Archive | November 16th, 2017

Satanist Naziyahu is mad, sad, and still wants to be bad

Satanist Netanyahu is mad, sad, and still wants to be bad

People like Netanyahu are Satanists not because they are drinking blood or calling up spirits, as in the case of Aleister Crowley, Rosaleen Norton, L. Ron Hubbard, and Antorn Lavey.[3] No, these people are Satanists because they want to destroy the moral and political order by any means necessary.

by Jonas E. Alexis

Netanyahu is obviously surprised that Assad is still in power. He has never faced such a challenge before. He helped destroy countries like Iraq, and he thought that he could still go around with his pants down continuing to rap Israeli songs like “Destroy this or that country.”

Netanyahu is mad and sad. He wants to continue to step out of his political bound and upset a ceasefire that has already been taking place in Syria. He is hopelessly and desperately trying to find a way to attack Syria, so has come up with a new lie and hoax. He has recently declared:

“I have also informed our friends, firstly in Washington and also our friends in Moscow, that Israel will act in Syria, including in southern Syria, according to our understanding and according to our security needs.”[1]

Pay close attention to what this joker is saying here. Israel will attack Syria according to their needs, not according to international law. How again can this man universalize this principle? What if Syria or Iran or any country in the Middle says the same thing? What if they say that they will act in Israel according to their needs? Would Israel like this? Would the West like this? And why is this man not being challenged by either Russia or the United States for saying crazy things like this?

Here is the issue here. The United States and Russia have finally come up with a somewhat reasonable and temporary solution in Syria, and one would assume that Netanyahu would join in. The Associated Press reported:

“U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin on Saturday affirmed joint efforts to stabilize Syria as its civil war wanes, including with the expansion of a July 7 truce in the southwestern triangle bordering Israel and Jordan.”[2]

But how does Netanyahu respond again? Well, he wants to attack Syria, which means that he wants to support more terrorist cells in the region, which means that he wants more bloodshed, which means that he wants to destroy the Syrian population. Whether Netanyahu or the Israeli regime likes it or not, this is essentially Satanism.

People like Netanyahu are Satanists not because they are drinking blood or calling up spirits, as in the case of Aleister Crowley, Rosaleen Norton, L. Ron Hubbard, and Antorn Lavey.[3] No, these people are Satanists because they want to destroy the moral and political order by any means necessary. They ultimately want to attack Logos, and by doing that, they have inexorably become the enemies of all mankind.

Sadly, these people are using America to do their dirty work. One of the first persons to have noticed this diabolical activity was the Ayatollah Khomeini way back in 1979. His words bear repeating because they are still true even to this very day. He said:

“International Zionism is using the United States to plunder the oppressed people of the world. There is no crime America will not commit in order to maintain its political, economic, cultural, and military domination of those parts of the world where it predominates.

“By means of its hidden and treacherous agents [i.e., the Neoconservatives and other warmongers], it sucks the blood of the defenseless people as if it alone, together with its satellites, had the right to live in this world. Iran has tried to sever all its relations with this Great Satan and it is for this reason that it now finds wars imposed upon it.”[4]

Tell me, what have you seen in Syria over the past five years or so? Hasn’t the Israeli regime been using the United States to essentially suck the blood of defenseless Syrians? And when those defenseless Syrians start migrating to places in Europe, haven’t marionettes like Alex Jones started blaming “the Muslims”? Just do the simple math and see if the numbers actually add up. The answer may surprise you.

Part of the solution? Unplug Satanist Benjamin Netanyahu out of the political system. Don’t allow him to influence much of the West with his colossal lies and fabrications. As Mark Dankof has pointed out during an interview with Press TV,

The Unites States that can essentially pull the rug out of the extremist groups and stopping the supporting for them logistically, militarily and financially supporting stable governments in the Middle East, getting out of the regime change business, getting out of the arms-selling business and first and foremost insisting that Netanyahu has to come to a legitimate agreement with the Palestinians as a prelude to any significant peace.”

[1] Jeffrey Heller, “Netanyahu signals Israel will act with free hand in Syria,” Reuters, November 13, 2017.

[2] Ibid.

[3] For scholarly studies, see Hugh B. Urban, Magia Sexualis: Sex, Magic, and Liberation in Modern Western Esotericism (Berkley: University of California Press, 2006); The Church of Scientology: A History of a New Religion (Princeton: Princeton University Pres, 2013); Henrik Bogdan and Martin P. Starr, Aleister Crowley and Western Esotericism (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012); Nevill Drury, Stealing Fire from Heaven: The Rise of Modern Western Magic (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011).

[4] Quoted in E. Michael Jones, “The Great Satan and Me: Reflections on Iran and Postmodernism’s Faustian Pact,” Culture Wars, July/August, 2015.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, SyriaComments Off on Satanist Naziyahu is mad, sad, and still wants to be bad

Iran & Saudi Zio-Wahhabi saber-rattling: Who would prevail in all-out war?


Tensions between Saudi Arabia and regional nemesis Iran are even higher than usual, with Riyadh targeting Tehran ally Hezbollah. If an actual military conflict between the two breaks out, who would have the best chance at prevailing?

The regional confrontation between the two nations separated geographically by the narrow Persian Gulf is deeply rooted in sectarian, political, and economic competition. Saudi Arabia and Iran follow the two rival sects of Islam with a long history of violence. They compete in the currently troubled energy market, with Tehran holding a grudge over the share it has lost due to sanctions imposed by Riyadh’s American patrons. They fight proxy battles, often violently, in places like Bahrain, Yemen, and Lebanon.

The recent flare-up comes as Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is considered the de-facto ruler of the country by many observers, is solidifying power through so-called anti-corruption operations against his rivals and appealing for foreign support with promises to modernize Saudi Arabia’s brand of Islam and massive investment in futuristic projects.

The Saudi domestic struggle may stem from a series of foreign policy failures. Riyadh’s military intervention in Yemen, launched with much fanfare in 2015 to counter the Iran-aligned Houthi rebels, has become a quagmire. The crown prince was one of the key figures behind the decision, which has led to a major humanitarian disaster, but no military victory.

This year’s rift with Qatar and an economic blockade of the small Arab kingdom failed to produce swift concessions from Doha. If anything, it pushed Qatar closer to Iran, which offered logistical help, and Turkey, a country that wants to assert its own role in the region.

In Syria, Islamist militant groups favored by Saudi Arabia failed to topple the government in Damascus. Propped up by Russian air support and strengthened on the ground by Shiite militias and Iranian military instructors, the Syrian Army has essentially prevailed in the conflict.

Now Riyadh appears to be trying to stir problems for Iran in Lebanon, a nation divided along sectarian lines following a 15-year civil war that claimed 120,000 lives. One of the main developments of the war was the emergence of Hezbollah, a Shiite militant movement that is currently one of the most powerful forces in Lebanon, and part of a government formed under a power sharing agreement in 2016.

This month’s self-exile of Lebanese Sunni leader, Prime Minister Saad Hariri, announced from Riyadh, and Saudi Arabia’s indirect threat of a Qatar-style blockade, is stirring the old ghosts of the Lebanese Civil War. Hezbollah believes that Saudi Arabia is forcefully holding Hariri and that its actions amount to a declaration of war, while the Saudi government is reportedly seeking support from Israel in the confrontation with Iran.

With accusations flying, tensions running high, and anti-Iranian sentiment prevailing in the US government, the potential for serious clashes between Saudi Arabia and Iran is rising.

Crunching numbers

Predicting the outcome of a potential war based on statistics alone is pointless. For instance, Israel’s conflict with Hezbollah in 2006 ended in a draw, despite the IDF being far better funded and equipped. Still, the figures give an idea of what Tehran and Riyadh may bring into play in case of an escalation.

The website Global Firepower Index, which tracks the relative strength of national militaries, closely ranks the two nations. Saudi Arabia is estimated to be the world’s 24th-strongest nation, compared to Iran (21st).

Iran is three times more populous than Saudi Arabia and is able to field over 39 million soldiers compared to Saudi Arabia’s 14 million. Its total military personnel is estimated at 934,000, or 3.6 times larger than its rival.

In terms of military budget, the situation is the opposite. Tehran spends $6.3 billion on defense each year, while Riyadh’s budget is $56 billion. The gap may appear more impressive than it really is, until you take into account that Saudi Arabia gets most of its weapons from the United States at steep prices, while Iran prides itself on manufacturing whatever it can domestically. Its successes in areas like rocketry are apparent.

There is also the fact that different countries get different bang for their buck simply because goods and services have varying costs in each market. The website estimates Iran’s defense budget adjusted for purchasing power at $1.459 trillion, compared to Saudi Arabia’s at $1.731 trillion.

In terms of solid hardware, the Saudis beat Iran in the number of fighter jets and attack aircraft (177 and 245 vs. 137 and 137). Some of Iran’s planes are outdated American models left over from the times of the Shah, like the F-4 Phantom II, while others are Soviet and Chinese aircraft delivered from the late 1980s to early 1990s. The Royal Saudi Air Force is stacked with modern American, and some European, models. In case of war, Tehran hopes to shoot them down with surface-to-air missiles which it has been developing for years.

The naval strength of the two nations arguably favors Iran. The vast difference in the number of ships (398 vs. 55) is mostly due to Iran’s mosquito fleet of 230 patrol boats, but the Persians also boast something that the Arabs do not: submarines. Iran has 33 of them, ranging in displacement from small 10-ton Al-Sabehat 15 SDVs, all the way up to its three Russian Kilo-class attack subs delivered in the 1990s. If the US does not get involved (a big if), Iran may at the very least block all Saudi ships from sailing the Persian Gulf.

When it comes to large-scale ground battles, Iran has hardware numbers more or less on its side. It lags behind Saudi Arabia in terms of infantry fighting vehicles, but beats it in strength of tank units and vastly outnumbers in all kinds of artillery. But again, Iran’s ability to capitalize on this advantage will depend on whether it can defend the sky.

Death & destruction

© Youssef Boudlal
The war that would transform oil markets

Of course, if Iran and Saudi Arabia do come to blows, it would take a heavy toll on both countries and the rest of the world. Unlike the sporadic launches from Yemen, Iran’s ballistic missiles are more than capable of overwhelming Saudi defenses. But they may not be precise enough to avoid hitting non-military targets. Saudi Arabia’s record of killing civilians in Yemen leaves little room for hope that it would be more careful in a fight against Iran.

A conflict involving two major crude oil producers would also send oil prices skyrocketing, especially since a big share of the trade relies on the route through the Persian Gulf. One can use the hike on the news of the Saudi royal purge as a kind of preview of what may happen.

And if the two nations do clash, other players are unlikely to just stand by. The usual proxy forces will be spun to action. A real mess with little gain can be predicted, which is why, hopefully, it will not happen.

Posted in Iran, Saudi ArabiaComments Off on Iran & Saudi Zio-Wahhabi saber-rattling: Who would prevail in all-out war?

Lost in reverie: Mattis claims UN let US intervene in Syria, although it never did


US Defense Secretary James Mattis has recently claimed that Washington received a mandate to operate in Syria from no less than the UN itself. The problem is the UN never did any such thing as it does not even have any legal capacity to do so.

The UN cannot sanction a foreign invasion of Syria or any other country because it is absolutely impossible under international law, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov said, commenting on the issue. “The UN cannot do such things,” he told the Russian media.

He went on to say that “Syria is a sovereign independent state,” adding that “only the Syrian government can invite armed forces of the third countries onto its territory” while “the UN has no such right,” as reported by Rossiyskaya Gazeta daily. The diplomat also said that “the fight against terrorism does not give any states or coalitions a free hand to establish their presence on Syrian territory.”

International law indeed envisages no way for the UN or any other international body to sanction an invasion of one state’s armed forces on the territory of another state. In fact, such actions are regarded as aggression under international law and are strictly prohibited.

UN General Assembly Resolution 3314 on the definition of aggression explicitly states that an “invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State” as well as “any military occupation, however temporary” or “bombardment by the armed forces of a State against the territory of another State” is what particularly constitutes aggression.

However, all these facts did not prevent Mattis from claiming that it was the UN that sanctified the presence of the US troops on the Syrian territory without the consent of the Syrian government. “You know, the UN said that … basically we can go after ISIS. And we’re there to take them out,” the US defense secretary said, referring to the US actions in Syria as he answered a journalist’s question on Monday.

Apparently, he implied that a call by UN on the international community and the US in particular to take action was more than enough to justify the US military’s presence in Syria. Actually, the UN did issue such a call – in Resolution 2249 adopted by the Un Security Council in November 2015.

Resolution 2249 called on UN member states “that have the capacity to do so to take all necessary measures” and “to redouble and coordinate their efforts to prevent and suppress terrorist acts committed specifically by ISIL [Islamic State (IS, former ISIS/ISIL)]” as well as other terrorist groups.

However, it urged the states to do so “in compliance with international law” – something that the US officials often neglect when they assess the actions of the US military abroad.

The statements of the US defense secretary also provoked an angry reaction in Damascus. The Syrian government once again stated that the US troops are operating on Syrian territory without its consent and in violation of international law.

“The presence of the US forces or any foreign military presence in Syria without the consent of the Syrian government constitutes an act of aggression and an attack on the sovereignty of the Syrian Arab Republic as well as a gross violation of the Charter and principles of the United Nations,” Syria’s Foreign Ministry said, as cited by the SANA news agency.

It further said that the US presence “only leads to prolonging the crisis and further complicating it,” adding that the real goal of the US in Syria apparently lies in obstructing the peace process. The ministry then once again called for the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of US forces from Syrian territory.

The statements made by Mattis are “absolutely baseless” and “irresponsible,” Vyacheslav Matuzov, a political scientist and the head of the Russian-Arab Friendship and Business Cooperation Society, told RT, commenting on the issue. He went on to say that any foreign military presence on the territory of any state can be authorized solely by the legitimate government of that state.

“There is a clear position of the Syrian authorities, according to which the US troops are stationed on the Syrian territory illegally,” he said, adding that there can be “no argument”about the legal status of US forces in Syria.

Posted in USA, SyriaComments Off on Lost in reverie: Mattis claims UN let US intervene in Syria, although it never did

Iran vs the Nazi regime: How things went south


Iran vs Israel: How things went south

by Petr Lvov,  … with New Eastern Outlook,  Moscow

VT with the Grand Mufti, 2015

[ Editor’s Note: It will come as no surprise that Israel, Saudi Arabia and the US will be triangulating to undermine the success of the Syrian Coalition counter terrorism campaign any way they possibly can.

Reports initially indicated that the US and Russia entered into a deescalation agreement in south Syria, which the Israelis will reject because they are demanding no Iranians remain, claiming their usual “perceived threats” which allow them to preemptively launch any attacks against anyone. They call this their “freedom of action”, which the US may be completely on board with.

Lavrov today denied there was any agreement with the US that Iranians would be “removed” in return for a ceasefire in the South. And Lavrov took the issue further, “If you look at who is the greatest danger, it’s just the wards of the United States, various foreign terrorists, militants who are attached to those groups of armed opposition that the US supports,” Lavrov said.

The Zionists, especially the Likuds, are not into getting the OK from the UN Security Council for military action. They look at the UN as a buffet. You take what you like and ignore the rest.

The Syrian coalition, of course, saw this coming. The key three members, Syria, Iraq and Iran, who have all targeted for pre-emptive attacks by Israel, are going to borrow a few pages out of the US/NATO playbook…the “forward deployment” and the “attack on one is an attack on all of us”.

The SAA has had to fight for every square mile

The Syrian coalition has fought and died to have secure interior lines of communications and supply, and they sure as hell are going to use them to boost their defensive posture. They are not going to get caught flatfooted like in the past as that would be political suicide after the suffering their people have endured.

The top security issue for Syrian now will be defending itself from Israeli airstrikes. Nothing debases Syrian authority and honor than to have its country attacked at will by Israel, and most of the world watch in silence, giving the Israeli terrorists permission to continue the attacks.

But Israel’s position has a weak spot. It has forward deployed into the Golan Heights which are internationally recognized as still belonging to Syria legally. It therefore has no legitimate claim to assert that other’s do not have the right to control their own airspace or borders, simply by declaring that they deem that a threat.

Jim Dean with Syrian soldier outside a polling station, Homs, Syrian, June, 2014

This is the reasoning and logic of gangsters. As Gordon Duff shocked the Damascus Counter Terrorism Conference in 2014 with his keynote address that the War of Terror as really being run my international criminals for the age old reason of exploiting the resulting chaos to make more money. That video is now one of VT’s treasures.

The US Coalition will undermine the current success by claiming that if anything is done in Syria that it does not like, it will simply declare the Terror War to not be over, and continue its presence to win in the piece what it could not on the battlefield, denying an Assad government sovereign control over Syria.

All those coming to the defense of Syria, be they Iran or Russia, will just be tagged as threats, thus justifying continued forward military deployment and sanctions, even after the ISIS defeat is complete.

The case that free and sovereign countries like Syria and Iran do not have the right to form defensive military pacts unless the US and friends give their permission is a form of terrorism itself. The jihadis felt the same way, that you don’t have any rights they disagree with, and we they will enforce that through violenceJim W. Dean ]

VT team with the Syrian Justice minister, seated, for midnight meeting. I am standing behind Mike Harris. Photo by Gordon Duff

– First published  …  November 14, 2017 –

by Petr Lvov,  … with New Eastern Outlook,  Moscow

It’s been noted time and time against that an abrupt increase in the level of tensions observed today in the Middle East can be attributed to the steps that Israel and Saudi Arabia have been taking. In addition to the uneasy situation with Lebanon, Tel-Aviv kicked its propaganda efforts into high gear in a bid to sow discord among the opposing parties in Syria.

The other day, while acting on Israel’s demand, the BBC announced Iran was allegedly building a military camp at the base of the Syrian Armed Forces in the town of Al-Kiswah, less than ten miles south of Damascus. The credibility of this statement is doubtful, especially in the light of the claims that a new transit base Iranian troops is being created, that would allow them to be quickly dispatched in Lebanon.

The images of this site bear no trace of such activities. But this did not prevent Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from immediately announcing that Israel will not allow Iran’s military presence along its borders. It’s been automatically assumed in Tel-Aviv that Iran wants to gain a foothold within the Golan Heights territory that Israel keeps occupying illegally.

One can even come across a number of reports stating that Iran allegedly planning to create a naval base in Syria, which will allow its submarines to patrol the waters in the immediate vicinity of the Israeli coast. The Israelis also claim that Tehran wants to bring ground-to-surface missiles to Syria and Lebanon to able to launch strikes deep inside the Israeli territory.

At the same time, the fact that Israel has repeatedly launched unilateral strikes against Syrian and Lebanese positions deep inside the Syrian territory is deliberately omitted.

At the same time pro-Israeli media sources are trying to show that both Washington and Moscow are somehow supporting the positions of Tel-Aviv. It’s allegedly been announced that the issue of Iranian military presence near Israeli borders was discussed with Russia’s Defense Minister Sergey Shoygu during his recent visit to Israel. Some media sources go as far as to claim that this issue was discussed by Russia’s President Vladimir Putin during his visit to Tehran on November 1.

In the development of this information campaign of Tel Aviv and Washington, the statement that was issued by US State Department on November 11 looks rather bizarre. It announces that Russia has pledged its support to the withdrawal of Iranian and pro-Iranian forces from south-west Syria, even though nobody would discuss this issue during the summit in Da Nang.

According to this statement, Washington believes that this issue is important since the presence of foreign combatants allegedly undermines the cease-fire and threatens Israel and Jordan. It has already been statement that the memorandum of understanding signed in Da Nang reflects the commitment of the United States, Russia and Jordan to exclude the presence of non-Syrian forces from the conflict.

According to Washington, among such forces one can find Iranian forces, Iran-backed militia groups, such as the Lebanese Hezbollah, and foreign jihadists working with Jabhat al-Nusra and other extremist groups in the south-western parts of Syria.

It’s clear that Russia is determined to push radical jihadists out of Syria, but how could it agree to assist Washington in pushing Iran and pro-Iranian forces from those regions of Syria that share a common border with Jordan and the Golan Heights, that are still occupied by Israel.

Maybe Washington wants Moscow to go to war with Tehran? Especially in a situation when Damascus would not be able to survive the Islamist onslaught for two months without the presence of Iranian troops. And what fate would await Russian military bases in Syria then?

It’s most curious that a pretty well-known and pretty competent Israeli journalist Barak Ravid, would announce on his Twitter that:

The United States, Russia and Jordan have signed a final version of the cease-fire agreement in southern Syria, in which buffer zones will be established. The parties have added a clause under which the three countries will ensure the removal of all Iranian forces from these areas.

Shortly before that he would report that Israeli officials would hold secret talks with representatives of Russia and the United States in early July, during which an agreement was reached on the creation of zones of deescalation in southern part of Syria.

He also claims that during these alleged meetings high-profile Israeli officials were objecting to a possible agreement between Russia and the United States, since it had no clause about the withdrawal of Iranian armed forces from Syria, since they are clearly going to stay there even after the official end of the Syrian conflict.

It’s curious that after the official announcement of the terms of the agreement on Syria, Tel-Aviv would be pretty vocal in expressing its disappointment with the fact that the so-called “Iranian factor” was not taken into account in this document. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described the agreement on the creation of a deescalation zone in southern Syria as “a very bad one”, since it legitimizes the presence of the Iranian military forces in this country.

On July 16, Netanyahu discussed the topic of the “southern zone of deescalation in Syria” with US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. And here it is appropriate to recall that the ceasefire agreement in Syria was agreed upon at the meetings of Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump in Hamburg. Formally, the ceasefire agreement in Syria entered into force on July 9.

It encompasses the territories of Daraa, Kuneitra and Al-Suwayda, including those zones that are adjacent to the Israeli and Jordanian borders. The treaty between supporters and opponents of the Bashar al-Assad government was concluded due to the mediation work of Russia, the United States and Jordan.

On July 8, at a press conference following the G20 summit in Hamburg, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin confirmed that Washington’s position has become more pragmatic. Putin announced that the talks between all the parties involved resulted in the drafting of an agreement on the southern zone of deescalation.

In general, the settlement scheme that was put forward by Moscow and its allies implies that the authority of the Bashar al-Assad government would be preserved, while new zones of deescalation will reduce hostilities in southern parts of Syria.

At the same time, as stated in the article featured in the Daily Beast, the common goal is the victory over the terrorist formation of the Islamic State, while the intermediate goal has been state as the resumption of coordination between the Russian and American military in Syria aimed at avoiding accidental clashes.

On July 6, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said that Washington is ready to explore the possibility of no-fly zones creation in cooperation with Russia along with other mechanisms that must ensure stability.

Against this backdrop, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz would announce that Tel-Aviv insists that the deescalation zones must be controlled by American military personnel. The leadership of Israel has repeatedly stressed that it won’t tolerate the presence Iranian armed forces or the Lebanese Hezbollah in the immediate vicinity of its borders.

On July 9, Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman would announce, while commenting the ceasefire agreement in Syria, that Israel retains complete freedom of action, even though it contradicts the agreements between Trump and Putin. Hence, the question of who will be ensuring compliance with the ceasefire agreement in southern Syria remains open.

So the information we have is contradictory. So far, apparently, we are to believe to what is said in the joint Russian-American document of November 11 about the success of the ceasefire initiative, that implies the reduction and ultimately the removal of foreign forces and foreign militants from the southern parts of Syria which must ensure a more lasting peace.

The monitoring of parties’ compliance with the ceasefire agreement will be carried out by the Amman Monitoring Center with the participation of experts from Russia, Jordan and the United States. It should also be noted that while the document mentions the Geneva peace process, there is not a single word about the Astana talks in it. That means that Turkey and Iran have been left on the sidelines. Even the Geneva process has been put aside together with all the arrogance of John Kerry.

Even before the summit in Da Nang, Moscow was the only party of the conflict that would announce the withdrawal of its forces from Syria, leaving only two military bases behind.

However, repeated calls from Riyadh and Tel Aviv to solve the Syrian issue in accordance with their own preferences jeopardizes international efforts. The escalation of anti-Iranian hysteria is clearly putting the region in a dangerous situation.

In recent days, the world has been watching how Riyadh is said to be ready to start a war against Iran and the Hezbollah in Syria and Lebanon. We see how the ambitions of Saudi Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman driving the entire Middle Eastern region over the edge, while Israel occupies the position behind the driving wheel now.

In the meantime, one would want to believe that logics will ultimately prevail and Tel Aviv will not get involved in yet another military adventure together with the Saudi prince who is obviously blinded by his uncontrolled ambition.

Since he’s not just risking to draw Syria’s neighbors into a major conflict, but such global players as Russia and the United States can as well found themselves drawn into it.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, IranComments Off on Iran vs the Nazi regime: How things went south

Saudi Zio-Wahhabi and the Nazi refgime want to drag US into war against Iran


Phil Giraldi – Saudi Arabia and Israel want to drag US into war against Iran

How can the worst among us always seem to rise to top political positions. The list is endless.

[ Editor’s Note: Giraldi hits a nail on the head here. I did not say The nail, as there are multiple aspects to this incredible situation, where US allies are running officially undeclared wars against UN member countries without feeling they need any UN or real international agreement to do this, in violation of a number of international agreements, and most all of their fellow members states never seem to mind.

Both Israel and Saudi Arabia are rogue nations, but highly respected by the US political, military and security establishment. North Korea is called a rogue nation for its nuclear threat, while Israel, with its nuclear, chemical and biological weapons is actually funded by the US.

NK claims its nuclear weapons program is it’s only guarantee for survival, as a deterrent, while Israel’s is not only ignored for the threat it represents in the Mideast, but US politicians trip over each pledging allegiance to Israel’s security.

Meanwhile, US security people admit that Israel runs huge offensive espionage operations against the US, that include attacking those that do not support rogue nation Israel, and yet attacking Israel, even politically, is being made against the law in state after state.

US security organizations have so far done little to stop this, and generally refuse to even discuss it openly. And when election time rolls around, this incredible problem is NEVER a campaign issue, for the Left or the Right. Somebody is getting conned here, big time.

It may be time to bring the term “Fake Countries” into the world lexicon – and yes, I bluntly mean taking a new look at whether countries run by criminal organizations should actually be referred to as such, or should a more accurate new name for them be considered, like “rogue countries” or “cabal countries”.

I would present that they should have their own international organization, something along the lines of “The United Rogue Nations”, so as to not make a laughing stock of the rest of us. I would even include another group, “The United Nations of Proxy Terrorism”. Most all of us could draw up a founding-members list in about five minutes.

VT readers know the power of satire, especially in geopolitical writing. The anger kind of writing can get old and wear readers down. So we have a long tradition here of mixing up our avenues of attack on hardened targets. Satirical writing is a major arrow in our quiver, as it makes people look at these huge problems we face in a different light.

The UN is a failed institution. We need to start over from scratch

One of those is to “rub it in their faces”, that if current world organizations have failed miserably to even address some of the most dangerous issues that we face, then we are our own worst enemies if we continue to treat them with deference and respect.

Phil Giraldi is among a small number of experienced intelligence officers with demonstrable access to the information needed to have credibility, and who steps forward to give the public a chance to know what is really going on.

Whether the public will do anything with the knowledge is a whole different matter, as it has its own institutional poor record of being AWOL in this fight as a group. This sad situation exists despite the public’s overwhelming numbers and the vast political power it should have in its hands, unless it also have been compromised via a variety of methods, the most used being the tried and true “divide and conquer” one.

We are losing, and will continue to lose if we don’t abandon whatever you could call the current game plan – new elections every two years – and realize that something new has to be built to take us were we want to go… Jim W. Dean ]

A former American counter-terrorism specialist and military intelligence officer of the CIA says Israel and Saudi Arabia are not in a position to defeat Iran and hence are trying to drag the United States into a war against the Islamic Republic.

Philip Giraldi made the remarks in an article headlined Saudi Arabia and Israel Know They Cannot Defeat Iran, Want to Drag the US into an Uncontainable War published on Monday.

Netanyahu and his mobster buddy, Shelley Adelson

“Both Saudi Arabia and Israel know they cannot defeat Iran,” Giraldi wrote, “without the active participation of the United States.”

“That would require shaping the “threat” narrative to start with a series of relatively minor military actions that appear defensive or non-controversial to draw the United States in without really appearing to do so,” he added.

“American involvement would be against Washington’s own interests in the region but it would serve Saudi and Israeli objectives, particularly if the situation is inherently unstable and is allowed to escalate,” he warned.

“Both the Saudis and, more particularly, the Israelis have powerful lobbies in Washington that will push a friendly Congress for increased US involvement and the Iranophobic mainstream media is likely to be similarly positive in helping to shape the arguments for American engagement,” the expert observed.

Giraldi predicted that “the escalation will be starting in Lebanon, where the resignation of Prime Minister al-Hariri has created a plausible instability that can be exploited by Israel supported by heavy pressure from the Saudis to harden the Lebanese government line against Hezbollah.”

During a visit to Saudi Arabia earlier this month, Hariri announced his resignation. The announcement is widely seen to have been made under Saudi influence. Lebanese President Michel Aoun has refused to formally consider Hariri’s resignation, saying he has to return first.

Lebanese government officials also said they believed Hariri was “being held” in Saudi Arabia against his will, and signaled that his resignation had not been voluntary.

Last week, Saudi Arabia escalated its threats against Iran, saying there will be a response “in the appropriate time and manner,” following a missile strike from neighboring Yemen, which has been under a nonstop bombardment campaign by a Saudi-led coalition for over two and a half years.

Posted in USA, Saudi ArabiaComments Off on Saudi Zio-Wahhabi and the Nazi refgime want to drag US into war against Iran

Saudis “moving out of oil, terrorism, and corruption” – but what will be left?!


…by Kevin BarrettVeterans Today Editor

Clown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman has announced with great fanfare an ambitious new plan for the future of Saudi Arabia. He says his country (yes it is his country, he totally owns it now, having grabbed all the other family fortunes for himself) is going to:

*End its dependency on oil exports.

*Stop being the epicenter of Wahhabi extremism and terrorism, and become the avatar of “moderate Islam.”

*Outlaw and abolish corruption.


Take away oil, terrorism, and corruption, and you’ve basically wiped “Saudi” Arabia right off the map. Which, come to think of it, might not be such a bad idea.

If Bin Salman’s real goal is to abolish his country as quickly as possible, he’s doing a pretty good job of it. First, he went along with the Rothschild-Fed “Plunge Protection Team” and pushed oil prices through the floor, in a doomed attempt to bankrupt Russia and Iran. In so doing, the Clown Prince shot himself in the foot.

“Saudi” Arabia is far more dependent on oil prices than Russia and Iran ever were. Those two countries actually have real economies. They have productive people adding value to things. And they have resources beyond oil. “Saudi” Arabia doesn’t. It’s just one big oil gusher, with terrorism and corruption as derivative sectors.

After bankrupting his country by obeying the Empire’s orders to collapse oil prices, Bin Salman threw away what was left of his money on doomed, idiotic, losing wars in Syria and Yemen. It’s no coincidence that almost on the very day that Saudi-backed ISIS was finally wiped out, Bin Salman orchestrated the “night of the long swords,” kidnapped and robbed his cousins, kidnapped the Lebanese Prime Minister, declared war on Lebanon and Iran, and uttered a three-digit-decibel whine about a likely false flag Houthi missile supposedly aimed at Riyadh.

But seriously folks, I think it is wonderful that Saudi Arabia is going to end oil, terrorism, and corruption, and go out and “get a real job.” In today’s increasingly interconnected world, there are many opportunities for decadent sybaritic ex-oil-sheikhs to make something of themselves.

For example, the Saudi royal family could start doing on-line order fulfillment for Amazon. Or they could re-invent themselves as a reality TV show. Bin Salman is such an obnoxious egomaniac he could easily take the reality TV world by storm and become the next Donald Trump.

Come to think of it, they’re already playing a sort of “desert kingdom survivor” game, with Bin Salman currently having the upper hand. (But who knows how it will end.)

Posted in Saudi ArabiaComments Off on Saudis “moving out of oil, terrorism, and corruption” – but what will be left?!

The Nazi cancer Invades Kansas Public Schools


The Israeli Regime Invades Kansas Public Schools

, Thomas Jefferson: “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations – entangling alliances with none.”

GOVERNOR COUMO NYC OFFICES, NEW YORK, UNITED STATES – 2016/06/09: State-sanctioned backlash against the movement for Palestinian human rights has reached a critic point as Gov. Cuomo just signed a McCarthyism executive order requiring state agencies to divest from organizations that support the Palestinian call to boycott companies profiting from, or cultural or academic institutions complicit in, Israel’s oppression of the Palestinian people. Furthermore, the order requires the creation of a publicly available blacklist of all companies and institutions that support the movement. (Photo by Erik McGregor/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images)

…by Jonas E. Alexis

If you have never read what the Founding Fathers said about foreign entanglements, perhaps it is time to do so, since Israel is obviously invading the United States by subterfuge. George Washington specifically lamented that the United States ought to disengage in finding monsters to kill from abroad and must focus on building a government based on morality.

Only then will the United States become “respectable in the eyes of the world.” Once that happens, said Washington,

“none of the maritime Power, especially none of those who hold possessions in the New World or the West Indies shall presume to treat them with insult or contempt.”[1]

America, Washington continued, “is remote from Europe and ought not to engage in her politics or wars.”[2] Washington declared in his Farewell Address: “The great rule of conduct for us…is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible.”

Similarly, Thomas Jefferson said: “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations – entangling alliances with none.” John Adams saw the same thing, going so far as to say that America “does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy.”

Washington had the insight to conclude that

“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens.

“The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice?

“And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”

These ideas have profound implications even today. And both Washington and Immanuel Kant were implicitly saying the same thing with respect to morality here. If you exclude morality from any political and intellectual enterprise, then that enterprise will eventually crumble. Morality is practical reason, and practical reason provides the basis for reasonable agreement.

The Neoconservative ideology completely turned the Founding Fathers’ foreign policy upside down by implicitly and explicitly rejecting practical reason. Instead of practical reason, Neocons advocate perpetual wars in the Middle East and around much of the world for Israel—wars that have already cost America trillions upon trillions of dollars and thousands of precious lives.

In that sense, the Neoconservative revolution as a Jewish political and ideological movement represents a fifth column in the United States in that it subtly and deceptively seeks to undermine what the Founding Fathers have stood for and replace it with what the Founding Fathers would have considered horrible foreign policies.

Stefan Halper and Jonathan Clarke, themselves philo-Semitic scholars, declare that the Neoconservative movement is “in complete contrast…to the general cast of the American temperament as embodied by the Declaration of Independence.”[3] The Neoconservative persuasion is horrible in the sense that much of the war in the Middle East has been based on colossal hoaxes and fabrications.[4]

This point became more interesting when it was discovered that Israel has maintained covert operations against the U.S. on multiple levels, including smuggling illegal weapons for years,[5] while the Neoconservative machine says nothing about this issue and keeps propounding that Israel is a model of Western values in the Middle East.

Israel has been spying on the United States for years using various Israeli or Jewish individuals, including key Jewish Neoconservative figures such as Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith, who were under investigation for passing classified documents to Israel.[6]The FBI has numerous documents tracing Israel’s espionage in the U.S.,[7] but no one has come forward and declared it explicitly in the media because most value their careers and lives.

For example, when two top AIPAC officials—Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman—were caught passing classified documents from the Pentagon to Israel, Gabriel Schoenfeld defended them.[8] In the annual FBI report called “Foreign Economic Collection and Industrial Espionage,” Israel is a major country that pops up quite often.[9]

This is widely known among CIA and FBI agents, and U.S. officials for years.[10] One former U.S. intelligence official declared,

“There is a huge, aggressive, ongoing set of Israeli activities directed against the United States. Anybody who worked in counterintelligence in a professional capacity will tell you the Israelis are among the most aggressive and active countries targeting the United States. They undertake a wide range of technical operations and human operations. People here as liaisons… aggressively pursue classified intelligence from people. The denials are laughable.”[11]

In 1991 the Israeli tried to recruit a former U.S. intelligence official, but he declined. “I had an Israeli intelligence officer pitch me in Washington at the time of the first Gulf War. I said, ‘No, go away,’ and reported it to counterintelligence.”[12]

Covert operations were done by the Israelis in “a 1997 case in which the National Security Agency bugged two Israeli intelligence officials in Washington discussing efforts to obtain a sensitive U.S. diplomatic document. Israel denied wrongdoing in that case and all others, and no one has been prosecuted.”[13]

Yet this has rarely seen the light of day in the popular media. Pointing these facts out, according to the reasoning of Omri Ceren of Commentary, is tantamount to anti-Semitism.[14]

Esther Koontz

The Israeli regime has obviously figured out that politicians in the United States do not want to challenge them, so the regime is slowly moving to other territories in the United States as well. Kanas has passed a law last July saying that teachers have to pledge allegiance to the state of Israel in order to be able to maintain their employment. The law, Newsweek tells us,

“prohibits the state from entering into a contract with any individual or company boycotting Israel—for instance, requiring school teachers to declare support of Israel.”[15]

Mark Dankof has properly called this “Zionist Stalinism at work.” One teacher in Kansas by the name of Esther Koontz was completely shocked by this new form of Stalinism. The Jewish Daily Forward reports:

“All Esther Koontz wanted to do was train fellow Kansas math teachers to be more effective in the classroom. Everything was set: She had completed the special training program. She had signed up to help schools in need of assistance. She’d even gotten requests from several schools via the state Department of Education and had indicated she was available to do training for them.

“Last July, the consultant running the state program asked her to fill out one more form. It required Koontz to certify to the department that as a contractor she was “not currently engaged in a boycott of Israel.

“But Koontz was engaged in a boycott of Israel. She was boycotting goods and services offered by Israeli companies and by international companies operating in Israel’s exclusively Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank.

“A Mennonite Christian, Koontz was doing so in conformance with her church’s endorsement of an Israel boycott and with her own convictions. And as a Christian, she felt unable to sign the affirmation untruthfully.”[16]

What was really her crime? Koontz said:

“I avoid Sabra hummus and, rather than use a SodaStream, I purchase soda water. It also means that I avoid using certain websites and apps like, TripAdvisor, and Airbnb.”[17]

Since these products were “either from Israeli companies or from companies working in Israel’s West Bank settlements,” she made a personal commitment to avoid them.

Well, obviously that was an unpardonable sin. You simply can’t say that you are going to avoid certain products from Israel, and you can’t tell other people you are avoiding these products! Where is that in the Constitution? How did we get here? Who is imposing this draconian law upon us? Is this part of practical reason? We can boycott any product from any country, but Israel has to be the exception? Koontz says:

“My participation in this boycott is based on my political, religious, and moral beliefs, including my support for Palestinians’ human rights. I participate in this boycott to protest the Israeli government’s actions, as well as the U.S. government’s support for those actions.”[18]

VT and people of reason would agree. The Jewish Daily Forward reports that “Supporters of the Kansas law—and similar laws that have been enacted in other states—maintain that economic boycotts do not fall under the category of protected political speech.”

Oh, really? I honestly didn’t know! I guess I and many other Americans have a lot of catching up to do. So, what’s next? Eric Mandel of the Jerusalem Post responded to this debacle by saying:

“‘Let’s be clear. The right to express one’s point of view, no matter how contentious or odious, is a constitutionally protected right.’ But ‘the attempt to expand the meaning of speech to include commercial transactions,’ he wrote, is another matter.”[19]

Mandel is certainly out of his depth here because there is no way that he can support this implausible and incoherent thesis from any document of the United States. If he is right, why is the Israel regime currently boycotting Iran? Why does Netanyahu continue to say that the West must stop any deal with Iran? Can Mandel universalize his principle here?

Mandel is essentially defending his own regime’s invasion of Kansas. Americans must certainly unite and fight this un-American and wicked invasion.

  • [1] Quoted in Norman A. Graebner and Richard Dean Burns, Foreign Affairs and the Founding Fathers: From Confederation to Constitution, 1776-1787 (Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, 2011), 129.
  • [2] Ibid.
  • [3] Halper and Clarke, America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 10.
  • [4] See Paul R. Pillar, Intelligence and U.S. Foreign Policy: Iraq, 9/11, and Misguided Reform (New York: Columbia University Press, 2011); Mearsheimer, Why Leaders Lie: The Truth About Lying in International Politics (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011); Vincent Bugliosi, The Prosecution of George W. Bush (New York: Perseus Books, 2008); John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy (New York: Farrar & Straus, 2007).
  • [5] See Grant F. Smith, Divert!: NUMEC, Zalman Shapiro and the Diversion of U.S. Weapons Grade Uranium into Israeli Nuclear Weapons Program (Washington DC: Institute for Research Middle Eastern Policy, 2012). For similar studies, see Avner Cohen, Israel and the Bomb (New York: Columbia University Press, 2005); The Worst-Kept Secret: Israel’s Bargain with the Bomb (New York: Columbia University Press, 2010).
  • [6] Philip Giraldi, “The Spy Who Loves Us,” American Conservative, June 2, 2008.
  • [7] Ibid.
  • [8] Justin Raymondo, “Trotskyites for Romney,”, October 17, 2012.
  • [9] Giraldi, “The Spy Who Loves Us,” American Conservative.
  • [10] See “France, Israel Cited in CIA Espionage Study,” LA Times, August 15, 1996; Bob Drogin and Greg Miller, “Israel Has Long Spied on U.S., Say Officials,” LA Times, September 3, 2004.
  • [11] Bob Drogin and Greg Miller, “Israel Has Long Spied on U.S., Say Officials,” LA Times, September 3, 2004.
  • [12] Ibid.
  • [13] Ibid.
  • [14] Omri Ceren, “The Times’s Spectacular Bias Against Israel,” Commentary, September 8, 2012.
  • [15] Linley Sanders, “Hurricane Victims Must Support Israel to Get Relief, Texas City Demand,” Newsweek, October 20, 2017.
  • [16] Larry Cohler-Esses, “This Math Teacher From Kansas Has Sparked A Huge Legal Feud Over BDS,” Forward, October 13, 2017.
  • [17] Ibid.
  • [18] Ibid.
  • [19] Ibid.

Posted in USA, ZIO-NAZI, CampaignsComments Off on The Nazi cancer Invades Kansas Public Schools

FBI Assault on New Zealand Internet File Sharer Larger than Phony Bin Laden Raid


Image result for FBI CARTOON


Kim Dotcom and his ex-wife have reached a confidential settlement with police in New Zealand over the “military-style” raid and arrest at his home as part of an FBI plot.

Dotcom said he agreed to settle for the sake of his children and because he felt the New Zealand government had recently changed for the better.

The Megaupload founder sought damages in the High Court for the raid on his home that was part of a global FBI operation to bring down the popular file-sharing website.


The Special Tactics Group raided Dotcom’s mansion in 2012, using what he described as “unreasonable” use of force in a “military-style raid.” The anti-terrorism squad arrived by helicopter at dawn, in what Dotcom said was, “a Hollywood-style publicity stunt tailored to appease US authorities.”

More than 70 police were involved in the raid as they searched the mansion for Dotcom, breaking open the children’s bedroom doors in the process. Dotcom’s then-heavily pregnant former wife was made to stand in the cold in her nightclothes.

Dotcom and three others were arrested and the US has been attempting to extradite them to the States ever since.

Police reached settlements with the others involved at an earlier date, the NZ Herald reports. These settlements are believed to be in the six figures, while Dotcom’s settlement is likely a greater amount.


Dotcom was also the subject of risk assessments used to justify the use of the anti-terrorism squad which carried out the dawn raid. Photographs of him holding shotguns, which were taken when he was clay pigeon shooting, were among the pieces of evidence taken into consideration.

Dotcom was also subject to visual surveillance without a warrant, which included police watching him from neighbors’ houses. A police officer also wore a hidden camera inside the home the day before the raid.

The internet entrepreneur said he respects the New Zealand police: “They work hard and have, with this one exception, treated me and my family with courtesy and respect.”

“We were shocked at the uncharacteristic handling of my arrest for a non-violent Internet copyright infringement charge brought by the United States, which is not even a crime in New Zealand.”

Dotcom is continuing to fight his extradition to the US.

Posted in USA, EuropeComments Off on FBI Assault on New Zealand Internet File Sharer Larger than Phony Bin Laden Raid

Civil society organizations ask Mugabe to step down

Zimbabwe CSOs joint statement on the military take over

More than a hundred civil society organizations have urged Robert Mugabe to resign as president of Zimbabwe following military intervention in the country’s politics. The organizations have also asked the military to ensure restoration of the constitutional order and an inclusive process to resolve Zimbabwe’s political and socio-economic problems.

We the undersigned civil society organisations guided by the Constitution express our concern over the political developments in Zimbabwe, today Wednesday 15 November 2017. We call for the peaceful and constitutional resolution of the situation and the immediate return of Constitutional order and democracy in Zimbabwe. As civil society we reiterate our position that the political transition in Zimbabwe must be guided by the Constitution and should adhere to all full tenets of democracy enshrined in it that include a multi-party democratic political system. We condemn any actions, attempts and interests to attain state power outside constitutional provisions. We believe that the solution to Zimbabwe’s socio economic and political problems should be a product of an inclusive all stakeholder process.

a. In the interest of peace, stability and progress in Zimbabwe, we urge President Mugabe to voluntarily step down and pave way for an all-inclusive all stakeholder process which will determine the future of Zimbabwe.

b. We implore and would want to remind the Zimbabwe Defense Forces that they have an obligation and duty to uphold, defend and respect the Constitution. We expect and demand that that they fulfil their obligation by issuing a clear and quickly implementable roadmap to restoring constitutional order in Zimbabwe.

c. In pursuit of our rights and obligations to the Constitution as citizens we urge the people of Zimbabwe to remain peaceful and freely contribute to their preferred way forward and solution to the current crisis.

d. We call on SADC to be the arbiter and allow an inclusive dialogue with political parties, civil society, church, labour, students and other critical stakeholders. We implore SADC to take a leaf from the active and constructive role ECOWAS has played in its sub-region in countries such as in Mali, Burkina and The Gambia in demanding and pressuring authorities to swiftly restore constitutional orders and protect citizens rights

e. We call on Parliament of Zimbabwe to uphold and fulfil their constitutional obligations by:
    i. Creating conditions for the swift realignment of key laws to the constitution including the Electoral Act paving way for the conduct of credible free and fair election in 2018;
    ii. Repealing legislations that dilute progressive provisions of the constitutions such as the Cyber-Security Act,
    iii. Immediately discard Constitutional Amendment Bill No.1 of 2017 to safeguard the independence of the judiciary;
    iv. Restoring citizens freedoms of assembly and speech by amending restrictive laws such as the Public Order and Security Act (POSA) and Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA)
    v. Liberalize the media space;
    vi. Ensuring civil servants neutrality in the political processes in line with Constitution

We reiterate our position that events in Zimbabwe pose serious security challenges for ordinary citizens and the global democratic order and restate our commitment to defend the Constitution of Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe’s political transition must be guided by the Constitution and a firm commitment made to uphold the Rule of Law.


1. Achieve Your Goal Trust (AYGT)

2. African Self-help Assistance Programme (ASAP)

3. Amalgamated Rural Teachers Union Zimbabwe (ARTUZ)

4. Artists for Democracy Trust (ADZT)

5. Build a Better Youth Zimbabwe (BABY Zim)

6. Bulawayo Progressive Residents Association (BPRA)

7. Bulawayo Vendors Traders Association (BVTA)

8. Bulawayo Youth Arise (BUYA)

9. Centre for Community Development Zimbabwe (CCDZ)

10. Centre for Natural Resources Governance (CNRG)

11. Centre for Youth Development Trust (CYDT)

12. Chinhoyi Residents Trust

13. Chitungwiza Centre for Community Development (CCDN)

14. Chitungwiza and Manyame Rural Residents Association (CAMERA)

15. Chitungwiza Residents Trust (CHITREST)

16. Christian Legal Aid Society

17. Christian Voice International Zimbabwe (CVIZ)

18. Civic Education Network (CIVNET)

19. Combined Harare Residents Association (CHRA)

20. Community Working Group on Health (CWGH)

21. Community Water Alliance (CWA)

22. Counselling Services Unit (CSU)

23. Disability Amalgamation Community Trust (DACT)

24. Doors of Hope

25. Ecumenical Support Services (ESS)

26. Election Resource Centre (ERC)

27. Federation of African Women Media in Zim (FAWMZ)

28. Female Students Network (FSN)

29. Gays and Lesbians Association in Zimbabwe (GALZ)

30. General and Plantation Workers Union in Zimbabwe (GAPWUZ)

31. Godlwayo Community Development Trust

32. Gwanda Residents Association

33. Gweru East Residents Association

34. Habakkuk Trust

35. Heal Zimbabwe Trust

36. International Revolutionary League (RILFI)

37. Institute of Young Women and Development (IYWD)

38. Japa Edutaiment Trust

39. Katswe Sistahood

40. Legal Resources Foundation (LRF)

41. Masvingo Human Rights Trust

42. Masvingo Research Institute (MRI)

43. Masvingo Residents Trust (MRT)

44. Masvingo United Residents and Ratepayers Association (MURRA)

45. Media Institute for Southern Africa (MISA)

46. Media Monitoring Project in Zimbabwe (MMPZ)

47. Mission to Live Trust

48. Mutasa Youth Forum Trust


50. National Movement of Catholic Student (NMCS)

51. National Vendors Union of Zimbabwe (NAVUZ)

52. National Youth Development Trust

53. News of the South

54. Nhimbe Trust

55. Non-Violent Actions for Social Change (NOVASC)

56. Padare

57. Platform for Youth Development (PYD)

58. Plumtree Development Trust (PDT)

59. Progressive Teachers’ Union of Zimbabwe

60. Radio Dialogue

61. Reconciliation Trust

62. Restoration of Human Rights (ROHR)

63. Savannah Trust

64. Shalom Trust

65. #SheVotes

66. Student Christian Movement in Zimbabwe

67. Students and Youth Working on Reproductive Health Rights (Saywhat)

68. Students Solidarity Trust (SST)

69. #Tajamuka

70. Transparency International Zimbabwe (TIZ)

71. Uhuru Network

72. United Mutare Residents and Ratepayers Trust (UMRRT)

73. Veritas

74. Vendors Initiative for Social and Economic Transformation (VISET)

75. Victory Siyanqoba Trust

76. Wedza Community Development Trust (WERDIT)

77. Women in Leadership and Development (WILD)

78. Women in Politics Support Unit (WIPSU)

79. Women in Politics Support Unit (WIPSU)

80. Women of Zimbabwe Arise (WOZA)

81. Women’s Coalition of Zimbabwe (WCoZ)

82. Women’s Trust

83. Young Voices Network (YVN)

84. Youth Empowerment and Transformation Trust (YETT)

85. Youth Agenda Trust (YAT)

86. Youth Agrarian Society (YAS)

87. Youth Alliance for Democracy (YAD)

88. Youth Dialogue Action Network

89. Youth Dialogue Network (YODAN)

90. Youth Environmental Management and Protection Trust (YEMAP)

91. Youth Forum Zimbabwe

92. Zimbabwe Christian Alliance (ZCA)

93. Zimbabwe Council of Churches (ZCC)

94. Zimbabwe Civic Education Trust (ZIMCET)

95. Zimbabwe Coalition of Debt Development (ZIMCODD)

96. Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU)

97. Zimbabwe Democracy Institute (ZDI)

98. Zimbabwe Doctors’ for Human Rights (ZADHR)

99. Zimbabwe Election Support Network (ZESN)

100. Zimbabwe Farmers Union Development Trust

101. Zimbabwe Human Rights Association (ZIMRIGHTS)

102. Zimbabwe Institute (ZI)

103. Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR)

104. Zimbabwe Liberators Platform (ZLP)

105. Zimbabwe National Students Union (ZINASU)

106. Zimbabwe NGO Human Rights Forum

107. Zimbabwe Organisation of Youth in Politics (ZOYP)

108. Zimbabwe Pastors Forum (ZPF)

109. Zimbabwe Peace Project (ZPP)

110. Zimbabwe Poets for Human Rights (ZPHR)

111. Zimbabwe United Residents Association (ZURA)

112. Zimbabwe Women Lawyers Association (ZWLA)

113. Zimbabwe Women Resource Centre & Network (ZWRCN)

114. Zimbabwe Young Women’s Network for Peacebuilding (ZYWNP)

115. Zimbabwe Youth Movement (ZYM)

Posted in Africa, ZimbabweComments Off on Civil society organizations ask Mugabe to step down

IN PICTURES: Likely players in post-coup Zimbabwe unity government


Zimbabwe’s army appears to be pushing for a quick and bloodless end to 93-year-old President Robert Mugabe’s 37 years in power, to be replaced by a national unity government headed by his former deputy, Emmerson Mnangagwa.

According to political sources in Harare, Mugabe – now under house arrest in his lavish Harare home – was resisting pressure to stand down voluntarily.

Assuming he does, the following are likely to be key players in the expected settlement, according to political sources in Zimbabwe and South Africa and several years of Zimbabwean intelligence documents seen by Reuters:

Emmerson Mnagagwa.

Emmerson Mnagagwa. 
Image: Twitter/@hinamundi

A lifelong Mugabe aide and 1970s liberation war veteran known as “The Crocodile”, Mnangagwa, 75, was in the pole position to succeed Mugabe until his progress was impeded by the dramatic political ascent of Mugabe’s wife, Grace.

His sacking as vice-president this month cleared a path for Grace to the presidency and appears to have been the trigger for the army to step in to advance its preferred successor.

Morgan Tsvangirai.

Morgan Tsvangirai. 

A former union leader who founded the Movement for Democratic Change in the late 1990s, Tsvangirai, 65, has been Mugabe’s main political rival for two decades.

He served as prime minister in a 2009-2013 unity government formed after violence-ridden elections in 2008. Tsvangirai has been undergoing treatment for cancer outside Zimbabwe but returned to Harare late on Wednesday.

Zimbabwe Army General Constantino Chiwenga.

Zimbabwe Army General Constantino Chiwenga. 
Image: Jekesai NJIKIZANA / AFP

As the military chief who pulled the trigger on the coup, Chiwenga is expected to win a senior role in the interim administration.

Chiwenga, 61, who has served in the armed forces since Zimbabwe’s independence in 1980, was sanctioned by the United States and European Union although the latter removed him from its list of restricted individuals in 2014.

Joice Mujuru.

Joice Mujuru. 
Image: Supplied

A liberation war veteran with the nom de guerre “Spill Blood”, Mujuru, 62, formed her own political party after being ousted as vice-president in 2014.

Her husband, Solomon Mujuru, a general who died in suspicious circumstances in 2011, was regarded as one of the most feared men in Zimbabwe and one of the few people capable of challenging Mugabe.

Dumiso Dabengwa.

Dumiso Dabengwa. 
Image: ZAPU via YouTube

Moscow-trained Dabengwa, 77, nicknamed “The Black Russian”, fought in the 1970s anti-colonial struggle for ZIPRA (Zimbabwe People’s Liberation Army), a rival to Mugabe’s ZANLA (Zimbabwe African National Liberation Army).

His incorporation in any unity government would ensure it represented both wings of the liberation struggle.

Tendai Biti. File photo.

Tendai Biti. File photo.

A lawyer by training, Biti, 51, won international plaudits as finance minister in the 2009-2013 government that stabilised the imploding economy.

He told Reuters he would be happy to reprise this role if Tsvangirai, his former political mentor, was on board.

Posted in Africa, ZimbabweComments Off on IN PICTURES: Likely players in post-coup Zimbabwe unity government

Shoah’s pages