of the opium market in China, during that time, Queen Victoria was the world’s biggest drug baron. The remaining 10% was owned by American merchants from Boston. Many of Boston’s institutions were built with profit from opium.

After 12 years of Nanjing Treaty, the West started getting really really greedy. The British wanted the Qing government:
1. To open the borders of China to allow goods coming in and out freely, and tax free.
2. Make opium legal in China.
Insane requests, Qing government said no. The British and French, with supports from the US and Russia from behind, started Opium War II with China, which again, China lost. The Anglo-French military raided the Summer Palace, and threatened to burn down the Imperial Palace, the Qing government was forced to pay with ports, free business zones, 300,000 kilograms of silver and Kowloon was taken. Since then, China’s resources flew out freely through these business zones and ports. In the subsequent amendment to the treaties, Chinese people were sold overseas to serve as labor.

In 1900, China suffered attacks by the 8-National Alliance(Japan, Russia, Britain, France, USA, Germany, Italy, Austria-Hungary). Innocent Chinese civilians in Peking (Beijing now) were murdered, buildings were destroyed & women were raped. The Imperial Palace was raided, and treasures ended up in museums like the British Museum in London and the Louvre in Paris.

In late 1930’s China was occupied by the Japanese in WWII. Millions of Chinese died during the occupancy. 300,000 Chinese died in Nanjing Massacre alone.

Mao brought China together again from the shambles. There were peace and unity for some time. But Mao’s later reign saw sufferings and deaths from famine and power struggles.

Then came Deng Xiao Ping and his infamous “black-cat and white-cat” story. His preference in pragmatism than ideologies has transformed China. This thinking allowed China to evolve all the time to adapt to the actual needs in the country, instead of rigidly bounded to ideologies. It also signified the death of Communism in actually practice in China. The current Socialism+Meritocracy+Market Economy model fits the Chinese like gloves, and it propels the uprise of China. Singapore has a similar model, and has been arguably more successful than Hong Kong, because Hong Kong being gateway to China, was riding on the economic boom in China, while Singapore had no one to gain from.

In just 30 years, the CPC have moved 800 millions of people out from poverty. The rate of growth is unprecedented in human history. They have built the biggest mobile network, by far the biggest high speed rail network in the world, and they have become a behemoth in infrastructure. They made a fishing village called Shenzhen into the world’s second largest technological centre after the Silicon Valley. They are growing into a technological power house. It has the most elaborate e-commerce and cashless payment system in the world. They have launched exploration to Mars. The Chinese are living a good life and China has become one of the safest countries in the world. The level of patriotism in the country has reached an unprecedented height.

For all of the achievements, the West has nothing good to say about it. China suffers from intense anti-China propaganda from the West. Western Media used the keyword “Communist” to instil fear and hatred towards China.
Everything China does is negatively reported.

They claimed China used slave labor in making iPhones. The truth was, Apple was the most profitable company in the world, it took most of the profit, leave some to Foxconn (a Taiwanese company) and little to the labor.

They claimed China was inhuman with one-child policy. By the way absolutely recommended by the UN-Health-Organisation at that time. At the same time, they accused China of polluting the earth with its huge population. The fact is the Chinese consume just 30% of energy per capita compared to the US.

They claimed China underwent ethnic cleansing in Xinjiang. The fact is China has a policy which priorities ethnic minorities. For a long time, the ethnic minorities were allowed to have two children and the majority Han only allowed one. The minorities are allowed a lower score for university intakes. There are 39,000 mosque in China, and 2100 in the US. China has about 3 times more mosque per Muslim than the US.
When terrorist attacks happened in Xinjiang, China had two choices:
1. Re-educate the Uighur extremists before they turned terrorists.
2. Let them be, after they launch attacks and killed innocent people, bomb their homes.
China chose 1 to solve problem from the root and not to do killing. How the US solve terrorism? Fire missiles from battleships, drop bombs from the sky.

During the pandemic,
When China took extreme measures to lock-down the people, they were accused of being inhuman.
When China recovered swiftly because of the extreme measures, they were accused of lying about the actual numbers.
When China’s cases became so low that they could provide medical support to other countries, they were accused of politically motivated.
Western Media always have reasons to bash China.

Just like any country, there are irresponsible individuals from China which do bad and dirty things, but the China government overall has done very well. But I hear this comment over and over by people from the West: I like Chinese people, but the CPC is “evil”\’. What they really want is the Chinese to change the government, because the current one is too good.

Fortunately China is not a multi-party democratic country, otherwise the opposition party in China will be supported by notorious NGOs (Non-Government Organization) of the USA, like the NED (National Endowment for Democracy), to topple the ruling party. The US and the British couldn’t crack Mainland China, so they work on Hong Kong. Of all the ex-British colonial countries, only the Hong Kongers were offered BNOs by the British. Because the UK would like the Hong Kongers to think they are British citizens, not Chinese. A divide-and-conquer strategy, which they often used in Color Revolutions around the world.

They resort to low dirty tricks like detaining Huawei’s CFO & banning Huawei. They raised a silly trade war which benefits no one. Trade deficit always exist between a developing and a developed country. USA is like a luxury car seller who ask a farmer: why am I always buying your vegetables and you haven’t bought any of my cars?

When the Chinese were making socks for the world 30 years ago, the world let it be. But when Chinese started to make high technology products, like Huawei and DJI, it caused red-alert. Because when Western and Japanese products are equal to Chinese in technologies, they could never match the Chinese in prices. First world countries want China to continue in making socks. Instead of stepping up themselves, they want to pull China down.

The recent movement by the US against China has a very important background. When Libya, Iran, and China decided to ditch the US dollar in oil trades, Gaddafi’s was killed by the US, Iran was being sanctioned by the US, and now it’s China’s turn. The US has been printing money out of nothing. The only reason why the US Dollar is still widely accepted, is because it’s the only currency which oil is allowed to be traded with. The US has an agreement with Saudi that oil must be traded in US dollar ONLY. Without the petrol-dollar status, the US dollars will sink, and America will fall. Therefore anyone trying to disobey this order will be eliminated. China will soon use a gold-backed crypto-currency, the alarms in the White House go off like mad.

China’s achievement has been by hard work. Not buy looting the world.

I have deep sympathy for China for all the suffering, but now I feel happy for them. China is not rising, they are going back to where they belong. Good luck China.

%d bloggers like this: