Uprooted Palestinians are at the heart of the conflict in the M.E Palestinians uprooted by force of arms. Yet faced immense difficulties have survived, kept alive their history and culture, passed keys of family homes in occupied Palestine from one generation to the next.
Tunisian President Kais Saied issues new orders, the most important of which is lifting immunity off members of Parliament – he stresses that he is “keen to enforce rule of law.”
Saeed reassures rights and freedoms
Tunisian President Kais Saied issued a presidential order to lift the parliamentary immunity of all members of the People’s Assembly for the duration of the suspension, and assigned the Secretary-General of the House of Representatives to handle the administrative and financial work of the Assembly.
He called on the Tunisian citizens, local and foreign, to be assured of their rights and freedoms because they “are governed by law,” noting that “the state is not a puppet driven by strings, and there are lobbies that move strings behind the curtain.”
The Tunisian president stressed that he “is keen to implement the constitutional text, and no one was arrested or deprived of his rights,” noting that he had taken these exceptional measures “to guarantee rights, freedoms, and the continuity of the state.”
Saied stressed that “there is no room for manipulating the state, dividing it, or exploding it from within,” noting that he derives confidence from “the popular power of attorney that appeared on more than one occasion, as well as on July 25.”
Saied assigned the advisor to the President of the Republic in the National Security Department, Reda Gharslawi, to run the Ministry of Interior.
Gharslawi took the constitutional oath before the Tunisian President to run the Tunisian Ministry of the Interior in accordance with Article 89 of the constitution.
President Saied also called on everyone in Tunisia and abroad to be reassured of their rights and freedoms, asserting that exceptional measures are taken to guarantee rights and freedoms and the continuity of the state.
Saied had earlier called on the Tunisian people to remain calm, and not to be drawn into provocations and rumors, stressing that his actions are consistent with the country’s constitution. This came after he issued a presidential order last Monday that decided to relieve the Prime Minister and the person in charge of managing the Ministry of the Interior, Hisham Al-Mashishi.
Today, Thursday, Al-Mashishi said that he is not denied any of his rights, rejecting rumors that he was beaten or threatened with weapons in the Carthage Palace.
The Head of the Tunisian Ennahda Movement, Rachid Ghannouchi, called earlier today for a national discussion in the country, expressing his party’s readiness for “any concessions in order to restore democracy.”
In an interview with Agence France-Presse, Ghannouchi called for “a national discussion in order to find out how Tunisia has a government,” noting that since the issuance of presidential decisions, “there has been no conversation with the President of the Republic, nor with his aides.”
In addition, the Assistant Secretary-General of the “Tunisian General Labor Union,” Mohamed Ali Al-Boughdiri, revealed that the union will present to the Presidency of the Republic a map that includes visions related to the political and economic aspects. He called called for an end to the transitional situation as soon as possible.
The President of Tunisia’s Ennhada Party Rached Ghannouchi considered the president’s recent decisions “a coup against the revolution and the constitution.”
The President of Tunisia’s Ennhada Party Rached Ghannouchi
The President of Tunisia’s Ennhada Party Rached Ghannouchi has called for a new national dialogue to restore democracy after Tunisia’s President Kais Saied announced his assumption of executive power and suspended parliament.
In an interview with AFP, Ghannouchi mentioned “if there is no agreement, we will call on the people to defend democracy.”
On July 25, Tunisian President Kais Saied took drastic measures, to dismiss Prime Minister Hichem Mechichi and freeze parliament for 30 days.
Ghannouchi has denounced President Kais Saied’s decisions, branding his suspension of parliament and dismissal of Prime Minister Hichem Mechichi’s government as “a coup”.
“We consider the institutions still standing, and the supporters of the Ennahda and the Tunisian people will defend the revolution,” he told AFP.
Ghannouchi continued, “there has been no contact with the President of the Republic, nor with his aides” since the decisions were issued” adding, “However, we believe that a national dialogue should take place regarding forming a Tunisian government.”
He went on to say, “We are willing to make any concession if democracy is restored…Our clinging to power is less important than the constitution.”
Related Videos
Following the protests in Tunisia on Sunday, Tunisian President Kais Saied suspends the Parliament and dismisses Prime Minister. Where is the situation heading to?
ليس في العالم بلد يكرهه بعض أبنائه ويتمنون الشر له ويجهدون لتسخيف كل إشارة خير لتعميم اليأس، كحال لبنان.
يلفت نظر المتابع للمواقف الإعلامية والسياسية وجود حلف إعلامي حزبي يضم ناشطين في جمعيات تسمّي نفسها بالثورية، مهمته شيطنة كل مبادرة أو خطوة تتصل بمعالجة وجه من وجوه الأزمة الضاغطة على اللبنانيين.
لم تكن مبادرة السيد حسن نصرالله بالدعوة لاستيراد البنزين والمازوت من إيران بالليرة اللبنانيّة الهدف الوحيد الذي تم التصويب عليه من هذا الثلاثيّ، كي نقول إن الخصومة السياسية هي السبب، علماً أن أي لبناني يفترض أن ينظر لكل مبادرة يمكن أن تسهم في حلحلة معاناة اللبنانيين بإيجابية ويناقشها بانفتاح وعقلانية بعيداً عن الكيد والشيطنة لمجرد ان المبادر هو خصم سياسيّ.
عندما عرضت شركات صينية استثمارات في لبنان بمليارات الدولارات، خرج هذا الثلاثي يشكك في مبدأ وجود هذه الشركات، بالرغم من أن لهذه الشركات ممثلين ظهروا على وسائل الإعلام وخبراء شاركوا في اجتماعاتها مع المسؤولين الرسميين، وذلك فقط للقول إن الطريق مسدود أمام أية حلول إلا بالسياق الذي ترسمه السفارات الغربية والخليجية، والتشكيك بالشركات الصينية ومؤهلاتها وقدراتها التمويليّة مثير للسخرية، خصوصاً في مجال المرافئ وتجهيزها وتشغيلها، فالمعدات والشركات الصينية تشغّل كبريات موانئ العالم من دبي الى بوسطن وصولاً الى امستردام.
عندما جاء وفد رسمي روسي يرافق شركات روسية وجال بمشاركة السفير الروسي على عدد من المسؤولين عارضاً مشاريع استثمار في المرفأ والكهرباء ومصافي النفط كرر الثلاثي المعزوفة التشكيكية ذاتها، وقامت قنوات تلفزيونية تنتسب لهذا الثلاثي بالحديث عن أن الشركات الروسية وهمية، بصورة تثير الضحك، فهل يعقل أن السفير الروسي ووزارة خارجية دولة عظمى كروسيا سترسل شركة وهمية الى أي بلد في العالم وبأي هدف، بينما ذهبت قناة تلفزيونية أخرى الى فبركة تقرير يربط بين الشركة وباخرة النترات التي تفجّرت في مرفأ بيروت.
بعد توقيع لبنان على عقد مبادلة النفط بالخدمات بالليرة اللبنانية مع العراق نشطت قوى الثلاثي الشيطاني، ولم يرق لها الأمر فخرج بعضها يتساءل عن ماهية الخدمات التي سيقدّمها لبنان بهدف القول إن العقد لن ينفذ، بينما المنطق أن يتعاضد اللبنانيون لإنجاح هذا العقد الذي يوفر على لبنان نزيف 500 مليون دولار، وبعض آخر وضع أسئلة حول كيفية مبادلة النفط بالفيول وصولاً لتشكيك لا يهدف لتحصين الخطوة بل للطعن بها، وبعض ثالث لم يتورّع عن تصوير العقد بأنه بيع نفايات عراقيّة نفطيّة للبنان بهدف التخلص منها.
ليس في العالم بلد يكرهه بعض أبنائه ويتمنون الشر له ويجهدون لتسخيف كل إشارة خير لتعميم اليأس، كحال لبنان.
From Palestine and South Africa to the Americas and Australia, settler-colonists [have] violently fought to prevent the indigenous people, that were colonised, from fighting for liberation.
This article explores Palestine’s right to self-determination under “Israel’s” illegal occupation. This paper seeks to demonstrate that since the Balfour Declaration that was issued by the British Government in 1917, there have been politically driven strategies deployed to gradually liquidate the Palestinian people. The indigenous people of Palestine have been faced with systematic persecution, apartheid policies and brutal occupation; as such, it is submitted that the Palestinian people must be able to exercise their right to self-determination. I will begin with a discussion on self-determination as a right before outlining the historical background of the “Israel”-Palestine issue, and the political allyship of each entity apart.
Self-Determination in International Law
The principle of self-determination, as it is understood today, evolved from a principle to a right, triggering much debate over the years. It denotes the legal right to peoples to decide their own destiny in the context of international order.[1]There are two aspects to self-determination: internal and external. Internal self-determination is the right of the people to govern themselves without any other interference, this includes the independence to freely choose their own political, economic and social system.[2] External self-determination on the other hand is the right for peoples to determine their own status politically – this allows the establishment of an independent state. After the First World War, and specifically after his famous “Fourteen Points” speech, US President Woodrow Wilson declared that, “Peoples may not be dominated and governed only by their own consent. ‘Self-determination’ is not a mere phrase. It is an imperative principle of action, which statesmen will henceforth ignore at their peril.”[3] The right of self-determination was introduced to the UN Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples in 1960, and subsequently adopted by the UN General Assembly Resolution 1514 in the same year. Additionally, the UN Charter stated that one of the purposes of the United Nations was “respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples.”[4] Upon adopting the Declaration of Decolonisation, the UN underlined the necessity of ending colonialism and through this declared, inter alia, that the right to self-determination was not limited.
It is important to note that the right of self-determination has been cited extensively by the UN assembly, Security Council, and is enshrined in various treaties as well as in decisions made by the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The following excerpt from the aforementioned declaration was subsequently introduced in Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and Article 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) providing a detailed legal definition of self-determination, and this definition is used in various international and national treaties and documents.[5]
“All peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social, and cultural development.”
It is widely accepted that the right of self-determination is applicable to “peoples” in colonial territories, as well as others who do not fall in the category of being colonised or oppressed, the only difference is they have to exercise their rights internally. The right of self-determination is no longer limited to the conventional colonial independence scenarios, such that various ethnic and cultural groups of people within different states effectively rely on the right of self-determination in order to declare their independence.[6] A common argument often presented against the right of self-determination is that the principle of territorial integrity in relation to states is challenged by the principle of self-determination – as it is the will of the people that fundamentally leads to the legitimacy of a state. This indicates that people are not only free to choose their state but also their territorial boundaries. However, in accordance with the Helsinki Final Act of 1975, the United Nations and International Court of Justice demonstrated that there is no contradiction between territorial integrity and the right of self-determination.[7] In that context, it is necessary to add that Koskenneimi argued that “It is doubtful whether the statement of principle was intended to be taken literally… its revolutionary potential was tempered by the Final Acts strong emphasis on territorial integrity.”[8]
In the context of Palestinian self-determination, I submit that “Israel” is a colonial entity that has occupied Palestinian territory; thus, the Palestinian people must be able to exercise this right. It is imperative to note that under international law, only groups categorized as “peoples” have the right to self-determination. The interpretation of “peoples”, however, continues to cause confusion. For example, one may question do all “peoples” need to share one ethnicity or location? If so, where would be the place that gathers people who are a part of multi-ethnic states? With regard to Palestinians, “Israel” has already officially accepted the existence of the “Palestinian peoples” in the Camp David Accords signed with Egypt in the year 1978.[9]
Moreover, it is argued that the right of self-determination can heavily disrupt the essence of peace, such that political communities may resort to force if their demands are not met.[10] Violence was also exhibited in the case of Nigeria after the British authorities recognized three main groups, Igbos, Hausa-Fulani and Yoruba. These groups were legally recognized after seeking independence. These minority groups were effectively excluded from the political sphere and the impact of this devolution caused further ethnic divide and political strife[11]. It is claimed that the violence that erupted between 1965-1967 with Nigerians and Biafrans signified that exercising the right of self-determination leads to political and ethnic turmoil.[12]
In response to this argument, it is contended that despite self-determination struggles usually portrayed as violent and brutal measures, people should still have the freedom to exercise this fundamental right. It is important to understand that colonial settlers aggressively battled to preserve their right of conquest as their own right to self-determination. Till present day, “Israel” has committed war crimes, most notably in Gaza. From Palestine and South Africa to the Americas and Australia, settler-colonists [have] violently fought to prevent the indigenous people, that were colonised, from fighting for liberation, thus the argument that self-determination leads to violence and brutality does not hold much weight in this context considering it is no different to the measures taken by colonising entities.[13] Further to this, in the past, the UN has failed to sustain peace even with states that exercised their right to self-determination, as noticed with the case of Cyprus.[14] Conflicts among states exist irrespective of self-determination, therefore the premise of this argument is incorrect. It may be more suitable to look beyond the UN paradigm if we ought to find lasting solutions to such conflicts.
The Palestine-Israel Conflict
In order to better understand the Israel-Palestine conflict, it is necessary to present the issue within the historical framework of decolonisation struggles. Historically, the world has witnessed decolonisation struggles beginning with violence as a result of a people being denied independence and liberation by the colonising entity. The Palestinian struggle against the Zionist ethnonationalist entity has lasted since the 20th century; the story of Palestine is on political independence, liberation, and putting an end to the apartheid Israeli regime. Whilst Zionists argue that “Israel” has a historic right to Palestinian land, it is imperative to note that had it not been for the involvement of European imperial powers, most notably Britain, there would have not been any creation of “Israel”. In November 1917, Britain the de facto ruler of Palestine, issued the Balfour Declaration. The eighty-word statement by Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour announced support for the establishment of a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine.
In 1922, five years after the Balfour Declaration, the “League of Nations” approved the British Mandate for Palestine and the establishment of a “Jewish homeland.” The decision of the mandate did not consider the will of the Palestinian people or their fundamental rights. Between 1939 and 1949, there were a series of mass protests that took place against Jewish immigration to Palestine as well as armed Zionist groups launching attacks against the indigenous people of Palestine[15]. It is necessary to note that in 1947, the UN adopted Resolution 181, a partition plan for Palestine which was subsequently rejected by the Palestinians. The UN General Assemblies plan was to partition Palestine between the native Palestinians and the Jewish colonial settlers. Throughout 1948-1949, the Palestinians were attacked by Zionist forces. Villages and hotels were bombed near Haifa demonstrating early signs of ethnic cleansing. In April 1948, one month before the State of “Israel” was created, Zionist forces massacred over 100 250 Palestinians in the city of Deir Yassin[16] which is in close proximity to Jerusalem. In December of 1948[17], the UN General Assembly passed Resolution 194 which allowed the right of return of Palestinian refugees. This is a brief explanation of how the state of “Israel” came into existence. In 1974, Yasser Arafat, a Palestinian Political leader stated:
“The [UN] General Assembly partitioned what it had no right to divide – an indivisible homeland.”
“Israel” consistently and tactically made use of Occupation Law to further acquire Palestinian land whilst simultaneously arbitrarily arresting and targeting Palestinian people through the use of apartheid policies. It is argued that “Israel” has used UNSC Resolution 242 to justify and legitimate these actions through “political framework shaped by U.S intervention”[18] as mentioned by Noura Erakat, a human rights attorney and Palestinian activist. Erakat claims that the Occupation Law failing to regulate Palestinian territories effectively, is a result of a political, not a legal contest. It is asserted that “Israel’s” argument that the Palestinian territories are simply under their administration, would hold no weight were it not for the political powers involved in the region.
Furthermore, it is also argued that the United States has favoured “Israel” to such an extent that the US dismisses “Israel’s” violation of international law and allows the state to carry out war crimes without facing any repercussions besides blanket statements. As a result of the Occupation Law that “Israel” takes advantage of, Palestinian territories remain occupied, Palestinian people are systematically being ethnically cleansed[19], and their fundamental rights such as the freedom of movement are infringed.
The Human Rights Watch published a report in April 2021, in which it was made very clear that for the past 54 years, Israeli authorities have transferred Jewish Israeli’s to the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OTP) and “granted them a superior status under the law as compared to Palestinians living in the same territory when it comes to civil rights, access to land, and freedom to move, build, and confer residency rights to close relatives.”[20] In 1970, the General Assembly Resolution 2625 added that “Every state has the duty to respect this right in accordance with the provision of the charter.” Therefore, “Israel” and the international community as a whole should not be denying the Palestinians their right to self-determination. Palestine should be able to manage its own affairs without the interference of external and colonial entities. It is important to understand that the Palestinian people have witnessed the occupation of their lands, forced expulsions to neighbouring lands, military bombardment, and erasure of their identity. As such, the struggle for independence and self-determination should be welcomed by all.
Ali Abunimah, a policy adviser, argues that self-determination “must return to the center of the Palestinian struggle”[21]. To add, Abunimah asserts that the Palestinian right to self-determination can indeed be compatible with the coexistence of Jews. It is claimed that the United States has a long history of deciding the fate of the Palestinian people. For instance, as per the Clinton Parameters, “Israel” would get “Jewish neighbourhoods” and the Palestinians would get “Arab neighbourhoods”. In hindsight, this meant that “Israel” would be allowed to keep the land it has colonised and annexed since 1967, and the people of Palestine would be able to have what is left – which Israeli occupation forces and settlers continue to annex and occupy till today. America’s “peace process” has allowed “Israel” to aggressively maintain their illegal occupation of the Palestinian people.[22]
Professor Noam Chomsky in his book ‘On Palestine’[23] highlights that “Israel’s” policies are directly connected to the Zionist ideology that “both aim to establish a Jewish state by taking over as much of historical Palestine as possible and leaving in it as few Palestinians as possible.” Chomsky, a Jewish historian and activist, further claims that the international community has “never condemned” the Israeli entity which led to the enormous expulsion of 750,000 people and the destruction of hundreds of villages and towns. In addition to this, Chomsky states that “ethnic cleansing has become the DNA of Israeli Jewish society.” Erasing the Palestinian land and people should be enough of a reason for the remaining people of Palestine to exercise their right to self-determination. There are distinct similarities between Palestine and the apartheid in South Africa. The Israeli Knesset authorises legislation that separates, segregates, and discriminates against the Palestinians. A recent report by Human Rights Watch also backs up this claim:
“Israeli authorities methodically privilege Jewish Israelis and discriminate against Palestinians. Laws, policies, and statements by leading Israeli officials make plain that the objective of maintaining Jewish Israeli control over demographics, political power, and land has long guided government policy.”[24]
The United States of America remains a close ally of “Israel”. The U.S provides financial and military support to “Israel” which has been used criticised by several human rights agencies as this funding is used to perpetrate human rights abuses against the Palestinians, particularly in the Gaza Strip. In the Ten-Year Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and “Israel”, $38 billion has been promised to “Israel” from the U.S beginning in 2016.[25] This includes $3.3 billion in Foreign Military financing and $500 million for missile defence programs. Several U.S politicians declare their support for “Israel” and do not shy away from mentioning “Israel has every right to defend itself” despite the fact that it is “Israel” that is committing heinous crimes against the Palestinian people. As mentioned by Chomsky, as a result of political power and close relationship with the U.S, “Israel” has been able to act with impunity since 1948. The U.S also has a history of blocking UN resolutions[26] against “Israel”. According to UN data, since 1972, the US has vetoed at least 53 United Nations Security Council resolutions that are critical of “Israel”[27].
Contrastingly, Palestine does not have such strong allies. Palestinian resistance leaders have announced receiving military and financial support from the Islamic Republic of Iran; however, I submit that as Iran is a sanctioned country, the support offered to Palestine may not be as much as the support offered by the U.S and the UK to “Israel”. The UK has consistently and repeatedly sold arms to “Israel” despite its illegal occupation of Palestine.[28]
In conclusion, the people of Palestine have every right to self-determination, and this can be understood just by investigating the crimes perpetrated by “Israel” against the Palestinians, and the systematic oppression they have faced as a people. Since 1969, the General Assembly has recognised the “inalienable rights of the people of Palestine”[29] In 1974, member states of the UN worked to restore the “Question of Palestine” on the General Assembly agenda, and as such Arab heads of states upheld the “right of the Arab Palestinian people to the return to its homeland and its right to self-determination.”[30] Some weeks later the General Assembly passed resolution 3236 which mentioned “Recognizing that the Palestinian people are entitled to self-determination in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations,” and (a) The right to self-determination without external interference”. It should be noted that the General Assembly condemned governments which failed to recognise the right to self-determination and independence of peoples under “colonial and foreign domination”. For the Palestinians to exercise this right, the Israeli entity must vacate from the occupied areas in order to establish an independent Palestinian state. The United Nations has again affirmed its commitment to the Palestinian right to self-determination. In November 2020, the UN General Assembly endorsed a draft resolution once again recognising “the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, including their right to an independent State of Palestine.”[31] 163 states voted in favour of this resolution, whilst 5 states voted against this, namely: “Israel”, The United States of America, Micronesia, Nauru, and the Marshal Islands. Tomis Kapitan eloquently argues that legitimate residents of Palestine include all Palestinians irrespective of where they are located in Palestine, including Palestinian refugees outside of the country. He states that “expulsion does not remove ones right of residency… Palestinians also retain residency rights in those territories from which they were expelled.”[32] Kapitan asserts that the Palestinian people, as a collective, have the “entitlement to being self-determining in that region [historic Palestine]… not qua Palestinians, but qua legitimate residents. The force used against them has not erased the fact that they are, and are recognized as being; a legitimate unit entitled to participate in their own self-determination.”[33]
Whilst some may argue that the Palestinian right to self-determination is an anti-Semitic stance, it should be duly noted that a Palestinian state would include Jews, Muslims and Christians. It is in fact the Zionist entity that remains anti-Semitic by expulsing and rejecting Jewish natives from enjoying their rights in Occupied Palestine. It should be remembered that the Palestinian right to self-determination is legal and in accordance with international law. For the state of Palestine to be completely independent, colonial settlers will have to return to the European countries they entered from and respect international law. To end, a group of academics including Palestinians and Israelis issued a One State Declaration in 2007, inspired by the South African Freedom Charter and declared: “The historic land of Palestine belongs to all who live in it and to those who were expelled or exiled from it since 1948, regardless of religion, ethnicity, national origin or current citizenship status; Any system of government must be founded on the principle of equality in civil, political, social and cultural rights for all citizens. Power must be exercised with rigorous impartiality on behalf of all people in the diversity of their identities.[34]
[6] Quane, Helen. 1998. “The United Nations and the Evolving Right to Self-Determination.” The International and Comparative Law Quarterly 47(3): 537–572.
[7] Johan D. Van der Vyer, ‘Self-Determination of the Peoples of Quebec under International Law’ [2012] 10(1) Journal of Transnational Law & Policy 38 [8] Martti Koskenniemi, ‘National Self-Determination Today: Problems of Legal Theory and Practice’ [1994] 43(2) The International and Comparative Law Quarterly <https://www.jstor.org/stable/761238> accessed 10 May 2021. [9] J Massad, ‘Against Self-Determination’ [2018] 9(2) Humanity 161-191 [10] M Evangelista, ‘Paradoxes of Violence and Self-determination’ [2015] 14(5) Formerly Global Review of Ethnopolitics <https://doi.org/10.1080/17449057.2015.1051811> accessed 3 May 2021. [11] B Ibhawoh, ‘Testing the Atlantic Charter: linking anticolonialism, self-determination and Universal Human Rights’ [2014] 18(7) International Journal of Human Rights 1-19
People still think that the “green pass” is for a pandemic, or worse, they think it will be over soon and it’s a temporary thing. But it’s here to stay, just like the limitation of human rights, freedom of expression, freedom of education and freedom to movement unless we, the people, try at least to do something about it!
People, especially in Western countries, like many EU countries, still think that the pandemic that we can question will soon be over and we will get back to normal, but that is not the purpose. In the European Union (EU), they are transforming many EU countries into technocraticsurveillance states with no freedom, limitation of human rights and prohibiting of freedom of travel, movement and education. As an excuse they give you a pandemic and try to argue that you contaminate other people. This is ridiculous if, as they claim, 50% are fully vaccinated and many, especially young or healthy people, arenot falling sick or just slightly, like a bad flu. Many sovereign EU countries have a constitution which states that we have, according to the law, all these rights as I mentioned above: freedom of expression, travel and most of all education.
France is the country where once a revolution began in 1789 because the “people” did not accept the curtailment of freedom anymore and there was a lot of poverty at that time, which (poverty) is another sign of the new technocratic state which we are experiencing right now. In France they take away freedom from citizens, as the first state in the EU, and anyone who wants to stay in charge of their own body and don’t want to be vaccinated for whatever reason are now second-class citizens. A comparison can be made to Germany in the Nazi era. The Nazis established, back than, many new anti-Jewish laws. These laws were introduced slowly at first so that the civilian population would not realise the extent of the Nazi party’s anti-Semitism (like now the pandemic). About 2,000 Nazi anti-Jewish decrees passed between 1933-1945. It is uncertain whether Hitler planned to murder the Jews when he came to power. Originally it seems he and his government intended to force them out of Germany but this eventually led to the plan to exterminate the Jews. Many people would say, “oh no, you can’t compare the C-VI to these times”, but yes you can, because, slowly but surely, people who are not vaxxed are being deprived of human rights and for a technocratic regime, depending on Arificial Intelligene (AI) and incompetent leaders, it’s very easy as we saw the last year to make new emergency laws which replace the regular constitution and take away our basic human rights and expression of freedom. French high school students who are not fully vaccinated will have to stay home from the new school year during a new corona outbreak. French Education Minister Jean-Michel Blanquer confirmed this on Wednesday. And France will not bethe only country depriving non-vaccinated children from education! It’s the start of something dark and sinister! In France and Germany, anti-vaxxers are now seen as terrorists.
Vera Sharav
Vera Sharav is a medical activist and a Holocaust survivor. In her testimony before the German Corona Inquiry Committee she draws comparisons to the Nazi regime and explains in the second half of the interview her theory why all this is happening.
After surviving the horrors of the Holocaust and finding refuge in the United States as an 11-year-old girl, she wondered how people could have allowed this to happen. She soon learned that there are many people who profit from wars. She decided not to look the other way if something like this ever happened again. “I have developed an antenna for this.” Also, she cannot understand, being Jewish herself, why the Israeli government has handed over medical data of the entire Israeli population to a company like Pfizer, which has committed countless crimes. This data is extremely valuable to pharmaceutical companies. The fact that they are exempt from liability in the event of vaccine damage should set alarm bells ringing, according to Sharav. She was therefore shocked that Israel introduced a “green pass”, which we will now get in Europe in the form of a digital green certificate, or an App on your mobile phone. This pass stands for apartheid and creates a divided society, says Sharav. Forced vaccination through the back door. “We are talking about a huge experiment here.”
The Pfizer Leaks
As Vera Sharav, the Holocaust survivor and medical activist, pointed out, Pfizer is a criminal organisation and she might be right. In recent days many alternative websites reported that they have read a tweet where a document is taken from a thread byEhden (@eh_den) / Twitter (account suspended). It is a copy of a leaked contract between Pfizer and, surprisingly, the country of Albania, a non-EU country. The contracts will all be the same. Perhaps the most damaging section is this:
“Purchaser acknowledges.the long-term effects and efficacy of the vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the vaccine that are not known.”
Actually they say that it’s all anexperimental vaccine and they take no responsibility if there are deaths or side-effects. Pfizer is the most used vaccine in Israel and as many leaks come out of the State of Israel, many people who got vaccinated are getting the C-VI, and problems with side effects according to the Israeli government not known!
My guess is that it’s not only Pfizer, but also other pharmaceutical companies, like Moderna, Janssen & Janssen and BionTech, who are part of Pfizer. Their vaccines are all experimental (MnRA) and not tested properly, only on 30,000 people, but are now conducted on half of the world population as a medical experiment.
Conclusion
The world is in the grip of a pandemic, which was actually not a real ‘big’ pandemic, and opportunistsand the deep state had it all planned or took advantage of it to carry out their plans, to force the Fourth Industrial revolution upon the entirety of mankind. A problem which existed before, they had no answer on the many unemployed people which would lose their jobs due to AI. A pandemic, with a depopulationplan, would be the answer. I am not suggesting that it’s like that, but all evidence and developments point in that direction.
Also, the geopolitical C-war is part of the plan: the EU and US against China and Russia (and BRICS countries) where the vaccination plays a key role. As I said many times before, it’s has become a politized weapon and as the current developments in all parts of the geopolitical spectrum show, the evidence is clear that we are in for hypersonic weapon race. 5G is necessary for these weapons, and when you consider all this, it’s a sinister world, perhaps it’s the case that the human race is on the brink of extinction and also the deep state, which the Pentagon is part of, will be extinct as well. After all, the ones who invented all these horrors are human themselves. Even if they want to be transhuman like Elon Musk or Klaus Schwab, they are still human and AI can also destroy them as well. It’s a bad nightmare that the human race is facing, but they did it themselves. I am usually not very religious, but it’s said in the Bible that humans will destroy themselves. Let’s hope there will be some human with moral feelings among the ones who are going to destroy us or intend to do so!
Assaulted by cognitive dissonance across the spectrum, the Empire of Chaos now behaves as a manic depressive inmate, rotten to the core – a fate more filled with dread than having to face a revolt of the satrapies.
Only brain dead zombies now believe in its self-billed universal mission as the new Rome and the new Jerusalem. There’s no unifying culture, economy or geography knitting the core together across an “arid, desiccated, political landscape sweltering under the brassy sun of Apollonian ratiocination, devoid of passion, very masculine, and empty of human empathy.”
Clueless Cold Warriors still dream of the days when the Germany-Japan axis was threatening to rule Eurasia and the Commonwealth was biting the dust – thus offering Washington, fearful of being forced into islandization, the once in a lifetime opportunity to profit from WWII to erect itself as Supreme World Paradigm cum savior of the “free world”.
Red Square
Today, it’s not Germany-Japan but the specter of a Russia-China-Germany entente that terrorizes the Hegemon as the Eurasian trio capable of sending American global domination to the dustbin of History.
Enter the American “strategy”. And predictably, it’s a prodigy of narrow mindedness, not even aspiring to the status of – fruitless – exercise in irony or desperation, yielding as it is from the pedestrian Carnegie Endowment, with its HQ in Think Tank Row between Dupont and Thomas Circle along Massachussets Avenue in D.C.
Making U.S. Foreign Policy Work Better for the Middle Class is a sort of bipartisan report guiding the current, bewildered Crash Test Dummy administration. One of the 11 writers involved is none other than National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan. The notion that a global imperial strategy and – in this case – a deeply impoverished and enraged middle class share the same interests does not even qualify as a lousy joke.
With “thinkers” like these, the Hegemon does not even need Eurasian “threats”.
Wanna talk to Mr. Khinzal?
Meanwhile, in a script worthy of Dylan’s Desolation Row rewritten by The Three Stooges, proverbial Atlanticist chihuahuas are raving that the Pentagon ordered the partition of NATO: Western Europe will contain China, and Eastern Europe will contain Russia.
Yet what’s actually happening in those corridors of European power that really matter – no, baby, that ain’t Warsaw – is that not only Berlin and Paris refuse to antagonize Beijing, but mull how to get closer to Moscow without enraging the Hegemon.
So much for microwaved, Kissingerian Divide and Rule. One of the few things the notorious war criminal really got it was when he noted, after the implosion of the USSR, that without Europe “the US would become a distant island in the coastline of Eurasia”: it would dwell “in solitude, a minor status”.
Life is a drag when the (global) free lunch is over and on top of it you need to face not only the emergence of a “peer competitor” in Eurasia (copyright Zbig “Grand Chessboard” Brzezinski) but a comprehensive strategic partnership. You fear that China is eating your lunch – and dinner, and nightcap – but still you need Moscow as the designated enemy of choice, because that’s what legitimizes NATO.
Call The Three Stooges! Let’s send the Europeans to patrol the South China Sea! Let’s get those Baltic nullities plus pathetic Poles to enforce the New Iron Curtain! And let’s deploy Russophobic Britannia Rules the Waves on both fronts!
Chongqing Night
So far, Russia-China had been exhibiting infinite Daoist patience in dealing with those clowns. Not anymore.
The key players in the Heartland have clearly seen through the imperial propaganda fog; it will be a long and winding road, but the horizon will eventually unveil a Germany-Russia-China-Iran alliance rebalancing the global chessboard.
This is the ultimate Imperial Night of the Living Dead nightmare – hence these lowly American emissaries frantically scurrying around multiple latitudes trying to keep the satrapies in line.
Meanwhile, on the other side of the pond, China-Russia build submarines like there’s no tomorrow equipped with state-of-the-art missiles – and Su-57s invite wise guys to a close conversation with a hypersonic Mr. Khinzal.
Sergey Lavrov, like an aristocratic Grand Seigneur, took the trouble of enlightening the clowns with a stark, erudite distinction between rule of law and their self-defined “rules-based international order”.
That’s too much for their collective IQ. Perhaps what they will register is that the Russian-Chinese Treaty of Good-Neighborliness, Friendship, and Cooperation, initially signed on July 16, 2001, has just been extended for five years by Presidents Putin and Xi.
As the Empire of Chaos is incrementally and inexorably expelled from the Heartland, Russia-China is jointly managing Central Asian affairs.
Lavrov detailed how Russia is driving “the Greater Eurasian Partnership, a unifying and integrational outline between the Atlantic and the Pacific Oceans that is as free for the movement of goods, capital, labor and services as possible and which is open to every country of the common continent of Eurasia and the integration unions created here.”
Then there’s the updated Russian National Security Strategy, which clearly outlines that building a partnership with the US and hitting win-win cooperation with the EU is an uphill struggle: “The contradictions between Russia and the West are serious and are hard to solve.” By contrast, strategic cooperation with China and India will be expanded.
A geopolitical earthquake
Yet the defining geopolitical breakthrough in the second year of the Raging Twenties may well be China telling the Empire, “That’s enough”.
It started over two months ago in Anchorage, when the formidable Yang Jiechi made shark fin soup out of the helpless American delegation. The piece de resistance came this week in Tianjin, where Vice Foreign Minister Xie Feng and his boss Wang Yi reduced mediocre imperial bureaucrat Wendy Sherman to stale dumpling status.
This searing analysis by a Chinese think tank reviewed all the key issues. Here are the highlights.
– The Americans wanted to ensure that “guardrails and boundaries” are established to avoid a deterioration of U.S.-China relations in order to “manage” the relationship responsibly. That did not work, because their approach was “terrible”.
– “Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Xie Feng hit the nail on the head when he said that the U.S. “competition, cooperation and confrontation” triad is a “blindfold” to contain and suppress China. Confrontation and containment are essential, cooperation is expedient, and competition is a discourse trap. The U.S. demands cooperation when it is in need of China, but in areas where it thinks it has an advantage, it decouples and cuts off supplies, blocks and sanctions, and is willing to clash and confront China in order to contain it.”
– Xie Feng “also presented two lists to the U.S. side, a list of 16 items requesting the U.S. side to correct its wrong policies and words and deeds toward China, and a list of 10 priority cases of China’s concern (…) if these anti-China issues caused by the U.S. side’s bent are not resolved, what is there to talk about between China and the U.S.?”
– And then, the sorbet to go with the cheesecake: Wang Yi’s three bottom lines to Washington. In a nutshell:
1. “The United States must not challenge, denigrate or even attempt to subvert the socialist road and system with Chinese characteristics. China’s road and system are the choice of history and the choice of the people, and they concern the long-term welfare of 1.4 billion Chinese people and the future destiny of the Chinese nation, which is the core interest that China must adhere to.”
2. “The United States must not try to obstruct or even interrupt China’s development process. The Chinese people certainly have the right to a better life, and China also has the right to modernization, which is not the monopoly of the United States and involves the basic conscience of mankind and international justice. China urges the U.S. side to expeditiously lift all unilateral sanctions, high tariffs, long-arm jurisdiction and the science and technology blockade imposed on China.”
3. “The United States must not infringe on China’s national sovereignty, let alone undermine China’s territorial integrity. The issues related to Xinjiang, Tibet and Hong Kong are never about human rights or democracy, but rather about the major rights and wrongs of fighting against “Xinjiang independence”, “Tibet independence” and “Hong Kong independence”. No country will allow its sovereign security to be compromised. As for the Taiwan issue, it is a top priority (…) If “Taiwan independence” dares to provoke, China has the right to take any means needed to stop it.”
Will the Empire of Chaos register all of the above? Of course not. So the inexorable imperial rot will go on, a tawdry affair carrying no dramatic, aesthetic pathos worthy of a Gotterdammerung, barely eliciting even a glance from the Gods, “where they smile in secret, looking over wasted lands / Blight and famine, plague and earthquake, roaring deeps and fiery sands, / Clanging fights, and flaming towns, and sinking ships, and praying hands”, as Tennyson immortalized it.
Yet what really matters, in our realpolitik realm, is that Beijing doesn’t even care. The point has been made: “The Chinese have long had enough of American arrogance, and the time when the U.S. tried to bully the Chinese is long gone.”
Now that’s the start of a brave new geopolitical world – and a prequel to an imperial requiem. Many a sequel will follow.
As Iran is literally depicted as illegitimate and derogatorily labeled a “regime,” these “experts” can inform their audiences without irony of the rising “menace” of Iran and the growing threat it poses to regional stability.
Under US occupation Afghanistan has become the beating heart of global opium cultivation and distribution, but for Iran haters, just a whiff of unrest anywhere in the country is often enough for them to get practically stoned. BBC Persian becomes embarrassingly euphoric, while Persian television ‘Iran International’ headquartered in London and with ties to Mohammed bin Salman, and VOA Persian begin to hallucinate completely.
Arabic media narratives usually depend on state policy towards Iran. Saudi Arabia’s Al Arabiya news channel is consistent in its hatred and is often more deranged than ‘Iran International,’ while Aljazeera Arabic and English narratives largely sway in harmony with the state of play in Doha’s dealings with Riyadh, Ankara, and Washington.
Western corporate and state-owned media usually, but by no means always, put more effort into appearing balanced and professional than their state backed Persian language Iran bashing counterparts. However, in all these outlets there is a recurring and repetitive theme that can appear credible and even well documented to the uninitiated or the true believers.
Any objective review exposes a certain consistency in “analyses” that many years ago used to surprise me. Since the 1980s, audiences have been constantly told that the Islamic Republic of Iran is an evil, unstable, unpopular, incompetent and a corrupt “regime” that is on the brink of collapse. In over four decades of research and reporting, it has been regularly implied that the day is not far off when the “regime” will finally fall into the dustbin of history.
Some would argue that these “experts” confuse analysis with aspirations and facts with expectations. For them, it seems the ultimate collapse of revolutionary Iran is natural and inevitable, since its ideological foundations, constitution and political structures are not based upon “superior” or “contemporary” western intellectual traditions. These views are constantly reinforced by a small army of Iranian comprador intellectuals and many angry “scholars” affiliated with western academia, think-tanks and media, who reassuringly repeat the favorite talking points of their western overlords. Liberals and “leftists” at academic institutions may fight over Cuba, Venezuela, and Iraq, but when it comes to Iran there is often a loving consensus.
The latent Orientalism of these western analysts and their native informants as well as the Eurocentric worldview imposed upon western institutions and academia, are solid barriers that prevent most from recognizing the often irresolvable paradoxes resulting from such “expert” analyses. Hence, as the Islamic Republic is literally depicted as illegitimate, incapable of self-governance, and derogatorily labeled a “regime,” these “experts” can inform their audiences without irony of the rising “menace” of Iran and the growing threat it poses to regional stability and even the “international community.”
They feel no need to explain how an incompetent and universally reviled “regime” can possibly be such an enormous threat to the existing and well entrenched regional and international order. Either the US-led Western Empire is vastly overrated, or the Iranian “regime” is not quite the regime it is portrayed to be.
Their failure to acknowledge, let alone explain, this contradiction lies in the fact that most are simply blind to its existence. The Orientalist demonization of Iran makes almost all negative attributes seem reasonable and plausible, even though they are often mutually exclusive.
The seemingly always-in-crisis Iran doesn’t even have the luxury of being competently evil or deceiving. We are told that Iranians hate the “regime,” Iraqis despise Iran (no allusion to General Suleimani’s massive funeral processions in Iraq), Afghans are resentful, Lebanese feel subjugated, Syrians are outraged, and Yemenis abused. Nevertheless, it is largely left unexplained how an unpopular and heavily sanctioned Iran can wield such enormous influence and maintain such powerful allies, while its western and regional antagonists have infinitely more wealth and resources at their disposal.
These so called experts and analysts don’t seem to recognize that while these powerful anti-Iranian narratives may have a significant impact on perceptions towards Iran, they definitely do not inspire confidence regarding the stability or legitimacy of the US Empire. Hence, we will continue to be told that the Iranian “regime” is possibly facing imminent collapse, but the real story may actually be that the centuries old domination of the “Free and Civilized world” is closer to imminent collapse.
Kabbalistic Balance
-
Kabbalistic Balance August 6 2026 ___________________________________ More
Vids! +BN Vids Archive! HERE! ___________________________________ Support
The Br...
Report on Beth Israel vigil 07-04-26
-
*1A Rights under combined attack from local government plus media*
Ann Arbor City Council is at it again. Right before the long 4th of July
weekend, they ...
-
Hello all,
It is with great sadness that I share with you the passing of our beloved
sister, Mother, and Grandmother, the individual that you all knew ...
Best Horror Podcast
-
Best Horror Podcast Introduction: Horror podcasts […]
The post Best Horror Podcast appeared first on Copper Shock Horror Podcast.
Ikhras Endorses Muntadhar Al-Zaidi
-
“Oh parties of banditry and sectarianism and corruption, we have come and
our goal is to destroy you.” Ikhras formally endorses Muntadhar al-Zaidi,
Iraqi j...
Prince Charles: Foreign Jews behind bloodshed in ME
-
In May, 2017, British Crown Prince Charles declined an invitation from
Zionist entity’s president Reuven Rivlin‘s to attend the 100th anniversary
of the no...
Palestinian Women – One for All, All for One
-
Honouring All Palestinian Women by Honouring Three: Hanin Zoabi, Ahed
Tamimi, Samah Sabawi Vacy Vlazna “Palestinian women have always stood side
by side ...
US’s Saudi Oil Deal from Win-Win to Mega-Lose
-
By F. William Engdahl Who would’ve thought it would come to this? Certainly
not the Obama Administration, and their brilliant geo-political think-tank
neo-...
-
*Mordechai Vanunu wins human rights prize of Brazilian Press Association *
* http://www.alternativenews.org/english/index.php/features/updates/7038-mordechai...
Abdul Aziz Rantissi:
"My ultimate wish, my God, is to attain martyrdom,"...God granted him his wish on April 17, 2004, at the hands of Israeli assassins.
