Archive | September 4th, 2017

Iran’s home grown air defense system to be operational soon


Iran’s home grown air defense system to be operational soon

Iran has tested its home-grown air defence system, designed to match the Russian S-300, the head of the Revolutionary Guards’ air defence has said.

“In parallel with the deployment of the S-300, work on Bavar-373 system is underway,” Farzad Esmaili told state broadcaster IRIB late Saturday.

“The system is made completely in Iran and some of its parts are different from the S-300. All of its sub-systems have been completed and its missile tests have been conducted.”

Bavar (which means “belief”) is Tehran’s first long-range missile defence system, and is set to be operational by March 2018, he added.

In 2010, Iran began manufacturing Bavar-373 after the purchase of the S-300 from Russia was suspended due to international sanctions.

Russia resumed the sale following the 2015 nuclear deal with world powers which lifted sanctions, and Iran’s S-300 defence system became operational in March.

On Saturday, the new defence minister Amir Hatami said Iran has “a specific plan to boost missile power”.

He said he hoped “the combat capabilities of Iran’s ballistic and cruise missiles” would increase in the next four years.

The comments came amid increasing tensions with Washington, which has passed new sanctions against Iran’s ballistic missile programme.

Posted in IranComments Off on Iran’s home grown air defense system to be operational soon

Raqqa: A hellhole created by the regime-changers of the West


By Russia Today and Neil Clark

As Jan Egeland, the UN humanitarian adviser on Syria, has stated, if there’s a worse place to be in the world at the moment than the Syrian city of Raqqa, then it’s hard to imagine.

It’s not just the almost non-stop aerial bombardment and shelling from the mainly Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces that the 25,000 or so citizens in ISIS-held parts of the city have to endure. “Access to safe drinking water, food and other basic services is at an all-time low with many residents relying on food they had stored up earlier to survive,” says UN public information officer David Swanson.

Both ISIS snipers and the US-led coalition have been targeting people trying to flee from the Middle Eastern hellhole. The UN notes that coalition forces have even been attacking boats on the Euphrates River, described as “one of the remaining escape routes for civilians.”

We can only imagine the headlines if Russia was doing all this. But because it’s the US and its allies, the international reaction has been muted to say the least. It’s revealing to compare the “humanitarian” concern voiced by pro-war Western politicians and mainstream media outlets when Russia began its military operations in Syria in September 2015, with the lack of concern over what’s been happening in Raqqa.

The claim that Russia was fighting terrorists was widely ridiculed. The US and its allies issued a statement saying that Russia’s actions, which included a strike on a ISIS training camp near Raqqa, would “only fuel more extremism and radicalization.”

On October 2, 2015, the claim made by then-US President Barack Obama that Russian strikes would only “strengthen ISIS” made Western news headlines.

Accusations that Russia was committing war crimes also received prominent coverage.

But when the US-led coalition bombs ISIS, the reporting from mainstream outlets is different. Then, the operation is presented much more positively, with little or no talk about how it will “strengthen” the enemy or “fuel more extremism and radicalization.” There is also little or no talk of war crimes.

A meticulously-researched Alert from Media Lens earlier this summer compared the coverage of the sieges of Aleppo and Mosul.

When Russian and Syrian forces were bombarding ‘rebel’-held East Aleppo last year, newspapers and television screens were full of anguished reporting about the plight of civilians killed, injured, trapped, traumatised or desperately fleeing…

By contrast, there was little of this evident in media coverage as the Iraqi city of Mosul, with a population of around one million, was being pulverised by the US-led ‘coalition’ from 2015; particularly since the massive assault launched last October to ‘liberate’ the city from ISIS, with ‘victory’ declared a few days ago.”

As I noted here in an earlier Op Edge, it was deemed a ‘Thought Crime’ by Imperial Truth Enforcers to actually refer to the recapture of eastern Aleppo by Syrian government forces as a ‘liberation.’ Pro-war Labour MP John Woodcock even went so far as to call the left-wing Morning Star newspaper “traitorous scum” for daring to defy the gatekeepers and use the ‘L’ word.

They sponsored the Momentum conference. If you associate with this traitorous scum after this front page you’ve no place in our politics 

But of course, if it’s the US and its allies doing the bombing, then using the word ’liberation’ is de rigueur, regardless of how much death and destruction the ‘liberation’ causes.

There have been no calls from ‘Inside the Bastille’ Western politicians or media pundits for people to protest outside US embassies about the number of civilians killed by coalition airstrikes in Raqqa – as there were over Aleppo. And absolutely no likening of coalition actions to those of the Nazis.

It’s worth noting, too, that while the US and its allies repeatedly called for a “humanitarian pause” in the fighting for Aleppo, they’ve rejected the UN calls for one in Raqqa. “Going slower only delays the liberation and subsequently costs more civilians their lives,” US Colonel Joe Scrocca, director of public affairs for combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent Resolve, toldMiddle East Eye.

UK & France call for emergency @UN meeting & resolution on  regime must allow  plan for humanitarian access to east 

What makes the double standards even more outrageous is that without the warmongering actions of the US and its allies in the Middle East, there would be no ISIS/ISIL in the first place. The ‘Coalition’ is fighting in Raqqa a monster that – like Frankenstein in Mary Shelley’s famous novel – they helped to create. The terrorist organization known by the names of ‘Islamic State,’ ‘ISIS/ISIL,’ or ‘Daesh,’ grew out of the chaos that Bush and Blair’s illegal invasion of Iraq had unleashed. As Patrick Cockburn, author of the book ‘The Rise of Islamic State,’ puts it, “ISIS is the child of war.”

Furthermore, the spread of IS to Syria was actually welcomed by the US and its allies as a way of weakening the secular Ba’athist government in Damascus, which Western neocons were desperate to see toppled because of its friendly links with Iran and Russia.

If the situation unravels there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in eastern Syria, and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran),” – declared a secret US intelligence report, which was declassified in 2015.

In 2016, a leaked tape conversation between US Secretary of State John Kerry and anti-government Syrian activists revealed how the US was pleased to see Islamic State gain territory. “The reason Russia came in is because ISIL was getting stronger,” Kerry admits, flatly contradicting the claims made publicly by the State Department in October 2015 that Russia wasn’t targeting ISIS/ISIL.

Daesh was threatening the possibility of going to Damascus and so forth,” Kerry went on. “We were watching. We saw that Daesh was growing in strength, and we thought Assad was threatened. We thought, however, we could probably manage. You know, that Assad might then negotiate,” he said.

The US and its allies didn’t just watch with pleasure as ISIS expanded – they aided the process. They did this not only by giving money and weaponry to ‘moderate rebels’ who then – surprise, surprise – defected to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi’s head-chopping outfit, but by targeting forces that were opposed to Islamic State. Israel, for instance, has bombed Syria on countless occasions in the last few years, but each time its attacks have been against those fighting ISIS. “An aspect of the conflict in Syria that has not received the attention it undoubtedly deserves, has been the role of the Israeli Air Force (IAF) in acting as the de facto air force of Daesh [ISIS] and sundry other Salafi-jihadi and rebel groups fighting in the country,” notes John Wight.

We must not forget too that if Washington’s Endless War Lobby had got their way in August 2013, and the US and its allies launched a full-scale military assault on the Syrian government – then Islamic State and its affiliates would probably now be in charge of the entire country. Yet the failure to bomb Assad four years ago is still openly regarded as a tragedy by Western regime-change hawks.

Of course, the key role that the US and its coalition have played in the rise – and expansion – of the forces they are now bombing, is never mentioned in the mainstream reporting of the ‘Battle for Raqqa.’ We’re meant to believe that ISIS fighters appeared – like Mr. Benn’s shopkeeper “as if by magic” – and took control of Syria’s seventh largest city by complete accident. And, we’re certainly not meant to ask questions such as “From where did these terrorists obtain their weapons?” or, “Under what legal authority do the US and its allies carry out air strikes in Syria?

My 1987 Lonely Planet Guideto Jordan and Syria, says of Raqqa: “There’s really nothing to do or see but it can be a good base from which to visit Lake Assad and the walled city of Rasafah, 30km to the south.”

The city is most definitely not a “good base” for tourists today.

One person who did manage to get out of “the worst place on Earth” earlier this year told RT’s Ruptly news agency: “The streets are full of dead bodies. The schools were targeted, the bridges, and mosques. The [dead] people are lying on the streets; some people were dragged by cars… Dogs were eating the [dead] bodies for there was no one to pick them up.

‘Dogs eating bodies’: Witnesses recall the horrors of US-led liberation of Raqqa. 

Photo published for ‘Dogs eating bodies’: Witnesses recall the horrors of US-led liberation of Raqqa — RT News

‘Dogs eating bodies’: Witnesses recall the horrors of US-led liberation of Raqqa — RT News

The city of Raqqa, Syria and its countryside are being completely destroyed by the ongoing US-led coalition airstrikes as Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) engage Islamic State fighters for control of…

The bombed-out ruins of Raqqa and the rotting corpses lying on its streets are a testament to a ‘liberal interventionist’ neo-con foreign policy, in all its bloodstained, hypocritical, ‘humanitarian’ glory.


Posted in SyriaComments Off on Raqqa: A hellhole created by the regime-changers of the West

Syrian War report – September 4, 2017: Syrian Army Reaches Deir Ezzor City




Government forces have lifted a 3-years long ISIS siege from the city of Deir Ezzor, according to pro-government sources.

Last weekend, government forces, led by the SAA Tiger Forces and supported by the Russian Aerospace Forces, recaptured a large area including Bir Ghabaghib and al-Shula villages. On Monday, government troops reportedly reached the 137 Regiment area in western Deir Ezzor and met with Republican Guard units there.

If it’s confirmed, the next SAA goal will be to establish a full control over the Sukhna-Deir Ezzor highway and to liberate the entire city.

ISIS responded to the SAA advance with launching multiple attacks against government forces positions inside the city. Separately, the terrorist group deployed large reinforcements to al-Mayadeen preparing for a large attack in the Deir Ezzor area.

The only ISIS chance to counter the SAA advance is to bring off a successful battle using prepared fortifications inside and around Deir Ezzor and to conduct multiple raids against SAA supply lines using car bombs and technicals.

In other cases, ISIS days in Deir Ezzor city are numbered.

In eastern Hama, the SAA and its allies liberated the key town of Uqayribat and some nearby points after a series of intense clashes with ISIS terrorists. Now, government forces are working to clear the entire pocket.

The Syrian military has deployed at least one Russian TOS-1 heavy flamethrower system in order to strengthen the defense of Aleppo city.

The military is actively preparing for possible attacks of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (formerly Jabhat al-Nusra, the Syrian branch of al-Qaeda) and its allies from the so-called moderate opposition.

The SAA is now deeply involved in a large-scale anti-ISIS operation in Deir Ezzor province. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham may use this for launching an attack against government forces at some front in the province of Aleppo or Hama.

Related Posts:

Posted in SyriaComments Off on Syrian War report – September 4, 2017: Syrian Army Reaches Deir Ezzor City

Labour Party betrays Palestine

Posted by: Sammi Ibrahem,Sr

[Editor’s note: As a supporter of Jeremy Corbyn and a lifetime Labour voter, I am annoyed about this policy change. Only annoyed rather than angry however because I understand why it has happened and that is the strength of the Israeli lobby. Yes, Britain, like the US is infested with pro-Israeli lobbyists including groups like Labour Friends of Israel and Conservative Friends of Israel who seek to exert a pernicious influence over British political affairs. The original policy of immediately recognising the Palestinian state is Corbyn’s true stance, this new policy is where he has been forced to go by the Israeli lobby. Ian]

Al Masdar
Labour Party betrays Palestine

The Labour Party in the United Kingdom has made a huge switch in its policy leaving many followers of the Jeremy Corbyn headed Party in disappointment and disbelief.

When Jeremy Corbyn ran his election campaign he presented a clear message to his Palestinian human rights advocating audience, which was outlined in the Labour Manifesto. However this stance for human rights and international law has been all but erased.

The original manifesto stated that “A Labour government will immediately recognise the state of Palestine” and that the party would call for the end of the 11 year ongoing siege of Gaza and the end to the Israeli illegal occupation of the West Bank (occupied officially since 1967).

Now however, due to pressure in the party, Labour have changed their stance on the issue to read; “In Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Labour is committed to a comprehensive peace based on a two-state solution: a secure Israel alongside a secure and viable state of Palestine.” Far from the immediate recognition of a Palestinian state which was formerly promised.

This change in policy has alarmed an overwhelming number of Labour MPs (Jewish and non-Jewish) and is seen to have implications on the parties reputation when it comes to its stances of international relations.

Earlier in January of this year an Israeli government employee (Shai Mascot) working for the embassy was exposed plotting to influence lobby groups, politicians and British student movements. Shai attempted to set up a pro-Israel group called the Young Labour Friends of Israel, he was exposed by al-Jazeera for doing so and with that the activities of many other pro-Israel figures were brought to light.

It seems that the latest move by the Labour Party only benefits pro-Israeli members of the party, and with the move being so widely condemned by Jewish and non-Jewish members alike for changing such a popular manifesto its a real wonder how such a change has been able to happen.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, UKComments Off on Labour Party betrays Palestine

Iran official gives alarming insight into Iraq partitioning

Mohsen Rezaei, the former commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) and the current secretary of Iran's Expediency Council
Mohsen Rezaei, the former commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) and the current secretary of Iran’s Expediency Council

A senior Iranian official has called on Iraqi Kurdish leaders to forgo a planned referendum for secession, warning that a possible breakup of the Arab country could have grave consequences for the security of the region.

The warning by Mohsen Rezaei during a meeting with Iraqi journalists in Baghdad Sunday night came as the date drew nearer for the semi-autonomous Kurdistan region in northern Iraq to hold the plebiscite on September 25.

“Iraq is a well-known nation and a member of the United Nations with international borders, and its breakup is a very wrong thing, because the disintegration of the country would be the starting point for dangerous insecurities in the region,” he said.

It would have “dangerous” ramifications for the regional countries, said Rezai, who is currently the secretary of Iran’s top arbitration body, the Expediency Council, having served as the head of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) all through the eight-year Iraqi war of the 1980s on Iran.

“If the disintegration of Iraq begins, it will be extended to Syria and Turkey, and a separatist war will break up in the region, which may plunge the region to 20 years of insecurity,” said Rezaei.

“That is why the Islamic Republic of Iran, Turkey, Syria and Iraq are strongly opposed to a geographical change in the region,” he said of the four ethnically diverse nations which have Kurdish populations.

The Iranian government has maintained generally positive relations with Kurdish political entities and it greatly values stability along its western border with Iraq. That mountainous region already enables some Kurdish groups to skirmish with Iranian forces.

With Turkey obsessive in opposing a Kurdish state, Rezaei warned of possible deployment of Turkish troops to northern Iraq if the Kurds secede.

The anti-Turkish PKK terrorist group dominates the armed groups operating in northern Syria. If a Kurdish state is forged from Iraq, the Turks will assume that it would appropriate Kurdish-occupied territory in Syria. That would formalize a major security threat along Turkey’s border.

The US has been supporting Kurdish militants in Syria for some time, shipping in massive volumes of heavy weapons to the region, which has sounded alarm bells in Turkey.

As a result of a secession, Rezaei said, new wars would start in the region between the central government of Iraq and Kurdistan, which would only harm the Kurdish nation.

“Unfortunately, the issue of the referendum on the Iraqi Kurdistan, more than being a popular demand, is a personal issue, and many Kurdish leaders are against it,” he said.

Masoud Barzani, president of the Iraqi Kurdistan region, has told various officials he would push for a referendum, but the UN and the Europeans have refused to support it, at least publicly.

Rezaei said, “Some Kurdish leaders want to make a name and a reputation through the referendum, while what Iraqi Kurdistan needs is security and progress.”

The Iranian official is in Iraq along with Expediency Council chairman Ayatollah Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi who met with Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi in Baghdad Sunday.

Iran’s Expediency Council chairman Ayatollah Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi (R) and its secretary Mohsen Rezaei arrive at Baghdad Airport on Sept. 3, 2017.

Rezaei said UN and European countries’ refusal to send delegations to observe the Kurdish referendum is “the biggest failure” for the process.

“If the Kurdish leaders of Iraq continue to insist on a referendum, that would have no more than two reasons: either personal motivation or behind-the-scenes hands,” he said, adding that the future would expose those hidden agendas.

Rezaei touched on the US policy in the region, stressing that the Americans do not want complete security to be established in Iraq and Syria, and oppose any action that leads to lasting security in these two countries.

Read more:

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has also expressed interest in partitioning Iraq and establishing an independent Kurdish state in the Arab country, the Jerusalem Post reported last month.

The Israeli premier expressed his “positive attitude” toward a Kurdish state in the northern areas of Iraq during a meeting with a delegation of 33 US Republican congressmen, the Israeli paper said.

A report published in the New Yorker magazine in 2004 said Israeli military and intelligence operatives were active in Kurdish areas and providing training for commando units.

According to the report, Israel has been expanding its presence in Kurdistan and encouraging Kurds, its allies in the region, to create an independent state.

Posted in Iran, IraqComments Off on Iran official gives alarming insight into Iraq partitioning

The New World Order Is Doomed to Fail (Part II)


Locke, Rousseau, and Voltaire were all somewhat dishonest. Voltaire wanted to “écrasez L’infâme” and ended up being a Freemason, another revolutionary and wicked ideology which sought to literally deconstruct the moral order in the 18th century in France.

By: Jonas E. Alexis and Marc C. Digiuseppe


Marc C. Digiuseppe is an expert on Microsoft VISIO 2003 and 2007. Over the years, he has worked as a systems analyst and technical writer at Exelon Corporation developing new process descriptions and standard operating procedures from that followed the requirements defined in the new NERC CIP Version 5 Reliability Standards.

Digiuseppe was assigned as a Senior Business Process Analyst and Technical Writer reporting to the Director of Solutions Delivery for the TSA ITIP Transition Team. He was also assigned as a Senior Advisor (Project Manager) reporting to the Director of AT&T Consulting, Inc. (Calisma) working on the TNet Program (U.S. Department of the Treasury). He was an adjunct instructor at Mohawk Valley Community College.


Marc C. DiGiuseppe: I should qualify my use of the term “Infinite Universe” out of deference for your scholarship. I wasn’t referring to the Static Model.  What scientists like Hawking are referring to in their suppositions is an “observable universe.”

These observations suggest that he Universe in fact is infinite, for they pose the question: Into what might the “observable universe” be expanding? Because we must wrestle with a quantifiable value of the speed of light, only a (relatively) small portion of our “Universe” (with a capital “U”) is observable.

This measurement—the distance light has been able to travel in the 13.8 billion years since Big Bang—would suggest that our “universe” has an arbitrary boundary that is continuously expanding (But, into what?).

When scientists discuss this aspect of our cosmology (the size of the Universe), they are, most often referring to this “observable universe,” or that area of the Cosmos in which the Earth and its solar system (or Galaxy for that matter) would seem to be centered.

That being said, even brilliant people like Stephen Hawking have been reported to have asserted that “the number of planets in the ‘observable universe’ is infinite” and in recent history referred to this observable universe as being “infinite.”

“We believe that life arose spontaneously on Earth,” Hawking said. “So in an infinite universe, there must be other occurrences of life.”[1]

Again, given the semantics of the parlance our scientists employ, in a relativistic universe which is expanding faster than the speed of light, the cosmological model would suggest that the “Universe” is effectively infinite for all practical purposes.

But that was not the descriptive device my reference was alluding to when I said: “The word “civilization” is a “name” for something of which we know nothing about for we cannot identify it (i.e., name it) until it manifests itself and becomes, to us, something real.

This conceptualization can be categorized as an “Absolute” as a civilization must become real in the “Infinite Universe” and cannot exist as a distinct alternate world view defined as a set of finite elements in a closed universe of ideation.”

Here, I was referring to the states of our consciousness when we observe something occurring within the domain of that which we can (comfortably) call our “reality,” and that which we surmise as a product of our thought. I use the word “Universe” to identify our material reality as something inclusive of every possible condition and state of awareness.

Our “reality” cannot be confined to our own individual awareness of it. Therefore, it is a Universe that is open and infinite, for it allows the thoughts of Jonas E. Alexis to be communicated—not just to me—but to thousands of readers who appreciate his discussions.

These discussions produce, within the mind of each reader, unique intellectual responses that—while some may be identified and categorized—illustrate the infinite possibilities of human thought as it evolves probabilistically.  We cannot know the future as its elements are not known to us and therefore cannot be named—cannot be identified.

In our musings, we develop models of understanding what might happen but these models are limited by the finite nature of our knowing; our thought flows are conceived within the “closed domain” of what we know as that domain is “finite.”

This aspect of our awareness cannot be immediately understood until it manifests as an aspect of our human experience within the domain of our material reality—the infinite Universe; an arrangement of existence over which we have no control and seems governed by the mathematics of probability.

The act of thinking is real when we engage in it (which is all of the time) but the products of that act—our thoughts—are not real until their intent can be externalized in some way.  In the one case, we are dealing with something that is real; that must be addressed.

In the other case, we are dealing with our own thoughts and they cannot be considered real since they are arrived at through a comparative process, however logical it may be, and not the practical reasoning we must employ to determine the validity of something we experience.

This conditional circumstance—once acknowledged and understood—underwrites Burke’s philosophical position against the Enlightenment philosophers, after all Kant did say: “The nominal definition of truth, namely that it is the agreement of cognition with its object, is here granted and presupposed…”

Well, I guess he’s right; you can’t have an intellectual transaction of “agreement” with something that is not real.  Let me illustrate my point.

I’m sitting in a rocking chair on my front porch taking in the scenery when this thought occurs to me: What would I do if a wild lion came upon me?  Laughingly—because I know that wild lions are not indigenous to my community here rural New York, I think to myself: well… I’ll just “think” him out of existence, after all, we’re just speculating—toying with the idea so-to-speak.

This is a perfectly plausible response within the context of my thought flow because I can “think” of anything—right?  I don’t have to compare that thought to any condition in reality. I can be speculative and theoretical.

Now…I’m on a “big game” hunt in Kenya and a wild lion walks out of the bush to stand directly in my path. Logos would “inform” me that I am not able to “think” the big cat away but that I will have to employ alternatives associated with this very real experience: aim my rifle at it and kill it; call for help; run like hell!

Here, Logos compels me to address my present reality with practical reasoning as theoretical reasoning in the material Universe can be very “impractical” for anything other than determining some kind of “likelihood.”

In this case, I can assert that the classical interpretation of “Truth” is something that distills into a notion that “Truth, in metaphysics and the philosophy of language, can be considered the property of sentences, assertions, beliefs, thoughts, or propositions that are said, in ordinary discourse, to agree with the facts or to state what is the case [in reality]. Truth is the aim of belief; falsity is a fault.” [Britannica]

And, dealing with the facts in any discourse requires Logos—which is the point you continually make in your premise. So, logically, metaphysically, scientifically, and theoretically speaking you, dear Jonas, are consummately correct in identifying the root cause of our collective distress.

If we can assume an Aristotelian point of view that defines “Logos” as an appeal, then the classical definition of Logos as an appeal to logic is one that is suggests a method of persuading a listener through the use of practical reason.

Practical reason is a developmental process of evaluation of the things that are and can be employed deductively as well as inductively to arrive at a state of awareness that knows the occurrence of something natural; something that has become real.  To use a response to Logos as a set of theoretical conditions is useful only as an exercise in risk management.

This, I think, is the fault in the rationale of theoretical philosophy as expressed by men like Locke, Rousseau, and Voltaire. I’m sure they meant us all some “Good” but failed to see that by claiming their theories of social and political development to be “Truth” they destroyed the idea of acquiescing to the power and guidance of Logos in their dialogues, ignoring its sublimity to mislead millions who later adapted their liberal agenda as an excuse to engage in wonton barbarity.

It was a barbarity of social congress (survival of the fittest), a barbarity of political expression (the inhumanity of thoughtlessly conceived revolutions), and a barbarity of thought (the popularization of gratuitous vulgarity and intentional, devolutionary approval for any group or any individual to misuse a language of communication, ideation, and intent).

Today the teeming masses live by “the trend” and not by a set of proven methods of discernment.  What does this tell us about our collective consciousness—our planetary “Group Think,” our Weltanschauung?  It is, indeed, a sad state of affairs.

But, I believe that, as long as scholars such as yourself pursue “Truth” through Logos, your microcosmic point of view will follow the mathematical laws developed by Benoit Mandelbrot affecting the whole to correct for the aberration in our collective thought that engendered such heresy.

Yes, yes, I know that, in saying that, I’m going “Michael Talbot” on you and suggesting that our Universe follows the mathematics of the Mandelbrot Set and is a “Hologram” but then, it is an infinite Universe full of possibilities—a wonderment that cannot be contained by the limitations of any closed system of thinking as is often expressed by the mind of humankind.  Wouldn’t you agree?

In other matters…Permit me to assert that Bibi Netanyahu represents the physical manifestation of human vulgarity.  I pause to consider that you might be laughing at this statement but if I identified and categorized all of the actions that this human being has engaged in since he became of age, at least judged sufficiently competent to be considered a person of some import, his behavior can be identified as “vulgar” in both the formative and philosophical sense.

Netanyahu lacks any notion of refinement, cultivation, or taste.  I submit that he is a very real example of the complete, utter abandonment of Logos!  He does exhibit a behavior that exacerbates the fundamental nature of our present distress and therefore can be treated as an aberration of dialectical materialism as his presence on the world stage does not embody any sort of ideation akin to synthesis.

Netanya is also real enough but only from a “metaphysically” bizarre and other-worldly alien point of view as his presence seems to transcend the reality in which I find myself writing to you and that cognition is beyond what is perceptible to my senses, fleeing from experience as he often does.

Theologically speaking, I agree with you; he is a wicked and evil man. Rationally speaking he seems so irrelevant and unnecessary an object of our awareness. I’m quite certain that we could manage to get along without him.


Jonas E. Alexis: Let me say quickly that Locke, Rousseau, and Voltaire were all somewhat dishonest.[2] Voltaire wanted to “écrasez L’infâme” and ended up being a Freemason, another revolutionary and wicked ideology which sought to literally deconstruct the moral order in the 18th century in France. Rousseau in particular abandoned all his five children but wrote an entire book (Emile) telling people how to raise children! E. Michael Jones has a lengthy discussion on Locke in his magnum opus Barren Metal: A History of Capitalism as the Conflict Between Labor and Usury.

I would still disagree with the definition of “infinite” here. I don’t think there is an infinite number of fish in the sea. David Hilbert, one of the greatest mathematicians of the last two centuries, showed that even an actual infinite is absurd. His analogy is quite complicated, so we won’t go into details here. Let’s just say that we don’t know whether there is an “infinite universe” out there. And the burden is on those who claim that there is. The scientific, experiential and philosophical argument only suggests that the universe if finite. Using Occam’s razor, I think we have to stick with the “finite universe.”

Some speculators talk about multi-verses, but there is not a single evidence for it. Cosmologist Lee Smolin, a staunch proponent of this theory, calls it “frank speculation, if you will, a fantasy.”[3] In his recent study Fashion, Faith, and Fantasy in the New Physics of the Universe, British mathematical physicist Roger Penrose says the same thing about string theory.[4]

Some scientists obviously did not want to face the fact that the universe began to exist precisely because they knew the simple logical step that whatever began to exist has a cause; the universe began to exist, therefore the universe has a cause.

While physicist Paul Davies agrees that the scientific data (most specifically from his own fields of interest, which include mathematics, physics, and astronomy) suggest that the universe had a beginning, he rejects the conclusion of a Creator because, in his own words, “I never liked the idea of divine tinkering.”[5]

This “divine tinkering,” or metaphysical Logos, is what Hegel was referring to when he said that “the world’s events are controlled by a providence, indeed by divine providence,” and this “divine providence is wisdom, coupled with infinite power, which realizes its ends, i.e., the absolute and rational design of the world…”[6]

Looking at all the evil and chaos in this world, obviously the average person who has been blinded to higher realities would think that there cannot be an “infinite power, which realizes its ends.”

But Hegel would respond by saying that this is why this “infinite power” is “cunning.” This “infinite power,” according to scholar Robert C. Tucker’s interpretation of Hegel, “fulfill its ulterior rational designs in an indirect and sly manner. It does so by calling into play the irrational element in human nature, the passions.”[7]

In other words, the “irrational element in human nature” will end up fulfilling the very goal and purpose of this “infinite power.” The pessimist, of course, cannot understand how this “infinite power” will work out in the future because he is blind to higher or metaphysical realities. He lacks spiritual vision and insight because he limits himself only to the philosophically worthless idea that the material universe, as Karl Sagan propounded, “is all that is or was or ever will be.”[8]  H.G. Wells was a classic representation of this idea. Having rejected Logos on irrational grounds, Wells proposed a metaphysical replacement—and his is a chaotic one:

“To a watcher in some remote entirely alien cosmos, if we may assume that impossibility, it might well seem that extinction is coming to man like a brutal thunderclap of Halt!…We may be spinning more and more swiftly into the vortex of extinction, but we do not apprehend as much…

“A harsh queerness is coming over things and rushes past what we have hitherto been wont to consider the definite limits of hard fact. Hard fact runs away from analysis and does not return.”[9]

Yet even this irrational and destructive prediction could not stop Wells from searching for an ultimate meaning to life’s most important questions: “The question ‘Is this All?’ has troubled countless unsatisfied minds throughout the ages, and—at the end of our tether, as it seems—here it is, still baffling but persistent.”[10] Why should it be “persistent” if it is a fact that the cosmos is all that is? That certainly does not make sense.

Suppose you walk the streets of Manhattan and come across a person who is constantly talking to himself, although nobody is around. So you approach him and ask, “What’s going on, dude? Why are you talking to yourself?” He answers, “I am angry with my wife.”

Further into the conversation, however, you realize that the man never had a wife. You then ask, “How can you be angry with an imaginary wife?” If he responded with, “Life doesn’t seem fair,” would you be satisfied with such an answer? You would immediately think that the guy is at least out of touch with reality, if not psychologically disturbed.

In that sense, it is crazy to look for life’s meaning when you already stated that life does not have any meaning whatever.


I would disagree with Hawking on the view that “life arose spontaneously on Earth.” Notice that he begins by saying “we believe.” Ever since Darwin, no one has ever provided scientific evidence showing that life arose spontaneously. Miller tried to do that but failed miserably.[11] Moreover, if a brilliant scientist happens to show that life arose “spontaneously,” that means that it takes intelligence (the scientist) to create life!

To say that “civilization” is actually a ‘name” “for something of which we know nothing about” seems self-defeating. You are actually positing the claim as if you have exhaustively looked at all the evidence in the “observable universe” and found that there was none. That’s quite hubristic, I must say. We do no something about civilization, and the term isn’t arbitrary at all. I would highly recommend Lawrence H. Keeley’s War Before Civilization: The Myth of a Peaceful Savage.


Marc C. DiGiuseppe: I must admit that I would have to agree with your point of view in that, inasmuch as we have no real material evidence for an “infinite Universe” governed by mathematical probability, we can only suggest it as a possibility. I guess my understanding of it as a phenomenon is derived from my Catholic upbringing and amounts to nothing more than my belief system.

Again, you are right about this notion that “life arose spontaneously on Earth.”  That too is like my “belief” in Infinite Intelligence (God) ergo an infinite universe.  It’s just too subjective an idea and when people employ too much subjectivity in their thought flow, they expose themselves to the same risk of “fault” the speculative philosophers of the Enlightenment did.

I would also have to accept your position on the manner in which you have identified the error in the way that I use the term “civilization.” When I chose those words I was attempting to frame a common misinterpretation of what a culture is.

I have had dialogues with some reasonably educated friends in the past who would call the social, economic, and political system of China a different “Civilization of the East” when, in fact, their governance model resembles similar models in the West and their Communist elements were perfected by “western intellectuals.”

So, the differences that we see are what could be called a “culture” bias but not a separate civilization as were the Ancient Egyptians who had different social, economic, and political infrastructure governed mostly by a state religion.

When we look at organizational society in this fashion we can’t really identify it (i.e., give it a name) until we understand what it is that we’re observing. However, that being said, I will hunt down a copy of Keeley’s book.

Jonas, your interpretation of “Natural Law” (as opposed to how the Enlightenment Philosophers thought of it) can be called an “absolute truth”—right?  I mean, that it’s Immutable.

That is, by and through the failure of speculative logic in both denying Logos and eschewing practical reason, the social engineers, scientific mountebanks, and speculative philosophers proved your definition of the immutability of Logos and practical reason is an “Absolute”—that because of its apparent efficacy, Logos is the most “real being” (the word “being” as a verb and not just a noun); the “Absolute” nature of Logos being itself or perhaps that of a condition that transcends and comprehends all other “beings.” Am I close?


Jonas E. Alexis: Let me make it clear here that I am not arguing for an epistemological foundation of objective moral values and duties, but rather for an ontological foundation of objective moral values and duties. For example, if a sexual predator rapes a twelve-year-old child, every human being on this planet will admit that this act is morally wrong. Why?

Well, this principle can be universalized very easily: it is wrong at all times and all place to rape little children. This is exactly what Kant was talking about when he proposed the categorical imperative.

By the way, Kant’s categorical imperative is logically consistent with the principle that we all need to do to others as we would have them do to us. It sounds to me that Christ got it first, and Kant was just philosophically treading on that principle.

You see, apart from practical reason, which provides the basis for the moral law, there is no such thing as child rape, sexual abuse, or immoral acts. Once practical reason is out of the equation, then morality, as philosopher Michael Ruse himself puts it, is just “flimflam.”[12]

This is one reason why I categorically reject Darwin’s ideas. They are not grounded in serious metaphysics but in “survival of the fittest,” which is logically congruent with Zionism, Bolshevism, Leninism, and Maoism. Darwin’s ideas are philosophically and logically innocent and therefore existentially worthless because Darwin deliberately excluded practical reason from his project.

Schopenhauer himself declared that a man is still a child if he cannot understand Kant. I guess he was calling Darwin and Spencer children because neither one of them could understand Kant.

What we now need is not Darwin but a resurrection of serious metaphysics which takes practical reason as foundational to any intellectual or philosophical project. And this is why I am a fan of people like Kant, Hegel, and Solzhenitsyn. I sometimes like Nietzsche because he was brutally honest. Nietzsche understood that Darwin’s ideas brought a radical change to the West—so radical in fact that they intended to overthrow practical reason in the political landscape. Interpreting Nietzsche, Will Durant writes:

“If life is a struggle for existence in which the fittest survive, then strength is the ultimate virtue, and weakness the only fault. Good is that which survives, which wins; bad is that which gives way and fails.

“Only the mid-Victorian cowardice of the English Darwinians, and the bourgeois respectability of French positivists and German socialists, could conceal the inevitableness of this conclusion.”[13]

Nietzsche made it very clear that once a person categorically denies or rejects metaphysical Logos, then he also categorically rejects the foundational basis for morality as well.[14]

Nietzsche did reject the foundational basis for morality, but he was not like modern Darwinists who are not willing to the face the intellectual consequences of their ideologies. Those talking heads are still toe-dancing around serious issues.

[1] Rachel Feltman, “Stephen Hawking announces $100 million hunt for alien life,” Washington Post, July 20, 2015.

[2] I have a long discussion on Voltaire in Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism (Vol. II). For similar studies, see Nigel Rodgers and Mel Thomson, Philosophers Behaving Badly (London and Chicago: Peter Owen Publishers, 2004).

[3] Lee Smolin, The Life of the Cosmos (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 6.

[4] Roger Penrose, Fashion, Faith, and Fantasy in the New Physics of the Universe (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2017).

[5] John Lennox, “Challenges from Science,” Ravi Zacharias, Beyond Opinion, 118.

[6] Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Lectures on the Philosophy of World History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975 and 1998), 35.

[7] Robert C. Tucker, “The Cunning of Reason in Hegel and Marx,” The Review of Politics, Vol. 18, NO 3, July 1956: 269-295.

[8] Carl Sagan, Cosmos (New York: Ballantine Book, 1980), xxii.

[9] H. G. Wells, Mind at The End of Its Tether and The Happy Turning: A Dream of Life (New York: Didier Publishers, 1946), 5-6.

[10] Ibid., 13-14.

[11] On the Miller-Urey experiment, see Jonathan Wells, Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth? Why Much of What We Teach About Evolution Is Wrong (Washington: Regnery Publishing, 2002), chapter 2.

[12] Michael Ruse, “God is dead. Long live morality,” Guardian, March 15, 2010.

[13] Will Durant, The Story of Philosophy (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1926 and 1961), 401.

[14] Friedrich Nietzsche, The Portable Nietzsche (New York: Penguin Books, 1976), 515–516.

Posted in USAComments Off on The New World Order Is Doomed to Fail (Part II)

Where is next destination of Daesh terror group?


Almost nobody could have ever imagined that Daesh would be able to expand its terror activities within a few years and pose big challenges and threats to the world.

Where is next destination of Daesh terror group?

Undoubtedly, Daesh has been one of the most dangerous and most complex terrorist groups which have reared their ugly head in the Middle East over past years. Daesh is still carrying out terrorist activities despite the resistance of the Iraqi and Syrian armies and people, as well as the formation of global and regional coalitions against it.

It seems that Daesh was established to fulfill the goals of arrogant powers. Ironically, the future advances of the terror group depend on the approaches that the West adopts in the region.

Edward Snowden, former US Central Intelligence Agency employee, admitted that the US, British, and Israeli intelligence agencies had a role in creating Daesh.

Citing leaked documents, he believes that Daesh was created to attract extremists from around the world to use them against countries that are opposed to Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian land.

Hence, it is necessary to devise plans to counter the threats that Daesh poses to global peace and security and identify the countries that it wants to target in the future.

No one can surely predict what action Daesh will take in the future. As a result, experts consider the likely plots that the terrorist group may hatch in the future.

In fact, different factors, including regional developments, the approaches of Western states and new coalitions can impact Daesh’s fate.

These factors are taken into consideration to predict the terror group’s moves in the future.

Daesh is a terrorist group which is a great menace to the world.

Hence, all countries, particularly the Islamic ones, must become united against Daesh, which is carrying out its terrorist activities under the name of Islam.

The Takfiri group which is suffering a complete defeat in Iraq and Syria could relocate its terrorists to other Islamic countries, to establish a so-called caliphate. Libya and Afghanistan could be Daesh’s next targets.

Daesh could also consider another scenario to relocate its terrorists to Central Asia or the Caucasus to set up its so-called Islamic State.

Although Daesh is being dislodged from Iraq and Syria, its ideology continues to spread in the Middle East and North Africa. This ideology is nurtured by Wahhabism which is being supported by certain regional nations which have close ties with Western states.

Posted in Middle EastComments Off on Where is next destination of Daesh terror group?

Fighting drugs, the most forgotten in new US Afghan strategy

16 years after the US invasion on the pretext of ousting Taliban, not only the group has not been destroyed in Afghanistan, but the poppy cultivation in the war-torn country has reached record high, creating an alarming situation for the whole world.

Fighting drugs, the most forgotten in new US Afghan strategy

Despite the presence of thousands of foreign troops in Afghanistan to secure the country and bring peace and development for Afghans, it has changed into the world’s main producer of opium.

By November 2001, the collapse of the economy and the scarcity of other sources of revenue forced many of the country’s farmers to resort to growing opium for export.

According to a data released by US departments in media almost 60,000 US citizens died from drugs in the year 2016 most of which comes from Afghanistan.

The US government in last 16 years has spent more than seven billion dollars on stopping heroin from Afghanistan whereas more than 5 billion US dollars every year are earned by mostly the Taliban in Afghanistan from this illicit and deadly drug.

According to the EU agencies, Afghanistan has been Europe’s main heroin supplier for more than 10 years.

Experts believe that the fight against Taliban can never be won unless the heroin producing crop, poppy is not eliminated in Afghanistan. It is financial capability which empowers Taliban to buy sophisticated weapons each year.

Some countries want to have more trade with Afghanistan to help their economy, but they are afraid of drugs which means during tracking is a hurdle for boosting Afghan trade.

Assisted by some other countries, Afghanistan has been trying to fight opium cultivation, including eradicating the crop before harvesting, but the efforts have so far achieved success.

Till this date not a single big drug dealer has been arrested in Afghanistan on charges of Heroin smuggling.

Fierce fighting in poppy-growing regions shows the Taliban’s determination to protect their trafficking routes and from government forces under orders to eradicate the crop.

While announcing his new strategy for Afghanistan and South Asia, US President Donald Trump had said that more troops would be sent to Afghanistan for bringing peace in Afghanistan, but he failed to reveal any mechanism to deal with the poppy cultivation and drug trafficking in the country which is a threat not only for the US, but the whole world.

The increase in poppy cultivation under US presence in Afghanistan has become a serious concern. It may be correct to say that presence of the US in Afghanistan is adding fuel to the afghan problem and the example of increasing poppy production is clear example of that.

If the US is sincere in its claims to bring peace and stability in Afghanistan, the most useful thing it can do, is leaving the poor country immediately and let Afghan people and other regional countries to find a peaceful solution to issue of Afghanistan.

Posted in USA, AfghanistanComments Off on Fighting drugs, the most forgotten in new US Afghan strategy

Take Aung San Suu Kyi to international court of justice


Take Aung San Suu Kyi to international court of justice over ethnic cleansing of Rohingya

We have had a storm of footages and reports being validateded through the media, governments, and the united nation inspectors such as the ex UN president Kofi Annan, Theresa May Jeremy Corbin, BBC, and the alike that the Mayanmar regime are persecuting and ethic cleansing the minority rohingya (Rakhine State) community and its people.

This torture is done only due to the minoritie’s faith and the particularly religion practised (Islam) which the army and the government deems it foreign to the state’s religion which is Buddhism.

Young children, women and men, the old and the disabled are all being tortured, set on fire, raped, murdered and their houses burned. We as the humankind have to take action and take the head of the mayanmar state Aung San Suu Kyi and the armed forces’ commander-in-chief, Ming Aung Hlaing to the International court (The Hague) I.C.J so both of them can answer to their hate crimes.

The current leaders are silent but little remarks made. Last year Theresa May invited the head of Mayanmar to Downing Street for a discussion and to join her for an afternoon tea. This is absurd.

Please bring justice back in this world and with your help we can achieve in sending this message of expression to those leaders that have no shame.

Posted in Far EastComments Off on Take Aung San Suu Kyi to international court of justice

A North Korean H-Bomb? Another Nuclear Test?


Pyongyang claimed it developed a hydrogen bomb miniaturized enough to fit atop a ballistic missile, according to its KCNA news agency.

Kim Jong-un was quoted saying his country has a “thermonuclear weapon with super explosive power made by our own efforts and technology. All components of the H-bomb were 100 per cent domestically made.”

KCNA said the DPRK “further upgraded its technical performance at a higher ultra-modern level on the basis of precious successes made in the first H-bomb test.”

After the January 2016 test, scientists said the six-kiloton yield was too low for a thermonuclear bomb. Its September 2016 test reportedly had a 10-kiloton yield.

The Hiroshima bomb was a 15-kiloton device. America’s first successful H-bomb test in 1952 produced a yield exceeding 10 megatons, the equivalent of 10 million tons of TNT – 500 times more powerful than the Nagasaki bomb.

It’s unknown if DPRK technology advanced this far. It likely will eventually, given its determination to develop the most powerful weapons possible – its most effective way to deter feared US aggression.

Post-WW II history shows America only attacked nations without its super-weapon capability. North Korea has A-bombs. If able to mount them atop ballistic missiles, it potentially can deliver a robust response to US aggression – against its regional forces in South Korea and Japan.

On Sunday, a 6.3-magnitude tremor was registered in DPRK territory. It’s unclear if it was an earthquake or nuclear detonation.

South Korean intelligence earlier said Pyongyang completed preparations for a nuclear test at its Punggye-ri site in the country’s northeast.

Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Kono said his government determined that a nuclear device was tested, the DPRK’s sixth since 2006, the first one since September 2016.

South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff called Sunday’s seismic event “artificial.” A 4.6-magnitude tremor followed the first one. China said a “cave-in” could have caused it.

Beijing’s earthquake networks center said a nuclear explosion might have caused the initial seismic event.

South Korean Nuclear Engineering Professor Kune Suh said

“(t)he power (of Sunday’s event was) 10 or 20 times or even more than previous ones.”

Japan’s meteorology agency called Sunday’s tremors at least 10 times more powerful than earlier ones. Seoul placed its military on high alert.

Japan’s Foreign Minister Kono said

“(a)ll options are on the table.”

Trump didn’t immediately comment.

US nuclear expert Jeffrey Lewis called Sunday’s event

“big, an order of magnitude bigger than anything else we’ve seen the North Koreans explode. (Its leadership) want(s) an arsenal as modern as anyone else.”

Sunday’s event occurred as a BRICS three-day summit began in China. Pyongyang said it won’t halt development of its nuclear and ballistic programs as long as US hostility persists.

Posted in North KoreaComments Off on A North Korean H-Bomb? Another Nuclear Test?

Shoah’s pages