Archive | March 1st, 2018

Blundering Into Iran

NOVANEWS

Image result for Blundering Into Iran CARTOON

Time to tell Israel and Saudi Arabia to fight their own wars

By Philip Giraldi • Unz Review •

[This article is an edited and expanded version of a memorandum that I prepared for Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity which has been released separately on Consortium News ].

The deluge of recent reporting regarding possible conflict with nuclear armed North Korea has somewhat obscured consideration of the much higher probability that Israel or even Saudi Arabia will take steps that will lead to a war with Iran that will inevitably draw the United States in. Israel is particularly inclined to move aggressively, with potentially serious consequences for the U.S., in the wake of the recent incident involving an alleged Iranian drone and the shooting down of an Israeli aircraft. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been repeatedly warning about the alleged threat along his northern border and has pledged that Israel will not be in any way restrained if there are any hostile moves directed against it. The Israeli Transportation Minister Ysrael Katz has warned that Lebanon will be blasted back into the “stone age.”

There is also considerable anti-Iran rhetoric currently coming from sources in the United States, which might well be designed to prepare the American people for a transition from a cold war type situation to a new hot war involving U.S. forces. The growing hostility towards Iran is coming out of both the Donald Trump Administration and from the governments of Israel and Saudi Arabia. National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster is warning that the “time to act is now” to thwart Iran’s allegedly aggressive regional ambitions while U.S. United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley sees a “wake-up” call in the recent shooting incident involving Syria and Israel. The hostility emanating from Washington is increasing in spite of the fact that the developments in the region impact on vital U.S. national interests, nor is Iran anything like an existential threat to the United States that would mandate sustained military action.

Iran’s alleged desire to stitch together a sphere of influence consisting of an arc of allied nations and proxy forces running from its western borders to the Mediterranean Sea has been frequently cited as justification for a more assertive policy against Tehran, but that concern is certainly greatly exaggerated. Iran, with a population of more than 80 million, is, to be sure, a major regional power but militarily, economically and politically it is highly vulnerable. Its economy is struggling and there is a small but growing protest movement regarding the choices being made for government spending.

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard is well armed and trained, but much of its “boots on the ground” force consists of militiamen of variable quality. Its Air Force is a “shadow” of what existed under the Shah and is significantly outgunned by its rivals in the Persian Gulf, not to mention Israel. Its navy is only “green water” capable in that it consists largely of smaller vessels responsible for coastal defense supplemented by swarms of Revolutionary Guard speedboats.

When Napoleon had conquered much of continental Europe and was contemplating invading Britain in 1804 it was widely believed that England was helpless before him. But Admiral Earl St Vincent was nonplussed. He said at the time: “I do not say the French can’t come, I only say they can’t come by sea.” In a similar fashion, Iran’s apparent threat to its neighbors is in reality decisively limited by its inability to project power across the water or through the air against other states in the region that have marked superiority in both respects.

And the concern over a possibly developing “Shi’ite land bridge,” also referred to as an “arc” or “crescent,” is likewise overstated for political reasons to make the threat more credible. It ignores the reality that Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon all have strong national identities and religiously mixed populations. They are influenced and sometimes more than that by Iran, but they are not puppet states and never will be. Even Lebanon’s Hezbollah, often cited as Iran’s fifth column in that country, is not considered a reliable proxy.

Majority Shi’a Iraq, for example, is generally considered to be very friendly to Iran but it has to deal with considerable Kurdish and Sunni minorities in its governance and in the direction of its foreign policy. It will not do Iran’s bidding on a number of key issues, including its relationship with Washington, and would be unwilling to become a proxy in Tehran’s conflicts with Israel and Saudi Arabia as such a move would be extremely unpopular. Iraqi Vice President Osama al-Nujaifi, the highest-ranking Sunni in the Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi government, has, for example, recently called for the demobilization of the Shi’ite Popular Mobilization Forces or militias that have been fighting ISIS because they “have their own political aspirations, their own [political] agendas. … They are very dangerous to the future of Iraq.”

A seemingly legitimate major concern driving much of the perception of an Iranian threat is the possibility that Tehran will develop a nuclear weapon somewhere down the road. Such a development is quite plausible if only from a defensive point of view as Iran has been repeatedly threatened by nuclear armed Israel and the United States, but the current Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action provides the best response to the possible proliferation problem. The U.N. inspections regime is rigorous and Iran is reported to be in compliance with the agreement. If the plan survives the attacks by the White House, there is every reason to believe that Iran will be unable to take the necessary precursor steps leading to a nuclear weapons program while the inspections continue. And it will be further limited in its options after the agreement expires in nine years because it will not be able to accumulate the necessary highly enriched uranium stocks to proceed if it should ever make the political and economic decisions to go ahead with such a program.

The recent incident involving the shoot-down of a drone alleged to be of Iranian provenance followed by the downing of an Israeli fighter by a Syrian air defense missile resulted in a sharp response from Tel Aviv, though reportedly mitigated by a warning from Russian President Vladimir Putin that anything more provocative might inadvertently involve Russia in the conflict. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accordingly moderated his response but his government is clearly contemplating a more robust intervention to counter what he calls a developing Iranian presence in Syria. It is important to recall that Netanyahu’s prime objective in Syria and Lebanon is to have both nations in turmoil so they cannot threaten Israel. With that in mind, it is wise to be skeptical about Israeli claims regarding Iranian intentions to build bases and construct missiles in Syria. Those claims made by Israel’s Mossad have not been confirmed by any western intelligence service, not even by America’s totally corrupted and subservient CIA.

Netanyahu is also facing a trial on corruption charges and it would not be wildly off target to suggest that he might welcome a small war to change the narrative, just as Bill Clinton did when he launched cruise missiles into Afghanistan and Sudan to deflect congressional and media criticism of his involvement with Monica Lewinsky. Unfortunately, if Netanyahu does wind up being charged and going to prison his successor will likely be even more hardline.

It must be understood that the mounting Iran hysteria evident in the U.S. media and as reflected in Beltway groupthink has largely been generated by allies in the region, most notably Saudi Arabia and Israel, who nurture their own aspirations for regional political and military supremacy. There are no actual American vital interests at stake and it is past time to pause and take a step backwards to consider what those interests actually are in a region that has seen nothing but U.S. missteps since 2003. Countering an assumed Iranian threat that is no threat at all and triggering a catastrophic war would be a major mistake that would lead to a breakdown in the current political alignment of the entire Middle East. And it would be costly for the United States. Iran is not militarily formidable, but its ability to fight on the defensive against U.S. Naval and air forces is likely to be considerable, producing high casualty levels on both sides. How would the U.S. public respond if an aircraft carrier were to be sunk by a barrage of Iranian shore-to-ship missiles? And Tehran would also be able to unleash terrorist resources throughout the region, particularly endangering U.S. military and diplomats based there as well as American travelers and businesses. The terror threat might easily extend beyond the Middle East, into Europe and also within the United States while the dollar costs of a major new conflict and its aftermath could also break the bank, literally. Promoting a robust U.S. role in “regime change” for Iran as a viable military option to support objectives largely fabricated by allies would be a phony war fought for bad reasons. It is not commensurate with the threat that the Mullahs actually pose, which is minimal, and is just not worth the price either in dollars or lives.

Posted in IranComments Off on Blundering Into Iran

Lewis Carroll’s White Queen would have a career in the media today

NOVANEWS

Alice and the White Queen, drawn by John Tenniel
By Catte | OffGuardian 

“I can’t believe that!” said Alice.

“Can’t you?” the Queen said in a pitying tone. “Try again: draw a long breath, and shut your eyes.”

Alice laughed. “There’s no use trying,” she said: “one can’t believe impossible things.”

“I daresay you haven’t had much practice,” said the Queen. “When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”

Lewis Carroll – Alice Through the Looking-Glass

Lewis Carroll invented the White Queen as an absurdist emblem of a refusal to deal. But now that deluded lady would slot right in at the BBC, CNN, Guardianet al. In fact to live in the mainstream western culture of today we need to be able to believe a lot more than six impossible things before breakfast. We need to plug into an entire matrix of the unreal, never happened, never could happen and purely ridiculous.

There is now almost no point of contact between the world described in daily mainstream news and social commentary and the actual veridical experiential world in which real people really live. The most basic “facts” upon which they operate are almost completely false. They produce hours and hours of comment and analysis based on events that never occurred, words that were never said, a history that doesn’t exist. It’s not about explaining reality any more, it’s about making it up.

In this world Russia is an outlaw for helping to defend an elected government in Syria, and the US is an emblem of law-abiding decency while it has spent 70 years carving up the world and murdering people it doesn’t like – and moreover is currently enabling terrorists and illegally occupying a swathe of Syrian territory.

In this world Putin, having cleaned up a good deal of the lawless mafia-rule that characterised the Yeltsin years, is a “kleptocrat” and a “gangster” while Yeltsin was a “democrat.” Facing an election with 60-80% popular support, Putin is a “tyrant” who needs to fix the vote in order to win. With reckless disregard for even the basics of narrative consistency he is portrayed by turns as an ignorant “thug” and a political mastermind. So brilliant he swung the US election using 13 lowlife trolls and a restaurateur, and so mindbogglingly stupid he had Boris Nemstov, the political nobody, gunned down for no reason right outside the Kremlin so that even more stupid western analysts could say “Putin must have done it because it was right outside the Kremlin!”

In this world Navalny, another political nobody, polling 2% popular vote is “the opposition”, cruelly silenced by being ruthlessly convicted of the fraud he almost certainly actually committed, and sent to the Gulag given a suspended sentence and the freedom to bullhorn his remedial-level “anti-corruption” narrative (designed primarily for western consumption and TV soundbites btw) to all twelve of his regular followers.

In this world even mass-shootings are starting to look like movie versions of themselves, and the victims interview each other, exchanging cliché mass media talking points, and improbable personal narratives that sound like Facebook statuses, while waiting to die.

Because reality is something even those living it in its rawest form can no longer process or recognise for what it is.

So, we have to salute Mr Pozner for his refusal to partake in this increasingly macabre farce. Maybe we should all follow his example, be like Alice, just walk away from the Mad Hatter’s tea table and let the lunatics continue to sit there, babbling empty memes at one another. They probably won’t even notice we’ve gone.

(and yes I know the White Queen and the Mad Hatter are not in the same chapter or even in the same book)

Posted in MediaComments Off on Lewis Carroll’s White Queen would have a career in the media today

Russia vetoes anti-Iran UNSC resolution

NOVANEWS
Image result for Iran UNSC resolution CARTOON

A UK-drafted resolution aimed at pressuring Iran over alleged weapons supplies to Yemeni fighters has failed at the UN Security Council.

On Monday, the resolution gained 11 favorable votes at the 15-member Security Council but was halted by Russia’s veto.

“We cannot concur with uncorroborated conclusions and evidence which requires verification and discussions within the sanctions committee,” Russian Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia told the council.

Earlier in the month, Britain circulated a draft resolution that would renew sanctions on Yemen for another year and also “condemns” Iran for allegedly breaching the 2015 arms embargo on the country by “failing to take the necessary measures to prevent the direct or indirect supply, sale or transfer” of short-range ballistic missiles, UAVs and other military equipment to Yemen’s Houthi Ansarullah movement.

The Houthi movement has been defending Yemen against a bloody Saudi-led military campaign, which was launched in 2015 with the help of the US and the UK to reinstall the country’s former Riyadh-friendly government.

The draft resolution, backed by France and the US, called for unspecified measures in response to the UN report about Iran’s alleged role in Yemen, stressing that the UNSC will take “additional measures to address these violations,” and that “any activity related to the use of ballistic missiles in Yemen” is a criteria for sanctions.

A group of UN experts monitoring the sanctions on Yemen reported to the Security Council in January that it had “identified missile remnants, related military equipment and military unmanned aerial vehicles that are of Iranian origin and were brought into Yemen after the imposition of the targeted arms embargo.”

The UN experts, however, said they were unable to identify the supplier.

Both Tehran and Sana’a have repeatedly rejected the allegations as a fabricated scenario, and said the armed forces of Yemen have strengthened their missile power on their own.

After the veto, the UNSC unanimously adopted a Russian-drafted measure to extend for one year the sanctions regime against Yemen.

Posted in Iran, RussiaComments Off on Russia vetoes anti-Iran UNSC resolution

UK has spent $2.4bn on bombing Iraq, Syria

NOVANEWS

UK has spent $2.4bn on bombing Iraq, Syria: Official data

Image result for UK WARS CARTOONS

The British government has spent over $2.44 billion (£1.7bn) to carry out airstrikes in Iraq and Syria since 2014, the year the US and its allies formed a so-called coalition to allegedly counter terrorist groups wreaking havoc in the two Arab countries, according to official data.

The larger chunk of the money, around $2 billion (£1.5bn), has gone into flying the Royal Air Force (RAF)’s Tornado and Eurofighter Typhoon fighter jets as well as Reaper attack and surveillance drones for more than 42,000 hours.

The figures, revealed on Monday in response to a Freedom of Information requests by anti-war group Drone Wars UK, seemed to be a fraction of what London has spent over the course of its unauthorized intervention dubbed Operation Shader.

The British air force has also dropped over 3,500 units of various munitions in over 1,700 airstrikes on Syrian and Iraqi targets at a cost of around $375 million (£267mn) over the past three and a half years.

That includes Paveway IV laser-guided bombs that cost an estimated $98,000 (£70,000) apiece for the older version and $140,000 (£100,000) for the enhanced ones.

RAF pilots have also fired no less than 8 Storm Shadow cruise missiles that are said to cost around $1,100,000 (£800,000) per unit, the activist group said.

The costs would grow if besides fuel, which is included in official figures, undisclosed data such as crew payments, aircraft maintenance and capital data are also included.

Drone Wars UK estimates that it costs the RAF $112,000 (£80,000) to keep the multi-role Typhoons airborne for an hour, while the figure drops to $49,000 (£35,000) and ($4,900) £3,500 for Tornado and Reaper aircraft respectively.

However large, the numbers are still a fraction of what the US-led coalition has collectively spent during the campaign, which has seen 105,000 bombs and missiles used in some 29,000 airstrikes. Drone Wars said the military campaign has cost around $10.5 billion (£8 bn).

The sheer number of US-led airstrikes since 2014 has alarmed rights activists about the possible civilian casualties.

While the US has only admitted to killing 841 civilians in the strikes, Drone Wars UK said it had recorded over 6,000 civilian deaths as a result of the military campaign. Neither Syria nor the United Nations have authorized the attacks.

The coalition forces have on many occasions air-dropped weapons and equipment for terrorists while targeting Syrian and Iraqi government forces who fight them.

Posted in UKComments Off on UK has spent $2.4bn on bombing Iraq, Syria

Is A “Neutral” Stance Possible When Reporting on Palestine/’Israel’?

NOVANEWS

Is A “Neutral” Stance Possible When Reporting on Palestine/Israel?

Robert Inlakesh 9ed12
Taking a position of neutrality when approaching any topic is often perceived as being the position of intellectual high ground and also objectivity. When anyone is to first approach a topic they do not yet understand, it is almost essential that they approach what they are looking at in an open and un-decided manner. To say that one remains neutral on a point of conflict, in many cases, is the most rational position.

Whilst neutrality is indeed commonly the position of intellectual high ground, applying this theory – of neutral is moral and correct – to all areas of human interaction would be intellectually lazy and in some cases, completely immoral.

If two people, countries, or sides of near to equal strength and/or ethics engage in a feud/conflict or heated exchange, it is imperative that – from at least an integral journalistic approach – the stance taken by the bystander/outsider is neutral and balanced.
For example; when an observer begins to watch a game of football/soccer between two separate clubs (sides), the listener/viewer of the game will expect that the commentators will give a two sided, neutral outline of what is to come. One sided commentary would be outlandish in the field of sports, therefore coming into a new standoff between sides, the position is one of observation and comprehension, based upon that observation.

Upon the games initiation, those giving commentary will not be cheering for one side over the other – they will generally be giving statistics and a balanced overview – normally insinuating a chance for both sides to claim victory. Perhaps the commentators will also add context to the likelihood of both clubs performances, in accordance to previous statistics and observations, this approach is seen as clearly fair.

As the game progresses, if the score remains equal then this is expected to be reflected in the reporting. However, if one side has scored 10 goals and the opposition none, the commentary will expectedly reflect this score, not cover it up in order to remain neutral.
Those who are employed to give commentary on sports would not be expected to report that both sides are scoring equally, making excuses for the losing side in order to “balance the reporting”. In the world of sports the truth stands in the games statistics. If we saw a reporter or commentator going out of their way to justify the score on part of the losing side, this is no longer neutrality, and this position by default is taking a clear side. The point being, the winning side is indeed announced along with the statistics surrounding the win, reporters are not expected to leave out factual evidence for fear of offending a team and its followers.

According to the Oxford dictionaries definition of the word ‘neutral’, it is “not supporting or helping either side in a conflict, disagreement, etc.; impartial.”

In order to truly remain neutral, one must report the truth statistically and investigate all sides of the dispute and/or conflict. Therefore it is in fact incorrect to call oneself neutral if they leave out significant statistical and factual evidence on either side. When it comes to Palestine-Israel, if it is to be report from a truly neutral perspective, then the reality must be provided, one cannot simply sugar coat things in order to make people happy.

Neutrality when reporting upon Palestine-Israel however, cannot be fully achieved by definition. Reporting the truth on the matter, although approached in a neutral way, will benefit the side which is morally justified and this is where the succinct difference – between a sports games and human conflict – come to fruition. For the Palestinians, the truth is a powerful weapon which they use as a valuable tool in the fight against their oppressors. Therefore an honest journalist or distributer of fair and truthful information, is helping the struggle of the oppressed against their oppressor.

Often people will state such things as; “what you are saying is not balanced”, when it comes to reporting upon Palestine-Israel and this statement is in fact very much true, however this does not mean the information stated is not being reported from a neutral standpoint.

If we are to observe – from a non-biased perspective – two people as they sit down onto a seesaw, witnessing the heavier individual sit down, shooting the lighter individual into the air, is it fair and coming from a neutral position to report an unbalanced observation?

The point that is trying to be communicated through the analogies above, is that illustrating the truth and expressing facts that lean towards one side’s narrative over the others, does not mean you are no longer neutral.

You can report exactly what you see in front of you and still have no steak in the outcome of the situation at hand. The idea often sold to us – through the bulk of mainstream sources – is that we have to be strictly siding with one party and that we must report the affairs at hand according to the pre-decided position we take, when this is just not the case.

Explaining this, now brings me to my next point of observation on the issue. When looking at Palestine-Israel, we are presented with more than just statistics and simple observations. From what I have personally witnessed, the issue is no-where near balanced, nor is it really to be referred to as a conflict or war. In my opinion, what is happening to the Palestinian people is statistically and factually speaking, ethnic cleansing and the textbook definition of genocide.

I do not believe it to be rational to provide Israel with any sort of moral status, its actions speak louder than words and claiming, and that I as an individual remain neutral would be a statement of fallacy. When it comes to mathematics, if someone asks me a basic question such as; “what is 1+1?” I would state with authority in my position that the answer is two. What I have seen with my own eyes during the duration of time that I lived in the occupied West Bank, gives me a very clear cut perception of what is occurring. It is an oppression, not a conflict and therefore morally and in accordance to the principles of international law, I side with the oppressed against their oppressors.

Martin Luther King Jr. once quoted Dante Alighieri’s “Inferno” when addressing the United States role in the Vietnam War, he said; that “The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in a time of moral crisis reserve their neutrality”. The reason I use this quote is because sometimes, not coming to the aid of our fellow human beings devoid us of our humanity and allows for travesties to be committed. International bodies such as the United Nations (UN) and others, were supposedly banded together in order to intervene in violations of human rights, this is in fact why we have international law altogether.

When wrong is being committed in such an evident fashion, it is imperative that action is taken to – prevent or serve the situation – justice. As of now, the state of Israel are currently in violation of more UN resolutions than any other nation/state on the planet and have had more resolutions placed upon them than any other entity in history.

Looking back through history, there are many examples to point to, where there is clear cut moral degeneracy on the part of regimes, countries and/or occupiers, for example; it would be very difficult to find many people today that will take a neutral position when it comes to the infamous South-African system of Apartheid. Modern historians will not try to sugar coat and remain neutral between European colonizers and the Native Americans they came to dispossess of their lands.

It is internationally accepted that the land theft and the campaigns of genocide against the native custodians of the Americas were one sided affairs. This is not to deny the fact that in resistance to colonization Native American resistance fighters did take up arms and slaughter innocent European men, women and children, it is simply to tell the truth about what actually happened and about which side initiated the wrongdoings, carrying out oppression and injustice.

If we are to witness a rape, are we to stand there and judge both sides equally, considering what both parties are thinking? Or are we to act in what ways we can in order to deliver justice to this evidently horrendous situation.

These analogies are not intended to pressure someone into taking the side of Palestine or Israel, the reason that they have been included, is for the simple purpose of getting you to think about morality. This analogy is to appeal to people who are too caught up between titles and to plead with you to look at right and wrong, rather than political or religious affiliation to a side in theory.

The ongoing ethnic cleansing and constant oppression of the Palestinian people is not a conflict, Palestinians have no army, it is not two equal sides as it’s sold to people through our mainstream media platforms. There is no “neutral stance” between oppressor and oppressed, between slave and slave owner. Those who claim to remain neutral and who know about what is happening to the Palestinian people are taking the side of the oppressor by default.

To take the moral position is to take a stance when wrong is done and not to cover it up, not to be pressured into painting a narrative which just isn’t the truth. Identifying with titles or sides is nothing essential nor should it be demanded.

Having a humane response to wrongdoing, truly does put the ‘human’ in humanity. Therefore, yes, according to the information presented to me and what I have concluded through my own observations – I take the side of the Palestinians in their, both legal and moral, struggle for human rights and self-determination. If you feel the same way, the reaction is not to backtrack when accused of this, nor is it to become nervous when somebody uses this in an attempt to discredit you, stand strong with your opinion and present your case as to why you take this position.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Is A “Neutral” Stance Possible When Reporting on Palestine/’Israel’?

Academic Freedom: Hoax or Hardhat

NOVANEWS

Rachel Notley Mahon 11b57

Rachel Notley Mahon

University eggheads seem to claim that academic freedom entitles them to run around saying or doing whatever the hell they want. That’s annoying to say the least. They should be challenged.

First of all what is a university supposed to be? There are lots of attempts at that one, from a few words to long boring books. Here’s a short version many years ago by Frank Scott, Dean of Law at McGill. During his time he was deemed the expert on laws relating to universities. He wrapped up all that tiresome claptrap like this:

A university consists of a group of scholars and students working together to discover, test, and impart knowledge in the various fields of higher learning. It is a non-profit institution, dedicated to the search for an ever-expanding truth. The governors of a university are trustees of the funds devoted to this purpose. The purpose of the trustees is to protect and improve the educational process going on within the university.

Note especially to the phrase “search for ever-expanding truth”. So those in a university don’t just snooze around studying what’s already well known. They are supposed to use that old stuff as the springboard for their real job of reaching out to the fringe and beyond. That’s not just their right, its their duty, and it’s tough work.
At its beginning fifty years ago, the University of Lethbridge adopted a Mission confirming that duty. It was drafted by History Professor Ted Orchard and Education Professor Russ Leskiw, endorsed by the first group of students and professors, and officially adopted by the Board of Governors. It’s still in effect.

The Mission says that the University “seeks to cultivate the transcendental dimension of the scholar’s personality”. One needs a dictionary to figure that out. But it means that professors and students should be imagining, guessing, speculating, and dreaming up theories about what might lie beyond the known, and then using their energy and smarts to explore out there to find out. The Mission concludes “the University asserts its right and responsibility for free expression and communication of ideas. It is self-evident that a university cannot function without complete autonomy in this domain”.

In their search beyond the outer boundaries the members of a university look for the causes and reasons why people do the things they do, whether as individuals, groups, churches, business firms and all manner of other agencies and organizations each with their own private self interested purposes, announced or secret. A vast amount of experience shows that those external folks don’t always appreciate nosy eggsheads probing around like that. Some try to intervene to hamper them or even better to stop them altogether, or maybe even better yet to exterminate the pesky probers. That goes especially for wealthy corporations, ruthless special interest lobbies, and most dangerous of all powerful vote hungry politicians and angry governments.

So societies around the world, including Alberta, have built into university law and organization two defences against that destructive intervention. The first defence is to create universities as independent institutions separate from government and free from political control. The second defence is to install trustees, usually called Boards of Governors, specifically to support and protect the professors and students as they go about their work. Academic freedom is the term coined to describe that protection.

At the University of Lethbridge, the trustees and professors have firmly committed themselves to academic freedom through a formal agreement stating:

The Board and (Faculty) Association recognize the need to protect academic freedom. Academic freedom is generally understood as the right to teach, engage in scholarly activity, and perform service without interference and without jeopardizing employment. This freedom is central to the University’s mission and purpose and entails the right to participate in public life, to criticize University or other administrations, to champion unpopular positions, to engage in frank discussion of controversial matters, and to raise questions and challenges which may be viewed as counter to the beliefs of society.

The Board and Association recognize their respective responsibilities to defend academic freedom as specified in this Article. These responsibilities may include, but are not limited to, providing legal support to Members that arise from the exercise of academic freedom, educating Members on the rights and responsibilities related to academic freedom, and promoting academic freedom.

So that’s the academic freedom those eggheads talk about. Maybe not a just a hoax. But how does all that airy fairy cloud nine stuff play out in real life? Time to have a look at just a few of the vast number of controversies over academic freedom in this country during the last half century.

The watershed 1958 Harry Crowe affair set the precedent and tone for academic freedom in Canada ever since. The Principal of United College in Winnipeg fired History Professor Crowe, no cause stated. Amidst growing public concern, the national Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) appointed a two member investigating Commitee, one of whom was a young law professor Bora Laskin who later served for a decade as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. The Committee reported that the dismissal was a clear violation of both the spirit and letter of academic freedom. As a result, the College Board felt compelled to reinstate Crowe.

There were spectacular consequences. Crowe and twelve other professors resigned from the College in protest over the fiasco. The provincial government recast United College into part of what is now the provincial University of Winnipeg. For its strong performance in the Crowe affair the fledgling CAUT emerged clearly as the national authority on academic freedom, the gold standard for the maintenance of high quality in the national university sector. After a period in labour research, Crowe was appointed Professor at York University and to two terms there as a college Dean.

At the height of North American campus activism, the University of Alberta reached an impasse in determining the status of two professors because of strident claims of bias and prejudice that even spilled over into the community. The Board of Governors reached beyond the campus to request the CAUT to conduct fair hearings within the University’s normal procedural guidelines and national academic standards. For that purpose, the CAUT appointed a seven member commission of professors from other Canadian universities. A satisfactory conclusion was reached.

Closer to home, two very early cases at the University of Lethbridge showed the positive results from firm defence of academic freedom. In the first, a United States Senator aggressively demanded the dismissal of a professor Fang-Quei Quo whom he declared to be a communist and enemy of the United States. The Senator threatened to reduce the campus to ashes if Quo were not fired. The University ignored that attempted intervention. Just a couple of years later Quo was appointed Dean of Arts and Science. In his youth Quo had been in the resistance to the invasion and hostile occupation of his native island Formosa by the Chinese Nationalist army evicted from mainland China by communist rebels. As an enemy of the Nationalists, Quo was evidently by definition a communist enemy of the US.

In the second case, a prominent US scientist Loren Hepler applied for a faculty position. The infant U of L had neither resources nor facilities nor staff to support his large advanced research program. Hepler replied that he could handle that himself. What he sought was protection. Despite his scientific stature, two major US universities had not shielded him from harrassment by federal agencies because of his activism as a pacifist and opposition to nuclear weapons. The U of L did provide that protection. Hepler became one of the campus leaders in teaching, research, and extension of science education into the community. He served as one of Canada’s representatives on the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry, and as a scientific consultant on oil sands technology and associated environmental factors. A campus building bears his name in appreciation of his comprehensive work and accomplishments at the U of L.

More recently, in two notable cases where legal and contractual duties to defend academic freedom failed, the University of Saskatchewan lost a President and the University of British Columbia a Board Chair.

The University of Calgary is currently charged by the CAUT for violation of academic freedom, administrative conflict of interest, and external corporate influence upon academic policies and staff resulting in a campus culture of fear. Two senior professors have left the U of C because of dissatisfaction over interference in their academic work there. Joe Arvai is now a Professor in the School for Environment and Sustainability and Director of the Institute for Global Sustainable Enterprise at the University of Michigan. David Keith is now Professor of Applied Physics and Professor of Public Policy at Harvard University. Alberta’s loss of these two leading researchers at the forefront of the crucial energy transition now underway throughout the world shows what can result when protection of academic freedom fails.

In sharp contrast to the case described above where the U of A Board sought assistance from the CAUT, here the U of C Board trashed the criticism of the CAUT consisting of 70,000 professional academics from 122 universities and colleges. It even went further to advise the U of C faculty to be wary of the CAUT.

In the real world, academic freedom is by no means a hoax. Academic freedom is to the those who work at univerities what hard hats are to those who work at construction sites.

Posted in Education, LiteratureComments Off on Academic Freedom: Hoax or Hardhat

Pedophilia and Empire: Satan, Sodomy, Judges, and Pedophilia

NOVANEWS

From Florida in America to Norfolk Island in Australia, the Great Game Evolves.

Sir John Walsh of Brannagh 883e1

Sir John Walsh of Brannagh

There was a time when the “Great Game” revolved around kings, queens, prime ministers and presidents using diplomats, armies, and spies, to accomplish their grand strategic objectives, with spies and lies being the darker side of the business.

Today there is a much darker side to affairs of state, one that involves Satan, sodomy, judges, and pedophilia that crosses over into torture, murder, as well as the harvesting of blood, bone marrow, and body parts from the most vulnerable among us, our children.

I am the Chief Counsel and a Commissioner for the treaty-mandated International Tribunal for Natural Justice, as recently endorsed in its humanitarian mission by senior Australian officials among many others. I am also a former spy recently recommended for the Nobel Peace Prize, and a widely-published author on the dark side of intelligence and governance.

Read also: How The Deep State Controls Social Media and Digitally Assassinates Critics
As the Australian Prime Minister visits the United States of America (where he will be briefed on what we know about Deep State and Shadow Government corruption in his own country), I note with interest that a US judge was just dismissed in Florida – a judge known to be working for pedophiles and helping pedophiles cover up their crime – while another judge, the Presiding Justice for my Commission, Sir John Walsh of Brannagh, has been struck off and debarred (without due process and with at least five provable perjured affidavits) in Australia by Justice Anthony Besanko and Justice John Gilmour of Norfolk Island. I believe pedophilia – including murderous pedophilia – to be an issue in this case also.

DEEP STATE: Generally defined as the descendants of Caesar, the Vatican, the Rothschilds, and the Chabad Jews, using the highest elements of the Freemasons and Knights of Malta as “fixers” and Central Banks, City of London, and Wall Street as “managers.”

SHADOW GOVERNMENT: The “best of the servant class” generally defined as the two-party political elite being bribed and blackmailed to disenfranchise 70% of the voters while legalizing high crimes by the banks; and select bureaucrats especially in the national security and law enforcement communities, along with judges who protect traitors, pedophiles, and white collar criminals.

For those who remain in denial about the pervasiveness and depth of child abuse, let me make just four observations:

First, I have been nurturing a book, free online, by West Point graduate and former US Army officer Joachim Hagopian, entitled Pedophilia & Empire: Satan, Sodomy, and The Deep State. Pedophilia goes back centuries and is something with which Royal Families everywhere are most familiar. It is local, provincial, and national.

Second, pedophilia is both the glue that holds the Deep State and Shadow Government together, and the Achilles’ heel by which they will be brought down under the leadership of our President, Donald Trump, and our Attorney General, Jeff Sessions.

Third, PizzaGate, in which a Romanian taxi driver working with antiquated equipment successfully spoofed John Podesta into giving up his email password such that all of his stored emails moved into the public domain, is a signal event. It documented beyond doubt the degree to which pedophilia is the daily bread of the Clinton Family and the Democratic Party leaders, complementing all that we know about Republican Party pedophilia inclusive of former Speaker of the House Denise Hastert. One Romanian taxi driver was able to open the public’s mind in a manner not done by the book The Franklin Scandal: A Story of Powerbrokers, Child Abuse & Betrayal (elites in Nebraska) or the movie Spotlight (Roman Catholic elites in Boston) also in book form as BETRAYAL: The Crisis in the Catholic Church. President Donald Trump’s thousands of sealed indictments are in deep harmony the growing awareness and anger of the US public, an anger fed by one recent book in particular, EPIDEMIC: America’s Trade in Child Rape.

Fourth, the Catholic Church, while an easy target with ten percent of its priests abusing children and many of its Cardinals appearing to be both murderous pedophiles and all too willing to claim sanctimonious grounds for denying and covering up the crimes of the Church against humanity – crimes that include the sale of babies taken from unwed mothers to pedophiles and even Satanists who wish to feast on the new-born – is not the worst abuser. Schools, child care services, and international aid organizations such as Oxfam – are the worst abusers. Put simply, any organization that deals with children attracts pedophiles, and the networks, including judges and politicians filmed on video abusing and sometimes murdering children, all close ranks.

PEDOPHILIA: Includes child kidnapping and child sales including sales by parents giving birth to children as a “cash crop,” child slavery, child rape, child torture, child murder, child ritual murder, and child body exploitation (blood, bone marrow, body parts, all with anti-aging properties).

This brings me to the critical role of judges as an obstacle to public education and political integrity. There are three classes of judges in the dark world of pedophilia and child murder:

01 Those that issue restraining orders and arrest warrants against witnesses to prevent members of their local pedophile network from being investigated, indicted, convicted, and incarcerated – Judge Scott Dupont of Florida is a documented example.

02 Those that seek (generally without due process) to disbar lawyers and judges who strive to do their sacred duty in service to the public in this domain of pedophilia and child murder, what I consider to be the “last veil” of the Deep State and its servant Shadow Government. Anthony Besanko and John Gilmour – “carpetbaggers” (non-residents) appointed to assist in the unlawful seizure of Norfolk Island by Australia in 2016, appear to be such judges and merit federal investigation.

03 Those, like my Presiding Justice, Sir John Walsh of Brannagh, who act with unfailing integrity and have a record of confronting corruption (including, most tellingly, in relation to Norfolk Island). I am quite certain that Sir John would triumph in a fair trial, particularly if it included polygraph examinations for all concerned. I am asking William Binney, former Chief Technical Officer of the National Security Agency, and will be discussing what measures Sir John could pursue that would lead to a special data extraction – we have all the emails and cell calls of both Anthony Besanko and John Gilmour, how interesting would it be to make them all available to the Australian Prime Minister while he is here in the USA?

Ever since Saudi Arabia received a tailored extract from these signals databases, I have been sought out by opposition parties – Australia, Canada, and France particularly – and asked what they might do to ask President Donald Trump for the publication of incriminating signals collection on entrenched political leaders. My answer: ask Rex Tillerson, the Secretary of State. I am proposing to Bill that we do a letter to the Secretary pointing out the diplomatic value of sorting all this incriminating material out country by country.

For myself, I have three speculative conclusions:

01 The signals data is going to be released eventually. Corrupt officials should begin planning their exit strategies now and strive to do no further harm. I continue to pursue a Truth & Reconciliation Strategy – it is better to educate the many than to hang the few.

02 The public is acutely aware now of what it means to be governed by a Shadow Government on behalf of the Deep State – 2018 may be the Year of the Independent, and I fully anticipate the rapid growth of earnest opposition parties such as the Independence Party in the United Kingdom and the Pirate Party everywhere else.

03 Sir John is being wronged by a Commonwealth country that is lacking a Bill of Rights and all too beholden to the Deep State. With or without his legal credentials from Australia, he is sure to become a world figure with his role as Chief Justice for the International Tribunal of Natural Justice. His vindication is certain.

Does Australia wish to be defined by two piss-ant alleged pedophile justices hiding in the weeds of Norfolk Island? Or might Australia wish to consider independence of mind and integrity of soul, and recognize Sir John Walsh of Brannagh as the gold standard for judicial integrity?

Here in the USA we have started the process of firing justices who protect pedophiles. I am most troubled by the reality that in Australia it appears there is a preference for the opposite course: firing justices who seek to expose pedophiles.

Posted in USAComments Off on Pedophilia and Empire: Satan, Sodomy, Judges, and Pedophilia

Three Decades Ago: US Fueled “Most Repressive Regime in the World”

NOVANEWS

US Imperialism and the Shah 0464b

US Imperialism and the Shah

31 years ago today, an article published by The Daily Iowan, “US Imperialism and the Shah,” lamented United States-sponsored terrorism against the Iranian people, which was nearing the breaking point. The author, a second-year law student who later became an attorney named Robin B. Potter, who at the time, was a member of the US-based Revolutionary Student Brigade (RSB), explained how the relentlessly brutal dictator, the Shah, acting as a puppet for US government interests, allowed the US economy to reap the harvests of Iran’s oil, while the people of Iran suffered under a torturous, totalitarian leader. Subjected to constant scrutiny, individuals and groups who opposed the Shah’s tyrannical rule drew the attention of the Shah’s secret police, known as SAVAK. They were used to torture political opponents and dissidents while imprisoning more than 100,000 Iranian citizens.

Iranian students attending college in the US in 1977 – the group named “Daneshjouian Irani”- in a letter to the editor carried by The Daily Iowan, wrote, “The CIA created the SAVAK in Iran in 1956 and over the last 25 years has created and controlled the most repressive regime in the world.”

At the same time that the SAVAK wreaked havoc on the free-thinking Iranian population, corporate US business interests, with the CIA’s backing, maintained 30,000 “advisers” in Iran in 1977 and provided millions of dollars in military arms and hardware. I suspect that many young people today in the US have no idea what a jagged, violent and deceitful path US politicians chose to follow in order to either harness Iran’s financial revenues, or seek its total destruction. Most do not know that the US instructed Saddam Hussein, another US puppet, to invade and occupy Iran in the Iran-Iraq War, which left 300,000 Iranian people dead, and they probably don’t know that the US Navy once blasted an Iranian airliner filled with hundreds of people out of the sky and then adamantly refused to accept guilt or accountability for the murderous act.

These are the events that shaped present-day relations between the United States and Iran today. Yes, Iran took many Americans hostage during the infamous “Hostage Crisis” in 1979, but it is also a fact that all were released alive. Still, the chagrin the Americans felt over that incident would be the reason for more unapologetic reprisals. Once US politicians lost the ability to profit from Iran, the country was immediately placed on America’s hit list.
Former US President Dwight D. Eisenhower famously revealed the truth when he said, “Lord knows what we’d do without Iranian oil.” Well Dwight, Americans would have had to live more humbly, they would have needed to drive economy cars like the rest of the world, instead of 6,000 pound beasts twenty feet long with engines often in excess of four liters. Americans would have had to listen to former US President Jimmy Carter when he told the nation on public television that they were living beyond their means; this even before credit card mania overtook Americans, causing them to all become like hamsters in a wheel, unable to get off, constantly worrying about paying off their growing debts.

In “US Imperialism and the Shah,” Potter wrote that the US government, “permits the SAVAK to spy openly on Iranian students and dissidents living in this country. Besides installing the ruthless dictator, the United States has assisted the Shah in building a complete intelligence network for the purpose of monitoring the Persian Gulf movements of foreign powers like the Soviet Union in the area, as well as to police his opposition.”

The same things gripping the state of the world in 2018, were well underway more than three decades ago. The article and attitude among progressive Americans at that time was that, “…the same investments, the same companies and moneybags who have their fingers in the Iranian economy and profit by the oppressive nature of its social system.”

Interestingly, at the time of the article, South Africa was still under full apartheid oppression and Black Africans were considered second-rate citizens as the Palestinians and African migrants are to the Israelis today. It’s as though they just keep trading positions instead of learning from mistakes. Greed, racial and religious superiority absolutely dominate the politics of the US and other oppressive regimes.

The article referenced here is republished on the Website, MohammadMossadegh.com. Mossadegh of course was Iran’s western educated democratically elected Prime Minister, who the US removed from power in a coup d’etat in 1953. Why? Because Mossadegh could read the writing on the wall and after many years of western governments and their corporate allies absolutely ripping Iran off over oil prices, he decided to nationalize oil and oust the Anglo Iranian Oil Company, today known as British Petroleum. This led the British to collaborate with the newly formed US CIA and overthrow Iran’s government, in order to install the Shah.

In fact The Economist reported 8 March, 1975, that the Shah was so oppressive, that he made an announcement about three principles that all Iranians must believe in: those were the monarchy, the constitution, and the Shah’s “white revolution.” He said those who accepted the principles he insisted upon, had to join the Shah’s new party. Those who refused to accept those tenets, the Shah said, should, “leave the country or go to jail.”

That is what the US government did to the Iranian people by forcibly removing their elected leader and installing the Shah. The US has been at odds with Iran since 1979 and while the US remains constantly engaged in unilateral overseas military engagements that claim many lives and brew endless controversy, Iran has not attacked a nation outside of its borders for hundreds of years.

 

Posted in USA, IranComments Off on Three Decades Ago: US Fueled “Most Repressive Regime in the World”

Celebrity Christian, Jewish, and Buddhist Religious Leaders Who Terrorize Muslims

NOVANEWS

religious terror trio 0d4ac

What do the Rev. Robert Jeffress, Rabbi Shmuley Boteach and Spiritual Leader Ashin WIrathu, have in common? They’re all widely followed, highly influential representatives of religions; Christianity, Judaism and Buddhism, who lend great influence toward the hatred and persecution, torture and murder of Muslims.

Jeffress, Boteach and WIrathu tell people how to think and who to hate. It’s a terrible lesson in religious superiority in the 21st Century. If any one thing is true, it is that members of all religions have members and representatives who are truly good, and truly bad. Hatred runs the gamut, and another important point is that all of the widely followed religions, in their core teachings, instruct their followers to be peaceful and not to kill.

These pseudo religious all have their common themes, along with their individual, more particular, cultural forms of hatred. All three are fueled by their celebrity status and each is reminiscent of someone who peddled their soul for a little fame and fortune while claiming that others sold their souls to the devil because they are members of the “wrong” religion.

Good Old Southern Christian Hatred
Rev. Robert Jeffress, the right-wing Southern Baptist reverend from Dallas who heads a so-called “megachurch” with 12,000-members that recently saw a renovation costing the obscene amount of a $128 million, is the Islamophobe who preached to fellow Islamophobe, Donald Trump, before his inauguration. He is known for saying the most foul things about Muslim people and people of other faiths, such as, “…religions like Mormonism, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism—not only do they lead people away from God, they lead people to an eternity of separation from God in Hell.”

Words like those that fly from this man’s mouth directly endanger American people who also happen to be Muslim. The spiteful accusations incite violent attacks and lead to injury and murder.

His behavior is reprehensible, it seems that Jefress doesn’t understand that people do not choose what flag or religion they are born under, and claiming that people are bad because of their faith removes any credibility for a sane and clear-thinking conversation. He says Muslim people are part of an, “evil” religion. Frequently opting to use the word “Islam” instead of Muslim, he claims the religion, so geographically and ideologically varied, is “oppressive” and “violent,” and he inspires hatred and division among his fellow Americans who swallow his words hook, line and sinker.

False prophets and religious profiteers are nothing new in America, and they are always the farthest thing from Christian, as they use hate and fear to grow their audience.

Jeffress clearly despises all who are different from him. He’s cozies up to Trump and he’s riding the wave of false Christianity and fear-mongering as he stands in judgement of hundreds of millions of people on this earth. Jeffress attempts to legitimatize Donald Trump’s bizarre thoughts about non-Christians and even defended Trump’s remark about what he called, “s**thole countries”–it might be the most nationalist claim about Christianity ever made…

“As individual Christians, we have a biblical responsibility to place the needs of others above our own, but as Commander-in-Chief, President Trump has the constitutional responsibility to place the needs of interests of our nation above the needs of other countries.”

Jeffress, in his hateful critique of Muslim people, uses half-truths and misconceptions from the Holy Qur’an to justify his accusations that Muslims, “worship a false God” and much, much worse.

The worst part is that Christianity has unwavering, inflexible commands about not judging others, loving your enemies, and turning the other cheek. These zealots who use Christianity as a tool to generate hatred and distrust, are having a tremendous impact on the opinions of their followers. Jeffress never distinguishes or talks about the incredible contrast that exists in the Muslim world, instead he views and regards Muslim people in a single sentence when the people in question are in fact, so highly diverse.

A Muslim bashing President backed by a Muslim bashing preacher, that’s apple pie in America today.

A Witch Hunt Leading Rabbi

Those familiar with the Israeli witch hunt against the performer Lorde, who canceled her show in Tel Aviv after being contacted by two people in New Zealand who explained how Israel is an apartheid state riddled with human rights violations against Palestinians, know that Rabbi Shmuley Boteach is the lead torch carrier. Good God, this man took out a full page ad in the Zio-friendly Washington Post calling Lorde a “bigot” and referencing the BDS (Boycott, Divest Sanction movement against Israel) as “terrorists” and “antisemitic” when he knows in his own rotten heart that he is a God forsaken liar.

Of course this is the oldest trick in the hasbara dictionary, always viciously and voraciously counterattack, and accuse anyone who disapproves of Israel’s incessant violence toward and killing of Palestinians, as antisemitic. Frankly, more people than ever are seeing this defensive act for exactly what it is, but it continues.

The Daily Beast summarized Boteach like this, “Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, who took out a full-page ad branding the pop star a ‘bigot,’ is a failed reality TV star and anti-porn crusader who served as Michael Jackson’s rabbi.”

Wow…

When actor Ben Affleck was sickened by Muslim bashing and spoke out, Boteach was right there, “… the problem with Islamic violence is that it’s being done in the name of Islam. And while we dare never repeat the lie that violence is endemic to Islam – knowing full well that other religions have had violent streaks – it is true that violence in the name of Islam is not being condemned by a sufficient number in the Islamic mainstream.”

“Violent streaks,” like an unprecedented war against Iraq over false intelligence about weapons of mass destruction? Or maybe he’s referring to the Spanish Inquisition? Perhaps the ruthless eradication and genocide of Native tribes in North America? In reality, but more human beings have been murdered and culturally obliterated in the name of false Christianity than any other faith in modern time.

The bottom line is that when he discusses Muslim people, Boteach cleverly fails to use words like “occupation” and “checkpoint,” no reference to “unjustified wars in the Middle east” or “apartheid.” I’ve got news for Boteach, those are the fires that ignite the explosions. The Middle east would not be aflame and ISIL would not exist, if former US President George W. Bush had not decided to launch this endless series of US wars, or if Barack Obama had not elected to add two countries to the mix, or if the allied warring nations and political leaders had just been able to find the guts to speak out and stop it.

In one of his own articles, Boteach reflects on a chance encounter with a Muslim man who said, “I was in Israel recently. I enjoyed it. But I was disgusted at the treatment of the Palestinians who cannot even go from Bethlehem into Jerusalem.”

The rabbi says he explained the series of military checkpoints all Palestinians must pass through were set up “…after a wave of terror bombings killed thousands of Israeli civilians. You can hardly blame Israel from trying to stop the slaughter.”

Thousands of Israeli’s killed in “a wave of terror bombings”… sounds a lot like Israel’s unprovoked attack Gaza, in 2008/09. The Israeli occupational forces “Operation Cast Lead, so obnoxiously named, killed 1,398 Palestinians, including 344 children, and Israel lost exactly five soldiers.

The Muslim man Boteach was talking to reacted, saying, “You mean the way Israel massacres Palestinians every day. And it’s all funded by America, who is the biggest murderer in the world. Just look at the 100 people every day being killed in Iraq.”

Boteach’s reaction? He completely ignores the part about Israeli’s killing of Palestinians and goes on a rant about Islamic terrorists. That’s because Israel’s crimes against the Palestinians are an indefensible crime of war and he knows it.

He also writes at length about Iran being a dangerous country, while praising the politics of the US and Israel. Iran simply objects to Israel’s inhumanity and human rights violations, and for this pays a continual price, unlike the Wahhabi and Salafist followers in Saudi Arabia, who have no problem being friendly with Israel.

Any religious leader who calls celebrities with a conscience who don’t want to perform in Israel anti-Semitic, is a cancer.

The Buddhist Face of Terror

The spiritual leader of the 969 movement in Burma (Myanmar), Ashin WIrathu, is a bloodthirsty criminal whose face filled a Time Magazine cover in 2013, with the title, “The Face of Buddhist Terror” — in all of the magazine’s editions except the one published in America. His influence has galvanized the grating ethnic tension in this Buddhist country, where monks are seen riding mopeds down the street while clutching machetes with blood dripping from the blade. Their victims are the Rohingya Muslims, who the United Nations stated are, “The most persecuted people in the world.”

As I wrote in a 2013 article …

“We have to wonder how many Americans realize that Time Magazine publishes several different regional versions of its publication each month. The Americans get the version that doesn’t piss off corporate interests, the rest are more honest. Americans receive a ‘dumbed down’ version. It is more in keeping with the ambitions of a country that murdered 1.5 million Iraqi people over bad intelligence. Of course many of America’s victims in Iraq were also Christian.”

Buddhism, a belief system assumed by almost all people in the world to be one of peace, is actually the religion that was used as an excuse to conduct the only two genocides of the 21st Century: the bloody and systematic elimination of 160,000 Tamil Hiindu’s and Christians by Sri Lanka’s Sinhalese Buddhist military in 2009, and the outrageous, horrific ongoing ethnic cleansing of Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar. Wirathu is largely tied to the latter. Of course years after the Genocide of Rohingya Muslims began, it is finally on the world radar, even in the US. But the number of people who have had to die and suffer is fully unjustified, and the tragedy continues.

The website that bears the 969 movement’s name, claims, “Our mission is to preserve the teachings of the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Sangha.” I quickly noted that according to the 969 movement’s view of Buddhism, which apparently is not in conflict with general Buddhist beliefs, “friendliness in itself is not the highest value in Buddhism,” it continues, “Nor can it be said that friendship with Muslims is essential to the success of Buddhism.”

So Buddhism is about success. Hmmm, last time I checked, a goal to be successful involves being competitive and putting your needs first, even before others. That sure does contrast with peace and harmony.

Wirathu has worked to change laws in Myanmar that allow Buddhists to marry Muslims. He is directly tied to the sectarian violence in this Asian country that for years, operated as a military junta. This Buddhist mad man is even defended by Myanmar’s former president, Thein Sien. One person who possibly could have made a difference for the Rohingya, turns out to be the biggest political disappointment in modern Asian history: the formerly respected Burmese national figure, Aung San Suu Kyi. She refuses to speak out, or even acknowledge the ongoing pogrom against the Rohingya.

The biggest point, is that Wirathu hates Muslims, he believes eradicating these people is his duty as a Buddhist leader, and he likes to see them murdered in mass. A few words from Wirathu can cause a group of Buddhists to transform into a violent, angry rampaging, murderous mob. To make things even worse, Wirathu is a convict. He was sentenced to 25 years in prison in 2003 for inciting anti-Muslim hatred, though his sentence was greatly shortened.

Why not one might ask? After all, former Myanmar President Thein Sien considers Wirathu to be a member of national clergy.

As long as hatred takes the form of religion, and people follow religious leaders who incite violence and hatred, people will die unnaturally, long before their time. Until these false prophets learn to confine their system of values to divine teachings, which have nothing to do with killing or harming Muslim people, the world remains in peril.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, USA, ZIO-NAZI, South AsiaComments Off on Celebrity Christian, Jewish, and Buddhist Religious Leaders Who Terrorize Muslims

Zio-Nazi Propagandists Drop to All-Time Lows

NOVANEWS

Israeli Propagandists Drop to All-Time Lows, Claiming Shooting Victim Muhammad Tamimi Hurt Himself on Bike.

Image result for joseph goebbels quotes
Photo by: Shoah

Israel is facing worldwide humiliation after issuing a false statement about Muhammad Tamimi, the 15-year old boy shot in the head by Israeli militants and permanently disfigured late last year. Muhammad Tamimi is one of at least 345 Palestinian children who were injured by Israel’s military during protests against Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

Today, Israel suddenly cleared itself in the incident, saying they learned through a “confession” (For years, Israel has demanded/extracted confessions from Palestinian children accused of crimes, but the papers they are asked to sign are always in Hebrew, translators not included) that the boy smashed his head on his bicycle. Israel’s desperate propagandists who apparently think people will believe absolutely anything, have stooped to a new low.

Image result for josef goebbels quotes

16-year old Ahed Tamimi, whose fiery hair captured the hearts and admiration of millions, is the Palestinian girl who slapped a heavily armed Israeli soldier in the face who was trespassing on her family’s property, she is Mohammed’s older cousin. She attacked the Israeli soldier after learning that Mohammed had been shot in the head with a lethal rubber bullet, by Israeli Defense Forces.

The voice behind the lie, that the lad suddenly “admitted” that he simply hit his head on his bicycle, Israel’s Maj. Gen. Yoav Mordechai, is the Israeli coordinator of government activities in the occupied territories. As Haaretz writes, Mordechai. “Expects us to believe that tens of Palestinians and a few Israelis conspired to concoct a huge lie in order to slander the…” (Tamimi family).

Muhammad Tamimi 0635a

(Muhammad Fadel Tamimi, 15, with his mother, at his home in the occupied West Bank village of Nabi Salah on 13 January. A month earlier an Israeli soldier shot at close range with a rubber-coated metal bullet causing serious head injuries. Image credit: Heidi Levine/ Sipa Press).

Famous for their role in protesting and exposing Israeli apartheid in the West Bank town of Nabi Saleh, the Tamimi family has faced years of violent reprisals from Israeli police and military for asserting their right to self-determination.

The world reacted sharply to the boy’s story. He is terribly disfigured from the injury, and Israeli rubber bullet was surgically extracted from his head. The story embarrassed Israel because it showed both the bravery of a child standing up against a violent occupying force, and the utter, extreme cruelty the Israeli militants exhibit toward children by shooting them up close, frequently leaving them disfigured like Muhammad Tamimi, and all too often, dead. Killing and maiming members of the Palestinian population has long been a cultural trait of the Israeli occupational forces.

The 15-year old boy was gravely injured and left in a coma for four days. It took two operations, “to remove a rubber bullet lodged in the back of his brain after being shot at close range by Israeli forces. He has been unable to attend school for at least six months because of the injury,” Middle East Eye reported. With regard to Mordechai’s incredible attempt to say the kid injured himself, the writer added, “Not only are there witnesses of Mohammed being shot by Israeli forces in December, a CT scan of his brain before undergoing surgery clearly shows the bullet lodged in the back of his skull.”

Israeli Major General Yoav Mordecai says Mohammed #Tamimi was not hit by an Israeli bullet, but rather fell from his bicycle.

Here is a photo of the bullet that was removed from Tamimi’s head.

And a CT scan showing it before it was removed.http://j.mp/2oxuPOS #Israel

The Jerusalem Post explains that the Israeli’s raided the Tamimi home while everyone slept early Monday morning, and that the arrest of several members of the household including Mohammed, preceded his alleged “confession”:

“The teenager was arrested in a pre-dawn raid on his home Monday along with eight other people in the village, on suspicion of involvement in public disturbances and nationalistic terrorist activity, according to an IDF representative.

“Muhammad was questioned by police and a civil administration officer and then released, the representative said. Mordechai said that during his interrogation, Muhammad confessed that the handbags of a bicycle caused his injury after he fell off.”

Terrorist activity? It never ends with Israel, Palestinians are always branded “terrorists” for simply defending themselves, and African migrants are branded as, “labor infiltrators” for trying to live in the Jewish state. The labeling is damaging and dangerously deceptive, and the problem only grows over time as evidenced by this current story.

The JP article carried statements from the Tamimi family, who said, “Israel has gone out of its mind in its attempt to discredit our family. What began as a far-fetched claim we are not a real family has descended into an attempt to deny documented reality.” The Tamimi family says Mordechai and Israel have proven only one thing – “that they will stoop to any depth to harm our just struggle for freedom and an end to the occupation.”

In response, and in order to prove the impossibility of Mordechai’s alleged “confession,” the family released his medical records, in English, from Istishari Medical Hospital in Ramallah, which stated that it had treated him for a “bullet injury.”

Israel has a long, sordid history of lying about actual events. The Zionist regime whose corrupt prime minister is facing charges of fraud and worse, has been solidly behind all of it for years and years and now he is circling the drain and getting ready for the big flush due to his exposed corruption. What chance do the Palestinians have as long as Israel lies and the US news media faithfully reports it?

Just the idea that a government would concoct this story, sadly, proves that Israel has no adherence to truth in any possible way. The fake news element is just sickening. The tragedies just go on and on.

 

 

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Zio-Nazi Propagandists Drop to All-Time Lows


Shoah’s pages

www.shoah.org.uk

KEEP SHOAH UP AND RUNNING

March 2018
M T W T F S S
« Feb   Apr »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031