Trump’s Opponents Succeeded With Their Government Coup (Ruslan Ostashko)

January 20, 2021

Translated and subtitled by Leo.

A successful coup was staged by opponents of Donald Trump in Washington on January 6. Of course, Joe Biden’s inauguration has not yet taken place, but at the moment the incumbent head of the United States looks broken and surrendered, and the Democratic Party is triumphant.

I greet you, our respectable subscribers of PolitRussia and once again congratulate you on the New Year 2021 and the Nativity of Christ. While we were calmly and peacefully celebrating these remarkable holidays, in the USA, there was a dramatic event for Donald Trump supporters. I was asked to speak out and and post daily by many subscribers on the geopolitical results of last year’s events. And so in December, I voiced an assumption that the head of the White House might try to keep the Democratic Party from taking power, by using extraordinary methods.

Right now, with the first 10 days of January passing, I have to admit that this option is not allowed to become reality, and the chance of it happening is close to 0%. The reason for this deplorable position for Trump is because of betrayal from the vice president’s side, Mike Pence and the further failed attempt to protest inside the Congress about the electoral votes going in favor of Biden. The move of protesting could have changed the outcome, but the misfortune with Trump is that this move was easy to foretell. And the Democrats cut short the session in Congress to arrange the so-called “capture of Capitol Hill by Trump supporters on January 6th.” The logical version of what happened in the capital of the USA was outlined by publicist Alexander Rogers.

Alexander Rogers: “While Trump supporters were peacefully rallying in front of the Capitol Hill, a group of unknown people, among which some of them were identified as BLM and Antifa activists, broke several windows in the back portion of the building, and got inside. Notice how they did it without firearms. Under the pretext that the building was under threat of seizure, the session in Congress gets interrupted exactly in the moment where Republicans protested the acceptance of the electoral votes from one of the disputed states – Arizona. It was very convenient for Democrats if they were worried that they would not be able to push the much needed decision.”

The so-called “seizure of Capitol Hill” was a staged provocation comparable to the Nazis igniting the Reichstag on fire, is evidenced by many facts, which came out after the events. For example, people who portrayed themselves as leaders of the Trump supporters, everyone turned out to be mummers or crisis actors and activists hired by Democrats operating under what’s called a ‘false flag’.

Aleksandr Aksenov (Telegram social media): “The [horned] shaman turned out to be actor Jake Angel, and was the so-called decoy ‘gatekeeper’ who was called upon to provoke the supporters of Trump. Here he is with Nancy Pelosi’s son-in-law, Michael Voss. It really does look like the Reichstag fire setup.”

Vatnik (Telegram): *Picture of two ‘Trump supporters’ who resemble two members of phillyantifa.org* “Listen, but were there any actual Trump supporters there? It turns out that the whole vanguard were made up of BLM-Antifa-Demo Leftists, from decoy ducks to goat provocateurs. And if there were any Republicans there, then they stupidly ran towards them.”

Real backers of Trump of course were there too, and they were shot at. Even to death, like [14 year] veteran of the US Air Force, 35 year old, Ashli Babbitt. Killed inside of the Capitol Hill building. But first of all, they were allowed inside the regime’s building without any resistance by the police.

*Video plays* – 3:35

Alexander Rogers: “The video where it’s seen that police are themselves allowing the protesters to get inside the Capitol. The tactic is simple: Dress Antifa members up as Trump supporters and disrupt the presentation of evidence [of election fraud] in Congress. Now Trump is the enemy, and they are working on various options of how to get him out of the way, deprive him of power and attempts to get a second term. Too easy and too suspicious. The leftovers of democracy in the USA are over.”

*Video ends* – 3:59

All of this was arranged for the sake of creating a media image meant to intimidate Republican congressmen. And the maneuver succeeded.

Alexander Rogers: “’Terrorists’ and ‘insurrectionists’ (such a friendly manner in which the democratic medias have called them) are given 30 minutes to fool around and make funny photos with Nancy Pelosi’s stand from the congressional hall. Seriously, tens of unarmed idiots, which didn’t do anything, besides taking pictures in the seat of the congressional speaker, were labelled as a universal evil, terrorists and ‘threats to democracy.’ And all of the media, all the journalists and a bunch of officials and congressmen with the most pompous looking faces are calling them a ‘scary threat to our way of life and our values.’ After which, calmly without a fight or gunshots or even an intervention by Bruce Willis and Gerard Butler, these horrible terrorists are removed from the building. On the sly, Pence bypassed the president and made a decision to deploy the National Guard to the capital. What is it called? Right, a governmental overthrow. Or in English, a coup. Oh yeah, Trump’s Twitter was blocked for 12 hours, and his address to the protesters to peacefully disperse was deleted by Facebook. This is exactly how a coup happens.”

The head of the USA trivially had his mouth shut, and couldn’t do anything at all since he was in the information space that is fully controlled by Democratic Party. And his opponents frolicked through all of it. Here we have someone’s ears stick out for half a meter. The main Maidanite [supporter of color revolutions] on the planet, Henri Lévy, quickly dumped the method he typically uses.

Bernard-Henri Lévy - Agent of Israel | The photo dossier - Radio Islam

Bernard-Henri Lévy: “Terrible image of vandals in hunting hats assaulting the seats of Jefferson and Roosevelt at the Capitol. Thousands of women and men gave their lives for this Republic. Millions dreamt of it. And billions watch it besieged by grotesque fascists.”

Vatnik (Telegram): “The great argument of calling you Hitler: ‘What point is there to talk to you if you’re like Hitler.’ Oh God, oh God. And a lying discourse to go with it: ‘Either you’re fully for democracy in our way, or you’re a fascist!’ Arguments at full length.”

For that reason they needed the hired clowns and the depicted caricature rednecks. But a serious man and woman during that time were sharpening their political steel, not walking away from the high tribune.

Alexander Rogers: “Here, Pence and Pelosi show up and declare that the meeting will be continued. A portion of the Republicans are demoralized, they declare that they no longer support the demand of a serious investigation in falsification of the election. Which the conspirators had wanted to hear. Looking at the objections of the rest of the states is removed from the agenda. Very convenient, what else is needed? The congressional meeting continues, and the duty clowns read text from already prepared papers about condemning the ‘horrible terrorists’, they intensely imitate a hearing (even though everybody says the same thing.) After which, the Capitol Hill Police outside is given an order to disperse the crowd by using tear gas and special equipment. The extras are no longer needed, the picture of ‘terrorists’ has already been drawn.”

Trump clearly was not prepared for such a vile provocation, it became a blow under his hook. But the opponents didn’t let them come to their senses and quickly unloaded their flywheel of repression. Trump was banned from everywhere [with social platforms] he possibly could. (Image shows he got banned from Facebook, Twitter, Google, Spotify, Snapchat, Instagram, Shopify, Reddit, Twitch, YouTube, Tik Tok and Pinterest.) His supporters that participated in the rally started to get pressed. Including those who just attended, but didn’t follow the provocateurs to Capitol Hill. The hidden hand of the market presses them. For those who did follow them, the democratic American media went after those people.

Maria Butina (Previous victim of US foreign agent claims and smear campaign. Her Telegram account): “Washington DC police published a list on January 7 of 736 people being indicted in connection to the protests and the infiltration of the Capitol. Citizens are accused of organizing a riot and a call for disorder, violence towards police officers, non-observance of curfew, violation of police fencing lines, penetration into private territory, possession of unregistered firearms, threats of violence, damage to property, robbery or attempted robbery, obscene acts, urination or bowel movements in a public place, threats of kidnapping, infliction of harm to the person and many other things.”

Sanctions under these articles are up to 10 years of imprisonment. And you don’t need to be a genius to understand that the detained Trump supporters will be condemned to their maximum sentences to scare the rest.

Chinese Threat (Telegram): “If the United States saw what the United States is doing inside the United States, the United States would have invaded the United States to liberate the United States from the tyranny of the United States.”

I congratulate all the storytellers who for decades sang to us about how fertile the state system of the USA is. It’s only a shame that these storytellers mostly live not in the creepy progressive United States, but rather in our lovable Russia. Where the provocateurs like Navalny for years are advocating for a violent change in state structures, yet walk free. Maybe it’s time for our so-called horrible totalitarian regime to take an example from the Democratic Party and tighten the screws? What do you think? Well at least for now, the information agents of foreign influence have not tried to attempt a coup here.

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

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)

The Anglo-Zionist nemesis – a nihilist pact with the losing side of history ?

The Saker

September 15, 2016

by Paul Matthews

It is in the Book of Proverbs (16:18) of the Hebrew Bible that we may find the locution : Pride comes before a fall. The following report chronicles and contextualizes events and chapters in the saga of a post WWII world under an improvident leadership of Uncle Sam and argues that there is always a good reason to hope even in a period of undiminished gloom. As the freak show of the US presidential election unfolds in the self-reflected glare of the mainstream press and TV, the signs are that partisans of the Zionist Power bloc have finally met their match in the ‘odd couple’ of Vladimir and Bashar.

The heroic struggle of the Syrians commands respect. Bearing in mind the need to avoid the pitfall of idolatry, nobody in their right mind would query the force of character or moral authority of Iran’s Supreme Leader, ‘living martyr’ Ali Khamenei and his Lebanese protegé, Hezbollah’s General Secretary Hassan Nasrallah. They are assuredly the spiritual guides of their respective peoples. Yet outside their nations they would seem to lack the undoubted charisma of the Russian and Syrian heads of state who figuratively and, in the latter’s case, physically, stand head and shoulders above their peers,

One has to be destitute of vision not to see through NATO’s Partnership for Peace initiative by whose obscurantist credentials politicians are provided with a licence to kill ‘extra judicially’ on behalf of the central banking system ie those ‘ finance houses, debt merchants and investment banks’ that seek to straitjacket, downsize, enslave humanity and plunder the planet in tune with their ideological mix of zombie economics and voodoo capitalism.

A fatal combination of Jewish hubris and American exceptionalism has left the Chosen People and their Gentile friends in high places ill-prepared to counter the immense popularity and esteem which these two statesmen and their countrymen have earned for themselves, notably in the eyes of so many ordinary US and EU citizens. By contrast, as agents of the militaro-industrial complex of a military alliance visibly in decline, the lying politicians and media anchors supportive of Zion have reached a level of ignominy beneath contempt. This narrative proceeds in several phases …

Artificers of the Axis of Evil – for whom, like Leo Strauss, «deception is the norm in political life» …

‘Let them eat precaution ?’ A recipe for social darwinism, corporate malfeasance, global terrorism by Paul Matthews … 6108 Views July 25, 2016

Comments 

Readers may be familiar with the above article. It showed how special interest groups exercise their lobbying power by usurping the functions of the judiciary and hijacking the prestige attached to the Nobel Prize system to promote activities detrimental to humanity and world peace. The forces thereby unleashed implement what are essentially odious policies of the central banking system that seeks to mould or anaesthetise public opinion, paralyse dissent and induce a popular sense of fatalism : telling us that, for example, while the Diary of Anne Frank is apparently acknowledged by experts to be a scientifically proven forgery, one can be accused – on a trumped up charge – of antisemitism and unlawfully prosecuted, fined or sent to prison for saying so in public.

A discriminatory pro-Israel, ‘Jews only’, neoliberal discourse monopolizes the political culture of the USA, its EU client states and other satellites. We learn from Robert Faurisson that Elie Wiesel and Simon Wiesenthal heartily detested one another and that the latter was as big a storyteller as the former. Tom Segev, a biographer of Simon Wiesenthal, explains how Wiesel, Wiesenthal and the Klarsfeld family competed with one another for public attention. Bickering among the divas is part of the act. Notoreity and celebrity are assets to ensure that the spotlight seldom wavers from the business of driving home the message concerning Jewish victimhood and to distract us from considering more fundamental subjects affecting negatively a much wider public interest.

Characterised in August 2003 by Justin Raimondo as an ‘intellectual street-walker’, hyper-sophist Ilana Mercer, née Isaacson, in her March 2003 article “The Jewish Connection” argues deceptively that GW Bush’s ‘vision’ for US intervention in the Middle East was in place before September 11, 2001 and that he was not ‘snookered into his power-hungry, messianic mania by a Jewish coterie’. She conveniently belittles the rôle of the 1997 ‘think tank’ Project for a New American Century (PNAC) and another 1996 ‘study group’ led by Richard Perle. It produced for Benjamin Netanyahu – the then Prime Minister of Israel – the seminal ‘policy document’ A Clean Break : A New Strategy for Securing the Realm. (q.v.) She similarly overlooks the existence of an even earlier Jewish Israeli blueprint for regional – prior to global – hegemony : the 1982 Oded Yinon Plan (q.v.).

It would also have been less disingenuous for her to admit to the formative influence and opportunism of a piece in the September 1990 issue of The Atlantic Magazine from the ‘orientalist’ and leading Anglo-Zionist, Bernard Lewis. It coins for the first time the expression ‘Islamic fundamentalists’ and popularises the socially divisive term ‘clash of civilizations‘ first used by Albert Camus in 1946. With the end of the Cold War visibly in sight, a newer big business friendly leadership model was required to (a) sustain the existence of an otherwise defunct NATO war machine and to (b) protect Israel. Fiercely opposed by Edward Said – a ‘public intellectual and pioneer of the study of post-colonialism’ – the gung ho British-American historian who is a ‘specialist’ in imperialist ‘oriental studies’ – and his pupil Samuel P Huntington – provide the wherewithal to fill the vacuum created by the collapse of the USSR even as the back room boys are busy concocting their new ‘Pearl Harbour’.

Why the river of Gentile blood from Pol Pot to ISIS never dried within a depotic ‘Free World’ matrix

«The ultimate cause of evil lies in the interaction of two human factors: (1) normal human ignorance and weakness and (2) the existence and action of a statistically small (4-8 per cent of the general population) but extremely active group of psychologically deviant individuals. The ignorance of the existence of such psychological differences is the first criterion of ponerogenesis. That is, such ignorance creates an opening whereby such individuals can act undetected». Political Ponerology Andrzej Łobaczewski (1921-2008) http://www.ponerology.com/evil_2b.html

In theology, ponerology (from Greek ponéros, πονηρός, “evil”) is the study of evil. It is related to the word “ponos” πόνος, which means pain. Political ponerology is an interdisciplinary study of issues connected with the genesis of evil on a macro-social level primarily associated with Polish psychiatrist Andrzej Łobaczewski. He was one of the founders of this anthropological discipline utilising data from psychology, sociology, history and philosophy to account for such phenomena as aggressive war, ethnic cleansing, genocide and despotism.

A test case for the scholarly scrutiny of evil genius is to be found in the ghastly example set by the exceedingly influential German born American diplomat and political scientist Henry Kissinger, né Heinz Alfred Kissinger. Despite the academic aura the 1973 Nobel Peace Prize winner has skilfully cultivated over the years, this is the ‘US peacemaker-cum-serial killer’ who, as US National Security Adviser (1969-1975) and US Secretary of State (1973-1977), oversaw the escalation of the socio-ecocidal Operation Ranch Hand (1962-1971) on the farmland acres and forests of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, the coordination of the twenty-two long years of Operación Cóndor/Operação Condor (1968-1980) in Latin America and of Operation Menu-Freedom Deal (1969-1973) when the US Strategic Air Command’s B52s dropped the equivalent of five Hiroshimas on rural Cambodia.

Highlights of the post 19th century concept of total war include the dropping of the uranium-based Little Boy and the plutonium-based Fat Man respectively on Hiroshima and Nagasaki – with the latter device wiping out most of Japan’s rather small Christian community – and the firebombing of Dresden, Hamburg and Tokyo.

Again featuring the massive use of napalm, under the aegis of the United Nations, the carpet bombing of North Korea destroyed an estimated 75 per cent of the urban centres and killed 20 per cent of the civilian population.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki cast a long shadow and without the Jews and their collective psychosis the design and manufacture of the Manhattan Project would probably have been impossible. In the wake of Suez, the 1956 Protocol of Sèvres awarded the Jewish state the wherewithal to build its own nuclear arsenal. Conveniently the ever contrite Germany offered Israel the means of an offshore nuclear second strike capability. The first two of the Dolphin class submersibles (Dolphin and Leviathan) were fully donated by Chancellor Helmut Kohl and the third (Tekumah) received a 50 per cent subsidy. A submarine-launched cruise missile (SLCM) tipped with a 200-kilogramme nuclear warhead containing up to 6 kilogrammes of plutonium provides an argument which reinforces significantly the type of pressure that previously was applied by a mere accusation of ‘antisemitism’.

SLCMs have a range of at least 1,500 km, bringing them within spitting distance of Western Asia, Southern Europe and North Africa. In 2010 a former Professor of Jerusalem’s Hebrew University brought this unpleasant truth home to Europeans. Dutch-born Doctor Martin Van Creveld, a world specialist in low-intensity wars, then suggested that were Europe to oppose the transfer of Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank, in order to survive Tel Aviv would be forced to destroy the European capitals with nuclear weapons, it being decided that EU member states would be unable to retaliate without annihilating their ‘Palestinian friends’. He added that, while in 2008, only 7 or 8 per cent of Israelis were of the opinion that the mass transfer of Arabs would be the best solution, two years later, according to a Gallup poll, the figure was 44 per cent. The radical swing to the extreme right in Israel is confirmed by Netanyahu’s March 2015 re-election. Already in 2014, a former speaker of the Knesset, Moshe Feiglin was unhesitatingly proposing to expel the Palestinians from Gaza into the Sinai.

He who pays the piper calls the tune. But no-one wants to face the music. Élitist ‘deep state security’ politics is about puppeteers projecting power via proxy wars and an utter disregard for human life orchestrated worldwide by the likes of BHL, Bernard Kouchner and all their friends in high places. Zionist Power Configuration people need ISIS and won’t see their brainchild easily defeated. No one is exempted from whatever violence ensues to serve solely the central banking system’s core interests. Evil afflicts believers and non-believers alike. Be they Buddhists, Moslems, Christians, Jews. devotees of other folk, traditional, shamanist, natural belief systems.

How Syria’s ‘weakest link’ survived to become a pillar of strength towering over his enemies 

«Absolutely nothing predestined this – shy in temperament – doctor (he trained as an ophthalmologist in St Mary’s Hospital, Marylebone, London NDLR) to face, twenty years later, the united forces of what in the 1940s went under the incomplete term of “global or international Jewry” (in reality Zionism) and its influential Arab allies from the Persian Gulf, at the head of a very modest ‘Third World’ army and, at the moment. its survival is due to a fragile set of strategic alliances with China, Iran and Russia. The man at the head of a small country called the weakest link, finds herself unwillingly, struggling with the same formidable forces that sparked the great 1914-1918 slaughter and triggered the Second World War of 1939 -1945. Strange fate». Translated from : Le maillon le plus faible … 2518 vues 08 août 2016 11 commentaires Avec photographie du Capitaine Bashar Al-Assad (deuxième à partir de la droite) en 1994.http://reseauinternational.net/le-maillon-le-plus-faible/https://strategika51.com/2016/08/06/le-maillon-le-plus-faible/.

Purportedly the oligarchy’s strategists always go for the jugular and that implies seeking out the weak spots in any adversary’s defence mechanisms. In the recent article published with the title Le maillon le plus faible (Cf. supra) one can observe the photo of a tall and gangling 29 year-old Capitain Bashar Al-Assad taken in 1994, at about the time of the death in a car crash of his elder brother Bassel and six years before his father’s death in 2000, when he took over the reins of power and started timidly to reform, then resist with tenacity as Damascus became the target of moves to destabilise his country and unseat him. These took the form of US-led sanctions and a bid to smear first the Syrian president, then Hezbollah and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, by trying to implicate them in the 14 February 2005 murder of Rafic Hariri and 22 other people near the St. George Hotel in Beirut.

Given the retracted testimony, the flimsy, doctored evidence and the would be internationally sponsored UN inquiry thoroughly discredited by bias, Thierry Meyssan in his 29 November 2010 article, first published in Odnako, (q.v.) argues convincingly the case for the involvement of Mossad and Germany. A scenario becoming even clearer when one poses the question cui bono ? regarding the assassination of the former, Saudi friendly, Lebanese premier. The answer comes swiftly on the heels the inquisitor, with the so-called Cedar Revolution, an anti-Syrian alliance, resulting in the complete withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon on 27 April 2005.

Successive attempts have been made to tighten the noose around the neck of all elements friendly to Iran or the Shias – starting with the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party in Syria and the region’s other two, multi-confessional cum secular, non-aligned nations, namely the Lebanese and Iraqi republics – crowned by the London plot hatched in 2009 to overthrow the Syrian government – as testified by France’s former Foreign Affairs Minister, Roland Dumas, invited to join the conspiracy. Syria has been thrown under a bus, just like Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and Muammar Gaddafi’s Libya. Since the invasion by cut throat foreigners of this beautiful land, Bashar Al-Assad’s moral stature has grown – as has his people’s loyalty to their president – for they see lucidly the fate reserved for them by those bankrolling the élites of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Qatar, Turkey, France, Britain and the USA.

Like the Syrians, the Russians are under no illusions. Their situation is best summed up by a Russian born Jew who reportedly converted to Orthodox Christianity and writes under the alias, or pen name, of Israel Shamir :

«The DNC 2016 reminded me of The Triumph of the Will, the paradigmatic film of Leni Riefenstahl. Thefiery oration of “four-star general of the Marine Corps” General (retired) Allen, ready to kick ass of the Russkies, flag-waving, hysterical rhythmical shouts Uoo-eS-Ay, runaway aggressiveness, military pomp and above all exceptionalism of “America is great because America is good”; the United States as an “indispensable, transformational power in the world,” the poisonous mix of Uber Alles and Manifest Destiny fits like a glove to the matrix established at the 1934 Nazi Party rally in Nuremberg, Germany. There similarity ends : the Demo version is all for the bankers and against the workers, while the Nazis called themselves “the workers party” and spoke against financial capital. The Nazis said they were for the family and the majority, the Dems say they do not care for workers’ votes, as they have enough votes from feminists and queers. And the Jews are now for, rather than against. The Jewish news agency JTA described General (ret) Allen fire-breathing delivery as “the Jewish moment at DNC … to further reassure the security hawks in the Jewish community” as he promised that “our armed forces will be stronger”. Bill Clinton came with a button saying Hillary in Hebrew, mobilising the Jewish community for Clinton and war […]

In words of Jeffrey Sachs, “Hillary is the candidate of Wall Street. Even more dangerous, though, is that she is the candidate of the military-industrial complex supporting every war demanded by the US deep security state run by the military and the CIA.” And now she and her party set their sights on Russia. The Russians have no say in this decision: they were formally appointed to the high post of The Enemy of the Empire, and this appointment requires no agreement of the victim. Why were the Russians chosen? Who else fits the bill ? The US war machine needs an enemy, and the world is not that large. Europe is subdued and occupied. China is too big, India is too soft, the Arabs are too small. Japan was fitted for an enemy in early Nineties, but surrendered. Putin perfectly understood the US war machine’s search for an enemy when he proposed to Americans at the UN they fight the Islamic State together with Russia. This nefarious Islamic State remains a possibility that will have to do, meanwhile, but for a greater and more serious enemy, able to attract nice budgets, Russia suits best. Russia has an additional charm: it is a successor state to the USSR, that was the designated enemy for the West for a long time, until 1991. Thus it is a traditional enemy. Hillary as a Goldwater Girl supported the most warlike Russia-hating candidate, and apparently she still remembers the thrill. It is true that Russia’s enemy status had been explained by the satanic nature of godless communism, and this explanation is as dead as a dodo, but explanations are not reasons, they are secondary rhetorical devices. The reason is the need for an enemy so the war budget will grow nicely and keep generals and weapon manufacturers in the lifestyle they are accustomed to…». The Reluctant Enemy by Israel Adam Shamir 4 August 2016http://www.unz.com/ishamir/the-unwilling-enemy/ /// http://plumenclume.org/blog/146-l-ennemi-malgre-lui.

Megalomaniac Zbigniew Brzezinski spoke in April 2016 of realigning the global power architecture

Not everyone enjoys the privilege of being a ‘Reluctant Enemy’. A mother of battles rages in Aleppo where lists of casualties mount. The Saker community is conscious of the sacrifices forced on and already made by Syrians and their allies. Blowback time for the EU from the Syrian and Ukrainian theatres proceeds apace with not a whisper from official media outlets whose soporific editorial line alternates with the need to maximize fear or panic and create the impression that violence is spiralling out of control. Kiev’s gunmen sought to infiltrate Crimea. Terrorists in NATO’s other spheres of influence get a free or helping hand from private ‘national’ state security services, working jointly with, or under the command of, Mossad’s sayanim. Europeans and Americans must pull up their socks if the “shaitans” (شياطين demons) and their Israeli handlers are to be rooted out chez eux.

‘Red in tooth and claw’, a stalemated EU-US combo snatches defeat from the jaws of victory

«… We need to have some sense that Assad is on the way out. There can be a transition ; but it needs to be clear that he is not part of Syria’s future. Until that happens – until that begins – until there is acknowledgement of that transition – we are going to have Syrians dying – continuing to die. Because many of them are trying to reclaim their country, for the good of Syria’s future, but many of them want Syria to be the safe haven for terrorists. So I don’t know whether or not Syria can be put back together again … ». WORLD NEWS | ASPEN INSTITUTE | Friday July 29, 2016 10:10pm EDT CIA chief Brennan not optimistic about Syria’s future as one country : http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-cia-idUSKCN1092PV?Il=0.

“Assad must go”. The same old tune. The senior American government official’s lietmotif – in a keynote speech at Washington’s Aspen Security Forum in late July 2016 – echo hasbara spouted in March earlier this year by academic James Stavridis, a retired four-star US Navy admiral and former NATO supreme allied commander.

To the effect that, like Humpty Dumpty in the children’s nursery rhyme, the odds of putting Syria back together again – as a functioning entity – appear low enough to consider partitioning the country once and for all. Lies.

On the contrary, what has been an Israeli wet dream since the 1982 Oded Yinon Plan is as far from coming to pass as the bid to erase Palestine from the collective memory of Arab speakers, be they Christian or Muslim.

Summer 2016 climaxed with state sponsored terrorism spilling over from Ukraine, Afghanistan, the Middle East and Asia Minor onto the streets of France, as tidings from trigger happy Police State America peppered the dystopian narrative and the airwaves were congested with a ludicrous manufactured outcry over the ‘burkini’.

With the memory of the dead in Nice – some decapitated – fresh in their minds, French people learn of the grisly murder during the July 2016 Aleppo offensive of a 12 year old Palestinian child Abdullah Tayseer Al Issa by a US backed Nour al-Din al-Zinki Movement. The current trail of some Israeli, but mostly Arab, blood spilled in a Jewish ‘power projection’ exercise is traceable to the death by fire of three members of the Dawabsheh family when their home in the West Bank village of Duma was torched by Jews in July 2015 and to the extrajudicial killing of 18 year old Hadeel al-Hashlamoun by the IDF at an army checkpoint in Hebron in September 2015.

In neighbouring Syria and Lebanon, resistance to the messianic “Hatikvah” agenda comes at a fearful cost in human and environmental terms of people slain and wounded, livelihoods and infrastructure wrecked. However politically and militarily, informational warfare is the key. The war for hearts and minds has been lost from the

Maghreb to the Mashreq. Obscene wealth concentration rots Europe’s, Israel’s and the USA’s social fabric.

So the protracted effort to enforce this ideological mantra of removing from office the Syrian republic’s legally elected president reminds us of the paradigm of the immovable object confronted with an allegedly unstoppable force – itself a paradox. To the extent that instead of beholding just a badly fractured and mutilated Syria, public opinion glimpses the diabolically flawed and irremediably fissured Atlanticist edifice. Le ver est dans le fruit.

Joe Biden demands from Serbia an allegiance to NATO that is offensive to all self respecting Serbs. To pacify ‘a disruptive citizenry’ Britain’s security forces suppress anti-fracking protests while, over the Channel, depleted of the means to police thousands of migrants endangering the lives of road hauliers, Calais resembles a war zone.

All’s grist to the mill when sowing discord and fomenting strife to enslave and spoliate others. Heeding history’s lessons means acknowledging the racially driven mindset of a mainly Ashkenazi intelligentsia, whose ‘culture’, ‘inventiveness’ and ‘social skills’ reflect the merciless chauvinism rooted in Jewish supremacism and Talmudic vengeance that fathered both Bolshevism and the tribal enterprise of Zion. In Syria the jury’s still out as pundits scratch their heads over Recep Erdoğan’s game. The world’s fate hangs in the balance and France’s finest legal minds discuss the pros and cons of banning modesty from the beach. For more news from the French banana republic, tune in to Panamza and Egalité et Renconciliation online – des mines d’or d’information subversive.

In the face of death threats both websites depict honestly a slice of life ‘beyond the pale’, ‘outside the bubble’ ‘scripted’ for us by a certifiable, criminally insane, terrorist minority culpable of a violent and suffocatingly long foreign occupation of Arab lands and attacks on the dignity and safety of defenceless civilians the world over.

Mammonism, Brexit and The Rest of Us

July 01, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

Gilad Atzmon interviewed by Alimuddin Usmani

Alimuddin Usmani: Following the victory speech by Nigel Farage, you wrote on your Facebook wall: “It is easy to grasp why British workers support Farage and not the Labour Party.”

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlN9o3g-yuA

 Can you explain this further?

Gilad Atzmon: Farage’s ideas are coherent and consistent. They reflect the feelings of the poor, the oppressed and the working people who have been reduced into a workless class. Whether Farage can help them is an open question but he offers a clear vision of change fuelled by nostalgic glory and a strong sense of belonging.

Corbyn, on the other hand, has little to offer although this is not entirely his fault. The Labour philosophy is full of contradictions and holes. On the one hand, Corbyn and Labour claim to represent the worker and the poor. But Corbyn and his party also subscribe to cultural Marxist and cosmopolitan ideas that advocate immigration, diversity, identitarian politics and various measures of ‘correctness.’  One cannot support the worker while simultaneously advocating immigration that puts local jobs at risk.

In the aftermath of Brexit, Farage talked directly to British workers about a new future and the prospects for renewal of manufacturing and housing. At the same time, Corbyn was holding forth in support of refugees and against racism. Important topics; but not immediately relevant to those out of work.

The next question is why this contradiction is embedded in Labour and Left politics. The Labour Party is:

1. dominated by Jewish cosmopolitan ideology; and

2. funded by Jewish oligarchs.

The Jewish Left is pro immigration, pro identitarian politics, pro LGBT and so on. Jews realize that when things turn sour, it is the working class that turns against the Jews. This causes them to feel threatened by a cohesive working class. They prefer the working class to be broken into an endless number of different sectarian and identity groups. Jews would prefer society to be seen as a manifold of tribes and synagogues. That way the Jews are just one tribe amongst many. It is the Jewish Left that taught us that ‘the personal is political.’ These are the same people that trained us to talk ‘as a’: ‘as a black,’ ‘as a Muslim,’ ‘as a gay, ‘as a Jew’ and so on.   They have succeeded in dividing us.

Farage offered the Brits an opportunity to re-unite and think once again as Brits. At least 52% of the Brits bought into his call. His support included the vast majority of nonurban Brits who were apparently impervious to the Labour party’s contradictory position.

Alimuddin Usmani: Bernard-Henry Lévy labeled Brexit a strange defeat. He wrote that Brexit was a victory not of the people but of populism. 

How would you respond to him?

 To read BHL on Brexit click here

Gilad Atzmon: BHL’s post Brexit rant provides a window into Jewish fear and we should thank him for his willingness to share it with us.

To BHL true democracy, patriotism, nationalism, a united working class, manufacturing, coherence and truth are all symptoms of the Goyim’s resistance and must be suppressed.

BHL’s new evil Goyim are: Donald Trump, Putin and Nigel Farage whom he has now formally united with the Le Pens as the Hitlers of our time.

BHL’s rant attempts to conceal the fact that the Brits who oppose the EU are expressing frustration with mammonism.

Mammonism is a type of capitalism that is driven by financial transactions such as trade, banking and stock exchanges instead of by manufacturing. It is the exploitive capitalist agenda manipulated by the large financial institutions like Goldman Sachs and the financial speculators like Soros.

Brexit was effectively a vote against mammonism, against the banksters in the City and the global economy that left the worker with no prospect of a future. But the Brits who voted leave will probably not achieve what they intended. Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Liam Fox who led the leave campaign are themselves servants of the Jewish Lobby and the global mammonites. Brexit was an attempt to divert examination from the City and its oligarchs and focus blame on Brussels. BHL is working hard to prolong this concealment project. He is suffocating us with his shallow liberal ideas and empty jargon and hoping to turn the goyim against themselves.

BHL, the pro war Zionist neocon who bears direct responsibility for the destruction of the lives of millions of Muslims, doesn’t like popular movements such as the Italian 5 Star or Podemos in Spain. He wants to keep the Goyim in the dark and let Soros’ ‘Open Society Institute’ fund their fake opposition.

“It is the victory of the mob of Fritz Lang’s Metropolis,” BHL writes. By ‘mob’ the Jewish ‘philosopher’ means hard working Goyim — people who transcend sectarian politics in a search for unity. BHL should be clever enough to understand that such a craving ‘to be one’ was the driving force behind the Scottish referendum and the leave victory for Brexit. The cultural Marxist divisive agenda seems to have backfired.

In his rant, BHL can’t hide his goy hatred. He claims that half of the Brits who voted to leave the EU are “wreckers and dimwitted leftists, … drunken skinheads and hooligans, … illiterate rebels and bull-headed neo-nationalists.” Not exactly a flattering image delivered by the Jerusalemite thinker.

It has been established that the Jewish so called ‘intelligentsia’ claims credit for the enlightenment. BHL repeatedly follows that pattern. He claims to preach enlightenment values. In truth, Jewish thinkers contributed very little, if anything, to the enlightenment. Spinoza, the only Jew considered to be a prominent enlightening figure was excommunicated by his fellow Jews for being too enlightened. The Jewish so-called enlightenment (Haskalah) didn’t leave a single universal text. It basically taught Jews how to mimic the Goyim in the street while remaining Jews in their dwellings (be a Jew in your tent and a man on the street.)

If the enlightenment was actually the anthropocentric shift that led to the construction of popular individualism and is responsible for the birth of mass greed and consumerism, one would expect a ‘philosopher’ to grasp the growing disillusion with this endeavor. But BHL is not really a philosopher; he is a ‘Jewish philosopher.’ He specializes in populist pseudo intellectual harangue made up of an arbitrary collection of sound bites. Rather than producing enlightening content, BHL produces jargon. No one exhibits better than BHL that distinct dichotomy between Jerusalem and Athens. They are like oil and water. They can never mix. Accordingly a Jewish philosopher could be seen as a contradiction in terms. And indeed, those very few Jews who produced philosophy with universal values (Christ, Spinoza, Weininger and just a few others) are those who ended up in open dissent with their tribe.

Alimuddin Usmani: Alain Minc, French political advisor and author, born to a family of Jewish immigrants from Poland, wrote that Brexit is the victory of poorly educated people against well-educated people. 

http://www.marianne.net/alain-minc-brexit-c-est-victoire-gens-peu-formes-les-gens-eduques-100244028.html

 What is your opinion?

Gilad Atzmon: It is true that there was a demographic, socioeconomic, age and education split between the remain and leave supporters. In general, the rich voted to remain and the poor wanted to leave.  The same was said about young and old. Some statistics point to an educational difference between the two sides. It is understandable that people who are less educated and likely to be limited to manual work would be the first to be affected by the collapse of manufacturing. It would be they who may see Brussels and the global economy as their enemy.

But here is the problem. Even if our society is partitioned by a cognitive barrier, the role of the ethical being is to care for the less able and less educated. Our duty is to make sure that all of us can earn a living and have a roof above our heads. I cannot see Labour and Corbyn with their Guardian supporters and Jewish funders leading such a move. In fact they didn’t. The Tories appear not to be aware that there is a problem.

Nigel Farage has unleashed a demon in Britain. But the movement extends beyond Britain or even Europe. The popularity of Trump, Sanders, NF and E&R (France) suggest that we are witnessing a global awareness of mammonism.

I also want to mention that the impression that all ‘leave’ supporters are less developed or educated is condescending and delusional. The Brexit debate revealed that some of the leave advocates were amongst the most sophisticated thinkers around. Many of them see the EU as a tool of the oligarchy and they are correct. They see leaving the EU as just the first step. The battle against mammonism is the big war ahead.

Alimuddin Usmani: An article published in Mondoweiss suggests that Israel should be deeply disturbed by the Brexit vote.

 http://mondoweiss.net/2016/06/should-disturbed-brexit/

 David Cameron and Tony Blair, true friends of Israel, have been shaken by Brexit. Do you think that Brexit could harm Israeli interests?

Gilad Atzmon: Not in the short run. The leading Brexiters are prominent British sabbos goyim. Fox, Gove and Johnson are servants of the Jewish lobby. However, in the long run Israel and Jews should be very worried. The Brexit is a clear sign of mammonism fatigue. When the Brits and the French and the Greeks and the Americans identify that their destruction is connected to Goldman Sachs, Soros and the Jewish Lobby we will see developments that could lead to global aggression on a catastrophic scale. We had been there more than once. I would have loved to avoid it if it had been possible.

 

The Weekly Sabbos Goy Award Goes to Michael Gove (must watch)

March 30, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

The Zio-con Who Bought Disaster to Libya is Doing it Again

March 25, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

 

By Gilad Atzmon

Bernard-Henri Lévy (BHL), the ultra Zionist who declared that ‘as a Jew’ he liberated Libya, is again campaigning for more immoral interventionist wars. He insists that the current terror in Europe comes from Syria and Iraq. His solution- let’s drop more bombs on Muslim and Arab cities- as if we haven’t been doing just that for decades.  I would expect nothing less from a Hasbra merchant, but why does the BBC feature such a clumsy Zio-con, one who is barely able to articulate an idea?

The Jewish so-called ‘philosopher’ tells lies on camera. He argues that the West had washed its hands of Syria’s uprising and didn’t want to intervene. Is that true?  In fact, throughout the war we have identified precisely those militias and the rebels that were working with Israel and the West.

Despite the obvious fact, widely accepted by Western analysts, that Asad and Iran hold the key to stability in the region, BHL continues to campaign against Bashar Assad.

Like his brethren Zionists, BHL also insists upon imposing a false demarcation between the ‘kosher Muslims’ and the ‘bad ones.’  In support, Levy recycles the false Zionist dichotomy between ‘Islam’ and ‘Islamism.’ But there is no such dichotomy. As in Judaism, in Islam there is no separation between the civil and the religious. Yet unlike the Jews, in Islam there is no such thing as a secular Muslim. Jews often drop God but retain their Jewish identity. When a Muslim stops believing in Allah, he or she stops being a Muslim. Thus the delusional dichotomy between Islam and Islamism is nothing but a Jewish projection–an attempt to Zionise the Muslim.

BHL reckons that Europe is dying.  If he is right, he can blame himself and Jewish lobbies that pushed us into so many criminal wars in devastating succession. But I believe that BHL is wrong; Europe will emerge from the present crisis in a stronger position. It will learn to identify its true roots in Athens and will drift away from Jerusalem and the destructive influence exerted by Zionist politics, such as BHL, Lord Cashpoint Levy, LFI, CFI and The Crif.

A Battle With No Front

November 14, 2015  /  Gilad Atzmon

By Gilad Atzmon

Yesterday morning, the news was broadcast of extensive ‘heroic’ allied drone attacks in Iraq and Syria in support of the battle for Sinjar. We also learned about the assassination of Jihadi John. We were told some revenge might be on the way.  As promised, last night Paris was bathing in blood.

Welcome to World War III – a global conflict with unlimited battlefronts. We, as people of the world, are all caught in the middle in this disaster. We see that our universe is crumbling, we want peace, yet we don’t even know who the enemy is.

For some of us, this recent escalation is not a surprising development. We have been writing about it for years. We have been scrutinising the disastrous impact of the matrix of Ziocon immoral interventionist lobbies that have been relentlessly advocating more and more conflicts.  The CRIF in Paris, CFI in London and AIPAC in Washington all push for escalation of the battle against Arabs and Muslims in accordance with the Israeli plan for a new Middle East.

We are forced to accept the fact that extremist Muslims are very upset and they can hit hard and in a very short time. Russia saw one of its planes falling out of the sky, killing more than two hundred innocent holiday makers. Paris has again suffered. We must ask, is it necessary? Do we have to live in fear from now on? Is peace an option?

The terror is a message that we have to understand. What is its message? ‘Leave us alone’ is what these homicidal terrorists are trying to tell us. Is that too complicated for the Western subject to take in?  ‘Live and let others be,’ is what this is about. The pragmatic implication is obvious. The West must immediately stop serving Israeli and global Zionist interests. We must cease all operations in Arabia and the Mid East. For that to happen, and for a chance for peace, opposition to global Zionism and Israeli lobbying is imperative.

Here is some practical advice; next time Bernard Henri Levy, David Aaronovitch or Alan Dershowitz attempt to sell a new conflict-pack in the name of ‘human rights,’ we should politely advise them that we have learned our lesson – no more wars for Zion. Then, peace may prevail.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian 

  

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Gilad Atzmon explains the subversion of the pro-Palestine cause by the Jewish left

June 02, 2015  /  Gilad Atzmon

By John Friend 

http://www.therealistreport.com/

Editor’s noteGilad Atzmon, an internationally renowned musician, philosopher, and writer born in Israel, is currently on a speaking tour to promote his latest book entitled A to Zion: The Definitive Israeli Lexicon, as well as address the Jewish subversion of the pro-Palestinian movement. On Monday, May 11th, Atzmon spoke at a public library in San Diego County, an event I was able to attend. We had a nice conversation and I was able to ask him a question following his presentation.

What follows is a Q&A I conducted with Atzmon via email shortly after his speech in San Diego. I hope to continue this dialogue in the near future. There are many more questions I’d like to ask him.

JF: In your talk, you described Jewish leftists infiltrating and ultimately undermining the Palestinian Solidarity movement – why? What is their ultimate goal?

GA: In an interview a few years back, Philip Weiss, the chief editor of the Jewish pro-Palestinian website Mondoweiss, admitted to me in plain terms that, in his eyes, pro-Palestinian activism serves “Jewish self interests.”

Such a Jewish activity conveys a (misleading) image of Jewish political pluralism. It suggests that not all Jews are “bad,” Jewish politics can even be ethical and universal.

Evidently, Jewish liberals are angry with me for unveiling the deceit that is embedded in such an attitude. They have invested a great effort attempting to silence me, and for a good reason – I have produced some persuasive arguments suggesting that Jewish solidarity is not the solution, it is actually the core of the problem.

In fact, the Jewish Left is far more problematic and dangerous than hardcore right-wing Zionism. Zionism is a celebration of the Jewish “symptom,” so to speak. The so-called “anti” are set to deny the rest of us an access to the symptom.

If Jewish power is defined as the power to suppress the discussion on Jewish power, Mondoweiss, Jewish Voices for PeaceDemocracy Now!Noam Chomsky and others are there to pursue with that task day and night.

They crudely restrict the boundaries of the discourse by means of political correctness. Mondoweiss went as far as banning any criticism of Israel within the context of Jewishness. This duplicitous attempt to subvert the discourse worked for a while. However, not anymore, and I take some credit for it.

Together with other thinkers and commentators, I have been pointing at a controlled opposition apparatus that is committed solely to “Jewish self interests,” as Philip Weiss was either brave or foolish enough to admit back in 2011.

JF: How is the Palestinian Solidarity movement or pro-Palestine cause now framed in Jewish terms and related to overall Jewish interests?

GA: As I showed in my San Diego talk, while in the past it was the Palestinian right of return that defined the Palestinian cause in ethical, political and legal terms, the growing domination of liberal Jews within the movement diluted this elementary right. It was replaced by a tsunami of misleading and faulty terminology that was set to appease some diaspora Jews and whatever is left of the Israeli Left. All of that was done at the expense of the Palestinians.

While the right of return located the Palestinian plight within historical, political, legal and moral context, the newly imposed terminology i.e., “End of Occupation”, “Colonialism”, “Apartheid”, and even the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement (post-2010), is legitimizing the Jewish state within pre-1967 borders. It dismisses the refugees, Gaza, and the Palestinian diaspora’s plight entirely.

It instead engages only with issues that are relevant to the West Bank, and why? Because the West Bank is subject of an internal Jewish debate. While the vast majority of world Jewry sees the West Bank as an integral part of greater Eretz Yisrael, a few liberal Jews in Manhattan insist that Tel Aviv is the true fulfillment of the Zionist project. The meaning of it is tragic. Thanks to the growing domination of Jews within the Palestinian Solidarity movement, the entire movement has been reduced into a Jewish internal debate. This may explain why the solidarity movement has achieved nothing as far as Palestine is concerned. It was born to fail and it achieved its goal.

In short, the Palestinian Solidarity movement is now a Jewish movement devoted to solidarity with the Jews. This could have been an amusing development unless there was a tragedy of another people involved.

JF: Can you comment on how the Palestinian Solidarity movement has become part of the larger overall social justice movement (LGBT rights, immigrant rights, feminism, etc.) in recent years?

GA: The Palestinian Solidarity movement becoming a part of a large social justice movement could have been a great and welcome development. Yet, one may wonder, is the breaking of society into identity politics sectors or factions such a great development? Obviously not.

In the last six decades the working people have been plundered repeatedly. The people who used to be called the working class are now the workless class, and many of them are underclass by now. But why?

Unlike the (imaginary) “old good labor-oriented Left” that promised to unite us all against capital and the Empire, the neo-Marxists and the Frankfurt Yeshiva enthusiasts invested a huge effort breaking the cohesiveness of the working people and Western society in general.

Instead of bringing people together, which was the old Left ideal, we are now split into tribal sectors. We are transformed into a matrix of a manifold of Jew-like tribal groupings defined largely by biology (color, gender, sexual preferences, race, etc). However, it is hardly surprising that Jewish identity merchants are way better than anyone else in being Jews. Jews have been practicing Jewish tribal survival strategies (identity politics and ethnocentrism) for 3000 years. This form of tribal politics is pretty new to gentiles and this may explain why identity politics has failed those who were lame enough to follow it in the first place.

We are dealing here with a multiplicity of impotent, marginal identity campaigns that are paralyzed by a strong sense of victimhood. The feminists are oppressed by masculinity, the Black is intimidated by the White, the gay is chased by the homophobe, the Muslims and their Islamophobes, and now the Palestinians also have the Zionists. We are dealing with a binary dichotomy between an imaginary and evasive “oppressor” and a concrete and lucid “victim”.

But here is the problem: those who indulge in a victimhood narrative end up in a state of paralysis – they learn to blame others yet vindicate themselves. Those who succumb to victimhood never look in the mirror; they never take responsibility for their fate.

For more than a while we have been witnessing a few Western Palestinians and Jewish liberals spreading hollow and misleading terminology that has removed the conflict from Palestine and their resistance; colonialism, apartheid, BDS –  everything but building Palestinian rockets or military defiance. This development obviously served the Jewish state. Instead of fighting Palestinian freedom fighters, the conflict was reduced into a meaningless exchange between two Jewish positions.

Though some Western Palestinians and NGOs joined this well-funded corrosive liberal Jewish project, Hamas didn’t fall into this trap. IDF infantry units were minced in Gaza last summer. They were met with fierce Palestinian resistance. While Chomsky debated Dershowitz on some questions to do with “the future of Palestine,” young Palestinians were preparing for battle. While the liberal Zionist George Soros’s Open Society funded a BDS LGBT tour in America, young Hamas engineers were digging tunnels and building rockets in Gaza. I am convinced that Palestinian Muslim leaders in Gaza grasped at a certain stage that the struggle for Palestinian queer politics may not be the definitive path toward Palestinian liberation.

False Flag in Kramatorsk

The Saker

 As always before any important negotiation, the US backed junta has executed yet another false flag, this time by firing at the city of Kramatorsk.  For all the details, please click here for a full analysis in Russian and here for a machine translated version of the same article.  The bottom line is this: the missile strike came from a location to the southwest of Kramatorsk, at least 35 miles away from the closets Novorussian positions.
To add “moral credibility” to this latest false flag, Poroshenko invited the French pseudo-philosopher but Ueber-Zionist warmonger Bernard Henri Levi (aka BHL) to inspect the results for himself.  Good move, but to add absolutely unimpugnable moral authority, Poroshenko should have also invited Elie Wiesel too.

Poroshenko and BHL – but where is Elie Wiesel?

Maybe next time?

The Saker

Donetsk PM: Ukraine run by ‘miserable’ Jews

Ukraine SITREP January 27th: Zionists, Nazis and a bit of history

TUESDAY, JANUARY 27, 2015

The Saker

The Zionists:

Oh this is too good!!!  My two “favorite” Russia-hating Ueber-Zionists join forces in the New York Times to call for the salvation of the Nazi Junta in Kiev by a massive injection of capital.

Priceless.

Here is what they wrote: (full text)

Save the New Ukraine

A NEW Ukraine was born a year ago in the pro-European protests that helped to drive President Viktor F. Yanukovych from power. And today, the spirit that inspired hundreds of thousands to gather in the Maidan, Kiev’s Independence Square, is stronger than ever, even as it is under direct military assault from Russian forces supporting separatists in eastern Ukraine.

The new Ukraine seeks to become the opposite of the old Ukraine, which was demoralized and riddled with corruption. The transformation has been a rare experiment in participatory democracy; a noble adventure of a people who have rallied to open their nation to modernity, democracy and Europe. And this is just the beginning.

This experiment is remarkable for finding expression not only in defending Ukraine’s territorial integrity from the separatists, but also in constructive work. Maidan’s supporters have moved from opposition to nation building.

Many of those in government and Parliament are volunteers who have given up well-paying jobs to serve their country. Natalie Jaresko, a former investment banker, now works for a few hundred dollars a month as the new finance minister. Volunteers are helping Ukraine’s one million internally displaced people as well as working as advisers to ministers and in local government.

The new Ukraine, however, faces a potent challenge from the old Ukraine. The old Ukraine is solidly entrenched in a state bureaucracy that has worked hand in hand with a business oligarchy. And the reformers are also up against the manifest hostility of Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin, who wants at all costs to destabilize Ukraine.

One drawback is that the new Ukraine is a well-kept secret, not just from the rest of the world but also from the Ukrainian public. Radical reforms have been hatched but not yet implemented.

It is instructive to compare Ukraine today with Georgia in 2004. When he became president that year, Mikheil Saakashvili immediately replaced the hated traffic police and removed the roadblocks used to extort bribes from drivers. The public recognized straight away that things had changed for the better.

Unfortunately, Ukraine has not yet found a similar demonstration project. Kiev’s police force is to be restructured, but if you need a driver’s license, you must still pay the same bribe as before.

Mr. Saakashvili was a revolutionary leader who first stamped out corruption but eventually turned it into a state monopoly. By contrast, Ukraine is a participatory democracy that does not rely on a single leader but on checks and balances. Democracies move slowly, but that may prove an advantage in the long run.

The big question is, will there be a long run? Although Russia is in a deepening financial crisis, Mr. Putin appears to have decided that he can destroy the new Ukraine before it can fully establish itself and before an economic downturn destroys his own popularity.

The Russian president is stepping up the military and financial pressure on Ukraine. Over the weekend, the city of Mariupol came under attack from forces that NATO said were backed by Russian troopsundermining the pretense that the separatists are acting on their own.

Ukraine will defend itself militarily, but it urgently needs financial assistance. The immediate need is for $15 billion. But to ensure Ukraine’s survival and encourage private investment, Western powers need to make a political commitment to provide additional sums, depending on the extent of the Russian assault and the success of Ukraine’s reforms.

The reformers, who want to avoid the leakages that were characteristic of the old Ukraine, have expressed their wish to be held accountable for all expenditures. They are passing extensive legislation but also want the International Monetary Fund to go on exercising oversight.

Unfortunately, just as democracies are slow to move, an association of democracies like the European Union is even slower. Mr. Putin is exploiting this.

It is not only the future of Ukraine that’s at stake, but that of the European Union itself. The loss of Ukraine would be an enormous blow; it would empower a Russian alternative to the European Union based on the rule of force rather than the rule of law. But if Europe delivered the financial assistance that Ukraine needs, Mr. Putin would eventually be forced to abandon his aggression. At the moment, he can argue that Russia’s economic troubles are caused by Western hostility, and the Russian public finds his argument convincing.

If, however, Europe is generous with its financial assistance, a stable and prosperous Ukraine will provide an example that makes clear that the blame for Russia’s financial troubles lies with Mr. Putin. The Russian public might then force him to emulate the new Ukraine. Europe’s reward would be a new Russia that has turned from a potent strategic threat into a potential strategic partner. Those are the stakes.

The way the NYT presents these two bloodthirsty clowns is also typical.  One, Soros, is a “philanthropist” while the other, Levi, is a “philosopher”.  They might as well have presented them as modern day saints.

Clearly, the Neocons and their Zionist allies are in a full-war mode, they fear that their russophobic Nazi regime in Kiev is going to tank and they are terrified at the consequences. As they should.

The Nazis:

Well, just as predicted the Rada in Kiev has declared Russia an “aggressor state“.  Now all that is needed to “prove” their point is a major false flag to show that hordes of Spetsnaz GRU throat-cutters are slaughtering babies in their cribs (Kuwait), blowing up peaceful shoppers (Markale market), committing genocide (Srebrenica), massacring villages (Racak) or using Viagra as a weapon of war (Libya).  Then Putin needs to be upgraded form “new Stalin” to “new Hitler” (or both) and, voilà, the US and NATO will have to “shoulder their historical burden” of having to defend “civilization, human right, freedom and progress” against the revanchist Russian aggressor.

I am sorry to have to say that, but I consider a large scale false flag a virtual inevitability by now.  God willing, the Junta is in too much disarray and chaos to make it happen, but I think that everybody in the Novorussian resistance needs to go to “red alert” for some crazy move by the Junta.

The belly is still fertile from which the foul beast sprang

Guys, I am constantly getting a flow of comments about “Jews this Jews that”, “Nazis this, Nazis that”, and the “killer argument” “Jews cannot be Nazis and Nazis cannot be Jews”.  Guys, think again.  Look at all Zionists and Nazis have in common:

1) the belief in the existence of races/ethnicities
2) the belief in the superiority of their own race/ethnicity
3) the morbid obsession with blood and racial purity
4) a phenomenal propensity to use violence to achieve their goals
5) the belief that their opponents are not really human
6) a morbid interest for the occult (Ahnenerbe, Kabbalism)
7) a rabid hatred for Russia, Russians and Orthodoxy

Now, of course, they also happened to hate each other.  So what?  Trotskists hated Stalinists and vice versa, the SS hated the SA and vice versa and the Jesuits hated the Lutherans and vice versa.  But in each case these movement spring from the same well (Bolshevism, National-Socialism and Frankish Papism).

Zionism and Nazism are born from the same fetid womb: 19th European secular nationalism and, as Brecht so well put it: the belly is still fertile from which the foul beast sprang.  This is also the root of Ukrainian nationalism, Russian pan-Slavism, and many other ideologies.  Most of them have lost traction and have been repudiated, but in Israel Zionism is still the main official state ideology and the same is true for the part of the ex-Ukraine run by the Nazi junta in Kiev.

Now, sincere there are apparently quite a few of you who still hold on to racist/racialist ideas, I feel the need to repeat here what I wrote in my postAngloZionist: Short primer for the newcomers:

Now this might seem basic, but so many people miss it, that I will have to explicitly state it: to say that most US elites are Anglos or Jews does not mean that most Anglos or Jews are part of the US elites. That is a straw-man argument which deliberately ignores the noncommutative property of my thesis to turn it into a racist statement which accuses most/all Anglos or Jews of some evil doing. So to be very clear:
When I speak of AngloZionist Empire I am referring to the predominant ideology of the 1%ers elites which for this Empire’s “deep state”.
By the way, there are non-Jewish Zionists (Biden, in his own words) and there are (plenty of) anti-Zionist Jews. Likewise, there are non-Anglo imperialists and there are (plenty of) anti-imperialists Anglos. To speak of “Nazi Germany” or “Soviet Russia” does in now way imply that all Germans were Nazis or all Russian s Communists. All this means it that the predominant ideology of these nations at that specific moment in time was National-Socialism and Marxism, that’s all.

This is why the listing of Jews in power in Kiev because what is missing from the picture is either a list of all Jews who are not in power in Kiev or the list ofall non-Jews who are in power in Kiev, or both.

Zionism is to Jews what National-Socialism is to Germans and what Communism is to Russians: a pathology triggered by a slight, but crucial, modification of these nation’s “spiritual DNA”.  This is like comparing healthy tissue to a malignant tumor: very similar but different enough to be fatal.

The real enemy:

The real enemy is not the Jew, the German or the Russian, of course. The real enemy are evil, satanic ideologies. As Saint Paul so eloquently put it: For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms (Eph. 6:12).  He did not say the “1%ers” of course, but if you ask me, this is close enough.

I recently got an email from a friend who asked me to stop using the word “Ukie” and I decided to follow his advice because even if some, or even most, Ukrainians nowadays might support the regime of freaks in Kiev, some, even maybe most, do not.

Yes, Soros and BHL are Jews.  Real evil, bloodthirstily and ugly buffoons whom I despise from the very bottom of my heart.  And yes, there ideology is the kind of Neocon Zionism which has become so popular in the USA and, in the past decades, in Israel (original Zionists were dramatically different, socialists, secularists and, actually, I think honest, if mistaken, idealists).  Oh, not that I believe for one second that either one of them sincerely cares about his fellow Jews or about Israel.  Not at all.  Contrary to the popular belief, one does not need to care for Israel at all to be a Zionist.  Are you shocked by that statement?  Okay, here me out.  Here is what I wrote in my “primer”:

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

So  we need to be very careful here.  First, we cannot fight an Empire whose nature and essence we do not understand.  Second, we cannot fight an enemy whom we cannot even name.  I therefore submit that speaking of the AngloZionist Empire is not only correct, but even crucial: “Anglo” refers to historical roots and geopolitical reality, “Zionist” refers to its ideological world view.  HOWEVER, as soon as we start “counting Jews” or saying that Nazis and Jews cannot be in the same junta, we are immediately falling back into a completely discredited 19th century West European ideology which has triggered many millions of deaths in all the major wars of the past couple of centuries.

This is bull.  Acting like a bull.  In a corrida.

Personally, I don’t even believe that the word “race”.  Here again, I will quote my “primer”

First, I don’t believe that Jews are a race or an ethnicity. I always doubted that, but reading Shlomo Sand really convinced me. Jews are not defined by religion either (most/many are secular). Truly, Jews are a tribe. A group one can chose to join (Elizabeth Taylor) or leave (Gilad Atzmon). In other words, I see “Jewishness” as a culture, or ideology, or education or any other number of things, but not something rooted in biology. I fully agree with Atzmon when he says that Jews are racist, but not a race. Second, I don’t even believe that the concept of “race” has been properly defined and, hence, that it has any objective meaning. I therefore don’t differentiate between human beings on the basis of an undefined criterion.

But I am aware that there are people out there who consider themselves as Jews or Jewish (never understood the difference between these two terms, but nevermind).  I say – let them.  But let’s not paint them as the enemy when the enemy is a tribal ideology which is shared by millions of people who do not consider themselves as Jews (US Evangelicals, for starters, millions of them).

If we miss the real target and get distracted by the fake one put in front of us by the real enemy, we will act just like a bull in a Spanish corrida: we will always miss the real enemy who will exhaust us and then kill us.

Let’s us please be smarter and stop constantly chasing the wrong enemy.  Let’s hit the real enemy there where he really is, there where he hides, there were it will really hurt him.  Let’s accurately name him.  His name is “Legion” because he has many ideologies and manifestations and he shows up in any and all human groups.

One last thing: I am truly sick and tired of moderating comments about “Jew this, Jews that” or “Nazis this, Nazis that”.  So, exceptionally, I will not allow any comments on this post at all.  And if some smart ass will post a comment about that elsewhere, I will delete it.  I want the level of conversation of this blog to go up, not down, and if that means shutting up the Jew-centric trolling then I will.  My apologies to everybody else, but the last thing I want here is 700 comments rehashing all the common racist/racialist inanities which were in fashion in the 20th century.

Please read the above post carefully, please re-read my “AngloZionists: a short primer” for a fuller discussion and, whether you agree with my arguments or not, please forgive me for exceptionally not opening this one post to comments.

Kind regards to all, cheers,

The Saker

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Meet “Matros” (Sailor) the company commander who booted the Ukies out of the new terminal of the Donestk airport

The Saker

This is a photo of “Matros” (Sailor), the commander of the company of the “Sparta” battalion (commanded by the famous “Motorola”) whose men, during a counterattack, succeeded in storming the new terminal of the Donestk airport and who booted the Ukrainians out of the last location of the airport under their control.

Short news: Donetsk, Ingushetia, France, Banderastan

The Saker

1) The Ukrainian claims that they retook the terminal are false.  The attack was beat back.


2) Contrary Ukrainian claims, Motorola is not dead.  In fact, a radio-intercept of him commanding the counter-offensive tonight (9PM local time) has been posted on YouTube:

3) The Ukrainians do not have the forces needed locally for an effective counter attack.


4) In Ingushetia, 20’000 people too the the streets to denounce the European attitude towards Islam.  They were supported by a Russian Orthodox priest who was invited to take the stage and whose words were recieved with an ovation:

Fr. Andrei Missura addresses Islamic rally in Ingushetia

5)  In France, Jean Marie Le Pen has stated that “may have been the work of an “intelligence agency”, working with the connivance of French authorities“.

6) French Uber-Zionist Bernard-Henri Levi has stated that the “Party of Charlie” is now the first party of France.  

7) The Ukrainian Parliament has approved three waves of mobilization for 2015: uring the first wave, some 50,000 people will be called to military service.  The three waves planned in 2015 could bring an additional 104,000 soldiers into the military’s ranks, bringing the number of army personnel to 250,000 soldiers.

The Saker

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Paris Mass March: Where Bender and Joulani and Alloush ?

بهدوء | مليونيّة باريس؛ أين بندر والجولاني وعلّوش؟

ناهض حتر

حين يتصدّر بنيامين نتنياهو وأحمد داود أوغلو، مليونيّة باريس ضد الإرهاب؛ يكون السؤال مشروعاً، بل ملحاً، عن غياب بندر بن سلطان وأبو محمد الجولاني وزهران علّوش، عن المسيرة «الجمهورية» للتضامن مع محرري ورسّامي صحيفة «شارلي أيبدو»؛ مئات الألوف من الفرنسيين البسطاء المذعورين المفجوعين، نزلوا إلى الميادين، دفاعا عن نمط حياتهم، وإصرارا على القيم الجمهورية، في تحدٍ جماهيري للإرهابيين ــــ الأدوات؛ إنما يغدو المشهد كاريكاتوريا، طالما أنهم يصطفّون وراء الإرهابيين ــــ القادة، وفي مقدمهم فرنسوا هولاند.

تابع هولاند، بإلحاح أكبر، سياسات سلفه نيكولا ساركوزي، القائمة على استخدام الجماعات التكفيرية الإرهابية لتحقيق أوهام استعادة الاستعمار الفرنسي في سوريا؛ المخابرات الفرنسية استنفرت، منذ 2011، كل قواها، لتصنيع وتأهيل وتلميع معارضين سوريين مرتبطين بها، أنفقت أموالا، وهربت أسلحة، وقدمت الدعم السياسي والإعلامي للمسلحين في سوريا، وتمنعت، علناً، عن منع المجاهدين الفرنسيين من السفر إلى تركيا فسوريا؛ ذلك أن باريس «لا تستطيع أن تمنع مواطنيها من المشاركة في القتال في سبيل الحرية»! ورغم كل التحولات، حتى في المواقف الأميركية والأوروبية، الأكثر براغماتية، ظلت باريس متمسكة بهدف اسقاط الدولة السورية، بأي ثمن… يدفعه الشعب السوري؛ لكن، كان ما سوف يكون بالضرورة، صار على الفرنسيين أن يواجهوا، هم أيضا، القتل على أيدي الجماعات التي دعمها حكّامهم.
في ليبيا، كانت فرنسا هي الأفعى الأكثر نشاطا وسمّا؛ «المفكر الغربي»، برنار هنري ليفي، وجد أذنا صاغية لدى ساركوزي: «هذه فرصة فرنسا»! ومن جهته، «المفكر العربي»، عزمي بشارة، هاج وماج وراء التدخل القَطري لإسقاط العقيد معمر القذافي؛ لا تنسوا، هنا، «المفكر التركي»، أحمد داود أوغلو… وتركيا، وحلف الناتو، بقيادة خلفية من الولايات المتحدة: هجوم «ديموقراطي» شامل؛ الطائرات في السماء والإرهابيون على الأرض؛ ولغوا في الدم الليبي، دمّروا البلد، وتركوها لصراع الجهاديين، مفككة، منهارة، وثلث سكانها مشردون، بينما تقترح فرنسا، تدخلا عسكريا وتمنّي المتقاتلين: سنعترف بمَن يسيطر على الحقول النفطية!
لا نريد استعادة الماضي الاستعماري الفرنسي الطويل، بكل جرائمه الأكثر بشاعة على مر التاريخ؛ فقط، نتذكر أن دور فرنسا في السنوات الأربع الكئيبة لما يسمى «الربيع العربي»، كفيل بوصمها كدولة إرهابية؛ لا نتحدث عن إرهاب الدولة فقط، بل عن دولة تستخدم الإرهابيين كأداة في السياسة الخارجية؛ الآن، الوحش يبدأ بنهش صاحبه. وهو ما يحتاج إلى تضامن عالمي مع أحد صانعي الوحوش الإرهابية!
فرنسا تثير الشفقة حقاً؛ فكل مؤامراتها وتدخلاتها وجرائمها والأثمان التي تدفعها لقاء سياساتها الوحشية، لن تنشلها من وضعها الدوني كدولة من الدرجة الثانية؛ ففي النهاية، سيأتي الأميركي، بما لديه من قدرات وبراغماتية، لكي يحصد نتائج أعمال الحلفاء الصغار، فرنسا وتركيا والسعودية الخ
حتى بنيامين نتنياهو، جاء إلى فرنسا، لكي يحصد نتائج سياساتها؛ يريد، بالمناسبة، تشليح هولاند، مواطنيه اليهود الفرنسيين؛ فلا يوجد مكان آمن لليهود، في العالم كله، سوى إسرائيل، الدولة اليهودية. هولاند يرفض، (ولم نعرف، بعد، رأي برنار ليفي الفرنسي اليهودي)، لكن مئات الإرهابيين الذين أرسلهم إلى سوريا، سيعودون، ويقدمون خدمة ترويع اليهود الفرنسيين لحليفهم الاسرائيلي؛ هذا ما سيفعله، على الأقل، أعضاء «جبهة النصرة» المدينة لتل أبيب بالكثير: المعلومات الاستخبارية، والدعم الناري، ومعالجة الجرحى.
بتعامله مع إسرائيل، ووقوفه ضد «داعش»، أثبت أبو محمد الجولاني، أنه «معتدل»، الائتلاف السوري يشهد بذلك أيضا؛ إلا أن القرار الأممي الخاطئ باعتبار «النصرة» إرهابية، حال دون حضور الجولاني، مليونية باريس؛ لكن كان على السعودية أن ترسل إلى عاصمة النور، رجلها المناضل ضد الإرهاب، زهران علّوش، أو حتى رئيسه، بندر بن سلطان؛ عندها كان مشهد المسيرة الجمهورية ضد الإرهاب، قد اكتمل!

المهم أن «داعش» كانت حاضرة في باريس؛ صحيح أن الخليفة ابو بكر البغدادي لم يحضر شخصيا، ولكن الجناح السياسي لـ «داعش»، حضر، ممثلا برئيس وزراء تركيا، أحمد داود أوغلو؛ هل هناك خلاف بين الجناحين الداعشيين، أم أنه مجرد توزيع أدوار؟ هذا ما سنعرفه في 18 شباط المقبل، حين يعقد الأميركيون، المؤتمر الدولي ضد الإرهاب؛ هناك، سيكون جون ماكين ــــ صديق البغدادي ــــ في صدارة المؤتمرين، وسيأتينا بالخبر اليقين.
بلغت العواصم الغربية أدنى درجات الانحطاط في تاريخها؛ فعجزها عن الحرب، يفرض عليها التحالف العضوي مع التكفيريين الطائفيين الإرهابيين، سلاحها الأقوى والأرخص لتدمير المتمردين من العالم العربي إلى إيران إلى روسيا؛ أتتوقعون أن تظلوا في مأمن أيها الفرنسيون والغربيون؟ نخب مليونية البلهاء!

Related Video

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Amidst A Religious War in Europe Or Is It Just another False Flag Operation?

By Gilad Atzmon

The massacre in France was a devastating crime against freedom and the right to laugh.

But was it really executed by a bunch of lunatic irrational Muslims who to decided to kill mercilessly because their prophet was mocked?

 French people should be asking what led members of their society to commit such cold blood murders against their fellow citizens.

France should ask itself why it has been dropping bombs on Muslims. Who enthusiastically advocated these ‘interventionist’ wars? What was the role of Bernard-Henri Lévy, the prime advocate of the war against Libya for instance?

What was all this French fuss about the burka? Who led this war on Muslims at the heart of Europe? Was it really in the name of tolerance?

Freedom and laughter are precious indeed, but isn’t it the French ‘socialist’ government that has been harassing and banning the best and most successful comedian in France, Dieudonné M’bala M’bala, because he satirized the Holocaust religion? Who pushed the French government to take such harsh actions against an artist; wasn’t it the Jewish lobby group CRIF?

If Europe wants to live in peace, it might consider letting other nations live in peace. By following the whims of The Lobby we have destined Paris to the fate of Aleppo, God forbidden.

But there is an alternative narrative that turns our perception of this disastrous Paris massacre on its head.

This morning 18-year-old Hamyd Mourad, suspected to be one of the three terrorists involved in yesterday’s attack, handed himself in to the police in Charleville-Mezieres. He reportedly surrendered peacefully after hearing his name on the news. And he claims that he had nothing to do with yesterday’s event. Bizarre isn’t it? Not really.

While every anti terror expert has agreed that the attack on Charlie Hebdo yesterday was a professional job, it seems pretty amateurish for a ‘highly trained terrorist’ to leave his ID behind. And since when does a terrorist take his ID on an operation?  One possible explanation is that the so-called terrorists needed a few extra hours to leave France or disappear. They had to fool the French police and intelligence into searching the wrong places and the wrong people. Is it possible that they simply planted a stolen or forged ID card in the car they left behind?

If this was the scenario, it is possible that the attack yesterday had nothing to do with ‘Jihadi terrorism.’ It is quite probable that this was another false flag operation. Who could be behind it?  Use your imagination…

%d bloggers like this: