Showing posts with label Facebook. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Facebook. Show all posts

Sunday, 6 June 2021

How Israeli spies influence and infiltrate Facebook, YouTube, Wikipedia, Google, and other social media

Israeli officials worked with former Nazis like Otto Skorzenry and Stepan Bandera.

By Jonas E. Alexis -June 5, 2021

…by Jonas E. Alexis, VT Editor

If you don’t think that Israeli spies haven’t been engaged in covert warfare online and via social media, then you have been living in a cave somewhere on planet earth.

We know for example that Israeli spies under the guise of “art students” infiltrated the United States, particularly the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency, way back in 2002,[1] one year before the Bush administration led us to a bloody war in Iraq. Back in 2019, Insider came out with an article entitled, “A company run by former Israeli spies reportedly tried to influence a local US election — and courted Trump’s campaign.”[2]

If readers would like to pursue these things further, I would highly recommend Gordon Thomas’ Gideon’s Spies: The Secret History of the Mossad, Ronen Bergman’s Rise and Kill First: The Secret History of Israel’s Targeted Assassinations, Michael Bar-Zoha’s Mossad: The Great Operations of Israel’s Secret Service, Dan Raviv and Yossi Melman’s Spies Against Armageddon: Inside Israel’s Secret Wars (New York: Levant Books, 2012), etc.[3]

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is IsraeliWar--320x180.jpg

We are certainly in a war with the Israelis, who find it congenial  to call anyone who criticizes Israel a Nazi, but Israeli officials and Neoconservatives find it congenial to work with former Nazis like Otto Skorzenry,[4] who styled himself “Hitler’s most daring commando,”[5] and Stepan Bandera;[6] the United States and Israel tell us that they are fighting against gangsters and terrorists, but one of the infamous gangsters in America, Meyer Lansky,[7] was working for the Israeli Mossad.

So, it shouldn’t surprise anyone to realize that Israeli spies have been infiltrated media outlets like Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc. The following video shows how:

If you still believe that Israeli spies are “the Good Guys,” then I have nothing to say to you because you have already gone too far.


  • [1] “Spies, or students?,” Haaretz, May 13, 2002; “The Israeli “art student” mystery,” Salon, May 7, 2002.
  • [2] “A company run by former Israeli spies reportedly tried to influence a local US election — and courted Trump’s campaign,” Insider, February 12, 2019.
  • [3] For related studies, see  Avner Cohen, Israel and the Bomb (New York: Columbia University Press, 1998); The Worst-Kept Secret: Israel’s Bargain with the Bomb (New York: Columbia University Press, 2010); Michael Karpin, The Bomb in the Basement: How Israel Went Nuclear and What That Means for the World (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2006).
  • [4] See Michael Bar-Zohar and Nissim Mishal, Mossad: The Greatest Missions of the Israeli Secret Service (New York: HarperCollins, 2012), chapter 8.
  • [5] Otto Skorzeny, My Commando Operations: The Memoirs of Hitler’s Most Daring Commando (Atglen, PA: Schiffer Publishing, 1995).
  • [6] See E. Michael Jones, “Crimea River: The Hypocrisy of U.S. Foreign Policy,” Culture Wars, April 2014.
  • [7] For historical studies on this issue, see for example Albert Fried, The Rise and Fall of the Jewish Gangster in America (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993); Jenna Weissman Joselit, Our Gang: Jewish Crime and the New York Jewish Community, 1900-1940 (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1983); Stephen Birmingham, The Rest of Us: The Rise of America’s Eastern European Jews (New York: Syracuse University Press, 1999); David Pietrusza, Rothstein: The Life, Times, and Murder of the Criminal Genius Who Fixed the 1919 World Series (New York: Basic Books, 2011); Robert A. Rockaway, But He Was Good to His Mother: The Lives and Crimes of Jewish Gangsters(Jerusalem and New York: Gefen Publishing House, 2000).

BIOGRAPHY

Jonas E. Alexis

Jonas E. Alexis has degrees in mathematics and philosophy. He studied education at the graduate level. His main interests include U.S. foreign policy, history of Israel/Palestine conflict, and the history of ideas. He is the author of the new book Zionism vs. the West: How Talmudic Ideology is Undermining Western Culture. He is currently working on a book tentatively titled, Kevin MacDonald’s Abject Failure: A Philosophical and Moral Critique of Evolutionary Psychology, Sociobiology, and White Identity. He teaches mathematics in South Korea.

Logoswars1@gmail.com


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!

Tuesday, 16 February 2021

Facebook Hires NATO Press Officer Ben Nimmo as Intelligence Chief

 By Alan Macleod

Source

Ben Nimmo

Ben Nimmo, a former NATO press officer and current senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, has announced Facebook has hired him to “lead global threat intelligence strategy against influence operations” and “emerging threats.” Nimmo specifically named Russia, Iran and China as potential dangers to the platform.

His announcement was greeted with joy by several NATO officials but was not met with such enthusiasm by others. “More censorship on the way as the former NATO press officer turned Pentagon-funded ‘researcher’ who labeled real people as Russian bots and peddled disinformation to link Jeremy Corbyn to Russian active measures moves to big tech,” responded investigative journalist Max Blumenthal.

Nimmo’s questionable past certainly raises questions over whether such an official having a substantial say in what 2.8 billion Facebook users worldwide see in their feeds is such a positive step for the free and open exchange of information.

“Disinformation agents”

For example, in 2019, U.K. Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn revealed secret Conservative Party documents showing negotiations the Tory government had with the U.S. over the privatization of the National Health Service (NHS). With just days to go before the U.K. general election, the scandal could have toppled the government and brought into power the most radical antiwar, anti-establishment government in the country’s history. Corporate media went into overdrive to spin the news, and Nimmo was a key part of this, immediately announcing, without evidence, that the documents “closely resemble…a known Russian operation.” His supposedly expert conjecture allowed the story to become “Corbyn’s links to Russia” rather than “Tories privatizing the NHS in secret.” Nimmo’s work helped the Conservatives to an election victory and consigned Corbyn to the scrapheap.

This was much to the relief of Nimmo’s Atlantic Council, who had branded Corbyn the “Kremlin’s Trojan Horse” — someone pushing Moscow’s agenda abroad. A British Army general was of a similar opinion, claiming that if Corbyn were to win the election, the military would respond. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo also said that the U.S. government was “doing its best” to prevent a radical leftist from winning power in the U.K.

Nimmo has been extremely liberal with whom he labels Russian disinformation agents. In 2018, his research identified one Twitter user, @Ian56789, as a “Kremlin troll.” In reality, the user, Ian Shilling, was a British pensioner, as Sky News was easily able to confirm, interviewing him on air and asking him the patently absurd question if he was actually a Russian bot or not. Despite clearly being a flesh and blood human, Shilling’s account was later deleted anyway.

In the past, Nimmo has also insisted that Ruslana Boshirova was an influential Russian bot. In reality, she is an internationally known concert pianist, as one Google search would have shown. This sort of behavior does not augur well for those critical of Western foreign policy, who have faced constant harassment, suspension, or outright bans from social media.

Pro-war putsch

The Atlantic Council began as an offshoot of NATO itself and maintains extremely close connections to the military alliance. It continues to receive major funding from Western governments and weapons contractors, and its board of directors is filled to the brim with senior American statespersons, such as Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, and Henry Kissinger. Also appearing on the board are no fewer than seven former CIA directors and a number of top military generals, such as Jim “Mad Dog” Mattis, Wesley Clark, and David Petraeus.

In recent years, the council’s employees have penetrated deep into big tech and social media organizations. In 2018, it announced it had partnered with Facebook to aid in the curation of Facebook news feeds of users worldwide, giving it considerable power over what sort of views to highlight and which to demote. One year previously, Jessica Ashooh left the position of the council’s Deputy Director of Middle Eastern Strategy to take the position of Director of Policy at Reddit, the eighth-most visited website in the United States. However, as with many intelligence agencies, it is unclear whether one truly “leaves” the Atlantic Council.

It is not just Russia that is in NATO’s crosshairs. Last week, the Atlantic Council published an anonymous, 26,000-word report stating that their goal for China was regime change and advising President Biden to draw a number of “red lines” around it, beyond which the U.S. would respond militarily. Meanwhile, the head of STRATCOM, Admiral Charles A. Richard, wrote that the U.S. must prepare for a potential nuclear war with Beijing.

Greater control

The military escalation has been mirrored by an intensifying online propaganda war, where the U.S. has attempted to isolate China economically and stop advancing Chinese technologies such as Huawei’s 5G network, mobile phone, and semiconductor manufacturer Xiaomi, and video sharing app TikTok. Nimmo has played his part in ramping up suspicions of nefarious Chinese activity online, claiming the existence of a wide-ranging pro-Beijing bot network encouraging Americans to believe that China has handled the COVID-19 pandemic far better than the United States. That Americans might have come to that conclusion on their own appears not to have been considered.

There is an enormous government effort to convince its population of the existence of (foreign) government efforts to manipulate their opinions online. In a massive case of projection, Western governmental organizations point the finger at their enemies, all the while securing greater access and control over the means of communication themselves, to the point where it is now difficult to distinguish where the deep state ends and the fourth estate begins. Nimmo’s move from NATO to NATO-aligned think tank to Facebook is just another example of this phenomenon. Perhaps the reason Nimmo is not looking for any Western influence operations online is that he is part of one.


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!

Sunday, 17 January 2021

Birth of the Digital Oligarchy: The Trump Ban and the Social Media Ruse

Birth of the Digital Oligarchy: The Trump Ban and the Social Media Ruse

By Raul Diego

Source

The events at Capitol Hill provided the perfect excuse for Twitter and other social media companies to advance the agenda of their benefactors in the permanent government of the United States

On January 6, as the events unfolding at the U.S. Capitol were discussed on Twitter, the barrage of opinions predictably accumulated on one side of the political spectrum. Outrage over what mainstream pundits characterized as the desecration of the symbols of democracy and similar bleeding heart liberal rhetoric was far more prevalent than the opposing camp’s tendency to side with the so-called “insurrectionists” or tweets in support of the made-for-social media putsch.

Evidence of straight forward collusion between elements of law enforcement and the Trump loyalists who stormed the Congressional building began to emerge throughout the evening, giving a measure of credence to the emerging narrative of a purported “coup” attempt by the sitting president. Simultaneously, members of Congress with large followings started calling for impeachment and other retaliatory measures against fellow members of Congress, who seemed to be implicated in the tawdry affair.

On January 6, as the events unfolding at the U.S. Capitol were discussed on Twitter, the barrage of opinions predictably accumulated on one side of the political spectrum. Outrage over what mainstream pundits characterized as the desecration of the symbols of democracy and similar bleeding heart liberal rhetoric was far more prevalent than the opposing camp’s tendency to side with the so-called “insurrectionists” or tweets in support of the made-for-social media putsch.

Evidence of straight forward collusion between elements of law enforcement and the Trump loyalists who stormed the Congressional building began to emerge throughout the evening, giving a measure of credence to the emerging narrative of a purported “coup” attempt by the sitting president. Simultaneously, members of Congress with large followings started calling for impeachment and other retaliatory measures against fellow members of Congress, who seemed to be implicated in the tawdry affair.

Predictably, conservative publications like Fox News decried the measures as a power grab by Big Tech and protestations came as far away from Europe, where German Chancellor, Angela Merkel – whose disdain for Donald Trump has never been a secret – called the decision to deplatform a head of state “problematic,” an opinion shared by France’s Finance Minister Bruno Le Marie, who warned of a “digital oligarchy” usurping the powers of the state.

Missing in the salacious back-and-forth conversation between ideological factions and absent from the argument that they are private corporations, which have the legal authority to ban or deplatform anybody they wish, is the fact that Twitter, Facebook, and all the other major social media platforms are organs of the state to begin with, and that nothing they do falls outside of the ultimate designs of the powers they serve. 

Examples abound of how these platforms regularly engage in cyber reconnaissance missions for American and Atlanticist interests in violation of their own terms of service, such as when NATO commanders made use of coordinates provided by Twitter users in order to select missile strike targets in their war against Libya in 2011. 

Facebook’s recently created oversight board includes Emi Palmor, who was directly responsible for the removal of thousands of Palestinian posts from the social media giant during her tenure as Director of Israel’s Ministry of Justice. She, along with other individuals with clear sympathies to American interests, now sit on an official body tasked with emitting the last word on any disputes regarding issues of deplatforming on the global social network. 

Following you since 1972

In Yasha Levine’s seminal work, “Surveillance Valley,” the military origins of the Internet and the close relationship of social media companies to federal and local law enforcement are made patently clear. Since their creation, Twitter, Facebook, and other Silicon Valley behemoths have worked hand in hand with law enforcement agencies to augment their capacity for mass tracking and surveillance.

From facial recognition technologies to aggregated user post history, these platforms have been a crucial component in the development of the pervasive surveillance state we now live in. In the book’s prologue, Levine details the attempted creation of a citywide police surveillance hub in Oakland, California called the “Domain Awareness Center” (DAC), which drew intense opposition from the local citizenry and privacy advocates who were quick to undress city officials who were trying to hide the proposed center’s insidious links to the NSA, CIA and military contractors.

Among other capabilities, the control hub would be able to “plug in” social media feeds to track individuals or groups that posed any kind of threat to the establishment. While the DAC project was successfully defeated by an engaged public, similar initiatives were quickly implemented throughout law enforcement agencies across the country and continue to be perfected in order to not only track, but infiltrate political groups deemed problematic. 

From the early 1970s, when the Internet’s precursor ARPANET was used to spy on anti-war protestors, the vast machinery that constitutes our present-day technological ecosystem has not deviated from the original intentions of its creators and has reached a level of sophistication most of us can barely comprehend.

The seemingly innocuous ad-targeting algorithms that generate bespoke advertisements based on our surveilled lives via social media conceals a far more sinister architecture of control, which includes direct influence over people’s political opinions through micro-targeted messaging and even more insidious methods that are powerful enough to influence people’s actual behavior.

Amateur honeypots and the victory of the surveillance state 

One of the biggest misconceptions we have about social media is that platforms like Twitter and Facebook represent the voice of the people and that they are the new “public square” where anybody can get on and voice their opinion. While this perception holds some water on the surface, a closer examination reveals that – on the contrary – these platforms are simply propaganda tools brilliantly disguised as vox populi.

According to a Pew Research study from 2019, 80% of all tweets are created by just 10% of Twitter users. Most people who have an account on the ostensibly left-leaning social media platform rarely tweet at all. In addition, a majority of the content is created by accounts with very large followings and, in most cases, verified accounts that mainly represent established mainstream media personalities. 

Given that the politics espoused by this minuscule portion of the social network’s user base are amplified by the platform’s own algorithms, which have been shown to contain biases as all algorithms do, the perception that these platforms represent some kind of public opinion is revealed to be a very dangerous assumption.

A case in point is disturbingly reflected in a meme that ostensibly developed in yet another social media platform and rapidly spread on Twitter as a result of the incident on Capitol Hill. A tweet posted the day after on January 7 claimed that a woman in Washington D.C. was changing her profile preference on the Bumble dating app to “conservative” in order to entrap “insurrectionists” looking to hook up while visiting the nation’s capital by forwarding their photos to the FBI.

The tweet received hundreds of thousands of ‘likes’ and was retweeted thousands of times. The comments expressed overwhelming support for what amounts to an ostensibly spontaneous snitching operation by regular American citizens against other American citizens. In such a case, whether the meme itself is true has no bearing on the fact that Twitter, Facebook and any other platform where it was disseminated has the ultimate effect of normalizing and generating consent for the idea of self-monitoring and bringing the designs of the surveillance state full circle.

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!

Tuesday, 24 November 2020

The Fascist neo-left and the Trump Factor

The Fascist neo-left and the Trump Factor

November 21, 2020

by Ghassan Kadi for the Saker Blog

Nearly three weeks after the American elections, Americans and the world in general, are still none-the-wiser; not knowing who really won and if the votes have all been legitimate or otherwise.

And the man who is supposedly trying to make America respectable again, yes, Joe Biden, started his ‘tenure’ ironically by presenting his own disrespect by breaking the law and declaring himself as ‘president elect’ and establishing an illegal entity in the name of the ‘Office of President-Elect’.

There are serious accusations that allege that dead people have voted, that boxes of late illegal ballots (all voting for Biden) suddenly appeared from no-where, that the Dominion machines have been deliberately rigged in a manner that favoured Biden, that ballot observers from the Trump camp were not allowed to scrutineer, and much more.

Whilst all of the above points are considered allegations from the legal point of view, the Democrat camp should not be concerned at all if it has nothing to hide. If anything, if it is serious about restoring America’s respect in the eyes of the world, it should encourage transparency and investigations that prove without a single speck of doubt that they are all false. But that same camp that refused the legitimate results of a Trump win four years ago and then fabricated stories like Russiagate and others, is now urging the whole world to believe that the alleged Biden win is legitimate and that there was no interference.

Apart from allegations, what each of us knows for fact is that the media, especially social media, especially Facebook and Twitter have been instrumental in restricting and censoring posts and comments that favour Trump. At the same time, they implemented a blackout relating to the serious allegations of corruption about Biden and his family. If this is not interference in the election results, then what is?

Given the reach and power of social media, and given that most people are not interested in fact-finding, Facebook and Twitter have been engaged in a deliberate campaign of choosing what they allowed to be published and preventing others based only and only on their political views vis-à-vis the American elections.

Once the dust settles one way or the other, if there is any justice left in this world, social media personnel who have forged and implemented those policies must face trial.

What is most ironic about this whole new world that is everything but brave, is that the filthy rich and corrupt are cloaking themselves with the attire of the Left. There is really nothing left of the original Left in today’s Left.

Many, if not most of today’s ”Lefties” are inclined towards the current version of the political Left without really discerning that much has changed since the days of Castro and Guevara.

Today’s Left does not represent the working class.

Today’s Left is not concerned with achieving social justice.

Today’s Left is not concerned with ending capitalism and feudalism.

Today’s Neo-Left, is the consortium of globalists who own sweat shops in developing countries. They are the war-mongers, the arms dealers, the foot soldiers of thought police and they insist that your six-year-old children and grandchildren must learn about subjects like gender fluidity instead of learning history.

The devolution of the former political Left has been taking place for at least three decades, since the collapse of the USSR perhaps and the emergence of the so-called ‘New World Order’. But the 2016 Trump election has fast-tracked the process. George Soros who has an axe to grind with Communism became overnight the principle benefactor of most post-USSR Left movements. For better or for worse, it was as if he wanted to make sure that he contained the Left in a manner that deviates it from its original ideology. But he is not alone, and he is probably not doing this only and only because of political conviction. His ‘bigger’ partners, whether he is aware of their presence or not, have got a much bigger fish to fry; the fish of global control.

But is globalism what it appears to mean or is it a new form of hegemony? Let us not get into this herein. This will be the subject of the next article. Enough to say that what seems to surface from the actions and agendas of globalists is that they are adamant about destroying Western values; including democracy.

When my wife and I were in Russia on the 70th Anniversary of Victory over Nazi Germany, we were in total awe watching the Eternal Regiment on Nevski Prospect in St. Petersburg. Men and women proudly, silently and dignifiedly marching carrying photos of family members who perished fighting the Nazi malice. What was most amazing was seeing young boys and girls giving flowers to the elderly as a mark of respect. This is because students in Russia study history. The young generations must never take for granted the privileges they have. If they do not understand and respect the sacrifices of their forebears, they will never be able to realize what their own obligations are for today and the future. Many Americans do not know what the 4th of July stands for any more than they know how many States there are in the Union. Children growing up in the West have no idea, no idea at all, how and why they live in affluent countries with public services and government-financed welfare.

And when the million man/woman march was over many hours after it started, we could not see a single empty drink can dumped on the street, not even cigarette butts. And then we remembered that a few days earlier when we were in Moscow admiring among other things, the subway/metro stations, we did not witness any evidence of vandalism or graffiti either on the carriages or in the stations.

A far cry from what we see in the West, because to be proud of who one is has become taboo in the West; courtesy the neo-Left and their henchmen.

Personally, I used to feel concerned of what the armed Right-wing Evangelicals might do if they have it their way. But despite their heavy public display of weapons, I didn’t see any evidence to show that they have taken to the streets for the purpose destroying shops and looting. In saying this, and I am not saying that the pro-Trump militias are incapable of perpetrating organized violence, but recently thus far they haven’t. If anything, with all the BLM-associated violence and the attacks Trump supporters have recently faced, the armed conservatives have thus far displayed a huge degree of self-control and abidance by the rules of the law. They argue that their presence is to protect private and public property, and evidence seems to stack up in their favour.

On the other hand, and despite the bias of mainstream media, videos have emerged showing BLM supporters not only looting, but also terrorizing those who disagree with them and refuse to put their fist up in show of support.

Today’s Neo-Left activists are the ones using Nazi tactics; not the other way around. They are the controlled opposition and the foot soldiers of the thought-police; and these are undeniable facts. If anything, the Trump factor has enhanced their exposure.

And if you resurrect Guevara and catapult him into today’s political world without giving him a crash refresher course, he would not know which side of the political divide is which. If anything, he may think that it is the other way around.

In the event of a Biden win that Trump’s supporters may see as unfair, they may be driven to become violent, I don’t know. What I do know is that I have seen serious and concerning rowdy violent behaviour from the Left that makes me now feel that I am more fearful of organizations such as Extinction Rebellion than I am from the armed Evangelicals.

When the late and great Martin Luther King Jr. made his historic ‘I have a dream’ speech, he did not dream of a day when angry mobs would use the excuse of human rights in order to loot and pillage, gang attack supporters of their political opponents, and break the law and Constitution.

And when John Lennon sang ‘Give Peace a Chance’ and ‘Imagine’, he was hoping that one day political leaders would take heed and start putting their hearts before what they can achieve militarily.

Among other things, the thing with Trump is that he is/was not a politician. What drove him from being a profiteering tycoon to a man who wants to end American wars in the world is not something I can explain or understand. Clearly though, even if he is merely running America as a corporation, he must realize that it is not in America’s interests to be constantly engaged in expensive wars that do not have any benefit for America itself. If this is pragmatism from a profit-and-loss business perspective, then I don’t have any problems with this. I want to see American troops pulling out of conflict regions in the world. They have no business in Japan, South Korea, Afghanistan, Iraq and my beloved Syria to name a few places.

The thing about Trump is that he is not even a typical die-hard Republican. The archetypal Republicans are not a bunch of ‘nice guys’ either. How can anyone forget the legacy of the GOP? How can we forget George W Bush’s war on Iraq and his lies about the alleged Iraqi WMD’s? And what about his gang of infamous neo-cons; Perle, and Wolfowitz; not to forget Cheney, McCain, and many more from the gung-ho Republican Right that invaded both Afghanistan and Iraq, killed at least a million civilians and only ended up creating more problems than the ones they claimed they needed to resolve?

Whether Trump wins or loses the legal battle against what looks like a huge body of evidence of electoral fraud at different levels, between now and January the 20th 2021, unlike what the social media brainwashers want people to think and believe, he is not a ‘presidential candidate’, he remains to be the President of the United States of America and he remains to be the Commander in Chief.

To this effect, in as much as the POTUS is domestically building up a huge legal case against the alleged win of Biden, he equally seems to be preparing for the worst-case scenario on international matters. He is working on the contingencies of losing by seemingly making serious efforts into ending wars and the presence of American troops overseas. May he be successful doing this if he is true to his word.

But Mr. President, if you really want to clean up the slate as much as possible in case you lose the legal battle against the corrupt who serve the Deep State, you must then remember that partial withdrawals do not end wars. A drawdown is not a withdrawal. Stand by your promise and let history festoon you as the man who ended all of America’s wars overseas. For even if you leave one soldier, yes Mr. President, one single American soldier on the soil of Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, or any other place on earth where his presence is not legitimately requested by the people of that land, then you will be remembered in history as the man who faked withdrawals of American troops; and you despise fake actions Mr. President, don’t you?

Last but not least Mr. President, you must at least stop the oil theft from Syria, repeal the Caesar Act, and pardon Assange.

Assange Mr. President is the victim of your enemies. His ‘crime’ was to expose the dirty works of Hillary. How can you not drop all charges against him?

And Mr. President, should you win the legal battle and prove that your opponents have cheated the public, you MUST then clean up the swamp with an iron fist and a high pressure hose. Zuckerberg, the Clintons, the Bidens, CNN, as well as officials that helped fabricate stories about you. The whole gamut of filthy lying manipulators must face justice and the next four years will be a case of now or never.

The electoral issues are something for the American legal system to decide; provided that the system continues to have the power to reach a decision that is lawful and not dictated by the party machine of the Democrats, their cohorts and henchmen with Facebook, Twitter and Google being on the top of the list.

Martin Luther King Jr. would now be saying I’m having a nightmare, I am having a nightmare because in the name of social justice, in my name, protestors are attacked, shops are looted and elections are getting rigged.

The failings of the Neo-Left do not mean that the neo-Right, Trumpism, is always or even necessarily sometimes right by default. What is pertinent is that the choice between the former and traditional Right and Left has now morphed into a choice of discerning right from wrong, and it is the Neo-Left activists who are behaving like Fascists, courtesy the Trump factor.

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!

Saturday, 15 September 2012

Facebook Censors Nasrallah Birthday Page

Syrian refugees in Lebanon
 By Richard Edmondson


I am no fan of Facebook or Mark Zuckerberg and have never made a secret of that. I don’t have a page on Facebook and try to avoid the place as much as possible. Zuckerberg not only seems to have some questionable ethics, but he is also evidently a big supporter of Israel, so perhaps the news item below is not too surprising.

It seems Facebook doesn’t like Hassan Nasrallah. Pity. The leader of Hezbollah recently celebrated his fifty-second birthday, and some of his many legions of supporters attempted to mark the occasion by setting up a Nasrallah Birthday page on Facebook—only to have the “social networking” site delete the page several hours after it went up. The Zionist media (and basically that’s what Facebook is, just another branch of the Zionist media, with a few variations) should really wake up and get a clue. Nasrallah has become one of the most widely respected leaders in the Muslim world, and not without reason. He has stood up to the US and Israel, which places him in a very small category of leaders, leaders who have earned the respect, not only of their own people but of people all over the world, for an unwillingness to compromise with Western profiteers and extortionists. Hezbollah is the only reason Lebanon retains its sovereignty and has not been turned into a puppet of the US or Israel, and actions like this by Facebook only increase the contempt felt for the West throughout much of the world now. Even though it was only up a few hours, Nasrallah’s page managed to get 7000 fans. This is why I say, the Zionist media should get a clue.

Facebook bans Nasrallah’s birthday
After 7,000 supporters join event in honor of Hezbollah’s chief’s 52nd birthday, social network removes page

By Roi Kais

Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah marked his 52nd birthday last week, and 7,000 Facebook users joined an event opened on the social network in celebration of his special day.

The Facebook event was organized by several of Nasrallah's young fans. According to Lebanese newspaper As-Safir, the page was quickly flooded with greetings in honor of the Hezbollah chief's birthday.

But only several hours after it was launched, the social network removed the event. According to As-Safir, this isn't an unusual move as many pages and accounts of Hezbollah supporters have been closed recently, likely following complaints from elements objecting to the "messages delivered by the resistance".

Complaints from “elements”? Can we not just be honest and say the words “Zionist pressure”? The story goes on to inform us that one of Nasrallah’s supporters wrote, "May you always be the secretary-general who has faith in the land, the honor, the blood and the soul…"—while another posted, “"We were blessed to have been born in an era ruled by Nasrallah."

The above story, by the way, appears on the Israeli website Ynet, which curiously also gives us the following story—oddly enough written by the same reporter. After Israel’s 2006 war in Lebanon, it was not the Lebanese government, but Hezbollah, which provided assistance to those whose homes had been destroyed. Now, not surprisingly, we are seeing the same sort of relief effort again—only this time it is refugees from Syria who are receiving assistance. Furthermore, it appears that Hezbollah, in handing out aid, is making no effort to distinguish between supporters and opponents of the Assad government. The aid campaign is being referred to as “The Islamic resistance’s present to the Syrian nation.”

Hezbollah aids Syrian refugees
Terror group (Resistance group) providing food, housing to displaced Syrians who fled violence to Lebanon…

By Roi Kais

Despite its loyalty to embattled Syrian President Bashar Assad, Iranian-backed Hezbollah has been providing assistance to Syrian refugees who have fled to Lebanon.

The London-based Arabic newspaper Al-Sharq al-Awsat reported this week that a social-service organization operating under the auspices of the Shiite group is granting humanitarian assistance to Syrian refugees…

Social Work Committee member Alhaji Mohammed al-Haj said Hezbollah was assisting our "Syrian brothers as part of the duty to return the favor for what they did for us in the July war (Second Lebanon War) and out of a moral and national obligation of the resistance."

MP Kamel Rifai, a member of Hezbollah's parliamentary bloc, said the Lebanese terror group's (resistance group’s) social-services organization is providing food, medical assistance and housing to more than 1,300 displaced Syrian families.

The story additionally informs us the aid is coming in the form of food and housing and that it is being handed out “regardless of the refugees’ ethnicity or political affiliation, with the understanding that most of the refugees who make it to Baalbek are not opposition members, but people who escaped the death and destruction in Syria.”

Well, about all I can say to that, is that it seems to be pretty much the same principle under which Jesus operated when he fed the poor. We have no record anywhere that he ever made any inquiries as to ethnicity or political affiliation. In other words…if you were hungry, you were fed. Simple as that.

Baalbek, by the way, is in the Bekaa Valley east of the Litani River. The name Bekaa is derived from an ancient Aramaic word, beka, meaning “to weep” or “mourn.”

I also recently came across this Nasrallah quote:

“When Israel threatens to destroy Lebanon, it is our duty to stand in its face and say: This era is over.”



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 this Blog!

Sunday, 29 January 2012

Egyptian Bloggers: The Revolution Has Just Begun



Egyptian blogger and activist Alaa Abdel Fattah speaks during a TV interview at his house in Cairo on 26 December 2011, a day after his release from SCAF custody. (Photo: AFP - Filippo Monteforte)

Published Thursday, January 26, 2012

On the first anniversary of the Egyptian revolution, bloggers who played a key role in sparking the uprising argue that their mission is far from accomplished. The only difference now is that thousands of ordinary citizens have joined them in online activism.

Three days after the outbreak of the revolution, the whistle-blowing website WikiLeaks published a cable that was issued by the US Embassy in Cairo in 2009. The cable explained that bloggers played a key role in raising the ceiling of freedom and widening the margin of sexual, political, and religious discussion in Egypt.

Of course, those familiar with the Egyptian situation did not need this cable in order to notice the growing activity of bloggers, whose numbers reached 160,000, according to WikiLeaks. However, the work of bloggers in Egypt began to take a different direction in 2008 with the April 6 strike, after which the April 6 Movement was founded.

Virtual calls for protests and strikes became more frequent, but this opposition to former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak’s regime remained limited to the Internet, until 6 June 2010. On that day, security forces killed a young Egyptian man named Khaled Said after brutally torturing him. The victim’s photo spread everywhere, and activists created a group on Facebook titled “We Are All Khaled Said.”

Months later, the number of members who had joined the group reached over 1 million. This milestone was crossed around the time of the outbreak of the Tunisian revolution and the fall of Zine el Abidine Ben Ali.

Inspired by the Tunisian experience, those furious with the Egyptian regime set a date on Facebook – January 25 – on which they would take to the streets in order to protest police brutality. To their surprise, tens of thousands gathered in Tahrir Square, and millions of Egyptians did the same in different cities. They declared the fall of the fear barrier and raised the slogan of toppling the regime.
The revolution was not a “Facebook revolution” nor were the revolutionaries “twitter kids,” as the regime tried to imply in the first few days. However, there is no doubt that social media websites played a major part in chronicling the revolution, and prior to that, in mobilizing millions to participate in the popular protests.

Behind Every Great Revolution.. is a GREAT WOMAN!‏
In the of span of 20 days, bloggers turned into stars on Arab television channels and were the main source of news as the Mubarak regime imposed a media blackout: Hossam el-Hamalawy, Wael Abbas, Nawara Negm, Amr Ezzat, Alaa Abdel Fattah, and Mohammad Jamal are names directly linked to the revolution. Some of these young activists were even nominated for a Nobel Prize, including Wael Ghonim, Asmaa Mahfouz, and Israa Abdel Fattah.

On the first anniversary of the outbreak of the uprising, these activists look back over the last year with optimism mixed with concern, as Ahmad Wael put it. Wael is the editor-in-chief of Wasla newspaper, which is published by the Arab Network for Human Rights Information.

In an interview with Al-Akhbar, Wael explains that after the revolution, the margin of freedoms in Egypt has decreased due to the many problems that the country is facing.

“Several concerns have emerged, especially among bloggers and intellectuals, due to the rise of Islamic movements to power. But thus far, we have not reached any real confrontation with them,” he says.
Wael points to the important role bloggers played after Mubarak’s fall on 11 February 2011. “The arrest of Alaa Abdel Fattah and Maikel Nabil, regardless of the difference between the two cases, is enough to prove the importance of blogging,” he says.

He refers to another form of indirect censorship imposed by the military council on bloggers: “Dozens of activists on twitter were charged based on what they tweeted. However, they were not tried due to public pressure.”

Wael also says that “electronic committees” – which existed during the rule of the dissolved National Democratic Party – are still working. These committees were responsible for the electronic war against the revolution.

In light of all the challenges activists are facing after the revolution, blogger Mohammad Jamal, who is known as Gemyhood, refuses to limit the blogging movement to activities that took place during and after the revolution. He says that protests began on the Internet in 2005, “but our work snowballed, and the technology became more advanced, so that now every citizen has become a blogger.”

Gemyhood explains that “despite the decline in the importance of personal blogs at the expense of social networking sites, blogging has become big.”

But what about the role of all those activists in the commemoration of the first anniversary of the revolution?

Gemyhood says that the picture is still unclear “and we do not know what we will be confronting.” Nevertheless, it appears that his personal role has become clear: “I will republish the article that I wrote on the eve of 25 January 2011 titled ‘What Are You Going to Do, If They Come for You,’ as a reminder of all our achievements over the past year.”

It seems that Mubarak’s fall and fresh parliamentary elections are not enough to satisfy a large section of the Egyptian population. For instance, blogger Amr Ezzat refuses to classify the actions of bloggers as “pre-revolution and post-revolution actions...the revolution is still ongoing and we have a lot left to accomplish.”

Ezzat believes that the role of bloggers “will continue, especially since some topics are not reported in the state media. Moreover, the slow rhythm of the traditional media does not suit the street’s fast pace.” Ezzat concludes that the aura that used to surround bloggers in the past has disappeared. “There is no longer such a thing as ‘a blogger who influences the people,’ for all Egyptians are now bloggers.”

This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.
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 this Blog!

Saturday, 20 August 2011

Events in Syria – Which side are you on? / Les événements en Syrie – Quel camp avez-vous choisi?

By Sara Flounders

When U.S. imperialism engages in an attack on any government or movement, it is essential that the workers’ and progressive political movements for change gather as much information as is available and take a stand.

It is cowardly to be neutral and rank betrayal to stand on the same side as the imperialist octopus, which seeks to dominate the world.

This has been an ABC for workers’ movements through 150 years of class-conscious struggles. It is the very basis of Marxism. It is reflected in union songs that raise the challenge “Which side are you on?” and by labor organizers who explain again and again: “An injury to one is an injury to all.”

A social explosion is shaking the Arab world. U.S. imperialism and all the old regimes tied to it in the region are trying desperately to manage and contain this still unfolding mass upheaval into channels that do not threaten imperialist domination of the region.

The U.S. and its collaborators are also trying to divide and undermine the two wings of the resistance -- the Islamic forces and the secular nationalist forces -- which together overthrew the U.S.-backed dictatorships in Egypt and Tunisia. There is now a concerted U.S. effort to turn these same political forces against two regimes in the region that have opposed U.S. domination in the past -- Libya and Syria.

Both Libya and Syria have their own development problems, which are exacerbated by the general global capitalist crisis and decades of compromise imposed on them as they tried to survive in a hostile environment of unrelenting attacks -- political, sometimes military and including economic sanctions.

The U.S./NATO bombing of Libya has clarified where imperialism stands regarding that country. The transnational exploiters are determined to totally seize hold of the richest oil reserves in Africa and cut off the billions of dollars that Libya was contributing toward the development of much poorer African countries.

Syria is also targeted by imperialism -- because of its heroic defense of Palestinian resistance over decades and its refusal to recognize the Zionist occupation. Syria’s assistance to Hezbollah in their struggle to end the Israeli occupation of Lebanon and their strategic alliance with Iran cannot be forgotten.

Even if a great deal of Syria’s internal situation is difficult to understand, it is important to note that in this unfolding struggle clear statements of support for the Syrian government and against U.S. destabilization efforts have come from Hugo Chávez in Venezuela, Hezbollah Secretary General Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah in Lebanon and several exiled leaders of Hamas, the Palestinian organization that was elected by the people of Gaza.
These political leaders have experienced first-hand U.S. destabilization campaigns that used corporate media fabrications, externally financed opposition groups, targeted assassinations, special ops sabotage and well-trained Internet operatives.

On the side of the supposedly “democratic opposition” are such reactionaries as Sen. Joseph Lieberman, chair of the powerful Senate Homeland Security Committee, who called on the U.S. to bomb Syria next, after Libya. Outspoken supporters of the opposition in Syria include James Woolsey, former CIA Director and advisor to Senator John McCain’s presidential campaign.

Wikileaks exposes U.S. role

An article entitled “U.S. secretly backed Syrian opposition groups” by Craig Whitlock (Washington Post, April 18) described in great detail the information contained in U.S. diplomatic cables that Wikileaks had sent to news agencies around the world and posted on its web site. The article summarizes what these State Department cables reveal about the secret funding of Syrian political opposition groups, including the beaming of anti-government programming into the country via satellite television.

The article describes the U.S.-funded efforts as part of a “long-standing campaign to overthrow the country’s autocratic leader, Bashar al-Assad,” which began under President George W. Bush and continued under President Barack Obama, even though Obama claimed to be rebuilding relations with Syria and posted an ambassador to Damascus for the first time in six years.

According to an April 2009 cable signed by the top-ranking U.S. diplomat in Damascus at the time,
Syrian authorities “would undoubtedly view any U.S. funds going to illegal political groups as tantamount to supporting regime change.” The Washington Post article describes in some detail the links between the U.S.-funded opposition Barada TV and the role of Malik al-Abdeh, who is on its board and distributes videos and protest updates. Al-Abdeh is also on the board of the Movement for Justice and Democracy, which his brother, Anas Al-Abdeh, chairs. The secret cables “report persistent fears among U.S. diplomats that Syrian state security agents had uncovered the money trail from Washington.”

Role of Al Jazeera

Perhaps the most revealing challenge to and exposé of the destabilization campaign in Syria came with the resignation of Ghassan Ben Jeddo, the best-known journalist with Al Jazeera’s television news programs and chief of its Beirut bureau. Ben Jeddo resigned in protest of Al Jazeera’s biased coverage, especially noting a “smear campaign against the Syrian government” that has turned Al Jazeera into a “propaganda outlet.”
Al Jazeera favorably covered the unstoppable mass upsurge of millions in Egypt and Tunisia. However, this satellite news channel has also extensively reported every claim and political charge, regardless of how unsubstantiated, made by the political opposition in both Syria and Libya. It became the strongest voice in the region, watched by millions of viewers, to call for U.S. “humanitarian” intervention, no-fly zones and bombing of Libya. So it is important to understand the position of Al Jazeera as a news corporation, especially when it claims to speak for the oppressed.

Al Jazeera, which is based in Qatar, never reports that 94 percent of the work force in Qatar is made up of immigrants who have absolutely no rights at all and exist in conditions of near slavery. The brutal repression of the mass movement in the absolute monarchy of Bahrain, which is just next door to Qatar and is now occupied by Saudi troops, also receives little coverage on Al Jazeera.

Is this censorship because Al Jazeera TV News is funded by the absolute monarch of Qatar, the Emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani?

It is especially important to note that Al Jazeera never mentions the huge U.S. Central Command military air base right there in Qatar. Drones on secret missions throughout the region regularly take off from this base. Qatar has also sent planes to participate in the U.S./NATO bombing of Libya.

Qatar works closely with the U.S. State Department in supporting U.S. intervention in the area. Qatar was one of the first Arab states, and the first among the Gulf States, to establish relations with Israel. During the 2009 Israeli bombardment of Gaza, it canceled these relations but has since offered to renew them.

Facebook and counter-revolution
The CIA and National Endowment for Democracy have become expert at utilizing a barrage of social media such as Facebook, Twitter and Youtube to overwhelm targeted governments with millions of fabricated messages, wild rumors and images.

Fabricated alerts about struggles and splits among rival factions in Syria’s military leading to resignations turned out to be false. For example, Major Gen. al-Rifai (Ret.) denied as baseless news broadcasts over satellite television that he was leading a split in the military. He added that he had retired 10 years ago.

Izzat al-Rashek of the Hamas Politburo and Ali Baraka, Hamas representative in Lebanon, denied published claims that the leadership of this Palestinian resistance organization was relocating to Qatar from Damascus. Ali Baraka explained that this was a U.S. fabrication to pressure Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah and obstruct Palestinian reconciliation while raising conflict between resistance movements and Syria.

The Syrian government has charged that snipers fired into demonstrations, shooting army and police in an effort to have police open fire on demonstrators.
Rumors, anonymous Internet postings and satellite television reports aimed at heightening sectarian differences are part of the destabilization campaign.

Dual character of Syria

It is not difficult to see why U.S. imperialism and its pawns in the region, including Israel and the corrupt dependent monarchies of Jordan, Qatar, United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, would want to see “regime change’ in Syria.

Syria is one of the few Arab states that have no relations with Israel. Several Palestinian resistance organizations have offices-in-exile in Syria, including Hamas. Syria is allied closely with Iran and with Lebanon.

Syria today is not socialist nor a revolutionary country. Capitalism with its resulting inequality has not been overturned. There is a capitalist class in Syria; many within it have benefited from “reforms” that sold formerly state-owned industries to private capital.
However, the Syrian state represents contradictory forces. It has been a bulwark to protect the gains won in the anti-colonial struggles and upheavals by the Arab masses in 1960s and 1970s. During that period many important social gains were made, major industries and resources that had belonged to foreign capital were nationalized, and big advances were made in guaranteed health care, living standards and education.

Syria under the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party is fiercely secular. It has maintained religious freedom for all while allowing no one religious grouping to dominate or be promoted by the state.

But the regime in Syria has also harshly repressed efforts of mass movements based in Lebanon and Syria that wanted to take the struggle further. It has defended its repression of past movements by pointing to its precarious position right next to Israel, the impact of two Israeli wars in 1967 and 1973, and the resulting Israeli occupation and annexation of the important Golan Heights region of Syria for 44 years.

Years of U.S. sanctions and past destabilization efforts have also had a cumulative effect. The state apparatus, ever fearful of continuing outside intervention, has become fearful of change.

It is essential to recognize this dual character and not apologize for or ignore all the problems that flow from it.
Syria has had the added burden of providing for more than 500,000 Palestinian refugees and their descendants for the past 63 years. Their conditions are better than in any surrounding countries because, unlike in Lebanon and Jordan, healthcare, education and housing are accessible to Palestinians in Syria.

Impact of Iraq war

The massive U.S. invasion and destruction of neighboring Iraq, the Bush-Blair discussion of a similar attack on Syria in 2003, and the harsh new sanctions on Syria have added intense pressure.

But the most dislocating factor is never discussed in the corporate media: More than 1,500,000 Iraqis have flooded into Syria to escape the last eight years of U.S. occupation.

This was a huge influx for a country with a population in 2006 of 18 million. According to a 2007 report by the office of the U.S. High Commissioner for Refugees, the arrival of 2,000 desperate Iraqis per day had an extreme impact on all facets of life in Syria, particularly on the services offered by the state to all its citizens and all refugees. Syria has the highest level of civic and social rights for refugees in the region. Other surrounding countries require a minimum bank balance and ban destitute refugees.

The unexpected arrival of these Iraqi refugees has had a dramatic impact on the infrastructure, on guaranteed free elementary and high schools, on free healthcare, on housing availability and other areas of the economy. It has led to a rise in costs across the board. The prices of foodstuffs and basic goods have gone up by 30 percent, property prices by 40 percent and housing rentals by 150 percent.

Iraqi refugees also benefited from Syrian state subsidies in gasoline, food, water and other essential goods provided to everyone. Such a large mass of unemployed people led to the lowering of wages and increased competition for jobs. The impact of the global economic downturn during this difficult period added to the problems. (Middle East Institute, Dec. 10, 2010, report on Refugee Cooperation)

The U.S. created the refugee crisis, which left more than 25 percent of the Iraqi population displaced by sectarian violence. Yet it accepts the lowest number of refugees and has donated less than the cost of one day of the war in Iraq toward U.N. relief costs. U.S. sanctions on Syria have increased the economic dislocations.

All this has increased the awareness of the Syrian government and people about the dangers of U.S. occupation and the internal destabilization and bloodbath that can come with U.S.-instigated sectarian violence.

Washington claims it is worried about instability in Syria. But U.S. imperialism as a system is driven to create instability. The overwhelming dominance and power of military and oil corporations in the U.S. economy and the enormous profits of military contracts endlessly reinforce the drive to seek military solutions.

Every statement made by the Syrian government has recognized the importance of making internal reforms while maintaining national unity in an extremely diverse country that has historic differences in religion, tribes and regions and now contains almost 2 million refugees.

The diverse nationalities, religions and cultural groupings in Syria have every right to be part of this process. But what they need most is an end to constant, unrelenting U.S. intervention.

U.S. hands off!


12 mai 2011

Quand l’impérialisme américain s’engage dans une agression contre l’un ou l’autre gouvernement ou mouvement, il est essentiel que les mouvements ouvriers et les mouvements politiques progressistes en faveur du changement puissent collecter le maximum d’informations disponibles et prendre position.

Il est lâche de rester neutre et c’est une trahison à l’égard de sa classe que de se ranger dans le même camp que celui de la pieuvre impérialiste qui cherche à dominer le monde.

C’est le b a ba des mouvements ouvriers depuis un siècle et demi de lutte des classes. C’est la base même du marxisme. Cela se retrouve dans les chants syndicaux qui posent la question : « Which side are you on ? » (De quel côté êtes-vous ?) et chez les organisateurs ouvriers qui ne cessent de répéter « En blesser un, c’est les blesser tous. »

Une explosion sociale ébranle le monde arabe. L’impérialisme américain et tous les anciens régimes qui lui sont liés dans la région tentent désespérément de gérer et de contenir ce soulèvement de masse incessant dans des voies qui ne mettent pas en péril la domination impérialiste sur le Proche et Moyen-Orient.

Les États-Unis et leurs collaborateurs essaient également de diviser et de saper les deux ailes de la résistance – les forces islamiques et les forces nationalistes laïques – qui, ensemble, ont renversé les dictatures soutenues par les États-Unis en Égypte et en Tunisie. On assiste actuellement à un effort américain concerté en vue de dresser ces mêmes forces politiques contre deux régimes de la région qui, dans le passé, se sont opposés à la domination américaine : en Libye et en Syrie.

Ces derniers pays ont tous deux leurs propres problèmes de développement, lesquels sont exacerbés par la crise capitaliste mondiale en général et par des décennies de compromis qu’on leur a imposés du fait qu’ils tentaient de survivre dans un environnement hostile d’attaques incessantes – politiques et parfois militaires, le tout comprenant également des sanctions économiques.

Les bombardements de la Libye des œuvres des États-Unis et de l’Otan ont clairement montré où en est l’impérialisme vis-à-vis de ce pays. Les exploiteurs transnationaux sont bien décidés à s’emparer totalement des réserves pétrolières les plus riches de l’Afrique et de mettre un terme au flux de milliards de dollars par lequel la Libye contribuait au développement de pays africains beaucoup plus pauvres.

La Syrie est également visée par l’impérialisme – en raison de sa défense héroïque de la résistance palestinienne des décennies durant et de son refus de reconnaître l’occupation sioniste. L’aide de la Syrie au Hezbollah dans sa lutte pour mettre un terme à l’occupation israélienne du Liban et dans son alliance stratégique avec l’Iran ne peut être oubliée non plus.

Même si une grande partie de la situation interne de la Syrie est malaisée à comprendre, il convient de faire remarquer que, dans la lutte qui se déroule actuellement, des déclarations claires de soutien au gouvernement syrien et d’hostilité aux efforts américains de stabilisation ont été prononcées par Hugo Chávez au Venezuela, par le secrétaire général du Hezbollah, Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah, au Liban et par plusieurs dirigeants en exil du Hamas, l’organisation Palestinienne élue par les habitants de Gaza.

Ces dirigeants politiques ont vécu aux premières loges les campagnes américaines de déstabilisation, qui recouraient à l’invention de mythes par les médias traditionnels, à des groupes d’opposition financés de l’extérieur, à des assassinats bien ciblés, à des opérations spéciales de sabotage et se servaient d’agents bien entraînés travaillant sur Internet.

Du côté de ce qui est censé être « l’opposition démocratique », on trouve des réactionnaires comme le sénateur Joseph Lieberman, président de la puissante Commission sénatoriale pour la sécurité intérieure, qui a lancé un appel pour que les États-Unis bombardent la Syrie, après la Libye. Parmi les partisans déclarés de l’opposition en Syrie, on trouve également James Woolsey, ancien directeur de la CIA et conseiller de la campagne électorale du sénateur John McCain.

Wikileaks dénonce le rôle des États-Unis
Un article intitulé « Les États-Unis ont soutenu secrètement les groupes d’opposition syriens » et rédigé par Craig Whitlock (Washington Post, 18 avril) décrivait par le menu les informations contenues dans les câbles diplomatiques américains que Wikileaks avait adressés aux agences d’information du monde entier et publiés sur son site Internet.
L’article résume ce que ces câbles du ministère américain des Affaires étrangères révèlent à propos du financement secret des groupes syriens d’opposition politique, y compris la transmission dans le pays d’émissions antigouvernementales et ce, via la télévision par satellite.

L’article décrit les efforts financés par les États-Unis comme faisant partie d’une « campagne de longue haleine visant à renverser le dirigeant autocratique du pays, Bashar al-Assad », qui a fait ses débuts sous le président George W. Bush et a poursuivi sa carrière sous le président Barack Obama, même si ce dernier a prétendu qu’il reconstruisait les relations avec la Syrie et qu’il a installé un ambassadeur en Syrie pour la première fois depuis six ans.

Selon un câble d’avril 2009 signé par le diplomate le plus élevé en grade à Damas à l’époque, les autorités syriennes « considéraient sans aucun doute tout financement de groupes politiques illégaux comme équivalant à appuyer un changement de régime ».

L’article du Washington Post décrit plus ou moins en détail les liens entre la chaîne de TV de l’opposition Barada, financée par les États-Unis, et le rôle de Malik al-Abdeh, qui fait partie de son conseil d’administration et diffuse des vidéos de protestation. Al-Abdeh fait également partie de la direction du Mouvement pour la justice et la démocratie, présidé par son propre frère, Anas Al-Abdeh.

Les câbles secrets « font état de craintes persistantes, parmi les diplomates américains, que les agents de la sécurité d’État syrienne n’aient découvert que la piste de l’argent remontait jusqu’à Washington ».

Le rôle d’Al Jazeera

Peut-être le défi de la campagne de déstabilisation en Syrie, ainsi que sa dénonciation, sont-ils venus avec la démission de Ghassan Ben Jeddo, le journaliste bien connu des nouvelles émissions de télévision d’Al Jazeera et le responsable de l’agence d’Al Jazeera à Beyrouth. Ben Jeddo a démissionné pour protester contre la partialité d’Al Jazeera, mettant tout spécialement en exergue une « campagne de diffamation contre le gouvernement syrien » qui a transformé la chaîne de TV en « vulgaire organe de propagande ».

Al Jazeera a couvert favorablement l’incontrôlable soulèvement de masse de millions de personnes en Égypte et en Tunisie. Cependant, cette chaîne d’information par satellite a également fait état par le détail de toute revendication et accusation politique, sans égard pour la façon dont elles pouvaient n’être pas fondées, qui ont été exprimées par l’opposition politique, tant en Syrie qu’en Libye.

Al Jazeera est devenue la voix la plus forte de la région – elle est captée par des millions de spectateurs – pour réclamer l’intervention « humanitaire » des États-Unis, des zones d’exclusion de vol et le bombardement de la Libye. Ainsi donc, il est important de bien comprendre la position d’Al Jazeera en tant que société d’information, et tout particulièrement lorsqu’elle prétend s’exprimer en faveur des opprimés.

Al Jazeera, dont le siège est au Qatar, ne fait jamais état du fait que 94 pour 100 du travail au Qatar est effectué par des immigrés qui n’ont absolument aucun droit et qui survivent dans des conditions proches de l’esclavage. La répression brutale du mouvement de masse dans le royaume à monarchie absolutiste de Bahrein, voisin immédiat du Qatar et actuellement occupé par les troupes saoudiennes, ne reçoit que peu de couverture non plus de la part d’Al Jazeera.

Cette censure est-elle due au fait qu’Al Jazeera TV News a été fondé par le monarque absolu du Qatar, l’émir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani ?

Il est particulièrement important de faire remarquer qu’Al Jazeera ne mentionne jamais l’énorme base aérienne militaire du Commandement central américain, installé au Qatar précisément. Des drones en mission secrète dans la région décollent régulièrement de cette base. Le Qatar a également envoyé des avions pour participer aux bombardements en Libye des États-Unis et de l’Otan.

Le Qatar travaille en étroite collaboration avec le ministère américain des Affaires étrangères pour appuyer à fond l’intervention des États-Unis dans la région. Le Qatar a été l’un des premiers États arabes, et le premier des États du Golfe, à établir des relations avec israël. Lors des bombardements de Gaza par Israël, en 2009, il a suspendu ces relations mais, depuis, a proposé de les renouer.

Facebook et la contre-révolution
La CIA et le NED (National Endowment for Democracy – Fondation nationale en faveur de la démocratie) sont devenus des experts dans l’utilisation des barrages des médias sociaux tels que Facebook, Twitter et Youtube pour submerger les gouvernements visés de millions de messages fabriqués, de rumeurs et d’images incontrôlées.

Les alertes fabriquées sur les luttes et les scissions entre les factions rivales de l’armée syrienne, lesquelles auraient abouti à des démissions, étaient fausses. Par exemple, le général de division al-Rifai (retraité) a nié comme dénuées de fondements les informations par TV satellite prétendant qu’il dirigeait une scission au sein de l’armée. Il a ajouté qu’il était retraité depuis dix ans.

Izzat al-Rashek, du Bureau politique du Hamas, et Ali Baraka, représentant du Hamas au Liban, ont infirmé publiquement des allégations prétendant que la direction de cette organisation palestinienne de résistance quittait Damas pour se réinstaller au Qatar. Ali Baraka a expliqué que c’était un bobard monté par les États-Unis pour exercer des pressions sur Mahmoud Abbas, du Fatah, et entraver la réconciliation palestinienne tout en attisant le conflit entre les mouvements de résistance et la Syrie.
Le gouvernement syrien a accusé des snipers d’avoir tiré sur des manifestations, sur l’armée et sur la police dans l’intention de voir la police ouvrir à son tour le feu sur les manifestants.

Les rumeurs, les messages anonymes sur Internet et les rapports émis par TV satellite dans l’intention d’exacerber les divergences sectaires font partie de la campagne de déstabilisation.

Le caractère dual de la Syrie

Il n’est pas difficile de comprendre pourquoi l’impérialisme américain et ses pions dans la région, y compris Israël et les monarchies corrompues et dépendantes que sont la Jordanie, le Qatar, les Émirats arabes unis et l’Arabie saoudite, aimeraient voir un « changement de régime » en Syrie.
La Syrie est l’un des rares pays arabes à n’entretenir aucune relation avec Israël. Plusieurs organisations de résistance palestinienne ont des « bureaux en exil » en Syrie, y compris le Hamas. La Syrie est alliée de façon étroite à l’Iran et au Liban.
La Syrie aujourd’hui n’est ni un pays socialiste, ni un pays révolutionnaire. Le capitalisme - et l’inégalité qui en résulte - n’y a pas été renversé. Il existe une classe capitaliste, en Syrie : nombreux sont ceux qui, en sont sein, ont bénéficié des « réformes » au cours desquelles des industries anciennement aux mains de l’État ont été vendues à des capitaux privés.

Toutefois, l’État syrien représente des forces contradictoires. Le pays a été un bastion de protection des gains obtenus lors des luttes et soulèvements anticoloniaux des masses arabes dans les années 60 et 70. Au cours de cette période, de nombreux gains sociaux importants ont été réalisés, des industries et ressources majeures ayant appartenu au capital étranger ont été nationalisées et d’importants progrès ont été enregistrés dans la garantie des soins de santé, dans le niveau de vie et l’enseignement.

La Syrie sous le parti socialiste arabe Ba’ath est résolument laïque. Elle a maintenu la liberté religieuse pour tous tout en n’autorisant aucun groupement religieux à dominer l’État ou à être promu par ce dernier.

Mais le régime syrien a également réprimé sévèrement les efforts des mouvements de masse basés au Liban et en Syrie et qui voulaient poursuivre la lutte. Il a justifié sa répression des mouvements passés en insistant sur sa position précaire à proximité d’Israël, sur l’impact des deux guerres contre Israël, en 1967 et 1973, et sur l’occupation et l’annexion par Israël de l’importante région syrienne que sont les hauteurs du Golan, et ce, depuis 44 ans.

Les années de sanctions de la part des États-Unis et les efforts de déstabilisation du passé ont également eu un effet cumulatif. L’appareil d’État, craignant depuis longtemps les perpétuelles interventions de l’extérieur, craint désormais le changement.

Il est essentiel de reconnaître ce caractère dual et de ne pas excuser ni d’ignorer tous les problèmes qui en découlent.
La Syrie a assumé le fardeau supplémentaire de nourrir et d’héberger plus de 500.000 réfugiés palestiniens et leurs descendants ces 63 dernières années. Les conditions sont meilleures que dans n’importe quel pays avoisinant parce que, contrairement à ce qui se passe au Liban et en Jordanie, les soins de santé, l’éducation et le logement sont accessibles aux Palestiniens vivant en Syrie.

L’impact de la guerre en Irak

L’invasion et la destruction massive par les États-Unis du pays voisin, l’Irak, la discussion entre Bush et Blair d’une semblable agression contre la Syrie en 2003 et les nouvelles sanctions très dures contre la Syrie ont encore accru l’intensité des pressions.

Mais le facteur le plus destructeur n’a jamais été discuté dans les médias traditionnels : plus de 1.500.000 Irakiens ont afflué en Syrie afin d’échapper à l’occupation américaine de ces huit dernières années.

Ceci a eu une importante influence sur un pays dont la population était de 18 millions d’habitants en 2006. Selon un rapport sorti en 2007 par le bureau du haut commissaire américain pour les Réfugiés, l’arrivée quotidienne de 2000 Irakiens désespérés a eu un impact extrême sur toutes les facettes de la vie en Syrie, particulièrement sur les services proposés par l’État à tous ses citoyens et à tous les réfugiés. La Syrie a le plus haut niveau de droits civiques et sociaux pour les réfugiés, dans toute la région. D’autres pays des alentours exigent un minimum de solvabilité bancaire et expulsent les réfugiés nécessiteux.

L’arrivée inattendue de ces réfugiés irakiens a eu un impact dramatique sur les infrastructures, sur les écoles primaires et supérieures à la gratuité garantie, sur les soins de santé gratuits, sur la disponibilité des logements et sur les autres domaines de l’économie. Elle a provoqué une hausse des prix dans toute l’alimentation. Les prix des denrées alimentaires et des biens de première nécessité ont augmenté de 30 pour 100, les prix des propriétés de 40 pour 100 et les prix des loyers de 150 pour 100.

Les réfugiés irakiens ont également bénéficié de la part de l’État syrien de subsides pour le carburant, la nourriture, l’eau et autres produits essentiels pour tout le monde. Une telle masse de personnes sans emploi a amené une baisse des salaires et a augmenté la concurrence autour des emplois. L’impact du ralentissement économique mondial durant cette période difficile a encore aggravé les problèmes. (Middle East Institute, 10 décembre 2010, rapport sur la Coopération au profit des réfugiés).

Les États-Unis ont créé la crise des réfugiés, qui a amené le déplacement de plus de 25 pour 100 de la population irakienne en raison des violences sectaires. Pourtant, ils acceptent le nombre le plus bas de réfugiés et ils ont contribué aux frais des secours des Nations unies pour une somme moindre que le coût d’un seul jour de guerre en Irak. Les sanctions américaines contre la Syrie ont encore accru la désorganisation économique du pays.

Tout cela a accru la conscience du gouvernement et du peuple de Syrie à propos des dangers de l’occupation américaine et de la déstabilisation interne et du bain de sang qui pourraient venir de la violence sectaire attisée par les États-Unis.

Washington prétend être ennuyé à propos de l’instabilité qui règne en Syrie. Mais l’impérialisme américain en tant que système est amené à créer l’instabilité. La domination et le pouvoir débordants de l’armée et des sociétés pétrolières sur l’économique américaine et les énormes profits résultant des contrats militaires renforcent cette motivation à rechercher des solutions militaires.

Chaque déclaration faite par le gouvernement syrien a reconnu l’importance de réaliser des réformes internes tout en maintenant en place l’unité nationale dans un pays extrêmement diversifié présentant des différences historiques sur le plan de la religion, des tribus et des régions, et qui héberge actuellement près de deux millions de réfugiés.

Les diverses nationalités, religions et groupes culturels en Syrie ont absolument le droit de faire partie de ce processus. Mais ce dont ils ont le plus besoin, c’est que soit mis un terme à l’intervention constante et sans relâche des États-Unis
.
USA, bas les pattes !

Traduction : JMF / Investig'Action
________________________________________________________
"Palestine is the heart of Arab countries" - PalestineFreeVoice
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian