This coming Thursday the State of Alabama will execute Domineque Hakim Marcelle Ray, and, though all Christian inmates executed in Alabama are afforded a spiritual advisor, one permitted to have physical contact and to minister to them during their final moments, Mr. Ray will not be granted this same measure of human dignity. Why? For one reason, and one reason only: he’s Muslim.
Over 60 years ago, Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote that “[t]he basic concept underlying the Eighth Amendment is nothing less than the dignity of man. While the State has the power to punish, the Amendment stands to assure that this power be exercised within the limits of civilized standards.”
Turning this concept – at the root of how we define “cruel and unusual” punishment in this country – on its head, this coming Thursday the State of Alabama will execute Domineque Hakim Marcelle Ray, and, though all Christian inmates executed in Alabama are afforded a spiritual advisor, one permitted to have physical contact and to minister to them during their final moments, Mr. Ray will not be granted this same measure of human dignity. Why? For one reason, and one reason only: he’s Muslim.
Arguing precisely this point in federal court last week, public defender Spencer Hahn urged United States District Judge W. Keith Watkins, to order, over Alabama’s religiously bigoted objections, that Mr. Ray be allowed to have his own spiritual advisor in the execution chamber – a Muslim imam, one already approved by Alabama’s Department of Corrections (ADOC) for contact visits with Ray; Hahn urged: “Why does Mr. Ray not get the same benefit as a Christian, non-Catholic condemned inmate would? If Mr. Ray were a standard, everyday Protestant Lutheran Christian, he would have a spiritual advisor there who could touch his hand and pray with him in his final moments. But because he happens to be a Muslim – and who knows if the next person is going to be a Catholic or Jewish or a Buddhist – they don’t get that benefit? We would dispute that there is a compelling governmental interest in allowing one type of religious leader into an area and not another.”
But, in a dog-whistle response, ignoring, as I’ve written elsewhere, the state’s “odious tradition of ducking and dodging death penalty accountability” for its manifold patently botched executions – executions that have devolved into excruciating medieval torture sessions because of the medically untrained personnel and unsuitable chemicals Alabama insists on using, and not remotely because of the threatened presence of a non-Christian spiritual advisor – Assistant Attorney General Richard Anderson argued: “[T]here is a very well-established interest in maintaining prison security and the safety and orderliness of prison operations. That is – that’s the main backbone of what our interest is in regulating who goes in and out of, particularly, the execution chamber itself.”
Unsubtly and unscrupulously, Anderson maintained that, in Alabama, only a Christian spiritual advisor can be trusted to maintain proper decorum and discipline during an execution, because “[y]ou know, whether overtly or inadvertently or intentionally, things could go wrong. That is the reason why we restrict access to that room.”
But what about Judge Watkins, you ask? Surely a federal judge would see through this farcical argument, one that makes an end-run around the Constitution while freely, offensively, and unjustifiably casting aspersions on any spiritual advisor not Christian?
Nope. Instead, Watkins, who once attacked the entire medical profession in a judicial opinion over the diminishing access to lethal injection drugs, ate up Anderson’s argument as if it was the most delectable piece of apple pie, served hot and piping fresh on the Fourth of July.
In Furman v. Georgia, the 1972 case in which the Supreme Court briefly struck down the death penalty in the United States, Justice William Brennan wrote in his concurrence: “Death is truly an awesome punishment. The calculated killing of a human being by the State involves, by its very nature, a denial of the person’s humanity”; Brennan complained that the “evolution of [the death penalty] evidences not that it is an inevitable part of the American scene, but that it has proved progressively more troublesome to the national conscience.”
If this is true, it is precisely in such a situation as this one involving Domineque Ray’s execution, that conscientious, justice-loving Americans, especially Alabamians, must speak up! On social media, by telephone, by post, by email, and in the street outside the offices of government, now is the time to make your objections to this pending abomination heard.
Following Justice Brennan’s noble example, we must object to religious bigotry and a lethal injection protocol that treats “members of the human race as nonhumans, as objects to be toyed with and discarded.” The time to be on record against a process disregarding “that even the vilest criminal remains a human being possessed of common human dignity” is now.
Stephen Cooper is a former D.C. public defender who worked as an assistant federal public defender in Alabama between 2012 and 2015. He has contributed to numerous magazines and newspapers in the United States and overseas. He writes full-time and lives in Woodland Hills, California.
How is Muslim Immigration to Sweden Working Out?
VIDEO : 10:28 mins
Don’t miss this video, if only for this reason: you will learn that the problem of rape and sexual assault is horrendous and widely recognized by most Swedes, but that there is a hard core of zombie feminists who take a different view of the situation: there is NO RAPE EPIDEMIC in Sweden at all, they claim! And even if there is, the Muslim immigrants are not to blame. It’s men in general who are to blame!
Over the last few years Tommy Robinson has gone from being a marginal character in the far right to a prominent figure with over one million Facebook followers. He’s also supported with lavish donations in the UK and overseas.
Over the last few years Tommy Robinson has gone from being a marginal character in the far right to a prominent figure with over one million Facebook followers. He’s also supported with lavish donations in the UK and overseas.
It’s hard to think of anyone else that has so rapidly gone from being a convicted football thug to a worldwide known political figure. Tommy Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, set up the extreme right Islamophobic English Defence League back in 2009. He has always denied being a racist and claims he does not worry about the colour of someone’s skin. But he is strongly opposed to Islamist ideology, although he claims not to be opposed to Muslims as people. This claim was undermined when he was recorded on film saying “Somalis are backward barbarians,” and British Muslims are “enemy combatants who want to kill you, maim you and destroy you.” The film also shows him claiming that refugees are “raping their way through the country.”
In 2017 Robinson began campaigning against what he called “grooming gangs,” appearing outside the courts and denouncing the defendants because of their religion and warning that their abuse had been covered up. He was arrested for contempt of court, and within just one day £20,000 in donations were raised to support him.
The following year Robinson was arrested again outside a court in Leeds, for contempt of court, after placing a live video on Facebook about a child exploitation trial. He was briefly jailed, and while his case was appealed his supporters staged a mass demonstration in London in July that turned violent. It was the largest right-wing demonstration since the 1970s and it was funded by a think tank in the US called Middle East Forum.
One of the activists present was Avi Yemini who denounced Islam as a barbaric ideology and claimed it had taken over England. Another speaker was Carl Benjamin who was revealed to have sent the Labour MP Jess Phillips a tweet threatening rape. Benjamin has over 880,000 YouTube subscribers and has posted videos denouncing not just Islam but feminism. He has now enrolled as a member of UKIP.
Although Robinson depicts himself as a mere underdog whose campaign against Islam has been suppressed by the establishment, he is now receiving more funding from right-wing groups than anyone else in Britain.
His growing prominence led to him being appointed as an official adviser to the UKIP party by its leader Gerard Batten, who supported the Westminster demo. In response its previous, and immensely popular leader, Nigel Farage resigned from the party after 25 years of active support, along with other prominent members.
The dramatic rise of Robinson from a marginal far-right fringe to now being followed by millions across the world shows the worrying growth of the far-right in current politics. He is now getting financial support from think tanks in the USA and Australia. This was revealed following an investigation by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, commissioned by the Guardian newspaper, that forty percent of the tweets supporting Robinson came from the US as opposed to only thirty percent from the UK. Others were also flooding in from Holland, Canada and nine other countries.
Robinson admits he has received several hundred thousand pounds in donations, but the Guardian investigation raised disturbing issues about the groups funding him. The US think tank Middle East Forum admits it has given $60,000 to support his legal fees and the London demo. The Guardian also revealed that the Middle East Forum, and other groups that supported Robinson, have themselves received nearly $5 million from four US foundations. A key supporter of these foundations is New York department store heiress, Nina Rosenwald, who gave $2.9 million. She is the president of the Gatestone Institute which regularly runs articles supporting Robinson online. Gatestone is also supported by the family of Robert Mercer, a hedge fund boss who was a key funder of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.The Foundation of Richard Mellon Scaife, a late billionaire who donated generously to conservative causes, gave $575,000 to the David Horowitz Freedom Centre, which frequently runs articles supporting Robinson.
The idea that American billionaires can impact on our politics in any way is profoundly wrong and the UK government should pass a law to ban all foreign funding in our domestic politics.
Two of the richest Americans, David and Charles Koch, who are worth $120 billion have not been seen before to be funding organisations in Britain but the Guardian’s George Monbiot revealed on December 7 that the Charles Koch Foundation had transferred money to a company that appears to be the US funding arm of a British organisation funding a magazine called Spiked.
The politics of Charles Koch were revealed back in 1978 when he wrote: “Our movement must destroy the prevalent statist paradigm.” He argues for lower taxes and deregulating businesses, yet his own company has faced massive fines for illegal emissions, ammonia pollution and oil spills. The company was found guilty in 1999 of using a corroded pipeline carrying butane which exploded and killed two people.
The Koch brothers set up the Mercatus Centre, the Cato Institute and Americans For Prosperity and over the years they have spent hundred of millions of dollars supporting those organisations that share their right-wing views. They provided vital support for the Tea Party but then moved on to support Trump by funding his transition team. Not surprisingly Trump’s administration has dramatically reduced taxes on large corporations such as those owned by the Koch brothers.
In the last two years the Charles Koch Foundation gave $300,000 to support Spiked which has denounced George Soros, Jeremy Corbyn and Black Lives Matter. It also denounced those campaigning for feminism and environmental issues. It provides strong support for the far-right columnist Katie Hopkins, Tommy Robinson, Aaron Banks, Toby Young and Viktor Orban (Hungary’s right-wing prime minister). It has consistently supported a hard Brexit without a deal.
It’s not illegal for Tommy Robinson to be getting funding from non-British political organisations but it could have a major impact on British politics. Robinson is a hard-line supporter of Brexit and Britain remains deeply divided on this crucial issue. If Robinson has enough money to mobilise his supporters to increase pressure on MPs to leave Europe without a deal the consequences for our economy could be severely damaging and lead to a surge of support for the far-right as unemployment increases following Brexit.
In the last ten years the thousand richest families in Britain have seen their wealth double while working class and middle class families have struggled to cope with savage cuts in services, and wages not keeping up with inflation. The same has happened in the USA and across the world, giant corporations have seen their profits continue to grow. It’s no surprise that the super-rich are spending hundreds of millions to influence government policies and it’s time that we campaign to force our governments to make this illegal, and supporting figures like Tommy Robinson needs to be stopped.
(MEE Op-ed) — Authorities in China have embarked on a large-scale and systematic campaign against the country’s Muslim minority, sending a staggering one million Uighurs to internment camps.
People showing any adherence to Islam in China’s northwestern Xinjiang region – praying, fasting, abstaining from alcohol or pork, growing a long beard, or wearing Islamic clothing – have been detained by authorities and treated as though they suffer from a mental illness.
Taken from their homes to re-education camps, the detainees have been forced to comply with Communist Party propaganda, which includes singing party anthems and slogans and attending daily brainwashing sessions. If they fail to submit, detainees are subjected to torture, including sleep deprivation, solitary confinement and physical violence.
Held Without Charge
Treated as “enemies of the state” solely because of their religious identity, the detainees are held without charge and often without access to legal representation, human rights activists say.
Yet, while the treatment of Uighur Muslims is shocking, it has failed to cause a global outpouring of sympathy or anger.
In 2014, authorities began using “transformation through education” to deal with Uighur Muslims amid concerns of “extremist” or “separatist” elements in the community, including reports of a few hundred Uighurs travelling to Iraq and Syria to join the Islamic State. But experts say the arrival of Communist Party leader Chen Quanguo to Xinjiang saw this programme expanded and intensified in 2017.
During the course of last year, Uighurs accounted for 21 percent of all arrests in China, even though they make up just 1.5 percent of the population.
News of discrimination and prejudice against the minority has repeatedly filtered out of China, but the events of the past year – including comments last month from the head of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, which stated that Beijing had “turned the Uighur autonomous region into something that resembles a massive internment camp” – have lent credibility to a story that most would rather pretend didn’t exist.
While international media have predictably started to ask questions about the treatment of China’s Uighurs, leaders and governments around the world have carefully steered clear of the issue. The silence has been startling.
China’s position as an immense economic power, able to wield tremendous political clout over governments around the world, is without question. But not one of the 49 Muslim-majority countries around the globe have asked for clarity or condemned the Chinese for the escalation of human rights abuses in Xinjiang.
Last week, leaders from more than 40 countries – including many with sizeable Muslim populations – travelled to Beijing for the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation. President Xi Jinping pledged $60bn to the continent in development initiatives and promised to cancel debts of those nations struggling to repay them.
For all the talk of Africa being “an equal partner” and the relations being a “win-win”, not one African leader dared to ask their hosts for clarity on the rights violations reported.
Clearly, “trade” between China and the Arab world and “economic development” in Africa is way more important than institutionalised bigotry on the part of their benefactor, an emphatic endorsement of China’s policy of non-interference in the domestic issues of the countries it deals with.
Yet Paul Kagame, Rwanda’s president and the current head of the African Union, described China’s engagement with the continent as “deeply transformational”, noting: “We will also open new pathways on environmental protection and scale up people-to-people exchanges.”
By refusing to raise legitimate concerns with their Chinese counterparts over the treatment of the Uighur population, those Muslim and African leaders in attendance were complicit in what is essentially a project of social engineering.
This is the same inertia that led to the murder and expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Rohingya Muslims from Myanmar’s Rakhine state in 2017, in what is now being openly called a genocide.
It is the same silence that accompanied India’s decision to potentially strip some four million people – mostly Muslims – of their citizenship in the northeastern state of Assam. They are now described as imposters and foreigners.
This same lacklustre approach has also allowed the US to continue to ban citizens of several Muslim countries, without so much as a whimper from the African and Arab world.
New World Order
The humiliation suffered by Uighurs, and the silence that has accompanied these disclosures, emphasises the rise of a new world order.
Xinjiang has long acted as a test-site for the Chinese government to experiment with new modes and methods of control; with endless checkpoints, including facial-recognition systems fitted on street corners across villages in the province, Uighurs face endless scrutiny. It may be among the most policed areas on the planet.
Should such conditions go unchallenged, activists say, these policies could easily be replicated by other countries looking to repress or control minorities.
With fascism knocking on our doors from India to the US, such concerns have never been more pressing.
Europe has had enough. Critical mass over the refugee crisis has been reached. Any sane person could have predicted what the influx of millions of asylum seekers and economic migrants would do to a cohesive European Union. And today, European citizens are astonished at how their trust in leadership has led to a growing catastrophe. It’s time for Europe to reassess the EU and the course for the future.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel was at the head of a cadre of European leaders that rammed ultra-liberalism down the throats of European Union citizens when the migrant crisis began. She was the poster girl for the liberal world order back in 2014 when the continent started being overrun with refugees. Today, Europe’s most popular leader looks like the sacrificial lamb the globalists will offer up to serve their destructive needs. The madness of importing millions of refugees from Africa and the Middle East will end up being all about Merkel and German idealism. But, her folly is only a bit part in the greater drama enacted by her colleagues in Brussels. Still, Merkel’s Bavarian CSU allies have given her until the end of the EU summit to reduce the burden of immigration on Germany. If she does not soften the impact of taking in 1.6 million migrants since 2014, she will certainly lose her job and reputation.
For those people who are astonished at the current situation, the logical question to EU leaders has risen; “What were they thinking?” And this is the right question for people of every country in the world. In Italy, Interior Minister Matteo Salvini has taken a stand. The Italians don’t want another boat from Libya to land ferrying African migrants. In Malta, the government has taken legal action against the German NGO Mission Lifeline responsible for delivering 234 migrants from Libya to its shores. The boat is at the center of a growing concern over human trafficking from those who say these German NGO efforts are not “rescue missions,” but virtual slavery endeavors instead. Where once Angela Merkel’s rare form of liberalism impressed average Germans, today there’s savage dissent.
The political crisis for the EU is most fittingly illustrated in statements from French President Emmanuel Macron, who said Mission Lifeline defied “all the rules and the Libyan coast guard” and “played into the hands of smugglers” when it picked up these migrants off Libya. From Warsaw and Budapest to London and Madrid the migrant disaster has sunk into the extent that world order media in Europe reports the citizen ire. Meanwhile, in New York and Washington, the press stands up for the Soros doctrine – destroy and conquer by any means. The New York Times leads in chanting “Malta Cracks Down on a Humanitarian Ship That Carried Migrants.” This stands in sharp contrast to Deutsche Welle’s “Germany and Austria vow to close immigration route.” For those who recall, these media outlets stood in stoic homogeneousness the day Russia’s Vladimir Putin asked, “Do you even realize what you have done?” Now it’s clear that the globalists weaponized desperate human beings. But to what end? Were the Hungarians right in defying the EU to create a package of bills that criminalized some help given to illegal immigrants, the laws also known as the “Stop Soros Package?” Before the migrant issue is decided, we may see even stricter regulations.
Look at Spain, Italy, and Greece, the hardest hit EU countries since the economic crisis. These three countries are the main entry ports for refugees from wars, famine, and economic disadvantage – and the fact the trio are hammered the hardest by the central Europeans. When Angela Merkel opened the door to Germany for these people, she drove a stake through the heart of EU member states already staggered by World Bank, IMF, and European Commission austerity and economic demands. The whole affair looks like a manual deconstruct. If a Soros-like crash of civilization was the goal, the meltdown occurring in European cities is a big win for the elites who dream up such things. And the western leadership points the finger at Putin and Russia as the dastardly enemy. What Merkel did to Germany, and Europe rivals Hitler’s Third Reich in her macabre stupidity – or her willing salute to the new order. The migrant crisis is either the result of a merciless act of warped hegemony or the most blatantly stupid policy goof in history. All we can do is hope that more sane or intelligent minds will eventually prevail.
What a disaster.
Phil Butler, is a policy investigator and analyst, a political scientist and expert on Eastern Europe, he’s an author of the recent bestseller “Putin’s Praetorians” and other books. He writes exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”
Islam is filling the cultural vacuum of a society with no children and which believes — wrongly — it has no enemies.
In Sweden, by 2050, almost one in three people will be Muslim.
The European mainstream mindset now seems to believe that “evil” comes only from our own sins: racism, sexism, elitism, xenophobia, homophobia, the guilt of the heterosexual white Western male — and never from non-European cultures. Europe now postulates an infinite idealization of the “other”, above all the migrant.
A tiredness seems to be why these countries do not take meaningful measures to defeat jihadism, such as closing Salafist mosques or expelling radical imams.
Muslim extremists understand this advantage: so long as they avoid another enormous massacre like 9/11, they will be able to continue taking away human lives and undermining the West without awakening it from its inertia.
In a prophetic conference held in Vienna on May 7, 1935, the philosopher Edmund Husserl said, “The greatest danger to Europe is tiredness”. Eighty years later, the same fatigue and passivity still dominate Western European societies.
It is the sort of exhaustion that we see in Europeans’ falling birth rates, the mushrooming public debt, chaos in the streets, and Europe’s refusal to invest resources in its security and military might. Last month, in a Paris suburb, the Basilica of Saint Denis, where France’s Christian kings are buried, was occupied by 80 migrants and pro-illegal-immigration activists. The police had to intervene to free the site.
Pictured: French police eject some of the 80 migrants and pro-illegal-immigration activists who occupied the Basilica of Saint Denis, on March 18, 2018. (Image source: Video screenshot, YouTube/Kenyan News & Politics)
Stephen Bullivant, a professor of theology and the sociology of religion at St Mary’s University in London, recently published a report, “Europe’s Young Adults and Religion”:
“Christianity as a default, as a norm, is gone, and probably gone for good – or at least for the next 100 years,” Bullivant said.
According to Bullivant, many young Europeans “will have been baptised and then never darken the door of a church again. Cultural religious identities just aren’t being passed on from parents to children. It just washes straight off them… “And we know the Muslim birthrate is higher than the general population, and they have much higher [religious] retention rates.”
Richard Dawkins, an atheist and the author of The God Delusion, responded to the study’s release by tweeting to his millions of Twitter followers:
Before we rejoice at the death throes of the relatively benign Christian religion, let’s not forget Hilaire Belloc’s menacing rhyme:
“Always keep a-hold of nurse
For fear of finding something worse.”
Dawkins is apparently concerned that that after the demise of Christianity in Europe, there will not be an atheistic utopia, but a rising Islam.
That is the major point of what Philippe Bénéton in his book The Moral Disorder of the West (“Le dérèglement moral de l’Occident“): Islam is filling the cultural vacuum of a society with no children and which believes — wrongly — it has no enemies.
According to Radio Sweden, fewer newborns in that country are being baptized due to the demographic shift. By 2050, almost one in three people in Sweden will be Muslim, according to a recent Pew report
The European mainstream mindset now seems to believe that “evil” comes only from our own sins: racism, sexism, elitism, xenophobia, homophobia, the guilt of the heterosexual white Western male –and never from non-European cultures. So Europe now postulates an infinite idealization of the “other”, above all the migrant. The heritage and legacy of Western civilization gets sectioned off piece by piece so that nothing remains; our values are mocked and our survival instinct is inhibited. It is a process of decomposition that Europe’s political authorities seem to have decided to mediate, as if it were inevitable. Now, the European Union waits to receive the next surge of migrants, from Africa.
In German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s major speech in the Bundestag after the unprecedentedly long and difficult process of forming a new government, she struck a conciliatory tone on immigration while offering an inclusive message on Islam. “With 4.5 million Muslims living with us, their religion, Islam, has also become a part of Germany”, she said.
The most powerful politician in Europe capitulated: she evidently forgot (again) the difference between the civil rights of individuals, which Muslim citizens enjoy in Germany, and the sources of a national identity, on which Europe is based: humanistic, Judeo-Christian values. This realization may why a week earlier the new German Interior minister, Horst Seehofer, said that “Germany has been shaped by Christianity” and not by Islam.
Europe’s tiredness can also be seen in a generational conflict embodied in the alarming rise of public debt. In Italy, the political establishment was recently shaken up by the election of two major populist parties. It is a country with a public debt of 40,000 euros per capita, and a tax burden equal to 43.3% of GDP. The average age of the population is the third oldest in the world, together with one of the lowest birthrates on the planet, one of the lowest retirement ages in Europe and the highest social security spending-to-GDP ratio in the Western world. It is also a country where pensions account for one-third of all public spending and where the percentage of pensioners in proportion to workers will rise from 37% today to 65% in 2040 (from three workers who support one pensioner to three workers who support two pensioners).
An Islamist challenge to this tired and decaying society could be a decisive one. Only Europe’s Christian population is barren and aging. The Muslim population is fertile and young. “In most European countries—including England, Germany, Italy and Russia, Christian deaths outnumbered Christian births from 2010 to 2015,” writes the Wall Street Journal.
Terrorist attacks will continue in Europe. Recently, in Trèbes, southern France, a jihadist took hostages in a supermarket and claimed allegiance to ISIS. It seems that Europe’s societies consider themselves so strong and their ability to absorb mass immigration so extensive, that nothing will prevent them from believing they can assimilate and manage terrorist acts as they have automobile fatalities or natural disasters. A tiredness also seems to be why these countries do not take meaningful measures to defeat jihadism, such as closing Salafist mosques or expelling radical imams.
Muslim extremists understand this advantage: so long as they avoid another enormous massacre like 9/11, they will be able to continue murdering people and undermining the West without awakening it from its inertia. The most likely scenario is that everything will continue: the internal fracture of Europe, two parallel societies and the debasement of Western culture. Piece by piece, European society seems to be coming irreparably apart.
When are we going to say that enough is enough? According to Act For America, more than 30,000 documented terror attacks have taken place around the world since September 11th, 2001. And in case you were wondering, almost all of those terror attacks were committed by radical Islamic terrorists. According to one website that tracks these things, in 2017 alone “there were 2035 Islamic attacks in 61 countries, in which 15,700 people were killed and 14,302 injured.” Even though ISIS is on the ropes, Islamic terror continues to spread, and we must boldly confront this threat.
But instead, many western nations have been eagerly importing large numbers of young males from hotbeds of Islamic terror. As a result, levels of crime are absolutely exploding. Just check out the latest crime numbers from the city of London…
For example, gun crime in London is up 15 percent, homicides are up 25 percent, including an explosion in youth homicide of 70 percent, robbery is up by more than a third.
Those numbers are extremely chilling, but there is more. According to WND, the number of acid attacks in London has “soared exponentially” in recent years…
Among the most terrifying crimes in London are acid attacks, which have soared exponentially since 2014. There were 431 such attacks record in 2016 and police report they have become the tactic of first resort for some gangs.
Acid attacks also seem to be correlated to the large Muslim population in some areas of the city.
Of course London is far from alone. Over in France, the chaos and violence never seems to end. On New Year’s Eve, more than 1,000 vehicles were set on fire, and authorities are claiming that this is a victory because that number only “slightly exceeded” the figure from last year when 935 vehicles were torched…
New Year’s Eve celebrations in France have turned out to be not only a time of joy, but also a frantic spell for police and emergency service personnel who faced mass disorder across the country.
The number of vehicles torched during the festivities that spiralled out of control in Paris and other French cities have surpassed 1,000, the French Interior Ministry said in a statement reviewing the New Year’s Eve celebrations. The number of vehicle arson attacks “slightly exceeded” last year’s figures, when 935 cars were set alight, the ministry added.
Things are getting really bad elsewhere in Europe as well.
Over in Germany, one recent study concluded that the recent spike in crime in Germany has been caused primarily by an “influx of mostly young, male migrants”. The following originally comes from Reuters…
The recent influx of mostly young, male migrants into Germany has led to an increase in violent crime in the country, according to a government-funded study published Wednesday.
The study used figures from the northern state of Lower Saxony to examine the impact of refugee arrivals on crime in 2015 and 2016, a period when the number of violent crimes reported increased by 10.4 percent.
The authors concluded that 92 percent of the additional crimes recorded could be attributed to the increase in refugee numbers.
What is happening in these western European nations is completely and utterly obvious to us, but the politically-correct crowd is still in a horrifying state of denial.
For example, just check out the storyline of a new television movie in Germany…
The TV movie “Break-out to the Unknown” (WDR/ARD Degeto), on Wednesday, 14 February 2018, at 8.15 pm, tells the tale of family fleeing a totalitarian system under life-threatening circumstances, from an unusual perspective: in the near future, Europe has collapsed into chaos. In many countries right-wing extremists have taken power. The formerly democratic state of Germany has become a totalitarian system that persecutes dissidents, Muslims and homosexuals.
As a lawyer, Jan Schneider (Fabian Busch) has taken the side of dispossessed victims. When he learns that the regime intends to put him in prison once more, he decides to flee. His goal is the South-African Union, which is enjoying political and economic stability after an economic boom. A cargo ship is to take him, his wife Sarah (Maria Simon) and both children Nora (Athena Strates) and Nick (Ben Gertz) together with other refugees to Cape Town, but the people traffickers put the passengers in boats that are far too small in front of the coast of Namibia.
And here in the United States, you can actually be arrested and prosecuted if you say the wrong things about radical Islam. The following comes from Information Liberation…
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra is attempting to prosecute 41-year-old Mark Feigin for criticizing Muslims on the Islamic Center of Southern California’s Facebook page in September 2016.
The Attorney General’s Office claims Feigin’s Facebook posts were “meant to annoy and harass” through “repeated contact by means of an electronic communication device” in violation of Cal. Penal Code § 653m(b) and should therefor not be protected by the First Amendment.
Have we gone completely and utterly insane?
We are trying to convince ourselves that radical terrorists that are committed to achieving world domination by violent means are actually solid citizens and will openly embrace us as friends if we will just treat them with kindness.
Meanwhile, the reality of the matter is that we are witnessing rape after rape and terror attack after terror attack.
In Sweden, violent gang rapes are becoming so common that incidents such as this one barely make a blip on the news anymore…
On January 21, 2017 in Uppsala, Sweden three men broke into a woman’s home armed with guns, tore off her clothes and gang raped her for three hours while livestreaming the whole attack on Facebook. Similar to other horrific rapes, the liberal mainstream media refused to unequivocally identify the offenders as Muslim immigrants. Jihad Watch reported that “The Swedish publication NyheterIdag says that the attackers were “nysvenskar,” that is, “new Swedes,” which is the establishment media euphemism for Muslim migrants.” A 21 year old woman came forward after she saw the Facebook broadcast and stated that she recognized one of the perpetrators who raped her 15 months earlier.
If you are “pro-woman”, you should be speaking out about this. But instead, many have been trained to believe that they can’t stand up and defend these victims because it might not be “politically-correct” to do so.
The goal of radical Islam is to completely dominate the entire globe. The intend to dominate us physically, mentally, emotionally, financially and spiritually. Omar Ahmad, the founder of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), once made the following statement about what his organization’s ultimate goals are…
Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Quran should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth.
We are not going to allow these jihadists to install their totalitarian system in the United States. They are the enemies of liberty and freedom, and we are going to fight their agenda every step of the way.
The regimes of Saudi Arabia, Israel and beyond this, successive US leaders have been engaged in a long-time disinformation campaign against the Lebanese political party and and popular resistance movement, Hezbollah.
Hezbollah is today, one of the most dynamic political forces in Lebanon whose firm opposition to the Takfiri terrorism of groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS has been vindicated by the victory of the Syrian government over foreign funded jihadists.
Hezbollah traces its origins back to the second phase of the Lebanese civil war. After Israel invaded and occupied Lebanon in 1982 and began exploiting Lebanon’s sectarian tensions, Hezbollah officially formed in 1985 as an anti-occupation resistance movement whose primary goal was freeing Lebanon of foreign occupation.
The same year Israel invaded Lebanon, it orchestrated the Sabra and Shatila massacre in which 3,500 Palestinian and Lebanese civilians were brutally slaughtered. This event was pivotal in helping to galvanise the volunteers who would eventually form Hezbollah as a means of defending those who were erstwhile defenceless.
Since the official end of the Lebanese Civil War in 1990, Hezbollah has consolidated its experience and has become a highly influential political movement. Although centred around its Shi’a core in southern and eastern Lebanon, Hezbollah has come to win support from many diverse factions which comprise Lebanese society.
During his recent trip to Moscow, Lebanese Foreign Minister Geral Bassil of the primarily Maronite Christian Free Patriotic Movement, praised Hezbollah’s role in keeping Lebanon safe from jihadist terrorism. Hezbollah’s armed wing serves as a kind of national guard for Lebanon and in recent years, Hezbollah has volunteered to aid the Syrian Arab Army along with its Russian and Iranian allies in fighting terrorism. Hezbollah recently conducted joint operations with the Syrian Arab Army which resulted in the full defeat of al-Qaeda/al-Nusra and ISIS along the mountainous Syria-Lebanon border.
Today, Hezbollah has the third highest number of seats of any party in the majority March 8 Alliance in the Lebanese parliament. Hezbollah also has two cabinet ministers in the coalition government.
Hezbollah which styles itself as the Islamic Resistance of Lebanon is opposed to further Saudi influence in Lebanon while seeking to maintain partnerships with Iran and Syria. Hezbollah continues to win votes as its volunteers build many roads, schools and hospitals in Lebanon, in areas that the central government has traditionally neglected.
Now watch this new video about the past, present and future of Hezbollah:
“For the moment, let’s forget the $9 billion dollar trade deficit the US has with Israel, and focus on the $38 billion US Senator Lindsey Graham and others approved for Israeli defense recently.
$38 billion dollars divided by 453,000 out of work vets, that’s $83,885.21 rounded to the nearest cent for each-and-every GI Joe or Jane out there. But I know it will take some IMPACT here for readers to share this with ALL their Average Joe friends out there. Let me spell this out. No funds for the IDF to blast Palestinians to smithereens – 453,000 new businesses and zero unemployment for down and out vets.”
“Average Joe”, who’s an American veteran down on his luck, he could have begun his own landscaping or mechanic business when hard times came. Only Uncle Sam was too broken to gift good old Joe $30,000 or so to get things rolling. It’s too bad, because Joe got a bronze star and lost a leg over there in Iraq. If Joe’s family only knew how Zionist, pig bankers had cost millions of Americans an alternative future, then maybe we’d all stand a better chance of life and liberty. But, they don’t know yet.
For a couple of years now I’ve laid awake nights trying to figure out how to convey to my countrymen the catastrophic abuse of power leveraged by Israel’s Washington based henchmen. At first, I was like most people, worried friends and enemies alike might call me an “anti-Semite” for the insinuation of Zionist lobby skullduggery. Then, a murdered and sodomized Libyan leader made fun of by a presidential candidate, and a few tens of thousands of dead kids over there in Syria, Yemen, and in Gaza, and some more in Yemen, they caused me not to give a damn what people label me as. But wait, what about my Jewish friends? What would they think if I jumped feet first into Bibi Netanyahu and his AIPAC vampires? Alas, my Jewish pals mostly got fed up too, at envisioning the bitter end of an abusive Israeli regime. None of them want a Hitler “final solution” on a global scale. And that’s where Tel Aviv is headed in my opinion. Seeing Netanyahu dangle US President Donald Trump like a wooden puppet in front of a live audience – well, the jig is up for most sane people I think. Realizing just how dastardly these Israeli (Zion Israel that is) interests are, that’s what spurred me to find the “Average Joe” quotient! The slap across the face that hopefully wakes some Americans the hell up.
The All-American Hobo
Let’s profile our All-American Joe here. He just like most of the rest of us, you know? Joe loves his country, his neighbors, and he adores all the legends of freedom and liberty, and especially the red-white-and-blue dream, remember he’s a vet too. Even though his future got shattered and stagnated a bit while serving in the US Army, Joe lives in the same information bubble as the rest of us. He’s wrapped up tight by CNN, Hollywood, the New York Times, and the Atlanta Journal Constitution. Once a week Joe goes to the unemployment office, just like he’s told. Unable to get an even break, he does the house chores while his wife works at Burger King flipping Whoppers with cheese. Good old Joe sometimes has to go to the pawn shop to unload something of value, something worth less than a grocery store visit to buy Cheerios for his little kids. Yeah, you get the picture now. I am hammering like hell on your sense of brotherhood, community, and civic pride in war heroes. You bet I am. Because I know most of your fail to care anymore. I know most of you are contented in that little bubble of existence. But, suck it up and read on. This is the reality of your apathetic and lazy patriotism – Average Joe is your next-door neighbor. And Average Joe should not be contemplating blowing his brains out – but you let Joe down – we let Joe down – Washington caused Joe to consider blowing his goddamned brains out, because we collectively turned a blind eye. We populated the halls of power in our country with liars, cheats, criminals, and the puppets of evil men, and of evil nations.
Now let me educate all the past, present, and future “American Joes” out there. Just so you know what has been happening while you slept.
While I’ve no space here to discuss properly what’s known as the “Movement for Greater Israel”, it’s important that the reader grasp the ultimate goal of new and old Zionists (see a moderate Zionism definition here). What this group wants is nothing short of the reestablishment of King David’s Empire, which encompassed all of the so-called “Mandate Palestine, the British Mandate of Palestine and British Palestine” plus Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq, as well as Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, U.A.E, Oman, Yemen, most of Turkey, and all the land east of the Nile river. Granted, this is an ambitious plan that is hard for “Joe” to grasp, but any reader can watch the news and put two-plus-two together. If Joe can accept my assertion here, then I am sure he will better understand why he is in such a fix. But let’s move on to examine the Zionist plan, stumbling blocks, and progress so far. Yes, of course, that is if this plan actually exists.
There are only two big problems with creating this great big land of “Greater Israel”. First, there are one hell of a lot of Arabs in the way. Second, getting those Arabs the hell out of the way is costing Americans and the rest of the world an unbelievable price. On the first point the proxy militaries of Zion and America are rapidly subtracting Arabs from King David’s former territory. Those that cannot be cluster bombed, beheaded, shot, blasted, or otherwise butchered are simply starved to death or die of disease. The rest will probably move to Europe if the lobbies there work hard enough, and if not America has lots of free land left. And this brings us to our main point, how AIPAC, the American Jewish Committee (AJC), the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and hundreds of other supporters of Netanyahu’s dreams of empire robbed poor heroic Joe of his future.
The Zionist Dream
Now, you’ll recall I said that all our hero Joe needed was a small grant to rev up his business. Most of you reading this probably have better math skills than me, so please try and divide and subtract or multiply some numbers here. According to the most recent figures from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (which are always WAY conservative), there were 453,000 jobless veterans as of 2016. So, let’s focus on these “GI Joes and Janes” for a moment. For an initial instance, let’s assume that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Arab Spring, and the Ukraine mess are not for the benefit of “Greater Israel”. Let’s just do some math with the massive funding through tax breaks and donations for Israel’s defense industry, the IDF, and gigantic weapons loans from the US that never get paid back. Let’s pretend Americans care more about “Joe” and less about genetically pure Israelis (more on this in a later post). For the moment, let’s forget the $9 billion dollar trade deficit the US has with Israel, and focus on the $38 billion US Senator Lindsey Graham and others approved for Israeli defense recently.
$38 billion dollars divided by 453,000 out of work vets, that’s $83,885.21 rounded to the nearest cent for each-and-every GI Joe or Jane out there. But I know it will take some IMPACT here for readers to share this with ALL their Average Joe friends out there. Let me spell this out. No funds for the IDF to blast Palestinians to smithereens – 453,000 new businesses and zero unemployment for down and out vets. Yes, Utopia, I know. But let’s continue, because this is just the chump change the Zionists levy from us. I won’t break down the private funding direct to the IDF. I will not harp about the star studded galas and auctions Hollywood and high society hold to shower gifts of “BILLIONS” on Israel. Read this article and discover those. Now, it’s time to return to the big picture, and to the role of Zionists in the wider world’s affairs. Let’s assume logically that the enemies of Israel, especially Arab nations, was the real cause for the so-called “war on terror” initiated after the 9/11 attacks by then US President George W. Bush.
Most of your reading understand I am not the first analyst or journalists to presume Israel and the Zionists have been behind recent wars. And I am not just talking about admitted anti-Semites like Louis Farrakhan, who always called the Twin Towers attacks a false flag operation. Forget wild eyed conspiracy theories for the moment, and instead look at evidence inside books like “The Zionist War on Terror Creates More Terror”, by Christopher Bollyn. A short excerpt from Bollyn serves to set the stage for my last assertion here:
“As long as Western governments and societies allow themselves to be deceived about the true nature of terrorism, the “War on Terror” and the threat it is meant to eradicate will only get worse. For our political leaders and media to go along with false-flag deceptions and to flail away at phantoms is to ensure that the “War on Terror” will go on for a very long time. The only way to liberate ourselves and our nations from this madness is to expose the true source of terrorism.”
Without bombarding you with 9/11 theories and anti-Israel rhetoric, it’s completely fair to say hard liner Zionists in Israel, America, and across Europe have played a major role in brewing conflicts in the Middle East. If we can admit that Greater Israel is part of this chaotic stew of destruction, then it is far easier to show “Average Joes” everywhere just what the costs of American and Israeli policies is. For the sake of this argument, here are some even more amazing “if” figures.
Since the so-called “War on Terror” was launched, experts claim that the United States has squandered in between $3.2 and upwards of $5 trillion dollars. I think it’s fair to assume that it’s costs Americans more than $4 trillion since 2003, so let me run with this figure.
I Want My 80 Grand Back!
Yesterday I was on hold with the Social Security Administration for 47 minutes on an international call to solve my initial retirement payments. While I waited the robot in charge of held calls kept telling me, “We provide benefits to over 50 million Americans, so there are very busy times. We are sorry for your long wait”. At that moment, this article was on my mind. I thought to myself over and over, “fifty million, fifty million into $4 trillion or so?” As I type this I am recalling over 40 years of hard work. I’m thinking about my fellow 50 million countrymen, and all the hard work I saw those “Average Joes” doing over the decades. And I am thinking about the $900 bucks a month my early retirement (63 instead of 65) gets me. I think I am “Average Joe” perhaps, and I am thinking $4,000,000,000,000.00 divided by 50 million. What is that figure? Wow, it comes out to $80,000 dollars! Now let me frame (or hammer) this in.
Without a war to destroy all of Israel’s neighbors and enemies (in my scenario) the people still alive who helped build and fuel the American dream could EACH have a lump sum payment of 80 grand! Eighty thousand dollars, what could the average retired person do – buy a small house – never pay rent again – get that eye surgery so desperately needed – live a little bit longer or more comfortably – survive instead of subsist! I am now thinking about an aged couple I know back home in South Carolina, and about the cat food I once caught them eating a couple of days before their US Treasury checks arrived. I’m thinking about my US veteran retired friend, who has to go to the VA to be treated like an animal. I am thinking about my own $900 dollars and how I will make due abroad, with no medical insurance except what my wife can pay for. Peace and $80,000 for America’s retired “Average Joe or Joanne” – or perpetual war until Greater Israel is established. Until the Syrians are killed or un out of the coming “Northern Jerusalem Empire”….. Take note folks, Americans got ZERO from these lost wars.
This is harsh, I know. It seems a bit conspiracy theoretical too, I understand. But after three or four years of research and analysis, and roughly twelve to fourteen hours a day hard at it, I’ve made my diagnosis. If killing and chaos, if the economical warfare and crookedness of our political processes are the illness, then rampant Zionism is the contagion. From my perspective western societies have been literally infected by an insidious flesh eating bug, a blood sucking tick that spreads a bigoted and elitist disease that will eventually destroy us all. Like the small, seemingly harmless little tick, the animal driving American policy breeds more animals in the blood it extracts from its host. And you think my seemly affront on Zionism dastardly or inappropriate? Then go and do your own pathology work. Look at the patient in his eyes, check his pulse, listen to that frail heartbeat, see his suffering, and try and cure humanity yourself. All I know is, “Average Joe” has not even been made aware of the parasite that has cost him everything.
How’s that for a wakeup call Joe?
Phil Butler, is a policy investigator and analyst, a political scientist and expert on Eastern Europe, he’s an author of the recent bestseller “Putin’s Praetorians” and other books. He writes exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”
Shortly after the fall of Communism in the Soviet Union, then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Colin Powell, made a candid confession to the Army Times, “I’m running out of demons, I’m running out of villains. I’m down to Castro and Kim Il Sung.” Amid the general bonhomie of the military interview, Powell nicely encapsulated a central truth of empire: it doesn’t want peace. Never did. Imperialism, the monopoly stage of capitalism, is based on conquest. Peace is little more than an aftermath in the imperialist vision. It is the dusty rubble-strewn silence that descends on Aleppo when the jihadists have been bussed out. It is the silent pollution of the Danube when the NATO jets have flown. It is the quiet that settles on the Libyan square once the slave auction has concluded. Peace is an interlude between the birth of avarice and the advent of aggression. Little else.
If Powell confessed empire’s disinterest in peace, he also expressed the need of the imperials state for a steady supply of new enemies. Conflict is the lifeblood of imperial capitalism. It is how the ruling class further enriches itself. It is how the global elite expand their dominion over the planet. Those who will not pay tribute under threat of menace, must ultimately face the menace. But this truth, that the imperial state is the carmine tip of elite expropriation, must not be aired among the hoi polloi. It is the unseemly underbelly of power and if it were widely understood it would hack away the legitimacy of the state, which is only justified by its nominal commitment to the welfare of the nation. That claim only appears legitimate in the face of some grim and ghastly threat. Powell understood that with the nasty specter of the evil empire crumbling to ash on an Asian plain, a spine-chilling new antagonist would have to be invented to replace it.
Enter the specter of Islamic terror. Islamic terrorism is largely the product of American terror. It is wittingly conjured into being through our wanton destruction of Muslim societies. We did not attack Muslim nations in order to produce a new enemy. We attacked them to extend our control of natural resources, shape the trade routes of the future, and expand the reach of global capital. But the epiphenomenon of terrorism was both predictable and embraced as a casus belli. It is the hobgoblin used by ruling class media to frighten western populations into acquiescence with the west’s warlike vision for global hegemony.
But western populations have of late grown weary of the terrorist scourge and the endless storylines of restive migrants doing the dirty work of mysterious jihadists on the Disneyfied streets of western capitals. Jets into skyscrapers. Cars into crowds. Backpacks in corners of concert halls. High-rise shotgunners spraying bullets into public squares. Terror fatigue is spreading across a western world that could only sustain permanent stress levels for so long. Thankfully, for the managers of empire and its media flacks, a reborn Russian state, rising from the ashes of a capitalist looting spree, has provided a second narrative front in the war for the mind of the west. A different visage emerges. Not the bearded votary narrating a death wish to a shaky cam. But a Muscovite in a bespoke suit with a supercilious grin on his sly poker face. The optics are different, but in a media environment of constant overexposure, that is a good thing.
Both terrorism and a revanchist Russia represent figments of horror in the minds of western citizens. They are the bête noire with which we can shape our worldview and pepper our cocktail conversations. We do not realize that Islamic terror is largely a product of American terror. We do not see that American aggression provokes Russian self-defense. As such, these orientalist caricatures represent the hypocrisy of imperial neoliberalism, which is forever flying the false flag of economic justice and democratic freedom over its just-conquered capitals. Inhabitants of those broken cities know better, as their standard of living plummets and their dictators are replaced by juntas. They know the west is like Joseph Conrad’s sepulchral city, where an alabaster exterior hides a crypt of rotting flesh. That is the real vision that western media works so feverishly to disguise, one no sane person could stomach. That’s why the media must craft fresh Frankensteins at such a feverish pace. Fairy tales of secular missionaries bringing the gift of free-market democracy to the benighted tribes of the east.
Globalization and Its Discontents
The terminology of that fairy tale is telling. The term ‘globalization’ has been used as a portmanteau containing all of the sly nuance of neoliberalism. Globalization is the rush of capital into every conceivable crevice of the planet in search of profitable new ventures. Unfortunately, markets must be pried open with war when rhetorical picklocks don’t suffice. The term ‘humanitarian’ is the masque we now affix to the gruesome face of war whenever we must attack some recalcitrant socialist backwater. What we used to call a ‘civilising mission’ in Africa, we now call a ‘humanitarian intervention’ in the Middle East. Historians call that ‘progress.’
The effect of this noble-minded fustian is to pacify a population and to marginalize anyone who attempts to reveal the true character of imperial action. Who would oppose a globalizing force of open markets that promise to bring ‘developing’ and ‘emerging’ nations online and on par with our post-industrial west? Those who do can hardly explain the extractive nature of neoliberal globalization or its deindustrializing effect on developing economies before they are skewered by the flagbearers of humanitarianism. Who would deny the righteous cause of intervening to halt imminent genocide? One has barely called into question whether genocide is actually imminent before being fleeced by the rhetorical guardians of the west’s civilizing mission. The righteous R2P. One has hardly breathed a word of how the ‘war on terror’ is largely generated by the state terror we inflict on other nations before being rubber-stamped a traitor and told to leave the country (if you don’t like it).
The fable must be accepted. We are spreading freedom and equality. Simple as that. End of story. Say that the United States is the greatest counter-revolutionary force in the world, and be branded a traitor–by the counter-revolutionaries. Wherever democratic freedom rears its ugly head, you can be sure that U.S. media flacks, as well as special forces, drones, proxy terrorists, and battalions are on hand to crush what they claim to defend.
Softening the Blow
The fairy tales are told by the mainstream media, shamelessly so. The Wolf Blitzers of the world devote themselves to the slavish production of fresh threats. The liberal MSM is represented today by outlets such as the New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, CNN, MSNBC, and NPR. These ciphers take the crude evasions of the White House, State Department, Pentagon, and intelligence agencies, and camouflage them. They dress them in muted tones that dampen the drama of blast craters. They massage the story to elide the facts that might produce introspection or taint the purity of our self-image. Self-criticism is inappropriate, but the righteous condemnation of other nations is a moral mandate. Print everything in classic fonts, with well-designed column widths, and add in world-class photography that turns ruination into artistic representation. This is the manna consumed by the acolytes of exceptionalism.
Nothing better embodies the empty ruse of liberalism than the bulky deadwood of the Times. There is of course the elitist coverage of mini-breaks in distant villas, where war-torn peasant societies repair their communities round a communal table. There are the heady profiles of the latest restaurant trends, where the bearded Brooklyn chef with neck tats touts his vegan currywurst to the gentrified hood. There is the fastidious theater review and the effusive real estate forecast. Filler aside, readers will be reminded that war is necessary when America wages it; globalization is inevitable when it means free markets, and free markets mean individual freedom; multiculturalism and mass immigration are desirable to all, irreversible, and a moral imperative; and inscrutable new alien threats are profiled with an Orientalist’s hopeful but ultimately worrisome and mystified gaze. Little mention is made of the fact that our conflicts are provably imperial resource wars; that in nearly every port of call our country wages counter-revolutionary battles that stifle liberation and independence; that globalization has wrecked the American standard of living through labor arbitrage and offshoring; that immigration ought not to be coupled with austerity unless the objective is race wars; that the lives of women, LGBTQ, and people of color are collateral damage in the crosshairs of empire; or that American capitalism has no interest in delivering jobs, living wages, or upward mobility to its extant population, let alone its newest members.
When these mostly taboo subjects are noted, they are presented as a perplexing side effects of a noble project of laissez faire globalization. They are unfortunate but must not be rashly addressed. Better to endlessly maintain the status quo as one wrestles with the philosophic implications of global capitalism. This was Obama’s favorite tactic. Open a dialogue, but don’t change anything important. This dissembling attitude was beautifully expressed in a recent Twitter thread which detailed seventy years of Times articles proclaiming a dizzying succession of reform-minded princes in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, where the patriarchy’s misogynist grip on power is as firm as ever, as is Washington’s backing. The last post in that thread noted Thomas Friedman’s sycophantic paean to the new idol of Saudi imperialism, Mohammed Bin Salman, or ‘MBS’ to his fawning admirers. Friedman’s article was printed last week.
When not absorbing the high culture of the Times literary supplement, one finds the corporate liberal Democrat happily digesting bite-sized reports from the National Public Radio (NPR). Here the adherence to the state view is no less vigilant than in print. Thus when NPR interviews a CIA psychologist who tells us that whistleblowers are either psychopaths, narcissists, or lingering in some irresponsible adolescence, the “national security correspondent” fails to challenge these claims. And when Australian broadcasting interviews Hillary Clinton, it allows the venal egotist to smear WikiLeaks as a Kremlin tool and call Julian Assange a narcissistic opportunist without the slightest resistance. Questions about the shady dealings of the Clinton Foundation are feebly set aside at the merest sign of discomfort by Madame Secretary. And Times op-ed writers like Friedman can happily call for support of al Qaeda, destroying target societies, and cheerlead more global wage leveling by chastising workers for not falling in lockstep with the elitist program.
These are the signs of a dead discipline. The mainstream media is no longer adversarial. It takes the official story at face value. It has abdicated its proper role in a democratic society, which is partly why we are no longer a democratic society. As Princeton University has explained, we are effectively a plutocracy. Thanks to the MSM, though, most of us continue to believe the rhetorical platitudes of our corrupt leaders. Media is one of our numberless emasculated institutions, which are now authoritarian and warlike. (See liberal faith in the Mueller investigation, led by a neoliberal imperialist who fought to crush Vietnamese socialism and led the FBI, one of the most regressive and criminal organizations in the world.) Like readers who still place a naive faith in the government, MSM writers continue to believe they are doing independent journalism in the service of truth (“Democracy dies in darkness,” the Post implores us). But real journalism accepts nothing at face value. It is the Socratic voice that unsettles the consensus.
Instead of incisive journalism that digs, defies, and holds power to account, we get self-censoring media automatons pampering oligarchs and pretending that all good-thinking people care deeply about the state of the state. Listen to the soothing language of the New York Times on the supposedly earth-shaking Russian influence campaign on social media. It hits all the right notes without seriously challenging the narrative. Note how it bleeds concern. This kind of journalism is a palliative for the conscience of a liberal. Ah, the “thorny debates” inside Facebook, no doubt had “in good faith,” and subject to “fateful misunderstandings,” if Ken Burns were documenting it. “Executives worry” and there is considerable “hand-wringing” afoot in good faith efforts to wipe out “fake news.”
Even the protagonists of the story are usefully quoted. Facebook lawyers, commenting on the miniscule purchase of ads over a two-year period from accounts with even the most tenuous Russian connection, much of it after the election, much of it not even mentioning presidential candidates, and the creation of bots to grow click farms, recoiled in horror and called the knowledge “deeply disturbing” and “an insidious attempt to drive people apart.” This is theater for the masses. Cue the organ grinder.
The goal of this domestic conditioning is to remove the democracy from democracy. The objective is to create a hollow shell of a democratic society, representative on the outside, plutocratic on the inside. The marble tomb inhabited by necrosis. This is deliberate. Read Alex Carey’s Taking the Risk Out of Democracy for a nice overview of how America’s collective conscience has been shaped by corporate forces. Why? Because we are the enemy. The enemy is our freedom of thought and speech, because that is what inevitably leads to democratic, socialist, or communist change that benefit the people as a whole, not just the vanishingly small margin of corporate elites who promote and profit from war, conquest, and rule. The problem with democracy is that it isn’t very profitable for capital. Socialist countries tend to emphasize social services. It is extremely hard to make money delivering quality social services to the poor. Really, the only way to make money off of social services is to deliver inadequate social services to the middle class for extravagant fees. See Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act for a master class in this technique. Monopoly capitalism is incompatible with actual democracy. To the degree that a truly democratic society can have free markets, they must be strictly regulated, prevented from reaching monopoly status, and completely walled off from public institutions. Otherwise, they will cannibalize those institutions, reshaping them as rubberstamp organs of elite profit.
As it is, democracy is merely the mask that disguises the engines of imperialism. It is useful in this regard because, unlike socialism, democracy makes no serious claims on the means of production. It depoliticizes the most political issue of all: economics. Thus the manufacture of enemies, job one for the ruling class media, always targets socialist-leaning nations that sense the need for economic justice alongside social justice. Even if they are mixed economies that provide space for open markets, like Venezuela. It makes no difference. We mustn’t tolerate the slightest majoritarian impulse in the economic arena. All such beliefs must be terminated. We must be refashioned as foot soldiers of exploitation. To this end, western propaganda outlets have made psychologist Erich Fromm’s warning sound less like prophecy than predestination, “The danger of the past was that men became slaves. The danger of the future is that men may become robots.”
Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israeli capital shows the US is part of the Middle East problem, writes Finian Cunningham.
“Washington has bankrolled the state of Israel with $3 billion every year in military aid; has turned a blind eye to every violation under international law by Israel; and offers unwavering support for Israeli transgressions through the American veto at the United Nations Security Council.”
US President Donald Trump makes one of the most protracted and painful world problems sound like he’s selling a condo between two parties. With cheesy easiness, he bluffs everybody gets a “great deal.”
“We want an agreement that is a great deal for the Israelis and a great deal for the Palestinians.” Thus spoke Trump this week in announcing US recognition of Jerusalem as the capital city of Israel.
The American property tycoon-turned-politician has shown again this week his vast ignorance of international relations. The trouble is that Trump’s rank foolishness risks inflaming the already combustible Middle East region and beyond.
Arab nations, including some close American allies like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, are furious at what they see as a historic “betrayal.” For Arabs and Muslims, Jerusalem – or at least the eastern half of the “old city” – is regarded as the spiritual capital of a future Palestinian state.
The ancient city is home to Muslims, Christians, and Jews, containing three unique religious sites. The eastern half of the city, which is legally Palestinian territory but under military occupation by Israel since the 1967 Six Day War, is where the ancient religious sites are located. Trump’s unilateral designation of Jerusalem as the Jewish capital is therefore as reckless as it is provocative.
In defiance of near-unanimous opposition from around the world, President Trump went ahead this week to declare Jerusalem the capital of Israel. The announcement violates international law which stipulates that the city is a contested matter to be resolved through peace negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians.
While Trump claims the US is still supportive of peace talks for a “lasting settlement” what his declaration this week does, in effect, is settle the seven-decade-old dispute on the side of Israel.
“We are not taking a position on any final status issues, including the specific boundaries of the Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem, or the resolution of contested borders. Those questions are up to the parties involved,” said the president.
But that’s contradicted by Washington now recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
Nevertheless, if the political tinderbox region does not explode with violence over Trump’s latest declaration, one good thing to come from this debacle is this: at long last, the so-called “peace process” can be seen for what it is – a charade, in which Washington has posed as an “honest broker” overseeing the relentless suppression of Palestinian rights.
“My announcement today marks the beginning of a new approach to the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians,” intoned the American president.
Note how Trump refers to the conflict between “Israel and the Palestinians.” One of the parties is a state – “Israel” – while the other party is made to sound like a group of people – “the Palestinians” – who must somehow be accommodated around the priorities of the former.
Trump’s sonorous claim of “a new approach” is nothing but the same old path that American administrations have trodden for the past seven decades since 1948, when the Israeli state was established by acts of violence against Palestinians – Arabs, Jews, Muslims, Christians, living in what was then the British Mandate of Palestine.
That path has been one of pandering to the aggressive expansion of the Israeli state – in spite of numerous United Nations resolutions condemning the annexation of Palestinian territory.
For the past 25 years, since the signing of the Oslo Peace Accords between Israeli leader Yitzhak Rabin and Palestinian counterpart Yasser Arafat, the US has served as self-appointed mediator.
But the purported peace process has yielded little for the Palestinians toward their aspiration of a final sovereign state with East Jerusalem as their internationally recognized capital. The American-brokered peace process is all process and no peace. That process is one of continual annexation of Palestinian land through the building of Israeli settlements – in flagrant violation of international laws.
Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu – who was the only world leader to welcome the Trump’s announcement this week – declares, along with his right-wing cabinet that Jerusalem is the “eternal Jewish capital.” It is obvious that for Netanyahu’s government there is no intention to engage in peace negotiations with Palestinians to reach a final status of two states.
For Israeli hardliners, there is no peace process – despite lip service. There is only a process of relentless dispossession of Palestinians, which first began in 1948.
American governments have long been complicit in this charade of dispossession regardless of pious pretensions of being an “honest broker.” Washington has bankrolled the state of Israel with $3 billion every year in military aid; has turned a blind eye to every violation under international law by Israel; and offers unwavering support for Israeli transgressions through the American veto at the United Nations Security Council.
Trump’s is not offering a “new approach.” He is instead ramping up a very old policy of American government indulging Israeli intransigence.
Why now? Part of Trump’s announcement this week from the White House – with a Christmas Tree background – was a gift. A gift to his evangelical Christian voter-base represented by Vice President Mike Pence looking on as Trump heralded the good tidings. For these supporters, Jerusalem is a Messianic issue. Another gift was to the right-wing pro-Israeli lobby in Washington, like billionaire Jewish businessman Sheldon Adelson, who reportedly donated $25 million to Trump’s presidential campaign. (So much for alleged Russian influence!)
When Trump emphasized, “I am delivering,” he sounded like he was playing Santa Claus for his backers.
But Trump’s foray this week is more like a bull in a china shop. His reckless ignorance will unleash huge repercussions of which he has very little awareness. The region is presently racked by war, with missiles flying across borders. Israeli aggression is already provoking Syria, Lebanon, and Iran. Trump’s fatuous gift-bearing could unleash a regional Intifada that tears apart America’s Israeli ally.
There are also dangers for America’s Arab allies. Elite rulers of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, the UAE, and Bahrain, among others, are angry at Trump partly out of fear that the popular rage he is inciting across the region over his Jerusalem designation may end up sweeping these autocratic American clients from power.
Paradoxically, Trump’s rash intervention this week is potentially a good thing. Inadvertently, it allows for a more accurate, realistic framework in which to bring about a peaceful settlement to the Arab-Israeli conflict. This conflict is at the root of the region’s never-ending tensions.
The United States is no longer mistaken as a neutral mediator. Its role as a self-appointed honest broker is over.
What’s needed now is an international, multilateral forum in which Palestinians are at last afforded real equality under international law. The Palestinian sovereign right for national status must be advocated in the context of an illegal occupation by Israeli forces. The full sanction of international law must be applied against Israeli transgressions going back to at least the 1967 war.
American chicanery, as illustrated again this week by Trump, is part of the problem. It can never be part of the solution, and it is good that Washington’s pretense is now discarded.
Finian Cunningham (born 1963) has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages. Originally from Belfast, Northern Ireland, he is a Master’s graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in newspaper journalism. For over 20 years he worked as an editor and writer in major news media organizations, including The Mirror, Irish Times and Independent. Now a freelance journalist based in East Africa, his columns appear on RT, Sputnik, Strategic Culture Foundation and Press TV.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
Researcher, Centre for Middle Eastern Studies, Lund University
Dec 6, 2017
Donald Trump’s decision to recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and start preparations for the US to move its embassy from Tel Aviv to the contested city, has the potential to further inflame tensions across the Middle East.
Although this is not an unexpected move – Trump expressed his intention to do so during his electoral campaign – the decision breaks with years of precedent.
Trump’s decision to move the embassy means he will not follow his predecessors by renewing a waiver on the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995, which required the embassy to eventually be moved from Tel Aviv.
Since then, there has been a cross-party consensus in the US that any act which recognises the annexation of East Jerusalem by Israel and its designation as the country’s capital would affect the fragile balance of power in the Middle East – and the ability of the US to promote its interests in the region. US diplomats have sought to tread carefully on this issue in one of the world’s most treacherous political landscapes.
The Palestinian leadership condemned the move before Trump spoke, as did leaders from the Arab world and beyond. The announcement of the embassy move is likely to cause a wave of resentment among Palestinians in the occupied territories and the city itself, especially after two decades of stalemate in the peace process and deteriorating conditions throughout the Palestinian territories. Ahead of the speech, US citizens and government employees were told to avoid Jerusalem’s Old City and the West Bank until further notice.
Central to the peace process
Jerusalem is not just a city of historical importance to Judaism, Islam and Christianity, but also a site key to both Israeli and Palestinian identity. Add to this the centrality of the status of Jerusalem in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, often described as one of the world’s most intractable disputes, and it’s clear why the decision to move the US embassy there has been described as tantamount to political arson.
At the political level, most Israelis and Palestinians insist that Jerusalem must be the capital of their states, present and future, and that this is non-negotiable. This is why the final status of Jerusalem was deemed to be one of the thorniest issues in the Oslo peace process in the 1990s. It was envisaged to be circumnavigated, dealt with only at the stage of “permanent status negotiations”, once all other issues between the state of Israel and the Palestinians were resolved.
As there has not been any progress in less important, yet substantive issues since Oslo, the issue of Jerusalem has acquired a symbolic importance among Palestinians.
Jerusalem is a city dense in symbolism in the Palestinian national imagination. Particularly so as other, more material anchors of identity such as territory, governance and self-determination are continually being eroded by the harsh realities of Israeli occupation, the blockade of Gaza and deteriorating cooperation between Israeli and Palestinian authorities.
The response to Trump’s announcement by Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and most of his government was muted. But its symbolic value among nationalist circles in Israel, and also among many ordinary Israelis, should not be underestimated.
The Israeli government has been active in strengthening Israeli claims to the entire city since its annexation in 1980. Settlement building around Jerusalem has aimed to ring-fence the city and integrate it more into Israel. Meanwhile, there were building restrictions in East Jerusalem, and a series of restrictions to Palestinian access to the Al-Aqsa mosque, built on the remnants of the last Jewish Temple. Both sets of restrictions were lifted.
Equally important in terms of symbolic politics has been Israel’s archaeological intervention around Jerusalem, which Palestinians see as an attempt to strengthen Israel’s historical connection with the city.
Trump’s decision seems oblivious to the fragility of coexistence in the city between its Israeli and Palestinian inhabitants. It also ignores the significance of Jerusalem in Palestinian national identity and national aspirations, and the devastating impact on the future of a moribund peace process.
It has the potential of not only affecting the political ecology of a place where history is a matter of life and death, but could also cause a ripple effect much further afield. It can destabilise a Palestinian authority already deprived of legitimacy and an array of fragile Arab regimes. And it is likely to accentuate the enmity between Israel and Iran. Iran perceives such a move as a “violation of Islamic sanctities” and, together with Trump’s revitalised alliance with Saudi Arabia, a clear sign of the US president’s anti-Iranian stance.
Last but not least, it could further stoke the flames of anti-Western Islamic movements in the Muslim world and the West alike, which have always put Jerusalem and the Palestinian issue in a central position.
When old and young are systematically rounded up and shot. When women are gang raped and their babies thrown into waterways to drown. When their homes and businesses are burned. When all the atrocities of ethnic cleansing are plain to see, international law leaps into action. Global bodies and their constituent states work to simultaneously put an end to the atrocities, provide refuge for survivors and bring perpetrators to book, no matter the identity of the offender or the victim. Or so we are told. For as the on-going slaughter and displacement of Myanmar’s Rohingya Muslims reveals, international law is not so blind.
Since their citizenship rights have been progressively revoked between the 1940s and ‘80s, thousands of Rohingya men, women and children have been subjected to murder and rape, their villages have been raised to the ground and more than a million have fled to neighboring countries without much protest from the world beyond. Even the UN’s late attempts to investigate the most recent barbarities have fallen short of constituting a full Commission of Inquiry and independent investigators have been blocked from entering Myanmar by the Buddhist-led government of Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung Sang Suu Kyi. “Just imagine, for a minute,” Columbia University’s Hamid Dabashi urges in a recent article, “if it were Jews or Christians, or else the ‘peaceful Buddhists,’ who were the subjects of Muslim persecutions.” Given the attention Muslim violence ceaselessly garners, the reason behind the apparent lack of outrage to protect the Rohingya is clear to him: “Something in the liberal fabric of Euro-American imagination is cancerously callous. It does not see Muslims as complete human beings.”
Even when one acknowledges that Muslim Bangladesh (where about 500,000 Rohingya have sought refuge) has long sought to prevent their “infiltration,” Dabashi’s point hits home. According to the UNHCR, ordinary Bangladeshis have opened their villages and towns to the latest influx of Rohingya refugees, providing food, clothing and shelter. And even the state’s seemingly cold-hearted actions only reflect Bangladesh’s inability to accommodate its Rohingya co-religionists without international support, which is clearly not forthcoming. Furthermore, various Muslim-majority governments, as well as the Organization of Islamic Conference, have begun pledging funds and voicing the deep concerns expressed by their constituencies. But is it just the dehumanization of Muslims in the Euro-American imagination that seems to be at play in their voices falling on deaf ears beyond? What of the contrasting image of ‘peaceful Buddhists’?
Academia is in fact rife with examples of scholarship that touts the tolerance and inclusiveness of Buddhists and the general argument is nothing new. According to Thomas A. Tweed, Professor of History at Notre Dame University, increasing awareness of religious diversity due to colonial expansion and Christian missionizing led Euro-American Enlightenment intellectuals repelled by Christian sectarianism to consider Buddhism to fit the bill of the “natural religion” (or “perennial philosophy”) they sought, one that exuded “tolerance” toward people of different faiths and was amenable to scientific progress. So convinced were they that some, such as the nineteenth century German-American scholar Paul Carus, even chastised Asian Buddhists when they launched polemical assaults on Christian missionaries, accusing the Asians of using language the “Buddha certainly would not…” So was born the pervasive myth, characteristically articulated by the early twentieth century Swedish-American Theosophist Herman Vetterling, that Buddhism is “a religion of noble tolerance, of universal brotherhood, of righteousness and justice,” and that in its growth as the religion of a global community it had not “caused the spilling of a drop of blood.”
Associate Professor of Religious Studies, Michael Jerryson, picks up where Tweed signs off to show that the tendency to associate Buddhism with tolerance did not die in the early twentieth century or remain bound in an ivory tower. In the wake of World War II, it found its way into the writings of Jack Kerouac and Allen Ginsberg, marching further forward in time with such works as Robert Pirsig’s Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, and by the 1980s assumed political dimensions in the form of the Free Tibet Movement. And finally, who can forget (even if you want to) Keanu Reeves in Bernardo Bertolucci’s Little Buddha.
Social history, however, tells a different tale than Orientalists and popular culture. For every instance of forbearance, history also provides examples of violent intolerance legitimated by Buddhist doctrines and conducted by practitioners. As many ancient Jain and Brahmanical texts speak of persecution at the hands of Indian Buddhists, as Buddhists accuse their South Asian competitors of the same. And consider Jerryson’s examples of the sixth century Chinese Buddhist monk Faqing, who promised his 50,000 followers that every opponent they killed would take them to a higher stage in the bodhisattva’s path. Or recall that with the advent of nationalism, Buddhist monks rallied to the cause as with Japanese Rinzai support for the military campaign against the Russians in 1904-5, or Zen and Pureland Buddhist justifications of the Japanese invasions of China, Korea and Singapore during World War II. Buddhism has been corrupted in these places, they argued, and violence is necessary to insure that ‘true’ Buddhism is restored and preserved. The same rhetoric – of some fundamental Buddhism under threat – also underwrites the more recently nationalized bigotry and violence that Buddhist monks and laypersons have unleashed on non-Buddhists in Thailand, Sri Lanka, Bhutan and, last but not least, Myanmar.
“No religion has a monopoly on ‘violent people’,” Jerryson astutely concludes, “nor does any one religion have a greater propensity for violence.” All religions are vast complexes of thought and institutions and devotees of each can always find legitimacy for hostility or hospitality toward the other depending on mundane needs or wants. It is for this very reason that the apparent disconnect between historical Buddhism and the sustained Euro-American myth of its tolerance is as malignant as the perpetual dehumanization of Islam and Muslims is cancerous. These Buddhists have long been the good guys and those Muslims the bad in this lore. Each is a necessary fiber in the liberal fabric of Euro-American imagination that veils the gaze of international law when it comes to the murder and displacement of the Rohingya.
The War on Terror is a concoction to manipulate you out of your rights and allow an endless war against a faceless enemy.
War on Terror has become a catchcry phrase
after the biggest of all false flag operations, September 11th. While it’s true that 9/11 became the pretext for the War on Terror™, and catapulted the doctrine from an idea to official US policy (and a preeminent Western ideology going into the 21st century), the idea didn’t originate with the George W. Bush Administration. The origins of the phrase War on Terror can actually be traced back to around 1979 and to another infamous New World Order agenda-pusher by the name of Benjamin Netanyahu, the current Prime Minister of Israel. The War on Terror™ has become such a hackneyed phrase that it’s worthy of being trademarked and corporatized, if the Military Industrial Complex hasn’t done so already. Think of how much carnage, death and destruction have been wrought in the name of fighting the War on Terror™ and its various offshoots such as Radical Islamic Terrorism™ – millions of people killed in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, Yemen, Syria, Palestine and more – and there’s no sign of it stopping. The War on Terror™ is the ultimate abstract endless war against a nebulous faceless enemy. It’s not going to stop until enough people see through the deception.
Netanyahu: inventor of the War on Terror doctrine.
Meet Benjamin Netanyahu, Inventor of the War on Terror
Netanyahu is more than just an Israeli politician. Netanyahu’s father, Benzion Netanyahu, was a leader of Revisionist Zionism, a colonialist, aggressive, xenophobic and expansionist form of Israeli nationalism founded by Ze’ev Jabotinsky in the early part of the 20th century. Netanyahu was already talking about terrorism in 1979 when he wrote his book International Terrorism: Challenge and Response that year. He wrote another book on terrorism in 1995, a major work entitled Fighting Terrorism: How Democracies Can Defeat Domestic and International Terrorism. The book explains all sorts of themes that have now become public knowledge and household terms and ideas: terrorism, radical Islamic suicide attacks and Iran pursuing a nuclear program. He repeatedly uses the phrase “Weapons of Mass Annihilation” throughout the book – now you know where the term “WMD” (Weapons of Mass Destruction) originated from! Netanyahu is not a prophet but rather a driver of these agendas. Using the immense power of Zionism, Jewish lobbies in America and the Jewish international banking cabal, he persuaded the US to align itself with Israel and view Islam as the next great enemy.
Netanyahu’s Pre-9/11 Speech
According to this source, Netanyahu made a speech in Israel at the Jewish Agency Assembly Plenary meeting held in Israel on June 24th, 2001 (2-3 months before 9/11) where he made these points:
“1. The Palestinians are to blame for the conflict in the Middle East, and specifically Yasser Arafat.
2. It is legitimate for established states to engage in wars, because the societies are imperfect.
3. Palestinians are not waging a legitimate war (like established states using regular armies) and are terrorists.
4. The Palestinian terrorists deliberately attack civilians.
5. The Israelis are responding in self-defense.
6. When the Israelis respond, they respond against combatants.
7. Arafat and the Palestinian Authority are committed to the destruction of the State of Israel.
8. Arafat and the Palestinian Authority are using the illegitimate and criminal means of terrorism.
9. The Palestinian are wrong and the Israelis are right.
10. Terrorism invariably comes from terrorist regimes.
11. Terror is useful, only if the cost of waging terrorism, the cost of that regime is lower than the benefits of waging terrorism.
12. To stop terrorism, one must make the terrorist regime pay very very heavily.
13. The root core of the Middle East conflict is the existential opposition by a great many in the Arab world still, and certainly by the Palestinian leadership to Israel’s very existence.
14. The first way of ensuring Israel’s existence is that the Arabs simply understand that Israel is so powerful, so permanent, so unconquerable in every way that they will simply abandon by the force of the inertia of Israel’s permanence all opposition to Israel.
15. The second way [of ensuring Israel’s existence] is for the forces of democratization get to the Arab regimes.
16. Using propaganda techniques, like broadcasting American television serials (which Netanyahu sees as subversive material) will ultimately bring down regimes like the Ayatola regime and the Khoumeni regime in Iran.
17. In the 21st century, you cannot achieve a military victory unless you achieve a political victory to accompany it; and you cannot achieve a political victory unless you achieve a victory in public opinion; and you cannot achieve a victory in public opinion unless you persuade that public that your cause is just.
18. It doesn’t make any difference if you are on the side of the angels or on the side of the devil. Anyone fighting in the international arena for public opinion must argue the justice of his cause. Hitler argued for the justice of his cause and Stalin argued for the justice of his cause. They all had propaganda machines. Whether you are right or you are wrong you must argue the justice of your cause.”
Note how he was already setting up a distinction between “legitimate” war and “illegitimate” war, thus trying to provide a legal and moral justification for war (which is legalized violence and mass murder) that would be initiated by Israel, the US and allies in the years to come against the Palestinians and other Muslim-majority nations. He made the point that states using regular armies can engage in legitimate war, but not loose bands of fighters which he brands terrorists.
Dubya Enshrines the War on Terror as Official US Policy and Ideology
Soon thereafter, George W. Bush declared the Netanyahu doctrine of War on Terror as official US policy on September 20th, 2001:
“We will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime … the civilized world is rallying to America’s side. They understand that if this terror goes unpunished, their own cities, their own citizens may be next. Terror, unanswered, can not only bring down buildings, it can threaten the stability of legitimate governments.”
This speech included the famous “you’re either with us or with the terrorists” ultimatum, a manipulative way to force other nations to take sides and to make a complex issue black and white. It also echoed Netanyahu’s concept of “legitimate” nations, “legitimate” war and “legitimate” government. In this way, the US tried to claim the moral high ground and granted itself the tyrannical power of being able to list any individual or group as “terrorists” and justify killing them them on those grounds, as well as branding any nation as a ”terrorist haven” and justify invading them on those grounds – both in stark violation of international law.
Netanyahu’s Post 9/11 Speech
It wasn’t long before Netanyahu expanded this now official War on Terror doctrine to include Israel. Netanyahu now expanded upon the childish “Us” vs. “Them” demarcation set up by Dubya to make it “US, Israel and the civilized democracies of the world” vs. “Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and other Arab and Muslim dictatorships of the world.” Here are the main points of his speech on April 10th, 2002 in front of the US Senate, from the same source:
“1. The American victory against terror in Afghanistan is only the first step in dismantling the global terrorist network. The other terrorist regimes must now be rapidly dealt with in similar fashion.
2. Israel, a democratic government that is defending itself against terror should not be equated with the Palestinian dictatorship that is perpetrating it.
3. Israel should not be asked to stop fighting terror and return to a negotiating table with a regime that is committed to the destruction of the Jewish State and openly embraces terror.
4. Israel has the right to defend itself.
5. The government of Israel must fight not only to defend its people, restore a dangerously eroded deterrence and secure the Jewish State, but also to ensure that the free world wins the war against terror in this pivotal arena in the heart of the Middle East.
6. Israel must dismantle Arafat’s terrorist regime and expel Arafat from the region.
7. Israel must clean out terrorists, weapons, and explosives from all Palestinian controlled areas.
8. Israel must establish physical barriers separating the main Palestinian population centers from Israeli towns and cities to prevent any residual terrorists from reaching Israel.
9. There can never be a political solution for terror. The grievance of terrorists can never be redressed through diplomacy. That will only encourage more terror. Yasser Arafat’s terrorist regime must be toppled, not courted. The Oslo agreements are dead. Yasser Arafat killed them.
10. A political process can only begin when this terrorist regime is dismantled.
11. The urgent need to topple Saddam is paramount. The commitment of America and Britain to dismantle this terrorist dictatorship before it obtains nuclear weapons deserves the unconditional support of all sane governments.
12. America must show that it will not heed the international call to stop Israel from exercising its right to defend itself. If America compromises its principles and joins in the chorus of those who demand that Israel disengage, the war on terror will be undermined.
13. For if the world begins to believe that America may deviate from its principles, terrorist regimes that might have otherwise been deterred will not be deterred. Those that might have crumbled under the weight of American resolve will not crumble. As a result, winning the war will prove far more difficult, perhaps impossible.
14. To assure that the evil of terrorism does not reemerge a decade or two from now, we must not merely uproot terror, but also plant the seeds of freedom.
15. It is imperative that once the terrorist regimes in the Middle East are swept away, the free world, led by America, must begin to build democracy in their place.
16. We simply can no longer afford to allow this region to remain cloistered by a fanatic militancy. We must let the winds of freedom and independence finally penetrate the one region in the world that clings to unreformed tyranny.”
Some key themes are introduced here, which those who follow Middle Eastern and Zionist affairs will notice. Firstly, Netanyahu pushes for the US to invade Iraq, a wish was fulfilled a short time later. Secondly, Netanyahu pushes back against calls for Israel to stop its harsh and barbaric treatment of the Palestinians, by simply declaring that Israel has a right to defend itself – even if Israel attacks first and uses missiles and bombs against Palestinian Arabs who throws sticks and stones at it. Thirdly, diplomacy doesn’t work with terrorists so Israel must keep fighting and killing its enemies (note the dehumanization that comes along with the word terrorist and the big lie that there’s no point talking or negotiating). Lastly, Netanyahu even promotes the idea of US seeding “democracy” (which has always been a big con – see US infiltration through NGOs) in other nations after the invasions – i.e. more permanent US occupation and military bases abroad, which only serve to expand the US (NWO) Empire! Time for the world to learn that when America or its allies say “democracy”, it’s a codeword for forced regime change.
The War on Terror is an Israeli War Strategy
If you are thinking that the term and concept itself of “War on Terror” has all the hallmarks of a New World Order scheme, you’re right. This article by Christopher Bollyn provides further background:
“The War on Terror is essentially an Israeli war strategy. It was first promoted on the world stage by Benjamin Netanyahu and Menachem Begin (of the terrorist Likud party) at the Jerusalem Conference hosted by the Netanyahu Institute in July 1979.
According to the War on Terror doctrine advocated by Netanyahu, “Islamic terrorists” attack Israel because it is a Western state with Western values. The West, Netanyahu says, is the real target so the U.S. must lead the West in waging a global War on Terror to destroy Islamic terrorists and the regimes that support them. This is exactly what the United States has done since 9/11, at incredible expense to its own population, leaving a trail of devastated nations in its wake.”
The War on Terror™ has been used by Israel to bring in the US (and the West) to help destroy Israel’s enemies by branding them as terrorists. The Zionist State has been fundamental in the creation of fake Islamic terrorism (Zio-Islamic Terrorism™) and in the manufacturing of scary enemies (al Qaeda, Daesh/ISIS, etc.) to serve as an excuse to target sovereign Arab and Muslim-majority nations surrounding them. Needless to say, the Zionist-controlled MSM has dutifully played its part by selling the fraudulent War on Terror to a largely unsuspecting public.
The War on Terror™ is an all-encompassing concept with which the NWO is expanding its Empire across the world. It’s a war that can never end. It’s a war whose success or failure can never be measured. It’s a war that leaders can always invoke to justify more money, power and regulation. 16 years on, have enough people woken up to the propaganda in order to break its spell?
Makia Freeman is the editor of alternative media / independent news siteThe Freedom Articles and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com, writing on many aspects of truth and freedom, from exposing aspects of the worldwide conspiracy to suggesting solutions for how humanity can create a new system of peace and abundance.
Barcelona, 17 August, 5 PM – a white van plows with 70 km/h into a mass of pedestrians, many of them tourists, on the famous Las Ramblas, in the heart of Barcelona. The death toll, 13 plus more than 100 injured. In an adjacent event, the police kill one alleged perpetrator. The main suspect flees and is still at large. Or is he? – Maybe he has already been killed.
All the recent truck killings were carried out by white vans. Does it mean anything? Maybe not. But importantly ISIS has already claimed responsibility, through their news agency Amaq, so say the presstitute media. Does anybody other than the mainstream media check? – Probably not. Doesn’t matter. When ISIS claims responsibilities, it puts hearts and minds at ease. The culprit has been found. It’s always the bloody Islamists-jihadists. We can rest in peace. And life goes on.
Indeed, life must go on and being prepared for more and increasing terror attacks is what the Mayor of London and Mr. Macron, the novice French President, already predicted. They must know a thing or two we don’t. OK, let’s brace ourselves. Much else we can’t do anyway – or can we?
The French head of the conservative Republican Party, François Fillon, a losing contender of the recent Presidential elections, said with regards to the French tourists who died in the Barcelona attack: “We must assume our responsibility…” referring to the fact that he was not elected President – as he, Monsieur Fillon, would have done away with this Islamist terror. How low-low can you sink? There are no words, no comments.
Fortunately, the alleged chief perpetrator leaves, as usual and conveniently, an ID behind in the cabin of the white van. So, he can be traced to Melilla, a Spanish enclave in Morocco. In a related event, in a small town, Alcanar, some 250 km south of Barcelona, where on Wednesday night – well before the deadly Ramblas run, a massive explosion took place in a residence, leaving one person dead and 7 insured. One person was arrested by police. One of the injured persons was suspected to be the driver of the white Rambla van.
In the early morning hours of Friday, hours after the Barcelona van-ram in the beach town of Cambrils, some 120 km south of Barcelona, another van runs a police barricade, attempting to embark on a similar terror attack against a tourist-packed pedestrian strip. Apparently one pedestrian was killed. The police however, so the ‘news’, killed all five alleged terrorists in the van. The police now say they suspect one of them was the driver of the white van that rammed the Rambla. Dead men can’t talk.
All has – sadly but predictably – the putrefied smell of another false flag. And the ‘system’, the deep-deep dark state, again, gets away with it.
The mix of information, is seemingly incoherent and purposely very confusing. Connections must be fabricated. Let chaos reign. Keep people confused. Keep them in the belief that police are on top of it and on the guard. You people must not think. Indeed, shopping, according to RT is almost back to normal. There is a candle vigil going on in plain daylight – and a bit of a somber ambiance – and a crowd is holding an anti-islamisation rally in the center of Barcelona. All the while the Rambla is overflowing with tourists as usual. That’s the way it should be. Shopping is first. Put police in charge. They will protect us henceforth. In case they can’t handle it, the military are right at hand.
In the meantime – and foremost – and immediately after the horror massacre, messages of condolences poured in from such illustrious personalities, like Theresa May, Madame Merkel, Emmanuel Macron, Sweden’s PM Stefan Löfven, from Belgium, Denmark…. Sorrow, no end.
Let’s not forget, in the last year the Ram-Truck-Terror, now a convenient tool of horror, fear and killing, has hit Nice, France – 14 July 2016, Promenade des Anglais, 86 killed, almost 500 injured; Berlin, 19 December 2016, Christmas Market, 12 people dead, 56 injured; England twice, 22 March 2017, Westminster Bridge, 5 dead, more than 50 injured; London Bridge, June 2017, 7 dead; Stockholm, 8 April 2017, the city’s busiest shopping street – 4 died, 15 injured. And now Barcelona Spain.
The condolences of these leaders sound hollow and so hypocritical because they, the very leaders, are at the heart of the problem. If not the direct instigators of this simply patterned string of terror attacks, they are utterly complicit, allowing the strings being pulled on their secret services by order of the Master Global Deep State, whose goal it is to subdue Europe, to convert her into a police – military state, chaos, possibly civil war. A civil war not as bad as to curtail essential consumption. But civil strife all the same. Give corporate finance enough room to escalate their debt and profit spiral, but leave the populace poor enough to produce a Europe that is devoid of thinking; no time to reflect, no time to protest – as people will struggle for their sheer survival.
You don’t believe it? Look at Greece and elsewhere, what’s going on around you. Militarization slow motion. Macron is fully committed to it – and doesn’t shy from saying so. The French have understood, and Macron’s popularity has sunk from 66% after the “election” to less than 35% today. Never mind. He is there to stay for 5 years. The French Constitution says so. A (people’s) miracle would have to happen to remove him.
On another occasion, I have mentioned the sophisticated hundreds of millions of euros worth ghost town being built in a German military camp in Saxony-Althaus – for the very purpose of training urban warfare – just in case, you and your fellow protesters, when you can’t take it anymore, you may take to the streets and go on the barricades – that’s when the urban trained forces of power come in to oppress you, even kill you, if necessary. What you saw in Hamburg at the G20 Meeting in early July was just a benign precursor of what’s to come.
Yes, that’s what’s expecting us Europeans – the US is already there, they are always a few notches ahead of us, they are doing the trial run for us. – Barcelona is just a little stone in the mosaic, in the Big Picture of “Full Spectrum Dominance” – the ultimate goal of the PNAC (Plan for a new American Century) – the Washington’s and the Deep-Dark One-Eyed State’s Bible, written and periodically updated by the ultimate One-Eyed Anglo-Zionists on top of the echelon. We are almost there.
Why now Spain? – Spain has been spared of major terror attacks since the 11-M (11 March 2004) attack, when a few explosions at Madrid’s Atocha train station killed 192 people and injured over 2000, three days ahead of Presidential elections. This had nothing to do with Jihadism. Though the terror was immediately blamed on Al Qaeda, no proof was ever found. It was the work of the right-wing government under PP (Partido Popular) in power at the time, blaming the Socialist Party (PSOE), hoping to defeat it. It backfired. The socialists won and stayed in power for two terms, a total of 8 years. But in the second term neoliberal might descended also on the socialists in Spain, as it did and does everywhere in Europe. The Socialists became and still are to this day, traitors to the people.
Today, Spain, with a smooth Parliamentary coup in 2016 that went almost unnoticed, has quietly slipped back to the neoliberal Rajoy Government. So, Spain is supposed to be safe for the system. It also followed the strict rules of the IMF, today reaching 100% debt to GDP, up from about 66% before the neoliberal manufactured crisis hit Europe and the western world in 2007 / 2008.
That’s exactly what the system wants. Spain is ready for another economic collapse, orchestrated in connivance with her leadership. Ready for another round of rent taking – more privatization, pension and base salary cuts – the usual. Again, look at Greece and you see the pattern. Wall Street’s appetite is never satisfied. It’s the fraudulent dollar (and euro) economy we are enslaved to that makes this human tragedy possible – and people don’t seem to even notice who and what is behind the planned misery.
Spain is on track for further ‘milking’. So, why more suffering now? – Spain is an important NATO country with three naval and military bases. The majority of the population hates NATO, would like to get rid of it. What better way of convincing the people that the forces of NATO are useful defenders against Islamist attacks. Yes, weak and with fear you accept (almost) anything. Actually, you call for your hangman to protect you – in fact, it’s the collective Stockholm syndrome.
Therefore, let’s not get sidetracked by the hollow and hypocritical words of sorrow of the chief vassal-leaders (sic) of our three most powerful European countries which are meant to lead the way for the people of the European Continent to become gradually but surely enslaved into mere hapless and powerless serfs, deprived of civil and human rights. We are well on the way there. Have you noticed?
It’s called Fascism with a smile. It’s a slow-moving soft but deadly fascism that fascinates you at every corner, pulling you deeper and deeper into the hole of no return. It’s the neoliberal fascism, that has abrogated and done away with every law, every regulation that may have protected you and your hard-earned savings and public assets; it conveyed everything to the market. Even your pensions and your saving. They are no longer yours. The market decides. Don’t believe it? – Just look at Greece. – “Hasn’t happen yet to me” – Well it will, I guarantee it, if you don’t take over your nation and make her again YOUR sovereign country. Act rather sooner than later. Time is running out.
Naturally, the situation will become unbearable to the point where you can’t take it anymore, and you will want to take to the street. It’ll be too late. Urban warfare will be ready against you.
Fascism with a smile has brought you to the point where there is no going back. It’s a new fascism. It’s not Hitler’s fascism. It’s soft, sophisticated and deadly, if you oppose it. You are manipulated by a blue-managed matrix, encircled by police and military, ready to fire – but you will be fine and get fed as long as you nod, as in agreement.
Barcelona, Nice, London, Berlin, Munich, Paris, Brussels, Stockholm – and whatever else is to come, are mere little pebbles in a growing mosaic. You better look ahead what the picture, the mosaic may look like when its finished – the Big Picture is nasty, very nasty.
Think about the message of sorrow Mr. Putin sent to King Felipe VI of Spain:
“We strongly condemn this brutal and cynical crime against civilians. What has happened once again emphasizes the need for the global community to join efforts to fight against the forces of terror.”
Mr. Putin has not mentioned Islam. He knows that he talks to western leaders who are in bed with terror, that getting them out of bed is a pipe dream. They are bought or threatened – with promises of heaven – to lead this system of terror all the way to a One World Order, or as India’s President Modi said so eloquently in a recent RT interview – until the world is eventually one happy family. Bingo.
But it is not the end. There are alternatives. The western world is like a sinking ship. It’s a slow sinking ship, slow and smiling as the fascism that drives it. We may not notice it. But look all around you, the massive killing, the fraud, the lawlessness at every step, up to the highest levels of government. Forget the msm presstitute, they are lying.
Most everybody knows this today. The next few centuries or more, are the Age of the East – Russia and China are opening the gates for an Economy of Peace, led by President Xi Jinping’s initiative, the enormous multi-pronged OBI – One Belt Initiative, formerly the OBOR – One Belt One Road; a new Silk road that stretches from Shanghai to Hamburg and from Vladivostok to Lisbon and connecting Syria and Iran in the South.
Be brave! Dare to detach. Detach from the lie and fraud we have been living for the last two millennia, all the way back to the Roman Empire and which may be reaching soon a peak, a fiery and bloody peak which may end life as we know it in a nuclear all-annihilating holocaust. Because the dying beast may not want to leave survivors on this planet of ours.
Peter Koenig is an economist and geopolitical analyst. He is also a former World Bank staff and worked extensively around the world in the fields of environment and water resources. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America.
After WWII, the West had one huge ‘problem’ on its hands: all three most populous Muslim countries on Earth – Egypt, Iran and Indonesia – were clearly moving in one similar direction, joining group of patriotic, peaceful and tolerant nations. They were deeply concerned about the welfare of their citizens, and by no means were they willing to allow foreign colonialist powers to plunder their resources, or enslave their people.
In the 1950’s, the world was rapidly changing, and there was suddenly hope that the countries which were oppressed and pillaged for decades and centuries by first the European and then North American geopolitical and business interests, would finally break their shackles and stand proudly on their own feet.
Several Communist countries in Eastern Europe, but also newly liberated China, were actively helping with rapid de-colonizing process in Africa, Asia, the Middle East and other parts of the world.
Those developments were exactly what the West in general and both the U.K. and the U.S. in particular, were not ready or willing to accept. ‘Ancient’ belief in some sort of ‘inherited right’ to colonize, to loot and to control entire non-white world, was deeply engraved in the psyche of the rulers in both Europe and North America.
Peaceful, tolerant and socially oriented Islam was seen as a tremendous threat, at least in London, Washington, and Paris. It had to be stopped, even destroyed – resolutely and by all available means. Only the pre-approved Wahhabism, which was collaborative with the West and from the onset at least partially ‘co-produced’ by the British Empire, was singled-out and allowed to ‘bloom and succeed’.
Iran fell first, in 1953.
Actually, it did not fall; it was brutally destroyed.
According to the logic of the Empire, Iran had to be derailed and ruined, in order to prevent so-called ‘domino effect’.
As written by Irfan Ahmad, an Associate Professor of Political Anthropology at Australian Catholic University, Melbourne and author of “Islamism and Democracy in India”:
“…Major theatre of de-democratization was Iran, whose elected government was overthrown, in 1953, by a US-UK alliance. Mohammad Mosaddeq was Iran’s elected prime minister. He enjoyed the approval of Iran’s parliament for his nationalization program. The US and UK organized a CIA-led coup to oust Mosaddeq – because Iran refused make oil concessions to the West. During World War II, the UK had taken control of Iran to prevent oil from being passed to its ally, the Soviet Union. Through the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, the UK continued to control Iran’s oil after the war. The French-educated Mosaddeq was highly critical of Iran’s draining of resources to the West. Soon after getting elected as prime minister in March 1951, Mosaddeq and his National Front alliance had moved to nationalize Iranian oil and throw out foreign control of oil fields. One such was the Abadan refinery, then the largest in the world. The UK retaliated by imposing economic sanctions, backed by its heavy naval presence in the region. Mosaddeq, however, was undeterred; his popularity only increased among the Iranian people. Faced with Mosaddeq’s resistance, the UK-US alliance staged a coup to over throw Mosaddeq’s government.”
France, the U.K. and Israel attacked it, in 1956, during so-called “Suez Canal Crises”. Although the invasion eventually ended and Canal stayed in the hands of Egypt, the country never fully recovered. There were further Israeli attacks and invasions, and after President Gamal Abdel Nasser passed away in 1970, gross meddling in Egypt’s internal affairs by the Western countries. Gradually, Egypt was turned into an impoverished client state.
In Indonesia, a progressive and religiously tolerant President Ahmed Sukarno was overthrown more than a decade after Mohammad Mosaddeq in Iran. The coup took place in 1965, with direct involvement of the United States. Between 1 and 3 million people were brutally slaughtered.
Sukarno’s main ‘sins’, at least in the eyes of the Western Empire, consisted of strong left wing, patriotic stands, which included nationalization of almost all natural resources. Sukarno was also one of the founding fathers of non-aligned movement.
By the end of the 1960’s, socialism in the Muslim countries had been almost thoroughly demolished. Dark era of collaboration, particularly in the [Persian] Gulf region, arrived.
The 1953 coup in Iran was later replicated in various parts of the world, even as far as Latin America.
For years it is has been no secret that the U.S and the U.K. planned and executed this deadly event.
In its article, CIA admits role in 1953 Iranian coup, published on 19 August 2013, The Guardian reported:
“The CIA has publicly admitted for the first time that it was behind the notorious 1953 coup against Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddeq, in documents that also show how the British government tried to block the release of information about its own involvement in his overthrow.
On the 60th anniversary of an event often invoked by Iranians as evidence of western meddling, the US national security archive at George Washington University published a series of declassified CIA documents.
“The military coup that overthrew Mosaddeq and his National Front cabinet was carried out under CIA direction as an act of US foreign policy, conceived and approved at the highest levels of government,” reads a previously excised section of an internal CIA history titled The Battle for Iran.”
Declassified, U.S Department of State “Top Secret” documents from 1952, also clearly demonstrated great appetite of the U.K. to perform the coup in Iran:
“Subject: Proposal to Organize a Coup d’etat in Iran
“The British foreign Office has informed us that it would be disposed to attempt to bring about a coup d’état in Iran, replacing the Mosadeq Government by one which would be more “reliable”, if the American government agreed to cooperate…”
Although the U.S. government was originally hesitant about supporting the U.K. in planning to overthrow Prime Minister Mohammad Mosadeq, it soon changed its mind and allowed the CIA to plot and execute the coup.
What followed was 26 years of perversely brutal rule of Shah Reza Pahlavi, as well as of the British-US control over almost all great natural resources of Iran.
In brief: the West performed an experiment on Iran and on its people: how would the country react to a bloodbath, to overthrowing of its popular leader, to a theft of its resources?
As it did for centuries, the U.K. ‘scored’: it correctly predicted that it would be able to ‘get away with murder’. It managed to convince its offspring, the United States, that huge international crimes pay, as long as they are committed barefaced.
And the US industrialized these crimes, as it earlier did production of automobiles or radio sets. Crimes got mass-produced. One ‘inappropriate’ government after another got overthrown, destroyed; all over the world: Congo, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Chile, Brazil, Indonesia, Vietnam… Crimes were piling up, and still are.
1953 in Iran marked the beginning of a ‘new chapter’ in the world history – a terrible and brutal chapter.
Iranian people and Iranian leadership are well aware of it. The country that suffered so much, the country which lost hundreds of thousands of its sons and daughters to Western imperialism, geopolitical games as well as naked greed, is now standing tall and strong, unwilling to surrender or to even budge.
It wants to go forward, it is going forward, but in its own direction, at its own pace, for the benefit of its people.
Iran is not alone. There is now an entire powerful alliance in place, consisting of countries from all over the world: an alliance of those who are not afraid to confront deadly expansionism and consequent terror. From Bolivia to China, from South Africa to Russia, Syria, Venezuela and the Philippines, people are remembering Iran of 1953, determined to defend their countries and the world against the greatest evil, which is imperialism!
Andre Vltchek is a philosopher, novelist, filmmaker and investigative journalist. He has covered wars and conflicts in dozens of countries. Three of his latest books are revolutionary novel “Aurora” and two bestselling works of political non-fiction: “Exposing Lies Of The Empire” and “Fighting Against Western Imperialism”. View his other books here. Andre is making films for teleSUR and Al-Mayadeen. Watch Rwanda Gambit, his groundbreaking documentary about Rwanda and DRCongo. After having lived in Latin America, Africa and Oceania, Vltchek presently resides in East Asia and the Middle East, and continues to work around the world. He can be reached through his website and his Twitter.
The Israeli-Islamic terrorism connection can’t be hidden any more. This article contains 11 clues (out of many). Above: Jabat al-Nusra terrorists wounded in Syria taken to Israeli hospitals. Image credit: SyrianFreePress.wordpress.com.
The Israeli-Islamic Terrorism connection has become
as clear as day. There are so many clues it’s impossible for the Anglo-American-Zionist axis to hide it any more. This article offers further proof of the Israeli-Islamic terrorism link, beyond what I have already exposed in previous articles such as Top 10 Indications or Proofs ISIS is a US-Israeli Creation. There is really no doubt that Israel is following the logic that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” Since its arch-enemy Iran is helping Syrian President Bashar Al Assad, Israel is turning to the enemies of the Syrian Government to collaborate and conspire with them in the overthrow of Assad. These enemies are the “Syrian rebels”, or Salafist, Wahhabi and Takfiri terrorists (see this article for a breakdown of what all these terms mean, and how mainstream Sunni Muslims are distancing themselves from these violent groups). Whether it’s ISIS, Al Qaeda, Fatah Al Sham, Jahbat Al Sham, Al Nusra Front, Syrian rebels in general or any other Takfiri terrorist group, Israel has been actively pursuing relationships with all them to undermine the Iran-Syria alliance.
The following 11 clues are arranged in chronological order, from the most recent (#1) to the oldest (#11), however all the following articles and reports have been written within the last 2 years.
Clues Exposing the Israeli-Islamic Terrorism Connection
1. Israel is building a new hospital for Islamic takfiri terrorists: A recent PressTV report from July 19th 2017 states that Israel is planning on building a new field hospital to help wounded soldiers. Do you think Israel is just doing this out of their love for humanity?
“Israel’s military says the Tel Aviv regime plans to build a new field hospital in Syria … Lieutenant Colonel Tomer Koler told reporters in a phone conference on Wednesday that the hospital would be located on the Syrian side of the fence but on the Israeli side of the demarcation line in the Golan Heights, which is Syrian territory occupied by Israel … He noted that Israel had delivered what he called “humanitarian aid” into Syria, including hundreds of tons of food and clothing, as well as fuel and equipment such as generators.”
“Humanitarian aid”? Smells like another Orwellian euphemism, similar to humanitarian intervention. Try “takfiri terrorist support” and you’ll be closer to the mark.
2. Israel takes Fatah Al Sham / Al Nusra Front terrorists to Israeli hospitals: According to a June 25th 2017 article from the AhlulBayt News Agency (an Iranian source), Israel is continuing to accept Syrian terrorists who have been wounded in battle with the SAA (the Syrian Arab Army which is the official, legitimate army of the Syrian Government) in Quneitra province. The articles states:
“The sources reported that a number of injured members of Al-Nusra Front (also known as Fatah al-Sham Front or the Levant Liberation Board) have been transferred to the Israeli hospitals via al-Hamidiyeh region in Quneitra countryside. The army troops repelled Al-Nusra Front’s offensives in the Southwestern province of Quneitra, leaving tens of terrorists dead and many more wounded. Later, the Israeli aircraft attacked the Syrian government forces’ tanks and artillery positions South-West of the war-hit country. This is not the first time that Al-Nusra terrorists have been transferred to Israeli hospital after sustaining injuries in clashes with the army soldiers. In September and November 2016, tens of wounded fighters of Fatah al-Sham (formerly know as the Al-Nusra) Front were transferred from Quneitra battlefields to Israeli hospitals in the occupied Golan Heights, as several Israeli ambulances entered Syria’s Southern province of Quneitra and transferred those terrorists injured in clashes with Syrian Army troops to their hospitals in the occupied part of the Golan Heights.”
3. Israel is coordinating attacks inside the Golan Heights with Al Nusra: Further evidence of the Israeli-ISIS connection can be found in this PressTV article of June 25th 2017, which reports a Syrian military source. Israel claims plausible deniability by saying their attacks on Syria are in retaliation for attacks that come out of Syria against Israel (though no necessarily from the SAA). The source states:
“Israel’s airstrikes on the Golan Heights on Saturday coincided with a push by Nusra Front terrorists against army (i.e. SAA) positions … Israel regularly hits positions held by the Syrian army in the Golan Heights, describing the attacks as retaliatory. Syria says the raids aim to help Takfiri militants fighting against government forces.”
Israeli-Islamic terrorism is right in line with the Mossad’s motto.
“… the growing interactions between the two sides could lead to escalation and cause harm to members of the UN Disengagement Observer Force deployed to the Golan Heights. UN observers listed 16 meetings between the Israel forces and the Syria militants in the border area, including on Mount Hermon, in proximity to UN outposts in Syria’s Quneitra Province and the Golan Heights, from March 2 to May 16.”
It should of course be noted that the entire Golan Heights region was annexed by Israel during its 6-Day War of 1967. It has been illegally occupying that region ever since, for over 50 years now. Rather than trying to find a way to give some territory back to Syria, Israel is pushing forward to create a buffer zone to further entrench themselves in the stolen land.
5. Israel communicates with and funds Islamic Terrorists to maintain its buffer zone in the “stolen Golan”: Israel stole the Golan Heights region from Syria during the 6-Day War of 1967, and has up to this point refused to give back all the territory it illegally annexed. This Russia insider article from June 19th, 2017, highlights how Israel is attempting to create a new buffer zone around Quneitra in Syria so that it can retain control of the Golan Heights forever.
6. Wall Street Journal reports that Israel has been secretly helping the Syrian rebels: The original Wall Street Journal article on June 18th 2017 claimed they had interviewed around half a dozen Syrian fighters to reach this conclusion:
“Israel has been regularly supplying Syrian rebels near its border with cash as well as food, fuel and medical supplies for years, a secret engagement in the enemy country’s civil war aimed at carving out a buffer zone populated by friendly forces.
The Israel army is in regular communication with rebel groups and its assistance includes undisclosed payments to commanders that help pay salaries of fighters and buy ammunition and weapons, according to interviews with about half a dozen Syrian fighters.”
The rest of the article is hidden behind a paywall. Subsequently, several other articles summarizing this have sprung up, such as this one which also states:
“The commander identified by the nom de guerre Abu Suhayb who leads the terrorist group told the Journal that he receives about $5,000 a month from Israel.”
Rita Katz of SITE further cements the Israeli-Islamic terrorism link. Image credit: HelpFreeTheEarth.com
7. ISIS videos are distributed to the world via SITE, an Israeli Intelligence Front: I have exposed previously on the The Freedom Articles how the organization SITE (Search International Terrorist Entities) led by Rita Katz is a Mossad or Israeli intelligence front. Isn’t it strange and very convenient how almost all (if not all) of ISIS’ videos (beheadings, killings, etc.) come via SITE? In this article from May 10th, 2017, Christopher Bollyn exposes SITE and people connected to it, such as Aaron Zelin – a Jewish Zionist from Illinois who works with Zionist think tanks like the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and who runs Jihadology.net.
8. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu quoted as saying that Israel will keep taking in Syrians to its hospitals: We also have an April 9th 2017 article from the Times of Israel that quotes Netanyahu as admitting that Israel has helping been helping wounded Syrian civilians, and will continue to do so:
“Netanyahu [said] “… Israel is treating injured civilians from Syria as part of the humanitarian effort. We will continue to do so.””
“In a status posted on his Facebook page on Sunday, Knesset Member Akram Hasoon (Kulanu) claimed Jabhat Fateh al-Sham is bombing the Druze village of Khadr with Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman’s support and protection.
Hasoon said that since the weekend, the quiet village of Khadr near the Syrian border has been subject to persistent bombardments by Jabhat Fateh al-Sham militants. “We have gotten information from all fronts and from people who are responsible within the village that the Nusra Front is operating with unprecedented support from Israel, because the organization’s fighters are advancing in those places where the Israel Defense Forces had previously bombed Syrian positions and the organization is holding those positions, in addition to the logistical and medical assistance it’s getting from Israel.”
Citing eyewitnesses, Hasoon said that the Jabhat Fateh al-Sham fighters have advanced technological equipment that gives them an advantage over Assad’s forces. “To date dozens have fallen and the fighting continues, all with Israeli support,” he wrote.”
Israeli-Islamic terrorism: Herzi Halevi (above) suggests that Israel directly support ISIS.
10. Israeli Intelligence Head Admits Israel Prefers ISIS: This Antiwar.com article from June 21st, 2016 quoted a high-ranking Israeli military officer, Major General Herzi Halevy, at the Herzliya Conference. Halevy is a major general in the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) and the current chief of the Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate. According to the article, which used Hebrew-language NRG site as its source, Halevy openly declared that Israel “prefers ISIS” to the Syrian Government and that Israel does not want to see ISIS defeated in the war. The article stated:
“Halevy went on to express concern that the defeat of ISIS might mean the ‘superpowers’ leaving Syria, saying this would put Israel ‘in a hard position’ after being so opposed to the survival of the Syrian government. He then said Israel will do ‘all we can so as to not find ourselves in such a situation,’ suggesting that the Israeli military is looking at direct support for ISIS as a matter of policy, and not just rhetoric.”
11. Israel was the main buyer of stolen ISIS oil in 2015: This well-researched article from November 30th, 2015 published by the Qatari-owned new outlet al-Araby al-Jadeed concluded that Israel was the biggest buyer of stolen ISIS oil.
Other Nations Funding ISIS and Islamic Terrorism
Islamic terrorism and creations like ISIS are, of course, not only supported by Israel. There is a mountain of evidence revealing the role of the US, UK, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE and others. In this video posted in 2015 former VP Joe Biden openly admits that ISIS terrorists are being funded by the allies of the US (and therefore of Israel). He specifically names Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and UAE. In November 2015, Russia exposed how ISIS trucks were carrying oil out of Syria to fund their operations, and presented evidence “that provided examples based on our data on the financing of different Islamic State units by private individuals. This money, as we have established, comes from 40 countries and, there are some of the G20 members among them.” In June 2017 Turkish politician Enis Berberoglu was sentenced to 25 years in prison for the crime of leaking secret documents to a newspaper showing the Turkey’s MIT (National Intelligence Organization) shipped weapons to foreign-backed Takfiri terrorists in Syria. US support of ISIS is well known, as is the fact that Britain helped to create ISIS along with America.
The Israeli-Islamic Terrorism Connection: The Game is Up
The evidence of the Israeli-Islamic terrorism link is overwhelming. We know that radical Islamic terrorism is really Zio-Islamic terrorism. Both radicalized individuals and key Zionist players (both using religion as an excuse to steal and kill) are involved. It’s a slick game but the cat is out of the bag.
Makia Freeman is the editor of alternative media / independent news siteThe Freedom Articles and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com, writing on many aspects of truth and freedom, from exposing aspects of the worldwide conspiracy to suggesting solutions for how humanity can create a new system of peace and abundance.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Bahram Qassemi on Sunday called on world nations and governments to support “the oppressed Palestinians and counter inhuman measures and aggression of the usurping Zionists.”
Iran has strongly condemned Israel’s siege of the al-Aqsa Mosque and its crackdown on Palestinian worshipers, saying the regime is the source of terrorism in the region.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Bahram Qassemi on Sunday also called on world nations and governments to support “the oppressed Palestinians and counter inhuman measures and aggression of the usurping Zionists.”
He touched on a “continued mass abduction of the Palestinian people by usurious Zionists and their crimes, aggressions and violations of the basic rights of Palestinians, in particular restrictions put on religious freedom and access to holy places” in Jerusalem al-Quds.
The crackdown “shows that the oppressed Palestine is still the first issue of the Islamic world and the Zionist regime acts as the manifestation, source, and origin of state terrorism and panic in the region,” Qassemi said.
He also criticized the regional states for their silence and inaction in the face of the Israeli crackdown, asking the international community, especially the the United Nations, “to urgently address the unfortunate developments in the occupied territories and firmly stand against the oppression, racial discrimination and religious discrimination policies of the Zionist regime.”
“We also call on the international community and human rights organizations, including the UN Human Rights Council and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), to act in accordance with their duty to confront and decisively condemn the inhuman and anti-cultural policies of the Zionist regime which are against human rights principles,” he added.
Tensions broke out in the occupied territories on July 14, when a deadly shooting took place outside the Haram al-Sharif which Jews call Temple Mount.
Following the incident, Israeli police briefly shut down the al-Aqsa compound in the occupied East Jerusalem al-Quds and canceled Muslim Friday prayers at the holy site.
Israel reopened the compound on July 16, but with metal detectors and surveillance cameras put up at entrances.
Palestinians say Israel’s fresh restrictions at al-Aqsa are meant to expand the regime’s control over the highly-sensitive site and change its status quo.
The occupied lands have been volatile ever since Israeli forces imposed restrictions on the entry of Palestinian worshipers into al-Aqsa two years ago.
The Tel Aviv regime has been trying to change the demographic makeup of Jerusalem al-Quds by constructing settlements, destroying historical sites and expelling the local Palestinian population.
More than 300 Palestinians have lost their lives at the hands of Israeli forces since October 2015, when the tensions intensified.
“Our Western governments tell us that they’re at war with “Islamic terror”. Yet in the geopolitics of the Middle East our governments align themselves with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States – the kingdoms which sponsor “Islamic terror”. Everyone with half a brain knows that Saudi Wahhabism is the mother of Al-Qaeda and ISIS.”
“The White House is not just doubling the bet in Iraq…..It’s doubling the bet across the region [and the world]. This could get very complicated. Everything is upside down.”
— Martin Indyk (former US ambassador to Israel) 2007
The West’s policies in the Middle East are coming home. Remember the “Vietnamese” heroin that showed up in the body bags at home? Well there’s a lot of body bags at home right now that are full of “Islamic” terrorism. And remember the army that invaded Basra? The British one! Well it’s now on the streets of Britain. And the army that destroyed Libya? The French one! It’s now on the streets of France. Meanwhile in America the US President is fighting the FBI and the US media are begging for a coup. And everywhere in the trans-Atlantic sewer the populists are freaking out the elitists. The Empire of chaos is a structural mess.
It is a case of one contradiction too many. On top of the West’s never ending class wars and imperial wars, the West’s latest “forever and ever war on terror” is a fiasco that has tipped the balance in favour disbelief and dissent. The illegitimacy of this “war on terrorism” points to the illegitimacy of all the structural wars the West is fighting across the planet. It is the domino theory in reverse. One imperial war stops making sense and so all the wars stop making sense (if they ever did). The Western establishment has tied itself in a knot in an attempt to prolong itself. Watch it fall.
Our Western governments tell us that they’re at war with “Islamic terror”. Yet in the geopolitics of the Middle East our governments align themselves with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States – the kingdoms which sponsor “Islamic terror”. Everyone with half a brain knows that Saudi Wahhabism is the mother of Al-Qaeda and ISIS. And a half of that half a brain can connect the dots between Western Interests in Arabia and “Islamic terror”. It’s obvious that the West have used and still are using “Islamic terrorism” as a proxy in places like Syria, Libya and Iraq. So when these same “terrorists” pop up in the West and cause mayhem: what the fuck?
Could it be that the West’s terrorists in the Middle East are still working for the West when they bomb and shoot in the West? Could our Western governments be targeting the West?
The House of Saud and the House of Commons as well as the White House (you can add the Houses of Rothschild and Rockefeller to this list of elite Houses) do nothing without each other. So if a Saudi linked death squad attacks the West: the Western establishment is complicit.
Why? To begin with the House of Saud was a British intelligence asset during World War I – long before Saudi Arabia was born in 1932. The British paid for Saudi head chopping back in the 1920s. And nothing has changed since then. For example, since the Saudi invasion of Yemen in 2015 the UK has sold £3.3 billion worth of military equipment to the Saudis.
The USA joined the Saudi bloodbath in the interwar period. The California -Arabian Standard Oil Company institutionalised this nefarious relationship in the 1930s. And Henry Kissinger cemented it in the 1970s. Oil and petrodollars therefore were the parents of Al-Qaeda. And any jihad since the 1980s has been a happy meeting of CIA and Saudi minds.
This includes ISIS. Seymour Hersh explains the latest US/Saudi cooperation explicitly in his 2007 New Yorker article ‘The Redirection’. After the US lost control of Iraq, Washington DC allowed the Saudis to ‘redirect’ US foreign policy in the region – in an effort to “contain” Iran. The end result was Sunni extremism in Iraq and eventually ISIS. And a US/Saudi 2017 military deal worth $110 billion.
This fundamental link between the Western establishment and Saudi Arabia’s overt and covert terror networks doesn’t categorically connect the West’s governments to the bullets and bombs of ISIS that explode in the West. It doesn’t suggest anything else other than blowback. But a more sinister connection than ‘guilt by association’ comes to the surface if we analyse Western elite behaviour elsewhere. If we widen our perspective and look at the war on drugs and compare it to the war on terror, then what the Western elite are capable of within the West is alarming.
It isn’t just blowback – it’s by design. That’s the lesson of the “war on drugs”. Richard Nixon started this war in 1971. However in 2015, according to RT, the illegal drug market was “bigger than the automotive industry and it’s volume is approaching that of the oil and gas sector“. In his book The CIA As Organised Crime, Douglas Valentine answers the following question:
Ken McCarthy: A member of the Sinaloa cartel, Vicente Zambada-Niebla, is currently in prison in the US “on charges of trafficking more than a billion dollars in cocaine and heroin.” Zambada’s attorney is saying that since the late 1990s, the Sinaloa cartel has provided various US law enforcement agencies with information about the other cartels. They help the US eliminate their rivals and in exchange they’re allowed to import limitless quantities of drugs into the US. Chicago is one of their main drop-off points.
So, Doug, has there ever been a case when the US government through its various law enforcement agencies gave a pass to drug dealers in exchange for something else? How often does it happen and how far back does it go?
Valentine: An old FBN [Federal Bureau of Narcotics] agent, Lenny Schrier, once told me: “The only way you can make cases is if your informant sells dope.” So, yes; not only has it happened, and not only does it still happen, but giving dealers a free pass to deal drugs is the foundation stone upon which federal drug law enforcement is based. Once you realise that, you have to look beyond, at the political and economic context that makes such an extra-legal practice possible…
The point here, is that the “war on drugs” is a contradiction. The official Western attempt to stop the trafficking of drugs is responsible for the proliferation of drugs in the West. Valentine’s point is that politics and economics trumps the law in the “war on drugs”. For political and economic reasons the West and its intelligence agencies (primarily the CIA) allows drug trafficking to flourish.
Maybe the reason is that drug money is a good way to fund a secret war (the Contra war against Nicaragua in the 1980s, for example). Maybe drug money maintains Third World CIA assets (landlords, generals, right-wing politicians, organised criminals – the usual anti-communists). Maybe drugs destabilise and therefore controls a strategic country (Mexico) or a strategic class (the working class and underclass). Or maybe drug money fuels a key part of the economy (the Western banks and corporations). Whatever the political or economic reasons the world’s illegal hard drugs are secretly tolerated and encouraged by the West despite the law.
If this is the reality of the war on drugs: can the same contradiction be found in the war on terror? If we superimpose the war on terror onto Valentine’s description of the war on drugs: will the patterns of one fit into the patterns of the other? In the war on terror does politics and economics trump the law? Is terrorism secretly tolerated and encouraged by the Western powers? According to the UK’s Independent newspaper in November 2016:
“A 650 per cent increase in deaths from terrorism in OECD countries and a marked rise in transnational terrorist attacks means the world is now a yet-more dangerous place in terms of terrorism, according to the IEP [Institute for Economics and Peace].”
Is the war on terror therefore like the war on drugs: does it actually promote what it allegedly is fighting against? The facts suggest that this is the case. Why?
As Valentine argues in relation to the war on drugs: the reasons concern politics and economics. The war on terror which George W. Bush began in the 2000s and which Donald Trump continues today is in fact similar to the war on terror which Ronald Reagan initiated in the 1980s. In short, it’s a hoax. It’s deceitful because to paraphrase Martin Luther King: the USA and the West back in the 1980s was, as it is today in the 2010s, the greatest purveyor of terror in the world. And it is so for political and economic reasons.
Like drugs, terrorism facilitates Western power. If no non-Western military force can compete with the military power of the West, then what scares the West? Why is the West panicking if it dominates the air, sea and land when it comes to conventional warfare? Why? Because that which makes the West nervous is the world’s civilian population. Cue unconventional warfare!
When the US war on drugs began in 1971, the US and it’s allies were producing heroin and killing civilians on a massive scale in South East Asia. A postmodern (anti-modern) partnership was born. A postmodern (two faced) pattern was set. Under the cover of Western self righteousness – drugs and terror became tools of the West. And they’ve been dovetailing each other ever since – targeting civilians all the way.
The template for the West’s postmodern terror onslaught, according to Douglas Valentine, was the Phoenix Program that shaped the underbelly of America’s war in Vietnam. Realising that the civilian population of South Vietnam was it’s real enemy the US – using it’s secret CIA “warriors” – in a very conscious, bureaucratic and bloody way covertly attacked it.
Secret detention centres, torture and executions terrorised the south Vietnamese population in the late 1960s and into the early 1970s. Up to 40,000 civilians were killed. And the rest were psyched out with propaganda – if they were not killed by a straightforward bombing raid. In this darkly coordinated approach to disobedient civilians the Western state-mafia found a formula that could be systematically used elsewhere. Like heroin, programmatic terrorism could be exported in a clandestine fashion. And in a massive scale it was.
The Phoenix Program was exported to Latin America in the 1970s and 1980s. It was called the ‘Salvador Option’ up north and ‘Operation Condor’ down south. And it ripped the guts out of civilian life in Central America and the Southern Cone.
A few hundred thousand executed civilians here and a few hundred thousand butchered civilians there. And, it’s fair to say, every one of the Latin American state terrorists responsible for this systematic killing of civilians passed through the US [Terror] School of the Americas which was located in Panama and now, under the name the “Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation”, is based in Fort Benning, Georgia. And, significantly, all of these terrorists had the political support of Latin America’s Cocaine kings and that ultimate king of war: Henry Kissinger.
At about the same time the CIA was training the mujahideen in the arts of terror and letting them blow secular civilian life in Afghanistan to bits. And so the Phoenix Program slowly made its way back to Asia and the heroin business.
This Western attempt to contain modern civilian life around the world, by throwing hardcore drugs and organised terrorism in the way of social progress, doubled it’s bet – in the 21st century – in Iraq, Syria and Libya.
If the Western 1% or 5% or 10% were to remain sure of their social position in global society, then they needed a countervailing primitive force or forces in the face of modern secular trends. Neoliberal capitalism and all it’s talk of competitive market forces became the primitive mainstream ideology of the 1% – the myth of free market individualism. And as it turned out hardcore drugs and hardcore terrorism covered the social and political backs of this 1% as they globalised themselves.
The catch for the Western 1% was that globalisation implied universalism. In capitalist terms, globalisation weirdly implied global equality or at least a level playing field. The BRICS took advantage of this. And the West hit back with a plethora of excuses to maintain inequality and it’s own privileged access to resources. Samuel Huntington’s The Clash of Civilisations was one excuse. And 911 and the subsequent “war on terror” was another excuse. The bet was that chaos in the heart of the Eurasian continent (think Zbigniew Brzezinski) would divert globalisation back into the familiar ways of Western domination.
However universalism, or the 21st century global civilian, had already bolted from Western parochialism. It was too late to slam the doors of history shut. Hence the need to double the bet against the progressive secular tendencies of the 21st century – the global dimensions of science and technology (reason), and as a result the global (non-Western) dimensions of human society. Feeling unsure of itself the parochial 1% backtracked away from globalisation and doubled it’s belief in the “Phoenix Program”.
The 1% and it’s allies and tools – NATO, Israel, the Saudis and all their secret services – combined in an attempt to divide and rule the world’s citizens one more time. Strategic cultural and political fractures were exploited in order to engineer social chaos and social reaction. The reason was Western power. And no price was too much for that.
Since World War II, at least, Western governments (the US leading the pack) have had no qualms about working with drug dealers so as to promote their interests. Likewise, since at least the Vietnam War, the West has systematically used for it’s own benefit terrorism and terrorists freely. From Vietnam to the Middle East – via Latin America – even the names of the Western teachers of terror are the same. For example, US colonel James Steele and US diplomat John Negroponte. And hovering above the likes of these are the gods of terror – the CIA, MI6, Mossad, etc. (figures like the ghostly Ted Shackley).
Which brings us back to Saudi Arabia and it’s “free pass” to commit acts of terrorism in what Seymour Hersh calls “The Redirection”. The importance of Saudi Arabia to the financial and petroleum heights of the Western establishment are beyond doubt. So the question now is whether that Saudi free pass extends to Western cities? Are policies like the Salvador Option on the elite table when dealing with Western countries?
If the war on drugs is any guide then Western society is as much a target for a “Phoenix type Program” as any other Third World society. Indeed Douglas Valentine believes that The United States Department of Homeland Security is a direct descendant of the Phoenix Program.
And the bombs and bullets in the streets of Europe? If the black neighbourhoods of Los Angeles could be flooded with drugs with the discreet blessing of a US government which was allegedly fighting a war against drugs: then the working class streets ofEurope can be flooded with terrorism with the surreptitious blessing of the Western governments which are allegedly fighting a war against terror.
Sweden prides itself as a recognized champion of human rights. However, its recently imported cultural values from the developing world may eventually shatter Sweden’s shining image. Tens of thousands of women have been found to be suffering from genital mutilation, despite the fact that this immensely painful procedure is illegal.
The number of Swedish women who have undergone genital mutilation has been estimated to be at least several times higher than previously expected, a new survey has found.In 2015, the National Board of Health estimated that there were approximately 38,000 women who have been victimized by female genital mutilation (FGM) in the Nordic country, which had for decades ranked at the top of various equality ratings.
The most recent survey, however, placed Sweden among the countries with the highest proportion of FGM sufferers, with a staggeringly morbid estimation of 150,000 in a nation of 10 million, Swedish Radio reported. Since genital mutilation is a very private and shame-laden, it remains largely unreported, with the actual number of victims potentially being still higher.
What makes matters worse, genital mutilation is being carried out among girls of immigrant descent in families that have been settled in Sweden for a long time. Despite the fact that FGM is strictly prohibited by Swedish law, tradition and religious prescriptions may sometimes overcome legal ramifications. In immigrant circles, girls are known to have been taken to their respective home countries to have this procedure performed.
The unexpectedly large and obviously still-growing number of genitally-mutilated women in Sweden places new demands on Swedish healthcare and school system, Swedish national broadcaster SVT wrote.
“Women who come to our reception have big problems. We remove the damaged parts in the lower abdomen area. But there are many more affected women in our society today, women we have to discover and offer help,” Bita Eshragi, a physician from Amelmottagningen, Sweden’s only clinic for FGM victims, told SVT.
Female genital mutilation, which is also known as female genital cutting and female circumcision, is the ritual cutting or removal of some or all of the external female genitalia. The practice is found in parts of Africa, Asia and the Middle East and is mostly carried out for religious or spiritual reasons. According to a 2016 estimation by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), around 200 million women living today have undergone this procedure.
Depending on the country, FGM is carried out at various ages ranging from days after birth to puberty. The practice is rooted in ideals about women’s chastity and purity, and failing to comply may result in social exclusion.The exact amount of surgery (mostly carried out in field conditions) varies from country to country, yet typically includes the removal of both inner and outer labia and parts of the clitoris. Adverse health effects may include recurrent infections, difficulty urinating, chronic pain, infertility and complications during childbirth — with no known benefits whatsoever.
“Our citizens should know the urgent facts…but they don’t because our media serves imperial, not popular interests. They lie, deceive, connive and suppress what everyone needs to know, substituting managed news misinformation and rubbish for hard truths…”—Oliver Stone