Axis of Resistance: from Donbass to Gaza

FEB 16, 2024

Pepe Escobar

The resistance in Donbas and Gaza share an essential common vision: overthrowing the unipolar hegemon that has quashed their national aspirations.

Photo Credit: The Cradle

The resistance in Donbas and Gaza share an essential common vision: overthrowing the unipolar hegemon that has quashed their national aspirations.

During my recent vertiginous journey in Donbass tracking Orthodox Christian battalions defending their land, Novorossiya, it became starkly evident that the resistance in these newly liberated Russian republics is fighting much the same battle as their counterparts in West Asia.

Nearly 10 years after Maidan in Kiev, and two years after the start of Russia’s Special Military Operation (SMO) in Ukraine, the resolve of the resistance has only deepened.

It’s impossible to do full justice to the strength, resilience, and faith of the people of Donbass, who stand on the front line of a US proxy war against Russia. The battle they have been fighting since 2014 has now visibly shed its cover and revealed itself to be, at its core, a cosmic war of the collective West against Russian civilization.  

As Russian President Vladimir Putin made very clear during his Tucker Carlson interview seen by one billion people worldwide, Ukraine is part of Russian civilization – even if it is not part of the Russian Federation. So shelling ethnic Russian civilians in Donbass – still ongoing – translates as attacks on Russia. 

He shares the same reasoning as Yemen’s Ansarallah resistance movement, which describes the Israeli genocide in Gaza as one launched against “our people”: people of the lands of Islam.

Just as the rich black soil of Novorossiya is where the “rules-based international order” came to die; the Gaza Strip in West Asia – an ancestral land, Palestine – may ultimately be the site where Zionism will perish. Both the rules-based order and Zionism, after all, are essential constructs of the western unipolar world and key to advancing its global economic and military interests.

Today’s incandescent geopolitical fault lines are already configured: the collective west versus Islam, the collective west versus Russia, and soon a substantial part of the west, even reluctantly, versus China. 

Yet a serious counterpunch is at play. 

As much as the Axis of Resistance in West Asia will keep boosting their “swarm” strategy, those Orthodox Christian battalions in Donbass cannot but be regarded as the vanguard of the Slavic Axis of Resistance.

When mentioning this Shia–Orthodox Christianity connection to two top commanders in Donetsk, only 2 kilometers away from the front line, they smiled, bemused, but definitely got the message.

After all, more than anyone else in Europe, these soldiers are able to grasp this unifying theme: on the two top imperial fronts – Donbass and West Asia – the crisis of the western hegemon is deepening and fast accelerating collapse. 

NATO’s cosmic humiliation-in-progress in the steppes of Novorossiya is mirrored by the Anglo–American–Zionist combo sleepwalking into a larger conflagration throughout West Asia – frantically insisting they don’t want war while bombing every Axis of Resistance vector except Iran (they can’t, because the Pentagon gamed all scenarios, and they all spell out doom).

Scratch the veneer of who’s in power in Kiev and Tel Aviv, and who pulls their strings, and you will find the same puppet masters controlling Ukraine, Israel, the US, the UK, and nearly all NATO members.        

Lavrov: ‘No perspectives’ on Israel–Palestine

Russia’s role in West Asia is quite complex – and nuanced. On the surface, Moscow’s corridors of power make it very clear that Israel–Palestine “is not our war: Our war is in Ukraine.”

At the same time, the Kremlin continues to advance itself as a mediator and trusted peacemaker in West Asia. Russia is perhaps uniquely situated for that role – it is a major global power, highly vested in the region’s energy politics, a leader of the world’s emerging economic and security institutions, and enjoys robust relations with all key regional states. 

A multipolar Russia – with its large population of moderate Muslims – instinctively connects with the plight of the Palestinians. Then there’s the BRICS+ factor, where the current Russian presidency can draw full attention from new members Iran, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Egypt to advance fresh solutions to the Palestine conundrum. 

This week in Moscow, at the 13th Middle East Conference of the Valdai ClubForeign Minister Sergey Lavrov went straight to the point, stressing cause, the Hegemon’s policies; and effect, pushing Israel–Palestine toward catastrophe.

He played the role of Peacemaker Russia: we are proposing “holding an inter-Palestinian meeting to overcome internal divisions.” And he also delivered the face of Realpolitik Russia: There are “no perspectives for an Israel–Palestine settlement at the moment.”

detailed Valdai report opened a crucial window for understanding the Russian position, which links Gaza and Yemen as “epicenters of pain.”

For context, it is important to remember that late last month, Putin’s special representative for West Asian affairs, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs ML Bogdanov, received an Ansarallah delegation in Moscow led by Mohammed Abdelsalam. 

Diplomatic sources confirm they talked in-depth about everything: the fate of a comprehensive settlement for the military-political crisis in Yemen, Gaza, and the Red Sea. No wonder Washington and London lost their marbles.

‘Disappearing the Palestine question’

Arguably, the most critical round table at Valdai was on Palestine – and how to unify the Palestinians. 

Nasser al-Kidwa, a member of the Palestinian National Council (PNC) and former minister of foreign affairs of the Palestinian Authority (PA) (2005–2006), stressed Israel’s three strategic positions, all of which are aimed at maintaining a dangerous status quo: 

First, Tel Aviv seeks to maintain the split between Gaza and the occupied West Bank. Second, per Kidwa, is to “weaken and strengthen one or the other, preventing national leadership, using force and only force to suppress Palestinian national rights and prevent a political solution.”

Third on Israel’s agenda is to actively pursue normalization with a number of Arab countries without dealing with the Palestinian issue, that is, “disappearing the Palestinian question.”

Kidwa then stressed the “demise” of these three strategic positions – essentially because Netanyahu is trying to prolong the war “to save himself” – which leads to other likely outcomes: a new Israeli government; a new Palestinian leadership, “whether we like it or not”; and a new Hamas. 

Implied then are four vast fields of discussion, according to Kidwa: the state of Palestine; Gaza and the Israeli withdrawal; changing the Palestinian situation, a process that should be domestic-based, “peaceful,” and harboring “no revenge”; and the overall mechanism ahead. 

What is clear, says Kidwa, is that there will be no “two-state solution” in the offing. It will be back to the very basics, which is affirming “the right of national independence for Palestine” – an issue already ostensibly agreed on three decades ago in Oslo.

On the mechanism ahead, Kidwa makes no bones about the fact that “the Quartet is dysfunctional.” He pins his hopes on the Spanish idea, endorsed by the EU, “that we modified.” It is, broadly, an international peace conference in several rounds based on the situation on the ground in Gaza.

That will imply several rounds, “with a new Israeli government,” forced to develop a “peace framework.” The end result must be the minimum acceptable to the international community, based on UNSC resolutions galore: 1967 borders, mutual recognition, and a specific timeline, which could be 2027. And crucially, it must establish “commitments respected from the beginning,” something the Oslo crowd couldn’t possibly fathom.

It is fairly obvious that none of the above will be possible under Netanyahu and the current dysfunctional White House.

But Kidwa also admits that on the Palestinian side, “we don’t have a maestro that puts these elements together, Gaza and West Bank together.” This, of course, is a strategic policy success of the Israelis, who have long toiled to keep the two Palestinian territories at odds and have assassinated any Palestinian leader able to surmount the divide.

At Valdai, Amal Abou Zeid, an advisor to the former Lebanese president General Michel Aoun (2016–2022), noted that “as much as the war in Ukraine, the Gaza war disrupted the foundations of the regional order.”  

The previous order was “economic-centric, as the pathway to stability.” Then came Hamas’ 7 October operation against Israel, which triggered a radical transformation. It “suspended the normalization between Israel and the Gulf, especially Saudi Arabia,” and revived the political resolution of the Palestine crisis. “Without such a resolution,” Zeid stressed, the threat to stability is “regional and global.” 

So we’re back to the coexistence of two states along the 1967 borders – the impossible dream. Zeid, though, is correct that without closing the Palestinian chapter, it’s “unattainable for the Europeans to have normal relations with Mediterranean nations. The EU must advance the peace process.” 

No one, from West Asia to Russia, is holding their breath, especially as “Israel extremism prevails,” the PA has a “leadership vacuum,” and there’s an “absence of American mediation.” 

Old ideas vs new players

Zaid Eyadat, director of the Center for Strategic Studies at The University of Jordan, tried to adopt a contrarian “rationalist perspective.” There are “new dynamics” at play, he argued, saying “the war is much bigger than Hamas and beyond Gaza.”

But Eyadat’s outlook is bleak. “Israel is winning,” he insists, contradicting the region’s entire Axis of Resistance and even the Arab street.

Eyadat makes the point that “the Palestinian question is back on the stage – but without the desire for a comprehensive solution. So Palestinians will lose.” 

Why? Because of a “bankruptcy of ideas.” As in “how to transform something from untenable to more reasonable.” And it is the “rules-based order” which is at the heart of this “moral deficit.”

These are the kinds of yesteryear statements that are at odds with today’s resistance-minded, mutlipolar visionaries. While Eyadat frets about Israel and Iran competition, an extremist and uncontrolled Tel Aviv, splits between Hamas and the PA, and the US pursuing its own interests, what’s missing in this analysis is the ground arena and the surge in multipolarism globally.

The Axis of Resistance “swarm” in West Asia has barely started and still carries a slew of military and economic cards yet to come into play. The Slavic Axis of Resistance has been fighting nonstop for two years – and only now are they starting to glimpse a possible light, linked to the fall of Adveevka, at the end of the (muddy) tunnel. 

The resistance war is a global one, played out – so far – in only two battlefields. But their state supporters are formidable players on today’s global chessboard and are slowly racking up victories in their respective domains. All while the enemy, the Hegemon, is in economic free-fall, lacks domestic mandates for its wars, and offers zero solutions.

Whether in the muddy black soil of Donbass, the Mediterranean shores of Gaza, or the world’s essential shipping waterways, Hamas, Hezbollah, Hashd al-Shaabi, and Ansarallah will take all the time they need to turn “epicenters of pain” into “epicenters of hope.”

The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of The Cradle.

MOST POPULAR

SACHA BARON COHEN’S BORAT PAVED THE WAY FOR ISRAEL’S SLAUGHTER IN GAZA

JANUARY 30TH, 2024

Source

Kit Klarenburg

In the wake of the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) landmark ruling in a case brought by South Africa against Israel, which found the Jewish state could be committing genocide in Gaza and must immediately cease its indiscriminate, industrial-scale slaughter of unarmed, innocent Palestinians of all ages, many Western journalists, politicians, pundits and influencers have changed their tune on the savagery. Or at least gone eerily silent, having previously whitewashed, legitimized, or even outright endorsed a twenty-first-century Holocaust.

This abrupt volte-face cannot be attributed to any moral qualms about Zionist actions since October 7. A far more likely explanation is that, given numerous statements of Israeli officials that the ICJ has found to indicate genocidal intent, they are worried their past advocacy and amplification of as yet unindicted war criminals could, in the future, be in itself legally actionable. Yet, some Zionist propagandists and apologists have not been deterred by the ruling’s ramifications.

Among the most vocal figures continuing to celebrate and encourage the Gaza genocide is Lee Kern, a self-described comedian who served as the lead writer for numerous high-profile cinema and TV projects led by Sacha Baron Cohen, including the sequel to “Borat,” and “Who Is America?” On a daily basis, since the Israeli Occupation Force carnage erupted, he has posted disgustingly Islamophobic statements while cheering and justifying Zionist bloodshed.

Lee Kern Israel
An Instagram post by Lee Kern, lead writer for multiple Sacha Baron Cohen films during his “Israel we F*cking Love You,” tour

At the end of 2023, Kern also visited Tel Aviv to co-host an event, “Israel we F*cking Love You,” alongside Michael Rapaport, a failed actor and convicted harasser turned wannabe culture warrior. The Zionist entity has attracted numerous Z-list celebrities to its stolen land in recent months, including unrepentant pedophile Jerry Seinfeld, in a lame attempt to boost its PR. Given Cohen’s ardent Zionism, it is rather conspicuous he has not made the journey.

Nonetheless, Cohen has been playing an active role behind the scenes in the genocide. In November 2023, he was among several high-profile figures who lobbied TikTok in private to block content and comments critical of Israel. He had good reason to believe this intervention would be decisive. In September 2020, he suspended his Instagram account to protest purported “hate speech” on the platform and Facebook. The Anti-Defamation League-sponsored action prompted over 1,000 businesses to suspend their Facebook ads for a month.

Cohen has, in recent years, significantly upped the ante of his public Zionist activism under the aegis of fighting anti-Semitism. He has claimed his “comedy” output, often coordinated with the CIA and Pentagon, is concerned with the same objective. This work almost universally features racist, crude stereotypes of Muslims, whom he portrays wearing makeup and wigs reminiscent of blackface. One might reasonably ask whether his true purpose all along has been to dehumanize Muslims everywhere in order to justify Israel’s genocide.

‘KAZAKH CENSORS’

Perhaps the most well-known – or infamous – segment of Cohen’s 2006 smash hit movie Borat is a scene very early on, in which he and a vast crowd spectate “the running of the Jew,” a purported annual Kazakhstan tradition. Easily the movie’s most impactful and memorable visual setpiece, standalone clips have garnered millions of views online since 2006. A virtually unique example of the film not featuring an “undercover” stunt, who were Cohen’s ultimate intended victims and audience here?

Giant, grotesque constructions of a Jewish man and woman replete with green skin, claws, devil horns, and pronounced hooked noses race down a dirt track after Kazakhs waving wads of money. When the female “Jew” stops mid-chase to spawn a gigantic “Jew egg,” Borat cheers on a gaggle of children who abruptly arrive to “crush that Jew chick before it hatches!” This scene is central to the film’s plot – if one can even refer to it as such.

A scene from “Borat” portrays a Muslim caricature cheering on a crowd at a fictional “A Running of the Jew” festival

Innate Kazakh anti-Semitism is the very inspiration for Borat’s “cultural learnings” tour around the U.S. As he explains immediately after the scene, his country faces three major problems – “social, economic, and Jew.” Throughout the movie, Borat invokes numerous hideous anti-Semitic tropes – Jews are greedy, secretly control international finance, governments and the media, and were responsible for 9/11. At one point, he even sings a supposedly popular Kazakh folk song titled “Throw the Jew down the Well.”

In all of Cohen’s in-character public appearances at the time, Borat made his visceral loathing of Jews abundantly clear. In November 2006, he was a guest on “The Tonight Show with Jay Leno,” an interview subsequently included on the film’s DVD edition. When asked by the host whether he thought his film was homophobic and anti-Semitic, Borat gleefully replied, “Thank you very much!” Meanwhile, at an advance screening of the movie in Manhattan, he declared to the assembled press and paparazzi:

At first, Kazakh censors wouldn’t let me release this movie because of anti-Semitism. But then they decided that there was just enough.”

The Amazon-produced “Borat Subsequent Moviefilm” in 2020 dialed up the main character’s rabid anti-Semitism even further. In one scene, he attends a synagogue dressed in anti-Semitic clothing, including a giant fake nose, and announces he saw a Facebook post claiming the Holocaust never happened. Judith Dim Evans, a Holocaust survivor present, greets him warmly, invites him to touch her own “Jewish nose,” and then proceeds to politely educate him about the realities of Nazi genocide while highlighting her personal history.

Understandably, many viewers effusively praised Evans’ dignity and grace. Cohen has claimed that before filming the scene, he broke character in private with her to explain he was himself Jewish, and his objective was to highlight anti-Semitic attitudes and the correct way of challenging them – supposedly the very first time one of his “victims” had been in on the gag all along. Evans herself was unable to confirm this version of events, as she sadly passed away before the film’s release.

Her daughter begged to differ, however, and filed a lawsuit against Amazon, seeking an injunction to remove the scene from the film. She contended her mother was duped into appearing in the movie and pointed to a release form allegedly signed by Evans featuring a “scribbled line” that did not match her actual signature. Amazon’s lawyers successfully argued this was a simple accident and that her signing of the document had been independently witnessed.

‘VIBRANT JEWISH COMMUNITY’

Whatever the truth of the matter, clearly, Cohen is extremely keen for his creation to be perceived by the everyday people he meets and global film audiences alike as a raging anti-Semite. This has prompted some observers to question whether, in attempting to highlight and challenge anti-Semitism, Borat might, in fact, inadvertently reinforce anti-Semitic public attitudes. A far more prescient question is whether Borat consciously legitimizes Islamophobic perspectives globally in service of the Zionist cause.

The release of the first “Borat” movie sparked public and state-level outrage in Kazakhstan for its portrayal of the country and its people. Ironically enough, a common grievance was the character’s anti-Semitism – for Kazakh Jews have a long and rich history, and Almaty has no record of religious strife or discrimination towards Jews whatsoever. During World War II, Joseph Stalin created a haven for Jews there, evacuating thousands from other parts of the Soviet Union to prevent their slaughter by the Nazis.

While Kazakhstan’s Jewish population was much reduced by emigration following the Soviet Union’s collapse, thousands still live in peace and harmony there today. A Hasidic synagogue in Almaty, named after widely respected Rabbi Levi Yitzchak Schneerson, buried at a nearby cemetery, attracts Jewish visitors from all over the world, who come to pray at his grave. Anti-Semitic incidents of any kind are vanishingly rare; the country is home to over a dozen Jewish schools, and the government electively provides land and buildings for creating new synagogues.

As a National Coalition Supporting Eurasian Jewry factsheet notes, “Kazakhstan has long embraced its Jewish community.” During “Borat’s” year of release alone, a new synagogue big enough to accommodate the capital’s entire Jewish population – and also Central Asia’s largest – was opened, Almaty’s first-ever Association for Hebrew Speakers formed, and the Kazakh government issued a postage stamp featuring a historic local synagogue. The factsheet went on to record:

In the wake of the widely released and successful 2006 comedy film Borat, which portrays Kazakhstan as a hot-bed of anti-Semitism, Kazakh officials are expanding outreach efforts to explain to the world that Kazakhs are in fact very tolerant of Jews.

As part of these “outreach efforts,” prior to the release of “Borat,” the government of Kazakhstan took out full-page ads in major U.S. newspapers such as The New York Times, and placed commercials on CNN and other mainstream news channels, at some expense. They sought to challenge and debunk the movie’s misrepresentations of Kazakhs, and Borat’s anti-Semitism loomed large. As a spokesperson for Almaty’s Washington D.C. embassy said at the time:

[Borat] claims the Kazakhs are very anti-Semitic people and running of the Jews is the famous pastime. That is, of course, ridiculous. Kazakhstan has a very vibrant Jewish community.”

AN ‘ALREADY ISLAMOPHOBIC CLIMATE’

The lack of wider pushback against Borat from the world’s Islamic community almost two decades ago surely reflects how the film was released at a time when Islamophobia was rife in the West due to the then-ongoing War on Terror. Systematic, institutionalized discrimination against and demonization of Muslims was unashamedly and openly normalized, advocated, and practiced by European and North American governments under the aegis of battling “extremism.” Muslim civil society voices were thus very effectively silenced in the mainstream.

Fast forward to the sequel’s release, and Cohen’s victims were finally positioned to fight back. In November 2020, the Council on American-Islamic Relations and Kazakh American Association fired off strongly worded letters to the Directors Guild of America, Oscars, Golden Globes, and British Academy of Film and Television Arts, demanding they bar Cohen, his movie and its cast and crew, from consideration for awards that year.

Sacha Baron Cohen
Sacha Baron Cohen dressed as a Gaddafi-esque caricature in the film, “The Dictator”

Commenting, Kazakh-American film professional and Hollywood Film Academy CEO Gia Noortas said:

The Kazakh community worldwide is underrepresented and inherently vulnerable. Sacha Baron Cohen understands this fact and exploits the Kazakh people by hijacking our ethnic identity, whitewashing us, and inciting harassment toward us. Considering today’s socially aware political climate and the new diversity policies adopted by film associations worldwide, it is unbelievable that a film which openly berates, bullies, and traumatizes a nation of people of color is still an acceptable form of entertainment.

As a fiery contemporary op-ed in The New Arab noted via “Borat,” “Cohen racially abuses, culturally appropriates, and mocks the Kazakh culture, traditions, and people for the purpose of crude laughter and monetary gain” – actions “not only offensive,” but directly harmful, as “Kazakhs know from personal experience.” It went on to record how since the release of the first movie:

Many Kazakhs have experienced psychological turmoil and ethnic-based humiliation. Many Kazakhs have had to explain to others that Cohen’s portrayal of Kazakhstan and its people as bigoted and backwards is a vile misrepresentation. Many Kazakh children have been bullied at school, and Kazakh women have been exposed to distasteful sexual jokes or harassment.

Again, we are left to ponder if Cohen explicitly intended these dire consequences. A 2016 academic paper published by Brunel University explored how audiences perceived the portrayal of Muslims across his oeuvre based on an extensive focus group study. Overwhelmingly, respondents expressed dismay at the content and volunteered their view that the assorted movies and TV shows Cohen produced throughout his three-decade-long career are, universally, intensely Islamophobic.

For example, one respondent asked to comment on the “Running of the Jew” clip, said it “enforces this opinion that Muslims are anti-Semites.” The study noted that “The Dictator” was “replete with signifiers that are stereotypic of Islam and Muslims – from the name ‘Aladeen,’ his long beard, misogyny, anti-Semitism, and anti-Americanism,” and “the film also displays minarets and thus typical Islamic architecture.” Another respondent observed:

If you look at all his movies, he does portray himself as a Muslim. So, I think there is an element of Islamophobia. The Dictator, Ali G, these are all Muslims and so he’s portraying them in a bad light, in an already Islamophobic climate.”

AN UNSAFE SPACE

Such adverse reactions are striking, for they would be music to the proverbial ears of Israel and the international Zionist lobby’s countless assorted components. Perpetuating the narrative that all Muslims worldwide are possessed of virulent anti-Jewish hatred has been a core Zionist propaganda objective since before Israel’s 1948 founding.

The purpose is to frame Palestinian opposition to Zionist oppression, and anyone Muslim or otherwise united in solidarity with them, as motivated by surging anti-Semitism rather than reasonable and legitimate condemnation of oppression, brutality, and mass slaughter in service of a fundamentally colonialist, genocidal, and deeply anti-Semitic endeavor. Accordingly, Israel has, ever since its founding, actively sought to create a hostile environment for Jews elsewhere in order to cynically cement itself as the world’s exclusive safe space for Jews.

Following Israel’s creation, a Mephistophelian feat achieved by murderous conquest, land theft, and the clandestine use of chemical and biological weapons, Zionists engaged in wide-ranging efforts to compel Jews elsewhere to migrate to Tel Aviv. This effort included covertly bombing synagogues throughout West Asia, encouraging anti-Semitism the world over through a variety of means, and infiltrating and funding Amnesty International to amplify and exaggerate anti-Semitism in Muslim lands from the 1970s onwards while concealing its criminal erasure of Palestine and its indigenous people.

The necessity of such actions from Israel’s perspective couldn’t be clearer. It is barely known today that a majority of world Jewish opinion actively opposed Israel’s creation. The 1917 Balfour Declaration, which pledged London’s commitment to creating a “national home for the Jewish people” and is widely considered the Zionist state’s foundational document, was vigorously condemned by Edwin Montagu, the only Jew in a senior British government position at the time:

The policy of His Majesty’s Government is anti-Semitic in result and will prove a rallying ground for anti-Semites in every country of the world.”

Montagu’s concerns were well-founded. Zionists, professing to be inspired by ubiquitous Western anti-Semitism, were and remain committed to building an ethnonationalist homeland for Jews in the Arab and Muslim world – the one place on Earth where Jews have always been safest. It is widely unknown that the only European country, bar Britain, to boast a bigger Jewish population following World War II than before was Muslim-majority Albania. It provided a sanctuary for Jews fleeing the Holocaust elsewhere in Europe.

Many Albanians are considered “Righteous Among Nations” for risking their lives to protect Jews during the genocidal Axis occupation of the Balkans, 1941 – 1944. A great many Jews had for centuries resided in the region by that point, having been invited to relocate there under Ottoman Sultan Bayezid II’s personal protection following the fall of Al Andalus to Christian crusaders in 1492. They flourished, free from the routine pogroms, discrimination, and punitive taxes inflicted upon them everywhere else in Europe.

Since the Gaza genocide began, shocking scenes reminiscent of 1930s Germany, in which Israeli security forces storm areas of Jerusalem, physically attacking Hasidic Jews and tearing down Palestine flags, have spread like wildfire on social media. Meanwhile, Jews can consistently be found in profusion at every major anti-Israel protest in Europe and North America, very vocally denouncing not only Tel Aviv’s relentless atrocities but the entire “Godless and merciless” ideology of Zionism.

Sacha Baron Cohen’s canon should be viewed as a modern-day manifestation of the perpetual Zionist drive to distort and conceal reality and turn Jews and Muslims, natural and historic comrades, against one another. Now that he and close collaborator Lee Kern have so amply exposed their guiding mission quite so publicly, a liberal media apparatus that enthusiastically promoted them and their repulsively racist, genocidal output must not be forgiven or trusted ever again.

Yemenis ditch UAE–Saudi coalition for Gaza

FEB 1, 2024

The Gaza war and renewed US–UK strikes on Yemen are shattering what remains of the UAE–Saudi-led coalition. Now Yemenis of all stripes are flocking to embrace the Sanaa government and its resistance stance.

Mohammed Moqeibel

While the Red Sea military operations of Yemeni resistance movement Ansarallah have shaken up geopolitical calculations of Israel’s war on Gaza, they have also had far-reaching consequences on the country’s internal political and military dynamics. 

By successfully obstructing Israeli vessels from traversing the strategic Bab al-Mandab Strait, the Ansarallah-led Sanaa government has emerged as a powerful symbol of resistance in defense of the Palestinian people – a cause deeply popular across Yemen’s many demographics. Sanaa’s position stands in stark contrast to that of the Saudi and Emirati-backed government in Aden, which, to the horror of Yemenis, welcomed attacks by US and British forces on 12 January.

The US–UK airstrikes have offended Yemenis fairly universally, prompting some heavyweight internal defections. Quite suddenly, Sanaa has transformed into a destination for a number of Yemeni militias previously aligned with the UAE and Saudi Arabia, now publicly declaring their allegiance to Ansarallah.

One such figure, Colonel Hussein al-Qushaybi, formerly with the Saudi–UAE coalition forces, announced in a tweet:

I am Colonel Hussein al-Qushaybi, I declare my resignation from my rank and my defection from the Legitimacy Army [army backed by Saudi-led coalition] that did not allow us, as members of the Ministry of Defense, to show solidarity with Palestine.
My message to army members: Go back to your homes, for our leaders have begun to protect Zionist ships at sea and support the [Israeli] entity, even if they try to deceive, but their support has become clear and it is still there.

Qushaybi claims he was incarcerated in Saudi prisons for 50 days – along with other Yemeni officers – for his outspoken defense of Gaza, during which he endured torture and interrogation by an Israeli intelligence officer.

Major Hammam al-Maqdishi, responsible for personal protection of Yemen’s former Defense Minister in the coalition-backed government, has also arrived in Sanaa, pledging allegiance to Ansarallah.

Simultaneously, a leaked ‘top-secret’ document from the Saudi-backed, UN-recognized Yemeni Ministry of Defense instructs military leaders to suppress any sympathy or support for Hamas or Ansarallah, as “this might arouse the ire of brotherly and friendly countries” – an implicit reference to Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

Defections and dissent 

The wave of defections within the ranks of Saudi–Emirati coalition forces is not limited to officers. Many regular troops have openly rebelled against their commanders – abandoning their positions and pledging allegiance to Ansarallah – following the recent airstrikes on Yemen. Dozens of these soldiers have been arrested and detained for displaying solidarity with Gaza. 

Yemeni news reports claim the US government, in a missive to the coalition’s Chief of Staff Saghir bin Aziz, expressed “dissatisfaction” with the lack of solidarity among his forces and demanded action.

While this trend of defections in the Saudi–Emirati coalition is not entirely new, it has accelerated considerably since the onset of the war in Gaza and the recent US-UK strikes on Yemen. 

Last February, high-ranking coalition officers, including brigade commanders from various fronts, began a series of defections, though none as significant as the current rebellion. 

These earlier defections were primarily driven by financial conditions and dissatisfaction with Saudi Arabia and the UAE for their dismissal of military commanders associated with the Islah Party (Muslim Brotherhood in Yemen), who were replaced by members of the UAE-backed Southern Transitional Council (STC) militias and those commanded by Tariq Saleh, nephew of pro-Saudi former Yemeni president Ali Abdullah Saleh. 

Most of these defections were by officer and troops associated with the Islah Party during a time when the foreign coalition began marginalizing the party’s military and political leadership, and dismantling several military sectors under their control – in favor of the UAE-controlled STC.

Now, the Gaza war has the Islah Party leadership fully breaking with its old alliances. As party official Mukhtar al-Rahbi tweeted upon the launch of US-UK strikes:

Any Yemeni who stands with the US, UK, and the countries of the coalition protecting Zionist ships should reconsider their Yemeni identity and Arab affiliation. These countries protect and support the Zionist entity, and when Yemen closed the Red Sea and the Arabian Sea to the ships of this terrorist entity, this dirty alliance struck Yemen and punished it for its noble stance towards Gaza and Palestine.

In stark contrast, the UAE-backed STC and the Tareq Saleh-led National Resistance Forces expressed readiness to protect Israeli interests. On the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos, STC President Aidarus al-Zoubaidi reaffirmed his support for the British attacks against Yemen, conveying this stance to British Foreign Secretary David Cameron.

Following these statements, an entire battalion under Saleh’s command defected to Ansarallah, while many other fighters now refuse his authority because they reject supporting US–UK strikes against Sanaa and its resistance leaders. 

A shift in public sentiment

In response to the latest western aggression against Yemen, media outlets affiliated with the STC and its supporters have launched a campaign against Ansarallah and the Palestinian resistance, casting doubt on the Yemeni resistance movement’s capabilities and motives. But, their efforts have backfired badly, instead leading to widespread public fury in the country’s southern regions controlled by the UAE and Saudi-backed government. 

Map of areas controlled by Ansarallah and Saudi-led coalition

Their anger is directed at the Aden-based government‘s perceived alignment with Israel’s regional projects, sparking both protests and symbolic acts, such as burning pictures of UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed and the Israeli flag.

According to Fernando Carvajal, a former member of the UN Security Council’s Yemen expert team, Ansarallah have managed to leverage – to their benefit – the untenable position of Abu Dhabi, which normalized relations with Israel as part of the 2020 US-brokered Abraham Accords. This, he argues, has helped them gain widespread support both within Yemen and internationally.

In the wake of this unexpected public outrage, the STC has experienced a further wave of defections within its ranks. Several leaders have joined the Southern Revolutionary Movement, and openly expressed their objective of liberating southern Yemen from what they see as “Saudi–Emirati occupation.”

Amidst the wave of military realignments, prominent Al-Mahra tribal Sheikh Ali al-Huraizi – arguably the most influential figure in eastern Yemen – has come out to praise Ansarallah’s military operations against Israel-bound shipping in the Red Sea, hailing its actions as a resolute and national response to the suffering of the Palestinian people.

Huraizi stressed that the US and British aggression against Yemen was launched to protect the Zionist state, because Ansarallah’s targeted strikes were negatively impacting Israel’s economy. Calling for unity among Yemenis, the tribal leader urged steadfast resistance against Israeli influence in the country. He also called on other Yemeni factions to follow the bold leadership of Abdul-Malik al-Houthi as a means to halt the genocide taking place in Gaza.

Countdown to the coalition’s collapse 

Yemen’s deteriorating economic conditions, currency collapse in coalition-ruled areas, and ongoing conflicts among southern militias have left many Yemenis disillusioned with Emirati and Saudi proxies, whom they had hoped would bring – at the very least – economic prosperity. 

In contrast, the Ansarallah-led Sanaa government has managed to maintain a relatively stable economic situation in the areas under its control, despite the foreign-backed war aimed at toppling it. This disparity has led to a growing sentiment among UAE-aligned soldiers that they are merely pawns fighting for the interests of Persian Gulf Arab rulers, without receiving due recognition from these governments.

The contrasting stances on Palestine between the coalition and Ansarallah have deepened the Yemeni divide since the events of 7 October. Sanaa’s support for the Palestinian cause has significantly boosted its domestic standing, while US–UK strikes on the country have complicated their Persian Gulf allies’ position by prioritizing Israeli interests over all other calculations. 

Disillusionment with the coalition will have profound political and military implications for Yemen, reshaping alliances, and casting the UAE and Saudi Arabia as national adversaries. Palestine continues to serve as a revealing litmus test throughout West Asia – and now in Yemen too – exposing those who only-rhetorically claim the mantle of justice and Arab solidarity. 

The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of The Cradle.

‘Israel’ Alarmed by Palestinian “Lone Wolves”, Sayyed Nasrallah’s “Spiderweb Theory”

 March 15, 2023

Marwa Haidar

‘Israel’ is alarmed by an “unusual incident” in which an explosive charge was detonated next to the Megiddo junction on a road near the West Bank seamline facing Jenin on Monday.

The incident, which injured a person seriously, was likely a roadside bomb of the type detonated in the past, mainly against Israeli occupation forces in south Lebanon during occupation before 2000, Haaretz Israeli daily reported on Tuesday.

Scene of a bomb blast at Megiddo junction in pccupied Palestine (Monday, March 13, 2023).

“The Shin Bet and IDF have been concerned for several months about increased attempts by terrorists in the West Bank to prepare explosive charges,” the paper’s Amos Harel said, referring to Israeli occupation forces.

Palestinian “Lone Wolves”

Meanwhile on Tuesday, a group named “Galilee Forces – Lone Wolves”, claimed responsibility for Megiddo junction attack, vowing to stage more attacks against Israeli occupation forces.

“One of our wolves planted a roadside bomb at Megiddo junction. The bomb went off and the wolves were unhurt after withdrawing the area,” the group said in a statement.

It also released a video showing Israeli outposts that the group intends to target soon. “Target is monitored and the weapon is ready,” the Galilee Forces – Lone Wolves group said in the video.

Rise in Explosive Charges

Harel reported that there has been, recently, a rise in the level of explosive charges being made and the number of Palestinian operations, noting that such upsurge comes after the situation was relatively calm in the occupied territories following the Second Intifada.

Since the Second Intifada, there’s been almost no sophisticated know-how in the West Bank on the preparation of explosive charges, the report said, listing a series of attacks which took place in the last three months.

There is concern in the Zionist entity that Palestinian attacks in the West Bank will soon rise, Harel reported, citing a clear increase of attacks for close to a year.

“But intelligence agencies are concerned about another escalation ahead of Ramadan, which begins in about a week,” the Israeli journalist said.

Resistance Warns

In this context, Palestinian resistance threatened the Israeli occupation that changing the status quo of Al-Aqsa Mosque will trigger an “earthquake” in the entire region.

Marwan Issa, Deputy Chief of Staff of Hamas’ Ezzedine Al-Qassam Brigades said that “allowing the resistance in the West Bank to take action, doesn’t mean that the resistance fighters in Gaza won’t patronize their brothers in the occupied territories.”

The Ezzedine Al-Qassam Brigades, the military wing of Hamas, has been accumulating power in order to reach the full liberation of Palestine, Issa stated.

“Spiderweb Theory”

On the other hand, Haaretz’ Harel correlated between rising motivation for Palestinian attacks and what he described as the Zionist entity’s “unprecedented political and constitutional crisis” represented by the mass protests over judicial overhaul planned by the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

He cited recent remarks by Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah about the Zionist entity’s collapse.

“Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah recently delivered two speeches in which he repeated his “spiderweb theory” regarding Israeli society’s weakness, which he initially presented after Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000. Now he’s forecasting that an internal schism in Israel will lead to the country’s collapse, meaning that Israelis won’t be celebrating the country’s 80th anniversary in five years,” the Israeli journalist wrote in his Tuesday’s article.

In his latest speech last week, Sayyed Nasrallah described Israeli protests as historic and significant, noting that Israeli officials are now concerned about what he called the “third ravage” of the Zionist entity.

“Nasrallah is Not Completely Wrong”

In his article, Harel said that one of the worries occupying the Israeli “security system currently is that Nasrallah is not completely wrong.”

“Not only is the judicial controversy tearing Israelis into two camps, the rage against the regime coup led by the Netanyahu government is harming the military’s cohesion and may, in the long run, compromise its operational fitness. The biggest concern was raised in recent weeks by the Air Force, against a backdrop of growing protest by reserve pilots and navigators, the tumultuous discussions within squadrons and petitions in which hundreds of reserve pilots threatened to stop volunteering to fly should the extremist legislation pass in the Knesset,” Harel wrote.

Source: Israeli and Palestinian media (translated and edited by Al-Manar English Website)

Hezbollah, Anti-imperialism, and the Compatible Left

March 11,

Source: Al Mayadeen English

By Sammy Ismail 

A review of Banerjee’s “Fighting Imperialism and Authoritarian Regimes: Between the Devil and the Deep Sea” (2003) and Salamey’s “Hezbollah, Communitarianism, and Anti-Imperialism” (2019).

“such power and the people who excercised it, embodied a mystique, expressed not simply in guns but in books, uniforms, social behavior and a mass of manufactured products. Only by accepting these things and those who brought them would it be possible to penetrate this mystique and grasp the power which lay behind it” (Chris Calpham, Third World Politics: an introduction, 1985)

According to the Middle East Institute, the Washington-based think-tank, Hezbollah today stands as the “most formidable” armed non-state actor in the world. Hezbollah has developed exponentially since the 1980s growing to be the most numerously large political party in the Arab world, and spearheading the Axis of Resistance coalition against Zionism and US imperialism [and its Arab allies] in West Asia at large. The stance on Hezbollah has recurrently caused sharp disagreements among the Left in the Arab World and abroad: whereby some would promote anti-imperialist solidarity with the party, and others would explain away the party’s anti-imperialist achievements to critique other factors.  

Anti-anti-imperialism

In “Fighting Imperialism and Authoritarian Regimes: Between the Devil and the Deep Sea”, Sumanta Banerjee introduces a pertinent debate of leftist circles into academia (2003). Banerjee offers a critique of post-soviet anti-imperialism: contrasting old leftist anti-imperialist liberation movements with contemporary identity-based anti-imperialist liberation movements which presumably fall short of leftist standards of social liberation. He argues that the Left is regressing by uncritically prioritizing the contradiction of imperialism while overlooking other tenants of social liberation which he characterizes as violating “the beliefs and operative norms” of “the Left and democratic forces” (S. Banerjee, 2003, p:183). 

The regression and eventual dissolution of the USSR stifled the popularity of socialist ideals and did away with the blanket ideology that most anti-imperialist actors adopted a variant of. It became a notable trend of liberation movements, especially in West Asia, to turn towards their respective cultures for revolutionary inspiration rather than turning to the literature of scientific socialism. The prior leftwing secular character of liberation movements was replaced by cultural indigenous ideologies: the most distinguished among which is Hezbollah.  

In his article, Banerjee condemns these non-socialist anti-imperialist movements as ‘authoritarian’. He doesn’t directly address Hezbollah but poses a critique generally to all non-socialist anti-imperialist actors. He argues that they hardly any better than their imperialist oppressors such that they too stifle social liberation: thus allegorizing the latter as the ‘Devil’ and the former as the ‘Deep Sea’ (S. Banerjee, 2003, p:184). He adds that the anti-imperialist struggle against US hegemony has been distorted since the time of ‘Che Guevara’ and ‘Nelson Mandela’ (S. Banerjee, 2003, p:183). Many leftists, he argues, have remained uncritically fixated on supporting any party opposing US hegemony regardless of other factors; he theorizes that they have been so blinded by the evils of the Devil that they have obliviously backed up into the embrace of the Deep Sea (S. Banerjee, 2003).

Banerjeee’s argument, essentially, challenges the precedence of the struggle against imperialism in leftist lore and activism. The novel significance of his article is that it formulates a topic heatedly debated in vintage cafes and niche pubs, and introduces it into academia where it can be scientifically unpacked. While he doesn’t address Hezbollah directly, his arguments echo those posed by some leftists against initiatives for political affinity with Hezbollah. 

Communitarianism 

Imad Salamey (2019) comports the aforementioned argument to be point-precise geared toward Hezbollah by introducing the prospect of “communitarianism”. Salamey explains in “Hezbollah, Communitarianism, and Anti-Imperialism” that Hezbollah is one byproduct of the global trend of communitarianism (2019). Communitarianism, Salamey explains, arises as a result of the ferocious expansion of capitalism and the equivocal decline of nation-states with the curbing of governments in favor of laissez-faire market policies (2019).

In the absence of the state’s welfare role, communities turn inwards for a safety net. Hezbollah’s inception in Lebanon came in this context: in light of the Shia community’s social marginalization, the sectarian chaos of the Lebanese civil war, and the recurrent Zionist attacks on the predominantly shia-populated south. Hezbollah arose as the safety net for its immediate community against the ills of capitalism and imperialism. 

Salamey explains that communitarianism is rooted in a “primordial cultural solidarity” which undermines the nation-state (2019); In the case of Hezbollah, this underlying cultural solidarity was of that between the Iranian and Lebanese Shias: which was optimized ultimately in the form of the robust alliance between Hezbollah and the Islamic Revolution’s Guard Corps. 

Before unpacking the communitarian basis of Hezbollah, Salamey aimed to synthesize the general conception of anti-imperialism in Marxist lore and then presented the two as incompatible. He argues that:

  1. The Marxist directive for revolution, and by extension anti-imperialist praxis, is premised upon the Westphalian conception of the nation-state (liberation is the liberation of a nation within a state),
  2. Communitarianism by definition undermines the nation-state, and Hezbollah is manifestly communitarian (primarily because of its substate identity)
  3. Thus, Hezbollah isn’t anti-imperialist (the strive against American imperialism is accidental and not decisively anti-imperialist).  

The conclusion of Salamey’s article builds on that of Banerjee’s: leftists in support of Hezbollah under the pretext of anti-imperialist solidarity are violating the ideological beliefs and operative norms of the Left (Salamey, Hezbollah, Communitarianism, and Anti-Imperialism, 2019; Banerjee, Between the Devil and the Deep Sea, 2003). This Post-Soviet Communitarian critique of Hezbollah roughly presents some arguments typically posed by western and westernized leftists denouncing affinity with Hezbollah. 

Argument 1: Hezbollah isn’t Leftist  

One of the typical discourse narratives posed against affinity with Hezbollah is by wistfully contrasting Hezbollah with the romanticized leftist anti-imperialist icons such as Che Guevara or Nelson Mandela. While this is a unscientific criticism of Hezbollah that is uncommon among credible Leftist intellectuals or noteworthy parties, it is popular among the contemporary ‘woke’ left as a to-go-to argument. 

The objective of conjuring the picturesque revolutionary experiences of Guevara and Mandela is to undermine Hezbollah’s strive for liberation in contrast. Proponents of such speaking points aim to marginalize Hezbollah’s achievements against Zionist colonialism and Takfiri fascism by putting it in competition with icons like Guevara or Mandela: In an effort to present Hezbollah’s anti-imperialist efforts as ‘accidental’ or ‘isolated incidents’ sidelining them in the assessment of Hezbollah’s character. 

These speaking points offer no real critique but only employ symbolic smearing to contain Hezbollah’s popularity momentum from extending to the Left-wing in the Arab World and the West. Such smear-campaigning speaking points are comparable to that posed against the Red Army in the late 1940s. The Red Army led by Stalin had taken on the full brunt of the Nazi war machine and liberated Europe from the ruthless rule of Nazism suffering 8.6 million deaths in the process (which is 10 times more than the deaths suffered by the US, Britain, and France combined). However this fact was actively distorted for western public opinion: presenting the victory over Fascism as a victory of all the “Allied Powers”, presenting the Red Army as only a marginal contributor to this victory, and presenting Stalin as an anti-christian-church-destroyer to the conservative working class in Europe and the US.

Argument 1 marginalizes Hezbollah’s admirable strife against the Zionist and Takfiri footsoldiers of US imperialism. It conditions support for Hezbollah upon the party’s self-identification as a leftist party, factoring out the consequential significance of Hezbollah’s strife against the forces of reaction. A bullet that pierces the heart of a colonizing soldier or a fanatic fascist promotes people’s liberation regardless of the ideological incentives which motivate the soldier.  

Argument 2: Hezbollah isn’t Secular

While argument 1 stands as a strawman argument against leftist solidarity with Hezbollah, other arguments present a more sophisticated version of Argument 1. Primarily, and most commonly, is the argument referring to the Islamic ideology of Hezbollah: an argument that is alluded to by the aforementioned prospect of communitarianism (Salamey, 2019). 

It is argued that Leftists can’t stand in solidarity with Hezbollah despite its anti-imperialist practice and stance because of its Islamic ideology. The Shia Islamic ‘communitarian’ character (or the ‘sectarian’ character of Hezbollah, to put it in the language of Lebanese political discourse), is argued, to devalue Hezbollah’s revolutionary anti-imperialist character.

Proponents of this argument explain that Hezbollah’s strife against Zionists and Takfiris arises from an in-group (shia community) v out-group (non-shia communities) rationale rather than a scientific understanding of imperialism: whereby imperialism is defined as the byproduct of the disproportionate accumulation of capital in favor of some nations at the expense of others, which entails the exploitation of the latter by the former for the purposes of maximizing economic interests (Lenin, Imperialism: the Highest Stage of Capitalism, 1917).

Hezbollah, however, isn’t sectarian despite adopting a religious ideology and employing religious discourse. The party’s praxis isn’t a zero-sum game of competition with other religious groups and this is assessed consequentially (i.e. in terms of results). Even if we were to entertain this faulty accusation and grant the validity of inferring chauvinistic sectarianism from religiosity, Hezbollah’s anti-imperialist character still holds. Assuming that Hezbollah is a “sectarian” communitarian party and interpreting wars in the “middle east” from an orientalist lens as irrational wars between different tribes motivated by identitarian chauvinism, Hezbollah’s praxis remains consequentially anti-imperialist praxis. Even if we were to assume that the Party’s wars against Zionists and Takfiris is motivated by an inter-communitarian feud, this doesn’t change the fact that (1) Zionists and Takfiris were acting as footsoldiers of Imperialism and (2) Hezbollah’s strife against them was successful and effective.  

This line of reasoning is cited by prominent theorists of Scientific Socialism. Marx and Engels hailed the Irish struggle for independence from British colonialism while acknowledging that the Irish liberation movement was prominently led by Catholic clergymen and that the conflict of decolonization had manifested for the Irish fighters as a war for protecting the catholicization of the indigenous population of the Island against the Protestant British invaders (Marx &Engels, On the Irish Question,1867). 

Additionally, Stalin, in “Foundations of Leninism” when addressing the monarchist Emir’s efforts for liberation in Afghanistan, emphasized assessing liberation movements according to the results which they yield rather than according to a checklist of democratic standards (1924). “The national movement of the oppressed countries should be appraised not from the point of view of formal democracy, but from the point of view of actual results, as shown by the general balance sheet of the struggle against imperialism. The revolutionary character of a national movement under the conditions of imperialist oppression does not necessarily presuppose the existence of proletarian elements in the movement, the existence of a revolutionary or a republican program of the movement, or the existence of a democratic basis of the movement.” (Stalin, 1924). 

More so, however, Hezbollah stands as significantly more politically sophisticated than the Irish liberation movement in the 1860s (endorsed by Marx and Engels) or the Afghan Emir’s liberation attempt (endorsed by Stalin). The party’s religious and cultural ideology doesn’t exclude a scientific conception of imperialism as expressly stated in their 2009 manifesto. In the Chapter on Domination and Hegemony, it reads “Savage capitalism forces – embodied mainly in international monopoly networks of companies that cross the nations and continents, networks of various international establishments especially the financial ones backed by superior military force have led to more contradictions and conflicts – of which not less important – are the conflicts of identities, cultures, civilizations, in addition to the conflicts of poverty and wealth. These savage capitalism forces have turned into mechanisms of sowing dissension and destruction of identities as well as imposing the most dangerous type of cultural, national, economic as well as social theft. Globalization reached its most dangerous facet when it turned into a military one led by those following the Western scheme of domination – of which it was most reflected in the Middle East, in Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, and Lebanon, where the latter’s share was the July 2006 aggression by the ‘Israelis’ ”(2009). 

Islamic Fervor 

Marxism isn’t as vehemently anti-religion as McCarthyists and infantile leftists make it seem. Dominoquo Losurdo unpacks this adequately in “Class Struggle: A Political and Philosophical History” (2016). He explains that, historically, the classes of society achieved initial awareness of the national question through religion: that It was through religious idioms and prospects that people became conscious of real material contradictions. “Marx and Engels carefully avoided indiscriminate liquidation of movements inspired by religion… Religious affiliation can be experienced very intensely and mobilized effectively in political and historical upheaval, but is not the primary cause of such conflict” (Losurdo, 2016). 

In the case of Hezbollah, political theory and praxis of anti-zionism and anti-imperialism was developed in reference to the Epic of Karbala, in which Al-Hussein fought ferociously for justice against the tyranny of Yazid. This cultural narrative is native to the Lebanese Shia even prior to the inception of Hezbollah. The cultural significance and religious rituals of Aashura weren’t parachuted from Iran on the eve of the Islamic revolution. Aashura is a historic watershed of Arab history. It symbolizes an indigenous revolution against the tyranny of the Islamic caliphate: the descendants of the Prophet contended the distorted interpretation of Islam which manufactured political legitimacy for tyrant caliphs by triumphing the authentic interpretation of Islam which promotes the normative ideal of justice.   

One would dismiss this, citing Marx: “religion is the opiate of the masses” (Marx, Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of the Right, 1843). Aashura, however, unlike the religious narratives which promote pacifism referenced by Marx in his opiate metaphor, acted as a catalyst for the masses of the Lebanese Shia community to bear arms against Imperialist projects.

Hezbollah capitalized on the Epic of Aashura which has long been transmitted from generation to generation in this community. The narrative was allegorically projected to contemporary politics following a scientific analysis of the material contradictions as the 2009 manifesto expressly elaborates. The cultural spite against Yazid’s injustice and tyranny was evoked by Hezbollah’s clergymen to be compared to the hegemony of the US empire, and consequently mobilizing hundreds against the proxies of imperialism. This tactic of mobilization proved exceptionally effective in consolidating the world’s most powerful non-state actor, reversing the Arab nation’s setback in their struggle against Israeli colonialism, and snuffing out the deviant Takfiri fascist enterprise in the Levant.

“What human consciousness does is try to understand the world. When social life is calm, so are ideologies; when class conflicts come to existence so too do competing ideologies and conscious statements; and only when a revolutionary class arises can revolutionary ideas come into being” (Peter Stillman, Marx Myths and Legends, 2005)  

Picturesquely, it is the whispered Islamic idioms that teemed serenity and discipline in the hearts of fighters fortified in Bint Jbeil as they took on the full brunt of the Israeli war machine, and it is the battle cry of “Ya Zaynab” which resounded as Kornet ATGMs flattened Israeli tanks back in 2006.  

The Compatible Left 

However, acknowledging criticism and engaging in self-criticism is central to the development and optimization of political praxis. A scientific analysis, regardless of the conclusion it’s comported towards, is generally beneficial. It introduces theoretical concepts that allow one to think better of complicated issues and theorize about them: like the allegory of the devil and the deep sea (S. Banerjee, 2003) or the trend of ‘communitarianism’ (I. Salamey, 2019). 

In the same context, to frame the discourse and filter critique from smear campaigning, it is notable to introduce a term coined by CIA strategists: The Compatible Left.  Which refers to leftist intellectuals and parties coopted by the CIA in an effort to manufacture a Left that is compatible with imperialism. The Compatible Left is also comparable with the Neo-comprador class which James Petras theorizes about in “NGOs: In the Service of Imperialism” (2007). The compatible left is an inconsequential left: it employs leftist lore and language while ensuring that the status quo of imperialism remains robust and unchallenged.

Related Stories

Sayyed Al-Houthi: Our Investigation Confirmed The American Role In Targeting Al-Sammad

Feb 24, 2023

Sayyed Al Houthi Addresses Americans, British, Saudis And Emiratis: “Leave All Our Provinces, Our Territorial Waters”

The leader of the revolution, Sayyed Abdulmalik Badr al-Din Al-Houthi, confirmed that the personality of the martyr President Saleh al-Sammad in loyalty and patriotism and his ability to unite the home front prompted the aggression to assassinate him.

This came in a speech he delivered on the occasion of the anniversary of the martyr President Saleh Al-Sammad.

Sayyed Abdulmalik affirmed that the aggression sought to target the martyr al-Sammad due to his active role in confronting the aggression and supporting the just cause of our people, adding that the aggression noticed in the martyr al-Samad his superior ability to unify the internal ranks as a priority of confronting the aggression.

Sayyed Abdulmalik Al-Houthi said: “On the anniversary of the martyr President Saleh al-Sammad, we remember him, as he was a model of honesty, loyalty, patience and relentless pursuit of God’s pleasure.”

Regarding the assassination of the martyr President Saleh Al-Sammad, Sayyed Abdulmalik indicated that “In the stages of escalation by the aggression to control Hodeidah, the martyr Al-Sammad was present there to mobilize the people and activate all official and popular capabilities.”

In his speech, Sayyed Abdulmalik accused the US of being behind the assassination of the martyr President Saleh Al-Sammad.

He said: “the US was the one who determined for the Saudi to target the martyr Al-Sammad as a primary target.”

The leader affirmed that all the campaigns carried out by the coalition forces in their aggression against Yemen, including the campaign that targeted Hodeidah, were carried out under US supervision.

In his speech, Commander Abd al-Malik Badr al-Din al-Houthi explained that the Yemeni people surprised the coalition, which had thought that the assassination of al-Sammad would break its will and weaken it, saying: “the result was completely the opposite.”

He added, “After the assassination of the martyr al-Sammad, Yemeni people showed an increase in their determination, patriotism and sacrifice”.

Sayyed Al Houthi Addresses Americans, British, Saudis And Emiratis: “Leave All Our Provinces, Our Territorial Waters”

Feb 24, 2023

Leader of the Yemeni revolution, Sayyed Abdul-Malik al-Houthi, revealed on Thursday the developments of the Muscat consultations between Sanaa and Riyadh, and the American role in obstructing them with the aim of benefiting from the sale of weapons and its continuation in occupying Yemen and its sea outlets.

This came in a speech that he delivered on the occasion of the anniversary of the martyred President Saleh Al-Sammad.

Al-Houthi explained that the American regime seeking to obstruct efforts by distancing the Saudi-led coalition from assuming any obligations arising from any agreement or understanding, trying to transform the issue and “as if it were a purely internal battle.

The leader of the revolution affirmed that who launched the aggression and war on Yemen is the Saudis, along with the Emiratis and their mercenaries who joined under American, British and Zionist supervision.

Therefore, the coalition cannot shirk through its well-known official statements announcing any commitments to any agreements or understandings, because it is the belligerent and aggressor party that leads the position and the war on our country as it is present at the political level in the United Nations and the Security Council, in addition to its planes and missiles that bomb, kill and destroy the infrastructure and destroy facilities in the country.

“Let the Americans and the British know, and let the Saudis and Emiratis know that they have to hold their obligations and entitlements that are legitimate for our people.”

Sayyed al-Houthi explained that the American sought to obstruct the understandings led by Oman by obstructing the file of salaries and entitlements that our people receive from our national wealth, noting that the national wealth and its sources are occupied by the coalition in Marib and Shabwa and Hadramout, as well as ports.

The aggression coalition practically controls our national wealth and is responsible for plundering that wealth and depriving the people of for eight years, in addition to compensation, he said.

The leader al-Houthi indicated to “the American played a game on the issue of the withdrawal of foreign forces from Yemen in trying to make this point postponed indefinitely and to keep the military presence in our country.

“We cannot accept the continuation of the imbalance in the country, or there be a solution to the internal problems in light of the existence of a state of war, siege and foreign presence in the country.”

He added, “We cannot accept understandings and search for solutions to political problems in light of the existence of war, siege and occupation, because understanding under such a situation is blackmail and direct interference in the affairs of our country. Let the Americans know that and let the picture be clear to our people.”

Al-Sayyed reaffirmed that one of the priorities and basic issues that we adhere to in any dialogues is the humanitarian and livelihood file for our people, and this is a priority and a humanitarian and legal entitlement, even as stipulated in the international law to which they belong.

A Planet of Apes

February 21, 2023

Source

by Tarik in the Vinyard

It’s like spending your nights at the casino and wondering why you’re always mostly broke. It must be the dealer, the deck of cards, the table, the slot machine, that black widow in red lingering in the corner, or the moonlight and stars, but never your own greed and hedonistic thrill in a game that is mathematically staked against you.

___________________

I once read, long time ago, a book called “Les Anatomies Fantastiques” by Gerome Paul. The fellow was writing about how individuals behave (act, think and feel) according to a built up mental psycho-emotive and moral representation of the world (a mix of cultural, educational, personal character and historic factors, etc…) that strives to be in harmony with their subjective experience of reality; and how groups, people, nations, and in our globalized environment, entire regions and possibly the world itself, also in turn develop such structures that will mutually affect each level of consciousness in a complex knot of feedback loops. Under normal circumstances, in reasonably “healthy” individuals and societies, these “anatomies” are fairly moral and rational reflections of the surrounding world and can adapt with minimal disturbances to gradual changes in the environment. But when the switch is more brutal or the lenses are too distorting (unhealthy individuals and societies), so is the discrepancy between behavior and reality. Anyways, I thought it made a very interesting read, and helped me connect many important dots in my own fantasmagorical construct of the world. And what a world that is! And yes, it is a hint to understanding what comes next.

___________________

And so it is that, to most, it must alternately be the Americans, the West or Anglo-Zionists, or else the bankers, speculators, the capitalists and Onepercenters, and if not, then surely the Socialists, the Neoliberals, the Dems, the Reps, the WEF and Davos oracles, even China and Russia if you went through truly extensive neural dry cleaning, or that all time favorite… the Jews of course. And no doubt, some of these formations, as much as they do exist outside our minds, have displayed much evil behavior and were certainly instrumental vectors to the present status quo. But it is also my contention that, as much as they do exist outside our minds, they’re granted way more credit and power than they actually deserve. Particularly, somehow, for some reason, I always found unsettling, like a lame excuse, the notion that one percent can impose its will over the remaining ninety nine. There must be fowl play, some prestidigitation trick of sort. I tried once imposing my evil will over my little brother; I cannot imagine attempting to do so on 99 little brothers. Even blackmail could only get me so far; for consistent results, I could only “charm” him.

Thus, I come to suspect an awful lot of us “Ninetininers” have let ourselves seduced by something(s); for otherwise how could possibly the “Few” indulge in so much excess and abuse for so long, with what must only be described as the sometimes tacit and implicit, and at other times the roaring and explicit approval of the “Many”?

2011, while France is leveling out Libya and orchestrating a bloody coup in Ivory-Coast, its good people are conducting massive demonstrations in the streets against a 1 year postponement of retirement age (bare in mind they already had the earliest retirement age on the planet), and in favor of Gay marriage. All four initiatives were successful. Gaddafi was properly done with, Gbagbo was ousted, retirement age was left unchanged, and homosexuals could happily marry. It all happened simultaneously. Now don’t get me wrong, I also have a lazy streak, and would frown at the news of an extra mandatory year of work before I get that lousy retirement check that once upon a long loooonnnng time looked quite appetizing, and I don’t give a loot about what gays do with their lives as long as they don’t mingle tongs under my nose (and I’m very inclusive in this regard, it bothers me as much with heteros). Neither am I singling out France, I’m sure I could find similar examples with virtually any other country; it’s just that this particular one is so juicy, in that it vividly illustrates what I consider our most socially disruptive idiosyncratic dichotomy.

Justice versus Equality… no, on closer inspection: Justice versus Greed is more truthful a description. But because 99% aspire to the 1%, greed can easily hide under the more respectable mantle of equality. Justice however is harder to fool with. After all, under its purview you get strictly what you deserve, no more, no less, irrespective of where you now stand on the socioeconomic ladder. Since an awful lot of us 99ners are lurking with big wide open round eyes at a chance to pounce a step or two closer to the “numero unos”, and since 100% of us all have no idea what we justly deserve (alright, some of us know all too well); it appears we have all somehow agreed to play it safe, and do with Justice what we did with Gaddafi: throw it overboard while looking the other way. Hence we turned our social contract into an unending and intractable negotiation on the “terms of Equality” in substitute to those of Justice, taking great care to never notice it is a physical and logical impossible proposition. And you don’t have to take my word for it; just spend a moment to ponder the issue rather than parrot an opinion, I’m sure it’ll quickly be apparent, axiomatic really. The only place where Equality makes sense is in the realm of Justice, but as said, that dude was long lost to the high seas.

Of course I’m not talking of the masses that live in a state of constant economic urgency and dine on Maggi soup on a lucky day. I’m describing the no less consequential middle class, those that can actually save a bank note or two, afford a mortgage, holidays in the tropics, have the time and means to learn and think instead of “socialitizing”. I’m looking at the activist, the do-gooder, the politician, intellectual and the legions of subsidized enablers and false prophets promoting always costly solutions to self made problems, or worse: problems they never bothered to understand, but instead blindly follow pamphlet instructions to bankrupt us all into saving the world or their own solvency. And the business owner whose sole concern is the extra cent in his quarterly income statement; the genius “buy and hold” investor in a CB induced perpetual bull market, while never asking what those digits piling in their accounts actually are, and many, many more alike… Yes, you and me, blissful in our comfortable, lazy ignorance of the true nature of that which we pursue.

I say “lazy” because lets face it, we all know if only intuitively, that money is at the center of it all. And yet, how much time have we ever devoted to understanding it, instead of acquiring, manipulating and controlling it, each according to his own reach, purpose and vanity? Which is a pity, because it’s really no rocket science (I can assure you right here and now, if you can successfully and profitably run a lemonade stand, then you have the necessary functional two neurons to understand all things money and the economy) and because the knowledge of which, other than spiritual enlightenment (and maybe a gun, depending on what neighbors share your space) is the master key to our individual and national sovereignty, prosperity; and incidentally, to our most pressing global issues. Well… pity it is, if we have any such concerns.

Indeed, few subjects are more poorly understood, disformed and tortured, other than God, and maybe the variance of genders, to fit our increasingly dysfunctional (and increasingly fanatical) fantastical mental anatomies. A dysfunction, might one add, in direct relation to the exponential growth in currency floods. The more we issue, the more the world and its understanding turn lalala. And no, this is not a coincidence.

I can now sense the confused uneasiness, the mental restlessness, the silent question mark. What has “understanding money” to do with Justice and an upside down world?

As with all stories we must start at the beginning. And at the beginning stands Barter.

There is this common deceitful misconception in the modern mind, that views money as a technological advancement akin to the mastery of fire, the wheel or the printing press (wink,wink); therefore subject to control and perpetual improvement; and thus best left to the specialists. Not so. The first use of money was more like a behavioral adjustment, a change in common habit. Presumably, a bit like switching from a “butsniff” greeting, to a handshake as we started covering our parts. It had simply become more convenient. One wouldn’t think of classifying the “handshake” as a technological achievement. Neither should money.

As it stands, money, the real thing (gold, silver and copper) was nothing more than bartering finding its common denominators in an increasingly complex environment. But it still remained fundamentally barter. One physical product in exchange for an equivalent good or service in terms of work cost (Energy X Time). An objectively and measurably “just” trade in its principle. Supply and demand may fluctuate the exchange rates, but over time they cancel out, and act as incentives to produce or not; thus regulating economic activity, induce price stability within a narrow band, and spread wide goods and money. Note that money production hence, is intimately linked to general economic activity and obeys strictly the law of supply and demand, as any other product would. In a moral world, under a just rule of law, that is exactly how things would go, with only the occasional natural catastrophe to disturb an otherwise idyllic measured economic progression.

But we live on a planet of apes, and when us primates interact, we quite naturally indulge in all sorts and manners of monkey business. Which is to say, in sapiens speak: we steal, lie, deceive, trick, blackmail, threat, and coerce, or any hereto combination; but above all we are a highly cronyistic, opportunistic, gluttonous creature that can hardly meet a shortcut we wouldn’t flirt with.

Quran: II-275.

« …they say, “Trade is no different than interest.” But Allah has permitted trading and forbidden interest… »

Quran: XI-85.

“O my people! Give full measure and weigh with justice. Do not defraud people of their wealth, nor go about spreading corruption in the land.”

And so it also came quite naturally that some of us started charging interest, taking undue advantage of one another setbacks or difficulties; and in turn, or simultaneously, cheating with scales and content, which both became a source of conflicts and wars even before we adopted money. But at this early stage of our economic evolution, disputes were largely confined to the parties directly involved. Then, as precious metals asserted themselves, we saw the appearance of mints to solve the standard weight and metallic content abuses through the creation of stamped coins. Obviously those coins became in great demand. As all the gold destined to monetary use now went through them, they accumulated huge reserves that gave them huge financial power. Still naturally they started lending these funds (directly or indirectly) at interest to accumulate even huger reserves for even huger financial power, hahahaha….

My apologies for the outburst.

The thing with interest rates is that, in the aggregate, it creates additional demand for money over and above existing supplies in circulation already tagged to current overall trades and investments. The only way for the economy at large to pay for this additional charge (interest) is either for someone else to lose revenue, or savers to willfully cover the expense (but then why would they charge Interests in the first place?), or else the amount must be defrauded or coerced from someone, somewhere, somehow. There’s really no other ways around it. Needless to say, the preferred resolution, by far is fraud in its infinite variety of forms, that target all: consumers, legitimate producers and, ironically, savers (loan originators) themselves, as we shall soon find out.

So the more interest bearing debt, the more fraud and disruptions in the economy. No matter what interest rates: 1%, 10%, 20%… the higher the starting rate, the quicker and more abrupt the disruption; the lower the starting rate, the more pervasive and long lasting. And no matter what the debt is used for; private, commercial, government, industrial, wars, you name it, the economic end game is immutable: widespread bankruptcies and loan defaults. But before we get there, the mint (no matter whether privately held, or the property of temples or the state) will have invariably postponed or covered the growing losses by gradually altering, you guessed it, the contents of its coins. The ultimate fraud.

Thus, we’re right back at pitiful cheats on weight and content. Except that now, instead of only the perpetrator and its victim being affected, the entire economy gets swindled. For sure Interest is not a requirement for currency debasement; for that you only need simian hubris and greed. But it certainly guaranties its outcome, and most often leads the way. Besides, even when debasement is first carried in an Interest free jurisdiction, as in historic Islamic societies, it always paves the way for opportunistic predatory interest bearing loans from outside actors, that now prolong and aggravate the economic disruption. The two, debasement and Interest, are intimately linked, in the manner of “egg and hen”. The one clucks (loudly) for the other.

This, I would refer to as the systemic or structural cause of severe economic disruptions and corruption in the social moral fabric. However this structural relationship is further reinforced by a more subtle and insidious psychological influence implied with interest rates.

Imagine an Interest free world. In that environment loans are only made to family and friends, for a common interest in helping or protecting an individual or entity, to increase one’s credit with Allah or pay out karma, or even out of pure compassion (yes, the rich can also be compassionate). Even if there is an element of predation when collateral is involved, the net result on the general economy in case of non payment is that of any regular trade, and the loss’ responsibility lies squarely with the debtors poor calculations and decision to contract a loan instead of outright selling the collateral. Because yes dear, sometimes life deals us an awful hand or we make regrettable choices, sometimes businesses go south or become unviable, sometimes assets must be sold and down scaling is the order of the day, with no fault to anyone. Still, overall an interest free economy encourages, strengthens and protects (or at the very least does not impede); good relations within the family and with friends, solidarity and trust among the various economic players, piousness and the general elevation of the human soul, as the early years of Islam have well illustrated. No, it would still not be a perfect world, but definitely a much kinder one. Now even if disagreeing with the latter assessment, an undeniable fact remains: loans would be a far less efficient direct predatory source of profit.

By introducing interest rates, the motivation to lend is dramatically altered from mainly an act of solidarity and common interest, to a pursuit of seemingly “guaranteed” profits if done “right”. It also mathematically reduces the probability of repayment in direct proportion to the interest rate. A disastrous combination.

From the lender’s perspective, the increased risk must be compensated with better collateral. This is achieved by valuing the latter at its absolute lowest range if not at an outright steal. In any case the discount on the collateral’s valuation will always be superior than the interest amount. So we witness the emergence of a structural conflict of interests between creditors and debtors, where it is now often in the former’s best interest to see the loan go sour and cash the higher profit on the collateral’s sales. But even when there’s no ill intent in granting the loan, it allows lenders a virtually risk free (therefore irresistible, therefore conductive to malinvesment) return at the expense of debtors, as long as the economy is functioning and not overwhelmed by the cumulative effect of frauds and malinvestments this lopsided incentive creates.

But therein lies the rub: precisely as fraud and malinvestment spread, distress demand for loans multiply, insuring a growing supply of new debtors to milk in a vicious self reinforcing cycle. Then, a second parallel cycle develops, just as destructive. As debt permeates ever more the ever more dysfunctional economy, the ratio of insolvency mounts till a breaking point. Mass bankruptcy abruptly deflates asset prices (collateral), which suddenly reminds the creditors there is never such things as risk free returns. But before we get there, the mint (no matter whether privately held, or the property of temples or the state) will have invariably postponed or covered the growing losses by gradually altering the contents of its coins. The ultimate fraud.

The point being: Interest rates transform loans from an instrument for social cohesion and economic resiliency, to that of social division, and economic mayhem.

Finally, what us laymen need to be made aware of, are the wealth distribution, government policies and geopolitical ramification that interest rates impose, and more specifically the link with the debasement of the currency.

Not all creditors are created equal. A few are more conservative, prudent, and understand the long game. Most are more or less reckless, opportunistic, impatient. As the debt crisis inevitably unfolds, aggressive lending institutions (what ever shape they may have taken through space and time) will be first to fall as their assets (loan books) and value of collateral gets decimated. The prudent lenders would have scaled down its exposure as the crisis approached and can now redeploy its capital to scoop anything of value for pennies. As those credit cycles repeat, wealth gets concentrated in the hands of a few wise monkeys, thereby creating a quasi financial monopoly. And we cannot really blame them orangutans for playing it right. The fault lies with the greedy, predatory behavior of their chimpanzee colleagues, a legislation that does not condemn the practice of interest charges and the irredeemable foolishness of the general public. Without all three ingredients in the soup, they could never have ended in a controlling position. Actually I’d go so far to say: in such a pot, by only virtue of their prudent behavior, as a group (orangutans), they are guaranteed the outcome whether they seek it or not. Us baboons and macaques may not have much sway over the actions of orangutans and chimpanzees, but we most definitely could stop acting like buffoons. Or is it really genetic?

Government – King Lewis – the Gorilla in the room – is, presumably, a natural monopoly. There’s a simple equation that governs its relationship to its macaques and baboons constituency. Widespread wealth in the population, equals disciplined programs, equitable legislation and careful policies. Concentrated wealth, equals sloppy programs, partisan legislation and reckless policies. To which one may add a few variables, here and there, to mitigate or delay the results, but that’s the basic logical frame. That is so because the state’s base income is its tax receipts. When wealth is widely distributed ( an unmistakable sign of a healthy economy), the base of the State’s income source is wide and at its highest output, and liability/loyalty to the majority is strong. After the deleterious effects that interest rates cause on the economy, government income craters. As tax rate increases make only matters worse and it is absolutely out of question that the state should shrink at a time when law and order is most needed, eventually bonds must be issued to cover the budget, which effectively hands over the state to the big lenders, the same way a poor peasant is brought to debt indenture by a bad crop; while the financially weakened crowd clamors for help, and crime, misery and depravity blossom.

There’s no way government debt can be serviced honorably under such circumstances. Which leaves only dubious means. Juvenile states would be tempted to outright renege on the debt or even start confiscating assets. But this is shortsighted. Money would then simply migrate to more welcoming shores or vanish underground, leaving the economy in even worse shape, leading to the collapse of the ruling regime.

More sophisticated ones would first surreptitiously alter the metal content of coins since they usually control the mint. Then as the lenders and economy catch up to the trick, increase interest rates and prices in reaction, still further aggravating the whole situation, our gorilla will attempt to lurk outside his jurisdiction. Instead of just repressing the desperate population, he would lump the deplorables into cheap makeshift armies do be sent on suicidal holly crusades, or spread the words of god to the uncivilized (or whatever convenient tale to the time and place) with free rein on looting in compensation. As these get decimated on their morbid way to some promised land, they never the less sow chaos and economic disruption in their wake, which weakens the regions they traverse. By then a debt financed elite army for conquest is raised to collect the loot and repay the loan with interest and then some. The feeling is exhilarating. Some have said it’s better than sex. So…do you see?

When successful (nothing is ever certain in this world), we may very well witness the birth pangs of a gestating empire. In which case the following template comes into play (if I dare quote myself):

“As an empire expands, the required military growth is self funded by the spoils. But all expansionary dynamics are subject to the law of diminishing return. With each new territory, a growing portion of the armed forces gets tagged to maintain “peace”, and less is available for conquest, while spoils get relatively smaller and increasingly inadequate. Once the expansion reaches its limits, the burden of military cost falls squarely on the economy through higher taxes. With tax induced economic strains, dissent and disorder spreads resulting in still higher expenses (military and otherwise), that then must be met through monetization, which begets inflation, which begets dissent and disorder; and the vicious circle is now locked.”

Lets dig deeper. To the Lenders, every war induced economic crisis, which ever party wins, is a golden opportunity to further their financial tentacles on the general economy through interest baring loans. The only difference is that they fatten much faster and greatly increase their geographic reach riding the back of a rising empire. Economically it appears as a jolly boom in production and trade around the center; and rape, pillaging, maiming, murdering, slavery towards the outer rim, with no end in sight as long as the empire expands. As Great Generals bring light and civilization to the barbarians, Exceptional Statesmen preside over exceptional economies through their exceptional policies. Fat children giggle in the courtyards, mothers are plump, fathers stand erect proudly wearing their protruding bellies, life is beautiful, almost heavenly if only we mustn’t die. Then, spoiled little brats grow into entitled psychopaths of gargantuan appetite just as the empire reaches its limits. Yes dear reader, that is most of you and me. Ok, maybe not you, but definitely the other guy sitting beside you.

On the way up, government debt is made whole by the spoils of war, which provides the lenders with fresh ammunition to financially grab the riches of the newly conquered and ravaged territories. Effectively these spoils carry the same function as debasement of the currency in the economy. Importantly, crucially, I cannot stress it enough, it does not correspond to a natural supply and demand driven increase in money supply, and thus will display the same characteristics as any fraudulent forced fed currency injection, which is devaluation of the latter and contagious malinvestments. Meanwhile, the severe pent up demand triggers a broad economic boom which brings out money, that previously went hiding during the invasion phase and from the four corners of the realm and beyond, further exacerbating the good times. The state’s coffers are now flush with exploding tax receipts. Bigger and better equipped armies are raised, palaces, pyramids, colosseums and pantheons are erected, while roads and ports spread across the lands to funnel resources and gold towards the center. While History will attribute these golden ages to the prowess of some Great Leader, Great scholar, Great technology, Great ideology or whatever other coincidental greatness in store, the more humbling truth is that it is fueled by a constant stream of freshly stolen wealth to pay for the ever expanding interest load on the economy. Now what do you think must happen when there’s nothing left to loot?

Yes, the usual: loans default, bankruptcies rise, fiscal deficit craters, debasement (inflation/hyperinflation) returns with a vengeance, repression, crime, misery, depravity. The blame game intensifies; it’s “anyone’s” or “no one’s” fault, but never is it “everyone’s”. And then, eventually, general rebellion; and in the total chaos, somewhere in a dim lit corner of the scenery, like the manager of some macabre casino, an orangutan watches in glee at the utter stupidity, richer and more powerful than ever, ready to scoop for pennies, not businesses, but entire industries and nations. A few more of these empire cycles and pretty soon he’s sitting on top of the world.

And how could you blame that otherwise harmless, placid, flaccid creature nested in the upper shades of the canopy? It never put a gun to your head; that’s gorilla and baboon behavior. Slip under its skin for a moment: you got this load of money in your right pockets. Then, on the one side there’s this endless procession of avid, solicitors, day in, day out, ready to pawn their mothers and kids, offering the moon plus interests because they’re so bright and it’s such a sure thing and they’re so deserving, and they crave so much to shine if only once. They will even assure you of the precise day and time they will repay you, yet wouldn’t know if they’ll still breath by next sunrise. On the other side, an equally endless and avid procession eagerly willing to fill your left pocket with their savings, responsibilities and guilt for the promise of an easy, risk free extra penny tomorrow. With such display of venal and cowardly covetousness, how can our otherwise harmless placid flaccid orangutan not grow increasingly cynic and, I guess, a bit nauseated. Now filled with contempt and disgust, how could he not be tempted by the devil’s offer? And as his clout grows and grows and grows, turn a little nuts himself? Pity the rich indeed, for you know not how lucky with your petty struggles. More than most any of us, he is relentlessly confronted with the basest and worst in human instincts, up to and including among his own, his family and closest friends, with no respite. Maybe now we can better appreciate the parable of the camel and needle. In the Quran man does not get rich because of his actions and skills, nor because he deserves it, but because God has decided. The battle is ours, but victory is His. There is no other reason. It is among the hardest tests He may bestow upon man. But few would know, since few were chosen. And interest rates makes it all the harder to pass the exam. Indeed it is the devil’s most enticing offer. It speaks to both deferred and immediate greed, dependent on which side of the deal; and virtually every monkey of every specie will fall for it willingly given the right circumstances. And there’s a right circumstance at every corner to satisfy all tastes and moods. Once widespread, it always leads to a paroxysm of social and political abominations and economic cataclysm.

Is this some sort of apology or eulogy to the rich and powerful? Certainly not. It is only to point out they are the faithful reflection of our collective unspeakable aspirations. Specifically, the size of their wealth and power is in direct proportion to our lust for… well, about most any and everything. They are a testament to the filth in our souls, they are the stench that reminds us we’re long past due some serious cleansing. A Hindu Yogi/Sage/Philosopher once wrote something to the effect of: “human monsters such as Hitler and others, were souls that self-sacrificed so the Divine may implement its plan”. Yeah, I also found the statement a bit fishy at first. I’m not sure what he really meant, but then again, in some counter intuitive way, he might have been onto something. Could it be that the rich and powerful are the in fine recipients, the alchemical precipitation of the spiritual miasma we exude. Then maybe we should thank them for absolving us from what would otherwise have been our own guilt, had God granted us our wishes. Could their depravity be, them succumbing to our unrelenting shameless supplicant assaults? Then maybe we should, after all, apologize for making it so much harder for them to stand upright to the Lord. It does take two to tango, you know?

Perhaps now we may better grasp the driving force behind the past two, three thousand years of human history, that locks us in a perpetual repetition of identical patterns and a persistent trend in wealth concentration. It is not that we are incapable of learning; it is just our collective incapacity to resist our inner compulsions. It is basic human psychology display in an interest rate environment, whose size is a pervasive expression of our frustrated insatiable appetite, that then leads to desperate real needs. It’s not some mysterious phenomenon that plagues humanity and only a PHD in economics can explain, nor some inherent inadequacy of gold money that can only be resolved through fiat currencies; which are the ultimate act of delusional rebellion against the natural limits that gold imposes on our unhinged desires.

And it is certainly not the result of some dark cabal conspiring for world dominion since the dawn of time. These are merely the usual scoundrels and parasites scattered along history, that thrive on the general interest rate status quo; meaningless and with no real power except the money we diligently deposit in our savings accounts, pension funds, social security and health insurance programs that feed the beast. Their latest version’s avowed goal, other than world domination, is population reduction and control, Yet even at the height of their power, with atomic bombs and COVID viruses, contraception, junk food and Coca Cola, and the entire pharmaceutical industry in their hands, the world still grew from 2-3 billion lucky souls to 8 billion sorry ones. It is as farcical as the wars on drugs, poverty, terror, climate change and viruses combined. And these are Titans we fear, demi gods that hold our destinies? Seriously?

This current breed will vanish with the currencies that brought them.

In truth our power is immense. We are the ones holding their faith in our hands at every moment, or rather in our senseless bank, brokerage, insurance accounts. The only useful account is a current account to get rid of those currencies as fast as they come. We don’t, because we want in on the Ponzi game. We made that choice the day we agreed to their pension and insurance schemes. And we perpetuate that choice every time we add to our saving accounts. Guaranteed income, zero responsibilities, how to resist?

As usual, there’s so much more to say and I may be totally wrong. Unfortunately the Saker is shutting down the site and I’m running out of time. Please read all that I’ve wrote as the excited exclamations of a child discovering in aw and fondly sharing his findings in the surrounding world. So in parting I’d like to leave you with one last tale:

One day, a long time now, God brought up the issue with the Hebrews, and told them to renounce interest rates. Because He whispered only to their ears and they were the Chosen Ones, they naturally assumed it only concerned their own dealings, but, they thought, there could be no harm in perpetuating the practice with the goyim, since surely God wanted them rich and to inherit the earth… or something like that.

Of course it was silly, God didn’t whisper and He meant it for all loans. Otherwise He’d have added: “but it’s okay to screw the rest of the planet”. But he didn’t.

Still, the net result, intended or not, was that they could rip all the benefits (interest income) with none of the cons (bankruptcies) because their businesses were spared the extra financing cost, which granted greater resiliency and much competitive advantage, especially in trade financing. Thus, as a group, by virtue of the reduced cost of business and the interest rate’s wealth concentrating function in the economy, they siphoned immense wealth from their foreign business relationship. It all proceeded sort of mathematically from a choice that did not necessarily require elaborate conspiracies for world dominion, but only the all to common, human greed, moral hypocrisy and tribal instinct.

As their trade financing activities required them to open offices in all corners of every empire to facilitate settlements between buyers and sellers of different regions, they acquired a unique bird’s eye view which they quickly learned to put to profit. Their coreligionists followed suit, taking advantage of the available preferential loans to open shop in faraway lands, lower margins, and gain market share. Soon the competition must lower quality to make up for the reduced margins and lose more market, then close shop, or take on debt at interest and then close shop. Then as the economic distress induced debt cycle falls flat on its face, people cannot help but notice that some have been spared more than others. They can smell something fishy has been going on, but couldn’t quite put their finger on it. Still they want to rip flesh.

Anyways, little wonder some of them are now among the top orangutans in the world and turned a little paranoiac and crazed. So stop whining. We’d have done the exact same, had we been the chosen ones to first receive God’s tip. Besides all we needed do, was take the queue and denounce, ourselves, those filthy interest rates to instantly restore the balance. The good news: it’s not that they’re so incredibly bright and wicked, nope, their intelligence and malice are perfectly average, it’s just that we’re so hopelessly stupid. I mean… 3000 years that game has been going on, for God’s sake!

The bloody sore on humanity’s conscience

February 14, 2023

Thou shalt not be a victim.
Thou shalt not be a perpetrator.
And above all,
Thou shalt not be a bystander.
Yehuda Bauer

Globalize the Intifada!
Lowkey

Intro – were do we really live?

Each society, each country has at least two foundational bases: an official ideology and a number of foundational myths (and these myths can be very close to the historical truth or not).  In the case of the West (roughly Zone A), the official ideology is “western liberal democracy” (itself based on a lionization of capitalism and “free market values”).  However, once we look “under the hood”, so to speak, we see that since its birth in the Middle-Ages the foundational myth of the West has been exceptionalism and its inevitable by-product, imperialism.  And it does not matter one bit what verbiage this myth has been wrapped it.  It can be the demented claims of universal authority the Papacy, or the so-called “universal values” (aka human rights) of Freemasonry, the racial superiority of the Nazis or globalist agenda of the transnational financiers.  The past two decades or so have, however, seen a very interesting phenomenon: the wholesale abandonment of any “pious” ideology other than the minimal lip-service needed to show a (totally non-existing) loyalty to any values.  That is, however, not to say that no ideology currently exists.  It does, very much so, but it is one *openly* based on hatred of the “other”.  I am talking, of course, of the Woke ideology which is so powerfully expressed by the actions of the “Biden” Administration.

The Woke ideology is not different from its predecessors by its underlying hatred of the “other” (all the previous western ideologies were also based on that hatred of the “other”), but by its unapologetic proclamation of this hatred.  You could say that the Woke ideology is following Dubya’s “you are either with us or with the terrorists“, but on steroids.  And like all western ideologies, the Woke ideology demands that you not only accept a lie (many lies, in fact), but that you also loudly proclaim it.  And, of course, the bigger the lie, the more vociferously it is proclaimed urbi et orbi.

Again, this is hardly anything new but, as Hegelian dialectics affirms, quantity can have a quality of its own.  We clearly see this today in the post-Christian society all of Zone A lives in: not only are falsehoods proclaimed as “secular dogma”, but the very notion of “truth” has lost any meaning.  To repeat, while in the past the rulers of the West did proclaim and even impose ideologies based on lies, today these same rulers have basically retired the very *concept* of “truth” in any other meaning than “in agreement with the official party line/narrative”.

Furthermore, while in the past violence had to be justified in various ways (be it the White Man’s burden, or Trotsky’s apology of Red Terror, or Roosevelt‘s “day of infamy” or Dubya’s GWOT), now violence has become accepted simply under the heading “because we can” and “what are you going to do about it?”.  The genocidal wars in Iraq or the terrorist attack on North Stream 2 are good examples of the “kuz we can” ideology.

In other words, we are now living in a society openly based on:

  • Lies or even the repudiation of the concept of “truth” and
  • Violence/terrorism

The first corollary of this is that facts simply don’t matter anymore.  Neither does logical analysis.

Second, in a way very reminiscent of Trotsky’s apology for Red Terror (if you have not, read his absolutely brilliant, if profoundly demonic, defense of Red Terror in this article!), the current ideology openly proclaims that “it’s okay if we do it, and it is not okay if you do it“.  That, of course, implies a qualitative superiority of the “we” over the “you”.  This type of “situational ethics” has some rather interesting characteristics and implications including:

  • It is profoundly narcissistic in its mindset (hence why the “we” has “rights” that the “other” does not).
  • It measures loyalty by how big a lie a person is willing to loudly proclaim and affirm

You could say that the bigger the lie you affirm and proclaim (virtue signaling) the “better” a person you are, at least by modern standards.  And if the lie is truly self-evidently ridiculous and counter-factual (Srebrenica, 9/11, MH-17, Skripals, etc. etc. etc.) then you are a loyal and enlightened member of society.  Conversely, if you reject a lie because it is simply obviously counter-factual, then you are not “just” wrong, you are the enemy.

This western infatuation with lies, ideology and violence has its roots in the heresies of the Papacy, but it has since long metastasized into every and all facets of our society and now it has openly become the main ideological pillar upon which everything else is built.

[Sidebar: in my personal observation, the northern European countries are, in that sense, far worse than the southern European ones.  That is also where, predictably, where you will find the most rabid russophobes.  The southern European countries, having more complex and stronger historical roots, seem to be less gullible and hateful than their northern counterparts.  The UK, of course, stands alone and above all others in terms of racist hatred for the “other”;  as for the rest of the Anglosphere, it is run by Neocons and Globalists whose hatred for the other is based on centuries of racist mythologizing, to the degree that this type of racism (externally; internally they proclaim to be categorically opposed to any racist notions which is, of course, yet another lie, except that in this case their – internal and external – racism is directed at any group upholding traditional values) has become a core pillar of their worldview, even if most brainwashed subjects are utterly unaware of it (or don’t even care anymore)].

The above is crucial to the understanding of the world we now all live in.  But before we continue, we need to address another issue: what is Zionism?

What is Zionism? A quick reminder

In my 2014 article “AngloZionism: Short primer for the newcomers” I wrote the following:

Let’s take the (hyper politically correct) Wikipedia definition of what the word “Zionism” means: it is “a nationalist movement of Jews and Jewish culture that supports the creation of a Jewish homeland in the territory defined as the Land of Israel“.  Apparently, no link to the US, the Ukraine or Timbuktu, right?  But think again.  Why would Jews – whether defined as a religion or an ethnicity – need a homeland anyway?  Why can’t they just live wherever they are born, just like Buddhist (a religion) or the African Bushmen (ethnicity) who live in many different countries?  The canonical answer is that Jews have been persecuted everywhere and that therefore they need their own homeland to serve as a safe haven in case of persecutions.  Without going into the issue of why Jews were persecuted everywhere and, apparently, in all times, this rationale clearly implies if not the inevitability of more persecutions or, at the very least, a high risk thereof.  Let’s accept that for demonstration sake and see what this, in turn, implies.  First, that implies that Jews are inherently threatened by non-Jews who are all at least potential anti-Semites. The threat is so severe that a separate Gentile-free homeland must be created as the only, best and last way to protect Jews worldwide.  This, in turn, implies that the continued existence of this homeland should become an vital and irreplaceable priority of all Jews worldwide lest a persecution suddenly breaks out and they have nowhere to go.  Furthermore, until all Jews finally “move up” to Israel, they better be very, very careful as all the goyim around them could literally come down with a sudden case of genocidal anti-Semitism at any moment.  Hence all the anti-anti-Semitic organizations a la ADL or UEJF, the Betar clubs, the network of sayanim, etc.  In other words, far from being a local “dealing with Israel only” phenomenon, Zionism is a worldwide movement whose aim is to protect Jews from the apparently incurable anti-Semitism of the rest of the planet.  As Israel Shahak correctly identified it, Zionism postulates that Jews should “think locally and act globally” and when given a choice of policies always ask THE crucial question: “But is it good for Jews?“.  So far from being only focused on Israel, Zionism is really a global, planetary, ideology which unequivocally split up all of mankind into two groups (Jews and Gentiles), which assumes that the latter are all potential genocidal maniacs (which is racist) and believes that saving Jewish lives is qualitatively different and more important than saving Gentile lives (which is racist again).  Anyone doubting the ferocity of this determination should either ask a Palestinian or study the holiday of Purim, or both.  Even better, read Gilad Atzmon and look up his definition of what is brilliantly called “pre-traumatic stress disorder”

Now let’s be clear: while Zionism itself is based or the ideology and worldview of rabbinical (Pharisaic) “Judaism”, it is not an ethnicity, but an ideology.  This is why I wrote the following in that same article:

By the way, there are non-Jewish Zionists (Biden, in his own words) and there are (plenty of) anti-Zionist Jews.  Likewise, there are non-Anglo imperialists and there are (plenty of) anti-imperialists Anglos.  To speak of “Nazi Germany” or “Soviet Russia” does in now way imply that all Germans were Nazis or all Russian s Communists.  All this means it that the predominant ideology of these nations at that specific moment in time was National-Socialism and Marxism, that’s all.

[Sidebar: I want to add one more thing here, especially for those who hate Jews: every time a Jew is unfairly denounced as the perpetrator of some evil deed, it is not only one innocent person which is unfairly condemned, but there is some non-Jewish SOB who is happily slipping away.  Is that something which you really want?  Just think about this, carefully, and understand the consequences of such a worldview!  I suggest that you don’t have to like Jews, or approve of what some of them do, to not want an outcome where any real investigation into the fact of the matter becomes impossible.  Finally, please realize that blaming “the Jews” for something require no knowledge, no expertise of any kind and no brains.  This is therefore something which the dumbest members of our society will be very strongly drawn towards.  Again, just think about it carefully. ]

By the way, while (Pharisaic) “Judaism” is clearly religious and while most original Zionist were not religious, over time Zionism adopted all the man-hating assumptions of (Pharisaic) “Judaism” while, at the same time, secularizing them.  You could say that (Pharisaic) “Judaism” is “God ordained racism” while Zionism is “secular racism”.  More fundamentally, both (Pharisaic) “Judaism” and secular Zionism are virulently anti-Christian and want to eradicate even the tiny remnants of a completely defeated Christianity in the West.  Finally, in the modern state of “Israel”, we now see a new phenomenon becoming very important: religious Zionism, that is a bland of Haredi (Pharisaic) “Judaism” with the type of secular Fascism cum Apetheid modern “Israel” embodies.

If you want to see the kind of freaks which this ideology produces, just see my articles “A crash course on the true causes of “antisemitism”” and “A Crash Course on the True Causes of “Anti-Semitism”, part II: the hunt for anti-Semites“.  If you read those (please do!) you will discover what I can only call “God ordained racism” which is quite unique as most religions are, by their very nature, universalist, including, of course, both Christianity and Islam (after returning from his trip to Mecca, Malcolm X totally dropped his “blue eyed white devils” nonsense; Islam cured him from Elijah Muhammad’s crude racism!).

What happened after WWII?

Simply put, the end of WWII saw an ideological alliance between Anglos and Zionists.  Why? Mainly for two very different reasons:

  • Their common hatred and fear of Stalin (who is always and *wrongly* accused of hostility towards Jews)
  • A recognition of very similar worldviews (exceptionalism, supremacism)

Basically, the racist worldview of (Pharisaic) “Judaism” blended with the historical racist worldview of the leaders of the Anglosphere to create the modern Anglo-Zionism.

Do I even need to mention that both worldviews are not only based on lies, they use lies as their primary, go-to, “weapon” against anybody dares who oppose them. You could say that the following verse by Saint John the Apostle, Evangelist and Theologian are the best description of the ideological cornerstone of both wordviews: “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it” (John 8:44).  Notice how closely Saint John connects lies and homicidal violence – these always go hand in hand!

During the Cold War, most of that hatred was directed at Communism, at least officially (after 1991 it became pretty clear that even without Communism the leaders of the West hated the Russian people).  After the 9/11 false flag, that hatred was directed at any state which would defy the West and Israel, and at any form of real, traditional, Islam.

I often smile when I hear the endless discussion about whether the dog is wagging its tail or the tail wag the dog.  In reality, this does not matter because the dog and the tail are one and the same organism, fully united in their purposes and goals.  And the point is, therefore, not who wags whom, but what the entire animal wants to achieve.

Originally, of course, the Anglos had mostly disdain for their up and coming Jewish counterparts, but money is much more powerful than any other consideration (at least in the West) and soon the part of the Anglo elites which was willing to adopt Zionism’s core values/reflexes easily out-competed the Anglo “old guard” which did not want to yield any real power to what they saw as their Jewish competitors.  And that is how AngloZionism was born.

What about “Israel” in all this?

The USA is probably the first and only country on the planet created by members of a demonic secret cult, that is Freemasonry (the fact that this Freemasonry had some external features of pseudo-Christianity does not change this).  “Israel” might well be the only country in history built purely on lies, also a sure sign of the “father of all lies”.  From the infamous “country without people for a people without country” to a complete ban on honest investigation into WWII or into the other founding myths of the state of Israel, to the endless “right” of this country to exist – “Israel’s” entire existence is predicated on the usual demonic pair: lies and violence.  In fact, while there were, and still are, plenty of states out there ruled by racists, Israeli is the only OPENLY racist state on the planet.  And this is why, for example, any Jew on the planet has the “right” to “return” to the state of “Israel” while a refugee born in Palestine has no right to return to his own home.  In “Israel” some are simply more equal than others!  Officially.

Is “Israel” unique in its systematic use of lies and violence?  No, not at all.  But it is unique in its unapologetic use of lies and violence to not only to achieve some specific geopolitical goals, but also to feed its cult of self-worship and sense of racial superiority above the “goyim” who, as we all know, “only understand violence”.

Yes, “Israel” is an abomination which no civilized person or society can accept, nevermind endorse.  But “Israel” is far more than that – it is also the litmus test of obedience to ruling classes of the West.  You can think of it as an Asch Conformity Experiment, but on a planetary scale, and one which you are asked not to only reject what your senses tell you, but one which shows how much you are willing to suppress you own conscience and embrace pure evil.

Those who embrace this lie become bound not only by a common worldview, but they become accomplices in something unspeakably evil and false.  Such people are much more than just bystanders to a slow-motion genocide, but they are also experts at Orwell’s doublethink:  when told to, they will gladly proclaim that right is wrong, white is black and reality whatever the ruling elites decree it to be.

For these people, neither “truth” nor “reality” make any difference.  None!

Such people are authoritarians not only because they love to give orders and impose their lies upon others, they are also authoritarians because they love to get orders and execute them (see here for an interesting discussion of this type of person).

Having said all that, we can we observe today?

Simply put, what we observe is a shameful and disgraceful attitude by almost every country out there.  And I will begin my denunciation of this state of affairs with Russia.

No, Russia is not “in cahoots” with “Israel” or Netanyahu!  This kind of crap is spread by infantiles who don’t understand how true complexity of the competition between states and by people who are paid (in money or recognition) to spread FUD (fear uncertainty and doubt) about Putin and Russia.

However, Russian leaders are showing an ice-cold indifference to the plight of the Palestinian people.  Oh sure, Russia officially supports all the relevant UNSC Resolutions about “Israel” and the Palestinians, but other than paying them lip-service, Russia does absolutely nothing against the “Israelis” as long as Russian interests are not directly affected or threatened.  I guess you can call it “Realpolitik” but I call it immoral and criminal indifference and I find is shameful.  Russia will never be come a truly Orthodox country again until it renounces such ugly forms of “pragmatism” and until moral/ethics return to the center state of the core values of Russian society and Russian policies.

In sharp contrast, and in spite of being much weaker than Russia while living its entire existence under the threat of attack by the AngloZionist, the Iranians have steadfastly placed morals over so-called “pragmatism” when dealing with the issue of “Israel” and the Palestinian people.  Of sure, of course, not all Iranians are that pure and noble, enough to see how Rafsanjani’s “Gucci Revolution” was backed to the hilt by Zionists to see that not everything is perfect in Iran.  But humans are the same everywhere.  What makes Iran so dramatically different is not that Iranians are “better” people, but that Iran officially places moral, ethical and even religious values at the cornerstone of its worldview and policies!  That is quite remarkable, and unique, and puts the shame the rest of the planet.

What about the current war in the Ukraine?

Today we are all fixated on the war between NATO and Russia in the Ukraine, and this is quite logical.  After all there is a fair chance that the freaks who run the Empire will prefer the destruction of the entire northern hemisphere to a (now quite inevitable) Russian victory.  However, we should not kid ourselves, this war is not, repeat, NOT about the Ukraine or even the future of the EU.  This is a war which will decide whether the AngloZionist will take full control of our planet or whether the last empire in history will be replaced by a multi-polar, multi-ethnic, multi-religious, multi-cultural, multi-political international order regulated by the rule of law.  Thus “Israel” has a HUGE stake in it, and no, *not* because the “(((Khazarians)))” wand to create a new state in the Ukraine or Crimea, but because if the AngloZionist Empire falls, the Zionist regime in “Israel” will have to either renounce its worldview of “God given racism” or, indeed, face its demise as predicted by Imam Khomeini when he said: “this regime that is occupying Qods [Jerusalem] must be eliminated from the pages of history“.

In the case of the Nazi run Banderastan, we saw the Ukrainian Nazis and the Israeli Nazis work hand in hand, while at the same time the Israelis pretended to maintain equidistance between the two belligerents.   Yes, the Ukronazis and the Israelis do hate each other too, but much less than they hate Russia and everything Russian.  What better example of the Zionist moral flexibility then to see “Israelis” sending weapons and “volunteer” instructors to the Bandera-worshipping Nazis in Kiev and against the people who liberated Jew from the Nazi camps!  Ditto for the so-called (and much misrepresented, see herehere or here) “pogroms” which were all located in what is today’s Ukraine and not in Russia.  As for the infamous (and also much misrepresented, see herehere or here) Pale of Settlement, how is is different from the wall the “Israelis” built to prevent Palestinians from freely loving across their own land?  In fact, any serious comparison of the two would immediately show that the latter is infinitely worse than the former.

And yet.

The truth is that the rabbinical/Pharisaic hatred of Russia is not based on history or any past wrongs, but on purely religious reasons: rabbinical/Pharisaic “Judaism” is an anti-Christianity just in the same was as the Latin Papacy is an anti-Orthodoxy!  Why?  Because Christians claim to the the “real Jews” (in spiritual terms) and Orthodox Christians claim to be the “true Church”.  In other words, Orthodox Christianity challenges and debunks both the Judaic claim to the Old Testament and the Latin claim to the New Testament.

Does it really surprise anyone to see the Latins working hand in hand with their “elder brothers in the faith” who “await the same messiah”?

There is also the fact that the Russian society today, while not truly Christian by a long stretch, is yet unwilling to give up the moral/ethical values of true Christianity.  Even “worse” is the real possibility that Russia might return to her true Christian roots, especially after the conclusion of the NATO war against Russia (assuming it does not end in a nuclear apocalypse, which it well might).

And no, it is no coincidence at all that the key actors (Nuland, Kagan, Blinken, etc.) are all Zionist Jews.  There are objective reasons for that.  Yet, we must always remember the words of Saint Paul who wrote “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places” (Eph 6:12).  We must remember these words not only because innocent people have no nationality, including innocent victims, or because there is no such thing as “collective guilt”, but because we – unlike the Latins – cannot defend true Christianity while ignoring its key teachings!  It is as wrong to deny the nature of this warfare as it is wrong to deny its spiritual, and not ethnic, nature.  At the very core, we are dealing with a stark choice:

  • Do we accept the common humanity of all people or
  • Do we reject it

If the latter, than your place with with the Nazis, be them German or Israelis.  If accept that common humanity – then act on it and never allow yourself to be brought down by the fact that our enemies do not share this key value.  It is really that simple!

Conclusion

Ever since the 2014 coup in Kiev I have been almost exclusively focused on the Ukrainian civil war and, after 2022, on the US/NATO war against Russia.  Only rarely did I mention Zionism or Israel.  Primarily because I simply did not have the time.  And this is why today, in what shall be my last posted analysis on the Saker blog I wanted to revisit that topic again.  At over 4000 words, the above is not indented as an exhaustive discussion of the topic.  My hope is that what I wrote above my seen enticing enough for you, the reader, to pursue your own research into this immense and complex topic.  I think you could do worse than reading the various texts I have mentioned above. But the choice is yours.

I want to conclude this post with the words of Alexander Solzhenitsyn in his famous text “Live not by the lie“.  I hope that they will inspire you.

Andrei

***

Excerpt from “Live not by the lie“:

When violence bursts onto the peaceful human condition, its face is flush with self-assurance, it displays on its banner and proclaims: “I am Violence! Make way, step aside, I will crush you!” But violence ages swiftly, a few years pass—and it is no longer sure of itself. To prop itself up, to appear decent, it will without fail call forth its ally—Lies. For violence has nothing to cover itself with but lies, and lies can only persist through violence. And it is not every day and not on every shoulder that violence brings down its heavy hand: It demands of us only a submission to lies, a daily participation in deceit—and this suffices as our fealty.
And therein we find, neglected by us, the simplest, the most accessible key to our liberation: a personal nonparticipation in lies! Even if all is covered by lies, even if all is under their rule, let us resist in the smallest way: Let their rule hold through me!
We are not called upon to step out onto the square and shout out the truth, to say out loud what we think—this is scary, we are not ready. But let us at least refuse to say what we do not think!
This is the way, then, the easiest and most accessible for us given our deep-seated organic cowardice, much easier than (it’s scary even to utter the words) civil disobedience à la Gandhi.
Our way must be: Never knowingly support lies! Having understood where the lies begin (and many see this line differently)—step back from that gangrenous edge! Let us not glue back the flaking scales of the Ideology, not gather back its crumbling bones, nor patch together its decomposing garb, and we will be amazed how swiftly and helplessly the lies will fall away, and that which is destined to be naked will be exposed as such to the world.
And thus, overcoming our temerity, let each man choose: Will he remain a witting servant of the lies (needless to say, not due to natural predisposition, but in order to provide a living for the family, to rear the children in the spirit of lies!), or has the time come for him to stand straight as an honest man, worthy of the respect of his children and contemporaries?

MORE

Anglo-Zionism and the Confederation of Europe

February 07, 2023

Source

By Batiushka

Introduction: The Origins of Anglo-Zionism

When I discovered the Saker in 2014, I at once discovered his term of genius ‘Anglo-Zionism’. That, after all, is exactly what it is. It is Anglo-Zionism that has poisoned the European well for over 300 years. The bankers who left Venice for Amsterdam and then moved to London, having financed their agent, the bloodthirsty Anglo Cromwell and so brought the monarchy in England under merchant-banker (‘parliamentary’) control, founding the Bank of England in 1694 and bribing the Scots to union in 1707, were Zionists.

So began Anglo-Zionism. The Anglos were the traders of British Imperialism and the Zionists were the bankers of British Imperialism, of whatever nationality they might be. Of course, there was intermixing, as some Anglos became bankers and some Zionists became traders, for example even moving to the Caribbean for the slave-trade, from which the family of the former UK Prime Minister Cameron made its millions. And Mr Cameron’s great-great-grandfather was a German Jewish banker who became a British citizen in 1871. It is a small world.

Anglo-Zionism in Europe

From all this was born the Anglo political system. Generally speaking, the right-wing party (the Tories) were the Anglos, the left-wing party (today called Labour) were the Zionists, though again there were exceptions, for example, the Jewish Prime Minister Disraeli, was in the right-wing party. This system has continued in the UK to this day, where, unsurprisingly, they talk about their ‘Judeo-Christian’ civilisation. Thus, the supposedly Labour Blair regime ministers were almost all Scots, homosexuals and Jews.

When the ultra-Tory Blair, ‘son of Thatcher’, was despatched after doing his appointed duty, a man called Jeremy Corbyn eventually became the leader of the Labour Party. Unlike Blair, he actually was left-wing, a true-believing Socialist. As a result, he was naturally pro-Palestinian and so was immediately branded by the Anglo-Zionist British Press as an ‘Anti-Semite’. They got rid of him through intrigues, including inducing him to be anti-Brexit (two-thirds of his supporters, his working-class backbone, were pro-Brexit and so, unnaturally, but with no other choice, voted pro-Brexit Tory). Corbyn was replaced with an Establishment millionaire called Starmer, who looks like a cardboard cut-out of a Tory. How did he get the job? Simply because he is married to a Jew and his children are therefore Jews.

However, the same system was exported all over Europe. In the Soviet Union the ideologue of the Third International was Bronstein (Trotsky) who wanted World Revolution. In Romania, the man who replaced Ceausescu in 1989 was a Jew. The present Romanian leader is a German. The situation in the Ukraine is well-known from the billionaire arms-dealer Poroshenko (real name Walzman) to the millionaire actor Zelensky (his name probably a translation of Gruen). In France the Zionist lobby has been strong from the 19th century on. Although the current French President Macron is French, he is a Rothschild banker. Franco-Zionism. There are dozens of other examples throughout Europe over the last 300 years, especially since Napoleon.

Anglo-Zionism in the US

However, the main bastion of Anglo-Zionism is undoubtedly the USA, which the bankers from London seriously colonised during the First World War. specifically during the 1916 turning-point, when it became apparent to the Round Table organisation there would only be one winner, neither Germany, nor Great Britain, but the USA. As soon as Russia had been taken out of the equation through US bankers via their British agents and Russian traitors in Petrograd in early 1917, the first US troops appeared in France less than one month later. All had been pre-planned.

Today in the US, the Republican Party represents the Anglos and the Democratic Party the Zionists. The billionaire Trump, like Bush, is a typical White Anglo nationalist WASP: America first. On the other hand, Biden is a typical Zionist, just like Obama and Clinton before him, though quite unlike Kennedy. An electoral accident, he of course had to be eliminated. And he was.

For 250 years the Anglos and the Zionists have worked together in the US, they have had the same self-interested interests – money and power. However, there are now discussions between them regarding the Ukraine. Already half of the Anglo Republicans want out of the Ukraine (1). It is too costly and they want to save the US (and their own fortunes) from its multiple self-inflicted wounds just in case it goes under. But the Zionists are thinking along the same lines. There is only one solution.

The Ukraine

The Anglos wanted the Ukraine in order to defeat their traditional rival, Russia. However, for the Zionists the Ukraine had another purpose, it was to destroy White Europe, the same purpose they had in fomenting the First and Second World Wars, so ensuring Zionist domination of the world – ‘Globalism’. Not all neocons are Wolfowitzes, Kagans and Nulands. Many are Anglos. Today, we are already seeing that the Republicans are increasingly beginning to support Zaluzhny, the Kiev military commander, whereas the Democrats still stand behind the Jewish Zelensky, but are now wavering.

The Republicans originally wanted to weaken Russia. The Republicans are nationalists, so are the Russians. It is now just dawning on them that Russia does not want to recreate the Soviet Empire or any other sort of Empire, all they want is to protect Russians, not to invade other countries. In any case, they are not going to weaken Russia any more through the Ukraine. All that they have done so far is to strengthen Russia. The Ukraine has not served its purpose. As for the Zionists, they are happy to kill as many White Europeans, especially Russian and Ukrainians, as possible, but above all they want world power.

The interests of Anglos and Zionists coincide. For if the Russians do not want world power after all, then the real rival is China, which has real mercantile power. Therefore, the pivot to China, where there is real money. Once the US has lost in the Ukraine, and Kadyrov confidently predicts that it will be over by the end of 2023 (2), the US will turn its attention to China. But it is already happening. That is what the balloon show was all about. China is a much more interesting option for the money-grubbers, whether Anglos or Zionists. But where does that leave benighted Europe?

Europe’s Demons

A spectre has long been haunting Europe, or rather two spectres, or rather two Legions of Demons: Unionist Demons and Nationalist Demons, Centripetal and Centrifugal forces, who have both been issued with strict instructions never to allow Unity in Diversity.

The Unionists are represented by all the big, supranational, unaccountable and so violent, corrupt and bullying institutions, whose blood-soaked hands have tormented Europe for over 2,000 years: the pagan Roman Empire, the Frankish barbarian ‘Holy Roman Empire’, the ‘Reformed’ centralist Papacy with its ‘Crusades’ and tyrannical medieval ‘unity’, Napoleon, Hitler and the EU. These torments all come out of exactly the same Unionist cauldron, boiling with love of power, greed and hatred for the Nation-State and the little people. The demons dance around the cauldron, hellishly gloating at the immense suffering and bloodshed they have caused to the innocent for two millennia.

Always the same victims.

The Nationalists are represented by wars and massacres between the Germans and the Wends, the English and the Welsh and the Scots, the medieval Italian city-states, the principalities of medieval Rus, by the Anglo-French Hundred Years War, the Central European Wars of ‘Religion’, the Normans and the English, the Turks and the Greeks, the English and the Irish, the Russians, both before and after 1917, and the Poles, Finns, Latvians, Georgians and Ukrainians, the Swedes and the Finns, the Germans and the French, the French and the Bretons and Corsicans, the Danes and the Norwegians, the Greeks and the Bulgarians and Macedonians, the Austrians and the Serbs, the Serbs and the Bulgarians and Croats, the Spanish and the Basques and Catalans, the Czechs and the Slovaks, the Hungarians and the Romanians, the Ukrainians and the Carpatho-Russians, the EU and Brexit, Grexit, Nexit, Frexit etc, and by all those many other interminable bullying conflicts between big neighbours and little neighbours, between capitals and provinces. One such conflict is going on at this very moment in the Ukraine, with hundreds of thousands of dead already. These torments too all come out of exactly the same Nationalist cauldron, boiling with love of blood and hatred for Unity. The demons dance around the cauldron, hellishly gloating at the immense suffering and bloodshed they have caused to the innocent for two millennia.

Always the same victims.

Overcoming the Demons

The most dangerous thing in European history is not the suicidal stupidity of Europeans, but when outsiders make it even worse by interfering. For example, to some extent, to what extent exactly is still being debated, the British elite in their island were responsible for meddling in Continental Europe and so creating both the First and the Second World Wars. However, modern Europe is the invention of the US. Itself a Union, built on the blood of over 600,000 of its own, it wanted to create a similar Union in Europe. The result is the EU with its ring of captive stars: ‘One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them. One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them; In the Land of Mordor where the shadows lie’.

More clearly, the latest conflict in the Ukraine has come about completely through the meddling of the world bully, which styles itself ‘the world’s policeman’, the US. As the US is now losing in this conflict, and losing very badly, what will happen once the US world bully is gone from the scene, not only from the Ukraine, but from Europe in general? After all, the US departure from Europe seems to be inevitable in the coming generation, maybe by the centenary of the US Occupation of Europe in 2045, if not well before that.

Will the present Unionist US-devised United States of Europe, the EU, which is about to collapse with its Demons of Unionism, fall back into petty nationalisms and intertribal massacres as before? Will Europeans once more have to obey the Demons of Nationalism? Could Europeans not at last learn to live in peace after two thousand years of interfering in the lives of other Europeans and, far worse, after a thousand years of interfering in the lives of Non-Europeans? What could replace Unionism and Nationalism?

Conclusion

There can be no peace in Europe, until the East and the West of Europe accept one another on an equal footing. And the only axis which can unite Europe is the Moscow-Berlin-Paris axis, the one which was disrupted before 1914. This axis is the only one that could also bring in Budapest, Bucharest, Belgrade, Athens, Warsaw, Stockholm, Rome, Madrid and even London, even if the latter has first to overturn its brutal Establishment by violence, even though the US will have dropped it. And we include Vilnius, Riga and Tallinn in this. The Balts may not like Russians because of the Soviet Occupation, but that was a long time ago and the Balts, unlike their puppet-elites, do not like the American Occupation that replaced it and being forced to exile themselves abroad just to live.

To ensure peace in Europe and to avoid both Unionism and Nationalism, there needs to be a Confederation of Europe from Moscow to Berlin to Paris to London. The rest will gather round them. If such a Confederation can be designed with care, it could achieve that long-elusive balance of Unity in Diversity which Europe needs. For far too long Europe has been on the wrong side of history, through its suicidal impulses of inviting its enemies in. It is time to stop sitting on the US fence and climb it. Co-operation with Moscow, rather than conflict, is to open the gateway to resources and all Eurasia and to cease that foolish isolationism, which for a thousand years has made Europe into a seat of ethnocentric pride and aggressive violence.

7 February 2023

Notes:

1. https://news.mail.ru/politics/54958857/?frommail=1

2. https://news.mail.ru/politics/54963166/?frommail=1

The War and the Future

January 31, 2023

Source

By Batiushka

Foreword: Stop Living in the Past

Since the historic Special Military Operation to liberate the peoples of the Ukraine from their US puppet tyrants in Kiev began on 24 February 2022, the post-1945 settlement has been over. In fact, it should have been over with the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 or, at latest, at the dissolution of the USSR in 1991. However, the USA was blinded by its exceptionalist hubris as ‘the only Superpower’ and engaged in its latest fantasy of destroying Islam, which it mistakenly saw as a serious rival, arrogantly dismissing Russia, China and India as minor players. So, as a sectarian rogue-state, the USA began its war of terror on all who thought differently, which it so humiliatingly lost. This can be seen in the dramatic pictures of the last flights out of Kabul in 2021.

In other words, after the end of the Soviet Union, which had been born directly out of World War One and formally founded in 1922, the end of the American Union (= NATO) should have followed, and with it the end of the worldwide American Empire. Thus, today NATO is an anachronism, well past its best before date, which is why has begun meddling all over the world, from the foothills of the Himalaya to the Pacific Ocean. NATO is just like the alphabet soup of other US organisations and fronts, IMF, EU, WTO, OECD, G7, G20 and UN, with its mere five Security Council members, including minor Great Britain and France. What might await us as a result of the liberation of the Ukraine on the centenary of the 1945 settlement, in 2045?

1. After the Ukraine

First of all, probably within the next fifteen months, we shall see the full liberation of the Ukraine. With the eastern Novorossija half of the Ukraine returning to Russia, the remaining half, Central and Western Ukraine, perhaps minus Zakarpattia (returning to Hungary as an autonomous region under the Balogh brothers) and Chernivtsy (returning to Romania), will return to being Malorossija, its capital in Kiev. Thus, the way will at last be open to form the Confederation of Rus’. The at last freed East Slav lands and peoples, Eurasian Russia and the Eastern European Belarus and Malorossija, could together form such a Confederation of Rus’, with a total population of just under 200 million.

2. The Reconfiguration of Eurasia

After the Ukrainian question has been solved and the USA has lost its political, military and, above all, economic power to bully the rest of the world, all of us in Eurasia will be able to start living in our new-found Freedom and building Justice and Prosperity for all. We foresee first of all the expansion of the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU).

a. The Eurasian Economic Union (EEU)

At present consisting of the Russian Federation, Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, the EEU will surely be joined by a host of other countries, including firstly China, by now reunited with Taiwan, and Mongolia, then India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Iran, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Syria, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Vietnam and Cambodia. They will be followed by the rest of Asia (60% of world population). Thus, the EEU will largely replace the present SCO (Shanghai Co-operation Organisation). However, true to its Eurasian name, the Economic Union will also receive and grant applications from a new organisation in North-Western Eurasia. This could be called the European Economic Alliance (EEA). This could be formed through the economic co-operation of all forty-four countries in the extreme western tip of Eurasia, to be known simply as ‘Europe’. This will include what was once known as Western, Central, Northern and Southern Europe, representing nearly 7% of world population.

b. The European Economic Alliance (EEA)

This Confederation could be formed as EU coercion collapses, with Brussels disarmed as the American Union of NATO dissolves. This will follow the long-overdue withdrawal of US occupying forces from Europe and the closure of their bases. All there will find freedom again. The founding member of the EEA would perhaps be Hungary and its Capital could be fixed in Budapest in honour of Hungarian courage and its geographical closeness to the resource-rich Confederation of Rus’, the gateway to Eurasia, on which the EEA will be so dependent. The Budapest Parliament building would make a fine administrative headquarters for the EEA. Other countries would follow Hungary like dominos, possibly in the following ten phases, after rebellions in each European country, one after another overthrowing their corrupt US-installed puppet-elites. This would resemble the rebellions that took place with a domino effect in the then Soviet Eastern bloc between 1989 and 1991.

i. The Western Balkan Four

After the European Economic Alliance has been founded by Hungary, it would next be joined by Serbia. No longer held under the heel of the US bully, the ancestrally Serbian province of Kosovo would return to Serbia. However, this would only be possible if its Albanian inhabitants, like those also in Montenegro and North Macedonia, first moved to Albania. For this to happen they would have to be attracted by a huge package of investment and development to pull Albania out of grinding poverty and chronic corruption and into prosperity, to make int into a magnet for Albanians. We suggest that China could invest in the massive rebuilding, and building, of infrastructure in Albania, as China already has a history of links with Albania. With such a just solution, all Albanians could at last live decently and work in decent jobs in their own country and not be forced to live like cuckoos in the countries of others. On this Albania could join the EEA. At this point Montenegro, (North) Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina could also join the EEA. These countries would perhaps form together with Serbia a Trade and Cultural Federation, perhaps to be called Yuzhnoslavia, though each would absolutely retain its political independence. Investment in Yuzhnoslavia could come from the Confederation of Rus’.

ii. The Eastern Balkan Three

After their example, Moldova, Romania and Bulgaria would almost immediately join the EEA, attracted by links with Eurasia and the resources and linked culture of the Confederation of Rus’.

iii. The Greek World

They would naturally be followed by Greece and Cyprus, in the latter of which Russian investment is already huge. These three phases, i, ii and iii, of linking up with the Confederation of Rus, but remaining as sovereign nations within the EEA, would complete the reconstitution and restoration of the Orthosphere. This is the Orthodox Christian Commonwealth, whose natural centre has for 500 years been Russia.

iv. The Former Habsburgs

Next would come Croatia, Slovenia, Slovakia, the Czech Lands and Austria.

v. Italia

They would naturally be followed by Italy, San Marino and Malta.

vi. Germania

The real turning-point would come if these countries were followed by the central domino of Germany. Germany, fixed between Western and Eastern Europe, knows that it cannot live without Russia and countries and markets to its east. It would immediately be followed by Germany-dependent Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Belgium.

vii. Nordia

Closely linked to Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Iceland and finally Finland would follow almost at once.

viii. Gallia

After Germany, France, which is so dependent on Germany, with Monaco and then Switzerland and Liechtenstein, would also be obliged to join the EEA in fairly quick succession.

ix. Iberia

Spain, with newly-independent Catalonia, and then Andorra and Portugal would swiftly follow France.

x. The Isolationists, East and West

Now we come to the end of this game of dominoes. The last mohicans, the once irreductibly isolationist Russophobes, the Johnson fantasy, would realise that they could no longer remain alone. The people would revolt against their elite-imposed poverty and depopulation and the absurd propaganda down the generations. First, Estonia, under pressure from Finland, and then in a chain, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland could join the EEA. However, the first three would have to throw off their US puppet-elites and at once grant human rights to their Russian minorities.

Then, under economic pressure from Germany, the Netherlands and Scandinavia, the British Isles and Ireland, would at last follow. Thus, now separated into their four natural components, there would appear an independent England, freed after a millennium of the delusional yoke of the invented ‘Great Britain’ (an invention on a similar scale of delusion to the old ‘Ukraine’) and of the British Establishment. Immediately would follow newly-independent Scotland and Wales and a united Ireland. After the collapse of the oppressive British Establishment elite and their London-run institutions, the people and the pragmatists would proclaim that there is no alternative to co-operating with Eurasia through joining the EEA. All the more so, given the debt crisis, chaos, division and poverty in the USA, the former British colony which had become Britain’s colonial and ideological master. Step by step, opened archives would reveal the MI5 and MI6 manipulations like Litvinenko, MH 17, the Skripals, the Kerch Bridge explosion and the Nordstream destruction and how the tabloid media (the whole British media, including the State-run mouthpiece of the BBC) were used to perpetrate these lies.

3. Outside Eurasia: Continental Councils, the Inter-Continental G30 and The World Alliance

Thus, a united Eurasia (some 70% of world population) will stand together with Africa (17% of world population), Latin America (South America, Central America, Mexico and the Caribbean – 8% of world population), and the small Northern America (under 5% of world population) and even smaller Oceania (a tiny 0.5% share of world population, with its economies increasingly dominated by China. This would only be natural justice, as the Pacific islanders originated from Taiwan). Each Continent could elect a Council, creating a Eurasian Council, an African Council, a Latin American Council, a Northern America Council (basically, the USA, or whatever it will break up into, with Canada and Greenland) and an Oceanian Council (Australia, New Zealand, Western New Guinea, Papua New Guinea, Melanesia, Micronesia and Polynesia). Each Council would be made up of all the nations in its Continent.

On an Inter-Continental level, there could also be formed the G30. This would be composed of all 30 nations of the world which each have a population of over 50 million + Australia, representing all Oceania, and would replace BRICS, the G7 and the G20. These nations in order of size at present are: China, India, USA, Indonesia, Pakistan, Brazil, Nigeria, Confederation of Rus, Bangladesh, Mexico, Japan, Ethiopia, Philippines, Egypt, Vietnam, DR Congo, Turkey, Iran, Germany, Korea, Thailand, France, Italy, Tanzania, South Africa, England, Myanmar, Kenya, Colombia and Australia. 18 are in Eurasia (13 in Asia and 5 Europe-based), 7 in Africa, 3 in Latin America and 1 each in Northern America and Oceania). The composition could change as the populations of new countries grow to more than 50 million or alternatively some contract to fewer than 50 million.

On a global level, the 235 nations of the world, including the 143 with populations of under ten million and the 75 with under one million, could assemble in a World Alliance, replacing the old New-York UN. The Capital of the Alliance could be fixed in a central position, not in an off-centre position like New York, but in the Eurasian heartland, for example, in Yalta in the Crimea. Its Security Council could be composed of the ten most populous nations, essentially all regional powers in the new multipolar world: China (also speaking for Oceania), India, USA, Indonesia, Pakistan, Brazil, Nigeria, the Confederation of Rus’ (the only country with the vast majority of its population in Europe, which it would therefore represent), Bangladesh and Mexico. Six are in Eurasia, two in Latin America, one in Africa and one in Northern America.

Afterword: Towards the Future

Fantasy? Fiction? Faction? Frankly, if only 10% of the above came to pass, that in itself would be world-transforming. And if you dismiss the above out of hand, just think for a moment of how all would have mocked predictions of the generational chain of World War I (1914), World War II (1939), the fall of the Berlin Wall (1989) and in quick succession the fall of the Soviet bloc, and, on the centenary of World War I, in 2014, the US-orchestrated coup in Kiev which has led directly to the world-changing events which began in the Ukraine in 2022, the centenary of the USSR. Yet it all happened. In 2021 nobody had predicted the events in the Ukraine either, for nobody could have imagined the Mariana Trench depth of the suicidal stupidity of the Anglozionist elite.

A generation ago, as a Russian Orthodox priest stranded in Western Europe, the Northern Sahara, as so much of it seems to be, I did not dream of any of this. Would I live to see the revival of corruption-bound, post-Soviet Russia, enslaved to and humiliated by the West and all its vices? My impression then was that the whole world was living on borrowed time. Then came the miracle of the events of August 2000 in Russia and the appearance of President Putin. After the shamefulness and shamelessness of the CIA’s useful idiot, the drunkard Yeltsin, Putin was a miracle. And I began to think that I would live to see the future. And since 24 February 2022 I have been living it. The English Shakespeare once wrote in his Twelfth Night: What’s to come is still unsure’. I will agree, but I will still try to pierce the darkness to glimpse the light.

31 January 2023

The Era of Threatening the Lebanese and Seeking Strength from Foreign Forces is Over – Hezbollah MP

January 24 2023

By Al-Ahed News

Member of Hezbollah’s “Loyalty to the Resistance” parliamentary bloc Hassan Fadlallah called for “meeting Hezbollah’s efforts to reinforce internal understandings and consensus for the election of a President of the Republic. In this frame, we have meetings with all political forces, some of which we agree with and others we don’t. We’ll pursue these meetings, as we’re not the only party that controls the accessibility to reach an understanding. There are other parties in this country.”

The Hezbollah MP stressed the necessity for “the political parties to meet one another, and agree on who’s qualified to be the President of the Republic since there’s in Lebanon who is qualified to fill this position.”

Fadlallah further emphasized “the need to achieve consensus which is what the structure of our country obliges us to do. Hence, no one can reach anything by competition and inciting. Hezbollah wants to hold the presidential elections but not randomly. We don’t want to fill this position with a random person, as he may deepen the crisis more.”

“We want to fill the vacancy with who fits, not to be filled otherwise. So, we called them for attending meetings, understandings, and dialogues because no one in the parliament possesses a two-thirds majority, and yet no one has majority of 65 seats. The position of the President of the Republic is crucial in our political system, as electing a president leads to the formation of a new government, which organizes the constitutional institutions. Accordingly, the government, which enjoys full powers, has to run the country’s affairs and address our crisis, especially that we see the financial and economic deterioration aggravates.”

By the same token, Fadlallah noted that “We stated a group of specifications for the President to have. We don’t need a president or a government or anyone to protect the Resistance. The Resistance is the one protecting the country, and it was the one that kicked Ariel Sharon out of Baabda Palace in 1982. Hadn’t it been for the Resistance, the Baabda Palace would have still been occupied until this day.”

“The Resistance liberated Lebanon, the Presidency, the state, and the institutions. It doesn’t need the protection of anyone. All we are saying is that we need a president who neither betrays the Resistance, nor the country and other political parties.”

أوروبا في مهبّ الرياح الأوكرانية وتململ فرنسي ألماني من التفرّد الأميركي

الإثنين 23 كانون الثاني 2023

محمد صادق الحسيني

بعد مرور نحو عام على اندلاع الحرب الأطلسية على روسيا، يمكننا القول بأنّ أوروبا سقطت بمثابة أول ضحايا هذه الحرب.

فأوروبا كما تظهر على المسرح الدولي اليوم لم تعُد أوروبا جاك شيراك (فضلاً عن غيرهارد شرودر) الذي ذهب يوماً الى روسيا واصطحبه بوتين آنذاك معه الى المركز الاستراتيجي للقيادة والسيطرة للرحلات الفضائية تيتوف، في رسالة يومها لواشنطن، بانّ روسيا يمكن أن تكون صديقة، بل وحتى مظلة نووية للدفاع عن القرار الأوروبي المستقلّ، وعضواً مستقبلياً في الاتحاد الأوروبي، كما صرّح بوتين نفسه يومها.

فأوروبا، ما بعد أوكرانيا لم تعُد أوروبا شيراك، ولا حتى ميركل، بل هي مجموعة تتخبّط، وتفتقر لاستراتيجية واضحة ناهيك عن رؤية مستقلة ومتوازنة في كلّ الملفات الحيوية العالمية.

وهي تخسر مع كلّ يوم يمرّ في الساحة الدولية من وزنها المعنوي الكثير، إضافة الى خسائرها المادية التي لا تعدّ ولا تحصى، من بينها فقط وعلى سبيل المثال لا الحصر عشرات الآلاف من الشركات الكبيرة والمتوسطة والصغيرة التي كانت تعمل في روسيا.

وعلى وقع هذا السقوط أمام العاصفة الأوكرانية اجتمع كلٌّ من المستشار الألماني والرئيس الفرنسي في الأليزيه في باريس، بمناسبة مرور ستين عاماً على توقيع اتفاقية الصداقة بين ألمانيا وفرنسا لإظهار تماسك قوتهما الأوروبية…

الاتفاق الذي نص يومها على إنهاء العداء المتوارث بين ألمانيا وفرنسا وبدء مرحلة بناء أوروبا الجديدة، وهو ما كان قد تعزز بالتجديد عليه بتاريخ ٢٢/١/٢٠١٩ بين الرئيس ماكرون والمستشارة ميركل، وصودق عليه من قبل برلماني البلدين آنذاك.
وقد علقت المستشارة ميركل يومها على ذلك التوقيع بالقول: «نريد إعطاء الوحده الأوروبية دفعاً جديداً .»
وقد سُمّي يومها باتفاق آخن نسبة الى المدينة الألمانية الواقعة على الحدود الهولندية التي وُقّع فيها.

بينما ركز الاجتماع الذي عقد يوم أول أمس، بين ماكرون وشولتس، على ضرورة تقوية أوروبا أيضاً:
«إنّ أوروبا ذات السياده القوية تؤمّن السلام والازدهار والحرية لسكان أوروبا» (هذا ما قالوه) .
ومن أجل أوروبا القوية غداً، يجب علينا اليوم أن نقوّي جيوشنا ونستثمر المزيد في صناعاتنا العسكرية.
اذ انّ هذا (تقوية الصناعة العسكرية والجيوش) يجعل أوروبا شريكاً أكثر (أقوى) للولايات المتحدة .»

لم يصدر هذا الكلام في بيان رسمي وإنما على شكل مقتطفات خصّ بها الرئيسان، صحيفة «فرانكفورتر الغماينه تسايتونغ» ونشرتها على موقعها الإلكتروني.

أوروبا هذه، الحالمة بالقوة، فقدت قبل أيام، حتى موقفها الوسيط مع دول صاعدة يفترض أنها ليست عدوة لها، لا بل قد تكون وسيلة لها لتقوية استقلالها بوجه واشنطن، لكنها سقطت مرة أخرى في الامتحان من خلال اتخاذها لمواقف متطرفة لا لزوم لها تجاه طهران كرمى عيون واشنطن، وثكنتها العسكرية المقامة على اليابسة الفلسطينية المسمّاة «إسرائيل».

فكان السقوط المدوّي بقرار البرلمان الأوروبي بتصنيف الحرس الثوري الإيراني منظمة ارهابية!

مصادر وثيقة الصلة بمطبخ صناعة القرار الأوروبي تؤكد، بأنّ القرار وانْ كان غير فعّال أصلاً ولن يلزم دول الاتحاد وهو لا يعدو عن كونه دعاية معادية لإيران، تماهياً مع سياسات واشنطن، المتعلقة بالحرب النفسية ضدّ طهران .

إلا أنه يشكل في الواقع، سقوطاً مدوياً للهيبة الأوروبية، والقوامة على قرارها المستقلّ في المعادلة الدولية، وهو ما تسعى إليه واشنطن بشدة، في كلّ الملفات المشتركة بين الطرفين، لا سيما بعد قرارها الأحمق في إعلان الحرب ضدّ روسيا.

بالفعل القرار البرلماني الأوروبي لا أفق له بالطبع على أرض الواقع… سوى كونه قرار ترضية للسيد الأميركي كما تؤكد المصادر المطلعة، مقابل امتناع الأوروبيين عن تزويد زيلينسكي بدبابات ليوبارد الألمانية ودبابات لوكلير الفرنسية …

ومن المعلوم انّ البرلمان الأوروبي في ستراسبورغ في الواقع ليس سوى واجهة فرنسية ألمانية، تعبّر عن رغبة مشتركة مكبوتة لدى باريس وبرلين، بأن تظهرا عالمياً بأنهما لاعبان مستقلان دولياً، وهي ما بدأت تترنح أمام الضربات الأميركية.

الخارجية الإيرانية في هذه الأثناء هدّدت بالانسحاب من معاهدة الحدّ من انتشار الأسلحة النووية إذا لم يصحّح الاتحاد الأوروبي موقفه.
فيما هدّد مجلس الشورى الإسلامي باستصدار قرار يعتبر الجيوش الأوروبية «منظمات إرهابية» ـ كما جاء على لسان رئيس مجلس الشورى الإسلامي، محمد باقر قاليباف.

والتصريحات الإيرانية هذه، حسب المصادر المطلعة، تصريحات فعّالة وقوية وواضحة جداً. فيما المصالح الأوروبية في منطقة غرب آسيا كبيرة ومتشعّبة ومن الصعب التضحية بها.

المصالح الاقتصادية وقبل كلّ شيء تمركز قوات مسلحة / وأفراد عسكريين / لكلّ الدول الأوروبية في الكثير من دول الإقليم، هذه القوات ستكون هدفاً لجميع الجهات الحليفة لإيران في المنطقة.

وهذا أمر لا تستطيع الدول الأوروبية تحمّله ولا مواجهته عسكرياً.

صحيح أنّ قرار ستراسبورغ، غير ملزم للدول الأعضاء البتة لكنه لو حصل فهو بمثابة إعلان حرب، سيطيح بما تبقى من مكانة وقوة أوروبا على يد الإيرانيين.

تقدير الموقف لدى المصادر يقول بأنّ دول الاتحاد لن تذهب الى تفعيل قرار برلمان ستراسبورغ، وإنها ستحاول التملص مما صدر في مقر البرلمان.
وهو البرلمان المعروف بأنه واقع تحت تأثير القوى الماسونيّة والصهيونية العالمية، لا سيما أنّ رئيسته المالطية متورّطة في فضائح قد تؤدّي الى محاكمتها وطردها من وظيفتها، ما قد يكون ساهم في اندفاعتها لصالح السيد الأميركي الصهيوني.

ختاماً يمكن القول بانّ أوروبا سقطت عملياً وأصبحت هشة كثيراً وأنها ستظلّ أسيرة تململ غير مجدٍ ما دامت عاجزة عن اتخاذ موقف مستقّل عن واشنطن، كما أنها ستتراجع أيضاً عن عنترياتها، تجاه إيران، ما يجعلها أشبه ما تكون بأعجاز نخل خاوية.

بعدنا طيبين قولوا الله…

Revisiting Russian objectives in the Ukraine

January 17, 2023

Check out this list of headlines, all from one source only, RT and all from the past week or so:

Some are only “more of the same” (like the Ukronazis making the Aussies ban Russian flags at the Open), some are rather disgusting (like the Ukronazi blogger who wants to exterminate the Russian people), some are revolting (like the French warning 5000 Russian graves that “their concession is expiring”!), some are hilarious (like the idea of bust of “Ze” at the Capitol building), some are outright crazy (like the idea of a “Ukraine peace summit” without Russian participation).  Some are weird but encouraging (like the Kentucky gubernatorial candidate, a Democrat, calling for an impeachment of Biden for war crimes).  But some are very, very serious indeed (like the increase of the size of the Russian military to 1.5M or the fact that both the General Milley and Defense Minister Shoigu visiting their troops at the same time.

One could certainly say that these headlines are “signs of the time” (“but can ye not discern the signs of the times?” Matt 16:2-3), but what does this all mean?

First, these headlines are like a snapshot of the West’s collective insanity.  Please keep in mind that the past week was no more and no less rich in crazy ideas and statements than previous weeks.  This snapshot is what one could call the “West’s homeostasis” or, in other words, that is the norm, the stable mental condition in which the West operates.  Future historians, assuming the AngloZionists freaks in power allow us to have a future other than a nuclear apocalypse, will marvel at the collective insanity which overcame an entire continent.

Second, both the rabid #CancelRussia mass phenomenon and the discussions about sending NATO weapons, including MBTs, fighter aircraft, SAMs and the like are an expression of the same impotent rage felt by the leaders of the West.  And headlines like this one “Russian economy doing much better than expected (…)” The financial results for 2022 have exceeded many forecasts, the president [Putin] says” certainly do not help.

The obvious danger here is that frustrated, hate-filled people are typically not capable of rational decision-making.  Let’s, for example, take the “clever” idea of sending the Ukronazis (well, NATO, really) more tanks or aircraft.  If you look at the numbers discussed, they are so small as to make no difference.  But once you sent them to the Ukraine and they get destroyed by Russian missiles, what do you do next?  Send more?

It took the Russians about one month to basically destroy the (original) Ukrainian armed forces.

Then it has taken Russia about 9 months to destroy most of the hardware former Warsaw Treaty Organization (no, it is *not* called a “Pact” – that is pure propaganda and why not call NATO the Atlantic Pact by the same logic?).  The sad part here is that in the process of destroying all that WTO kit, Russia had not choice but to inflict horrendous casualties with Ukrainian KIA/MIA going well into the several hundred of thousands.  “Ze” sent wave after wave after wave of mobilized men straight into the Russian meat-grinder with no chance of prevail and very little chance of survival.

It might take Russia a year or more to fully destroy all the hardware (and “volunteers”) sent by NATO.  Russia is certainly making plans for a long and major war, hence the re-creation of the Moscow and Leningrad Military Districts (you can think of them as “fronts” once a war starts) or the massive increase in weapons procurement up to and including strategic deterrence forces (nuclear and conventional).

Right now, Russia seems to be focusing on destroying the (comparatively) better trained units of the mixed NATO-Ukronazi forces in the eastern Ukraine.  The Russian strategy is very simple: Russia can kill NATO soldiers and hardware faster than NATO can provide reinforcements.  Obviously, this is only a temporary situation, and there are three groupings of Russian forces (North, East, South) all along the frontlines which can intervene at any time and give Russia something she never had since the initiation of the SMO: a full combined arms offensive and a numerical superiority over the other side.

Most knowledgeable observers, such as Col Maggregor, believe that a Russian offensive is all but certain.  Wars can be very unpredictable, and Putin does have a genius ability to act in unpredictable ways, so I would not say that this offensive is absolutely certain, but I agree that it is highly likely.  However, such an offensive is not risk free.

In purely military terms, there is no force on the European continent which could take on the Russian forces currently aligned along the Ukrainian border.  In political terms, there is a major issue for Russia: any terrain that she liberates will have to be protected.

During the first phase of the SMO, the Russians sent in a comparatively small force, which did great in combat against the Ukronazis, but which did not hold ground (which you never do in economy of force and maneuver warfare), resulting into absolutely awful optics including:

  • The perception that Russia promises to come and protect the people she liberated only to then abandon them.
  • The perception that the Russian retreated because of Ukronazi military successes.

The fact that neither of these statements is quite true does not help as they are “close enough” to the truth to sound convincing.  As a result, the Russian side completely lost control of the narrative, for a while even inside Russia!  It took the appointment of Surovikin to reassure the Russian public that while mistakes were made (including in the early phase of the war or during the mobilization), those mistakes would be addressed and corrected.  Now with the Russian Chief of General Staff in final and personal control of the war, nobody doubts that the Kremlin does mean business.

There is also a small, but noticeable change, in the western propaganda with more and more voices dissenting from the official AngloZionist party line.  Of course,  the economic disaster facing the EU is most helpful in sobering up the Europeans: now that more and more EU citizens have to say “bye bye” to the comforts and jobs they used to enjoy (including first and foremost, dirt cheap energy costs), we can count on an increasingly loud rumble of protests.  Maybe not “pro-Russian” ones, no – most Europeans, especially northern Europeans, *do* hate Russia – but at least anti-Establishment ones.  Having silenced your conscience does not keep you warm or, for that matter, employed.  The EU will now discover the very real costs of rabid russophobia.  And sending tanks to the Ukraine obviously won’t help.  Hence the current strikes and protests in several EU countries.

So when the promised offensive materializes, there will be only two options left: ditch the Ukronazi regime “Kabul style” or full commit NATO (or a subset of NATO states) to invade the western Ukraine.  My money is on the latter option.

Actually, this is not one option, but two very different ones.

  • In the first case, NATO (or a subset) will move in unilaterally hoping that Russia will not strike the occupation force.
  • In the second case, the US and Russia could strike a deal and jointly agree to partition the rump-Ukraine.

Obviously, the second solution in infinitely safer and preferable, but just like Hitler and his goons did not want to negotiate with Russian subhumans, neither do the AngloZionists.

Still, here is a truism which must be always kept in mind:

==>>There is nothing in the Ukraine Russia wants or needs<<==

This was true of the Ukraine before the SMO, and it is even more true today.  Country 404 is basically deindustrialized and a prototypical failed state, while the population has been so brainwashed that it will take years to deprogram them.  Russia only wants two things:

  • Protect the Russian speaking population from genocide
  • Deny NATO the use the Ukraine territory to attack Russia

Notice that neither of these options necessarily requires making major territorial gains.  I would even argue that, with one exception (see below), it would be ideal for Russia to achieve these objectives by liberating as little as possible of the currently Nazi occupied land.  As I have said it many times, the Ukrainians need to clear their own house and not expect Russia to do it for them.  Alas, it will take another generation of Ukrainians to do that, assuming they ever will.  But as long as country 404 is sufficiently demilitarized, Russia can wait for the denazification to seep into the minds of millions of brainwashed Ukrainians.

The first consequence of this, is that the Russians are more than happy not to move forward and have the US push NATO forces into the Russian meat grinder.  True, it is unlikely that Russia will be able to demilitarize and denazify the Ukraine without a major offensive to finish up the Nazi forces.  However, the seizure of land is not the Russian goal, only the means to achieve it.

Then there is the issue of the Nikolaev-Odessa-PMR (Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic).

While the Kremlin might have other plans, I personally don’t see any other option than to open a land corridor to PMR.  This would also have the immense benefit of cutting the rump-Banderastan from the Black Sea.  For NATO, however, the loss of Odessa and the Black Sea Coast would be a major setback, both politically and militarily.  There were some really dumb ideas circulated about this in the West,including sending in the 101st as a “tripwire” force.  Why is that dumb?  Simply because *IF* the Russians have concluded that the liberation of the entire Ukrainian coast is vital to the security of Russia, then no “tripwire” force will stop them.  And what will the US do if that tripwire force is attacked?  Launch a fullscale nuclear attack on Russia?

Are the US Neocons willing to lose Washington DC, New York, Miami or Los Angeles over Odessa?  I don’t know, but if they are the typical self-worshiping Nazis (which they are), then a nuclear holocaust might seem preferable to these hate-filled freaks.  Can somebody sane stop them?  I don’t know that either.

The headlines above suggest to me that no real decision has been made and that right now there is a tug of war inside the western ruling elites about what to do when the (almost certainly) inevitable Russian offensive happens.  By the way, this fact by itself might be a good reason for the Russians not to move in too soon.  Yes, it is unlikely that saner voices will prevail, but being a nuclear superpower Russian must act with utmost caution and not listen to the Russian turbopatriots and the western “friends of Russia” would have been advocating for total war for months, if not years.

Maybe the “Georgian model” is what might save the day?

Remember how during the three day war in 08.08.08 Russian forces were closing on Tbilissi with nobody left to defend the Georgian capital?  The Russians decided to call back their forces (no, Russia has no need for either the land or the people of Georgia.  Sounds familiar?) but Saakashvili reinterpreted this withdrawal as “our heroic and invincible forces stopped the Russians”.  And two years before that, Dubya who declared with a straight face that Israel defeated Hezbollah the “Divine Victory” war.  So maybe the AngloZionist can save face by declaring that they “prevented Russian from seizing Lvov or Ivano-Frankovsk”?  And if the Russians decide not to try to liberate Kiev, then NATO will be able to declared that “we stopped Russia from seizing Kiev”.  Yes, that would be a rather transparent lie, at least for those few still capable of critical thought, but I personally much prefer a lie, however, silly, to a fullscale war.

So maybe Russia needs to have a third, unspoken, objective: give the crazies in the West a face-saving “out”, no matter how thin or ridiculous.  In fact, I am pretty confident that there are folks in Russia working on this right now.

Andrei

What would it take?

January 10, 2023

How NATO “celebrated” the Orthodox Nativity

NATO did “celebrate” the Orthodox Nativity, but in its own way. First, a few headlines:

Remember the truce offered by Russia?  It was rejected.  Instead we got this:

And, just to clarify, NATO uses Serbia as a defenseless victim to show Russia what it can do to its allies, the message being, as Stoble Talbott said, “after Serbia, you are next”, so the link here is strong.

NATO did not stop at that, it also continued its policy of persecutions, see these headlines:

Speaking of issues of freedom of religion, NATO is planning to completely ban the parishes which used to have an autonomous status under the Moscow Patriarchate, which then turned against Moscow and condemned the SMO.  But that was not enough, so, just like in NATO occupied Kosovo, the persecution of Orthodox clergy and faithful is both a “feel good” operation for Orthodoxy-haters and a “message” to Moscow.

NATO did not stop at that, it also announced yet another military aid package for Banderastan: (no translation needed I suppose)

None of that will be enough to make a difference, but there are many more such “aid” programs being discussed, so NATO wants to continue to draw out this war for as long as possible and fight the Russians down to the last Ukrainian.

Not that any of this did any good to “Ze” and his gang: having rejected the Russian truce, the Ukronazis are now loosing the towns of Soledar and Artemovsk (see here for details), which are not only tactical victories for the Russians, but this now threatens the operational defenses of the Ukronazis which will have to fall back on what we could call a “third line of defense” if they want to restabilize the front.

Russia has also continued with her strikes, including an absolutely huge explosion at the NATO base in Ochakovo and a retaliatory attack following the HIMARS strike which killed nearly 100 Russian soldiers.  The retaliatory attack was aimed at two barracks in Kramatorsk and, according to the Russian, it killed 600 Ukronazis soldiers.  Finally, it appears that 40% of the Ukrainian electrical grid is down forever, since nobody (except Russia) can replace the extremely heavy (and costly) transformers needed to reconnect that grid (now all electrical power is local, with no means to distribute it through the grid).

Feel the hatred

I think that it would be fair to say that what we are witnessing is possibly the most intense demonization of a political leader – Putin – and a country – Russia – in history.  And it is absolutely *not* only something coming from the West’s ruling class.  A few days ago my daughter and I were laughing because she accompanied some kids to an comics/action figures store and, to her dismay, most customers were adults (lots of infantiles in the USA).  Then I asked her, just for fun, “was there any Putin action figure on sale”?  There were none, obviously, but we decided to check on the Internet, again, just for fun and, we saw what was on offer on Etsy.  Here is the link, see for yourself: https://www.etsy.com/market/putin_action_figure

Now Etsy is not a front for the CIA, and items sold there are mostly made by individuals.  I suggest you go through a couple of page of items in the link above and see for yourself: Putin-hatred is certainly a very “popular” thing in the West.

Another example, check out this website: https://fightforua.org/.  This is about a worldwide recruitment operation to send mercenaries to the Ukraine.  The traffic on that site is modest, but the effort directly linked to the Ukie military “intelligence” service (it goes through their military attaches) and that means that it is run by NATO.

And then there are all the mantric statements from Western politicians expressing their total love and support of “Ze”, his policies and Banderastan.

Which begs the question:

What would it take for the West to see the true (Nazi) face of Banderastan?

So far, the narrative has not changed: Putin is a megalomaniacal dictator who wants to restore the Soviet Union (or the Russian Empire), Russia attacked the Ukraine because that is what Russians do – they attack others for no good reason.  Banderastan is a de facto NATO member state who fight in a “NATO operation” (as per the Ukie Minister of “Defense”) and it now protects all of Europe from the Russian hordes.  And since the heroic Ukrainian soldiers are shedding their blood, the very least NATO and the EU can do is to supply infinite amount of money and weapons to this freedom-loving beautiful and heroic country.  Listening to that nonsense one could be forgiven for assuming that Country 404 is as democratic as Iceland or San Marino.

It is even more amazing, at least at the first glance, to see how strong the Israeli and Jewish support for a clearly Nazi regime has been.  Of course, the Israelis/Jews have no love for the Nazis, but they hate Russia even more than they hate the Nazis (which is quite ironic, since all the anti-Jewish pogroms in the Russian Empire happened in the Ukraine and not in what is Russia today).  This is also true of all the doubleplusgoodthinking western politicians who ban Nazi symbols or “revisionist” books in their own countries, but who fully support the Nazis in NATO and Kiev.

[The topics of “Israel” deserves a separate article, as that country leaders go from bad, to worse to completely insane.  Their latest “brilliant idea”: call the Palestinian flag as a “terror flag” and then to ban its public display.  In Palestine.  Does that not sound Ukie to you?  It is not exactly the kind of batshit crazy action which both Banderastan and “Israel” are known for and which the freedom loving and doubleplusgoodthinking western politicans and media will never see, as their hate-filled eyes are only directed as Moscow.  In fact, I would argue that “Israel” is something of a precedent and even an “older brother” to Banderastan – infinitely ugly, infinitely evil, yet enthusiastically supported by the entire West.]

The Ukronazis can burn people alive, torture all their POWs, completely suppress the freedom of information, murder civilians by the many thousands, try to deprive entire regions of water and electricity (they never realized that karma can be a bitch!), persecute people for having the wrong photo on their cellphones, “disappear” many thousands of supposed political opponents, ban languages, close down churches, freely use a unambiguously racist terminology dehumanizing their own citizens, etc. etc. etc.  And for all that, they get a standing ovation (in Congress, literally), billions of dollars of “aid”, tons of weapons and thousands of “volunteers”.

And yet, far from being reviled, “Ze” and his gang are lionized by the West while “Ze’s” victims are demonized and Russia, as a civilization, “canceled” (and not only by authorities, most of that “canceling” is done spontaneously and quite voluntarily).

What is being ignored here is this: what does the West’s total support for the Albanian terrorists in Kosovo, the Israeli terrorists in Palestine and the Ukronazis in Banderastan say about the West itself?

Yes, I know, the Neocons who run the US don’t give a damn about what any “deplorables” might think about them as they see themselves as fundamentally superior and entitled to rule the world.  What they are completely missing in their narcissistic self-worship is that much of Zone B is absolutely disgusted with the AngloZionist Empire.  Just one example:

Are you aware that most of Latin America is taking an increasingly strong anti-US stance?  Following the attempted coup against President Lula in Brazil, all of the following countries immediately condemned that (obviously CIA run) coup including: Argentina, Mexico, Chile, Venezuela, Cuba, Ecuador and even Colombia (which is a tectonic change in Colombian politics)!  I got that list from this article, but I am confident that we can add Bolivia and Nicaragua to that list.  In fact, I wonder if there is any Latin American country who backed the coup (if yes, please post it in the comments).  Yes, even Colombia, which used to be Uncle Shmuel’s bitch for decades, now elected its first President who is not a US puppet.

Much of the same is happening in Africa where more and more countries are openly (and covertly) supporting Russia and ditching their colonial oppressors – like France in Mali – see here for details.

And, again, we observe the same in the Middle-East were countries such as the KSA, which used to be joined at the hip with the USA, are now seeking Russian support and through the Russians, a channel of communications with Iran.  Again, these are immense geostrategic shifts which the western free and democratic media tries very hard to ignore.

There is a well-known saying which goes “tell me who your friends are and I’ll tell you who you are“.  Clearly, racist freaks like Bibi Netanyahu or “Ze” are not only the “friends” of the West, they are the West’s heroes, which deserve infinite support not matter what evil actions they commit, it all goes away under the “our son of a bitch” doctrine which makes is possible to support both Zionists in Palestine and Nazis in Banderastan.  As I wrote many times, both Zionism and National-Socialism are twin brothers, born from the same European nationalistic womb; and while they claim to hate each other, they mostly work together as we have seen in the example of, say, South Africa.  So yes, these two monsters do hate each other, but they hate Russia even more, hence their current alliance in Banderastan.

Conclusion: the true (Nazi) face of Banderastan is the true face of the West

The Ukronazis used to have a slogan “Україна – це Європа” (Ukraine is Europe).  The past eight years have shown us that the opposite is true – Europe is the Ukraine.  And since the original Ukie slogan very much includes the USA as part of being “European” (which I would very much dispute), we can basically conclude that “the West is the Ukraine”.

It would be stupid to expect Nazis to condemn other Nazis.  That is just not going to happen.  Not until Russia defeats NATO, at which point the European “great supine protoplasmic invertebrate jellies” (BoJo) will have to quickly rebrand themselves as peace loving “good neighbors” of Russia or live in terror (and poverty!), and not because Russia will attack any EU country, but because they will have lost even the illusion of US “protection” (aka colonization) of the EU.  And there will be A LOT of finger pointing, especially at the rabid Hyena of Europe and the UK (nobody will even notice the quite irrelevant Baltic statelets which nobody needs, including Russia).

It goes without saying that the West’s support for Banderastan and “Israel” is a wholesale and very public repudiation of the values which the West claimed to stand for.  I would argue that one of the biggest achievements of the SMO was to force the West to show it’s true (Nazi and Zionist) face.  Ironically, this is not unlike what happened in the Soviet Union where Marxist-Leninist propaganda was everywhere, but absolutely *nobody* took it seriously.  And here is the crucial factor to always keep in mind: every regime in history, no matter how brutal and oppressive, needs at least some degree of public support.  As Talleyrand, Bonaparte’s Foreign Minister, once said “My Lord, you can do anything you like with bayonets, except sit on them“, and this is quite true.  Furthermore, history shows that there is a critical moment when the rulers of a regime are seen has hypocrites the regime inevitably collapses.  Right now the ruling class which runs the West looks like a gang of meat-eating carnivores claiming to stand for “vegan values”, something nobody can take seriously (except maybe those truly too dull to be able to understand anything).

And then there is this: Russia is arguably the last Christian country in Europe (the other one would be Serbia).  The rest of the continent has now comprehensively caved to the “Woke” ideology, yet another reason for their hatred for Russia: compared to Russia, the post-Christian West looks idolatrous and even openly demonic!  Remove Russia, and that would be far less obvious (without any point of comparison).  Considering this state of affairs, I think that it is quite safe to assume that in the future it will be Islam, brought in by millions of emigrants, which play a much bigger role in European affairs than any remnants of pseudo-Christianity.  From a Russian point of view, this would be much preferable than to deal with Orthodoxy-hating pseudo-Christians.

But all that will only happen once NATO is defeated and the EU denazified and demilitarized.  Until then, the coven of witches which run NATO will continue to fully support Ukrainian Nazis and Israeli Zionists.

Andrei

IRGC Says Revenge on Gen. Soleimani’s Murderers is “Definite”

January 2, 2023

IRGC

In a statement commemorating the third anniversary of Martyr Soleimani, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) considered revenge against the perpetrators and murders of Martyr Soleimani as certain.

The statement said that the three years since the martyrdom of Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani the discourse of Resistance and anti-Arrogance around the world has matured.

Referring to the school of Martyr Soleimani, the statement added that Martyr Haj Qassem is a lasting legend and myth not only for Iran and Iranians but also for the Anti-Arrogant and anti-Zionist Resistance front in the world.

According to the statement, Martyr Soleimani following the instructions of Imam Khomeini (RA) and Imam Khamenei, had firmly set to respond to the needs of the revolution, Iran, and the Muslim nations of the region in dealing with Takfiri terrorism and ISIL by using the capacities of the Resistance Front and its allies and supporters.

The statement further added that the strength and vitality of the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps in advancing the strategy of supporting and accompanying the Islamic Resistance Front indicate the continuation of the path of General Soleimani and the survival of the ideal of the Iranian nation in supporting the Palestinian nation and the liberation of Quds.

The statement considered taking revenge on the perpetrators and murderers of Martyr Soleimani as a “definite” and “inviolable” matter and further stated that the IRGC monitors the process of expelling the US from the West Asian region and deems the promotion of the schools of figures such as General Soleimani schools in Iran as undeniable strategies of the IRGC.

In the end, the Guards reiterated that they will sacrifice their lives for the sake of the homeland and the nation against the global hegemonic system and Zionism.

Source: Mehr News Agency

Related Videos

Related news

Leader: Gen. Soleimani empowered, equipped and revived resistance front against Israel, US

Sunday, 01 January 2023 11:23 AM  

[ Last Update: Sunday, 01 January 2023 12:13 PM ]

Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei holds a meeting with General Soleimani’s family and members of his commemoration committee. (Photo by Leader.ir)

Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei has lauded sacrifices made by late commander General Qassem Soleimani, saying the anti-terror icon’s great work was to protect, empower, equip and revive the resistance front against Israel and the US.

The item is being updated..


Press TV’s website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:

www.presstv.ir

www.presstv.co.uk

Gen. Soleimani ‘unifying figure’, ‘architect of resistance’: Academic

Sunday, 01 January 2023 11:07 AM  

[ Last Update: Sunday, 01 January 2023 11:08 AM ]

Iran’s top anti-terror commander, Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani

An academic has described Iran’s top anti-terror commander, Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani, as the “architect of resistance” and a “unifying figure” in life and death.

Pro-Palestine professor, David Miller, sacked by Bristol University over his criticism of Israel and Zionism, made the comments about General Soleimani in Press TV’s Palestine Declassified aired on Saturday.

Soleimani, the chief commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Quds Force, was assassinated on January 3, 2020, in a US air raid outside Baghdad International Airport under the direct order of then-US president Donald Trump.

Miller mentioned the “practical effect” of Soleimani’s legacy on enabling the Axis of Resistance as well as Palestinian factions to collaborate with each other.

“All the Palestinian factions got together and still remain unified, even though the Israelis tried to split them apart; I think that the resistance is unified much stronger than it has been for many years and that is directly because of Soleimani’s activity,” he said, adding that, “he was a unifying figure in life and death.”

Miller also said that Soleimani was the “architect of resistance” and brought together the forces in the Axis of Resistance, a transnational organization, willing to fight US imperialism and target and fight Zionism.

He also lauded the anti-terror commander for his endeavors in bringing the resistance together despite the Shia-Sunni divide.

“He worked seamlessly across the sectarian divide, and the support from [the Palestinian resistance movement] Hamas, predominantly a Sunni organization, is unparalleled for any other particular leader in the Iranian government,” he said.

“Soleimani is somebody who, during his life, accomplished military feats, for which the whole world should be grateful,” Miller added.

The killing of General Soleimani

The killing of Qassem Soleimani by a drone strike on 3 January 2020 was carried out on the direct orders of President Donald Trump.

‘Gen. Soleimani steadfast ally of Palestinian resistance’

Aamar Kazmi, an anti-imperialist political activist, also told Press TV that General Soleimani was certainly seen as a “steadfast ally of the Palestinian resistance.”

“Many Palestinians, particularly those in Gaza, admire Soleimani, display portraits of him and even in the West Bank, and there are murals of him on the apartheid wall, so he is very well respected in Palestine and lots of tributes were paid to him upon his martyrdom,” he said.

‘Soleimani, architect of defeat of ISIS’

Elsewhere in his remarks, Kazmi said Soleimani was the architect of the defeat of Daesh (ISIS) terrorists in Iraq and Syria.

“Qassem Soleimani’s role was quite unique; over the years, he was on the ground, literally all over the place in Iraq and Syria, building connections, planning and strategizing, providing inspiration and morale. Sometimes it is possible to attribute too much to a single individual but I do not think this is one of those cases,” he concluded.

Iraq commemorates General Soleimani ahead of US assassination anniversary: ‘His path will continue’

The Iraqi people hold ceremony in Salahedine Governorate to commemorate the former commander of the IRGC Quds Force General Qassem Soleimani and his comrades.

During his lifetime, General Soleimani played a significant and direct role all across the region.

In 2006, Soleimani sent military support to Hezbollah to help eject the Zionist invasion of southern Lebanon.

In Syria, Soleimani assumed personal control of the Iranian intervention. He reportedly coordinated the war from a base in Damascus with Syrian officers, Hezbollah, and Iraqi Shia militia forces.

In 2015, he was the main architect of the joint intervention involving Russia as a new partner with Assad and Hezbollah. Soleimani personally briefed President Putin on the strategy.

In 2017, he dealt a decisive blow against ISIS in both Syria and Iraq.

General Soleimani was targeted in a US drone strike directly ordered by Trump, which also killed the deputy chief of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis among others.

Five days later, Iran, which had vowed to avenge Soleimani’s assassination, launched a barrage of missiles at the US-run Ain al-Assad airbase in Iraq’s western province of Anbar, as well as another airbase in Erbil.

The Islamic Republic also said the attack, dubbed Operation Martyr Soleimani, was a “first slap” and that its retaliation was not over.


Press TV’s website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:

www.presstv.ir

www.presstv.co.uk

RELATED ARTICLES

Syrian Media: Turkey Agrees to Fully Withdraw Troops from Syria

January 1, 2023

By Staff, Agencies

Turkey has agreed to a complete pull-out of its troops from Syria after a recent meeting between defense ministers of Russia, Turkey and Syria in Moscow, according to a report published in Syrian media.

The Arabic-language al-Watan newspaper said in a Friday report that Russia had brokered the meeting in Moscow after intelligence authorities of Turkey and Syria held several rounds of discussions to sort out their differences.

It said that Turkish media outlets, especially those who are close to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, have also published articles and opinion pieces in recent months suggesting that the Turkish government would better put aside differences with Syria in line with political changes and developments that have happened in the region.

The report said that the meeting in Moscow on Wednesday was held after Damascus and Ankara reached consensus on some key issues, including the need to take into account conditions set by Syria in previous rounds of negotiations.

A source told al-Watan that Turkey had agreed in the tripartite meeting in Moscow to fully withdraw its forces from Syria and to respect sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Arab country.

Turkish Defense Minister Hulusi Akar, his Syrian counterpart Ali Mahmoud Abbas and Russia’s defense chief Sergei Shoigu attended the meeting.

The report said that Syria and Turkey had also discussed the implementation of a 2020 agreement to reopen the M4 highway in northwest Syria along the border with Turkey.

The participants also emphasized that the PKK terrorist group has been a pawn in the hands of the United States and the Zionist regime and should be considered as a major threat to both Syria and Turkey.

They also agreed to set up some specialized committees follow up on agreements reached in the meeting and to hold other rounds of talks between Ankara and Damascus in future.

Late on Wednesday, the Syria’s Ministry of Defense described the meeting between defense ministers of Turkey and Syria as positive.

It said the meeting paved the way for pursuing efforts meant to fight terrorism and to review the situation in Syria, especially with regards to the refugees.

Defense ministers attending the meeting also emphasized the need for continued trilateral talks in order to create stability in Syria and in the wider region.

Russian Defense Ministry also issued a statement after the meeting and said that defense ministers of the three countries had discussed the crisis in Syria, the issue of refugees and fight against terrorism.

Carthage Must Be Destroyed!

December 16, 2022

Source

By David Sant

During its rise to world domination, the City of Rome had one major competitor, which was its equal in every way. That city was Carthage, located 370 miles away, on the South side of the Mediterranean Sea.

Carthage had been planting colonies around the Mediterranean and Atlantic for over a century before Rome was even founded. As Rome rose to power, these two Mediterranean cities fought two wars for control over the Island of Sicily, called the Punic Wars. Despite an admirable performance by Hannibal who managed to invade Italy twice and inflicted a terrible defeat on the Romans at Cannae, Carthage still ended up losing both wars.

At the close of the second Punic War in 201 BC, Carthage was conquered by Rome and placed under a special administrative status that disallowed it from fielding a navy or overseas military without permission from the Roman Senate.

Carthage was one of only three powers that ever managed to directly threaten Rome during the days of the Republic, the others being the Gauls who sacked Rome in 390 BC, and the Macedonian Greeks, who were defeated in 197 BC.

The Roman attitude and behavior toward Carthage then was very similar to the Anglo-American attitude toward Russia, today. The main “sin” of Carthage in the eyes of the Romans was that it was equal in power and influence to Rome. And for that sin, it had to be destroyed.

Cato the Elder was a Roman soldier, who later became a Senator and famous orator who gave many speeches in the Senate even after his retirement. Over a period of forty years, he routinely ended his speeches on any subject with the statement, “And furthermore, I consider that Carthage must be destroyed!”

Cato repeatedly made this demand, despite the fact that Carthage was now a Roman client state bound by a peace treaty.

For fifty years after losing the Second Punic War, Carthage submitted to the terms of the treaty. However, after the death of Cato the Elder in 149 BC, a certain faction in Rome deliberately allowed the King of Numidia to pillage and conquer Carthagenian territories, in violation of the treaty.

This placed Carthage in a position where they had to defend themselves from predations by a neighboring Roman client state. Their appeals to the Roman Senate were ignored. So, they took action to defend their interests against Numidia without permission.

When they did so, the Roman Senate immediately interpreted this as a violation of the 201 BC peace treaty, and authorized the invasion and destruction of Carthage. This was not unlike the “rules based international order” of Washington, DC, where we make the rules (for you) but we don’t have to follow them ourselves.

Despite having surrendered their weapons at the outset of the Roman campaign, the walls of Carthage were so well made that it took the Romans nearly three years of siege to break through.

Finally in 146 BC, Carthage fell for the last time to the Roman Army, and was deliberately razed to the ground and burned. The Romans slew all of its population, men, women, and children, except for 50,000 who were taken back to Italy as slaves. According to Polybius, the wife of the last general of Carthage threw herself and her own children into the burning temple of the city rather than surrender to Rome.

Moscow as the New Carthage

The dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 was not the result of losing a war. It was caused by the failed policies of a centralized economy, exacerbated by American manipulation of the oil markets, and a costly American-backed guerilla war in Afghanistan. The United States moved in with “shock therapy” economic advisors and took the opportunity to restructure a confused and gullible Russia, including writing a new constitution.

For Russia the collapse of the Soviet Union had many similarities to the loss of Carthage in the Second Punic War.

Despite making peace with their former adversary, and honoring their treaties, Russia found that she could never be accepted as a friend on equal terms by the Western world order. And this was for the very same reason that Carthage could never be tolerated by Rome. Russia was and is in every way an equal to the Anglo-American Empire.

Ever since Vladimir Putin became President of Russia, the chorus of the West has become louder and louder that Putin must go. While they cannot say it aloud yet, what they really mean is “Russia must be destroyed!”

If Russia had continued the policy of submission to Western control that was begun by Boris Yeltsin, we can be assured that Moscow would have eventually met the same fate as Carthage from the Anglo-American Empire.

However, the appointment of Vladimir Putin as President of Russia derailed their plans. Under his rule Russia has steadily reasserted her former leadership and strength against the machinations of the Anglo-American Empire.

False Flag Attacks as a Means to an End

While at first Mr. Putin made a genuine effort to be a “partner” with the West, by the year 2011 it was clear that the West would never accept Russia as a friend or an equal. The West had enjoyed two decades of bossing everyone else around and had learned to enjoy giving orders rather than negotiating. One might say that the West forgot the art of diplomacy.

After watching in horror the NATO-led destructions of Serbia, Libya, and Syria, the Kremlin began asserting itself with foreign policy problems that directly affected Russian security interests starting in 2013.

The Obama Administration was very busy from 2011 to 2013 planning the overthrow of the Assad Regime in Syria. Two major hacks of intelligence related companies shed some unexpected light on what was going on behind the scenes. These were the Stratfor hack in 2011, and the hack of a British private security company (ie. mercenaries), that shall not be named, in January of 2013.

I must note that the private security company (PSC for short) admitted that they were hacked, but claimed that two of the most damning emails released within the gigabytes of leaked files were “fabricated.”

The “fabricated” email as reported by the Oriental Review, purportedly from the business development officer to the company founder reads as follows:

Phil

We’ve got a new offer. It’s about Syria again. Qataris propose an attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved by Washington.

We’ll have to deliver a CW to Homs, a Soviet origin g-shell from Libya similar to those that Assad should have. They want us to deploy our Ukrainian personnel that should speak Russian and make a video record.

Frankly, I don’t think it’s a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous. Your opinion?

Kind regards

David

The original story and its context can be found at The Oriental Review: https://orientalreview.org/2013/01/31/britamgate-staging-false-flag-attacks-in-syria/

Despite the file dump including personnel files containing copies of 58 real Ukrainian passports of employees of said PSC, the “fact checkers” at the time examined the email headers and noted that the email in question had a very similar time stamp, of three minutes before midnight, to another email in the release that was sent on a different date, also at three minutes before midnight. While this could be explained by a mail server or laptop setting which sent mail every day at the same time, it was accepted as proof of skullduggery and the entire affair was quickly dismissed and mostly forgotten.

Said PSC then sued The Daily Mail for libel for reporting the “obviously fake” email above as authentic, and was awarded damages and a partial retraction in January of 2022.

The supposedly fabricated email above happened to fall between several other breaches which revealed US and British intelligence were planning to release a video showing Russian-speaking soldiers as the operators of Syria’s chemical weapons depots.

I consider the aforementioned “hoax” to be one of the most amazing coincidences of the past two decades.

The PSC hack was shortly followed by claims of the Khan al-Assal chemical attack near Aleppo only three months later, and another at Ghouta five months after that, both of which were blamed by the West on the Assad Regime in the ramp up for an American invasion of Syria.

It is simply amazing that some unknown hacker managed to fabricate an email discussing the details of an event that hadn’t even happened yet. But the truth is often stranger than fiction.

Of course I know that the PSC referred to above couldn’t have had anything to do with either of the real chemical attacks which followed, because after their demonstrated incompetence of allowing all of their operations in the Middle East to be breached and published on the Internet, I seriously doubt they would be trusted to handle such an offer, had it been real.

The “fabricated” email shows us a picture of what was certainly going on in Syria as US and British intelligence farmed out projects to mercenary groups like Blackwater and other “private security companies.”

However, the invasion party was halted in its tracks in September of 2013, when Mr. Putin completely neutralized the Anglo-American casus belli against Syria by offering to help Syria destroy their chemical weapons stockpiles.

This was successfully completed and verified by the OPCW as being completed in late June of 2014. Thus Syria’s chemical stockpiles were completely removed before the American false flag plan could be convincingly executed. In poker this is known as calling the bluff.

Anyone who actually believed the Western propaganda about chemical weapons might have expected that President Vladimir Putin would be given some kind of international award for bringing Syria into the Chemical Weapons Convention and averting yet another major war in the Middle East.

However, rather than being pleased at the destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons, the Atlanticists were furious. This was the first major chess move by Mr. Putin that completely derailed the plans of the Atlanticists on the world stage. They shifted gears to the Euromaidan Revolution in Ukraine, beginning in November 2013.

However, the chemical weapons saga in Syria was only getting started. The Assad Regime continued to be accused of chemical weapons attacks in 2015, 2016, 2017, and even up until 2022. Syria has suffered from multiple attempted chemical weapons attacks since 2012, culminating in a major one in Idlib on April 4, 2017. The Idlib attack was used by President Trump to justify a cruise missile strike on Syria, two days later, before any facts could be ascertained about the event. Since 2017, Russia has warned repeatedly that the White Helmets group were planning false flag chemical attacks to be blamed on the Assad Regime. This activity has continued all the way up to the present year.

The most important lesson to be learned from the chemical weapons saga in Syria is that the Atlanticist intelligence agencies have such complete control over global mainstream media outlets that they do not fear exposure of their false flag attack plans. And furthermore, if you want to anticipate their plans, all you have to do is listen to what they say.

On August 20, 2012, a few months before any of the false flag chemical attacks in Syria, President Obama made the following comments:

We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus. That would change my equation.

Obama started warning Syria that using or even moving chemical weapons was a red line, shortly before the American false flag attempts began.

Thus, we can see that the US regime will telegraph their plans by first naming a casus belli, and then secretly working to create the false appearance of violation of the casus belli by the intended victim.

Even when the plans are exposed in advance, they will still be carried out. The MSM will pretend that there was no prior warning, and fact checkers will claim the prior warning was part of the deception by the country that was in reality falsely accused.

Russia Must Be Destroyed!

This brings us to the likely culmination of the Western war against Russia. In Septemer of 2022, Biden officials suddenly started clucking about how Russia must not use tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine. This refrain was repeated to the media multiple times by officials including the PresidentSecretary of State, and National Security Advisor, as well as several retired military officers.

Anyone with an ounce of sense can see that using nuclear weapons in Ukraine would go against every interest Russia has there, as well as breaking all the rules of Russian nuclear doctrine. The majority of Russian citizens have relatives in Ukraine, which would make such an action political suicide. Russia has never threatened to use such weapons in Ukraine. So, why would the USA give such warnings?

The ridiculous American warnings against nuclear weapons in Ukraine show the wise observer exactly what the US State Department is planning to do. They obviously intend to deploy a nuclear weapon or dirty bomb through their proxies in order to blame Russia for it.

We have already seen this beginning to play out. The Kremlin warned several major countries in October of 2022 that Ukraine was planning to detonate a dirty bomb to be blamed on Russia. US Defense Secretary Austin immediately spun the story to say Russia is fabricating that accusation to justify their own intent to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine. Then the topic seemed to die down for a spell.

It is unfortunately naive to think Mr. Shoigu’s warnings averted anything. In the past, exposing the planned chemical false flag did not prevent its eventual execution. We know from the Russian MOD that a radiological or nuclear false flag event has definitely been planned for Ukraine.

Since Russia announced this, it is possible that the Atlanticists may have upgraded the plot to use an actual tactical nuclear weapon, because Ukraine supposedly doesn’t have those, and it would be harder for Russia to deny. It will probably be saved for a moment where it looks like Russia is about to win a major victory in Ukraine.

In the larger context, Britain’s MI6 has run a series of false flag poisonings blamed on Russia, starting with Litvinenko in 2006, followed by the Skripal poisoning, and most recently the Nalvany poisoning. The purpose of these theatrical false flag campaigns has always been to reduce Russia’s influence in the international community, and attempt to isolate Russia as a “rogue regime.”

And going back to the “fabricated” email of the PSC quoted above, we see that the requirement to get video of Russian-speakers deploying a chemical weapon against innocent Syrian civilians fit right in with the British narrative that, “Russia poisons people, because Russia is a venomous serpent!”

The downing of MH-17 would also count as the same class of false flag incident, but with a somewhat more tactical purpose of trying to create enough international hysteria to turn the victory of the Donbass militia into a major defeat for Russia internationally through sanctions.

The downing of MH-17 succeeded in energizing Europe to apply the first round of sanctions against Russia. And even more so, it generated enough hysteria that Russia no longer is given the chance to defend her actions, to cross examine witnesses, or bring her own witnesses with regard to accusations against her. Russia and her citizens are now routinely accused of atrocities by the West and summarily punished by confiscation of property with no recourse in the international bodies that were created to adjudicate such disputes.

As the Ukraine War has stopped trending on Twitter, freezing Europeans are ready to take up pitchforks against their masters, and Russia’s presumed Winter offensive seems very likely to inflict some major losses on Ukraine and the NATO backers, the Atlanticist spin masters badly need a bigger shock to jolt the UN and EU into doing their bidding.

As in the case of MH-17, the Satanists running the Empire of Lies need a large sacrifice of human lives to generate enough shock and outrage to achieve their next big foreign policy coup.

The reader should recognize the same playbook as the warnings for Syria not to use chemical weapons in 2012, followed by years of false flag attempts.

After hearing the US warnings against Russia using a nuclear weapon in Ukraine, we should not have been surprised to learn from the Russian MOD that the Zelensky regime was planning to deploy a dirty bomb to be blamed on Russia as a tactical nuclear weapon. The American forewarnings, followed by exposure of such a plot, express the same pattern seen in Syria playing out again.

I expect that some version of this nuclear plot will eventually be carried out with the backing of Atlanticist intelligence agencies.

To What End?

Russia’s position as a permanent member of the UN Security Council with veto power has been a thorn in the paw of the Atlanticist beast since the Cold War.

Russia’s willingness to use her military to defend allies in Syria, Ukraine, and Armenia presents an uncontrollable risk factor for Anglo-American hegemony. They cannot tolerate it.

Russia has used her veto on the Security Council multiple times to block American warmongering. If Russia cannot be destroyed literally, then at minimum, they must destroy Russia’s reputation to the point of revoking their seat on the Security Council.

If the Atlanticists cannot risk directly attacking Moscow itself, then they can achieve the next best thing by creating a provocation to justify kicking Russia off the United Nations Security Council.

The Atlanticist Axis is desperate to remove Russian leadership and influence on the rest of the world, because Russia keeps blocking their imperial plans, whether in Syria, Ukraine, Asia, Latin America, or Africa.

The purpose of such an overt false flag attack as a nuclear detonation, real or fake, would be to generate sufficient international horror and emotion to remove Russia from the UN Security Council, or expel her from the UN entirely. They will require a 9-11 level event to achieve that.

Rest assured that when the bomb is finally detonated, the paperwork to expel Russia will be presented to the UN General Assembly before the ashes have hit the ground.

It doesn’t make sense to view such an event as an attempt to stave off Russian advances in the Ukraine. A nuclear bomb might be tactical but its purpose is strategic – to excommunicate Russia from the UN and all other international bodies of which it is a member.

The long term campaign by the USA and UK intelligence services to frame Russia for provocations using weapons of mass destruction follows the dark parallel of Rome’s treatment of Carthage.

Cato and his faction demanded the destruction of Carthage, not because Carthage was involved in any current plots against Rome, but because Carthage was a near equal to Rome in wealth, in culture, and in potential military power. Carthage was a potential adversary that could block Rome’s path to Empire.

Cato made these speeches for decades prior to his death, and ended every one of them with the demand that Carthage must be destroyed. At first it was probably considered a joke. But eventually through repetition he succeeded in priming the minds of the Roman Senate to carry out his desire.

Rome could brook no competition, and therefore did not recognize Carthage as an equal. The existence of Carthage, to the Roman mind, required its destruction. And this is exactly how the think tanks in DC and London view Russia today. “Russia must be destroyed!”

Just as Rome used the peace treaty with Carthage to prevent Carthage from defending herself, while encouraging Numidia to go to war against Carthage, both Angela Merkel and Petro Poroshenko have now admitted that the Minsk Agreements were only used to buy time for Kiev to prepare for war against Russia.

Cato the Elder died at the old age of 85 years in 149 BC. Within a year of his death, the Roman Senate used their client kingdom, Numidia, to create the false pretext to go to war against Carthage. After an extended siege they burned the city to the ground and ensured that it was not rebuilt for generations.

The deliberate destruction of Carthage by Rome was completely irrational. They destroyed what would have been billions of 2020 Dollars worth of property. They destroyed a civilization that wasn’t even at war with them. The Roman Empire became poorer by the destruction of Carthage, not richer. The irrational destruction of Carthage was entirely driven by hatred and jealousy, both of which are irrational.

If Russia ever capitulates to the Atlanticist Axis she will meet the same fate. “Russia must be destroyed,” is the mantra that has been woven through all of the actions, plots, and strategies of the Atlanticists ever since Putin became President of Russia. We should have no doubt that Washington is willing to use nuclear weapons to achieve that objective, whether outright or by farce.

In the nearterm, we should expect the farce – a false flag nuclear attack on Ukraine. If Russia achieves a major breakthrough in Ukraine in the coming year, the nuclear false flag will probably be triggered, followed by hysterical condemnation and demands that Russia be immediately expelled from the United Nations.

The question to which I have no answer is, how can Russia defeat such a strategy?

The End of Mutually Assured Destruction

The doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction is based on the assumption that two rational actors who understand that a certain action will destroy them both will avoid that action at all costs. This was the lynchpin of foreign policy during the Cold War.

The problem is that most humans are only rational some of the time. And some small percentage of us may reach a state of complete irrationality most of the time.

Furthermore, humans have a strange tendency on rare occasions to go mad together in crowds, not unlike lemmings who follow each other over the cliff into the sea. Nazi Germany in the 1930s comes to mind.

While Russia has recently been trying to protect herself from the acidic influence of Western imposed sodomy, the West has fully embraced it. And that, not merely as one of many valid options, but as a totalitarian state religion that children must be indoctrinated into. This is what Mr. Putin meant when he said that the West has become Satanic.

Sodomy is not merely an individual choice. It is a suicidal choice both for the individual and for human society. Consistent sodomites have no offspring, so they must recruit the offspring of normal people in order to grow in numbers. But in the end, a civilization that embraces sodomy as the preferred lifestyle will completely collapse morally, economically, and numerically.

The West has come under the spell of a death cult, currently led by the World Economic Forum. Their irrational desire to deindustrialize and depopulate the world in the name of environmentalism and technocracy can only be described as insanity. Ultimately both sodomy and Malthusian environmentalism are rejections of our Creator, and the mandate to be fruitful, multiply, and exercise dominion over the Earth and its living creatures. It is a rejection of the mission of transforming the Earth from wilderness and wasteland into a garden.

But he who sins against me wrongs his own soul; All those who hate me love death. (Proverbs 8:36)

Such leaders cannot be counted on to act rationally under the MAD regime, because they may view a nuclear war as a shortcut to achieve their goals of deindustrialization and depopulation. Of course, they have their bunkers in Switzerland and irrationally believe they will survive the conflagration to become the new elite of a greener world controlled by technocrats.

The Heaven’s Gate cult members also believed that by committing mass suicide they would ascend into a higher and better state. As far as anyone knows, they were completely wrong. But that did not stop them from carrying out mass suicide.

Jesus said that you don’t pour new wine into an old wineskin. The reason is that the leather of a wineskin stretches under the pressure of fermentation. An old wineskin has lost its elasticity, and cannot contain the power of a second batch of fermenting wine. It will burst.

It appears to me that Mutual Assured Destruction is an old wineskin of the twentieth century that may not be able to contain the fermenting minds of the annihilationist “young leaders” whose hearts were trained by the World Economic Forum.

In the past year we have already seen the West demonstrate it has reached a state of chronic criminal insanity.

First, they blew up the Nord Stream Pipeline which will cause the deindustrialisation of Western Europe.

That is criminally insane!

Then, Ukraine, under western supervision and using western weapons, has spent the past six months shelling the Zaporizhia Nuclear Power Station in an effort to cause a nuclear accident.

That is criminally insane!

Now, the Russian MOD already has said they have evidence that the NATO-backed Ukrainians are planning a false flag radiological or nuclear weapon detonation on their own soil!!!

That is criminally suicidally insane!

We have reached a point in world history where the West appears to be planning a nuclear false flag attack in Ukraine to be blamed on Russia in order to justify the next big change, whatever that is. And Russia stands in their way. The leaders of the West have gone certifiably mad. And this means that MAD is no longer a shield against nuclear war.

Any remaining sane powers in this world need to immediately take that into account, and start preparing and planning to survive and win a nuclear war against a diabolically insane and suicidal adversary who may not see a total nuclear war as a bad thing.

If Carthage waits for Rome to make their next move, trusting in the good faith of the parties to make rational decisions under international law, then it is quite likely that once more, Carthage shall be destroyed.

Kyrie eleison on us all!

Do the Europeans deserve what is coming to them next?

December 15, 2022

Dear friends

I was born in Switzerland, arguably the heart of Europe, and as a European by birth, if not by culture, I feel that I should address the issue of the regular European’s responsibility for what is going on in both the Ukraine and Serbia.

I don’t believe in collective guilt, so the short answer is “no”.

But I do believe in consequences and I do believe in God’s justice (and love, of course!).  In other words, I don’t think you can commit evil deeds and get away with it: sooner or later you will have to pay, especially if you fail to repent for your evil actions.

Furthermore, I do realize that the EU is a US colony/protectorate, but so was much of the world.

Why can there be real resistance to the Empire in Latin America or Africa and none in the EU?  Should Cuba begin sending soldiers, doctors and engineers to the EU (just kidding!)?

[As a kid I remember all the various protest and resistance movements we had in Europe, they ranged from the (mostly) peaceful anti-nuclear ecologists, to striking unions, to the RAF in Germany, to the IRA in Ulster, ETA in Spain and even the various Kurdish, Armenian, Palestinian and other ethnic groups engaging various degrees of violent resistance against the state.  Even in tiny Switzerland we had the Jura autonomists with some creative resistance methods!  That is not to say that I approve of all of these, only that I remember a time when there was real resistance in Europe.  Are modern Europeans capable of meaningfully resisting *anything* nowadays?  I very much doubt it]

I think that we can safely say that the EU is the most docile, cowardly and loyal colony to the Empire.  Why?  Probably because all the other colonies *knew* that their colonial status will never change under the AngloZionist rule, whereas the Europeans hoped to somehow “elevate” themselves by being Uncle Shmuel’s “poodles”.  And, after all, imperialism was born in Europe (the Crusades) and not in the New World.

You would think that by now, even the dumbest EU politician would realize that anti-Russians sanctions almost exclusively hurt Europe.  Yet, what do we see?  They are STILL at it and they are STILL doubling down, check out this headline: “EU set to freeze assets of RT’s parent company – media“.  Please read it, you will see that this is a direct and absolutely unapologetic crackdown on free speech.  And while doubleplusgoodthinking and politically correct Europeans love to (mis-)quote Voltaire and proudly proclaim that they too “I don’t agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it” in reality they absolutely don’t give a damn.

This is nothing new.

When the AngloZionist launched a TOTALLY ILLEGAL war of aggression against the Serbian nation and a country, Yugoslavia, which was a founding member of the Non Aligned movement the proud Europeans did this (see image).

At best!

Many actively participated in the martyrdom of the Serbian nation.  Again.  The same way the Europeans betrayed Serbians during WWII.  And now, they are STILL at it (see EU threats about Kosovo).

And, make no mistake, all these years KLA terrorism in Kosovo has been fully supported and even aided by KFOR and EULEX (that latter entity modestly called “European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo“(emphasis added).

And, now again, all we hear from the Old Continent is a deafening silence.  Either that, or threats.

Long forgotten is Yehuda Bauer’s wise admonition:

Thou shalt not be a victim.
Thou shalt not be a perpetrator.
And above all,
Thou shalt not be a bystander.

By making the EU the accomplice of the US aggression on Serbia, the US has basically secured the European’s loyalty forever, since now they are not only bound by cultural or colonial ties, they are also accomplices in the rape of Serbia, the Maghreb and Mashreq, Afghanistan and all the other countries which suffer(ed) under the Hegemony’s yoke.

The AngloZionist attack on Yugoslavia was the Kristallnacht of international law, it was the event from which all of the horrors we see today sprang.  And yet, far from understanding (and nevermind admitting!) the crime of aggression (the worst crime in international law, above even genocide or crimes against humanity!) and showing some remorse, the European leaders stayed the course while the “regular” people of Europe simply ignored it all like the good little poodles they became.

And please don’t give me the argument that “we faced too pwoerful an enemy” or “we could do nothing”.  At the very least, every single European could follow Solzhenitsyn’s appeal and “live not by the lie“.  But they could not even do that.  1000 years of anti-Christian propaganda and heresy has resulted in a society which does not even believe in the very notion of “truth”.  No wonder they can’t stop lying anymore…

I think that it is a truism that if you have no self-respect you will also get no respect from others.  I also think that it is fair to say that the EU has become the most despised society on the planet.  And it is not just Putin who calls the EU a “doormat for the US” – the same opinion is held in much of Zone B.

Here is, I think, the correct answer to the question I asked above: do the Europeans deserve what is coming to them next?  Considering that what is coming to them next is entirely self-inflicted, I think that irrefutable answer is a resounding “YES!”.

If not, then who is to blame?  Russia?  The USA?  Putin?  “The Jews”?  Immigration?  Muslims?

Speaking of the USA – at least the US Americans voted for Trump (twice).  The fact that this made (almost) no difference is irrelevant, at least the people of the USA tried to resist!  In fact, even under the current crackdown against dissent, I still think that there is a much higher proportion of US Americans capable and willing to resist than Europeans.

And so today I want to do something I never did before.  I will re-post once more something I have already posted once: the interview of Col. Douglas Macgregor by Dr Michael Vlahos.  I judge this conversation to be so important that it deserves a second posting.  Before I leave you with these two men, I want to just add the following:

These two man are from the generation which I had as professors during my years in US colleges (1986-1991) and for whom I still have the utmost respect.  That does not mean that I necessarily agree with everything they did, said or wrote, not at all.  But such men I can respect not only for their formidable intellect, but also for being men of honor and truth, and real (as opposed to flagwaving) patriots of their country.

This is the generation of men like David Glantz or Lester W. Grau – US officers who truly studied, carefully, Soviet military doctrine (authors like Reznichenko, Gareev or Ogarkov) and who, through their studies, did not come to hate Russia or Russians at all, but saw them as fellow professionals and patriots.   Having had the privilege to spent some time with the folks who taught at the Frunze Military Academy (I even ended up co-authoring a small book with one of them) I can attest that the Russian top strategists had a great deal of respect for their US colleagues too.

The contrast with the Neocon freaks “from the basement” could not be bigger.

I sincerely think that in the following conversation every topic and every sentence is important because it shows what that generation of competent and honorable US Americans think of the (many) abomination(s) which we are witnessing today.  I can sincerely say that I wish them, and their cause, full success.

As far as I am concerned, we have the same enemy.

May their example of resistance (because that is *exactly* what this is) inspire more (there are already a few) Europeans to follow their example.

Andrei

Finally, and in the spirit of my post today, I leave you with one superb music video from France: “Indignez-vous” by HK et les Saltimbanks (see translated lyrics below).

Who knows, maybe this video will wake-up a few more Europeans?

Machine translated lyrics:

I got up one morning, dark day of existence
I raised my voice and my fist, when the rule was silence
I’ve seen some get on trains, leave in a huge fog

I could be neither accomplice nor witness, I entered into resistance
A voice paved with hope, populated by women and men from everywhere
A choice as a matter of course, between gallows and neck rope
I came back from so far away, I give thanks to my star
Death forgot me on the way, to Dora and Buchenwald
93 years old I can believe, that my end is not very far away
93 years old here is my memory, take the greatest care of it
Indignation stubbornly, in a world on guard of you
Be one of those who walk against the wind my friends, be indignant
Be indignant!
Be indignant!
This is an old gentleman talking to you
Brandishing his star, do you hear?
So do you think that today we are missing the reasons for the uprising
When our own lives are on credit, under the dictatorship of the banks
Money commands the shareholders, they themselves command the president
Who orders ordinary people to execute well kindly
All this unsold food, so throw it in the trash
And on top of the pile of junk, pour me 10 liters of bleach
This is the world that is ours, absurd, cruel and merciless
Until that damned poverty line comes through our door
Human rights set aside, sold in individual portions
When the food crisis lingers in front of the eternal
But miracles when billions are found in the second
To save the king dollars and all the bankers of this world
Be indignant!
Be indignant!
This is an old gentleman talking to you
Brandishing his star, do you hear?
Be indignant!
Be indignant!
This is an old gentleman talking to you
Brandishing his star, do you hear?
Our chains are certainly less visible, than in the dark days of slavery
But our minds are being targeted, what have they done with our heritage
Excessive competition, generalized amnesia
Mass consumption products for an anesthetized youth
It’s high time, my friends, to finally turn on the stars again
Who have guided his whole life, this old gentleman who speaks to you
Yes I was that Armenian, I am still that German Jew
I am the Palestinian people, justice is my only side
Be citizens without borders, of those peoples who rise up
Contaminate the whole earth, with your revolts and your dreams
Be indignant it is your right, and in memory of all those
Who are still dying not to have it, this right is in fact a duty
Be indignant!
Be indignant!
It’s an old man who’s talking to you
Brandishing his star, do you hear?
Be indignant!
Be indignant!
This is an old gentleman talking to you
Brandishing the starry sky, do you stand up?
Be indignant!
Be indignant!
This is an old gentleman talking to you
Brandishing his star, do you hear?
Be indignant!
Be indignant!
He is an old gentleman, a great gentleman
Who’s talking to you, who’s talking to you

IRGC Chief: Enemies’ Dream to Dominate Iran Will Never Come True

 December 15, 2022

Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Major General Hossein Salami

The Commander-in-Chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) stressed on Thursday that Iran’s enemies’ dream of dominating Iran will never come true.

“There is no place for weak nations in the political arena of the world, nations that are weak inevitably surrender,” said Major General Hossein Salami, as quoted by Mehr news agency

“Being strong means that society should regulate its actions and international relations based on its own will, and make its own patterns of friendship and enmity and act on its own rules,” he added.

Iran’s enemy is angry and did not want Iran to be influential in the region, Salami said, adding that the Leader of the Islamic Revolution has turned Iran into a powerful force in the region.

“Today, Iran is continuously strengthening its drone and missile and military power, which is not acceptable to the enemy,” he noted. “The enemy has tried all ways including economic sanctions to imposing war, psychological operations, trying to isolate Iran in the international arena and stopping Iran from playing role in regional crises, but it has not been successful.”

The enemy’s dream of dominating Islamic Iran will never come true, but it exists in the enemy’s mind and uses all its power to achieve it, the IRGC chief added.

Source: Iranian media