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



=>
Topics/Categories Filter?
2016 Election American Media American Military Anti-Semitism Britain Christianity Communism Cuba Deep State Donald Trump Economics Feminism Foreign Policy France Gay Marriage Gaza Gilad Atzmon Hillary Clinton History Holocaust Ideology Immigration Iran Iraq ISIS Islam Israel Israel Lobby Israel/Palestine Jews Judaism Lebanon Libya Middle East Neoliberalism North Korea Palestinians Political Correctness Putin Race/Ethnicity Russia Saudi Arabia Syria Terrorism Turkey Ukraine Vladimir Putin Wikileaks World War II 2004 Election 9/11 Abortion Afghanistan Africa Amazon.com American Jews Anarchism Anders Breivik Arab Spring Armenians Banking Industry Belarus Benjamin Netanyahu Bernie Sanders Boris Nemtsov Brexit Cambodia Catholic Church Censorship Charlie Hebdo China Civil Liberties Cynthia McKinney Democracy Dreyfus Affair Economic Sanctions Edward Snowden Egypt Erdogan Estonia Ethiopia EU Eurozone Financial Bubbles Financial Crisis Gaza Flotilla Genocide Georgia Germany Global Warming Greece Hitler India Japan Jeff Bezos Jeremy Corbyn Jewish History Julian Assange Kim Jong Un Kurds Lenin Liberalism Litvinenko Madoff Swindle Malaysia Malaysian Airlines MH17 Mel Gibson Mikhail Khodorkovsky Mohammed Bin Salman Muslims NATO Neocons Netherlands New Cold War New World Order Noam Chomsky Norman Finkelstein Nuclear War Nuclear Weapons Organ Transplants Orthodoxy Paris Attacks Pavel Grudinin Poland Racism Russian Elections 2018 Russian Orthodox Church Serbia Sergei Magnitsky Sergei Polonsky Sochi Olympics South Korea Soviet Union Spain Srebrenica Sweden Syriza The Left Tibet UN Security Council United Nations Wikipedia William Browder World War I Yasser Arafat Zionism
Nothing found
Sources Filter?
 TeasersIsrael Shamir Blogview

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
🔊 Listen RSS

Ron Unz did it again. He published a few pieces on the Jewish Question, and caused a veritable avalanche of comments and responses. His strong point is the personal touch. It is not a lecture on Jewish faith or Jewish contacts with the Nazis, but rather a story of Unz’s own Odyssey from commonly accepted truisms to a better understanding. Along the way, Unz breaks out of the box, and we share in his discovery of unknown or well-forgotten truths.

His language is moderate, he never screams, and such peaceful delivery makes the material easier to comprehend. He did not emerge a philosemite, for sure, he is not a man who believes that everything Jews do they do for the Glory of God. He goes quite far, but he does not go to the extreme in his judgements, and this is good thing.

In the prevailing climate of Adoration of the Jew, it is good that some brave and noble persons step forward to speak truth to power and to the masses. Without going too far in history, in the beginning of the present century there were more such stubborn and reckless guys. I wrote here on WHEN VICTIMS RULE: A Critique of Jewish Pre-eminence in America, a huge internet project that regretfully disappeared from its usual place, and it hadn’t been updated for a decade at least, but it still can be found here, albeit under a Not Secure banner.

Ron Unz mentions his predecessors Professors Albert Lindemann of the University of California, Kevin MacDonald of California State University, Israel Shahak of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Elliot Horowitz, Israel Joseph Yuval of the Hebrew University and other researchers. These people of science doubted the eternal benevolence of the Jews for the Gentiles.

Unz bravely deals with the German anti-Jewish polemics of Mein Kampf, as well, and he made it available on his site. Though, if you are interested in Hitler’s thoughts on the subject, you can choose a much shorter (22 pages) and more lucid book, a discussion between Adolf Hitler and his teacher, early NSDAP ideologue Dietrich Eckart, Bolshevism From Moses to Lenin.

Unz did not get yet to the Leftist critique of Jewishness, and there are real pearls waiting for him, like Karl Marx’s On the Jewish Question, a brief (22 pages) and powerful treaty, and Abram Leon’s The Jewish Question. There is Left-Christian point of view by the wonderful Simone Weil, who famously refused to enter the Catholic Church considering it “too Jewified”, and whose Need for Roots combines Communism and rejection of mass migration.

There is a Right-Christian view of G K Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc. E. Michael Jones of Culture Wars is a contemporary bearer of the Catholic anti-Jewish tradition (His latest text had been annotated thus “Catholics and the Jew Taboo by E. Michael Jones. For more than 50 years, the Catholic Church has lost every battle in the culture wars. Sun Tzu said if you don’t know who you are and who your enemy is, you will lose every battle. The record of the Church has proven Sun Tzu right. It’s time for a different approach. It’s time to break the Jew Taboo.”)

Indeed there is no better tool against Jewish supremacy than the glorious name of Christ; but it will take time and effort for Americans to recognise that.

One of the best critical thinkers on the subject was the greatest historian of the 20th century, Arnold Toynbee. Any discussion of Jews and Nazis is incomplete without reference to his seminal Study of History, v.8 (can be read here). Toynbee explained why Jews want mass migration from the Third World to Europe: in a European country populated by Somali, Afghan, Syrian etc communities, the Jews will become normalcy itself. Toynbee considered Naqba, the expulsion of Palestinians in 1948, a terrible crime on a par with Nazi persecution of Jews. For his moral position, his name had been erased from the lists of recommended literature, he is not quoted anymore, and practically vanished, while ceding space to his third-grade Jewish contemporaries.

In short, there were Jews and Gentiles, leftists and rightists, who made a go at deconstructing the Jewish narrative and undermining Jewish influence. Today, there are fewer and fewer such voices; and that’s why God bless Ron Unz for picking up the torch. Hopefully he will persist where others dropped of fatigue. The Jews and Gentiles both need it, and especially in the US.

Jews and Bolsheviks

This is not to say that Unz is always right. The Russian Revolution had been allegedly perpetrated by Jewish money, and/or German money, but those claims remained in the realm of black PR. Jacob Schiff was in correspondence with Milyukov, a leading minister in Kerensky government, and an enemy of Bolsheviks in 1917. Claims that Lenin took money from German military had been disproven long time ago. Antony Sutton’s book presents the sum of these claims, and the Russians argued against it convincingly.

Moreover, there is nothing wrong about taking money from wealthy Jews. I did it. Everybody does it. Wealthy Jews give money to all parties that have some chance of success; like now in the US, they support the Reps and Dems, for Trump and against Trump.

Lenin’s attitude was simple and straightforward: take money from whoever gives, do only what you should. Lenin wouldn’t hesitate to take money from Schiff, or Rothschild, or from the Elders of Zion. He believed the capitalists will sell Bolsheviks the rope they will be hanged on. But people who tried to collect what they considered a debt of influence were promptly shot after Bolsheviks’ victory. Jews were involved on all sides in the Russian Revolution: for Lenin and against Lenin, but apparently majority of Russian Jews supported the Mensheviks, the moderate Social Democrats, who lost in 1918 to Lenin’s Bolsheviks. Bolsheviks succeeded to de-Jewify even Russian Jews: they were quickly assimilated, their language Yiddish vanished, their synagogues were decimated; they intermarried, took Russian names, many of them joined the Russian church.

Do not overestimate importance of money. Clinton had much more money than Trump, yet she lost. Bolsheviks had much less money than their enemies, yet they won. Their victory was due to Lenin’s genius, to clear and coherent agenda, to their iron will and readiness to act, and the last but not least: due to popular support by the Russia’s Deplorables.

The Jews moved from their hamlets to Moscow and Petersburg after the Revolution, and they were very visible, like Latinos in New York in 1970s, or like the Blacks after the Civil War. However, they couldn’t and didn’t take over the Russian state. The anti-Communists (“the Whites”)who had lost in the ensuing struggle blamed their defeat on Jewish intervention – like Dems blame their defeat on Putin’s Russia. In reality, they had to blame themselves.

Jewish Church

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Anti-Semitism, Jews 
🔊 Listen RSS

Like an orange hurricane, President Trump made a stormy visit to the Old World. Usually American presidents’ visits to Europe present photo opportunities and vows of eternal love and friendship. Not this time. Since the Mongol invasion, not many visitors from outside shook Europe like he did. The US President has finally emerged from the cage built by his political adversaries, and begun to say things his voters wanted to hear.

However, his wonderful daring statements were quickly undermined and disowned by his ministers and advisers, creating the feeling that Trump speaks only for himself, while the US administration, his own appointees say the opposite. And then he also repudiated his own statements, saying he was misunderstood.

The American president increasingly resembles the hero of The Prince and The Pauper, the poor boy who accidentally became a king – and began to behave in a non-royal way: showing mercy and caring for people. His own staff disregards his commands. Trump says what people like to hear, but his administration sticks to the original course.

During the first part of his trip he acted a rebel in Wodehouse World with its feeble men and formidable women. Indeed the West is ruled by formidable aunts and elder sisters. Aunt Angela in Germany, Aunt Theresa in England, Aunt Brigitte in France. Only Aunt Hillary is missing to complete the puzzle and establish the rule of Aunties over their hen-pecked nephews.

(Hillary’s defeat didn’t derail the Aunties’ program of emasculation: #MeToo campaign goes on unabated. Men are afraid to flirt with girls. Henry (The Superman) Cavill admitted as much in an interview, saying that flirting with somebody would be like “casting myself into the fires of hell”, as a person in the public eye. “I think a woman should be wooed and chased”, he said, but it could lead to jail. He was immediately attacked for this heresy: “If Henry Cavill doesn’t want to be called a rapist then all he has to do is… not rape anyone”, implausibly they claimed. And he apologised profusely.)

Trump’s trip had been accompanied by mass protest demos. Normally I am all in favour of a good anti-American demo, but in this case, the protesters were extreme feminists and supporters of unlimited immigration. That’s people who like the Aunties, and hate Uncles. They do not mind conflict with Russia and even consider Trump as a “Russian agent”. They dislike that he does not obey Aunties.

In the second part of the tour, Trump had met with the formidable Mr Putin, a real man. Now that we have learned from our reliable sources what had happened in the palatial halls of Helsinki (excepting face-to-face private talk with Putin) we can describe Trump’s Pilgrim’s Progress and share our knowledge and conclusions with you.

In short, President Trump made the right sounds and called for right solutions, but he has been unable to insist on any. If he were a free man of his own mind, this trip would transform the world. The way things are, it will remain a sign of his honourable intentions, for everything he said has been overturned and denied by his aides.

In Brussels, Trump attacked Frau Merkel. How does she dare to buy Russian gas, if Germany faces a Russian threat? Why does it accept immigrants and refugees who undermine the European way of life? Saying that, he sided with “the populists”, the Italians, Hungarians and Austrians, whose top politicians are male and friendly to Trump and Putin.

The Brussels meeting almost came to an undoing of NATO. Trump hinted that the US would leave NATO unless they pay. They have to pay more, much more, if they want to have American protection.

Could he mean it? NATO is an instrument of American control over Europe, and Washington keeps dozens of bases in Europe, in particular – in Germany. Germany has remained under American occupation since 1945. This would seem good for America, but the occupied and controlled Western European states are tied to the Clinton camp, to Democrats and liberals. They do not accept Trump as their rightful sovereign. And Europe does not pay for its occupation, so it is costly. Of course, it is a great honour to occupy and control the great powers of the past, England, France, the Netherlands, Spain. But it costs a lot of money for America. Likewise, in 1990 Russia discovered that it is expensive to control surly East Germany, independent Poland, sunny Georgia, tricky Armenia, populous Uzbekistan and the rainy Baltic States.

There is no certainty that the countries of Europe will agree to pay and submit to Trump’s demands. In Germany, there are growing voices demanding the Yankees be sent home, that is, to ask the American soldiers to leave Germany. It would be good if NATO were to disintegrate and disappear, like the Warsaw Treaty Organization disappeared. Trump has repeatedly said that he wants to return the American soldiers home. Perhaps we shall witness Pax Americana without American troops in Europe, like England fictitiously claimed to belong to the Roman Empire, though Roman legions had left, and Rome lost all interest in foggy Albion.

In England, Trump confronted Mrs May. She reminded him of his school mistress, and Donald does not like school mistresses. The soft Brexit, which she intends to conclude, is a complete bummer, not a Brexit, he said. Under the proposed treaty, all prerogatives remain in Brussels. So, there can be no trade agreement between the United States and Britain. America will negotiate directly with Brussels. And in general, it would be better if May transferred Downing Street 10 to her former Foreign Secretary, a hard-line Brexit supporter, the red-headed Bojo (as the Brits call Boris Johnson, who had just resigned, resenting the proposed plan for soft Brexit).

The European Union is an American design, too. Why, then, does the US President want to undermine it by removing the UK, his own Trojan Horse? Apparently, it means that the globalist forces have entered a state of direct confrontation with America.

This first part of Trump’s tour had been followed by the Kremlin with satisfaction. The Kremlin also believes that NATO has become obsolete, and that Brexit is the right step. Russia instinctively disapproves of mass migration, just like Trump.

Trump’s meeting with President Putin had been postponed for a year; both men were eager to meet. Trump wanted to meet another strong man, a powerful chieftain who can assist him in building a new world, instead of the one created under Obama, by media and Supreme Court Judges. President Putin wanted to solve bilateral issues and to ease American pressure upon Russia.

Their problems were very different. The main problems of Trump were Mme Clinton and Barack Obama, and the whole army of their obstinate followers who didn’t recognise Trump’s legitimacy. Putin couldn’t do much for him, with all his sympathy.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Deep State, Donald Trump, Russia 
🔊 Listen RSS

Helsinki after Singapore! The summit Trump-Putin will hopefully take place this month in the Finnish capital, after being delayed and delayed for ages. We had expected the two strong men to meet right away after Trump’s historic election, but the summit didn’t take place, for Trump had been besieged by Mueller’s Gestapo and accused of being a Russian agent. This frivolous accusation is still floated every time Trump is doing something sensible, but things changed with Trump-Kim summit, an event that grows in importance in perspective almost daily.

Trump before Singapore and after Singapore are entirely different creatures, like a boy before and after his first kiss. Before, he was a Mr Big Mouth, a ruler of his own Twitter account and of preciously little beside it. After the summit, he became Prometheus Unbound, the regal President of the mighty US. By meeting Kim, he denied the wiseguys in the media and in the deep state; he refused to take their orders and did what he thought right. By meeting Putin he will turn his disobedience into full scale revolt.

His adversaries, the Masters of Discourse, were alarmed by Kim summit and horrified by approaching Putin meet.

Let us have a brief look at their reaction to Singapore. (Here you can find a lot more). The Senate Minority leader Chuck (“the Guardian of Israel”) Schumer has expressed “extreme concern”, saying that “Trump has drawn a false equivalency between the legitimate joint military exercises by South Korea and the US, and illegal North Korean nuclear testing (“How can you compare!” – a standard Jewish response) … Nothing should be given to N Koreans until “complete, verifiable and irreversible dismantlement of North Korea’s nuclear program.”… Trump has given “a brutal and repressive dictatorship the international legitimacy it has long craved.”

Nicholas Kristof in the New York Times complained that Trump ‘made a huge concession — the suspension of military exercises with South Korea’ while he got nothing in return – “nothing about North Korea freezing plutonium and uranium programs, nothing about destroying ICBM, nothing about allowing inspectors to return, nothing about North Korea making a full declaration of its nuclear program, nothing about a timetable, nothing about verification etc”. Noah Rothman, co-editor of the neocon magazine Commentary, called the summit “a disgrace”.

And the “humanitarian interventionists”, that is, the leftists for intervention on humanitarian grounds, have already rolled out complaints of defectors from North Korea to the front pages, and they expectedly demand to never consent to any peace without a complete change of regime, lustration and international control.

President Trump has been presented with a united front of media and experts alarmed with any progress towards peace. For them, the only way to deal with N Korea is the Libya way: disarm first, intervene and bomb later, for it is much safer to bomb a disarmed country. The Korean leader understands that; he is not likely to go the Gorby way. The last Soviet leader disarmed his country, dismantled the Warsaw Treaty, gave East Germany to the West and allowed the US inspectors into the most secret Russian installations after a friendly chat with President Reagan. Kim won’t do it, and China won’t allow him. The last thing Chinese (or Russians) need is an American protectorate in North Korea, a rather short drive from Beijing, Harbin, and Vladivostok. But warm relations between N and S Koreas and the US are certainly possible, if President Trump were to stick to his Singapore line.

However, a few weeks after Singapore, it seems that the naysayers prevailed, as they usually do. The US refused to work towards lifting sanctions in the UN Security Council, and had rejected the Russian-Chinese proposal to begin their dismantling, while the Western media began working up its roll of Kim’s transgressions. Thus the aura of unreliability again surrounded the head of American president.

Putin’s meet had brought forth similar responses. OMG, peace is breaking!

“Fears grow over prospect of Trump ‘peace deal’ with Putin, editorialised The Times.Britain fears that President Trump will undermine NATO by striking a “peace deal” with President Putin… Cabinet ministers are worried that Mr Trump may be persuaded to downgrade US military commitments in Europe… NATO figures fear that Mr Trump could seek to replicate his “peace agreement” with Kim Jong-un of North Korea, which generated positive coverage. One cabinet minister said: “What we’re nervous of is some kind of Putin-Trump ‘peace deal’ with Trump and Putin saying, ‘Why do we have all this military hardware in Europe?’ and agreeing to jointly remove that.” Other media sources, and politicians are equally unhappy and worried. “European allies hugely worried over Trump’s summit with Putin”, says MSNBC; so does the Atlantic, the Guardian etc.

The nearest to a positive attitude to the Singapore meeting had been displayed by the observer of the liberal Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz, British Jewish journalist Anshel Pfeffer: of course, an agreement with the bloody tyrant (Kim) is undesirable, but there is a hope that, having reconciled with Kim, Trump will go to war with Iran more easily. He comforted the warmongers that their loss of a Korea war will be made up by a war on Iran. This is the line the comforters take on the Helsinki meeting: Ta rump-Putin summit could be forgiven if it would lead to war on Iran. This is the alternative as presented by the Western MSM: warmongers condemn both summits, comforters say ‘not all is lost, there is still Iran’.

In order to understand why unwilling Americans are being led into war, we shall turn to a recent important piece by Ron Unz. It is a part of his American Pravda series investigating modern American history and its [mis]presentation in media and in public memory. Our Great Purge of the 1940s, despite the title, is a decoding of secret codes in American and British public discourse in 20th century. After going through an immense number of newspapers and magazines, Unz discovered that whoever in American public life sided against wars, usually had found himself marginalised, expelled, forgotten, or even assassinated.

In a touching personal way, he tells of his discovery that writers he believed were marginal radicals actually had held supreme positions in MSM and politics of their times, until they were marginalised and presented as extremists.

An example is H.E. Barnes, a highly esteemed and popular commentator on most prestigious tribunes, until “By the end of the 1930s, Barnes had become a leading critic of America’s proposed involvement in World War II, and was permanently “disappeared” as a consequence, barred from all mainstream media outlets, while a major newspaper chain was heavily pressured into abruptly terminating his long-running syndicated national column in May 1940.” He disappeared from memory, says Unz.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Donald Trump, Israel, North Korea, Russia, Syria 
🔊 Listen RSS

When I see a crying child on my screen, I know somebody is trying to take advantage of me. The same is true about every appeal to my basic human instincts, whether it is a naked female body or a dead baby. Instead of convincing me, such a cheap trick calls for immediate rejection. I know that this voluptuous body will not land into my hands even if I buy all Coca Cola in the shop. The sight of dead babies will not convince me to do something against common sense, for it is manipulation. In politics, I want a Socratic discussion, not emotional persuasion. If you can’t persuade me by words, do not try to do that with pictures. However, they try and often succeed.

Words can be pretty inflammatory, but pictures are stronger stuff. In order to kill the flower of English youth at the tranches of Verdun, pictures of German brutes roasting Belgian babies on their bayonets were used; pictures of Jewish commissars raping an Aryan blonde pushed the German lads to premature death at the banks of Volga River. You can’t argue pictures with words, saying that there is a simple way to avoid the calamity: do not start war, and the German brute will have to satisfy his ravings by roasting a bratwurst, and the Jewish commissar will just subscribe to the Playboy to view an Aryan body.

This is the case with #Trumpbabysnatcher. It is heart-renting to see a picture of small kids beyond the bars. But there is a childishly simple way to avoid separation and incarceration: do not cross the Rio Grande without a visa.

Picture pushers are dishonest and they do not care a fig about kids: Madeleine Albright famously thought it is worth while to kill half a million of Iraqi children. Hillary Clinton unleashed hell on Libyan and Syrian soil, killing and dispossessing hundreds of thousands of children. All the US Presidents have been hugging and kissing Israeli rulers, who habitually detain, torture and kill Palestinian kids. Our friends in the alternative media (Counterpunch etc) who joined these ladies and gents waving kiddie photos are of weak mind or dishonest or they think that anything goes to achieve their goal, getting rid of Trump.

The wonderful Diana Johnstone wrote recently that the immigration issue splits the German left. Indeed support for free immigration is suicide for the Left. But this issue does split the whole Western world. On one side, believers in the world without borders, in the free movement of people. It sounds great, until you understand that this is a way to destroy the native working class, abolish the welfare state, ruin social structures and at the same time undermine donor countries, in short, to destroy the world as we know it. On the other side, people who want to preserve the world they live in work to keep the walls up.

What we need is some sincerity and honesty, as opposed to manipulation. If you think mass immigration will return us to new Dark Ages, say so. If you think it would be better to remove borders and to unleash a new Volkswanderung, just say so, but please do not show us baby pictures.

On a personal level, people for open borders are those who are certain their jobs aren’t threatened by any migrants; for them, a new Mexican arrival means a new Mexican restaurant or a new Mexican field worker or builder or house cleaner, cheaper than what they have had, not a competitor for job and housing. People for preservation of the world are aware that they are vulnerable, that new people can make them unemployed. In other words, the former are upper classes or their sycophants, the latter are working classes and people who feel solidarity and compassion towards them.

“Why don’t you say that the former feel compassion towards refugees and immigrants”, you’d ask. Because they do what is profitable for upper classes. They feel zero sympathy for suffering Palestinians, and this is the sterling proof that they lie.

Do you remember the picture of a poor drowned Syrian boy on the seashore? This picture moved a million Afghans, Iraqis, Gypsies and even some Syrians to Europe. Indeed it is terrible, that the drowned child’s father endangered lives of his family for no valid reason. He lived in safe and prosperous Turkey for a few years; he preferred to go to Canada; Canadians refused him a visa, so he sailed the dangerous Mediterranean Sea and lost all his family. Awful; but why this personal tragedy should influence any decision beyond caution: do not sail the sea in unseaworthy vessels. It is better to live in Turkey as 80 million people do than to die at sea.

A few days ago we saw Palestinians – men, women, children, – being shot at by Israeli snipers because they wanted to leave their concentration camp of Gaza. Did the people who love immigration say anything in their support? No, they know better that their Jewish organisers won’t approve that. And the Jews weren’t impressed at all. “Let them all die” – they wrote in their social networks. As a rule, Jews are visually challenged, and excel verbally. This allows them to remain unmoved by pictures, while spreading the kiddie pictures to impress Gentiles.

Israelis are divided about African migrants: the wealthy want more of it, the working classes want them out. Netanyahu’s government is rather populist and it deports the migrants, though Soros types try to block deportations. However, the wealthy and the workers, Jewish left and Jewish right are of one anti-native mind: they do not want to allow native Palestinians to roam the land. Jews are anti-native by definition; this defines their attitude to human trafficking.

Migration is not all that different from the slave trade of old (the trade Jews excelled in). Recently a video from Libya has been delivered to Europe: the Coast Guard soldiers whip the black migrants to the rubber boats and push them into the sea. Those who remain in the camps are sold in the auction, women – for sex, men – for hard work. This video came at a very opportune hour when the struggle for and against the new slave-trade swept the world from the US to Italy and Germany.

Libya is one of main slave trade markets. Once it was a relatively prosperous country, and a reliable block on the road of African migrants to Europe. The Africans could and did find jobs in Gaddafi’s Libya. But in 2011, the country was destroyed by Obama and Clinton. Since then, it has become a poor ruined country with slowly simmering civil war. Libya has oil, but now many Libyans have discovered the African slave trade. Like in 17th century, the African blacks once again make some Arabs and Europeans wealthy.

Many millions of dollars are earned by Libyan militias this way. They take money from both sides – from Africans rushing to Europe from their ravaged countries, and from Europeans who pay the militias to stop refugees.

The man captured in a video with a whip in the hands, the leader of the brutal gang of slavers is a former rebel against the ‘bloody dictator’ Muammar al-Gaddafi, a friend of democracy and European values, Abd al-Rahman al-Milad, a commander in the Coast Guard. The boats, in which he sends Africans to Europe, are bought with European money. Two hundred million euros a year is paid by Brussels, but the slaves bring much more income. Europeans appreciate Milad – a year ago he was invited to a refresher course in Rome, where he spent a fruitful month in a classy hotel at the expense of the European Union.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Media, EU, Immigration 
🔊 Listen RSS

These long summer days are good for forest walks or swimming; in the evenings, I read classics with my 10 year old son who otherwise spends too much time at video games. This time, it happens to be the Odyssey, the poem I translated some 25 years ago, and yesterday I came to read Book IV on Menelaus bewailing his comrades who fell at Troy or on the perilous way home.

And for me it was the time to beweep my dear comrades-in-arms who have suffered the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune. So many of you, who went fighting the beast, are dead, or exiled, or imprisoned, like my Spanish publisher Don Pedro Varela and the American researcher Barrett Brown. Or fired from a university like Julio Pino, professor of Kent State.

And then Menelaus said: Much as I weep for all my men, for none of all these comrades do I grieve as much as for this one. The one is Ulysses who has been detained for years on the island of Ogygia by Calypso the Nymph.

It brought to my mind the fate of Julian Assange, this modern Odysseus, who has been held in his luxurious Knightsbridge prison for years. Actually, for full six years, as today, as I write it, is the anniversary of his incarceration in the Ecuador Embassy.

So many epithets used by Homer for the King of Ithaca fit Julian to a tee! He is wise and noble, resourceful and cunning, wily and crafty, brilliant and steadfast, but also evil-starred man of woe.

His name still scares the enemy, and cheers a friend. Though an Antipode by birth, Julian became famous in the North of Europe, where this tall slim handsome youthful silver-haired man came to raise the banner of his revolt. Eight years ago, I compared him to Neo of the Matrix, the man destined to break the matrix of lies and set us free.

The Amazing Adventures of Captain Neo in Blonde-Land, as no doubt the story of Julian Assange’s escapades in Sweden will be known once it inevitably makes its way into the hands of one of the goofier Hollywood directors – say Robert Zemeckis or Mel Brooks, or perhaps Stephen Herek of Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure. It would do better in the hands of Andy Wachowski, where he might do for Julian Assange what he once did for Keanu Reeves.

Who could ask for a more beautiful set-up? It’s a story fit for a tabloid, yet it might be transformed into something an intellectual could read without embarrassment. This latest adventure is the stuff of pulp fiction, and chock full of Langley spies, computer hackers, crazy feminists, flatfooted cops and sleazy rags in the female kingdom of Sweden!

Julian Assange is a character that might have been ripped from the celluloid frames of the Matrix: flaxen and lanky, he moves through cyberspace like a superman. When, on those rare occasions that he does emerge into the real world, it is to perform Kung Fu exercises. He hardly ever eats or drinks. His corporeal body can normally be found sitting in front of a MacPro or two, while his digital alter ego commutes and computes, battling the odds and the system in fantastic virtual combat. Like Neo, he is a natural-born hacker who hacked just for the heck of it until he discovered the Matrix. He had hundreds of remarkable hacking achievements to his name when in 1992 he pleaded guilty to twenty-two of them. I like to think that someday, after he has passed on in the fullness of time, he will become a kind of guardian angel for hackers, or perhaps the Greek God of Cyberspace with His Golden Board, forever surfing the web.

Recently this comparison had been repeated by brave Jonathan Cook, the man from Nazareth, but it is suitable for Jonathan himself, and for many of us, including the American Pravda writer, Ron Unz, for we all fight for liberation of mind and discourse.

In the beginning of his political activity, Julian was lionised by media and society. His Wikileaks was considered the most fashionable thing in the known universe. He floated from a party to reception, admired by the Scandinavians from Reykjavik to Stockholm.

But the enemy prepared its snares. A CIA-friendly feminist got to his bed by a dirty trick: she offered him her small flat saying she was leaving the city for a few days, and when he accepted and moved in, she suddenly returned and offered to share the only bed. He didn’t know she had carried out a CIA mission in Cuba, otherwise he would have been more cautious. Or not: a full-blooded man, he was easy to tempt. The next day she Tweeted friends about her success, about sharing the limelight with this celebrity. And a few days later she complained to police that he possessed her without protection; this is an offence of second-degree rape in feminised Sweden. Her accusation has been seconded by another girl, who was unhappy that Julian didn’t call her the next day after their loving tryst. A man-hating Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny took over the job of hunting Julian, and Swedish newspapers displayed headlines “Rapist At Large.” Immediately Julian lost all his admiring entourage. The Empire knew the vulnerability of his crowd.

However, in a few days his case was closed down, and Julian was free to leave Sweden. He went to England, and there he prepared the great publication of Cablegate, that is the vast collection of the State Department and the US Embassies’ cables from around the world. Stolen by Manning, these cables opened to us the full picture of the Empire dealings with the nations. I wrote:

One quarter of a million secret and confidential US Embassy cables sit like so many digital wasps waiting to be released into cyberspace. They will strike at the tender underbelly of the empire, the flattering self-delusions that maintain the imperial armies. It just might be enough to turn the tide in the battle to recover our evaporating freedoms.

These dirty little cables throw a bright light upon the murky policies of the American Imperium, on their methods of collecting information, of delivering orders, of subverting politicians and robbing nations. Yet before we lapse into a comfortable and reflexive anti-Americanism, let us never forget that this, arguably the greatest revelation of criminal wrongdoing in history, was only made possible because brave and honest Americans were willing to risk life and limb to leak the truth.

Tensions run high when you dare oppose the awesome power of the Matrix. It is impossible not to admire Julian Assange. He is forever kind, quiet, gentle, and even meek; like the Tao, he leads without leading, directs without commanding. He never raises his voice; he hardly needs to speak and the way becomes clear. Our Neo is guided by the ideal of social transparency. Bright light is the best weapon against conspiracies.

The Empire responded by having Sweden re-open the case and issue an arrest warrant. England picked it up, and Julian had lost his freedom. For a long while he stayed in East Anglia, in the house of a friend, and then he moved to London, with an electronic bracelet on his arm and under constant police supervision. When he was perilously close to deportation to Sweden, and to a long stretch of solitary confinement in a jail cell to be followed by extradition to the US and to its Guantanamo tropical paradise, he jumped the boat and asked for asylum in the Ecuador Embassy in London, after he received the then President of Ecuador Rafael Correa’s promise. That was in June 2012, and since that time, Assange has been immured within the walls of the Embassy.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Media, Julian Assange, Wikileaks 
🔊 Listen RSS

Poland
Country in Europe
Poland is an eastern European country on the Baltic Sea known for its medieval architecture and Jewish heritage

– thus the Google characterises the land of proud Polacks. For a Pole, this definition hurts more than the three partitions of his country. Why do they stop at Poland, he’d cry out.

Why Google describes

England
Country of the United Kingdom
England, birthplace of Shakespeare and The Beatles

Instead of “England is a European country on an island in the North Sea, known for its Jamaican Rastas”?

I commiserate with you, my Polish friends. It is very demeaning to be known not for the deeds of your ancestors, nor for mighty sword of Jan Sobieski that saved Vienna for Christendom, nor for the star lore of Copernicus, neither for the gentle muse of Mickiewicz and Chopin, but for something quite marginal for your culture and history, at least as marginal as Rastafarians are for the Brits.

The Russians and the Germans partitioned your lands thrice, but they didn’t think your only claim to fame is that you were hospitable towards Jews. This very Jewish attitude is typical for America in our days, for the US has become more Jewish than Poland ever was. And they are repaid for your hospitality with a mean coin.

Jews lived in the Polish lands for centuries, and lived very well, until they moved to new pastures – to America, to Germany, to Russia, to Israel. My father was a Polish citizen, and he cherished his memories of the land and its folk, and so felt other Jews of his generation. However, organised Jewry had different ideas.

The conflict between the Jews and Poland began with anti-Polish publications in the US media a few years ago. The Jews began to goad Poland. They reminisced about Polish clashes with Jews in the 1930s and 1940s, not exactly a unique Polish story. Many nations have clashed with Jews, lately the people of Gaza.

The last anti-Jewish riot, or pogrom, in Europe took place in in England in 1947, not in Poland, and was caused not by some pathological, illogical, irrational hatred of the Other, but by the Jews’ heinous act: they murdered two English soldiers, hanged their bodies on a tree and booby-trapped these with a landmine. However, the Jews do not choose to recall those British riots, they are forever reciting Polish troubles.

They said the Nazi concentration camps were built in Poland because Poles sympathised with the Nazi plans to eliminate the Jews. More and more often they referred to “Polish concentration camps” (instead of Nazi concentration camps in Poland), heavily implying Polish complicity in the Holocaust. The Poles responded to this salvo of abuse by passing a law forbidding anyone of accusing them of collaboration with the Nazis under penalty of imprisonment. The Jews were furious and called for knowingly breaking the law by shouting “Polish Holocaust!”. (It is worth watching this short video in order to feel their fury).

There was a practical reason, as well as a discursive one. By putting pressure on the Poles, the Jewish organisations followed the blueprint they had utilised against the Swiss with great success. Although known Jewish assets in Swiss banks were quite small, the Swiss gave in under pressure and paid billions of dollars to the Jewish organisations. Now a similar extortion racket has been planned against Poland.

This was the practical reason, while the needs of their battle for discourse called upon the Jews to safeguard their copyright, i.e. to keep in their hands the authority to decide and rule what is the Holocaust and who is guilty of it. The Polish example could be followed by the Americans and the British who may become tired of being accused of failing to bomb the railways leading to concentration camps. Indeed Donald Trump already tried to speak of millions of non-Jewish “victims of the Holocaust”. Rebellious Poland had to be suppressed.

Organised Jewry called upon Poland to restore to them all the property that belonged to individual Jews in Poland before the WWII. Though Jews were a small minority, they were a very prosperous minority, and many Jews owned a lot of property. They owned it as private Polish citizens, naturally. In the Communist period, many Polish properties were nationalised, whatever their owner’s faith was, Jewish, Catholic or even Buddhist. However, the 1960 treaty between the United States and Poland solved this problem. Poland compensated American nationals whose assets had been nationalized by the Polish government and the United States indemnified Poland from any additional claims and compensation demands.

Now they have decided to re-open the case by claiming properties that belonged to Jewish owners who died leaving no heirs. If an owner dies intestate, his estate goes to the state. This is the basic rule all over the world, and Polish Jews are no exception. If a Polish citizen, a Jan or a Moses (or even an Ahmed) dies intestate, his property in Poland goes to Polish state. The Jews want to change it. They say intestate property of private Jewish Polish citizens should revert to Jewish ownership, actually to Jewish-American organisations.

These bodies have already pocketed billions of dollars’ worth of German funds; this money pays handsome salaries to Jewish officials; it builds Holocaust memorials and museums, and allows Jews to fight numerous legal cases strengthening their hegemony. Now they want to shake Poland down for a cool $300 billion, 60% of the country’s GNP. It will certainly allow many Jewish functionaries to live in a style to which they are accustomed.

The US supported this claim, and a few days ago, S. 447, the “Justice for Uncompensated Survivors Today (JUST) Act of 2017,” became law, as President Trump signed it after the House of Representatives and the Senate duly voted for it in bipartisan solidarity. Now the Poles can’t just disregard these claims. They have to transfer every asset that ever belonged to a Jew into the hands of American Jewish organisations.

If and when a similar law would be enforced in the US, American Jewish organisations would inherit from Chomsky and Unz, me and Gilad Atzmon, the Amazon and Soros Fund. This is patently crazy: just in a few years, Jewish organisations will become richer than Rothschild and Rockefeller ever were.

The Jewish organisations collecting the tribute are also very rich. They have a dirty history of fraud with dozens of convictions; they spend much more money on their own salaries than on needy survivors. Norman Finkelstein wrote a well-known book, The Holocaust Industry, full of strong critique and indignation, about the Holocaust Lords with their half-a-million-dollar-a-year salaries and great hotels to hold conferences.

I would prefer they’d spend all their ill-gotten wealth on their salaries and hotels, because they use whatever is left (and we are speaking of billions of dollars) to restore Jewry and to promote their narrative, to build a Holocaust Museum in every city, to give grants to painters, writers, film directors, media editors. They bribe whole communities. They keep the descendants of Jews together by scholarships, free schools, free meals. And they de-Emancipate the Jews.

 
• Category: History, Ideology • Tags: Holocaust, Jews, Poland 
🔊 Listen RSS

No, the freshly-minted British Duchess of Sussex, Meghan is not Jewish. She’s been married to a Jewish producer (@hertoo!), this is the nearest. Still, the cry Messiah is here! sounded in the British Jewish community, for they had a great run of success. They proved at court that a dead Jew is better than a dead Englishman, and that you have to discriminate in favour of a Jew. Another feat in the Kingdom of the Jewish Messiah!

The hunt for anti-Semites eclipsed the foxhunt in the category of blood sports. Ken Livingstone, a very popular ex-Mayor of London, lifelong Labour political activist, has been expelled out of Labour for his anti-Israeli views, deemed “antisemitic”. This is a big victory in a wider campaign against Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader, carried out by Friends of Israel, for Corbyn is a determined anti-Zionist with a long record of support for Palestinians and for other Resistance movements.

He is also for repairing relations with Russia, and the BBC played it up presenting him in a Russian winter hat against a Russian church background, to show for sure that he is a Russian agent. His son Tommy ‘liked’ a Facebook link to a piece of mine on a Palestinian site, and this was duly recorded as a proof of his father’s antisemitic tendency.

Livingstone is a jolly, hard-boiled, outspoken and very popular fellow, a real asset for Corbyn’s Labour. Thus Corbyn repeated the original error of Donald Trump who also agreed to drop his best supporters after they were accused of breaking PC rules and of antisemitism.

Organised Jewry hates Corbyn and Livingstone not only for their stand on Israel/Palestine; it is an indicator of policy. Organised Jewry, as opposed to ordinary accidental Jews, is a political body acting against the working people of England and for themselves, that is for the landlords and the moneybags. Usually they vote Conservative, and if they support Labour, they bend it in a Blairite mode. Blairite Labour is a pro-Jewish Labour, Conservative Lite. Blair took the UK into the Iraqi War and added to the destruction of the British working class that was launched by the Iron Lady Margaret Thatcher.

Now Corbyn and Livingstone are definitely no Blairites. They are against wars, against NATO, against selling arms to Israel and Saudi Arabia. Corbyn was the rare voice of reason during the Skripal madness. That’s why Organised Jewry wants to get rid of him; and antisemitism is their weapon of choice.

When Corbyn is subdued, the Cold War with Russia will become colder, much colder – if not very hot, by the way of dialectics. More Yemenis and Palestinians will be killed by British weapons, and British money will go to nuclear rearmament, instead of health services. It is very sad Corbyn allowed them to remove Livingstone; he lost an ally and he showed a sign of weakness.

Not the first one. Corbyn is weak on Jews, this is his Achilles Heel. Jeremy Corbyn agreed that dead Englishmen are inferior to dead Jews, and this is worse than Livingstone’s departure. (Let us add for balance’ sake, that this is the law of the realm, too.)

In England, dead bodies are released for burial by the coroner, and his permission usually takes time. The Jews do not want to wait with the commoners even after death. They demand to be buried right away, while non-Jews may have to wait for a week or longer. Many coroners just do it, but the obstinate coroner for progressive inner North London, a certain Ms Mary Hassel, decided to operate on ‘first come, first serve’ basis. In her own words, “no death will be prioritised in any way over any other”. For her, a dead Jew has no priority before an Englishman on his way to the cemetery. It sounds fair, sort of “all are equal in front of the Grim Reaper”, but such equality is against Jewish tradition.

The Jewish law postulates that a dog is better than a goy. This was stated by the leading authority, Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Itzhaki, the 11th century exegete) in his commentary to Exodus 22:30. A dog is to be preferred over a goy, said he in discussing the proper way to dispose of non-kosher meat. Here is the original with a modern Jewish translation into English. The translation softens the message by adding “to be given preference in this respect” where the original has the brutal “dog is better than him [a goy]”. The translation offers “heathen”, where the original has straightforward “goy”. With such an attitude, it is obvious that the Jews should not mind overtaking non-Jews in the line to the coroner.

Now the story takes an unbelievable turn. The Jews sued Mary Hassel, and won. Not in Israel, not in a Jewish state, but in England. The High Court ruled a coroner must consider Jewish sensitivities. If they do not want to wait, do not cause them grief by waiting – it is “unlawful, irrational and discriminatory” to refuse to discriminate in favour of Jews. This mind-boggling (and in my view extremely offensive to an ordinary mortal goy who has to wait for weeks to get released for burial) decision has been made by a Lord Justice Singh, and lauded by Lord Mayor Sadiq Khan.

One could mumble something about Indians who import their caste ideas into fair England, but there was no rush by native judges to overrule Singh. And unfortunately Jeremy Corbyn approved of the decision, saying: “The High Court ruling is very welcome and will be a huge relief to the Jews who have suffered significant and unnecessary anxiety.” Even worse: before the matter went to the High Court, Jeremy Corbyn wrote to Hassel demanding that she reconsider.

Perhaps they were right? The Jews say that urgent burial is a religious duty. It is true, but so is the killing of a baptised Jew like me; it is a religious duty to kill such an apostate even on Yom Kippur, but Jews usually manage without fulfilling this obligation. On a milder note, a Jew is prohibited from eating bread baked by a non-Jew (פתנוכרי), but the vast majority of Jews transgress this prohibition. There are hundreds of Jewish laws and prohibitions that Jews do not observe if they can’t be fulfilled.

It is possible to offset this requirement of the Jewish law by another, keeping peace with neighbours (דרכישלום), as obviously getting in front of the line and bypassing your neighbours is disturbing peaceful relations with them.

The Jews say that they do it for the Muslims’ sake. Somehow Mary Hassel was taken to Court by Jews, not by Muslims. Jews often use Muslims for an alibi: instead of saying “we do not want to see a Christmas tree” or “we don’t want to hear church bells”, they say: it is offensive for Muslims. It is offensive for Muslims to be locked up in Gaza, but Jews do not mind causing that offence. So this elaboration is just an exercise in futility.

Jeremy Corbyn, a man who tried to please the Jews, is a sitting duck for antisemite hunters. I do not intend to criticise him, for he is a politician who operates in an England blessed with such a High Court, such a Parliament and such a corporate media.

Nothing is going to help him, nothing is going to help the British people, until they will free themselves from this Jewish fiefdom.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Perhaps the Jewish Messiah is already here, though we are not aware of his coming? All Jewish dreams and desires were fulfilled this mid-May. Well, almost all. Two great world power leaders competed in their benevolence to Jews, while ordinary Israelis had fun and exhilarating soft target practice shooting unarmed Gazans or at least cheering the sharpshooters. Iranians gnashed their teeth but did nothing. The US Congress deemed that the Poles should pay the Jews $300 billion in tribute. And an exceedingly obnoxious Jewish wench got the crown of the European art scene, accidentally ensuring that the new capital of Israel, Jerusalem, will be the location of a prominent international gathering next year.

If you think that some of this benevolence should drip to you and that your lot should be somewhat better, think again. Nobody promised you a rose garden. The Jewish Messiah is good for the Jews, while non-Jews should just work harder and prepare for divine vengeance. There are arguments about whether all the goyim will be hit by vengeance, or whether some should survive to buy retail. However, benevolence towards non-Jews is not a striking feature of this arrangement.

I was quite apprehensive in the beginning of May. The schedule appeared scary. The Iranians had established themselves in Syria, the Russians were prepared to equip Syria with their best S-300 system (it is more reliable than the new and fancy S-400). The Palestinians planned to demonstrate on the 70th anniversary of their Nakba loosely coinciding with the US Embassy move to Jerusalem and with beginning of Ramadan. A war with Iran and Hezbollah, riots in the Palestinian territories, loss of the God-given right to fly and bomb as we wish all over the Middle East – dangers galore were stored for the first half of May. With all my critical attitude, the utter destruction of the beloved land is not my wet dream.

Prudent people would tread cautiously, preferring to minimize their risks in such a situation, but Jews are all for maximising them. If we must have trouble, let us have all the trouble now to have it done with, said Netanyahu. And all troubles – the Iran nuclear deal collapse, the Nakba anniversary, the shift of the US embassy to Jerusalem, the confrontation in Syria, the beginning of Ramadan – were unloaded at once. Israel passed it with flying colours. There was no big war.

Palestine

True, some 60 Palestinian demonstrators were shot dead, the same number as were martyred in the Sharpeville Massacre, but what a difference! South Africa turned into a pariah state overnight, and the global campaign to dismantle apartheid began in earnest. The Gaza Massacre has been whitewashed by the obedient mainstream media, reported the RT. This event proved once again that mass media and social networks all over the world are in the Jewish grip, firm and invisible. Governments, parties, diplomats can and did protest, but the general public was insulated from the event.

The global system of mass information has changed a lot since 1960. There is an incredible abundance of information, a veritable flood that washes off everything. People think only what they are told today, and mass campaigns are produced by media and think tanks, they do not produce themselves. People are being told every day about, say, the Holocaust, or about Assad’s atrocities, or Putin’s meddling so it is kept in their minds. The moment the campaign is turned off, interest flags and the matter is totally forgotten, like the Skripal Affair was forgotten after it had been played to full capacity. Now Skripal has been disappeared by the British Secret Services, but this is not mentioned, outside of this publication.

And the mass murder in Gaza is already on its way to oblivion. They wanted to remind the world that they are buried alive in the grave of Gaza, and now they are dead. The people of Gaza have been locked up there for 70 years; the last 12 years were the worst, as the Gaza Strip has been under siege by Israel since they voted for Hamas. Gaza is almost unliveable, as Israel has bombed its power station, its sewage plants, its harbour and airfield. They can’t even fish, as Israeli boats machinegun the fishing boats. They can see their homes and fields taken from them just because they aren’t Jews, and they can’t reach them. This expulsion, dispossession, imprisonment of three generations, and siege are a unique Jewish sin.

Perhaps, the Holocaust was a divine punishment for Jewish treatment of Gaza, since for God, time sequence is of no importance. In the Torah, there are no earlier or later events, בתורה מאוחר ואין מוקדם אין, teaches the Talmud, and it is true. One can be punished for the sins not yet committed, and if they will not be committed, the punishment will be undone, too. If the Jews wouldn’t torture Gaza, there would be no Auschwitz.

Gaza is a noble place despite its depredation. In many countries, children of rulers are turning into billionaires. The daughter of the Angolan president is the richest woman in Africa: she is the only mobile telephony provider in diamond-rich Angola. But there is another tradition, of the children of the rulers being first to war. That is the tradition of Gaza. Among those shot by Israeli sharpshooters, there were thee children of Gaza’s leaders.

The son of the ex-Prime Minister of Gaza, Ismail Haniye, Maaz, has been among the heavily wounded. Ahmed al-Rantisi, the son of Abd el Aziz al-Rantisi, the founder of Hamas, has been killed. His father, called the Lion of Palestine, was been assassinated by the Jews in 2004, when an Israeli helicopter gunship launched a missile at his car in the centre of Gaza, killing him, his bodyguards and wounding passers-by. And now his son has followed him. Izz al-Din al-Sammak, son of Musa al-Sammak, a Hamas leader, was killed, and he was only 14 years old.

Altogether over a hundred boys and young men, the flower of Palestine, have been reaped in these unarmed demonstrations of April-May. A purpose of this killing spree was to show that non-violent resistance is futile. It is more fun to kill an armed opponent, if you are much better armed. When you kill an unarmed one, it is obviously not cricket. But such consideration has never stopped a Jew.

The reason is the serious doubt in the humanity of non-Jews that is planted in the centre of the Jewish religious Weltanschauung. A good Israeli who condemns Gaza killings most probably is a vegetarian, who objects to the killing of animals, too. Such good Israelis are often anti-male, and prefer to use a feminine form of nouns, like Zochrot. Such good Israelis usually are anti-native, and support unlimited immigration of Africans to Palestine. Such people can’t be numerous, and they aren’t.

As for other Jews, they learned from the Matrix protagonist, Neo (Keanu Reeves), who had been taught to (dis)regard obvious dangers as maya, as a mirage created by the Matrix, and he jumped from skyscrapers and dodged bullets. Jews apparently have a similar attitude to reality. One day it won’t work, to their surprise, but this time it worked.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

A wonderful, joyful day, a jubilant summit! On the bloody 38th parallel, for the first time in many years, the two Koreans met, the leaders of the two Korean states. There were affable smiles and a spontaneous brief and unscripted visit of the southern president to the northern country, and then the northern one – to the southern one. Kim led his colleague over the concrete lump marking the border of two worlds. Now there are hopes of getting out of the impasse into which the Koreans were driven, and on the horizon – the hope of the two states’ reunification.

Only a few weeks ago, President Trump had threatened to erase North Korea from the face of the earth and kill tens of millions of civilians, boasting that he had a bigger red button (or was it missile?) than Kim. It turned out that Kim’s will was stronger than the American’s will; and willpower is more important than gun power. And best is will power reinforced by armed force.

Trump’s threats bore an unexpected benefit: the President of South Korea looked into the abyss and saw his country and his people driven to annihilation. He saw that – and took a step towards reconciliation, showing an unexpected independence of mind.

You can compare the two Koreas in different ways. You can say: one is rich, the other one is poor. One is for the market, the other one is communist. One is the country of Samsung, and the other one has nuclear weapons. Alternatively, you can say: one Korean state is independent – North Korea – while the other one is occupied – South Korea. This is a fact, not an opinion.

Many years have passed since the forces of its former allies, the Russians and the Chinese, left North Korea, but the Americans do not even think about leaving the South. The ruler of the North, Kim, can do anything that his people agree to do. But the ruler of the South, Moon, must defer to Washington for every important decision. Many presidents of the South have been removed, imprisoned, or killed by the Americans and their agents for their attempts to reconcile with the North. We’ll see whether Moon will be able to stay in the presidential palace after this summit, but he took a chance, and this will be written to his credit in the history books.

There is no doubt that the people of Korea, of the North and the South, want peaceful reunification and the prosperity of their country. But so far the US has prevented it. The US deep state preferred to have its military bases in South Korea with its nuclear weapons aimed not only at Pyongyang, but also at Beijing and Vladivostok. Last year, the US brought in its THAAD missile defence system to South Korea, directly threatening the North, Russia, and China.

The Americans outlined the goal of the talks as they see it – the nuclear disarmament of North Korea. This is all that interests them. A North Korea without nuclear weapons is always vulnerable to a volley of Tomahawks, as in Syria. But Kim is not that simple. Instead of “nuclear disarmament of North Korea,” he proposed “the liberation of the Korean peninsula from nuclear weapons” – and, importantly, these words were repeated by the president of the South.

The liberation of the peninsula from nuclear weapons means, first of all, the removal of American bases and occupation forces, and the banning of American ships capable of carrying nuclear weapons from entering Korean ports. And then, without the invaders being present, the two independent Koreas will agree on their own terms. This, roughly, is the logic of Kim – and Moon accepted it, uttering the cherished words “the liberation of the peninsula” instead of “the elimination of the North Korean nuclear program.”

Russia as an original member of the nuclear club has traditionally supported the idea of ​​nuclear disarmament of all non-member countries. But it does not actively insist on it, if only because India, Pakistan and Israel are among the new nuclear powers, and the last not only did not sign the non-proliferation treaty, but also does not agree with any control over its nuclear weaponry. Under these conditions, it makes no sense to insist on the nuclear disarmament of North Korea. But, let us repeat, Russia is for disarmament. If this disarmament brings about the elimination of US bases in South Korea, this can only be welcomed.

The summit in the DMZ (demilitarized zone) has already had an effect. We have no doubt that the North is short of freedom, but in the South, there is certainly freedom of speech, isn’t there?

It turned out that in South Korea until this very day no one had seen or heard Kim, the North Korean president, on a video or in live broadcast. The Independent, a British quality newspaper, reported:

Until the meeting, many South Koreans had never actually heard Kim Jong-un speak. The leader is usually seen only in heavily edited footage, and accessing more videos of him can land people in jail. “I can’t believe I’m listening to the voice of Kim Jong Un. Someone I have only seen as a jpeg is speaking now,” South Korean Lee Yeon-su wrote on Twitter. It is a dramatic change for South Koreans, who under the National Security Act are banned on threat of jail from accessing media considered pro-North Korean.

Internet resources “sympathetic to North Korea” or, worse, praising North Korea, are banned there; and accessing such sites, or listening to Pyongyang Radio can send a South Korean to prison for several years. A good word about the northern neighbour can earn you a long stretch in jail under the Law on Combating Terrorism.(The law also provides for the death penalty, but it has not been used for the last ten years.) Anti-communist propaganda in the South is part of the school curriculum, part of the news program, part of everyday life.

After the summit, the surprised South Koreans wrote in their social media that the bloody tyrant from the North looked like a teddy bear, small, plump and cute.

And he speaks the same language as they do. And he eats buckwheat noodles, which they love.

Demonization of North Korea was the first victim of the summit: the South Koreans saw that the much besmirched Kim was quite a worldly guy, even with a very slight trace of Swiss German in his speech. Women’s diplomacy also played a role: Kim’s sister, Kim Yo Jong, made the first contact with the President of the South during her visit to the Olympics. Kim’s wife, a well-known actress, became friends with Moon’s wife. This North Korean ruler is a regular guy, they say today in Seoul.

At the NATO headquarters there was a lot of teeth gnashing and demands not to relax the sanctions, or rather to add some more sanctions. The Western mainstream media keeps saying that this summit had been just a preparation for the real main thing, for the meeting of Kim and Trump. But a sharp-sighted observer of The Guardian had noticed that it won’t be easy for Trump to do his usual bellicose sabre-rattling after the peaceful meeting of the two Korean leaders. He has been trapped. “If Trump tries to play hardball with Kim, he risks looking like a warmonger and a bully whose policies are inimical to Korean interests, north and south. Intentionally of otherwise, Moon, a lifelong advocate of detente with personal connections to North Korea, has spiked Trump’s guns.”

Actually, there is not much of reason for the Trump-Kim summit. Trump can take his troops home, and let the Koreans to settle their relations as they find fit. If the Russians and the Chinese did it, so can the Americans, too. The world, including Korea, is fully grown up and it can live without American tutelage.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

With slight disappointment the public regarded the field. Just a minute ago, two knights were converging in fearsome joust, their spears pointing forth, plumage blowing, horses galloping, ladies out waving their handkerchiefs to their champions, – and now we see they have passed each other, both firmly in the saddle, plumage unruffled, spears unbloodied, horses trotting away joyfully.

“Cowards!” – the boys shouted, while the ladies are happy to see their knights riding off the field unharmed. We all know this was just the first joust, where prudence often inhibits the testosterone flush. Soon, the knights will ride again.

This is a brief summary of the Syrian strike. An external force had pushed the leaders of Russia and the US into confrontation; Putin and Trump were equally unwilling to fight, but they couldn’t avoid the charge. The best they could do, they did: they avoided each other.

This was the somewhat unexpected conclusion of the carefully planned encounter. It plainly did not make sense to fire up fear and loathing of Russians to its unprecedented heights for such a finale. A mountain gave birth to a mouse, as Horace said. Presumably, the mountain will make another effort.

The last thing I want is to cheer and encourage the next encounter. The two presidents already have displayed vigour and courage by limiting the damage to a minimum. It is unwise to troll them for failing to defeat their opponent, though this is now being done by hundreds of pundits and by millions of private persons.

On the US side, Trump has been castigated by such brilliant humanitarians as Mr Mohammed (brother to late unlamented Zahran) Alloush, the leader of Jaysh al-Islam, a moderate Jihadi fighter group supported and paid for by that most progressive prince and lady drivers’ best friend, Mohammed bin Salman. The airstrikes were “a farce”, he said. Israel is also upset that President Trump “did the minimum he could”.

If Trump hasn’t been skinned yet by the neocons in Washington, it’s because he judiciously brought into his camp the worst warmongers, John Bolton and Nikki Haley as human shields in the case of a neocon attack: nobody can accuse a man whose security adviser is Bolton and the UN ambassador is Haley of being soft on Putin. Now they can’t voice their indignation. As they say in the army, it’s better to have them inside the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in.

Well, some guys are anyway unhappy. Vil Mirzayanov, the Russian expert, who had spied over the development of the Novichok chemical weapon and immigrated to the US,, wrote in his blog to his erstwhile CIA masters: “[by this strike], Trump confirmed that he is a Putin’s agent! Poor Nikki [Haley] should slam the door and leave, as an honest person can’t serve under Kremlin’s agent”.

Real Kremlin’s agents, trolls and scribes, or alternatively, Western dissidents presented the strike as a “huge victory for Putin”. This is the common ground of Putin and anti-Putin trolls: whatever the Kremlin ruler does, has to be presented as his great victory. Afterwards, they part their ways, and Putin’s agents bless the Lord for Putin, while anti-Putin trolls call to fight him harder and accuse everybody softer than Genghis Khan of collaboration with the tyrant.

It is silly to present the strike as Putin’s achievement. Kremlin tried to avoid the strike altogether, spoke darkly of a harsh response, of “carriers” being shot at, of Satan 2.0 and nuclear winter, but the talk failed to stop the strike. No British or American planes were downed, or even shot at. The Russians didn’t use their S-300 or S-400 SAM systems, claiming the US missiles didn’t approach Russian bases. This is a dubious argument: Putin tried to stop at attack on Damascus; and Damascus is not a Russian base. Let us face it: Putin did not stop the strike and he didn’t make the offender pay a price for this breach of the Law of Nations.

General (Ret) Leonid Ivashov, an important Russian military observer, said the strike had annihilated Russian deterrence, exposed Putin’s bluff of his powerful new weapons and, worst of all, proved him indecisive and unable to respond to an attack. We walked away with our tail between our hind legs, as punished dogs, he continued. Russia’s achievements in Syria have been erased by this shameful inaction.

What is worse, Trump’s strike destroyed what was left of the international law structure established by Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin. These three giants created the UN and its Security Council in order to avoid such eventualities by forbidding aggression, and the strike has been definitely an act of aggression against a sovereign state despite an objection of a permanent SC member, namely Russia. Now the gates of hell are open, international law has been demolished, and this happened because Putin agreed to accommodate Trump’s strike, said Ivashov.

Though official Russian media speaks of a great Russian victory, as no Russian or Syrian soldiers were killed, many Russians subscribe to the bleak view of Ivashov. The main question is whether this Russian fight aversion will encourage the Americans to carry out a future strike, or whether Trump will rein in his adversaries.

It is hard to accept the official Russian version saying the Syrian SAM systems intercepted 70% of the incoming missiles, as the excellent journalist Pepe Escobar did. This would be too good a result even for the best, latest, and most update systems. The unimpressive outcome of the attack can be explained easier by Trump’s decision to minimise the damage, as indeed the Israeli military says.

The Russian military experts here in Moscow told me that out of a hundred missiles fired by the US and their allies, only one or two were modern cruise missiles (“nice and smart”)and they destroyed the research institute in Barzeh. (It was not a “chemical weapons centre”, just a chemical research institute; it’s destruction was a copy-paste of Bill Clinton’s bombing of the pharmaceutical factory in Sudan over a similar pretext.)

All other missiles were old and at the end of their service; they had to be utilised somehow, and so they were. A few of them might have been downed by Syrian anti-aircraft fire, others fell without inflicting much damage. Syrian air defence is not able to blow modern cruise missiles out of sky; Syrian appeals to supply them with modern SAM systems have been refused at the request of Israel. (Netanyahu came to Moscow saying that S-300 in Syrian hands will turn all Israel into a no-fly zone; Putin agreed with him, and the Syrians were denied modern SAMs.) Now, hopefully these modern systems will find its way to Syrian army.

The Russian experts who were in contact with the US military told me that the US military used this occasion for retraining and refreshing reserve pilots; what they call “a milk run”. This combination of old missiles and less experienced pilots helped to lower the efficiency of the strike. And both sides, the Russians and the Americans, admitted that the deconfliction line was operative all the time, to avoid eventualities.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, Donald Trump, Russia, Syria 
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.