National Cliteracy Campaign

Ad campaign for cliteracy.
Ad campaign for cliteracy.

Please support everyone. It’s a great cause. Everyone should learn how to read a love map. Let’s make this a national campaign.
Here is a sample of some of the cliteracy materials we are using in our cliteracy classes.

Some fun facts about the clit.

  • The clitoris contains at least 8,000 sensory nerve endings. To put that into perspective, the penis has about 4,000.
  • Only one quarter of the clitoris is visible. The rest of it is inside the body.
  • The clitoris and penis are the same materials put together in a different way. The clitoris has a glans, a foreskin (also known as the hood), erectile tissue and a teeny-tiny shaft. It even swells when it’s aroused!
  • By the time a woman is 32 years old, the clitoris will be almost four times as big as it was at the onset of puberty.

Freedom and Democracy!

Instances of the United States overthrowing, or attempting to overthrow a foreign government since the Second World War. (* indicates successful ouster of a government)

  • China 1949 to early 1960s
  • Albania 1949-53
  • East Germany 1950s
  • Iran 1953 *
  • Guatemala 1954 *
  • Costa Rica mid-1950s
  • Syria 1956-7
  • Egypt 1957
  • Indonesia 1957-8
  • British Guiana 1953-64 *
  • Iraq 1963 *
  • North Vietnam 1945-73
  • Cambodia 1955-70 *
  • Laos 1958 *, 1959 *, 1960 *
  • Ecuador 1960-63 *
  • Congo 1960 *
  • France 1965
  • Brazil 1962-64 *
  • Dominican Republic 1963 *
  • Cuba 1959 to present
  • Bolivia 1964 *
  • Indonesia 1965 *
  • Ghana 1966 *
  • Chile 1964-73 *
  • Greece 1967 *
  • Costa Rica 1970-71
  • Bolivia 1971 *
  • Australia 1973-75 *
  • Angola 1975, 1980s
  • Zaire 1975
  • Portugal 1974-76 *
  • Jamaica 1976-80 *
  • Seychelles 1979-81
  • Chad 1981-82 *
  • Grenada 1983 *
  • South Yemen 1982-84
  • Suriname 1982-84
  • Fiji 1987 *
  • Libya 1980s
  • Nicaragua 1981-90 *
  • Panama 1989 *
  • Bulgaria 1990 *
  • Albania 1991 *
  • Iraq 1991
  • Afghanistan 1980s *
  • Somalia 1993
  • Yugoslavia 1999-2000 *
  • Ecuador 2000 *
  • Afghanistan 2001 *
  • Venezuela 2002 *
  • Iraq 2003 *
  • Haiti 2004 *
  • Somalia 2007 to present
  • Libya 2011*
  • Syria 2012

What Language Is This?

3. Üzeyir Hacibeylinin ortaya çikisi.
4. Köroglu operasi.
5. Üzeyir Hacibeyli ve Güney.
6. Üzeyir Hacibeyli ve Dünyasi.
7. Sonuç.
Giris
Bireylerin ve uluslarin fitratinda bir tekamül duygusu mevcuttur. Kendi yapisi üzerinde gelismeyi ve manevi genislemeyi basaran uluslar, yalniz kendileri için degil, bütün insanlik için de akli, zihni, sanatsal büyüme olanaklarini saglamis olurlar. Ne var ki evrensellik hep yöresellikten baslar.
Ayni iman gibi. Topraktan baslayip Tanri’da bitenbir ahlak, idrak, düsünce yolu oldugu gibi insanlik dünyasindaki terakki de yöresellikten baslayip bütün evreni içeren bir gelisme süreci, tekamül yoludur. Yani milli kimligin gelismesi, degismesi, genislemesi o kimlige mensup olan bireylerin zihinsel imkanlarini, kavrayicilik güçlerini artirdigi için genel olarak insanligin mutluluguna katkida bulunmak da müyesser oluyor.
Milli kimlige mensubiyet duygusu Arsimet’in “Dayanak Noktasi”na benzer. Yani bir etnik yapiya dayanarak bütün insanligi etkileme. Arsimet “Bana bir dayanak noktasi gösterin yer küresini yerinden oynatiyim” derdi. Içinde dogdugumuz ve mensubu oldugumuz kimlige dayanildigi ölçüde dünya ve insanlik medeniyetine, zekasina, marifetine, ilmine, sanatina katkida bulunmak mümkün.
Milleti t’e girerken, Arap-milletlerinin tersine hiçbir milli projesi olmadan bir kabullenme egilimi ve süreci içerisine girmistir. Hatta ne oldugunu bilmeden onu kabul etmistir. Kurandan sadece yanlis sesletimle (talaffuz) “Bismillah ar rahman arrehim” cümlesini ezber bilirlerdi. Bugün de öyledir.
921 yilinda Karahanli sultani Satuk Bugra devletin çikari(!) icabi Hanefi mezhebini kabul eder, adini da degstirip Abdulrahman koyar. Dilde ilk yabancilasma bu sekilde baslar. Yani lügün i kabüllenmesi ile es zamanda baslayan yabancilasma süreci! “Zaman dilden ibaretdir”, “dil ulusun evidir” der. Ulusu zamani (tarihi) ve evini adi altinda yabanciya birakir.
Lakin lügü Babek Hurremdin timsalinde direnis gösterir. Fakat Babek maglup edildikten sonra o döneme ait bütün kitaplar ve bilgiler araplar tarafindan yok edilir. Süphesiz ki 23 yil hilafetle savasan düzenli bir ordunun kendine özgü disiplini, bu disiplini barind kitaplari mevcut imis.
Dünyanin en büyük devleti ile savasan ve az kala onu deviren ve bir ihanet sonucu yenilen Hurremilik tabii ki yalniz savassal planda degil, medeniyet planinda da büyük bir güc imis. Bir kaç kale kalmis o döneme ait. Peki bu kalelerin mimarlari bu bilimsel bilgileri nasil elde etmisler, ne oldu o bilgilere? Sonrasi siyasi tarihi lügün adi altinda kendisini yok etme kararliligidir sanki!
Bu sebepten siyasi tarihine bakildiginda milli enerjisi Arap-dillerinin, kimliklerinin ve medeniyetlerinin yapilanmasina, gelismesine adanmis gibi görülmektedir. Sinirli ve devrilgen iktidar gücünü elinde bulunduran siyasi tarihi, sinirsiz ve devrilmez medeniyet ve dil iktidarini Araplara ve lara birakmistir. Söyle bir soru ortaya çikiyor: ‘in mahiyetinde mi düsmanligi var, yoksa suç lügün ‘i algilayis seklinde olmustur? Kur’an’da ve hadislerde
millet olgusunun kabul edildigi bellidir.
Demek ki, lügün ‘i yanlis algilamasi söz konusudur. Siyasi tarihi dili ve medeniyetini devre disi biraktigi için, lük Arap-milletleri dillerinin temellenmesi, gelismesi için bir kaynak haline gelmistir.
Arap milliyetçiligi merkezli v? Milliyetçiligi merkezli Sialik kimligini hep sömürmüsler. Tarihinde dili bürokrasi ve ilim dili olarak hiç kendi yapisi üzerinde gelismedi. Bunu milletinin talihsizligi, masum ulusunun sömürülmesi gibi de algilamak mümkün! Bir padisahinin Nizami Gencevi’nin çe yazmasini yasaklamasi bilinmektedir:
dili yakismaz sah neslimize
dili eksiklik getirir bize![1]
Siyasi iktidarlarinin bu sekilde davranmasinin psikolojik bir nedeni olsun gerek. Arap milliyetçilgi merkezli v? Milliyetçiligi merkezli Sialik tarafindan onlarca düsmanligni ksrükleyen hadisler uyduruldu. Bu yalan hadislerin gerçekmis gibi algilanmasi için yüz yillar boyunca teorik planda propagandalar yapildi, telkinler edildi.
Arap milliyetçiligi merkezli ve milliyetçeligi merkezli Sialik düsmanligini tarih boyunca canli ve gündemde tutmak için kitaplar yazdilar. Öyle bir süreç yasandi ki, siyasi iktidarlari da bu yalanlara inanacak düzeye geldiler. Kalsik tarihinin zirvesi olan Osmanlilar kendi soylarina “Etrak-i bi idrak” diyecek kadar kendilerini asagilar bir zihniyet içine girdiler.
Tarihi garipliklerle iç içedir. Bir taraftan öncesi Hakan ve Halk bütünlesmesi sonrasi dönemlerde görünmemektedir, diger taraftan da ‘in disinda kalan halklari yalnizca gelismemekle kalmamis, hem de tarihte büyük devlet ve imparatorluklar kuramamis, dillerini ve bütün kimlik unsurlarini kaybedip, baska milletlerin içinde tamamen yok olmuslar. öncesinde hakanlarin “Ey budunu…”
hitabetinin yerini sonrasinda “Ey ümmeti…” hitabeti almistir. Milletinin gelecegini, varligini ve kimligini göz ardi eden bu süreç siyasi, askeri[2], kültürel ve devletçilik anlaminda Büyük Ata’e kadar, özellikle musiki medeniyeti anlaminda Üzeyir Hacibeyli’ye kadar sürüp gitmistir.
Üzeyir Hacibeyli ile medeniyet tarihinde günes gibi dogan ve yeni bir olusum saglayan süreç gelecegine hedef göstermis ve de musiki tarihini bir düzen ve disipline tabi etmistir. Aydinlarini mecbur etmistir gibi büyük musiki alimleri ve filozoflari Araplarin ve larin tekelinden çikarip kendi tarih ve medeniyet suurunun alt yapisi gibi algilasinlar.
Bu bakimdan uluslasmasi sürecinde uygarlik bilinci açisindan özgüveni saglayan kisi Üzeyir Hacibeyli olmustur. Bu önemli mesele üzerine arastirmalarimizi ve yorumlarimizi sürdürürüz. Bu makale sanat ve düsünce adamlarindan Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin yaraticiligina ve çalisma alanlarina farkli bir açidan bakmaga özenmektedir.
19. asrin sonu ve 20. asrin baslarinda
1795’te Han Kaçar Sava’ya yakin eski bir köyü olan ‘i o dönemdeki stratejik ve güvenlik konumundan dolayi baskent ilan ederek, Kaçar- devletinin kurulma sürecini sona erdirmis olur. Aga Mehemmet Han Kaçar döneminde bir kural “Yasay-e Kaçariye” diye tasvip edilmisti.
Bu yasaya göre veliaht veya ülkeyi yönetecek sonraki padisahin sadece baba tarafindan Kaçar soyundan olmasi yeterli degildi, ana tarafindan da Kaçar- soyundan olmasi gerekirdi. Kaçariye’nin kuruldugu dönemde küçük bir çocuk olan [3]’ya Han çok güvenir ve onun büyük isler yapacagina inanirdi. Bu yüzden bir çok seferlerinde o cümleden Susa`ya hücüm zamani onu kendi yaninda bulundurmakta idi. Sonraki tarihi olaylar Han Kaçar’in hakli oldugunu ispatlayacakti.
Han Kaçar’in güçlü siyasi, harbi iradesi hesabina tesis edilen Memalike Maheyi Kaçar (Kaçarlarin korudugu memleketler) devleti sonraki dönemlerde-Kaçariye arasinda uzun süren savaslar sonucunda arazi kaybina ugrar. 1813 “Gülistan” ve 1828 “mençay” anlasmalari ile Kuzey Kaçariye’den koparilip, idaresine geçer.
‘in bütünlesmesi ugruna bütün halkini seferber etse de muvaffak olamaz. Bu amaç adina Ordusunu kurar, halkinin aydinlanmasi için gereken çabalari gösterir, ‘de Bati tipli okullar açar. ‘da onun reformlarina karsi çikan din adamlarina karsi din adamlarinin destegini arkasina alarak[4] mehverli bir Milli anlayisinin olusmasina özen gösterir.
Lakin yine de muvaffak olamaz, çünkü Safevilerden itibaren baslamis olan dinde lasmanin kökü çok derinlere kadar uzanmakta idi. bu amac ugruna, yani i inanc alaninda lastirma ugruna yalniz de on iki bin sünninin basini kesmisti.
Hatta Büyük Nadir de Safevi cehaletini tarihinden silmek isterken Kizilbaslar tarafindan öldürülür. Ancak ‘nin da reformlari yarim kalir, çünkü a zamanindan ve halkinin zihinsel ve düsünce düzeyinden çok ilerideydi. Böylece ne birlesir, ne de ‘a özgü sekilde aydinlanma süreci bir yarar saglamis olur. ‘nin cilik mefkuresini yaklasik bir asirdan sonra Emin Resulzade bayraklastiracakti.
Güney ve Kuzey ‘da farkli ortam ve tarihi süreç olusmaya baslar. Parçalandiktan sonra hem Güney’de ve hem de Kuzey’de önemli tarihi hadiseler meydana çikar. Farkli degisim ve olusum süreci baslar. Ancak Güney ‘daki olusumlar arkadan zorlama veya klasik milliyetçiliginin determinist baskilari nedeniyle milli hedeflerine göre bir çizgi dogrultusunda ortaya çikar.
Örnegin Merkezli Mesruta Hareketi aslinda klasik milliyetçiliginin modern milliyetçiligine uyum saglamasindan baska bir ise yaramadi. Yani ilimli ve lere karsi bir asimilasyon siyaseti uygulamayan Kaçar devleti nihayet Mesruta tarafindan devrildi ve sülalesi iktidari gasbetti. Kaçariyeyi deviren zihniyeti mesruta yetistirdi.
Riza Han mesrutanin yavas yavas yetistirdigi bir devlet adami idi. Onun sahliga varisinda Ingilizlerin rolü olsa da, yalniz iç kosullar ve olusmus siyasi ortam böyle bir diktatörün iktidara tirmanisini icap etmekte idi. 19. asrin sonlarindan baslayip 20. asrin ikinci on yilligina kadar yatirilan siyasi ve ideoloji yatirimlar Riza Han ‘yi ortaya çikardi.
Mesruta Hareketinin ‘a bir yarari olamazdi ve olmadi da, çünkü mesruta milli mefkureden, milli musikiden, milli amaçtan ve milli ruhtan yoksun idi. Belki tek tük ve sevdalilari da var idi, lakin bunlarin sesi duyulmamakta idi. Merkezli Mesruta Hareketi fikren, milli kimlik, milli hedef, milli suur ve milli dil açisindan maglup idi. 1909’da kurulan Demokrat Partisi’nin slogani Sehname`den bir alinti olarak söyle
sekillenmisti:
“olmaz olsa, olmaz olum ben
Bu ulu ülkede kalmasin bir ten”[5]
Resulzade’nin bu partide aktif olmasinin nedeni belli idi. Resulzade bütün Kaçariye’de bir Milli Devleti kurmak istiyordu. Kuzey ‘da gerçeklestirdigini önce Kaçariye’de uygulamak istemisti. Lakin bu amaç için ne institutlasmis milli edebiyat, ne milli dilin oturulmasi ve sekillenmis olmasi, ne de gereken ulusal bilinç ve sekülarizm süreci mevcut idi. Bu realiteler ister istemez Resulzade’yi de kendi milli tarihi misyonunu gerçeklestirmek için Kuzey ‘a sevk edecekti.
Mesruta Hareketi’nin milli hedeflerine göre ayarlanmasi için Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin musikide açtigi yolun ‘den geçmesi, Güney insanlarinin duygularini, düsüncelerini, sosyal ve bireysel zevk anlayislarini, davranislarini etkilemesi gerekirdi.
Bunun için ise zaman lazim idi. Zaman faktörü çok önemlidir. Zaman geçtikçe bir çok degerler kendiliginden çöker ve yeni degerler üretilir. 9. asirdan baslayip ve Suubiye adi ile gelisip, Ihvan-üs Safa ve Sia semsiyesi altinda yogun edebiyat olusturan milliyetçiligi paradigmasi 19. Asirdan itibaren kendisine irkçiligina dayali baska rakip bir paradigma olusturmustu.
Rakip paradigmalar bir birini mahvetmezler, yer degistirirler. Bir birinin yasamalarina ve uzun ömürlü olmalarina yardimci olurlar, yalniz egemenlik ugruna da yarisirlar. Sülalesinin devrilip ve siyasi Sia’nin iktidara tasinmasi sövinizminin asimilasyon siyasetini hiç degistirmedi.
Humeynizmin gelisi ile egemenligi yipranmadi, sadece paradigmalar yer degistirdiler. Ari irkçiligi ve eski tarihine özenim mesruta edebiyatinda daha da abartili sekilde ortaya çikmisti. Bu iki rakip milliyetçiligi paradigmalari kendilerine özgü edebiyati, felsefesi, musikisi, ibadet tarzlari ve din anlayislari ile mevcutlardi.
Bunlarin kendi içinden çökmeleri, bu, ve karsiti bakis açilarinin dagilmasi için Üzeyir Hacibeyli devriminin Güney ‘i sarmasi ve suurlarda, duygularda yerlesmesi gerekecekti. Genç, enerjik, taze nefes ve tarihi duygularini, soydan gelme anilarini kendi bünyesinde barind, sistematize eden yeni bir paradigmanin, eskimis ve dejenere olmus paradigmalarini yipratmasi ve ‘dan dasi gerecekti. Iste bunun için zaman faktörü çok önemli idi. Bugün bu paradigmalar Üzeyir Hacibeyli musiki anlayisinin karsisinda direnecek güce sahip degiller.
Her musikinin açtigi bir yol var, derin psikolojik ve ruhsal etkisi olan bir yol. Musiki görünmez bir silahtir, bireyin ve milletin ruhunu öyle bir zamanda ve mekanda yakalar ki, onun etkisinden bütün bir tarih degismis olur. Iste 1945. yil Piseveri hareketinin ve sonraki hareketlerin Üzeyir Hacibeyli devrimi ile ilintili olmasi dolayisiyla milli içerikli olmalari makalenin akisi içerisinde ispatina çalisilacak bir konudur.
Kuzey baska bir yazgiyi yasamaktaydi. Felsefi gelenekler, düsünce gelenekleri, davranis gelenekleri altüst olup degistiginde bir çok hakikatler görünmeye baslar.
Büyük düsünceler ve degisimler uzun tarihi geleneklerin baskisindan kurtarildiginda ortaya çikar. Geleneklerin kirildigi zaman toplumlar yeni bir kimlikle kendilerini tanimlamak zorunda kalirlar. Yeni bir davranis ve bakis açisinin yaranmasina imkan yaranir. 1.000 yillik bir cehalet ortaminda yaygin olan gelenekler aydinlarini dilinde yazmaya zorluyordu. Bu gelenegin ömrüne son verilmis, bu gelenegin çöküs ve ölüm zamani gelmistir.
Sia müçtehitlerinin, din hadimlerinin aydinlar hakkinda çikardiklari ölüm fetvalari Kuzey ‘da geçerliligini kaybetmistir. lar bunu engellemisti. Kuzey kendisini milli açidan tanima ve tanimlama zorunda birakilmisti. Ortam degisikligi dünyaya farkli bakma olanagini saglamisti. Tarihinde ne zaman disina kayilmissa lük bilinci gelismege baslamistir. Bu nedenle de lük bilinci `da dogdu. Ataürk`ün dini tarafi zayif oldugu ,için lük suuru agirlik kazanmisti.
“Dünyada her bedbahtligin
Hem zarari, hem nef’i var”[6]
Kuzey aydinlari, kendi kimligi ile temasta bulunmasini engelleyen ve düsünce tarzini içeren din gibi faktörlerin ve hurafatin baskisindan toplumu kurtarmak için sekülar bir hareket baslatmislardi.
Yenilikler geleneklerin, hem de anti milli ve kötü siyasi geleneklerin yok edilmesi ile ortaya çikar. Dogrular, tarihin bakir anlarinin ürünüdür. Öyle anlar ki insan düsüncesi geleneklerin baskisindan kurtulmus ve özgürce düsünme imkanina sahip olmaktadir. Hakikatin suratina örtülmüs geleneklerin kara ve çirkin perdeleri yirtilmadan, insan suuru da bütün dogal imkanlarini mezara gömmüs olur.
Iste 1.000 yillik bir zaman süresi içerisinde bugün adlanan bu ortamda, kötü ve çirkin gelenekler nedeni ile milli entelekti, milli enerjisi, Arap-milliyetçiligine hizmet eden bir anlayisi içerisinde mahvedilmis, baskalarinin yükselisi için kaynak haline gelmis, mezara gömülmüs, bosuna heder edilmis, harcanmis bir tarihe dönüsmüstür. Resulzade milletinin milli sitem ve zulüm karsisinda direnmemesini, itiraz etmemesini bu sekilde anlatmaktadir: milleti milli zulmü kendi cinsinden gördügü için nefsi müdafaa refleksini yitirmistir.[7]
Kuzey bu kötü ortamdan ayrilmisti. Kuzey’in istilasina ugramasi bir yazgisizlik, ugursuzluk gibi görünse de baska bir sonuç ortaya çikti. Resulzade sunu bu sekilde anlatir:
Tanri isterse düsman hayirlar saglar![8]
Kuzey ortam degisikligine ugradiktan sonra 1.000 yillik cehalet ve karanlik bir muhitten ayrilma firsatini yakalamis, 1.000 yillik milliyetçiligi baskisindan kurtulmus, Necef’ten ve daha sonralar Kum’dan gelen larin fetvalarinin tesir dairesi disinda kalmis ve dolayisiyla Bati medeniyeti ile tanisma firsatini elde etmisti. Lar bu bölgeyi Kaçariyeden hem de kültürel anlamda tam ayirmak için lerini kendi dillerinde yazip okumaya zorlamistir.
Resulzade bu açidan ile `in milletlesmesini kiyas eder. ler gibi kendi dillerini sevmez dillerini köylü dili olarak tanimlar ve Isveç dilinde yazarlardi. Lakin kendi istilasina ugrattiktan sonra onlari da kendi dillerinde yazip okumaya zorlar. Bu davranisi ile Finlandiya`yi Isveç ve Kuzey `i da Kaçariye kültüründen koparmayi amaçlamakta idi.
Resulzade`ye göre hem `nin hem de Kuzey `in milli suura sahip olmalarinda `nin büyük rolü olmustur. 19. asirda Güney ‘da dinde Bati tipli reformlari baslatan Babi’lerin ve Bahai’lerin idam edilmeleri için larin fetva verdikleri, aydinlarin vahsice öldürüldükleri bir dönemde Kuzey ‘da ve digerleri sekülar sürecin temelini atmis, modern insan tipini simgeleyen zihniyet olusturuyorlardi.
19. asir medeniyetinin altin çagidir. Yalnizca büyük bir imparatorluk degil, hem de Bati medeniyetinin bir parçasi olmaya özen gösteren Avrasya gücü idi. Çernisefiski gibi büyük düsünürler vasitasi ile Avrupa’yi bile etkisi altina alan büyük bir devlet idi. Kaçariye ve gibi içe dönük degil, dis dünyaya açik bir devlet idi. Bu nedenle de çülük ekolleri ne Kaçariye’de, ne de dogdu. Cülük akimlari Ziya Gökalp’in de belirttigi üzere istilasinda bulunan halkalari arsinda boy gösterdi.
Kuzey ‘da Mirza Fetali Ahundov’dan baslayan intibah ve sekülarizm süreci çesi’nin nispeten kendi yapisi üzerinde gelismesine yol açti. Yayimladigi “Ekinci” gazetesi ilk kez olarak Kuzey ‘da degisik fikirlerin ve görüslerin ortaya çikmasina, farkli görüslerin bir biri ile tartismasina olanak sagladi.
“Ekinci”nin açtigi yolun uzantisi olarak sonralar “Molla Nasrettin”, “Füyuzat”, “Hayat”, “Açik söz” ve onlarca bu gibi dergiler ve gazeteler milli ruhun yükselisine yardimda bulunacak, bir kalabaligi, bir insanlar toplulugu izdihami millet yapma yönünde düsünce planinda seferber etmege çalisacakti. Aydinlari, hedefi belli olmayan ve hobisi horuz dövüstürmek olan bir toplumu tiyatrohanelere celb ve cezb etmege çalisacaklar, bir kalabaligi milli devlet kurmaya yönlendireceklerdi.
1918 yilinda kurulan Demokratik Halk Cumhuriyeti’nin temeli  milli dilde yazdigi dram eserlerinde atilmis, sonra da bu temel ve diger aydinlari tarafindan güçlenmis, genislemis ve sonunda bu süreç içinden Milli Devleti dogmustur.
Dilde, fikirde saglanan bu modernizasyon ve sekülarizasyon süreci klasik tarihinin uzantisi degil idi, tarihinin anti tezi idi. Bu süreç tarihinde Arap-Merkezli tutum ve davranislari sadece kabul etmemekle yetinmiyordu. Hem de bu tarihi hatalari siddetle kiniyordu. Bu devrimci tutumun basinda durmaktaydi. hakli olarak “Arap alfabesi bizi karanliklara sürüklüyor” diyordu. Dini cehaleti kökünden baltalayan ilk modernist mütefekkirdir.
Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin ortaya çikisi
Ifade edildigi üzere Kuzey ‘da farkli bir gelecek ugruna aydinlari fikri, manevi ve ahlaki faaliyetler içerisine girmistiler. Güney aydinlari (ve parmak sayi insanlar istisna olmak üzere) ‘i ‘a perçinleyip, kendilerini li-kimligi ile degil, soyut ve anlamsiz li kimligi ile tanimladiklari halde Kuzey aydinlari cografyasinin bir siyasi mekan olmasi ve milli kimliginin tespiti ugruna bütün fikri, zikri ve hissiyatlari ile haysiyetli bir mücadele yapmaktaydilar.
Kuzey ‘daki milletlesme ugruna verilen mücadele ve fikri savas gerçekten de büyük bir hamaset. Bu kutsal davanin sayisiz büyük erdemleri ve erenleri vardir, lakin bu makalenin konusu Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin yaraticiligi ve davasidir.
Üzeyir Hacibeyli’den önce musiki sanati gibi büyük sahsiyetler yetirmistir. Bu büyük insanlar soyut Dogusu musikisinin gelismesini, genislemesini ciddi sekilde etkilemisler. Üzeyir Hacibeyli ile baslayan yeni bir çag musikisi olarak tarihe geçer ve milli ruhun uyarilisina, uyanisina, milli ruhun yükselisine takan veir.
Üzeyir Hacibeyli ile baslayan musikisi klasik musikisiyle kiyasta farkli evrim evreleri yasasa da, yalniz bu evrim evreleri eskilere dayanan musikisinden de tam soyutlanmis sekilde gelismemistir.
Resulzade bu konu ile ilgili çok güzel bir tespitte bulunmaktadir: “Ümmetçilik tarihi milletlerinin ortak medeniyetidir. Milletlesme sürecinde ve milliyetçilik asamasinda her millet bu ortak deger ve medeniyet üzerine yatirdigi manevi yatirimini geri almak, kendi milli medeniyet suurunun bir parçasi yapmak zorundadir”.[10] Bu sebepten Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin musiki anlayisinin kökü sadece tarihine dayanmamaktadir, öncesi ve Asya müzik tarihini ve keyfiyyetini de içermektedir.
Sark musikisi içerisinde kaotik bir hayat süren musikisi, Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin devrimleri ile adi altinda bir düzen ve disipline tabi olarak dünyayi etkilemeye ve dünyadan etkilenmeye baslar. Her anda ve her yerde seciyelenip seçilen bir özgünlük musikisinin özelligi haline gelmistir.
Sanat yüksek bilgiye esaslanmalidir, derin bilgilerden yoksun olan sanat türü etkilesim kültüründen mahrum olur. Yalnizca etkilenim süreci içerisinde bir taklit evrelerini yasar. Böyle olunca da sanat eseri tarihsellikten yoksun birakilir, yeni bir tarih yaratma yetenegini kaybeder.
Bunun farkinda olan Üzeyir Hacibeyli ilk önce ve uygarlik tarihini ve genel olarak insanlik medeniyet tarihini ve içerigini ögrenmek amaci ile büyük bir telas içerisine girer. Bu anlayistan yola çikarak genis bir alani ve manevi dünyayi içeren musikisini ve daha sonra da Bati musikisini cografyasinda ve ulusunun zevk anlayisinda merkezlestirmeyi hedefler.
Çünkü ulusunun millet olmasi ve siyasi iradesini milli devletçilik seklinde tanimlamasi için her alanda, özellikle müziksel zevk alaninda farklilik saglamasi bir zaruret idi. Eflatun “Bir milletin musikisi ve müzikal zevk anlayisi degisirse, o milletin anayasasi ve gelenekleri de degisime ugrar” der.
Iste Üzeyir Hacibeyli tarihinde bu degisim ve olusumu saglamistir. Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin devrimleri sonucunda musikisi soyut Dogu Dünyasinin uzantisi olmaktan çikmis, duygulari, düsünceleri, fiilleri ve zevk anlayisi kendi ruhundan fisk bir milletin musikisine dönüsmüstür.
“sanat yapitinda ulusun ruhu rahatlanip ve kendisinin en mazmunlu dahili seyahatine dalar”[11] der. Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin yaraticiliginda ise ulusu yalnizca kendi ruhunun mazmununu kavramaz, hem de ruhuna milli musiki vasitasi ile bir yol açilir. Bu yolun basi tarihinin baslangicina dayaniyorsa, devami ve uzantisi da ulusunun ebedi yazgisi ve akibeti ile özdeslesmistir.
Üzeyir Hacibeyli çeyrek perdeleri çikararak musikisini soyut Dogu musikisinden farklandirdi. Bu farklilik zamanla halkinin siyasal, toplumsal yazgisinin da somutlasmasina ve lilasmasina neden olacakti. Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin yarattigi sanatsal uzayda görünen milli istikbal özgürlük ve özgünlük çagristiriyordu. Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin sanatina yüklenmis ütopik suur, hayal gücü ve duygular siyasi bagimsizligi minyatürlestirmekteydi.
Üzeyir Hacibeyli’ye kadar gelen makamlar (mugamlar) daha çok içe dönümlü, hayattan kopuk ruh halini animsatan bir musiki türü gibi görünmektedir.
Üzeyir Hacibeyli makamlarin içe dönümlü ve tezkiyeyi nefisle ugrasan yönünü muhafiza ederek onlarin disa dönümlülügünü, hayata girisini, insani ile bir yerde ulusal serefin ve istikbalin saglanmasinda vasita olmasini saglamis oldu. Bugün büyük bir gururla “milli haysiyetimizin koruyucularindan biri de dilimizin yani sira hem de musikimizdir” söyleyebiliriz. Yani eskilerden cem evlerinde, hanigahlarda sufilerin ruh halini anlatan makamlar Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin yaptigi devrimle hem de disa dönümlü bir tutum ve ifa tarzini sergilemis oldu.
Böylece makamlar, yalniz insanin iç dünyasinin psikolojik ayrintilarini anlatan mevkiinden çikip, iç dünyasi arinmis, temizlenmis insana sosyal ve milli hedefler ugruna mücadele yapmasini da telkin etmege basladi. Bu sebepten de makamlarinda subeler arasi renklere Üzeyir Hacibeyli tarafindan önem verildi.
Çünkü subelerin zeka ve düsünce planinda yarattigi genisligi ve derinligi renkler de duygu planinda yaratir. Düsünceli insanda raks etme ve düsüncelerini baskalari ile paylasma duygusu yaranmaya baslar. Içi sevgi ile dolmus insan toplumla kucaklasmak ister.
Duygulu düsünce ve düsünceli duygularin olusmasini hedeflemektedir Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin müzik anlayisi. Yani dünyayi sadece anlamak söz konusu degil, hem de onu estetik biçimde yasamak ve özümsemek de gerekmektedir. Dünyanin güzelligi güzel duygularin ürünüdür. Güzel görme bir yetenektir, Hacibeyli’nin sanati güzel görmek için dinleyicisini egitmektedir.
Dünyayi anlamak, tam anlamak ve sonra da dünyaya anlatmak. Yalin düsünce ile degil, musiki dalgalari altinda sarki söyleyerek, raks ederek dünyayi degistirmege özen gösterme ve topragi vatan yapma sevdasi. Iste bu degisen dünya insani ve ahlaki yönde degisip ve gelisecektir. Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin musiki anlayisinin özünde ve cevherinde duran budur.
Makamlardaki olusum diyalektigi bireyin içindeki çeliski ve tezatlarin bir düzene tabi olusu ile sonuçlanir. Bu diyalektik süreç Üzeyir Hacibeyli anlayisinda daha da mürekkep ve genis boyutlara ulasir. Çünkü birey sadece kendi iç tezatlari ile degil, sosyal bir olgu olarak toplumsal tezatlarla da karsi karsiyadir. Ister iç, isterse de dis dünya tezatlarini bir olgunluk sürecinden geçirerek disiplinize etmek zorundadir.
Bu nedenle de Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin musikisi yalniz ferdin iç dünyasinda baris ve iç kontrol saglamaz, hem de ulusunu yabanci etkenlerin vahim ve muharrip etkisinden kurtarip, onu özgün bir inanç ve ahlak nizamina tabi olmaya sevk eder. Bu inancin ve ahlak nizaminin cografyasi ve fikri kaynagi ise milliyetçiligidir, çülüktür, maneviyatidir.
Alman milliyetçilik ve milletlesme tarihinde yaptigi devrimleri Üzeyir Hacibeyli de medeniyet tarihinde yapmistir. Alman mitolojisine dayanarak fevk el-insan milli insan tipini simgeleyen operalar yaratmistir. Büyük Alman filozofu “Benim yaraticim, benim düsüncelerimin mimari” der. Gerçi sonralar kendi fevk el-insan felsefesine göre de kabullenmedi ve Alman insaninin daha da yüksek olmasini hak ettigini söyledi.
Üzeyir Hacibeyli de ‘da milli insan tipini mitolojilerine dayanarak yaratmis, remizlesmistir. Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin sanat yapitlarinda ister epik, isterse de lirik psikolojiyi kendi düsünce ve duygusunda tasimasi gereken insani Köroglu, Asli ve Kerem, Asik Garip gibi insanlari örnek almalidir görüsü ima edilmektedir.
Bu mitolojilerdeki tipler ister sosyal erekleri ugrundaki mücadelelerinde, isterse de kendi asklari ugrundaki özverilerinde, ahlaki ve iradi açidan denenmis ve inançlarindan, hedeflerinden hiçbir kosulda dönmeyen özverili insanlardi.
Böylece Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin sanat anlayisinda ‘in mitolojisi, tarihi, medeniyeti, dünü, bu günü ve gelecegi vahdet halindedir. Kolektif ve milli bilinçaltinda saklanan eski hayallerin, ülkülerin ve arketiplerin (unutulmus mefhumlarin) musiki araciligi ile hafizaya tasinmasi saglanmaktadir.
Bu yüzden de Üzeyir Hacibeyli musikisi ile kendi duygularini egiten, ruhunu aydinlatan insani sadece bir fert degil, o, artik bir fert olmanin ötesinde bir tarihtir, bir millettir ve bir misyonun savasçisidir. Bu misyonun adi dir. Hiç de tesadüfi degildir ki, 1988 yilinda bagimsizlik ugruna baslayan mücadele Köroglu operasinin uvertürü ile basladi.
Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin sanat anlayisi hem de saldirgan bir psikolojiye sahiptir. Gericilige, cehalete karsi barismaz bir tutum içinde ve insanlik disi törelere karsi saldirmaktadir. Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin sanati geçmisle, geçmisin eskimis degerleri ile ikna olmayan, fakat geçmisin olumlu, uyumsal degerleri ile de yüklü olan, bugün içinde kendisine yer ederek, yaratkan heyecan ve enerji ile yükümlü bir halle gelecege dogru bir yönelis sergilemektedir.
Hep yeni erekler pesinde kosmak ve yolculukta bulunmak hedefe varis kadar önemlidir. Burada Üzeyir Hacibeyli sanatina yansiyan Hüseyin Cavit felsefesine tanik olmaktayiz:
“Lazimsa cehaletle güresmek
Bir çare var ancak: yenilesmek”[12]
Çünkü:
“Bizler yenilessek bile daim
Bir eskilik az çok bize hakim”[13]
Iste bireysel psikolojiden tutmus, toplumsal psikolojiye kadar bize hakim olan ve beyin kapaklarimizi, duygularimizi tekamüle ve çagdasliga kapatan her seye karsi Üzeyir Hacibeyli sanati saldirmaktadir.
Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin müzik anlayisina göre insana teskinlik veren ne varsa devre disi birakilmalidir, çünkü teskinlik insani tembellestirir, çare aramaktan ali koyar ve bir misyonun adami olma halinden çikarir. Bu yüzden de faciayi bütünü ile yasamak lazim, teskinliksiz! Çünkü büyük idealler faciayi bütünü ile yasamakla dogar.
Birey ve millet kendi amellerinin ve davranislarinin mahsulüdür. Ferdi ve milli hayat büyük mutluluklarla beraber büyük facialarla da iç içedir. Bu nedenle de Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin makam anlayisinda derin kederlerin, tasalarin içinden büyük sevgi ve sevinçler, mutluluklar yogrulur.
Üzeyir Hacibeyli bir misyonun adami degil, bütün misyonlarin adamidir. Onun sanati dünya görüsünü ikiye bölmez, tersine, bütün görüsleri bütünlestirir. Bu nedenle Üzeyir Hacibeyli`nin sanati ‘in bütünlük projesidir.
Ancak bu bütünlük sadece cografi alani içermez. Bu bütünlük duygu, düsünce, zevk, raks, söz, öz, dil ve millet olmanin temel degerleri ne varsa hepsini içerir. Bu yüzden de Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin sanati tarihinde bir etnik kristallesmeyi hedeflemektedir. Kendi etnik bünyesi ile fikren, hissen tanisan, güçlenen ve sonra da evrenle bütünlesen bir ulusun olusum diyalektigini anlatmaktadir.
Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin sanati determinist degil, finalist bir felsefi mefhumu içermektedir. Bölgede kimligine karsi olusturulmus tarih disi yargilar ve asagilik kompleksi arkadan gelen bir determinal baski araci olarak duygu ve düsüncesini olumsuz yönde etkilemektedir. Üzeyir Hacibeyli sanatinin ve musikisinin tipledigi insan modeli bütün bunlari def etmekte, halkina final hedef göstermektedir.
Determinizm arkadan zorlayarak dünü oldugu gibi bugüne tasimakta kararliyken, finalite önden çekerek olusum saglar. Bu yüzden de Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin sanati finalist bir psikoloji içerdigi için düsüncesi ve duygulari seyyaliyet ortaminda hep çaglayan bir insan tipini olusturmak ister.
Yalniz Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin determinizm anlayisi mitolojisine, masallarina, söylencelerine ve folkloruna dayanmaktadir. Bu sebepten de Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin sanatindaki “olus”un arkasinda mantiksal tarihi nedenler ve önünde ise zihinsel derinliginden ve basiretinden yogrulan erekler, gayeler durmaktadir.
Bütün bu söylenenler nazara alindiginda böyle anlasilir ki Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin eredemi ve sanati bir örnektir (paradigmadir). Çünkü paradigmalar olaylara yanasma tarzini belli eder, yeni olusumlarin istikametini belirler ve örneklendirme sürecini saglar.
Asirlar boyunca bu örneklendirme eylemi toplumun ne yapacagi için örnekler sunar, sorunlarla karsilastiginda ön hazirlik gibi olanaklar yaratir. Paradigmalar ön olusum, ön yaklasim ve ön sezi araçlarini olusturur. Bütün fertlerin zihnindeki bilgiler ve kolektif hafizada barinan sifreler ve tarihi kodlar, soydan gelen degerler paradigmalarda birikir. Hangi fertlerin? Sadece yasayan fertlerin degil, hem de ölen fertlerin.
Çünkü millet sadece yasayanlari ile degil, ölüleri ve ululari ile bir yerde bir bütündür. Bütün gözlemler örnege (paradigmaya) tabi olur. Paradigmalar öyle bir yol açarlar ki o yolda yürüyenler dünyayi farkli sekilde anlamak zorunda kalirlar. Paradigmalar toplumun geleceginin içerigi ve sekli konusunda önceden ip uçlari verir. Gelecek hakkinda düsünmeden, getirme iradesi ortada olmadan gelmez. Iste o düsünme ve getirilme hakkinda düsünsel ve duygusal gücü seferber eden paradigmalardir.
Paradigmalar getirilme iradesi, fenni ve teknigi konusunda bilgi biriktirir, bilgi aktarir. Bütün bunlar Üzeyir Hacibeyli misyonunun felsefesini, eregini olusturmaktadir. Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin sanati sadece bir çaga degil, bütün çaglara isik tutmakta, bütün çaglarda olusum projesi olacak gibi görünmektedir. Insani “ne yapalim?” sounu aklinda canlandirirken, Üzeyir Hacibeyli paradigmasi (örnegi) onun yardimina kosacak, sounu yanitlayacaktir.
Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin “Arsin mal alan”, “O olmasin bu olsun” gibi operetlerinde verdigi iki insan tipi vardir. Birinci insan tipi eski geleneklerin simgeledigi Meshedi Ibad ve ikincisi ise Server’dir. Meshedi Ibad kötü adam degil, sadece onun davranislarina ya yer yoktur, ya da yer olmamasi gereken eskimis geleneklerin uzantisi olan tiptir. Meshedi Ibad gerektiginde kendi hissiyatini da tam klasik insan tipi gibi dilinde bir siir okuyarak ifade etmektedir.
Ancak Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin tarihine sunmak istedigi çagdas insan tipi gibi görünen Server kendi milli kimliginin farkindadir ve kendi sevdasindan vaz geçmeyerek, hem de asikane hislerini ‘in büyük sairleri lirik gazelleri ile ifade etmektedir. Yani Server timsalinde seyirci sadece seven bir genci görmemektedir. Üzeyir Hacibeyli sanatinin etkisi altinda kalan insani okudugu siirler dolayisi ile onun timsalinde kendi medeniyet, dil ve tarih suurunun farkinda olan bir insan tipini gözlemlemektedir.
Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin büyüklügü hem de Fuzuli gibi bir genis batinli, sair ve filozofu kendi yaraticiligi için kaynak seçmesindedir. Bir taraftan Fuzuli gibi büyük düsünce ve sanat adaminin yaraticiligina ve diger taraftan da yüz yillarin degerlerini dil ve ask kültürünü kendi bünyesinde barind Asli ve Kerem, Asik Garip gibi halk yaraticiligina güvenmek Üzeyir Hacibeyli sanatinin tabanini tarihin derinligine indirmis’ basini da sonsuzluga kadar yükseltmistir.
Bu nedenle Üzeyir Hacibeyli yalnizca tarihinde sade bir sanatçi, bestekar degildir. Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin sanatinda insani Fuzuli ile tanismakta, yalniz ozanlarin belleginde sakli olan degerlerle rastlanmaktadir. Böylece Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin sanati insanini özgün, özgür ve milli, tam ‘a özgü bir dünyaya
sevk etmektedir.
Köroglu Operasi
Köroglu epik bir mitoloji olarak yurdunda her kes tarafindan bilinmektedir. Babek Hurremdin maglup edildikten sonra Arap i Hürremilere özgü bütün degerlere ve kimlik kodlarina karsi sert çikti. Milli geleneklerinin tamamen yok olmasi için her tür yasaklamayi uyguladilar.
Bütün tarihi ve varligi ile Babek Hürremdin`e bagli olan lügü Babek timsalindeki kahramanliklari mecburen bilinç altina sevk etmek zorunda kalir. Mitolojilerin kaynagi bilinçten daha ziyade bilinç altidir. Köroglu timsalinde ulusunun hatiralarinda yasayacaktir. Köroglu mitolojisindeki Çenlibel aslinda Babek Hurremdinin Keleyber`de yerlesen kalesi gibi tezahür etmektedir.
Köroglu destanlarini okuyup ve Babek kalesine bir kez varan her kes çok kolaylikla bu fikire varabilir. Köroglu mitolojisinde hem Köroglu kendisi ve hem de delileri sadece güçlü kisiler degil, hem de bir yönleri ile de ozandirlar. Bir yönleri ile ozan olmak ne demektir? Yani sadece sanat, saz ve söz olarak ozan degiller, hem de erenlik, ermislik ve sosyal davranislarinda da ozan gibidirler.
Çenlibel de ozan sanatinin merkezidir. Ayni Babek Kalesinin ozancilik kültürünün merkezi oldugu kimi. Cografiyasinda ozancilik kültürünü tarihinde ve bugününde barindirmakla seciyelenen üç önemli merkez var: Karadag ki Babek Hurremdinin merkezi üssü (karagahi) olmuustur. 2. Borçali ki bugün Gürcüstanin isgali altindadir. 3. Babek Hurremdin`in savasçilari ile Köroglu delilerinin arasindaki benzerlik ve özdeslik ayrica bir arastirma konusudur.
Saz, Köroglu mitolojisinde kutsaldir, sazin ötesinde kutsal olacak baska bir sey yoktur, en kutsal makamda duran kopuzdur.
Çünkü kopuz Samanlarin, Dede Korkutlarin kutsal efeslerini çagdan çaga tasimis ve Körogluluga ve Körogluculara, Çamlibelcilere (Çenlibelcilere) miras birakmistir. Saz, sadece bir musiki aleti olarak degil, hem de bin tür tecrübelerle yüklü ve yükümlü olan ata sözlerini, ozan kosmalarini, konusmalarini ve ögütlerini de kendisi ile beraber çagdan çaga tasimistir, tasimaktadir.
Medeniyetinden saz dislanirsa onunla beraber Dede Korkutçuluk, Körogluluk, Babekçilik de suurlardan ve hafizalardan kaybolur. Böyle olunca da ‘in millet olma dinamikleri ve kodlari tarihin karanliklarinda yitip batar.
Üzeyir Hacibeyli’nin toplumunun uluslasmasinda mitolojilerden de yararlanmasi takdire sayandir. Sokrat; “Tümüyle mitoloji, geçmisin, simdinin ve gelecek olaylarinin anlatimidir” der. Köroglu operasinda geçmisi, simdisi ve gelecegi ile bir bütün seklinde mevcut olmaktadir.
Köroglu operasi öyle bir dönemde yaratilir ki, ‘in bütün tarihi ve milli degerlerine yasak getirmis, milli insanlarini ya sürgün ya da idam etmektedir. Üzeyir Hacibeyli böyle karanlik bir dönemde degisik ima ve simgelerle ‘in bütün amaçlarini, ideallerini, olusmasi ve yaratilmasi gereken yazgisini, talihini ve akibetini bu operaya yerlestirir. 1920’de lar tarafindan devrilen Milli Devleti, Üzeyir Hacibeyli’yi büyük ruhi sarsinti içine sokar. Çünkü o devletin bestecisi Üzeyir Hacibeyli idi.
Üzeyir Hacibeyli, sanatçi ruhunda yasadigi ve ya.

CIA Advocates Assassinating Putin

Well that is comforting.
Notice the author. “Former” top official in the CIA. He wasn’t just CIA, he was ultra-CIA, like King of the CIA. Watch out for guys like that. They will kill you. They can kill you. They kill people all the time. It’s what they do. They kill Americans too. Pretty regularly. And they never get caught.
Notice it says former CIA. But there is no such thing as former CIA. Once Agency, always Agency in my book, unless you specifically renounce them, which usually isn’t done. I figure the CIA uses these “former” CIA guys to write some of the more wild and insane stuff that current spooks can’t really get away with saying. Current CIA might get some heat for saying, “Kill Putin now.” So they just outsource the job to “former” CIA. Get it?

What Language Is This?

Հրաչյա Աճառյան, ՀԱՅԵՐԵՆ ԱՐՄԱՏԱԿԱՆ ԲԱՌԱՐԱՆ, հատոր Բ (Ե-Կ)
Հայերեն արմատական բառարանը» վեց հատորից է բաղկացած (Եր., յոթերորդ հատորն է հավելվածը, որ լույս է տեսել : «Հայերեն արմատական բառարանը» վերահրատարակվել նույնությամբ՝սեղմ չորս հասորով: «Արմատական բառարանը» լիակատար ցանկն է շուրջ հազար հայերեն արմատական բառերի` նրանց բացատրութ…

There Are One Million Terrorists in America

Good, hard, solid, scientific evidence:

The No Fly List is different from the Terrorist Watch List, a much longer list of people said to be suspected of some involvement with terrorism. The Terrorist Watch List contained around 1,000,000 names by March 2009.

Yeah right. There are a million terrorists in the United States. LOL! Is that supposed to be some kind of a joke?!

The Values of America Are Freedom and Democracy!

Yeah right.
What do you call this?
Guess what? That operation supposedly ended in 1971, but the truth is it was never really shut down. The operation itself was shut down, but all of the illegal tactics used in the operation continue to this very day.

Fake Investigative Citizen Journalist Site

Belling Cat.
Poses as these cool, hipster, young guys, investigative reporters, anti-society, anti-establishment, renegades, muckrackers, derring-do reporters risking it all to get to the bottom of things and find out the real truth.
That site was very confusing. They actually fooled me for a little bit until I said wait a minute.
Turns out that every one of their deep, undercover, cutting edge investigations is mostly just a sausage factory of disinformation supporting the US government/CIA Lie Du Jour.
I am not sure if there is even a true sentence on that whole website, never mind a true article. Every piece on there just reads like “the voice of the CIA.” It’s full of all of these gung-ho young reporters, apparently well-paid, and the fancy site has no visible means of support whatsoever. Nor do they ask for donations. Who pays to keep the site running? Who pays the reporters?
As far as I can tell, that whole site is nothing but CIA. I assume everyone there works for The Agency in some way or other. There’s no other explanation for it.

The "Phony War" Atmosphere

Just learned a cool new phrase today. What is a “phony war” atmosphere? Well, let us imagine London and Paris in late 1939 and the first half of 1940.

  • People are afraid that war is coming soon, maybe even to their city.
  • The war hasn’t happened yet.
  • Optimists still hope they can head off the war.
  • Maybe the war will come and maybe it won’t, but unfortunately, it does look like peaceful days are numbered.

Why is it a phony war? The city and/or the country is not yet at war, but everyone is acting like they are living in wartime. In short, everyone is terrified and living in the future.

MH17 – The Silence of the Liars

Exactly.
Exactly.

The Dutch report on MH17 is out today. As I suspected, it is a complete whitewash. Worse than that, it is an attempt to frame Russia and the rebels. Looking at the conclusions, I do not think there is a single true sentence in this entire report. The lies probably start with the first sentence and end with the last one. Truly pitiful.

US Support for Violent Neo-Nazis in the Ukraine


Fantastic compilation. Also delves into other areas, such as the suggestion that US/NATO/Deep State sniper teams have been roaming around the globe shooting at people in protests stirred up by the US/NATO. Some of the incidents were Egypt, Ukraine, Thailand and Syria. It is true that NATO trained snipers did shoot over 100 people on the Maidan, both Berkut police and Maidan protestors. This was all blamed on the Yanukovitch government, and the resulting outrage fomented a coup that drove him out of office. However, all investigations have revealed that

  1. The cops and the protestors were both shot with the same bullets.
  2. The Berkut did not have these bullets, nor did they have sniper rifles.
  3. Right Sector snipers were apparently seen shooting at people.
  4. All shots were coming from a tall building that at the time was under the control of the Right Sector
  5. The group that did this, the Right Sector, had just been trained in such behaviors by NATO instructors at a base in Poland the previous fall/winter.
  6. The Prime Minister of Estonia told the Foreign Minister of the EU in a taped phone call that everyone shot on the Maidan was shot by Right Sector forces.
  7. An anti-Russian Ukrainian parliamentarian conducted his own investigation. He has not revealed the result, but he did say that the Berkut police are absolutely not guilty of any of those killings.
  8. To this day, 100% of the Western media continues to falsely blame the pro-Russian Yanukovitch Berkut police for this NATO/Right Sector false flag.

Apparently the same thing occurred early on in the Syrian demonstrations against Assad. Mysterious snipers appeared on rooftops firing on both police and protestors equally. The video says that these sniper were working for NATO/US/CIA. In addition, snipers fired on crowds in the recent Thailand unrest. The video says that these snipers were also working for NATO. NATO snipers also fired on Egyptian demonstrations. The purpose of all of these attacks is apparently to create chaos, as the US/NATO apparently thrive on chaos somehow.
The report also produces excellent evidence that Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are more or less appendages of the US Deep State/State Department/Pentagon/CIA. Both organizations have been caught repeatedly telling lies in order to drum up support for wars. AI promoted the Saddam kills babies in their incubators lies that helped the US lie its way into the first Gulf War. Human Rights Watch was one of many groups that spread a lie that Gaddafi had killed 6,000 anti-regime protestors. This lie went viral and with the help of the US media, helped gin up support for the NATO intervention in Libya. Afterwards, Human Rights Watch admitted that the 6,000 figure was a complete lie.
At this point, we really need to see both AI and HRW as more or less CIA assets who work for the Deep State and slavishly serve the interests of US foreign policy. I had always suspected something like this was up, but I was too caught up in the “human rights groups are good guys” game. My opinion of these groups has plunged to a new low. I used to be a member of AI. I will never give them a dime again.

Malaysia Apparently Accusing Ukraine of Shooting Down MH17

Figures.
Malaysia is said to be very unhappy with the way the investigation of the MH17 disaster has unfolded.
For instance, the black box was turned over to the British, some of the worst criminals on Earth. The British have sat on that black box for a long time without issuing the slightest peep about it. That is very bizarre and makes no sense.
Further, there was apparently an agreement between the Netherlands, Ukraine and Australia to hide the cause of the crash. Each party would have a veto on releasing the data. They all signed a non-disclosure agreement about releasing the results of the investigation of the crash. That is very odd.
There have been persistent calls for the Nazis to release all of their air traffic control tapes from around the time of the accident. A Spanish air traffic controller reported that the chatter in the Kiev ATC tower at the time of the shootdown was that the Nazis did it. In fact, some wings of the Nazi government were saying, “We shot down that plane. Who gave the order to do that?” An hour after the shootdown, Nazi officials came into the tower and confiscated all of the ATC tapes. They also threatened to confiscate each controller’s computer.
Despite constant calls for the Nazis to release their ATC tapes, they have not yet released them. Not one single Western media outlet has reported on this fact, nor have they pressured the Nazis to release the tapes. Nor has one single Western nation pressured the Nazis to release the tapes. That is all extremely suspicious.
The Obama Administration says it has hard evidence that the rebels shot down the jet. Yet despite many calls to show us that evidence, they have refused to present any of this evidence. Not one single Western media outlet nor one single Western government has reported this fact, nor have they pressured the Administration to release their data. Apparently the Obama team will not even release this data to the CIA.
One of the top US investigative reporters wrote that his CIA sources told him that there are people in the CIA who think that the Nazis shot down the plane. These CIA elements are asking Obama to show them his evidence that the rebels shot it down. Obama has so far refused to do this. Not one single Western media outlet has reported on the opinions of these CIA analysts.
The Malaysian government is said to be very angry at the way the investigation is taking place or not taking place. They say that they are breaking away from the other teams to form their own investigation of what  happened, implying that the other teams are not reliable investigators.
Right now, the Malaysians are saying that their intelligence investigations on the cause of the shootdown are “pretty conclusive.” This probably means that the Malays think the Nazis shot down the plane. A large contingent of 133 Malay investigators went to the Ukraine to gather evidence. A reporter for the New Straights Times got close to the investigative team and leaked their findings.
According to his article, Malay intelligence reports had concluded that the Nazis shot down the plane. First they shot a Buk at the plane, which missed. Then the Nazi fighter that had been following the jet fired an air to air heat-seeking missile at the jet which blew up the engine of the plane. Then the cockpit was shot up by the fighter’s 30mm cannon.
So unless there was strong political pressure by the Malaysian state to doctor the investigators’ findings, I assume that the article is saying that they Malays are quite sure that the Nazis shot down the jet.

New MH17 Revelations

Here. The latest charges.
This is very interesting, but I have nothing to add to that. To my knowledge, this is the only time a Buk missile has been seen in the hands of either the rebels or the Russians. The rebels have no Buks. They seized four of them, but they are worthless as they were disarmed by the Nazis before they were seized. You can’t fire a missile that has a hole in it.
This is the only reference I have ever seen to the Russians having a Buk missile in the Ukraine. Yes, there are Russian forces there, and yes, they have a lot of equipment, but I have never heard a report of even a single Buk. Why is it that the only reference to a Buk appearing on the rebels’ side is a Buk that mysteriously shows up right before the plane shootdown and then mysteriously vanishes right afterwards? What’s the point? The Russians moved the Buk into Novorussia solely to shoot down a jet and then moved it back to Russia. What sense does that make? Why would they do that?
There are many problems with this story other than that this is the first and only reported Buk ever seen in rebel territory.
Let’s assume that this crazy story is true. If the Russians did not shoot down the jet on purpose, then let us say shot it down accidentally. You have to train on a Buk system for a very long time. Furthermore, it has more than a missile. It also has a number of other components, including a truck with radar on it. There is no way on Earth that a trained Buk crew of the Russian army would ever shoot down a passenger jet by accident. Not possible. Ever.
The article says that the jet appears to have been hit by a missile of the Buk type. That is a complete lie. The only experts who have given interviews have said that there was no indication whatsoever that the jet had been hit by a ground missile. Zero. None. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Not there. Forget it. Instead they said what they noticed was that the cockpit was shot up by what looked like a machine gun. That could only have come from the Nazi fighter that was tailing the jet.
Furthermore, the Russians have photos showing five Nazi Buks near the site of the shootdown at the time. Their radar was very active for days before the shootdown, getting more active every day. On the day of the shootdown, the radar was the most active of all. The only radar operating in the area at the time of the shootdown was coming from a Nazi Buk crew. After the shootdown, the radars became much less active. One of the five Nazi Buks was placed near the edge of rebel territory. The day after the shootdown, this Buk was moved back to its original position.
The Russians have a video, which I have seen, that shows a Buk on Nazi territory right before the launch. The video also shows the Buk launching a missile at the same time that the jet went down. The images come from a satellite, and the resolution is so clear that it can be seen that the Nazis manning the Buk are wearing Ukrainian uniforms.
The latest thinking is that the Nazi Buk launch was supposed to take down the jet, but it missed. Then Plan B was put into effect, which was for the fighter tailing the jet to shoot down the jet. It did, first with a missile that blew up the engine – fighter missiles are heat-seeking missiles – and then with a 30mm gun that shot up the cockpit from both sides. This was the theory of the Malaysian experts who released their report blaming the Nazis for shooting down the jet. They said there were three attacks – first a Buk launch that missed, second a fighter missile that blew up the engine, and third a 30mm cannon that shot up the cockpit.
I am not sure what to make of this latest revelation, but I am quite certain that an innocent explanation will be found for it sooner rather than later.

Novorussia Signs Outrageous Peace Plan (Surrender Plan)

This makes no sense at all.
The political leaders of the LPR/DPR completely sold out everything that so many fought and died for? Why? The Novorussian people and especially the armed forces are up in arms over this sellout plan. There are threats to lynch the two political leaders who signed this ridiculous plan if they ever show their faces in Donetsk or Lugansk again. The 12-point plan simply reads like a wish list for the Nazis. The Novorussians gave the Nazis everything they want. Worst of all, it calls for “the disarmament of illegal armed groups from the territory of Ukraine.” What this means is unilateral disarmament for one side only – the rebels. The Nazis get to keep their army, of course.
The Novorussians are all screaming that Putin sold them out. The notion that Putin is behind all of the unrest in SE Ukraine is madness.
1. Putin has always wanted, and still wants, a whole Ukraine, federalized. He does not want Ukraine broken up. He will accept it if he has to, but that is not his first choice. So the notion that Putin is causing the armed breakup of Ukraine is an insane lie.
2. The Novorussians have been calling Putin a sellout and a traitor from Day One of this mess. If Putin is running this whole show, then why are his so-called proxies calling him a traitor? It makes no sense. This was an indigenous rebellion of, by and for the residents of the SE who refuse to live in a Nazi Ukraine. They received some support at the start from Russian volunteers.
These were Russian nationalists operating outside the state. The Russian state didn’t start giving weapons until the war had been going on for quite some time. And when they started, they gave them on 4th class aging weapons, the worst of the stockpile. They finally changed that in early July. But even while Russia was arming the rebels (mostly to keep the Novorussians from being genocided) Russia still wanted federalization and only federalization. They only reluctantly supported independence when they were backed into a corner.
3. The West is telling a gigantic lie that Russia is trying to create another frozen conflict along the lines of Transdniestria, South Ossetia and Abkhazia. All of these were indigenous rebellions against racist nationalist states who discriminated against non-titular citizens – Ossetians and Abkhazians were discriminated against by Georgian ultranationalists and Russians were discriminated against by Moldavian ultranationalists.
After the rebel areas had beaten the national government to a draw, Russia entered with peacekeepers. They entered the breakaway Georgian provinces because Georgia was run by fanatical Russia-hating ultranationalists. This Russophobic menace on Russia’s border was a serious national security threat for Russia. So separatists were supported. But all three of these were simply indigenous separatist rebellions similar to those that occur the world over.
One thing Russia does not like are these frozen conflicts. The lie is that they are trying to create another frozen conflict in SE Ukraine. It’s not true. Russia hates these frozen conflicts. They would rather that South Ossetia and Abkhazia form independent states. The frozen conflicts are a nightmare for Russia. The last thing they need is another one. Anyway the whole reason that these conflicts are frozen in the first place is because the West has refused to ratify the independence of these newly created nations.
The US acts like hypocrites here just like they always do. Briefly, the US tries to break up its enemies (supports separatism in its enemies) and opposes separatism in its allies. There is no moral basis to this foreign policy at all.
4. Putin completely sold out the Novorussians and forced them to surrender with this document. If he’s behind all the armed unrest in SE Ukraine, why would he do that? Because he never liked this armed uprising, that’s why. He never liked it, so he’s only to glad to sell it out at the first opportunity.
5. Putin may be hoping that the West will ease up on sanctions by signing this surrender document. That is fanciful thinking. America is a like a shark. When it smells blood, you’re already dead meat. The American shark has already smelled Russian blood. No way are they going to back off now. In fact, I expect the sanctions to be increased even more.
6. The document has no legal basis whatsoever. It was signed by Kuchma, the former President of the Ukraine. He was the worst president Ukraine ever had. Corruption was worse under him than under any other Ukrainian regime which is probably why the US likes him so much. He let them steal so much stuff, so he’s their pal. As former President, Kuchma has no legal basis to sign this document for the Nazi government. In other words, the agreement is illegal and unenforceable – it’s as meaningful as toilet paper. Nevertheless there are consequences even for breaking illegal agreements.
7. The Nazis’ word is no good. They violate any agreement they want to anytime they want to. Why sign any agreement with the Nazis when you know that they never honor any agreements?
8. There is a suggestion that the Novorussian leaders who signed the document were either paid off or threatened. I would suggest certainly the latter.
9. The instigators behind the sellout were probably the Russian oligarchs. These are the people that to a large extent run Russian society. In a lot of ways, they have more power than Putin does. Putin has to listen to them rather than the other way around.
10. The Nazis are already using the ceasefire to heavily rearm. As soon as the ceasefire was announced, several Western nations announced that they would be arming the Nazis.

Jack the Ripper Finally Identified

Amazing if it holds up to scrutiny, and I think it will. Anti-Semites on the blog may wish to note that Jack the Ripper was definitely a Jew. Now knock yourselves out, guys. Polish-born Jew Aaron Kominski, hairdresser, has been revealed by DNA evidence found on the shawl of one of his victims to be the Ripper. The 126 year old DNA was a match for a current descendant of Kominski’s. Kominski was always considered to be one of the three most viable suspects. He is thought to have been mentally ill, possibly a paranoid schizophrenic with auditory hallucinations. He had a strong misogynistic streak. He lived in the Whitechapel neighborhood. Kominski was later committed to a mental hospital.
The case is not 100% proven yet, and some still have reservations about Kominski. But it looks like they finally got their man.

Protocol of the Trilateral Contact Group – Minsk, September 5, 2014

Here is the exact text of this outrageous treasonous sellout surrender document that the Novorussians signed. You can see that Russia signed it too, so Russia sold out the Novorussians again, just like they have been doing for most of the time since this war started.

(1) Protocol of the Trilateral Contact Group – Minsk, September 5, 2014 

PROTOCOL

on the results of consultations of the Trilateral Contact Group
with respect to the joint steps aimed at
the implementation of the Peace Plan
of the President of Ukraine, P. Poroshenko,
and the initiatives of the President of Russia, V. Putin

Upon consideration and discussion of the proposals put forward by the participants of the consultations in Minsk on September 1, 2014, the Trilateral Contact Group, consisting of the representatives of Ukraine, the Russian Federation and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe [OSCE], reached an understanding with respect to the need to implement the following steps:

  1. Ensure the immediate bilateral cessation of the use of weapons.
  2. Ensure monitoring and verification by the OSCE of the regime of non-use of weapons.
  3. Implement decentralization of power, including by means of enacting the Law of Ukraine “With respect to the temporary status of local self-government in certain areas of the Donetsk and the Lugansk regions” (Law on Special Status).
  4. Ensure permanent monitoring on the Ukrainian-Russian state border and verification by the OSCE, together with the creation of a security area in the border regions of Ukraine and the Russian Federation.
  5. Immediately release all hostages and unlawfully detained persons.
  6. Enact a law prohibiting the prosecution and punishment of persons in connection with the events that took place in certain areas of the Donetsk and the Lugansk regions of Ukraine.
  7. Conduct an inclusive national dialogue.
  8. Adopt measures aimed at improving the humanitarian situation in Donbass.
  9. Ensure the holding of early local elections in accordance with the Law of Ukraine “With respect to the temporary status of local self-government in certain areas of the Donetsk and the Lugansk regions” (Law on Special Status).
  10. Remove unlawful military formations, military hardware, as well as militants and mercenaries from the territory of Ukraine.
  11. Adopt a program for the economic revival of Donbass and the recovery of economic activity in the region.
  12. Provide personal security guarantees for the participants of the consultations.

Participants of the Trilateral Contact Group:

Ambassador Heidi Talyavini (signed)

Second President of Ukraine, L.D. Kuchma (signed)

Ambassador of the Russian Federation in Ukraine, M.Y. Zurabov (signed)

A.V. Zakharchenko (signed)

I.V. Plotnitskiy (signed)

UN Shows Strong Support for Nazis

The UN is some kind of a joke. They are blocking the investigation of the Odessa Massacre. This means the UN is lining up 100% of the side of the West-supported Nazi regime in Ukraine. I have known in recent years that the UN is a controlled asset of the US Deep State (really the UN is a de facto CIA asset) but this takes things to insane extremes.
In Iraq, the UN immediately praised the illegal Nazi-like war of aggression the West led in the 2003 War on the Iraqi People (Iraq War). To completely ratify their support for this neocolonial war of conquest and colonization, the UN very quickly set up shop in Baghdad. Thankfully, the Iraqi resistance set off a truck bomb that devastated the UN building and killed many of the UN criminals inside, including the UN leader, the biggest criminal of them all. I was so happy that day!
Then the US CIA staged a violent coup against democratically elected president of Haiti, President Aristide. US mercenaries working for the CIA showed up at Aristide’s house with automatic weapons in the middle of the night and ordered him out of the country. A plane then came and took him to various African countries. The CIA-controlled death squads then took power and quickly murdered 3,000 unarmed Aristide supporters.
This is how US rightwing coups in Latin America always work – first they seize power, then they slaughter the unarmed Left. The lesson is that if you ever elect a leftwing government again, there will be another coup, and we will come out to kill you again. This is the standard operating procedure for rightwing rule in Latin America. It is taught by the Pentagon at the School of the Americas in the US South. Almost all Latin American coup and death squad leaders and members have graduated from this School for Killers run by the US Army. While the death squads were slaughtering people, the UN invaded Haiti with a “peacekeeping” force that was really intended to cement in power for the death squad/coup government. The UN force spent most of their time outside the slums that supported Aristide keeping them from protesting. Every time they protested, the UN thugs shot at the people. The UN killer force shot dead many Aristide supporters in order to keep the fascist coup regime in power.
At this point, I think the UN is complete crap. It’s totally useless. In fact, it is worse than useless. It has turned into a criminal organization, aiding and abetting the United States as it thuggishly swaggers around the globe, killing left and right.
The concept of the UN was intended to be beneficial for not just democracy within states but actually for democracy in the world – world democracy. At this point, world democracy is shot since the UN is simply an appendage of the US State Department, a wholly owned subsidiary of the US World Dictatorship.
 

Hilary Clinton, Republican

Evidence.
There doesn’t seem to be any limit to how low she will stoop. She has also proved herself to be a 100% dyed in the wool neocon. She’s more hawkish than Barak Obomber. As a young woman, she protested against the Vietnam War. Then she sat on Congressional subcommittee that drew up articles of impeachment for mass murderer Richard Nixon.
One of the charges against him was his secret bombing campaign in Cambodia that killed 500,000 people and directly led to the radicalization of the Khmer Rouge and their genocidal takeover of the country. The man who ran that bombing campaign? Hilary’s hero, Henry Kissinger, the man she lauds as promoting “values-driven foreign policy.” Sure he promotes a values driven foreign policy. The values of a psychopath. Apparently sociopath Hilary Clinton thinks a psychopathic foreign policy is the way to go. She would.

The Arab-Muslim

Someone sent this text to me and asked me to publish it. Judging by his name, I believe he is a Slav. This is pretty inflammatory stuff, but if you have been around a lot of these people as I have, there does seem to be a lot of sad truth in this piece. Read it and weep. Read it and think.

The Arab-Muslim

The Arab-Muslim is wanting and desperate in his want. Not just his most basic needs but his dreams as well.
The Arab-Muslim never produces anything of his own, whether concrete or intellectual property. And he rarely earns his property, concrete or intellectual. He steals concrete property by direct robbery or by fraudulent use of the law or by taking spoils in war. He steals intellectual property by using it, and if asked about its origins, claims it as his own.
Has the Arab-Muslim given up on this world, when he says, “My true life is in Paradise,” and “I will be backward for the sake of my deen”? No, he has
admitted defeat in challenging his poverty. But this defeat is without dignity. He would rather not lose face and deign to feign victory: “I am poor but I am religious! You can have all the fortunes of this world; God is giving me my fortunes in Paradise, which you won’t be entering haha. But still, the kuffar must not have those fortunes unless I have them too! And I can take their property, including their women, as booty too!”
When the Arab-Muslim says his life is in paradise and not this world, this shows his sense of entitlement. Give me, give me, because I deserve it, because I believe in the right thing though I haven’t earned anything by doing anything. Because the Arab-Muslim is Muslim, he’s going to heaven for sure. He need not worry about improving his condition in this life because it’s not worth it.
How easy is it to get to heaven? As easy as a few simple instructions. Doing the hard things, like telling the truth, acknowledging the painful reality, being honest when it is harmful, disciplining oneself, is no requirement to enter heaven. Doing easy things like praying five times a day, reciting the Qur’an without ever having to understand what it says, and appearing pious only superficially are simple requirements to enter heaven.
Does the Arab-Muslim ever reject the numerous benefits allowed to them: free housing, free education, free healthcare, and monthly allowance without ever having to work for any? No, because they are not ascetics or monks. They crave the good stuff but are too lazy to work for it.
The Arab-Muslim’s condition in this life is poor, so everyone else’s condition must be poor. What the Arab-Muslim doesn’t acknowledge is that he failed. Because he failed, nobody else must succeed. Those who succeed must be brought down to below his level. To see kuffar and ajam on top of the Arab-Muslim is painful to the Arab-Muslim.
What does this say? That the Arab-Muslim craves the good things of this world despite having given up on trying improve his life. And he wants to be on top of everybody and to have more than what everyone enjoys. If he can’t be on top of everybody, then nobody can be below him. Otherwise, he is humiliated.
The Arab-Muslim wants to be chosen, wants to be special, wants to belong to something great whose greatness exceeds the lives of its adherents. The Arab-Muslim becomes Muslim. He enjoys something that is only for the privileged, for the believers. Those who are outside the circle are unchosen, and by not following the teachings of Islam, they are lowly and contemptuous. Their behavior is contemptuous, their way of life is contemptuous, what they believe and they hold onto is contemptuous.
The smirk on an Arab-Muslim’s face is the look of arrogance. The look of hatred on an Arab-Muslim’s face is the look of one who was challenged or rightfully confronted. The look of pained anxiety on an Arab-Muslim’s face is of one who worries about his good name being tarnished in the eyes of his fellow Arab-Muslim’s (not the kuffar’s though.)
Smug, hateful and anxious: these are the three basic expressions on a Arab-Muslim’s face. The eyes are sunk lower, the eyebrows either frowned or not, the corners of the mouth raised, the smile slight and cunning: this is the smug face. The eyes are sunk lower, the lips narrowed and puckered, the eyebrows either slightly or intensely frowned: this is the hateful face. The eyes are wide, the eyebrows frowned intensely, the lips slightly puckered: this is the anxious face.
The Arab-Muslim is smug when confronting his prey, hateful when confronting a challenging contender, and anxious when helpless before his enemy. Arab-Muslim women and girls differ little in this regard. The Arab-Muslim is also smug in praise, hateful when envying another, and anxious when a scandal is about to break out.
What the kuffar have earned, what the kuffar have produced that is good and wealthy, the Arab-Muslim is entitled to. Entitlement once again. The Arab-Muslim takes from the kaffir what he has never earned but deserves by virtue of being Muslim. The kaffir makes, the Arab-Muslim takes. The ajam makes, the Arab-Muslim takes. This is ingrained deeply into the Arab-Muslim’s mindset, and questioning his right to it is questioning the core of his identity.
The Arab-Muslim is perpetually angry with unresolved problems and ever ready to break out into violence. What angers him is those who have wronged him and those who have taken the side of the wrongdoer. This is a common phenomenon in Arab-Muslim countries. Injustice is common thanks to the pent-up hatred of Arab-Muslims and their penchant to destroy what they never made and they can never have (envy). The worst judge is an Arab-Muslim judge.
The Arab-Muslim hates human rights and thinks it heretical to Islam. He hates the concept of people happy and enjoying rights as he is miserable and deprived of his rights.
And the Arab-Muslim hates justice. But he wishes human rights for himself and wishes justice to be done for his sake. For this reason, as a prisoner of war, he crows for rights he will never give to others, and demands justice that he would hate to see given to his belligerent.
For this reason, an jihadi prisoner of war should be stripped of his last right and his day in court made a show-trial akin to Stalin’s trials. The only kind
of court a jihadi deserves is the only one that he can make: a kangaroo court.
The Arab-Muslim is extremely cruel, knowing nothing of mercy. Hurting others to him is victory. Mercy to him is weakness. Pleas for mercy mean that his victim is finally weak and ready to be killed.
He will kill and overkill. The Arab-Muslim doesn’t just kill, he mutilates. Killing is not enough, mutilation is not enough, no, burning is not even enough. The Arab-Muslim is never satisfied in his revenge. Even afterwards, he still wants more revenge.
Imagine the anger, the pent-up rage, on having been done wrong, perceived wrong, either real or imagined. And finally comes the moment of redemption. “Destroy!” says his mind. There is never enough destruction. Finally, the wrongdoer gets the justice that was never handed to him by his judge or the police.
Fighting back against Arab-Muslim aggression is necessary, and no mercy should be shown to him despite calls for mercy because mercy is only a weapon in his hands. The Arab-Muslim: a thief, a wrongdoer and a destroyer.

**

The Arab-Muslim is naturally a slave and tyrant. Tyranny and slave-mindedness exist in the same person. One needs the other; one cannot do without the other. A slave-minded person who accepts his slavery as necessary and good for him is a tyrant to his subordinates and a sycophant to his superiors.
The Arab-Muslim metes out disgusting and obnoxious sycophantic behavior to his superior, whether his superior is his parent, his boss, his teacher or
professor, his president or God.
Notice how the Arab-Muslim relates himself to God? In his supplication, he makes God a tyrant who demands that He be showered with endless praise before one simple thing can be asked of Him. This is not to say insolence and thanklessness is how a worshiper should ask of something from God.
He unconsciously does the same for his other superiors: his boss, his professor, his parents. He showers them with all kinds of praise, whether imagined or real but exaggerated (but not the kind of praise he gives to God), before asking for one simple thing.
And he demands the same from his subordinates. God has his own Will, he gives to whomever he wants and takes from whomever he wants. And so it is the same with the Arab-Muslim. He accepts to fulfill demands or rejects fulfilling them according to his own wishes. His subordinates either bite the bullet and shrug their shoulders or jump for joy that their superior accepted their demand. Is that not tyranny?
This is deep in the Arab-Muslim subconscious: to enjoy over subordinates what God naturally enjoys over mankind. They strive to have a bit of God’s powers and privileges. That is their will-to-power. They desire to be worshiped not by prostration but by words of praise and hand-kissing.
The paganism of the Arabs has never departed as Arab-Muslim’s seem to venerate the black stone, a copy of a Qur’an, the remaining hair of Muhammad(s), the imam and “scholar” (who have a certain sanctity not shared by others) and much more.
The lowest subordinate is the jobless black woman or one who is disabled or is a bastard child, one who broke one of Arab-Muslim society’s most delicate rules. The highest superior is God, chauvinistically called by His Arabic name, Allah. The most disgusting and obnoxious sycophancy is meted out to God, the most horrible and depraved cruelty is meted out to the lowest subordinate for her bad fortune.
A tyrant on the throne does not necessarily mean tyrants in common society. But a tyrant elected to office means a tyrant picked out from a common society of tyrants, especially if that tyrant comes from modest beginnings and speaks in the common language. This is the source for the Arab Spring’s failure.
The Arab-Muslim is strong before the weak and cowardly before the brave. He is either your slave or your superior but never your equal. If you hate having him be your superior, make him your inferior. Do not wrap your arm around his shoulder and call him your equal. By that, he’s seen an opportunity to overcome you and you will pay the price.

**

The Arab-Muslim is a cannibal. Not a literal cannibal. But one who kills his own, his own daughter, his own wife, his fellow Arab-Muslim, over a petty (non-)crime. He hates his daughter and hates his femininity. He is driven to a wild out-of-control rage when he finds out that his daughter has committed an act of indiscretion. Like a newly-made zombie, he acts to kill without thinking twice and feels no remorse afterwards.
Instead, he feels satisfaction because his dignity has been restored. When his daughter has sex outside of marriage, his manhood is gone. “His own daughter,” he thinks, “committed this unspeakable sin?! What will the neighbors think?” Such questions drive an Arab-Muslim to the edge of oblivion.
Why does the murdering Arab-Muslim kill so easily, you ask? Because his conscience is always clear. He is self-righteous, meaning he can only do good and he can never do any evil. If he did evil….it was necessary or it was a good and how dare anyone question otherwise!
When one’s conscience is always clear, one can do any evil and not be affected by it. One can kill and that killing was necessary or was done in the name of good. Killing in God’s name is holy because God is holy, and God prescribes for man only good and never evil. Therefore, how can killing in God’s name be evil? So goes the thought.

**

Why is the Arab-Muslim a cannibal?
Because

  1. He doesn’t mind his own business
  2. He cares about other people’s business, and what they are up to
  3. He cares deeply about other’s opinions of himself.

When was the last time an Arab-Muslim lost himself in the demands of a mind-taxing affair, forgetting all around him?
The Arab-Muslim has two watchful eyes and a divided concentration. A part of his attention is busy watching the environment surrounding him lest
something unusual happen, and he spies with his little eye and later tells his idle friends a funny story of what just happened. Or watching for an unusual person or an enemy so that he spring into action and attack. The other part of his attention is inadequate for the task at hand.
The little eye also spies on women, especially young unmarried girls, watching closely what they’re up to. Should they commit a horrible deed, their deed will be documented, spread to the last corner of the neighborhood and the indiscretionary woman judged. Big Brother has always been watching everyone in the Muslim society, because Big Brother is everyone in the Muslim society.
There is a Youtuber, not famous enough to be mentioned here, who is an active sport in more ways than one (sans dirty language). One of his favorite things to do is to go to different cities around the world and ask random locals in the street, “What do you think of Arabs?” In other words, “What is your opinion of me?”
“Why does he care for another person’s opinion?” you might ask.
The Arab-Muslim will agree with the nature of the question, and adds with an air of declaration, “You shouldn’t care about what others think.”
Ask him, “Why do you care for the people’s opinions?”
“Because,” he answers, “Because…”
The people’s opinions matter, because they hold his honor. What is the Arab-Muslim concept of honor?
Honor is how other people regard the Arab-Muslim. The Arab-Muslim does not derive his worth from discipline or achievement but from the opinion of others. For this reason, he is constantly conscious of himself and constantly trying to please the people by acceding to their demands. They demand at the spur of the moment, and their demands are unrealistic and taxing.
The orthodoxy of Muslim society is strict and exact, thus being harsh and confining. It covers all aspects of human life, and thus it is totalitarian. The life of Muslim society is one of despair, deception, lies and hypocrisy.
An Arab-Muslim’s honor, if dragged through the dirt, must restore its lustre. The people demand the right thing, and demand that honor be redeemed.
Honor can be redeemed by anything from ostracism to killing.

**

When you walk down a neighborhood of Arab-Muslims, it is instinctively felt that you are being watched. You become conscious of your own movements and feel anxiety. As a matter of fact, everyone around you is watching everything around them though they seem busy. Everyone is busy talking about the unusual thing that is you, because you are unusual, though they seem busy talking about something else.
Slowly, the tension builds, and the portent nears its actualization. Portent is the golden word: the fear that at any moment, sudden mindless violence will break out just around the corner. “The temperature is at boiling point,” said an Australian journalist when he was “hemmed in” by a crowd of Wahhabi predators harassing the renegade Arab-Muslim next to him.
The hostility is felt just before the blow. They try, by hook or by crook, to justify hitting you. It doesn’t matter if you did anything wrong, they want to hit you, to strike you a blow. Why? Because they hate you. Why do they hate you? Because you, not you but your government, “killed their brothers and sisters in Muslim lands” (whom they would hate had they an opportunity to live side by side with them).
Notice that they cannot mask their anger. It appears in their face and their finger-jabbing. And also: that they’re impatient and can’t wait to hit you. They keep escalating because they can’t wait any longer: they must hit you.
And perhaps the reason for hatred is deeper.
They hate the Norwegians who inhabit their Norway, they hate the Brits who inhabit their Britain, they hate the Jews who share their France. Why do they hate the British, the Norwegian, the Jew?
The Briton is dignified, and the Arab-Muslim is not. The Briton is free, proud of his freedom and doing what he is free to do, and the Arab-Muslim can only do the good and the evil that his imam shoves down his throat and threatens to punish if violated. The Briton loves and is loved back; the Arab-Muslim can only hate and hate back in revenge. The Briton is wealthy and happy, the Arab-Muslim is not.
The happiness, joy, freedom and dignity of the Briton feels like a dagger in the heart of the Arab-Muslim. The Arab-Muslim instinctively hates the European. It is a feeling as primary as hunger. Osama bin Laden once said, “Ever since my childhood, I have always hated Americans.” The Americans were the thorn in his side. He studied in America and hated Americans and their culture. Instinctively.
They gladly take benefits and human rights from their European country of adoption and give hatred, hostility, murders, assaults and rapes in return. This does not include every Arab-Muslim but only the orthodox Arab-Muslim who either carries out the crime or actively supports it or tacitly supports it. They build their mosques with the blessings of the local governments and use the mosques to preach hatred against the same people who let them build the mosque, not to mention overthrowing the government of their adopted country.
In the Quran, rebellion against the state is punished with either:

  1. Death
  2. An arm and a leg {literally}, or
  3. Expulsion

And Islamic scholars are of a consensus that Muslims should obey the laws of a land within the House of War, and should the adopted land persecute or make the lives of Muslims difficult, the Muslims should leave that land and go to the House of Islam. The run-of-the-mill imam is conveniently silent on these two little facts.

**

The Arab-Muslim suffers from neurosis. This is because he believes in absolute purity and achievable perfection. Purity is homogeneity, that is: a thing being consistent throughout its material contents. Purity of deed means never, ever sinning and doing only one good after another. Purity of society means

  • everyone being of the same religion or race, and
  • everyone being pure in deed

What is impure? That which is tainted with something different, not necessarily something filthy, i.e. repugnant to the human senses. Fecal matter and urine, for example, are repugnant to the human senses: they smell bad and look disgusting. Loose, flirtatious behavior is not repugnant to the senses but is actually refreshing and exciting. But the bad taste it leaves afterwards is repugnant in more than just an aesthetic way.
Purity can never be attained absolutely. You can never keep clothes completely clean from dirt. You can never keep yourself away from sin. Your clothes must have some trace amounts of dirt, you must have committed some kind of sin even yesterday. To believe that purity can be attained absolutely is a delusion.
The Arab-Muslim conflates different with filthy. Both are impure, but one stands out in the midst of sameness, and the other stands out in the midst of cleanliness. If sameness and cleanliness are the same thing, then their opposites, difference and filth, are the same thing.
Is the Christian who believes differently filthy? Is the liberal Muslim who dissents filthy? Is the girl who fornicated with her lover filthy?
What is a pure Islamic society, as proposed by a bearded ogre?

  • One where everyone believes not just in the same essentials: God and his state of being just One, the Angels and jinns, the prophethood of Muhammad and the divinity of the Qur’an but also think alike in every little way.
  • One where everyone is pure in action, always doing good and never doing evil.

In this society, there is no place for anyone who believes differently. There is no room for Christians, Druze, or Jews. And in this society, there is no place for dissenters who differ on small technical issues. These people violate the sameness of the pure Islamic society.
“This society is pure and innocent of your filth (read: differentness)!” so rants the angry Muslim.
In this society, everyone is doing good and never doing evil. Those who do evil taint the active purity of the Islamic society, the purity in the action of its individuals. These people violate the actual sameness of the Islamic society by behaving differently.
“This society is pure and innocent of your filth (read: differentness)!” so roars the irate ogre.
Orthodoxy, absolute and pure, all around.
Perfection is the Arab-Muslim’s aim. It is pronounced in every aspect of his life: his prayer, his clothes, his (re)production of art.
In his prayer, he seeks absolute orthodoxy, by reciting exactly what is supposed to be recited in each station of each unit of prayer, and he seeks perfection by absolute orthodoxy and painstaking choreography.
In his clothes, he wears his traditional clothes, but keeps them painstakingly clean and flawless. The Muslimah is painstaking about her manner of dress: she takes extra care to cover the corners of her face with her hijab and to make sure her dress does not suggest even the slightest angle of her feminine curvature.
In his songs, he does not produce anything new, but instead is painstaking about getting every lyric and melody of the song exactly as it is in the original production.
In his printing of the Qur’an, there is not a single mistake in the wording, lettering or even the curve of a letter throughout the entire copy. This is about 300,000 letters and 29,000 words.
Painstaking dedication to the highest authority (God), painstaking dedication by painstaking orthodoxy to established rites and traditions, and painstaking dedication to perfection.
Tyranny, purity and perfection.
One of the most important aspects of modern Islamic culture is the idea of purity. God forbade man the eating of pork, the drinking of blood and the drinking of alcohol. But did he ever say that to have it on one’s clothes is to make that cloth impure? No. It came from the “scholars”, who by ijtihad (personal effort in coming to the truth), found that alcohol, pork stains and blood on one’s clothes make that cloth impure, thus with it, one cannot pray, hold a Quran in one’s hands, or go around the Kaaba.
How does this register in the mind of an Arab-Muslim simpleton? Alcohol is filthy, pork is filthy; those Westerners eat pork and drink alcohol, therefore they are filthy, and their women are filthy. “Alhamdulilah,” he says, “I am pure!” Pure of impurities not repugnant to the senses but outside of the established orthodoxy.

**

The Arab-Muslim: insolent and arrogant in prosperity, angry and hate-filled in poverty; covetous, desiring of luxury; rapine, desiring of women; loving the glory and wealth of this world, and optimistic and certain about the glory and wealth of the next world; chosen by Allah and proud, looking down on those who willfully remain unchosen, looking up to those who are holy in attire and manner; believing in mortal perfection, and striving to absolute purity. He can live with the similar but must be above or far from the different.
And this is one of the main problems of the 21st century.

"Thinking the Unthinkable"

This is an old article from the Saker that really needs to be read. In it, the Saker suggests the various responses the US/NATO might make to intervene in the war. I agree with him that the Pentagon is generally full of sane people who do not want to risk all-out war with Russia. However, the US civilian leadership has gone insane, and I believe that they have been insane and drunk on power and stupid for some time now, maybe even a couple of decades. This are the people who really worry me, not the generals. And sadly, I believe that Saker’s most apocalyptic scenarios are probably very much possible.
The Ukraine mess has the potential to be utterly terrifying; in fact, I would argue that it already is.
Why do most Americans, and most in the West even, not care about this Ukraine mess? Because Americans no longer care about anything we do overseas and they are lulled into a false sense of security by the corporate takeover of the media which turned the US media into a state propaganda organ. Americans are fat, lazy, stupid, apathetic and ignorant. They don’t care what we do overseas. In fact, they love it whenever we attack and kill people. The more the merrier.
We can kill as many people as we want to overseas as long as parades of soldiers are not coming back in body bags. This was the only reason for the opposition to the Vietnam War – too many Americans were being killed. Really the only thing Americans seem to understand and the only way to get through to them is to kill lots of US soldiers in a war with an easy out. In any case like that, the US public will simply bail and for good reason.
There is nothing too evil or sinister that the US can do overseas because the vast majority of Americans continue to believe in the Indispensable Nation, the City on the Hill, and Great and Good America that fights for freedom and democracy, confronting Evil everywhere on Earth. The idea that America itself might be the Evil, and that folks we are fighting are the Good Guys is simply too much for most Americans to deal with. They simply flat out refuse to believe it.
The Americans are always the Good Guys and our enemies are always the Bad Guys. Even Democratic Party liberals hold this attitude as one of their core beliefs. If you tell these liberals otherwise, they start jumping up and down, screaming and yelling and ordering you to get out of their homes. US patriotardism runs extremely deep in society. I estimate 80% of Americans are hardcore patriotards.
In fact, for much of my life, I believed the bolded lie myself until I finally wised up and learned the very painful truth.
 

Thinking the Unthinkable

By Saker

Introduction

I have been putting off writing about this topic for a very long while. In fact, I wrote several articles trying to explain the self-evident truism that the US/NATO/EU does not have a military option in the Ukrainian war. First, in an article entitled Remembering the Important Lessons of the Cold War, I tried to explain that the reason the Cold War did not turn into a hot shooting war is that both sides understood that they simply could never win and that any escalation in strikes and counter-strikes could very rapidly lead to a intercontinental nuclear war, something which neither side was willing to risk.
In a piece entitled Making Sense of Obama’s Billion Dollar Hammer, I tried to show that all the money the US will be pouring into “European security” is just a grandiose bribe for some European elites and that it had no real effect on the ground. A few days later I posted an article entitled Why the US-Russian Nuclear Balance is as Solid as Ever in which I tried to dispel the myth prevalent in the West about the putative state of disrepair of the Russian military in general and of the Russian nuclear forces in particular. Lastly, in a piece entitled Short Reminder about US and Russian Nuclear Weapons, I tried to show that in reality it was the US nuclear forces who were in a state of disrepair.
And over and over, in many comments, I tried to lay out the reasons why I simply did not believe that the US/NATO/EU would dare to attack Russia.
In summary, I will say this: the US is not nearly as powerful as US propaganda claims. Without going into long debates about what “victory” and “defeat” mean, I will just say that in my personal opinion is that the last time the US military fought well was in Korea, and even there it had to accept a draw. After that, it was all downhill. This is not the fault of the US solider, by the way, but instead is caused by the fact that big money and politics got so heavily involved in the US military that they corrupted everything.
This is most evident in the USAF which still has superb pilots but who are given a terrible choice: either fly on good but old aircraft or fly on new but terrible ones (I believe that given the choice, most would chose the former). As for the European NATO allies, they are such a joke that they hardly deserve mention. They even look bad on a parade.
As for a military option in the Ukraine, it appears unthinkable to me not only because, frankly, I don’t see a single military in the West capable of taking on the Russian military in full-scale battle but also because geography powerfully argues against such a crazy idea (the very same geography which would make it impossible for Russia to try to invade western or even central Europe).
And yet, something in all this very logical reasoning felt wrong to me. A few days ago it finally hit me. What bothered me was this:

The American Duck

Among the many beautiful and witty expressions and neologisms Americans use, I always loved this one: If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. This so-called “Duck test” is funny, but it is also a powerful logical method which ended up chewing at me day after day after day. Here I was, all sure and certain that the US/NATO/EU would never consider such a ludicrous notion as a military attack on Russia or Russian forces.
But kept hearing the voice of the American Duck telling me: look at what they are doing, what does that look like to you? Suspend your conclusions and just tell me what are you observing? Tell me, if they had decided to escalate to the point of a military confrontation with Russia, would they be doing things differently?
And a few days ago, I threw in the towel (at the duck, of course) and had to accept that while I did not know what they were thinking or what their intentions really were, it sure looked to me like the western plutocrats had decided to escalate the crisis has much as possible.
In truth, I have to admit that when I studied the theory of deterrence in the 1980’s, my teachers always insisted that this theory of deterrence was predicated on what they called a “rational player”.
To put it simply – how do you deter a lunatic? Or a desperate man with nothing to lose? Or a person hell-bent on mutual destruction? The truth is, you cannot. Deterrence assumes a rational actor making a logical decision about unacceptable costs. As far as I know, nobody has ever developed a theory of deterrence applicable to a madman.
When I initially wrote my pieces explaining why I believed that a US/NATO/EU attack was impossible, a lot readers posted comments saying that while maybe the top US military command was still mainly composed of rational men, the US imperial elites had clearly gone crazy a long time ago and that they were so stuck in their arrogance, imperial hubris, delusions of invincibility and knee-jerk and systematic use of violence that they could no more be considered as rational. At the time I replied that, yeah, sure, maybe, but what is the point of analyzing something crazy? How do you try to make sense of the suicidally insane?
And yet, this is what I propose to do today. I will try as best I can to try to place myself in the mind of these lunatics and see what they could try doing and what the consequences of that would be. I will go through several possible plans that these crazies might have starting from the most limited one and then going up the insanity slope.

Plan One: a Symbolic and Limited Intervention

This plan is already underway. We know that there are US military advisers in the Ukraine, including at least one general, we know that the Dutch and Australians will be sending in a lightly armed force to “protect” the investigators at the crash site of MH17 (although how a few men armed with assault rifles can protect anybody from Ukie artillery, tank or mortar fire is anybody’s guess).
Then there are all the reports of foreign mercenaries, mostly US and Polish, fighting with the Ukie death squads. There is also some good evidence that Poland is sending military equipment, including aircraft and possibly crews. Well, all of that is dumb and serves very little useful purpose, but that is what the West is so good at: pretending. If this plan stays at this level, I would say that it is not very important. But, alas, there is a nastier possibility here:

Plan Two: A Tripwire Force

This is just an extension of plan one: bring in a few men and then have them killed. This would trigger the needed “popular outrage” (carefully fanned and reported by the corporate media) to force the Europeans to accept more US sanctions in Europe or even some kind of “EU-mandated peacekeeping force”.
Of course, if the Russians or Novorussians do not take the bait and fail to kill the “observers”, US/NATO false flag teams could easily do that. Just imagine what a heavy mortar strike on a building with these OSCE observers would look like. The junta in Kiev would be more than happy to “invite” such a “peacekeeping” force into Novorussia and since this would be an “invited” force, no UNSC Resolution would be needed.
Finally, such a “peacekeeping” force would be regularly reinforced and augmented until it could basically cover the flanks of the Ukies in their attacks against Novorussia. This force would also assume the command and control of Ukie forces, something which the Ukies could greatly benefit from (their current command and control is a mess).
Plans One and Two assume that Russian forces stay on the other side of the border and that the only opposition to such a deployment could come from the Novorussians. But what if the Russians decided to move into Novorussia either to protect the locals or to stop this limited US/NATO/EU “peacekeeping force”? Then the US/NATO/EU would have to take a dramatic escalatory step and send in a much bigger force, more capable of defending itself.

Plan Three: UPROFOR on the Dniepr?

This is the Yugoslav scenario. The West would send in something on the order of 10 battalions which would each be given an area of responsibility for “peacekeeping”. Then police forces would be also sent to “maintain law and order,” and EU commissars would be sent in to “help” the local population “express their will” and “organize” a local government. Soon there would be some kind of EU-run election, and all the Novorussian forces would be declared “bandits” from which the local population need to be “protected”.
Since Strelkov himself fought in Yugoslavia as did many other Russians, I don’t believe that the Russians or Novorussians would fall for this one. I think that Russia would express its opposition to such a plan and that if she was ignored, she would move in her own forces along the line of contact.
This might be the US/NATO/EU end goal: to create a Korea-like “line of demarcation” which would isolate the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics from the rest of Novorussia and the rest of the Ukraine. This would mean getting plenty of Kosovo-like “Camp Bonsteels” all along the Russian border, and it would make it look like the “Wartime President of the One Indispensable Nation stopped the Russian Bear”. Finally, it would create a perfect Cold War-like environment in which the western 1%ers could continue to exploit the 99% while constantly scaring them with the “Russian threat”.

Plan Four: Operation Storm in Novorussia and Crimea?

I would not put it past the folks in the Pentagon and Mons to try to pull off an “Operation Storm” in Novorussia and even possibly Crimea. That is the scenario Glazev fears: the US/NATO/EU would put enough forces inside the Ukraine to allow it to survive long enough to mobilize a sufficient number of men and equipment for a lightning-fast attack on Novorossia and even possibly Crimea.
And in theory, if we assume that Banderstan does not collapse under its own weight and economic disaster, the Ukraine has the resources to mobilize far more men and equipment that the tiny People’s Republics of Donetsk and Lugansk or even Crimea. But that again assumes that Russia will let that happen, which she won’t, so now we have to look at the really crazy plans:

Plan Five: First “Desert Steppe Shield,” Then “Desert Steppe Storm”

That is a crazy notion: to do with Russia what the US did with Iraq. First, to place down a “protection force” in the Ukraine, isolate Russia, and then attack in a full-depth and full-scale determined attack. We are definitely talking about a continental war with a fantastic potential to turn into a world war. This plan would have be based on two crucial assumptions:

  1.  The US/NATO/EU conventional forces would be capable of defeating the Russian military.
  2. If facing conventional defeat, Russia would not use nuclear weapons.

I think that both of these assumptions are deeply mistaken. The first one is based on a mix of propaganda, bean counting and ignorance. The propaganda is something which western military are very good at. They are not. Most western armies are a pathetic joke, and those who can fight well (the Brits, the Turks) are too little to matter.
That leaves the US military which have capabilities far in excess of what its NATO allies can muster. Just as in WWII all the serious fighting had to be done by German units, in case of a WWIII (or IV?), all the serious fighting would have to be done by Americans. The problem is that the Americans would have an extremely hard time bringing in enough forces to really make the difference. In any case, I have the biggest doubt about the current fighting capabilities of the US Army and Marine Corps. Faced with a Russian battalion defending its own soil, I think that an equivalent US Army/Marine force would get slaughtered.
The “bean counting” is when you compare all the NATO APC’s or tanks to the number available to the Russian military. The corporate media loves these sorts of charts in which soldiers, APC’s, tanks, aircraft and other gear are compared. Professional analysts never use them simply because they are meaningless.
What matters is how much of that gear is actually available for battle, the kind of tactics used, the training and morale of the soldiers, the skills of their commanding officers, and stuff which is never mentioned: supplies, logistics, petroleum, lubricants, ammunition, lines of supply, medical standards, and even food and weather. Bean counters simply never see that. But one could argue that the number of trucks is more important to a military than the number of tanks. Yet trucks are never counted. But yes, on paper NATO looks huge. Even though most NATO gear could not even survive your average Ukrainian road, never mind the winter.
But let us assume that the Hollywood image of the US military is true: invincible, best trained, best armed, with a fantastic morale, led by the very best of the best officers, it would easily defeat the primitive Russian military, armed with antiquated weapons and commanded by fat drunken generals.
Okay, and then what? If the official Russian nuclear deterrence doctrine is examined, in this case Russia would use nuclear weapons.
Since even in Hollywood movies nobody makes the claim that the US anti-missile systems could stop Iskanders, cruise missiles or even gravity bombs, we would have to accept that the invincible US force would be turned into radioactive particulates and that in turn would leave the US President two terrible choices: a) take the loss and stop b) retaliate, and the second option would have to include the location from where the strike came from: Russia proper. That, of course, would place the following choices for the Russian President: a) take the loss or b) strike at the continental United States. At this points nuclear mushrooms would start appearing all over the map.
Now please make no mistake: Russia can not only destroy Mons, the Pentagon and Cheyenne Mountain (just a matter of placing enough warheads on the right spot) but also every single major city in the United States. Sure, the USA can retaliate in kind, but what kind of consolation would that be for anybody left?
I cannot believe that the US Deep State would truly, deliberately, want to start a planetary nuclear war. For one thing, US leaders are cowards, and they will not want to take such a monumental decision. A far more likely version is that being stupid, arrogant cowards, they will stumble upon just that outcome. Here is how:

Plan Six: American Football’s “Hail Mary”

In American football there is a specific pass which is used only when seconds are left on the clock, and your team is badly losing anyway. Basically it works like this: every single person who is not defending the quarterback rushes to the end zone, as do all the defenders, and the quarterback then just throws the ball straight into that zone with the very slim hope that one of his own players will catch it and score a touchdown. This is called a “Hail Mary” for very good reason as only a miracle makes such a desperate plan work. Most of the time the ball is either fumbled or caught by the other team. But, very rarely, it works.
I can very much imagine a desperate Obama trying to show the American people that he “has hair on his chest” and that he is not going to let “regional power” challenge the “indispensable nation”. So what he and, really, his administration risks doing is the following: to play a game of chicken hoping against all odds that the Russian will yield. This is my worst nightmare and the worst possible assumption to make because Russia cannot yield.
In March of this year I issued a warning which I entitled Obama just made things much, much worse in the Ukraine – now Russia is ready for war. What prompted me to issue that warning was the fact that the Council of the Russian Federation has just unanimously passed a resolution allowing Putin to use Russian armed forces in the Ukraine. Since then, this resolution has been repealed at Putin’s request and for obvious political motives, but the mood and determination are still there. In fact, I think that it has grown much stronger.
There has been much useless speculation about Putin, his motives and strategy. This is way bigger than just Putin. If the US/NATO/EU really push too far, and that includes a genocide in Novorussia, an attack on Crimea or an attack on Russian forces, Russia will go to war, Putin or no Putin. And Putin knows that. His real base of support is not the Russian elites (who mostly fear him), but the Russian people (with whom his current rating are higher than ever before). And Putin himself openly spoke about the “threats to Russian sovereignty” though he did add that because of the Russian nuclear forces, there was, in his opinion, no immediate threat to Russian territory.
If the US decides to play a game of chicken with Russia, then it will do the same thing as a car driver playing a game of chicken against an incoming train: regardless of the train’s driver, the train is on tracks and its momentum is too great: it cannot stop or veer away.
The problem is that the USA has a long record of making absolutely irresponsible statements which end up putting them into a corner from which they cannot bulge without losing face. Just look at the MH17 disaster: the Obama administration immediately rushed to blame the Russians for it, but what will it do when the evidence to the contrary comes out? What if Obama also draws a red line somewhere (it does not really matter where) and then forces Russia to cross it?
Sadly, I can imagine the USA declaring that the US/NATO will defend the Ukie airspace. I think that they are dumb enough to try to seize a Russian ship entering or leaving the Black Sea.
Remember – these are the folks who hijacked the aircraft of Bolivian President Evo Morales to try to find Snowden on board. These are the folks who regularly kidnap Russian citizens worldwide (the last time the son of a well-know Russian member of Parliament who was kidnapped in the Maldive Islands). And, of course, these are the folks who did 9/11.
Their arrogance knows no limits because they are profoundly evil sociopaths. For them, the organization of false flag operations is a normal standard procedure. They almost triggered a war between the DPRK and South Korea by sinking a South Korean military vessel. They used chemical weapons in Syria not once, but several times. And the last time we had a Democrat in the White House, he was crazy enough to send two US Aircraft Carrier Groups into the Strait of Taiwan to threaten China.

My Biggest Fears

This is my biggest fear: some kind of desperate “Hail Mary” maneuver in which the US will try to convince Russia that “look, we are crazy enough to start this thing, so you better back off” not realizing that Russia cannot back off. The other thing which really scares me is that during the Cuban Missile Crisis everybody was aware of the stakes, and most people were truly terrified. Now, thanks to the propaganda of the corporate media, almost nobody is afraid and hardly anybody is paying attention. Russia and the USA are on a clear collision course and nobody cares! How come?
Because if 9/11 proved anything, it is that there are things which most people are simply unwilling to contemplate, no matter how close and real they are. It would only make sense that the Empire of Illusion would be populated by a people in total denial. After all, illusion and denial usually go hand in hand.
Most of you, dear readers and friends, seem to be sharing with me a sense of total distrust in the sanity of our leaders. When I asked you whether you believed that the US/NATO were crazy enough to use military forces against Russia, an overwhelming number of you answered “yes,” and a good part of you were even emphatically sure of that. Why? Because we all know how crazy and deluded our Imperial Overlords are. Crazy and deluded enough not to quality as “rational actor”? Crazy and deluded enough to play a game a chicken with a train? Crazy and deluded enough to risk the planet on “Hail Mary? Alas, I think that this is a very real possibility.

But What Does Uncle Sam Really Want?

There is a gradual realization in Russia that for Uncle Sam this is not about the Ukraine. It is about Russia and specifically about regime change in Russia. A vast majority of Russian experts seem to believe that the US wants to overthrow Putin and that this entire war in the Ukraine is a means to achieve that. As a very cynical joke going around now says “Obama is willing to fight Putin down to the very last Ukrainian”. I think that this is correct. The US hopes that one of the following will happen:

  1. A Russian military intervention in Novorussia which will allow the US to restart a Cold War v2 on steroids and which will also fully re-enslave Europe to the USA. Putin would then be blamed for falling in the US trap.
  2. The creation of a US-run “Banderastan” in the Ukraine. That would ‘contain’ and destabilize Russia. Again, Putin would be blamed for letting that happen.
  3. A “nationalist Maidan” in Russia: this is what is behind the current Putin-bashing campaign in the blogosphere: to paint Putin as a weak and/or corrupt man, who traded Crimea for the Donbass (you know the tune – these folks even comment on this blog). These efforts are supported and sometimes even financed by Russian oligarchs who have a great deal of money involved in the EU and don’t need the current tensions. Here Putin would be blamed for not doing enough.

In all three cases, Putin would risk a (patriotically) color coded revolution which would, inevitably, bring either crazy rogue or a clueless fossil to power (a la Zhirinovsky or Zuganov) or, much better, a pro-American “liberal” (a la Medvedev). I think that all of these plans will fail.
Putin will not give Uncle Sam the intervention he wants. Instead, Russia continue to support the Resistance in Novorussia until Banderastan goes “belly up”, i.e. for another 30-60 days or so. As for the “nationalist Maidan”, the Russian people see straight through this “black PR campaign” and their support for Putin is higher than it ever was. It’s not Putin who does not want to intervene overtly in the Donbass, it is the Russian people. The attempts at stirring up anti-Putin by first stirring up anti-Strelkov feelings have completely failed and, in fact, they have backfired. A lot of these “hurray-patriots” are now overly called “useful idiots” for the CIA or even provocateurs.
Finally, while they are at this point in time only rumors, there seem to be more and more specialists of the opinion that MH17 was a deliberate false flag by the US. If the news that the Ukies did it ever becomes public, then the entire destabilization plan will go down the tubes. At this point, I would not put anything, no matter how crazy, past the US Deep State.
And that is a very scary thought.
The Saker

The Media in a Fascist State

As Uygur further explained: “All the large media conglomerates have some tie to getting contracts from the government. Whether Comcast needed approval for a merger, or GE needed a defense contract, every one of those giant corporations needs something from the government. So it’s become a synergistic environment—Comcast gives the government something, the government gives Comcast something else.
“The implicit message is: Don’t rock the boat, and keep the gravy train coming,” Uygur said.

The best definition of a fascist state is a state in which the state and the large corporations are merged into a single entity whereby you can hardly tell where one ends and the other begins. The media in a fascist state is always highly controlled in various ways. In a fascist state, the only media that is allowed to exist is media that parrots the state propaganda line and does not upset the corporations that serve the state.
Apparently the large US media qualifies as a fascist-type media system.
The dissident press in large US news media is essentially nonexistent. However, there is some dissident press in large circulation monthlies such as New York Magazine, the New Yorker and Harper’s. Cenk Uygur of Young Turks seems to qualify as a dissident journalist. He is on the MSNBC network. However, this network is otherwise part of the controlled media system. Seymour Hersch of the New Yorker is possibly one of the last true journalists working today. He writes for the New Yorker, where he has uncovered many of the lies and sinister plots of the US Deep State. I am amazed they haven’t killed him yet.
Rolling Stone also has a few true journalists. This is a monthly like the New Yorker, Harper’s, etc. None of the organs above are news organs. Instead they are best thought of as in depth feature publications.
Perhaps the History Channel could be seen as a dissident TV station, but they are not a news station, and they were horribly punished over their airing of the great The Men Who Killed Kennedy documentary. There were wild calls to actually stop selling the video. The channel actually caved in and stopped selling the video. Then in a major mea culpa, they chaired a 3 man panel of state controlled historians who headed a roundtable where it was concluded that the JFK assassination series was utterly insane. Later they apologized for the (nonexistent) errors in their reporting.
Gee, do you think somebody threatened the History Channel?
My sources tell me that the CIA/Deep State was enraged over that documentary. To get their revenge, last year on the 50th anniversary of the assassination, the entire US media spent most of the anniversary bashing Kennedy as a lousy president and trashing assassination theories. It was quite bizarre how the entire US media did this in concert. It was as if they were all reading off the same script. You know, like a…controlled media?

ISIS Leader Killed by US Airstrike?

Here.
Three senior members of ISIS and a bodyguard to al-Baghdadi were verified as being killed by US airstrikes in Mosul earlier in the week. The verification was made by Iraqi government sources when interviewed by ABC on Thursday, September 4. The claim is that the same airstrikes that killed the three top leaders and al-Baghdadi’s aide also killed the leader of ISIS himself.
Thousands of social media users have been circulating a photo that is said to be of the body of al-Baghdadi. It is not known if the photo is genuine.

Is this the dead body of ISIS leader al-Baghdadi?
Is this the dead body of ISIS leader al-Baghdadi?

Nazism: History Repeating Itself in the Ukraine


I do believe in the Godwin Rule in that one should not call people Nazis promiscuously. That is, don’t call people that unless they deserve it. A now banned commenter (and his ban was long overdue) recently asked me if I saw Nazis under my bed. Of course I don’t. I am very careful with the use of that word, especially since I myself get called that more or less on a continuous basis – I get called anti-Semite, Jew-hater, Nazi, White supremacist, virulent racist, white power advocate and all sorts of nonsense all the time. None of those things are true. I would probably just tell you if I were any of those things. It’s not like there is anything to be ashamed of.
But in the case of these Ukrainians, the Godwin Rule no longer applies. That is because we are dealing here with not just fascists but real, true blue, dyed in the wool Nazis, as you can see from this video. That accusation is not propaganda at all. It’s the flat out truth.
It is true that some figures and organizations in Ukrainian society are more Nazi than others. Poroshenko is not so much a Nazi as he is a mafioso oligarch. There are quite a few others who be better described that way. The Ukrainian military is not a particularly Nazi organization. It is just an unpaid, underfunded ragtag military with an amateur officer corps. However, the National Guard (the Nazi Guard) is very much a Nazi organization. Most of the paramilitaries fighting alongside the government are Nazis – the Azov, Adair, Donbass, Right Sector and Svoboda groups are are hardcore Nazis.
I honestly feel that Yatsenyuk is a real Nazi. He’s also a Jew, which is quite bizarre, but weirdly enough, in the bizarro world of 2014 Ukrainian politics, Jewish Nazis are not rare. The crazed murderess Yulia Timoshenko, the Gas Queen, a female version of a mafioso, is surely a Nazi. So is Dmytro Yarosh, the leader of the Right Sector. Ihor Kolomoisky is another Jewish Nazi, and I mean he is a real Nazi. Kolomoisky is one of the most evil people in all of Ukraine. He runs the Azov Battalion, a hardcore Nazi paramilitary. It was Kolomoisky and his paramilitary that shot down the MH17 Malaysian jet in July.

The Saker On the Anglo-Zionists

Saker keeps using this word for the people who are fomenting trouble in Ukraine, Syria and really all over the world. It turns out that Anglo-Zionists simply means “the US Deep State.” So why not just call it the Deep State? Is Zionism really so important? What exactly is the role of the Jews or Zionists in this Ukraine conflict? I cannot yet figure it out.

I refuse to use this word as I consider that not only is it ridiculous, but it is also borderline anti-Semitism. And as one who gets called that all the time, I am not one to throw that word around lightly.

I also refuse to use the term “the Ukraine” to describe the country called Ukraine as Ukrainians really hate that phrase. They seem to think that it denies them their right to a national identity. As one who believes that a Ukrainian state with deserves to exist (but not with the borders it has now), I will not use that word. Also, as a linguist, I refuse to repeat the Russian lie that Ukrainian is not a real language but is instead some corrupted dialect of Russian. Obviously Ukrainian is a real language.

Yes, Zionism sucks. Yes, Judaism is as lousy as any other religion, and in fact, it may be one of the worst religions out there. But how is the religion of .3% of mankind so important to the rest of us? I don’t get it.

What do you think of using the term Anglo-Zionist do refer to the US elite, foreign policy elite, or Deep State?

 

AngloZionists: Short Primer for Newcomers

by the Saker

To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize”

 – Voltaire

Dear new-to-this blog friends,

Why do I speak of “AngloZionists”? I got that question many times in the past, so I will make a separate post about it to (hopefully) explain this once and for all.

1) Anglo:

The USA in an Empire. With roughly 1000 overseas bases (depends on how you count), a undeniably messianic ideology, a bigger defense offense budget then the rest of the planet combined, 16+ spy agencies, the dollar as work currency there is no doubt that the US is a planetary Empire. Where did the US Empire come from? Again, that’s a no-brainer – from the British Empire.

Furthermore, the US Empire is really based on a select group of nations: the Echelon countries, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK and, of course, the US. What do these countries have in common? They are the leftovers of the British Empire and they are all English speaking. Notice that France, Germany or Japan are not part of this elite even though they are arguably as important or more to the USA then, say, New Zealand and far more powerful. So the “Anglo” part is undeniable. And yet, even though “Anglo” is an ethnic/linguistic/cultural category while “Zionist” is a political/ideological one, very rarely do I get an objection about speaking of “Anglos” or the “Anglosphere”.

2) Zionist

Let’s take the (hyper politically correct) Wikipedia definition of what the word “Zionism” means: it is “a nationalist movement of Jews and Jewish culture that supports the creation of a Jewish homeland in the territory defined as the Land of Israel“. Apparently, no link to the US, the Ukraine or Timbuktu, right? But think again.

Why would Jews – whether defined as a religion or an ethnicity – need a homeland anyway? Why can’t they just live wherever they are born, just like Buddhists (a religion) or the African Bushmen (ethnicity) who live in many different countries? The canonical answer is that Jews have been persecuted everywhere and that therefore they need their own homeland to serve as a safe haven in case of persecutions.

Without going into the issue of why Jews were persecuted everywhere and, apparently, in all times, this rationale clearly implies if not the inevitability of more persecutions or, at the very least, a high risk thereof. Let’s accept that for demonstration sake and see what this, in turn, implies.

First, that implies that Jews are inherently threatened by non-Jews who are all at least potential anti-Semites. The threat is so severe that a separate Gentile-free homeland must be created as the only, best and last way to protect Jews worldwide. This, in turn, implies that the continued existence of this homeland should become an vital and irreplaceable priority of all Jews worldwide lest a persecution suddenly breaks out and they have nowhere to go.

Furthermore, until all Jews finally “move up” to Israel, they better be very, very careful as all the goyim around them could literally come down with a sudden case of genocidal anti-Semitism at any moment. Hence all the anti-anti-Semitic organizations a la ADL or UEJF, the Betar clubs, the network of sayanim, etc.

In other words, far from being a local “dealing with Israel only” phenomenon, Zionism is a worldwide movement whose aim is to protect Jews from the apparently incurable anti-Semitism of the rest of the planet. As Israel Shahak correctly identified it, Zionism postulates that Jews should “think locally and act globally” and when given a choice of policies always ask the crucial question: “But is it good for Jews?”.

So far from being only focused on Israel, Zionism is really a global, planetary, ideology which unequivocally split up all of mankind into two groups (Jews and Gentiles), which assumes that the latter are all potential genocidal maniacs (which is racist) and believes that saving Jewish lives is qualitatively different and more important than saving Gentile lives (which is racist again). Anyone doubting the ferocity of this determination should either ask a Palestinian or study the holiday of Purim, or both. Even better, read Gilad Atzmon and look up his definition of what is brilliantly called “pre-traumatic stress disorder.”

3) Anglo-Zionist

The British Empire and the early USA used to be pretty much wall to wall Anglo. Sure, Jews had a strong influence (in banking for example), but Zionism was a non-issue not only amongst non-Jews, but also amongst US Jews. Besides, religious Jews were often very hostile to the notion of a secular Israel while secular Jews did not really care about this quasi Biblical notion. WWII definitely gave a massive boost to the Zionist movement while, as Norman Finkelstein explained it, the topic of the “Holocaust” became central to Jewish discourse and identity only many years later.

I won’t go into the history of the rise to power of Jews in the USA, but from roughly Ford to GW Bush’s Neocons it has been steady. And even though Obama initially pushed them out, they came right back in through the back door. Right now, the only question is whether US Jews have more power than US Anglos or the other way around. Before going any further, let me also immediately say that I am not talking about Jews or Anglos as a group, but I am referring to the top 1% within each of these groups. Furthermore, I don’t believe that the to
p 1% of Jews cares any more about Israel or the 99% of Jews than the top 1% of Anglos care about the USA or the Anglo people.

So, here my thesis:

The US Empire is run by a 1% (or less) elite which can be called the “deep state” which is composed of two main groups: Anglos and Jews. These two groups are in many ways hostile to each other (just like the SS and SA or Trotskyites and Stalinists), but they share 1) a racist outlook on the rest of mankind 2) a messianic ideology 3) a phenomenal propensity for violence 4) an obsession with money and greed and its power to corrupt. So they work together almost all the time.

Now this might seem basic, but so many people miss it, that I will have to explicitly state it: to say that most US elites are Anglos or Jews does not mean that most Anglos or Jews are part of the US elites. That is a strawman argument which deliberately ignores the non commutative property of my thesis to turn it into a racist statement which accuses most/all Anglos or Jews of some evildoing. So to be very clear:

When I speak of AngloZionist Empire I am referring to the predominant ideology of the 1%ers elites which form this Empire’s “Deep State”.

By the way, there are non-Jewish Zionists (Biden, in his own words) and there are (plenty of) anti-Zionist Jews. Likewise, there are non-Anglo imperialists and there are (plenty of) anti-imperialists Anglos. To speak of “Nazi Germany” or “Soviet Russia” does in now way imply that all Germans were Nazis or all Russians were Communists. All this means it that the predominant ideology of these nations at that specific moment in time was National Socialism and Marxism, that’s all.

My personal opinion now

First, I don’t believe that Jews are a race or an ethnicity. I always doubted that, but reading Shlomo Sand really convinced me. Jews are not defined by religion either (most/many are secular). Truly, Jews are a tribe. A group one can chose to join (Elizabeth Taylor) or leave (Gilad Atzmon). In other words, I see “Jewishness” as a culture, or ideology, or education or any other number of things, but not something rooted in biology. I fully agree with Atzmon when he says that Jews are racist but not a race.

Second, I don’t even believe that the concept of “race” has been properly defined and, hence, that it has any objective meaning. I therefore don’t differentiate between human beings on the basis of an undefined criterion.

Third, being Jewish (or not) is a choice whereby one to belong, adhere and endorse a tribe (secular Jews) or a religion (Judaics). Any choice implies a judgment call and is therefore a legitimate target for scrutiny and criticism.

Fourth, I believe that Zionism, even when secular, instrumentalizes the values, ideas, myths and ethos of rabbinical Judaism (aka “Talmudism” or “Phariseeism”), and both are racist in their core value and assumptions.

Fifth, both Zionism and Nazism are twin brothers born from the same ugly womb: 19th century European nationalism (Brecht was right, “’The belly is still fertile from which the foul beast sprang”). Nazis and Zionists can hate each other to their hearts’ content, but they are still twins.

Sixth, I reject any and all form of racism as a denial of our common humanity, a denial of the freedom of choice of each human being and – being an Orthodox Christian – as a grievous heresy. To me people who chose to identify themselves with, and as Jews are not inherently different from any other human, and they deserve no more and no less rights and protections than any other human being.

I will note here that while the vast majority of my readers of Anglos, they almost never complain about the “Anglo” part of my “AngloZionist” descriptor. The vast majority of objections focus on the “Zionist” part. You might want to think long and hard about why this is so and what it tells us about the kind of power Zionists have over the prevailing ideology. Could it be linked to the reason why the (openly racist and truly genocidal) Israeli Prime Minister gets more standing ovations in Congress (29) than the US President (25)?

Some objections:

Q: It makes you sound like a Nazi/redneck/racist/idiot/etc.
A: I don’t care. I don’t write this blog for brainwashed zombies.

Q: You turn people off.
A: If by speaking the truth and using correct descriptors I turn them off, then this blog is not for them.

Q: You can offend Jews.
A: Only those who believe that their ideas cannot be challenged or criticized.

Q: But you will lose readers!!
A: This is not a popularity contest.

Q: Your intentions might be good, but they are easily misinterpreted.
A: This is why I define my words very carefully and strictly.

Q: But why are you so stubborn about this?
A: Because I am sick and tired of those in power hiding in the dark: let’s expose them and freely challenge them. How can you challenge something which is hidden?

Q: But I am a hasbarachnik and I need to get you to stop using that expression!!
A: Give it up and find an easier target for your efforts. You will still get paid.

A: I have a much better term.
Q: Good! Use it on your blog then

That’s it for now.

Actually no, there is one more thing, while I am at it:

Open message to those objecting to my use of the article ‘the’ in front of the word “Ukraine“: before lecturing others, learn Russian and learn a little something about the history of the Ukraine

Thanks,

The Saker

The "Impartial" Media

Stupid article.
Reiterates the usual conceit that there are two types of journalism – biased or advocacy journalism or straight news gathering such as is done by our large media outlets, which is supposedly impartial.
f you think of the names that have created the biggest buzz in the media world in the past few years – blogger/journalist Glenn Greenwald, data guru Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight, Julian Assange of Wikileaks, and now the increasingly popular lo-fi documentary makers at Vice News – they have one thing in common. These are story-tellers for a digital age that come less from the tradition of straight, impartial news gathering and instead embrace a new style of journalism which favors transparency, strong analysis, opinion, a subjective standpoint, and at times, flat-out advocacy for one side of a debate.
Screw Vice. Vice is just the Voice of the CIA for the Hipster Generation. I never knew hipsters loved the CIA so much! I do not consider Vice any more biased than the New York Times or the Washington Post. In fact, it takes the exact same state propaganda line as both of those controlled media outlets.
Assange and Glenn Greenwald are direct threats to the Deep State and the media it controls or is in bed with. Hence, the controlled state propaganda media which dishes up nothing but propaganda day in and day out decides to call those brave souls blowing the whistle on their corrupt asses “biased and subjective.” Laughable!

These are story-tellers for a digital age that come less from the tradition of straight, impartial news gathering…

But here is the joke. Straight impartial news gathering is typically anything but.

“by moving outside the ideology of objectivity, alternative news sources may help to put the facts into a more complete context and perspective…

The MSM has never been inside the ideology of objectivity anyway.

Even former BBC News boss Richard Sambrook has asked “does a neutral voice hold the same value today as it did a century ago? Is the emphasis on impartiality in news actually an impediment to a free market in ideas?”

Sadly, the MSM media was vastly more dishonest and propagandistic 100 years ago (remember the yellow journalism of the Hearst papers?) than it is today. And there is no emphasis on impartiality. If anything, there is a bias against it.

Further, academics such as New York University’s Jay Rosen have criticized impartial journalism, saying it can lead to what he dubs “the view from nowhere”.

He is criticizing a ghost, something that doesn’t even exist.

He describes this as “a bid for trust that advertises the viewlessness of the news producer. Frequently it places the journalist between polarized extremes, and calls that neither-nor position impartial.”

Yes, this leads to “the truth is somewhere in the middle” nonsense, which most Americans sadly believe in. For instance, the Democratic Party is said to be the party of the radical Left, and the Republican Party is said to be the party of the radical Right, so many call themselves Centrists. But what if the Democratic Party isn’t even radical Left in the first place?
I agree with Hunter Thompson. Screw objectivity. “How can you be objective about Nixon?” he argued. Of course.

This differs slightly from the methods of the ABC and the BBC, who generally garner trust through an impartial and independent approach which examines the facts and draws conclusions based on the weight of evidence.

LOL! ABC and BBC unbiased? Haha.

The Australian Press Council has reflected this in their newly released standards, which ask newspapers to ensure “writers’ expressions of opinion are not based on significantly inaccurate factual material or omission of key facts”.

The problem is that this is a regulation passed too late that has never been followed anyway. Since when has the Murdoch-owned Australian media not been based on significantly inaccurate factual material or omission of key facts? That’s their modus operandi.

Transparency must still be coupled with the hallmarks of solid journalism: checking facts, attributing accurately, uncovering new information, and exposing falsehoods.

LMAO! Since when does the US MSM media check facts, attribute accurately or expose falsehoods? If they checked facts, they would not print blatant lies so often. If they attributed accurately, they would not deviously print selective quotes to warp the message of the quoted person. If they exposed falsehoods, then they would have to kill half the stories in the paper.

New media prefer transparency and plurality to achieve impartiality, old media achieve it with objective methods. Let’s acknowledge that both methods can lead to quality journalism, or for that matter, to poor journalism.

There is no such thing as quality journalism anymore in any large US media outlets. The only real journalists anymore write for small presses, low-volume news or opinion magazines, low traffic Internet sites or perennially broke radio stations like Pacifica.

But it’s also important to recognize what hasn’t changed. Audiences now have access to more information and a variety of different perspectives to form their own conclusions. Do audiences need a journalist to de-code the news or contextualize the facts anymore?

Honestly, you are better off just figuring stuff out on your own. Relying on an MSM journalist to figure things out for you is like bleeding a sick person. He’s only going to tell you a bunch of lies that leave you even more confused than before. Best solution is just unplug the box, turn off the radio, cancel your daily paper and tell Time Magazine to stick it.

News consumers are best served when the media provides them reliable information without spin and distills it into a digestible form.

Tell me the last time the MSM provided us with reliable information without spin about anything?

After all, there’s only 24 hours in a day. Presumably most people are too busy with work and the school run, to conduct their own robust investigations

Exactly. Not everyone is a trust fund kid like me who can sit around and track down all the Western MSM lies all day long. The fact that almost on one has the time to do this is how the Western Propaganda Model works.

And let’s keep the advocacy journalism and the Twitter rants to a minimum.

What a senseless comment. The media prints nothing but advocacy journalism. If they keep it to a minimum, they would have to shut down their business.