Pages

▼

Saturday, 23 February 2019

عودة النازحين أم عودة العلاقات؟



القرار الأميركي ببقاء 200 جندي… لماذا؟

فبراير 23, 2019

ناصر قنديل

– خلال سنة لم يعّد الأميركيون يتحدثون عن دور لقواتهم في سورية، ولم يعُد يسمع لهم حديث عن شروط وتهديدات وخطوط حمراء، ونجح الرئيس الأميركي دونالد ترامب بالتهرب من المحاسبة عن الفشل في رسم خطوط حمراء ادعى أن سلفه باراك أوباما كان عاجزاً عن فرضها، وبالتغطية على متابعته التلاعب بقضية وجود داعش التي كشف أن الرئيس أوباما هو مَن فبركها مع وزيرة خارجيته هيلاري كلينتون. وصارت القضية الموضوعة في التداول هي قرار ترامب بالانسحاب من سورية، وصار السؤال، هل ينسحب أم لا ينسحب؟ ومتى ينسحب؟ وماذا سيحدث بعد أن ينسحب؟

– يعرف صناع القرار الأميركي أن السذج وحدهم يفسرون قرار الانسحاب بالبروباغندا أو بالارتجال، وهو يأتي منسجماً مع مناخ تراجع عام في القدرة الأميركية على رسم السياسة في آسيا، ونيات بتخفيف الحضور العسكري والتورّط في المواجهات على مساحة ساحات الحرب، من سورية إلى أفغانستان واليمن، ويعرفون أن قرار الانسحاب من سورية كما الانسحاب من أفغانستان كما وقف الحرب في اليمن، رسمت كمسارات يجب توظيف تطبيقها بما يتيح إرباك الساحات والخصوم، واستدراج التفاوض.

– يهتم الأميركيون بإثبات أن انسحابهم سيسبّب إرباكاً وفوضى، وأن لا بديل متفق عليه يخلفهم، وأن تنسيق الانسحاب بات ضرورة يطلبها الجميع منهم، ليفاوضوا على ثمن التنسيق، طالما أنهم فشلوا في استدراج التفاوض على ثمن الانسحاب، بعدما حددوا السعر بمقايضته بالانسحاب الإيراني. والأميركي عموماً كتاجر والرئيس الأميركي خصوصاً كتاجر، جاهزان للبيع والشراء، لكنهما يكتشفان أنهما جاهزان للبيع لكن ليس هناك مَن يشتري. فبعد الإعلان عن انسحاب سريع لم تأت دعوات التأجيل إلا من «إسرائيل» وداعميها في الكونغرس، لكن من يريدهم الأميركي للتفاوض رحبوا بالقرار وشككوا في صدقيته، وهذا ما قاله الروس والإيرانيون والسوريون، بينما تسابقت القيادات التركية والكردية على البحث عن صيغ ما بعد الانسحاب ودورها فيها، وليس هذا ما يهم الأميركي، بل استعداد روسيا وإيران وسورية للتفاوض، ولما لم يصل إليه الصدى بوجود أي استعداد، تحدث عن بقاء مئتي جندي أملاً بأن يسمع هذا الصدى.

– الأميركي جاهز ليقبض ثمن التنسيق في غير سورية، هذه المرّة وهو يتحدث عن أفغانستان ويضع ورقة البقاء المؤقت والجزئي على الطاولة، لكنه لا يسمع الصدى. وهو يدرك أن ما لم تنجح بفعله وحدات بالآلاف لن تنجح فيه بالتأكيد وحدة رمزية من المئات، بل ستكون كلفتها البحث سياسياً عن حماية عليه أن يسدد ثمنها لمن يملكون القدرة على تهديد أمنها، كما كان الحال في العراق، وكما سيعود، ولذلك سيبقى الأميركي يحدّث نفسه، فيقول مرة إنه منسحب كلياً وفوراً، ولا يسمع صدى، ممن ينتظر سماعهم، فيقول إنه غير مستعجل، فلا يسمع الصدى، فيقول إنه لن ينسحب لأن الحرب مع داعش لم تنته، فلا يسمع الصدى، فيغيّر ويقول إن الحرب انتهت فلا يسمع، فيقول إنه سينسحب بالتدريج فلا يسمع، فيقول إنه يطلق اليد التركية فلا يسمع، فيقول إنه يهدّد الأكراد إذا تعاونوا مع الدولة السورية فلا يسمع شيئاً،وها هو اليوم يقول إنه سيبقي مئتي جندي ويحتفظ بوجود عسكري في التنف كي يسمع.. ولن يسمع.

Related Videos
Related Articles

 River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!
at No comments:

OLD ALEPPO SHOP OWNER: JUST LEAVE US IN PEACE AND WE WILL RE-BUILD

More from my January 2019 re-visit to Aleppo, Syria.
Again in the old city of Aleppo, and around the Citadel, I speak with civilians about life, take footage from a city ravaged by terrorism but rebuilding, and add a bit of footage from November 2016 where the person I was with told me terrorists burned the old souq before leaving.
Shop owner:
“This is not my work. My work, I have a factory for bottling olive oil, in Idlib.” [When was the last time you saw it?] “Before 8 years.”
See previous clips from Aleppo:
Memory Lane, Old Aleppo: November 2016 Terrorist Snipers Vs Today’s Peace
Reconstruction in Aleppo
Signs of Reconstruction Among the Destruction in Old Aleppo
*Thanks to R&U Videos for compiling some of my clips into a video:
Shops Re-Opened in Old Aleppo
Aleppo Taxi Driver and Singer 🙂
From A Main Square in Aleppo That Was Sniped & Bombed By “Moderate” Terrorists
Ibrahim, an Aleppo Resident, Speaks About Experiences as Syrian Army Volunteer
Lively Clothes Market, Aleppo–The City That Did NOT Fall
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!
at No comments:

Iran urges immediate action to stop ‘racist’ Israel

Israeli forces patrol near an entrance to the Al-Aqsa compound in Jerusalem al-Quds. (Photo by AFP)Israeli forces patrol near an entrance to the Al-Aqsa compound in Jerusalem al-Quds. (Photo by AFP)
Tehran has condemned Israel’s recent move to shut down al-Aqsa Mosque, calling on Muslim countries and the international community to take “immediate” action and stop the “racist” regime.
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Bahram Qassemi on Thursday said Israel’s actions are a violation of the sanctity of al-Aqsa Mosque, which is the third holiest site to Muslims.
“The process of the massacre and ethnic-religious cleansing (of Palestinians) in al-Quds has been underway incessantly and in a systematic way since the occupation of Palestine (in 1948),” he added.
Qassemi further censured the “deadly silence” of the regional states in the face of such violations of Palestine’s historic and Islamic sites, calling on the international community, the UN in particular, to take “immediate” actions and stop the “racist” regime.
He hailed the Palestinian people’s resistance against the Israeli regime.
On Monday, Israeli soldiers placed locks and metal chains on the al-Rahma gate of the al-Aqsa Mosque compound in the Old City of occupied East Jerusalem al-Quds and prevented hundreds of Palestinian worshipers from entering the site, while several were arrested inside the holy site.
Local sources, requesting not to be named, told the Arabic-language Palestine al-Aan news agency that 10 Palestinians sustained injuries on Tuesday evening after Israeli troops assaulted them at Bab al-Rahma (Gate of Mercy).
Qassemi also took a swipe at certain regional states for participating in a recent US-organized Warsaw conference, noting that their participation and attempts to normalize ties with Israel have emboldened the occupying regime to commit such acts of aggression and violations.
The international gathering took place in the Polish capital from February 13 to 14.
The Palestinians, who boycotted the conference, strongly denounced the summit and the participation of Arab ministers.
Nabil Shaath, an adviser to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, wrote in a column published by Israel’s Haaretz newspaper that the Warsaw conference lacked credibility as aimed to “normalize” the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory.
“By fully siding with the Israeli government, (the Americans) have tried to normalize the Israeli occupation and the systematic denial of the Palestinian right to self-determination,” he said.
Saeb Erekat, the secretary-general of the Palestine Liberation Organization’s Executive Committee, called it “an attempt to bypass” the Arab Peace Initiative

 River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!
at No comments:

Dozens of Palestinian children injured as israeli forces (apartheid state) attack school



At least 30 Palestinian children suffered choked on teargas, one of them reported in critical condition, after Israeli forces and settlers attacked on Thursday their elementary school in the Old City of al-Khalil, in the southern occupied West Bank.
Medics at the school’s clinic said Israeli soldiers fired teargas canisters towards schoolchildren, resulting in scores of suffocation cases, including one who was rushed to Mohammed Ali Hospital in critical condition.
According to the school’s headmaster a number of settlers took part in the attack on the school alongside the soldiers, including one identified as Ofer and known for his extremist and racist views against the Palestinians
Israeli attacks against Palestinians in al-Khalil, most of it under Israeli army control, have increased since the international civilian monitoring team, the Temporary International Presence in Hebron (TIPH), has been forced out of the city earlier this month after Israeli occupation authorities refused to extend its mandate after 22 years of service in the occupied city.
Source: 

 River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!
at No comments:

MARTYRDOM ANNIVERSARY 54 FOR MALCOLM X (R.A.), OUR TEACHER: OPPOSE JEWISH SUPREMACISM AS HE DID OR DON’T SPEAK HIS NAME



There aren’t enough salutes in the WORLD… No… Hell no… The whole of the UNIVERSE… Which can adequately pay homage to our teacher, our preacher, our leader, our hero, our inspiration, our rock and our Anti-Parasitic guiding starlight, Malcolm X aka El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz (R.A.) Even if such salutes were executed by Earth’s Most Righteous straight in the hideous, scaled faces of Earth’s Most Evil, it simply wouldn’t be sufficient. True indeed, nothing would be. That’s how monumental Malcolm X (R.A.) was and is; that’s how gigantic he was and is; that’s how vital he was and is, not to mention how much he was hated by the Anglo-Zionist Imperium. He was special, simple and plain, in the classic sense of the word. The Michiganian-turned-New-Yorker, son of a Georgian Garveyite father and a Grenadian Garveyite mother, was a personality so unique that there hasn’t been anyone like him since, nor will there be ever again–although a handful, like the remarkable Nashid Abdul Khaaliq (R.A), do come close. Today marks 54 years since he was martyred in a multi-dimensional conspiracy involving the heaviest hitters of Empire Zionica. And his life, his blistering oratory, his sagacious and perspicacious autobiography, his revolutionary actions, his Anti-Imperialist linkage with the Global South and of course, his Husseini sacrifice, have all never been more relevant.
From his early days as a top-ranking Minister and rising star within the Nation of Islam (NOI), Malcolm X (R.A.) was spied on by the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith (ADL), an organization with a rabid and murderous anti-Black history, and went as far to make note of it to NOI founder Elijah Muhammad and describe the surveillance as “malicious spying operations”. And the ADL was right in the heart of his murder, partnering up with the FBI, which has in fact gloated and taken credit for laying the groundwork for his death, and the NYPD’s Bureau of Special Services aka the Red Squad, to eliminate the greatest grassroots threat to Zio-Imperialism. For the record, ADL spying on Black Muslims goes as far back as at least 1942, so this shouldn’t be anywhere near surprising.
Furthermore, it was John Ali, a Fed-Rat, who triggered the rift between Hajj Malik (R.A.) and the NOI to begin with, and, even more ominously, the FBI appears to be linked to the violent and gruesome death of Black historian Louis Lomax, who was working on a film about FBI involvement in Malcolm X’s assassination when his brakes mysteriously gave out before being ejected from his station wagon after a crash and three turnovers. The CIA’s fingerprints, typically, can also be found on Hajj Malik’s killing, as it was immensely apprehensive of the man formerly known as Malcolm Little attending the Bandung Conference on March 3rd, 1965 and forging ties with the Global South Leadership. Ahmed Ben Bella (R.A.), Nkrumah (rip), Che Guevara (rip), Sukarno (R.A.) and many other freedom fighters were going to be present.
Verily, Malcolm’s aforementioned opposition to the ADL isn’t as widely known as his despisal of the usurping Zionist entity. It was in the September 17th, 1964 edition of the Egyptian Gazette in which he succinctly summed up the illegality of the fake Jewish “state” and the need for it to be dismantled. “Did the Zionists have the legal or moral right to invade Arab Palestine, uproot its Arab citizens from their homes and seize all Arab property for themselves just based on the ‘religious’ claim that their [alleged] forefathers lived there thousands of years ago? Only a thousand years ago the Moors lived in Spain. Would this give the Moors of today the legal and moral right to invade the Iberian Peninsula, drive out its Spanish citizens, and then set up a new Moroccan nation … where Spain used to be, as the European Zionists have done to our Arab brothers and sisters in Palestine? In short, the Zionist argument to justify ‘Israel’s’ present occupation of Arab Palestine has no intelligent or legal basis in history … not even in their own religion.”
Brilliant, beautiful and the exact stance all principled humans should take. All throughout his rebuke of Zionism, he tore Jewish supremacism limb from limb, castigating the Zionist land-thieves for absurdly and viciously believing that they “must fulfill [their] ‘divine’ mission to rule all other nations with a rod of iron.” With certitude, that open, eloquent, gratuitous and unrelenting criticism of Jewish supremacism, particularism and especially, exploitation of the Black community is what sets Hajj Malik (R.A.) apart from all other revolutionary figures. In 1963, he was asked whether the Nation of Islam, and Black Muslims generally, were “anti-Semitic”. Malcolm responded with razor-sharp wit, “Many Jews have guilt feelings when people talk about ‘exploitation.’ This is because they know that they control 90% of the businesses in Black communities, from the Atlantic to the Pacific. And they benefit more from Black buying power than Blacks do from other parts of the White community. So they feel guilty about it.” He also obliterated the idea that Jews can be on the board of groups like the NAACP, but, “the[ese] same Jews won’t let you become president of B’nai B’rith, or any of their other organizations.”
As revealed on page 162 of his autobiography, thanks to the eye-opening positions of a brother and ex-hustling partner of his who had just joined the NOI, Malcolm (R.A.) came to realize that the Ashkenazi Jew bootlegger that he once held in such high regards for being the only “White” to have given him a job, Hymie, was in fact a parasitic exploiter who was using him to line his pockets en masse. From then on, he was able to see through the Jews, their lies, their stratagems, their artificial support for Black civil rights and their overall agenda like one standing in a glass-bottom boat who could pick up on all the wonders of the ocean. On page 289, he discusses the hyper-sensitivity and ultra-subjectivity of the Jew, declaring, “I mean, you can’t even say ‘Jew’ without him accusing you of ‘anti-Semitism’.” Truer and more cutting words were never spoken on the matter. He noted in greater depth that it was Jewishness and Jewishness alone, in a blunt case of radical ethnic chauvinism, that drove the Jew in all he/she did, “I don’t care what a Jew is professionally, doctor, merchant, housewife, student, or whatever–first he, or she, thinks Jew.”
On the same page, Malcolm lambastes the Jews for profiting off anti-Black bigotry, “All of the bigotry and hatred focused upon the Black man keeps off the Jew a lot of heat that would be on him otherwise.” And then he drops the bomb that lays waste to the very foundation of so-called “anti-Semitism”, especially when anti-Jewish sentiments come from Blacks and other people of color living in projects, slums and ghettos across America, “For an example of what I am talking about–in every Black ghetto, Jews own the major businesses. Every night the owners of those businesses go home with that Black community’s money, which helps the ghetto to stay poor. But I doubt that I have ever uttered this absolute truth before an audience without being hotly challenged, and accused by a Jew of ‘anti-Semitism’. Why? I will bet that I have told five hundred such challengers that Jews as a group would never watch some other minority systematically siphoning out their community’s resources without doing something about it. I have told them that if I tell the simple truth, it doesn’t mean that I am ‘anti-Semitic’; it means merely that I am anti-exploitation.” Anti-exploitation. And Anti-Parasitic. Not… And NEVER… “anti-Semitic”–a completely fallacious ideological construct to begin with ANYWAY. Ameen.
There is a severely fascinating exchange as the historic, epic and irreplaceable autobiography, a work that, I can say personally, saved my life, comes to a close. It starts on page 378 where he discusses how he was under constant surveillance following his 18-week trip to the Arab world and Africa. He reveals an exchange with one operative specifically from an unknown agency, who he mockingly called “super-sleuth”. On page 379, Malcolm (R.A.) describes how he confronted the agent directly and told him curtly that if he had any questions, he didn’t need to lurk around. He only had to ask. Almost immediately, the intelligence emissary took a defensive, hyper-sensitive posture and started hammering Hajj Malik (R.A.) about his Black nationalism and Islamic beliefs. The revolutionary giant knew what he was dealing with instantly and instinctively. “From the consistent subjectivity in just about everything he asked and said, I had deduced something, and I told him, ‘You know, I think you’re a Jew with an Anglicized name.’ His involuntary expression told me I’d hit the button. He asked me how I knew. I told him I’d had so much experience with how Jews would attack me that I usually could identify them.”
From page 379, it rages on magnificently right into page 380, “I told him all I held against the Jew was that so many Jews actually were hypocrites in their claim to be friends of the American Black man, and it burned me up to be so often called ‘anti- Semitic’ when I spoke things I knew to be the absolute truth about Jews. I told him that, yes, I gave the Jew credit for being among all other Whites the most active, and the most vocal, financier, ‘leader’ and ‘liberal’ in the Negro civil rights movement. But I said at the same time I knew that the Jew played these roles for a very careful strategic reason: the more prejudice in America could be focused upon the Negro, then the more the White Gentiles’ prejudice would keep diverted off the Jew. I said that to me, one proof that all the civil rights posturing of so many Jews wasn’t sincere was that so often in the North the quickest segregationists were Jews themselves. Look at practically everything the Black man is trying to ‘integrate’ into for instance; if Jews are not the actual owners, or are not in controlling positions, then they have major stockholdings or they are otherwise in powerful leverage positions-and do they really sincerely exert these influences? No!”
Malcolm (R.A.) concludes his destruction of the “super-sleuth” by stating, “And an even clearer proof for me of how Jews truly regard Negroes, I said, was what invariably happened wherever a Negro moved into any white residential neighborhood that was thickly Jewish. Who would always lead the Whites’ exodus? The Jews! Generally in these situations, some Whites stay put–you just notice who they are: they’re Irish Catholics, they’re Italians; they’re rarely ever any Jews. And, ironically, the Jews themselves often still have trouble being ‘accepted.’ Saying this, I know I’ll hear ‘anti-Semitic’ from every direction again. Oh, yes! But truth is truth.” Again, we say, loudly and proudly as ever, AMEEN.
In a Paris Q&A session printed under the title “The Black Struggle In The United States” in Presence Africaine, No. 2, 1965, and as usual, he spoke with power and passion about Jewish manipulations, machinations and hypocrisy, “Now in regards to what is my opinion of the Jews. I don’t think that a man can be intelligent when he’s in the frying pan and he becomes wrapped up or involved in trying to solve someone else’s problems or cry for someone else. The American Negroes especially have been maneuvered into doing more crying for the Jews than they cry for themselves. In America the Jews used to be segregated. They never were ‘Freedom Riders’. They didn’t use this tactic to solve their problem–begging in, walking in, wading in. Whenever they were barred from a neighborhood they pooled their economic power and purchased that neighborhood. If they were barred from hotels, they bought the hotel. But when they join us, they don’t show us how to solve our problem that way. They show us how to wade in and crawl in and beg in. So I’m for the Jew when he shows me how to solve my problem like he has solved his problem.”
These are but a few excerpts. Read “The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews”, Volumes 1-3. Read and watch Dr. Tony Martin (rip). Listen to Fire-Breathing Mega-Man Dr. Khaled Abdul Muhammad (R.A.) Pay heavy attention to Minister Farrakhan. Read and listen to the previously invoked Nashid Abdul Khaaliq (R.A.) Check the work of the ever-vigilant and exceptional research extraordinaire Steve Cokely (rip). Dig into the Jewish character of Christopher Columbus (L.A.) and the Puritans, the Jewish exploitation of boxing great (and friend of Malcolm X) Muhammad Ali (R.A.), the Jewish-Zionist takedown of Marcus Garvey (rip), the Jewish origins of disgusting, racist “blackface” and the Jewish money behind the ungodly Tuskegee experiment. Delve into the terrible, continent-wide scheme World Zionism has imposed on Africa. Malcolm X (R.A.) was right. The Jew exploits, manipulates and oppresses the Black Man whilst pretending to be the Black Man’s best friend. This knowledge should be applied to the Muslim/Arab struggle of today in which we are seeing Jews infiltrate our ranks and dictate how our discourse should run all so their interests are protected. We should adopt a Malcolmite stance and declare that this unacceptable.
Today, the “Woketivists” who claim Malcolm X (R.A.) don’t and won’t touch his staunch, erudite and ruthless critique of Jewish supremacism, not even with a 6-million-foot pole. This is evidence of their disingenuousness as well as who is signing their checks. It’s also, quite ironically and rather hilariously, the proof of EVERYTHING that Hajj Malik (R.A.) EVER uttered in EVERY circumstance vis-a-vis the interactions between African-Americans and the Yahoud on the political, historical, social and financial levels. It is always a scenario of slave and master, controlled and controller, oppressed and oppressor, dictated-to and dictator. Never an actual partnership.
And if the “Woketivists” don’t have the guts to call a spade a spade and a Jew a Jew, they don’t belong talking about Malcolm X (R.A.) in any capacity. Such people are hypocrites and we know how much that el-Shabazz (R.A.) hated hypocrites. It doesn’t require any courage to call out White supremacy when it’s a commonly discussed topic on the likes of Zionist-owned CNN and MSNBC; when its perfidy is taught in universities and it is a frequent PHD target across academia. It requires a gargantuan amount of dauntlessness however to tackle the Jew and his current status as the world’s wealthiest, most influential and most “untouchable” globe-holder. Hence why whoever does it, whether criticizing Zionism or Judaism, comes under the most maleficent assault–especially when they’re Black, like Marzieh Hashemi, Marc Lamont Hill, Angela Davis and Alice Walker.
Now five and a half decades since his brutal murder, we see that a war on Malcolm X (R.A.) has continued. His second daughter, Qubilah Bahiyah Shabazz, was framed for a plot to kill Farakhan by a JDL terrorist who later became a Fed-Rat, Michael Fitzpatrick. His grandson, Malcolm Latif Shabazz (R.A.), who, like him, endured many struggles early on in his life, found a way back to the Nour of the Deen, adopted the Shi’a Islamic school of thought, and launched his own revolutionary struggle before being murdered under shady circumstances by Zionist-American assassins.
And anyone who espouses what he espoused, opposes what he opposed, embodies what he embodied, and fights for what he fought for, disregarding all Jewish supremacist onslaughts that may come their way, this writer included, gets a Blue-and-White label on their dome-piece and then marked for destruction, figuratively and literally. Yet… Despite all the plots by Organized Jewish Interests, they have failed miserably to stomp him out. They have failed miserably, to use a Judaic idiom, to “blot out” his “Amalekite” legacy. El-Hajj Malik el-Shabazz (R.A.) lives on not in infamy… But in INFINITY, beating and screaming in the hearts of Anti-Parasitic youth and elders, men and women, Muslims and Christians, Blacks and Browns, Whites and Reds and Yellows and ALLAH (SWT) knows who else worldwide.
And for the record, he lives on not as a secular liberal. Not a peacenik. Not a Marxist-Leninist. Not a communist, a socialist or a leftist of any persuasion. Not some godless militant being militant for militancy’s sake. Not an LGBTQIA+ sympathizer nor an advocate or “stan” of any sort of degeneracy. But an Islamic Liberationist guided by the Qur’an, the Sunnah, Ahlul Bayt (A.S.) and the righteous Sahaba (R.A.) He was an Anti-Parasitic Mouqawamist who had Striking Star Solidarity with the Moustazafeen the world over. Hence his saying, “Time is on the side of the oppressed today, it’s against the oppressor. Truth is on the side of the oppressed today, it’s against the oppressor. You don’t need anything else.”
He was a Pan-Africanist and a Garvey-influenced Black nationalist that believed in Black independence from Whites and ESPECIALLY Jews. If he was alive today in the physical form, the “Woketivists” would cast him out as an “anti-Semite”, a “homophobe”, a “transphobe”, a “misogynist” for opposing abortion and promoting strong family values particularly when it concerned the Black family unit, a “fascist”, a “reactionary”, a “capitalist” for championing Black businesses and autonomous Black economies–his outspoken anti-capitalism aside–and probably even a “Nazi” too. Why do you think that when they utter his name to show off their “wokeness”, they pretend his Anti-Parasitism, as it is documented in quite a large quantity in this essay, is a figment of our imaginations?
Moreover, to conclude, when we recall Hajj Malik’s (R.A.) brotherhood with Iraqi-American Shi’a Muslim revolutionary Dr. Mohammad Taki Mehdi (R.A.), the figure who brought him to traditional Islam and helped him make Hajj, we know that Imam Hussein (A.S.) had a profound and sublime impact on his life. The sacrifice of Aba Abdallah (A.S.) is what led Malcolm (R.A.) to fearlessly… Even LOVINGLY… Run towards martyrdom. If he was alive long enough to witness the Islamic Revolution, perhaps he, like his grandson, not to mention another African titan, Sheikh Zakzaky, would have adopted the Jaafari Shi’a tradition. Maybe it would have been the Zaydi Shi’a path that appealed to him after witnessing the glory of Sayyed Hussein al-Houthi (R.A.) and his own unfiltered dismantlement of Judaic malevolence. Or perhaps, like martyred Sunni Palestinian revolutionary Dr. Fathi Shaqaqi (R.A.), he would have just modeled a movement in Imam Khomeini’s (R.A.) likeness. What isn’t necessary to ponder on is whether or not he’d be a champion of Islam. No doubt that he would be. One of its most prolific.
Capitalism, Communism, Wahhabism, Shiraziism, Zionism, both its Jewish and its Untemeyer-birthed “Christian” forms, Imperialism, Hindutva and all the other tentacles of the Judaic-Dajjalic system would feel his furious and pious wrath. International Jewry wouldn’t be able to breathe. That’s why International Jewry and its devilish collaborators snuffed him out. But no Shahid, let alone a Shahid of the treasure-like quality of Malcolm X (R.A.), truly dies. The Monsters on the other hand die a little bit inside on each individual occasion that we provide insight into the legend’s actual/factual stances. In his sanctified name, his revered memory and unprofane, resistant example, we’ll be doing a whole lot more of THAT until we too achieve martyrdom. Case in point… And meanwhile, as we await our reunion with our teacher, our preacher, our leader, our hero, our inspiration, our rock and our Anti-Parasitic guiding starlight El-Hajj Malik el-Shabazz (R.A.) in Jannah insha’ALLAH… If you don’t oppose Jewish supremacism, bigotry, deceitfulness and planet-spanning exploitation the way that he did, then keep his blessed name the hell out your mouths.

 River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!
at No comments:

Former French diplomat to ST: ‘ME Stability’ from U.S. viewpoint includes the neutralization of Syria as long as it is not possible to destroy it



Monday, 18 February 2019 09:03
The former French diplomat Prof. Michel Raimbaud has argued that it is very difficult to envisage a fighting alliance between the Gulf States with Israel and US against Iran, making clear that ‘Middle East’ stability from U.S viewpoint means the safety for Israel, the eradication of Iran and Hezbollah and the neutralization of Syria as long as it was not possible to destroy the country.
The professor’s remarks were made during an interview with the Syria Times e-newspaper about Warsaw Conference, Israeli-Gulf relations and France’s clash with U.S. over Iran nuclear deal.
Following is the full text of the interview:
ST-Why the US Administration has failed to get the world on board with Washington’s tough-on-Iran policy?
Prof. Raimbaud : Let’s note at first that this Warsaw Conference was competing with two important international meetings liable to attract the attention of observers and public opinions: the Munich Security Conference 2019, that is the annual meeting of the Western World enlarged to other Powers as China and Russia…and the tripartite Summit gathering in Sotchi around Vladimir Poutine the Presidents of Iran and Turkey about the Syrian conflict.
Anyway, the so-called spectacular performance that was shown on TV screens or delivered to the public or the World at large was remarkable indeed as it brought to the fore several discordant points:
The relative weakness of the reply to US invitation to the Warsaw Conference: about sixty States had been called, but much fewer came (it is very difficult to know exactly how many ones attended).
We must note the absence of some important countries. Iran was not invited, as being the target against which the Summit had been convened, Turkey was apparently represented by its ambassador to Poland, Russia and China having refused to participate. Iraq and Lebanon abstained, according to some reports.
It is obvious that many States were represented at a fairly low diplomatic level, for example the Ambassadors posted in Warsaw. This was the case with most of the European “partners” or guests that were underrepresented, as a mark of opposition or blame to the main purpose of the conference: to promote a holy alliance against Iran, for instance through America making pressure to bear on the European countries in order to incite them to withdraw from the Nuclear Treaty.
On the other hand, and by contrast, this discretion brought out the strong presence and overzealousness of the Gulf countries, including the envoy of Yemen. But we can take note of the low profile of countries such as Morocco, Jordan and Egypt, nevertheless anxious not to clash head-on with their US “partner”.
Israel, the great feeder of the obsession about Iran, was represented at the top level, one of the most prominent figures starring in the show being indisputably the Prime Minister Netanyahou who behaved as the Host, to the great satisfaction of the two Mikes, Pence and Pompeo.
But finally, the US administration has failed to reach the main goal of the conference: to mobilize the World around their tough-on policy. No common position against Iran, no reference to the fight or a War against the Islamic Republic and no final official statement.
ST-What does the open meeting between Israel and Gulf States reflect? Why has Israel unmasked its covert relations with Gulf States at this time??
Prof. Raimbaud: The meeting that took place in Warsaw was not a real innovation. But the fact of being an open meeting was doubtlessly something new. In fact, if there was somewhere a real success inside the whole Summit, it is to be attributed to Netanyahou, the Israeli Prime Minister. After all, two Arab States of the region have diplomatic relations with Israel, and it is common knowledge that the Gulf countries have been maintaining for some time semi-secret but well-known contacts and relations with the former “Zionist enemy”.
But it is sure that the show will strongly help Netanyahou to be re-elected in the forthcoming poll.
Having in mind the very special relationship between Washington and Israel that is the real “Beating Heart of America”, it is not far-fetched to imagine that this point was enough for Mike Pence and Mike Pompeo to consider the Summit as a big achievement: for the first time, the Israeli Head of Government was openly sitting in company of a team of Arab foreign ministers around the same table, in the same room, under the coverage of medias, and they apparently were very proud of their boldness and performance, laying it on thick, rivaling each other in kindness and thoughtfulness towards their new friend. For instance the Bahraini Minister affirmed that of course Iran was the threat number one for Arabs, and this was more important than the Palestinian cause…The Yemeni minister was also fairly effusive…
The whole operation looks like a trap for the Arabs, aiming at compromising them with Israel and making a routine out of this new relation.
ST- What can Gulf States do with Israel and US against Iran?
Prof. Raimbaud: In my opinion, it seems very difficult to envisage a fighting alliance between the Gulf States with Israel and US against Iran for various reasons related to geographical situation, religion, immigration. Let’s not forget at first that Gulf countries and Iran are very close neighbors, facing each other from both shores of the Oman Gulf and Persian Gulf.
Regardless of its conflict with the “Gulf Cooperation Council” Member-States, Qatar is duly condemned to maintain good and active relations with Iran, as far as it shares with this powerful neighbor a common huge gas-field that is the main source of its providential wealth. As to Oman, it was a tradition to nurse a wise and peaceful relationship with Iran, to make a distance with Saudi Arabia and to keep a specific go-between role in what regards the relationship of the Gulf countries and Iran. The Emirates, specially Dubai, welcomes hundreds of thousands of active Iranians… It is well known that most of the Bahraini population is Shiite as well as a strong minority in Kuwait. As a result, and even though the GCC was created in order to counter Iran, we might hardly imagine those countries waging a serious war against Iran. As far as Saudi Arabia is concerned, I strongly doubt that the Saudi Kingdom could think of starting a War against Iran, given that the Saudi leadership must surely have drawn the harsh lessons of the still ongoing conflict and the military disaster in Yemen.
The fact of fighting alongside with US and Israel wouldn’t help, the populations feeding a very lukewarm sympathy for those two countries irrespective of their kings and princes feelings.
ST-What is the meaning of Middle East stability’ from the viewpoint of U.S. and its allies?
Prof. Raimbaud: At first, we must take into account the real meaning of the words being used today in the political and diplomatic language of US and, to some extent, US proxies. As an example, if we take for granted that the expression “Friends of the Syrian People” refers exactly to the whole group of the enemies of Syria, that the so-called “Rogue States” are those resisting the American and western “Rogue Rule”, that democratization and Human Rights are a mere pretext for destabilizing the countries where the regimes are considered as unsuitable to Washington and Israel views, it is quite clear that “Middle East Stability” means to say instability and disorder.
From this view point,” stability “means the safety and quietness for Israel, the eradication of Iran presence in the region, the eradication of Hezbollah and the neutralization of Syria as long as it was not possible to destroy the country or change the “regime”. Last but not least, the Middle East stability includes the leadership of the Gulf countries and Co, and their alliance along with Israel, under the supervision of America.
The creation of Israel is commonly considered by many analysts, historians and thinkers as a destabilizing event that occurred in the Middle East in the twentieth century. Many experts and commentators agree about the fact that this State, created by the “international community” but violating endlessly and restlessly all the rules of the international law, all the Security Council resolutions, became and remains the major destabilization stronghold in the Middle East at large and beyond. In those conditions, how to consider Israel as a stabilizing pole?
At the same time, many observers and analysts do think that America has become and remains – more and more – one of the main sources of instability in the World, including of course in the Middle East. Having in mind the exhibition of some high-ranking western representatives or ministers, speaking at the Security Council, we must say that the allies of US can hardly be accounted for their sense of responsibility in what regards the stability in any part of the World.
To sum up the question, to call a meeting on “stability” in this context and with such actors, sounds like a flash of humor.
ST-Why does France reject to withdraw from Iran nuclear deal??
Prof. Raimbaud : France is not the only party rejecting the idea to withdraw from the Nuclear Treaty. In fact four (out of six) of the Iran partners in the aforesaid Treaty do refuse (China, Russia, Germany, France). In 2015, the French authorities “inspired” by Fabius (the previous Foreign Minister) had been fairly reluctant to sign for various reasons I won’t elaborate here, but they found no other way out…There are strong economic reasons linked to US former pressures and sanctions that exasperated the French government, and the deep misunderstanding prevailing between Trump’s administration and many European governments. Some people will refer to the respect of international law and treaties, but there is no doubt that European governments, usually very tolerant to the abuses of power from the US, have finally come to the conclusion that “too much is too much”.
Interviewed by: Basma Qaddour

 River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!
at No comments:

Putin’s Self-Defense Warning Twisted as ‘Unacceptable Threat’ to US



Putin’s Self-Defense Warning Twisted as ‘Unacceptable Threat’ to US
FINIAN CUNNINGHAM | 22.02.2019 | FEATURED STORY

Putin’s Self-Defense Warning Twisted as ‘Unacceptable Threat’ to US


With stupendous double-think, Western news media claimed this week that Russian President Vladimir Putin was “threatening” the United States and its NATO allies with nuclear missiles.
The New York Times accused the Russian leader of “nuclear saber-rattling” while Radio Free Europe headlined: ‘Putin threatens to target the US with missiles’. Many other news outlets conveyed the same depiction of Russia somehow escalating bellicose tensions, based on Putin’s annual state-of-the-nation address this week.
Buried beneath the sensational headlines was a little more context that hints at the gross distortion being propagated by the Western media.
The New York Times disdained Putin was speaking with an “aggressive tone” and “doubling down on threats against the United States”.
The Times then went on to report: “President Vladimir Putin used his state-of-the-nation address to make some of his most explicit threats yet to start a nuclear arms race with the US after [sic] the Trump administration said this month that America was withdrawing from a landmark arms control treaty.”
Obliquely, but crucially, what the Western media coyly admit is that Putin’s remarks this week on deploying new missiles systems are in response to Washington’s decision to unilaterally abandon the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty.
In other words, decisions have consequences. But for the Western media, they seem to be only preoccupied by consequences.
Furthermore, the Washington Post added somewhere lurking in the bowels of its coverage: “Putin emphasized that Russia will only respond if the United States makes the first move.”
That is, if the US instals short- and medium-range missiles in Europe then Russia will take symmetrical measures to target America territory and that of its NATO allies.
Radio Free Europe even breezily reported Putin as saying, “we don’t want confrontation” and added: “Putin said Russia wanted friendly relations with the United States and remained open for arms control talks with Washington.”
So, Western media are correctly – albeit coyly – noting that the Russian leader is acting in response to actions taken by Washington, and that he is explicitly appealing for friendly relations instead of confrontation. And yet the headlines were all screaming that Putin was “threatening the US”.
This willful distortion is reprehensibly adding to already dangerous international tensions. It is also a baleful failure to accurately determine which party is actually responsible for the brooding confrontational climate. Russia is being blamed for “threatening” the US and its allies when the reality is the reverse: it is the US that is unleashing the dangers of nuclear conflict, as even the Western media obliquely admit.
The Trump administration’s decision to walk away – unilaterally – from the 1987 INF Treaty is the key here. The US side claims that Russia has violated the treaty with its development of a land-launched cruise missile within the banned range of 500-5,500 kilometers. Moscow counters that the 9M729 (also known as SSC-8) missile has an operating range below the lower limit banned by the INF. Last month, in an unprecedented move, the Russian ministry of defense publicly disclosed the missile’s flight specifications at a press conference. Moscow points out that the US has not provided substantiating details to back up its claims that Russia is in breach of the treaty.
For its part, Russia accuses the US side of violating the INF treaty by already installing missile systems in Romania and Poland which can deploy offensive cruise warheads as well as performing as anti-missile systems. The US says its Aegis Ashore system is solely defensive.
However, rather than negotiating through the claims and counter-claims, it is the US side which decided to terminate its participation in the INF Treaty – just like it did with the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty back in 2002 under President GW Bush.
The abandonment of a second major arms control accord is solely the responsibility of the US. The third remaining treaty, New START, is also at risk from redundancy by Washington.
With the INF now being trashed, the US has freed itself to potentially deploy additional missile systems in Europe right on Russia’s borders. The eastward expansion of NATO over the past three decades means that US nuclear weapons could be deployed with a strike capability on Moscow within 10-12 minutes, not hours as with strategic warheads.
President Putin this week noted that Washington has not indicated if it will refrain from installing medium-range nuclear missiles in Europe.
But the Russian leader emphatically specified the condition that “if” the US does embark on such a threatening deployment then Russia will take “symmetrical measures”. He warned that new hypersonic and submarine-launched missiles will be deployed to match the 10-12 minute flight time that the US could poise against Moscow. The Russian weapons will target European launch sites for the US missiles as well as “decision-making centers” in American territory.
Of course, such a dramatic proximity of nuclear capability is extremely alarming and deplorable. The risk of error is manifold greater in such a scenario in a way that far exceeds the Cold War decades. Putin noted that the scenario recalls the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 when the world almost witnessed a nuclear war. The reference point is apt for today’s predicament. The Soviet Union deployed nuclear missiles in Cuba in 1962 after the US installed ballistic missiles in Turkey the year before in 1961. Again, as now, it is the US side that is initiating the dynamics of provocation.
Any objective observer can see that it is the US that is continually upping the ante for nuclear war. The jettisoning of the ABM is now followed by the US discarding the INF based on dubious, unverified claims. Russia in fact views the ulterior rationale of the US as covertly wanting to free itself from the arms controls restriction in order to exert threatening pressure on Moscow for geopolitical goals: those goals may include forcing Russia to be compliant with American foreign policy interests, or opening up Russia’s natural resources to American capital exploitation, and so on.
Putin’s remarks this week are clearly consistent with Russia’s defensive doctrine for using nuclear forces. Moscow is patently stating that it will take “reciprocal steps” if Washington follows through on its offensive trajectory. Yet Western media invert the situation to portray Russia as “threatening” the US.
This is analogous to a gang marauding outside a home. Then the mob ringleader announces that projectiles are to be readied to lob over the garden wall. The homeowner shouts out: just try it and we’ll shoot your henchmen. Nobody in their right mind could fault the homeowner. It’s called self-defense.
But in Russia’s case, self-defense is twisted by dutiful, brainwashed Western news media as “unacceptable threat”.

 River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!
at No comments: