Trump’s talk of a Syria pullout nothing new

President Donald Trump’s unscripted remark this week about pulling out of Syria “very soon,” while at odds with his own policy, was not a one-off: For weeks, top advisers have been fretting about an overly hasty withdrawal as the president has increasingly told them privately he wants out, U.S. officials said.

Only two months ago, Trump’s aides thought they’d persuaded him that the U.S. needed to keep its presence in Syria open-ended — not only because the Islamic State group has yet to be entirely defeated, but also because the resulting power vacuum could be filled by other extremist groups or by Iran. Trump signed off on major speech in January in which Secretary of State Rex Tillerson laid out the new strategy and declared “it is vital for the United States to remain engaged in Syria.”

But by mid-February, Trump was telling his top aides in meetings that as soon as victory can be declared against IS, he wanted American troops out of Syria, said the officials. Alarm bells went off at the State Department and the Pentagon, where officials have been planning for a gradual, methodical shift from a military-led operation to a diplomatic mission to start rebuilding basic infrastructure like roads and sewers in the war-wracked country.

In one sign that Trump is serious about reversing course and withdrawing from Syria, the White House this week put on hold some $200 million in US funding for stabilization projects in Syria, officials said. The money, to have been spent by the State Department for infrastructure projects like power, water and roads, had been announced by outgoing Secretary of State Rex Tillerson at an aid conference last month in Kuwait.

The officials said the hold, first reported by The Wall Street Journal, is not necessarily permanent and will be discussed at senior-level inter-agency meetings next week.

The officials weren’t authorized to comment publicly and demanded anonymity.

The State Department said it continually reviews appropriate assistance levels and how best they might be utilized. And the agency said it continues to work with the international community, members of the Coalition, and our partners on the ground to provide much needed stabilization support to vulnerable areas in Syria.

“The United States is working everyday on the ground and with the international community to help stabilize those areas liberated from ISIS and identify ways to move forward with reconstruction once there has been a peaceful political transition away from (Syrian President Bashar) Assad,” according to a statement from the State Department.

Trump’s first public suggestion he was itching to pull out came in a news conference with visiting Australian Prime Minister Alastair Campbell on Feb. 23, when Trump said the U.S. was in Syria to “get rid of ISIS and go home.” On Thursday, in a domestic policy speech in Ohio, Trump went further.

“We’ll be coming out of Syria, like, very soon. Let the other people take care of it now. Very soon — very soon, we’re coming out,” Trump said.

The public declaration caught U.S. national security agencies off-guard and unsure whether Trump was formally announcing a new, unexpected change in policy. Inundated by inquiries from journalists and foreign officials, the Pentagon and State Department reached out to the White House’s National Security Council for clarification.

The White House’s ambiguous response, officials said: Trump’s words speak for themselves.

“The mission of the Department of Defense to defeat ISIS has not changed,” said Maj. Adrian Rankine-Galloway, a Pentagon spokesman.

Still, without a clear directive from the president, planning has not started for a withdrawal from Syria, officials said, and Trump has not advocated a specific timetable.

For Trump, who campaigned on an “America First” mantra, Syria is just the latest foreign arena where his impulse has been to limit the U.S. role. Like with NATO and the United Nations, Trump has called for other governments to step up and share more of the burden so that Washington doesn’t foot the bill. His administration has been crisscrossing the globe seeking financial commitments from other countries to fund reconstruction in both Syria and Iraq, but with only limited success.

Yet it’s unclear how Trump’s impulse to pull out could be affected by recent staff shake-ups on his national security team. Tillerson and former national security adviser H.R. McMaster, both advocates for keeping a U.S. presence in Syria, were recently fired, creating questions about the longevity of the plan Tillerson announced in his Stanford University speech in January. But Trump also replaced McMaster with John Bolton, a vocal advocate for U.S. intervention and aggressive use of the military overseas.

The abrupt change in the president’s thinking has drawn concern both inside and outside the United States.

Other nations that make up the U.S.-led coalition fighting IS fear that Trump’s impulse to pull out hastily would allow the notoriously resourceful IS militants to regroup, several European diplomats said. That concern has been heightened by the fact that U.S.-backed ground operations against remaining IS militants in Syria were put on hold earlier this month.

The ground operations had to be paused because Kurdish fighters who had been spearheading the campaign against IS shifted to a separate fight with Turkish forces, who began combat operations in the town of Afrin against Kurds who are considered by Ankara to be terrorists that threaten Turkey’s security.

“This is a serious and growing concern,” State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said this month.

Beyond just defeating IS, there are other strategic U.S. objectives that could be jeopardized by a hasty withdrawal, officials said, chiefly those related to Russia and Iran.

Israel, America’s closest Mideast ally, and other regional nations like Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are deeply concerned about the influence of Iran and its allies, including the Shiite militant group Hezbollah, inside Syria. The U.S. military presence in Syria has been seen as a buffer against unchecked Iranian activity, and especially against Tehran’s desire to establish a contiguous land route from Iran to the Mediterranean coast in Lebanon.

An American withdrawal would also likely cede Syria to Russia, which along with Iran has been propping up Syrian President Bashar Assad’s forces and would surely fill the void left behind by the U.S. That prospect has alarmed countries like France, which has historic ties to the Levant.

In calling for a withdrawal “very soon,” Trump may be overly optimistic in his assessment of how quickly the anti-IS campaign can be wrapped up, the officials said. Although the group has been driven from basically all of the territory it once controlled in Iraq and 95 percent of its former territory in Syria, the remaining five percent is becoming increasingly difficult to clear and could take many months, the officials said.

___

Associated Press writers Robert Burns and Jonathan Lemire contributed to this report.


MARCH 17 ,2018BY JASON HIRTHLER
Colonialism by another Name
The globalists are colonial conquerors in disguise

221 SHARES

  •  IMF Colonialism 46b49

In a talk last summer to promote his book Washington’s Long War on Syria,

In a talk last summer to promote his book Washington’s Long War on Syria,

IMF Colonialism 46b49

In a talk last summer to promote his book Washington’s Long War on Syria, author Stephen Gowans quotes U.S. foreign policy veteran Graham Fuller, who says, “The U.S. is by its own reckoning the overwhelmingly dominant power in the globe…with the determination to impose its will by one means or another…the term ‘imperialism’ cannot be far off the mark even after the formal age of western imperialism, new forms of imperialism were introduced in the modern age, especially in the Middle East starting with the pliant rulers selected to rule the newly ‘independent’ governments of most states. Theses rulers are expected to be responsive to western needs and preferences…and the majority of Arab leaders and elsewhere pursue pro-western policies unpopular with their own populations.”

Gowans then lists countries with American military installations in them, a clue that those governments pursue pro-western policies. They include Turkey, Israel, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Yemen, Bahrain, Qatar, UAE, Oman, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Djibouti, and the Philippines. What countries are left off the list? Iraq under Saddam Hussein, Libya under Muammar Gaddafi, Syria under Bashar al-Assad, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and don’t forget Venezuela under Bolivarian rule which, although in South America, is a prominent member of OPEC. None of these countries permitted U.S. bases. None of these countries welcomed Chicago School economists into their midst or conducted neoliberal economic overhauls. Half have been overthrown and bases have since been installed and western business interests privileged. The rest are in the crosshairs of the imperial arsenal and are subject to a revolving door of illegal threats from the White House, regardless of its inhabitant. In short, all the nations alienated from the so-called ‘international community’ are those that refuse to submit themselves to what Gowans calls America’s “undeclared, informal empire.” In other words, colonialism.

Long story short: the West, led by Washington, recognized, particularly after Vietnam, that occupations and full-scale invasions were expensive, tiresome, and particularly bad for public relations. (Setting aside the butchery; never a seminal concern in D.C.) It was too easy for global opinion to be rallied against you by the image of the fearless rebel, cap in hand, rifle slung across his broad shoulders, uncombed locks and scraggly beard hiding the fearsome gaze of a revolutionary. Che. Toussaint L’Ouverture. Minh. Biko. Lumumba. Gandhi. (It seems courageous men are often lionized over equally courageous women like Emma Goldman, Claudia Jones, Arundhati Roy, and many others.) Sooner or later a tsunami of public opprobrium would cause you to decamp, beg forgiveness, and promise a new vision of mutual prosperity (even as you sought backchannels to keep the whole business alive, as occurred in South Africa as formal apartheid was ending).

But Washington understood that it didn’t have to quit colonizing countries, just that it needed to do it in a manner that afforded maximum plausible deniability. It soon realized that it could colonize and exploit nations by economic sabotage, unscrupulous mercenaries, and debilitating debt rather than napalming villages. Naturally, the bullet and the bomb were a tantalizing last resort, always being brandished as a backstop for less brutal overtures, but invasion wasn’t strictly necessary in most cases. Colonialism was fundamentally an economic action, after all. It was and is a form of looting. What was needed was an ideology of exploitation disguised as a philosophy of humanitarianism. Which is how we ended up with neoliberalism, an economic strategy that continues imperialism by other means.

Colonies of the Mind

Beginning with the Powell Memo in 1971, dozens of think tanks were established across the western world and billions of dollars were spent proselytizing the tenets of so-called free-market economics, generating a counter-revolution to the liberal rebellion of the Sixties. The neoliberal economic model of deregulation, downsizing, and privatization was preached by the Reagan-Thatcher junta, liberalized by the Clinton regime, discredited by an unhinged Bush administration, and calmly restored under the Obama brand. The ideology that underlay the model saturated academia, notably at the University of Chicago, and the mainstream media, principally at The New York Times. Since then it has trickled down to the general populace, to whom it now feels second nature. Today think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, the Brookings Institution, Stratfor, Cato Institute, American Enterprise Institute, Council on Foreign Relations, Carnegie Endowment, the Open Society Foundation, and the Atlantic Council, among many others, funnel millions of dollars in donations into cementing neoliberal attitudes in the American mind. The ideological assumptions, which serve to justify what you could call neocolonial tactics, are relatively clear.

In the U.S., the concept of freedom is the taproot of the neoliberal ideology. Particularly, the right of the individual to live free from the overreach of monolithic institutions like the state. As the tale goes, government interventions are almost always ill-conceived and harmful. Markets must be free and individuals must be free to act in those markets. People must be free to choose, both politically and commercially, in the voting booth and at the cash register. This conception of markets and individuals is most often formulated as “free-market democracy,” a misleading conceit that conflates individual freedom with the economic freedom of capital to exploit labor.

So when it comes to foreign relations, American and western aid would only be given on the condition that the borrowers accepted the tenets of an (highly manipulable) electoral system and vowed to establish the institutions and legal structures required to fully realize a western market economy. These demands were supplemented with notions of the individual right to be free of oppression, some fine rhetoric about women and minorities, and somewhat more quietly, a judicial understanding that corporations were people, too. Together, an unshackled economy and an unfettered populace, newly equipped with individual rights, would produce the same flourishing and nourishing demos of mid-century America that had been the envy of humanity.

Fake News

This ‘Washington Consensus’ is the false promise promoted by the West. The reality is quite different. The crux of neoliberalism is to eliminate democratic government by downsizing, privatizing, and deregulating it. Proponents of neoliberalism recognize that the state is the last bulwark of protection for the common people against the predations of capital. Remove the state and they’ll be left defenseless. Deregulation eliminates the laws. Downsizing eliminates departments and their funding. Privatizing eliminates the very purpose of the state by having the private sector take over its traditional responsibilities. Ultimately, nation-states would dissolve except perhaps for armies and tax systems. A large, open-border global free market would be left, not subject to popular control but managed by a globally dispersed, transnational one percent. And the whole process of making this happen would be camouflaged beneath the altruistic stylings of a benign humanitarianism.

Pillage and Plunder

The neoliberal ideology (theory) conceals the neoliberal reality (practice). The media tirelessly rehearses the tropes of ‘western values’ and ‘free-market democracy’ embraced by the ‘international community.’ Economists reproduce neoliberal ideologues in academia and exert ideological control of Bretton Woods institutions like the World Bank andIMF. Against this twofold backdrop of intellectual conditioning, the West moves against its target economies.

The most common pretexts for intervention depict the target nation as:

a) An Economic Basket Case — The country is failing economically and needs a major loan from the IMF, which will be more than happy to deliver one if only said nation will adhere to certain crushing structural adjustments (SAPs) that effectively privilege foreign investors and debilitate the country’s social safety net, but which are naturally aimed at bringing said economic basket case into the community of responsible nations (those that have never been colonized or ransacked); Greece and Argentina provide useful examples here. It is rarely admitted that the country’s economic woes are often caused by odious debt, illegal sanctions, or misguided austerity measures preached by the West. Thus, as often happens, the prescription for recovery is the very set of tactics that caused the crisis. And the western nations know this.

b) A Tyranny Oppressing its own People — The country is failing to embrace western democratic institutions and is therefore, by definition, oppressing its population. Often, accusations against socialist countries typically pivot on the vilification of leaders as ‘brutal tyrants’ who manage ‘authoritarian regimes,’ which include but are not limited to the use of vicious dungeons and gulags to torture nameless citizens, jailing political opponents and disappearing gadfly journalists, and extending a ‘brutal crackdown’ over a ‘popular’ uprising. Problem is, these so-called uprisings are usually funded, armed, and instructed by Washington and its unsavory band of ‘allies’ for the express purpose of finding a pretext for intervention; Libya, Syria, and Venezuela are instructive in this regard. Venezuela, in particular, since even the World Bank conceded the dramatic improvements the Bolivarian revolution made. In the mainstream press, however, these figures were hidden while sketches of authoritarianism titillated readership. Some accusations are usually true, as all governments tend to tyranny, but they tend to be wildly inflated and conflated with a host of unproven claims of the kind we witnessed watching the cumbersome empire move on Iraq.

c) A Security Threat to America and its Allies — The country is failing to abide by the protocols of the onerous and sovereignty-violating UNSC resolution taken against it. In the global security arena, the unspoken truth is that all independent socialist nations must be gradually disarmed, thus making regime change a fairly painless formality. The country will be pressured to accept some sort of military fettering, such as the WMD restrictions on Iraq, chemical weapons restrictions on Syria, or the civilian nuclear energy restrictions on Iran. Justifications for such restrictions are generally untenable, given that the U.S. traffics in WMDs, bioweapons, and nuclear energy itself, insisting others forsake all of these is perhaps little more than racially motivated despotry. But significant fear mongering in the international media will provide sufficient moral momentum to ram through sanctions, resolutions, and inspection regimes with little fanfare.

Once consensus is achieved among the ‘international community,’ consisting of Washington’s sickly European vassals and a couple small Malaysian islands, the intervention is staged. All of the above will be seized upon by western media as definitive proof that a) the government is illegitimate and must step aside at once; and b) that socialism has been (once again) comprehensively debunked and should never be attempted again by anyone under any circumstances. Heads of various illegitimate western governments will convene in the decorous council rooms of the discredited UN Security Council and sanction military confrontation. (If China or Russia object, the U.S. will attack anyway, claiming moral obligation.)

Cracking the Shell

These knife-edged arrows in the arsenal of the West have fairly predictable results: cultural and economic chaos, rapid impoverishment, resource extraction with its attendant ecological ruin, transfer of ownership from local hands to foreign entities, and death from a thousand causes. We are currently sanctioning around 30 nations in some fashion; dozens of countries have fallen into ‘protracted arrears’ with western creditors; and entire continents are witnessing huge outflows of capital–on the order of $100B annually–to the global north as debt service. The profiteering colonialists of the West make out like bandits. The usual suspects include Washington and its loyal lapdogs, the IMF, World Bank, EU, NATO, and other international institutions, and the energy and defense multinationals whose shareholders and executive class effectively run the show.

The numeric evidence of imperial aggression is everywhere. It is better grasped by people living outside the walls of doctrinal system. People living in the 57 countries we’ve attempted to overthrow since WWII, or in the 81 nations whose elections we’ve poisoned. People living in occupied territories, alongside the 800 military bases we’ve flung like a net across the planet. People living beneath the drone arsenals that float in the sky, or those in nations that suffered the 51,000 bombs President Obama let drop in the final two years of his presidency.

The problem is that few inside America seems to know about it. As Fuller acknowledges, the emerging nations are still under the thumb of a vast western executive, but their rule is now comfortably disguised as humanitarian aid and succor. The Eton-bred officers in khakis have been supplanted by Yale-schooled technocrats and grim-faced Security Council delegates. The White Man’s Burden and its crude assumptions of racial superiority have been rearticulated as a message of inclusivity, a policy of multicultural aid. And because of this sleight of hand, few of us really believe the West is still the savage colonizer it once was. We comfortably assume we are a more civilized people now, that we have progressed past the embarrassing chauvinism of our forbearers. But one has to wonder if that idea is just a useful narcotic swallowed by a drowsy electorate more interested in solace than gospel truth.

Colnialism

WRITER

JASON HIRTHLER
Jason Hirthler is a writer, strategist, and 15-year veteran of the communications industry. He has written for many political communities. He lives and works in New York City.



MARCH 12 ,2018BY PHILIP GIRALDI
FARA Registration for AIPAC and Congress Is Washington’s Interest
359 SHARES

chuck Schumer bf937

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee,

Charles Ellis Schumer (/ˈʃmər/; born November 23, 1950)  bf937

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee, has just completed its annual conference in Washington. There were reportedly 18,000 attendees speakers included the Vice President, United Nations Ambassador, as well as numerous senators and congressmen. The organization is better known by its acronym AIPAC, and it has been fixture on Capitol Hill for more than sixty years. Its website proclaims “The mission of AIPAC is to strengthen, protect and promote the U.S.-Israel relationship in ways that enhance the security of the United States and Israel” because “…it is in America’s best interest to help ensure that the Jewish state is safe, strong and secure.”

In reality, the security of the U.S. part is a bit of a sham as AIPAC in no way works to strengthen the United States or benefit the American people. Quite the contrary. The bilateral “special” relationship is a one-way street that has done considerable damage to the United States in terms of its international standing and national security. AIPAC is all about Israel and always has been. Its hundreds of staffers lobby Congress and the White House daily to support legislation and policies favorable to Israel and damaging to its enemies and critics. It works closely with the Israeli government to obtain maximum benefit from the U.S. Treasury and Pentagon, to the detriment of American citizens and genuine national interests.

So why isn’t AIPAC forced to register as a foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) of 1938? There has been only one serious attempt to register AIPAC, undertaken by President John F. Kennedy in 1963, shortly before he was assassinated. Since that time growing Jewish political and financial power in the United States has meant that no chief executive has dared to make any demands on Israel and its Lobby. On the contrary, Israel has significantly benefitted materially over that time period, commensurate with its ability to manipulate or coerce the media and Congress while also intimidating a series of presidents.

FARA registration of AIPAC, currently a tax exempt 501(c)4, would require the organization to open its books to make transparent its sources of revenue. It would also be unable to contribute to political campaigns, reducing its leverage over Congress. So it is Washington’s interest to have AIPAC register, if only to limit interference in government and elections by a foreign country.

FARA should rightly be understood as a tool to punish the activities of governments that Washington does not like. In 1938, it was originally directed against the German, Italian and Japanese governments, whose front organizations were forced to register. The British, who were in fact lobbying much more heavily, were ignored. In todays environment, Russian news outlets RT America and Sputnik were forced to register while the actions of the Israel lobby have been basically protected by its powerful advocates within the government.

MORE…
DEPLOYING US MARINES TO ISRAEL IS A BIG MISTAKE
NEW WAR IN THE MIDDLE EAST? – WASHINGTON IS DANCING TO THE TUNE BEING PLAYED BY ISRAEL
ISRAELGATE: FLYNN’S COLLUSION WITH RUSSIA, WAS FOR THE BENEFIT OF ISRAEL
TRUMP AND NETANYAHU MADE COMPLETE FOOLS OF THEMSELVES IN FRONT OF WORLD LEADERS
So yes, AIPAC should be registered under FARA. I would even suggest that FARA be further extended to include public figures like congressmen and journalists, who basically lobby for Israel. That extension of FARA might seem overreach, but there is really no difference, legally speaking, between organizations like AIPAC that promote Israeli interests and individuals who do the same.

Some recent AIPAC conference included prominent Israel-firsters, who place Israel’s interests ahead of those of the United States. Let’s start with Christian Zionist Vice President Mike Pence, who said last year that “Every freedom loving American stands with Israel because her cause is our cause, her values are our values and her fight is our fight.” Wrong Mike. Israel is a foreign theocracy that has embraced deliberate policies inclusive of war crimes and crimes against humanity. It is manifestly un-American.

And then there is UN Ambassador Nikki Haley, whose speech at AIPAC this year was, uh, memorable. It is no surprise that she is being touted by neocon commander-in-chief Bill Kristol as the future GOP candidate for president. Haley, who received twelve standing ovations from the audience plus two shout-outs of “We love you Nikki!” seemingly forgot that she represents the U.S. at the U.N. She said that “There are lots of other things that we do, big and small, week after week, to fight back against the U.N.’s Israel bullying.”

Senators Ben Cardin and Chuck Schumer also received standing ovations from the audience. Schumer, who has described himself as Israel’s “shomer” or defender in the Senate, was particularly bizarre, saying “”The fact of the matter is that too many Palestinians and too many Arabs do not want any Jewish state in the Middle East. Of course, we say it’s our land, the Torah says it, but they don’t believe in the Torah. So that’s the reason there is not peace…that is why we, in America, must stand strong with Israel through thick and thin.”

So they are all promoting Israeli policies and should be compelled to register under FARA. And if you want to know what an Israeli recruited agent of influence sounds like you need go no farther than House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer, who addressed the AIPAC Political Leadership Conference on December 15, 2003 and said:

“I had the privilege of leading the largest congressional delegation in history to Israel in August. This was my sixth trip to Israel, and my fifth as a member of Congress… Let me say very clearly: as a member of the Democratic leadership and a long-time supporter of Israel, it is absolutely imperative that Members of Congress…recognize the moral and strategic significance of the U.S.-Israel partnership… Israel’s safety and security is not a Jewish/non-Jewish issue. It is an American national security issue.”

Steny is flat out wrong about Israel aiding U.S. national security. It is a liability and always has been, but don’t expect him to be convinced otherwise. Maybe it’s somehow related to the $304,000 in pro-Israel PAC money he has received. One thing that is undoubtedly true is that American politics will be measurably less corrupt if AIPAC, Hoyer and the rest of the congress critters are forced to register under FARA and become responsible for the damage they continue to do to the United States and the American people.

Israel US Relations

WRITER

PHILIP GIRALDI
Philip M. Giraldi is a former CIA counter-terrorism specialist and military intelligence officer who served nineteen years overseas in Turkey, Italy, Germany, and Spain. He was the CIA Chief of Base for the Barcelona Olympics in 1992 and was one of the first Americans to enter Afghanistan in December 2001. Phil is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a Washington-based advocacy group that seeks to encourage and promote a U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East that is consistent with American values and interests.

—————————————————————–

Martin Luther´s Book: On the The Jews and their Lies

MARTIN LUTHER’S SOLUTION TO THE JEWISH PROBLEM

MARTIN LUTHER’S SOLUTION TO THE JEWISH PROBLEM

Church leaders, through the age, have been alert to Satan’s use of the Jewish people in thwarting the program of Christ in the world. Some Christians have been more outspoken than others, on the subject, but every generation has produced its watchmen who have known the truth and have dared to proclaim it. Among the more bold spokesmen on this question was Martin Luther, the founder of the Protestant Church, who prepared a treatise entitled, The Jews and Their Lies.

Image result for martin luther png

ON THE JEWS AND THEIR LIES, CHAPTER 15 –   MARTIN LUTHER’S FINAL SOLUTION OT THE JEWISH PROBLEM 

What shall we Christians do with this rejected and condemned people, the Jews? Since they live among us, we dare not tolerate their conduct, nowthat we are aware of their lying and reviling and blaspheming. If we do, we become sharers in their lies, cursing and blasphemy. Thus we cannot extinguish the unquenchable fire of divine wrath, of which the prophets speak, nor can we convert the Jews. With prayer and the fear of God we must practice a sharp mercy to see whether we might save at least a few from the glowing flames. We dare not avenge ourselves. Vengeance a thousand times worse than we could wish them already has them by the throat. I shall give you my sincere advice:

First, to set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them. This is to be done in honor of our Lord and of Christendom, so that God might see that we are Christians, and do not condone or knowingly tolerate such public lying, cursing, and blaspheming of his Son and of his Christians. For whatever we tolerated in the past unknowingly_and I myself was unaware of it_will be pardoned by God. But if we, now that we are informed, were to protect and shield such a house for the Jews, existing right before our very nose, in which they lie about,blaspheme, curse, vilify, and defame Christ and us (as was heard above), itwould be the same as if we were doing all this and even worse ourselves, as we very well know.

In Deuteronomy 13:12 Moses writes that any city that is given to idolatry shall be totally destroyed by fire, and nothing of it shall be preserved.If he were alive today, he would be the first to set fire to the synagogues and houses of the Jews. For in Deuteronomy 4:2 and 12:32 he commanded very explicitly that nothing is to be added to or subtracted from his law. And Samuel says in I Samuel 15:23 that disobedience to God is idolatry. Now the Jews’ doctrine at present is nothing but the additions of the rabbis and the idolatry of disobedience, so that Moses has become entirely unknown among them (as we said before), just as the Bible became unknown under the papacy in our day. So also, for Moses’ sake, their schools cannot be tolerated; they defame him just as much as they do us. It is not necessary that they have their own free churches for such idolatry.

Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed. For they pursue in them the same aims as in their synagogues. Instead they might belodged under a roof or in a barn, like the gypsies. This will bring home to them the fact that they are not masters in our country, as they boast, but that they are living in exile and in captivity, as they incessantly wail and lament about us before God.

Third, I advise that all their prayer books and Talmudic writings, in whichsuch idolatry, lies, cursing, and blasphemy are taught, be taken from them.

Fourth, I advise that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb. For they have justly forfeited the right to such an office by holding the poor Jews captive with the saying of Moses (Deuteronomy 17:10) in which he commands them to obey their teachers on penalty of death, although Moses clearly adds: “what they teach you inaccord with the law of the Lord.” Those villains ignore that. They wantonly employ the poor people’s obedience contrary to the law of the Lord and infuse them with this poison, cursing, and blasphemy. In the same way the pope also held us captive with the declaration in Matthew 16:18, “You are Peter,” etc., inducing us to believe all the lies and deceptions that issued from his devilish mind. He did not teach in accord with the word of God, and therefore he forfeited the right to teach.

Fifth, I advise that safe-conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews. For they have no business in the countryside, since they are not lords, officials, tradesmen, or the like. Let them stay at home. I have heard it said that a rich Jew is now traveling across the country with twelve horses his ambition is to become a Kokhba devouring princes, lords, lands, and people with his usury, so that the great lords view it with jealous eyes. If you great lords and princes will not forbid such usurers the highway legally, some day a troop may gather against them, having learned from this booklet the true nature of the Jews and how one should deal with them and not protect their activities. For you, too, must not and cannot protect them unless you wish to become participants in an their abominations in the sight of God. Consider carefully what good could come from this, and prevent it.

Sixth, I advise that usury be prohibited to them, and that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them and put aside for safekeeping. The reason for such a measure is that, as said above, theyhave no other means of earning a livelihood than usury, and by it they havestolen and robbed from us an they possess. Such money should now be used in no other way than the following: Whenever a Jew is sincerely converted, he should be handed one hundred, two hundred, or three hundred florins, as personal circumstances may suggest. With this he could set himself up in some occupation for the support of his poor wife and children, and the maintenance of the old or feeble. For such evil gains are cursed if they are not put to use with God’s blessing in a good and worthy cause.

But when they boast that Moses allowed or commanded them to exact usury from strangers, citing Deuteronomy 23:20 apart from this they cannot adduce as much as a letter in their support we must tell them that there are two classes of Jews or Israelites. The first comprises those whom Moses, in compliance with God’s command, led from Egypt into the land of Canaan. To them he issued his law, which they were to keep in that country and not beyond it, and then only until the advent of the Messiah. The other Jews are those of the emperor and not of Moses. These date back to the time of Pilate, the procurator of the land of Judah. For when the latter asked them before the judgment seat, “Then what shall I do with Jesus who is called Christ?” they all said, “Crucify him, crucify him!” He said to them, “Shall I crucify your King?” They shouted in reply, “We have no king but Caesar!”[Matt. 27:22; John 19:15]. God had not commanded of them such submission to the emperor; they gave it voluntarily.

But when the emperor demanded the obedience due him, they resisted and rebelled against him. Now they no longer wanted to be his subjects. Then he came and visited his subjects, gathered them in Jerusalem, and then scattered them throughout his entire empire, so that they were forced to obey him. From these the present remnant of Jews descended, of whom Moses knows nothing, nor they of him; for they do not deserve a single passage or verse of Moses. If they wish to apply Moses’ law again, they must first return to the land of Canaan, become Moses’ Jews, and keep his laws. There they may practice usury as much as strangers will endure from them. But since they are dwelling in and disobeying Moses in foreign countries under the emperor, they are bound to keep the emperor’s laws and refrain from the practice of usury until they become obedient to Moses. For Moses’ law has never passed a single step beyond the land of Canaan or beyond the people of Israel. Moses was not sent to the Egyptians, the Babylonians, or any other nation with his law, but only to the people whom he led from Egyptinto the land of Canaan, as he himself testifies frequently in Deuteronomy. They were expected to keep his commandments in the land which they would conquer beyond the Jordan.

Moreover, since priesthood, worship, government with which the greater part, indeed, almost all, of those laws of Moses deal have been at an endfor over fourteen hundred years already, it is certain that Moses’ law also came to an end and lost its authority. Therefore the imperial laws must be applied to these imperial Jews. Their wish to be Mosaic Jews must not be indulged. In fact, no Jew has been that for over fourteen hundred years.

Seventh, I recommend putting a flail, an ax, a hoe, a spade, a distaff, or a spindle into the hands of young, strong Jews and Jewesses and letting them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow, as was imposed on the children of Adam (Gen. 3 [:19]). For it is not fitting that they should let us accursed Goyim toil in the sweat of our faces while they, the holy people, idle away their time behind the stove, feasting and farting., andon top of all, boasting blasphemously of their lordship over the Christians by means of our sweat. No, one should toss out these lazy rogues by the seat of their pants.

But if we are afraid that they might harm us or our wives, children, servants, cattle, etc., if they had to serve and work for us — for it is reasonable to assume that such noble lords of the world and venomous, bitter worms are not accustomed to working and would be very reluctant to humble themselves so deeply before the accursed Goyim — then let us emulate the common sense of other nations such as France, Spain, Bohemia, etc., compute with them how much their usury has extorted from us, divide,divide this amicably, but then eject them forever from the country. For, as we have heard, God’s anger with them is so intense that gentle mercy will only tend to make them worse and worse, while sharp mercy will reform them but little. Therefore, in any case, away with them!

I hear it said that the Jews donate large sums of money and thus prove beneficial to governments. Yes, but where does this money come from? Not from their own possessions but from that of the lords and subjects whom they plunder and rob by means of usury. Thus the lords are taking from their subjects what they receive from the Jews, i.e., the subjects are obliged to pay additional taxes and let themselves be ground into the dust for the Jews, so that they may remain in the country, lie boldly and freely, blaspheme, curse, and steal. Shouldn’t the impious Jews laugh up their sleeves because we let them make such fools of us and because we spend our money to enable them to remain in the country and to practice every malice? Over and above that we let them get rich on our sweat and blood, while we remain poor and they suck the marrow from our bones. If it is right for a servant to give his master or for a guest to give his host ten florins annually and, in return, to steal one thousand florins from him, then the servant or the guest will very quickly and easily get rich and the master or the host will soon become a beggar.

And even if the Jews could give the government such sums of money from their own property, which is not possible, and thereby buy protection from us, and the privilege publicly and freely to slander, blaspheme, villify, and curse our Lord Jesus Christ so shamefully in their synagogues, and in addition to wish us every misfortune, namely, that we might all be stabbed to death and perish with our Haman, emperor, princes, lords, wife, and children — this would really be selling Christ our Lord, the whole of Christendom together with the whole empire, and ourselves, with wife and children, cheaply and shamefully. What a great saint the traitor Judas would be in comparison with us! Indeed, if each Jew, as many as there are of them, could give one hundred thousand florins annually, we should nevertheless not yield them for this the right so freely to malign, curse, defame, impoverish by usury a single Christian. That would still be far too cheap a price. How much more intolerable is it that we permit the Jews to purchase with our money such license to slander and curse the whole Christ and all of us and, furthermore, reward them for this with riches and make them our lords, while they ridicule us and gloat in their malice. Thatwould prove a delightful spectacle for the devil and his angels, over which they could secretly grin like a sow grins at her litter, but which would indeed merit God’s great wrath.

In brief, dear princes and lords, those of you who have Jews under your rule: if my counsel does not please you, find better advice, so that you and we all can be rid of the unbearable, devilish burden of the Jews. Lest we become guilty sharers before God in the lies, the blasphemy, the defamation, and the curses which the mad Jews indulge in so freely and wantonly against the person of our Lord Jesus Christ, his dear mother, all Christians, all authority, and ourselves. Do not grant them protection, safe-conduct, or communion with us. Do not aid and abet them in acquiring your money or your subjects’ money and property by means of usury. We have enough sin of our own without this, dating back to the papacy, and we add to it daily with our ingratitude and our contempt of God’s word and all his grace; so it is not necessary to burden ourselves also with these alien, shameful vices of the Jews and over and above it all, to pay them for it with money and property. Let us consider that we are now daily struggling with the Turks, which surely calls for a lessening of our sins and a reformation of our life. With this faithful counsel and warning I wish to cleanse and exonerate my conscience.

And you, my dear gentlemen and friends who are pastors and preachers, I wish to remind very faithfully of your official duty, so that you too may warn your parishioners concerning their eternal harm, as you know how to do, namely, that they be on their guard against the Jews and avoid them so far as possible. They should not curse them or harm their persons, however. For the Jews have cursed and harmed themselves more than enough by cursing the Man Jesus of Nazareth, Mary’s son, which they unfortunately have been doing for over fourteen hundred years. Let the government deal with them in this respect, as I have suggested. But whether the government acts or not. Let everyone at least be guided by his own conscience and form for himself a definition or image of a Jew.

When you lay eyes on or think of a Jew you must say to your self: Alas,that mouth which I there behold has cursed and execrated and maligned every Saturday my dear Lord Jesus Christ, who has redeemed me with his precious blood; in addition, it prayed and pleaded before God that I, my wife and children, and all Christians might be stabbed to death and perishmiserably. And he himself would gladly do this if he were able, in order to appropriate our goods. Perhaps he has spat on the ground many times this very day over the name of Jesus, as is their custom, so that the spittle still clings to his mouth and beard, if he had a chance to spit. If I were to eat, drink or talk with such a devilish mouth, I would eat or drink myself full of devils by the dish or cupful just as I surely make myself a cohort of all the devils that dwell in the Jews and that deride the precious blood of Christ. May God preserve me from this!

We cannot help it that they do not share our belief. It is impossible to force anyone to believe. However. we must avoid confirming them in their wanton lying, slandering. cursing, and defaming. Nor dare we make ourselves partners in their devilish ranting and raving by shielding and protecting them, by giving them food, drink, and shelter, or by other neighborly acts, especially since they boast so proudly and despicably when we do help and serve them that God has ordained them as lords and us as servants. For instance, when a Christian kindles their fire for them on a Sabbath, or cooks for them in an inn whatever they want, they curse and defame and revile us for it, supposing this to be something praiseworthy, and yet they live on our wealth, which they have stolen from us. Such a desperate, thoroughly evil poisonous, and devilish lot are these Jews, who for these fourteen hundred years have been and still are our plague, our pestilence, and our misfortune.

Especially you pastors who have Jews living in your midst, persist in reminding your lords and rulers to be mindful of their office and of their obligation before God to force the Jews to work, to forbid usury, and to check their blasphemy and cursing. For if they punish thievery, robbery, murder, blasphemy, and other vices among us Christians, why should the devilish Jews be scot-free to commit their crimes among us and against us? We suffer more from them than the Italians do from the Spaniards, who plunder the host’s kitchen, cellar, chest, and purse, and, in addition, curse him and threaten him with death. Thus the Jews, our guests, alsotreat us; for we are their hosts. They rob and fleece us and hang about our necks, these lazy weaklings and indolent bellies; they swill and feast, enjoy good times in our homes, and by way of reward they curse our Lord Christ, our churches, our princes, and all of us, threatening us and unceasingly wishing us death and every evil. Just ponder this: How does it happen that we poor Christians nourish and enrich such an idle and lazypeople, such a useless, evil pernicious people, such blasphemous enemies of God, receiving nothing in return but their curses and defamation and every misfortune they may inflict on us or wish us? Indeed, we are as blind and unfeeling clods in this respect as are the Jews in their unbelief, to suffer such great tyranny from these vicious weaklings, and not perceive and sense that they are our lords, yes, our mad tyrants, and that we are their captives and subjects. Meanwhile they wail that they are our captives, and at the same time mock us — as though we had to take this from them!

But if the authorities are reluctant to use force and restrain the Jews’ devilish wantonness, the latter should, as we said, be expelled from the country and be told to return to their land and their possessions in Jerusalem, where they may lie, curse, blaspheme, defame, murder, steal, rob, practice usury, mock, and indulge in all those infamous abominations which they practice among us, and leave us our government, our country, our life, and our property, much more leave our Lord the Messiah, our faith,and our church undefined and uncontaminated with their devilish tyranny and malice. Any privileges that they may plead shall not help them; for no one can grant privileges for practicing such abominations. These cancel and abrogate all privileges.

If you pastors and preachers have followed my example and have faithfully issued such warnings, but neither prince nor subject will do anything about it, let us follow the advice of Christ (Matthew 10:14) and shake the dust from our shoes, and say, “We are innocent of your blood.” For I observe and have often experienced how indulgent the perverted world is when it should be strict, and, conversely, how harsh it is when it should be merciful. Such was the case with King Ahab, as we find recorded in I Kings 20. That is the way the prince of this world reigns. I suppose that the princes will now wish to show mercy to the Jews, the bloodthirsty foes of our Christian and human name, in order to earn heaven thereby. But that the Jews enmesh us, harass us, torment and distress us poor Christians in every way with the above mentioned devilish and detestable deeds, this they want us to tolerate, and this is a good Christian deed, especially if there is any money involved (which they have filched and stolen from us).

What are we poor preachers to do meanwhile? In the first place, we will believe that our Lord Jesus Christ is truthful when he declares of the Jews who did not accept but crucified him, “You are a brood of vipers and children of the devil [cf. Matt. 12:34]. This is a judgment in which his forerunner John the Baptist concurred, although these people were his kin. Now our authorities and all such merciful saints as wish the Jews well will at least have to let us believe our Lord Jesus Christ, who, I am sure, has a more intimate knowledge of all hearts than do those compassionate saints. He knows that these Jews are a brood of vipers and children of the devil, that is, people who will accord us the same benefits as does their father, the devil, and by now we Christians should have learned from Scripture as well as experience just how much he wishes us well.

I have read and heard many stories about the Jews which agree with this judgment of Christ, namely, how they have poisoned wells, madeassassinations, kidnaped children, as related before. I have heard that one Jew sent another Jew, and this by means of a Christian, a pot of blood, together with a barrel of wine, in which when drunk empty, a dead Jew was found. There are many other similar stories. For their kidnaping of children they have often been burned at the stake or banished (as wealready heard). I am well aware that they deny all of this. However, it all coincides with the judgment of Christ which declares that they are venomous, bitter, vindictive, tricky serpents, assassins, and children of the devil who sting and work harm stealthily wherever they cannot do it openly. For this reason I should like to see them where there are no Christians. The Turks and other heathen do not tolerate what we Christiansendure from these venomous serpents and young devils. Nor do the Jews treatany others as they do us Christians. That is what I had in mind when I saidearlier that, next to the devil, a Christian has no more bitter and galling foe than a Jew. There is no other to whom we accord as many benefactions and from whom we suffer as much as we do from these base children of the devil, this brood of vipers.

Now let me commend these Jews sincerely to whoever feels the desire to shelter and feed them, to honor them, to be fleeced, robbed, plundered, defamed, vilified, and cursed by them, and to suffer every evil at their hands — these venomous serpents and devil’s children, who are the most vehement enemies of Christ our Lord and of us all. And if that is not enough, let him stuff them into his mouth, or crawl into their behind and worship this holy object. Then let him boast of his mercy, then let him boast that he has strengthened the devil and his brood for further blaspheming our dear Lord and the precious blood with which we Christians are redeemed. Then he will be a perfect Christian, filled with works of mercy for which Christ will reward him on the day of judgment, together with the Jews in the eternal fire of hell!

That is speaking coarsely about the coarse cursing of the Jews. Others write much about this, and the Jews know very well that it is cursing, since they curse and blaspheme consciously. Let us also speak more subtlyand, as Christians, more spiritually about this. Thus our Lord Jesus Christ says in Matthew 10:40, “He who receives me receives him who sent me.” And in Luke 10:16, “He who rejects you rejects me. And he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.” And in John 15:23, “He who hates me hates myfather also.” In John 5:23, “That all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him,” etc.

Related image

Rest in peace Martin…Rest in peace my brother in Christ

CONTINUE READING MARTIN LUTHER’S ON THE JEWS AND THEIR LIES HERE

SEE ALSO –

JEWISH LEADER: PROTESTANTS SHOULD CONDEMN MARTIN LUTHER’S ANTI-SEMITISM

 

NORWAY CHURCH CONDEMNS MARTIN LUTHER’S ANTI-SEMITISM (A BUNCH OF BRAINWASHED CUCKED JEW LOVERS, MARTIN IS ROLLING OVER IN HIS GRAVE NOW)

RELATED –

THE FATHERS OF CHRISTIANITY WERE ANTI-JEW !

http://smoloko.com/?p=18371&embed=true#?secret=7vgLZ5wK1I

MARTIN LUTHER ON THE JEWS – WHAT YOU WEREN’T TAUGHT IN SCHOOL

http://smoloko.com/?p=3595&embed=true#?secret=mvrZgZkl2s

A RELIGIOUS SOLUTION TO THE JEWISH PROBLEM

http://smoloko.com/?p=11008&embed=true#?secret=JdAULi3dbs

REMEMBERING THE GLORIOUS BYZANTINE EMPIRE

http://smoloko.com/?p=12782&embed=true#?secret=yfCKe7dgpW

WHAT IS THE MOST HOLY MISSION ON EARTH ?

http://smoloko.com/?p=16619&embed=true#?secret=RQrJihfd4h

THE JEWISH QUESTION REVISITED BY HILLAIRE BELLOC

http://smoloko.com/?p=11386&embed=true#?secret=sfyTAo36E3

JESUS CHRIST AND ADOLF HITLER ARE MY TWO HEROES

http://smoloko.com/?p=16222&embed=true#?secret=9NC9J1xose

MORE RELATED – 

DOSTOEVSKY & THE JEWS

EZRA POUND: JEW-WISE POET AND POLITICAL PRISONER

REMEMBERING THE GREAT CHESS LEGEND BOBBY FISCHER

.

US may require 5 years of social media data from visa applicants

US may require 5 years of social media data from visa applicants

Russian Ambassador Speaks Out After Russia Expels 60 Americans Amid Rising Tensions | TODAY

Russia ‘Novichok’ Hysteria Proves Politicians and Media Haven’t Learned The Lessons of Iraq

Patrick Henningsen
21st Century Wire

If there’s one thing to be gleaned from the current atmosphere of anti Russian hysteria in the West, it’s that the US-led sustained propaganda campaign is starting to pay dividends. It’s not only the hopeless political classes and media miscreants who believe that Russia is hacking, meddling and poisoning our progressive democratic utopia – with many pinning their political careers to this by now that’s it’s too late for them to turn back. As it was with Iraq in 2003, these dubious public figures require a degree of public support for their policies, and unfortunately many people do believe in the grand Russian conspiracy, having been sufficiently brow-beaten into submission by around-the-clock fear mongering and official fake news disseminated by government and the mainstream media.

What makes this latest carnival of warmongering more frightening is that it proves that the political and media classes never actually learned or internalized the basic lessons of Iraq, namely that the cessation of diplomacy and the declarations of sanctions (a prelude to war) against another sovereign state should not be based on half-baked intelligence and mainstream fake news. But that’s exactly what is happening with this latest Russian ‘Novichok’ plot.

Admittedly, the stakes are much higher this time around. The worst case scenario is unthinkable, whereby the bad graces of men like John Bolton and other military zealots, there may just be a thin enough mandate to short-sell another military conflagration or proxy war – this time against another nuclear power and UN Security Council member.

Enter stage right, where US President Donald Trump announced this week that the US is moving closer to war footing with Russia. It’s not the first time Trump has made such a hasty move in the absence any forensic evidence of a crime. Nowadays, hearsay, conjecture and social media postings are enough to declare war. Remember last April with the alleged “Sarin Attack” in Khan Sheikhoun, when the embattled President squeezed off 59 Tomahawk Cruise missiles against Syria – a decision, which as far as anyone can tell, was based solely on a few YouTube videos uploaded by the illustrious White Helmets. Back then Trump learned how an act of war against an existential enemy could take the heat off at home and translate into a bounce in the polls. Even La Résistance at CNN were giddy with excitement and threw their support behind Trump, with some pundits describing his decision to act as “Presidential.”

As with past high-profile western-led WMD allegations against governments in Syria and Iraq (the US and UK are patently unconcerned with multiple allegations of ‘rebel’ terrorists in Syria caught using chemical weapons), an identical progression of events appears to be unfolding following the alleged ‘Novichok’ chemical weapon poisoning of retired British-Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury, Wiltshire on March 4th.

Despite a lack of evidence presented to the public other than the surreptitious “highly likely” assessments of British Prime Minister Theresa May and Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, President Trump once again has caved into pressure from Official Washington’s anti-Russian party line and ordered the expulsion of 60 Russian diplomats – which he accused of being spies. Trump also ordered the closure of the Russian Consulate in Seattle, citing speculative fears that Russia might be spying on a nearby Boeing submarine development base. It was the second round of US expulsions of Russian officials, with the first one ordered by the outgoing President Obama in December 2016, kicking out 35 Russian diplomats and their families (including their head chef) and closing the Russian Consulate in San Francisco, with some calling it “a den of spies”.

Trump’s move followed an earlier UK action on March 14th, which expelled 23 Russian diplomats also accused of being spies. This was in retaliation for the alleged poisoning of a retired former Russian-British double agent in Salisbury, England.

This was my initial reaction back on March 14, 2018, during a live TV segment:

YouTube Video Preview

.
The ‘Collective’ Concern

It’s important to understand how this week’s brash move by Washington was coordinated in advance. The US and the UK are relying on their other NATO partners, including Germany, Poland, Italy, Canada, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands, Estonia and Lithuania – to create the image of a united front against perceived ‘Russian aggression’. As with multilateral military operations, multilateral diplomatic measures like this are not carried out on a whim.

Aside from this, there are two seriously worrying aspects of this latest US-led multilateral move against Russia. Firstly, this diplomatic offensive against Russia mirrors a NATO collective defense action, and by doing so, it tacitly signals towards an invocation of Article 5. According to AP, one German spokesperson called it a matter of ‘solidarity’ with the UK. Statements from the White House are no less encouraging:

“The United States takes this action in conjunction with our NATO allies, and partners around the world in response with Russia’s use of a military grade chemical weapon on the soil of the United Kingdom — the latest in its ongoing pattern of destabilizing activities around the world,” the White House said.

“Today’s actions make the United States safer by reducing Russia’s ability to spy on Americans, and to conduct covert operations that threaten America’s national security.” 

What this statement indicates is that any Russian foreign official or overseas worker in the West should be regarded as possible agents of espionage. In other words, the Cold War is now officially back on.

Then came this statement:

“With these steps, the United States and our allies and partners make clear to Russia that its actions have consequences.”

In an era of power politics, this language is anything but harmless. And while US and UK politicians and media pundits seem to be treating it all as a school yard game at times, we should all be reminded that his is how wars start.

The second issue with the Trump’s diplomatic move against Russia is that it extends beyond the territorial US – and into what should be regarded at the neutral zone of the United Nations. As part of the group of 60 expulsions, the US has expelled 12 Russian diplomats from the United Nations in New York City. While this may mean nothing to jumped-up political appointees like Nikki Haley who routinely threaten the UN when a UNGA vote doesn’t go her way, this is an extremely dangerous precedent because it means that the US has now created a diplomatic trap door where legitimate international relations duties are being carelessly rebranded as espionage – done on a whim and based on no actual evidence. By using this tactic, the US is casting aside decades of international resolutions, treaties and laws. Such a move directly threatens to undermine a fundamental principle of the United Nations which is its diplomatic mission and the right for every sovereign nation to have diplomatic representation. Without it, there is no UN forum and countries cannot talk through their differences and negotiate peaceful settlements. This is why the UN was founded in the first place. Someone might want to remind Nikki Haley of that.

BIRDS OF A FEATHER: Never in modern history has mediocrity in politics been celebrated as a virtue by so many.

On top of this, flippant US and UK officials are already crowing that Russia should be kicked off the UN Security Council. In effect, Washington is trying to cut the legs out from a fellow UN Security Council member and a nuclear power. This UNSC exclusion campaign been gradually building up since 2014, where US officials have been repeated blocked by Russia over incidents in Syria and the Ukraine. Hence, Washington and its partners are frustrated with the UN framework, and that’s probably why they are so actively undermining it.

Those boisterous calls, as irrational and ill-informed as they might be, should be taken seriously because as history shows, these signs are a prelude to war.

Also, consider the fact that both the US and Russian have military assets deployed in Syria. How much of the Skripal case and the subsequent fall-out has to do with the fact that US Coalition and Gulf state proxy terrorists have lost their hold over key areas in Syria? The truly dangerous part of this equation is that the illegal military occupation by the US and its NATO ally Turkey of northeastern Syria is in open violation of international law, and so Washington and its media arms would like nothing more than to be history’s actor and bury its past indiscretions under a new layer of US-Russia tension in the Middle East.

Another WMD Debacle?

Is it really possible to push East-West relations over the edge on the basis of anecdotal evidence?

Former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, highlighted the recent British High Court judgement which states in writing that the government’s own chemical weapons experts from the Porton Down research facility could not categorically confirm that a Russian ‘Novichok’ nerve agent was actually used in the Salisbury incident. Based on this, Murray believes that both British Prime Minster Theresa May and Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, and Britain’s deputy UN representative Jonathan Allen – have all lied to the public and the world when making their public statements that the Russians had in fact launched a deadly chemical weapons attack on UK soil. Murray states elaborates on this key point:

“This sworn Court evidence direct from Porton Down is utterly incompatible with what Boris Johnson has been saying. The truth is that Porton Down have not even positively identified this as a ‘Novichok’, as opposed to “a closely related agent”. Even if it were a ‘Novichok’ that would not prove manufacture in Russia, and a ‘closely related agent’ could be manufactured by literally scores of state and non-state actors.”

“This constitutes irrefutable evidence that the government have been straight out lying – to Parliament, to the EU, to NATO, to the United Nations, and above all to the people – about their degree of certainty of the origin of the attack. It might well be an attack originating in Russia, but there are indeed other possibilities and investigation is needed. As the government has sought to whip up jingoistic hysteria in advance of forthcoming local elections, the scale of the lie has daily increased.”

Murray has been roundly admonished by the UK establishment for his views, but he is still correct to ask the question: how could UK government leaders have known ‘who did it’ in advance of any criminal forensic investigation or substantive testing by Porton Down or an independent forensic investigation by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW)?

One would hope we could all agree that it’s this sort of question which should have been given more prominence in the run-up to the Iraq War. In matters of justice and jurisprudence, that’s a fundamental question and yet, once again – it has been completely bypassed.

Murray is not alone. A number of scientists and journalists have openly questioned the UK’s hyperbolic claims that Russia had ordered a ‘chemical attack’ on British soil. In her recent report  for the New Scientist, author Debora MacKenzie reiterates the fact that several countries could have manufactured a ‘Novichok’ class nerve agent and used it in the chemical attack on Russians Sergei and Yulia Skripal in Salisbury.

“British Prime Minister Theresa May says that because it was Russia that developed Novichok agents, it is ‘highly likely’ that Russia either attacked the Skripals itself, or lost control of its Novichok to someone else who did. But other countries legally created Novichok for testing purposes after its existence was revealed in 1992, and a production method has even been published.”

The New Scientist also quotes Ralf Trapp, a chemical weapons consultant formerly with the OPCW, who also reiterates a point worth reminding readers of – that inspectors are only able to tell where molecules sampled in Salisbury have come from if they have reference samples for the ingredients used.

“I doubt they have reference chemicals for forensic analysis related to Russian CW agents,” says Trapp. “But if Russia has nothing to hide they may let inspectors in.”

Even if they can identify it as Novichok, they cannot say that it came from Russia, or was ordered by the Russian government, not least of all because the deadly recipe is available on Amazon for only $28.45.

RELATED: REVEALED: Pentagon’s $70 Million Chemical & Biological Program at Porton Down in UK

It should be noted that a substantial amount of evidence points to only two countries who are the most active in producing and testing biological and chemical weapons WMD – the United States and Great Britain. Their programs also include massive ‘live testing’ on both humans and animalswith most of this work undertaken at the Porton Down research facility located only minutes away from the scene of this alleged ‘chemical attack’ in Salisbury, England.

Problems with the Official Story

If we put aside for the moment any official UK government theory, which is based on speculation backed-up by a series of hyperbolic statements and proclamations of Russian guilt, there are still many fundamental problems with the official story  – maybe too many to list here, but I will address what I believe are a few key items of interest.

The UK police have now released a statement claiming that the alleged ‘Novichok’ nerve agent was somehow administered at the front door of Sergie Skripal’s home in Wiltshire. This latest official claim effectively negates the previous official story because it means that the Skripals would have been exposed a home at the latest around 13:00 GMT on March 4th, and then drove into town, parking their car at Sainsbury’s car park, then having a leisurely walk to have drinks at The Mill Pub, before for ordering and eating lunch at Zizzis restaurant, and then finally leaving the Zizzis and walking before finally retiring on a park bench – where emergency services were apparently called at 16:15 GMT to report an incident. Soon after, local Police arrived on the scene to find the Skripals on the bench in an “extremely serious condition”. Based on this story, the Skripals would have been going about their business for 3 hours before finally falling prey to the deadly WMD ‘Novichok’. From this, one would safely conclude that whatever has poisoned the pair was neither lethal nor could it have been a military grade WMD. Even by subtracting the home doorway exposure leg of this story, the government’s claim hardly adds up – as even a minor amount of any real lethal military grade WMD would have effected many more people along this timeline of events. Based on what we know so far, it seems much more plausible that the pair would have been poisoned (or drugged) at Zizzis restaurant, and not with a military grade nerve agent.

When this story initially broke, we were also told that the attending police officer who first arrived on the scene of this incident, Wiltshire Police Detective Sgt. Nick Bailey – was “fighting for his life” after being exposed to the supposed ‘deadly Russian nerve agent’. As it turned out, officer Bailey was treated in hospital and then discharged on March 22, 2018. To our knowledge, no information or photos of Bailey’s time in care are available to the public so we cannot know the trajectory of his health, or if he was even exposed to the said “Novichok’ nerve agent as the government and media have repeatedly said.

In the immediate aftermath, the public were also told initially that approximately 4o people were taken into medical care because of “poison exposure”. This bogus claim was promulgated by some mainstream media outlets, like Rupert Murdoch’s Times newspaper. In reality, no one showed signed of “chemical weapons” exposure, meaning that this story was just another example of mainstream corporate media fake news designed to stoke tension and fear in the public. We exposed this at the time on the UK Column News here:

Patrick Henningsen

@21WIRE

@medialens @Ian56789 Look who’re the ACTUAL producers of on the story…

To further complicate matters, this week we were told that Yulia Skripal has now turned the corner and is in recovery, and is speaking to police from her hospital bed. If this is true, then it further proves that whatever the alleged poison agent was which the Skripals were exposed to – it was not a lethal, military grade nerve agent. If it had been, then most likely the Skripals and many others would not be alive right now.

Unfortunately, in this new age of state secrecy, we can expect that most of the key information relating to this case may be sealed indefinitely under a national security letter. In the case of Porton Down scientist David Kelly, the key information is sealed (hidden) for another 60+ years (if we’re lucky, we might get to see it in the year 2080). This means that we just have to take their word for it, or to borrow the words of the newly crowed UK Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson – any one asking questions, “should just go away and shut up.”  Such is the lack of decorum and transparency in this uncomfortably Orwellian atmosphere.

While Britain insists that it has ‘irrefutable proof’ that Russia launched a deadly nerve-gas attack to murder the Skripals, the facts simply do not match-up to the rhetoric.

The Litvinenko Conspiracy

It’s important to note that as far as public perceptions are concerned, the official Skripal narrative has been build directly on top of the Litvinenko case.

In order to try and reinforce the government’s speculative arguments, the UK establishment has resurrected the trial-by-media case of another Russian defector, former FSB officer Alexander Litvinenko, who is said to have died after being poisoned with radioactive polonium-210 in his tea at a restaurant in London’s Mayfair district in late 2006.

Despite not having any actual evidence as to who committed the crime, the British authorities and the mainstream media have upheld an almost religious belief that the Russian FSB (formerly KGB), under the command of Vladimir Putin, had ordered the alleged radioactive poisoning of Litvinenko.

The media mythos was reinforced in 2016, when a British Public Inquiry headed by Sir Robert Owen accused senior Russian officials of ‘probably having motives to approve the murder’ of Litvinenko. Again, this level of guesswork and speculation would never meet the standard of an actual forensic investigation worthy of a real criminal court of law, but so far as apportioning blame to another nation or head of state is concerned – it seems fair enough for British authorities.

Following the completion of the inquiry, Sir Robert had this to say:

“Taking full account of all the evidence and analysis available to me, I find that the FSB operation to kill Litvinenko was probably approved by Mr Patrushev and also by President Putin.”

Contrary to consensus reality )popular belief), Owen’s inquiry was not at all definitive. Quite the opposite in fact, and in many ways it mirrors how the Skripal case has been presented to the public. Despite offering no evidence of any criminal guilt, Owen’s star chamber maintained that Vladimir Putin “probably” approved the operation to assassinate Litvinenko. Is “probably” really enough to assign guilt in a major international crime? When it comes to high crimes of state, the answer seems to be yes.

According to Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Marina Zakharova, that UK inquiry was “neither transparent nor public” and was “conducted mostly behind doors, with classified documents and unnamed witnesses contributing to the result…”

Zakharova highlighted the fact that two key witnesses in the case – Litvinenko’s chief patron, a UK-based anti-Putin defector billionaire oligarch named Boris Berezovsky, and the owner of Itsu restaurant in London’s Mayfair where the incident is said to have taken place, had both suddenly died under dubious circumstances. The British authorities went on to accuse two Russian men in the Litvineko murder – businessman Andrey Lugovoy and Dmitry Kovtun. Both have denied the accusations. Despite the lack of any real evidence, the United States Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control blacklisted both Lugovoi and Kovtun, as well as Russian persons Stanislav Gordievsky, Gennady Plaksin and Aleksandr I. Bastrykin – under the Magnitsky Act, which freezes their assets held in American financial institutions, and bans them from conducting any transactions or traveling to the United States.

Notice the familiar pattern: even if the case is inconclusive, or collapses due to a lack of evidence, the policies remain in place.

Despite all the pomp and circumstance however, Owen’s official conspiracy theory failed to sway even Litvinenko’s own close family members. While Litvinenko’s widow Marina maintains that it was definitely the Russian government who killed her husband, Alexsander’s younger brother Maksim Litvinenko, based in Rimini, Italy, believes the British report “ridiculous” to blame the Kremlin for the murder of his brother, stating that he believes British security services had more of a motive to carry out the assassination.

“My father and I are sure that the Russian authorities are not involved. It’s all a set-up to put pressure on the Russian government,” said Maksim to the Mirror newspaper, and that such reasoning can explain why the UK waited almost 10 years to launch the inquiry his brother’s death.

Maxim also said that Britain had more reason to kill his brother than the Russians, and believes that blaming Putin for the murder was part of a wider effort to smear Russia.

Following the police investigation, Alexander’s father Walter Litvinenko, also said that he had regretted blaming Putin and the Russian government for his son’s death and did so under intense pressure at the time.

For anyone skeptical of the official proclamations of the British state and the mainstream media on the Litvinenko case, it’s worth reading the work of British journalist Will Dunkerly here.

With so many questions hanging over the actually validity of the British state’s accusations against Russia, it’s somewhat puzzling that British police would say they are still ‘looking for similarities’ between the Skripal and Litvinenko cases in order to pinpoint a modus operandi.

The admission by the British law enforcement that their investigation may take months before any conclusion can be drawn also begs the question: how could May have been so certain so quick? The answer should be clear by now: she could not have known it was a ‘Novichok’ agent, no more than she could know the ‘Russia did it.’

A Plastic Cold War

Historically speaking, in the absence of any real mandate or moral authority, governments suffering from an identity crisis, or a crisis of legitimacy will often try and define themselves not based on what they stand for, but rather what (or who) they are in opposition to. This profile suits both the US and UK perfectly at the moment. Both governments are limping along with barely a mandate, and have orchestrated two of the worst and most hypocritical debacles in history with their illegal wars in both Syria and Yemen. With their moral high-ground a thing of the past, these two countries require a common existential enemy in order to give their international order legitimacy.  The cheapest, easiest option is to reinvigorate a framework which was already there, which is the Cold War framework. Reds under the bed. The Russian are coming etc. It’s cheap and it’s easy because it has already been seeded with 70 years of Cold War propaganda and institutionalized racism in the West directed against Russians. If you don’t believe me, just go look at some of the posters, watch the TV propaganda in the US, or read about the horrific McCarthyist blacklists and political witch hunts. I remember growing up in America and being taught “never again” and “we’re past all of that now, those days of irrational paranoia are behind us, we’re better than that now.” But that madness of the past was not a fringe affair – it was a mainstreammadness, and one which was actively promoted by government and mainstream media.

You would have to be at the pinnacle of ignorance to deny that this is exactly what we are seeing today, albeit a more plastic version, but just as immoral and dangerous. Neocons love it, and now Liberals love it too.

Dutifully fanning the flaming of war, Theresa May has issued her approval of the NATO members diplomatic retaliation this week exclaiming, “We welcome today’s actions by our allies, which clearly demonstrate that we all stand shoulder to shoulder in sending the strongest signal to Russia that it cannot continue to flout international law.”

But from an international law perspective, can May’s ‘highly likely’ assurances really be enough to position the west on war footing with Russia? When Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn asked these same fundamental questions on March 14th, he was shouted down by the Tory bench, and also by the hawkish Blairites sitting behind him.

Afterwards, the British mainstream press launched yet another defamation campaign against Corbyn, this time with the UK’s Daily Mail calling the opposition leader a “Kremlin Stooge”, followed by British state broadcaster the BBC who went through the effort of creating a mock-up graphic of Corbyn in front of the Kremlin (pictured above) apparently wearing a Russian hat, as if to say he was a Russian agent. It was a new low point in UK politics and media.

Considering the mainstream media’s Corbyn smear alongside the recent insults hurled at Julian Assange by Tory MP Sir Alan Duncan who stood up in front of Parliament and called the Wikileaks founder a “miserable worm”, what this really says is that anyone who dares defy the official state narrative will be beaten down and publicly humiliated. In other words, dissent in the political ranks will not be tolerated. It’s almost as if we are approaching a one party state.

Would a UN Security Council member and nuclear power really be so brazen as to declare de facto war on another country without presenting any actual evidence or completing a genuine forensic investigation?

So why the apparent rush to war? Haven’t we been here before, in 2003? Will the people of the West allow it to happen again?

As with Tony Blair’s WMD’s in 2003, the British public are meant to take it on faith and never question the official government line. And just like in 2003, the UK has opened the first door on the garden path, with the US and its ‘coalition’ following safely behind, shoulder to shoulder. In this latest version of the story, Tony Blair is being played by Theresa May, and Jack Straw is being played by Boris Johnson. On the other side of the pond, a hapless Bush is hapless Trump. Both Blair and Straw, along with the court propagandist Alastair Campbell – are all proven to have been liars of the highest order, and if there were any real accountability or justice, these men and their collaborators in government should be in prison right now. The fact they aren’t is why the door has been left wide open for the exact same scam to be repeated again, and again.

Iraq should have taught us all to be skeptical about official claims of chemical weapons evidence, and to face the ugly truth about how most major wars throughout history have waged by the deception – and by western governments. What does it tell us about today’s society if people still cannot see this?

That’s why it was wrong to let Blair, Bush and others off the hook for war crimes. By doing so, both the British and Americans are inviting a dark phase of history to repeat itself again, and again.

It’s high time that we break the cycle.

***
Author Patrick Henningsen is a global affairs analyst and founder of independent news and analysis site 21st Century Wire, and host of the SUNDAY WIRE weekly radio show broadcast globally over the Alternate Current Radio Network (ACR).

SEE ALSO: A Guide to Mainstream Media ‘Fake News’ War Propaganda

READ MORE SKRIPAL NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Skripal Files


Moscow confronts London with 14 questions on ‘fabricated’ Skripal case

__________
RT
Moscow confronts London with 14 questions on ‘fabricated’ Skripal case

Russia’s Embassy in London has sent a list of 14 questions to the UK Foreign Ministry, demanding that it reveals details of the investigation into the nerve-agent poisoning of former double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter.

The questions, provided in full below, include a demand to clarify whether samples of the nerve agent “Novichok” have ever been developed in the UK.

1. Why has Russia been denied the right of consular access to the two Russian citizens, who came to harm on British territory?

2. What specific antidotes and in what form were the victims injected with? How did such antidotes come into the possession of British doctors at the scene of the incident?

3. On what grounds was France involved in technical cooperation in the investigation of the incident, in which Russian citizens were injured?

4. Did the UK notify the OPCW (Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) of France’s involvement in the investigation of the Salisbury incident?

5. What does France have to do with the incident, involving two Russian citizens in the UK?

6. What rules of UK procedural legislation allow for the involvement of a foreign state in an internal investigation?

7. What evidence was handed over to France to be studied and for the investigation to be conducted?

8. Were the French experts present during the sampling of biomaterial from Sergei and Yulia Skripal?

9. Was the study of biomaterials from Sergei and Yulia Skripal conducted by the French experts and, if so, in which specific laboratories?

10. Does the UK have the materials involved in the investigation carried out by France?

11. Have the results of the French investigation been presented to the OPCW Technical Secretariat?

12. Based on what attributes was the alleged “Russian origin” of the substance used in Salisbury established?

13. Does the UK have control samples of the chemical warfare agent, which British representatives refer to as “Novichok”?

14. Have the samples of a chemical warfare agent of the same type as “Novichok” (in accordance to British terminology) or its analogues been developed in the UK?


—————————————————————

Furious China ramps up support for Russia on Skripal, calls West’s actions “outrageous”

Global Times says West disregards due process, bullies Russia, no longer leads world community, threatens other nations,

Global Times – unofficial English language organ of China’s ruling Communist Party – has published a scorching editorial savaging the West’s bullying of Russia over the Skripal case.

The editorial notes the West’s disregard of basic courtesies and of due process, and warns that other countries – including implicitly China – may one day find themselves in the same crosshairs for this sort of attack.

The editorial also reminds the Western powers that so far from representing “the world community” they represent only a small part of it.

The editorial is so trenchant and so strong – going so much further than any editorial I have seen in a Chinese newspaper supporting Russia in its conflict with the West, including two previous editorials which Global Times has itself published on the Skripal case – that I am going to set it out in full

On March 26, the US, Canada, and several European Union countries expelled Russian diplomats from their respective foreign embassies and consulates in retaliation against Russia’s alleged poisoning of former double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter.  As of this writing, 19 countries, including 15 EU member states, have shown their support to Great Britain by enforcing such measures.

On March 4, Skripal and his daughter Yulia were rushed to a hospital after they were found unconscious at a park in Salisbury. It was later reported the father and daughter had come into contact with an obscure nerve agent. UK government officials said the Skripals were attacked by “Novichok,” a powerful Soviet-era chemical nerve agent used by the military.

The British government did not provide evidence that linked Russia to the crime but was confident from the beginning there could be no other “reasonable explanation” for the attempted assassination. Great Britain was so convinced of their Russia theory, they wasted no time taking the lead in levying sanctions against the country by quickly expelling Russian diplomats from London.  Shortly afterwards, UK capital officials reached out to NATO and their European allies who provided immediate support.

The accusations that Western countries have hurled at Russia are based on ulterior motives, similar to how the Chinese use the expression “perhaps it’s true” to seize upon the desired opportunity. From a third-person perspective, the principles and diplomatic logic behind such drastic efforts are flawed, not to mention that expelling Russian diplomats almost simultaneously isa crude form of behavior. Such actions make little impact other than increasing hostility and hatred between Russia and their Western counterparts.

The UK government should have an independent investigation conducted into the Skripal poisoning by representatives from the international community. An effort such as this would provide results strong enough for those following the case to make up their minds on who should or shouldn’t be accused of the crime. Now, the majority of those who support Britain’s one-sided conclusion happen to be members of NATO and the EU, while others stood behind the UK due to long-standing relations.

The fact that major Western powers can gang up and “sentence” a foreign country without following the same procedures other countries abide by and according to the basic tenets of international law is chilling. During the Cold War, not one Western nation would have dared to make such a provocation and yet today it is carried out with unrestrained ease. Such actions are nothing more than a form of Western bullying that threatens global peace and justice.

Over the past few years the international standard has been falsified and manipulated in ways never seen before. The fundamental reason behind reducing global standards is rooted in post-Cold War power disparities. The US, along with their allies, jammed their ambitions into the international standards so their actions, which were supposed to follow a set of standardized procedures and protocol, were really nothing more than profit-seizing opportunities designed only for themselves.  These same Western nations activated in full-force public opinion-shaping platforms and media agencies to defend and justify such privileges.

As of late, more foreign countries have been victimized by Western rhetoric and nonsensical diplomatic measures. In the end, the leaders of these nations are forced to wear a hat featuring slogans and words that read “oppressing their own people,” “authoritarian,” or “ethnic cleansing,” regardless of their innocence.

It is beyond outrageous how the US and Europe have treated Russia. Their actions represent a frivolity and recklessness that has grown to characterize Western hegemony that only knows how to contaminate international relations. Right now is the perfect time for non-Western nations to strengthen unity and collaborative efforts among one another. These nations need to establish a level of independence outside the reach of Western influence while breaking the chains of monopolization declarations, predetermined adjudications, and come to value their own judgement abilities.

It’s already understood that to achieve such international collective efforts is easier said than done as they require foundational support before anything can happen. Until a new line of allies emerges, multi-national associations like BRICS, or even the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, need to provide value to those non-Western nations and actively create alliances with them.

What Russia is experiencing right could serve as a reflection of how other non-Western nations can expect to be treated in the not-to-distant future.  Expelling Russian diplomats simultaneously is hardly enough to deter Russia. Overall, it’s an intimidation tactic that has become emblematic of Western nations, and furthermore, such measures are not supported by international law and therefore unjustified. More importantly, the international community should have the tools and means to counterbalance such actions.

The West is only a small fraction of the world and is nowhere near the global representative it once thought it was.  The silenced minorities within the international community need to realize this and prove just how deep their understanding is of such a realization by proving it to the world through action. With the Skripal case, the general public does not know the truth, and the British government has yet to provide a shred of evidence justifying their allegations against Russia.

It is firmly believed that accusations levied by one country to another that are not the end results of a thorough and professional investigation should not be encouraged. Simultaneously expelling diplomats is a form of uncivilized behavior that needs to be abolished immediately.

In my experience China – even in editorials in Global Times, which are unofficial – invariably sets out its views in measured terms, preferring to avoid tough language though always making its views clear.

This editorial is different, showing the depth of Chinese anger about the way the Western powers have been conducting themselves over the last few weeks, which note that the editorial characterises as “uncivilised behaviour”.

Even a short visit to China – such as one which I did in August – suffices to show how much importance the Chinese attach to “civilised behaviour”, and how strong this criticism coming from them therefore is.

I suspect that when the dust over the Skripal case finally settles, it will become clear that its main effect has been to bring China and Russia even closer together they already were.

image: https://i2.wp.com/theduran.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/DRN-Icon.png?w=662

The Duran
———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

CrossTalk on Anti-Russia Hysteria: Crisis Point?

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

This is an alleged image of the daughter of former Russian Spy Sergei Skripal, Yulia Skripal taken from Yulia Skipal's Facebook account on Tuesday March 6, 2018

London Considering Requests for Consular Access to Ex-Spy Skripal’s Daughter

© AP Photo/ Yulia Skripal/Facebook

EUROPE

Get short URL
Alleged Poisoning Attack on Russian Ex-Spy Skripal in UK (163)
1150

The Russian Embassy in London has insisted it has to be granted consular access to Yulia Skripal as she has regained consciousness and the ability to talk weeks after being exposed to a nerve agent in the English city of Salisbury.

The UK Foreign Office said on Saturday that it is considering requests to grant consular access to Yulia Skripal, a 33-year-old Russian citizen who has been in hospital along with her father since early March.

“We are considering requests for consular access in line with our obligations under international and domestic law, including the rights and wishes of Yulia Skripal,” a spokeswoman for the UK foreign office said.

The Russian Embassy on Friday insisted that consular access to Yulia Skripal to be granted in the wake of the reports that her condition had improved.

​The Salisbury District Hospital medical staff said she had come out of a coma, began talking and was recovering rapidly, while her father, former Russian spy Sergei Skripal, was still in a critical but stable condition.

The Skripals have been treated for suspected exposure to a nerve agent after being found unconscious on a bench at a shopping mall. The UK authorities claimed both had been poisoned by a chemical developed in the Soviet Union.London has claimed it was “highly likely” that Moscow had staged the poisoning attack and responded by expelling 23 Russian diplomats from the country. Following London’s lead, over 20 countries, including the United States have expelled Russian diplomats.

Russia, which has consistently denied involvement in the incident, saying the accusations are baseless, expelled dozens of diplomats from the UK as well as from the states supporting the expulsion of Moscow’s diplomats in a tit-for-tat response.

 ————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Cup of Shame’: Billboards call for boycott of FIFA 2018 in Russia

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

 

Israel loses recon drone in Lebanon, the fourth this year

Israel loses recon drone in Lebanon, the fourth this year
A small IDF surveillance drone was lost in southern Lebanon near the Israeli border on Saturday. It’s the fourth drone lost by the Israeli military this year, according to local reports.

The drone was identified by Lebanese media as a Skylark, a tactical surveillance UAV used by Israeli artillery troops. According to reports in Lebanon, it landed near the Lebanese village of Ayta ash-Shab and was destroyed by another Israeli drone.

علي شعيب 🇱🇧@ali_shoeib1

عاجل

سقوط طائرة تجسس إسرائيلية من دون طيار في منطقة خلة مريم بين بلدتي برعشيت وبيت ياحون دون معرفة اسباب سقوطها وطائرة تجسس ثانية تستهدفها بصاروخ موجه وتدمرها

The IDF confirmed the loss of the aircraft, but said that it had fallen from the sky rather than being destroyed on the ground. The military said they were investigating the incident and that it had been caused by a technical malfunction.

According to the Times of Israel, the IDF had lost three Skylark drones before the most recent incident on Saturday. One crashed in southern Lebanon in January, prompting the Israelis to launch a cross-border raid to recover it. Two other drones were lost in March – one in southern Syria and another one in the northern part of the Gaza Strip. The Israeli military say the incidents were not the result of a common problem with the drone model.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!


Published on

Alleging ‘Very Serious’ Violations, Groups File Complaint Against John Bolton Super PAC Over Ties to Cambridge Analytica

“What’s worse than the fact that it apparently happened in this case is that the people involved apparently knew they were breaking the law and continued to do so anyway.”

John Bolton speaks at the National Oversight and Government Reform Committee on moving the U.S. Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem on Capitol Hill on November 8, 2017 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images)

With John Bolton set to officially become President Donald Trump’s national security adviser in just over a week, two government watchdog groups filed a criminal complaint late Thursday demanding an investigation into whether Bolton’s super PAC wittingly conspired with the scandal-ridden British data firm Cambridge Analytica to commit “very serious” violations of U.S. election laws.

“If Bolton knew or should have known that his super PAC received illegal foreign support, that is highly relevant to the new position he will assume next month as national security adviser.”
Norm Eisen and Fred Wertheimer

The complaint (pdf)—which also calls for a Justice Department probe into Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon—was spearheaded by Democracy 21 and Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington (CREW), and it argues that Bolton’s PAC violated federal laws prohibiting foreign nationals from “directly or indirectly” participating in the decision-making processes of American political campaigns.

“What’s worse than the fact that it apparently happened in this case is that the people involved apparently knew they were breaking the law and continued to do so anyway,” Noah Bookbinder, executive director at CREW, said in a statement on Thursday. 

News that Bolton’s PAC was an “early beneficiary” of Cambridge Analytica’s vast Facebook data-harvesting effort was first reported by the New York Times last week.

Based on the accounts of former Cambridge Analytica employees as well as a trove of company documents, the Times reported that between 2014 and 2016, Bolton’s super PAC “spent nearly $1.2 million primarily for ‘survey research'” and “behavioral microtargeting with psychographic messaging”—services that relied on the personal data of Facebook users. 

“These are very serious apparent violations of federal law. The Justice Department and the FBI should immediately commence an investigation into this matter and take appropriate action.”
—Noah Bookbinder, CREW

According to Cambridge whistleblower and former employee Christopher Wylie, the Bolton PAC’s messaging was aimed at “making people more militaristic in their worldview.”

The filing by CREW and Democracy 21 alleges that this coordination between Cambridge and Bolton’s super PAC violates federal laws barring foreign nationals assisting U.S. political campaigns with strategic decision-making.

“These are very serious apparent violations of federal law,” Bookbinder of CREW said. “The Justice Department and the FBI should immediately commence an investigation into this matter and take appropriate action.”

In a statement, Bolton spokesman Garrett Marquis denied that any Cambridge employees made strategic decisions in election-related matters and insisted that “the John Bolton Super PAC no longer uses any of the data provided by Cambridge Analytica.”

The complaint against Bolton’s super PAC and the Trump campaign comes as new reporting from Bloomberg shows that that internal documents from Cambridge Analytica, unsealed as part of a parliamentary inquiry in the U.K., indicate that the firm did in fact provide Bolton’s group with data obtained from Facebook users, confirming the Times report.

In an op-ed for CNN earlier this week, former White House ethics czar and CREW board chair Norm Eisen and Democracy 21 president Fred Wertheimer argued that both the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) and special counsel Robert Mueller should immediately launch an investigation into the John Bolton Super PAC’s relationship with Cambridge Analytica.

“If Bolton knew or should have known that his super PAC received illegal foreign support, that is highly relevant to the new position he will assume next month as national security adviser,” Eisen and Wertheimer argued. “If an appointee has benefited from illegal foreign support, this creates the risk of more revelations that could worsen that person’s exposure.”

UK’s search of Russian plane violates international law – Aeroflot, lawmakers

UK's search of Russian plane violates international law – Aeroflot, lawmakers
The inspection of a Russian plane, which was carried out by UK authorities in the absence of the crew and without any justification, violates international legal norms, Aeroflot airline and top Russian lawmakers said.

Aeroflot confirmed to RT that UK police and customs services performed a search aboard its Airbus A321 aircraft after it landed in the British capital on Thursday. The carrier expressed “bewilderment” that there was no reason or justification provided for the search. Moreover, UK authorities forced the crew out of the plane and isolated the captain in the cabin.

“Such actions by the UK representatives contradict the international practice of performing such inspections,” Aeroflot pointed out, adding that it is ready to cooperate with Britain if it justifies and explains its actions.

The chairman of the Russian State Duma’s Transport Committee, Vitaly Yefimov, also called the actions of British authorities “illegal”and said they violated international regulations.

“The board of the airplane is the territory of Russia, just like its embassy,” Yefimov told Tass. “It is a precedent… It’s the first time on my memory when the authorities go in and inspected an aircraft with no justification. They have no right to do it.”

An inspection of a plane can only be carried out in agreement with the crew, the MP stressed, adding that he’s waiting for official explanations from the British.

The Russian aviation security center will send a request to the UK authorities regarding searches of the Aeroflot plane in London, the Russian Transport Ministry said in a statement. In the event that the British side fails to provide any explanations, Moscow “will regard these actions against our plane as illegal, and will consider similar measures against British aircraft,” it added.

Senator Vladimir Dzhabarov, who is the First Deputy Chairman of the Federal Council’s Committee on Foreign Affairs, told RIA-Novosti that the actions taken by British authorities were “another provocation.” Due to the current tensions between London and Moscow over the Skripal case, “it’s worth recommending our citizens to refrain from visiting the UK,”Dzhabarov said.

Deputy Chairman of the State Duma’s Committee for Security, Anatoly Vyborny, blasted the search of the Russian plane as “legal nihilism” and a “flagrant violation of the norms of international law” on the part of Britain.

READ MORE: Escalation in West-Russia tension is frightening & dangerous – former diplomats

Russia’s Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova, earlier said that the search of the Aeroflot Airbus A321 was yet another anti-Russian provocation by the UK. The reckless act might have been an attempt by London to somehow save its reputation, which was heavily damaged by the Skripal case, Zakharova said.

In early March, former double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, were poisoned in Salisbury with what the UK called a Soviet-designed nerve agent. London accused Moscow of being behind the attack, despite carrying out no proper investigation and refusing to provide samples of the chemical to Russia.


143k civilians & rebels left E. Ghouta amid humanitarian ceasefire – Russian MoD

143k civilians & rebels left E. Ghouta amid humanitarian ceasefire – Russian MoD
Over 143,000 people, including tens of thousands of rebels and their families, have left Syria’s eastern Ghouta amid a ceasefire which also helped some 40,000 residents return to their homes, the Russian military said.

“143,194 people in total, including 105,857 civilians as well as 13,793 militants and 23,544 members of their families have left eastern Ghouta during humanitarian pauses,” Sergey Rudskoy, Deputy Chief of Russian General Staff, said at a news briefing on Friday.

The evacuation is being monitored by the UN and other aid agencies, and a live broadcast of escape routes is available on the Russian Defense Ministry’s website, it said. Russia’s Reconciliation Center is negotiating another evacuation from the town of Douma, one of the last remaining strongholds controlled by militants.

Meanwhile, life is returning to normal in villages and settlements in Ghouta province. Displaced persons are returning to “areas liberated from armed groups,” General Rudskoy said, adding that “some 40,000 people have returned to their homes.”

The returnees are receiving aid packages delivered by UN agencies and the Russian Reconciliation Center, he said, adding that the “arrival of three UN aid convoys, carrying 445 tons of food, medicine and basic necessities, was ensured since the first humanitarian pause took effect in the enclave.”

Daily humanitarian pauses in eastern Ghouta began on February 27 as part of the Syrian military’s and Russia’s efforts to help civilians leave the combat zone. The Russian military has repeatedly said that the militants are using civilians as human shields, targeting those who are trying to flee the terrorist enclave.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

UK – Jeremy Corbyn given his orders by Board of directors of British Jews (Full Text)

British Jews

Rt Hon Jeremy Corbyn MP
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA
Wednesday 28th March 2018
Dear Mr Corbyn,
Thank you for your letter of 26 March, setting out your detailed views on the problem of
antisemitism in the Labour Party.
We are sure you saw the strength of feeling in the mainstream Jewish community that was
expressed in our open letter and in Parliament Square on Monday. These were
unprecedented steps on our part and we hope you understand the seriousness of such a
communal action. It arose from more than two years of cumulative anger and despair in the
Jewish community at repeated, numerous cases of antisemitism in the Labour Party and
failures to deal with them in a decisive, swift and public manner. For whatever reasons, you
have not, until now, seemed to grasp how strongly British Jews feel about the situation.
Your letter was a welcome change in this regard, but only if it marks a new era of consistent
and strong action and leadership to tackle the problem.
Consequently, we appreciate your apology for the pain caused by antisemitism in the
Labour Party and for your prior comments regarding the antisemitic mural; and your
acknowledgement that this is not just “a matter of a few bad apples”, but represents a
particular way of thinking. For the situation to meaningfully improve, rather than keep
worsening, this understanding will require embedding across the Party.
Any meeting between us must produce concrete, practical outcomes to be implemented by
the Party; there is no point in meeting if the situation remains the same or continues to
worsen. In this spirit, and to enable a meeting to take place, we propose an agenda of
actions for discussion:
Leadership
The Party leadership, and you personally, must be seen and heard to lead this work. Only
your voice can persuade your followers that this a necessary and correct course of action. If
actions need to be passed by the NEC or other Party bodies, you need to take personal
responsibility for ensuring this happens.
Antisemitism disciplinary cases
Outstanding and future cases to be brought to a swift conclusion under a fixed timescale. An
independent, mutually agreed ombudsman should be appointed to oversee performance,
reporting to the Party and to the Board of Deputies and Jewish Leadership Council.
Relations with suspended members
MPs, councillors and other party members should not share platforms with people who
have been suspended or expelled for antisemitism and CLPs should not provide them with a
platform. Anybody doing so should themselves be suspended from membership; in the case
of MPs, they should lose the party whip.
Education
The Party should circulate the IHRA definition of antisemitism, with all its examples and
clauses, to all members and branches. The Party should work with mainstream Jewish
community organisations to develop and implement education about antisemitism. This
should include a clear list of unacceptable language, such as the use of ‘Zio’ and ‘Zionist’ as
terms of abuse, based on the full IHRA definition and on the examples included in your
letter of 26 March.
Engagement
Public confirmation that the Party will seek to understand and engage with the Jewish
community via its main representative groups, and not through fringe organisations who
wish to obstruct the Party’s efforts to tackle antisemitism.
Process
These changes must be sustained and enduring. There needs to be an agreed process to
monitor the progress and implementation of these actions in the future.
To conclude, your personal pledge to be a “militant opponent” of antisemitism and to
always be our ally are vital statements: the situation demands it and we would expect
nothing less. In this light, there is an urgent matter that we need you to address. People
inside and outside the Jewish community are repeatedly subjected to abuse and insults for
raising the issue of antisemitism in the Labour Party. This even affects those Labour MPs
who showed their solidarity with the Jewish community on Monday. This is a disgrace:
nobody should be vilified for opposing antisemitism. Those Labour Party members and
Labour-supporting blogs pushing the abuse are largely doing so in your name. They need to
hear you say, publicly and in your own voice, that we had every right to protest about
antisemitism, and that Labour MPs had every right to support us; that our concerns about
antisemitism are sincere and not a “smear” as has been widely alleged (including on your
own Facebook page); and that anyone directing abuse, intimidation or threats at those of us
who oppose antisemitism is damaging your efforts to eliminate it and to start rebuilding
trust. We firmly believe that this must happen urgently, and certainly before we meet.
We hope this can be the start of a process of constructive anti-racist work in the Labour
Party, one that will help to rebuild the relationship between the Party and the Jewish
community. The Party and the Jewish community deserve nothing less.
Yours sincerely,
Jonathan Goldstein Jonathan Arkush
Chair President
Jewish Leadership Council Board of Deputies of British Jews


UK – Jews Of Britain To Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn: Get On Your Knees!

ENGLAND BRITAN UK

REDRESS – In their response to Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, the Jewish Leadership Council (JLC) and the Board of Deputies of British Jews (BDBJ) claim to “propose an agenda of actions for discussion” between the Labour Party and those who claim to “represent” British Jews.

In practice, the two Zionist institutions have managed to produce one of the most disgusting documents in modern Jewish history. It is little more than an ode to the self-defamation of its own authors and to the community they claim to “represent”. It is rude, authoritarian and disrespectful to the democratically elected leader of Europe’s biggest party.


ISRAEL SHAHAK: ANTI-SEMITISM AND XENOPHOBIA

By Jason Palmer

jewish-history-jewish-religion

Anti-Semitism, as the late great Israel Shahak informed us, is a form of xenophobia, a fear of the alien or the outsider. That this xenophobia has oftentimes been a backlash against the self-segregation, chauvinism and sense of Jewish superiority permeating Jewish-Gentile social and economic relations is, needless to say, hardly remarked upon by court historians.

To note too that Jewish tribalism itself and the religious ideas attendant to it are both extreme examples of xenophobia, often of the preemptive variety, is not to invite discussion, but opprobrium upon one’s heretical head. Heat rather than light.

But the truth is simple. Jews are the most ancient and theocratic of all ethnic cleansers and the most violent xenophobes ever featured in religious lore. They are the only people in history to inscribe xenophobia into their very identity.

While masquerading as a monotheistic religion that most of the tribalists have no interest in taking literally, Jews behave instead like a recognizable genetic entity, which they most assuredly are.

Jews do not behave devoutly, piously or religiously, but tribally. Yet this tribalism, taken all alone, IS the embodied devoutness of their “faith”. The tribe IS the religion. As an obvious moral inversion, their pushiness for their own preservation IS their piety. Their survival IS their morality. In fact, at the end of the day, it is their ONLY morality. Few understand this reality.

But the big obvious secret is this: xenophobia, whether of the hard-line Jewish tribal strain or the softer European variety, is always required in order to protect group identity. Exclusion is actually not a wholesale vice. It is not evil. It is a survival mechanism. Nations form of exclusion. They form from isolation and from tribalism. A human family is simply the deliberate isolation and amalgamation of two gene pools. Variegated cultures spring from variegated peoples. Exclusion is often birthed by the handmaiden of xenophobia. And vice versa.

When Jews accuse others of anti-Semitism, they accuse others of xenophobia. By this accusation, they declare themselves to be above xenophobia, completely free of its taint, when in fact they are its prime progenitors amongst THEIR VERY OWN CHILDREN.

Many Jews teach their children to hate and distrust Gentiles axiomatically. They teach their self-consciously Jewish children that Gentiles are genetically predisposed to anti-Semitism and genocidal tendencies, independent of the behaviors and attitudes of Jews themselves. This is not just xenophobia. It is scientific racism. It is theological racial determinism.

Yet Jews declare themselves to be free of xenophobia, which is a laughable declaration of moral and historical faultlessness that history belies. When taken to its logical conclusion, this is a brazen declaration of genetic and moral superiority by Jewish tribalists over all other peoples on the planet.

Israel Shahak stated: “I believe that anti-Semitism and Jewish chauvinism can only be fought simultaneously.” [1] Shahak knew that anti-Semitism would never disappear until Jews decided to root out the radical xenophobia within themselves.

The Jewish hatred of non-Jews and the ancient religious, tribal and ethnic supremacism taught by Jewish tribalists to their own children must end, once and for all. The preemptive xenophobia and celebrated chauvinism of Jewish self-identity is in need of a radical refresh. Otherwise, the Jewish people will only repeat the mistakes of their tragic past.

Jewish tribalists must not misunderstand. Only after cleansing their own hearts and only after a genuine moral transformation occurs within the Jewish community will Jews be able to lecture their host populations on the historical inevitability of anti-Semitism. Without this Jewish moral transformation, which must take place, Jewish organizations should not expect their claims of anti-Semitic persecution to be met with anything other than quiet and seething hatred. One might even call it xenophobia.

[1] Israel Shahak, Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years: Pluto Press, London, 1994.

 Share this:

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

THE FATHERS OF CHRISTIANITY WERE ANTI JEW

THE FATHERS OF CHRISTIANITY WERE ANTI JEW

 BY ALICIA FRISCHMANN

It is interesting for people today, even those agnostics and atheists, to learn some facts about how the Jews were treated by the authentic Christianity which doesn’t exist today anymore.

Authentic Christianity was very hostile to Jews and Judaism, not only because the Jews are destroyers of Christians since 2000 years, but also for purely religious reasons. In fact the Holy book of Christianity the Bible calls the Jews “Synagogue of Satan” in Revelation 3:9 and Revelation 2:9, also they were called by Jesus himself on earth “the sons of the devil” in John 8:44. The early founders of the Christian church were very aware of the danger of the Jews and their destruction of Christianity and the lives of Christians; they also accused the Jews of murdering the Christ by manipulating the Romans to do their dirty work. Jews were expelled at least 109 times form European cities, some reports say they were expelled 250 times. When Islam appeared and started its conquests, the Jews of Spain brought the Muslims, helped them to conquer Spain. That was called the “Golden Age” for both Muslims and the Jews because they lived in harmony together and enjoyed the fruits of European civilization. It was Queen Isabella of Spain who kicked them both out of Spain. Later on during the reign of Queen Maria Theresa it was their great expulsion from many European cities of the empire. Till WW2 the great leader of German Adolf Hitler also facilitated their expulsion and imprisoned the Communist Jews in labor camps were they were obliged to work… too much History to know but we can start by the Quotes.

The following is a long list of quotes said by the leaders of Christianity from different sects about the Jews and their obvious wish to expel them, ban them, some even called to burn their Synagogues and homes, some called to put them in forced labor take their properties and punish them.

Most Christians today don’t know the real History of Christianity; the Jews almost destroyed Western Christianity since the French revolution against the Catholic Church, then the Bolshevik revolution against the Eastern Christianity the Orthodox Church. Since 1958 the Jews are in control of the Vatican so they try to control the minds of the 1.2 Billion Catholics in the world. Jews created the “Vatican II” reform that teaches Catholics that “Jews are Chosen people” and that Jews have the right to have “Homeland” in Palestine. Same happened to the Churches in the American continent where most of the Churches are Zionist, pro-Judaism and Jews or literally lead by Jews masquerading as “Christians”

I let you enjoy these amazing, shocking and deep quotes from the real leaders of Christianity about the Jews:

St. John Chrysostom, the Patriarch of Constantinople (died 406 A.D.) says: “How dare Christians have the slightest intercourse with Jews! They are lustful, rapacious, greedy, perfidious bandits: pests of the universe! Their synagogue is a house of prostitution, the domicile of the devil, as is the soul of the Jew. As a matter of fact, Jews worship the devil; their religion is a disease, their synagogue an abyss of perdition. The rejection and dispersion of the Jews was done by the wrath of God because of His absolute abandonment of the Jews. God HATES the Jews, and on Judgement Day will say with those who sympathize with them: “Depart from Me, for you have had intercourse with my murderers!” Flee, then, from their assemblies, fly from their houses, and hold their synagogue in hatred and aversion.”

St.Jerome said: “If it is expediant to hate any men and to loathe any race I have a strange dislike for those of the circumcision. For up to the present day, they (Jews) persecute our Lord Jesus Christ in the synagogues of Satan.”

St. Ambrose said in 374 A.D.: “The Jews are the most worthless of all men. They are lecherous, greedy, rapacious. They are perfidious murderers of Christ. They worship the Devil. Their religion is a sickness. The Jews are the odious assassins of Christ and for killing God there is no expiation possible, no indulgence or pardon. Christians may never cease vengeance, and the Jew must live in servitude forever. God always hated the Jews. It is essential that all Christians hate them.”

St. Augustine says: “Our Lord Jesus Christ referred to Himself as ‘the Stone’ (St. Mt. 21:44). Lying on the ground, it shakes whoever falls over it; coming from on high, it crushes the proud. The Jews have already been shaken by their previous stumble. What awaits them is to be crushed by His Coming.”

St. Barnabas (the student of St. Paul) says: “Do not add to your sins by saying that the Covenant is both theirs and ours. Yes it is ours, but they lost it forever.”

St. Vincent Ferrer says: “Since His spouse, the Synagogue, refused to receive Him, Christ answered: “This is a harlot!” and gave her a bill of divorce.”

Pope Gregory IX says: “Ungrateful for favors and forgetful of benefits, the Jews return insult for kindness and impious contempt for goodness. They ought to know the yoke of perpetual enslavement because of their guilt. See to it that the perfidious Jews never in the future grow insolent, but that they always suffer publicly the shame of their sin in servile fear.” (Epistle to the Hierarchy of Germany)

Pope Innocent III says: “Crucifiers of Christ ought to be held in continual subjection.”

St. Thomas Aquinas says: “It would be licit, according to custom, to hold Jews in perpetual servitude because of their crime.”

Pope Leo VII says: “Let the Gospel be preached to them and, if they remain obstinate, let them be expelled.”

St. Augustine says: “The Jews wander over the entire earth, their backs bent over and their eyes cast downward, forever calling to our minds the curse they carry with them.”

Pope Innocent III says: “As wanderers, they (the Jews) must remain upon the earth until their faces are filled with shame and they seek the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.”

“Thou shalt eat bread and cover it with the dung that comes out of a man. Thus shall the children of Israel eat their bread all filthy among the nations wither I will cast them out, saith the Lord.” (Ezechiel 4:12-13)

“The Jews, who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets and have persecuted us, do not please God, and they have become adversaries to all men, to fill up their sin always; for the wrath of God has come upon them to the end.” (I Thessalonians 2:14-16)

St. Vincent Ferrer says: “One who dies a Jew will be damned.”

St. Justin the Martyr says: “Those of the seed of Abraham who live according to the Law of Moses and who do not believe in Christ before death shall not be saved; especially they who curse this very Christ in the synagogues; who curse everything by which they might obtain salvation and escape the vengeance of fire.”

St. Agobard says: “Jews are cursed and covered with malediction. The curse has penetrated them like water in their bowels and oil in their bones. They are cursed in the city and cursed in the country, cursed in their coming in and cursed in their going out. Cursed are the fruits of their loins, of their lands, of their flocks; cursed are their cellars, their granaries, their shops, their food, the very crumbs off their tables!”

“If any man love not Our Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema.”

(I Corinthians 16:22)

St. Ambrose says: “O Jewish hearts, harder than rocks!”

“For all the House of Israel is a hard forehead and an obstinate heart.” (Ezechiel 3:7)

St. Bernard says: “O intelligence coarse, dense, and cow-like, which did not recognize God even in His own works! Perhaps the Jew will complain that I call his intelligence bovine, but his intelligence is LESS than bovine: ‘The ox knows his Owner, and the ass knows his Master’s crib, but Israel has not known Me, and My people have not understood.’ (Isaiah 1:3) You see, O Jew, I am easier on you than your own prophet!”

St. Bernardine of Feltre says: “Canon Law forbids all intercourse with Jews.”

The Council of Elvira declared: “Indeed, if any one of the clergy or faithful has taken a meal with Jews, he is to abstain from Communion so that he may be reformed.”

St. Augustine says: “Judaism, since Christ, is a corruption; indeed, Judas (Iscariot) is the image of the Jewish people: their understanding of Scripture is carnal; they bear the guilt for the death of the Savior, for through their fathers they have killed Christ. The Jews held Him; the Jews insulted Him; the Jews bound Him; they crowned Him with thorns; they scourged Him; they hanged Him upon a tree.”

St. Gregory of Nyssa says: “Jews are slayers of the Lord, murderers of the prophets, enemies and haters of God, adversaries of grace, enemies of their fathers’ faith, advocates of the devil, a brood of vipers, slanderers, scoffers, men of darkened minds, the leaven of Pharisees, a congregation of demons, sinners, wicked men, haters of goodness!”

“Woe to the sinful nation, a people loaded with iniquity, a wicked seed, ungracious children. They have forsaken the Lord, they have blasphemed the Holy One of Israel, they have gone away backwards. And when you stretch forth your hands, I will turn away My eyes from you, saith the Lord; and when you multiply prayer, I will not hear, for your hands are full of blood.” (Isaiah 1: 4,15)

St. Basil the Great says: “And such are the prayers of the Jews, for when they stretch forth their hands in prayer, they only remind God-the-Father of their sin against His Son. And at every stretching-forth of their hands, they only make it obvious that they are stained with the blood of Christ. For they who persevere in their blindness inherit the blood-guilt of their fathers, for they cried out: “His blood be on us AND ON OUR CHILDREN” (St. Mt. 27:25)”

St. Alphonsus Liguori says: “Poor Jews! You invoked a dreadful curse upon your own heads; and that curse, miserable race, you carry upon you to this day, and to the End of Time you shall endure the chastisement of that innocent blood!”

ST. JUSTIN, martyr stated in 116 A. D.: “The Jews were behind all the persecutions of the Christians. They wandered through the country everywhere hating and undermining the Christian faith.”

Our Lord +Jesus Christ+ said to the Jews: “You are of your father the devil: and the desires of your father you will do. He was a murderer from the beginning: and he stood not in the truth, because truth is not in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father thereof.” (St. John 8:44)

St. Luke 19:

[14] But his citizens [THE JEWS] hated Him [+JESUS+]: and they sent an embassage after Him, saying: We will not have this man to reign over us. [27] Jesus said to His followers: But as for those My enemies, who would not have me reign over them, bring them hither, and KILL THEM BEFORE ME.

St. Matthew 10: [34] Jesus said: Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword.

St. John 18:

[36] Jesus answered: My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would certainly battle that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now my kingdom is

not from hence.

St. Jerome said: “If you call [the synagogue] a brothel, a den of vice, the devil’s refuge, Satan’s fortress, a place to deprave the soul, an abyss of every conceivable disaster or whatever else you will, you are still saying less than it deserves.”

St. John Chrysostom of Antioch who lived some 400 AD stated, “I know that many people hold a high regard for the Jews and consider their way of life worthy of respect at the present time… This is why I am hurrying to pull up this fatal notion by the roots … A place where a whore stands on display is a whorehouse. What is more, the synagogue is not only a whorehouse and a theater; it is also a den of thieves and a haunt of wild animals … not the cave of a wild animal merely, but of an unclean wild animal … When animals are unfit for work, they are marked for slaughter, and this is the very thing which the Jews have experienced. By making themselves unfit for work, they have become ready for slaughter. This is why Christ said: “as for my enemies, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them and slay them before me’ (St. Luke 19.27).”

——————

http://www.romancatholicism.org

THE POPES AGAINST THE JEWS

We have compiled quotes from Popes of the Roman Catholic Church wherein they taught:

That the Jews are cursed for murdering Jesus

That the Jews are cursed to be traitors like Judas

That the Jews are cursed to be unscrupulous moneygrubbers, like Judas

That the Jews are cursed to be outcasts like Cain, segregated from the rest of the society within which they live

That the Jews are cursed to be distinguished from everyone else by an identifying mark, like Cain

That the Jews are cursed to be outcasts, periodically ejected from the nations amongst whom they live, like Cain

That the Jews are cursed to be slaves like Esau

We also give a list of instances where Christians expelled the Jews in line with the teaching and exhortation of the Church.

The Jews are cursed for murdering Jesus

“And Pilate seeing that he prevailed nothing, but that rather a tumult was made; taking water washed his hands before the people, saying: I am innocent of the blood of this just man; look you to it. Then cried all the people, and said, May his blood be on us, and on our children.” (Saint Matthew 27:24)

Pope Saint Peter I: “And when they had brought the apostles, they set them before the council: and the high priest asked them, saying, Did not we straitly command you that you should not teach in this name? And, behold, you have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man’s blood upon us. Then Peter and the other apostles answered, and said, We ought to obey God rather than men. The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. […] And we are witnesses of these things.” (Acts 5:27-30)

Pope Clement VIII: “The Bible itself says that the Jews are an accursed people.”

That the Jews are cursed to be traitors like Judas

“Judas Iscariot, which was the traitor.” (Saint Luke 6)

St. Augstine said: “The true image of the Hebrew is Judas Iscariot, who sells the Lord for silver. The Jews can never understand the scriptures, and forever bear the guilt of the death of Christ.”

And as soon as it was morning, the chief priests held a consultation with the elders, the scribes and the whole sanhedrin. And they bound Jesus and led him away, and they betrayed [tradiderunt] him to Pilate.” (Saint Mark 15)

“The Jews who both killed the Lord JESUS, and the prophets, and have persecuted us, and please not God, and are enemies to all men. […] To fill up their sins always: for the wrath of God is come upon them to the end.” (I Thessalonians 2)

Pope Innocent III: “When Jews are admitted out of pity into familiar intercourse with Christians, they repay their hosts, according to the popular proverb, after the fashion of the rat hidden in the sack, or the snake in the bosom, or of the burning brand in one’s lap.”

Pope Gregory IX: “Ungrateful for favours and forgetful of benefits, the Jews return insult for kindness and impious contempt for goodness.” (Epistle to the Hierarchy of Germany)

Pope Stephen III: “With great sorrow and mortal anxiety, We have heard that the Jews have in a Christian land the same rights as Christians, that Christian men and women live under the same roof with these traitors and defile their souls day and night with blasphemies.” (Epistle to the Bishop of Norbonne)

 

Pope Innocent IV: “The wicked perfidy of the Jews – from whose hearts Our Saviour did not remove the veil because of their enormous crimes but caused them justly to continue in their blindness, commit acts of shame which engender astonishment in those who hear, and terror in those who discover it.” (The Wicked Perfidy of the Jews)

Pope Saint Gregory the Great: “Furthermore, I must tell you that I have been led to praise God the more for your work by what I have learnt from the report of my most beloved son Probinus the presbyter; namely that, your Excellency having issued a certain ordinance against the perfidy of the Jews, those to whom it related attempted to bend the rectitude of your mind by offering a sum of money; which your Excellency scorned, and, seeking to satisfy the judgment of Almighty God, preferred innocence to gold.” (Epistle to Rechared, King of the Visigoths)

Pope Saint Gregory VII: “We exhort your Royal Majesty [King Alfonse VI of Castile], not to further tolerate, that the Jews rule Christians and have power over them. For to allow that Christians are subordinated to Jews and are delivered to their whims, means to oppress the Church of God, means to revile Christ himself.” (Regesta IX. 2)

Pope Innocent III at the Fourth Ecumenical Lateran Council: “They shall not appear in public at all on the days of lamentation and on passion Sunday; because some of them on such days, as we have heard, do not blush to parade in very ornate dress and are not afraid to mock Christians who are presenting a memorial of the most sacred passion and are displaying signs of grief. What we most strictly forbid however, is that they dare in any way to break out in derision of the Redeemer.”

Pope Gregory IX: “We order all our brother bishops absolutely to suppress the blasphemy of Jews in your dioceses, churches, and communities, so that they do not dare raise their necks, bent under eternal slavery, to revile the Redeemer.”

Pope Innocent III at the Fourth Ecumenical Lateran Council: “We therefore renew in this canon, on account of the boldness of the offenders, what the Council of Toledo providently decreed in this matter: we forbid Jews to be appointed to public offices, since under cover of them they are very hostile to Christians.”

Pope Saint Gregory I: “It has come to my ears that certain men of perverse spirit have sown among you some things that are wrong and opposed to the holy faith, so as to forbid any work being done on the Sabbath day. What else can I call these but preachers of Antichrist, who, when he comes, will cause the Sabbath day as well as the Lord’s day to be kept free from all work. For, because he pretends to die and rise again, he wishes the Lord’s day to be had in reverence; and, because he compels the people to judaize that he may bring back the outward rite of the law, and subject the perfidy of the Jews to himself, he wishes the Sabbath to be observed.” (Epistles, Book XIII:1)

That the Jews are cursed to be unscrupulous moneygrubbers, like Judas

“Judas Iscariot, went to the chief priests, and said to them: What will you give me, and I will betray him unto you? And they appointed him thirty pieces of silver. And from thenceforth he sought opportunity to betray him.” (Saint Matthew 26)

Pope Saint Pius V: “Besides usury, through which Jews everywhere have sucked dry the property of impoverished Christians, they are accomplices of thieves and robbers.” (Hebraeorum Gens)

Pope Benedict XIV: “Furthermore, by means of their particular practice of commerce, they amass a great store of money and then by an exorbitant rate of interest utterly destroy the wealth and inheritance of Christians.” (A Quo Primum)

Pope Clement VIII: “All the world suffers from the usury of the Jews, their monopolies and deceit. They have brought many unfortunate people into a state of poverty, especially the farmers, working class people and the very poor. […] Their ethical and moral doctrines as well as their deeds rightly deserve to be exposed to criticism in whatever country they happen to live.”

St Thomas Acquinas said: “The Jews should not be allowed to keep what they have obtained from others by usury; it were best that they were compelled to worked so that they could earn their living instead of doing nothing but becoming avaricious.”

Pope Innocent III at the Fourth Ecumenical Lateran Council: “The more the Christian religion is restrained from usurious practices, so much the more does the perfidy of the Jews grow in these matters, so that within a short time they are exhausting the resources of the Christians. Wishing therefore to see that Christians are not savagely oppressed by Jews in this matter, we ordain by this synodal decree that if Jews in the future, on any pretext, extort oppressive and excessive interest from Christians, then they are to be removed from contact with Christians until they have made adequate satisfaction for the immoderate burden. Christians too, if need be, shall be compelled by ecclesiastical censure, without the possibility of an appeal, to abstain from commerce with them. We enjoin upon princes, not to be hostile to Christians on this account, but rather to be zealous in restraining Jews from so great oppression.”

The Jews are cursed to be outcasts like Cain, segregated from the rest of the society within which they live

“And when they were in the field, Cain rose up against his brother Abel, and slew him. […] And he said to him: What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother’s blood crieth to me from the earth. Now, therefore, cursed shalt thou be upon the earth, which hath opened her mouth and received the blood of thy brother at thy hand. When thou shalt till it, it shall not yield to thee its fruit: a fugitive and vagabond shalt thou be upon the earth.” (Genesis 4)

Pope Innocent III: “The Lord made Cain a wanderer and a fugitive over the earth, but set a mark upon him, making his head to shake, lest anyone finding him should slay him. Thus the Jews, against whom the blood of Christ calls out, although they ought not to be wiped out, nevertheless, as wanderers they must remain upon the earth until their faces are filled with shame and they seek the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.” (Epistle to the Count of Nevers)

Pope Saint Sylvester I at the First Ecumenical Council of Nicea: “Concerning the prohibition of usury and base gain by the clergy; and concerning the prohibition against conversing or eating with the Jews. No priest shall set money out at interest or take unfair profit or be friendly or sociable with Jews; nor should anyone take food or drink with the Jews; for if this was decreed by the holy apostles, it is incumbent upon the faithful to obey their command; and the synod shall excommunicate any one who does not comply with this order.”

Pope Eugene IV: “We decree and order that from now on, and for all time, Christians shall not eat or drink with the Jews, nor admit them to feasts, nor cohabit with them, nor bathe with them. […] They cannot live among Christians, but in a certain street, separated and segregated from Christians, and outside which they cannot under any pretext have houses.”

Pope Alexander III: “Our ways of life and those of the Jews are utterly different, and Jews will easily pervert the souls of simple folk to their superstition and unbelief if such folk are living in continual and intimate intercourse with them.” (Ad Haec)

That the Jews are cursed to be distinguished from everyone else by an identifying mark, like Cain

“And the Lord set a mark upon Cain.” (Genesis 4)

Pope Martin V: “However, we received a short time ago through credible reports knowledge to our great alarm, that various Jews of both sexes in Cafas and other cities, lands and places overseas, which fall under the jurisdiction of Christians, are of obstinate mind and, in order to conceal swindling and wickedness, wear no special sign on their clothing, so that they are not recognisable as Jews. They are not ashamed to give themselves out as Christians before many Christians of both sexes of these cities, districts and places mentioned, who could not in fact identify them, and consequently commit shameful things and crimes.” (Sedes Apostolica)

Pope Eugene IV: “We decree and order that from now on, and for all time […] All and every single Jew, of whatever sex and age, must everywhere wear the distinctive dress and known marks by which they can be evidently distinguished from Christians.”

Pope Saint Pius V: “In order to make an end of all doubt concerning the colour of the cap and the sign of the women, we declare that the colour must be yellow.” (Romanus Pontifex)

That the Jews are cursed to be outcasts, periodically ejected from the nations amongst whom they live, like Cain

“A fugitive and vagabond shalt thou be upon the earth.” (Genesis 4)

Pope Saint Pius V: “With full understanding and in exercising of the apostolic powers, we withdraw from the Jews and their rule (and recognize no right or claim) all properties, which the Jews have in their possession in this city Rome or other places of our domain of rule.” (Cum Nos Super)

Pope Paul IV: “It is too absurd and pointless that the Jews, whom their own guilt condemns to slavery, under the pretence that Christian piety suffers and tolerates their coexistence, pay back [with wickedness] the mercy received from Christians.” (Cum Nimis Absurdum)

Pope Leo VII: “Let the Gospel be preached unto them and, if they remain obstinate, let them be expelled.”

Pope Adrian I at the Second Ecumenical Council of Nicea: “Since certain, erring in the superstitions of the Hebrews, have thought to mock at Christ our God, and feigning to be converted to the religion of Christ do deny him, and in private and secretly keep the Sabbath and observe other Jewish customs, we decree that such persons be not received to communion, nor to prayers, nor into the Church; but let them be openly Hebrew according to their religion, and let them not bring their children to baptism, nor purchase or possess a slave.”

Pope Innocent IV: “We who long with all our hearts for the salvation of souls, grant you full authority by these present letters to banish the Jews, either in your own person or through the agency of others, especially since, as we have been informed, they do not abide by the regulations drawn up for them by this Holy See.” (To the King of France)

Pope Saint Pius V: “The Jewish people fell from the heights because of their faithlessness and condemned their Redeemer to a shameful death. Their godlessness has assumed such forms that, for the salvation of our own people, it becomes necessary to prevent their disease. Besides usury, through which Jews everywhere have sucked dry the property of impoverished Christians, they are accomplices of thieves and robbers; and the most damaging aspect of the matter is that they allure the unsuspecting through magical incantations, superstition, and witchcraft to the Synagogue of Satan and boast of being able to predict the future. We have carefully investigated how this revolting sect abuses the name of Christ and how harmful they are to those whose life is threatened by their deceit. On account of these and other serious matters, and because of the gravity of their crimes which increase day to day more and more, We order that, within 90 days, all Jews in our entire earthly realm of justice – in all towns, districts, and places – must depart these regions. After this time limit shall all at the present or in the future, who dwell or wander into that city or other already mentioned, be affected, their property confiscated and handed over to the Siscus, and they shall becomes slaves of the Roman Church, live in perpetual servitude and the Roman Church shall have the same rights over them as the remaining [worldly] lords over slaves and property.” (Hebraeorum Gens)

Christians agreed with the Church and the Jews were expelled in the following instances.

1. 250: Carthage;

2. 415: Alexandria;

3. 554: Diocese of Clement (France);

4. 561: Diocese of Uzzes (France);

5. 612: Visigoth Spain;

6. 642: Visigoth Empire;

7. 855: Italy;

8. 876: Sens;

9. 1012: Mayence;

10. 1181: France;

11. 1290: England;

12. 1306: France;

13. 1348: Switzerland;

14. 1349: Hielbronn (Germany);

15. 1349: Hungary;

16. 1388: Strasbourg;

17. 1394: Germany;

18. 1394: France;

19. 1422: Austria;

20. 1424: Fribourg & Zurich;

21. 1426: Cologne;

22. 1432: Savory;

23. 1438: Mainz;

24. 1439: Augsburg;

25. 1446: Bavaria;

26. 1453: Franconis;

27. 1453: Breslau;

28. 1454: Wurzburg;

29. 1485: Vincenza (Italy);

30. 1492: Spain;

31. 1495: Lithuania;

32. 1497: Portugal;

33. 1499: Germany;

34. 1514: Strasbourg;

35. 1519: Regensburg;

36. 1540: Naples;

37. 1542: Bohemia;

38. 1550: Genoa;

39. 1551: Bavaria;

40. 1555: Pesaro;

41. 1559: Austria;

42. 1561: Prague;

43. 1567: Wurzburg;

44. 1569: Papal States;

45. 1571: Brandenburg;

46. 1582: Netherlands;

47. 1593: Brandenburg, Austria;

48. 1597: Cremona, Pavia & Lodi;

49. 1614: Frankfort;

50. 1615: Worms;

51. 1619: Kiev;

52. 1649: Ukraine;

53. 1654: Little Russia;

54. 1656: Lithuania;

55. 1669: Oran (North Africa);

56. 1670: Vienna;

57. 1712: Sandomir;

58. 1727: Russia;

59. 1738: Wurtemburg;

60. 1740: Little Russia;

61. 1744: Bohemia;

62. 1744: Livonia;

63. 1745: Moravia;

64. 1753: Kovad (Lithuania);

65. 1761: Bordeaux;

66. 1772: Jews deported to the Pale of Settlement (Russia);

67. 1775: Warsaw;

68. 1789: Alace;

69. 1804: Villages in Russia;

70. 1808: Villages & Countrysides (Russia);

71. 1815: Lubeck & Bremen;

72. 1815: Franconia, Swabia & Bavaria;

73. 1820: Bremes;

74. 1843: Russian Border, Austria & Prussia;

75. 1862: Area in the U. S. under Grant’s Jurisdiction;

76. 1866: Galatz, Romania;

77. 1919: Bavaria (foreign born Jews);

78. 1938-45: Nazi Controlled Areas;

79. 1948: Arab Countries.

That the Jews are cursed to be slaves like Esau

“And the Lord said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy womb; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder [Esau] shall serve the younger [Isaac].” (Genesis 25)

“But he [Ismael] who was of the bondwoman, was born according to the flesh: but he [Isaac] of the free woman, was by promise. Which things are said by an allegory. For these are the two testaments. The one from mount Sina, engendering unto bondage; which is Agar: For Sina is a mountain in Arabia, which hath affinity to that Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.” (Galatians 4)

Pope Innocent III: “The Jews, by their own guilt, are consigned to perpetual servitude because they crucified the Lord.” (To the Archbishops of Sens and Paris)

Pope Innocent IV: “And that you [King Saint Louis IX] order both the aforesaid abusive books [The Talmud] condemned by the same doctors and generally all the books with their glosses which were examined and condemned by them to be burned by fire wherever they can be found throughout your entire kingdom, strictly forbidding that Jews henceforth have Christian nurses or servants, that the sons of a free woman may not serve the sons of a bondwoman, but as slaves condemned by the Lord, whose death they wickedly plotted, they at least outwardly recognize themselves as slaves of those whom the death of Christ made free and themselves slaves. So we may commend the zeal of your sincerity in the Lord with due praises.” (The Wicked Perfidy of the Jews)

Pope Saint Martin I: “If anyone shall teach a slave, under pretext of piety, to despise his master and to run away from his service, and not to serve his own master with good-will and all honour, let him be anathema.”

Pope Benedict XIV: “It is fitting for Jews to serve Christians, but not for Christians to serve Jews. On the contrary, the Jews, as slaves rejected by that Saviour Whose death they wickedly contrived, should recognize themselves in fact and in creed the slaves of those whom the death of Christ has set free, even as it has rendered them bondmen.” (Quoting Pope Innocent III, “Etsi Judaeos”)

Pope Gregory IX: “They ought to know the yoke of perpetual enslavement because of their guilt. See to it that the perfidious Jews never in the future become insolent, but that they always suffer publicly the shame of their sin in servile fear.” (Epistle to the Hierarchy of Germany)

Pope Alexander III at the Third Lateran Ecumenical Council: “We declare that the evidence of Christians is to be accepted against Jews in every case, since Jews employ their own witnesses against Christians – and that those who prefer Jews to Christians in this matter are to lie under anathema, since Jews ought to be slaves to Christians.” (Canon 26)

More quotes

“The Jews are the most worthless of all men. They are lecherous, rapacious, greedy. They are perfidious murderers of Christ. They worship the Devil. Their religion is a sickness. The Jews are the odious assassins of Christ and for killing God there is no expiation possible, no indulgence or pardon. Christians may never cease vengeance, and the Jew must live in servitude forever. God always hated the Jews. It is essential that all Christians hate them’ (year 379). Furthermore: ‘The Jews sacrifice their children to Satan. They are worse than wild beasts. The Synagogue is a brothel, a den of scoundrels, the temple of demons devoted to idolatrous cults, a criminal assembly of Jews, a place of meeting for the assassins of Christ, a house of ill fame, a dwelling of iniquity, a gulf and abyss of perdition… The Jews have fallen into a condition lower than the vilest animal. Debauchery and drunkenness have brought them to a level of the lusty goat and the pig. They know only one thing: to satisfy their stomachs, to get drunk, to kill, and beat each other up like stage villains and coachmen. The Synagogue is a curse, obstinate in her error, she refuses to see or hear, she has deliberately perverted her judgment; she has extinguished with herself the light of the Holy Spirit.’ He elaborated further on God’s punishment of the Jews: ‘But it was men, says the Jew, who brought these misfortunes upon us, not God. On the contrary, it was in fact God who brought them about. If you attribute them to men, reflect again that even supposing men had dared, they could not have had the power to accomplish them, unless it had been God’s will. Men would certainly not have made war unless God had permitted them. Is it not obvious that it was because God hated you [Jews] and rejected you once for all?” ~ St John Chrysostom, “Father of the Church” (AD 344 – 407)

“I have read and heard many stories about the Jews which agree with this judgment of Christ, namely, how they have poisoned wells, made assassinations, kidnaped children, as related before … However, it all coincides with the judgment of Christ which declares that they are venomous, bitter, vindictive, tricky serpents, assassins, and children of the devil who sting and work harm stealthily wherever they cannot do it openly … That is what I had in mind when I said earlier that, next to the devil, a Christian has no more bitter and galling foe than a Jew. There is no other to whom we accord as many benefactions and from whom we suffer as much as we do from these base children of the devil, this brood of vipers. These poisonous envenomed worms should be drafted into forced labor. The young and strong Jews and Jewesses should be given the flail, the ax, the hoe, the spade, the distaff, and the spindle and let them earn their bread by the sweat of their noses.” As a last resort, they should simply be kicked out for all time.” ~ Martin Luther, founder of the Protestant Church, in his book [On the Jews and Their Lies] in 1526

The Talmud

Eight popes condemned the Talmud. Martin Luther, founder of the Protestant Church, ordered it burned. Pope Clement VIII declared, “The impious Talmudic, Cabalistic and other wicked books of the Jews are hereby entirely condemned and they must always remain condemned and prohibited and this law must be perpetually observed.”

Like you, at one time I believed that the essential difference between Jews and Christians was that the Jews believed in the Old Testament and the Christians believed in the New Testament. The truth is that their “real bible” is The Talmud. The Jewish book “The Mitzbeach” states that “there is nothing superior to ‘Holy Talmud’.” While the Jews profess to be attached to the Old Testament to the outside world, the real essence of the Jewish creed is not the Old Testament as such, not the books of Moses, but The Talmud.

There are several branches of Jewry such as the Orthodox, Reform, Liberal, Conservative, Sephardim, Ashkanazim, Zionist, etc., but they all use The Talmud in their synagogues, just as all different branches of Christians use the same Bible. The Talmud is made up of 63 books in 524 chapters and is often printed in 18 large volumes. It was written by Rabbis between the years 200AD and 500AD. It basically contains all the Jewish laws in their relationships between each other, and also in relationship of the Jews towards the Gentiles.

Eight Catholic popes condemned the Talmud. Martin Luther, founder of the Protestant Church, ordered it burned. Pope Clement VIII declared, “The impious Talmudic, Cabalistic and other wicked books of the Jews are hereby entirely condemned and they must always remain condemned and prohibited and this law must be perpetually observed.” The Talmud holds that only Jews are true human beings and Gentiles are “goyim” (meaning cattle or beast). The following are shocking but exact quotes from the various books of “The Talmud.”

1. Sanhedrin 59a: “Murdering Goyim is like killing a wild animal.”

2. Abodah Zara 26b: “Even the best of the Gentiles should be killed.”

3. Sanhedrin 59a: “A goy (Gentile) who pries into The Law (Talmud) is guilty of death.”

4. Libbre David 37: “To communicate anything to a Goy about our religious relations would be equal to the killing of all Jews, for if the Goyim knew what we teach about them, they would kill us openly.”

5. Libbre David 37: “If a Jew be called upon to explain any part of the rabbinic books, he ought to give only a false explanation. Who ever will violate this order shall be put to death.”

6. Yebhamoth 11b: “Sexual intercourse with a little girl is permitted if she is three years of age.”

7. Schabouth Hag. 6d: “Jews may swear falsely by use of subterfuge wording.”

8. Hilkkoth Akum X1: “Do not save Goyim in danger of death.”

9. Hilkkoth Akum X1: “Show no mercy to the Goyim.”

10. Choschen Hamm 388, 15: “If it can be proven that someone has given the money of Israelites to the Goyim, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of the earth.”


11. Choschen Hamm 266,1: “A Jew may keep anything he finds which belongs to the Akum (Gentile). For he who returns lost property (to Gentiles) sins against the Law by increasing the power of the transgressors of the Law. It is praiseworthy, however, to return lost property if it is done to honor the name of God, namely, if by so doing, Christians will praise the Jews and look upon them as honorable people.”

12. Szaaloth-Utszabot, The Book of Jore Dia 17: “A Jew should and must make a false oath when the Goyim asks if our books contain anything against them.”

13. Baba Necia 114, 6: “The Jews are human beings, but the nations of the world are not human beings but beasts.”

14. Simeon Haddarsen, fol. 56-D: “When the Messiah comes every Jew will have 2800 slaves.”

15. Nidrasch Talpioth, p. 225-L: “Jehovah created the non-Jew in human form so that the Jew would not have to be served by beasts. The non-Jew is consequently an animal in human form, and condemned to serve the Jew day and night.”

16. Aboda Sarah 37a: “A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated.”

17. Gad. Shas. 2:2: “A Jew may violate but not marry a non-Jewish girl.”

18. Tosefta. Aboda Zara B, 5: “If a goy kills a goy or a Jew, he is responsible; but if a Jew kills a goy, he is NOT responsible.”

19. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 388: “It is permitted to kill a Jewish denunciator everywhere. It is permitted to kill him even before he denounces.”

20. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 348: “All property of other nations belongs to the Jewish nation, which, consequently, is entitled to seize upon it without any scruples.”

21. Tosefta, Abda Zara VIII, 5: “How to interpret the word ‘robbery.’ A goy is forbidden to steal, rob, or take women slaves, etc., from a goy or from a Jew. But a Jew is NOT forbidden to do all this to a goy.”

22. Seph. Jp., 92, 1: “God has given the Jews power over the possessions and blood of all nations.”

23. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 156: “When a Jew has a Gentile in his clutches, another Jew may go to the same Gentile, lend him money and in turn deceive him, so that the Gentile shall be ruined. For the property of a Gentile, according to our law, belongs to no one, and the first Jew that passes has full right to seize it.”

24. Schulchan Aruch, Johre Deah, 122: “A Jew is forbidden to drink from a glass of wine which a Gentile has touched, because the touch has made the wine unclean.”

25. Nedarim 23b: “He who desires that none of his vows made during the year be valid, let him stand at the beginning of the year and declare, ‘Every vow which I may make in the future shall be null’. His vows are then invalid.”

Here is what the Talmud says about the Lord Jesus:

1) He and his disciples practiced sorcery and black magic, led Jews astray into idolatry, and were sponsored by foreign, gentile powers for the purpose of subverting Jewish worship (Sanhedrin 43a).

2) He was sexually immoral, worshipped statues of stone (a brick is mentioned), was cut off from the Jewish people for his wickedness, and refused to repent (Sanhedrin 107b; Sotah 47a).

3) He learned witchcraft in Egypt and, to perform miracles, used procedures that involved cutting his flesh, which is also explicitly banned in the Bible (Shabbos 104b).

Gittin 57a. Says Jesus is in hell, being boiled in “hot excrement.”

Sanhedrin 43a. Says Jesus was executed because he practiced sorcery: “It is taught that on the eve of Passover Jesus was hung, and forty days before this the proclamation was made: Jesus is to be stoned to death because he has practiced sorcery and has lured the people to idolatry…He was an enticer and of such thou shalt not pity or condone.”

Kallah 51a.”The elders were once sitting in the gate when two young lads passed by; one covered his head and the other uncovered his head. Of him who uncovered his head Rabbi Eliezer remarked that he is a bastard.

We could provide many more quotes from this offensive book, but I believe that the point is clear: The Jews are involved in what can be called, and indeed has been called, a conspiracy against all mankind and will take whatever steps they deem necessary for them to dominate the rest of the world. It is because of these beliefs, and the willingness of the Jews to act upon them, that “anti-semitism” exists and perhaps the reason why the Jews have been disliked and driven out of every nation in which they have inhabited at least once. In the pages that follow, I hope to make clear to you just how far the Jews have gotten with this Talmudic conspiracy.

SEE ALSO –
THE CHURCH AND ANTISEMITISM…AGAIN

KevinMacdonaldCatholicChurchMeme

THE EVANGELICAL HERESY OF “JUDEO-CHRISTIANITY”
TRADITIONAL CATHOLICISM IS PRO-FASCISM, JEW-WISE, AND PERFECT FOR WHITE NATIONALISTS
WHAT IS THE MOST HOLY MISSION ON EARTH???
JEWS ARE SATAN’S CHOSEN ONES
REMEMBERING THE BYZANTINE EMPIRE
A RELIGIOUS SOLUTION TO THE JEWISH PROBLEM
RABBI CHEMOR LETTER TO SANHEDRIN 

How To Preach Jesus To Jews

How To Preach Jesus To Jews


Pissing On Jesus–Just a “Drop in the Bucket” as Far as Jewish Interests are Concerned

calvin-piss-cross-small

“Dishonoring Christian religious symbols is an old religious duty in Judaism. Spitting on the cross, and especially on the Crucifix, and spitting when a Jew passes a church, have been obligatory from around AD 200 for pious Jews. In the past, when the danger of anti-Semitic hostility was a real one, the pious Jews were commanded by their rabbis either to spit so that the reason for doing so would be unknown, or to spit onto their chests, not actually on the cross or openly before the church. The increasing strength of the Jewish state has caused these customs to become more open again.”

—Professor Israel Shahak, former Israeli citizen and holocaust survivor

“I still remember old Jews spitting while passing by a church, and cursing the dead while passing by a Christian cemetery. Last year in Jerusalem, a Jew decided to refresh the tradition. He spat at the Holy Cross carried in the procession along the city. Even today, Jews in Israel refer to Jesus by the demeaning word Yeshu (instead of Yeshua), meaning “Perish his name”. In a similar pun, the New Testament Gospel is called “Avon Gilaion”, the booklet of Sin. These are the endearing feelings that the friends of Christian Zionists maintain towards Christ.”

—Israel Shamir, Israeli Jew turned Christian writer and anti-Zionist

Honestly, as crazy as it sounds, I don’t know what stinks worse, the very-Jewish “comedian” Larry David pissing on a picture of Jesus in one of his recent shticks or a bunch of pissed-off Christianites pissing and moaning over it.

Don’t get me wrong. It’s not that I’m not outraged too, but at the same time I can’t help but laugh as I watch the gathering storm.

And again, it’s not for lack of outrage on my part, but rather because the shock value has worn off for me. Once you realize this kind of thing (meaning the Jews defaming Jesus in the most banal, vile and vulgar ways) is as natural as a baby with poor potty training messing his pants, there’s a certain amount of, “Well DUHHH, whaddya expect???” to it all and you sort of learn to “go with the flow”, no pun intended.

Consider it all–The VERY-Jewish Larry David urinating on a picture of Jesus on a VERY-Jewish TV program produced, written by, and starring Jews? IN JEWISH HOLLYWOOD? You mean TODAY, when Jews and Christians are getting along so fabulously and with the latter forking over their blood, sweat and tears in propping up the Jewish state and fighting all her wars for her in the Middle East?

Well of course they–meaning the Jews–would do such a thing. Besides the fact they cornered the market on potty humor a long time ago, as well their using Jesus’ face as a piss pot is every bit in congress with their organically anti-Christian nature as a dog lifting his leg next to a fire hydrant. This is something that Christianites more than anyone else should be aware of, as well as the fact that the aforementioned “brilliant” shtick (as it is now being described by Jewish critics) with the very-Jewish Larry David is certainly not a one-time event.

It has been like this for 2,000 years…After all, the Jews have been in a pissy mood since literally day one when Jesus came riding into town and peed on their whole “We’re the Chosen people of God” parade. By holding a mirror up to their faces and showing them what kind of jerks they really were He made Himself public enemy #1, a position He has maintained since that time. His refusing to go along with their delusional “we can do whatever the f*** we want to anyone, anywhere at anytime” collective mindset and then exposing them as the haughty, racist, self-worshiping, lying, thieving, blind, psychopathic banditos they were has resulted in a 20-centuries long pissing contest on the part of these people in seeing who could outdo the other in disrespecting and defaming the very men sent to save the world from this dangerous cult.

Truth be told, we should all be thankful in a sense that the only thing taking place (as of now) was this filthy, inbred troglodyte pissing on a picture of Jesus. It could (and probably WILL BE) much worse in the days to come. Remember, the Jews are a people whose religion teaches that Jesus was a sorcerer, a sex pervert and a false prophet who is paying for the unforgivable sin of trying to liberate the Jewish people by being boiled in a giant vat of semen and feces. Wonder how long before they try THAT stunt on TV or the big screen?

Furthermore, now that the Jews have their nuclear-armed nation and hold the bulk of the Christian West by the family jewels in terms of media, economics and control of her various governments, they know they can basically “let it all hang out” without fear of any substantive backlash. Whereas before they scurried like cockroaches when the light switch was flicked on, now they merely don their sunglasses and continue on with business as usual.

In a sense, I’m glad the whole episode has taken place. As awful as it sounds and as much as I try not to be one of those “I told you so” types, this is precisely what the doctor ordered in terms of what the Christian world needs. Now that the Jews are living large and in charge and are not bothering to hide how they REALLY feel about the rest of the non-Jewish world (and particularly Christians) it is a breath of fresh air, despite as bad as it smells. From Sarah Silverman’s “I hope the Jews DID kill Christ…I’d fucking do it again, in a second” to the recent skit appearing on Israel’s channel 10 TV with the very-Jewish talk show host Lior Shlein entitled “Like a Virgin”(depicting the holy mother of Jesus as a girl of loose morals who pleasured herself with a whole assortment of devices) to the recent urination presentation by Larry David, I cannot help but be relieved, again, no pun intended.

The reason for this is not because I get any pleasure in seeing Jesus treated so disrespectfully. If I could be king for just 15 minutes the very first thing I would do with sewer rats like Larry David, Jerry Seinfeld, Lior Shlein, Sarah Silverman et al is to reunite them with their natural environment by flushing them and their filth down the toilet were they belong.

Rather, it’s because events like these function as smelling salts that Christianites need to whiff if they are to ever wake up from the deadly sleep they are in and in which they have placed the rest of the world. As a result of the delusions they entertain concerning their ‘better brethren’ in the Jewish community (namely their divine status and how God’s gonna be REALLY pissed if the Holy Land isn’t occupied by these depraved creatures) they have literally set loose plague after plague upon the rest of the world, the only end in site to it all being the “Big One”, meaning Armageddon.

As cynical as it sounds, IF (and that is a BIG if) there is any outrage on the part of our Christianite leaders, rest assured it is not necessarily because they are offended at Jesus being treated so disrespectfully by Jewish interests. Rather it is because it puts them in the difficult position of having to conjure up a believable explanation to their mindless, non-thinking followers as to why the wonderful, innocent, enlightened, pure-as-the-wind-driven-snow Chosenites would do such a thing, while at the same time trying to avoid discussion of the obvious–the fact that it is all intrinsically tied to the organically anti-Christian behavior on the part of Jewish interests.

That’s assuming anything about it gets said from the priests, pastors and preachers across the fruited plane at all. Almost down to the last “man” (and I use that term lightly) they have all testified to the fact their fear of getting sideways with the Jews overpowers their fear of getting sideways with God. More than likely, it will be the Muslim groups making the most noise (as is usually the case) rather than the lukewarm, Judaized Christianites who will simply fall back on the old, worn out and misapplied “turn the other cheek” and “meek as doves” routine.

What whining from the Christianites that does take place however will actually be more unbearable than the snickering on the part of the Chosenites, if such can be imagined. As bad as it is (the idea of defacing a picture of Jesus in such manner as accomplished by the bigotted troglodyte Larry David and his partners in La Kosher Nostra) it does not compare with the greater sins done to the millions of people in the Middle East born out of both support for and silent acquiescence to Jewish demands from the Christian community in the west. Where was their outrage over a million Iraqis being killed in 5 years of war for the benefit of world-wide Jewry? Where was their outrage when for-the-most-part Christian villages were bombed into oblivion by the Jews in the summer of 2006, killing over 1,000? Where was it when–a mere 2 days after Christmas–the same Goddamned Jews producing, directing, acting in and celebrating the recent “Piss Christ” episode bombed Gaza, resulting in 1,500 men, women and children being incinerated, shot and blown to pieces?

Having stayed quiet over the assault on Jesus’ teachings with regards to the genocide waged by the Jews in the aforementioned places, they really ought to just stay quiet over this one as well.

Now some, in the interest of drawing some imaginary, non-existent distinction between the very-Jewish Larry David and those “good, religious Jews” who would NEVER resort to something as pornographic as emptying their bladder on a religious picture of Jesus will try to say it is a case of comparing apples to oranges.

Not true. Larry David can be considered a “good Jew” for what he did, whether he is a true believer or (as most Jews are these days) an atheist. According to the law handed down by Moses it is the duty of all “good Jews” to stone to death anyone who comes amongst them preaching different traditions, which certainly Jesus did. Since they cannot stone to death a man they already killed 20 centuries past, the least they can do is subject his memory to a continued death, which they most certainly do on a daily basis through their control of the media and churches in the west.

Of course, the real pisser in all of it is–as always–the staggering hypocrisy associated with it. If it were a “Christian” show written by, produced, directed and starring “Christians” and one of its skits featured two Christians going into the house of a Jew and dowsing a copy of Anne Frank’s Diary we’d all be in a real big mess for who knows how long. 

When Jews do it however, it is “bright, witty, brilliant and hilarious”. And yet they still have the gall to wonder why they are the most persecuted (translation–hated for good reasons) people in history. The silence on the part of all the typical noisemakers (ADL, SPLC et al) constantly shilling about the dangers of “anti-Semitism” in shrieking tones proves they obviously are not worried about it in the least.

And the real miracle is that without missing a beat, the anti-Islamic chorus warning about the “dangers of the Islamic fifth column” will continue as if the aforementioned had never even taken place.

Given that the contribution to our modern world by Jewish interests is–with few exceptions–mere raw sewage (be it war, economic exploitation, pornography, murder of the unborn, political/cultural corruption and a general malaise as far as morality goes) this latest outrage is for all intents and purposes a mere drop in the bucket, again, no pun intended.

What those in the Christian world offended by this latest display by the very Jewish Larry David need to realize however is that the Jews are just-a-getting’ warmed up and that, as bad as it is now, we ain’t seen nothin yet.

© 2009 Mark Glenn

nomorewarsforisrael@gmail.com

Moscow warns Israel of ‘anti-Russian hysteria’ over spy’s poisoning

PUTIN NETANYAHU

TIMES OF ISRAEL – Russia on Friday told Israel not to be drawn into “a renewed anti-Russian hysteria” campaign after Jerusalem condemned the poisoning of a double agent in England that the UK and its Western allies have blamed on Moscow.

“The Embassy notes with concern attempts undertaken by the government of the United Kingdom and supported by some other foreign nations and a number of media outlets, to draw Israel into [a] political and propagandistic campaign, which was unleashed by London under the false pretext of Russia’s alleged involvement in the poisoning of Sergey and Yulia Skripal,” the Russian embassy in Israel said.

It said “such actions constitute an unprecedented, flagrant provocation that undermines foundations of normal dialogue between countries” and seriously challenges the international rules-based system.”

The statement came after the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem on Thursday condemned “the event that occurred in Great Britain” but made no mention of Russia. “Israel views with gravity the event that occurred in Great Britain and condemns it vigorously,” the Foreign Ministry said. “We hope that the international community will cooperate in order to avoid such further events.”

On March 4, Skripal, once a Russian double agent, along with his daughter Yulia, and a British police officer, were poisoned with a rare and powerful nerve agent. Skripal and his daughter remain in critical condition, while the police officer is in serious condition.

Britain’s Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson accused Russian President Vladimir Putin of personally ordering a nerve agent attack in Britain, ratcheting up tensions Friday in an increasingly global showdown over alleged Russian meddling abroad.

Johnson said it was “overwhelmingly likely” that Putin himself ordered the attack.

“Our quarrel is with Putin’s Kremlin, and with his decision, and we think it overwhelmingly likely that it was his decision, to direct the use of a nerve agent on the streets of the UK, on the streets of Europe, for the first time since the Second World War,” Johnson said.

Russia ordered a halt to high-level meetings with the UK and prepared Friday to expel British diplomats in retaliation for similar British moves — but still hasn’t said who will be kicked out or when.

Britain is expelling 23 Russian diplomats and taking other steps against Russian interests as the two nations’ relations sink to a post-Cold War low.

Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov was quoted by Russian news agencies as calling Johnson’s statement a “shocking and inexcusable breach of diplomatic propriety.” Peskov reiterated Russian denials of involvement in the attack that has left both Skripals in critical condition.

“We have never encountered this level of discussion on the global stage,” Peskov told reporters.

The source of the nerve agent used — which Britain says is the Soviet-made Novichok — is unclear, as is the way it was administered.

Russia denies being the source of the poison, suggesting it could have been another country, and has demanded that Britain share samples collected by investigators.

Separately, Israel’s Ynet news site reported Friday that Anatoly Kuntsevich, a former Russian general considered to have been the head of the Soviet Union’s Novichok development program, was once closely monitored by Israeli intelligence.

According to the report, Kuntsevich — who became Russian president Boris Yeltsin’s adviser for eliminating chemical weapons — began assisting Syria in the 1990s with establishing an advanced chemical weapons program, providing know-how and equipment in exchange for large sums of money.

Kuntsevich’s activities in Syria eventually became known to the Mossad, which raised concern in Israel and prompted then-prime minister Ehud Barak to alert Moscow to Kuntsevich’s efforts, which the report said were likely at his own initiative.

Kuntsevich, who died in 2002 mysteriously on a flight from Syria’s Aleppo to Moscow, had even brought instructions for producing Novichok during his last trip to Syria, according to a top-secret CIA document from the time cited by the report, although Syria’s development of advanced chemical weapons was likely hampered by his death.

Last Act Of ‘Novichok’ Drama Revealed – “The Skripals’ Resurrection”

March 29, 2018 – Moon of Alabama

Novichok

MoA

It seems that the ‘Novichok’ fairy-tale the British government plays to us provides for a happy ending – the astonishing and mysterious resurrection of the victims of a “military grade” “five to eight times more deadly than VX gas” “nerve agent” “of a type developed by” Hollywood.

Happy Easter!

Yulia Skripal no longer in critical condition, say Salisbury doctors

The condition of Yulia Skripal, who was poisoned with a nerve agent in Salisbury along with her father, is improving rapidly, doctors have said.Salisbury NHS foundation trust said on Thursday the 33-year-old was no longer in a critical condition, describing her medical state as stable.

Christine Blanshard, medical director for Salisbury district hospital, said: “I’m pleased to be able to report an improvement in the condition of Yulia Skripal. She has responded well to treatment but continues to receive expert clinical care 24 hours a day.”

Her father’s condition is still described by the hospital as critical but stable.

Only yesterday the Skripals chances to survive was claimed to be 1 out of 99. Nerve agents are deadly weapons. A dose of ten milligram of the U.S. developed VX nerve agent will kill 50% of those exposed to it. The ‘Novichok’ agents are said to be several times more deadly than VX.

It seems less and less likely that the British government claim about ‘Novichok’ poisoning is actually true. Way more likely are other explanations, for example food poisoning or an allergic shock soon after eating out at a fish restaurant.

The claims of a nerve agent and ‘Novichok’ seem to have been taken from the script of the British-American spy drama Strike Back (clip) which recently ran on British and U.S. TV. The sole purpose of the ‘Novichok’ drama is to implicate and damage Russia.

As the former MI6 spook Alastair Crooke writes:

The evidence is beside the point: here was the opportunity to close-off Trump’s ‘illusion’ of a possible détente with Russia. The narrative is all. We will likely never know the full story.

Yulia and Sergej Skripal were found unconscious on the afternoon of March 4.

The U.S. State Department says that its campaign to use the Skripal incident as a tool against Russia started on March 6, only two days after the incident and six full days before the British government raised accusations against Russia.

In her press briefing on March 27 the U.S. State Department spokeswomen Heather Nauert talked about the coordinated ousting of Russian diplomats by some “western” countries:

Our Deputy Secretary Sullivan, Assistant Secretary Wess Mitchell, and many others in the building across the interagency process have worked tirelessly over the past three weeks to achieve this unprecedented level of cooperation and also coordination. The end result – 151 Russian intelligence personnel sent home to Moscow – is a testimony of how seriously the world takes Russia’s ongoing global campaign to undermine international peace and stability, to threaten the sovereignty and security of countries worldwide, and to subvert and discredit Western institutions.

The above quote is from Nauert’s prepared remarks, not the more free wheeling Q&A section.

The British prime minister made her allegations against Russia only on March 12:

“It is now clear that Mr Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a military grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia.This is part of a group of nerve agents known as ‘Novichok’.”

(See our earlier pieces, linked below, for many details on ‘Novichok’ and its history.)

May’s announcement was similar to Tony Blair’s “45 minutes” claim. A lie, concocted in a common propaganda operation with the U.S. government. As the Downing Street Memos said of the preparations for the war on Iraq:

C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.

bigger

There are several details that debunk the ‘Novichok’ thesis.

The specialists in the British chemical weapon laboratory in Porton Down, which gets millions of U.S. military research dollars, did not agree with the ‘Novichok’ claim for whatever effected the Skripals. May’s phrase “of a type developed by Russia’ was politically negotiated. As ambassador Craig Murray provided:

I have now received confirmation from a well placed FCO source that Porton Down scientists are not able to identify the nerve agent as being of Russian manufacture, and have been resentful of the pressure being placed on them to do so. Porton Down would only sign up to the formulation “of a type developed by Russia” after a rather difficult meeting where this was agreed as a compromise formulation.

But was there really a nerve agent involved?

A doctor who administered first aid to Yulia Skripal for 30 minutes was not effected at all. The emergency services suspected the victims had received on overdose of fentanyl.

Doctor Steven Davies, who leads the emergency service of the Salisbury District Hospital, wrote in a letter to the London Times:

Sir, Further to your report “Poison exposure leaves almost 40 needing treatment”, (Mar 14), may I clarify that no patients have experienced symptoms of nerve agent poisoning in Salisbury and there have only been ever been three patients with significant poisoning.

A Court of Protection judgment about the Skripals issued on March 22 quotes as witness a Porton Down chemical and biological analyst:

Blood samples from Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal were analysed and the findings indicated exposure to a nerve agent or related compound. The samples tested positivefor the presence of a Novichok class nerve agent or closely related agent.

“Indicated exposure” is a rather weak formulation. It means that no ‘novichok’ was found but decomposition products of something that may have been a nerve agent or not. A blood sample may “test positive” for all kinds of stuff but that does not say anything about the amount or about the lethality of any of the “positive tested” elements. The ‘Novichok’ nerve agents are organophosphates like many of the usual insecticides are. These break down relatively fast. A walk through a field freshly sprayed with some insecticide or the domestic use of such a product might leave similar decomposition products in the bloodstream as a nerve agent attack.

The Court of Protection also said that no relative or friend contacted the authorities about the Skripals. That was evidently false (ru).

Today, 25 days after the incident, the police say they suspect that the Skripals were poisoned from the front door of their home. Today, 25 days after the incident, they removed the front door. I believe that this decision was based on a “most plausible story” guess and not on material evidence. If the door had tested positive for a nerve agent it would have been removed weeks ago. This is, like those people in high protection suits roaming around Salisbury, just theater.

The Skripals were said to have left their home at 9:00am in the morning. They collapsed relatively sudden at 4:00pm in the afternoon. Is this seven hour delay consistent with being severely affected by a “military grade” highly toxic nerve agent? I doubt it.

But even if a nerve agent of the ‘novichok’ type was involved the jump to allegations against Russia is completely baseless. David B. Collum is Professor for Organic Chemistry at Cornell University. He really, really knows this stuff:

Dave Collum @DavidBCollum – 12:54 AM – 27 Mar 2018
I will say it again: Anybody who tells you this nerve agent must have come from Russia is a liar–a complete and utter liar. They are simple compounds.

The Skripals are getting better. Good for them. But their resurrection from certain death is a further dint in the British government’s claim of ‘nerve agent’ ‘of a type developed by Russia’.

The whole anti-Russian campaign constructed out of it is just ridiculous and deeply dishonest. The five page propaganda handout the British provided to other governments is a joke. It provided no solid facts on the case. To respond to it rationally, as Russia tries to do, makes little sense.

An editorial (recommended) in the Chinese Global Times captures the utter disgust such behavior creates elsewhere:

The fact that major Western powers can gang up and “sentence” a foreign country without following the same procedures other countries abide by and according to the basic tenets of international law is chilling.

Over the past few years the international standard has been falsified and manipulated in ways never seen before.

It is beyond outrageous how the US and Europe have treated Russia. Their actions represent a frivolity and recklessness that has grown to characterize Western hegemony that only knows how to contaminate international relations. Right now is the perfect time for non-Western nations to strengthen unity and collaborative efforts among one another.

Resurrection or not – the result of the ‘Novichok’ nonsense will not be to our ‘western’ favor.

—Previous Moon of Alabama reports on the Skripal case:

Posted by b on March 29, 2018 at 02:59 PM | Permalink


Russian diplomat expulsions signal crude side of Western intention

Source:Global Times Published: 2018/3/27 8:00:15

On March 26, the US, Canada, and several European Union countries expelled Russian diplomats from their respective foreign embassies and consulates in retaliation against Russia’s alleged poisoning of former double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter.  As of this writing, 19 countries, including 15 EU member states, have shown their support to Great Britain by enforcing such measures.

On March 4, Skripal and his daughter Yulia were rushed to a hospital after they were found unconscious at a park in Salisbury. It was later reported the father and daughter had come into contact with an obscure nerve agent. UK government officials said the Skripals were attacked by “Novichok,” a powerful Soviet-era chemical nerve agent used by the military.

The British government did not provide evidence that linked Russia to the crime but was confident from the beginning there could be no other “reasonable explanation” for the attempted assassination. Great Britain was so convinced of their Russia theory, they wasted no time taking the lead in levying sanctions against the country by quickly expelling Russian diplomats from London.  Shortly afterwards, UK capital officials reached out to NATO and their European allies who provided immediate support.

The accusations that Western countries have hurled at Russia are based on ulterior motives, similar to how the Chinese use the expression “perhaps it’s true” to seize upon the desired opportunity. From a third-person perspective, the principles and diplomatic logic behind such drastic efforts are flawed, not to mention that expelling Russian diplomats almost simultaneously isa crude form of behavior. Such actions make little impact other than increasing hostility and hatred between Russia and their Western counterparts.

The UK government should have an independent investigation conducted into the Skripal poisoning by representatives from the international community. An effort such as this would provide results strong enough for those following the case to make up their minds on who should or shouldn’t be accused of the crime. Now, the majority of those who support Britain’s one-sided conclusion happen to be members of NATO and the EU, while others stood behind the UK due to long-standing relations.

The fact that major Western powers can gang up and “sentence” a foreign country without following the same procedures other countries abide by and according to the basic tenets of international law is chilling. During the Cold War, not one Western nation would have dared to make such a provocation and yet today it is carried out with unrestrained ease. Such actions are nothing more than a form of Western bullying that threatens global peace and justice.

Over the past few years the international standard has been falsified and manipulated in ways never seen before. The fundamental reason behind reducing global standards is rooted in post-Cold War power disparities. The US, along with their allies, jammed their ambitions into the international standards so their actions, which were supposed to follow a set of standardized procedures and protocol, were really nothing more than profit-seizing opportunities designed only for themselves.  These same Western nations activated in full-force public opinion-shaping platforms and media agencies to defend and justify such privileges.

As of late, more foreign countries have been victimized by Western rhetoric and nonsensical diplomatic measures. In the end, the leaders of these nations are forced to wear a hat featuring slogans and words that read “oppressing their own people,” “authoritarian,” or “ethnic cleansing,” regardless of their innocence.

It is beyond outrageous how the US and Europe have treated Russia. Their actions represent a frivolity and recklessness that has grown to characterize Western hegemony that only knows how to contaminate international relations. Right now is the perfect time for non-Western nations to strengthen unity and collaborative efforts among one another. These nations need to establish a level of independence outside the reach of Western influence while breaking the chains of monopolization declarations, predetermined adjudications, and come to value their own judgement abilities.

It’s already understood that to achieve such international collective efforts is easier said than done as they require foundational support before anything can happen. Until a new line of allies emerges, multi-national associations like BRICS, or even the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, need to provide value to those non-Western nations and actively create alliances with them.

What Russia is experiencing right could serve as a reflection of how other non-Western nations can expect to be treated in the not-to-distant future.  Expelling Russian diplomats simultaneously is hardly enough to deter Russia. Overall, it’s an intimidation tactic that has become emblematic of Western nations, and furthermore, such measures are not supported by international law and therefore unjustified. More importantly, the international community should have the tools and means to counterbalance such actions.

The West is only a small fraction of the world and is nowhere near the global representative it once thought it was.  The silenced minorities within the international community need to realize this and prove just how deep their understanding is of such a realization by proving it to the world through action. With the Skripal case, the general public does not know the truth, and the British government has yet to provide a shred of evidence justifying their allegations against Russia.

It is firmly believed that accusations levied by one country to another that are not the end results of a thorough and professional investigation should not be encouraged. Simultaneously expelling diplomats is a form of uncivilized behavior that needs to be abolished immediately.

Posted in: EDITORIAL
—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–
A large portion of a famed Magnolia tree, at left, photographed from the Ellipse in Washington, Tuesday, Dec. 26, 2017 and planted on the south grounds of the White House by President Andrew Jackson in 1835 has become too weak to remain standing

President Trump Undecided on Tougher Stance on Russia – Reports

© AP Photo/ Andrew Harnik
US

Get short URL
105

While the US administration is mulling additional sanctions and other measures against Russia, President Trump’s team is not sure just how far the president is ready to go.

In an effort to persuade President Trump to change his stance on Russia, some of his top administration officials are pushing for more aggressive posture in the wake of Moscow’s alleged involvement in the March 4 poisoning of former Russian intelligence officer Sergei Skripal and his daughter in the UK, the New York Times wrote.

White House aides, quoted by the newspaper, said that while the president has become increasingly convinced that Russia is dangerous, he has still refused to embrace a tougher public posture and remains uncertain how far to authorize his administration to go.

The United States has expelled 60 Russian diplomats for being “undeclared intelligence officers and closed the Russian Consulate General in Seattle in a show of solidarity with Britain that had earlier expelled 23 Russian diplomats after Prime Minister Theresa May said that Moscow was “highly likely” behind the Skripals’ alleged poisoning.Besides the US and the UK, 16 EU countries, as well as Canada, Albania, Norway, Ukraine, Macedonia and Australia said they were expelling over 150 Russian diplomats in connection with Moscow’s alleged involvement in the nerve agent attack on Skripal and his daughter.

READ MORE: Scandal Over Skripal Might be Yet Another Gross Mistake by EU — Politician

In a tit-for-tat move, Russia is expelling an equal number of Western diplomats.

Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were found unconscious in Salisbury on March 4 after being exposed to what British experts claim was an A234 nerve agent.

Russia has strongly denied any connection to the Skripal case and has offered assistance in the ongoing investigation.

———————————————————————————————————————–

“Right of Return” denied – In Gaza, Israel turned Good Friday into bloody Friday

A wounded Palestinian woman is evacuated after Israeli forces opened fire on Palestinians during Land Day marches along Gaza’s boundary with Israel, near Khan Younis, demanding the right to return to their homeland, 30 March. Ashraf AmraAPA images

My 15-year old cousin Muhammad Abu Loz just got injured by gunfire from Israeli occupation forces at the Great March of Return, east of Jabaliya refugee camp in the Gaza Strip.

He was among thousands of Palestinians from all generations who have joined these marches in commemoration of Land Day, protesting against the longstanding Israeli colonial occupation and the denial of our inalienable political rights.

Israel met them with 100 military snipers.

My cousin survived, but my grandfather’s neighbor, Muhammad Kamal al-Najjar, 25, was shot dead. He is one of at least 12 people who had been killed by Friday evening.

More than 700, including 130 children, had been injured.

Since 30 March 1976, when Palestinian citizens of Israel led a popular uprising against Israel’s confiscation of huge swaths of their land in the Galilee, the anniversary has been marked as Land Day.

On that day in 1976, Israel also met civilian protesters with lethal gunfire, killing six and injuring and arresting many more.

Popular resistance

Four decades later, Land Day remains one of the most significant dates in the Palestinian political calendar – a day commemorated by popular resistance to ongoing Israeli colonial oppression, land theft and systematic policies of erasure.

In Gaza, Land Day demonstrations are held near the Israeli-imposed buffer zone, a strip of land inside the Gaza boundary that eats up 30 percent of the small territory’s farmland.

This buffer zone only tightens the Israeli chokehold over Gaza’s two million residents who are besieged by the Israeli military from land, sea and air.

From the north and east, Gaza is surrounded by Israeli artillery, tanks, snipers and military checkpoints. From the sea it is blockaded by Israeli warships that constantly fire on Gaza’s fishers, and from the south, the Egyptian military collaborates with Israel to maintain the closure of the Rafah crossing, the only lifeline to the outside world for most people in Gaza.

Sick with worry as I followed the day’s events from a distance, I called my mom in Gaza. I knew she had been looking forward to this evening’s celebration of her nephew Abed’s wedding, with drums banging as people joyfully sing and dance dabke.

My mom sounded overwhelmed over the phone. When I asked if the wedding was still on, she said yes.

“But given our neighbor’s devastating loss and your cousin’s injury, the zaffa [the celebratory procession] is canceled and the wedding songs will be substituted with revolution songs celebrating freedom fighters,” she said.

My parents, like other Palestinians, anticipated Israel’s violence today, but for them Israeli violence is constant, so carrying on with the wedding is not as strange as it might sound. It’s a way to show that life goes on.

They also went to the place of protest in eastern Jabaliya yesterday to help set up the “return tents” which will remain rooted there until 15 May – Nakba Day – to call for our long-denied right of return to the lands from which we were expelled by Israel in 1948.

That right that remains at the core of our anti-colonial struggle.

This morning, they went to my grandfather’s house, where the wedding lunch was set to take place, not knowing that it would turn into a funeral.

Far from home

Our short conversation left me feeling further detached from my current place of residence in the UK, where the majority of people are celebrating Good Friday with their families in safety and happiness.

But in Palestine, Good Friday was stained with bloodshed and brutal violence, thanks to Israel.

There is no justification for Israel to open fire against protesters posing no threat whatsoever.

Israeli and Palestinian human rights groups warned that this is a crime.

There is no justification for suppressing people whose right to resist colonial oppression is guaranteed by international law. The fact that Israel has been able to continue this brutal violence against Palestinians with total impunity for 70 years reflects a deep-seated moral problem in our world.


Note to TUT readers on this Crucifixion Friday

Friends, Romans, Countrymen…

Out of respect, reverence, and solemnity for what this day–Crucifixion Friday–represents and has represented for the last 2,000 years, there will be no news updates.

Furthermore we ask the readership not to post comments, but rather to reflect upon and consider the practical aspects of what this day represents in terms of its real life, up-close-and-personal political relevance, as the same group of people–driven by the very same mindset that caused them to screech madly for the release of a convicted Jewish murderer/terrorist named Barabbas while at the same time condemning an innocent man, Jesus of Nazareth, to be crucified–who are now on the rampage in remaking the world in such a way that cooperates with their insane religious worldview, and who today are not just content with seeing one innocent man crucified in satiating their bloodlust, but indeed, are out to see millions if indeed not billions of innocent people awash in their own blood as a ‘sacrifice’ to the racist, vindictive, psychopathic deity they refer to as ‘YHWH”.

Watch: Massacre in Gaza (5 minute video report)

 


Latest news on Great March of Return in Gaza – constantly updated

Latest news on Great March of Return in Gaza – constantly updated

Latest numbers: at least 14 killed, over 1,400 injured.

Take action here to stop Israel’s killing of unarmed demonstrators

We will post updates here as we learn of them. Please check back often. You can also check IMEMCMaanWAFA and Al Jazeera for their latest reports. Ha’aretz also often has valuable reports (though they’re sometimes slanted, are censored by the Israeli military, and often take their information from the IDF.

You may also wish to share our Facebook graphic (at end of post) to inform others of what’s going on in Gaza, since U.S. media reports are sparse and often slanted and incomplete (see our report on AP below).

OCHA… As of 22:00 today, 30 March, 15 Palestinians were killed and 1,416 were injured by Israeli forces in the Gaza Strip, according to the Ministry of Health (MoH) in Gaza. Of all injuries, approximately 750 were hit by live ammunition, including twenty, who are reported to be in a critical condition.

 Medical facilities in Gaza, which have already been overstrained by the longstanding shortages of medical supplies, electricity and fuel, are struggling to cope with the overwhelming number of casualties. The MoH has requested support from the international community, including humanitarian organizations through the Health Cluster. The MoH has also reported shortages of essential medical supplies, including emergency and anesthesia drugs and disposables, in addition to essential laboratory materials. The Health cluster is monitoring the situation and providing support, in coordination with all health partners. The Israeli-controlled Gaza crossings are closed until Sunday, 8 April, due to the Passover holiday, except for urgent humanitarian cases.The casualties occurred in the context of mass demonstrations by Palestinians on the Gaza side of the perimeter fence with Israel, where the Israeli army imposes a ‘No Go Zone’. Today’s event, which marked the Palestinian ‘Land Day’, was the first in the ‘March of Return’, a series of mass peaceful protests leading up to the 70th anniversary of what Palestinians refer to as the 1948 ‘Nakba’, on 15 May. The events include the establishment of tent camps in all five Gaza governorates, some 700 metres from the fence. Read more

PCHR (Palestine Center for Human Rights)… PCHR emphasizes that before occurrence of demonstrations – previously declared by the organizers as peaceful demonstrations only calling for implementation of United Nation (UN) Resolution 194 and raising only Palestinian and UN flags – the Israeli forces sent threatening letters to intimidate the organizers and Gaza Strip residents in addition to deploying snipers and dog sniffer unit along the borders with Gaza as declared by Spokesperson of the Israeli Army on his Facebook page.  The spokesperson also threatened that “ if needed, we will respond in the center of the Gaza Strip against those behind these violent protests,” Hinting about committing crimes of extra-judicial killings (assassinations)…

…PCHR also reiterates its call upon the High Contracting Parties to the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention to fulfill their obligations under Article 1; i.e., to respect and ensure respect for the Convention in all circumstances and their obligations under Article 146 to prosecute persons alleged to commit grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention. These grave breaches constitute war crimes under Article 147 of the same Convention and Protocol (I) Additional to the Geneva Conventions regarding the guarantee of Palestinian civilians’ right to protection in the occupied territories. Read more

Haaretz: 12 Palestinians Killed… IDF fires live ammunition as 30,000 Palestinians demonstrate throughout Gaza for ‘March of Return’ ■ IDF expects demonstrations to continue for weeks ■ 27 Palestinians wounded in parallel West Bank demonstrations Updated this to 14 killed

CNN report…  The dead included one 16-year-old, the ministry said.
In northern Gaza, CNN witnessed at least two dozen people being taken away by ambulances in the span of half an hour. Injuries varied from rubber bullets, tear gas and live rounds fired by the Israeli military. The majority were young men — one woman was among the injured. Palestinian Red Crescent spokesman in Gaza told CNN that 355 injuries were from live bullets and included serious wounds to the head, abdomen and back… Tens of thousands of Palestinian protesters marched in Gaza, with smaller groups taking to the streets in the West Bank and Israel Friday…

The Independent, UK … Palestinian factions in Gaza, including the ruling Hamas, had ordered that the demonstration be peaceful, insisting marchers to keep well back from Israel’s barrier wall.

With 100 snipers positioned on the barrier, however, Israel’s preparations were a show of brute force and soon after dawn an Israeli tank shell had killed Omar Samour, a Palestinian farmer with land near the buffer zone – the first Return March martyr but certainly not the last.

Israel’s ruthless response to the Gaza’s peaceful Return March should come as no surprise. The Israeli military justified the show of force on the grounds that Hamas might exploit the event in some way with acts of violence. But Israel’s real fear of the “return marchers” runs far deeper. Nothing has ever frightened Israel more than the demands of Palestinian refugees for a right to return to their pre-1948 homes. And no group of refugees has a stronger case than those of Gaza who live within a few miles of their former villages… see video

 

Previous and related articles:

Updated: Israeli Soldiers Kill Eight Palestinians, Injure 1100 In Gaza

Israel deploys 100 sharpshooters against planned mass Gandhian demonstration by Gaza families

AP’s slanted report on Gaza Return March, corrected and annotated

Gaza ‘Return March’ organizer: ‘We’ll ensure it doesn’t escalate to violence — on our end’ 

IDF Maj.-Gen. (res.) Amos Gilad: “We don’t do Gandhi very well”

Calling Bono: Your Palestinian Gandhis Exist … In Graves And Prisons 

The Nakba did not start or end in 1948: Key facts and figures on the ethnic cleansing of Palestine.

 

Holy Land: 70 years of dispossesson – Occupation Army killed 12 injured more than 1,000 in Gaza

ISRAELI DEFENSE FORCES KILL 12 PALESTINIANS, INJURE ABOUT 1,000 IN GAZA CLASHES

 48  20  0 Share0  0

 

Israeli Defense Forces Kill 12 Palestinians, Injure About 1,000 In Gaza Clashes

FILE IMAGE: Israeli battle tank

UPDATE: According to the recent reports, about 12 Palestinians have been killed and about 1,000 injured in the ongoing clashes between protestors and the IDF in Gaza.

Three Palestinians were killed and about 20 were injured by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) on March 30.

According to reports, early on March 30, IDF battle tanks opened fire when the Palestinians were approached the so-called security fence between Gaza and Israel. One of the Palestinians was killed. Few hours later, the IDF opened fire on two other Palestinians in the northern part of Gaza. One Palestinian reportedly was injured.

Two Palestinians burn agricultural equipment and other staff after infiltrating the security fence east of Gaza:

نبض غزة@Nbdgaza

فيديو جديد لشابين يحرقان معدات زراعية ودشمة عسكرية بعد تسللهم شرق غزة.

According to Palestinian media, two more Palestinians were killed during clashes between protesters and the IDF at the Israeli-Gaza contact line. On the same time, reports are circulating that about 20 people were wounded in clashes with the IDF. Currently, about 7,000 Palestinians protest against the Israeli occupation.

The March 30 date marks “Land Day” commemorating the six Arabs who were killed by Israeli security forces during demonstrations in 1976 over land confiscations by Israel.

The IDF accuses Hamas of escalating the situation in an official statement:

“Thousands of Palestinians are present in six clusters along the border. The Palestinians have set fire to tires and are hurling rocks at the border fence and toward IDF troops. The forces are responding using riot dispersal measures and accurate fire targeting ringleaders.

In light of the security assessment, the IDF has declared the area as a closed military zone. Any activity in the region requires IDF permission. There are no special instructions to citizens.

The IDF had prepared in advance with large forces and is prepared to respond to various developments. We will not allow a breach of our sovereignty or harm to the border defences.

The Hamas terror organisation is endangering the residents of Gaza and using them as cover for terror activities. Hamas alone bears responsibility to all events and their ramifications.”

— IDF (@IDFSpokesperson) 30 March 2018


AP’s slanted report on Gaza Return March, corrected and annotated

AP’s slanted report on Gaza Return March, corrected and annotated

Palestinians march towards the Israeli border on March 29, 2018 in the build up to the Great Return March scheduled for March 30. [Photo by Mohammed Asad/Middle East Monitor]

The Associated Press’s news story on the upcoming Great Return March echoes Israeli talking points… 

By Kathryn Shihadah

The Associated Press, a (usually) trusted name in global news, has been unmasked for its pro-Israel bias, and the ruse continues.

Today’s exhibit is of particular significance, as the people of Gaza are about to embark on a large-scale nonviolent protest. True to form, AP has cranked out a Hamas-bashing, Israel-congratulating piece that fails to provide the accurate information its readers deserve. The report largely replicates Israel’s public relations strategy.

Below are excerpts from the AP article with commentary that will fill in some of the gaps and clear up some misrepresentations. Truth matters.

AP: Gaza’s embattled Hamas rulers are imploring people to march along the border with Israel in the coming weeks in a risky gambit meant to shore up their shaky rule, but with potentially deadly consequences.

Many Americans fail to recognize what is going on in Gaza for precisely this reason: nearly every word of this paragraph is problematic. Hamas has not imposed some kind of tyrannical regime over Gaza; their rule is shaky in that Israel has such a chokehold on the territory that the people are starving to death. There is little governing going on.

Grassroots movements have been in the making for years  decades, even  because Palestinians dont need to be told they should resist the occupation. Many can see their original homes in what is now Israel or the location of their villages from the fence imprisoning them. They remember every day; they pray to God to bring them back home. Their people are being slowly, systematically eradicated.

 The gambit is indeed risky  because Gazans will be nonviolently protesting while in the crosshairs of Israeli snipers, and the potentially deadly consequences of the initiative will almost certainly involve unarmed Palestinians dying.

Israel has essentially promised this outcome: Major General Yoav Mordechai vowed, We intend to do everything to prevent violent demonstrations and terror demonstrations. While Palestinians have made it clear that they will not so much as throw rocks, Israel has 100 sharpshooters at the ready, drones lined up to drop tear gas canisters, and thousands of troops armed to the teeth.

AP: But the first-of-its-kind protest also comes at a low point for the Islamic militant group and the 2 million residents of Gaza, where conditions have deteriorated since Hamas seized control of the territory from the internationally-backed Palestinian Authority in 2007.

Conditions have indeed deteriorated, but this statement is misleading: Hamas was voted into office by the people of Gaza, and Israel collectively punished them for this by imposing a blockade. Combine that with multiple “wars” against the essentially unarmed population with thousands killed and tens of thousands left homeless. “Conditions have deteriorated” is an understatement.

AP: Beginning Friday, Hamas hopes it can mobilize large crowds to set up tent camps near the border. It plans a series of demonstrations culminating with a march to the border fence on May 15, the anniversary of Israel’s establishment, known to Palestinians as “the Nakba,” or catastrophe.

Lets take a minute to unpack the phrase that tried to sneak past. The Nakba is not just an Arabic name for the anniversary of Israels birth: it is the name for the forced exile of 75% of their population and the loss of 78% of their land. This catastrophe occurred in 1948, and tens of thousands of Palestinians who live in Gaza today are among those refugees.

AP: The group aims to mobilize hundreds of thousands of people for the effort, though it hasn’t been able to get such turnouts at past rallies. Nonetheless, a jittery Israel is closely watching and vowing a tough response if the border is breached.

Israel lives in a constant state of jitter, but why? Because the stones in Palestinians’ hands are so dangerous? Because the rockets are so deadly? (See here) Or because if Palestinian voices are heard, Israel will be exposed?

AP: An Israeli-Egyptian blockade, along with three wars with Israel and a series of sanctions by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, have left Gaza’s economy in tatters. Unemployment is well over 40 percent, tap water is undrinkable and Gazans receive just a few hours of electricity a day.

Israel is the occupying power over Gaza. The occupation is now in its 6th decade, and the blockade in its 11th year. Israel has an obligation as occupier to maintain the lives and wellbeing of the occupied. Egypt and Abbas are minor players in this situation.

AP: “Hamas has realized it’s besieged from three sides; Israel, Egypt and the Palestinian Authority,” said Mkhaimar Abusada, political science professor at Gaza’s al-Azhar University. “It feels the crisis is suffocating.”

All Gazans are suffocating, not just Hamas. That is why this movement is happening right now. This is not some ploy by a terrorist organization to make trouble for Israel. It is the organic response of Palestinians who can endure no more, who must resist.

AP: [Mkhaimar Abusada] said that for Hamas, the protests can divert attention from their domestic woes while avoiding renewed war with Israel. “They think busying Israel with this issue may put it under pressure,” he said.

What the people actually think is that perhaps this time, the world will pay attention and finally realize that the level of cruelty and injustice being perpetrated on Palestinians is a huge, ongoing crime against humanity. The hope is not to busy Israel but to seek the rights that have been promised them by international law: the right to self-determination, the right to return to the land from which they were exiled, the right to be heard and to receive justice.

AP: A combination of social pressure and curiosity in a territory with few options for recreation could help attract people.

This statement shows an inexcusable level of ignorance: it assumes that Palestinians are content with a never-ending, illegal occupation and blockade; that they would not be inclined to march in resistance against their oppressor; and above all that people attending the protest would come for recreational purposes.

AP: Israel opposes any large-scale return of refugees, saying it would destroy the country’s Jewish character.

Its hard to decide how to respond to this statement. Yes, having refugees pour into ones country can be upsetting to ones culture. The Palestinians were willing to take in Jews in the early 20th century, at a high social cost. The thanks they got for this gesture was to be themselves made refugees. Of course Israel opposes the return of non-Jews. But return they must, according to international law and consensus.

AP: Israeli Cabinet Minister Yoav Galant said, “Hamas is in distress. They are using in a cruel and cynical way their own population in order to hurt them and to hurt Israel.”

Israel has massive military might, and Israel and AP both know it. With one of the most advanced armies in the world, $10 million a day in military aid coming from the US, at least 100 nuclear weapons, and a military that is armed to the teeth, this march is not going to hurt Israel in any reasonable sense of the word. The only real pain the state can anticipate is the fear of being found out.

AP: “We will try to use the minimum force that is needed in order to avoid Palestinians wounded and casualties. But the red line is very clear. They stay on the Gazan side and we stay in Israel.”

Only time will tell what minimum force looks like, but in a nation where children can be imprisoned for years if they are suspected of throwing a stone, chances are Palestinians will die.

Most Western media, if they cover this event at all, will publish inaccurate, biased accounts that will make the Palestinians out to be the aggressors. They will completely fail to ground the story in the context of illegal occupation and blockade, not to mention dispossession and forced exile. Israel will come out looking like it acted in self-defense, and the injustice will continue unchecked as it has for lo these many years. 


Kathryn Shihadah is a staff writer for If Americans Knew.

RELATED: 

Associated Press Double Standard in Israel-Palestine Reporting

Israel deploys 100 sharpshooters against planned mass Gandhian demonstration by Gaza families


 Church-based activists

———————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Holy Land: 7 Dead, Hundreds Hurt – Israeli Occupation Army Uses Tear Gas Against Palestinian Protesters

Palestinians run from tear gas fired by Israeli troops during clashes, during a tent city protest along the Israel border with Gaza, demanding the right to return to their homeland, east of Gaza

Israeli Army Uses Tear Gas Against Palestinian Protesters: 7 Dead, Hundreds Hurt

© REUTERS/ Mohammed Salem

MIDDLE EAST

Get short URL
7622

The IDF, which have doubled its troops and deployed snipers ahead of the rally, have started shooting and using riot control weapons.

According to officials, at least 7 Palestinians have been killed and about 500 wounded by live fire, rubber-coated steel pellets or tear gas as the mass protests have grown violent on the Gaza border, where about thousands of Palestinians have been protesting against Israel.

They demand the right of Arab refugees to return to the territory of Israel, which the country has blocked over fears that it will lose its Jewish majority. The IDF have started shooting and using riot control weapons as mass sit-ins went out of control and dozens of protesters clashed with the Israeli troops.

FOLLOW Sputnik live feed to find out more

It its turn, the Israeli military claims that the Palestinians rolled burning tires and threw stones at the IDF, who then responded with tear gas and fire at “main instigators.”

Palestinian Ambassador: It is a Peaceful Protest

Palestine’s Ambassador to Russia Abdel Hafiz Nofal told Sputnik in an interview that he did not expect any violence from the Palestinians who were taking part in protests in the Gaza Strip and across Israel to mark the so-called Land Day.

“The event that started today is dedicated to the so-called Land Day, commemorating the day in 1976 when Israeli troops killed six Arabs protesting against the confiscation of land. This day will be celebrated not only in Gaza but in Ramallah and even in Israel. It is a peaceful protest that organized every year. We don’t know why this year the Israelis insist it would be violent, placing 100 snipers on the border with Gaza,” Nofal said.

According to the ambassador, Hamas issued a statement calling on the Palestinians to hold rallies in a peaceful manner.

“An official Hamas statement on the occasion highlighted the peaceful manner of the protests. We do not expect any violence from the Palestinian side. There is an official order for peaceful protests,” he said.

Closed Militarized Zone

The area is declared a closed military zone. Any activity in the region requires IDF permission. There are no special instructions to citizens. The IDF also stated that the Hamas movement was endangering the residents and “using them as a cover for terror activities.”

According to Israel Defense Forces spokesman Brig. Gen. Ronen Manelis, the army has prepared for trouble along the border which separates the country from the Palestinian Territories.

“Land Day”

The rallies, inspired by the Palestinian Islamic fundamentalist organization Hamas, commemorate “Land Day” when Arabs honor the six Palestinian protesters who were shot and killed by the IDF in 1976. The protests, which Hamas claims to be peaceful, will culminate on May 15th, the 70th anniversary of the establishment of the State of Israel, when many Palestinians had to leave this state. Their descendants represent the majority of Gaza residents.

Now the Palestinians have set tent camps for sit-in on the border. On the final day, the protesters intend to cross the border fence, strongly opposed by the Israelis. Despite claims they don’t want violence, the IDF warns that they will fire if attempts are made at “mass infiltration” or if the demonstration grows violent and the fence is damaged.

 “We will not allow the Hamas leadership to remain in Gaza by sending women and children to the border fence. If needed, we will respond to those behind these demonstrations both at the border and in Gaza. There is one task — to prevent a massive breach of the fence and the disruption of public order,” Manelis’ statement reads.

The Jewish state intends to double its military presence along the border. More than 100 snipers have been deployed, as well as Special Forces and paramilitary police units for riot control.

READ MORE: Purim Holiday: Israel Closes Border With Palestine

Meanwhile, armor fire on Gaza border has left a Palestinian farmer killed and another man injured. The Israeli Army said they reacted to suspicious activity along the border fence.

Yasser Samour, a relative of the victim in the southeastern corner of Gaza, said the 27-year-old victim was harvesting parsley before dawn when he was attacked.

“I was working on the next field,” Yasser Samour said. “We heard shells landing on the field where Amr works. We ran there and found him hit directly with a shell. We were more than a kilometer away from the border.” At its narrowest, the Gaza Strip is just 6 km wide.

The tensions in the area have been rising over the past three months ahead of the 70th anniversary of the founding of Israel, as well as the recent relocation of the US Embassy from Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem.

READ MORE: Palestinian Movement Threatens Israel With New Intifada

Tensions Escalated as Trump Declares Jerusalem the Capital of Israel

In December US President Donald Trump officially recognized Jerusalem as the capital of the state of Israel. The move was widely condemned at the UN, among European leaders, and even by Pope Francis. Six days after the announcement, Hamas, which governs the Gaza Strip, called for the beginning of the third “intifada,” a word meaning “uprising.”

Other critical factors include the worsening social and economic decline in Gaza, as well as the failure of reconciliation between the secular Fatah and Islamist Hamas movements.

At the same time, Israel has boosted operations in Gaza, with the latest taking place last Sunday, when the IDF attacked Hamas targets after an attempt to damage the fence between Israel and the Gaza strip and torch an engineering vehicle.

With a population of over 1.8 million crammed into a 365 square kilometer strip of land along the Southeastern Mediterranean coast, the Gaza Strip has a higher population than Bahrain, is less than half its physical size, and has a GDP that is less than 1/30 that of the Persian Gulf nation.


Palestine Is Still the Issue (2003)


 Israel: Founded on Terrorism

The Hidden Terrorist History of Israel which puts in context the current massacres in Gaza. Every Zionist constantly parrots the mantra that Israel only acts to defend itself from Hamas terrorism; in the vain hope that if they repeat the lie often enough it will be believed. As the video shows Israel was founded on Terrorism and thrives to this day on State Terrorism. The King David Hotel bombing (July 22, 1946) was a bomb attack against the British Mandate government of Palestine and its armed forces by members of the Irgun, a militant Zionist organization, which was led at the time by Menachem Begin, a future Prime Minister of Israel. Members of the Irgun, commanded by Yosef Avni and Yisrael Levi [1] and dressed as ‘Arabs’ and as the Hotel’s distinctive Sudanese waiters, planted a bomb in the basement of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, part of which was being used as the base for the Mandate Secretariat, the British military headquarters and a branch of the police Criminal Investigation Division.

The ensuing explosion caused the collapse of the south-western corner of the southern wing of the hotel. 91 people were killed, most of them staff of the secretariat and the hotel: 28 British, 41 Arab, 17 Jewish, and 5 others. Around 45 people were injured. Some of the deaths and injuries occurred in the road outside the hotel and in adjacent buildings. The attack on the hotel was the deadliest attack against the British in the history of the Mandate and is often credited as being a major factor in the British decision to relinquish the Mandate. If classed as terrorism, the attack was the most cowardly & deadliest of that kind anywhere in the world. Prime Minister Clement Attlee commented on the attack to the House of Commons: Hon. Members will have learned with horror of the brutal and murderous crime committed yesterday in Jerusalem. Of all the outrages which have occurred in Palestine against the Arabs, and they have been many and horrible in the last few months, this is the worst. By this insane act of terrorism 93 innocent people have been killed or are missing in the ruins. The latest figures of casualties are 41 dead, 52 missing and 53 injured. I have no further information at present beyond what is contained in the following official report received from Jerusalem: “It appears that after exploding a bomb in the street, presumably as a diversionary measure — this did virtually no damage — a lorry drove up to the tradesmen’s entrance of the King David Hotel and the occupants, after holding up the staff at pistol point, entered the kitchen premises carrying a number of milk cans.

At some stage of the proceedings, they shot and seriously wounded a British soldier who attempted to interfere with them. All available information so far is to the effect that they were Jews. Somewhere in the basement of the hotel they planted bombs which went off shortly afterwards. They appear to have made good their escape.” The Zionist Irgun issued an initial statement accepting responsibility for the attack, blaming the British for the deaths due to failure to respond to the warning and mourning only the Jewish victims. A year later, on July 22, 1947, they issued a new statement saying that they were acting on instructions from “a letter from the headquarters of the United Resistance, demanding that we carry out an attack on the British at the King David Hotel as soon as possible.”

In July 2006, Israelis including former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former members of Irgun attended a 60th anniversary celebration of the bombing, which was organized by the Menachem Begin Centre. The British Ambassador in Tel Aviv and the Consul-General in Jerusalem dissented, saying “We do not think that it is right for an act of terrorism, which led to the loss of so many lives, to be commemorated.” They also protested against an Israeli plaque that claims that people died because the British ignored warning calls, saying it was untrue and “did not absolve those who planted the bomb.” The plaque read “For reasons known only to the British, the hotel was not evacuated.” The problems of Palestine continue and the recent bombing of the King David Hotel resulted in 65 deaths, 58 missing and 50 others injured. The hotel housed the British Army headquarters and the Palestine Government Offices. You can license this story through AP Archive: http://www.aparchive.com/metadata/you… Find out more about AP Archive: http://www.aparchive.com/HowWeWork Jewish Man Brags About Blowing Up King David Hotel (documentary) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8Zav…


David Ben-Gurion

Shock Claim: Cambridge Analytica Employee Found Dead After ‘Deal Went Sour’

Whistleblower, Christopher Wylie speaks during a press conference at the Frontline Club on March 26, 2018 in London, England.
Dan Kitwood/Getty Images

Christopher Wylie, the Cambridge Analytica whistleblower who claims that the project he led resulted in the company’s unethical use of Facebook data to help elect Donald Trump, made a series of shocking claims in front of a British parliamentary committee on Monday. Among allegations of “anti-Islamic” campaigns and hacking, Wylie said that his predecessor may have been “poisoned” after a “deal went sour.”

In his testimony, Wylie said that CA’s elections chief Dan Muresan was found dead in a hotel room in Kenya in 2012 while working with President Uhuru Kenyatta’s re-election campaign. Wylie said he’d heard Muresan was murdered.

“Cambridge Analytica was working with Kenyan politicians, but because in a lot of African countries if a deal goes wrong you pay for it,” said Wylie, the Daily Mail reports.

“Dan was my predecessor….what I heard was that he was working on some kind of deal of some sort — I’m not sure what,” he said. “The deal went sour. People suspected he was poisoned in his hotel room. I also heard that the police had got bribed not to enter the hotel room for 24 hours. That is what I was told — I was not there so I speak to the veracity of it.”

Muresan was the son of Romania’s former Agriculture Minister Avram Muresan. Shortly after he died, Romania’s Foreign Ministry described him as working for a “telecommunications company”; his presence in Kenyan territory, the ministry told the Bucharest Herald, had not been registered yet with the Romanian diplomatic mission. “The same source shows that after the police arrived, the body was taken by an undertaker company for an autopsy,” the Herald reported.

Among other scandalous claims, Wylie told MPs that the SLC, the parent company of CA, was involved in the 2015 Nigerian election, allegedly distributing compromising material and hacking information from presidential candidate Muhammadu Buhari. Wylie described the organization as “incredibly anti-Islamic,” producing “threatening” messages “portraying Muslims as violent.”

Wylie’s allegations that Cambridge Analytica accessed Facebook data to create a database of millions of user profiles for targeted campaign — a tactic used by the Obama campaign in 2012 to much praise from the media — created a media firestorm. Subsequent reports have indicated that the portrayal of CA’s role in the Trump campaign was overblown and the company maintains that the data collected under Wylie was not used after Facebook asked them to destroy it.

Related:

Ex-Obama Campaign Official: Here’s How We Were Able To Mine So Much Facebook Data

Mark Zuckerberg: Here’s What Really Happened With Cambridge Analytica, And How We’re Responding


Moscow: Analysis of Skripal Case Suggests UK Intel Services Involved in Incident

_________
Sputnik
Moscow: Analysis of Skripal Case Suggests UK Intel Services Involved in Incident

Earlier, the Russian Foreign Ministry stated that the chief executive of Porton Down Defence Science and Technology Laboratory had “amount to admitting” that the United Kingdom was developing combat poisoning substances.

According to the Russian Foreign Ministry, the analysis of the Skripals’ case “shows that the UK authorities are not interested in finding out the motives and those responsible for the crime in Salisbury and suggests that the British intelligence services are involved in it.”

“The behavior of the British authorities raises many questions. The UK population is itself kept in the dark about the key moments of this announced serious threat of the incident, the total number of victims is unknown,” the statements reads.

The ministry has also accused the British lab in Porton Down of “hushing up information” in the wake of the poisoning of former spy Sergei Skripal.

“Information about the fact that the day before the poisoning of Skripals, the center together with the British military conducted exercises, during which the methods of combating chemical and biological contamination were practiced.”

In addition to this, “throughout the world, London has been developing a campaign to create an absolute presumption of Russia’s guilt,” a statement on the website of the Russian ministry reads.

According to Moscow, London is unable to protect Russian citizens on its soil.

“A blatant example of this is, in particular, the poisoning of former FSB officer Alexander Litvinenko, the death under unclear circumstances of Russian businessmen Badri Patarkatsishvili and Alexander Perepilichny, the mysterious “suicide” of Boris Berezovsky and the strangulation of his business partner Nikolai Glushkov and, finally, the assassination attempt of Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal.”

The ministry has emphasized that it would consider the poisoning of Skripals as an “assassination attempt” on the lives of Russians if the opposite was not proved by London.
The statement follows a statement made by the Russian Embassy in the United Kingdom, that earlier accused Gary Aitkenhead, the chief executive of Porton Down Defence Science and Technology Laboratory of “amount to admitting” that the United Kingdom was developing combat poisoning substances including those that had been used in the so-called “attack” on Skripal and his daughter Yulia.

Last week, Aitkenhead said that no dangerous chemical could leave “four walls” of the laboratory because of “the highest levels of controls, of security around the work” that is being done there.

Moscow Slams Reported Britain’s “Proof” on Skripal’s Poisoning as ‘May’s Fail’

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said that London and Washington had ignored Moscow’s request to send it a printed document related to the Skripal case.

In her Facebook page, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has commented on the Kommersant daily’s publication on what she said has prompted the expulsion of Russian diplomats in connection with Skripals’ poisoning.

“This is [UK Prime Minister] Theresa May’s fail. The largest manipulation of the world public opinion has been revealed, and British authorities are involved in it. Just assess it. The decisions on a state’s responsibility in a chemical attack were made on the basis of six pictures,” she wrote.

Earlier, she told Russia’s NTV Channel that the US and the UK had refused to heed Moscow’s call to deliver it a printed document pertaining to the Salisbury incident.

“The document, which is a sort of London’s explanations on what happened in Salisbury, has never been published by the media,” Zakharova said.

She added that the Russian Foreign Ministry had repeatedly tried to obtain the document, sending relevant requests to its British and American colleagues.

“We did so publicly but in response we received zero information,” she pointed out.

Zakharova’s remarks came a few days after more than 100 Russian diplomats have been expelled by about 20 European countries as well as the US, Canada and Ukraine over Moscow’s alleged involvement in the March 4 poisoning of former Russian intelligence agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Britain’s Salisbury.

On Tuesday, NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg said that the alliance had withdrawn the accreditation of seven staff at the Russian Mission to NATO and denied the pending accreditation request for three others.

Moscow has pledged to respond in kind to the expulsions, which it said ride roughshod over an investigation into the Skripal case.


Syrian Ambassador Threatens Israel: We Will Take The Golan Back

 6 1,709

NEW YORK CITY, The United States of America – A Syrian Ambassador has directly threatened the Zionist entity known as Israel by saying his country will liberate the occupied Golan Heights.

“We reject any terrorist or aggressive presence on our soil in any form and we will liberate all of our lands, including Golan, Afrin, Idlib and Raqqa,” Bashar al-Jaafari, Syria’s Ambassador to the United Nations stated yesterday.

Afrin and Idlib in northwest Syria are currently occupied by Turkish-backed jihadists while the former ISIS-capital of Raqqa in northern Syria is occupied by the US-backed and Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).

The Golans however, close to Damascus, has been occupied by Israel since the end of the Six Day War in 1967. The area is home to a large Druze population who are slowly being supplanted by Israeli colonialists despite the region being internationally recognized as a sovereign part of Syria.


————————————————————

US Sells Poland Patriot Anti-Missile System amid Continued Campaign against Russia

The Pentagon and Poland Wednesday signed a $4.75 billion deal to sell the eastern European country the Patriot anti-missile system.

While Poland’s extreme right-wing government hailed the arms deal, the largest in the country’s history, it will undoubtedly further stoke tensions between the West and Moscow, which has viewed the deployment of such systems as part of a concerted effort by Washington and its allies to undermine Russia’s ability to defend itself against a nuclear attack.

“It is an extraordinary, historic moment; it is Poland’s introduction into a whole new world of state-of-the-art technology, modern weaponry, and defensive means,” Polish President Andrzej Duda said during the signing ceremony, which was held at an armaments factory before a column of Polish troops.

“It’s a lot of money, but we also know from our historical experience that security has no price,” said Duda, whose authoritarian regime will no doubt extract the money to pay for the missiles through redoubled attacks on the living standards of Polish workers.

The Polish arms deal has been inked in the midst of a coordinated international campaign led by London and Washington to indict Moscow for the poisoning of the ex-Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter in the southern English city of Salisbury on March 4.

Russia has denied any involvement in the poisoning, which the British authorities have claimed was carried out with a nerve agent “of a type” (Novichok) that had once been manufactured in the Soviet Union and that it was “highly likely” that the attack was the work of Russia.

Without presenting any evidence to substantiate these accusations—much less any conceivable motive for Moscow to carry out such an action on the eve of the presidential election in Russia—the British Conservative government of Prime Minister Theresa May expelled 23 Russian diplomats.

London has refused Moscow’s requests to supply a sample of the alleged nerve agent used in the attack, as is required by international chemical weapons treaties. The Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement Wednesday charging that the attitude of the May government shows that “UK authorities are not interested in finding out the motives and those responsible for the crime in Salisbury and suggests that the British intelligence services are involved in it.”

Washington joined this anti-Russian crusade, ordering the expulsion of 60 Russian diplomatic personnel and the closing of the Russian consulate in Seattle, while joining with London in pressuring other countries to follow suit. More than 20 other countries responded with expulsions. Most of these countries took only token actions, however, involving one or two Russian diplomats. Nine members of the EU took no action. The only expulsion of more than four diplomats in Europe came from the rabidly anti-Russian government of Ukraine, which ordered 13 Russian diplomats to leave the country.

Poland, which along with Germany, France and Canada was one of the countries expelling four Russians, has long served as a pillar of the military buildup by the US and NATO against Russia.

Since the coming to office of the Trump administration, Washington has openly promoted the forging of closer ties to Warsaw and other eastern European governments, reviving the so-called Intermarium project of the 1920s, in which the US sought an alliance with fascistic and right-wing regimes in the region directed against both the Soviet Union and the rise of Germany as a continental hegemon.

The turn toward Eastern Europe is in large part a response to mounting tensions between Washington and Germany, which is increasingly seeking its own great power interests, including through commercial and other ties with Russia. While Berlin joined with the UK, France and the US in signing a joint declaration blaming Russia for the Skripal poisoning, there exist sharp divisions within the German ruling establishment and Chancellor Angela Merkel’s grand coalition government over the issue.

“We must do everything possible to prevent a new Cold War with Russia,” Social Democrat Gernot Erler, the government coordinator for Russia, told the Passauer Neue Presse.

Other prominent Social Democrats went further. Former European Commissioner Guenter Verheugen questioned the objective basis for the sanctions. “The view that if in doubt, ‘Putin and the Russians are responsible for everything’, is one that poisons thought and must stop,” he told the Augsburger Allgemeine.

Such views reflect the concerns of major German corporate and financial interests, whose profits are tied up with the Russian market.

The German Committee on Eastern European Economic Relations, whose members include some 200 German companies, warned against “over-hasty conclusions” over the Skripal affair leading to a “spiral of escalation.”

Just one day after it expelled a handful of Russian diplomats, the German government on Tuesday announced final approval for the construction and operation of the Russia-led Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, which will pipe Russian natural gas to Germany under the Baltic Sea. The project has been bitterly opposed by both Washington and its Eastern European allies.

It is no doubt such tensions that the US defense secretary, Gen. James Mattis, had in mind when he told reporters at the Pentagon that Russia was “trying to break the unity of the Western alliance.” Mattis claimed that it was “pretty obvious” that Russia was responsible for the attack on Skripal and charged Moscow with having “chosen to be a strategic competitor, even to the point of reckless activity.”

The sharp divisions that have emerged among the NATO powers notwithstanding, there are continuous signs that active preparations are underway for war with Russia.

Senior US military officers speaking at the Association of the United States Army’s Global Force Symposium on Monday issued warnings that the Pentagon must “dramatically increase the range of the service’s artillery and missile systems to counter a Russian threat that would leave ground forces without air support in the ‘first few weeks’ of a war in Europe,” the website military.com reported. The American military, the officers revealed, is working on a number of new weapons systems designed to counteract supe’ve got to push the maximum range of all systems under development for close, deep and strategic, and we have got to outgun the enemy,” Gen. Robert Brown, commanding general of United States Army Pacific Command, told an audience of military officers and defense contractors.

Meanwhile, the European Commission, the executive arm of the European Union, announced Wednesday that it has launched an initiative to create a “military Schengen zone,” allowing NATO military forces to freely cross European borders. The military project is being unveiled even as right-wing nationalist and anti-immigrant European politicians, including Germany’s new Interior Minister Horst Seehofer, are openly rejecting the original Schengen Agreement, in effect for over two decades, which allows border control free travel between the 26 European countries that signed on to it.

EU transport commissioner Violeta Bulc told reporters that the aim was to ensure “quick and seamless mobility across the continent. This is a matter of collective security.”

In addition to removing border controls, she said that investments would be made to assure that key corridors would be capable of handling tanks and heavy military vehicles. “We must be able to quickly deploy troops either within the EU or rapidly launch military operations abroad and to do so we need infrastructure that is fit for the purpose.”

Russian Deputy Defense Minister Col. Gen. Alexander Fomin responded to the announcement by stating that the real goal was to “fast-track to the maximum extent … deployment towards Russia’s borders.”

He also told the Russian Defense Ministry’s official newspaper that the US and NATO were creating arsenals of weapons ammunition and food supplies in various countries, including Poland, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, to prepare for war with Russia.

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Russia to US: So, you want to “play with fire” in Syria?

…by Jonas E. Alexis

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has recently produced a devastating blow on US forces in Syria by warning that the US needs to stop to “play with fire.”

The United States, said Lavrov, is so desperate that they are using virtually anything to accomplish their main objectives in the region. The US is trying to use the Kurds “to undermine the Arab Republic’s territorial integrity.” Lavrov:

“Such fears arise when we get acquainted with the plans that the US is beginning to implement on the ground, primarily to the east of the Euphrates, on vast territories between this river and the border with Syria with Iraq and Turkey.”[1]

Lavrov also seems to suggest that the United States hasn’t produced enough evidence showing that they are only concerned about fighting terrorism in the region. Lavrov continued:

“It seems to me that the statements of our American colleagues that the only purpose is to fight ISIL [Daesh] and preserve territorial integrity need to be confirmed by actions.

“Unfortunately, with all the statements about the need to unite efforts in the fight against this common evil [terrorism], there is still a desire to use this situation for geopolitical narrow-minded purposes and attempts continue to move away from truly collective work…

“Al-Nusra Front militants do not halt their provocations. In particular, they shelled residential areas of Damascus, including the Russian embassy, the Russian trade mission, from East Ghouta. Nevertheless, our Western partners for some reason prefer to make a fuss about these two areas — Idlib, East Ghouta, without saying what is happening there”[2]

Lavrov is certainly on target here precisely because the United States and Israel have been supporting terrorist cells in Syria since the beginning of time. Why? Well, Assad had to go; Assad is a bad guy; Assad is the new Hitler on the block; Assad is killing his own people; Assad used chemical weapons on civilians in the region; Assad must not be tolerated.

The United States and Israel have been using these dumb excuses for decades now. In fact, even Wikileaks, of all places, admitted that the United States gave Saudi Arabia the license to thwart democratic dissents in the Middle East: “Among Washington’s other repressive responses to the Arab Spring was the support it gave to Saudi Arabia’s invasion of Bahrain to suppress democratic dissidents.”[3]

Going back to Syria, the United States specifically intended to create sectarian violence in order to destroy the government from within.

“So, while the sectarian character of the civil war in Syria is now publicly bemoaned in the West, it seems fair to say that in 2006 the US government foreign policy apparatus believed that promoting sectarianism in Syria was a good idea, which would foster ‘US interests’ by destabilizing the Syrian government.”[4]

It gets even more interesting:

“The US government knows perfectly well that the Saudi government blames Iran for things that the Iranian government has nothing to do with, and is unconcerned about this….But as the 2006 cable makes clear, the US was happy to make common cause with Saudi Arabia in blaming Iran for things happening in Syria with which Iran had no connection.”[5]

So, are we repeating history here? Doesn’t Netanyahu tell us ad nauseam that Iran is the most dangerous country in the world? This guy never invents something new.

Netanyahu’s message in 1995? Iran is the most dangerous regime in the world.[6] His message in 2012? Iran is the most dangerous regime in the world.[7] His message in 2017? Iran is the most dangerous regime in the world.[8] His message in 2018? Iran is the most dangerous regime in the world.[9]

But when any person even remotely mentions Israel’s crimes in places like Gaza; when a person simply says that the Israeli settlements are not compatible with the rule of law, then that person is an anti-Semite

Netanyahu is certainly a complete lunatic. Why doesn’t Hollywood hire this guy for the next joker movie?


  • [1] “’Don’t Play With Fire’: Lavrov Slams US Attempts to Break Up Syria,” Sputnik News, February 19, 2018.
  • [2] Ibid.
  • [3] The Wikileaks Files: The World According to US Empire (London and New York: Verso, 2015), Kindle edition.
  • [4] Ibid.
  • [5] Ibid.
  • [6] Benjamin Netanyahu, Fighting Terrorism: How Democracies Can Defeat Domestic and International Terrorists (New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1995).
  • [7] “Benjamin Netanyahu: Iran is the most dangerous regime in the world,” Telegraph, July 19, 2012,
  • [8] “Iran is more dangerous than North Korea, Says Israel’s Netanyahu,” Newsweek, November 11, 2017.
  • [9] Oliver Holmes, “Israel ready to act against ‘dangerous’ Iran, Netanyahu warns,” Guardian, February 19, 2018.

——————————————————————-

Bolton: Another War Criminal Joins Trump’s Gangster Regime

The appointment of the notorious warmonger John Bolton as National Security Advisor is the latest move in reorganizing the Trump inner circle as a war cabinet. The Bolton announcement came just days after the naming of Central Intelligence Agency director Mike Pompeo as Secretary of State replacing Rex Tillerson, and Pompeo’s replacement at the CIA by Gina Haspel. Both Pompeo and Haspel are advocates of torture, and Haspel personally supervised torture at a CIA secret site in Thailand, later destroying the video tapes documenting waterboarding and other abuse of prisoners kidnapped and brought there.

Bolton is the sworn enemy of all progressive and independent governments and movements in the world. He is especially well-known for his virulent and abiding campaign for launching new wars against Iran and North Korea. Less-known is his contempt for working people, illustrated by his call to dismantle all domestic social programs, “root and branch.”

As an Assistant Secretary of State under President George W. Bush, Bolton was asked in 2002 what administration policy was toward North Korea. Bolton responded by placing a book titled “The End of North Korea” on a table next to the reporter, saying, “That is our policy.”

Bolton has a long history of advocating the most belligerent policies toward Russia and earlier the Soviet Union.  He has called Russia’s alleged “meddling” in the U.S. election “a casus belli, a true act of war, and one Washington will never tolerate,” a statement that highlights what a menacing character Bolton is. A U.S.-Russia war would be one between the leading nuclear weapons states and would have the potential of destroying life on the planet, a consequence that doesn’t faze Bolton–just the opposite.

“The next step in the bilateral relationship with Russia,” he recently wrote, “is for this administration to abrogate the New START Treaty,” a nuclear arms reduction agreement between Russia and the U.S. in 2010.

A gung-ho supporter of the Iraq War, Bolton advocated that it be followed by similar regime-change wars against Syria and Iran, as well as North Korea. Bolton worked closely with Israeli intelligence to fabricate  a falsified “weapons-of-mass-destruction” justification for an assault on Iran after the occupation of Iraq, which top Bush officials had predicted would be a “cakewalk.” It was anything but, and it was the fierce resistance in Iraq that was the key factor in preventing a new war on Iran at that time.

Bolton, like Trump and Pompeo, wants to overturn the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, signed in 2015 by the five permanent members of the UN  Security Council, Germany and Iran. It called for severe limitations on Iran’s nuclear program for 15 years in exchange for an end to the harsh sanction that were strangling Iran’s economy.  According to the International Atomic Energy Agency which conducts on-going inspections, Iran has met all the requirements of the agreement.

But Bolton calls the JCPOA agreement “the worst act of appeasement in American history,” and said, “The only thing that will stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons is regime change in Tehran.” While the JCPOA negotiations were underway, Bolton authored a New York Times op-ed headlined, “To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran.”

It is expected that Trump will pull the U.S. out of the JCPOA in May 2018, heightening the threat of a new war in the Middle East.

On February 28, when he undoubtedly already knew that Trump was preparing to appoint him, Bolton published a piece in the Wall Street Journal under the headline, “The Legal Case for Striking North Korea First.” The op-ed reads, “It is perfectly legitimate for the United States to respond to the current ‘necessity’ posed by North Korea’s nuclear weapons by striking first.” In fact, of course such an attack would be a war crime of the highest order.

While Trump surprised many by announcing that he would meet with North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un, by May of this year, a recent Bolton interview with a Washington DC radio station raised serious questions about whether the negotiations will actually take place.

“I think this session between the leaders will be a fairly brief session where Trump says, ‘Tell me you have begun total denuclearization, because we’re not going to have protracted negotiations. You can tell me right now or we’ll start thinking of something else.’”

Such a contemptuous approach would not be “negotiations” at all, and would of course be rejected by the North Korean leaders. Clearly, this is what Bolton want to see happen, as underlined by another recent statement: “The only way to resolve the North Korean problem is to change the regime.”

The most extreme Zionists in both Israel and the U.S. are celebrating the Bolton appointment. Bolton has expressed undying support for the apartheid Israeli state and complete disdain for the Palestinian people and their right to self-determination. He has advocated what he calls the “three-state solution,” turning over remnants of the West Bank that Israel doesn’t want to annex to Jordan, and Gaza to Egypt.

The elevation of Bolton, Pompeo and Haspel can only be seen as a turn in the direction of new war and intensification of the seven wars the U.S. is already engaged in. Now is the time to intensify the resistance.

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Bolton Fabricated Lies that Justified War on Iraq


Trump Fires Freemasons and Jews!

Actually the real story is:

ZOG Emperor Trump Fires Freemasons and Jews… Replaces them with Drug Dealers and Jews

Mr. Orange has been busy recently. Fortunately the revolving door at the White House was not only oiled early this morning to prevent any fire hazard but an electrical system has also been installed so that all of D.C. is now being powered by all the rotation caused by the incoming and outgoing Freemasons and Jews.

Rex Tillerson ‘found out he had been sacked from Donald Trump’s tweet’

After Freemasonic Rex was given the boot, his Jew handler Steve Goldstein was also fired for supposedly leaking the less than meritorious way in which Rex found out he was unemployed.

Replacing the departing dynamic duo will be suspected Freemason and Cocaine Import Agency Director Mike Pompeo as the new Secretary of State.

Gina Haspel a long time C.I.A. insider who happens to be a Jewish Dominatrix with a torture fetish has been selected to be the new Director of the C.I.A. She is best known for running the concentration camp in Thailand named Cats Eye. She destroyed all records of torture at this and other “Black Site” locations during her time there.

Haspel played a vital role in the destruction of interrogation videotapes that showed the torture of detainees both at the black site she ran and other secret agency locations

Also being axed today was Fox News media insider turned campaign trip director turned personal assistant to Donald Trump John McEntee, who has been fired and escorted out of the building for compromising financial reasons.

The West’s ‘guilty until proven innocent’ mantra is wrecking and international relations

Robert Bridge
Robert Bridge is an American writer and journalist. He is author of the book, ‘Midnight in the American Empire,’ released in 2013. robertvbridge@yahoo.com
The West's ‘guilty until proven innocent’ mantra is wrecking lives & international relations
Western society is flirting with a disturbing trend where people are being denied the time-honored ‘presumption of innocence’. The same undemocratic method is even being used against nations in what is becoming a dangerous game.

Imagine the following scenario: You are a star football player at the local high school, with a number of college teams hoping to recruit you. There is even talk of a NFL career down the road. Then, overnight, your life takes an unexpected turn for the worse. The police show up at your house with a warrant for your arrest; the charges: kidnapping and rape. The only evidence is your word against the accuser’s. After spending six years behind bars, the court decides you were wrongly accused.

That is the incredible story of Brian Banks, 26, who was released early from prison in 2012 after his accuser, Wanetta Gibson, admitted that she had fabricated injurious claims against the young man.

Many other innocent people, however, who have been falsely accused in the West for some crime they did not commit, are not as fortunate as Brian Banks. Just this week, for example, Ross Bullock was released from his private “hell” – and not due to an accuser with a guilty conscience, but by committing suicide.

“After a ‘year of torment’… Bullock hanged himself in the garage of the family home, leaving a note revealing he had ‘hit rock bottom’ and that with his death ‘I’m free from this living hell,’” the Daily Mail reported.

There is a temptation to explain away such tragic cases as isolated anomalies in an otherwise sound-functioning legal system. After all, mistakes are going to happen regardless of the safeguards. At the same time, however, there is an irresistible urge among humans to believe those people who claim to have been victimized – even when the evidence suggests otherwise. Perhaps this is due to the powerful emotional element that works to galvanize the victim’s story. Or it could be due to the belief that nobody would intentionally and unjustly condemn another human being. But who can really say what is inside another person’s heart? Moreover, it can’t be denied that every time we attempt to hunt down and punish another people, tribe, sex, religion, etc. for some alleged crimes against victims, there is a real tendency among Westerners to get carried away with moralistic zeal to the point of fanaticism.

A case in point is last year’s scandal that rocked the entertainment industry as the movie mogul Harvey Weinstein was accused of sexually assaulting numerous women over the span of a 30-year career. Eventually, over 80 females, emboldened by the courage displayed by their peers, drove Weinstein straight out of Hollywood and into the rogue’s gallery of sexual predators. Few could deny this was a positive thing.

But then something strange began to happen that has been dubbed the ‘Weinstein effect.’ Powered by the social media #MeToo movement, women from all walks of life began to publicly accuse men for all sorts of sexual violations, some from decades ago. Certainly, many of the claims were legitimate. However, in many cases they were not. Yet the mainstream media, which has taken great delight in providing breathless details of every new accusation, has shown little interest in pursuing those stories of men who went on to suffer divorce, ruined reputations, and the loss of jobs without so much as a fair hearing in a court of law.

As far as the mainstream media is concerned, and to be fair they don’t seem that concerned, the victim’s story is the only story that matters. Indeed, it was almost as if the victim had become judge, jury and executioner. This is, in reality, just one step from mob rule, and woe to anyone who questions the motives of the movement, as French star Catherine Deneuve discovered.

The (female) writer, D.C. McAllister, described the poisonous “environment of suspicion” that has beset relations between men and women.

“While women’s willingness to hold men accountable for criminal sexual behavior is to be applauded, the scorched-earth approach we are seeing today is destructive because it undermines trust,” McAllister wrote in The Federalist. “When anything from a naive touch during a photo shoot to an innocent attempt at a kiss is compared to rape and sexual abuse, we are not healing society but infecting relationships with the poison of distrust.”

In other words, neither men nor women have gained anything from this otherwise-well-intended campaign against sexual improprieties. However, this is not the first time the West has allowed raw emotions to knock the train of progress right off the tracks. History books are replete with examples of Western campaigns rising out of sheer mass hysteria. But at least in those wild times there was still some semblance of justice, complete with trials and investigations. Now compare that with our ‘modern’ times, when all it took for the United States to win approval for an illicit attack on Iraq was for Colin Powell to shake a vial of faux anthrax in front of the UN General Assembly.

With these historical hiccups in mind, it is possible to argue that the West has truly forgotten the lessons of history because they are certainly repeating them today.
By way of example, consider where the great bulk of US troops are encamped today – in and around the Middle East – and then ask yourself how they got there. The answer is by hook and by crook, and not a little public manipulation and chicanery. That is because, in our insatiable desire to defend victims – the good guys, we are told – we are allowing ourselves to ignore crucial evidence while placing blind faith in what we are being told is the truth. Clearly that has not been the case to date.

From the accusations that Iraq was harboring weapons of mass destruction to launch against innocent people, to the current claims that the Syrian government of Bashar Assad is using chemical weapons against his own people, the West is gambling that claims based on zero evidence will always work to fulfill ulterior motives. So far, the ploy seems to be working with the gullible public, but sooner or later truth will catch up, indeed, as truth usually does.

Just this month, for example, an assassination attempt was made against Sergei Skripal – a former double agent who had moved to Salisbury, England following a spy-swap in 2010. Any guesses as to who the British authorities have ruled – without a trial, evidence or motivating factor – is the main culprit? Yes, Russia. Yet, even the usually loyal British press has started expressing reservations over the dubious claims.

This should come as no surprise since the UK, a member of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), has staunchly refused to provide samples of the alleged nerve agent to Russia for analysis. Why would it do that? Would anyone be surprised if this investigation goes the same way it did for all those Russian athletes who were, unjustly, banned from the Winter Olympic Games this year?

Or perhaps the same way it went following the 2016 US presidential elections, when Russia was accused of meddling on behalf of Donald Trump – zero evidence to back up the slanderous accusations, which are responsible for putting US-Russia relations into a free fall.

In conclusion, the unsightly spectacle of Western capitals backtracking on legal precedent – from domestic cases to international – makes it all the more clear why it is so anxious to win back the media mountaintops – it has no evidence whatsoever to support the reasons behind its increasingly illicit behavior. It is therefore incumbent upon them to own the narrative, as well as the justice system. How long this democratic charade can last is anybody’s guess.

@Robert_Bridge

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.


How Iraq War destabilized the world and why the neocons aren’t finished yet

Rania Khalek
Rania Khalek is an American journalist, writer and political commentator based in the Middle East.
How Iraq War destabilized the world and why the neocons aren't finished yet
The Iraq War architects have been thoroughly rehabilitated and are planning their next adventure, even as the catastrophic ramifications of their crimes continue to reverberate around the world.

Last week marked the 15th anniversary of the American invasion of Iraq in 2003. April 9 will be the 15th anniversary of the fall of Baghdad. The consequences of these events are still playing out today, from Mali to Niger, to the Philippines. Iraq has never recovered and is only beginning to emerge from the trauma, while American officials plan the next military adventure.

Writing in the New York Times, Iraqi novelist Sinan Antoon observed“The invasion of Iraq is often spoken of in the United States as a ‘blunder,’ or even a ‘colossal mistake.’ It was a crime. Those who perpetrated it are still at large. Some of them have even been rehabilitated thanks to the horrors of Trumpism and a mostly amnesiac citizenry.”

The rehabilitation of the neocons

Indeed, the rise of Trump has provided the cabal of Iraq War architects with a rebranding opportunity. After their utter failure in Iraq, these people were largely disgraced and no longer taken seriously outside of right-wing circles. But Trumpism, and the desire of liberals to oust the current president, has led to an anti-Trump coalition which includes at its helm many of the instrumental figures behind the Iraq invasion. The list includes David “axis of evil” Frum, former speechwriter to President George W. Bush and now a senior editor at the Atlantic, as well as neoconservative think tanker Bill Kristol, and George W. Bush, who is now celebrated as a pragmatic leader – even by nostalgic Democrats who contrast him with Trump.

Trump’s victory in the Republican primary on a seemingly isolationist platform, which was obviously a facade, sent many of these neoconservatives running toward Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee. Those who lined up behind Clinton have since been embraced by the Democratic establishment, while the more extreme neoconservative hawks who stuck by the Republican Party have effectively inserted themselves into the Trump administration. The most recent and terrifying of these is John Bolton, former US ambassador to the UN. Bolton played a key role in politicizing the intelligence that was used to mislead the public about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. And now he is Trump’s national security advisor.

Bolton is a neoconservative extremist who has never seen a country he didn’t want to bomb. On the top of his hit list is Iran and North Korea, though Bolton has expended most of his energy agitating for the US to bomb Iran, which he seeks to hand over to the Mujahedin E Khalq (MEK), a cultish group of Iranian exiles that has received backing from Israeli intelligence and was formerly classified as a terrorist organization by the United States.

In light of the Iraq war anniversary and the recent appointment of Bolton, it’s a good time to survey the damage that neocons such as Bolton caused in Iraq. The war left an estimated 1 million Iraqis dead, 4.5 million displaced, 5 million orphaned, some 2 million widowed, and caused birth defects and cancer rates in some Iraqi cities that are significantly worse than those seen in the aftermath of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan at the end of the Second World War.

But the destruction reaches far beyond just Iraq.

The new Jihad

The irony is that Trump’s rise to the presidency is in many ways the fault of the Iraq War architects. Their policies in Iraq, which were recycled in Libya and Syria, led to the rise of Islamic State and the refugee crisis that fueled right-wing populists such as Trump and his counterparts in Europe. The war in Iraq revived a jihadist movement that was dead after the first few months of the war on Afghanistan, opening the floodgates to jihadists and their supporters from around the world.

When the US dismantled the Iraqi state in 2003, instead of replacing it with a functioning government it punished Sunni areas and installed a sectarian Shiite regime comprised of exiles with no popular support in the country. The US essentially created a new category known as the Sunni Arab and, where the state collapsed, it was Al-Qaeda who would fight on their behalf. The inflammation of sectarian fears and lack of security resulted in a power vacuum that opened the floodgates to Al-Qaeda in Iraq and ignited a gruesome civil war. AQI eventually morphed into the Islamic State of Iraq. Before morphing into ISIS, ISI established an Al-Qaeda offshoot in Syria called Jabhat al-Nusra, the strongest and most disciplined armed opposition group in the country.

ISIS and Al-Qaeda  groups cultivate and thrive off of stateless zones as well as a Sunni Arab victimhood narrative, which started with the execution of Saddam Hussein and has been propagated throughout the region by popular gulf-funded religious figures and media outlets such as Al Jazeera Arabic.

Beheadings became a hallmark of the Al Qaeda branch in Iraq under Abu Musab al-Zarqawi who, unlike Osama bin Laden began to focus on fighting the near enemy — the Arab dictatorships, secular people and minorities — as opposed to the far enemy of the infidel west. We would later see these beheadings in ISIS propaganda videos aimed at terrifying the west. There was a theory in the past in bin Laden’s era that you should fight the far enemy, the west, before the near enemy. But under this new and evolved Al Qaeda, whether in Iraq or Yemen or Mali, we saw local franchises focused on slaughtering their fellow countrymen, with particular genocidal hatred for Shias.

The American occupation of an Arab country fueled this Salafi jihadist movement on a global scale. The occupation led to sympathy for this Iraqi jihad throughout the Muslim world, which meant foreign fighters coming in and a huge amount of funding from the gulf.

This global war on terror framework was also implemented by the US in countries such as Somalia and Yemen and across North Africa as well.

The Iraq War gave us Donald Trump

In spite of America’s criminal disaster in Iraq, Barack Obama continued to implement regime change policies in both Libya and Syria by funding and arming right-wing insurgencies made up of none other than Al-Qaeda affiliates, the very ideology the US was supposedly fighting in its global war on terror. Like in Iraq, US intervention led to the rise of a failed state in Libya and in much of Syria.

In Syria, these failed state zones were then filled by thousands of foreign fighters coming in from the Turkish border, which the US tolerated as a means to put pressure on the Syrian regime, hoping the regime would offer concessions, which of course it never did. ISIS eventually took over many of these failed state areas and began kidnapping westerners and the group made millions of dollars in ransom money as a result.

The massive refugee flows which resulted from the US encouraging war and regime change in the Middle East led to the destabilization of much of Europe and to some extent, the rise of Donald Trump, who campaigned on the fear-mongering of ISIS, refugees and Muslims. You can trace all these and other terrible consequences to the US decision to encourage war and state collapse rather than to prioritize stability and order in the Middle East. It all started with the Iraq War.

The gift that keeps on giving

The ramifications of the Iraq War are still playing out today, having inspired Salafi jihadist movements from the Philippinesto Mali and even Niger, where US soldiers were recently killed by jihadists.

Moreover, the war in Iraq, according to the very people who architected it, has strengthened Iran in the region. That isn’t necessarily a bad thing given that Iran and its partners, such as Hezbollah and the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), were crucial to defeating ISIS in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. But a strengthened Iran is a nightmare for the US as it threatens American, Saudi and Israeli hegemony in the region. So, the Iraq war planners are using the strong position of Iran – created by neoconservative policies – to push for a war with Iran. They’ve also expanded their hit list to include Russia, who they’re still hoping to escalate against in Syria.

With Bolton as Trump’s national security advisor, a war with Iran is now much more likely. For the war industry and the neocons who lobby for it, the Iraq war they started is the gift that keeps on giving.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.


Neocon Jew Wolfowitz

Assange’s internet blackout and Skripal case part of propaganda war that risks real one – John Pilger

Assange’s internet blackout & Skripal case part of propaganda war that risks real one – John Pilger
The Skripal saga and Ecuador’s move to cut Julian Assange’s internet is part of a wider crackdown on freedom of speech and states like Russia which have stood up to the West. It risks evolving into a real war, John Pilger told RT.

“This is about a war on freedom of speech; this man is being denied the most basic right – freedom of speech. It’s part of a wider war. The wider war is against known enemies, and Russia is one of them, China is another,” investigative journalist and documentary filmmaker John Pilger said.

Earlier this week, the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where Assange has been holed up since 2012, cut off all communications for the WikiLeaks founder, blocking his internet access and not allowing any visitors. A source close to WikiLeaks told RT that Ecuador cut Assange’s internet due to his tweet about the arrest of former Catalan leader Carlos Puigdemont in Germany.

Pilger argued that the way the Western media – instead of doing its job, blindly sided with the official narrative – framed the events in Salisbury is another instance in the same global propaganda effort. “It’s part of the propaganda war that the attack in Salisbury represents. Here we have Russian diplomats being expelled all over the world on the basis of no evidence.”

Former Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter were poisoned earlier in March and found unconscious in Salisbury. The UK government has blamed the attack on Russia, but Moscow denies the allegations, saying that no evidence has been presented to support the claim. Following calls from London, almost 30 states announced they would expel Russian diplomats over the case, prompting the Kremlin to announce tit-for-tat measures.

Pilger said Assange was castigated by the British government for merely saying it was “poor diplomacy” on the part of the UK to kick out Russian representatives with no independent confirmation of its rushed investigation.

“He was just suggesting that there was no evidence, but this is what this propaganda war is about. It’s a war on speaking out, it’s a war on dissent, it’s a war on the very things that I’m saying at the moment, it’s a war on journalism and requires collaborators,” Pilger said.

He cited as an example an article written by the Guardian’s James Ball. The opinion piece by Ball says Assange “has himself to blame” for invoking Ecuador’s ire, and he should “hold his hands up and leave the embassy.”

“These are not journalists, because this is about the public’s right to know and it’s the public right to know what the governments are doing. The second part of this war is about a real war. We’ve got the prospect of a real war unless this propaganda war is seen through,” Pilger said.

What made WikiLeaks and Assange the target of multiple attacks over the years is the commitment to true journalism.

“The attack on him and WikiLeaks over the years is so important because it does what journalism should be doing and that is holding power to account.”

Watch RT’s full interview with John Pilger on YouTube:

If you like this story, share it with a friend!


The killing of history – John Pilger

John Pilger
Journalist, film-maker and author, John Pilger is one of two to win British journalism’s highest award twice. For his documentary films, he has won an Emmy and a British Academy Award, a BAFTA. Among numerous other awards, he has won a Royal Television Society Best Documentary Award. His epic 1979 Cambodia Year Zero is ranked by the British Film Institute as one of the ten most important documentaries of the 20th century.
The killing of history - John Pilger
One of the most hyped ‘events’ of American television, The Vietnam War, has started on the PBS network. The directors are Ken Burns and Lynn Novick.

Acclaimed for his documentaries on the Civil War, the Great Depression and the history of jazz, Burns says of his Vietnam films, “They will inspire our country to begin to talk and think about the Vietnam war in an entirely new way”.

In a society often bereft of historical memory and in thrall to the propaganda of its “exceptionalism”, Burns’ “entirely new”Vietnam war is presented as “epic, historic work”. Its lavish advertising campaign promotes its biggest backer, Bank of America, which in 1971 was burned down by students in Santa Barbara, California, as a symbol of the hated war in Vietnam.

Burns says he is grateful to “the entire Bank of America family” which “has long supported our country’s veterans”.  Bank of America was a corporate prop to an invasion that killed perhaps as many as four million Vietnamese and ravaged and poisoned a once bountiful land. More than 58,000 American soldiers were killed, and around the same number are estimated to have taken their own lives.

I watched the first episode in New York. It leaves you in no doubt of its intentions right from the start. The narrator says the war “was begun in good faith by decent people out of fateful misunderstandings, American overconfidence and Cold War misunderstandings”.

The dishonesty of this statement is not surprising. The cynical fabrication of “false flags” that led to the invasion of Vietnam is a matter of record – the Gulf of Tonkin “incident” in 1964, which Burns promotes as true, was just one. The lies litter a multitude of official documents, notably the Pentagon Papers, which the great whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg released in 1971.

There was no good faith. The faith was rotten and cancerous. For me – as it must be for many Americans – it is difficult to watch the film’s jumble of “red peril” maps, unexplained interviewees, ineptly cut archive and maudlin American battlefield sequences.

In the series’ press release in Britain – the BBC will show it – there is no mention of Vietnamese dead, only Americans. “We are all searching for some meaning in this terrible tragedy,” Novick is quoted as saying. How very post-modern.

All this will be familiar to those who have observed how the American media and popular culture behemoth has revised and served up the great crime of the second half of the twentieth century: from The Green Berets and The Deer Hunter to Rambo and, in so doing, has legitimized subsequent wars of aggression. The revisionism never stops and the blood never dries. The invader is pitied and purged of guilt, while “searching for some meaning in this terrible tragedy”. Cue Bob Dylan:“Oh, where have you been, my blue-eyed son?”

I thought about the “decency” and “good faith” when recalling my own first experiences as a young reporter in Vietnam: watching hypnotically as the skin fell off Napalmed peasant children like old parchment, and the ladders of bombs that left trees petrified and festooned with human flesh. General William Westmoreland, the American commander, referred to people as “termites”.

In the early 1970s, I went to Quang Ngai province, where in the village of My Lai, between 347 and 500 men, women and infants were murdered by American troops (Burns prefers the term “killings”). At the time, this was presented as an aberration: an “American tragedy” (Newsweek ).  In this one province, it was estimated that 50,000 people had been slaughtered during the era of American “free fire zones”. Mass homicide. This was not news.

To the north, in Quang Tri province, more bombs were dropped than in all of Germany during the Second World War. Since 1975, unexploded ordnance has caused more than 40,000 deaths in mostly “South Vietnam”, the country America claimed to “save” and, with France, conceived as a singularly imperial ruse.

The “meaning” of the Vietnam war is no different from the meaning of the genocidal campaign against the Native Americans, the colonial massacres in the Philippines, the atomic bombings of Japan, the leveling of every city in North Korea. The aim was described by Colonel Edward Lansdale, the famous CIA man on whom Graham Greene based his central character in The Quiet American.

Quoting Robert Taber’s The War of the Flea, Lansdale said, “There is only one means of defeating an insurgent people who will not surrender, and that is extermination. There is only one way to control a territory that harbours resistance, and that is to turn it into a desert.”

Nothing has changed. When Donald Trump addressed the United Nations on 19 September – a body established to spare humanity the “scourge of war” – he declared he was “ready, willing and able” to “totally destroy” North Korea and its 25 million people. His audience gasped, but Trump’s language was not unusual.

His rival for the presidency, Hillary Clinton, had boasted she was prepared to “totally obliterate” Iran, a nation of more than 80 million people. This is the American Way; only the euphemisms are missing now.

Returning to the US, I am struck by the silence and the absence of an opposition – on the streets, in journalism and the arts, as if dissent once tolerated in the “mainstream” has regressed to a dissidence: a metaphoric underground.

There is plenty of sound and fury at Trump the odious one, the “fascist”, but almost none at Trump the symptom and caricature of an enduring system of conquest and extremism.

Where are the ghosts of the great anti-war demonstrations that took over Washington in the 1970s? Where is the equivalent of the Freeze Movement that filled the streets of Manhattan in the 1980s, demanding that President Reagan withdraw battlefield nuclear weapons from Europe?

The sheer energy and moral persistence of these great movements largely succeeded; by 1987 Reagan had negotiated with Mikhail Gorbachev an Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) that effectively ended the Cold War.

Today, according to secret Nato documents obtained by the German newspaper, Suddeutsche Zetung, this vital treaty is likely to be abandoned as “nuclear targeting planning is increased”. The German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel has warned against “repeating the worst mistakes of the Cold War … All the good treaties on disarmament and arms control from Gorbachev and Reagan are in acute peril. Europe is threatened again with becoming a military training ground for nuclear weapons. We must raise our voice against this.”

But not in America. The thousands who turned out for Senator Bernie Sanders’ “revolution” in last year’s presidential campaign are collectively mute on these dangers. That most of America’s violence across the world has been perpetrated not by Republicans, or mutants like Trump, but by liberal Democrats, remains a taboo.

Barack Obama provided the apotheosis, with seven simultaneous wars, a presidential record, including the destruction of Libya as a modern state. Obama’s overthrow of Ukraine’s elected government has had the desired effect: the massing of American-led Nato forces on Russia’s western borderland through which the Nazis invaded in 1941.

Obama’s “pivot to Asia” in 2011 signaled the transfer of the majority of America’s naval and air forces to Asia and the Pacific for no purpose other than to confront and provoke China. The Nobel Peace Laureate’s worldwide campaign of assassinations is arguably the most extensive campaign of terrorism since 9/11.

What is known in the US as “the left” has effectively allied with the darkest recesses of institutional power, notably the Pentagon and the CIA, to see off a peace deal between Trump and Vladimir Putin and to reinstate Russia as an enemy, on the basis of no evidence of its alleged interference in the 2016 presidential election.

The true scandal is the insidious assumption of power by sinister war-making vested interests for which no American voted.  The rapid ascendancy of the Pentagon and the surveillance agencies under Obama represented an historic shift of power in Washington. Daniel Ellsberg rightly called it a coup. The three generals running Trump are its witness.

All of this fails to penetrate those “liberal brains pickled in the formaldehyde of identity politics”, as Luciana Bohne noted memorably. Commodified and market-tested, “diversity” is the new liberal brand, not the class people serve regardless of their gender and skin color: not the responsibility of all to stop a barbaric war to end all wars.

“How did it f-cking come to this?” says Michael Moore in his Broadway show, Terms of My Surrender, a vaudeville for the disaffected set against a backdrop of Trump as Big Brother.

I admired Moore’s film, Roger & Me, about the economic and social devastation of his hometown of Flint, Michigan, and Sicko, his investigation into the corruption of healthcare in America.

The night I saw his show, his happy-clappy audience cheered his reassurance that “we are the majority!” and calls to “impeach Trump, a liar and a fascist!” His message seemed to be that had you held your nose and voted for Hillary Clinton, life would be predictable again.

He may be right. Instead of merely abusing the world, as Trump does, the Great Obliterator might have attacked Iran and lobbed missiles at Putin, whom she likened to Hitler: a peculiar profanity given the 27 million Russians who died in Hitler’s invasion.

“Listen up,” said Moore, “putting aside what our governments do, Americans are really loved by the world!”

There was a silence.

JohnPilger.com – the films and journalism of John Pilger 

Israel praises ‘record’ $705mn missile defense funding from Washington

Israel praises ‘record’ $705mn missile defense funding from Washington
The Israeli defense minister hailed the US’ hefty contribution to the missile defense program, thanking Washington for its $705 million in aid – $558 million more than Israel’s initial request.

“I am pleased to announce that the US Congress has approved a record amount for missile defense: $705 million in 2018,” Avigdor Liberman tweeted. “We will continue to develop the multi-layered missile defense system. Our enemies who try to hurt us will be surprised by the capabilities we have developed.”

אביגדור ליברמן

@AvigdorLiberman

אני שמח לבשר שהקונגרס האמריקאי אישר סכום שיא להגנה מפני טילים. 705 מיליון דולר בשנת 2018. נמשיך לפתח את מערך ההגנה הרב שכבתי מפני טילים. אויבנו שינסו לפגוע בנו יופתעו מהיכולות שפיתחנו. מחר אפגש בירושלים עם משלחת חברי קונגרס בראשות ידידת ישראל ננסי פלוסי ואודה להם באופן אישי.

On Tuesday, Liberman met with a US Congress delegation headed by Nancy Pelosi, the minority leader in the House of Representatives (D-CA), thanking the US for its support.

The “highest aid budget ever” will go to the mass production of the Iron Dome, Magic Wand and Arrow 3 interceptors and defense system development to respond against “future threats,” according to the defense ministry.  Liberman praised “our great friend the United States of America” for investing $6.5 billion in “protecting the skies of Israel.”

READ MORE: Israel fires volley of Iron Dome defensive missiles after false alarm over gunfire in Gaza (VIDEO)

Liberman’s statement followed the IDF sending missile interceptors after sirens went off late Sunday. The Iron Dome system was mistakenly activated in response to gun fire during a Hamas military exercise in Gaza. Ten Tamir missiles, each costing $50,000, were fired as a result.

READ MORE: Deal reached on record $38bn US military aid to Israel, signing set for Wednesday

In 2016, the US pledged $38 billion in military assistance to Israel under a 10-year arrangement, which will start in FY2019. Israel is already the largest recipient of American foreign aid since World War 2.


Erdogan slams Israel as ‘terrorist state’ that ‘kills children’

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan lashed out against Israel Sunday, calling it a ‘terrorist state’ that ‘kills children.’ Erdogan promised to fight to the bitter end against Donald Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish state.

“Palestine is an innocent victim… as for Israel, it is a terrorist state, yes, terrorist!” Erdogan said at a congress of his ruling Justice and Development Party’s (AKP) in the Turkish city of Sivas on Sunday. “We will not abandon Jerusalem to the mercy of a state that kills children,” he added.

As for the US decision to recognize Jerusalem as the Israeli capital, despite the Palestinians viewing the eastern part of the city as the capital of its future sovereign state, Erdogan promised to use “all means to fight” it, according to AFP.

Violent clashes have continued in East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza for several days after Trump’s announcement on Wednesday. Two Palestinians were killed and over 1,000 people injured on Friday, with a further 230 wounded on Saturday, as Israeli security forces fired tear gas, rubber bullets and water cannon at the protesters.

Erdogan blasted Israel as an “oppressive, occupation state,” calling the response of the police and military to the protests “disproportionate,” Hurriyet reported.

“The US ignored a 1980 UN Security Council ruling regarding Jerusalem which the US itself signed at that time,” Erdogan said as cited by the Daily Sabah. “A system in which the stronger one is regarded as being right can’t constitute justice, peace and stability,” he said, adding that the American approach could lead to more tragedies.

In response to Erdogan’s remarks, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu retorted that that his Turkish counterpart was hardly one to talk.

“I’m not used to receiving lectures about morality from a leader who bombs Kurdish villages in his native Turkey, who jails journalists” said Netanyahu, adding that Erdogan “helps terrorists, including in Gaza, kill innocent people.”

“That is not the man who will lecture us.”

Trump’s announcement faced widespread international condemnation and was backed only by Israel, which has been pushing for Jerusalem to be recognized as its capital for decades. The leaders of France, Germany and other European nations have all agreed that the US move is dangerous and harmful to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, urging the US to abide by international agreements. The Arab League also rejected the American decision, saying on Saturday that it amounted to recognition of the illegal occupation of East Jerusalem by Israel, and ipso facto had no legal basis.


Several dead, hundreds injured in IDF-Palestinian clashes at #GreatReturn protest

At least seven people have died and up to 500 others have been injured during clashes between Palestinian protesters and Israeli troops along the border of the Gaza Strip and Israel, according to media reports.

The Palestinian Health Ministry reported the casualties after hundreds demonstrated Friday afternoon. IDF troops fired live rounds, rubber-coated steel pellets and tear gas at the protesters during the ongoing violence.

Thousands have gathered along the border for a six week-long ‘Great Return’ protest. The mass demonstration got underway on Friday as Palestinians held a mass rally to commemorate Land Day, which marks the killing of six unarmed civilians by Israeli forces in 1976.

Hamas said as many as 100,000 Palestinians will take part in Friday’s massive demonstration. The protest coincides with the week-long Jewish holiday of Passover, which regularly leads to increased tensions in the already-volatile region.

The six week-long demonstrations are calling for the right of return for Palestinian refugees to what is now Israel. The protests are set to culminate in May as Israel celebrates the 70th anniversary of its independence, which Palestinians call Nakba (castastrophe) day.

Tent cities have been set up by Palestinian activists, backed by factions of Fatah and Hamas, at five locations along the border. They feature medical facilities, media zones, portable toilets, running water and electricity.

READ MORE: 100+ snipers authorized to use live fire during Gaza protests – IDF chief

“We have deployed more than 100 sharpshooters, who were called up from all of the military’s units, primarily from the special forces,” Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot said, Ynet news reports“If lives are in jeopardy, there is permission to open fire.”

A Hamas official warned that there will be a reaction to any Israeli provocations. “We don’t want to see a bloodbath. Just a quiet protest,” he said to Israel Hayom, warning that “if there are Israeli provocations and if Israel deliberately harms protesters or our people we will mount a harsh response.”

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Bolton’s Past Advocacy for Israel at US Expense Heralds Dangerous New Era in Geopolitics

By Whitney Webb

This article is Part I of a series exploring the past of soon-to-be National Security Adviser John Bolton and what his recent appointment will mean for U.S. foreign policy, with a focus on the Middle East, Latin America, and the Koreas. Part I explores Bolton’s history of putting the interests of the Israeli government ahead of those of the U.S., as well as what his appointment means for Israel’s current preparations for a “three front” war and American involvement in that war.

WASHINGTON – Last Thursday, President Trump announced that former UN ambassador John Bolton, once called the “most dangerous man” in the entire George W. Bush administration, would replace H.R. McMaster as national security adviser, making him the man in charge of what the President sees and hears regarding issues of national security. Bolton will officially take over McMaster’s post on April 9.

The appointment was not surprising. Indeed, earlier this month, MintPress reported that McMaster was soon to be replaced – largely at the behest of billionaire Republican donor and militant Zionist Sheldon Adelson – and that Bolton was a top contender for that position, largely due to Bolton’s reputation as a “stalwart friend of Israel” and his frequent calls for military action against Iran, Israel’s regional arch-rival.

Yet, Bolton’s appointment – placed in the greater context of recent changes to Trump’s cabinet – is a harrowing portent for those opposed to more U.S. regime-change wars. Mike Pompeo, another proponent of war with Iran, is set to take over the State Department; and Gina Haspel — whose nickname “Bloody Gina” speaks to her history of overseeing torture and depreciating human life — is slated to take over for Pompeo as head of the CIA. Bolton completes the triumvirate and his ultra-hawkishness speaks to the President’s posturing for war against not one but several countries — with hopes of building a unipolar world with the United States as its sole leader, a perverse distortion of his isolationist campaign promise “America First.”

Though he is just one of the war hawks now roosting in the Trump administration, Bolton is arguably more dangerous than all the rest due to his bellicose rhetoric, unilateral decision-making, and his “kiss up, kick down” style of interaction with superiors and colleagues, allowing him to be remarkably effective in getting his way. Not only that, but Bolton – who has long been vying for a position in the Trump administration – has been admittedly eager to work with a president with minimal foreign policy knowledge or experience — obviously true in Trump’s case — as it would allow him to have maximum effect in achieving his policy goals. Bolton has already exercised great influence over the president, reportedly adding statements to Trump’s speech at the United Nations without the knowledge of Trump’s staff.

Thus, Bolton is set to have a disproportionately influential role in the Trump administration, making it essential to examine what his appointment will likely mean for U.S. government policy, particularly regarding geopolitical “hotspots” such as the Middle East and the Koreas.

Freelancing for Israel
John Bolton speaks at the Republican Jewish Coalition, March 29, 2014, in Las Vegas. (AP/Julie Jacobson)

Though the domestic reaction to Bolton’s appointment was rather mixed, top ministers of the right-wing Israeli government lavished praise upon the soon-to-be National Security Adviser, calling him “one of the most outstanding” allies to Israel in U.S. politics, and a “true friend” to the Jewish state who brings “great experience and original thinking” to “the most sympathetic administration toward Israel of all time.”

View image on TwitterView image on Twitter

John Bolton

@AmbJohnBolton

to Monday when I was in Israel to receive the “Guardian of Zion” award from @BarIlanU‘s Ingeborg Rennert Center for Jerusalem Studies.

Indeed, Bolton’s ties to Israel are as deep as they are long-standing — so deep that some have posited that his commitment to extreme Zionism has led him to betray the national interest of his own country on more than one occasion.

For instance, Danny Gillerman, the former Israeli ambassador to the UN, recently noted that Bolton, when serving in the Bush administration, was prone to “direct fire on his own forces,” —  i.e., the U.S. government — in order to advance the goals of the Israeli government. Gillerman, speaking on the Israeli radio program Galei Tzahal this past Sunday, stated:

[W]hen the State Department — then headed by Condoleezza Rice, who wasn’t so friendly to Israel even though the Bush Administration was very friendly — was about to either make a decision, or not abstain, or not veto, or to advance something that was against us [Israel], Bolton would call me, and he would say ‘Danny, you’ve got to call the prime minister right now, in order for him to phone the president to stop this.’”

In addition, Bolton garnered a reputation – as well as the ire of State Department officials at the time – for violating State Department protocol by acting unilaterally in matters of diplomacy to negotiate privately in Israel. The New York Times reported in 2005 that Bolton traveled to Israel without the required State Department clearance in 2003 and 2004 in a direct effort to undermine then-Secretary of State Colin Powell. As journalist Gareth Porter noted:

[A]t the very moment that Powell was saying administration policy was not to attack Iran, Bolton was working with the Israelis to lay the groundwork for just such a war.”

Bolton’s numerous private and unannounced visits to Israel entailed meetings with officials of Mossad, Israel’s intelligence service, including Meir Dagan, then Mossad’s director.

Despite his flagrant violations of government rules, Bolton remained the main liaison between the U.S. and Israeli governments under Bush.

Bolton has pressured Israeli officials to attack Iran even when calling for such an attack was not the U.S. government’s position. According to Shaul Mofaz, former Israeli defense minister, Bolton “tried to convince me that Israel needs to attack Iran,” which Mofaz recently asserted was not “a smart move – not on the part of the Americans today or anyone else until the threat is real.”

Billionaire Adelson gets his way
Sheldon Adelson talks with Rex Tillerson, before a speech by President Donald Trump at the Israel Museum in Jerusalem,s May 23, 2017. (AP/Evan Vucci)

Bolton’s commitment to the Israeli state has manifested in other ways. For instance, he has remained a constant critic of Palestine’s right to self-determination, calling an independent Palestinian state a plot “of Israel’s opponents to weaken and encircle the Jewish state.” Bolton has called for the Gaza strip and the West Bank to be given to Egypt and Jordan, respectively. This approach, nicknamed the “Three State solution,” would eliminate any hopes for Palestinian sovereignty by giving Palestinian territories to two U.S.-allied countries that enjoy cordial relations with Israel, making this solution preferable for Israel hard-liners that wish to see an end to the Palestinian Authority and Hamas.

Bolton has also praised President Trump’s recent decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, and relocate the U.S. embassy in Israel accordingly – a policy change allegedly orchestrated by pro-Israel Republican mega-donor Sheldon Adelson — as an “injection of reality.” In addition, he has strongly promoted the construction of illegal settlements on Palestinian land, stating recently that Israelis “ought to be able to build houses wherever they want to, including all of the lands of Judea and Samaria [Palestine’s West Bank].”

Bruce Baird@drbairdonline

“At every turn, Zionist Neocon (aka ZioCon) John Bolton has shilled for Israel – no matter the cost or consequence to the safety of the American people.”https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=393&v=w6zEitguxLI 

Bruce Baird@drbairdonline

John Bolton says “Well, I know my strong view is that Jews ought to be able to build houses wherever they want to, including all of the lands of Judea and Samaria.” pic.twitter.com/fnF6eE10Bw

Given his embrace of extremist Zionism, it is no surprise that Bolton has found himself replacing H.R. McMaster, whose ouster was orchestrated bybillionaire Republican donor Sheldon Adelson. Bolton has long been promoted by Adelson, as the latter personally intervened to keep Bolton in contact with the Trump throughout his presidency and had lobbied soon after Trump’s election to have Bolton appointed to his cabinet. Like the embassy move to Jerusalem, Adelson has again gotten his wish.

Adelson’s push to have Bolton installed comes at a crucial time, as Israel is currently preparing for war on “three fronts” — Palestine, Lebanon, and Syria – and is actively lobbying for American aid and involvement in launching that war. With Bolton in the Trump administration, along with numerous other staunch Israel allies in key government positions, Israel will likely get that aid in addition to American troops fighting alongside them, even if Israel is the aggressor in the imminent conflict.

The timing of Bolton’s appointment as National Security Adviser is also noteworthy, as it comes little over a month before the U.S. embassy is set to move to Jerusalem, when tensions between Israel, Palestine and its neighbors will be at their highest and when a war is most likely to break out. Bolton is set to ensure strong U.S. support for any Israeli military action that takes place during this time, even though Israel is explicitly planning to target civilians and civilian infrastructure.


Top Photo | Former U.S. Ambassador to the UN John Bolton arrives to speak at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), Feb. 24, 2017, in Oxon Hill, Md. (AP/Alex Brandon)

Whitney Webb is a staff writer for MintPress News who has written for several news organizations in both English and Spanish; her stories have been featured on ZeroHedge, the Anti-Media, and 21st Century Wire among others. She currently lives in Southern Chile.