The creepy French “intellectual” Bernard-Henri Levy gets it wrong

The creepy French “intellectual” Bernard-Henri Levy gets it wrong

Eight days ago eleven Palestinian buildings containing seventy family apartments located in the illegally Israeli occupied East Jerusalem village of Wadi al-Hummus were demolished in a military-led operation by more than 1,000 Israeli soldiers, policemen and municipal workers using bulldozers, backhoes and explosives. Residents who resisted were beaten by the soldiers, kicked down flights of stairs and even shot at close range with rubber bullets. The soldiers were recorded laughing and celebrating as they did their dirty work. Occupants who did not resist and who held their hands up in surrender were also not spared the rod, as were also foreign observers who were present to add their voices to those who were protesting the outrage. The injuries sustained by some of the victims have been photographed and are available online.

Twelve Palestinians and four British observers were injured badly enough to be hospitalized. The British reported that they were “stamped on, dragged by the hair, strangled with a scarf and pepper sprayed by Israeli border police.” One who was hospitalized described how Israeli soldiers dragged him by his feet, lifting him up, and kicking him in the stomach, while one soldier stamped on his head four times “at full force” before standing on his head and pulling his hair. Another suffered a fractured rib after “[the policeman] then stamped on my throat and others started punching my torso. It was a sadistic display of violence…”

Yet another foreign observer was dragged out of the house, “…her hands were crushed so badly that she suffered a fractured knuckle on her left hand, and her right hand suffered severe tissue damage ‘which will be permanently misshapen unless she gets cosmetic surgery.’”

Edmond Sichrovsky, an Austrian activist of Jewish origin, who was in one of the houses, described how Israeli forces broke the door down, first dragging out the Palestinians,

“knocking the grandfather to the floor in front of his crying and screaming grandchildren.” Cell phones were forcibly removed to eliminate any picture taking or filming before soldiers began attacking him and four other activists. “I was repeatedly kicked and kneed, which left a bloody nose and multiple cuts, as well breaking my glasses from a knee in the face. Once outside, they slammed me against a car while shouting verbal insults at me and women activists, calling them whores.”

The buildings were destroyed due to claims that they were too close to Israel’s illegal separation wall, with the Benjamin Netanyahu government citing “security concerns.” The families living in the buildings that did not have either the time or ability to remove their furniture and other personal items will now have to comb through the rubble to see what they can recover, if the Israeli soldiers will even allow them that grace. They will also have to find new places to live as the Israelis have made no provision for housing them.

The homes were legally constructed on land that is nominally controlled by the Palestinian Authority (PA), a fine point that the Israeli authorities chose to consider irrelevant. When the Palestinians object to such arbitrary behavior, they are sent to Israeli military courts that always endorse the government decisions. And the Netanyahu regime of kleptocrats has made clear that it does not recognize international law about treatment of people who are under occupation.

The buildings were destroyed a few days after rampaging Israeli settlers on the West Bank continued their campaign to destroy the livelihoods of their Palestinian neighbors. Hundreds of olive trees were burned on the West Bank on July 10th, a deliberate attempt to drive the Arabs from their land by making it impossible to farm, strangling the local economy. Olive trees are particularly targeted as they are a cash crop and the trees take many years to mature and produce. The Israeli settlers have also been known to kill livestock, poison water, destroy crops, burn down buildings, and beat and even kill the Palestinian farmers and their families. And in Hebron the settlers have surrounded the old town, dumping excrement and other refuse on the Palestinians shops below that are still trying to do business. It should surprise no one that the Jewish settlers who engage in the violence are rarely caught, even less often tried, and almost never punished. The ghastly Benjamin Netanyahu’s government has declared that what was once Palestine is now a country called Israel and it is only for Jews. Killing a Palestinian by a Jewish Israeli is considered de facto to be a misdemeanor.

And meanwhile the carnage continues in Gaza, with the death toll of unarmed demonstrating Palestinians now at more than 200 plus several thousand wounded, many of them children and medical workers. Recently, orders to the Israeli army snipers direct them to shoot demonstrators in the ankles so they will be crippled for life. This is what it takes to be the “most moral army” in the world as defined by French fop pseudo intellectual Bernard-Henri Levy, demonstrating only yet again that the tribe knows how to stick together. But the war crimes carried out by Israel also require unlimited support from the United States, both in money and political cover to allow it all to happen. Israel would not be killing Palestinians with such impunity if it were not for the green light from Donald Trump and his settler-loving mock Ambassador David Friedman backed up by a congress that seems to cherish Israelis more than Americans.

How is it that the horrific treatment of the Palestinians by the Israelis as aided and abetted by the worldwide Jewish diaspora is not featured in headlines all over the world? Why isn’t my government with its highly suspect but nevertheless declared agenda of bringing democracy and freedom to all saying anything about the Palestinians? Or condemning Israeli behavior as it once did regarding South Africa?

Can one even imagine what The New York Times and Washington Post would be headlining if American soldiers and police were evicting and beating the residents of a housing project in a U.S. city? But somehow Israel always gets a pass, no matter what it does and politicians from both parties delight in describing how the “special relationship” with the Jewish state is cast in stone.

In the wake of the home demolitions, Washington yet again shielded Israel from a United Nations censure for its behavior by casting a Security Council veto. The Jewish state is consequently never held accountable for its bad behavior, and let us be completely honest, Israel is the ultimate rogue regime, dedicated to turning its neighbors into smoking ruins with U.S. assistance. It is evil manifest and it is not in America’s own interest to continue to be dragged down that road.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org

Advertisements

Things discovered on the way to the grave

January 31, 2019

by Denis A. Conroy for The Saker Blog

“Europe ‘coming apart before our eyes’, say 30 top intellectuals”. The Guardian, 26 Jan 2018. The group of 30 writers, historians and Nobel laureates state that “we must now will Europe or perish beneath the waves of populism”. Which immediately raises the question; who is the ‘we’ that must do the willing…the answer would appear to be the church of the neo-liberal Zionist order working from within the precincts of a covert calculus.

The 800-word paean was drafted by the French philosopher Bernard-Henri Levi. Signatures included the novelist Ian McEwan and Salman Rushdie, the historian Simon Schama and the Nobel prize laureates Svetlana Alexievitch, Herta Muller, Ophan Pamuck and Elerieve Jelinek and the whole exercise came across as a continuation of a sheeple-people paradigm that has its origins in Western ‘saviour’ mythology. Quick off the mark to capitalise on World War 2’s victor mentality, the latter-day exponents of ‘white-man’s-burden’ philosophy express their allegiance to the status quo per medium of a propaganda apparatus serving elite interests…a group indeed… focusing on adversarial groups contesting the idea that the EU (Europe) is a viable union.

Having spent the past 75 years exploiting the print media and the big silver screen, the simplistic adumbrations of virtue-speak have in no way lost their hold over the masses. The elites who have taken ownership of the good-verses-evil narrative are the same elites who have always believed it their right to own the moral high ground. The ‘we’, here to save you with a paean lamenting the supposed threats to an obviously internecine economic system committed to perpetrating an order that favours banking elites and other institutional heavyweights, is nothing more than a hoary piece of existential rhetoric crafted to present Europe as a jewel in the evolutionary crown. Have these ’30 top intellectuals’…top heavy public intellectuals maybe…succumbed to selective amnesia?

“Abandoned from across the channel and from across the Atlantic by the great allies who in the previous century saved it twice from suicide; vulnerable to the increasingly overt manipulations of the master of the Kremlin, Europe as an idea, as will and representation, is coming apart before our eyes,” the text read.

But Europe has been coming apart and regrouping (the Sphinx is aware that the group is wrong even when it is right). The “doge” was the title of the senior-most elected official of Venice and Genoa in 8th century Byzantine times. The billionaires and the Royals of the 21st century share synchronicity with the doges of the Byzantine Empire. A doge was referred to variously by the titles, “My Lord the Doge”, or, “Most Serene Prince”, or, “His Serenity”. They occupied a place in historic capitalism where the sanctity of private …institutional…power was maintained by monetising market share and investments made for corporate market gain. The line that extends from 8th.century Italian capitalism to contemporary times is marked by the practice of extracting profit for the few…the elite…and any thought that public utilities could do a less onerous job is apostasy de jure!

Ignoring the collateral damage that historians tend to omit from ledgers associated with solipsistic elitism is akin to drinking the elixir-of-life from a half-filled glass. Ignoring the fact that the wars of ‘the previous century’ were started by elites…as is still the case in this century…is akin to pulling the wool over our own eyes so as not to see the Anglo Zionist elephant in the room busily taking ownership of our lives per medium of propaganda and ‘the great allies who in the previous century saved it (Europe) twice from suicide’ were in fact responsible for numerous Herculean faux pas that ultimately define European history as class struggle. But don’t blame the perpetrators of these crimes…focus on populist unrest?

It appears that nations, like individuals, are composed of two basic dynamics… inductive and deductive reason being the staple elements…nurture versus reason…in a system made available to individuals and nations alike that enable actors to achieve resolutions that clarify reality in order to achieve unity of purpose. The mathematics of the situation clearly suggest that 1+1=3 in matters of human development vis a vis free will confirm that nature and nurture exist as a formidable duo engaged in the task of producing a progeny. The name of this offspring is Resolution and it is reason’s third leg. Trinitarian expropriation of this phenomena in the pursuit of elite religious interests, disregard the fact that enlightenment is not something that is gifted to an elite. The math suggests that reason is no longer reason when it is privatized. Nurturing Resolution may require the participation of the entire polity.

The ‘previous century’ saw the ‘doge class’ produce the highly contentious Treaty of Versailles whose ramifications continue to resound throughout the Western world to this very day.

Article 231 of that treaty later became known as the War Guilt Clause. The treaty required Germany to disarm, make ample territorial concessions, and pay reparations to certain countries that had formed the Entente powers. They were designated the guilty party in perpetuity…the victors had spoken!

In 1921 the total cost of these reparations was assessed at 132 billion marks—roughly equivalent to US $442 billion, or UK 284 billion pounds in 2019. At the time, economists, notably John Maynard Keyes (a British Delegate to the Paris Peace Conference), predicted that the treaty was too harsh and said that the reparation figure was excessive. It was this bellicose 1+1=3 resolution that laid the groundwork for the next episode of hostility where elites continued to stoke the embers of internecine gravitas.

From the early decades of the ‘previous century’, it became apparent that civilians had been moved into the crosshairs of warfare and that collateral damage had become a thing of little importance. The elites on both sides of the divide sought to inculcate, per means of persistent instruction, a phony gravitas suggesting that virtue is the father of patriotism. So therefore, participating in battle could mean achieving dignity and a place of importance in the community you belonged to. In time, German elites would be demonized in ways that suggested that they were more obnoxious than other elites. Eventually, on being occupied by zealots of a dystopian empire masquerading as savours, they would seek to retain their sovereignty per populist means.

The West in the ‘previous century’ ushered in Russophobia…indifferent to the fact that Russia had been an ally throughout World War 2…imagining that Russia’s experiment with Communism could threaten its private interests, it resorted to calumny on a grand scale. Together, the termites of Wall Street set out to prove that their termite colony was greater than the sum of its parts.

Europe soon found itself hosting NATO, a blustering military behemoth that was used to destroy Libya and other small countries that did not have the means to defend themselves. It is no secret that show-pony philosopher Bernard-Henri Levi and his ‘liberal’ cohorts were instrumental in inveigling Nicolas Sarkozy to wage a war of ‘humanitarian intervention’ against Muammar Gaddafi and the State of Libya. The outcome was the destruction of that country, and an ensuing tide of collateral humanity seeking refuge in Europe met with distain upon arrival… a class of inferior people whose nuisance value was merely an irritation to the comforts of the Cafe Latte set. An out of sight, out of mind attitude was the resolution to this problem. Understanding how their elites caused this to happen, was a bridge too far!

At which point we should pause a moment to ponder what is meant by the statement “the two great allies who in the previous century saved it twice from suicide” and what it might mean to the 30 venerable signatories who seem to believe that it was ok for European countries to connive with its allies… the USA and Israel… in destroying whole countries.

Had these spectral elites, our allies, generated a fear of criticism capable of short-circuiting the deductive-logic that might otherwise raise concerns about the insidious actions of our ‘democratic’ partners? Accepting the role of unconscionable vassals faithfully trotting behind the USA sheriff while somehow believing themselves less vile because they held a scholarly idea of what the idea of European ideas might mean was subpar, to put it mildly.

There can be no doubt about it, European and American squabbles are cut from the same cloth. If we look closer, we can see that the power elites within these various states on either continent provide the military boots and camouflage-cloth that conceal the feet of clay of the Anglo Yeomen Class shuffling from country to country in military-attire to inflict death upon unsuspecting little brown natives in exotic places. The ‘we’ are the we that trample Palestine underfoot, sanction Venezuela to death, threaten to bomb countries back into the stone age, surround Russia with nuclear warheads, lie their way into Iraq so that they can render that country and many others dysfunctional so that Israel can reign supreme.

Internecine warfare is as old as history, but internecine economics is only as old as capitalism. In the modern era we observe how capitalism invests its vast resources in destroying every vestige of social development that attempts to prove that there are better options for securing stability in our fractious world. That ‘socialism’ can achieve a better balance between the nurturing dynamic and the creative dynamic remains a tantalizing proposition. The truth cannot be avoided, private ownership has a bad habit of sequestering the resources of the commons, thereby providing the conditions for gross inequality.

European scholars may lament the fact that the legacies of Erasmus, Dante, Goethe and Comenius are under threat. But its not true; their spirits continue to occupy the hallowed halls of scholarship/academic space where their bright markings arouse passionate interest.

On the other-hand it disturbs one to acknowledge that there is a total absence of names in connection with the 3 million Koreans and the 3 million Vietnamese who died when ‘we’ the West enacted an earlier version of humanitarian-intervention warfare…aka seek-and-destroy-the-competition in the spirit of might-is-right. Of the millions of Africans brought into slavery in America, few have names. They were used as pawns in a turbo-charged- internecine (economic) war that had no ethical moorings. It was plunder as you go with a break on Sunday to read the Bible.

But all this is merely the tip of the iceberg. While dealing with the subject of the West’s selective memorializing, does anybody in Europe…that jewel in the crown of superlative edifices… identify in the loss of 28 million Russian casualties (populists) defending their country from yet another aggressor during World War 11? Perhaps not, as European elites had in that century…as they had in previous centuries…designated Russia as a threat because it refused to kowtow to European elites. It would appear that European elites had scant regard for Russian lives while holding Russian resources in high regard.

The conclusion drawn from said “paean” is that the 30 signatories are somewhat ‘high’ on performance-hype. It strikes one as something that might work if it were addressed inhouse to a gathering of the ‘learned’.

Europe lost its imaginative edge to America when it forfeited the ideation-baton to its progeny who overran the original people of the Americas, believing that they would continue to run the race its ancestors had long run; coveting other people’s resources. Along with the baton it passed to its youthful successors came the cultural baggage of its parents. The subtext of the transmission implied that the progeny receiving the keys of the kingdom would build a modern-day utopia that would stand tall, though bereft of moral foundations. As modernity was equated with growth and exploitation of resources…especially those that were there for the taking…the new world soon became a business opportunity par excellence…until…as the wheel turned and kept turning it became ever more apparent that Europe’s progeny was motoring…full throttle…toward full-spectrum global dominance. Greed had donned the mantle of Emperor and it was not a pretty sight.

Strangely, Salman Rushdie told the Guardian: “Europe is in greater danger now than at any time in the last 70 years, and if one believes in that idea it’s time to stand up and be counted.”

Maybe the danger is that Europe, while under the influence of Anglo-Zionist projections, will become what America became, a monochromatic hybrid devouring its own progeny.

No suggestion in any of this that it is time for European nations to stop licking American arse…the fact is, one has a name if one of the elite and a number if you’re not.

No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of a Continent, a part of the main.”
John Dunne, 1624 prose work.

Denis A. Conroy
Freelance writer
Australia

Dr. Saïd Bouamama: “Bouteflika Symbolizes the Freezing of Several Trends and It Does Not Make It Possible To Build Anything”

“Why was there so much support for the creation of Israel as a state and then? It is simply because this state serves as a bridgehead for all interventions, all strategies of interference, and so on. And so, we should not consider the fight as being only between Palestinians and Israelis. In fact, in confronting Israel, the Palestinians – and that is why it is a central cause in the anti-colonial and anti-imperialist struggle – clash with the entire imperialist camp.”

Said-Bouamama_4c0a6.jpgSaïd Bouamama is a sociologist, activist and political Algerian residing in France. A doctor in socio-economics, he has written mainly on topics related to immigration, such as discrimination and racism.

Mohsen Abdelmoumen: What is your reading of the geopolitical situation that prevails in Syria at the moment?

Dr. Saïd Bouamama: The situation in Syria is at first a situation of failure of imperialism. In fact, what is happening in Syria has been an attempt to destabilize the Syrian state by supporting jihadist groups. We think what we want from Bashar al-Assad, but he has made a great service to mankind by stopping this destabilization and this attempt to balkanize Syria. Because in reality, it is a balkanization. If we look at all the last wars, what I call the new colonial wars, what is left? Iraq is cut in pieces, Afghanistan is a complete chaos, in Somalia, it is the slaughter, and Sudan is cut in two. In reality, there is such competition today between great powers that, in order to continue to make profits, it is necessary to destabilize states that may be states of resistance or states that do not accept the rules imposed by a number of large countries. This is what happened in Syria whose stake was first of all the control of the region and the access to the regional geostrategy, that is to say, the control of the oil resources of the region.

How do you explain that the Trump Administration threatens to strike at the positions of the Syrian Army, Iran, and Russia even though in reality, those who are encircled in Idlib are for the most part terrorists of Al Nosra and Daesh? Saving Idlib, isn’t that saving al-Nosra and Daech? Does the US want to save the imperialist soldiers al-Nusra and Daesh?

I think we need to become lucid and stop being naive. There is no consistent fight against terrorism on the part of the United States. In reality, they fight it when it suits them and they support it when it suits them. And it’s not new. It must be remembered that the first great advances of the so-called jihadist groups were in Afghanistan, and the pretext for supporting them was to oppose the Soviet Union. We must not forget that whenever the interest of the United States requires destabilization, they let these groups do. They are only fought when the interest of the United States is in question, and therefore there is not a consistent fight of the United States against them. There is a fight at a time, in pieces, and a support at other times. It’s important to keep in mind that the United States does not have a coherent policy, they know only the politics of their economic interest, even in destroying countries and provoking the massacre of the populations, and if it is necessary for that by supporting terrorist groups, well, they do it. Unfortunately, it was done before Syria and if we are not able to immunize, it will be done again elsewhere.

I interviewed Noam Chomsky a few years ago and he told me verbatim that Syria was going to be divided into several areas. There is currently a US redeployment in northern Syria. Do not you think there is a risk of total confrontation, especially between the United States and Russia?

In fact, the US project, at this stage, is part of a long process of destabilizing all states with an economic size, a geographical area, and oil and gas wealth or strategic minerals to balkanize them, to cut them into several pieces, because it’s easier to maintain domination in chaos. And so, we had a number of wars before. With Syria, it is the same project today, but there are other countries and, in particular, there is the will to balkanize Iran. Let us not forget that the United States has not given up on destabilizing Iran. But Iran, in terms of the balance of power, is another matter and the United States is extremely cautious. Russia has understood this very well and has made agreements. Russia is not naïve and understood if it continued to let this balkanization, it could be balkanized itself, this is the big project of the United States – and so Russia has understood very well that its interest was to stop this process.

Before the Chechen sector enters the game?

Exactly, and that is why we have such strong support from Russia to Syria and that agreements with Iran exist.

The Russians regard Syria and Iran as strategic depths.

Exactly. It’s like it’s an inside front. And the Russians are right. Every decline before the balkanization offensive is, in the long term, the danger of war with Russia which is increasing. And whenever there is a failure of this project of balkanization, it is the danger of war that recedes. And today, the good news is that they did not succeed in Syria. And so, it makes them a bit more cautious, but of course, they do not give up.

Do not you think that Algeria is another target of imperialism, especially US and Israeli?

Of course, it is a target and we can even say that if Syria had been defeated, Algeria would be the next target country. There is Iran and then Algeria. There are not thousands of other countries that have this geographical area and this economic depth, so Algeria is on the line of fire. Besides, there is a man to listen to, even if he is an idiot, it is Bernard-Henri Lévy. He often comes to unveil the strategies of imperialism because he wants to strut. This man has nevertheless declared publicly that Algeria actually means three countries and that it was necessary to separate South, North, and Kabylia, in three countries. We can see that behind this, there are spaces, places called think tanks in which they think about different types of divisions, and in Algeria, there is actually a cutting plan. If Algerians stop being patriots and to defend the integrity of the territory, excuses will be found to intervene.

According to you, are our revolutions, Algerians, and Africans, completed? Do not you think that we need a second wind to our revolutions to complete the struggle of our ancestors?

It is absolutely necessary. First, we must not feel guilty. We’ve come from so far. We must not underestimate what was the colonization of Algeria and what was slavery for the countries of sub-Saharan Africa. That is to say that the work is immense to recover from such a trauma. We must not say “we are zero”, etc. On the other hand, it is clear that the emancipatory project that led to independence was a project that required going much further than what we have done today. Issues as important as the issues of economic development, the distribution of wealth, the involvement of people in decisions, are still tasks ahead and so, yes, there is a need for a second wind. We also know that independence has given birth to a whole series of parasites, people who take advantage of the state apparatus to divert income, etc. and so there is indeed a need to refocus the process on those who have actually done it, those who have an interest in leading Algeria to real independence.

That is to say, if I understand you correctly, the sincere Algerian patriots who can find themselves among the young, within the population and the healthy vital forces of the nation?

Absolutely. And the matter of youth is, of course, an essential issue. When a part of the youth turns to the jihadists, we can not pretend that it is not important. This means that we have failed on a number of things and we must resume the fight. You know, young people just want to build their future. It is when the future becomes unthinkable when they can no longer imagine it, that they turn to the past and that charlatans can come to divert their legitimate anger. And so, yes, there is a need to take this breath and there is a need to recover the dynamics of the first two decades of independence. Remember the atmosphere when young people graduated from university in the years 1974-1975. It was full of hope for the future, it was the idea of building the country, it was the idea of agrarian reform and going to see the farmers, etc. We have to find that breath that has been lost notably because of parasites who have hijacked the process.

Do not you think that there is a real danger due to the various separatist movements in Algeria? Should the political and economic elite not be self-critical and remain alert to the geopolitical challenges that lie in wait for us? Can Algeria, according to you, go towards a gradual positive change well controlled without being afraid? Second question: has the red and black decade not vaccinated us against Islamist terrorists?

On the first question, yes, there are real dangers with the separatist movements, which nevertheless remain extremely minor, including in Kabylia.

And in Ghardaia.

Yes. In fact, one of the reasons for the development of these movements is that we have been shy about the issue of identity. Today, things are catching up, the Amazigh language is recognized, etc. but it took too long for it and when a right claim is not taken into account, charlatans can come to pick up the frustration. Algeria is pluricultural and multilingual and it is a wealth. There is no reason to consider this as a weakness, therefore, it must be accepted and pull the rug from under the feet to all who would like to exploit this issue.

On the side of the elites, there is no secret, all those who are attached, whatever their political and economic opinions, to the territorial integrity of Algeria and to true independence, must have in mind that this can only be done if there is a minimum of economic redistribution. That is to say that if there is no economic redistribution, if poverty sets in if people are in misery, charlatans can come again instrumentalize. That’s why our youth, even the one who listened to charlatans, is first and foremost a victim because in reality, if it had could think about her future, it would never have listened to these thugs.

You talk about the 1990s. Today, when we talk about the presence of Algerians at Daesh, they are very minor in comparison with the other peoples of the Maghreb.

Absolutely.

How do you analyze this? Have not we been vaccinated by the red decade?

Unfortunately, you are never totally vaccinated. But this has developed real resistance mechanisms and you must know that people who, at first, were able to listen to charlatans, turned away when they saw what this project of society was. There have been entire regions where huge votes have gone in favor of charlatans and which today do not want to hear about these people. So, we can see that it was a popular experience and, yes, there are antibodies in Algeria, stronger than in other countries, because there was this tragedy. We paid a high price for it. But be careful, as long as the causes are untreated, the disease can always come back and we return to the previous question about the distribution of economic wealth.

The fifth term of President Bouteflika is evoked. Do not you think that the time has come to accompany a process of renewal of the entire political class in Algeria, even at the level of “the opposition”, because, for me, the crisis is not only at the level of power, but also at the level of “the opposition”? Should the fifth term not be abandoned to inject new blood into Algeria and vaccinate the country against various risks, both internal and external? Should we not abandon this alternative of an additional term of the current president and go towards a change piloted – why not – by the army which remains the most structured force in Algeria? What is your opinion on this subject?

In any case, I am completely opposed to the idea of a fifth term. Today, Bouteflika symbolizes the freezing of several trends and it does not make it possible to build anything. I also think that there is a gap between the entire political class and the civil part of the nation. We must succeed in bringing to the political class all these young union activists, these doctors, all this generation that was born after. We must pass the baton on the basis, always, of territorial integrity and economic independence. It is time for a new generation to emerge.

President Bouteflika is very sick, very tired and he should give way to someone else.It’s common sense. What is your opinion about that?

Absolutely. It is an absolute necessity and we must also question the image we give to our own people and other peoples by keeping a sick president at all costs.

To say that we are against a fifth term is not to be unpatriotic or anti-national, on the contrary, we serve our country. Do not you think that those who are against a fifth term are the real patriots?

Absolutely. I think being a patriot today means being against the fifth term. Of course.

There is a country whose people are legally killed, it is Palestine. Do not you think that Israel, in addition to being a rogue state, is reaping all the benefits of the problems associated with the various US strategies to balkanize the Arab-Muslim region?

Of course. Why was there so much support for the creation of Israel as a state and then? It is simply because this state serves as a bridgehead for all interventions, all strategies of interference, and so on. And so, we should not consider the fight as being only between Palestinians and Israelis. In fact, in confronting Israel, the Palestinians – and that is why it is a central cause in the anti-colonial and anti-imperialist struggle – clash with the entire imperialist camp. And Israel is not isolated, because precisely, there is this support. In reality, let’s imagine that tomorrow there is a democratic and secular Palestinian state, where Muslims, Christians, atheists live together, the end of Israel would mean that the whole imperialist strategy has failed. Israel is a tool of the great powers and of course benefits from imperialist strategies.

What’s left of Frantz Fanon’s message?

Unfortunately, Fanon’s message has been largely forgotten. Fanon said: “pay attention to the emergence of business managers of the West in the newly independent countries”, that is to say, people who will do the work the West did before with its army. It tends to be forgotten. The message of hope is that, on Frantz Fanon, in particular, we see his name come back while he had completely disappeared. A new generation rediscovers Fanon, unfortunately after several decades of forgetfulness, and we see more and more Fanon quoted and more and more young people take back his image. There is a return to Fanon and this is good news.

What prompted you to write your book “Manuel stratégique de l’Afrique“?

What prompted me to write this book was the tiredness of the wars that followed each other. And in “wars”, I put the black decade in Algeria until the French intervention in Mali. The question was “what is happening on this continent?” and the need to answer all the theories that were given to us, which were culturalist theories, that is to say we were told the war in Algeria as an opposition between Muslims and military, elsewhere we were told that it was tribes that were fighting each other. All of this seemed completely wrong to me in relation to the realities. So I went to look at what was common in all these wars. Of course, I had intuitions and I actually came across the confirmation of my intuitions. All these wars have one thing in common: the economic challenge. Whether in Algeria, we must have in mind the interests of the major powers for Algerian oil and gas, whether it is in the Congo with these wars that do not end and the wealth of the Congo. In fact, the African continent is the richest continent and the continent where we still make discoveries of ores and oil in the sea offshore, and it is, therefore, an enormous challenge for the great powers and there are wars to control the spaces of raw materials. In addition, the great fear of Western countries was the emergence of new countries like China, India or Brazil that trade with African countries and trade with more egalitarian rules and with less domination. And, indeed, it is the direct interest of the great imperialist powers that is at stake. When Algeria makes a contract with China for the construction of roads, etc., you imagine that those who used to consider Algeria as their market are not happy. When it is the Congo that has a contract, Belgium cannot be happy. And so, there are these two factors that combine and explain the African drama, because it’s a real drama. From Algiers to the Congo, there have been dozens of wars since independence, and I have only spoken of wars since independence, I did not talk about wars of independence. I just reported the ones from 1960 until today. All these wars are the same.

Why did you choose the Investing’action editions of our friend Michel Collon? Have other publishers refused to publish your book? Is your book disturbing? Have you been censored?

No, I have not been censored. I did not even think of presenting this book to other publishers for the simple reason that I know very well where we are today in many publishing houses on anti-imperialist issues. This project was born following a number of articles that I wrote on the news and where, while talking with Michel, he told me: “But Saïd, you do not realize, you told us about Algeria, you told us about Congo, you told us about this and that, when do you make us an overall book?” This is how this book was made. Quite frankly, I do not see major publishers taking it back today. It is unimaginable in the French-speaking world. It is different in other countries, for example in England.

Or in the United States.

Yes, in the United States, it would be different, but in the French-speaking world, it is clear that publishing houses today are closed on these issues.

What the committed, anti-imperialist, intellectual that you are, can say to the anti-imperialist and anti-Zionist resistance fighters?

That we must never despair of peoples. There are times when we believe that things are over, there are times when we despair of seeing failures, but in reality, as long as oppression exists, resistance exists, and we are sometimes surprised that two years after our despair, well, there is an offensive in a country we did not think at all. I think we came out of the recoil period. We must not underestimate what happened in Syria, which is the end of this process of decline; we must not underestimate the resistance in Latin America, Venezuela, Nicaragua, etc.

In Cuba.

In Cuba, yes. All this points to one thing: since the collapse of the Soviet Union, we were going from recoil to recoil, people were losing, losing, losing. And there, there is a stop. Of course, we have retreated so much that we have trouble to learn the facts. But if we combine all this, if we look at the struggles in all countries, we see a youth that mobilizes, etc. So, yes, in the short term, at a year or two, there is no immediate change, but we see that people are beginning to learn from this period of twenty-five years of decline. And today, we have breakpoints. For example, they eliminated Gbagbo, but look at the number of protesters demanding that Gbagbo come back. It was unimaginable a few years ago. And so, we can see that something is moving in anti-imperialism and I think we are entering a new mobilization sequence. That’s for the southern countries. For here, it’s to us to be up to it, to live up to the challenge and to make known the struggles that will develop.

Do not you think that we need a global anti-imperialist and anti-Zionist front that will be decisive in the struggles ahead?

My previous book, just before the last one, is a book called “La Tricontinentale : les peuples du Tiers-Monde à l’assaut du ciel “. Why did I write this book? Because the tri-continental conference in Cuba in 1965-1966 was the moment in which there was a unity of Africa, Asia, and Latin America, and that at the same time, all the progressive movements in Europe were in support of the Tricontinental. It was the moment when we were furthest, I think, in this movement. If I wrote this book, it’s because I think it’s time to find that kind of dynamic.

Source

Bernard Levy gets pie in face in Belgrade

Posted on

French intellectual Levy gets pie in the face in SerbiaOn Wednesday, Algerian-born Bernard-Henri Levi, 68, the self-appointed French philosopher, was hit with a pie while promoting his propaganda documentary Peshmerga which is about the Kurds fighting the US-Israel created ISIS.

A Serb protester chanting Murderer, leave Belgrade hurled a pie at his face when he was presenting the film. Another protester climbed the stage with a banner bearing Jewish-communist hammer and sickle that read, Bernard Levy advocates imperialist murderers.

As a typical humiliated Zionist whore, Levy equated Serbia with Syria – he shouted Long Live Democracy in French. It’s is the same idiot who never get tired calling Israel being the only democracy in the Middle East – a very disputed statement even by Jew scholars (here, here).

Serbian nationalists see Levy as one of the main advocates of NATO bombing of Serbia in 1999 over Belgrade’s crackdown on Kosovan separatists.

MP Vojislav Seselj said in parliament: “Levy deserved much worse than a cake in face.”

Serbian largest newspaper Kurir even claimed that Bernard Levy faked the incident to make Serbia look bad.

An identical incident occurred 23 years ago in Cannes, leaving doubt that Levy stages attacks just to make Serbs look bad,” the paper claimed. Being an Israeli agent in France, Levy must have learned such trick from Mossad.

Levy is a close friend of former French presidents, Jacques Chirac, Francois Hollande and Nicolas Sarkozy. In November 2011, speaking at the first national Jewish convention in Paris, organized by the French Israel Lobby, the Council of Jewish Organization of France, Levy boasted that he lead the anti-Qaddafi campaign because it was a Jewish thing to do.

What I have done all these months, I did as a Jew. And like all the Jews of the world, I was worried. Despite legitimate anxiety is an uprising to be welcomed with favor, we were dealing with one of the worst enemy of Israel,” said Levy.

In February 2017, Levi stated that if French communist party presidential candidate Jean-Luc Melenchon wins, he would leave France. Jean-Luc Melenchon is considered pro-Palestinian by the country’s organized Jewry.

Bernard-Henry Levy, appeared on world-stage during his campaign for the release of Jewish film director Roman Polanski, who was arrested in Switzerland on September 26, 2009, for having unlawful sexual relationship with a 13-year-old girl in 1977.

On July 4, 2011, Bernard Levy sponsored first Israeli conference on Syria in Paris. The conference was attended by Bernard Kouchner, former French Jew foreign minister and founder of Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders), Frederik Ansel, a member of Israel’s ruling Likud Party, Alex Goldfarb, former Knesset member and adviser to Israeli defense minister Ehud Barak and Andre Glucksmann, an Islamophobe French writer (here).

Bernard Levy had spewed his anti-Muslim propaganda from Bosnia to Bangladesh. In 2002, French president Chirac sent Levy to Afghanistan on an official mission to find out what Afghans expect from Paris to defeat Taliban. During his visit, Levy set-up Radio Free Kabul. Levi is author of several books including Qui a tue Daniel Pearl, in which he whines about Mossad spy Daniel Pearl who was killed in 2002 while snooping around as WSJ journalist in Karachi.

In 1971, Bernard Levy pleaded with French president Georges Pompidou to help Indian invasion of East Pakistan in order to establish a separate homeland for Bengali people.

 

Elor Azaria and the Myth of Jewish Universal Values

March 04, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

Gilad Atzmon interviewed by Alimuddin Usmani for La Pravda and E&R

Alimuddin Usmani: IDF soldier Elor Azaria was convicted of manslaughter for shooting dead a  wounded Palestinian. The case deeply divided Israel. Many Israelis said he was just doing his duty and was scapegoated by the army. On the other hand, a military spokesperson said“This is not the IDF, these are not the values of the IDF and these are not the values of the Jewish people”. Gideon Lévy called the 18 month sentence “a sentence fit for a bicycle thief”.

What are your comments on this case?

Gilad Atzmon: A lot of issues are at stake here. Azaria was obviously a cold-blooded murderer who shot a wounded Palestinian in the head. Basically, he committed an execution in broad daylight.  From an Israeli perspective, Azaria’s main crime was being caught on camera. Yet, the circumstances in which he operated were pretty impossible. These Israeli soldiers are deployed in policing tasks. They, the occupiers, are engaged in conflict with the indigenous people of the land. It is a recipe for disaster. More often than not, Israeli soldiers and police forces end up operating as execution squads. Yet, these vile practices do not necessarily reflect any official military order. Instead, they bring to light the atmosphere within the Israeli street: the PRE-traumatic stress, the impunity to kill, the lack of any ethical sense and so on.

Putting aside Azaria’s brutal act, the court case exposed a deep conflict within Israeli society. Zionism, as we know, promised to make the Jews ‘people like other people.’ Yet, the reality on the ground suggests that Israelis have to spend a lot of time and energy concealing the fact that they actually share very little with other people, if anything at all.

Azaria was found guilty of manslaughter, which is surprising considering the clear evidence of 1st degree murder. Yet he was sentenced to just 18 months in prison.  The explanation of this discrepancy between the court’s verdict and the light sentence can be understood on more than one level.

Military courts, as opposed to civilian courts, are not committed to any notion of ethics but rather to the needs of the military system. For instance, a military court sentencing a soldier to death at daybreak is not guided by the seeking of justice but by the needs of the system. It attempts to deter other soldiers from insubordination, cowardice or defection.    

Similarly, because Israel needs the IDF to sustain the occupation, Israel must make sure that its soldiers are confident that the system will always eventually stand by them even if they are  caught in an unfortunate situation such as shooting a wounded Palestinian in the head.

On the day of the verdict, veteran chief of staff Moshe Yaalon, admitted that his initial and harsh reaction to the Azaria incident was because there was an immediate need to calm the situation on the ground. He basically had to throw something at the Palestinians, hoping to prevent mass protest and possible escalation. But at the end of the day, Israel wants the Palestinians to know that any form of resistance will be met with by radical and unpredictable measures.

This leads us to the notion of Jewish values in general and the IDF’s moral values in particular. As I have said many times before, there are no Jewish universal values. Judaism and Jewish culture are tribally-oriented. Moreover, Judaism is guided by Torah and Mitzvoth (commandments). Accordingly, the Jew is expected to follow rules rather than forming ethical judgments. Haskalah, the Jewish enlightenment, was an attempt to universalize Judaism by mimicking European secular thinking. Thus, those universal values that were introduced by Haskalah are not Jewish, but simply borrowed by the Jews from their host nations.

Zionism was a promise to civilise the Jews by means of ‘homecoming.’ It implicitly accepted that Jews weren’t people like all other people, but it believed they could be. Zionism promised to make the Jews productive, to gravitate towards labour and farming. The IDF was supposed to be a humane and ethical military force.  I grew up with photos of Israeli soldiers giving their own water to Egyptian POWs in the desert (1967). It took a few years before I learned that in fact, the Sinai desert was a slaughter zone for thousands of Egyptian soldiers who were sent to their deaths in the burning sand. It took a few more years before I became aware of the Nakba horror – the brutal ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian population in 1948. Just 3 years after the liberation of Auschwitz the young Israeli army, together with Jewish paramilitary forces, massacred dozens of  Palestinian villages. I assume I don’t have to go into details of current Israeli war crimes.  To sum it up,  the IDF as never been a moral army. IDF moral values are a myth. What we have instead is a growing record of crimes against humanity.  The facade of the military trial was, in practice, an attempt to convey the image of ethical thinking. After all, ‘by way of deception’ must be a kosher procedure.

Alimuddin Usmani: The Jewish Telegraphic Agency wrote that Socialist primary winner in France, Benoit Hamon, had the backing of prominent anti-semites. Before the vote, Dieudonné and Alain Soral called for Manuel Valls to be knocked out of the race and Valls, known for his zealous support of Israel, did indeed receive a slap in the face.

What do these things reveal about the mood of French people?

Gilad Atzmon: It isn’t just France. We detect a global fatigue with Jewish politics and lobbying. We see it in Britain and in the USA – and Jews are the first to notice it. Jewish organisations have long been complaining about the rapid growth in ‘antisemitic’ incidents (whatever that means). Yet, instead of engaging in some elementary self-reflection, asking themselves what is it about them and their behaviour that brings such anger and opposition, these organisations manage to repeat the same mistakes over and over again. Instead of opening the discussion on Israel and Jewish power, they use every means at their disposal to suppress freedom of speech and to silence legitimate criticism of Jewish ID politics, global Zionism and the brutality of the Jewish state.

One would think that, after the Shoah, Jews would learn the necessary lessons and would go out of their way to conceal Jewish arrogance. But In practice, the complete opposite has happened. The Jewish lobbies, both Zionists and ‘antis,’ are more obnoxious and arrogant than ever.

 

Alimuddin Usmani: CRIF defines itself as the political representation and official mouthpiece of the organized Jewish community. In the FAQ on it’s website we find this question : Does CRIF have an influence on French politics? 

And the answer is:

Yes, CRIF influences French politics by defending its vision of what should be the public policy against racism and anti-Semitism, offering its thoughts on the transmission of the memory of the Holocaust, or defending its idea of the peace in the Middle East.

In summary, CRIF acts exactly like any other association concerned by the public interest.   

What do you think of this answer?

Gilad Atzmon: I believe that it is a valid answer as long as French people are willing to accept that one minority group that just happens to be privileged can dominate the discourse on public matters such as racism, French past and foreign affairs. But Jewish history actually teaches us that these celebrations of Jewish power always come to a tragic end.

 

Alimuddin Usmani: On CNN, Bernard-Henri Lévy wrote that the Trump administration has a problem with Jews.

How do you explain that BHL is so worried about Trump?

Gilad Atzmon: It is simple. BHL realises that, considering his intensive bellicosity and war-mongering, he himself is a serious Jewish problem. Zionism was all about a promised land yet global Zionism, for which BHL is a prime conduit, signals the transformation from a ‘promised land’ into a ‘promised planet.’ It is, in fact, immoral interventionists such as BHL who bring disasters on the Jews.

When BHL accuses Trump, the first American Jewish President, of antisemitsm, he may be providing us with a glimpse into his own sense of guilt. It is a last and desperate attempt to prevent the floodlight from exposing the criminal continuum between Israel and the Ziocon wars spreading around our planet.

Alimuddin Usmani: Recently you gave concerts and talks in Czech Republic. You announced that you will be back there in June. What do you like about this country?

Gilad Atzmon: pretty much everything. It is a country that has managed to sustain its culture, its work ethic, its cuisine, its productivity. It is a country that is living in peace with its past and sees a prospect of a future ahead.

BHL, the Ukraine and the Russian bear (priceless!)

February 16, 2017

Related Videos

برنارد هنري ليفي: أيّها اليهود… اِحذروا ترامب!

يناير 28, 2017

ترجمة: ليلى زيدان عبد الخالق

نشرت صحيفة «نيويورك تايمز» الأميركية تقريراً لـ«غُراب الثورات»، اليهوديّ برنارد هنري ليفي جاء فيه:

منذ أسابيع قليلة فقط، كان يهود الولايات المتحدة الأميركية و«إسرائيل» يشعرون بأنهم تعرّضوا للخيانة من قِبل باراك أوباما. وذلك بسبب السماح لمجلس الأمن التابع للأمم المتحدة بتمرير قرار يدين الاستيطان «الإسرائيلي»، والذي سمح الرئيس المنتهية ولايته بإقراره على حساب اليهود أنفسهم. غير أنّ الخطر الذي يواجه يهود «إسرائيل» والولايات المتحدة اليوم، وكذلك اليهود في بلدان أخرى، لا بدّ لهم أن يحملوه لفترة طويلة من الآن، إذ يبدو أنهم سيتعوّدون على تلقّي الخيانة في المستقبل، وهذه المرّة من الرئيس الأميركي دونالد ترامب.

يمكن لأحدهم الاعتراض على هذا الحكم المسبق على ترامب، الذي قدّم إلى الآن أدلّة وافرة على حُسن نيّته. فعلى سبيل المثال، عندما عمد إلى تسمية أحد أصدقاء «إسرائيل» للعمل كسفير، واعداً بنقل السفارة من «تل أبيب» إلى القدس، مستعيناً بصره زوج ابنته، جلريد كوشنر، اليهودي الأرثوذوكسي، و«حفيد ناجٍ من المحرقة»، لتقديم المشورة له في شأن سير علمية السلام في البيت الأبيض. ألا تشكل هذه خطوات حاسمة تدعو إلى طمأنة اليهود الذين يؤيدون «إسرائيل»؟ نعم ولا.

هناك قانون يحكم العلاقات بين اليهود وباقي العالم. وقد شُكّل هذا القانون أثناء محاكمة أدولف إيخمان، وذلك حين انتقد المفكّر اليهودي العظيم غيرشوم شوليم، حنة أرندت واتّهمها بالتقصير في مساندة الشعب «الإسرائيلي» ـ مُظهرةً حبّاً غير كافٍ للشعب اليهودي. هو عينه الحبّ المطلوب من الرئيس الأميركي للتعاطي مع قضايا «إسرائيل».

في مثل هذه الظروف، وعلى عكس تلك التي تتوافر في الظروف الحياتية الاعتيادية، يؤكد هذا القانون أن التظاهرات الودّية أو السلمية ـ وللمفارقة ـ لا تُؤتي بالكثير. وتحدّد أيضاً من أن التفاتات الصداقة، حين لا تنبع من أعماق القلب لا تُبنى على حبّ صادق وخالص ـ ولهذا، أخيراً، واستناداً إلى معرفة حقيقية للحبّ ـ تتحوّل التفاتات الحبّ هذه إلى نقيضها ـ في نهاية المطاف.

ولتوضيح المغزى أكثر فأكثر، نحن لا نستطيع أن نحكم ما إذا كانت سلسلة الإشارات التي أطلقها ترامب ناحية «إسرائيل»، ستكون لها تبعات شريرة سواء على المديين القصير أو البعيد.

وقد تعتبر هذه الإشارات، على سبيل المثال، تعزيزاً لهامش قُصر النظر، وبالتالي، قد تشكّل بعداً انتحارياً في السياسة «الإسرائيلية». قد يرسلون إشارة خاطئة إلى أولئك الذي سيُظهرون سعادة كبيرة عند رؤية الولايات المتحدة تعكس النموذج أحاديّ القرارات غير القابلة للنقاش، وبالتالي، فتح الآفاق للقوى الأخرى كي تعرض بطولاتها. وقد يتبدّى ذلك في الولايات المتحدة على شكل احتضان فائق لليهود المؤيّدين لـ«إسرائيل»، ضدّ الرئاسات المتقلّبة ومنها واحدٌ على الأقلّ غيّر رأيه وفقاً لمصالح صفقاته الشخصية ، أحد هؤلاء الرؤساء الذين لا يتمتعون بشعبية كبيرة بين الأميركيين، بسبب دعمه المتراجع للقضايا «الإسرائيلية»، التي يمكن أن تشكّل خطراً على إجماع الحزبين الجمهوري والديمقراطي، التي قدّمت الكثير من الدعم والتأييد لـ«إسرائيل» على مدى عقود من الزمن.

لا يمكنني الادّعاء بأنني أدرك ما يجول في خاطر دونالد ترامب أو حتى في كيفية تحرّك عواطف قلبه في ما يتعلّق بالالتزام الصادق مع الدولة اليهودية. لكن، من المؤكد أننا نستطيع الاستدلال على مثل هذه المؤشرات بالعودة إلى سنوات عدّة مضت.

وأحدها يعود إلى جون أودونيل، وهو الرئيس التنفيذي السابق لكازينو آتلانتا سيتي الذي يملكه ترامب، الذي ذكر في كتابه الصادر عام 1991 بعنوان «Trumped» قول ترامب نفسه: «أفضل الناس الذين أودّ أن أحصي أموالي معهم كلّ يوم هم أولئك اليهود الذي يرتدون القلنسوات القصيرة». وفي الآونة الأخيرة، برزت عبر «تويتر»، عاصفة من التغريدات اليائسة، لإثبات أنه الأكثر ذكاءً والأكثر قدرة على المراوغة حتى مع جون ستيوارت نفسه.

ثمّ، وفي غمرة انغماسه بحملته الانتخابية، كان هناك لقاءٌ حيث توجه ترامب إلى المانحين من أعضاء الائتلاف الجمهوري اليهودي: «إنّي أدرك جيداً، لمَ لن تقوموا بدعمي! فقط لأنني لا أريد مالكم». وتدلّل هذه العبارات على احتقار معيّن، على أقلّ تقدير. وإذا ما أردنا أن نكون أكثر دقةً، فإن هذه المجموعة تعكس ازدراءً معيّناً، ويمكن تفسير ذلك ـ وفقاً لفرويد ـ على أنه أحد ميكانزمات الدفاع الاستباقية للأنا، ضدّ ازدراء مفترض من الطرف الآخر. بغضّ النظر عمّا إذا كان هذا الازدراء حقيقيّاً أو متخيّلاً.

وسواء كان جون ستيوارت أو الجهات اليهودية المانحة تزدري هذا المهرّج ذا الشعر اللامع، وكذلك أمواله، وممتلكاته بما فيها برج ترامب الشهير، فمن الواضح أن المسألة غير مرتبطة بكلّ هذا. فالأمر الأساس الذي يعتقد ترامب أنهم سيقومون به، يرتبط في نظرته الكاريكاتورية لليهود، بحسب ما ذكرت «نيويورك تايمز»، من أنه رجل استعراضيّ بامتياز، فضلاً عن أنه مبتذل.

إن هذا لمثالٌ رائع للدفاع عن النفس من الازدراء المفترض الذي لطالما أظهره حيال معاداة السامية، ومع بروز اليهود مرّة أخرى، كممثلين لنخبة كبيرة تعمل ضدّه وأحياناً تؤيده، نراه الآن في موقع السلطة والقوّة، ويسعى ببساطة إلى الانتقام.

يذكّرني هذا بإحدى قصص التلمود التي تفسّر هذا السياق المنطقي خير تفسير.

إنها تلك القصة ـ جزءٌ من التاريخ المنقّح للحاخام اليهودي ناسيا إحدى شخصيات الفكر اليهودي في القرن الثالث ميلادي. أدار هذا الحاخام مدرسةً، كان يمرّ بها يومياً أحد الشبان من مربّي الخنازير. ولم يوفّر تلاميذ هذه المدرسة الأذكياء المليئة رؤوسهم بالعلم والمعرفة، هذا الشاب الراعي وأصرّوا دوماً على التندّر على حاله والسخرية منها.

وبعد مرور سنوات عدّة، استُدعي هذا الحاخام إلى مدينة بعيدة تحت حكم القيصر، وذلك للمثول أمام القيصر الروماني ديوكلتيانوس. يبدو أن هذا القيصر كان شديد التقدير لضيفه. فقد أرسل إليه أحد أهمّ سفرائه آمراً بتوفير حمّام فاخر لضيفه لتطهير نفسه بعد رحلته الطويلة المرهقة.

غير أن ديوكلتيانوس أرسل سفيره أيضاً يوم الجمعة، ليطلب من الحاخام السفر نهار السبت منتهكاً بذلك أهم الوصايا عند اليهود، كما أمر القيصر بتسخين الماء حتى درجة الغليان كي يحترق الحاخام من شدّة حرارتها، لكن ملاكاً أنقذه في اللحظة الأخيرة بعدما عمل على تبريد المياه.

وعندما مثل الحاخام أمام الإمبراطور ديوكلتيانوس، تعرّف إلى راعي الماشية السابق الذي قال له: «هل تعتقد أنه بإمكانك ازدراء الإمبراطور، لمجرّد أن ربّك يستطيع القيام بالمعجزات؟».

تعمّدتُ ذكر هذه القصة لأنها توفر استعارة جيدة للغرب في الوقت الحالي، حيث الحال الآن، كما كان في روما في العصر القديم، انتصارٌ للعدمية حيث يمكن لأيّ كان، حتى مربّي الخنازير أن يصبح إمبراطوراً.

إنه لمثالٌ جيد، أيضاً، على الحكمة اليهودية التي تستجيب للوضع وفقاً للتالي: «كان لدينا ازدراءٌ واضح لديوكلتيانوس، راعي الخنازير، كما أننا مستعدّون الآن لتقديم كلّ التبجيل والتقدير لهذا الراعي ـ الإمبراطور، الذي وكما فعل شاوول، قبل أن يصير ملكاً، كان سائساً للحمير ـ فأصابته النبوّة، وارتفع في منصبه وأصبح رجلاً جديداً».

وفوق هذا كلّه، إنها أسطورة جيدة، ترمز إلى التفاضل بين حدّين، أو إذا صحّ التعبير، إلى التفاح المسموم من ناحية، والمقدّم من قبل الراعي المُهان، والتوّاق إلى الانتقام، كما برز عند جون ستيوارت وزملائه اليهود، الذين يظهرون أذكى ممّا نعتقد. وفي مواجهة هذه الحالة، ما من شيء ـ بالنسبة إليّ ـ يستحقّ الاهتمام أكثر من قدرتنا على الحفاظ على قدرٍ من المسافة.

وكغيرهم من المواطنين الأميركيين، فعلى اليهود احترام الرئيس المنتخب كما ينصّ على ذلك الدستور. غير أنه من الضروري ألا يقعوا ـ في نهاية المطاف ـ في فخّ الاعتقاد بأن هذا يتعارض مع الفضيلة التي هي وَسَطٌ بين طرفين. عليهم ألّا ينسوا أبداً أنه مهما كان عدد المرّات التي يعلن فيها ترامب عن حبّه وولائه لـ«إسرائيل»، من بنيامين نتنياهو أو أيّ أحد غيره، سيبقى ترامب ذلك الراعي السيّئ الذي يحترم القوّة فقط، والمال والقصور الفاخرة، بينما لا يلقي بالاً للمعجزات، أو حتى لإمكانية دراسة نموّ القطاع الاستخباري في ضوء التقاليد اليهودية.

أخيراً، عليهم أيضاً أن يدركوا جيداً، أنه في مثل هذه الفترة، التي وُصفت بالشعبوية، بسبب عدم القدرة على صوغ مصطلح أفضل، إبان فترة الانتخابات الأميركية، لا تجسّد سوى أعراض إنما على مقاسات كبيرة في وقت يُهاجَم الفكر من كلّ حدب وصوب، لتزدهر الأكاذيب المتغطرسة المشوبة بالثقة بالنفس، بشكل لم يسبق له مثيل. وفي ظلّ هذه الثقافة السياسية الجديدة المهيمنة حالياً على كوكبنا، يتقدّم أحد الأثرياء الأميركيين من أحد أبناء عمومته ـ أي الأقلية الروسية ـ يتقدّم رعاة الخنازير بتوجيه صفعة مدوية غير خجلة أو آبهة بشيء، بل مهدّمة للقصور الإمبراطورية، لن يبقى لـ«الأمة اليهودية» أيّ دور يمكنها أن تلعبه.

وفي سبيل التحالف مع هذا النوع من «الشعبوية»، ستكون دعوة إلى خيانة «إسرائيل».

إن الاستسلام لديوكلتيانوس يشكّل في حدّ ذاته خيانةً للذات.

(Visited 184 times, 11 visits today)
%d bloggers like this: