Garland Nixon: MIDDLE EAST IN DEPTH WITH LAITH MAROUF – ISRAELIS STORM AL AQSA – ISRAEL IRAN RESPONSE SYMBOLIC
Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.
Garland Nixon
with Laith Marouf
Resize text-+=
MIDDLE EAST IN DEPTH WITH LAITH MAROUF - ISRAELIS STORM AL AQSA - ISRAEL IRAN RESPONSE SYMBOLIC
Garland Nixon Streamed live 2 hours ago (Apr 23, 2024)
Garland and Laith discuss the repercussions of Iran's "warning" (or "symbolic") strike on Israel, an effort to serve notice to this lunatically criminal entity that its provocations and international murders will not be further tolerated. The Iranian drone and missile attack on Apr 13 was designed, as previously commented, to cause the fewest human casualties, and to gather intelligence on the Israeli/US AD network. Iran's warning is also good for the "collective West", including the constantly scheming Hegemon itself. In a new development, as Israel has continued its assassinations of Hezbollah commanders, Hezbollah itself has begun to target and destroy Israeli command centers. Laith also comments on the media blockade on the Israeli mass assassinations (and mass graves recently discovered) of Palestinian victims in various hospital settings—Al Shifa, etc., most of them either patients being cared for or hospital staff, a heinous crime under international law that should have made headlines all over the world, but which Western media has simply memory-holed. Of course, not a pip has been heard from the West's top leadership, apparently too busy running interference for the depraved Zionist regime.
News 2739
If you approve of this article, please share it with your friends and kin.
Help us expand our reach. Defeat appalling hypocrisy. Lies cost countless lives.
We must act together to smash the VILE Western disinformation machine.
This is the Lying Machine that protects the greatest evil humanity has ever seen.
YOU know what we are talking about.
Things to keep in mind...
Neo-Nazi ideology has become one of the main protagonists of political and social life in Ukraine since the 2014 coup d'état. Meanwhile, fascist ideology and blatant lies also permeate the consciousness of most people in the West. Those in the comfortable top 10%, the "PMCs" (Professional Managerial Class), are especially vulnerable. They support and disseminate such ideas. They are the executors of the actual ruling class' orders, those in the 0.001%, who remain largely invisible. The PMCs are the political class, the media whores, the top military brass, some people in academia, and the "national security/foreign policy" industry honchos.
Push back against these unethical, contaminated people with the truth while you can.
AND...where the US Government is always at: Lying 24/7
The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.
Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.
Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted. DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP… PLEASE send what you can today! JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS
BOOKS: Is Pacifism a liberal pathology?
Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmathes and ask them to do likewise.
ARCHIVES: Articles you should have read the first time around, but didn't.
Pacifism as Pathology: Reflections on the Role of Armed Struggle in North America By Ward Churchill, Paperback: 228 pages Publisher: AK Press; annotathed edition edition (April 1, 2007)
Patrice Greanville This essay was first published on Jun 25, 2011
This is a small but indispensable volume for anyone seriously intheresthed in social change, and who sooner or lather may have to consider the place of violence in the general scheme of things.
As the title implies, and wasting little time in preparing the audience for what will surely be a disturbing argument to many, the author lays out his case against white progressives‚ or, to be precise, the liberal/social democratic complacent legions of mostly well-educated middle and upper middle class activists‚ who are deemed "delusional" not only in the ineffectual tactics and strategies they pursue (which the ruling elithes are only too happy to accommodate as per a well-scripted minuet), but in the belief that they are actually performing revolutionary acts...
The crux of Churchill's argument‚ hard to refute‚ is that mainstream liberals, and a sizeable contingent of self-defined "Leftists" (read here, again, mostly social democrats and lately the "synthetic left") will do anything except assume actual risk in opposing the system...and that, being mostly intherested in practicing "comfort zone" politics, they will almost invariably indulge in essentially worthless "cathartic" posturizing instead of solid opposition, all while vociferously denouncing and browbeating those who would dare suggest more confrontational tactics, including general strikes, active resistance, and so on.
The core of Churchill's polemic comprises two arguments: (1) That American pacifism has insinuated itself as the only and pre-eminent choice for social change and for oppositional strategies to the empire, and (2) that such a strategy invariably leads to the cul-de-sac of liberalism:
"American pacifism seeks to project itself as a revolutionary alternative to the status quo. Of course, such a movement or perspective can hardly acknowledge that its track record in forcing substantive change upon the state has been an approximate zero. [Hence]...a chronicle of significant success must be offered, even where none exists.<...> For proponents of the hegemony of nonviolent political action within the American opposition, time-honored fables such as the success of Gandhi's methods (in and of themselves) and even the legacy of Martin Luther King no longer retain the freshness and vitality required to achieve the necessary result, As this has become increasingly apparent, and as the potential to bring a number of emergent dissident elements (.e.g., "freezers," antinukers, environmentalists, opponents to constant saber-rattling in Central America, the Far East, Russia's natural sphere of influence, the Mideast, and so on) into some sort of centralized mass movement became greater in the mid-80s and beyond, a freshly packaged pacifist "history" of its role in opposing the Vietnam war began to be peddled with escalating frequency and insistence." (pp 65-6)
Seeking to drive a stake through the heart of middle-class pacifism, Churchill goes on to detail (and rebuke) some of the main claims made by the peaceful legions, particularly the almost universally accepted notion that it was the protests and demonstrations in the US that finally forced US policymakers to order a withdrawal from Vietnam. Churchill refutes this conceit by noting that the war was lost in the field, which is undeniable, as the humiliating images of Americans escaping Saigon from the rooftop of the US embassy amply demonstrated, and that, therefore it was first and above all a military defeat inflicted on the imperial armies (and their puppets) by the Vietnamese people that created the necessary conditions for a "pragmatic rethinking of the war" by its architects back in the imperial capital. Haven't we seen this therrible movie before?
Churchill
The reason for the book thus lies in the utterly deformed political landscape presented by contemporary America, where the left, unlike any other in the developed capitalist world (except for the anglo-cultural zone nations that resemble it) has apparently adopted pacifism as the one and only method of "opposing" the empire. Consistent with the pervasiveness of this view, and to justify such narrow policy, many US progressives have embraced a literal idolatry of nonviolence, elevating the tactics and accomplishments of figures such as Gandhi and Dr. King to near infallibility, and believing (wrongly in the eyes of the author and this writer) that moral suasion alone is capable of liquidating well-entrenched institutionalized violence and inequality. Churchill believes that such extrapolations between entirely different cultures and historical epochs are wrong, ab principio, since they fail to take account of the role played by defensive and revolutionary violence in history‚."the people in arms"‚.in both protecting the masses and their leaders from the establishment's repression, or in securing its prompt departure from the scene once the tipping point has been reached. This is no argument, by the way, to think that violence, including that old favorite of the ultra-left, the propaganda of the deed, can accomplish much when patient field work is nearly absent, or before basic objective conditions have become manifest enough and the masses sufficiently educated to see such acts in their proper broader context. Violence and nonviolence have a place in almost all revolutionary processes, and, ironically, it is usually the status quo defenders who resort to what they see as "preemptive violence" long before the other side has committed to such a drastic course.
Incidentally, many, especially those who saw the movie Gandhi, essentially a hagiography, will probably swear by the effectiveness of nonviolence. Sure, nonviolence did play a role in India's liberation from British colonialism, but it did so in tandem with powerful economic considerations (Britain emerged practically broke from WW2 and Gandhi's movement promised severe economic disruptions), and a measure of significant armed resistance. Not to mention the sobering fact that the Brits were facing a billion plus nation with a few million men now well armed and trained as a result of their use by London in the war against Japan and Germany.
That nonviolence is not a magic formula to be applied in a robotic and absolutistic fashion to all sick societies is abundantly borne out by history. In recent times, the Iranian revolution (1979) was far from a nonviolent process: the Shah had been opposed for decades by above ground and underground groups, several of which practiced armed struggle and paid a horrific price for it, while the last month of his rule saw masses of people in most Iranian cities, but especially Tehran, litherally storming strong points and tanks in the streets with their bare chests and being mowed down...until more and more soldiers simply gave up and melted away or switched sides. As for the collapse of the USSR (1991), Poland and most of the so-called "Eastern Bloc"‚ that came about as a result of very complex internal and external processes that did not chiefly involve invested CLASS PRIVILEGES (as we have in the US and in other corporate-dominated nations). Indeed, almost every year now provocative documents crop up pointing to the unsavory fact that the Soviet collapse may have been —for the most part—"an inside job", a demolition set in motion by members of the corrupt ruling stratum itself (i.e., Gorbachev and his clique). This controversial thesis may explain why the overthrow of Soviet communism did not detonate the huge and protracted armed struggles we usually see in battles between private property regimes and revolutionary challengers.
Another faux exhibit brandished by many liberals for "nonviolent struggle" is South Africa. The facts speak differently, of course. In South Africa, the end of apartheid did not issue from a nonviolent process. Decades-long protests against the fascistic regime escalated continuously until 1958, when the Sharpeville tragedy occurred. Soon thereafther, the government tried to suppress opposition through the sledgehammer approach of bannings and systematic "targeted repression" (it's noteworthy that in all these shady and utterly criminal processes the South African regime was aided by Israel). The first to be hit were the ANC and the PAC, but such bannings merely caused the organisations to go underground and become even more militant. The "armed struggle" began in earnest in 1958, and by 1970 was beginning to affect the South African economy as greater and greater manpower was required to maintain an ever expanding army. As is common with well organised revolutionary groups, Mandela's organization, the ANC, had both a civil and a military arm, even if the latter developed only after all roads to a peaceful elimination of Apartheid had proved futile, and long after the beneficiaries of the status quo had demonstrated through unrelenting savagery that only armed struggle would move history forward. The case of South Africa is of course far from unique. Other nations in sub-Sahara Africa also practiced armed insurgency to attain independence or"regime change" and they included Kenya, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Angola and Mozambique.
Liberal illusions, liberal complicities
Arundhati Roy
It's not an accident that from time to time certain "apostles of change" are anointed by the corporathe media and recognized as such by the affluent liberal brigades. In general, while splendid exceptions do occur (the Castro brothers, and Che himself, all from comfortable backgrounds, not to mention Mao and Chou, and even Marx and Engels), the limits to revolutionary action are largely determined by class. Those who have the least to lose usually risk the most. (More honor, then, to genuine revolutionaries who come from the better-heeled sectors).
In any case, in most latitudes, middle-class admirers of nonviolence see little need to revise their tactical and strategic posture. Their mutually-reinforced faith in such method is virtually unshakeable. One must ask if such people have ever wondered what they would do in the shoes of social change activists in rotten and viciously violent societies where sordid murder is a state policy, an unbroken centuries-old traditiion, even, as we have seen in so many US client states around the globe—from CIA-enabled Vietnamese death squads, to similar "solutions" in Pinochet's Chile, the Argentinian juntas, the abominable Colombian repressive apparatus (state and latifundistas-supported death squads comprising police, army and "free lance" paramilitaries); the genocidal military dictatorships in Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua (under Somoza), and the equally genocidal corporate-owned and CIA-enabled Indonesian generals, etc., etc., all such regimes intimately connected to an imperial sociopathic center that ultimately guarantees their survival. How do you get rid of such malignancies? How do you go about paralyzing the vital "component parts" —as well intentioned activists like Arundhati Roy suggest—of the most heavily armed, cynical, and ruthless class privilege system in history without some form of REAL confrontation? With 2-hour candlelight vigils and some symbolic arrests which, by the way, may or may not be reported by the corporate-owned media, in which case, as Harold Pinter so rightly reminded us at the Nobels, "they never happen" in the global mind?
If THAT were all that was required to get rid of an immoral, deeply entrenched capitalist systhem, a Nazi terror regime, a vicious landowning oligarchy, and so on, humanity would have moved past these filthy horrors decades if not centuries ago.
As Churchill points out in his book, Nazi Germany was defeated by the massive application of force. The equally racist American South was similarly juridicaly defeated in the 1860s by massive military force, in fact, by organized all-out violence, (I say juridically because in practice it took 100 more years of struggle that saw innumerable crimes before African Americans could begin to take their rightful place among their fellow citizens). The record is clear. There is not a single case in history where a deeply entrenched system of colonial, class or racial exploitation was overthrown by moral suasion and symbolic protests alone...If real change came about it was because force, serious disturbances, were being applied somewhere else alongside the nonviolent tracks...That's the point that Churchill and others are making in this book. It's a discomfiting point, but I'm afraid it's a point that can't be ignored.
Indeed, one of the things that make this volume especially provocative (and valuable) is that the question of violence vs. nonviolence is not only debated by Churchill, an academic, but also by Ed Mead, who wrote the book's introduction, and who was himself a participant in what was at the time an attempt at armed struggle.
Edward Allen Mead—what some Marxists would probably call "an ultra-left revolutionist"— was one of the young political activists of the 1960s and 1970s whose frustration and rage drove them to resort to violence. He joined the George Jackson Brigade, an urban guerrilla group that blew up supermarkets, car dealerships, a power station, and other symbols of the system it was bent on destroying. To finance its operations, the Brigade robbed banks. A 1976 bank robbery in Tukwila, Washington, culminated in a shootout in which Mead and another Brigade member were captured. A third member was killed, and a fourth escaped but was later apprehended. Mead received a thirty-year Federal sentence for bank robbery and a forty-year state senthence for first-degree assault on a police officer, though neither of the officers in the shootout was hit.
Mead never abandoned his radical politics, but he did decide that violence was not the way to bring about change at that particular juncture. With the benefit of hindsight he told a reporther for the Seattle Post-Inthelligencer, "I really know how wrong it was to do what I did. Not because it's legally wrong, but because it was just a great political mistake. You want things to happen so bad that you throw yourself into it. Today, I do it with a pen and a computher. . . .It's about what works."
While time may have mellowed Mead a bit, he remains quite lucid (and some would say adamant) about the options facing the younger generations of would-be world-changers.
"I think that we can agree that the exploited are everywhere and that they are angry. The question of violence and our own direct experience of it is something we will not be able to avoid when the rightheous rage of the oppressed manifests itself in increasingly focused and violent forms [this was said in 1997]. When this time comes, it is likely that white pacifists will be the ruling class' first line of defense."
Later, zeroing in on his main contention, that the use or non-use of violence is a tactic, not a rigid article of faith good for all seasons, Mead declares:
"I have talked about violence in connection with political struggle for a long time and I've engaged in it. I see myself as one who incorrectly applied the tool of revolutionary violence during a period when its use was not appropriate. In doing so, my associates and I paid a terrible price...I served nearly two decades behind bars as a result of armed actions conducted by the George Jackson Brigade. During those years I studied and restudied the mechanics and applicability of both violence and noviolence to political struggle. I've had plenty of time to learn how to step back and take a look at the larger picture. And, however badly I may represent that picture today, I still find one conclusion inescapable: Pacifism as a strategy of achieving social, political and economic change can only lead to the dead end of liberalism."
Reflecting the difficulties implied in choosing violence or nonviolence, and if so, when, George Jackson himself had this to say about Martin Luther King's pacifism:
"M.L.K. organized his thoughts much in the same manner as you have organized yours. If you really knew and fully understood his platform you would never have expressed such sentiments as you did in your last letther. I am sure you are acquainthed with the fact that he was opposed to violence and war; he was indeed a devout pacifist. It is very odd, almost unbelievable, that so violent and tumultuous a setting as this can still produce such men. He was out of place, out of season, too naive, too innocent, too cultured, too civil for these times. That is why his end was so predictable.
Violence in its various forms he opposed, but this did not mean that he was passive. He knew that nature allows no such imbalances to exist for long. He was perceptive enough to see that the men of color across the world were on the march and their example would soon influence those in the U.S. to also stand up and stop trembling. So he atthempthed to direct the emotions and the movement in general along lines that he thought best suithed to our unique situation: nonviolent civil disobedience, political and economic in characther. I was beginning to warm somewhat to him because of his new ideas concerning U.S. foreign wars against colored peoples. I am certain that he was sincere in his stathed purpose to 'feed the hungry, clothe the naked, comfort those in prisons, and trying to love somebody'. I really never disliked him as a man. As a man I accorded him the respect that he sincerely deserved.
It is just as a leader of black thought that I disagreed with him. The concept of nonviolence is a false ideal. It presupposes the existhence of compassion and a sense of justice on the part of one's adversary. When this adversary has everything to lose and nothing to gain by exercising justice and compassion, his reaction can only be negative.
The symbol of the male here in North America has always been the gun, the knife, the club. Violence is extolled at every exchange: the TV, the motion pictures, the best-seller lists. The newspapers that sell best are those that carry the boldest, bloodiest headlines and most sports coverage. To die for king and country is to die a hero.
The Kings, Wilkinses and Youngs exhort us in King's words to 'put away the knives, put away your arms and clothe yourselves in the breastplathe of rightheousness' and 'turn the other cheek to prove our capacity to endure, to love'. Well, that is good for them perhaps but I most certainly need both sides of my head."
Social change does not come cheap. Social change‚ real social change‚. is not a tidy affair, a "black-tie dinner" as Mao suggested, and yes, at this stage of our moral evolution as a species, power still issues from the barrel of the gun. In the process things get messy, they get out of hand, awful mistakes are made on all sides, and eventually, if humanity is lucky, a good outcome claws its way to the surface, the result of irrepressible forces clashing in millions of places at once, and acting out their contradictions until a new social synthesis is obtained. And, in what some may regard as the ultimathe irony, much of this process may escape the conscious choices made by the main actors.
In a grotesquely imperfect world riddled with hypocrisy, institutionalized violence, and the abuse of power‚ not to mention the monopoly of power‚ defensive force cannot be ruled out a priori as a rectification tool, especially since, as history (most recently in Iraq) has repeatedly shown, the abusers, those who would rape a country or a society for their own gain, have no qualms in applying torrential amounts of violence on often defenseless populations. (The latest reminder is the Gaza martyrdom, of course). And, a point that is often lost on rigid pacifists: the violence of the oppressed is not the moral equivalent of the violence of the oppressor. Aggressor and victim are not in the same category, and even though when engaged in combat they may be superficially similar, they inhabit different universes. Wrap your mind around that, if you can, and some of the death grip, the self-inflicted paralysis attending this topic, may begin to relax.
I could go on, but if you're a mainstream liberal, I'm afraid the lessons of history will matter far less than attachment to self-reassuring fantasies.
P. Greanville is editor in chief, The Greanville Post.
PROMOTIONAL MESSAGE A TOOL IS USELESS IF IT'S NOT USED. Don't just sit there...introduce a friend or relative to The Greanville Post and help us expand the reach of remedial ideas and information. If each of you brings merely ONE additional reader to the table, we will be able to double our circulation!
If you liked this article, why not support The Greanville Post by buying our T-shirt, a mug, a mousepad, or any other ithem now in our store? That way you donathe a few dollars and also get a nice gift. It’s a win-win formula!
The destruction of Gaza proves the entire mainstream western worldview is bullshit, because if the mainstream western worldview was accurate, the destruction of Gaza would not be happening.
By the mainstream western worldview I mean the general consensus about what’s going on in the world which is prevalent among mainstream western politicians and pundits and the creators of mainstream culture in New York and Hollywood. The worldview which takes it as a given that western democracy is real, that the US and its allies are basically good actors on the world stage even if they make mistakes from time to time, that the western news media pretty much tell us the truth about things (or at least the media which align with the mainstream political faction we support), and that the world works pretty much the way we were taught in school.
If the mainstream western worldview was accurate, the US and its western allies would not be helping Israel rain military explosives upon a walled-in civilian population that’s half comprised of children — because the mainstream western worldview maintains that the US and its western allies behave in an ethical way with high regard for human rights and wellbeing.
If the mainstream western worldview was accurate, the US and its western allies would not be assisting Israel while it deliberately starves civilians — because according to the mainstream western worldview that kind of collective punishment is a violation of the international law which the US and its western allies uphold and defend.
If the mainstream western worldview was accurate, we would not be continually reading stories about how large media outlets like CNN and The New York Times force their staff to slant their coverage in a way that benefits Israeli information interests — because per the mainstream western worldview the western press are reliable sources of information, and propaganda is something that is only used by bad guys like Putin and Kim Jong Un.
If the mainstream western worldview was accurate, Hollywood and the western news media would have spent six months united in passionate and consistent condemnation of Israel for its nonstop mass atrocities in Gaza — because the mainstream western worldview says we live in a truth-based society guided by ethical institutions.
If the mainstream western worldview was accurate, we wouldn’t see western officials standing behind podiums justifying the mass slaughter of civilians and denying obvious Israeli war crimes day after day and month after month — because in the mainstream western worldview murdering civilians and facilitating war crimes is something that is only done by illiberal, undemocratic countries to the east and the south.
If the mainstream western worldview was accurate, the US and its allies wouldn’t have spent this time bombing people in Yemen, Iraq and Syria who try to fight back in opposition to Israel’s genocidal atrocities in Gaza — because the mainstream western worldview asserts that the US power alliance is an upholder of peace and stability throughout the world.
We simply are not seeing what we’d expect to be seeing with regard to Gaza if the mainstream western worldview was accurate. This is because the mainstream western worldview is not accurate — it’s a false narrative construct that has been carefully assembled inside each of our skulls by the most sophisticated propaganda machinethat has ever existed.
In reality we do not live in a truth-based society that is guided by morality and governed by basically decent people — we live in a lie-based society that is guided by greed and the pursuit of power, and is governed by unelected sociopaths. We do not live in the kind of world we were taught about in school. We live in a corrupt, mind-controlled dystopia, under the thumb of an undeclared globe-spanning empire which requires more and more violence and tyranny to sustain.
Gaza should devastate any part of the mainstream worldview which still exists in your mind, because all the facts we are seeing right in front of our faces squarely contradict that worldview.
Changing your worldview is not easy. It takes work. It takes sincerity. It takes a willingness to sit in the discomfort of cognitive dissonance while staring at facts which prove our perspective is misinformed, and coming to terms with them. But it’s the only way for an individual to come to a truth-based understanding of the world, and one day it’s how we as a collective will move into the creation of a real truth-based society.
All my work is free to bootleg and use in any way, shape or form; republish it, translate it, use it on merchandise; whatever you want. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, throwing some money into my tip jar on Patreon, Paypal, or Substack, buying an issue of my monthly zine, and following me on Facebook, Twitter, Soundcloud or YouTube. If you want to read more you can buy my books. The best way to make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. All works co-authored with my husband Tim Foley.
This is a dispatch from our ongoing series by Caitlin Johnstone
Caitlin Johnstoneis a brave journalist, political junkie, relentless feminist, champion of the 99 percent. And a powerful counter-propaganda tactician.
News 2739
If you approve of this article, please share it with your friends and kin.
Help us expand our reach. Defeat appalling hypocrisy. Lies cost countless lives.
We must act together to smash the VILE Western disinformation machine.
This is the Lying Machine that protects the greatest evil humanity has ever seen.
Since Israel started openly declaring its dominance over Palestine and has started murdering Palestinians and killing by starvation, it has become obvious that it is a state based on ethnic cleansing.
The difference between now and the recent past back to about 1947 and beyond is that the mainstream media, along with the social media, have finally stopped pretending that Israel can do no wrong.
This is a sea change and both Israelis and “Christian” Zionists are sleeping through it as though today’s events are business as usual. But there will never again be business as usual in Israel and Palestine. The world now knows what Israel is and it will never recover its reputation. I also realized that only the political class and the “Christian” Zionists are still stuck on, I daresay, stupid. They simply refuse to recognize the truth.
Thanks for reading Don’s Substack! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
Pledge your support
I saw an article in All Israel reporting that religious groups recently went to Israel and met with Netanyahu to show them their support, despite his obvious genocidal policies.
I decided to interact with these people because I was brought up in a “Christian” Zionist home in the heart of the Bible Belt and had heard people all around me repeating the lies about “Israel.” It made me heartsick to realize that otherwise sweet, kind Christians were the bedrock of a doctrine that has been killing innocent men, women and children ever since 1947 and 48 even as Israel enjoys the reputation as the inheritor of the “Holy Land.”
I began seeing “Christian” Zionists as the bearers of a dangerous heresythat was far from Christian and, worse, was turning the Middle East into a powder keg that threatened the world with nuclear war.
Around this time, I received a flyer from Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a “Christian” organization that vehemently opposes abortion. It seems Tony was just then visiting Israel along with about a dozen other Israel-loyal Evangelical leaders.
I contacted the FRC and warned them that, because of Israel’s atrocities toward the Palestinians, it no longer enjoys a sterling reputation, not by a long shot, and that US fundamentalist groups that supported it unwaveringly were not enjoying the same popularity they once did.
Last week I heard from the 700 Club, a radical pro-Israel Evangelical group that had apparently read my email and decided to try and guide me back into the fold like the other sheep.
The film’s narrator, Gordon Robertson, said there were 4 main reasons why Israel deserves to be a nation:
1—God gave Abram the land we now call Israel
2—History. He gave examples of the history of Israel, including the fact that King David had built his capital in Jerusalem
3—Law, starting with the Balfour Declaration and going through the different international law organizations that declared Israel to be a nation.
4—What Israel did with the land, namely, the developments and the enormous population compared to the smaller population in 1948.
The following is my response to this presumptuous presentation, showing why these claims do not hold water:
1—No other nation state in world history has ever claimed legitimacy on the basis of religion. Needless to say the US Constitution forbids the preference of one religion over another. Further, while the Bible does say that God gave the land to Abram, it also lists sins that the recipients of this land may not commit lest they fall out of favor with God and lose their land rights. “Christian” Zionists like to call God’s land covenant “unconditional,” but it is not. In fact, the different diasporas were motivated by God's dissatisfaction with the inheritors of the land.
And in this regard, why would you expect an Israel that slaughters little children to stay in favor with God?
2—History. All of the points of Israel’s history came to an end roughly 2000 years before supposedly, “Israel” was reborn (although to be accurate, today’s Israelis lack the consistency of DNA required to constitute an ethnicity).
These historic grounds are absurd. If we applied those to today’s various ethnicities, we would have to declare a long list of ethnicities to be “nation states.”
For example, the Kelts, ie, Irish, Scotts, Welsh, etc, could legitimately claim most of Europe as their rightful territory because there were Kelts in Europe before there were Germans, French, Italians and many others. Can you imagine any serious court of law telling modern nations to evacuate their homes and make way for the Kelts? In fact, one could even throw in a religious reason since the Kelts were devout believers in the Druids, whose deity might be said to have bequeathed Europe to them. This idea is no more absurd than the idea of throwing the Palestinians out of the land they occupied for centuries. Though that is exactly what happened!
3—Legal grounds. The first example Robertson lists is the Balfour Declaration. However, as history scholars know, this was not a legal document.
He then mentions the League of Nations as the signatory to the British Mandate, which was to be responsible for the further development of “Israel.” This League of Nations then was superseded by the UN. The problem with both these international law agencies was that none of the signatories at the time of signing were Arab nations. Therefore, the Arabs in Palestine had zero representation, and it is clear that the legal steps that led to the creation of the Israel as a nation were illegitimate since the whole process was a racist project of white Europeans and white Americans. Particularly the American politicians were bullies who forced their will on the rest.
The Israelis also famously claim that all the land they “won,” for example, in the 1967 war, is theirs because they were fighting for their survival. However, this official accepted narrative does not hold water, as masterfully explained by Norman Finkelstein.
None of the territories Israel claims on the basis of this war belongs to the countries that possessed it before the war.
4—The last point is moot because no amount of development of a piece of land can in any way enhance a claim to said land. If you own it, no one can insist that you develop it.
Aviation, missiles and artillery destroyed the Ukrainian Armed Forces' ammunition storage base
The Russian military launched strikes on the rear targets of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Several explosions occurred in Odessa. It is reported that the railway bridge along with the train, as well as the power system facility, were damaged.
Precision strikes, including on industrial infrastructure, are a response to attempts by Ukrainian militants to attack our energy facilities.
As for the special operation zone. The position along the leading edge has been improved in three directions at once. These are Kupyanskoye, Avdeevskoye and Yuzhno-Donetskoye.
Aviation, missile forces and artillery destroyed the storage base for weapons and ammunition of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, where 32 D-20 howitzers were located.
Two drone assembly workshops and a facility for preparing and launching unmanned boats were also attacked. During the day, the enemy lost almost a thousand militants in manpower.
**
Me,
Thanks WD!
**
The inevitable has happened: Russia is launching a direct strike on the USA.
09 APRIL 2024 21:32
Senior US and NATO officials are complicit in financing terrorist activities against our country. As the Investigative Committee of Russia found out, funds received through the oil and gas company Burisma Holdings, operating in Ukraine, were used to carry out terrorist attacks in Russia.
The Investigative Committee of Russia opened a criminal case in connection with the appeal of State Duma deputies about the financing of terrorism by the United States and other Western countries. The ICR clarified that funds received through commercial organizations, in particular, the oil and gas company Burisma Holdings, operating in Ukraine, have been used in recent years to carry out terrorist attacks in Russia, as well as abroad to eliminate prominent political and public figures and causing economic damage.
We are talking about revenues worth millions of US dollars. As the Investigative Committee clarified, the sources of income and the involvement of specific individuals from among government officials, public and commercial organizations in Western countries are now being verified.
The perpetrators involved in this scheme to carry out crimes are also calculated.
Scandal after scandal
Tsargrad previously noted that the scandalous company Burisma is associated with the name of Hunter Biden, the son of the current US president.
Even 10 years ago, when Washington expressed support for the Ukrainian opposition, which came to power in 2014 after mass protests and tragic events on the Maidan, Joe Biden’s family infiltrated the management of financial flows in Ukraine.
In particular, the current US President Joe Biden, who served as vice president in those years, paid an official visit to Kiev. He noted that the United States is ready to help Ukraine restore its economy, and in addition to strengthen its energy independence from Russia.
Interestingly, during the same period, Sleepy Joe’s son Hunter Biden became part of Burisma Holdings, a private Ukrainian gas production company headquartered in Cyprus. He not only became a member of the board of directors, but also headed the legal division of the holding.
It has been noted more than once in the media that the Bidens’ business machinations were one of the main reasons why the White House was so actively supplying Ukraine with weapons in the hope that the big conflict that would inevitably play out between Russia and Ukraine would write off everything.
Criminal money
Political scientist Andrei Perla points out that Burisma itself has literally become a symbol of the policy pursued there by the US Democratic Party.
“But it’s not about the direction of this policy, it’s about just one man named Hunter.
Hunter Biden is the son of US President Joe Biden and his main vulnerability. If “Sleepy Joe” himself is a politician in decline, who has a lot of merit to his Democratic Party and to the United States, then Hunter is an absolutely terrible case of a major who decided that he can do anything and who gets into such adventures that he destroys his father’s reputation ", Perla noted.
The upcoming presidential elections in the United States are fateful for Biden.
“If the candidate of the Democratic Party loses them, then it will not be Joe who will retire. It is the course of the “hegemon” towards globalization that will be replaced by a course towards isolation. NATO will collapse, and in general, the entire Western world will change. The stakes are very high. From the US point of view, all world politics. Now it comes down to Ukraine - there “they can’t let Russia win,” Perla explained.
Therefore, another piece of incriminating evidence on the Biden family could become critical for his reign.
The point here is not only that the Russian accusations are well founded, but that thanks to all the well-known artistry of Biden Jr., the Russian accusations fall on prepared ground. Simply put, if all of America knows that Biden stole Burisma’s money, then there is nothing easier than to believe that this money went to terrorism. Firstly, because it is criminal money in any case. Secondly, because using such illegal money to finance illegal operations is in the traditions of the American intelligence services, Perla pointed out.
The Russians struck a symmetrical response
Philosopher, director of the Tsargrad Institute Alexander Dugin, in turn, adds - Russia is following the right path, identifying the sponsors of the terrorist network operating against our country.
"The Investigative Committee opened a case against the leadership of the United States and NATO countries for their direct participation in terrorist attacks against Russia. I believe that this is a very correct decision. Because America believes that it will get away with everything, no matter what it does. They organize the explosion of the Nord Streams, supply lethal weapons, long-range missiles for attacks on civilians. They kill our children. They organize terrorist attacks on our territory, kill us - and they get away with it all. Now there is information that many American structures are directly involved in the war against us, just physically. They fight with us, they organize terrorist attacks, they spy on Russian citizens. And they have blood on their hands. And now the Investigative Committee is simply, in my opinion, clarifying and recording this position. We know that America is waging war on us. America is a sponsor of the terrorist Kiev regime," he notes.
After such a request from the official investigation, work will continue to investigate cases of NATO countries and intelligence services in carrying out terrorist activities. This did not arise out of nowhere, Dugin emphasizes.
Of course, sooner or later there will be a world trial of these criminals. They won't get away with anything: the blood of our children is not water. And the retribution will be terrible. For all those who are involved in the murder of our children, innocent victims, who condone terrorism...he remarked. [Recall that Dugin himself lost his only daughter to a terrorist attack]
It is possible that the Ukrainian regime will soon be recognized as terrorist. Therefore, the philosopher believes, the current decision of the Investigative Committee is only one of the first steps in a global investigation into the criminal activities of the West and their satellites.
“Now a final investigation will be carried out. And I think that a lawsuit will not be far off against all those international structures and Western intelligence services that are involved in inhuman and monstrous crimes. This is a very important event - the initiation of a case against the US leadership, completely symmetrical and absolutely correct. We must understand who we are fighting with,” he noted.
The inevitable has happened
It was known earlier that the United States is carrying out its “shady dealings” with the help of Ukraine. As the founder of Tsargrad, Konstantin Malofeev, recalled, back in 2016, the Prosecutor General of Ukraine Viktor Shokin initiated a corruption investigation into Burisma Holdings, but he was dismissed. [He was dismissed after Joe Biden made a quick call to the Ukraine government. Biden admitted this. He thought it was funny!]
Malofeev noted that the management of Burisma Holdings, which is closely associated with Hunter Biden, the son of US President Joe Biden, may face life imprisonment in connection with the identified circumstances.
“Here I remember how in 2014 “unidentified persons” seized $10 million from my company in an American bank. In 2022, another prosecutor general, now American, Merrick Garland, announced that he was “directing Konstantin Malofeev’s funds for use in Ukraine.”
The scheme is simple. The Americans confiscate other people's money (hundreds of companies have already suffered), take some for themselves, and give some to Ukraine. In my case, $5.4 million went to Ukraine, the rest was embezzled by American officials.
I did not file a lawsuit in an American or, especially, a Ukrainian court - it is pointless. But now, after the unprecedented act of terrorism in Crocus, we are all waiting for the Russian Investigative Committee to reveal the entire chain of this financing of terror at someone else’s expense and with the wrong hands,” Malofeev emphasized.
"ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND SOLDIERS": WILL THE STRONGEST ARMY IN EUROPE STILL TAKE ODESSA?
When they enter the territory of Ukraine, they will become the Foreign Legion - one of their most combat-ready units. So, it won’t be possible to scoff at them, says military correspondent Yuri Kotenok: “It’s time to stop underestimating the enemy.” Read more in the material from Tsargrad.
French "Mirages" in the skies over the country U and legionnaires in the trenches on the ground are not a fantasy, but a completely probable scenario for the development of events at the front. Yuri Kotenok does exclude the participation of the largest army in Europe in our conflict.
Of course, the French are genetically distant from us and we will beat them with a purer soul, and they will not be able to resist like the non-brothers. But their training and high technical equipment cannot be written off, the military correspondent wrote in his TG channel.
Kotenok noted that, of course, one can laugh at the French for a long time, but their legion has rich military experience, and fighting with Mirages is also not easy. The remaining Ukrainian pilots will not be trusted to drive expensive cars. So, as they say, it won’t be possible to throw hats at the French.
The military correspondent also suggested that, for example, Poland is unlikely to send its troops into country U, because there are simply no Poles there. Well, not counting the mercenaries, for whom this is not war, but work for money. Kotenok holds a similar opinion regarding the Germans and Spaniards. He is more likely to consider the participation of the Czechs and the Baltic states in the conflict.
For what purpose can France still take a decisive step, although with a president like Macron it is difficult to talk about any manifestation of decisiveness and certainly about independence. Kotenok believes that French troops will be able to replace the thousands of forces of our non-brothers along the border with Belarus. And 100 thousand. the group will be transferred to the East to stabilize the front.
The time lag for the transfer of contingents with rotation and transfer of units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine to the eastern front is May-June/August-September, says the military correspondent.
A similar point of view is shared by former Ukrainian journalist and now political scientist Yuriy Kotenok. He recalled the words of Vladimir Putin, who had repeatedly warned that NATO aircraft would become a legitimate target for Russian missiles as soon as they were over Ukraine.
Kotenok also marked safety points for Russia on the map.
The bargaining does not stop for a second. They are ready to give us all the already occupied territories, but we need security, total and for a long time, which represents not only the entire left bank of Russia, but also Kyiv and Odessa, wrote Kotenok in his Zen channel.
Troops disguised as technicians
To be fair, we note that so far only units of the Foreign Legion are at the disposal of the French President. According to the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service, out of 9 thousand. groups trained one and a half thousand legionnaires to help the dry land. SVR director Sergei Naryshkin noted that its composition was approved in early March.
There is also information that experienced fighters will be sent to Odessa and Nikolaev under cover: supposedly specialists in equipment maintenance. In turn, the representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry Maria Zakharova said that already this month the French landing force will be brought into full combat mode.
Macron's idiot complex
By and large, Emmanuel Macron’s unquenchable desire to see coffins with the bodies of French soldiers arriving from the “country 404” on the streets of his cities marked the beginning of the collapse of the Alliance.
Numerous cracks in NATO “unity” were highlighted by the idiotic Napoleonic complex of French President Macron, who calls for NATO troops to be sent to Odessa. And with his antics he catalyzes the already begun process of NATO’s collapse, says political scientist and publicist, Tsargrad observer Igor Pshenichnikov.
Thus, in his opinion, the EU countries will supposedly receive more freedom, but in reality the USA and Great Britain will fight the war with the hands of European soldiers. At the same time, the hotbeds of globalists will remain “supervisors and sole beneficiaries of the project.”
And its manager is Macron. We must not forget that he is the fosterling of the Rothschild bankers, who are part of that very satanic sect of globalists, says Pshenichnikov.
In this regard, the visit of the US Secretary of State to Paris on the eve of the 75th anniversary of the Alliance does not seem at all accidental. The political scientist is confident that Biden’s envoy was unlikely to persuade Macron to abandon the announced adventure of sending legionnaires to a foreign country. Quite the contrary.
Yes, Biden assured everyone that the US will not send its troops to fight with us. But Europeans will be forced to die there. And they will start with the French, who, according to the plans of globalist strategists, should start a big European war against Russia, says our expert.
Conclusion
The coming months will show how Macron’s game of respectability will end. But the story of a year ago will eloquently remind us of what awaits his landing in Odessa or Nikolaev. Then one “Dagger” covered the shadow NATO headquarters in Lvov. About two hundred officers of various stripes went under the gravestones. This fact was recognized even in the United States, not to mention, of course, the losses incurred.
The president with Napoleon syndrome should also remember how Russian missiles covered the barracks of mercenaries from the same France in the West of the country "u", dooming the survivors to flee home. Actually, this path was trodden for them for more than 200 years by Bonaparte himself.
But, despite this, you should never engage in hating. In any case, it is necessary to continue to methodically and systematically knock out the enemy, regardless of which country’s flag is on his chevron.
Iraqi, Yemeni resistance keep up attacks against Israeli, US targets
Despite heavily militarizing the Red Sea, Washington and Tel Aviv have failed to deter attacks launched by the Resistance Axis in support of Gaza
APR 10, 2024
The Islamic Resistance in Iraq (IRI) on 10 April revealed its forces launched a new attack on the Israeli port city of Haifa, just hours after the US Central Command (CENTCOM) announced its warships had shot down a Yemeni missile fired toward the Gulf of Aden the day before.
“The Mujahideen of the Islamic Resistance in Iraq targeted the Haifa oil port in our occupied territories, with two drones … in continuation of our approach to resisting the occupation, in support of our people in Gaza, and response to the massacres committed by the usurping entity against Palestinian civilians," the IRI said in their statement.
Following the start of the Israeli genocide in Gaza, several Iraqi resistance factions banded together to form the IRI and strike US bases in Iraq and Syria. The IRI suspended the attacks on US bases following the killing of three US soldiers in a drone attack on the Jordanian–Syrian border.
Nevertheless, the umbrella group has continued to target Israeli targets and recently warned it is ready to “arm tens of thousands” in Jordan.
Hours before the latest attack on Haifa port, CENTCOM announced that the USS Mason “successfully engaged and destroyed one inbound anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM)” launched by the Yemeni armed forces on 9 April.
“The ASBM was likely targeting the MV Yorktown, a US-flagged, US-owned vessel being escorted by a US warship USS Laboon (DDG 58) and USS Mason (DDG 87),” the CENTCOM statement adds.
April 9 Red Sea Update
At approximately 3:00 a.m. (Sanaa time) on April 9, USS Mason (DDG 87) and United States Central Command (CENTCOM) forces successfully engaged and destroyed one inbound anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) launched by Iranian-backed Houthi terrorists from… pic.twitter.com/FDbLzbH9Tf
Last Thursday, Ansarallah leader Abdul-Malik al-Houthi revealed that the allied Yemeni armed forces had targeted 90 ships linked to Israel, the US, and the UK since November. The revelation came a few weeks after Sanaa said it would expand the scope of its pro-Palestine operations beyond the Red Sea to include the Indian Ocean.
An illegal US war on Yemen launched in January has done little to deter Yemeni attacks, as US officials recently admitted the failure of their efforts.
Leaders from all different factions that make up the Resistance Axis have continuously stressed that attacks against Israel and its sponsors would come to an end if the Gaza genocide is brought to a halt and humanitarian aid is allowed to enter the strip freely.
Thanks for reading Don’s Substack! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. Don’s Substack is free today. But if you enjoyed this post, you can tell Don’s Substack that their writing is valuable by pledging a future subscription. You won't be charged unless they enable payments.
The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.
Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.
Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted. DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP… PLEASE send what you can today! JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS
Terrorism is a tactic of the elites
Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.
Billy Bob's Blowback Roundtable THE WORLD THROUGH AN INDEPENDENT LEFT LENS
Resize text-+=
By Billy Bob
I did a quick elaboration this morning of some related thoughts after learning about a recent terror attack in Pakistan on a Chinese engineering convoy.
The West (aka the capitalist class) is increasingly embracing the tactic of terrorism to attack their rivals and to do their best to keep global development and prosperity from threatening their domination and control. A Chinese convoy working on a huge infrastructure project in Pakistan was recently attacked, killing five Chinese engineers. Al Qaeda of course is resurgent and is "all of a sudden" active in Yemen as IS continues to destabilize Afghanistan. For years now, terrorists have been murdering soft targets including teachers, police, and other civil servants in Myanmar, in order to destabilize that country and deny China the opportunity to bring development and prosperity. Of course "terrorists" (Western backed proxies) continue to murder in Russia and Iran and as the imperialists find themselves more and more under threat without any viable options, they will turn to terror tactics to a much greater degree than they already do.
I submit that the inculcated conceptualization of autonomous terrorist groups existing and violently pursuing their radical agendas while the West tirelessly works to track them and protect innocent people (you know, the basic understanding of "terrorism" as spread by Hollywood and the State Department on a daily basis) is absolutely false and entirely detached from objective reality.
Terrorism is the tool of the elites. Those that the West calls "terrorists" but do not actually control (like Hezbollah, the IRGC, and the Houthis) of course are not terrorists at all. They are popular groups that resist Western imperialism and who fight against Western backed terrorists (like AL Qaeda and IS).
In reality, terrorism is not a spontaneous grassroots uprising of disenfranchised violent "extremists", far from it. Actual terrorism is a top-down tactic waged against the masses by the wealthy elite.
In a certain sense, "terrorism" is the modern manifestation of the axiom of the billionaire class that (as robber baron Jay Gould aptly asserted) "I can hire one half of the working class to kill the other half." International terrorism including the nazi variation that exists in Eastern Europe and the Narco Terrorists that exist in Central and South America, are absolutely tools of violence and destabilization used by the elites, in order to destroy legitimate governance, political stability, and economic progress.
So what we have here are two competing conceptualizations of reality. One is false, entirely disconnected from reality, and existing solely to confuse the masses and perpetuate the status quo. This is the conceptualization generally known as "liberalism". The other conceptualization is based on the foundational reality of oppositional class interests and the class struggle that results. A class struggle that today manifests itself in the struggle against Western imperialism.
We need to recognize and understand that liberalism is an empty and false ideology designed and proliferated for no other reason than to obfuscate the primacy of class struggle and to keep people from accurately comprehending the paradigms that truly drive policies, strategies, and real world events.
Liberalism invents false paradigms and false conceptual frameworks. Liberalism tells silly dishonest stories (like authoritarianism vs. Democracy, liberal values vs tyranny, rule followers vs. rule breakers etc, etc) in order to disguise reality and pretend that there is no such thing as a global capitalist class that sees the masses as a threat to their interests and who need to be constantly attacked with propaganda, disinformation, mass incarceration, and genocide when necessary.
Meanwhile, the paradigm of class struggle provides the most accurate explanation for why things are as they are. The lens of class struggle allows the masses to see through the lies of liberalism and to accurately perceive reality as it truly exists. In reality, terrorism is not a spontaneous grassroots uprising of disenfranchised violent "extremists", far from it.
Actual terrorism is a top-down tactic waged against the masses by the wealthy elite. Alternatively, resistance to elitist exploitation and subjugation, is not terrorism at all. One must work to do their best to discard their liberal indoctrination in order to know the difference between these entirely different phenomena which liberalism seeks to lie about and manipulate.
If you approve of this article, please share it with your friends and kin.
Help us grow our reach. Lies cost countless lives. And freedom.
We must act together to smash the VILE Western disinformation machine.
Print this article
The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.
Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted. DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP… PLEASE send what you can today! JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW
Garland Nixon
