Monthly Archives: March 2024

Western Hegemony's Collapse

Russia’s Conditions for Strategic Arms Talks

Leave a comment

by Gilbert Doctorow via Gilbert Doctorow

Western media have mentioned Vladimir Putin’s remarks a week or so ago that Russia will not enter into new negotiations on strategic arms limitations with the United States while the USA is doing everything possible to inflict a strategic defeat on his country in the Ukraine war. Strategic arms talks cannot be separated from the rest of the relationship between the countries, said Putin.

This position was amplified a day ago by a senior Russian diplomat, Dmitry Polyansky, first deputy permanent head of Russia at the United Nations. His statements have received little if any attention in our media, though they were broadcast on prime time news in Russia.

What is entirely missing in Western reporting, to my knowledge, is a context for these Russian position statements that goes back in time further than a few weeks. Let us try to address that lacuna here and now.

Contrary to what one might expect, pursuit of strategic arms treaties with the Soviet Union and then with Russia was never championed by doves in the USA, who were more interested in people to people exchanges, increased cultural, educational and commercial relations…in détente in its widest sense. Many of these doves even believed that Russia and the United States could and should be friends, acting in consort to address the problems of humanity.

No, the champions and chief negotiators of strategic arms treaties were always the hawks in United States political circles. It was they who saw in these agreements the possibility to continue trade, diplomatic and other policies that would prevent the USSR’s economic development and reduce its more general threat to American global interests while providing guard rails against the relationship erupting into war threatening life on earth, and most especially life and prosperity in the US of A.

The last iteration of these American initiated arms control talks was the negotiation of the New START agreement in the presidency of Barack Obama. This took place against the background of the widely advertised “Reset” of relations, which was intended to move beyond the open hostility between the two countries in the summer of 2008 during the Russia-Georgia war under George W. Bush. At that time, armed conflict in the Black Sea was averted only by Turkish intervention, preventing entry through the Dardanelles of American naval vessels.

In that crisis atmosphere, ‘wise men’ from among active and retired U.S. Senators, former senior government officials and including the most notable celebrity of the time, Henry Kissinger, formulated a road map for bringing US-Russian relations back from the brink which they passed along to both candidates for the presidency, Barack Obama and John McCain. The underlying logic was to improve the atmospherics while doing nothing to change the substance of America’s containment policies towards the Russian Federation in the spirit of Cold War I. Following Obama’s inauguration in 2009, this was rolled out as the ‘Reset.’ The logic given to the American public was that despite their adversarial positions, the United States would cherry pick those issues where a cooperative relationship with Russia would serve American interests and pursue them in the months ahead.

For those who wish to understand the origins and sense of the ‘Reset,’ there are several highly pertinent and detailed essays in my Stepping out of Line: Collected (Nonconformist) essays on Russian-American relations, 2008-2012.

One might well ask why the Russians played along with the American initiative in 2008 which fell far short of their hopes for a new détente? The answer is very simple: the Kremlin held a weak hand of cards, one that was as bad, possibly even worse than the Soviet Union held when it negotiated the first treaties on arms limitations with the United States in the 1970s. Its armed forces were still far from being restored from the self-destruction and chaos of the Yeltsin years. This was demonstrated to the glee of Western military analysts who commented on the performance of Russian troops in their engagements in Georgia. Moreover, even if Russia held some better cards, its then President, Dmitry Medvedev, was, shall we say, naïve and inexperienced in international relations. He hoped that gestures of good will towards the Americans would be reciprocated. Needless to say, they were not.

So what has changed now for Russia to declare arms limitations talks inseparable from negotiations on the full scope of US-Russian relations? The answer to that question goes back to 2018 and Vladimir Putin’s announcement of his country’s latest strategic arms systems which, for the first time in Soviet and RF history, placed Russia as much as a decade ahead of the United States in developing, producing and deploying strategic weapons. The hypersonic missiles and other state of the art systems that Putin presented at his State of the Nation address back then were said to be invincible and would nullify entirely the nuclear first strike capability that the United States under Bush had been investing hundreds of billions of dollars to achieve by its global anti-ballistic missile installations.

In 2018, Putin’s announcements of strategic superiority over the United States were taken to be a bluff. There was the common belief among U.S. elites that the Russians could never produce these weapons in numbers sufficient to pose a threat to American superiority.

Now, in 2024, Putin has been proven right and the doubters and scoffers in the Collective West have been proven wrong about Russia’s ability to put on standby, ready for launch, weapons that the USA still has not succeeded in passing trials. Moreover, the two years of the Russia-Ukraine war have demonstrated that Russia possesses conventional weapons which are equal to or superior to the best that NATO can bring to the battlefield.

Whereas a couple of years ago major media in the West spoke of China as the world’s fastest rising military power, second only to the USA, and Russia was said to be just a spoiler, a star on the decline, today the The Financial Times, The New York Times and their confrères in the USA and Europe do not hesitate to admit that Russia is number two in the world’s league of military powers.

This, my friends, is the proper context for reading Mr. Polyansky’s declarations in the United Nations. The worm has turned.

For the full English translation text of Polyansky’s address in the UN, see: https://russiaun.ru/ru/news/180324

Saving Ukrainians from Themselves

Are Ukrainian Elites Starting to Switch Allegiances to Russia?

Leave a comment

by Paul Serran via The Gateway Pundit


Sergey Naryshkin.

Heads of Intelligence Service becoming heads of state is nothing new, as CIA’s George Bush and KGB’s Vladimir Putin immediately pop to mind.

But more and more, today’s Intelligence Chiefs from the world’s superpowers – while still in command of the intelligence apparatus – have stepped out of the shadows and are doing diplomatic work or simply openly appearing in the media with a renewed force.

CIA Director, Ambassador William J. Burns, for example, develops parallel diplomatic efforts alongside State Department.

Besides the Agency, the Israeli Mossad chief is also involved in negotiations to free the remaining hostages held by Hamas.

It stands to reason that it wouldn’t be much different with Russian Foreign Intelligence Service SRV’s head Sergey Naryshkin.

New Deals At The Gateway Pundit Discounts Page At MyPillow – Up to 71% Off With Promo Code TGP

Sergey Naryshkin has just come public to say that Russian intelligence has reported cases of Ukrainian elites switching over to Russian side.

Naryshkin specified that such concerns came up during US and UK discussions to appoint the West’s new ‘special emissary’ to Ukraine.

Fears about members of the Kiev elite adhering to the Russian side are justified, as such cases are already taking place.

TASS reported:

“‘Washington and London fear treachery on behalf of many representatives of the Kiev elite, who may try to get ahead of the game by switching to the side of the future winners [Russia]’, the SVR press office said in a statement quoting Naryshkin as saying.

‘Such fears are justified as the first cases have already emerged’, he said.”

The SVR chief went on to say that such concerns were detected as they came up during discussions to appoint the West’s new ‘viceroy’ to Ukraine.

“‘This fact underlies the increasingly difficult situation at the frontline, complications regarding military mobilizations and delays in receiving Western military aid. Many Ukrainians have begun to grasp the inevitability of Moscow achieving the objectives of the special military operation’, Naryshkin stated.”

A “viceroy” is unlikely to yield the results the West is hoping for.

“‘Naturally, the West’s latest flagrant attempt to amplify the subjugation of our brotherly Ukrainian people cannot but cause our concern’, he said.”

[…] ‘The West’s so-called ‘viceroy,’ whoever may take this office, is unlikely to stay afloat in Kiev’s bog of hatred, intrigue, lies, adulation and betrayal for long. Hitting the bottom, he will find himself in the warm company of ambassadors of the G7 countries, who have evidently failed as the ‘collective viceroy’ on Ukraine’s soil’, Naryshkin added.”

RT reported:

“In a statement issued by the SVR’s press service on Monday, Naryshkin suggested that the US and the UK are trying to convince other G7 states to establish the post in order to ‘strengthen the mechanisms of direct external control of the territory controlled by the Kiev regime’.

‘It is expected that [the ‘special envoy’] will have constant access to President Zelensky and know about all his plans’, the SVR’s statement read. The person will also have the ability to ‘block the steps of the Ukrainian leadership that are not coordinated with Washington and London, proposing instead the correct solutions, from the point of view of the Anglo-Saxons’, it added.”

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg was mentioned as candidate for the new role.

Trending: Ron Paul Warns Public to Prepare for Unpredictable ‘Black Swan’ Event During Tucker Carlson Interview (VIDEO)

Meanwhile, reports arose last week that Kiev’s troops could soon be forced to abandon their frontline positions unless they receive more urgent aid from the West.

Anglozionism

Israel’s “Assault” of Gaza Mirrors “US Regime Change Wars”

Leave a comment

Max Blumenthal, Editor of Greyzone, has compared Israel’s “wider goal of regime change” to a number of US-led conflicts and chaos of the past.

Uncategorized

UK, the Provocateur, Just Like in WWI

Leave a comment

by Leo Hohmann  via leohohmann.com

How NATO powers are using the U.K.’s World War I model to lure Russia into the next big global war

Using duplicity, deception and secret alliances, the U.K.’s inner circle of top elites led by Nathaniel Rothschild, King Edward VII, and Lord Alfred Milner backed the German Kaiser into a corner and intentionally set the Germans up to blame them for starting the First World War, when in fact it was the British who provoked the Germans to the point where war was the only option.

German generals were caught strategizing several weeks ago on how to bomb Russia’s main bridge to Crimea. This would be an act of aggression that Russian President Vladimir Putin described as guaranteed to draw a harsh military response from Russia, possibly even including a nuclear strike against Berlin.
And that has led to an admission by German officials that their military is woefully unprepared to take on Russia. If German generals and politicians truly want to provoke a war with Russia, they had better slow down and wait for their military to catch up to the political rhetoric coming out of Berlin.
A March 14 article by John Cody at Remix News shows that the German Army lacks the personnel, equipment and infrastructure to wage a major war of any kind, let alone with a nuclear-armed military superpower like Russia.

“Germany’s own military and government are painting such a dire picture of the armed forces that there are now calls from some of the most powerful politicians in the country to reinstate mandatory military service,” Cody writes.

Yes, a military draft.

A video produced by Remix News details testimony provided by Eva Högl, German Parliamentary Commissioner for the Armed Forces, who provided catastrophic details about the state of the German military. It is shocking in terms of its candor regarding the current state of the German armed forces.

She finds it “really impressive” that Germany has emptied out its military defense stocks by handing it over to Ukraine to be wasted in a losing war with Russia. That sounds like an admission of treason in the wide open.

But wait. There’s more.

Germany knows it is incapable of taking on Russia so it is negotiating a secret deal with the insane leaders of two other European countries, France and Poland, for the very purpose of sending troops into Ukraine separate from NATO, although I do not believe this could truly be done without the acquiescence of Washington and London.

An organization called the Weimar Triangle – composed of France, Germany and Poland – has been in existence since 1991 at the fall of the Soviet Union.

The stated purpose of the Weimar Triangle was to assist Poland’s emergence from Communist rule. It’s strange that it still exists but it may have found a new purpose – instigating World War III with Russia.

According to Wikipedia, “the Weimar Triangle exists mostly in the form of summit meetings between the leaders of the three countries and of their foreign ministers. The collaboration between member states includes inter-parliamentary contacts, military, scientific and cultural co-operation. The most recent summit of leaders occurred in Paris on June 12, 2023.” (Emphasis mine)

There’s been almost no media coverage of it, but Reuters reported yesterday, March 13, that the three nations of the Weimar Triangle are meeting Friday, March 15, in “hastily arranged talks” regarding how to move forward in aiding Ukraine in its war against Russia. This meeting may produce an agreement, possibly secretive, to build up their military personnel using conscription and other means for the purpose of ultimately inserting some combination of French, German and/or Polish troops into the Ukrainian battlefield against Russia.

Russia has won phase one of this war and the NATO nations are having to get creative if they want to continue the fight. And there is absolutely no question in my mind that they do want to continue the war against Russia. Why? Because Russia, even more than China, is the focal point of the BRICS coalition of nations that are challenging the U.S.-led world economic order which is tied to the U.S. petro dollar and U.S. military supremacy.

All of the military experts I’ve been listening to over the past two years seem to miss the economic reasons for why the war will widen beyond Russia and Ukraine. It was never about Russia and Ukraine. It was about challenges and shifting realities related to the global economic order.

Military analysts have talked in terms of Ukraine or Russia winning or losing the war but few, if any, have really seriously considered the possibility of a third outcome – that neither Ukraine or Russia will “win” this war because the real war is not between Ukraine and Russia. It is between NATO and its allies and Russia and its allies. Ukraine is just a proxy and it’s about to be forced to limp off the battlefield. If a new influx of troops doesn’t come from somewhere, the war is over and Russia wins. But because of the economic reasons stated above and other reasons related to the West’s liberal social agenda that is at odds with Russia’s more conservative culture, NATO won’t let that happen.

Take for example, the “husband” of the U.S. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, leading a group of children in a “Pledge of Allegiance to the Rainbow.” This would never be welcomed or allowed in Russia.

So, if NATO can figure out a way to insert troops into Ukraine now that Ukraine has lost the war, and do it under the auspices of it being “separate from NATO,” then look for them to do exactly that.

The question is, will Putin buy the phony excuse that NATO has nothing to do with the fact that he’s now got Polish, German and French troops to fight in his back yard? When troops arrive in Ukraine from France, Germany and Poland, will he play along and say, oh, this is a separate endeavor and not really NATO, even though all three countries are NATO members? I don’t think so. But, this is exactly what NATO wants. It’s hoping to trick Putin into invading a NATO country.

The lie works something like this: French, German and Poland troops fighting in Ukraine are not doing so as part of NATO, but if Putin responds to this provocation by launching any direct attacks on cities or infrastructure in France, Germany or Poland, then he has “attacked” a NATO country and all of NATO now has the legal pretense to invade Russia.

I know it sounds crazy but look who is in charge of these NATO countries. They are all madmen and puppets of the World Economic Forum, the United Nations, the British Royal Family and the intel agencies in Washington and London.

Even though France, Germany and Poland would be fighting Russian soldiers in Ukraine under the guise of the “Weimar Triangle” there is no denying the fact that they are also members of NATO and NATO’s defensive mechanism would be triggered if Putin strikes back at any of these three countries. Then you have full-on World War III, which is apparently just what the U.S./U.K./NATO are looking to start. But before they can launch World War III against Russia they must position themselves as the “victim” by tricking Russia into attacking one of their NATO members. The Western media will be fully on board with this international chicanery and will intensify its propaganda war against Russia, characterizing that country and its leader as the “aggressor.” They will continue with the big lie about Putin wanting to “re-establish the old Soviet Empire.” Even though they have zero evidence of that, they will treat it like a foregone conclusion. They say it so it must be true.

History repeating itself?

This is where the Weimar Triangle comes into play in my hypothetical scenario, which I think is a very plausible scenario to watch for over the next six to 12 months. It will likely take about a year for the Weimar Triangle nations to build up their military prowess through forced conscription and converting to a wartime economy.

It sounds like treachery because it is. And it’s not without precedent. If you doubt that the Western powers are capable of such treachery, I recommend the excellent book, Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War, by Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgregor.

According to the book’s thesis, the U.K.’s inner circle of top elites led by Nathaniel Rothschild, King Edward VII, and Lord Alfred Milner, used duplicity, deception, a propaganda campaign, and secret alliances to back the German Kaiser into a corner and intentionally set a trap for war. The Secret Elites used the bought-and-paid-for British press to whip up hatred against the Germans and then later to blame them for starting the First World War, when in fact it was the British who provoked the entire conflagration. Wars start when powerful money elites take away all options for peace.

The U.K. leadership of both the Conservative and Liberal parties feared Germany was rising and about to overtake Britain in terms of its economic output and potential military might. They had to be stopped, but in a way that made the U.K. and its allies look like the victims of an aggressive Germany, when in fact Germany had no desire for war, it just wanted to grow its economy.

To this day, every student in the West is taught that Germany started World War I. When it comes to war, the victor writes the history. And in this case it’s a false history, which is now on the verge of repeating itself.

World War III appears to be taking shape in very similar fashion to World War I, only instead of the Germans being the object of the West’s obsession, this time it’s the Russians and by extension the Chinese. These two nations and their leadership in developing the BRICS coalition of nations pose a threat to U.S. global economic dominance. They must be dealt with and dealt with harshly. You can already see the narrative building in the Western media. If you insert “World War III starts in Ukraine” into your favorite search engine, you will find articles galore on how “Russia wants to start World War III.”

Keep in mind we are talking about the same group of people fomenting this narrative who mandated toxic, genetically modifying jabs on their own militaries and their own civilian populations. Their consciences have been seared and they are about to fall in the grandest of fashion. Yes, a fall is coming. Pride goes before a fall, and you can see how pride is leading the West to believe it can defeat Russia in a war, which is an impossible feat. If NATO and Russia go head to head, there will be no winners. Nations that place their military leadership in the hands of women and transgenders have no future as a superpower and no ability to win a war against Russia or China. And yet, this is the very same feminized leadership that seeks to provoke war with Russia and China. All I can say is, good luck with that.

Democracy as Mob Rule

Hungarian Chutzpah

2 Comments

Editor’s Note:The Hungarian nation is unique in Europe as it is the only one of the “barbarian” hordes who actually managed to conquer and settle a piece of real estate in the heart of Europe; not the Avars, not the Huns, not the Cumans, not the Pechenegs, not the Tatars, not the Mongols, etc. They started by exterminating the local population, mostly the remnants of the Roman Empire inhabitants, and the late Avars, becoming the Apostolic army of the Catholic Church in the year 1000 AD when they converted to Catholicism, and claiming to be the true Christians in Europe. In fact, they are cousins, i.e., very close relatives of the Khazarians, former mercenaries of the Turkic tribe and then facilitators of the Khazarian invasion in Europe, as the Khazarians pursued the same policy of conquer and plunder – this one on the quiet, in the name of another adopted old religion of money, that is Judaism.

Listen below to what this ultra xenophobic, ultra chauvinistic leader of the imported tribe is now claiming. Having forgotten that they were for most of their history a province of the Austrian Empire, and for 150 years, from 1526 through 1699, an Ottoman Pasalach, ruled directly by the Sultan in Istanbul, and then known for only 50 years, before WWI, as partner in the Austrian-Hungarian Empire. And that’s the only part they claim everybody should remember, as if the Austro-Hungarian “prison of nations” in its dying days was all there was to remember out of a millennium of European history.

In a few words, Orban is betting on a Trump-Netanyahu axis reversing the last 100 years of “misfortune” for Hungary, ignoring the Treaty of Versailles/Trianon in favor of rejoining the “ball of the Vampires”. A frustrated vampire himself, Orban is now looking to his new Masters to continue to take blood from the innocent. No longer serving as the Apostolic army, he is willing to sell his services to the new Emperor, whether the American Trump, or Russia’s Putin, without compunction. He also anticipates that Russia under Putin is going to stop the West’s expansion and that in exchange for his vociferous bragging about Hungarian non-intervention in Ukraine, he will actually be rewarded with parts of the territory of Ukraine and maybe, in his dreams, of Romania’s Transylvania, also parts of Vojvodina, Serbia.

In fact, he has kowtowed to NATO at every turn when it comes to supporting Ukraine, except sending weapons. However, in truth, the same can be said of Romania, no weapons to Ukraine, just a nothing burger here, of which the Hungarian actor makes a big show.

Big ego, big bluster, big bully, just like his cousin and family friend Netanyahu. Both slated to pass into oblivion quite soon. Their plot is unraveling both in Israel, in terms of the genocide and the planned ethnic cleansing in Gaza, and in Hungary, in terms of thumbing its nose at and threatening the old Europe.

Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban has said that he and his supporters are ready to march on Brussels to defend their country’s sovereignty within the EU.

Orban gave the warning on Friday in a fiery speech dedicated to an anniversary of Hungary’s unsuccessful revolution of 1848 against the rule of the Austrian Empire. “Brussels is not the first empire that has set its eyes on Hungary,” he stressed.

The conservative prime minister told a crowd of around a thousand of his supporters that he’s ready to do everything to protect Hungary from what he described as attempts by the EU to “force” the country into the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, to make it accept migrants, and to “re-educate” its children by imposing an LGBTQ agenda on them.

Powers in the Western world, of which the EU is a part, “start wars, destroy worlds, redraw countries’ borders and graze on everything like locusts,” Orban told his audience. [Read: we are still reeling from the Versailles treaty, and still dream of revanchism and repossession of the territories that we occupied as feudal lords.] “We Hungarians live differently and want to live differently,” he pointed out. [Yes, they long, not for some aristocratic past, but for the time of direct plundering of the poor subjugated, wretched enslaved ‘Africans of Europe’, that is the Romanians, Serbs, Slovaks, Ukrainians, etc.]

“If we want to defend Hungary’s freedom and sovereignty, we have no other choice but to occupy Brussels,” the PM said. [The army of the nomadic invaders, all over again.] “We will march all the way to Brussels, and will orchestrate change in the EU ourselves.”

Orban stressed that he and his supporters are experienced people who know what needs to be done in order to properly restructure the bloc of which Hungary has been a member since 2004. It’s time for the EU leadership to “start trembling,” he said.

In power for 14 years now, Orban is being criticized by Brussels over allegedly undermining the rule of law, infringing on press freedoms and clamping down on gay rights. The EU has been withholding funds from Hungary for years over these and other issues.

Brussels is also unhappy about the stance taken by Budapest on the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, a neighbor to which it has refused to provide arms, unlike other fellow EU member states, while at the same time maintaining economic and political ties with Moscow. Orban insists that there’s no military solution to the crisis and that it should be settled through diplomacy.

During his speech, he reiterated that “Hungary can only benefit from peace, we do not want war.” However, Brussels has brought the conflict to its doors, he said, referring to the ongoing fighting. “We have been deceived, it is time to rise up,” he stated.

*

Meanwhile,  the US ambassador to Hungary, David Pressma delivered a speech on Thursday at the Central European University (CEU) in the capital at an event to mark the 25th anniversary of Hungary’s accession to the US-led NATO bloc.

The envoy gave a long list of grievances plaguing ties between Washington and Budapest, ranging from Hungary’s stance on the Russia-Ukraine conflict to its refusal to allow US troops stationed in the country to get local license plates for their family vehicles.

Budapest is now finding itself “increasingly isolated” from the NATO “community of democracies,” the ambassador said, insisting that links between the two countries should not depend on their “temporary” leaders.

“We should be mutually concerned for the well-being of democratic values, institutions, and of our relationship – regardless of who has the privilege of temporarily leading either of our governments,” the envoy stated.

Pressman also took personal jabs at Prime Minister Viktor Orban, criticizing him for viewing the US as Hungary’s “adversary,” as well as accusing the country’s government of interfering “in a very blatant way” in the internal affairs of others, “all while decrying foreign interference here at home.”

“PM Orban, who on the one hand baselessly claims the US government is trying to overthrow his government, publicly calls for the political defeat of the President of the United States and actively participates in US partisan political events,”Pressman stated.

The envoy also appeared to issue a thinly-veiled threat aimed at the Orban government, stating that while it “may want to wait out the United States government, the United States will certainly not wait out the Orban administration.”

“While Hungary waits, we will act,” Pressman warned.

On the Road to Serfdom ?

The West’s Moral Decay: Cannibalism Normalized?

Leave a comment

via New Scientist”

“New archaeological evidence shows that ancient humans ate each other surprisingly often – sometimes for compassionate reasons. The finds give us an opportunity to reassess our views on the practice”


IT IS the ultimate taboo: in most societies, the idea of one human eating another is morally repugnant. Even in circumstances where it could arguably be justified, such as when a plane crashed in the Andes in 1972 and starving passengers ate the dead to survive, we still have a deep aversion to cannibalism. One of the survivors, Roberto Canessa, has since described the passengers’ actions as a “descent towards our ultimate indignity”.
Ethically, cannibalism poses fewer issues than you might imagine. If a body can be bequeathed with consent to medical science, why can’t it be left to feed the hungry? Our aversion has been explained in various ways. Perhaps it is down to the fact that, in Western religious traditions, bodies are seen as the seat of the soul and have a whiff of the sacred. Or maybe it is culturally ingrained, with roots in early modern colonialism, when racist stereotypes of the cannibal were concocted to justify subjugation. These came to represent the “other” to Western societies – and revulsion towards cannibalism became a tenet of their moral conscience.
A slew of recent archaeological discoveries is now further complicating how we think about human cannibalism. Researchers have unearthed evidence suggesting that our hominin ancestors ate each other surprisingly often. What’s more, it seems that they weren’t always doing so for the reasons you might expect – for sustenance or to compete against and intimidate rivals – but often as funerary rituals to honour their dead.
Like it or not, then, cannibalism is an important part of our story. This isn’t to say that we should change our attitudes towards it. But understanding its deep roots might shift our perspective on the few cultures that still practise cannibalism today, albeit only occasionally, such as the Aghori, a Hindu ascetic sect in India that does it in pursuit of transcendence. Above all, these discoveries invite us to reconsider our revulsion to cannibalism in the context of our evolutionary past.

Behold the West’s latest outrage—debating the undebatable and defending the indefensible. Cannibalism, once the vilest of violations, is now served up as a thought experiment for the liberal palate. It’s not enlightenment; it’s ethical insanity. The sanctity of human life, chewed up in the cogs of moral relativism, is spat out as a “cultural preference.”

This is not a slippery slope; it’s a nosedive into the abyss. The normalization of atrocities marches forward, with pedophilia disgracefully queued for a rebrand. Society’s moral fabric isn’t just fraying, it’s being shredded by the day. Western liberalism, once a bastion of purported high values, is now an echo chamber where the deviant becomes mainstream if whispered enough times.

We must draw the line with an iron fist. The time for nuanced debate is over—this is a fight for our collective soul. We reject this mockery of human dignity, and we condemn the architects of this madness. We stand defiant, ready to reclaim our humanity and protect the most vulnerable. It’s time to restore sanity, shun the shadow of relativism, and rekindle the flames of unyielding, absolute moral truth.

Anglozionism

Inside Hamas Intelligence

Leave a comment

Inside-Hamas.pdf

Despite Israeli intelligence superiority, Hamas managed to bridge the intelligence gap and plan a precise and well-executed attack.

These capabilities were the result of immense work and effort within the brain battle with the enemy in the intelligence field.

The PDf linked above is a translation of an article in one of the Israeli newspapers about Hamas’s intelligence capabilities in various branches of intelligence work.

A highly recommended read.

Note that this is a rough and a fast translation but covers everything.

Anglozionism

Schumer, Top Democrat, Calls for Netanyahu’s Removal

1 Comment


Is this the long awaited end of Israel’s thumbing its nose at the rest of the world?

Highest-ranking U.S .Jewish official and the U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer blasts unpopular Israeli PM Netanyahu, calls for new elections in Israel.

The world has changed — radically — since October 7, and Israeli people are being stifled right now by a governing vision that is stuck in the past. Netanyahu’s coalition no longer fits the needs of Israel after Oct 7. Netanyahu has lost his way – Schumer (video).

Chuck not only wants Netanyahu, who fears elections, chucked out of office but also hates “far-right extremists” like Ben Gvir who enjoys top positions in Bibi’s government.

Western Hegemony's Collapse

Not Bibi, But the UAE Behind US Plan to Build Pier on Gaza

Leave a comment

via The Cradle

The Emirati government reportedly threatened to suspend work on an Arab–Israeli land route if aid does not reach Gaza

US plans to construct a temporary port on the shores of Gaza are reportedly the result of Emirati pressure on Washington.

“UAE pressure on the US administration led to the recent announcement by President Joe Biden regarding plans to construct a port for humanitarian aid entry into Gaza,” Israeli news site I24 reported on 10 March, citing exclusive sources.

“Abu Dhabi warned of potentially suspending work on the land trade line if aid does not reach Gaza, highlighting the UAE’s growing dissatisfaction with Benjamin Netanyahu’s government’s policies,” the sources told the Israeli outlet.

They added that the UAE has lost hope in Netanyahu’s government, specifically due to its continued blocking of roads and border crossings and obstruction of efforts to bring in aid to the Palestinians.

Israeli President Isaac Herzog tried to mediate between Netanyahu and Emirati leadership during his last visit to the Gulf state in November 2023 but failed as UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed (MbZ) “refused to engage in dialogue” with the prime minister, according to I24 sources.

In response to the severe humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the famine overtaking the strip, the UAE introduced the plan to the US, with Washington welcoming the plan. Emirati and Palestinian businessmen are reportedly supporting the initiative.

The land route, which I24 said Abu Dhabi threatened to suspend its work on, was reported on by Hebrew and western media at the start of February.

According to Channel 13, ships unload goods in the UAE and are trucked into Saudi Arabia before reaching Jordan and entering Israel via the Jordan River Crossing, helping Tel Aviv bypass Yemen’s Red Sea blockade on Israeli shipping.

Israel’s Broadcasting Corporation reported on 7 March that an Emirati officer made a secret visit to Tel Aviv that week to discuss efforts to bring aid into Gaza.

The report came a day after two Israeli officials said that Tel Aviv would begin allowing aid through its territory into the north of Gaza and cooperate with Cyprus to establish a sea route.

A source told Hebrew Channel 13 that the UAE will fund and lead these efforts. Abu Dhabi did not comment on the matter.

The Hebrew radio report coincided with US President Joe Biden’s announcement that Washington will build a temporary pier on the shores of Gaza to bring in “large” amounts of humanitarian aid.

While the war in Gaza has soured Israeli–Emirati ties, the US-sponsored peace accords between the two states are unlikely to be threatened, according to analysts who spoke with the New York Times (NYT) on 10 March.

The UAE also confirmed in a written statement to NYT that ties with Israel will help facilitate aid entry into Gaza.

“The UAE believes that diplomatic and political communications are important in difficult times such as those we are witnessing,” the statement read.