A Documentary You’ll Likely Never See

A Documentary You’ll Likely Never See
EDITOR’S CHOICE | 16.02.2017

A Documentary You’ll Likely Never See

James DiEUGENIO

It is not very often that a documentary film can set a new paradigm about a recent event, let alone, one that is still in progress. But the new film Ukraine on Fire has the potential to do so – assuming that many people get to see it.

Usually, documentaries — even good ones — repackage familiar information in a different aesthetic form. If that form is skillfully done, then the information can move us in a different way than just reading about it.

A good example of this would be Peter Davis’s powerful documentary about U.S. involvement in Vietnam, Hearts and Minds. By 1974, most Americans understood just how bad the Vietnam War was, but through the combination of sounds and images, which could only have been done through film, that documentary created a sensation, which removed the last obstacles to America leaving Indochina.

Ukraine on Fire has the same potential and could make a contribution that even goes beyond what the Davis film did because there was very little new information in Hearts and Minds. Especially for American and Western European audiences, Ukraine on Fire could be revelatory in that it offers a historical explanation for the deep divisions within Ukraine and presents information about the current crisis that challenges the mainstream media’s paradigm, which blames the conflict almost exclusively on Russia.

Key people in the film’s production are director Igor Lopatonok, editor Alex Chavez, and writer Vanessa Dean, whose screenplay contains a large amount of historical as well as current material exploring how Ukraine became such a cauldron of violence and hate. Oliver Stone served as executive producer and conducted some high-profile interviews with Russian President Vladimir Putin and ousted Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych.

The film begins with gripping images of the violence that ripped through the capital city of Kiev during both the 2004 Orange Revolution and the 2014 removal of Yanukovich. It then travels back in time to provide a perspective that has been missing from mainstream versions of these events and even in many alternative media renditions.

A Longtime Pawn

Historically, Ukraine has been treated as a pawn since the late Seventeenth Century. In 1918, Ukraine was made a German protectorate by the Treaty of Brest Litovsk. Ukraine was also a part of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact of 1939 signed between Germany and Russia, but violated by Adolf Hitler when the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union in the summer of 1941.

German dictator Adolf Hitler

The reaction of many in Ukraine to Hitler’s aggression was not the same as it was in the rest of the Soviet Union. Some Ukrainians welcomed the Nazis. The most significant Ukrainian nationalist group, Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), had been established in 1929. Many of its members cooperated with the Nazis, some even enlisted in the Waffen SS and Ukrainian nationalists participated in the massacre of more than 33,000 Jews at Babi Yar ravine in Kiev in September 1941. According to scholar Pers Anders Rudling, the number of Ukrainian nationalists involved in the slaughter outnumbered the Germans by a factor of 4 to 1.

But it wasn’t just the Jews that the Ukrainian nationalists slaughtered. They also participated in massacres of Poles in the western Ukrainian region of Galicia from March 1943 until the end of 1944. Again, the main perpetrators were not Germans, but Ukrainians.

According to author Ryazard Szawlowksi, the Ukrainian nationalists first lulled the Poles into thinking they were their friends, then turned on them with a barbarity and ferocity that not even the Nazis could match, torturing their victims with saws and axes. The documentary places the number of dead at 36,750, but Szawlowski estimates it may be two or three times higher.

OUN members participated in these slaughters for the purpose of ethnic cleansing, wanting Ukraine to be preserved for what OUN regarded as native Ukrainians. They also expected Ukraine to be independent by the end of the war, free from both German and Russian domination. The two main leaders in OUN who participated in the Nazi collaboration were Stepan Bandera and Mykola Lebed. Bandera was a virulent anti-Semite, and Lebed was rabidly against the Poles, participating in their slaughter.

After the war, both Bandera and Lebed were protected by American intelligence, which spared them from the Nuremburg tribunals. The immediate antecedent of the CIA, Central Intelligence Group, wanted to use both men for information gathering and operations against the Soviet Union. England’s MI6 used Bandera even more than the CIA did, but the KGB eventually hunted down Bandera and assassinated him in Munich in 1959. Lebed was brought to America and addressed anti-communist Ukrainian organizations in the U.S. and Canada. The CIA protected him from immigration authorities who might otherwise have deported him as a war criminal.

The history of the Cold War was never too far in the background of Ukrainian politics, including within the diaspora that fled to the West after the Red Army defeated the Nazis and many of their Ukrainian collaborators emigrated to the United States and Canada. In the West, they formed a fierce anti-communist lobby that gained greater influence after Ronald Reagan was elected in 1980.

Important History

This history is an important part of Dean’s prologue to the main body of Ukraine on Fire and is essential for anyone trying to understand what has happened there since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. For instance, the U.S.-backed candidate for president of Ukraine in 2004 — Viktor Yushchenko — decreed both Bandera and Lebed to be Ukrainian national heroes.

Stepan Bandera, a Ukrainian ultra-nationalist and Nazi collaborator

Bandera, in particular, has become an icon for post-World War II Ukrainian nationalists. One of his followers was Dmytro Dontsov, who called for the birth of a “new man” who would mercilessly destroy Ukraine’s ethnic enemies.

Bandera’s movement was also kept alive by Yaroslav Stetsko, Bandera’s premier in exile. Stetsko fully endorsed Bandera’s anti-Semitism and also the Nazi attempt to exterminate the Jews of Europe. Stetsko, too, was used by the CIA during the Cold War and was honored by Yushchenko, who placed a plaque in his honor at the home where he died in Munich in 1986. Stetsko’s wife, Slava, returned to Ukraine in 1991 and ran for parliament in 2002 on the slate of Yushchenko’s Our Ukraine party.

Stetsko’s book, entitled Two Revolutions, has become the ideological cornerstone for the modern Ukrainian political party Svoboda, founded by Oleh Tyahnybok, who is pictured in the film calling Jews “kikes” in public, which is one reason the Simon Wiesenthal Center has ranked him as one of the most dangerous anti-Semites in the world.

Another follower of Bandera is Dymytro Yarosh, who reputedly leads the paramilitary arm of an even more powerful political organization in Ukraine called Right Sektor. Yarosh once said he controls a paramilitary force of about 7,000 men who were reportedly used in both the overthrow of Yanukovych in Kiev in February 2014 and the suppression of the rebellion in Odessa a few months later, which are both fully depicted in the film.

This historical prelude and its merging with the current civil war is eye-opening background that has been largely hidden by the mainstream Western media, which has downplayed or ignored the troubling links between these racist Ukrainian nationalists and the U.S.-backed political forces that vied for power after Ukraine became independent in 1991.

The Rise of a Violent Right

That same year, Tyahnybok formed Svoboda. Three years later, Yarosh founded Trident, an offshoot of Svoboda that eventually evolved into Right Sektor. In other words, the followers of Bandera and Lebed began organizing themselves immediately after the Soviet collapse.

The neo-Nazi Wolfsangel symbol on a banner in Ukraine

In this time period, Ukraine had two Russian-oriented leaders who were elected in 1991 and 1994, Leonid Kravchuk, and Leonid Kuchma. But the hasty transition to a “free-market” economy didn’t go well for most Ukrainians or Russians as well-connected oligarchs seized much of the wealth and came to dominate the political process through massive corruption and purchase of news media outlets. However, for average citizens, living standards went down drastically, opening the door for the far-right parties and for foreign meddling.

In 2004, Viktor Yanukovych, whose political base was strongest among ethnic Russians in the east and south, won the presidential election by three percentage points over the U.S.-favored Viktor Yushchenko, whose base was mostly in the country’s west where the Ukrainian nationalists are strongest.

Immediately, Yushchenko’s backers claimed fraud citing exit polls that had been organized by a group of eight Western nations and four non-governmental organizations or NGOs, including the Renaissance Foundation founded by billionaire financial speculator George Soros. Dick Morris, former President Bill Clinton’s political adviser, clandestinely met with Yushchenko’s team and advised them that the exit polls would not just help in accusations of fraud, but would bring protesters out into the streets. (Cambridge Review of InternationalAffairs, Vol. 19, Number 1, p. 26)

Freedom House, another prominent NGO that receives substantial financing from the U.S.-government-funded National Endowment for Democracy (NED), provided training to young activists who then rallied protesters in what became known as the Orange Revolution, one of the so-called “color revolutions” that the West’s mainstream media fell in love with. It forced an election rerun that Yushchenko won.

But Yushchenko’s presidency failed to do much to improve the lot of the Ukrainian people and he grew increasingly unpopular. In 2010, Yushchenko failed to make it out of the first round of balloting and his rival Yanukovych was elected president in balloting that outside observers judged free and fair.

Big-Power Games

If this all had occurred due to indigenous factors within Ukraine, it could have been glossed over as a young nation going through some painful growing pains. But as the film points out, this was not the case. Ukraine continued to be a pawn in big-power games with many Western officials hoping to draw the country away from Russian influence and into the orbit of NATO and the European Union.

Ousted Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych

In one of the interviews in Ukraine on Fire, journalist and author Robert Parry explains how the National Endowment for Democracy and many subsidized political NGOs emerged in the 1980s to replace or supplement what the CIA had traditionally done in terms of influencing the direction of targeted countries.

During the investigations of the Church Committee in the 1970s, the CIA’s “political action” apparatus for removing foreign leaders was exposed. So, to disguise these efforts, CIA Director William Casey, Reagan’s White House and allies in Congress created the NED to finance an array of political and media NGOs.

As Parry noted in the documentary, many traditional NGOs do valuable work in helping impoverished and developing countries, but this activist/propaganda breed of NGOs promoted U.S. geopolitical objectives abroad – and NED funded scores of such projects inside Ukraine in the run-up to the 2014 crisis.

Ukraine on Fire goes into high gear when it chronicles the events that occurred in 2014, resulting in the violent overthrow of President Yanukovych and sparking the civil war that still rages. In the 2010 election, when Yushchenko couldn’t even tally in the double-digits, Yanukovych faced off against and defeated Yulia Tymoshenko, a wealthy oligarch who had served as Yushchenko’s prime minister.

After his election, Yanukovych repealed Bandera’s title as a national hero. However, because of festering economic problems, the new president began to search for an economic partner who could provide a large loan. He first negotiated with the European Union, but these negotiations bogged down due to the usual draconian demands made by the International Monetary Fund.

So, in November 2013, Yanukovych began to negotiate with Russian President Putin who offered more generous terms. But Yanukovych’s decision to delay the association agreement with the E.U. provoked street protests in Kiev especially from the people of western Ukraine.

As Ukraine on Fire points out, other unusual occurrences also occurred, including the emergence of three new TV channels – Spilno TV, Espreso TV, and Hromadske TV – going on the air between Nov. 21 and 24, with partial funding from the U.S. Embassy and George Soros.

Nazi symbols on helmets worn by members of Ukraine’s Azov battalion. (As filmed by a Norwegian film crew and shown on German TV)

Pro-E.U. protests in the Maidan square in central Kiev also grew more violent as ultra-nationalist street fighters from Lviv and other western areas began to pour in and engage in provocations, many of which were sponsored by Yarosh’s Right Sektor. The attacks escalated from torch marches similar to Nazi days to hurling Molotov cocktails at police to driving large tractors into police lines – all visually depicted in the film. As Yanukovich tells Stone, when this escalation happened, it made it impossible for him to negotiate with the Maidan crowd.

One of the film’s most interesting interviews is with Vitaliy Zakharchenko, who was Minister of the Interior at the time responsible for law enforcement and the conduct of the police. He traces the escalation of the attacks from Nov. 24 to 30, culminating with a clash between police and protesters over the transport of a giant Christmas tree into the Maidan. Zakharchenko said he now believes this confrontation was secretly approved by Serhiy Lyovochkin, a close friend of U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt, as a pretext to escalate the violence.

At this point, the film addresses the direct involvement of U.S. politicians and diplomats. Throughout the crisis, American politicians visited Maidan, as both Republicans and Democrats, such as Senators John McCain, R-Arizona, and Chris Murphy, D-Connecticut. stirred up the crowds. Yanukovych also said he was in phone contact with Vice President Joe Biden, who he claims was misleading him about how to handle the crisis.

The film points out that the real center of American influence in the Kiev demonstrations was with Ambassador Pyatt and Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland. As Parry points out, although Nuland was serving under President Obama, her allegiances were really with the neoconservative movement, most associated with the Republican Party.

Her husband is Robert Kagan, who worked as a State Department propagandist on the Central American wars in the 1980s and was the co-founder of the Project for the New American Century in the 1990s, the group that organized political and media pressure for the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003. Kagan also was McCain’s foreign policy adviser in the 2008 presidential election (although he threw his support behind Hillary Clinton in the 2016 race).

Adept Manipulators

As Parry explained, the neoconservatives have become quite adept at disguising their true aims and have powerful allies in the mainstream press. This combination has allowed them to push the foreign policy debate to such extremes that, when anyone objects, they can be branded a Putin or Yanukovych “apologist.”

Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland during a press conference at the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, Ukraine, on Feb. 7, 2014. (U.S. State Department photo)

Thus, Pyatt’s frequent meetings with the demonstrators in the embassy and Nuland’s handing out cookies to protesters in the Maidan were not criticized as American interference in a sovereign state, but were praised as “promoting democracy” abroad. However, as the Maidan crisis escalated, Ukrainian ultra-nationalists moved to the front, intensifying their attacks on police. Many of these extremists were disciples of Bandera and Lebed. By February 2014, they were armed with shotguns and rapid-fire handguns.

On Feb. 20, 2014, a mysterious sniper, apparently firing from a building controlled by the Right Sektor, shot both police and protesters, touching off a day of violence that left about 14 police and some 70 protesters dead.

With Kiev slipping out of control, Yanukovich was forced to negotiate with representatives from France, Poland and Germany. On Feb. 21, he agreed to schedule early elections and to accept reduced powers. At the urging of Vice President Biden, Yanukovych also pulled back the police.

But the agreement – though guaranteed by the European nations – was quickly negated by renewed attacks from the Right Sektor and its street fighters who seized government buildings. Russian intelligence services got word that an assassination plot was in the works against Yanukovych, who fled for his life.

On Feb. 24, Yanukovych asked permission to enter Russia for his safety and the Ukrainian parliament (or Rada), effectively under the control of the armed extremists, voted to remove Yanukovych from office in an unconstitutional manner because the courts were not involved and the vote to impeach him did not reach the mandatory threshold. Despite these irregularities, the U.S. and its European allies quickly recognized the new government as “legitimate.”

Calling a Coup a Coup

But the ouster of Yanukovych had all the earmarks of a coup. An intercepted phone call, apparently in early February, between Nuland and Pyatt revealed that they were directly involved in displacing Yanukovych and choosing his successor. The pair reviewed the field of candidates with Nuland favoring Arseniy Yatsenyuk, declaring “Yats is the guy” and discussing with Pyatt how to “glue this thing.” Pyatt wondered about how to “midwife this thing.” They sounded like Gilded Age millionaires in New York deciding who should become the next U.S. president. On Feb. 27, Yatsenyuk became Prime Minister of Ukraine.

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko shakes hands with U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt as U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry shakes hands with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Pavlo Klimkin in Kyiv, Ukraine, on July 7, 2016.[State Department Photo)

Not everyone in Ukraine agreed with the new regime, however. Crimea, which had voted heavily for Yanukovych, decided to hold a referendum on whether to split from Ukraine and become a part of Russia. The results of the referendum were overwhelming. Some 96 percent of Crimeans voted to unite with Russia. Russian troops – previously stationed in Crimea under the Sevastopol naval base agreement – provided security against Right Sektor and other Ukrainian forces moving against the Crimean secession, but there was no evidence of Russian troops intimidating voters or controlling the elections. The Russian government then accepted the reunification with Crimea, which had historically been part of Russia dating back hundreds of years.

Two eastern provinces, Donetsk and Lugansk, also wanted to split off from Ukraine and also conducted a referendum in support of that move. But Putin would not agree to the request from the two provinces, which instead declared their own independence, a move that the new government in Kiev denounced as illegal. The Kiev regime also deemed the insurgents “terrorists” and launched an “anti-terrorism operation” to crush the resistance. Ultra-nationalist and even neo-Nazi militias, such as the Azov Battalion, took the lead in the bloody fighting.

Anti-coup demonstrations also broke out in the city of Odessa to the south. Ukrainian nationalist leader Andrei Parubiy went to Odessa, and two days later, on May 2, 2014, his street fighters attacked the demonstrators, driving them into the Trade Union building, which was then set on fire. Forty-two people were killed, some of whom jumped to their deaths.

‘Other Side of the Story’

If the film just got across this “other side of the story,” it would provide a valuable contribution since most of this information has been ignored or distorted by the West’s mainstream media, which simply blames the Ukraine crisis on Vladimir Putin. But in addition to the fine work by scenarist Vanessa Dean, the direction by Igor Lopatonok and the editing by Alexis Chavez are extraordinarily skillful and supple.

Screen shot of the fatal fire in Odessa, Ukraine, on May 2, 2014. (From RT video)

The 15-minute prologue, where the information about the Nazi collaboration by Bandera and Lebed is introduced, is an exceptional piece of filmmaking. It moves at a quick pace, utilizing rapid cutting and also split screens to depict photographs and statistics simultaneously. Lopatonok also uses interactive graphics throughout to transmit information in a visual and demonstrative manner.

Stone’s interviews with Putin and Yanukovych are also quite newsworthy, presenting a side of these demonized foreign leaders that has been absent in the propagandistic Western media.

Though about two hours long, the picture has a headlong tempo to it. If anything, it needed to slow down at points since such a large amount of information is being communicated. On the other hand, it’s a pleasure to watch a documentary that is so intelligently written, and yet so remarkably well made.

When the film ends, the enduring message is similar to those posed by the American interventions in Vietnam and Iraq. How could the State Department know so little about what it was about to unleash, given Ukraine’s deep historical divisions and the risk of an escalating conflict with nuclear-armed Russia?

In Vietnam, Americans knew little about the country’s decades-long struggle of the peasantry to be free from French and Japanese colonialism. Somehow, America was going to win their hearts and minds and create a Western-style “democracy” when many Vietnamese simply saw the extension of foreign imperialism.

In Iraq, President George W. Bush and his coterie of neocons was going to oust Saddam Hussein and create a Western-style democracy in the Middle East, except that Bush didn’t know the difference between Sunni and Shiite Moslems and how Iraq was likely to split over sectarian rivalries and screw up his expectations.

Similarly, the message of Ukraine on Fire is that short-sighted, ambitious and ideological officials – unchecked by their superiors – created something even worse than what existed. While high-level corruption persists today in Ukraine and may be even worse than before, the conditions of average Ukrainians have deteriorated.

And, the Ukraine conflict has reignited the Cold War by moving Western geopolitical forces onto Russia’s most sensitive frontier, which, as scholar Joshua Shifrinson has noted, violates a pledge made by Secretary of State James Baker in February 1990 as the Soviet Union peacefully accepted the collapse of its military influence in East Germany and eastern Europe. (Los Angeles Times, 5/30/ 2016)

This film also reminds us that what happened in Ukraine was a bipartisan effort. It was begun under George W. Bush and completed under Barack Obama. As Oliver Stone noted in the discussion that followed the film’s premiere in Los Angeles, the U.S. painfully needs some new leadership reminiscent of Franklin Roosevelt and John Kennedy, people who understand how America’s geopolitical ambitions must be tempered by on-the-ground realities and the broader needs of humanity to be freed from the dangers of all-out war.

FakeNews: ‘Mass sex assaults by refugees’ in Frankfurt on New Year’s Eve… never happened

Hystericizing Westerners against Muslims: ‘Mass sex assaults by refugees’ in Frankfurt on New Year’s Eve… never happened 

 

Fake news: An example of the ‘reporting’ done by media outlets across Europe in the wake of ‘mass rapefugee-gate’ in Germany on New Year’s Eve 2015.

Reports of mass sexual assaults on women in Frankfurt on New Year’s Eve allegedly committed by dozens of drunken refugees, and which initially appeared in Germany’s Bild newspaper, were made up and are “completely baseless,” police said.

The story about mass sexual assaults by refugees in the Fressgass Street area in downtown Frankfurt was reported by Bild earlier in February. The article has since been taken down.

One of the victims, Irina A., 27, told Bild: “They [the migrants] grabbed me under the skirt, between my legs, my breasts, everywhere….More and more of these guys came. Their hands were everywhere,” the Express said, quoting the original report.

Her words were supported by Jan Mai, a local pub owner, who said that a mob of Arabs was “highly aggressive, there was shouting and hand gestures.”

“When I came in, the whole place was full with a group of around 50 Arabs. They did not speak German, drank our guests’ drinks and danced towards them. The women asked me for help because they were being attacked. The mood changed completely,” he told Bild, as cited by the Express.

It was claimed the migrants came from a refugee center in Hesse state, where Frankfurt is located, the Local said, citing the original report.

Police started an investigation into the alleged incidents and on Tuesday released a report stating that the allegations of mass sexual assaults had been invented.

“There were no massive mob-like attacks by masses of refugees in Fressgass [Street]. The allegations were groundless,” police said.

In the article several people “reported about sexual assaults, bodily injuries, thefts and extremely aggressive behavior of masses of refugees. Media interest in these descriptions was very high. The police were not aware of these circumstances,” the statement said.

According to police, “interviews with alleged witnesses, guests and employees led to major doubts with the version of events that had been presented.

One of the alleged victims was not even in Frankfurt at the time the allegations are said to have taken place,” the report said.

The Bild editorial team quickly apologizedfor this inaccurate reporting and the accusations against those concerned.”

“This reporting does not correspond in any way to the journalistic standards of Bild,” the newspaper said in a statement.

Comment: Actually, it does. Bild, like other Fake News outlets, the British Express included, is one of the key tabloids the ‘reality-creators’ have routinely used since 9/11 to hystericize the population in western Europe against Muslims.

Bild said that the alleged witnesses – the pub owner and his staff – talked of mass sexual assaults to other media outlets.

“We apologize for our own work. I’ll shortly announce what Bild will do about it,” online editor-in-chief Julian Reichelt tweeted.

Comment: Too late; mission accomplished. There’s no way this genie is going back in the bottle. It appears at this point that a majority in western Europe has been ‘bitten’ by The Big Lie: for them, Muslims are inherently evil and the phony ‘clash of civilizations’ is reality.

The Bild story appeared to prompt comparisons with the Cologne attacks committed on New Year’s Eve in 2015. Back then, groups of North African men sexually assaulted hundreds of women in the city.

A German police report from November revealed the latest figures on the crimes committed on New Year’s Eve 2015 across Germany: 881 sexual offenses involving over 1,231 women. The victims were almost all young women.

Apart from Germany, similar sex attacks allegedly took place on New Year’s Eve that year in Sweden, Austria, Finland and Switzerland.

Comment: That first round of ‘mass rape-fugee’ in 2015 was likely also fake news:

Fact Check: Daily Express Publishes Fake Cologne Assault Video

Cologne sex assaults: Muslim rape myths fit a neo-Nazi agenda

The Truth About The New Years Eve Refugee Attacks On Women In Germany

Fake photos flood Internet after sexual assaults in Germany

Yes, assaults took place… and they’ve been taking place on an increasing basis in cities across the West for years. These assaults are being carried out NOT primarily by newly-arrived immigrants, but by nationals and longer-term residents of European countries (ie, by people already living in Europe’s ghettos before the waves of arrivals after NATO destroyed Libya and Syria) – a fact that has everything to do with the West’s internal economic, political and moral collapse, and little to do with ‘outsiders coming for our wimmins’.

Sandwiching NATO in Ukraine, by Scott Humor

By Scott
Sandwiching NATO in Ukraine, by Scott Humor

When I started my master’s program in an American university, I also took work as a web developer, and programming was making me very hungry.

My tuition paid for a meal plan and the use of a buffet-style dining hall, but as the only Russian there, I was the subject of extreme scrutiny by the student body of “food police,” resulting in my inability to take a second helping of turkey and mashed potatoes without being stared down.

I managed to get by by buying high-energy food in a local Russian-Ukrainian grocery store. Which is to say I snacked on sandwiches with salo. Salo is pure 100% pork fat, pickled and smoked. In college, during the breaks I would eat a sandwich assembled with bright white slices of salo between two slices of black Russian bread. Other students would ask me, ‘What are you eating? What smells so good?’ ‘It’s a tofu sandwich,’ I would tell them.

Not everything is what it’s seems, and many things are not even close to what they are named and appear to be.

As we all know the plans to instigate war between Russia and Ukraine go way back.  It’s kinetic stage, however, started in 2008. Immediately after the skirmishes in South Ossetia with Georgian and NATO troops in August 2008, in October the Washington Times publishes an article of  Jeffrey Kuhner: “Will Russia-Ukraine be Europe’s next war?”

Europe faces the risk of another major war. In 1939, Nazi Germany’s invasion of Poland triggered the Second World War. Today the possible trip wire is not Poland, but Ukraine. And the aggressor will not be Adolf Hitler, but Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.”

That’s a statement; it’s not an analyses, or expert opinion, its a statement of intent. This statement was made not by anyone in the government of Russia. This statement was made by the “deep state” globalist government. It says that they are about to stage a major war in Europe. Like the previous big war in Europe, this new war will be fought under the fascists and Nazi flags. They also say that they will start this war on the territory of Ukraine, the war will be against Russia and Russia will become an appointed aggressor and even “the invaders of  their own homeland.

This is a typical for globalists switch, when the victims are named aggressors, and that the Western powers act in order to “stop an aggression” and even better “to prevent an aggression.”

What actually happened was a remarkable transformation since 2008. The American Universities came out as a breeding ground for the militant Marxists movements, while the Western media had died a slow death of virtue signaling and reporting the CIA memos as news.

War on Donbass was planned to ignite a major war in Europe.

Just let this to sink in for a moment: the collective armed forces of the European nations, including but not limited to Germany, Poland, France, United Kingdom, Slovakia, Denmark, United States, Australia, Austria, Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and Canada, and last but not least Israel, are in a war against the Russian population of Ukraine in order to bait the Russian government to interfere and start a major European war.

The list of participants tells you how much Europeans want a major war in their countries. It’s actually quite remarkable

Don’t get me wrong. I am not particularly adverse to a major war in Europe. I even think that Western Europe needs a major ass kicking. Just keep Russia out of it. It’s not Russia’s problem to fight your wars any more.

Left Picture: German Nazi Troops at the Russian Border facing Ivangorod Fortress 1941

Right Picture: the US Troops at the very same spot yesterday

View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

Left Pic: German Nazi Troops at the Russian Border facing Ivangorod Fortress 1941 | Right Pic: US Troops at the very same spot yesterday

 Ivan-Gorod was a fortes built in 1485 as a Russian for-post as a way to prevent the European hordes from moving any further east. Six centuries later, it is still serving the same purpose, which speaks volumes of the progress the Europeans have made in the past six centuries, which is exactly zero.  Not that they didn’t try.

No matter how many times the Russian government says that Russia doesn’t have a war with Ukraine and Putin says that it’s impossible to fathom and that it will never happen, people who started this war back in 2008 keep saying that it’s all “Russian aggression.”

After the assassination of the Donetsk militia leader Givi, the Russian government’s spokesperson, Peskov, made yet another statement saying that the Donbass republics’ tanks are from Kiev, and not from Russia.

He also said that Russia officially has never deployed any volunteers to Ukraine, and that all volunteers that have been fighting in Donbass have done so on their own free will.

The question about tanks came after 100’s of old Soviet tanks magically appeared in Eastern Ukraine, most likely Poroshenko finally used those junk tanks Kiev bought from Hungary.

The Russian media and other experts have been consistent in one regard about the recent intensification of the war in the Donbass republics: most of them trace this to the “fight” between Poroshenko and the “national patriots” for control over the Ukrainian army.

Upon careful consideration, I think it’s a misleading idea. Poroshenko is nothing but a front man for the globalists’ rule of Ukraine. Poroshenko and all the others insiders of the Kiev regime always do what they are told. Poroshenko does what he is told to do by the CIA, and by the US senators, like Lindsey and McCain.

In this scenario, that I suspect is called a “Bear Trap,” NATO is sitting on the Russians Western borders like a hunter, Ukraine is positioned as a trap and the Donbass republics are a collective bear cub being used as a bait.

Captured beforehand, a bear cub is being tormented and when it screams in pain, the hunters in NATO are getting ready to shoot a mother bear coming to save her cub. That’s a scenario, but luckily for us, those who wrote this scenario have no knowledge neither of bears, nor of the Russian intelligence.

Bears are extremely smart animals; they won’t go for a trap without circling it around many times covering vast areas of space while doing so. If in their travels they run into a hunter, they attack from behind.

Instead of trying to figure out the Porosh’s next move we should be looking at the broader picture of NATO’s moves. The question is not why the Ukrainian armed forces had started their massive assault on Donbass. The real question is why they stopped and backed out.

The attacks of the Ukrainian armed forces on Donetsk is connected and coordinated with NATO actions from Russia’s Northern border in Norway, to the Southern border in the Black Sea.

With German and American tank divisions moving across Poland towards Belarusian and Russian borders, with the US troops arriving to the east European countries, the NATO fleet has started gathering in the Black Sea.

February 5th, 2017 the US troops have arrived in Latvia

📹 US troops have arrived in Latvia today.

 US troops have also arrived in Romania.

The US troops marching to Narva on February 9th, 2017

 

On February 2 the USS Porter entered the Black Sea for the Sea Shield 2017 naval exercise

US Navy’s Arleigh Burke-class Destroyer “USS PORTER” DDG78 passed İstanbul Strait for join to Sea Shell 2017 naval exercise (18:00 local)

Sea Shield 2017’ was scheduled to run between February 1 and 11 in the proximity of Russian borders. The “drill” was designed to be NATO and Ukraine’s provocative activities in the Black Sea. 16 warships, a submarine and 10 warplanes along with some 2,800 troops from Ukraine, Romania, Turkey, Bulgaria, Greece, Spain, Canada, and the US. The drill also was scheduled to include the HMS Diamond of the UK Royal Navy dubbed “Putin Hunter.”

Against all this “might” Russia put just one: the Vishnya class intelligence collection ship RFS Priazovye SSV201.

So, once again the same Black International as always is gathering on the Eastern front. It’s this time of a century again, when our better civilized Western non-brothers get an itch they can’t scratch yearning for a good ass kicking by the Russian soldier’s boot. This one, if it takes place, is going to be swift and spectacular.

Other NATO activities in January – February 2017

  • The president must tell the Senate to act swiftly and ratify Montenegro’s accession to NATO. Tell those few holdout Senators not to mess with Montenegro. By Evelyn N. Farkas
  • According to the Daily Mail, 650 British military specialists and troops are involved in secret mission in Ukraine.
  • the France24: NATO backs Ukraine as clashes surge: deputy chief

https://twitter.com/FRANCE24/status/829778424927367168

On February 6, the Russian military Red Star TV channel posted an analysis of the Sea Shield 2017 navy drill, stating its main task to prepare for a “liberation of Crimea,” it’s impressive coverage – 80,000 square kilometers, it’s extreme proximity to Russian border, you can see the  NATO ships from the Russian shores.

Something happened, however, and on February 10, much earlier than planned and before the Sea Shield drill was over, the USS Porter left the Black Sea.

11 Feb 2017  US Navy’s Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer USS Porter DDG78 southbound on the Bosphorus, returning from Sea Shield 17 in Black Sea

View image on Twitter

US Navy’s ArleighBurke Class Destroyer USS Porter DDG78 southbound on the bosphorus, returning from in Black Sea

In the middle of the Bosphorus Crossing USS Porter passed Korolev 130, a Project 775M Large Landing Ship (LLS), a.k.a. “yankie-terminator” returning from Syria.

Bosphorus Crossing: Just after USS Porter’s Med-bound Bosphorus transit, ВМФ Бф BF Korolev 130 entered Strait after returning from Syria

View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

Bosphorus Crossing: Just after USS Porter’s Med-bound Bosphorus transit, ВМФ Бф BF Korolev 130 entered Strait after returning from

It’s obvious that the heavy shelling of Donetsk and other local towns were done in preparation for the start of the Sea Shield drills in the Black Sea. That’s the basic American strategy of invasion, that I described in the Failed NATO Invasion of Moldova.

Only, unlike Libya, NATO would have to go over Crimea to “liberate Donbass.” It’s interesting how the invasion of the historical Russian lands are called “liberation” by the Europeans and Americans.

In clear coordination with the Sea Shield, on February 7th,  the Ukrainian “free” media announced that Kiev is sending its aviation to the “ATO Zone.”

At the same time, Shoigu announced the sudden combat readiness for the Aerospace forces of the country.

Today, in accordance with the decision of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, an unannounced inspection of the Aerospace Forces has begun to assess the readiness of military administrative bodies and forces to carry out combat training tasks,” Shoigu said at a meeting.

Needless to say, the Ukrainian aviation stayed grounded.

 

Coming back to our ship. Before we decide that USS Porter fled the Black Sea chased by the “yankees terminator” Korolev,  consider that something else has happened.

On February 8th, the FOX news Pentagon news  producer Lucas Tomlinson  posted an information that per unnamed US official, Syria had received a shipments of 50 SS-21 Tochka short-range nuclear-capable  ballistic missiles. The missiles allegedly  arrived at the Syrian port of Tartus along the Mediterranean Sea in the past two days, starting with Monday February 6th.

The SS-21 short range missile is called “Scarab” by NATO.

A month prior, on January 7, 2017  some Israeli news sources reported that Russia’s advanced Iskander SS-26 “Stone” short-range ballistic missile systems have been spotted at Russia’s Hmeimim air base in Latakia by Israel’s ISI EROS-B satellite.

To put it in simple terms, an Israeli satellite was allowed to “see” those systems.

After pointing out that, “this places Tel Aviv and Jerusalem well within dangerous range of these missiles, as well as the cities of Haifa, Tzfat, Herzliya and numerous other targets.”

The Israeli newspaper with incurable optimism stated that : “However, it is believed the Russians have no interest in targeting Israeli cities, at least at this point.”

That was January 7th, a month before the Kiev regime, whose members in Rada publicly call themselves as being “one nation” with Israel, had started pounding Donetsk, and NATO fleet entered the Black Sea to “liberate Crimea.”

On Thursday, February 9th, asked about those pesky “Scarabs” spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters:We cannot comment on that. I have no such information.”

It’s important to note that by then the heavy shelling of Donetsk died out and the major attack of the Ukrainian army on Donetsk was canceled.

I see the murder of Givi by the CIA as a demonstration of their weakness. Since they are neutralized on the Middle East from making any military moves in Ukraine, they go and act like average terrorists by killing someone in the middle of the huge city.

Givi was assassinated on Wednesday, February 8th, the Donetsk republic security services reported that they were in hot pursuit of the Ukrainian sabotage-reconnaissance group (DRG) group suspected in his murder.

On Saturday, February 11th, Ukrainian military reported a disappearance of one of the their sabotage-reconnaissance groups (DRGs) that according to their version went to Lugansk and disappeared without a trace.

In an unprecedented move, the press officer of the tactical grouping “Mariupol”  Dmitry Zavtonov made an announcement on the Ukrainian TV channel 112 Ukraine.

What makes it interesting is that they never before reported on the activities of those groups. What makes this one special? It’s clearly the group that took part in the assassination of Givi. It also being reported as an alert to the Russians, because it has US and maybe UK special ops troops. Otherwise, it wouldn’t be mentioned. In essence, NATO wants those their “specialists” back in one piece.

In conclusion, the heroism and stoicism of Donbass defenders is already written into the book of Russian military victories along with the defenders of the Brest Fortress and  the Badaber uprising, when eleven Russian POWs took on the Army of Pakistan.

However, the battle for Donbass and Ukraine is being fought on the Middle East.

In this bright new multi-polar world, a tofu sandwich might turned into a smoked pork sandwich, and the battle for Donbass can be won by the rush delivery of the Scarab ballistic missiles to Syrian Tartus.

 

P.S. Every generation Russians has been in war, directly and indirectly:

1914-1917 – WWI

1917-1920 – The War against Atlanta and the Red Terror

1941-1945 – WWII

1979-1989 – The war in Afghanistan, shielding the country the spread of Islamic terrorism and extremism

December 1994 to August 1996 – First Chechen War with Islamic terrorists coming to Russia and setting up their Islamic caliphate

1999-2006 – Second Chechnya War, kicking Islamic terrorists from the Russian territory

2008 – Georgian–Ossetian conflict. Not sure what it was all about.

2014 – present – the War in Ukraine, the rise of the European fascism.

2015 – present – war in Syria, finishing up those Islamic terrorists coming from Chechnya and some of those European fascists.

All of these wars were fought either on the Russian territory, or near its borders. All of these wars were fought with the same Euro-Atlantic nations and the same states’ actors.

Now, by getting Syria under its wing, and by talking control over the Israeli skies, Russia gets a reprieve from the need to fight the wars on our territory, current and historical. In response to the hopes expressed by our comrades in Israel, – don’t worry,  your security is in the Russian’s capable and kind hands.

A Soviet soldiers’ song, “We are leaving, leaving, leaving….the Middle East forever. We will never come back.

 Well, guys, don’t despair and never say never.  

News of our “Run, Mice, run…” department

The Interpreter staff are offered to freelance.

From the Kulak: “RFE/RL claimed that the decision to defund The Interpreter came a few weeks before the election. I am not so sure that’s true but to save face and not burn his bridges at the Prague Palace for future funding, perhaps neocon’s neocon Michael D Weiss is sticking to that version of what happened. There will be more WH directives to management I’m sure to at least try to cover FN or AfD fairly and GASP even give their party spokesmen or women the same right to comment on stories as any other political parties even while the shrill ‘Russian media (that no one but extremists and losers in moms basement read anyway) are attacking Merkel and Macron’ talking points are spread.

There’s an old expression in military circles that tracer rounds not only allow you to track your fire but also reveal your firing position to the enemy. The same holds true in social media when you see #TheResistance trolls or the likes of Jakub Janda, Jakub Kalensky and Bellingcat (Bellingcrap)’s Eliot Higgins all eagerly retweeting the same agitprop article from fake news creator John R Schindler on the same day:”

The bottom-line, our Orthodox Chekists have bent everyone over. BOHICA.

Thank you for your time,

 

Germany SITREP February 6th, by C.

February 07, 2017
Germany SITREP February 6th, by C.

In a sick twist, now that the Trump-bashing Steinmeier has been promoted from foreign minister to head of state, his former position goes to Sigmar Gabriel.

Who has insulted Trump even more gravely (as reported in my last sitrep).

Gabriel is a pathetic loser. Under his leadership the SPD has become a shadow of its former self. (In 1990 the SPD had close to a million members, today not even half that. Gabriel may not be the main culprit, but he certainly did nothing to reverse course.) In its current state the SPD is useless for everybody except for the higher ranking members of the party. Sandwiched between Merkel’s left-leaning CDU and the LINKE, the SPD’s only hope is that people who always voted SPD, will still vote SPD, probably mainly as a matter of habit.

So to get ready for the elections later this year the SPD has prepared as follows:

  • Steinmeier gets to be president of Germany and gives up his position as foreign minister.
  • Gabriel gets to be foreign minister (hopefully not for long) and gives up his current ministerial post and, more importantly, his position as party leader.
  • Schulz gets to be party leader of the SPD and candidate for this years election.

What a horrible move. As questionable as Steinmeier has been as foreign minister, replacing him with a bag of slowly composting, rotten potatoes would have been better than installing Gabriel. The former change might have gone unnoticed, but Gabriel will be noticed, and not for the better.

He summarised Steinmeier’s advice for him as : “Mach keinen Scheiß.” or “Don’t fuck up.”

What is he talking about? He already “fucked up” big time. If he had any sense of decency he would resign in shame and let people a take a turn, who have not already demonstrated their incompetence.

“Retire, write your memoirs, or something… But please get out of the way. It’s over for you. The Germans (which you partly insulted as “Pack”) do not respect you, your own party does not respect you, your fellow politicians do not respect you, and no one will respect you as a “German emissary”. Please spare yourself and Germany the embarrassment of being her foreign secretary.”

The best part of this story is that the SPD replaced Gabriel with Schultz.

This will look good for a couple of weeks at most. I see no way this can still look good this autumn, when people vote. But admittedly for now it looks pretty good.

All elections in Europe this year will mainly be about “Pro-One-World-Order” or “Against-One-World-Order”. Or “more EU power, more centralisation” versus “less EU power, more regional independence”. And there is no doubt where the people of the world and the EU lean.

The EU is already history and can only be saved by dictatorial violence for some time. And the SPD in Germany elects the one person that symbolises the party’s submission to this hated institution more than anyone else…

Gabriel is just incompetent but Schulz symbolises the EU-devil. This campaign will, I hope, end very badly for the SPD.

Like most established parties the SPD should listen to the people who could potentially vote for them, but instead they ridicule them. They should be agents of the people they represent, instead they try to force whatever they want on people and belittle them when they dare disagree. Here is SPD’s Ralf “Pöbel Ralle” Stegner:

from 0:09

Guest:

I would like to try to show the panel what they look like from down here to the common people (1). On the one hand we hear that Germany is a democracy, a free nation under the rule of law. It is not OK to claim that you are the only one fit to represent others (2). And still Stegner says “They (AFD) do not belong up there, no matter what the people think. That is verbatim what you said less than an hour ago.

That leaves me wondering: How democratic is such a position? And how is it acceptable in a democracy that the political parties polarize to such an extreme, with all the negative consequences this entails? It must be possible that even a major party (3) has enough respect for a new up-and-coming party. That they at least acknowledge that they made mistakes. Otherwise this movement would not even exist. In this context I need to mention that since your policies are ignoring European asylum laws by decree, and accusing all critics of the current refugee policies as inhuman (4), it comes as no surprise that people who think for themselves, Mr. Stegner, even if they are not part of the parliament, say: “That is not true. Yes, we want to help, but this should have been done differently.” In this case law and order have been eliminated. Mrs. Merkel said: “I know the way, I’m going there, and who ever dares criticise me is an indecent person.” And the populace stands up to this, that is the situation.

– Moderator gives Stegner the word –

Stegner:

Stegner (2:06):

As long as a party has not been outlawed, it can nominate candidates for parliamentary elections. So far, so good…  But I see no reason whatsoever, for a party like the SPD, with core values like freedom, justice and solidarity, to engage with people who agitate against foreigners, who promote intolerance, who tolerate anti-semitism, and many more such things. With such a party my party will not cooperate. Say whatever you will, and even if you have 20 percent, which I find sad… Luckily in most German states 80% give their vote to other parties, that is also part of the truth. (6)  That you get a lot of attention and that you manage, in a country like Germany with a free press – spontaneous laughter in the audience – to talk of “Lügenpresse” … Yes we have a constitution in which the freedom of the press – I am not sure how you, for example (turns to the Swiss moderator), are “under the government’s boot”. In how far you are forced to do things against your will, it did not seem to me that way. Even thinking about “Lügenpresse” when certain things are reported shows that, sometimes we are dealing with lunatics. I would advise such people to seek medical treatment, I certainly do not have to work with them. They are voted into parliament, which is bad enough… But my party will fight them politically.

Good job, Ralle. That is how you win hearts and minds. Just keep on babbling incoherent bullshit, but make sure the people you talk to understand that you talk down to them. People love that. When you talk about “free press” and they laugh, they do not laugh at you… They laugh with you. “Ha, Ha.”

Funny stuff. Just next time: Don’t let it get to you that much. Keep your cool. You are a fraud and everybody (except for your 20 percent of fifty percent) knows it. For now all the others do is ask questions. Just keep your mouth shut and enjoy that while you still can.

But seriously: I think this moment of spontaneous laughter is very revealing. Much like this one:

 This kind of instinctive laughter probably tells you much more about what people think than interviewing them in a formal setting could, it comes from the collective gut.

Other News:

***Horst Seehofer Breaks Ranks, Praises Trump, Demands End of Sanctions Against Russia:

German

English

***So Called “Humanitarian” NGOs Work Hand in Glove with Human Traffickers:

 

  

Something Strange Is Taking Place In The Mediterranean

Read the article, I should have linked to it earlier, sorry.

*** Spiegel goes “Full-Tilt on Trump – Shows him decapitating Statue of Liberty on Cover:

***Law and Order in Germany:

 

A 39 year old convicted murderer, who already served his sentence, was accused of abusing his 25 year old girlfriend. He smuggled a blade into the courtroom from jail and assaulted the victim as she was getting ready to testify.

The victim’s attorney says he received death threats from the defendant’s brothers.

***More Law and Order in Germany – She had it coming:

Just look how provocatively she minds her own business. And isn’t a kick in the back of unsuspecting victims traditionally the hallmark of manliness?

***Let’s end on a funny note:

The Netherlands welcome Trump:

Thank you for your time.

Translation Notes:

  • German: “Ein Spiegelbild vorhalten” / English: “Show someone what they look like in a mirror” more or less
  • “Alleinvertretungsanspruch ist undemokratisch” – I do not know how to translate that better. If you have any ideas feel free to post them in the comments
  • “Volkspartei” means something like “relevant party of old”. Imagine e.g. new parties becoming more relevant in the US and the Democratic Party ending up with around 20% of the vote. That is when they might invoke their status as a “Volkspartei”. In Germany only SPD and CDU are usually referred to as “Volksparteien”. It’s a pretty silly concept.
  • “menschenverachtend”
  • Was ich bedaure”
  • That is very misleading. Most people in Germany do not vote at all. The “non-voters” have almost always been the biggest voter block, ever more so recently. Stegner should say: We are losing ground even among the indoctrinated idiots we took for granted. Only a little more than half the population believe in the game we call democracy, and of those almost 80% percent vote for “non-SPD-parties”.

French Islamophobia data: Punching the garbage man’s wife

February 03, 2017

French Islamophobia data: Punching the garbage man’s wife

by Ramin Mazaheri

There wasn’t an official award handed out, but the Islamophobic statement of 2016 in France has to go to the politician who said that Muslim women who wear the hejab are like the “American niggers who were in favor of slavery”.

LOL, she did even not say “blacks”, she said “niggers” – “nègres”, in French. You simply cannot use that word in polite society. I know because I tried – simply to understand what the level of acceptable racial discourse here was in France – and was roundly admonished. Fortunately, I could honestly plead ignorance.

The person who said it was Laurence Rossignol, of the Socialist Party, so she’s also a candidate for “French fake leftist of the year”.

It gets worse: This was not some nobody Socialist politician, she said it while serving as a member of President Francois Hollande’s cabinet!

But wait, there’s more! She was the Minister for Women’s Rights, hahaha.

Yes, Muslims in France truly have nobody in power on their side, LOL – ya gotta laugh to keep from crying.

And yet…“Islamophobic acts in France were down in 2016”, is what tomorrow’s headlines will blare from the mainstream media.

Because, of course, the issue of Muslims being attacked should be treated exactly like how capitalists treat the economic growth rate: “But did we get more than last year?”

(Coincidentally, those numbers were out today as well: a paltry 1.1% economic growth rate in 2016 for France. Another year of failure, but you can send me all the mainstream media reports which do not put a positive spin on the numbers.)

Back to Islamophobia: the number of Islamophobic acts was indeed down 36% in 2016 when compared with 2015.

“Three cheers for France! Pass the halal croissants!”

For those of you new to this planet: In 2015 there were 2 huge terror attacks in France and an enormous outpouring of Islamophobic violence, both private and state-sanctioned. That was the year that Islamophobia “went mainstream”- it became ok to openly talk about every Muslim as if they lived in a cave, were stuck in the year 742 AD and had 4 wives.

So, had the Collective Against Islamophobia in France (CCIF) – the nation’s watchdog on the subject – reported that the numbers had actually increased in 2016…ooh la, now that would have meant 2016 was a Muslim massacre.

I can feel…people clicking away from this article, because I’m sure people are so fed up that they will read the words “Collective Against Islamophobia in France” and move on – because aren’t we all tired of such subjects? I know I am sure as hell tired of reporting it!

So let me pass on the actual good news: On the personal level, Islamophobia truly is decreasing in France.

I covered the CCIF’s press conference for Press TV and they told me that their years of work are paying off: they see more and more solidarity and help for the victims of Islamophobia. Some government workers, teachers and cops have realized there is a problem, and they are actually putting their authority to good use (as opposed to throwing up obstacles, as many civil servants still do).

That’s what grassroots activism does – it thinks long-term, it’s committed for the long-term and it really wins…long-term.

Keep in mind that it was only in 2015 that France decided to finally join the 20th century and admit that “Islamophobia” actually existed so…baby steps. But if you’ve been sucker-punched and had your hejab pulled off, such baby steps are important – if only to get the bleeding stopped.

Politically, Islamophobia is worse than ever

Again, to the aliens among us, France has been a police state dictatorship (the correct term) since November 2015. It will be until May 2017, depending on who is elected president.

As regards the Muslim community, France’s state of emergency has been one big “we run this place” message.

Intimidation, arrests, house arrests, brutal tactics, smashed doors, smashed reputations, smashed lives, smashed innocence of children…but it’s been effective in the fight against terrorism, right?

Wrong – 4,000+ raids by the French state have produced just 6 investigations opened regarding terrorism. I haven’t been able to find any new data, but going back about 6 months there had been just 1 indictment from such raids. There had been 0 convictions.

I don’t want to waste much of our time on this because the state of emergency is so obviously wrong for all Frenchmen and racist towards Muslims, so I’ll just throw out some key phrases the CCIF used at the press conference – I think you are smart enough that I don’t have to clarify: “climate of general suspicion”, “winning electoral formula”, “Muslim frustration with Hollande”, “lack of a clear message of ‘zero-tolerance’”, “Islamophobic security state”, and here’s what it was really all about in 2016: “institutional validation of Islamophobia”.

Even if you think these shifty Muslims deserve it for being born Brown, isn’t your libertarian, anti-authority side upset? I hope so.

There are, as always, only 2 poles of thought on dealing with us lousy immigrants: “live and let live”, which is known as “multiculturalism”, or you have what France has pushed all their chips behind: “assimilation”.

The problem with assimilation is that it inherently implies that other cultures have nothing of value to add. Secondarily, it necessarily freezes the growth of French culture, which is implied to be “perfect”, and thus cannot progress. Doesn’t such cultural chauvinism sound so very French? It is.

But why keep abusing the already-abused?

But enough of this ethno-racial analysis – you can find identity politics and please for tolerance all over, but it’s rarely enough: keeping the boot on the Muslims’ neck has two class components which are vital to understand.

The point I need to make to those who don’t live in France is:

Blacks & Muslims are the underclass here.

In France, the security guards in supermarkets are big and Black (the riot police are all big and White, of course). The cashiers are pretty Arab young ladies. The office cleaning ladies are middle-aged Black women. The bleary-eyed people you see unhappily taking the buses on your way home from a night of carousing are Black and Arab. The garbagemen are Black, Arab, Muslim or all three.

And it’s the wives and sisters of these garbagemen who suffer the most from Islamophobia: 75% of all such attacks are against women. Muslim women were the victims in physical Islamophobic attacks 100% of the time last year.

This is what Islamophobia in France basically boils down to: White guys scaring Muslim women, or pulling off their hejab or maybe beating the woman who is simply on her way to clean their office toilets.

This is cowardice, tragedy, deadly, misogynistic, anti-feminist, and reactionary, of course. But this Muslim underclass has nothing, is going to get nothing and poses no threat. So if France hates Muslims and tolerates violence against them, what are they for?

France – rich, rich France – needs Muslims two reasons: number one, to staff these low-level service jobs.

It’s the same reason why the only Palestinians allowed inside Israel’s football stadiums are to work as low-level service workers: “Get me my large Coke, boy, and mop it up when my kid kicks it over.”

Capitalism cannot replace these types of workers with robots. It’s the same with Mexican fruit-pickers – some jobs have to be done by human beings.

In France’s it’s the non-Whites who are fated to serve in this caste. Of course, they are not all Muslim simply because they are non-White, of course, but such collateral damage hardly keeps the Roman Catholic 1% up at night.

And we must remember that the 1% has no interest in letting Muslims improve their station, because then who would clean their toilets and check them out at the supermarket?

No class is more at the mercy of the 1% than the negative-99%, and that is Muslims are in France. What good is being in the 1% if you cannot abuse your butler, I guess is their thinking?

But Islamophobia is not just for kicks – attacking women are just one of the ways to keep all Muslims on edge, insecure, isolated and – above all – disunited. Class unity is any sort, of course – of course! – is what the 1% fear most.

To disempower an entire underclass and keep them your servants, it’s not enough just to not provide basic services like health and education or good jobs – you have to get them to short-circuit their own lives, and a simple way is via racial violence and the promotion of it; through constant media messages that your group is associated with terrorism, death and backwardness; through the constant message that your group has no values to share, and that you must “become French”, which is something French people have told me here over and over.

This is all simply colonization at home instead of abroad – i.e., capitalism!

These are all the same tactics reported by Franz Fanon in the French Caribbean or by Amilcar Cabral by the Portuguese in Angola.

To paraphrase Cabral, the French want to break the Muslims here down like any other “bush people” – they want to make Muslims “cling” to the French; to make them want to “pretend as hard as they can to be” French; they want Muslims to forget their origin because “That, unhappily, is what many people want.”

I told such French people that in a multicultural society such an order to “become French” is rightly considered to be fascistic and prejudiced. In inheritance there is richness, for all people.

Furthermore, even if France can get all the 3rd-generation Muslims here to 100% believe in their hypocritical assimilationist “everyone is French under the law” nationalist hypocrisy, they still cannot get people to give up their Allah in exchange for either the Roman Catholic God, or their French atheism.

But keeping the 99th percentile down is one thing, what about the 98% in between?

The Islamophobic safety valve for leftist indignation

The second class component is that Islamophobia is so heavily promoted by both the mainstream media and government police is because it is a flaming distraction from the real issues. We all know this.

Who does not know this are the idiot White French who go around attacking Muslims. They fail to realize they are the modern-day equivalent of the poor White sharecroppers in Jim Crow America – yeah, you have a bit more status than French Muslims, but not much, you dumb crackers.

Islamophobia is a tool not just against French Muslims, but against French non-Muslims who are not in the 1%.

These attackers are double-losers because they have also imbibed the false leftism of identity politics – they are told to worship their French nationality instead of the universal respect for hard work which unites everyone not in the 1%.

They are content with the privilege of wielding Islamophobia instead of being a real leftist like their great-grandfathers, who demanded real rights prior to World War One. My most tepid congratulations on not being in the lowest rung of society….

Why is racism and Islamophobia rising across the West?

There is no mass influx of Syrian immigrants here – France has only taken in about 12,000 Syrians while probably arming 2-3 times that number – and there won’t be. France already has their caste of non-White low-level service workers, and we understand their place in the French capitalist system. Hollande’s state of emergency has only pushed them down deeper in fear, cultural exclusion and institutionalized racism.

Germany, probably because of their incredibly racist legacy, did not have such a non-White underclass. They have a sizable Turkish minority, but France’s Muslim community is 3 times larger, proportionally.

Well, they just got theirs – 600,000 Syrians – and they have already re-closed the gates.

What happened to Merkel’s reportedly-big heart? Did you think Time Magazine’s Person of the Year was actually good person and not just a sharp capitalist businesswoman?

Germany needs a new underclass for these low-level service sector jobs nobody wants, and these jobs are even worse than in France because Germany permits part-time work – what they call “minijobs”.

Such underemployment is banned here, and that’s why France’s poverty rate is so much lower than in Germany, the US and the UK. But this is what the patsy Hollande was for – to ram through right-wing roll backs which permit part-time jobs for 45-year old men instead of 14-year old boys – and he did it.

German capitalists told Merkel that they already rolled back their wages and worker rights in the 2000s, and in order to keep an economic leg up on France they need a new pressure to keep workers from asking for better wages: and that’s why you have Syrians in Germany.

They’ll be, like all refugees, desperate for work and ready to work for subsistence wages. It’s a German capitalists dream! But if you think there is anti-refugee sentiment in Germany now, just wait – it will get far worse.

In America, Mexicans have long-provided the same function of depressing worker wages and security. But why do you think so many want a wall to keep out Latin Americans – free trade sends jobs to Mexico and desperate Latin American immigrants depress wages in America. Voila.

Is America racist? Yes, history proves that but, again, the proper analysis is not just “France, Germany and the US are a bunch of racists”. No, racism and Islamophobia is a diversionary tactic used by the 1% to keep the negative 99th% and the 98% down.

If one is content with railing against the racial angle, as falsely-superior fake leftists are, one cannot see that these racists are responding to capitalist manipulation, above all.

Charlie Hebdo – ‘fake leftism’ of Biblical proportions

It’s hard not to talk about Islamophobia without bringing up Charlie Hebdo, because that’s when it all went really bad. My God! That was the motherlode of French “fake leftism”! Ugh! What a terrible story that was to cover!

I interviewed the CCIF’s Marwan Muhammad for my report for Press TV, and he was eloquent as usual. I laughingly reminded Marwan of his debate with Charlie Hebdo cartoonist Luz on CNN in September 2012, just after Luz had penned some pictures of the prophet Muhammad.

Marwan wiped the floor with him.

I don’t know what made Luz arrogant enough to think his terrible English was good enough to outdo Marwan, who speaks like a native, on such a subject….

Luz barely managed 5 minutes of unintelligible and unsatisfying philosophic rationale – to a totally impatient Christiane Amanpour – for drawing pictures of the Muhammad bent over and spreading apart his buttocks, filming a porno movie, etc. Pure class, that Luz.

Charlie Hebdo will always be a sore subject in France because there is so much phony philosophical bull surrounding the violence, but it’s worth re-reading Marwan’s interpretation, because it helps explain my fundamental class-based premise of Islamophobia:

“I don’t think at all that Charlie Hebdo’s cartoonists are racists – I think they’re just stupid, and they don’t know what they are doing. This is a band of friends, and they are in their basements with their pencils and paper, and they don’t know the consequences of what they are doing. And that’s why you have just heard Luz saying that, ‘Well, we are just making cartoons; and we don’t expect anything bad to happen; and we are journalists; but at the same time we are not responsible at all.’ Well this doesn’t stand, because whenever you take responsibility for something you say, on national TV or on paper – you need to stand with the consequences of this. And what we see when we speak with perpetrators of hate crimes towards Muslims is that this type of cartoons, this type of ideology, is building their will to act. It legitimizes them when they to turn to actions, to stab a Muslim woman in a German court or to discriminate (against) a Muslims child in a school, so this is conducive to violence.’

I wonder if Luz thinks doing prophet Muhammad-based porn was worth it? Doesn’t every kid dream of being a man like that? In France, I guess. Luz threw in the towel at Charlie Hebdo about 3 months after the attacks – he reported that the workplace culture had changed. It did – Charlie Hebdo used to not pick on the weak and powerless, but their shift to pro-Zionism, pro-NATO & Islamophobia is another story.

As your intrepid reporter in France I could find out what Luz is doing now, but I won’t. I’ll assume he’s still in his basement drawing porn, probably like this one kid I knew in high school. That kid was a riot…when I was 14.

Not even the French left supports the Muslim underclass

One mainstream French reporter asked the CCIF about their close ties with Benoit Hamon, the surprise Socialist candidate. LOL, Marwan said that he had no relationship at all with Hamon, and I didn’t write it down so I can’t be sure, but he might have said they have never even met.

This is, of course, part of the right’s effort to scare voters that Hamon is too leftist, too close to Muslims, too willing to increase welfare to 750 euros per month, etc.

Hamon, to his credit, said he was proud of his new nickname of “Bilal Hamon”. Boring…that’s just their same old tactics: The far-righters would have come up with something similar for Manuel Valls if he had beaten Hamon, even though Valls visibly seethes on his favorite subject – holy French secularism.

Of course, good ole’ Bilal Hamon will surely be very well received in Syria, Mali and Libya, right? He supported all those foreign interventions, like all fake leftist Socialist Party members.

Anyway, Marwan did fairly criticize Hollande and his henchmen when I brought up the subject of Hollande’s Islamophobic legacy at the press conference. Remember back in 2012? Islamophobia was all Sarkozy’s fault, right? In 2017 that answer is a clear “no”.

Technocratism won’t work, even with Islamophobia

The CCIF refuses to give voters political advice, and I think that’s a mistake: the CCIF are the “technocrats” of Islamophobic facts, but what good are facts without ideology? If they are the experts and study these things, then they should take a stand and advise voters which parties are Islamophobic and which are not.

The idea that technocrats can stay above the fray is totally false. With another terrible economic year imposed by (pro-capitalist) economists in Brussels officially in the books, technocratism as a governing ideology needs to be demolished: what’s needed is activism of the side of right.

Because just giving data is not enough – and the clear proof will be in the headlines which say “Islamophobia down in France”! It’s not down, in any sort of a real sense. It’s far worse!

I understand the reticence of the CCIF to possibly tarnish their data –– but they need to get even more involved than they already are. Of course, everyone in France knows that the National Front, the conservative Les Republicains, the Socialist Party, and half of the culturally-chauvinistic far left are all Islamophobic. Still…take a public stand and get political, even if it just means telling the truth about these parties.

Predictions for French Islamophobia for 2017: Hopefully Marine Le Pen wins, and I say that seriously. I predict that a “Mexican Power” movement will rise up in the US against Trump to advance civil rights, and a “Muslim Power” movement would be the response here to Marine Le Pen. Both are what’s needed to lift the underclass out from hell…and this is the only proven route, failing a successful communist-inspired revolution like in the USSR, Cuba, China, Iran etc.

Just like Mexicans in the US, you can kick out the illegal Muslims in France, but then you are still left with 3 generations of legal French Muslims, and there’s no solution for them.

Ya gotta accept your phobias if you want to work past them…and truly live.

Ramin Mazaheri is the chief correspondent in Paris for Press TV and has lived in France since 2009. He has been a daily newspaper reporter in the US, and has reported from Cuba, Egypt, Tunisia, South Korea and elsewhere. His work has appeared in various journals, magazines and websites, as well as on radio and television

‘The Euro’ by Stiglitz: Even fake leftists say ‘exit’

January 29, 2017

by Ramin Mazaheri

‘The Euro’ by Stiglitz: Even fake leftists say ‘exit’

“The Euro”, both the monetary system and the book of the same name by Nobel-Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, can appear complicated.

Take heart from Noam Chomsky, who wrote that nothing in the social sciences cannot be understood by the average bus driver in a couple of minutes – this is not calculus or physics, after all.

Give me just three paragraphs to simplify everything:

Stiglitz successfully makes two indisputable academic assertions: The euro has failed in its promise to bring about prosperity and security, and that there is nothing in its organizational structure which allows for the possibility for change.

Take a moment and realize these do not constitute an attack on the euro – these are clear facts, the former of which is clear to anyone. You’ll have to take his academic word for the latter assertion, unless perusing the euro’s structure is your idea of a fun Saturday night.

After covering the entirety of the Eurozone crisis from France, it is impossible to refute my assertions that the Eurozone has failed to bring about prosperity and security for the average Frenchman, and that there is nothing in the mainstream political structure which allows for the possibility for change.

Trust us. The first part is the main part, anyway.

I thought I’d revisit Stiglitz’s book, seeing as how the National Front’s Marine Le Pen may win the presidency in a few months largely thanks to her promise to leave the euro.

It’s vital to realize that it is not just right-wing ignoramuses like me and Le Pen who want out of the Eurozone – a mainstream, Nobel Prize-winning economist has reached the same conclusion. What I am saying here is: You don’t have to agree with us, but you cannot denigrate euro-exiters by calling us stupid or racist like you did Brexiters or Trumpers – at some point you have to openly debate.

“The Euro” is very good and worth reading. If you want know the truth about the Eurozone, read the analysis of someone who has no personal stake in it, like Stiglitz.

But believing that the euro should continue should be referred to as “Islamic market fundamentalism”, not because it has one single thing to do with Islam, but because then it would hit home with the average Westerner just how fanatical “market fundamentalism”, or “neoliberalism” truly is.

Such a term should make the deranged ideological basis of the Eurozone crystal-clear: Neoliberals are not at all constrained by the facts of 25 years of failure in Africa, a lost decade in Latin America, and nearly-lost decade in the Eurozone – Stiglitz makes this point repeatedly throughout the book.

What Stiglitz fails to do is to point out that the simple root of the Eurozone is capitalism and that this is the ideology which must be questioned, not simply its capitalist variant of neoliberalism.

I can easily relay a bunch of his facts, combine them with my on-the-ground experiences and convincingly make the urgent case that the Eurozone is flawed and must be abandoned or replaced.

But this is not that column.

I want this column to be about something else, and I will get right to the heart of the matter:

Stiglitz is about as leftist an economist as the mainstream media is permitted to report on.

That is why my headline calls him a “fake leftist”- I don’t think any economist would call him a “leftist economist”, but for all intents and purposes he is as economically left as the average person can find without caring enough to dig deeper.

Stiglitz is on the left of the right-wing; which makes him a centrist-tending-right. That he is consistently presented as a “progressive” economist is the mistake this column seeks to make right.

And like so many “progressives” who fall short of real leftism, even Stiglitz cannot believe his own eyes or his own words.

Fake progressives always let them off the hook

So many times in “The Euro” Stiglitz delivers a devastating conclusion about capitalism, only to immediately lets it off the hook by claiming bafflement as to how this could possibly happen. This failure is intellectually indefensible, intellectually unsatisfying, regressive and violently damaging. This passage is, unfortunately, typical.

“Austerity has always and everywhere had the contractionary effects observed in Europe: the greater the austerity, the greater the economic contraction. Why the Troika would have thought that this time in Europe it would be different is mystifying.”

It is not mystifying – this is what capitalism does over and over. Just as they sought in Africa and Latin America, neoliberals want to impose labor code rollbacks and deregulate; in Europe they wanted to end the gains Europeans have fought decades to win. It has worked in France – Hollande rammed through the “Macron Law” last year despite mass protests, and he arrested thousands of demonstrators to achieve it.

Time after time Stiglitz presents a devastating indictment which totally attacks the premise that capitalism is concerned with good governance and promoting even basic equality, only to soft-pedal backwards.

“But the eurozone programs have been a success, in the sense that the German and French banks have been repaid….Perhaps the real goals of Germany and the other creditor countries have indeed been achieved.”

For those not following Europe closely, this is exactly what has happened since the European Sovereign Debt Crisis began and why people have lost faith in the Eurozone: the rich countries of France, the Netherlands and Germany have no solidarity with the average Eurozone citizen at all (which is endemic in capitalism), and are ruthlessly waging economic colonization against the poorer nations (which is endemic in capitalism). It is the banks of France and Germany which have been bailed out, not the average indebted person in Greece or Finland, as Stiglitz repeatedly proves.

Spain and Ireland didn’t even need a bailout in 2009: They had a fiscal surplus and healthy debt-to-GDP ratios, but not anymore. Greece is now actually running a fiscal surplus! No matter – they are slated to be paying back banks further west and north for perhaps decades.

Stiglitz says these things, backed by academic facts, all the time in his book.

And yet with that seemingly ironic “perhaps the real goals” statement –a question mark is missing, which must be a grammatical error because it is clearly a question – Stiglitz simply ends the matter and moves on to a new topic. Tellingly, it is “The Need for Growth”.

Perhaps if Stiglitz were not trapped by capitalist ideology, by capitalism’s obsession with growth, he could have pursued his own hypothesis (which matches with reality) even further. But he didn’t, he dropped the potato once it got hot, or he doesn’t realize he has a capitalist-programmed obsession with “growth”.

A cynic might say that this was the intent of the law: to preserve power relations. But I am convinced that the rule in Europe was driven more by ideology and misguided economic beliefs than narrow self- interest.”

It is not at all cynical to say that capitalists in the Eurozone have not yet rectified a long-standing criticism by the left: that capitalism needlessly and inefficiently promotes international competition and imperialistic rivalries. Leftists have said this for decades, are saying it now, and will say it forever until 1) capitalism stops doing it, which they won’t (can’t) or 2) capitalism finds a solution to this problem, which they can’t (won’t).

Either Stiglitz, with all of his honorary degrees, has not read basic leftist economist thought, or he has forgotten it, or he has ignored it in the confirmation bias of his definitely non-progressive adoration of capitalism.

Like all capitalist promoters, and like all mainstream media members who live in a 24-hour news cycle, instead of taking a longer view Stiglitz is guilty of viewing the Eurozone as some sort of isolated case in capitalism when the moment arrives from clear conclusions and logical condemnation. He remains in his ivory tower, and his telescope does not take in the full historical view.

“Its construction (the ECB) was based on ideological propositions that were fashionable at the time (Stiglitz is discussing the ECB’s mandate, which is limited to only inflation, and not growth, employment, etc.) These beliefs, however, are increasingly questioned, especially in the aftermath of the 2008 global financial crisis.”

An obsession with inflation is not a “fashion”: this is a fundamental concern of capitalism throughout its history. Why? Inflation is called “the great leveler” for a reason – it reduces the values of the most immense fortunes. The rich have far more to lose than anyone else from inflation!

It also reduces debts, so God send us inflation! At least for the poor debtors, who will be able to pay off their burden and stop being tortured.

Inflation also reduces the power of interest – without that power, bankers/moneylenders will have to actually work for a living, which is why they fear it so.

Finally, lacking the stability provided by communistic cooperation, an inflation-induced downturn also spells chaos, and that could force a revolution and compel the wealthy to flee to some other country with only a part of their ill-gotten gains (see revolutions in Russia, China, Cuba and Iran for examples).

Stiglitz knows that for all these reasons an obsession with inflation is fundamental, not fashionable.

“The dismal (economic) forecasts made it clear: the Troika’s grasp of the underlying economics was abysmal”.

Really? All those eggheads with their salaries so much bigger than mine don’t understand their own domain?

The problem here is not that people with a PhD do not “grasp” their own field – the problem is their ideology.

It is not a conspiracy of stupidity or a confederacy of dunces – it’s the promotion of capitalism over communism.

The ideology of communism shows clearly that the Eurozone was indeed a conspiracy – a money-lending cartel on the grandest scope. And why would such a scope be out of the reach of banks whose yearly gross corporate product can exceed half of all nations in the world?

Stiglitz says that from 1999-2007 the Eurozone had a short period of success – “divergence reigned” – i.e., rich countries loaned to poor Eurozone members (economic redistribution). But what happened is those loans were called in during a crisis, and they could not be repaid.

We know that bankers routinely aim for such a scenario to happen. What happened in the Eurozone has happened all over the 3rd world during the 2+ centuries of European-led imperialism – indebted countries were picked apart by foreigners.

To say that the bankers/Eurozone planners/Troika didn’t know what they were doing is pathetic. Stiglitz has too much sympathy, perhaps, or not enough contempt for negligence.

Was it just an accident, a slip, that they opted for a property tax that would have inflicted pain on ordinary Greeks, rather than one that would have hit the oligarchs?”

This is – somehow – an honest question from Stiglitz, and a less ideologically-rigorous reader will be lulled into complacency and sympathy for those who are orchestrating the re-colonization of Greece.

Stiglitz poses the question but he never takes a stand. This is as far as a person like him is willing to go – fake leftism. The leftism that nobody wants to associate with. The leftism that loses. The leftism that embarrasses leftists to say that they are leftists.

To take a stand would force Stiglitz to change his fundamentally pro-capitalist view, and it would risk all those honorary degrees. (I have a t-shirt which reads “Where’s my bailout?”. Where’s my honorary degree, huh? Hundreds of unpopular leftist reports and French tear gas attacks don’t cut it, eh?)

For those who do go further we conclude: “No, it was not an accident! It happens all the time. Such pro-oligarchy decisions are routine in capitalism. This is just one measly little example you have publicized and you haven’t even interpreted it correctly, Dr. Stiglitz, PhD, Esq, Rev., DDS,!”

Why care about ‘alternative facts’ when ideology is neglected?

Facts don’t matter because in the social sciences ideology filters everything, people. Again, this is not calculus or physics – if it was, then economic policy wouldn’t be disputed and austerity wouldn’t still be reigning.

The capitalists have an ideology and they won’t call it “Islamic market fundamentalism” so they call it “neoliberalism”, and it is the foundation of the Eurozone.

You want to be a capitalist and not an “Islamic market fundamentalist”, you complain? The Eurozone is necessary, you say?

Fine. Let’s judge the Eurozone on your own neoliberal terms: As a capitalist you obviously accept that economic downturns and depressions are simply a part of life, and you are willing to make everyone suffer the consequences.

But the judge of any capitalist policy is how long and how deep your capitalist downturns are, and by this fair gauge the EU has totally failed. This will be a lost decade. I pity the poor and unemployed youth because they are suffering for the refusal to accept the facts which impose a change of ideology.

There is an alternative to the Eurozone – it has not been decreed by God. As Stiglitz writes, monetary systems come and go. If structural limitations prevent us from changing the euro then the euro has to go.

Capitalist reader, even your emperor is cold from wearing no clothes: Germany has averaged 0.8% annual growth since 2007 – that is failure, and this is your leader and success story?

Joe oughtta know better

But Joseph Stiglitz, with all his egghead degrees that make him so much smarter than me and your regular bus driver, should know extremely well how capitalism ravages everything because isn’t he reading economic literature from the left at least some of the time?

That is not clear. But I say Stiglitz should know better because he is from Gary, Indiana, my former hometown.

Gary, if you don’t know, is the American industrial hellhole par excellence. It is the poorest, Blackest, most violent city in America, per capita. White flight, racism, capitalism, pollution, drugs, guns, blocked futures – it all the stuff nobody wants.

You cannot compare it with a stereotypical Soviet-era counterpart because there is humiliating racism, deadly violence and crack instead of vodka.

Gary truly is the foul, steel-fume belching armpit of America. Most people in nearby Chicago are too frightened to even stop there for gas…and mainstream media/politicians couldn’t care less.

Gary’s dismal past, present and future should have been enough for Stiglitz to renounce capitalism, but it wasn’t.

Like most “progressives” who do not go far enough to make any real or lasting difference, the tone throughout his book is that Stiglitz “sincerely cares”. He really, truly does and…this only makes him more enlightened than your average, selfish fascist.

Like most of his fake-leftist peers he never discusses “class”, but loves to discuss the environment. And if there was an economic component to transgender bathroom rights I’m reasonably sure Stiglitz would have focused on that as well.

He – by blinding himself to a true leftist interpretation – by being content with being “mystified” in the most non-poetic ways in the most dismal of “sciences” – he creates a false impression of what “progressive” should truly mean.

The best that such a half-hearted progressive like Stiglitz can do is provide us ammunition for the struggle – and he does in “The Euro”.

This makes him without fault, but it does not earn him great praise. Somebody in his influential position should break free of his mainstream confines and propose real solutions instead of trying to fix what he clearly knows is fundamentally broken: capitalism.

Being “mystified’ should not earn you prizes in economics – the people deserve immediate solutions.

The Euro has proven there is no “Third Way”

Urbane, cultured, human rights-loving Europe has not been able to show that one is able to combine a capitalism and communism in a capitalism-centered system.

This is exactly what the Euro was supposed to do. Capitalism is simply too strong and must be confined in a drastic manner.

The Eurozone has allowed European imperialism to turn on itself. This should be as crystal clear to you by now as it is to an increasing number of Eurozone citizens.

What is working, and even despite the global recession, is combining capitalism and communism in a communism-centered system.

China is booming; Cuba has had steady 2% growth since the Great Recession started, despite the genocidal blockade; since 1989 in Iran (communism’s ignored victory) only one country in the world has increased their Human Development Index more – South Korea.

Destroy the euro, yes, because it has been created in a way so that it is possible to reform, as Stiglitz repeatedly demonstrates. It was an economic union before there was a political union, and the pain of muddling through to finally get that political union correct is going to hurt hundreds of millions of people for decades – that price is too high.

There has to be another way, even though pro-euro people repeatedly cry TINA: There Is No Alternative. The euro was, after all, created in 1992 – the USSR was over and so was “history”. This anti-democratic philosophy has been inscribed in the euro’s genetic structure, per Stiglitz .

But the only way any pan-European project can ever possibly succeed – and Stiglitz repeatedly notes this as well – is through solidarity.

What he doesn’t say is that there is no pan-national solidarity ever in capitalism.

He holds up the US model as an example, but the US has always been, fundamentally, the same country. It’s not as if the US merged with Native American tribes or territories of freed Africans. Europe requires their own solution, not just a US copy, just as Cuba requires their own model, Iran their own model, etc.

The euro has undoubtedly decreased the sentiment of solidarity so vital to something like the euro ever having a chance of working. Greece distrusts Germany, Germany distrusts Portugal, France distrusts everybody including other Frenchmen, etc.

There can be no doubt about that. The capitalist euro project has ruined European solidarity, and I – intrepid reporter on the ground – can report to you that I see no “solidarity boom” on the horizon. I see the far-right, racism, protectionism and closing of borders. Why? Well, the euro has failed to bring about prosperity and security, dummy – you can even ask a capitalist reactionary like Stiglitz!

Modern history proves that any sort of solidarity – especially pan-national or racial – requires a commitment to communist ideology. The USSR was the only empire built on affirmative action, after all.

Communism is the only way forward, as we’ve all known for decades. The question, if there is one, is not “if” but “how much”.

Stiglitz, and his fundamentally pro-capitalist fake leftist ilk, can see that but they look away.

Ramin Mazaheri is the chief correspondent in Paris for Press TV and has lived in France since 2009. He has been a daily newspaper reporter in the US, and has reported from Cuba, Egypt, Tunisia, South Korea and elsewhere. His work has appeared in various journals, magazines and websites, as well as on radio and television.

TULSI GABBARD’S TRIP TO SYRIA IS A SIGNAL EVENT IN HISTORY OF THE WAR; SUWAYDAA`: SAA AND PDC BLAST ISIS; DAMASCUS: ISIS CRUSHED AGAIN; ALEPPO: ARABIAN COCKROACHES’ LIES EXPOSED AT KHANAASSER

Ziad Fadel

SUWAYDAA`: 

Al-Rasheeda Village:  Spotters delivered coordinates to the SAA’s vaunted artillery corps who took action immediately to pulverize ISIS groupings around 4 tanker trucks hauling oil and gas to other terrorist gangs for use in their vehicles of death.  4 tanker trucks arriving from Homs Province were struck dead on by lethal mortar, Howitzer and rocket fire killing a confirmed 16 ISIS rats and destroying all the trucks and their payloads.  This area is 38 kms east of the capital of Suwaydaa` City.  Many ISIS vermin were seen leaving the area driving banshee-like into the open desert.  SAAF helicopters continued to follow them.  No details are available.

 

Al-Qassr Village:  Yesterday, northeast of Suwaydaa`, the SAA nearly surrounded a nest of ISIS maggots and forced them to flee leaving whole boxes of ammunition and light weapons which will be distributed to our militias in order to kill Wahhabists.

_____________________________________________

ALEPPO:

 

The Arabian lie machines of Al-Jazeera, Al-‘Arabiyya and other repugnant sources of disinformation claimed falsely that the ISIS terrorists had managed to retake Khanaasser Town and, thus, block the movement of vehicles to and from Aleppo City.  As I wrote, it is completely and utterly false.  Traffic is moving very normally according to all reliable sources in Aleppo.

__________________________________________

DAMASCUS:

Kassaaraat Al-Manqoora:  In the East Qalamoon area, the SAA wiped out fortifications built by the ISIS rodents managing, in the process, to target a pickup with 23mm cannon aboard, killing 2 occupants.  Also, the army confirmed the destruction of a heavy bus used to transport the filth.

 

Qarn Al-Kabsh:  (Ram’s Horn) 14 IEDs dismantled after the SAA captured several Nusra/Alqaeda rodents who confessed very quickly to the locations of the bombs.

 

Al-Naassiriya-Palmyra Road:  Way to the farthest reaches of Damascus Governorate, the SAA engineers found 3 IEDs and dismantled them.

 

West Qalamoon:  A perfectly executed ambush caught a pack of ISIS rodents unawares killing 5 of them.  The rest escaped leaving weapons and ammunition.

 

Khaan Al-Manqoora-Palmyra Triangle Road:  ISIS took a big hit here losing 17 rodents and 2 pickups with 23mm cannons.

____________________________________________

WHAT DID TULSI GABBARD TELL DR. ASSAD IN DAMASCUS?

Image result for tulsi gabbard

When Tulsi Gabbard finally admitted that she met Dr. Bashar Al-Assad in Damascus, we were free to discuss what we knew about her trip.  At first, we respected her deliberate efforts to obscure the fact that she met with the Prez.  But, she also met with President-elect Trump who told her that he wanted her to deliver a message.  The first message was that Dr. Assad had nothing to fear from the United States.  The U.S. will not truck with any party out to change governments.  This is why Boris Johnson, the U.K.’s foreign minister, has just declared that the U.K. had no objections to Dr. Assad running again for the office of the president.  Leave aside the fact that we don’t care about the opinions of some limey aristocrat or elitist, we do care about the U.K.’s constant violations of international law by its facilitating terrorism.  In any case, Donald Trump has delivered his message successfully to Dr. Assad.

The second message has to do with Trump’s willingness to help the Syrian government to control the out-flux of refugees by establishing a “safe zone” for Syrians in areas controlled by either the Syrian Army or the Russian Air Force.  I have been informed that Dr. Assad has accepted this kind of benign interference as long as it was coordinated with the Syrian government.

The third message she carried to Dr. Assad was that the U.S. is intent upon wiping out every vestige of ISIS and Alqaeda, and, that it would do so in coordination with Russia and the Syrian government.

The Zionist Khazars, whose DNA is inevitably Ukrainian, Polish, German or Russian, have gone berserk over this issue. While never condemning John McCain – the drunken mass-murdering pilot who killed Vietnamese civilians in the thousands – for his trespass on Syrian soil without so much as a visa – Tulsi Gabbard took the trouble to secure Syrian permission to enter the SAR and, thus, entered legally and properly.  Only Zionist child molesters and drug addicts attack a woman so courageous and, yet, so punctilious in the way she conducts her affairs.

With Marine LePen slated to trounce the cowardly vipers of Paris in the next elections, expect a great year for Syria and its people.  Expect that kraut schlampe, Merkel, to go down the sewer straight into the cesspool of history this time around.

_____________________________________________

NEWS AND COMMENT:

Diana Barahona sent me this shockeroo about Trump calling Dr. Assad brave in a conversation with President Sisi:

“Presidential sources in Cairo have said that U.S. President Trump, when he phoned Egyptian President Sisi, told him that he supported the fight against terrorism, and that the United States will fight terrorism in the Middle East. Washington will also carry out military operations against terrorism in Iraq and Syria in coordination with Russia. He supports the congressional decision that the Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist organization.

When the two leaders spoke about the situation in Iraq, Trump said that the United States will support the Iraqi army with aerial bombing and warplanes to end terrorism in Iraq.

As for Syria, the president told President Sisi: Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is a brave man who stood firm in the face of terrorism, but the circumstances do not allow me access to him.

Trump added: I’ll be in touch with Russian President Vladimir Putin together to coordinate military action in Syria against terrorism and terrorists and the Daesh organization.

Egyptian presidential sources concluded that President Trump told President Sisi that Assad was brave, because Sisi conveyed the words of the American president in a message to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.” http://www.addiyar.com/article/1296635

And from Dimitri Porfyris this article in French:

https://dimpenews.com/2017/01/24/trump-a-sisi-assad-est-un-homme-courageux/

And from Afraa Dagher the reason why the USA is helping ISIS to take Dayr El-Zor.  However, Donald Trump has put an end to that:

http://theduran.com/us-isis-deir-el-zour/

Waf sends this article and video showing our army ambushing and killing 10 ISIS rodents in DZ at the Panorama Axis:

http://www.syrianews.cc/saa-ambushes-10-isis-terrorists-eliminates-der-ezzor-panorama/

Patrick Henningsen sends more to us about the disgraced MSM:

http://21stcenturywire.com/2017/01/19/syria-dr-bouthaina-shaaban-on-the-weaponization-of-corporate-media/

Want to know more about Tusa Gabbard’s trip to Syria?

http://21stcenturywire.com/2017/01/26/syria-there-are-no-moderates-tulsi-gabbards-reports-from-syria/  (Thanks, Patrick Henningsen)

You’re going to love this article from Syrianews about illegal terrorist aliens and even mentions McCain:

http://www.syrianews.cc/who-needs-an-army-of-350000-wahhabi-terrorists

Brandon attacks Trump’s “safe zone” policy in Syria and analyzes it.  I think we will deal with this subject soon in a post by Ziad. Not to worry. It’ Trump now:

http://www.activistpost.com/2017/01/trump-orders-safe-zone-syria-reports.html

__________________________________________

PHOTO OF THE DAY FROM SILVIA:

Image may contain: 2 people, sky and outdoor

Read more 

Related Videos

 

Related Articles

%d bloggers like this: