The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
 Israel Shamir BlogviewTeasers

As a rule I try to see my glass half-full, leaving the half-empty one to other fellows. And now there are some good reasons for an eternal optimist to stick to his positive schedule.

Though it tarried, the summer has come, after all, to the North. The skies are blue, the grass is green and lush, the flowers are breaking out; in short, there is nothing for complaint. If God in His abundant grace bestowed this marvelous beauty upon us, He surely will not abandon us. Summertime, it is much harder to feel dejected than under incessant rain. God is in heaven and all’s right with the world.

And beside the wonderful weather, the whole neo-liberal edifice is collapsing. With the election of Trump, I told you that the Jewish Century (in the words of Slezkine) was on its way out. It is so, though sometimes it is darkest just before the dawn.

You were annoyed by PC, political correctness. And rightly so. You may call a spade, a spade, but you can’t call a Jew, a Jew. They do not like it, and waste no time in making their dislike known. This was the unfortunate experience of Jeff Sessions, the Attorney-General, who referred to “the Jewish AIPAC”. This does not sound very controversial. What can be more Jewish than AIPAC, the American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee, aka Israel Lobby, or Jewish Lobby? This organisation is a member of the Jewish Organisations’ Conference. Its participants are Jews – or politicians and activists hoping to get generous Jewish donations. Still, Jeff Sessions has been called an anti-Semite and a KKK sympathizer.

It had much less impact that you’d expect. There were no apologies, no visible distress. A much forwarded twit (by Andrew Joyce) said “Expect Sessions to be labelled an anti-Semite from here on in for the egregious crime of suggesting that AIPAC is Jewish. Jews in panic mode”.

Why did they panic? An important part of Jewish strength has been due to their stealth mode of operation. They aren’t seen, they try (and often succeed) in being invisible.

If a scientist gets a Nobel prize, or an actress has a hit, and they are Jewish, you’ll know it. If it is a slum landlord, you won’t. AIPAC is in the twilight zone: it is a valuable tool, but with a murky reputation as Capitol Hill’s Genghis Khan. If people will call it “Jewish”, as Sessions did, who knows what else they will call “Jewish” tomorrow? The New York Times?

And here we come to the second and bigger reason for Jewish panic. Their Masters of Discourse system (media, talking heads, opinion makers) does not deliver the goods anymore. They failed to crown their preferred choice Hillary, and they failed to stop advancement of Jeremy Corbyn. The British establishment vowed to derail Corbyn; the newspapers prophesied he would suffer the biggest defeat in the history of the Labour Party. This mild man had been presented as the arch-enemy of the Jews; his hobnobbing with Hamas and other Palestinians had been mentioned endlessly. They demanded his apologies, he had to prove he was not an anti-Semite.

His worst enemies were in his own party. The Guardian attacked him incessantly. The Jewish socialists wanted to skin him. The Jewish Labour MPs were strongly against Corbyn. They participated in an attempted coup, when they and other Blairites voted no confidence in Corbyn. Corbyn appealed to the masses – and won.

Michael Foster is a typical Jew-against-Corbyn. He is a millionaire many times over, a sponsor for Blair, an enabler of the Iraq war, the man whose name is connected to political bribery and to the subversion of the Labour Party in Blair days. He published a ferocious attack on Corbyn in the Mail, and then in the Haaretz newspaper, calling the new leader “a bully who is bad for democracy, for Britain and for British Jews”.

He objected to Corbyn’s rejuvenation of the Party: “Now [Corbyn’s people] are “democratizing” the established Labour Party by swamping the old membership with more radical, more vocal, more socialist, more Green, more anti-establishment middle class and working class supporters. Old and young, they expound a creed of public sector socialism we all experienced as having been completely discredited by the dark economic stasis of the 1970’s.”

But his “discredited” does not impress people anymore. The other way around: whatever they dislike, whatever they condemn, is a good thing for voters. There are real objectives of Corbyn, first of all. It is not a vague “make Britain great”, but a down to earth decision to end austerity, to provide free tuition in universities, to grant housing benefits for youngsters, to renationalise the railways, the National Health Service and other utilities. To take money from the defence budget, and give it to people. This is what people want, and this is what they were promised by Corbyn, while the Conservatives promised more austerity for all and less taxes for the rich.

Trump would do good to borrow a leaf from Corbyn’s cooking book: he organised his supporters into an “inner party”, called Momentum, the nearest thing to Lenin’s idea of a party. Its members acted against British counterparts of John McCain, against the traitors within the Labour. They were so efficient, that Michael Foster called them “Nazi Stormtroopers”, though their leader is Jon Lansman, who grew up in an Orthodox Jewish family, lived in an sraeli kibbutz for a while, and is friendly to the Israeli Left (So much for the alleged anti-Semitism! A sincere Jew is always welcome in any movement, as opposed to two-timers in search of opposition control. Even Josef Stalin, who was not a renowned philosemite, had Jewish comrades at the top positions in the government and in the Party, and they remained loyal to him when others betrayed his memory.)

Foster was a poor prophet. “Labour, under Jeremy Corbyn, has never done so badly in the polls since the early 1930’s”, he wrote. Actually, Labour never did so well for many years, as under Corbyn.

Do you think the Jews hated Corbyn because of his stand on Israel/Palestine? They would like you to think so. They like to be seen as patriots of Israel, but Israel is just a smokescreen to cover their true interests. They are against the working people and for themselves, that is for landlords and moneybags. They have a much better reason to hate Corbyn than the Middle East. Israel/Palestine is after all just an indicator of policy.

Indeed, now Corbyn called to take over empty houses of absentee landlords to house the survivors of the horrible fire in North Kensington. There are at least fifteen hundred empty houses in the borough, whose owners keep them empty in the hope of selling them on at a massive profit when the time is right. There are also empty houses kept by banks and investment companies.

This is why London has such expensive property rents, such long waiting lists for municipal housing, and that’s why native Brits can’t afford to live in London. Their homes are being taken over by people who can afford the high rents or by people who are willing to squeeze into shoe-box-size flats, like the burned-out Grenfell Tower. In both cases the tenants aren’t likely to be English, while the landlords are very likely to hate Jeremy Corbyn.

 
• Category: Economics, Ideology • Tags: Britain, Jeremy Corbyn, Jews, Neoliberalism, Sweden 

Life is not boring with President Trump. Perhaps he hasn’t yet fulfilled many wishes of his voters, but he definitely has made their news much more entertaining. Standing a few inches from impeachment, surviving lynch by media, hunted down by rogue Republican senators, the US President broke three taboos established by his predecessors: he removed the major fear of climate change, he voided the trans-pacific and trans-atlantic trade treaties, and he undermined NATO. Those three achievements would win any president his place in the history books.

Before his unexpected electoral victory, the West was rolling towards a Brave New World, led by the United States and followed by Western Europe. Trade treaties were supposed to eliminate democracy and impose governance by major companies. The Transhuman agenda had been prepared to embark upon an audacious project of completely remaking Homo Sapiens. Our life was about to turn for the worse: with greater expenses, as heating without oil would cost more; with less income, as more immigration would lower salaries; and and with less security for workers.

Trump unhooked the US engine from this train speeding to the inferno. The European train keeps rolling on without its American engine. France celebrated a necrophiliac “marriage” of a cadaver to his same-sex (if dead men have sex) partner in the presence of former French President François Hollande. Such a pagan travesty of the natural human order would become normal all over the world, but for Trump. After Trump, this weird act remained a signifier of what could happen in the New World Order.

Trump did these great things in the aftermath of his pilgrimage to the sources of faith. He went to the Guardians of the Two Mosques. He walked to the greatest church of Christendom, the Holy Sepulchre. He visited the Jewish Wall. He had a private audience with the Pope. Afterwards, he teased the heads of the European states, incurring their hostility. At the end, he came back to his capital to be hunted again.

A man of his own will and designs, nobody’s puppet, Donald Trump had been the first ruling American president to visit the Holy Sepulchre. This great church, first built by the Queen Helena, mother of Emperor Constantine in the 4th century AD, and rebuilt by the Crusader Queen Melisende in the 12th century, harbours the sites of the Crucifixion, of the Burial and of the Resurrection of Christ. Crusades had been launched on its behalf, and its liberation from the yoke of infidels had been the best wish and dearest dream of the shining knights whose names – Godfrey of Bouillon, Tancred, Richard Cœur de Lion – are not entirely forgotten.

Usually, American statesmen stay away from the Holy Sepulchre. They go to the Jewish Western Wall, for a photo op that will do them a lot of good with their Jewish voters or supporters. Trump began his pilgrimage in the Holy Land with the Church, where he had met with the Latin and Orthodox Patriarchs and only afterwards, he went down to the Wall. Moreover, he refused Netanyahu’s request to let him accompany the President. “The Wall has nothing to do with the state of Israel – it is a part of East Jerusalem, a part of Palestine”, his people said to Israeli officials. His visit to East Jerusalem and to Bethlehem hadn’t been presented to the Israeli Foreign Office nor of Israeli government. Thus he stated in the visible form that the Church is more important for him, that despite his positive attitude to the Jews, he is not their obedient servant.

His audience with the Pope in Rome was dignified and sincere. The President and the Pope had a long private talk, and only after that, he departed to political meetings with the NATO leaders.

During his election campaign, Trump declared NATO obsolete, and indeed he was right. NATO had been created in the days of Cold War I to confront the mighty USSR, a superpower with 50,000 tanks and 5 million soldiers. The border went west of Prague and Berlin. Now the border runs east of Kiev and Tallinn, Russia has about one thousand tanks, and its army is of an ordinary European size. NATO is superfluous to deal with Russia.

Perhaps if Trump’s hands were free, he would give NATO his Paris accord treatment, and just walk out, but that was plainly impossible. The allegation of Putin-Trump conspiracy is the last and best defence of NATO, and of the New World Order. While being accused of illegal dealings with the Kremlin, Trump could not dump NATO, drastically cut his military expenditure and attend to friendly relations with Russia. He was even forced to say he changed his mind and became a new believer in NATO.

But his plans did not change. Instead of slamming the door, he accused his NATO partners of not paying their dues. He quarrelled with them, until Mrs Merkel said that “Europe will defend itself by its own means”. The result was the same desirable one: NATO is on its way to dissolution.

But his greatest strike against hidden world governance was in Washington when he dumped the Paris climate accord. The man-made GW (Global Warming) doctrine had been located in the very pinnacle of the single unified narrative impressed upon mankind by the Masters of Discourse, right next to the Holy Holocaust. Ten years ago, a prominent columnist of Boston Globe Ellen Goodman stated that “global warming deniers are now on a par with Holocaust deniers”. Since then, the twain were frequently compared as examples of what “thou shalt not”.

And now, all of a sudden, Trump broke the taboo and gave us freedom. We do not have to profess our fear of rising seas, melting ice and scorching heat when we live through the coldest spring on living memory. It was snowing today, June 2, in Moscow, and in Sweden, the apple trees came to bloom only now, instead of early May, but without Trump, we’d never dare to admit loudly that man-made climate change theory is sheer bunkum.

Actually, I have never met a climate scientist who believed in the GW theory, though few would say that openly in company, for fear of losing their job and being ostracised. In private, they all laughed off the idea that people are able to influence climate. The climate changes all right all the time, but human contribution to the change is negligible. Russian scientists (the same ones who imposed Trump upon Clinton-loving Americans, perhaps?) had made a working model of climate, and they concluded that the main factor of change is solar activity. Carbon dioxide (CO 2) is rather a by-product of warming than the cause, and anyway it is beneficial for vegetation.

As opposed to historical events, physical effects are observable. We shall see with our own eyes who is right. According to the Russian climate model, we are in the beginning of a minor Ice Age. Observations of the Antarctic ice fields confirm that ice is building, not receding. It will not become warmer, as official scientists claimed; it will be much, much colder, at least for the next thirty years. Winter is coming! The fathers of the Kyoto and Paris treaties will surely congratulate themselves with winning the battle against global warming when we freeze. Our influence on climate is very minor, whether for good or for ill, but we shall need oil and coal to survive.

 

God bless Donald Trump for sacking James Comey! Just a few days before this decisive step, Justin Raimondo of Antiwar.com called James Comey “the most powerful man in America”. Comey was pushing the US into an unnecessary war with unwilling Russia. Answering a question by Lindsey Graham, the notorious warmonger, he said that Russians are “the greatest threat of any nation on earth, given their intention and their capability.” This is really not an FBI agenda! He claimed the right to decide the foreign policy of the US, and even what is (MSM) and what is not (Wikileaks) legitimate media. The guy became too big for his boots, and it is good that he’s gotten the boot.

By sacking Comey, Trump has made a first step to recovering his lost ground. Previously, we saw him retreating. He sacked Bannon, he bombed Syria, he promoted his silly daughter and her weird husband to almost-presidential status. The results were sad. The president has been treated as a legless (not just lame) duck. Comey’s behaviour has been especially insulting. If the foreign policy is decided by the FBI and the NY Times, who needs a president, anyway?

I would applaud if Trump were to send killing drones, Obama-style, to deal with John McCain and Lindsey Graham, too. It would make a terrific show: over a beautiful chocolate cake, watching drones flying all the way to these two bastards. But probably Trump is not made of sufficiently stern stuff. He should invent some less spectacular way to get rid of the traitors.

His next step – inviting Mr Sergey Lavrov to the White House – was also good and right, particularly in the context of Comey’s “Russia is a threat” pronouncement. Some wise heads suggest that he chose the wrong timing and exposed himself to attacks. Bollocks! He would be attacked at any time, sooner or later. By doing what he did when he did it, Trump proved that he can. Despite the incredible demonization of Russia, despite the silly claim that he is on Putin’s beck and call, he met with the Russian minister. This was a manly act, something to be proud of.

The warmongers responded with the ridiculous accusation of “leaking strategic secrets to Lavrov”. Ridiculous but meaningful: the idea is to build a conditioned reflex in politicians and statesmen, like Dr Pavlov did for dogs. His dogs began salivating while hearing the bell usually associated with feeding, or they ran away at the sound associated with trashing. A conditioned politician will cross the street to the opposite pavement if a Russian diplomat is sighted, and thus the danger of peace will be removed.

Until now, the clearest cases of conditioning were produced by the Israel Lobby. Jews are wonderfully good at conditioning. So many politicians and journalists have been conditioned into swearing their compliance with Jewish dogma. At the first sound of displeasure, they crawl of all fours and declare their love for the Jews and/or Israel. The late Joe Sobran, a witty Washington journalist, compared them to cows that graze on a field surrounded with low-voltage electric wire. If they try to get close, they get a small but unpleasant shock. For vast majority, this is enough to keep them inside.

And when a politician is conditioned, he can be led wherever his shepherds want. Indeed, the first man to blow whistle on Trump “passing secrets” to Lavrov had been Alan Dershowitz, the torture-loving Zionist, who had conditioned many politicians to love Israel or else.

For this reason I prefer politicians who proved they weren’t scared or conditioned by the Jews. Such is the wonderful Cynthia McKinney – she lost her position on the Capitol Hill, but she did not surrender. This I would call the first test for a politician. If the Jews can subdue you, they will. I’ll add for your comfort: it is not necessary to fight the Jews: just do not give them a single inch, and then they will do what you want. It is practically the same idea as in walking a large dog. Let him have his way once, and he will pull you for miles and miles; keep him on tight leash, and he will obey.

I saw this quality in President Trump, too. He rejected the Jewish call to apologise for the six-pointed star on Clinton’s image, he rejected their insistence to mention the Holocaust, and even when he did, he did not mention Jews, to their great annoyance. Then he gave in for a while, and bombed Syria and made some pro-Israel noises, and he sent his Ivanka to do an even more pro-Jewish routine, and he appeared defeated. But then he had met with Lavrov. Let us hope this time Trump will keep the leash in his strong hands.

I am somewhat embarrassed to cheer the US President for doing such minor routine things as firing an FBI director or meeting with the Foreign Minister of a major state. Next, I’d have to laud him for eating an apple or washing his hands (“Attaboy!”). But one feels that the guy needs our encouragement for doing something right. As the father of three boys, I know: boys need encouragement. And if there is no great achievement to cheer them for, even washing their hands before the meal will do.

Trump has a huge, Herculean task: to turn the battleship America away from its collision course when all the important people in all the important positions are deadly keen to run it full speed ahead. They think the other ship will turn away first; but the “other ship” is actually a lighthouse. It is the rock of the World-Island and its Heartland. Why would so many smart Americans, Brits and Europeans push their luck by courting war and disaster?

Exactly a hundred years ago, in 1917, Vladimir Lenin discovered that the present system necessarily produces world wars. It is not a question of bad guys or good guys, it’s the system, stupid! He wrote about it a concise book called Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, radically updating Marx. The idea is that capitalism evolves from dynamic competitive production to financial capital takeover, while the financial capital unavoidably leads to wars. If financiers rule, war is inevitable, he said, because they are insatiable.

Industrialists, builders, farmers can and will stop at the limits of their territory, but financiers always want more, and there is no natural limit to their expansion. They want to colonise more lands, subjugate more nations and suck up their substance. The only way to save the world from the horrors of war (remember, Lenin wrote after Verdun and Ypres), is to get rid of financial capital’s dominance (Jesus came to the same conclusion whens He expelled the moneychangers from the temple).

That same year, Lenin made his great experiment to rid his country Russia of bankers and other exploiters, while earning their eternal hatred (and volumes of fake news about his bloodthirsty cruelty, in addition). History has proven him partially right: the countries that followed Lenin’s path never began a war, and they never colonised other states, though they did help some to get rid of their leeches and Western interference. Soviet Russia is an example: it was a donor to all the other socialist states, from Georgia to Afghanistan. (Perhaps the communists had been too good for this world. After Russia was de-communised, Russian income went up, while the incomes of practically all the ex-Soviet states plummeted, unless subsidised by the EU.) And they knew no war.

On the other hand, the states that remained under bankers’ sway went to war more and more frequently. They colonised or were colonised. Probably none as often as the US, the home country for the Federal Reserve, for the dollar and for so many great financial companies.

 

For Russians, “Aurora” is not the Goddess of Dawn; it is first of all the battleship Aurora, the legendary cruiser whose thundering salvo over the Winter Palace had started the Russian Revolution in November 1917. Recently I participated in a conference commemorating the 100th anniversary of the Russian Revolution in the Mirror of World Left Movement, in St Petersburg, the City of the Revolution, attended by representatives of European socialist parties. In front of our venue, we had the cruiser Aurora, and it helped concentrate our minds on the only important things, victory and defeat.

The Left had won a hundred years ago, and the Left lost quarter of century ago. When the Soviet system went down, there was a wide-spread illusion that the Left would blossom as the eternally young movement had gotten rid of rusty old-fashioned Russia. This was the idea of the Euro-Communists. Surprisingly, the Left just agonised and died after 1991. The Euro-Communist parties vanished. We did not know it, or we denied it, but apparently, the world Left movement had been connected with the Russian Revolution.

A hundred years ago, Lenin and Stalin solved all their problems by cutting the Gordian knot of greed. They modernised their country, they gave people hope, they offered a choice for the workers. They did not turn Russia into a paradise, though the Soviet Russia of the 1960s had been as developed and as prosperous as any core country of Western Europe.

Paradoxically, the Western workers had been the greatest beneficiaries of the Russian Revolution. The Western owner class had been scared by the Russian communists and afterwards behaved rather nicely. It shared its profits with its workers. Your life has been good because the naval guns of the Aurora threatened your One Per cent. In 1991, the communists were defeated through the treason of their leaders. And since then, the victorious Western owners have gone into full-scale Reconquista. They took away all the achievements of the workers, and created this new world of immense wealth for a few and growing misery for the rest.

But what was lost, can be regained. The capitalists did not despair in 1917, the communists should not despair in 2017. It seems that there is no other way, no shortcut: the world needs new Lenins and Stalins. Greed should be defeated again, media and factories have to be taken away from the owners. Not only minimal, but a maximal income should be legislated.

Populism became a dirty word, but I’ll tell you: there should be more, much more populism. Work with dignity for workers – this populist slogan gave Trump his entry ticket in the White House. People should be given whatever they want. Lenin promised to give land to farmers, factories to workers, peace to nations, and his government did it as much as they could. People now want to be sure of their tomorrows, they want their children to study, they want to have free medical care and affordable, good housing; they want freedom and safety. They want to regain all that was lost after 1991. And if for this purpose some bankers should be retired to the wall at Dawn, so be it.

No more Mister Nice Guy, this is the first commandment for the Left’s comeback. The Left should part its ways with the liberals.

It’s the right time for divorce, if it’s not too late. Oh gosh, but why? The Left and liberals appear happily married. At first, it was a marriage of convenience, but by now it’s a marriage of love. So far so good. It’s just that the life expectancy of the Left became pretty short, as that of an octopussy’s mate. These creatures (Octopus cyanea, to be precise) eat their mates after they have done their job. The Left did its job, and now it is ripe to be eaten. But who will notice the Left’s disappearance?

Sometimes I am ashamed of belonging to the Left. Ask a man on the street, what do the leftists strive for, and he will tell you: these are the good people who support good causes. Transgender toilets, gay marriages, women for CEOs, Syrian refugees, climate change, access for the handicapped, perhaps unemployment benefits. They are certainly against immigrant discrimination, micro-insults, they are for political correctness and identity politics. The Left hates Putin and Trump, and loves Israel though not its present Prime Minister.

Or even worse. With a sense of short, sharp shock I’ve read it three times, and I couldn’t believe my eyes. A honourable writer of Unz.com, Dr. Paul Gottfried, described the red-faced ADL ex-boss, Abe Foxman as a “leftist”. This is really an insult. A Jewish nationalist like Mr Foxman can’t be a leftist. Stalin would have sent him to the Far North-East of Siberia, where the hard work and hard climate would cure him of his permanent indignation and constipation. Leftists are not against “white Christian majority population,” as Gottfried claims. Leftists are for the working class majority.

There is no light between the Left and the liberal agenda, you’d say. And now, surprise! Until 1990, the Left and the liberals were sworn enemies. The Left was for the workers; its icon, Stalin, scared the hell out of liberals; he advised the German Communists to make an alliance with the German Far Right instead of Liberals; its Marxism was not the cultural abomination, but real trouble for the rich guys. But after 1990, the Left joined with the victorious liberals – for practical reasons. As it happens in marriage of convenience, their relations turned to true love, and eventually they became one.

In politics, Occam’s Razor works mercilessly. The Left had lost its own identity, and a reason to exist. Now it disappears, having been eaten by liberals. Usually, the way to oblivion goes through a government coalition. Whenever the Left joined the government of the liberals (they could call it National Unity, or Popular Front, or Stop the Beast Government), the Left melted in the liberals’ hot embrace.

I am very sorry that the Counterpunch, a publication I liked and wrote for many years (admittedly, in Alex Cockburn’s days), has succumbed to that disease. They still call themselves the Voice of American Left, but they publish John Feffer. The nauseous beastie, Feffer, a “leftist”-for-free-immigration-war-with-Russia-and-against-Trump, made a call: “Everyone to the left of Ann Coulter should be on board. If ever there were a time for unity, it is now.” Oh no, I want to stay with Ann Coulter who wrote on almost the same day Feffer penned his garbage: Let Russia be our sister-state. And the last thing I want is unity with Feffer.

 

Fefferite unity for all brought us to this place: the Left is dying, and the Liberals will inherit the lot. The anti-Liberal Right is not a viable alternative, alas. The recent Dutch elections on March 15 proved that point.

I wonder whether you followed these elections, the most interesting and most important event coming out of Netherlands since the Glorious Revolution. It was impossible to predict how the Dutch would vote. The Trump effect, people said darkly, and hinted that the Dutch would vote for their own Trump, called Geert Wilders.

The guess was quite a reasonable one. The Netherlands had been governed by a joyless coalition of Right and Left. It makes no difference whether you prefer left or right, anyway the parties of Left and Right rule together. It is the establishment that governs, while democracy provides a smoke screen.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: France, Neoliberalism, Netherlands, The Left 
(A Light-headed discussion of grave affairs)

What’s wrong with gassing your own people? After all, California does it and Oklahoma plans it, and these are fine advanced states. I would not like the Russians to send their howling missiles to Sacramento: they gas their own people. While gassing someone’s else people may be considered a sort of interference in their affairs, gassing of one’s own people is clearly one’s own business. Mind your own business, sir, gas your own.

And if these are beautiful babies that you worry about, why, the US flushes them down the drain, a million beautiful babies a year are ripped out by abortionists. Would you like Vlad Putin to strafe the Planned Parenthood headquarters at 434 West 33rd Street, New York, NY as they kill beautiful babies?

Who are “your own people” is also open for interpretation. A few years ago I went to the funeral of a young Palestinian Christian girl who has been gassed to death by Israelis in her own bedroom in Beit Jalla near Jerusalem (they shot a tear gas bomb into her window). Was she “their own people”? If you say she wasn’t, then, by the same measure, the Jews of Germany weren’t “their own people” for the Germans, and then, Hitler did not “gas his own people” making him a great improvement on Bashar Assad, according to the ADL-authorised version.

Why it is so God-awful to gas people and/or beautiful babies, while frying them with napalm, pouring Agent Orange over them or starving them to death is a proper thing to do. Or nuking them, indeed. Would nuking Nagasaki count as a lesser crime than anything else? If it is a question of aesthetics, I think napalm makes the worst pictures of deep-fried babies as those made in Gaza after Israeli attack. They are so awful that I forbade my Italian publisher to place one of them on the cover of my book. In comparison to them, gas deaths are almost blissful.

For these reasons I do not intend to discuss whether Bashar Assad did, or he didn’t. The story is murky, and the Russians – and the alternative press – had a few mutually contradicting versions Rashomon-like. The whole thing was a false flag cautiously prepared by the rebels and/or Americans; or it was a freak accident, a result of Syrian air force hitting a rebel chemical weapons factory, like the US did a week later; or was it a combination of two, the rebels using the spill to raise hell. Washington is not Kurosawa, and the Trump administration immediately declared they knew what happened before the dust settled, just like Bush and Netanyahu all knew on 9/11. For me it is of little interest: in what way these eighty people died – out of hundreds of thousands who have died in the Middle East wars started by President Bush the Senior and continued by his worthy successors.

The verdict of official Washington is of very little value, after the Kuwaiti incubator baby hoax, the Iraqi WMD of Powell, Libyan atrocities and similar fake news. This boy has cried wolf too often for us to pay attention this time. I do not trust anything the mainstream media tells us, for they proved to be inveterate liars. But who cares even if it were true, when we have heard US State Secretary Madeleine Albright saying it was worth while to kill 500,000 beautiful babies to weaken Iraq?

I would advise you to dismiss this horror story of he-gassed-his-own-people and banish it out of your mind. Who cares? It is just a psy-war against his-own-people, meaning you. Rejecting such stories will restore your ability to judge right. Reject whatever they want you to discuss out of hand and you will regain freedom of mind.

However, the underlying story of Donald’s U-turn is one of the most entertaining and riveting stories that deserves to be looked at. Without unnecessary embellishments (“he saw dead babies”) it is even better. After years of twits against Middle Eastern wars and for friendship with Russia, after going against the establishment and winning, such full surrender is amazing.

It is less amazing if you think of his choice: to be removed from power and locked up in the cellars of Alcatraz or Guantanamo. The CIA and The New York Times with help of the judiciary and the ever-treacherous McCain had plotted to jail or kill Trump, and he saw no other way to save his skin but doing a full Canossa.

Trump had some ambitions, but becoming a martyr hasn’t been one of them. He who fights and runs away, lives to fight another day, he murmured to himself, dumped Bannon and bombed Syria.

It worked like magic. His avowed enemies in Congress and in the media greeted him like a young lad coming out of a cathouse: boy, now you became a man! Now you are a real president! Fareed Zakaria blessed him on CNN: “Donald Trump became President of the United States last night.” The Jews forgot their silly stuff of antisemitism and threw their yarmulkes high in his honour. Mme Clinton stopped sulking and said now she does not regret losing the elections to this fine man. A small deed, but a great reward, Donald could say. If Paris was worth a mass, Washington is worth a strike.

After all, America is an evolved Comanche and Apache tribal union, and the Great White Chief has to have the biggest string of scalps at his belt.

The Russians weren’t unduly upset. They have tolerated Israeli missile strikes and bombings of Syria all the time; so why would they object now? The Russian line is as follows: we fight the terrorists, we do not fight for Bashar Assad against other forces, be it Israel, Turkey, Kurds or the US or against moderate opposition. Yes, it is unfair to Assad, but this is the Russian attitude, like it or not. They do not intend to fight the whole West, Israel and the Sunni kingdoms. They fight against ISIS, Al Nusra and similar extreme factions of Islamic movement. So Trump’s strike annoyed them, but it did not cross the red line they drew.

The Western media stressed that the Syria strike has been aimed against Putin, first of all, that the intention was to humiliate the Russian ruler. The Russians did not think so. For them it was an affair between Trump and Assad. Putin did not feel humiliated, and that’s why he received State Secretary Rex Tillerson at the Kremlin. He and Mr Lavrov told Tillerson that the US has absolutely zero evidence for their claim; that this event should be investigated; that they do not believe Assad was behind it. Tillerson proposed that the Russians switch sides in Syria, and this proposal was been immediately rejected. Lavrov quickly recapped previous the causes of war in Iraq, Libya and Syria; he reminded them of the proven case of 2013 chemical weapons hoax. Still, they parted without acrimony. Russian-American relations are not worse than they were; mainly due to Putin’s dogged desire to avoid war with the US for as long as he can, preferably for another five or six years at least.

Trump managed the China angle well. He claimed that President Xi expressed his understanding or even approval of the strike. The Chinese deny that, but they did not make too much of it. They abstained at the Security Council vote on Syria, and Russia had to veto it alone. This is a big achievement for the American President, and an unexpected one.

The pundits thought Trump planned to befriend Russia in order to isolate China; surprisingly he used China to isolate Russia. The Russian and the Chinese Presidents should worry about this American gambit more than about the Syrian strike.

 

If President Trump would say “The sun rises in the east and sets in the west”, undoubtedly the New York Times will sarcastically laugh and claim that the ignorant redneck who became the president thanks to Putin the Killer’s interference, is not aware of not-so-recent advances in astronomy that make his sentence truly absurd. There was no statement, not a single Trump’s twit that the mass media did not debunk and made a subject of mirth.

However, as time goes, we learn that Trump knows things other people do not know or do not dare to say. Here are three statements of Trump that caused disbelief and indignation but later on, they turned out to be absolute truth.

Sweden

In February, Trump said: “You look at what’s happening in Sweden. Sweden, who would believe this? Sweden. They took in large numbers [of immigrants]. They’re having problems like they never thought possible.” His enemies almost died of laughter. “What has he been smoking?”, – asked Carl Bildt, elderly Swedish statesman, the leading pro-NATO Russia-basher of this country. Swedish devotees of the NWO competed for the silliest response: “we went to sleep at 9 pm”, “a moose has been sighted”, “we ate too much”.

A few days passed, and this complacency was destroyed by immigrants rioting in a Stockholm suburb. They burned cars, women were molested, peaceful Sweden has been turned into a trouble spot. It was even worse in Malmo, the third city of Sweden, practically vacated by Swedes. Immigrants took over its urban centre, while the prosperous Danes had bought its leafy suburbs. Swedish media tried to keep these events under wraps, but failed. It appears that immigrant crimes have a special code R291, making it forbidden for the press to publish. The riots and the displacement of native Swedes are a real problem in Sweden, and they are likely to impact the Swedish vote next year.

So Trump was right, and his debunkers were wrong. Thanks to the obedient Swedish media, the government played the game of «Tout va très bien, Madame la Marquise», “everything is fine”, but Trump knew what was brewing and he did not hesitate to say that. In a few days it became clear that he was right; but surely his detractors did not apologise and did not acknowledge their fault.

By the way, an important Swedish newspaper has published an attack on yours truly. They did not like that I “designated” Trump’s triumph as a historical turning point, “the Jewish century” was now at an end, and Europe will rise from “the liberal tyranny”, and in particular, “the happy slaves” in Sweden would have the strength to rise up against the stifling media and fanatical feminism.” To make clear that I am a rotten egg, they added “a racist and holocaust denier”, just like Trump. This is a mark of disobedience. They can’t get off this topic, for some reason.

Wiretapping

In March, Trump Tweeted “Obama had my “wires tapped” in TrumpTower just before the victory.” And the mainstream media exploded in laughter. Their headlines called it “unsubstantiated insinuations” or worse. (One could think that their accusations of Russian interference were ever substantiated!) It took a few days and proof emerged.

This was obvious from the very beginning to whoever listened to Edward Snowden and to Julian Assange of Wikileaks. The secret services surveil everybody and everything. Not in vain, after Trump’s victory, Obama allowed the CIA and NSA to spread their illegally obtained data among other agencies without judicial control. This was done to facilitate future leaks of poison and make the location of the leak nigh impossible, or quite difficult.

Anyway, the claim of Trump has been validated by Devin Nunes, the brave head of the House Intelligence Committee, who saw proof of the surveillance and reported it to his President. (A propos, Nunes was the man who openly supported the Liberty survivors and the enquiry of the Israeli attack on the American vessel. Even brave people are usually hesitant to quarrel with the Israeli Lobby, but he did. Such a person can already do anything, even report to his president that he was wiretapped.)

The agencies indeed wiretapped Tramp and his assistants, and they spread the data widely. After the inauguration, the data was leaked into CIA-related media. At first, it was not even denied: on January 20, the New York Times carried a front-page story with the headline: “Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides” saying, inter alia, that “American law enforcement and intelligence agencies are examining intercepted communications and financial transactions as part of a broad investigation into possible links between Russian officials and associates of President-elect Donald J. Trump.”

This surveillance and its leak caused the Flynn affair. I have learned what Flynn actually discussed with the Russian ambassador. I haven’t seen this being reported in the US media: they darkly hissed of Flynn “discussing sanctions” with the Russian. The truth was somewhat different. Flynn called the Ambassador when Obama in a fit of fury expelled dozens of Russian diplomats in 24 hours just before the New Year’s Eve, and forbade them to use their holiday vacation premises. Obama did it in order to poison the US-Russia relations, for as you know, the NWO-beholden Democrats want at least a cold war, or preferably a nuclear one with the Russian bear. Obama tried his worst to spoil the relations to such an extent, that even Trump would find it hard to heal.

Flynn did his best (I presume on orders of Trump) to calm the Russians. He offered and procured help: the expelled diplomats needed a plane to leave on very short notice, and seats weren’t available. Flynn fixed it. Flynn told the Ambassador that Trump would roll back Obama’s punitive measures related to the expulsion. The Ambassador passed the message to Putin, and Putin, always a gentleman, refrained from tit-for-tat expulsion of the US diplomats from Moscow, as he would definitely do otherwise. Putin even invited children of the US diplomats to a Christmas event in Kremlin. So Flynn acted for the benefit of America and its diplomats, and saved the two great countries from much aggravation. He deserves a medal for his work, not a dismissal; and it is really shame that Trump could not keep him.

The newspapers keep denying the wiretap, but they do so in a tricky way: as surveillance did not literally “tap wires” (for there are no wires between mobiles) they swore it did not happen. This is an old trick, practiced by Autolycus, grandfather of Odysseus, and he learned from his father Hermes how to cheat under oath.

So Trump spoke truth, and he proved it in a most impressive way.

Jews Under Threat

The third case of Trump being ridiculed and fully vindicated is the most remarkable one. There were recently many threats against Jewish institutions all over the US. The Jewish media connected the threats with Trump’s election. They called it a “wave of threats”, “second wave of threats”, “third wave of threats”. Apparently, dozens, if not hundreds of Jewish institutions received intimidating calls and threats.

The Jewish journalists are usually Trump-haters. Not for some specific Jewish reasons: they are for immigration, for race-mixing (always excepting Jews), for re-gendering, and for finance. For them, Trump’s attack on financier George Soros, Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen, and Goldman Sachs Chair and CEO Lloyd Blankfein has been an antisemitic attack as they are Jewish.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: American Media, Donald Trump 

The Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu is the friendly calf of the Russian proverb who sucks two cows. After his rather successful meeting with President Trump, he went to the enemy No.1 of the United States, and to his good friend, President Putin, in chilly Moscow, where he always gets a warm reception.

This time he came just before Purim, the jolly Jewish feast, when the Jews celebrate their legendary rise to prominence in Persia, some 2500 years ago. This feast (coming this Sunday March 12) was very much on the mind of two men. To keep up with tradition, Netanyahu was supposed to bring his host some Purim sweets, homentashen in Yiddisch, or “Haman ears”, triangular pastries filled with jam.

One of the nicest street scenes you can observe in the Orthodox Jewish quarter of Jerusalem, Mea Shearim, is played on the next day, when perfectly dressed in 18th century garb dainty maidens carry neat willow baskets with sweets, shalahmones to their friends and relatives, like so many Little Red Riding Hoods. Purim is the Jewish carnival, Mardi Gras, and it almost coincides with the beginning of Christian Lent. Carnival is the time for doing things topsy-turvy: Jews get drunk and boisterous; in the old days they were likely to manhandle a Christian, preferably a priest and generally indulged in wayward frolics.

Putin, friendly as ever, wished his guest joyous Purim, and Bibi, as on the cue, immediately revealed the reason for his visit. Persians wanted to kill Jews on that day, but God prevented that, he said. Nowadays Iranians, who are the Persians, want to kill the Jews, but the Jewish state is strong etc. Bibi came to ask Putin to drop Iran; to remove Iranian fighters from Syria; block Iranian transit to Lebanon; or even to join an anti-Iranian coalition, and this reference to Purim had been an argument in defence of his audacious request.

Putin has been framed to play the part of Artaxerxes, the silly Persian king, who had been convinced by the arch-seductress Esther to arrange for mass killings of the enemies of the Jews and for giving the Jews the preferential treatment they enjoy to this very day. Bibi played the part of Esther in this short Purim-Spiel (Purim Play), traditional comic performance the Jews usually enacted on Purim. He tried to entice Putin with prospect of joining President Trump, the Saudi King and himself against the evil Persians.

Netanyahu was worried that the Syrian war is almost over (he’d love it to last forever, until the last Syrian), and the Iranians who contributed so much to Damascus victory will probably stay and keep their Hezbollah friends in Lebanon resupplied. And it means Israel won’t be able to bomb Lebanese and Syrians as freely as she had been accustomed to. Russians never used their S-400 missiles against Israeli jets when they intruded into Syria, but Iranians perhaps won’t be that reluctant to respond. Just a few days ago the Iranians demonstrated their Russian-supplied S-300 system is fully operational.

Netanyahu could try and tempt Putin with his ability to mobilise Israel Lobby on his side, and to end anti-Russian hysterics in Washington. The Jews have a lot of power in the US; surely the Jewish state’s Prime Minister can swing them the way he likes, if Putin agrees to his demands. And Trump had made some very anti-Iranian statements, to make the suggestion plausible.

Many people were anxious to see how Putin will respond to his Jewish seducer. Putin laughed him off. Even if you never watch videos, I strongly suggest to see with your own eyes these few seconds of mirthful laugh, of totally relaxed Russian President who listened to the Israeli Prime Minister as the indulgent father to an insistent son who just had tried an umpteenth time to trick him to buy a dangerous toy. No way, son, – thought Putin, and he said: “that was 2500 years ago. Now we live in a different world”.

I was not particularly anxious, as a few days ago this very dialogue had been dress-rehearsed, by Russian Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Mr Michael Bogdanov and the journalists of Al Hayat, the prominent Saudi-owned Arab newspaper of record published in London. Bogdanov is an excellent diplomat, smart, good-looking, spiritual, intellectual and knowledgeable. He served as the Russian Ambassador in Tel Aviv and Cairo, and he knows everybody who is somebody in the Middle East by his first name. Now he is also the special representative of the President in the Middle East. He is a man who knows Russian foreign policy in the Middle East as well as anybody. His responses could not be far-removed from Putin’s views.

He was grilled by Raed Jabr, the Moscow correspondent of Al Hayat, a dark and svelte Palestinian who represents mainstream Arab view prevalent from Riyadh to Beirut. Do you remember the favourite line of U.S. presidents and legislators that “there is no light between the U.S. and Israel”? Judging by Jabr’s persistent questions, there is no light between Israel and Saudi Arabia, too.

Time after time, Al Hayat man asked when and whether Iranians will withdraw from Syria. Mr Bogdanov replied: In Syria there are tens of thousands of foreign volunteers, thousands of Tunisians, Moroccans and Afghanis, while the Iranians, like the Russians, are in Syria by request of the legitimate government, and only the legitimate government can issue them walking orders. “The official leadership may demand all foreign forces to withdraw after reaching a solution”.

His words were imprecisely but fluently rendered by the WaPo “The lawful authorities who will be lawfully chosen in Syria would be the ones with the right to demand the withdrawal of all foreign powers from the country,” Bogdanov said. Actually Bogdanov spoke only of legitimate government after the settlement, not necessarily of a government chosen in this or other way.

Bogdanov rejected the talk about the export of the Iranian revolution, and the alleged Iranian desire to expand their influence in the Middle East, in particular in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Bahrain. He called for US and Iranian rapprochement with Saudi participation. In Syria he called for a secular system, not a Shiite and not a Sunni Muslim and not a Christian, comes by way of free, fair and transparent elections at home and abroad including the participation of refugees in neighbouring and non-neighbouring countries, under the auspices of the United Nations.

Bogdanov complained that the US wants to keep Iran out of negotiations on Syria. “Americans are working without respect for international laws. We must respect the sovereignty of Syria, a member state of the United Nations.” He is clearly pessimistic about dealing with Syrian rebels: “They say, the revolution does not end until after the overthrow of the regime, when Bashar al-Assad and his clique will be brought to an international court. With this goal, the war can go on forever.”

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Iran, Israel, Russia, Syria 

Full disclosure: I’ve met with Russians. I met with a Russian this morning. She brought me coffee. Such crazy and dangerous things can occur in Moscow. I am afraid the CIA and NSA could take notice of this meeting, and then it can be used – even against you. “You have perused an article by Israel Shamir. Were you aware he had Russian contacts?”

Though I am not too young, this is the first time I have witnessed such a witch-hunt. In Russia, there are many foreigners, Europeans and Americans as well, and Russians mingle with them freely, with no fear. The Russians are not afraid to meet with the US Ambassador; they are rather proud of the occasion. When the US Ambassador throws a party or holds a reception, all who-is-who in Moscow come to Spaso-House, the residence.

Even in Stalin’s days, the Russians went to the reception, and Mikhail Bulgakov depicted such a reception as Satan’s ball in his Master and Margarita. In recent years, all Russian opposition figures have visited the US ambassador and had had hearty chats with him.

Not only in Russia. The Wikileaks-published State Department cables describe hundreds of meetings between US Ambassadors and opposition figures all over the world. Amazingly, nowhere was such a meeting considered as a breach of national security and an incapacitating blemish on an opposition leader.

Well, probably in light of the Russian scare, nations should enact laws forbidding a person who had met with the US ambassador from occupying any public position or running for election. They could call it the Flynn Law, in the spirit of reciprocity.

The US political class has brought this calamity upon itself. If whoever met the Russian ambassador or a Russian government minister, or the Russian president (God forbid) is unsuitable for governing, the whole top layer of American politicians would be disqualified. Last year even Jill Stein, the super-kosher woman of the US politics, the Green Party candidate for president, visited Moscow and had a place at the table with Putin, before flying back and asking to recount the Wisconsin vote.

The Russians watch the new witch-hunt over the ocean with mild surprise. They did not know they were so formidable, so scary. Nor did I. I can list Russia’s faults from today till next Christmas – it is a country of terrible bureaucracy, of impossible laws, of annoying police, of huge social gaps, of harsh weather and bad roads – but I do not know of a single reason for considering Russia a threat to anybody. The Russians are keen to accept international law, they believe in national sovereignty, they do not tell other states how they should manage their civic life or do business. And they do not meddle in other states’ affairs, though it would be better if they did.

When in February 2014, Ms Nuland, then of the US State Department (the ‘F*ck the EU’ lady mercifully lost her job with ascent of Trump) and the US Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt stoked the Maidan fire and doled out cookies in Kiev, the Russian Ambassador in Kiev made himself scarce. Perhaps he went to play golf. Not a single Russian political figure had bothered to go to Kiev and talk to people. Russian non-interference in the Ukraine’s affairs had been so scrupulous, as if the Ukraine were a remote Latin American state of little interest to Russians.

That fateful February three years ago, the only thing in which the Russians had interested were the Sochi Olympic Games. Kiev burned, but they discussed the biathlon. Biathlon, forsooth! The governors of Ukraine provinces asked Moscow whether it would come to save the day of the legitimate government, but in Moscow nobody picked up the receiver. On February 22, 2014, when the president Yanukovych escaped Kiev and went to Kharkov for meetings with the leaders of the Eastern Ukraine, the Russians could have established the legitimate government in Kharkov and at least split the Ukraine into two halves, with very little effort. But they did not show up and they did not say they would support such a government, and the people of Ukraine accepted the Kiev putsch.

If Putin were just slightly similar to the fire-breathing image of himself in the Western media, the Ukraine would be a Western province of Russia, as it had been for the last four hundred years, and it could have been done legally, without firing a single shot. But Vladimir Putin is not Vlad the Terrible of your comic strips. He is a great procrastinator, a man who will do nothing if possible. He goes into action only if there is no way to postpone it. He took the Crimea, or rather accepted the Crimeans’ demand to join Russia, as he (correctly) thought his people would not forgive him for surrendering the peninsula with its main fleet base to NATO and the Russian population to the tender mercy of ferociously anti-Russian Western Ukrainian gangs.

My old Israeli friend and Russia watcher, Yakov Kedmi, the former head of an Israeli intelligence service, predicted in April 2014 that the Russian army would take East and South Ukraine before the May 2014 presidential elections in Ukraine. I dismissed that as a pipe dream. Putin will do nothing if he is given half a chance. I was right.

Putin acted in Georgia in 2008 only after his peace-keeping troops had been attacked by the NATO-trained troops of President Saakashvili, who famously said his army would take Moscow in a fortnight. Even then he did not take Tbilisi the capital, but quietly pulled his troops back.

Even such provocations as the removal of Russian war-time graves and memorials, as stripping ethnic Russians of their citizenship rights in the Baltics, did not force his hand.

The last thing he wanted was to quarrel with the United States. He approved of the US invasion of Afghanistan and opened his territory for the transit of the US troops and weapons. He approved the resolutions on Iraq before the US invasion; he spoke against the invasion only in tandem with France and Germany. He agreed (rather, abstained) on the West-sponsored resolution on Libya leading to the murder of Colonel Gadhafi. He gave up the Russian bases in Vietnam and Cuba. He withdrew his troops from Tarsus, his only naval base in Syria, and returned to Syria only in face of an imminent American attack on the sovereign state, at request of its legitimate leader.

The Western media presents Russia as a ferocious Rottweiler, and the Russians do not recognise themselves in the mirror of the Western media. Russia is a Newfoundland dog, not a Rottweiler. It is big, strong, peaceful and not aggressive. I know, I have had Newfoundlands. Even a very nasty cat can’t wake up their fighting spirit.

Ideologically, Putin’s Russia is not all that different from the West. March 8, Women’s Day, is an official holiday in Russia, and Russian women have all the rights their Western sisters have, or even dream of. Russian billionaires are free to build the biggest yachts in the known universe. They pay as little taxes as anybody, a flat income tax rate of 13%. Even Trump is unlikely to beat that.

Communism is dead, and the official propaganda machine daily tells Russians that the Soviet days were dreadful, in spite of the living generation’s tender memories of Soviet equality. Communists have no access to the mass media, despite being the second biggest party in Russia.

The small and unpopular pro-Western (say, Clintonesque) opposition receives a lot of government support. They are allowed to demonstrate, they have a TV and newspapers, while anti-Western opposition, whether Trumpist or Communist, has been kept in the cold, without demos and only marginal media.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Media, Deep State, Putin, Russia 

Mike Moore’s flabby mug always looks indecently exposed, like middle-aged female genitalia. The fat slob could lead the old hags’ march without the pink pussyhat. Just his own visage would suffice. He is actually similar to George Soros: the same obscene pussyface. For me, his appearance would doom him: like Oscar Wilde, I believe that ugly creatures are immoral as well. It’s enough to look at Madeleine Albright, another pussyface, for a proof. But if you need more, his Stupid White Men has been the most execrable book produced in the US in this century: there he claimed that were 9/11 passengers black, the hijack would never have succeeded. Now the Pussyface bared the hidden plans of Putin and called for enthroninge Clinton because Trump is a Russian spy. Years ago he spoke against the Iraq War; now he calls for the nuclear Armageddon. With such enemies, we should not give up on Trump.

Trump is down, cry the fans and haters alike. He’s been defeated, broken, never to rise again. He is a lame duck soon to be impeached. He will crawl back to his golden lair leaving the White House to his betters, or even better, he will run to his pal Vlad Putin.

No, my friends and readers, Trump is fighting, not running, but things take time. It is not easy to change the paradigm, and the odds were heavily slanted against Trump from step one. Still, he got this far, and he will go on. Stubborn guy, and he perseveres. The corrupt judges chain his hands; the CIA and NSA reveal his moves to the NYT, CNN, NBC; but he stands up, ready to carry the fight to his – and American people’s – enemy, the hydra of so many triple-letter heads.

There are sprinters who want to see victory right away, and they despair at the first setback. A power-intoxicated judge opens America’s gates for the ISIS advance troops, voiding a very moderate and sensible executive order, and they wring their hands. Terrible, but what could Trump do? To do nothing because his order would be overturned? He had to try, so the people will see and judge the judges. Line the judges up against the (Mexican border) wall at sunrise? He can’t do it yet, though it would make sense.

Flynn had to leave, and they exclaim: all is lost. It would be bad indeed, if Trump were to take it lying down, but he did not. At a very public and well-covered press-conference with Prime Minister Netanyahu, Trump said: “Michael Flynn, General Flynn is a wonderful man. I think he’s been treated very, very unfairly by the media — as I call it, the fake media. It’s very, very unfair what’s happened to General Flynn, the way he was treated, and the documents and papers that were illegally — I stress that — illegally leaked. Very, very unfair.” These are fighting words, of a man who lost a battle, or a skirmish, but he still fights the war.

Perhaps it would be better to keep Flynn, but politics is an art of possible. Trump’s words of support for the dismissed general were already out of line.

Trump had met with Netanyahu, and the faint-of-heart bewailed the US President’s surrender to the nefarious lobby. The other way round. The ADL, the Jewish assault crew, attacked him for refusing to mouth their favourite word “antisemitism”, Haaretz declared “Yes, Trump is an antisemite”, the NY Times editorialised why he did not condemn the a-s word as demanded; Rabbis called his remarks “terrifying” and “anti-Zionist” for Trump refused to tromp the well-trodden impasse called “two-states solution”. By the way, Palestinians do support one-state-solution mentioned by Trump and do not believe in the mythic two-states-solution, the Middle-Eastern equivalent of squaring the circle. Trump deftly applied his weapon of choice, Bibi Netanyahu’s support; with this weapon a-blazing, Trump was able to beat off the bouts of a-s hunters without doing what they wanted.

It would be better to forget about Jews altogether, but it can’t be done while they own all the fake-news media and the hearts of ordinary Americans. Refusing to condemn a-s is as far as an American politician can walk without falling of the earth’s disc altogether.

After this explaining-away, let us admit that the first month of Trump’s first term was an uphill one. We hoped the defeated forces would be reasonable and allow the new president to implement his agenda, but they carried on their arrière-garde battle. His task is huge: Trump endeavours to bury globalising capitalism before it buries European and American workers. Without Trump, America and Europe would be invaded by millions made homeless by R2P wars. Without Trump, the American and European workers would work in hamburger joints, while the financiers would bloat off their blood and sweat. Such a U-turn couldn’t pass unopposed.

Look back at people who achieved radical changes of such magnitude. I will not mention names so you won’t be scared. None of them had a specially nice personality, but they had charisma, iron will, good memory, vision and perseverance; they were master tacticians, i.e. they felt when it was the right time to retreat and when to advance. Perhaps Trump has these qualities. But besides, they usually had a loyal and supportive party, or at least an army or secret services at their disposal. Trump has none.

These additional tools are necessary to overcome the undemocratic and unelected elements of the government. In the US, the judiciary and media, two “powers” out of four, are profoundly un- or even anti-democratic. The media is owned by the media lords, usually rich Jews, and it promotes their agenda. Judges are instinctively anti-democratic; they despise democracy and popular opinion.

The judiciary is also heavily Judaised: three out of nine (or four out of nine) Supreme Court judges are Jewish. President Obama had tried to install an additional Jewish judge, and pro-Jewish elements will fight to prevent a non-Jew “stealing” his place. There are so many Jewish lawyers and Jewish teachers of law that this puts its imprimatur upon the whole profession. No radical change can be entertained and implemented unless these powers are limited.

Trump has no loyal party, no reliable and loyal secret services. The US intel is against him, spies on him and delivers the goods to his political enemies. The Republican Party is suspicious of Trump. There are too many Republicans sharpening knives for his back, beginning with the old traitor, John McCain. Republican Senators and Representatives owe a huge debt to (a large extent Jewish) donors; they need the support of the media in order to get re-elected.

Trump should establish control over his party, by placing his loyalists and weeding out his adversaries in the party apparatus, in the Senate and Congress. I’d advise him to break, humiliate and unseat a prominent hostile Republican Senator, even if the seat would go to a Democrat. It is not an impossible task. This would instill some fear in the meek hearts.

 

President Trump had paid a hefty advance to the Jews. He did (almost) all they wanted for their Jewish state: he promised to move the US embassy to the occupied Jerusalem thus legalising their annexation of the holy city; he condoned their illegal settlements, he gave them starred positions in his administration; he told the Palestinians to drop their case in the ICC or else, he even threatened Iran with war. All that in vain. Jewish organisations and Jewish media attack Trump without slightest hesitation and consideration. His first step in curbing the soft invasion wave had been met with uniform Jewish vehemence.

He was called a new Hitler and accused of hatred of Muslims: what else could cause the President to arrest, even for a few months, the brave new migration wave from seven Middle Eastern states? Today he singles out Muslims, tomorrow he will single out Jews, said Jewish newspapers. Migration is the lifeblood of America, and the Muslim refugees are welcome to bring more diversity to the US.

Massive demonstrations, generously paid for by this notable Jewish philanthropist Mr George Soros, shook the States, while judges promptly banned the banning order. They insisted the orders are anti-Muslim, and therefore they are anti-constitutional. Somehow the constitution, they said, promises full equality of immigrants and does not allow to discriminate between a Muslim and a Christian.

This sounds an unlikely interpretation of the US Constitution. The US, and every other state, normally discriminates, or using a less loaded word, selects its potential citizens. The choice of seven states hasn’t been made by Donald Trump but by his saintly predecessor: President Barack Obama, this great friend of Muslims, made the choice personally some years earlier. So Trump had made a most moderate and modest step in the direction of blocking immigration by picking states already selected by the Democratic President.

One could reasonably claim that people of the seven states have a very good reason to hate America, and the reasons were supplied by previous US Presidents.

Libya, the most prosperous North African state until recently, had been ruined by President Obama: NATO invasion had brought Libya down; instead of stopping migration wave Libya had been turned into a jumping board for the Africans on their way North.

Syria is another Obama’s victim: by his insistence that ‘Assad must go’, by massive transfer of weaponry, money and equipment (remember white Toyota pickups?) to the Islamic extremists, he ruined this country.

Iraq has been ruined by President Bush Jr: he invaded the most advanced Sunni state, broke it to pieces and gave the centre of the country to the Isis.

Somalia has been ruined by President Bush Sr: he invaded this unfortunate country in the early nineties, when the USSR collapse allowed him to do so under the UN flag. Since then Somalia has become the supplier of choice of migrants and refugees for Sweden (there they formed the biggest community in Malmo and elsewhere), the US is also keen on getting them.

Yemen has been destroyed by Obama with Mme Clinton playing an important role: she facilitated delivery of weapons to Saudi Arabia in real time as they bombed Yemenis.

Sudan was bombed by President Clinton; afterwards this country had been dismembered and separate South Sudan had been created. Both halves became dysfunctional.

Iran is the odd one in the Magnificent Seven. It has not been invaded, has not been bombed, just threatened with invasion and bombardment for many years since President Carter. This country has no terrorists, it did not fail, its citizens are not running seeking for asylum. It was placed on the list by President Obama, who planned to bomb it, but never got to do it.

While Bush, Clinton and Obama bombed and invaded these countries, the Democratic humanitarians including their Jewish leaders just applauded and asked for more bombs. But they became appalled when Trump promised: no more regime change, end of “invade the world/invite the world” mode. Wikileaks put it well: bomb the Muslims, and you are fine; ban the Muslims, and you are the enemy.

Apparently, the people who instigated the Middle Eastern wars wanted to create a wave of refugees into Europe and North America in order to bring more colour and diversity to these poor monochrome lands. Welfare state, national cohesion, local labour and traditions will disappear, and these countries will undergo a process of homogenisation. Never again the natives will be able to single out Jews, for there will be no natives, just so many persons from all over the world, celebrating Kumbaya.

The Jews will be able to get and keep their privileged positions in Europe as they do in the US. They won’t be alone: by their success, they will establish a pattern to copycat for whoever wants to succeed in the new world, and masses of imitation-Jews will support the policies of real Jews.

Still, Jewish insistence on the Syrian refugees’ acceptance and on Muslim immigration in general is a strange and baffling phenomenon. Hypocrisy is too mild a word to describe that. We may exclude compassion as a cause for it. There are many thousands of natives of Haifa in Israel who suffer in Syria and dream to come back to their towns and villages, but the state of Israel does not allow these Syrian refugees to return for one crime: they aren’t Jews.

Israel accepts Jews only; and American Jews do not object to it; they do not compare Israeli leaders with Hitler or Trump. Israel had build a wall on its border with Sinai, and this wall stopped the black wave of African migrants. American Jews did not shout “No wall, no ban” in front of Israeli Embassy. Mystery, eh?

Kevin MacDonald wrote a thoughtful piece trying to unravel the mystery, Why Do Jewish Organizations Want Anti-Israel Refugees? and published it on January 17, a few days before Trump’s inauguration and full three weeks before the subject moved to the front burner. KMD correctly predicted that Donald Trump won’t appeal for “national unity” in his Inaugural Address, though this was the guess of mass media. Moreover, KMD correctly predicted that “Trump will announce an immediate pause in “refugee” admissions, currently surging, to be followed by a zero quota for the next fiscal year. There would be hysteria, in which the major Jewish organizations would, almost certainly, join. My (KMD’s) question: why would they do that?”

KMD provides a few possible answers, but none answers his own question. The world is full of troubles, and the US can get as many refugees as they wish from the Ukraine or Brazil, from China and Central Africa, without an anti-Israeli angle.

I’d suggest a simple explanation. Jews want to import Muslims to fight Christ and the Church.

Muslims of the Middle East are not, or weren’t, anti-Christian; they co-existed for millennia with their Christian neighbours. In Palestine, Christians and Muslims lived together and suffered together under the Jewish yoke.

But recently a new wind has blown in the Muslim faith, the wind of a very strong rejection of whatever is not strict Sunni Islam of the ISIS brand. Their first enemy is Shia Islam, but Christians follow Shias as a second-best object of persecution. The much softer Muslim Brotherhood has also hardened towards Christians. In Gaza, Hamas (a branch of MB) delivers friendly speeches, but the Christians are leaving the Strip very fast. MB rule in Cairo was considered anti-Christian by their Copt neighbours. So the new refugees from ISIS-touched lands (six out of Trump’s Seven: Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, Sudan) have been possibly infected with anti-Christian tendency.

 
Israel Shamir
About Israel Shamir

Israel Shamir has written extensively on public affairs, primarily relating to the Israel/Palestine conflict and Russia, including three books, Galilee Flowers, Cabbala of Power and Masters of Discourse available in English, French, German, Spanish, Russian, Arabic, Norwegian, Swedish, Italian, and Hungarian.

He describes himself as a native of Novosibirsk, Siberia, who he moved to Israel in 1969, served as paratrooper in the army and fought in the 1973 war, afterwards turning to journalism and writing. During the late 1970s, he joined the BBC in London later living in Japan. After returning to Israel in 1980, Shamir wrote for the Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz, and was the Knesset spokesman for the Israel Socialist Party (Mapam), also translating and annotating the cryptic works of S.Y. Agnon, the only Hebrew Nobel Prize winning writer, from the original Hebrew into Russian.

His perspective on the Israel/Palestine conflict was summed up in The Pine and the Olive, published in 1988 and republished in 2004. That same year, he was received in the Orthodox Church of Jerusalem and Holy Land, being baptised Adam by Archbishop Theodosius Attalla Hanna. He now lives in Jaffa and spends much time in Moscow and Stockholm; he is father of three sons.