Moral Israeli army in the West Bank be like … “No roads for Palestinians”
‘Today is a sad day’: China responds to US vetoing Palestine UN membership
“The application by Palestine for full membership at the UN has been rejected, and the decades-long dream of the Palestinian people ruthlessly dashed,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian said.
On Thursday, the United States thwarted the UN Security Council’s advancement of a Palestinian proposal seeking full member state recognition at the United Nations, halting attempts by Palestinian supporters to garner global backing for the initiative. The resolution received 12 affirmative votes, with the United States dissenting, while Britain and Switzerland abstained.
by John Miles via sputnikglobe
A leaked memo reveals the depth of the controversial newspaper’s anti-Palestinian bias.
A shocking internal style guide from The New York Times was leakedthis week, revealing the depth of the controversial newspaper’s bias regarding the Palestine-Israel conflict.
“I’ve closely monitored the paper’s slanted coverage for more than a decade, and I admit to being stunned by this,” wrote Mondoweiss editor James North. “Arguably the worst example of bias is the Times’s directive that its reports should ‘avoid’ using the phrase ‘occupied territory’ when describing Palestinian land.”
“Israel’s military and police checkpoints and the fact that Israel’s military law is supreme – what is this if not an ‘occupation?’” wrote North of the situation in the occupied West Bank, clarifying that Israel’s years-long blockade of the Gaza Strip has been deemed by international legal experts to constitute an occupation as well.
“Occupied territories is the internationally accepted reference to the space,” noted host Wilmer Leon on Sputnik’s The Critical Hour program Thursday. “I think it’s important for people to also understand that the ability to define is the ability to control.”
“I think that’s very true,” agreed Palestinian activist and author Robert Fantina [author of “Desertion and the American Soldier, 2006, Algora Publishing]. “The New York Times has for years been trying to define the occupation as something else. Sometimes they call it ‘disputed territory’ or other kinds of language… The United Nations has said it’s still considered occupied. So there’s no question about it, the legal term is ‘occupation.’”
UN officials have long criticized Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians, which has led Tel Aviv to frequently criticize the organization, even though the country owes its creation to a 1948 act of the international body. Recently the Israeli government alleged that several members of UNRWA, the UN organization responsible for aid to Palestinian refugees, were involved in Hamas’ October 7 uprising last year.
US intelligence found no evidence for the claim, and it later emerged the Israeli military had tortured UNRWA employees to extract false confessions, waterboarding the aid workers and threatening them with rape and murder. Israeli torture of detainees is reportedly a routine practice as the country holds thousands of Palestinians without charge.
“Even the United States government accepts [Palestine is] occupied, and that’s saying something,” noted Fantina. “So the fact that The New York Times is trying to avoid using ‘occupation’ and deceive its readers is an attempt to control the narrative. It’s about control… and that’s what they want to do, control the narrative in Israel’s favor.”
“There are international laws governing occupation,” he added. “For the occupied, they have the right – the legal right – to resist the occupation in any way at their disposal, including armed struggle. That is specified.”
“Fortunately, people aren’t buying it anymore because of the prevalence of social media and people seeing what’s actually happening. And the prevalence of independent news sources. They’re seeing that, yes, Palestinian people are being massacred in huge numbers – men, women, and children.”
Discussion then turned towards the leak of several US State Department cables that revealed the Biden White House, despite publicly declaring its support for a so-called two-state solution, has undermined efforts towards that end at the United Nations. The leaks revealed Washington was privately lobbying foreign countries to vote against full recognition of Palestine at the international body in order to avoid the embarrassment of a lone veto against the measure.
“[Biden] believes, as a Zionist, in this myth of God-given land to the Jewish people or whatever,” noted Fantina. “Yet then he says he supports a two-state solution, which would deprive the Israelis of a good portion of land. So he can’t be seen as an honest broker between the two.”
“He can’t be seen as anyone with the rights of the Palestinians in his mind. He only cares about the Israelis, and the Palestinians can all be killed as he’s supporting now, as he’s financing. And it doesn’t matter to him as long as Israel gets whatever it wants.”
Despite its constant violation of international law, Israel frequently manages to intimidate its critics into silence through extensive lobbying and influence in Western politics. Jewish scholar Norman Finkelstein documented the settler colonial country’s efforts in a book entitled “The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering.”
“After the Holocaust, Jews can do whatever they want,” claimed former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir, summing up the mindset of Israel’s defenders.
In fact, many Jewish people reject any association with the Zionist cause, decrying the country’s abuses. The Zionist lobby has persecuted Jewish and non-Jewish critics of Israel alike; in 2007 Finkelstein was denied tenure and forced out of his position at DePaul University after a campaign against him by pro-Israel lawyer Alan Dershowitz.
International Man: According to a recent study by Investopedia, the classic middle-class American Dream now costs over $3.4 million.
That’s the estimated lifetime cost of marriage, two children, cars, homes, healthcare, education, and retirement. It’s now entirely out of reach for many Americans.
What do you make of this? How did this happen?
Doug Casey: The fact is, despite the fact that his standard of living has been slipping over the past 50 years, the average American today lives much better and longer than a king during pre-industrial times. There were never any guarantees that Americans would live in the lap of luxury for their entire lives.
We got to this high standard of living for two reasons. One, people tended to produce more than they consumed and saved the difference. And two, technology has been improving at almost the rate of Moore’s law for the last 200 years.
However, there’s no guarantee that either of these fonts of progress will continue, especially since savings are being wiped out by the destruction of the dollar. A lack of savings means there won’t be a capital pool to finance further advances in technology.
But there are other serious things at work, termites eating away at the foundations of civilization. It’s become customary for Americans to think that it’s okay for some people to live their entire lives without producing at all and to live at the expense of others. A lot of the country is on welfare. And many more are buried in consumer debt, which means they’re either living off the capital others have saved in the past, or they’re mortgaging their own futures.
On top of that, since about 1980, the main export of the US hasn’t been Boeings or soybeans; it’s been dollars. Foreigners have accepted those paper dollars in exchange for real wealth. They’re really just another form of debt. At some point—soon—they’ll repatriate them in exchange for titles to land and companies.
Capital is also being destroyed by the constant wars that the US fights against trivial countries on the other side of the world.
The fact is that our institutions, from corporations to academia to government, have become corrupt, ineffectual, and bloated. The Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that, in the physical world, things inevitably degenerate over time. That’s also true in the world of human action. In general, as any institution gets old, it winds down. That’s true of the US, and it’s apparent to everyone—at least anyone outside of the Washington Beltway.
International Man: As the American middle class continues to shrink, it seems the “New American Dream” is to merely get by and make ends meet.
People will have to rent instead of own. They may not be able to afford kids, pets, ribeye steaks, or retirement. They’ll have to take on a lot more debt.
The “New American Dream” looks more like the WEF’s “you’ll own nothing and be happy.”
What’s your take?
Doug Casey: It’s rather shocking that in a traditionally middle-class society like the US, that the “one percenters”—typically those wired to the State and major corporations—now own about one-third of the total wealth.
What’s even more shocking is that the bottom half of society only owns 2% of the country’s wealth. That kind of an imbalance makes for instability. No wonder it’s said that the average guy can’t lay his hands on even $500 cash if there’s an emergency. No wonder a criminal like Klaus Schwab can promote his “You’ll own nothing and be happy” meme and not be hung from a lamp pole— a lot of people now feel they’d be better off in that kind of world.
Increasingly, the wealth of the country is owned by corporations and their top management. It used to be said that “What’s good for General Motors is good for America.” I used to believe that because General Motors actually created cars, and that was good. But we’ve devolved. GM and other major corporations have become defacto arms of the State. Taxes, staggering regulations, subsidies, and bailouts have destroyed free-market capitalism.
The capitalist system in the US is long gone. We’ve devolved into classical Mussolini-style fascism, which is to say, State corporatism, where corporations and the State work hand-in-glove.
It’s euphemistically called a public-private “partnership.” The people in government and the people in top corporate levels scratch each other’s backs and reinforce each other’s positions. They feed each other power and money. This makes for a highly politicized society, where connections, not production, are what count.
For instance, in the last election, $14 billion was spent on campaign spending to get the hoi polloi to vote for one party or another. But only a fifth of that money came from small donors—the rest from the wealthy and corporations. Of course, the rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting poorer as our highly politicized society degenerates.
International Man: Many people look back on how they viewed the future and how it was portrayed in movies. Many thought we would have flying cars by now, among other futuristic luxuries.
Instead, we have a declining standard of living, and people look back on the good old days.
Where do you think this trend is headed?
Doug Casey: We’re heading in the wrong direction at an accelerating rate because there’s been a breakdown of moral fiber in society. People, in general, no longer understand what’s right and what’s wrong—or what’s good and what’s evil. They’re taking less responsibility for their individual lives and what happens around them.
We’ve gone from a high-trust society, where you didn’t need to lock your car or your front door, to a low-trust society, where everybody is constantly observed, and security is of critical importance.
At the same time, the country has generally gone from having low time preferences and being future-oriented to high time preferences; “I want it all, and I want it now.” They’re not as future-oriented as they once were.
Going back to the question of moral fiber breakdown, the economic observer Thorstein Veblen coined the phrase “conspicuous consumption.” People wanted to show off expensive cars and clothes to advertise to other people that they were more successful. But now, because of all the debt in society, anyone can have a nice car. And nobody even cares about nice clothes anymore; everybody wears the equivalent of T-shirts and jeans.
The trend setters have moved from owning and displaying frivolous goods to displaying frivolous ideas—like Wokeism. Everybody is adopting those ideas, to show that they’re hip, in-the-know, and part of the cognoscenti. In the past, adopting the conspicuous consumption lifestyles of their betters would only make them poor. Adopting these degenerate ideas makes them stupid and immoral—which is much worse.
International Man: What advice do you have for struggling middle-class people who are about to be kicked down to the lower class?
Doug Casey: First and most important, don’t go to college unless you need a STEM degree—Science, Technology, Engineering, or Math.
Going to college today does nothing but misallocate four critically important years of your life, permanently indebt you, and corrupt your mind with the idiotic ideas that Marxist professors and administrations cram down students’ throats. Educate yourself. Read constantly.
Next, work to become self-employed, not to “get a job.” You don’t want to rely on a job that somebody else gives you. And save your money—but don’t save in fiat dollars. Save in gold. When you have sufficient savings, learn to speculate and invest.
International Man: As you’ve noted, The Greater Depression is a period in which there will be a significant decline in the general standard of living.
Is there any way to make lemonade out of these lemons?
Doug Casey: We’re well into what I’ve long called The Greater Depression. But I’d point out that most of the real wealth in the world will still exist – it’s just going to be owned by different people.
The opportunity will exist for nimble entrepreneurs and speculators to do well, even as most people’s standard of living drops. But the big question is: For how long will the societal trend that we’re now on continue going down?
When Rome collapsed over a period of several hundred years, living well and peaceably got harder and harder as Europe entered the Dark Ages. Even if you had a lot of money, it really didn’t do you that much good. That’s why it’s important to preserve what’s left of the idea of America.
It’s National Libraries Week in the United States and to mark it we’re looking at readership patterns around the world. [category cultural/ideological divide
As Anna Fleck shows, based on data from Statista’s Consumer Insights survey shows, women were more likely to say that reading is one of their personal hobbies than men in all of the selected countries.
You will find more infographics at Statista
The gender gap was widest in Germany, with a 20 percentage point difference, followed by Spain and Italy (with 19 p.p. difference each).
Spain (58 percent) had the highest share of female readers who considered it one of their personal hobbies of the surveyed countries included in this chart, while Mexico had the highest share of men who said the same (41 percent).
In the United States, 44 percent of women said reading was one of their main pastimes versus 30 percent of men. When looking at the U.S. adult surveyed population with both genders combined, the share of people selecting reading in response to this question increased with age (30 percent of 18-19 year olds, 32 percent 20-29 year olds, 36 percent 30-39 year olds, 38 percent for 40-49 year olds, 41 percent 50-59 year olds, 44 percent 60-64 year olds).
Is the Jews’ alleged superior IQ a tested, proven fact?
No, rather it’s an urban legend constantly repeated without any verification.
Watch the video hereafter.
What’s interesting is that the author of this video is willing to accept any result, including that of an average IQ of 110 for Ashkenazim. He explains that this result was obtained through studies biased by the choice of samples that were not representative of the entire target population.
Final result:
– ashkenazim: about 94 – 96
– sephardim: 85 – 92
He says: “They are over-represented in the film industry, in the media, in politics, sociology and so on.” Add speculators, so-called philanthropists (in fact, investors) etc.
But is it necessary to have a high IQ to succeed in these fields?
The author provides some clues as to the reasons for this over-representation.
His conclusion is interesting and reasonable: “Is it normal and democratic for any 2% minority in the US to be so disproportionately overrepresented? Is there not a risk of favoritism towards their own kind?”
High Jewish IQ Debunked [if the presentation is too fast you can lower the speed of the payer – click on 1x and select 1.25x].
by Gilbert Doctorow via gilbertdoctorow.com
Iran’s weekend massive drone, cruise missile and ballistic missile attack on Israel has now been covered in the global media, with the headlines announcing that 99% of the barrage was shot down by Israeli, U.S. and other friendly air defense systems. The question these media pose is what will be the Israeli response, as if that were a matter strictly to be decided by Prime Minister Netanyahu’s cabinet.
In fairness, I note that The Financial Times has also published a front page article setting out what it considers to be the Iranian perspective on the attack, namely that it was successful insofar as it demonstrated their country is not shying away from direct military confrontation with Israel and is confidently prepared to prosecute a full scale war if it comes to that. See “We’re crazier than you realize”: Iran delivers its message with attack on Israel. Tehran believes calibrated missile and drone barrage is enough to restore deterrent and bolster image.”
However, the Iranian position is much more nuanced and contains far greater threat not only to Israel but also to the entire United States presence in the region than the FTsuggests. I say this on the basis of an analysis provided on last night’s edition of the Vladimir Solovyov talk show on Russian state television by a regular panelist, Semyon Arkadievich Bagdasarov, who is a leading Russian specialist on the region.
For those who wish to see and hear Bagdasarov’s 14 minutes on air in the original Russian, the link is
https://all-make.su/22174-vecher-s-solovyovym-14-04-2024/ minutes: 27 – 41.
In what follows I offer a brief biographical sketch of Bagdasarov so that the seriousness of his remarks can be better appreciated. Then I will summarize what he said on air.
Aged 69, Bagdasarov was born in Central Asia in the Ferghana Valley, which passes through Uzbekistan, Tadjikistan and Kyrgyzstan. Accordingly, he has the proper birthright to his position since 2014 as director of the think tank called the Center for the Study of the Countries of the Near East and Central Asia. However, Bagdasarov reached this academic plateau after passing through a succession of military and civilian government posts, including the 5 years starting in 2007 as a Duma member from the ‘For a Just Russia opposition party of Sergei Mironov, which might be described as slightly to the Left of the ruling United Russia party.
Bagdasarov’s professional education was in a military academy and he ultimately retired with the rank of colonel. He then moved into government service first at the regional level and then as an expert to the Duma, to which, as I said above, he was later elected.
In line with what the FT article has said, Bagdasarov calls the Iranian attack on Israel a limited strike intended as a warning, but also yielding both specific tactical and strategic results.
On the tactical side, the swarming of drones was intended to activate the Iron Dome and other levels of Israeli air defense and to reveal the location of their component parts as well as to deplete the Israeli stock of relevant missiles.
Per Bagdasarov, Israeli claims to have shot down 99% of the incoming barrage should be taken with a grain of salt. The Iranians’ key targets in the attack were the Israeli air force base in the south of the country from which the Israeli strike on Iran’s consulate in Damascus was launched two weeks ago and a military intelligence compound which had prepared that deadly strike. The actual extent of damage from Iranian missiles remains to be evaluated.
Bagdasarov explains that the Iranian attack was ‘limited’ because it consisted of rather slow moving drones and of missiles with small warheads. These were not Iran’s most advanced and lethal attack materiel, which has been held in reserve for any possible Round Two.
How many drones, ballistic missiles and cruise missiles does Iran have? Bagdasarov says no one knows exactly but it may well be 10,000 or more and includes several hundred highly advanced missiles which also have multiple warheads and so are very difficult to defend against. Over the past 20 years, Iran has bet its defense budget on missiles and drones, and it has a large-scale serial production of both. Meanwhile, Iran’s regional allies also have large stocks of these weapons, some of which are also fairly sophisticated. In particular, Hizbollah in Lebanon may have 1500 high quality missiles in its arsenal.
At the strategic level, Iran demonstrated its ability to coordinate a missile and drone attack on Israel with its regional proxies so as to maximize the threat coming from all directions.
Iran used the attack to achieve a political and military objective that has long eluded it. Teheran has now issued threats against Persian Gulf states to bomb any and all that allow the Americans to use their air space or otherwise facilitate Israel’s possible revenge attack on Iran from their territories. These states all fear a war and have now agreed to Iran’s demand. In effect, this negates decades of U.S. unchallenged domination in the Gulf.
Iran has specifically threatened the U.S. regional command in Qatar and the base of the 5th fleet in Bahrain.
The latter point is reflected in Biden’s latest urging restraint on Israel. Washington has understood that its forces in the region are now hostage to whatever Netanyahu may do against Iran as follow-up to this weekend’s barrage.
Furthermore, at the threat level, Iran has a still unused but clearly visible ace in the hole: its ability at will to blockade the Straits of Hormuz and thereby cut off nearly all export shipments of gas and oil from the region. The Straits are just 50 km wide and are easily controlled by Iran’s anti-ship missiles ashore. Such a closure would create havoc on global energy markets. We were reminded of Iran’s dominant position there several days ago when they captured a container ship owned by an Israeli millionaire which was traveling through and directed it to their own coast.
And what about Israel’s alleged plans to attack Iran’s nuclear installations? Bagdasarov insists that this is an impossible objective. Firstly, because the Iranian nuclear program is distributed among 200 centers spread across the vast country and many of these locations are in desert areas buried under 40 meters of sand. The Israelis might only destroy a couple of the best known nuclear centers. Secondly, because to reach their targets in Iran, the Israeli jets would require in-air refueling by American tankers, and it is scarcely credible that Biden will give his consent considering how the U.S. regional bases are under threat.
Iran fired this time only on military objects, but if they use not 300 but 10,000 missiles and drones then Israel will be obliterated. Hizbollah alone have 1,500 advanced missiles. Iran surely has real missiles and drones that are still more powerful. No one knows exactly how many. Over the past 20 years Iran placed its bets on drones and missiles. In the assortment, they have some very sophisticated multi warhead missiles that are unstoppable.
Later in the program (at 1 hour 36 minutes) a military commentator who is a frequent panelist on the Solovyov show, Lt General (retired), Yevgeny Buzhinsky, head of the Center of Applied Military Research of Moscow State University, seconded the estimation of Bagdasarov that this was just a warning, a PR exercise by Iran. As for the shoot-down, he noted that with its S400 and other systems Russia has probably the best air defense in the world, and yet they strain to reach the 99% interception that Israel has blithely claimed.
As host Vladimir Solovyov commented at the opening of the program, the principal fact is that the Iranians did it. They spat on the U.S. and its allies, and they just did what they believed was necessary. In consequence the world ‘built on rules’ counts for nothing.
Cameron wins the hypocrisy contest, blaming Iran for retaliation strikes on Israel
The British foreign secretary David Cameron, who served as the UK’s prime minister from 2010 to 2016, continues to set records in hypocrisy. Pressed by the reporters to clarify his position on the conflict between Iran and Israel in the context of his hawkish stance on Ukraine, Cameron simply refused to face facts which did not fit his agenda.
Pressed on Monday on LBC radio to assess the deadly Israeli strike on April 1 against the Iranian consulate in Damascus, Cameron said: “It is a matter for Israel. We have not made a comment on it. Can I understand Israel’s frustration with Iran? Yes. Absolutely I can. I am not getting into what Israel has or has not done.”
Russia’s envoy to the UN Vassily Nebenzya on the same day blasted the UK and the US for hypocrisy, putting part of the blame for Iran’s attack on the failure of the UN Security Council to condemn by a consensus Israel’s strike.
“If a Western diplomatic representation had been hit, you [the US, the UK and France] would have immediately rained down reprisals,” Nebenzya said. “And you would have argued in this very chamber that you had the right to do it.”
A few days ago, Cameron refused to condemn Ukrainian drone and missile strikes on Russian territory, even though the US officially urged Zelensky’s regime not to hit the internationally-recognized Russian territory and spare oil facilities. But Cameron defended “Ukraine’s right to hit Russian energy targets.”
While British jet fighters actively participated in the defense of Israel’s territory and Cameron called for “peace” there, for Ukraine he only had military solutions — more war, but without any risk for NATO troops. He said Ukrainians needed not Western pilots, but “more anti-aircraft systems to be given by us.”
via Sputnik
Bishop Mari Emmanuel was stabbed live in Wakeley, Sydney while delivering his sermon.
Bishop Mari Emmanuel was preaching at Christ The Good Shepherd Church in Wakeley in Sydney’s west on Monday just after 7pm when a man dressed in black walked up to the altar and allegedly stabbed him multiple times.
Let’s see if I have this right:
Iran vowed to retaliate, taking its time. It spent the next two weeks in a huddle with Russia and China figuring out an appropriate response which would not result in expanding the conflict in the Middle East, something Israel clearly wants.
Iran, Russia, and China have a “partnership”; they have carried out extensive military drills and operations in support of this partnership.
With the aid of the US, France, and UK, Israel was able to shoot down most of the drones, spending about a billion dollars worth of arms in the process of shooting down obsolete cheap Iranian armament.
Iran was also able to do damage to the two military bases from where the attack on the Iranian embassy originated. Military personnel was evacuated, but damage to the bases was sustained. The extent of the damage is contested by the two sides.
Iran declared that the incident was closed so far as they were concerned.
Israel vowed to retaliate, but a phone call from Biden put a stop to that…for who knows how long.
The way I read this is that
Iran was able to deplete Israel’s expensive anti-missile ordonance.
Iran was able to demonstrate the precision and effectiveness of the strikes it actually meant to complete.
Iran was able to show that despite advanced warning, Israel would have been unable to shoot down all the drones without help form US, UK, and France, which shot down about half the drones.
Iran was able to show that it could act intelligently, rationally, and that it too was backed by powerful friends.
The operation was carried out in a way that allowed both sides to save face, which is a tricky tactical feat.
Hamas has already shown that the IDF is a crap army good mostly at shooting down women and children.
Now Iran has shown that without outside help, Israel is a paper tiger with nuclear weapons.
Have I missed anything?
Posted by: JAB
