YOU’RE LOSING YOUR MIND AND YOUR DECENCY, RABBI – NOT EUROPE

YOU’RE LOSING YOUR MIND AND YOUR DECENCY, RABBI – NOT EUROPE

August 29, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

leshe.jpg

by Michael Lesher

Because I have no ambition either to be the next Chief Rabbi of Barcelona or to be subject to the whims of whoever is – as it is, I’m not even Spanish – it’s of very little direct importance to me that the current occupant of that position, one Meir Bar-Hen, is a blithering idiot.

On the other hand, I am a Jew – and a human being. And on both counts it does matter very much to me that Rabbi Bar-Hen, who claims in the wake of a car-ramming attack in Barcelona (for which the motive remains unclear) that “Europe is lost” so long as its governments allow Muslims to live side by side with other citizens, is not only a fool but a bigot of unspeakable effrontery. In fact, he’s exactly the sort of man who, with Goebbels, would have pointed to Herschel Grynszpan’s murder of a young German diplomat in 1938 as “proof” that Jews could not be tolerated in Germany.

And yet I confess that even the rabbi’s racism – essentially a declaration of war against every Muslim in Europe – is less infuriating to me than the silent complacency with which his remarks have been received throughout the Jewish world.

One might have hoped a few Jews, even today, would remember that being stigmatized as a collective threat to civilization was a familiar Jewish experience not so long ago. In the previous century, when the Reverend A.E. Patton complained of the danger of immigrant “hordes” who were “stealthy and furtive in manner…too filthy to adopt ideals of cleanliness from the start, too bigoted to surrender any racial traditions or to absorb any true Americanism,” he was writing about Jews, not Muslims, and if asked for evidence of the threat would have pointed to nothing less momentous than the gathering storm in Russia. (The Nazis used similar “evidence,” for that matter; so did some of their descendants at the recent violent hatefest in Charlottesville.) Quite apart from its moral reprehensibility, then, is Muslim-bashing a clever game for Jews to play, given our continuing minority status and a little knowledge of our own history?

And in Spain, of all places! Has a Spanish rabbi utterly forgotten what Jewish historians once dubbed the “Golden Age” of medieval Jewry – namely in Spain, under Muslim ruleand that anti-Semitic persecutions followed on the heels of the expulsion of Muslims from that country?

But bigots don’t speak the language of history, just as they don’t speak the language of contemporary fact. They speak the language of power – and Rabbi Bar-Hen provides a fine example of how that language can turn the truth inside out. Just look at how neatly his recent statements, though at odds with reality, dovetail with Western imperial propaganda.

“I tell my congregants,” Rabbi Bar-Hen told JTA after the attack that left 14 random victims dead in Barcelona, “this place is lost. Don’t repeat the mistake of Algerian Jews, of Venezuelan Jews. Better [get out] early than late.”

Say what?

Algerian Jews did face discriminatory treatment in the 1960s, in the wake of Algeria’s bloody war for independence from France (which the Jewish community, by and large, did not support). But Venezuela is a “historically open society without significant anti-Semitism,” the U.S. State Department concluded as recently as 2005. The only “grievance” of Venezuelan Jews JTA could scrape up the following year was that President Hugo Chavez had had the temerity to criticize Israeli war crimes in Lebanon.

And anyway, what has Venezuela got to do with Spain?

Well, nothing – except that Chavez was on Washington’s enemies’ list long before ISIS was. And that’s the clue to unpacking Rabbi Bar-Hen’s ominous reference to Latin America: it means, “Jews shouldn’t want open societies where the U.S. doesn’t want them. We must stay on the side of Big Brother.”

The same goes for Bar-Hen’s weird juxtaposition of Spain – where, he claims, Jews can’t survive because “radical” Muslims are “living among you” and “it’s very difficult to get rid of them” – against Israel, where he explicitly encourages his congregants to immigrate.

Now, Rabbi Bar-Hen knows as well as anyone that Israel and its occupied territories have a Muslim population too (in fact, one that is proportionally larger than the Muslim community in Spain), and that this population is not altogether acquiescent. If Spain is a “hub of Islamist terror for all of Europe,” as the rabbi claims, what in the world makes Israel a safe haven?

Again, nothing – except that Israel, unlike Spain, is an American client state. And so what the rabbi is really saying to Jews is, “Go where American power goes. The U.S. is fighting a war against the Muslim world, and we want to be on the side of the powerful – never mind what’s right or wrong.”

And then there’s Bar-Hen’s flagship “proof” that Spain is soft on Muslim terrorism: the fact that the government wouldn’t suppress the free travel of Leila Khaled, a Palestinian refugee who nearly 50 years ago helped hijack an airplane (hurting no one) and who wanted, to the horror of people like Rabbi Bar-Hen, to attend a book festival in Spain this year. This showed that Spanish authorities “do not understand the nature of terrorism, if they treat it as an action by the disenfranchised,” the rabbi told JTA.

Got it? In Bar-Hen’s world, a Palestinian woman who was driven out of her native Haifa at the age of 4 can’t possibly be “disenfranchised.” And any country that would dream of allowing a small-time Palestinian resistance fighter to set foot in it, five decades after her last illegal act – the same country having already welcomed the likes of Shimon Peres, the butcher of Qana and eager backer of apartheid South Africa – should be ashamed of itself. That is, if its moral standard is all about what’s good for the Empire.

Which, in a word, is Bar-Hen’s standard.

Taken separately, each one of Bar-Hen’s remarks amounts to pure stupidity. But their sum total is something rather more sinister. Bar-Hen may be a blithering idiot, as I called him a moment ago, but what am I to call a man who scorns the mayor of Barcelona for saying, after the tragic car-ramming deaths in her city, that “Barcelona is a city of peace,” and that “[t]error will not make us stop being who we are: a brave city open to the world”?

Bar-Hen thought so little of that fine statement that he said he might not attend the public solidarity rally called by the mayor, claiming security officials instructed him to avoid public areas in the coming days – because he is recognizably Jewish.

Rabbi, I doubt you’ll read this column. But if you do, I’m calling your bluff. I want to know which “security officials” told you it’s not safe for a Jew with a skullcap to be seen in the streets of Barcelona, though it’s apparently quite safe for Muslims to show themselves, even immediately after a terrible crime has been blamed on someone in their community, and even with the likes of you whipping up public hysteria against them all. I want to know what entitles you to claim victimhood at the same time you incite violence against roughly a billion people worldwide. I want to know why Leila Khaled’s 50-year-old violence is reprehensible to you, while Israel’s continuing brutality is not.

And I want to tell you something, Rabbi. You’re not losing “Europe.” What you’re losing is your mind – your ability to reason, to ground your opinions in fact, to guide your congregants with truth rather than propaganda.

And you’re losing something else, too: your common decency. Because behind your stupidity is, as I’ve shown, a corrupt agenda every Jew, let alone a rabbi, should repudiate. Because when you sell out to imperial power, you cease to be a religious leader and become one more toady to the powers that be. Because inciting hatred against an already demonized people puts you squarely, and exclusively, in the ranks of vulgar propagandists.

And this is one Jew who isn’t going to let rabbis like you forget how utterly, in a moment of crisis, you morally betrayed and abandoned us all.

Advertisements

Iran deeply concerned over continued violence against Myanmar Muslims

Source

بهرام قاسمی

 

News ID: 4072458 – Tue 29 August 2017 – 09:16
TEHRAN, Aug. 29 (MNA) – Foreign ministry spokesman has expressed Tehran’s deep concern over the continuation of inhumane and violent actions against Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar.

“Within the framework of respect for basic human rights and dignity as an internationally recognized norm, the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran expresses its deep concern about the continued violation of Muslims’ rights in Myanmar, which has led to the death and forced immigration of many of them,” Foreign Ministry Spokesman Bahram Ghasemi said.

He further noted in his Monday statement that Iran is not pleased with the continuation of ‘this miserable situation’ and slaughter and displacement of Muslims in Myanmar.

Ghasemi also called on the Myanmarese government to adopt prudent and realistic policies to restore peace and peaceful coexistence and prevent the institutionalisation of such inhumane and violent situation

Netanyahu Invites Top Saudi Officials to Al-Aqsa

18-07-2017 | 15:25

Local Editor

Amidst the escalation of tensions in al-Aqsa as well as the Saudi-“Israeli” normalization of ties, the “Israeli” entity’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu invited top Saudi officials to visit the al-Aqsa mosque.

Saudi King Salman and

The invite came after Saudi King Salman personally passed a message of objection to the entity after the apartheid “Israeli” regime decided to place metal detectors at the entrance to the al-Aqsa Mosque compound on Sunday.

Salma’s message was passed to the “Israeli” entity via Washington that the compound should be reopened to worshipers, Saudi news site Elaph reported on Tuesday.

For its part, the Waqf – the Muslim religious body that has authority over the site – announced that the metal detectors are an attempt to change the status quo and called on worshipers not to enter the site.

According to the report, Netanyahu sent a message in response to the Saudi King’s demands, in which he vowed that the status quo at the site won’t be harmed, and even invited senior Saudi officials to al-Aqsa Mosque to examine it for themselves.

However, he did not receive a response from the Saudis.

The report went on to say that in a phone call Netanyahu held with Jordanian King Abdullah on Saturday night, Bibi protested a speech by the speaker of the Jordanian Parliament, Atef a-Tarawana, who attacked the “Israeli” entity over its conduct on the al-Aqsa Mosque area. “The speech was irresponsible,” Netanyahu told Abdullah.

Accordingly, there was no comments from “Israeli” Prime Minister’s Bureau.

Source: News Agencies, Edited by website team

Related Videos

Related Articles

Interview with Sheikh Imran Nazar Hosein

Source

Interview with Sheikh Imran Nazar Hosein, an Islamic scholar, author and philosopher specializing in Islamic eschatology, world politics, economics, and modern socio-economic/political issues.

Related

Looking to the Past, not ISIS, for the True Meaning of Islam

Emir Abdelkader, 19th century Muslim humanist and sheikh

[Ed. note – British journalist Robert Fisk has published an interesting historical retrospect on Abdelkader ibn Muhieddine, or Emir Abdelkader, an Algerian Muslim leader of the 19th century who fought against French imperialism and was a great champion of human rights–of all people. Abdelkader intervened at one point to save a community of Christians in Damascus, Syria, where he spent a portion of his life, and while Fisk doesn’t bother to point it out, his act of saving Syrian Christians is something he shares in common with the present-day leader of Syria, Bashar Assad.

I thought it timely to post such an article since we’ve just seen a deranged individual arrested in Portland, Oregon after allegedly stabbing three people, killing two of them, while spouting hatred for Muslims–a man whose last name is “Christian” no less. So you’ll see a lengthy excerpt from Fisk’s essay on Abdelkader, along with a link to the original article, and just below that I’m also tossing in a video of a group of Syrians, including about 3,000 students, taking a walking tour of Aleppo’s recently-liberated historic areas. A Syrian woman you’ll see interviewed in the video, Anushka Arakelyan, says she hopes that the city will one day be “the same as it was before the war.”

“There are no nationalities here. All people love each other; all live together, rejoice together, cry together and wait together,” she added.

“Aleppo will be the same as it was before the war. We hope and wait,” Arakelyan said.

“As one Russian song says, we hope and wait, and we will wait and hope,” she added.

“We love Aleppo very much. Aleppo is a very good city, very hospitable city. I’m very happy to live here. Here, there are no nationalities. All people love each other; all live together, rejoice together, cry together and wait together,” she concluded. (Uprooted Palestinians )

It would seem, from this lady’s remarkable words, that there are plenty of Muslims who today carry on in the spirit of Abdelkader, and that therefore we don’t have to look to the past to find “the true meaning of Islam”–plenty of examples we can point to in the present. ]

***

We must look to the past, not Isis, for the true meaning of Islam

By Robert Fisk

After the Manchester massacre… yes, and after Nice and Paris, Mosul and Abu Ghraib and 7/7 and the Haditha massacre – remember those 28 civilians, including children, killed by US Marines, four more than Manchester but no minute’s silence for them? And of course 9/11…

Counterbalancing cruelty is no response, of course. Just a reminder. As long as we bomb the Middle East instead of seeking justice there, we too will be attacked. But what we must concentrate upon, according to the monstrous Trump, is terror, terror, terror, terror, terror. And fear. And security. Which we will not have while we are promoting death in the Muslim world and selling weapons to its dictators. Believe in “terror” and Isis wins. Believe in justice and Isis is defeated.

So I suspect it’s time to raise the ghost of a man known as the Emir Abdelkader – Muslim, Sufi, sheikh, ferocious warrior, humanist, mystic, protector of his people against Western barbarism, protector of Christians against Muslim barbarism, so brave that the Algerian state insisted his bones were brought home from his beloved Damascus, so noble that Abe Lincoln sent him a pair of Colt pistols and the French gave him the Grand Cross of the Legion of Honour. He loved education, he admired the Greek philosophers, he forbade his fighters to destroy books, he worshipped a religion which believed – so he thought – in human rights. But hands up all readers who know the name of Abdelkader.

We should think of him now more than ever.

He was not a “moderate” because he fought back savagely against the French occupation of his land. He was not an extremist because, in his imprisonment at the Chateau d’Amboise, he talked of Christians and Muslims as brothers. He was supported by Victor Hugo and Lord Londonderry and earned the respect of Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte (later Napoleon III) and the French state paid him a pension of 100,000 francs. He deserved it.

When the French invaded Algeria, Abdelkader Ibn Muhiedin al-Juzairi (Abdelkader, son of Muhiedin, the Algerian,1808-1883, for those who like obituaries) embarked on a successful guerrilla war against one of the best equipped armies in the Western world – and won. He set up his own state in western Algeria – Muslim but employing Christian and Jewish advisors – and created separate departments (defence, education, etc), which stretched as far as the Moroccan border. It even had its own currency, the “muhamediya”. He made peace with the French – a truce which the French broke by invading his lands yet again. Abdelkader demanded a priest to minister for his French prisoners, even giving them back their freedom when he had no food for them. The French sacked the Algerian towns they captured, a hundred Hadithas to suppress Abdelkader’s resistance. When at last he was defeated, he surrendered in honour – handing over his horse as a warrior – on the promise of exile in Alexandria or Acre. Again the French betrayed him, packing him off to prison in Toulon and then to the interior of France.

Yet in his French exile, he preached peace and brotherhood and studied French and spoke of the wisdom of Plato and Socrates, Aristotle and Ptolemy and Averoes and later wrote a book, Call to the Intelligent, which should be available on every social media platform. He also, by the way, wrote a book on horses which proves he was ever an Arab in the saddle. But his courage was demonstrated yet again in Damascus in 1860 where he lived as an honoured exile. The Christian-Druze civil war in Lebanon had spread to Damascus where the Christian population found themselves surrounded by the Muslim Druze who arrived with Isis-like cruelty, brandishing swords and knives to slaughter their adversaries.

Abdelkader sent his Algerian Muslim guards – his personal militia – to bash their way through the mob and escort more than 10,000 Christians to his estate. And when the crowds with their knives arrived at his door, he greeted them with a speech which is still recited in the Middle East (though utterly ignored these days in the West).

“You pitiful creatures!” he shouted. “Is this the way you honour the Prophet? God punish you! Shame on you, shame! The day will come when you will pay for this … I will not hand over a single Christian. They are my brothers. Get out of here or I’ll set my guards on you.”

Muslim historians claim Abdelkader saved 15,000 Christians, which may be a bit of an exaggeration. But here was a man for Muslims to emulate and Westerners to admire.

His fury was expressed in words which would surely have been used today against the cult-like caliphate executioners of Isis. Of course, the “Christian” West would honour him at the time (although, interestingly, he received a letter of praise from the Muslim leader of wildly independent Chechnya). He was an “interfaith dialogue” man to please Pope Francis.

Abdelkader was invited to Paris. An American town was named after him – Elkader in Clayton County, Iowa, and it’s still there, population 1,273. Founded in the mid-19th century, it was natural to call your home after a man who was, was he not, honouring the Rights of Man of American Independence and the French Revolution? Abdelkader flirted with Freemasonry – most scholars believe he was not taken in – and loved science to such an extent that he accepted an invitation to the opening of the Suez Canal, which was surely an imperial rather than a primarily scientific project. Abdelkader met De Lesseps. He saw himself, one suspects, as Islam’s renaissance man, a man for all seasons, the Muslim for all people, an example rather than a saint, a philosopher rather than a priest.

But of course, Abdelkader’s native Algeria is a neighbour of Libya from where Salman Abedi’s family came, and Abdelkader died in Syria, whose assault by US aircraft – according to Abedi’s sister – was the reason he slaughtered the innocent of Manchester. And so geography contracts and history fades, and Abedi’s crime is, for now, more important than all of Abdelkader’s life and teaching and example. So for Mancunians, whether they tattoo bees onto themselves or merely buy flowers, why not pop into Manchester’s central library in St Peter’s Square and ask for Elsa Marsten’s The Compassionate Warrior or John Kiser’s Commander of the Faithful or, published just a few months ago, Mustapha Sherif’s L’Emir Abdelkader: Apotre de la fraternite?

They are no antidotes for sorrow or mourning. But they prove that Isis does not represent Islam and that a Muslim can earn the honour of the world.

***

The Mosul Massacres: the Banality of Evil revisited.

The Mosul Massacres: the Banality of Evil revisited.

April 01, 2017

By Anwar Khan

What is the moral difference–if any– between the intentional shooting at fleeing civilians and using them as human shields on the one hand, and the flattening of entire neighborhoods, killing hundreds of innocent civilians, on the pretext of the presence of enemy fighters there-in, on the other? The answer is that there is no moral difference. Both are high crimes under any book, and it is being perpetrated on the people of Mosul as we speak. The first is done by ISIS– the Frankenstein that crept out of the Empire’s Research and Development labs, with the sole aim of destroying Muslim societies, disparaging the name of Islam, and advancing the march towards Full Spectrum Dominance— and the second is perpetrated by the Empire’s military might in broad day light, on the pretext of annihilating the very monster that it created. In between a most vicious massacre of innocent people is being perpetrated, with an almost complete media blackout.

(Side Note: Not that the knowledge of such crimes would bother much the moral nerves of the western world, who have come to accept scenes of dead Muslims as a phenomenon as normal as cloud formation. Between slavish work to pay for what they call life, celebrity worship, and the collective immolation of the soul that takes place in the dark temples we call cinemas— mirroring very much the darkness that encompasses the modern conscience—one wonders if idle time could be spared to show moral revulsion to such crimes. Yes, candles are lit and tears shed to the unfortunate victims at home, but the Muslim lands are simply too far, too unknown, and too “other” to cause any discomfort of the conscience)

While the Syrian and Russian offensive to retake Aleppo from the terrorists saw much crocodile tears from the Empire’s media, the Mosul offensive or Inherent Resolve—where Coalition air strikes have turned the city into a heap of rubble hiding a virtual urban graveyard inside its belly— is not even mentioned in passing. The amount of suffering that the people of Mosul have faced since the operation began is difficult to compare to anything in our times, including the Syrian war theatre which is as cruel as modern warfare can be. The scenes from Mosul Jadida(New Mosul) area are reminiscent of Dresden during the Second World War.

The Guardian reported Chris Woods, the director of monitoring group Airwars, to have said: “The Jadida incident alone is the worst toll of a single [airstrike] incident that I can recall in decades. The coalition’s argument that it doesn’t target noncombatants risks being devalued when so many civilians are being killed in west Mosul.” He is referring to a coalition airstrike that killed over 200 civilians mostly children, women and elderly seeking shelter in a building. The mounting human suffering and infrastructural destruction is of such a scale that the Iraqi Army, conducting the ground offensive, had to call off its advance fearing that the operation has slid into a catastrophe, thanks to the coalition’s Make America Great Again strategy.

(Side Note: You wonder where is Hollywood and George Clooney and their crocodile tears which they shed incessantly for the people of Sudan– who we were told were going through a “genocide”– eventually leading to imperial intervention and creation of South Sudan. How courageous of these celebrities to root for imperial causes and then hide in their holes when true courage is needed?)

Those who still harbor any doubts about the Empire being beyond redemption and salvation need to see its conduct in Mosul to realize how utterly indifferent it is to human suffering, or even to public opinion, which was of some concern, purely for PR reasons, not too long ago. But when the imperial hubris has reached such proportions that it cannot be even bothered to explain why shelters housing children and women are blown into oblivion for the sake of one ISIS fighter, you surely have entered what I call the Curse Stage, a particular stage in the stagnation of empires when there is not even a veneer of moral pretense behind its conduct. It is the homestretch of the unraveling. It cannot possibly be reversed.

“Once the Heavens cast the dice of fate, it shall not be reversed, even when a million supplication intersect its path”. Hafiz Shirazi

What is also there to be witnessed is that the same western world that always held Russia to be morally inferior to the ideals of the Enlightenment, part of “the primitive and cruel East”, have fared infinitely more inhumane and cruel in its conduct of warfare under very similar circumstances. The Russian method displayed in the Aleppo offensive was one that regarded avoidance of civilian suffering as the driving factor in its formation. Humanitarian corridors were formed with aid and shelter also being provided in some areas. It took months of meticulous planning and coordination with local partners, and even with the rebels to guarantee their and their families’ safe passage. It was a diplomatic and humanitarian master class of an act. Carpet-bombing of Aleppo would have been a rather easier choice. But the “primitive and cruel” Easterner had a soul after all.

The Coalition on the other hand, forbade the creation of any human corridors which would have allowed many inhabitants to leave the city. This was proposed by the Iraqi government but refused by the Coalition. Their rationale to the Iraqi government was that “they feared ISIS will trickle out of the city with the civilians”. They were told to have faith in the Coalition’s “precision strikes”. To the media they would say “well its ISIS that is not allowing civilians to leave, not us”, which actually is not entirely true. The fact is that they wanted to send a clear message to the world with the new administration’s military strategy in the Muslim lands, featuring Trump as Krishna: Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds. 

This article can go in many directions. I can begin with how Mosul fell in ISIS hands to begin with; the conduct of ISIS terrorists of systematic terror to “reform” its citizens; the role of Turkish, Gulf states and the Kurdish intelligence agencies with ISIS during its four year occupation (yes, even the “anti-ISIS” Kurdish leaders like Jalal Talabani and Masoud Barzani had intimate relationship with ISIS and often allowed them safe passages to conduct its operations. The ultimate Kurdish goal was to annex Mosul to Barzani and Talabani’s fiefdoms when the conditions were ripe). But today I have one concern only and that is the plight of the innocent civilians and the dead children under the rubble.

I am embedding a video here (with my edits and translation) that my Iraqi friends (whose families are still trapped in Mosul) sent me to watch, and help spread the word on the unspoken suffering that the people of Mosul have to persevere. I promised them to do my part, knowing well the fate of such writings when it meets the dead conscience of the modern media consumer. God forbid that the comrades here on this site have such a disposition. But the fact remains that in our times, no matter how deeply shocking an event comes to our knowledge, it does not stay long enough deep inside our conscience to bother the usual trajectory of our lives (this happens even to the most soft-hearted amongst us) But it has to be said nonetheless, whether it finds the desired place or not. That’s the least we owe to the dead children under the rubble–their little bodies still warm from the not too long ago association with life.

The Prophet of Islam is reported to have said “whosoever see an evil, let him stop it with his hand; if he is not able, then with his tongue, and if he is not able to do so, then with his heart— and that is the least of faith.” (The masculine pronoun is inclusive of the feminine, lest the more gender-sensitive raise an issue with that). I am doing the least of what the faith and humanity requires.

The video shows a government official inspecting the part of Mosul most affected by the coalition airstrikes, and gathering first-hand information on the nature of the offensive and plight of the people. Please do watch the entirety of it. I will leave you with one quote from her that sums up the Mosul offensive:

After meeting many people and hearing the reports from all sides, it has become abundantly clear to me, and I can swear to God on this, that there are no more than 6 or 5 ISIS fighters in the entire New Mosul area and they walk around freely in open streets and amazingly they are not targeted. Yet what is targeted are entire neighborhoods and houses containing shelter seeking civilians. And all this on the pretext of targeting these ISIS fighters. It is very clear that the idea is to just destroy Mosul and nothing else”. Basma Basem, President of Mosul Judiciary Council.

{From God we come and to Him shall we return}–Common Muslim statement on hearing the news of death.

Post Script: Since this article, which was first written on March 20th, there finally has been some media coverage. RT has been especially active and credit should go to them. But the scale of suffering is still far from being portrayed accurately.

Also, the subtitles could have been more viewer friendly, alas, that’s the extent of my video editing skills.

Trump’s Safe-Zone Mandate: The Blind Leading the Blind into More Blindness in Syria

Trump’s Safe-Zone Mandate: The Blind Leading the Blind into More Blindness in Syria

Big mouth, small ears

Thu Jan 26, 2017 9:29

TEHRAN (FNA)- The man who has been called by psychologists and clinical psychologists “a narcissist with multiple sociopathic and psychopathic tendencies,” has just ordered the State Department and Pentagon to prepare for the establishment of what he calls “safe zones” in Syria.

The safe-zone mandate was included in the text of a draft executive order by President Donald Trump that puts harsh restrictions on people traveling from Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen and Sudan to the United States.

The new Republican president, who wants to bring back waterboarding and believes “torture works and would help,” claims the long anticipated move is “on humanitarian grounds,” giving the State Department and Pentagon 90 days to provide a full blueprint for how they would go about it.

It’s the darkest of lies. He cannot hide such fabrications from hardcore thinkers. They get more aggravated and more provoked by his half-truths and “alternative facts” than the most painful truths:

1- Safe zones would be meaningless without a de-facto no fly zone. It would mean war with Syria and Russia. Even Trump agrees. During the campaign, he had endorsed the idea of safe zones, but also scorned Hillary Clinton for supporting the no-fly zone aspect, citing the concerns about starting such huge new wars. He said, “It would lead to World War III.”

2- The executive order is more than just an attempt at quietly considering potential safe zone options. The US flew no-fly zones over Iraq for more than a decade before the 2003 invasion. Now, it is planning to launch something similar over northern Syria. So it’s not a safe zone. Much as in Iraq and Libya, the de-facto no-fly zones often become precursors to additional military involvement at a later date.

3- This is not about humanitarianism. Washington is resisting use of the term no-fly zone, preferring the more innocuous safe zone. But after initially ignoring Turkish media reports that a deal was struck long before Trump’s presidency, war-party Washington said a protected area could soon be a reality. They say the evolving plan envisages occupation of the zone by their Al-Qaeda-linked proxy forces.

4- The scheme has no UN mandate and suggests the War Party hasn’t given up on the idea of regime change. They seek to eliminate air defenses so they can launch airstrikes against the Syrian military and free up a launching pad for their proxies to conduct attacks deeper into Syria.

5- Former Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey once said, “The no-fly zone seeks to deny the Syrian military the ability to launch airstrikes against terrorist groups therein.” European sources also told Kuwait’s al-Rai Daily last year, “The plan is to back moderate rebels and cripple the country’s military forces. The no-fly zone would include a ban on the movement of Syrian military forces, designed to neutralize Syria’s ability to carry out airstrikes.”

It’s a dramatic escalation and Trump’s arguing of semantics doesn’t mean much of anything here. Every indication is that the US occupying troops are not content to leave northern Syria. They are there to help terrorists keep the fighting going.

The whole idea is to derail the ongoing peace talks that has already led to an all-Syria ceasefire. It seeks to hinder the use of military power by Iran, Syria, Russia and Hezbollah against the terrorist groups of ISIL and Al-Qaeda that are not part of the ceasefire agreement.

Further still, the clandestine project is intended to provide more arms to US-backed “moderates,” help them use it to recruit and recover, operate out of the zone, deepen US military intervention, and revive the initial military objective, as happened with no-fly zones in Iraq and Libya: regime decapitation.

Related Videos

Donald Trump’s foreign policy proposals have been somewhat of a mystery & his call for the establishment of safe zones in Syria, in order to help refugees fleeing war, does not provide much clarity. Turkey & Qatar, both supporters of no-fly/buffer zones in Syria, have cautiously welcomed President Trump’s call, while Russia has called for Trump to properly study the consequences of such action. The biggest unanswered question remains as to if this is proof that Trump is now reneging on his promise to work with Russia to defeat terrorism in places like Syria.

Published on Jan 26, 2017

The United States is in the “death grip” of the Jewish Zionists who are completely obsessed in pursuing the interests of Israel, says Kevin Barrett, an American author and political commentator.

Related Articles

%d bloggers like this: