');
The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Topics Filter?
2016 Election American Media American Military Anti-Semitism Benjamin Netanyahu Britain Catholic Church Censorship Christianity Communism Cuba Deep State Donald Trump Economics Feminism Foreign Policy France Gaza Gilad Atzmon Hillary Clinton History Holocaust Ideology Immigration Iran Iraq ISIS Islam Israel Israel Lobby Israel/Palestine Jeremy Corbyn Jews Judaism Libya Middle East Neocons Neoliberalism North Korea Poland Political Correctness Putin Race/Ethnicity Russia Syria Terrorism Turkey Ukraine Vladimir Putin Wikileaks World War II 2004 Election 2020 Election 9/11 Abortion Academia Adam Schiff ADL Afghanistan Africa Alain Soral Amazon.com American Jews Anarchism Anders Breivik Arab Spring Armenians Auschwitz Banking Industry Belarus Bernie Sanders Bolshevik Revolution Boris Johnson Boris Nemtsov Brexit Cambodia Charlie Hebdo China Christmas CIA Civil Liberties Cynthia McKinney Democracy Democratic Party Dreyfus Affair Economic Sanctions Edward Snowden Egypt Emmanuel Macron Erdogan Espionage Estonia Ethiopia EU Eurozone Facebook Financial Bubbles Financial Crisis Gay Marriage Gaza Flotilla Genocide Georgia Germany Glenn Greenwald Global Warming Greece Hate Hoaxes Hitler Hong Kong India IQ Japan Jared Kushner Jeff Bezos Jeffrey Epstein Jewish History Joe Biden Julian Assange Jussie Smollett Kashmir Kim Jong Un Kurds Lebanon Lenin Liberalism Litvinenko long-range-missile-defense Madoff Swindle Malaysia Malaysian Airlines MH17 Mel Gibson Meritocracy Mikhail Khodorkovsky Mohammed Bin Salman Muslims NATO Nazi Germany Nazir Ahmed Netherlands New Cold War New World Order New Zealand Shooting Noam Chomsky Norman Finkelstein North Africa NSA Nuclear War Nuclear Weapons Organ Transplants Orthodoxy Pakistan Palestinians Paris Attacks Pavel Grudinin Pedophilia Qassem Soleimani Racism Ron Unz Rothschilds Russian Elections 2018 Russian Orthodox Church Saudi Arabia Serbia Sergei Magnitsky Sergei Polonsky Sergei Skripal Sochi Olympics South Korea Soviet History Soviet Union Space Program Spain Srebrenica Stalinism Sweden Syriza The Left Tibet UN Security Council United Nations Venezuela Wikipedia William Browder World War I Yasser Arafat Zionism
Nothing found
Sources Filter?
 TeasersIsrael Shamir Blogview

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
🔊 Listen RSS

These days, Jerusalem could compete with Davos and Bilderberg. Most distinguished, high and mighty gentlemen have met here, at the Auschwitz Forum in Yad Vashem, The World Holocaust Remembrance Center: kings, presidents, prime ministers; a living proof the Jews have some pull in the world.

The British Court of St James was represented by Prince Charles; France – by President Macron; the mighty US of A sent VP Pence, this supreme achievement of AI (he looks almost human, though not quite). There was also the Governor General of Australia, President of Austria, President of Albania, President of Argentina, President of Armenia, King of Belgium, President of Bulgaria, President of Hungary, Prince of Wales, President of Germany, President of Greece, President of Turkey, President of Denmark, President of Iceland, King of Spain, President of Italy, Governor General of Canada, President of Cyprus, Grand Duke of Luxembourg, President of Northern Macedonia, President of Moldova, King of the Netherlands, Crown Prince of Norway, President of Romania, President of Serbia, Vice President of the United States, the president of Finland, the French president, the Montenegrin President, Prime Minister of Sweden, President of the European Council, President of the European Parliament, European Commission President …

Their hosts used the occasion to the utmost. Mr Netanyahu, the Israeli Interim PM, compared Iran with Nazi Germany and said that destruction of Iran today equals the liberation of Auschwitz then. The Israeli President, Reuven Rivlin, said there is no difference between anti-Semites and anti-Zionists; whoever is an enemy of Israel is the enemy of all Jewish people, very simple.

However, judging by Israeli media attention, there was really just one prominent guest, President Vladimir Putin. While he was in Jerusalem – less than one day – all the limelight was his; all other kings and rulers faded into the background. The power this man has, his grip on public mind and imagination, his charisma -is quite unprecedented. He was treated as an Emperor on pilgrimage, like Kaiser Wilhelm on his 1898 visit to this Middle Eastern town.

Putin knew why he came, and he stayed focused on the topic. His principal theme: Russia saved the Jews 75 years ago and she has earned the support of today’s Jews, especially when you compare her history with that of her neighbours. In his speech, he stressed that very few Jews survived in Poland, Ukraine, Latvia and Lithuania, for the locals did their utmost to catch and kill every Jew who managed to slip out of the German vice. It is not a coincidence that the presidents of the three neighbouring states, Lithuania, Latvia and Poland didn’t come at all; the Ukrainian president Mr Zelensky did come, but stayed away from the forum.

In modern Ukraine there is a widespread cult of Stephan Bandera, the Ukrainian Quisling, adept of Hitler and the leader of brutal gangs (OUN-UPA). They murdered Jews, Poles, Russians and politically untrustworthy Ukrainians. Recently the CIA was forced by law to reveal its documents about the man, and so they did. You can read the original reports here; they describe him as a Nazi spy and a mass murderer. The Banderites were suppressed by Stalin’s KGB, but the gangsters were soon allowed to return to normal life for there was a general feeling that the insurgency was over.

Yet in the post-2014 Ukraine, there are now streets in Kiev and other cities dedicated to his name; his pictures embellish government buildings, and modern Banderites are now a strong fighting force both in Eastern Ukraine against Donbas separatists and elsewhere against Russian-language-speakers. They are even hostile to the recently-elected President Zelensky, considering him too soft by half. Zelensky does not dare to confront them. That is why he avoids the Babi Yar massacre site near Kiev, and why he stayed away from the forum in Jerusalem; his mere presence is enough to enflame the Banderites.

I was asked by a reader, shouldn’t Poles, Ukrainians and Russians sort out their historical issues before tackling the problems of today? In general, I do not think so. I think that the past is the past, and history will take care of itself. Today’s issues must be solved today. If Ukraine and Poland, as well as Lithuania and Latvia were to curtail their anti-Russian policies in conjunction with NATO and the US Deep State, Russia would gladly set aside the crimes of their fathers. But if the governments of these four countries continue to carry on with their hostile politics towards Russia, Russia will be forced to ally with the Jewish power against these heirs of Nazi henchmen.

The Monument

Putin had been treated in Jerusalem as the beloved son and clear favourite of Netanyahu and people in general. Just opposite the Knesset (Parliament), they erected a monument to the Jewish victims of the Leningrad siege, and Putin was asked to inaugurate it. Netanyahu was there, and survivors, and musicians from Russia, too. It was a big and impressive event, one of the biggest of this event-crowded day.

I personally find it of bad taste to commemorate the Jews separately from all the other fallen people of Leningrad. One of my uncles was killed in 1942 at the defence of the city on the Black River, but he fought and died together with his Russian comrades. Jews seem to have great difficulty empathizing with non-Jews; they always demand separate memorials, and Putin couldn’t force them to do things differently.

Putin was very cautious – he did not say a word about Iran. Russia is a friend of Iran; Russian and Iranian navies performed joint naval exercises quite recently. Putin was silent about the alleged plague of anti-Semitism of recent days. Straight after the Forum, he went to the Palestinian city of Bethlehem for a meeting with Mahmud Abbas, the president of Palestine. Russians are engaged in the reconstruction of Star Street leading to Manger Square in front of Nativity Cathedral in the city.

Putin was the only one of the many Forum guests who balanced his visit to the Jews with a visit to the Palestinians. He also met with the Patriarch of Jerusalem, expressing his support for the native church of the Holy Land.

Correction

For some time, Putin has been increasingly disappointed with the Israelis. Israelis are very difficult people to deal with: whatever they get, they take as their due. They have no sense of gratitude, and no desire to repay any gestures from the other side. Putin did a lot for Israel and for Netanyahu personally – he returned to Israel the mortal remains of an Israeli soldier who had been killed in action in Lebanon many years before; he fulfilled many big and small requests of the Israeli PM. Not such big and impossible wishes like removing the Iranians from Syria or delivering the Messiah, but reasonable requests. Yet still he encountered the Jewish dislike of paying back.

By request of the US, a Russian programmer was detained in Israel in 2015. Despite Russian appeals, Israel refused to return the detainee, and quite recently they shipped him to the US, where this young man can expect many years of jail time, and possibly torture to force him to “confess” to interfering in the US elections. Russians were very upset with this Israeli decision, as well as with the Israeli shelling of Syria.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

On Friday, January 17, 2020, three thousand salvos shook the earth of the Russian capital city; the sky over Moscow had been emblazoned by glorious fireworks. This was the repeat of the memorable salute given seventy-five years ago, on January 17, 1945 by 24 salvos of 324 heavy cannons at liberation of Warsaw by the Red Army. Ruined Warsaw had been saved from total loss.

This could be an excellent occasion for display of friendliness between the two Slavic nations. The Poles could remember 200,000 Russian soldiers and officers killed in action at Warsaw, and say: they died so we may live. They could thank Russia for the bountiful lands and great cities that were torn out of defeated Germany and presented to Poland: Danzig became Gdansk, Stettin became Szczecin, Breslau became Wrocław, and Posen became Poznań. They could thank Russia even for passing to the Ukraine the Ukrainian-populated lands that were under Polish rule between the wars, the rule that ended in a big massacre of the resident Poles by Ukrainian nationalists.

Gratitude is not a strong feature of the Polish national character: the Polish government ignored the event. Instead, the Poles destroyed the memorials and tombs of Russian soldiers. It was mighty annoying, but much less important than Warsaw’s decision to establish the US radar system of a European missile shield on its soil, the system that made a sudden US nuclear strike on Russia a very tangible possibility. Poland’s effort to undermine Russia’s pipeline to Germany; Poland’s invitation of US armour to take positions on its eastern border; Poland’s endless hostility to Russia in the Europarliament made the Russians to view this old founding member of the Warsaw Pact as its enemy No. 1 in the European continent.

You won’t be amazed that the Russians had used a good opportunity to pay tit for tat. This opportunity came from the Jewish offensive against Poland. The Jews attacked this anti-Communist eastern bulwark of the West from two sides at once, powerful US Jewry and the mighty Jewish state. Or almost at once. American Jews began the operation by pushing through the obsequious Congress Bill S. 447 (it became the Public Law No. 115-171) . This bill told Poland to cough up $300 Billion to American Jewish organisations.

Under this American law, all property that once belonged to a person of Jewish descent in Poland must be transferred to American Jewish organizations. One third of Warsaw, half of Krakow, much of residential property in Poland belonged to Jews before the war – and now it was going ‘back’ to US Jewry. The law created a unique situation – what belonged to a Jew remains forever in Jewish hands. And lawsuits cannot be brought against these “Jewish hands”. That is, if a Jewish citizen of Poland died leaving debts, these debts disappeared. But if he died intestate, then the house goes to Jewish American organizations. They can evict the resident Poles, or make them pay a rent for what they thought was their own apartments.

S774 is a brilliant idea. It revives medieval Polish Jewry – a state in a state. In pre-war Poland this was not the case; Polish Jews were Polish citizens, and if a Polish Jew died without leaving any heirs, his escheated property went to the Polish republic, as did the property of a Catholic or Orthodox Pole who died intestate. American Jews decided to turn the Holocaust into the biggest property snatch of the 21st century, by reverting to the 16th century ideas. They will take in their own hands all the property that belonged to the Polish citizens of the Mosaic Law before the war.

This peculiar idea was not to be applied in the US or England. If an American (or British) Jew dies without appointing heirs, the property will be transferred to the state. But for Poland, they conceived a complete restitution. If it will work with the Poles, it may work elsewhere; the Jews won’t be ordinary citizens of their countries, but rather members of supranational Jewry. The debts will be their private affairs, but their assets will be of the Jewry. Brilliant, isn’t it?

The Poles didn’t like S447. There are demonstrations against the law, there are calls to oust the American ambassador, who added insult to injury by congratulating Polish Jews on Hanukkah while forgetting to send Christmas greetings to the Catholic Poles, the vast majority of the nation. At that time, Israel came to support the US Jews. They demanded that Poland repent for being nasty to Jews, to accept partial responsibility for the Holocaust and pay. Israel pumped out many billions from Germany, but these billions have already been used up. Poland had paid nothing to Israel. The Bolsheviks who ruled after-war Poland did not think that the Zionists should be paid; they considered Poland a Nazi victim, not a beneficiary. Now there were no more communists, so please pay, said the Jews.

Israel and American Jews keep the pressure on Poland. They call Auschwitz a “Polish concentration camp”, which offends the Poles very much. They say that many Poles helped the Nazis to realise the “final solution to the Jewish question.” Poles made a law forbidding saying that; the Jews took to chanting it on the streets.

The conflict is coming now to the fore, with the 75th anniversary of Auschwitz liberation (by the Red Army, by the way: President Obama’s uncle didn’t fight in Poland, despite this silly claim of the previous American president). It will be celebrated in two places: in Jerusalem and in Auschwitz. In Jerusalem, all important dignitaries will gather: the French President, the US Vice-President, the German Chancellor, the Russian President Putin. The Polish president Andrzej Duda was invited, too – but not as a speaker, just an also-present guest. He preferred to skip the occasion altogether and to visit the much more modest Auschwitz celebration at the site of the camp.

President Putin is aware of the Polish controversy, and he decided to show the Poles that their relentless hostility to Russia just does not pay. A few weeks ago on December 24, at the meeting of the Russian Ministry of Defence, Putin presented certain documents of the World War Two period, attesting to the rabidly anti-Jewish attitude of the pre-war Polish leadership. For instance, Jozef Lipsky, the Polish ambassador to Nazi Germany until 1939, told the Germans that the Poles would erect a monument to the Reichskanzler Adolf Hitler in Warsaw if he were to rid Poland of its Jews. “Such an anti-Semitic pig!” – exclaimed Putin indignantly.

The Poles made a miserable attempt to reinterpret the damning words, saying that the Polish ambassador had meant to save Jews by sending them to safe Africa, for instance, to Madagascar, to the harmless lemurs, in cooperation with Zionists, and so he was a Zionist pig, rather. It did not play well.

But Putin had more papers and more proof in his vaults. He produced a report dated late 1944-early 1945, when pro-London Polish militants of AK had made an attempt to take over Warsaw from the Germans before the Red Army’s arrival. The report said that the AK fighters systematically killed all the Jews who survived the German suppression of Warsaw Ghetto uprising (1943). It could explain why the Russian army did not think it is their sacred duty to help the AK militants.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Trump was panting heavily, like Darth Vader on the Death Star. The mike was too close to his mouth. His laboured speech and strange look did not match the comforting words as he spoke to the American people. But the meaning was clear: the world sheriff had received a ringing slap in the face. First time ever, a regional power brazenly shelled a superpower’s air base, hiding not in the shadows of deniability. Trump was given two choices: to rush forward furiously berserker-style or to smile piteously and say: “It doesn’t hurt at all.” He chose the second option, which can only be approved.

This situation had mirrored the Syrian incident, when Trump fired Tomahawks (after having a beauuutiful chocolate cake with Chairman Xi), and the Syrians responded that the missiles missed the goal. This time, Trump was in the place of Assad. It was a powerful anti-climax: talking heads expected Trump to completely annihilate Iran. Let us hope that this embarrassment for the Lord of (half) the Universe will provide him a useful exercise in humility.

In both cases, the debacle was not the end of the story. After and despite Trump’s shelling, Assad regained 80 percent of Syrian territory. After Iranian shelling, there was a murky Ukrainian airliner disaster and riots in Tehran. Moreover, the assassination was not the beginning: the naval drills of Russia, China and Iran preceded it.

As this episode is behind us and has not led to a third world war or a large-scale regional conflict, we can carry out a short debriefing. The assassination of Soleimani turned out to be ‘worse than a crime, a mistake’, in Talleyrand’s adage. The Russians and the Chinese branded it with a rare word from Marxist vocabulary, ‘adventurism’.

Even Israelis, who rarely shy away from taking risks, gave a short sharp gasp when they learned (on short notice) of the coming assassination. Amnon Abramovich, a knowledgeable man, said Mossad toyed with the idea, and they could kill Soleimani any time since 2008; but considered it too audacious by half. Indeed Israelis had practiced more political assassinations than anybody since The Old Man of the Mountain, but the results were underwhelming. Who remembers the previous bosses of Hezbollah and Hamas? They were killed by Jews, but their successors were even worse for Israel.

There were no regrets in Israel. Netanyahu blessed Trump’s arms, and a leading journalist Ehud Yaari said Soleimani was the worst and most dangerous enemy of Israel since 1948. Still there was not a single attempt to claim the feat for Mossad. NBC said that ‘Intelligence from Israel helped confirm the details’, but there was no high preparedness for Iranian vengeance, for there was no place for vengeance at all: Israel didn’t participate in the assassination, by experts’ account.

While Israel prefers to stay on the margin, the Israeli lobby is much more aggressive. They want to fight Iran like a teenager wants petting. Long ago, in 2006, they convinced Israeli army to enter fight in Lebanon, intending to continue to Syria and Iran. It did not work out well. Since then, Israel Lobby wants war, while Israel wants to keep outside, while encouraging pro-war elements in the US.

The Lobby supported Mike Pompeo, a former CIA officer and now secretary of state, and he convinced the cornered president Trump that this assassination would improve his position with the voters, and even Adam Schiff, his chief Nemesis, would applaud as a good Israeli patriot and forget all about impeachment.

Nothing of the kind happened. Jingoist Americans would approve of any bomb strike, it’s true, but the Democrats are even more prone to war and violence than the Republicans. The more competent and authentic Trump voters had supported Trump, who promised to end unnecessary Middle Eastern wars. And here is such an affront. “Hillary Clinton would have bombed Iran even faster and more decisively, as she bombed Libya,” they murmured in consolation, but it did not console them completely. The Democrats – opponents of Trump – condemned the president, saying that Soleimani was, of course, an enemy of America, but now it was not the right time to kill him.

However, the main negative (for the US) consequences were the events in Iraq. Despite the fantasy that all Shia Muslims are pro-Iranian; many Iraqis, both Sunni and Shia, have an anti-Iranian animus. They have a painful memory of Iran-Iraq war; and they prefer a secular state to the Iranian model. This difference of opinions could help the US to play its hand in Iraq for long time after its conquest. But all Iraqis, Shia and Sunni, pro-Iranian and anti-Iranian were indignant at the uncouth and rude way Trump disregarded the opinions of Iraqi authorities, killing the local hero Soleimani on their territory while he acted as intermediary between Saudis and their neighbours.

Muqtada al-Sadr, an important Iraqi Shiite leader who is considered rather pro-American and anti-Iranian, demanded that the American embassy and the entire American occupation army be driven out of Iraq. The Iraqi parliament also made a similar demand – to cease the activities of the pro-American coalition and proceed with the withdrawal of troops from Iraq, though the Americans considered the parliament being tame and obedient.

The deputies were told by the Iraqi Prime Minister about the hidden causes of the internal crisis. As you may recall, last year there were riots in Iraq, and some four hundred protesters had lost their lives. On December 1, 2019 Prime Minister Adil Abdul Mahdi had to resign. (In practice, he continues to “temporarily fulfil the duties of the prime minister,” and in that capacity, he spoke in parliament.)

He said that the United States demanded that he give them half of all Iraqi oil to compensate for the reconstruction of Iraq, which suffered a lot – first from the American invasion and occupation, and then from the militants of the Islamic State. He said he refused to do this and gave the order for reconstruction to China, who did not demand such a large fee. (While the story is not fully verified, Abdel-Mahdi indeed visited China just before the riots).

According to the prime minister, Trump was annoyed, saying it’s a pity, that President George W. Bush did not take all Iraqi oil as trophies and in payment for liberating the Iraqi people from the villain Saddam Hussein; and if the prime minister does not change his mind, the people will overthrow him.

And what would you think – indeed, an uprising soon started in Iraq, and the protesters began to die from sniper bullets. “They were third-party snipers – the American marines, they killed both policemen and demonstrators,” the prime minister said. He added: “When I first mentioned the third force — the snipers — I received a call from Washington and was threatened with death. Therefore, I resigned.”

After his speech, parliament quickly voted for grounding and subsequent withdrawal of the pro-American forces. (It is a pity that the Ukrainian Maidan did not hear this speech, for they also suffered from ‘third party snipers’).

This was the biggest damage to Trump and the United States from the killing of Soleimani. If the Americans will withdraw, it would be possible to say that Soleimani, by his death, achieved what he could not achieve in his whole life, namely, to drive the Americans out of the region. After all, after leaving Iraq, they could not have stayed in Syria.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Israel Adam Shamir – biography

Will you ever see this bio, my reader? The chances are not great. Wikipedia controls the bio market; Google delivers Wikipedia’s version to the multitudes. And Wikipedia and Google are controlled by the people I fight against for many years. These guys do not pretend they are fair. My Wiki bio is a hatchet job; plentiful attempts to set the record straight – all failed. There are six full Archive pages of my Wiki bio discussion here, proving that you can’t win in this crooked game. Anyway, provided you want to know who I am, here is a brief record, updated to the first day of 2020 in Jaffa, Israel/Palestine.

Who is Israel Shamir

Israel Shamir (72) is a writer on international affairs, a life-long dissident, a radical spiritual and political thinker, a Biblical and Judaic scholar who writes mainly in English and Russian. His comments on current affairs (in English) are published on The Unz Review, on his own sites www.israelshamir.net and www.israelshamir.com and elsewhere. His books Galilee Flowers, Cabbala of Power, Masters of Discourse are available on the Amazon in English, French, German, Spanish, Russian, Arabic, Norwegian, Swedish, Italian, Hungarian etc. His book The Pine and the Olive is available in Russian and French. There are a few collections of his essays published in Russian, French and Spanish.

He is also a prolific scientific and literary translator. He translated and annotated the cryptic works of S.Y. Agnon, the only Hebrew Nobel Prize winning writer, from the original Hebrew into Russian (published and republished from 1973 till 2007). In 2006, his mammoth annotated translation of a Renaissance Hebrew history Sefer Yohassin (The Book of Lineage) into English had been published. He translated a scientific History of Arab-Israeli Wars by Chaim Herzog into Russian. Shamir translated the Odyssey, selected chapters of Joyce’s Ulysses, a modern Israeli writer Gabriel Moked into Russian. In 2016, he published his reconstruction of Genesis, the lost Hebrew original of the Greek 2d c BC translation, the Septuagint.

Israel Shamir is a dissident; he was a dissident in the USSR of his youth, as he called for democracy; he is a dissident in Israel, as he called for full rights for the Palestinians; he is a global dissident as he calls for dismantling the New World Order and the American Empire.

He has three sons; he divides his time between Jaffa, a small Palestinian/Israeli seaside town, St Petersburg in Russia, and a tiny Swedish village in Bergslagen.

Life

Shamir had been born in 1947 in Novosibirsk, Siberia. He moved to Israel in 1969, served as paratrooper in the army and fought in the 1973 war. After the war, he turned to journalism and writing, his first job was with Israel Radio. In 1974, he was in the SE Asia. In 1975, Shamir joined the BBC and moved to London. In 1977-79 he lived in Japan. After returning to Israel in 1980, Shamir wrote for the Israeli daily newspapers Haaretz and Al Hamishmar, and was the Knesset spokesman for the Israel Socialist Party (Mapam).

In 1989 – 1992 Shamir stayed in Moscow and witnessed the transition of the USSR into post-Soviet chaos. At that time he reported for Haaretz; he was fired for calling for return of Palestinian refugees to their homes in Israel/Palestine. In 1993 he returned to Israel. Palestine, its sad history and enchanting landscape remained his most important subject. His views were summed up in The Pine and the Olive, the story of Palestine/Israel, written in his native Russian and published in 1986 (republished in 2004, 2008, 2011, 2015, 2019 in Russian, twice translated and published in French); it acquired a cult following among the Russian readers. His main thesis: Jews in Israel should live together with native Palestinians and learn from them how to fit into the landscape.

The second Palestinian Intifada had turned Shamir to writing in English. His highly political and poetic pieces centred on Palestine had spread via new-born Internet like wild fire. Shamir proposed a simple solution to the crisis: equality of rights; One Man, One Vote; One State for the whole of Palestine/Israel. This idea had a huge appeal in the US and elsewhere. Upset by this response, the Zionists activated a public campaign against Shamir, calling him “anti-Semite, Holocaust denier, a Swedish neo-Nazi, not a Jew at all”.

The final battle was fought on the Wikipedia site, where they decided to make me a Swedish neo-Nazi impostor, instead of the Israeli writer I really am.

All the time this battle was going on, I lived in my Jaffa house, receiving endless visitors, giving numerous interviews, going to work, seeing people – but I might as well have been dead. I felt like Doc Daneeka, a character in Joseph Heller’s witty Catch-22, who was declared dead as the plane he was supposed to fly was downed. “I am alive!” he shouted. “Here we have a paper saying you are dead”, they replied. His wife “inherited” his property, he was stricken from the lists, they stopped serving him food, and even his friends and comrades looked askance when he appeared. This is the power of an official-looking document – or a webpage blue with hyperlinks. Thus I have learned the dreadful power of an encyclopaedia: it does not reflect the world, but rather creates the world. Wiki is linked to thousands of sites; whether you look at answers.com or at an Arab English-language site, you’ll be led to Wiki with its lies.

If an encyclopaedia says I am a Swedish neo-Nazi antisemite, nothing can change it. I could scream all day long: “Look, here I am, in Jaffa” but they would reply: “Here we have an official paper saying that you are not”. If tomorrow they decide to make you a little green man from Mars, they will succeed, too. And then, even your friends will look behind your back for your flying saucer.

In 2002 he was received in the Orthodox Christian Church of Jerusalem and Holy Land, being baptised Adam by Archbishop Theodosius Attalla Hanna. He wrote about this event:

[I am] a member of the Greek Orthodox Church of Jerusalem, for though born a Jew, by the Grace of Christ I was baptised this year in its wonderful ancient cathedral of Mar Yakoub, the old see of St James, the brother of our Lord and the first Bishop of Jerusalem. It is adjacent to Golgotha and to the great Church of the Resurrection, and it is the home church of the local Arab-speaking Palestinian Orthodox community. I was baptized in the old deep octagonal Byzantine font that so many saints and bishops of the Holy City were baptized in. My skin still feels the touch of olive oil and myrrh, soft, supple, fragrant, though it was more than a year ago.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: American Media, Israel/Palestine, Russia, Wikipedia 
🔊 Listen RSS

(1) England

Jewish logic is astounding! The Jews fought Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour tooth and claw. Their newspapers claimed he is a new Hitler. Their Chief Rabbi issued a fatwa against Corbyn. Israel’s Foreign Minister said he hopes Corbyn will lose British election. And Labour had been soundly trashed in the British elections. Jews could congratulate themselves with this result: they’ve got what they wished. But such a response would be too simple-minded for Jews.

When the results of the elections became known, immediately, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz responded with: “The blaming of the Jews for this historic defeat has already begun. It will only get louder.” Well, this is the nature of elections. If you actively support one, winning side, you’d be congratulated by the winners and blamed by the losers. This is just, this is right. But it is not good enough for the Jews. The smart people want a better deal: to be congratulated by the winners, while the losers should just regret they haven’t had you on their side. They can’t blame you for it will be antisemitic act.

This is the great Jewish trick: they always win, and they never lose. When their side loses, they say they didn’t act qua Jews. Even if they pull the Jewish solidarity card, and say that as Jews they have to be for unlimited immigration everywhere but in Israel; or as Jews they want Corbyn to lose; you are not allowed to “blame” them for the result. The Jews are always blameless. You may congratulate them with the result, never blame.

Jonathan Freedland, the Guardian journalist who had worked overtime blowing Corbyn antisemitism hoax into flame, twitted “I predicted Labour would be defeated”. He was corrected: “it was not predicted, it was manufactured by you!” And the Jews responded with “How do you dare to blame a Jew?”

And now, if you are unhappy with Corbyn’s defeat, should you blame the Jews? Yes and no. No, because whatever Jews say, it is Brits that vote. No, so they won’t think that Jews decide everything. And still, yes. They contributed their energy to his defeat. The Jewish onslaught on Corbyn had one immediate unfortunate consequence: Corbyn have tried to accommodate the attackers and sought a compromise with wealthy Remainers at the expense of the workers. And a politician who accommodates Jews is likely to be defeated twice: once, by a politician who is totally, without reservations, on the Jewish side; and the second time, by your supporters who would leave you. This is what happened to Corbyn. He went towards Jews, away from the British working class; while on the Jewish territory, he was easily defeated by Johnson, the eager friend of Israel.

Corbyn had a chance: if he would unleash a Night of the Long Knives on Blairites after his victory in the party, if he would allow the party members to deselect the pro-Remain Blairite Jewish MPs, if he would drop silly pseudo-left notions of climate change, green economy, gender discourse, migrants, if he were to stick to the hard left class line, he would surely win. People are sick of fence sitters.

Instead of being horrified by Jewish fatwa, he could make it his banner. Instead of blessing Jews with the Hanukkah and getting “Go f*ck yourself” in return from Stephen Pollard, editor of the Jewish Chronicle, he could bless the British people with coming Christmas. But then, he won’t be Corbyn.

This development has a long history. The close aide to Jeremy Corbyn and a leading Labour strategist Seumas Milne had published a piece in the Guardian (he was then the paper’s leading columnist) called “This slur of anti-semitism is used to defend repression”. That was in 2002, and he wrote: “Since the French revolution, the fates of the Jewish people and the left have been closely intertwined. The left’s appeal to social justice and universal rights created a natural bond with a people long persecuted and excluded by the Christian European establishment. Despite the changed class balance of many Jewish communities, Jews remain disproportionately active in progressive political movements throughout the world” but now they accuse the Left of anti-semitism.

I replied to him then:

In civilised New York, a girl eager to brush-off an insistent admirer does not have to be rude. She slips him a phone number to call, and there a recorded message informs him, “The person you are calling does not wish to remain in contact with you. If you want to listen to a sad poem, press ONE, if you want to cling to unrealistic dream of reunion, press TWO, if you want to have counselling and advice, press THREE.”

The Milne’s article is a rejected lover’s complaint. Apparently, he can’t overcome his rejection by the Daughter of Zion. He laments the glorious days of their alliance: “Since the French revolution, the fates of the Jewish people and the Left have been closely intertwined. From the time of Marx, Jews played a central role across all shades of the left.” Mr Milne and the Left are in need of some advice and counselling (press THREE).

Everything that has a beginning, Mr Milne, has an end as well. Before the French Revolution, the Jewish people supported despotism against the aristocracy, and the Magna Carta was signed by King John despite their opposition. After Napoleon, the Jewish people had had a long alliance with the Left. It was long, but not everlasting. This alliance was severed in the aftermath of the failed 1968 revolution. Since that time the Jewish People have built a new alliance, with Globalisation forces.

Give it a thought, Mr. Milne: if the Daughter of Zion could ally herself with the Left, why could she not change her partners? Should she be considered a permanently beneficial force, next to God Almighty? Jewish leadership benefited from the union with the Left while it was an aspiring force, struggling with the traditional upper classes. After their aspirations were satisfied, they had no more interest in such an ally.

Why should one describe as a ‘natural bond’ rather than a ‘marriage of convenience’ this relationship with the rich Jewish bankers and newspaper owners who had supported the Left? It was quite an unnatural bond, formed against the obvious class interests of the involved sides, and its collapse was inevitable. The Left accepted the help of rich Jews, disregarding their motives. It paid a heavy price: alienation from the working classes who had had a long and painful history of Jew-Gentile relations, alienation from the Church, and the uncompromising hostility of the upper classes. The Jews used the energy of the Left until it ran out, and then ditched it. Now, the Left can dial a phone number in New York and listen to the pre-recorded message. (Read this article in full here.)

Since 2002, the Left didn’t part with Jews; instead, it went to the desert the wealthy Jews wanted to send it, to the desert of identity politics and climate bull, to the desert of accommodating Jews and disregarding Christians. This policy came to the natural end in the 2019 elections. The new leadership of the Labour should learn its lesson and complete the disengagement from the Jews.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

England and France, two antagonists, two mainstays of European civilisation, are simultaneously engulfed in paroxysm of Judeophilia. The result of the forthcoming very important parliamentary elections in Britain hinges on this issue, with Labour and Tories competing who will express their love of Jews more profusely, while the Jews can’t decide whom they loath less. France, after a year of the middle-class Yellow Vests rebellion, enters the fresh working class uprising with million strikers rioting on the streets, but its parliament finds prime time to ponder and rule how Frenchmen should love Jews and hate those who hate them. What is the meaning of this charade?

Surely they do not argue about Jewish cuisine. While palatable, it is rarely more than that. A proof can be found in Israel, where Arab food rules, Japanese is recognised, Italian cherished but Jewish cuisine shines by its absence. It is not Jewish noses, though a significant feature of facial anatomy, they are not more elaborate or prominent than, say, Sicilian. It is all about ideas.

Judeophilia, love of Jews is a troublesome symptom of a dangerous malady, of elites’ estrangement from its working classes, the malady presently in full bloom in France and England. Judeophilia strikes divided societies and could lead to their collapse much faster than its Siamese counter-twin, antisemitism. It did so in the past, most famously in Kingdom of Poland, where the szlachta (nobility) loved Jews and despised ordinary folks, the bydlo (rednecks), until their state collapsed. In a Christian, or post-Christian society, Jews are a symbol, a signifier of a certain attitude and behaviour that is profoundly non-Christian.

Jews are a small minority that defies the large society and opposes it. Jews care for themselves and disregard the majority and its needs; they have no scruples beyond prescribed by the criminal law; they feel no communality with the majority. Jews do not share communion with majority, and do not appeal to the same deity. Jews prosper when the majority regresses. They are fast to see a break and use it for their advantage.

We won’t enter a discussion whether the real Jews fit the description, and to what extent. That is how they are perceived by those who love them and who hate them. There were Jews who acted against the paradigm, and they weren’t considered ‘good for Jews’. Bruno Kreisky, the Austrian Chancellor, Lazar Kaganovich, the Soviet official, Leon Trotsky or Torquemada weren’t ‘good for Jews’. And there are plentiful Gentiles who were considered ‘good for Jews’, like Hillary Clinton or Tony Blair. Usually they were bad for everybody else. So, while we shall defer our judgment on ‘real Jews’, there is no doubt that philo-Semites are bad for your health.

The dominant economic and political paradigm, Neo-Liberalism claims that Jewish attitude is the right one, and that we all should emulate Jews. This is an impossible claim; a majority can’t emulate a minority. A society whose members relate to each other as Jews-to-Gentiles is a cannibals’ cabal, and that is exactly what happens in our world. Jews prosper because they are few; if all emulate Jews, the result is misery, not prosperity. An all-Jewish society can’t exist; Israel is a place where Thai, Chinese, Ukrainians and Palestinians work, the Russians and Druze guard them, while Jews do usual Jewish things.

In England, the Jews are divided about Boris Johnson. They do not want Brexit to succeed, but the access of Corbyn scares them even more. Corbyn is an avowed enemy of … no, not of Jews, but of neo-liberalism. Combine it with his rejection of Israeli politics, and you come to the sum of anti-Jewish attitudes. Yes, Corbyn is anti-Jewish, if you wish, even anti-Semite, i.e. a man whom Jews hate, for he is against both Jewish modes of operation, the capitalist and the Zionist. He is perfectly ok with people of Jewish origin, he has no prejudice, he is no racist, but it is irrelevant. His victory won’t be ‘good for Jews’, neither for Jews who bleed Palestine, nor for Jews who prosper at the expense of the British worker. Perhaps Corbyn would be wonderful for Jewish workers, but they are not represented in the Board of Deputies, and the Chief Rabbi does not care for them.

On the international scene, Corbyn is not a friend of NATO. If he could he would take the UK out of this obsolete military alliance. So would President Trump, who is looking for a justification to steer the US out of NATO. Jews do not like this attitude. For them, the US and the UK should stay in NATO, for NATO is a strong defender and supporter of the Jewish state.

Brits have a difficult choice in the coming elections. Johnson is not too bad, and his stand against EU should be applauded. Corbyn is likely to seek compromise on every position, including Brexit, immigration, NATO, but his initial stand is good. For a working man, he is the right choice. And the Jewish attitude to him is a strong indicator: of the two contenders, Corbyn would be better for those who do not emulate Jews.

France

In France, the Jews are very close to power, and it is usually a sign that things do not go well for native middle and working classes. Indeed things go from bad to worse. While a million of French workers demonstrated against Macron’s government, the French parliamentarians discussed antisemitism. Not surprisingly, they accepted the definition produced by a Jewish organisation. Demurring against this definition caused a lot of trouble for Corbyn; Macron had learned a lesson.

I am all for such definitions; their scope is too narrow, if anything. I’d prefer a broad definition that would describe as anti-Semite any person who attends a church or a mosque; who does not contribute to Jewish settlements; who does not believe in God-chosen Jewish nation being above all mortal laws. Maybe then the Gentiles would be healed of their fear of being labelled ‘anti-Semite’. This fear kills their souls more than the accusation. Though, best of people, Shakespeare, St John the Divine, Dostoyevsky and Chesterton are considered anti-Semites, and it did not diminish their fame and glory.

You can’t escape this label; if they want they will attach it to your name. Likewise, a man can’t avoid being called a male chauvinist and accused of harassment by a radical feminist. Anna Ardin, the Swedish feminist who accused Julian Assange of rape and destroyed his life as surely as if she’d knifed him, also accused a student of harassment because he avoided looking at her. Such accusations should be shrugged off.

France is not doing well because its elites are engaged in the rip-off and sale of their country’s industrial, political, and cultural assets. In the last few years, France had lost Alstom, Pechiney, Technip, Alcatel. These premium assets were lost to US companies. French businessmen and officials who were supposed to care about French heirlooms, betrayed their trust and defrauded their country, that’s why France is not doing well.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy, Ideology • Tags: Anti-Semitism, Britain, France, Jews 
🔊 Listen RSS

The impeachment farce is basically a Jewish affair, noted the Israeli daily Haaretz. The soul and engine of the impeachment is Adam Schiff, ‘Shifty Schiff’ in Trump’s colourful expression. His name brings to mind the Jewish banking house of Schiff, top Jewish aristocracy of money and media. The second man is Greedy Goldman, or Daniel Sachs Goldman, the chief interrogator in the impeachment hearings. Sachs Goldman or Goldman Sachs, another top Jewish name and bank. The third Jew in the heart of the impeachment is infamous George Soros. Haaretz could add that the top witnesses for prosecution are also Jewish, the bizarre Gordon “Zelensky loves your ass” Sondland, or Vindman the Spy. Trump would never dare to notice this remarkable coincidence, concludes Haaretz. Only antisemites would.

Instead of pointing this open conspiracy out and calling the Americans to save the Republic, President Trump appealed to the Jewish sense of gratitude. He bestowed now his third fabulous gift to the Jewish state, namely recognition of the settlements for-Jews-only on the stolen Palestinian land, after he recognised Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. Or perhaps the fourth, if you’d count his withdrawal out of Iran agreement. He legalised the settlements by the unilateral decision of the superpower, something the Israeli governments never could or dared. If the US were be as omnipotent as it was twenty years ago, that would be the end of Oslo and Geneva agreements, and practically the end of attempts to create a State of Palestine alongside with Israel, something Israeli nationalists wanted all along. With the US engulfed in the cold civil war, it could lead to self-de-legitimisation of the US, or to collapse of Two States paradigm. It is apparently a huge gift to the Jewish state.

Trump thought that his generosity would melt Jewish hearts, and they would let him govern in peace. But no, the Jews accept every gift as their due; it is absence of a gift that is surprising and troublesome, probably to be explained by anti-Semitism. They said that his recognition will annoy the Democrats, and they will take it away when they regain the White House.

Probably this reaction is exactly what Trump counted on, for he does not care about Palestine or Israel. His target audience is the US Jewry. Trump hopes that the Jews who care about Israel more than they care about the US would switch allegiance and support him, so the Democrats wouldn’t win the next elections and roll back the recognition. Judging by past experience, the Jews will gain by this competition for their favours, while the US will lose, and so will Trump.

It is worth our while to see who are the Jewish persons in the impeachment proceedings. Adam Schiff, whether a remote relation to the banker Jacob Schiff or just a namesake, could be a reincarnation of the old man; for he inherited his love for mass immigration and hatred to Russia. Before Jacob Schiff’s time, the US Jewry was a small community. Wealthy, yes, but very small. Jacob Schiff who arrived to the American shore in the mid-19th century, understood that he needed numbers, masses, demography on his side if he wanted Jews to become an important player. He organised mass immigration of Russian and Polish Jews into the US. “He lobbied Congress and President Grover Cleveland to prevent the passage of legislation which would have prevented the massive wave of Russian Jewish immigrants from whom most current New York Jews descend”, says the Jewish source. Millions of Jews arrived and eventually changed the US in their own image. Now Adam Schiff wants to import millions of Third Worlders to cement the change started by Jacob.

Jacob Schiff’s hatred of Russia had been quite extraordinary, even by the standards of that time. A prominent banker, he issued a war loan to Japan to build its fleet to fight Russia. Accidentally, the fleet built with Schiff’s money had attacked Pearl Harbour some years later, so every victim of the Pacific War and his descendants may sue Schiffs for their contribution.

Long before Soros and NED, Jacob Schiff played the regime change game in Russia, bankrolling the revolutionaries. (He contributed to February 1917 revolution, the liberal pro-Western coup, but the Russians screwed him by doing another coup in November 2017 and installing the Bolsheviks; his agents had to flee and Russia regained its independence, while Schiff had lost his investment.)

Adam Schiff is rabidly anti-Russian just like Jacob was. He dreams of a regime change in Moscow like Jacob did. He claimed Russian conspiracy had brought Trump to the White House; he refused to accept Mueller’s enquiry results and still insists that the Russians interfered in the US elections. His words of “damning evidence” of collusion with Russia, “more than circumstantial,” a scandal of a size “beyond Watergate” had poisoned Russo-American relations, and made Trump presidency a lame duck from the first moment.

Adam Schiff is so dishonest and unfair that even the WSJ noted his innovation in law. “Is it an impeachable offense for a president to resist impeachment? House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff told CNN last week that White House officials’ refusal to testify in his committee’s impeachment probe could lead to “obstruction of Congress” charges against President Trump.” Perhaps, after all, Adam Schiff is a relative to another swindler, Irwin Schiff, who died in federal prison in 2015 while he was serving a 13 years sentence for tax evasion. (Probably it is anti-Semitic to mention the old canard that some Jews could be swindlers, but we’d dare anyway).

The chief interrogator Daniel Sachs Goldman has an excellent pedigree for a Jewish macher (wheeler dealer). He went to the school “President Barack Obama’s daughters, Sasha and Malia attended, as well as Chelsea Clinton, former Vice President Joe Biden’s grandchildren, Richard Nixon’s daughter Tricia and Theodore Roosevelt’s son Archibald”. His wife is a Vice President of Goldman Sachs Bank, the “great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity”, in the famous words of Matt Taibbi. His family had established a special program called The Birthright-Taglit. The name implies that every Jew has a birthright for the land of Palestine, as opposed to its natives. The program allows American Jewish youths to make a free (courtesy of US taxpayer) trip to Israel, to meet other Jewish young men and girls and to fight intermarriage by marrying within the tribe. That’s right, you are forbidden to approve of such racist measures, but Jews are allowed to run it as a tax-exempt charity.

Daniel Sachs Goldman’s family is also a founder of New Israel Fund, another tax-exempt, that directs money saved from the US tax authorities (where it could reach goyim) towards Jews-only purposes.

George Soros is another prominent Jewish participant in the impeachment proceedings. The old reptilian is so ugly that our soul (being naturally Wildean) feels he is immoral, too. The facts on the ground confirm this premonition. If the Ukraine had been turned from a jolly rotund East European country into pale grim disaster area, he is partly responsible.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Lawyers have a very dubious reputation. Since the days of old, they were considered scumbags; advocates being shysters at best; judges as despotic tyrants at worst. Half a millennium ago, Maître Rabelais said: There is no cause so bad that it does not find itself an advocate, otherwise there would be no lawsuits in the world. Judges were considered even worse; the best judge is the one who decides the case by drawing lots, added the Renaissance writer. And still, in his days the legal profession presented a threat but to a private person, not to the realm or to the order of things. Judges are extremely conservative, generalised Vladimir Lenin, himself a lawyer by education, in the beginning of the 20th century.

Well, they aren’t conservative anymore; they are full of zeal to reshape the world. The United States had been the first (and for a long time the only) country in the world to turn yesterday’s scumbags into a powerful threat to the common sense and to the order of things. The legal establishment is omnipotent in the Shining City upon the Hill. They destroyed the tobacco industry by a single decision, ordering sot-weed factors to pay billions to people who enjoyed their smooth and cooling smoke; they ruined Palestine by ordering them and Iranians to pay billions to the Jews who fought them. They may decide that abortion or same-sex marriage is a universal right, while free education and health care are not. They may forbid stopping a foreign invasion, but allow impoverishment of the native citizenry. There never was a king as powerful as the US legal establishment.

The impeachment trial of President Trump is an attempt to dislodge a legitimately elected ruler by quasi-legal methods. If his opponents would rely upon the US voters, they wouldn’t go into this farce. But they know they can’t win; that’s why they want to remove Trump by trying him for his alleged crimes.

In many countries the leaders had been tried and imprisoned, usually on the basis of unsubstantiated claims of ‘corruption’. If in the past, the rulers rarely went to jail; unless after a coup or military defeat; now they are arrested and sentenced at a drop of a hat for disobeying the Deep State orders, too. (The Wikipedia list is whimsical but useful.) In such a way, the leaders are reminded that elections are not the most important thing: they must also act in accordance with the will of establishment, national and Western. If populists are doing what the people want disregarding the establishment’s will, they may well end in prison, like the presidents of Brazil and Argentina did. “Nobody is above the Law!” the lawyers exclaim when they send another leader to jail; and they add, “This is the rule of Law!”

Sorry to say, the rule of law is not a wonderful thing. We have a stark choice whether we want democracy, or the rule of law. These two regimes are not identical, – they stand in direct opposition. In a democracy, the people rule via their elected representatives; under the rule of law, the judges rule supreme. Yes there is the Law, but the judges interpret it as they see fit. They may nullify a law, or reinterpret it in an entirely different vein.

This new tendency of using Law as a tool in politics is the gift of Jews to perplexed mankind. The Jews were traditionally ruled by sages, or judges. Theoretically, Talmudic sages interpreted the Law of Halacha, but actually the rule of Halacha was the rule by sages, and only the Enlightenment broke its iron grip. Jews were set free, but this freedom did not last long. As the world increasingly Judaises, the sages take over the decision-making all over the world.

In England, the Supreme Court had been established quite recently, in 2009, and already it has stopped PM Johnson from achieving Brexit on time. In the US with its highly advanced Judaisation, the Supreme Court blocked every initiative of President Trump. The old witch Ruth Bader Ginsburg, though unelected by the people, still is more powerful than the US President. The legal establishment supported by media can make elections meaningless.

These two non-elected and non-democratic powers of Media and Judiciary entered into conspiracy against the elected parliament and government.

In the smaller Jewish state of Israel, the judges want to govern. They think they know better what should be done than elected statesmen; and they find Bibi Netanyahu too independently minded. He is too friendly with Donald Trump and (God save us!) even with Mr Putin. Netanyahu developed his own electoral base; he does not obey the old elites. For the last few years they have tried to remove Bibi and substitute him with a more pliable politician, like they did years ago with Ehud Olmert.

Ehud Olmert did not have a snowball’s chance in hell. Every day the newspapers and the TV channels broadcast new accusations against him and informed of fresh police investigations. Often the Israeli public learned of Olmert’s alleged misdeeds before the Prime Minister himself did. Police did not just leak the details of the case – they poured it out like tropical torrent. The police went after him; the Supreme Court began deliberations, while newspapers and the TV blew it out of proportion. Thus two mighty powers of Israeli politics, the media and the legal system, united in one effort to unseat Olmert, and he caved in. This episode demonstrated who actually runs Israel. Though media amplifies, the judges judge.

Now, Netanyahu is getting the same treatment. The Police leak horror stories from an investigation room to a selected journalist, and he would spill it all over media. Every time Bibi asked to make accusations public and to allow him to defend himself openly, the Attorney General refused him saying he does not want to have a trial by media – while doing exactly that.

It is hard to sympathise with the war criminal Netanyahu; but he has an advantage of being elected, while his opponents were appointed. Olmert ended in jail, and they want to send Netanyahu to jail, too. Not for murdering thousands of Palestinians, neither for destroying thousands of homes, but for something technical, like the silly quid pro quo reason of Trump’s impeachment. The idea was that his electorate would desert him if he were charged with crimes. But they had not enough stuff for the proper charge, until they got confessions of Netanyahu’s minions.

Last week the Israeli Justice Minister shocked the public. He had revealed the methods used by the judicial establishment against Netanyahu. These methods are remarkably similar to those applied by the Deep State against President Trump. It is threats, extortion and blackmail. Israeli police assaulted Bibi’s assistants like Trump’s enemies attacked Manafort, Cohen, Stone.

When an investigative journalist wanted to publish how the confessions were squeezed out of Bibi’s confidante, the judicial authorities immediately slammed him with a gagging order.

Israelis are prompt to gag the publication of whatever the authorities do not like. Only after many years the Israeli people had learned that their authorities stole children from Yemeni Jews, treated Moroccan children skin diseases by X-raying them to death, sterilised Ethiopian women, blew up synagogues in Baghdad, kidnapped the nuclear technician Vanunu in Rome, bombed the USS Liberty and poisoned drinking water in Acre. All these crimes were protected by a gagging order from prying eyes.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Benjamin Netanyahu, Deep State, Israel 
A talk with Oleg Tsarev reveals the alleged identity of the "Trump/Ukraine Whistleblower"
🔊 Listen RSS

Top Dems are involved in the plundering of the Ukraine: new names, mind-boggling accounts. The mysterious ‘whistleblower’ whose report had unleashed the impeachment is named in the exclusive interview given to the Unz Review by a prominent Ukrainian politician, an ex-Member of Parliament of four terms, a candidate for Ukraine’s presidency, Oleg Tsarev.

Mr Tsarev, a tall, agile and graceful man, a good speaker and a prolific writer, had been a leading and popular Ukrainian politician before the 2014 putsch; he stayed in the Ukraine after President Yanukovych’s flight; ran for the Presidency against Mr Poroshenko, and eventually had to go to exile due to multiple threats to his life. During the failed attempt to secede, he was elected the speaker of the Parliament of Novorossia (South-Eastern Ukraine). I spoke to him in Crimea, where he lives in the pleasant seaside town of Yalta. Tsarev still has many supporters in the Ukraine, and is a leader of the opposition to the Kiev regime.

Oleg, you followed Biden story from its very inception. Biden is not the only Dem politician involved in the Ukrainian corruption schemes, is he?

Indeed, John Kerry, the Secretary of State in Obama’s administration, was his partner-in-crime. But Joe Biden was number one. During the Obama presidency, Biden was the US proconsul for Ukraine, and he was involved in many corruption schemes. He authorised transfer of three billion dollars of the US taxpayers’ money to the post-coup government of the Ukraine; the money was stolen, and Biden took a big share of the spoils.

It is a story of ripping the US taxpayer and the Ukrainian customer off for the benefit of a few corruptioners, American and Ukrainian. And it is a story of Kiev regime and its dependence on the US and IMF. The Ukraine has a few midsize deposits of natural gas, sufficient for domestic household consumption. The cost of its production was quite low; and the Ukrainians got used to pay pennies for their gas. Actually, it was so cheap to produce that the Ukraine could provide all its households with free gas for heating and cooking, just like Libya did. Despite low consumer price, the gas companies (like Burisma) had very high profits and very little expenditure.

After the 2014 coup, IMF demanded to raise the price of gas for the domestic consumer to European levels, and the new president Petro Poroshenko obliged them. The prices went sky-high. The Ukrainians were forced to pay many times more for their cooking and heating; and huge profits went to coffers of the gas companies. Instead of raising taxes or lowering prices, President Poroshenko demanded the gas companies to pay him or subsidise his projects. He said that he arranged the price hike; it means he should be considered a partner.

Burisma Gas company had to pay extortion money to the president Poroshenko. Eventually its founder and owner Mr Nicolai Zlochevsky decided to invite some important Westerners into the company’s board of directors hoping it would moderate Poroshenko’s appetites. He had brought in Biden’s son Hunter, John Kerry, Polish ex-President Kwasniewski; but it didn’t help him.

Poroshenko became furious that the fattened calf may escape him, and asked the Attorney General Shokin to investigate Burisma trusting some irregularities would emerge. AG Shokin immediately discovered that Burisma had paid these ‘stars’ between 50 and 150 thousand dollar per month each just for being on the list of directors. This is illegal by the Ukrainian tax code; it can’t be recognised as legitimate expenditure.

At that time Biden the father entered the fray. He called Poroshenko and gave him six hours to close the case against his son. Otherwise, one billion dollars of the US taxpayers’ funds won’t pass to the Ukrainian corruptioners. Zlochevsky, the Burisma owner, paid Biden well for this conversation: he received between three and ten million dollars, according to different sources.

AG Shokin said he can’t close the case within six hours; Poroshenko sacked him and installed Mr Lutsenko in his stead. Lutsenko was willing to dismiss the case of Burisma, but he also could not do it in a day, or even in a week. Biden, as we know, could not keep his trap shut: by talking about the pressure he put on Poroshenko, he incriminated himself. Meanwhile Mr Shokin gave evidence that Biden put pressure on Poroshenko to fire him, and now it was confirmed. The evidence was given to the US lawyers in connection with another case, Firtash case.

What is Firtash Case?

The Democrats wanted to get another Ukrainian oligarch, Mr Firtash, to the US and make him to confess that he illegally supported Trump’s campaign for the sake of Russia. Firtash had been arrested in Vienna, Austria; there he fought extradition to the US. His lawyers claimed it is purely political case, and they used Mr Shokin’s deposition to substantiate their claim. For this reason, the evidence supplied by Shokin is not easily reversible, even if Shokin were willing, and he is not. He also stated under oath that the Democrats pressurised him to help and extradite Firtash to the US, though he had no standing in this purely American issue. It seems that Mrs Clinton believes that Firtash’s funds helped Trump to win elections, an extremely unlikely thing [says Mr Tsarev].

Talking about Burisma and Biden; what is this billion dollars of aid that Biden could give or withhold?

It is USAID money, the main channel of the US aid for “support of democracy”. First billion dollars of USAID came to the Ukraine in 2014. This was authorised by Joe Biden, while for Ukraine, the papers were signed by Mr Turchinov, the “acting President”. The Ukrainian constitution does not know of such a position, and Turchinov, “the acting President” had no right to sign neither a legal nor financial document. Thus, all the documents that were signed by him, in fact, had no legal force. However, Biden countersigned the papers signed by Turchynov and allocated money for Ukraine. And the money was stolen – by the Democrats and their Ukrainian counterparts.

Two years ago, (that is already under President Trump) the United States began to investigate the allocation of 3 billion dollars; it was allocated in 2014, in 2015, in 2016; one billion dollars per year. The investigation showed that the documents were falsified, the money was transferred to Ukraine, and stolen. The investigators tracked each payment, discovered where the money went, where it was spent and how it was stolen.

As a result, in October 2018, the U.S. Department of Justice opened a criminal case for “Abuse of power and embezzlement of American taxpayers’ money”. Among the accused there are two consecutive Finance Ministers of the Ukraine, Mrs Natalie Ann Jaresko who served 2014-2016 and Mr Alexander Daniluk who served 2016-2018, and three US banks. The investigation caused the USAID to cease issuing grants since August 2019. As Trump said, now the US does not give away money and does not impose democracy.

The money was allocated with the flagrant violation of American law. There was no risk assessment, no audit reports. Normally the USAID, when allocating cash, always prepares a substantial package of documents. But the billions were given to Ukraine completely without documents. The criminal case on the embezzlement of USAID funds had been signed personally by the US Attorney General, so these issues are very much alive.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Amid the usual hysterics of ‘impending genocide’ and ‘brutal betrayal’, the long-expected Turkish operation in northeast Syria is rolling, and Turkish troops accompanied by their Syrian rebel allies quickly advance into the former US occupation zone east of the Euphrates River, pushing the Kurdish nationalist militias away from the border. The American soldiers withdrew from the area by the order of their Supreme Commander (save some Special Forces who came under fire but safely retreated).

The Kurds (or their advisers) excel in PR and they created a beautiful image of their girl fighter, which resonates with the paradigm of a strong Superwoman beating the hell out of male chauvinist pigs. Every second recent action movie has such a girl, carrying out the War on Man. Lefty Western feminists love them, as they loved its prototype, Israeli Sabra soldier girl. The Syrians do not share this love. They view the Kurd fighters as brutal ethnic cleansing US mercenaries.

‘One Israel is more than enough’, say the locals who are mighty pleased with the forthcoming defeat of the “New Israel”, the Kurdish entity of ‘Rojava’, or ‘Syrian Kurdistan’. Its backbone, YPG fighters, had made a good try in using the civil war as an opportunity to carve out a piece of Syria for them. Their ruthless gangs flourished “under the canopy of F-18s, as the YPG has stretched across a vast swath of northeast Syria, acting as the Kurdish janissaries of America. The Kurds were engaged in their own nation-building exercise on the ruins of ISIS,’ in words of the Forbes.

President Obama, acting upon advice of his neocon advisers, had chosen them as a proxy to fight ISIS on the ground, as he removed the bulk of American soldiers out of Syria. It was a rotten advice: the Kurdish YPG was a Syrian subsidiary of a veteran Kurdish terror organization in Turkey that killed tens of thousands of Turks over forty years of activity. The Turks weren’t amused when fighters and weapons began to flow from Syria to the terrorists in Turkey.

“The YPG was given an inch and took a mile, and built huge extensions to its homeland in Syria along the Turkish border” – continued the Forbes.

However, their attempt misfired, and now they have to retreat inland. They threatened to fight the Turks tooth and claw, but their bite is not as awesome as their bark. They declare that they ‘will win, or will die‘ to a CNN lady reporter, but in reality the Kurds are good at retreating. During the previous Turkish operation in March 2018 centred at the enclave of Afrin, they promptly withdrew when facing superior force. The Kurds withdrew even faster from Kirkuk and Mosul in Iraq, in October 2017, following a similar scenario of independence claims, threats “to win or die”, American calls for restraint and European insistence that “military action must be stopped immediately”. They have no reason to fight to the death: they know they and their families can continue carry on their lives peacefully after the independence-seeking firebrands will be gone. The collapse of the nascent Kurdish entities had not been accompanied by massacres or ‘genocide’ as the prophets of doom predicted: those chimeras dispersed rather painlessly like mist at sunrise.

The Syrian patriots are ambivalent about the Turkish invasion. It’s good that the Americans have been withdrawing and their occupation zone is shrinking. It would be even better if they would all leave Syria completely, but even this partial withdrawal is a good start. It’s good that the Turks are squeezing out the ruthless gangs of Kurdish nationalists. Not only the Kurds entered into a close alliance with the United States and Israel, but they also carried out violent ethnic cleansing of the local Arab population, trying to create a “Syrian Kurdistan”. Now Syrian Arabs will be able to return to their homes.

But what if the territory liberated from Kurdish militants would become permanently occupied by Turkey and its allied Islamist militants? It is the choice between the devil and the deep blue sea. Turks say their plans are limited – to push the Kurdish fighters some 20 miles from the border, disrupt the “Syrian Kurdistan” venture, and transfer Syrian refugees from Turkey to the created strip of land. President Erdogan knows that his citizens are fed up with millions of Syrian refugees. If he doesn’t figure out how to drive them back to Syria, the Turks can drive him away – this scenario has already been rehearsed in Istanbul, where citizens voted for the opposition promising to make peace with Assad and send the Syrians back home. Erdogan says he recognises the integrity and sovereignty of Syria, and that is already big progress, but Damascus doubts his sincerity and condemns the invasion.

There is a simple way to deal with the refugee problem: let them go home, to their own towns and villages. Damascus government wants it and ready to accept them, granting amnesty and pardon for past offences. But Erdogan is not ready for that, yet. The Americans do not want to vacate their zone, for it has oil. If Assad will get it, he will be able to rebuild Syria with his own money without assistance from the West. The West wants a Syrian government poor and broke, needing money, taking loans, begging for help. That’s why they do not allow the Syrian army to enter the areas beyond the Euphrates. Syrians tried to make a move when the American troops departed, but they were warned they will be mercilessly bombed if they just try. For Syria it is too much: to fight Kurds, Turks and Americans at once.

The Kurds try to preserve what they can. Their supporters speak of impending “ethnic cleansing” – although until now the Kurds were the ones who carried out ethnic cleansing. The Kurds also threaten to resuscitate the defeated Islamic Caliphate by releasing tens of thousands of captured Islamist fighters. This blackmail is no bluff, but it will have to be dealt with if and when it happens.

The Europeans oppose the Turkish offensive. This is a violation of Syrian sovereignty, they say. For some reason, they did not recall Syrian sovereignty when the American troops and their Kurdish allies were deployed there. Brussels does not like the Turkish plan to move millions of Syrian refugees back to Syria in the territory freed from Kurdish militias. The EU wants Syrian war to go until Assad is gone and a neo-colonial administration comes in his stead.

Erdogan knows how to reply to Europeans. If you condemn my measures, he said, I’d unleash three and a half million refugees upon Europe. This threat does not scare Kurdish supporters in Europe: Antifa, various Jewish organisations and pro-immigrant NGOs would just welcome more diversity. But the governments know it could become very hard to stop such a wave.

 
Israel Shamir
About Israel Shamir

Israel Shamir has written extensively on public affairs, primarily relating to the Israel/Palestine conflict and Russia, including three books, Galilee Flowers, Cabbala of Power and Masters of Discourse available in English, French, German, Spanish, Russian, Arabic, Norwegian, Swedish, Italian, and Hungarian.

He describes himself as a native of Novosibirsk, Siberia, who he moved to Israel in 1969, served as paratrooper in the army and fought in the 1973 war, afterwards turning to journalism and writing. During the late 1970s, he joined the BBC in London later living in Japan. After returning to Israel in 1980, Shamir wrote for the Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz, and was the Knesset spokesman for the Israel Socialist Party (Mapam), also translating and annotating the cryptic works of S.Y. Agnon, the only Hebrew Nobel Prize winning writer, from the original Hebrew into Russian.

His perspective on the Israel/Palestine conflict was summed up in The Pine and the Olive, published in 1988 and republished in 2004. That same year, he was received in the Orthodox Church of Jerusalem and Holy Land, being baptised Adam by Archbishop Theodosius Attalla Hanna. He now lives in Jaffa and spends much time in Moscow and Stockholm; he is father of three sons.