As Tom Lehrer wrote, it's 'So long Mom, I'm off to drop The Bomb'

All the Western media, CNN, MSNBC, BBC, France24, DW, etc., etc., etc. say Israel are just defending themselves in the Ghaza, so ethnic cleansing is their indisputable right under International Law, and Russia are losing badly in the Ukraine, with losses of three armies, more than 1 million men, and a big chunk of Western Russia, and the Ukraine should take Moscow any day now.

So a few $trillion more and we'll finish the job. But the Ukraine need guns and bullets, and without those $trillions, all that we've invested so far will be a big waste and Russia will win.

The US were sure they were winning in Korea, but then the PRC sent in an army with more men than the US forces had bullets. The PRC only wanted to protect the PRC, so they let the US keep South Korea, but North Korea was off limits for the US military.

Then came Vietnam, where the Vietnamese had a lot of help from the USSR and shot down a lot of US planes and took the pilots as POWs.

And now there is Syria, where an Arab friend says that Syria is lost, all are surrendering to the Free Syrian Army, Assad fled to Tehran, and no one has anything that can stop that Free Syrian Army. Russia and Iran have pulled out completely, since they know they are no match for the Free Syrian Army which will have all of Syria in less than 48 hours.

Reading a few more sources, there are the anti-Assad forces under Türkiye, the US supported anti-Assad Kurds, Hayʼat Tahrir al-Sham (formerly al-Qaeda + Daesh), and some Israeli supported anti-Assad forces, and these anti-Assad forces include Syrian Arab Sunnis, foreign Sunnis from places like the PRC, and the -stans, and the Syrian Kurds.

One obvious point that my friend seems to have missed is that a) Russia are very attached to their Mediterranean naval port in Syria and have no intention of giving it up; b) in spite of the Western media, Russian military production far exceeds that of all of NATO, which is incredibly corrupt, with NATO defence companies paying for sales, with weapons contracts that pay $billions, most of which goes as sales commissions and management bonuses, with very little wasted on actual weapons production. Making sales brings in the big bucks, not making weapons.

Russia have a lot invested in the Ukraine, and it's taking time to bring the Russian forces to bear. They were slow 15 years ago, but eventually salvaged the Assad regime that gave them those Russian naval bases that, if Assad is overthrown, will go to NATO.

So the US is pushing hard in the Ukraine, Georgia, Syria, and Romania, and are shooting ATACMS into Russia, killing Russians, and it's not clear how much longer Russia will put up with this before doing something to stop the attacks on Russia by NATO.

The US/UK/EU say, 'If Russia get annoyed, they'll totally destroy Kiev, but we can live without Kiev. Russia wouldn't dare do anything to any NATO nation since they are terrified of Article 5 which would mean the certain end of Russia.'

Of course, the certain end of Russia was clearly seen by Napoleon, and we all remember his great victory over Russia in 1812. And the certain end of the USSR was seen by the Wehrmacht who had a great victory over Russia in 1944. And if Napoleon and the Wehrmacht could do it, surely it will be an easy victory for the US of A.

And if Russia tries to destroy anything outside the Ukraine, the US will up the ante, and it'll be, 'So long Mom, I'm off to drop the bomb,' as Lehrer wrote back in the '60s.

 

 

 

President-elect Trump

In spite of the US news reporting that St Kamala was ahead and almost certain to win, and in spite of the Democrats planning to harvest votes and have the official State Election Committees (at least in the 9 swing states) say that St Kamala won, somehow, no one is quite sure how, Trump won the election and is now President-elect.

In 2016, Trump had no idea what the role of the elected president is (the role is to read the Teleprompter: the people in charge have decided what they're going to do, and the elected 'president' must give their orders as if those are his own orders, and make it sound like that's the only thing the US can do so all is for the best in America, the best of all possible nations).

When Trump ordered all the US troops out of Syria, none left. Now Trump thinks the US president, as Commander in Chief, can order any general who doesn't follow orders removed from his position pending Court Martial. We might see, or Trump might have learned that his job is just to read the Teleprompter.

***

Trump said, if he'd been president, Russia would never have invaded the Ukraine. There are two ways to take this.

First, in December, 2021, Putin wrote St Biden that Russia would never allow the Ukraine to join NATO. The official US response (no idea who really wrote it) was, 'Russia have no say in the matter. The Ukraine will join NATO and host the largest NATO military base and a huge number of nukes that can take out the entire Russian dead-hand nuclear switch before Russia could possibly respond.'

A few days after receiving this letter in 2022, Putin ordered the 'invasion'. What else could he possibly have done? What leader of a major power could respond to such a letter in any other way?

Had Trump received Putin's letter and written back, 'Under no circumstances will NATO allow the Ukraine to join,' there would have been no 'invasion'.

But the Trump team are now trying to say, 'Putin knew President Biden was weak and could not put up an effective defence of the Ukraine, so he invaded. Putin also knew that Trump was too strong, that any attempt to invade with Trump as president would result in the absolutely certain destruction of Russia, so Putin would never have dared to invade had Trump been president in 2021 and 2022.'

One of Trump's nominees who will 'negotiate' with the Ukraine and Russia said that he will demand an immediate ceasefire by both sides, and will offer to Russia that the Ukraine will not join NATO for 10 years, but Russia must withdraw from the Ukraine. If Russia refuse, NATO will send $trillions in armaments to the Ukraine, enough to make everything already sent seem insignificant, so Russia, facing a strong president, will immediately back down.

Or, in simpler words, Trump's appointees have absolutely no idea what is happening in the Ukraine, no idea what the US should do, and a firm conviction that the US must make sure that the US Defence-Industrial-Congressional-Intelligence-Media Complex executives continue to get $trillions in profits from the US taxpayers and printing presses, and what could possibly go wrong?

****

I remember the Cuban Missile Crisis. We lived in a small village, and all our relatives from cities they expected would be destroyed came to stay in the homes of my father and uncle. I had to sleep on the floor, because they got my bed. Everyone was sure we were close to WWIII and nuclear destruction, but it was all fake.

First, the US put nukes in Turkey. The USSR was furious, and said, 'If you don't remove those missiles from Turkey, we'll put nukes in Cuba.' President Kennedy called Khrushchev and said, 'I have to run for re-election and  you don't, so if you'll say the USSR backed down, the US will do everything the USSR wants.' So the Soviet Fleet turned around and retreated back to the USSR, and the Soviets said they removed all the nukes from Cuba as ordered by the US.

Then the US, with Soviet inspectors watching, secretly removed all the nukes from Turkey, but this was classified Top Secret for 20 years. (To this day, no US nukes are in Turkey, now all those nukes are in Türkiye.)

Today, this ain't no Cuban Missile Crisis. President Biden is incapable of making a coherent call to Putin to make an offer. 

And Trump's appointments are a very mixed bag with regard to the Ukraine. Some say we must keep sending even more money to the Ukraine until Russia are completely destroyed and no longer a threat to US hegemony. Other say we must stop sending all that money to the Ukraine and put it to better uses, but not much agreement on what those 'better uses' might be.

Some say that money should help Americans live better lives, while others say we must use the money being squandered in the Ukraine against a weak Russia and use it to a) help Israel ethnically cleanse all Arabs from Palestine, Lebanon, and Syria, and b) destroy Iran and the PRC.

***

It is not clear if WWIII will be postponed until after 20 January 2025, Inauguration Day (for that matter, it's not clear who will be named as president on that day), or if Biden will try to get it over with before he leaves office (in which case, he'll be leaving an office that probably no longer exists).

Since Biden (i.e., the people actually running things while pretending it's Biden) seem to want to go out with a big bang, we're in for six or so exciting weeks.

And, if there is still a world on 21 January 2025, we'll have to see what Trump and his appointees do about WWIII.

Iran is trying to kill Trump???

For reasons I cannot imagine, after three attempts to assassinate Former President Trump, he announced that it was Iran trying to kill him. Most of the establishment media (excluding Fox and the New York Post) say that Trump would be, by far, the worst president ever if re-elected, and the poll of presidential historians favoured by Wikipedia already has him rated worst president based on his first term when he had no idea how things worked, and the media reiterate that his second term promises complete disaster for the US and the world.

But Vice-president Harris is already backing Israel, who say Iran must be taken out, so it looks like, no matter who wins the election, war between the US and Iran is inevitable. How this war will probably go does not seem at all clear to any of the mainstream media I watch or read.

In 1988, the USS Vincennes shot down Iran Air Flight 655, a plane filled with 290 suicidal jihadis, or so the sailors on the USS Vincennes said, a plane trying to crash into the USS Vincennes and kill everyone on board, so they had no choice but to shoot the plane down. Photographs show that the plane must have been flying backward at the USS Vincennes, since the tail of the airplane is pointing at the ship, not the nose.

Back in 1988, there were still many independent news media in the US, and some of them said the USS Vincennes shot down an Iranian airliner that was flying away from the ship, and posed to threat of any kind to the ship. Fortunately, all the US media are now owned by four or five corporations who let the CIA write, or at least proof, everything they print, so all tell whatever story the US government wants told.

And all say Iran are a very weak nation, all their illegal attacks on Israel were war crimes that were completely stopped by Israel's air defences, with help from the US and US allies. One can see a video showing missiles hitting Israel, but Russia joke that the US and Israel say those were the Israeli missiles rising to hit the incoming Iranian missiles, but the film is run backward by Iran to make it look like it is Iranian missiles actually landing on Israeli targets. In any case, Israel put up a cover of smoke so no one could photograph the area where those Iranian missiles might have landed, and Israel reiterate that not one Iranian missile hit Israel. So nothing to worry about, Israel can destroy Tehran and Qom and Iran can do nothing about it.

Going back to 1988, Iran had nothing they could use, nothing they could shoot at the USS Vincennes. They have been working on that problem for the past 36 years. Iran now have a large number of anti-ship missiles ready to deploy should a US fleet approach Iran, a fact that seems to have escaped the CIA agents who are supposed to be spying on Iran, I guess they're too busy proofing all the US news media to make sure every story is the official US government version. The US fleet will have one or more aircraft carriers from which the US plan that planes will bomb Iran. Not clear where those US planes will land after dropping their bombs. Not clear if there will be any US planes to actually drop any bombs.

But both Trump and Harris are determined to destroy Iran to protect Israel, if Israel can't do it alone, as Israel has promised that they can. Someone leaked US classified documents with the US assessment of Israeli preparations for a major strike against Iran, mentioning Israeli attack planes and refuelling planes that would carry missiles within range of Iranian targets (not clear if the Israeli planes would actually fly over Iran: they never fly directly over Syria, but use short-range missiles from outside the Syrian border: this is in response to Russia providing Syria with antiaircraft batteries that can strike any planes flying over Syrian territory).

Again, Israel and the US seem unaware of Iranian defences, or at least the media report that Iran have no effective offence nor defence against Israel with or without the US military providing support (the US will provide Israel with whatever military hardware they request, and the US Air Force and other services did help Israel shoot down hundreds of Iranian drones, none of which did Iran intend to actually reach Israel, so the US might send US planes to help the Israeli planes attacking Iran).

The US/UK/EU media all keep saying that Russia is very close to complete defeat in the Ukraine, the sanctions completely collapsed the Russia economy so Russia only has, in addition to Soviet weapons from WWII and Czarist weapons from WWI, all taken from the museums where they were housed, weapons and ammunition from the DPRK and Iran, but these are all very, very primitive in comparison to the ultra-advanced NATO weapons with which the Ukrainian military have been provided, so we've seen the best weapons Iran can produce, and they are not up to much.

Only the reporters actually in the Ukraine, reporters like Eva Bartlett and Vanessa Beeley, report that Russia are winning, but such stories are never allowed in any US/UK/EU media. And Tucker Carlson was fired for reading a Top Secret paper released by (now gaoled) Airman Teixeira that said Russian troop losses were only 10% to 20% as many as Ukrainian losses, when the official US/UK/EU figures are more than one million Russians soldiers have been killed and only 31,500 Ukrainian soldiers.

And I suspect the official US assessment of Iranian offensive and defensive capabilities that appear in the US/UK/EU media are about as accurate as the official US/UK/EU media reports on the battle in the Ukraine.

Of course, it is said that someone sent a ship with 100 tonnes of yellowcake, the name for uranium oxide, to Israel, and 60 tonnes of yellowcake are enough to generate a chain reaction which will produce enough plutonium for many bombs, so many figure Israel must have more than 100 nuclear bombs (and might have done one test in 1979 somewhere near the southern tip of Africa, but that evidence of a nuclear test is now officially a 'device malfunction').

Iran has relatively little uranium under Iranian soil, and no access to uranium from any other source, so there is no way Iran can have a bomb, but they've been less than one month away from a nuke for the past 30 years, according to Netanyahu, who has been reiterating that a US regime-change invasion of Iran is essential and urgently needed.

And it looks like neither Harris nor Trump would do anything to stop Israel from nuking Iran, so not much difference for the Palestinians, Lebanese, Syrians, or Iranians who gets elected week after next.

What is less clear is what will happen in the Ukraine, where Harris has promised complete victory and Trump refuses to say what he will do. When president, Trump read on the official US Presidential TelePrompter, 'I order the US military into Syria to bring peace, freedom, and democracy,' and Trump said, 'I order all US troops out of Syria.' Twice. The third time, he said, 'Now I understand US troops will be going into Syria to steal all the oil, and then we'll sell that oil, so this won't cost the US 1¢, it will make the US money, and I fully support this move.'

Net: the people who run the US wanted Trump to order the troops into Syria to bring peace, freedom, and democracy, but they couldn't get him to do that, and now rate Trump as worst person ever to play the part of US president and speak the lines he or she is given with the right timbre.

But, in his second term, Trump might order generals who fail to follow his orders, e.g., 'All US troops must leave Europe!' fired. Not clear that a single general would leave, or the US military would do anything any differently than their original plans, but it was bad enough that Trump ordered all US troops out of Syria. Twice! We can't have that happen again. So the US government is doing everything it can to make sure the next president is Harris, not Trump, since we know she'll read the official Presidential TelePrompter and never ad lib.

And she has promised the total defeat of Russia, and the restoration of 1991 Ukraine. So what could possibly go wrong???

Iran’s Nuke?

Iran was offered the JCPOA by Obama, but it was cancelled by Trump. The dimmycrats figure Trump was stupid and evil, but they figure that with or without his cancelling the JCPOA.

Clinton ordered a strict blockade on Iraq. No food, no medicine, no vaccines or antibiotics, so childhood diseases that could have easily been treated proved fatal, and malnutrition plus treatable medical problems killed at least 500,000 Iraqi children, a number the US said was well worth it. Clinton promised an end to the blockade if Iraq allowed UN inspectors to verify that Iraq had no WMD.

 Just as soon as those UN inspectors verified no WMDs in Iraq, the Bush, Jr. government announced that they had found anthrax and other biological WMD, and ordered an invasion, execution of all top Iraq government officials, and killed several million more Iraqis than the blockade had already killed.

Then Bush, Jr ordered a strict blockade on Libya and made the same offer, and Qaddafi accepted. As soon as the UN inspectors verified no WMDs, Obama announced that he’d found WMD in Libya and ordered the US military to kill Qaddafi, and lots of other Libyans, and the US military were glad to comply. Then Obama tightened the blockade on Iran (there since 1979) and offered the JCPOA. Plan A, of course, was for Hillary to find WMD and order the overthrow of the Ayatollah. Only Trump got elected and cancelled the JCPOA, and, as a result, we still have the Iranian Ayatollah.

Meanwhile, Clinton, Bush, Jr, and Obama blockaded the DPRK and made the same offer. Kim Jong Il had a huge explosion set off in a mine and said he’d set off a nuke, but seismic evidence was ambiguous. His son, Kim Jong Un set off an explosion in a mine that was unambiguously a nuke. Nothing has happened to the DPRK.

 So why doesn’t Iran have a nuke?

The US executed two Jews for giving away the big secret to a nuke, a secret known to just about every physicist: one needs a pile of about 60 tonnes of uranium and three years. The first US pile was created in Chicago in 1942, and that pile had about 5 tonnes of metallic uranium and the rest was yellowcake, both made as pure as possible, and a chain reaction started, a chain reaction that produced plutonium, something that does not occur in nature. (The pile also needs very pure graphite and cadmium, but graphite and cadmium are easy to obtain, and refining the graphite isn’t that difficult, the hard part is getting enough uranium.)

In 1945, the US obliterated Hiroshima and Nagasaki with two nukes. The US, after Nagasaki was destroyed, explained that there had been a secret test of the first nuke. The US also explained that all three nukes were based on a critical mass of U₂₃₅. They also explained that they got the U₂₃₅ by taking pure uranium, which is mostly U₂₃₈ with a tiny amount of U₂₃₅. One transforms metallic uranium into uranium fluoride gas and centrifuges the gas to separate out the U₂₃₅. It takes a lot of centrifuging, because each round only increases the percentage of U₂₃₅ by a small amount. Eventually, one gets almost pure U₂₃₅, which is a fissile material that can form a nuclear bomb.

I saw a Disney comic in the ‘50s where the duck scientist, Ludwig von Drake, has a tiny speck of U₂₃₅, which he said was the most powerful explosive in the world. He threw the tiny speck of U₂₃₅ into a huge canyon. Someone said, ‘Nothing happened.’ Ludwig von Drake said, ‘It hasn’t hit bottom yet.’ Finally, there was a huge explosion that completely filled the entire canyon, all from a tiny flake of U₂₃₅.

In high school, my science teacher said he’d worked on the bomb, centrifuging uranium fluoride to get pure U₂₃₅.

The Soviets were not fooled. It is extremely difficult to separate out almost pure U₂₃₅. The US eventually admitted one of the three nukes was a plutonium nuke, which is very easy to extract from the uranium pile after three years of a controlled chain reaction. Later it became two plutonium nukes and one U₂₃₅ nuke. Last I heard, many figure it was three plutonium nukes.

Iran has found about 10 tonnes of uranium. None of the nations with large amounts of uranium will sell to Iran.

The nations of the world are divided into two groups, those with lots of uranium, more than 60 tonnes of yellowcake, and those with very little uranium. The group with lots of uranium is further subdivided into two subgroups: those that want and have a nuke, and those who absolutely do not want a nuclear bomb, and sell the uranium that they do not need for their own nuclear power plants to countries of which they approve.

Needless to say, Iran is in the group with very little uranium and no one willing to sell or give them uranium. Israel is in the group of one nation that has very little uranium in mines in their own country, but who might have had a friend that gave them 100 tonnes of yellowcake that they used to build one of the world’s largest and somewhat ‘secret’ nuclear arsenals–Israel will neither confirm nor deny that they have nukes.

As everyone who has ever listened to President Netanyahu has heard him reiterate, ‘Iran is less than a month away from having a nuke,’ so the US must invade immediately or face a nuclear armed Iran that cannot be safely invaded. And Iran has been less than a month away for at least 30 years now.

But without those UN inspectors verifying that Iran aren’t hiding a secret nuke that they could deploy against the US, the US are reluctant to invade.

So Iran are very lucky that Hillary lost the election, or the JCPOA would have gotten them invaded and destroyed.

So Long Mom?

If one reads the US/UK/EU news, Putin had this hair-brained idea of rebuilding the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, and figured the Ukraine was the weakest link and the best place to start. What Putin did not know (as the US/UK/EU reiterate) was that NATO had armed and trained the Ukraine. Russia, meanwhile, had old Soviet weapons from WWII and Czarist weapons from WWI, and nothing else, so the entire Russian army was wiped out by the Ukraine. The Russians managed to invade a few villages, such as Bucha, and kill a bunch of unarmed civilians, but the Russians could not stand up to the Ukrainian military with their ultra-advanced weapons and training from NATO.

Putin lost one army, so he sent a second and a third. Russia have lost more than one million men, while the Ukraine have only lost 31,500. Russia is on the edge of defeat, the Ukraine military have taken the Westernmost part of Russia and will soon be in Moscow and will hand Putin over to the Hague, then Russia will be broken up into 30 or more small, unarmed countries, with all Russian oil and gas forfeited to US oiligarchs as War Reparations.

Great story, and it sells Western news media: print, web, and TV. Not a word of it true, but the point is profit, and the Western news are profiting from this story (and any other story is strictly illegal, unless it's the story that they lied: Russia are much weaker than this story portrays, and victory will be much easier).

Meanwhile, classified US documents read by Tucker Carlson (for which he was fired) say that it's not Russia but the Ukraine that are losing, that the Ukraine have lost close to 1 million men, while Russian losses are only 10% to 20% of Ukrainian losses.

Russia will not stop until NATO agree that the Ukraine will never be a part of NATO, and the faux Ukrainian government, installed by NATO, specifically by Victoria Nuland, is replaced by a government that promise never to join NATO.

It is never mentioned that, in 2021, Putin sent 2 letters, one to the White House and one to NATO headquarters in Europe, that Russia could never allow the Ukraine to be part of NATO. The White House and NATO headquarters both said that Russia had no say in the matter, the Ukraine would join NATO and host the largest NATO military base in the world. After which, Putin invaded.

Putin made one huge mistake. In 2014, Victoria Nuland got rid of a rabidly pro-Russian government whose president kept going back and forth between Russia and Europe, asking which would give him the better deal. So Victoria put in a rabidly anti-Russian government that promised the largest NATO base in the Ukraine, in return, the president got $millions and the Ukraine got nothing, which is just as it should be. The new government announced that all those Russian naval bases in Crimea would be given to NATO, and Russia would be kicked out, leaving Russia with no sea access for their fleet.

Russia invaded Crimea, and the army, with almost all Slavic senior officers, met the Russians and agreed that Crimea would return from the Ukraine to Russia, where it had been until Khrushchev gave it to the Ukraine in 1954. Not a shot was fired.

But, from 2014 until 2022, NATO had the Ukraine remove all Slavic officers from their military and replace them with Aryan officers who wanted the complete destruction of all Slavs and Slavic nations. So when Russia arrived in 2022, it was not like the Crimea, the  Ukrainian Aryans tried their best to destroy the Russian military, who reorganised and began crushing the Ukrainian military.

It is now clear, to observers who are currently in the Ukraine seeing what is happening, that Russia will win.

It is just as clear, to observers in the US/UK/EU, that all reports and news articles say Russia are losing, and losing badly, they have lost three armies, and now all Russian military are very elderly men and very young boys, and most Russians are ready to hand Putin over to the Hague.

The Ukraine say they need long-range weapons that can destroy Moscow and St Petersburg. The UK said, 'OK, we'll give you long-range Storm Shadow missiles.'

Putin said, 'If one Storm Shadow missile hits Russia, every Storm Shadow facility in the UK will be toast.'

The UK withdrew the offer, but the US are now making a similar offer, and Putin has not yet threatened the US facilities, or, if he has, the US suppress that news.

US/UK/EU readers/watchers of the news are still told that the Ukraine are winning and Russia are just days away from total defeat, provided the US/UK/EU support continue. A mere $900 billion have kept the Ukraine close to victory, and more money is essential to completely destroy Russia, 

Everyone is sure the US will easily destroy Russia just as Napoleon did in 1812, and the "1812 Overture" celebrates Napoleon's victory over Russia.

And, of course, the Wehrmacht defeated the USSR. The Wehrmacht fought at Leningrad and Stalingrad, and easily destroyed both cities. Just look at any modern map: there is no trace of Leningrad nor Stalingrad, since both were destroyed by the Wehrmacht, and the Ukrainian/NATO army are rapidly advancing on Moscow (but the US/UK/EU prediction of what will happen when they get there might prove rather less than accurate).                                                                                                                                            

How did we get to Ghaza?

The word 'Zionism', coined by some Jews in central Europe for going to Palestine and forming an army to defend themselves, first appeared at the end of the 19th century. But the basic concept of all Jews going to Palestine started with the British Anglican clergy in 1843 when they said that "Palestine is a land without a people for a people without a land."

The British clergy thought it wrong to allow Jews, deicides all, to live in the UK. While the Bible says the Jews killed Jesus and then said, 'Let his blood be on us and on our children,' making every Jew since the crucifixion a deicide, I was taught in Sunday School that G_d put upon Jews the Mark of Cain, making it prohibited to kill them (the Nazis must have been absent that Sunday). So the best thing the world could do, according to the Anglican clergy, and first written by Rev. Keith, was to send all the Jews to Palestine.

The UK geography said that Arabs are nomads, they don't have homes, they have tents, and follow their goats and camels around from one grassland to another. They wander from Sanaa to Mecca to Jerusalem to Damascus to Baghdad and back to Sanaa, and they could start going around, rather than through Palestine, which would be exclusively for the Jews.

In the 19th century, Britain wanted to take Arabia from the Ottoman Empire and add it to the British Empire. An early British proposal said that Palestine and Transjordan would be exclusively for the Jews, and the rest of Arabia would be for the Arabs. A later proposal said only Palestine would be for the Jews, Transjordan would be for the Arabs. The final Balfour Declaration said that British Jews must go to Palestine and live peacefully with the Palestinians as British colonials.

After WWI, Britain and France took Arabia from the Ottoman Empire, chopped it up into chunks including Palestine, Jordan, Iraq, and other bits as British colonies, Syria and Lebanon as French colonies. With all of Palestine a British colony (or Mandate, as it was technically called), Britain said Palestine was only for Palestinians and British Jews.

In the 19th and early 20th century, most Jews lived in The Pale, where they were subject to frequent pogroms. Some asked if they could go to Palestine to avoid the pogroms, but the British said, 'NO!' So many went to the US, which allowed anyone to immigrate until 1921, and we got the play, "Fiddler on the Roof". But from 1921 until 1944, Jews were only allowed into the US if they had a Nobel Prize or the equivalent.

So, from 1933 until 1945, Jews in Europe had nowhere they could run, and many were killed. The usual number stated is six million murdered in the Holocaust, but serious historians say we really don't know, the Germans did their best to keep the Holocaust secret. So serious historians say the number is almost certainly between four million to six million Jews that were killed in the Holocaust, and those who want to maximise the horror of the Holocaust always use the six million. The Holocaust is almost alone as being legally genocide, because the legal definition of genocide requires written proof that a religious or ethnic group are being killed only because of their religion or ethnic group, and we have hard proof that the Nazis killed Jews just for being Jews. (We also have hard proof that the Nazis killed Slavs just for being Slavs, but that was not genocide, it just went to show that there's a little good in the worst of men.)

After WWII, The Axis were officially defeated, but the UK and France were also defeated, even if no one said anything. Both had to give up their large Empires, including Palestine, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon. So in 1948, the British colony of Palestine ceased to be a British colony, and all the Jews in Western Europe were shipped to Palestine, whether they wanted to go or not.

The Americans, British, and French gave the European Jews weapons, and they were able to defeat the Palestinians and drive many of them (but not all) out of Palestine. But this is not genocide because there is no written proof that the Jews were killing Palestinians only because they were Palestinians, proof that is required for the killing to be genocide.

It is, likewise, impossible to prove that Israel have been committing genocide in Ghaza since 7 October 2023: they say they are only targeting terrorists, not Palestinians, and we have no written proof that Israel are killing the Palestinians in Ghaza (and the West Bank) only because they are Palestinians. As one expert said, 'Genocide can only be proven in a case like Germany where they were defeated, and the victors sought and found written proof that they were killing people only because of their religion or ethnic group.' Since it is unlikely that Israel, backed by the US/UK/EU, will be defeated, no proof that Israel are killing Palestinians only because they are Palestinians will ever be found.

So the US/UK/EU have made it a serious criminal offence to accuse Israel of genocide. In fact, it is a criminal offence in the US/UK/EU to make any criticism of Israel, and many protesting for the Palestinians have been arrested, expelled from university, and generally punished for saying anything negative about Israel.

One must say that Israel have the right to self defence, and that killing terrorists who are determined to kill every Jew on earth is Israel's legal right, and non-terrorists killed were human shields, so their deaths are all the fault of the terrorists, not Israel.

Israel have their own translations of the Hamas charter and the school textbooks in Ghaza and the West Bank (in Hebrew and English), and the Israeli translations say it is the duty of every Palestinian to kill every Jew. It is, of course, illegal in the US/UK/EU to question those Israeli translations, we must accept them as proven fact.

So clearly Israel have the right to defend themselves, and this is certainly not genocide, it is a very laudable thing the Israelis are doing in Ghaza and the West Bank. And one must say that or be in serious violation of US/UK/EU law.

Western News and More about Telegram and X

All the news—TV, newspapers, whatever—in the US/UK/EU must write that Putin, in a harebrained scheme to recreate the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, launched an unprovoked and totally illegal, under international law, attack on the Ukraine, where he lost three armies with only Soviet weapons from WWII and Czarist weapons from WWI against the most advanced NATO weapons. And Putin is still sending what is left of Russian manhood—young boys and old men—to certain deaths in the Ukraine, who are now annexing a large part of Russia and will soon own Moscow and send Putin to the Hague as a war criminal.

But there is another story that is de rigueur in the US/UK/EU media: the genocide in Israel. Basically, for three horrible days starting on 7 October, 2023, Palestinian Islamic jihadists committed the worst genocide since the American-led Allies liberated the Nazi Concentration Camps at the end of WWII.

The Palestinian terrorists killed about 1,4001,200 innocent Jewish civilians, mostly women and children, raping and murdering the women and burning the babies in ovens while their parents were forced to hear their screams as they burned to death. All the Palestinian textbooks in Israel (translated by the Israelis into American, British, and European languages) say it is the duty of every Palestinian to kill all the Jews in the world. So Israel, acting strictly in self defence, have been forced by the Palestinians to kill the Palestinian terrorists trying to kill Jews, and the terrorists hold Palestinian babies in front of themselves as they are shooting Jews, so Israel have accidentally killed a few babies to save the lives of all those Jews targeted by the jihadi terrorists. This, and only this, is the story about Palestine that may be told in the US/UK/EU. Say the Israelis are committing a genocide on the Palestinians and go to gaol, this is not allowed, it is illegal in the US/UK/EU. Proving that the US/UK/EU are totally anti-genocide, and never allow any nation to do such a thing. And the US/UK/EU are also totally THE TRVTH, making it illegal to publish or broadcast anything else.

But on the evil and now banned Telegram (whose owner is rightly under surveillance in France pending his trial, conviction, and sentence to at least 10 years, and probably a lot longer), it is the Israelis who are committing genocide on the Palestinians, a story that is illegal in the US/UK/EU.

It was in 1843 that the Anglican Rev. Keith wrote that 'Palestine is a land without a people for a people without a land,' meaning that the UK must send every Jew in the UK to Palestine, since good Anglicans could not live with deicides but neither could they kill the Jews, since every Jew bears the Mark of Cain for killing Jesus. (Since it was the Romans who executed Jesus, the Bible has to do some work to make it clear to the reader that the Romans were innocent, it was the Jews who killed Jesus.)

During WWII, the Royal Navy prevented Nazi Germany from sending Jews out from Europe, so there was no other way for the Nazis to get rid of Jews, except by killing them. But all Jews still bear the Mark of Cain, so it is not permitted to kill them, and the UK hanged thousands of Germans for killing Jews after WWII, and recorded the fact (I haven't seen anything like the autobiography of a British hangman who wrote about hanging hundreds of Germans, and he was just one of several hangmen sent to hang Germans after WWII, so I don't know what the French and Soviets did to their Nazi prisoners). The US were at Nuremberg, but not much is written about what the US did to other Germans after WWII, except for those responsible for the V-1 and V-2 attacks on the UK who were made US citizens so they could help the US develop their own V-rockets to defend against the impending Soviet attack on the US, since the Soviets hate Freedom and Democracy so much the US knew they must be planning to attack the US.

It was in the 19th century that the UK wrote Mandates that Arabia must be divided, with Palestine for the Jews and the rest of Arabia for the Arabs, or that Palestine and Transjordan were for the Jews, and the rest of Arabia for the Arabs. But the final 20th century Balfour Declaration said that UK Jews must peacefully share Palestine with the Arabs as a UK colony. The UK Jews, like the Americans of all religions and sects, hated the British Imperialists and fought hard to get rid of them, until 1948 when the US and France forced the UK to agree that the UK Palestinian colony was a Free Country. Actually, two Free Countries until 1967, when Israel declared, with US/UK/French consent, that all of what had once been Palestine was now all Israel (plus parts of what had been Syria and Lebanon).

And the US will defend this new and improved Israel, and will ban and gaol anyone who says anything negative about the totally justified and legal and honourable Israel.

So Telegram had to go, and Twitter must return to its prior state with thousands of US government employees checking every tweet and shadow banning all tweets that are not in full compliance with US government guidelines.

Alphabet® and Meta® both have lots of US government agents checking to make sure that none of the widely viewed items violate US government policy (I have seen some Instagram® posts, originally in English but completely covered with Arabic translations of what the person is saying, that are in heinous violation of Meta®/US government guidelines, but such posts must be seen by so few Westerners that they don't trigger the 'check me' button).

So any platform where many can see the lies that Israelis are committing genocide, when it was the Palestinian terrorists who committed genocide on 7-9 October, 2023, must be blocked and the owner gaoled.

Telegram down, X to go.

Telegram

Pavel Durov set up a website in Russia where Russians could complain about Putin's government. He was ordered to stop, so he left Russia. France immediately offered him French citizenship for doing the Right Thing and setting up a website to complain about Russia, getting threatened by the Russian government, then leaving Russia so he could keep a website to complain about Russia, and Durov accepted since he loves French cuisine. He abandoned his original anti-Russian website and set up Telegram, which was also anti-Russian. He was lauded by the US, UK, France, the EU, etc.

But then Telegram grew and grew, and now has about one billion users (and is probably still growing). And the Russian government and military started using Telegram.

France had a huge part of Africa colonised before WWII, but then the US made France 'liberate' all their colonies, meaning, make those former French colonies into French neo-colonies.

The US has been the world leader in neocolonialism since 1823. The European Imperialists sent their armies to conquer a country, then the top government officials were all Europeans. The Head of State was the European Head of State. The resident Head of State was a European governor or viceroy. All senior government officials were European.

The US had an agent give money and weapons to a small group of local citizens in the country they wanted to neo-colonise, and those local citizens took over the country and formed the government. The US agent made it clear that the new government must do whatever the US ordered them to do or they would be replaced. The local leaders, helped into their positions by the US, got paid very well, but most of the country's resources went to US corporations at minuscule prices, and most of the population were impoverished, while US corporations made huge profits.

After WWII, the US forced France to 'liberate' all their former colonies and make them into neo-colonies. Now locals are the government instead of French citizens, but they must do whatever France tell them to do or be replaced, and French profits are as much or more than they had been when the neo-colonies had been colonies.

Until about a year ago. Russia, probably using Telegram, provided assistance and about half the French African neo-colonies rebelled and ejected all the French troops and 'advisors'. And all their natural resources are now being sold by the countries at world market prices with all the profits going to the former neo-colony. France are furious, and blame Russia and Telegram.

So France has planned since February, 2024, to arrest Pavel Durov; however, Durov is a billionaire who probably had access to French arrest warrants, so the plans were Top Secret. When Durov's plane called a French airport to say Durov was coming to France, the airport called the police, the government issued a warrant for Durov's arrest, and he was arrested as soon as his plane landed.

I like Telegram because of the news. They have national news from the US/UK/EU, but also news that is not US/UK/EU.

The news is basically the same on CNN, BBC, France24, DW, Euronews, and all the US/UK/EU news media: Russia, hoping to rebuild the Soviet Union, launched a totally unprovoked attack on the Ukraine, planning to dominate the country that hated the Soviet Union, and wanted to keep the Russians out. Fortunately, NATO gave the Ukraine modern, advanced weapons, while Russia only have outmoded Soviet weapons from WWII, or maybe Czarist weapons from WWI. So the entire first Russian army was completely destroyed in just a few weeks by the Ukrainian Army, who can't possibly be Nazis since they have a Jewish president, so the Russian propaganda is patently  ridiculous. The Russians, while they were unable to fight the Ukrainians with their advanced weapons, did go into undefended villages and murdered all the civilians, running away as the Ukrainian military approached.

After that, Putin sent a second and third Russian Army, but all were wiped out. Russia have lost more than a million troops, while the Ukraine have only lost 31,000. The Russian economy has been totally destroyed by US sanctions, Putin is barely holding onto his presidency and will soon be handed over to the Hague, while the Ukraine will not only have all the Ukraine back, but a large part of what was formerly Russia.

But on Telegram, I can read a different story, a story where Russia are winning in the Ukraine, where most of the Ukrainians who invaded Russia are dead and the Kursk Oblast will soon be totally liberated.

And France and the US both hate Durov's Telegram and want to change it back to the rabidly anti-Russian Telegram it was when it first started.

I only use Telegram to read news. But Telegram is also an encrypted communications channel with an encryption NATO have been unable to break, but breaking the encryption will be very easy with Durov a French prisoner who can't enjoy his $billions until he fully complies with US and French demands.

France intend to hand Telegram over to the US who will use it to spread pro-US/pro-French/-pro-EU/anti-Russia/anti-PRC/anti-Iran propaganda, and where they will be able to see everything every one of the billion Telegram users are posting.

Durov has been charged with child pornography. Since there is no child pornography on the public channels that carry national news from just about every nation, if there is any, it is only on the encrypted channels with unbreakable encryption (until Durov hands over the key). So there is no way France have actually seen any child pornography on Telegram, but it could be all over all those encrypted channels, so Durov is charged as a child pornographer. French justice doesn't require extraneous, irrelevant things like 'proof'.

So Durov will either break and hand Telegram over to US Intelligence or spend the rest of his life in gaol as a child pornographer.

And those Russian lies about what is happening in Russia and the Ukraine won't be visible, everyone will have to accept the official US/UK/EU version of the news as true, since there won't be any alternatives.

So France have done the world a great service by getting rid of access to any news that isn't US/UK/EU based. 

 (Mike Benz says this will also make it easier for the US DoJ and Intelligence to block any pro-Trump information, since it is vital to the US ruling classes that Trump never again get any position of power, Trump and what the Deep State call his lies must be totally blocked.)

New US President???

Before President Biden was 'persuaded' not to run for re-election, Former President Trump seemed to be almost certain to win the election. Since then, Vice-president Harris has been rising rapidly, and seems to be leading in most of the swing states. President Trump seems likely to do a bit better than in 2020 when he lost Georgia, since he is now leading in Georgia, but he is trailing in most of the other swing states and it looks very likely that he will lose to Harris.

But, ultimately, what are we likely to see?

In the Ukraine, President Trump noted that President Putin sent two letters saying Russia could not allow the Ukraine to join NATO. Putin got two replies: 'Russia have no say in the matter. NATO will incorporate the Ukraine and there is nothing Russia can do about it.' Trump says he would not have responded that way, and war would have been avoided.

Vice-president Harris has said that Russia must be completely and utterly defeated, Ukraine must regain all of the territory they had in 1991, plus the large section of Russia they will be able to annex with NATO weapons. Several Harris advisors have said that Russia must be destroyed completely, Putin must go to the Hague as a war criminal, Russia must broken up into many small, unarmed nations that can never threaten NATO in any way.

But does the US President actually have any say in anything? Twice Trump ordered all US troops out of Syria, and not one troop left.

Most US presidents read the Teleprompter. They are good actors who seem to be giving all the commands, but they read what's on the Teleprompter. Trump did not, and his refusal to read the Teleprompter and order troops into Syria had absolutely no effect on what the US military did, but it did convince the senior Civil Servants to make sure Trump is never reelected, and they did their best in 2020 and will try their best in 2024.

The people running the US will still be running the US, even in the unlikely event that Trump is re-elected. Trump might fight against the war in the Ukraine, but money and weapons will still go to Ukraine.

And, of course, Trump and Harris are 110% behind Israel, so there isn't even a chance of any complaint about the US doing everything it can to help the Israel Occupation Force (IOF) eradicate all the Palestinians in the Ghaza and the settlers eradicate all the Palestinians in the West Bank, no matter who gets elected.

***

History

The Chancellor of Germany elected in 1933 said he wanted a Judenfrei Europe, but he said during the 1920s that he wanted to deport all the Jews. The UK said that Jews were a problem, but European Jews were a European problem and must not be inflicted on any other continent, so no European Jews would be allowed in British Palestine, and the Royal Navy would prevent any attempt to deport Jews from Europe. 

The US only allowed a very few European Jews into the US: there was a law against Jewish immigration, with exceptions for people such as Nobel Laureates. One (or more) from a small selection of top scientists and museum directors had to write letters recommending that a specific Jew (e.g., Albert Einstein and Harry Kissinger's father) be admitted, but almost all were rejected.

With nowhere to deport Jews, Germany put them in Concentration Camps, but there wasn't enough food in Germany during WWII, so the Jews were starved until they began developing serious infectious diseases and infecting the Concentration Camp guards and other workers, so Germany began gassing and cremating any Jew too weak to do heavy manual labour as the only way to stop the infections.

***

Israel wants either to deport all the Palestinians, or for them to voluntarily leave Israel. Only no one will take Palestinians except Syria, where the law says any Palestinian who can make it to Syria with a valid travel document will be admitted; however, Israel does not want any Palestinians in Syria, so they are not allowed to go from Israel to Syria with a travel document.

If no other nation will take the Palestinians, Israel will kill them all, just as the Germans tried to kill all the Jews.

But Germany was at war with two or three nations with strong militaries and lost the war, so the German government that wanted to kill all the Jews was replaced with a military occupation government that saved as many Jews as they could and executed many Germans for killing Jews.

Israel is now at war with various independent groups, e.g., Hamas in Ghaza, and also with Hizbollah and Ansarallah, none of which can possibly defeat Israel.

Israel assumes that, if they can provoke Iran to strike Israel a second time, preferably a strike that does no more damage than the first Iranian strike on Israel, the US will then do their duty and totally destroy Iran.

Here, of course, is one tiny glitch: it's not clear if the US can destroy Iran, which has a much stronger military than any the US has faced recently. After a US Navy ship destroyed an Iranian passenger plane on 3 July 1988, killing 290 passengers, Iran could do nothing, but they vowed that would never happen again, and have been working for 36 years on anti-Naval weapons.

A huge US fleet is sailing toward Iran to attack if Iran attack Israel. The US have promised they will totally destroy Iran if Iran dare strike Israel. But the US have not faced an enemy like Iran. There is a very good chance that the entire fleet will be sunk, and that the Iranian strike on Israel will severely damage major government and military targets.

Germany had easily defeated Britain and France, once the strongest militaries in the world, so they thought it would be very easy to defeat the Soviet Union and the US. They were wrong.

And Israel and the US might have seriously underestimated Iran. Especially if Iran get a little help from their friends.

A US Fleet Is Sailing toward Iran to Protect Israel

 On 3 July 1988, an Iranian airliner filled with suicidal jihadis tried to destroy a US Naval vessel by flying into the vessel backwards. The photographs show the airliner had its tail pointed at the US Naval vessel, and the crew of the vessel said the airliner was flying directly at them in a suicidal jihadi attack.

Iran must have had advanced airliners designed to fly backwards so they could fly into and destroy US Naval vessels and the crew would be fooled into thinking the airliner was flying away from them. At least that's the official US Navy version of what happened. So the US Navy ship shot the airliner down, killing 290 people, men, women, and children suicidal jihadists. And Iran could do absolutely nothing.

Iran were annoyed and vowed to work on naval defence systems that would enable them so sink any US Naval vessel that attacked Iran. They've had 36 years to work on their naval defence systems.

 

Ghaza genocide?

The International Court of Justice said that what is happening in Ghaza might be genocide, and they are going to study the case further. Israel, backed up by the US, UK, and Western Europe, say what they are doing is 'self defence', allowed by the UN Charter, so they are in full compliance with International Law.

Genocide requires that one be killing members of a religious and ethnic group only because they are members of a religious and ethnic group. This is, pretty much, just the Jews. The Palestinians are a mixture of Christians and Muslims, so not a uniform religious and ethnic group as the Jews all are.

If one relaxes the definition from a religious and ethnic group to a religious or ethnic group, the Palestinians are all Arabs, and killing a group of Arabs only because they are Arabs is genocide. Maybe.

Israel say they are not killing everyone in Ghaza because they are Arabs, they are killing them because they are terrorists, and killing terrorists is allowed under International Law. Of course, many say one cannot be a terrorist if younger than 5 years old, but the Israelis say that's because one does not understand that Ghazan parents teach babies who can barely crawl to carry a knife instead of a baby rattle and be ready to kill every Jew they can crawl to. Also, if a terrorist surrounds himself with human shields, it is the terrorist who is responsible for the deaths of the human shields, not the Israeli Occupation Force (IOF). The charter of Hamas says that it is the duty of everyone in Ghaza to kill every last Jew everywhere in the world, so how can Israel allow such people to live where they can easily repeat the attack of 7 October?

Max Blumenthal writes a lot about what is happening in Israel in The Grayzone. First, the Hamas Charter has not one word about killing Jews, just the desire for a place to live that is not a Concentration Camp. Crops were limited, and Ghazans were often shot when farming or fishing, to limit the food in Ghaza. Hamas wanted to change their way of life, and managed to break out and take hostages, this much is uncontested. Israel released a 47 minute tape, said to be put together from videos on Hamas' phones, showing rapes and murders. Max Blumenthal says those rapes and murders are real, but were not filmed anywhere in Israel, the IOF downloaded the clips from YouTube, all uploaded before the end of 2022, so they could not have been of the 7 October 2023 Hamas raid. Max Blumenthal also says the Israeli claim of 1,200 killed by Hamas is another falsehood: many of the Israelis killed on 7 October were killed by the IOF to prevent their being taken hostage, and this is called the 'Hannibal Rule': never let anyone be taken hostage if there is any way to prevent it, and killing hostages and kidnappers with a Hellfire missile or machine gun fire is an acceptable way to prevent Israelis from being taken hostage.

Rick Sanchez has also been looking at Ghaza. He was particularly horrified by the attack last Sunday where the IOF shelled a place the Palestinians had been told to go since it was safe. The attack set many tents on fire and at least 45 Palestinians were burned to death. As Mr Sanches says, this will harm Jews since some people will have developed an anger and hatred of all Jews for what the IOF are doing, even anti-Zionist Jews. But the US, UK, France, Germany, and some other Western European countries still support Israel, but Ireland, Spain, and Norway say they now recognise the (non-existent) Palestinian State.

Netanyahu says the IOF will stay in Ghaza at least until the end of this year, so another 6 months, maybe longer. Unless the famine kills off all the Ghazans in less than 6 months, or some other country agrees to take them.

I must note that the Israeli version, that they have never committed genocide, is strongly supported by Fox News and those who view Fox News uncritically. Other US news channels say they just don't know. No US news channel say Israel is definitely guilty of genocide.

Antisemitism

I heard the name 'Candace Owens' and decided to look her up. She was on The Daily Wire, but was fired for antisemitism.

It started when Rabbi Barclay wrote several columns calling her an antisemite. Then she invited him to be on her show on The Daily Wire where she asked him to define antisemitism. He began by saying he could not define misogyny, since he was not a woman, only women can define misogyny. Then he said he could not define racism since he was not Black, and only Blacks can define the racism that affects Blacks. Finally, he said only a Jew can define antisemitism, and there is an agreement among Jews, and the term has been defined in print in many places.

Rabbi Barclay gave a brief history of antisemitism. First, he said, Christians hated Jews because they did not accept Jesus as the Messiah. This is, of course, historically verified. He called this religious antisemitism.

Next, he added, was the 'Blood Lie', that Jews drink the blood of Christian infants. Again, the fact that some Christians told this lie is historical record. It is also a fact that Jews, before they eat kosher meat, must cleanse if of all blood, so blood is treyf for Jews, including the blood of Christian infants. And, again, this was a verifiable part of what he called religious antisemitism.

Later, in the 18^th and 19^th centuries, he continued, Christianity no longer drove hatred of Jews, but just the fact that Jews were different. This he called racial antisemitism.

Note that in both cases, the underlying antisemitism was hatred of Jews.

But now, Rabbi Barclay says, antisemitism means criticism of Israel or Zionism. Everyone who dislikes  Israel or Zionism must hate Jews, and so is antisemitic.

I have many problems with Rabbi Barclay's logic, but the effectiveness of his presentation is indisputable: it get Candace Owens fired, which was the one goal of the articles he wrote about her and his appearance on her show.

Rape by Hamas??????

The London Review of Books has a May 2024 article by Azadeh Moaveni studying the rapes by Hamas on 7 October 2023. She asks if all the rapes that Israel say Hamas committed actually occurred. It is a long article, and she did quite a lot of research.

Basically, Israel announced that Hamas had murdered more than 1,400 Israelis and raped and murdered many, many women, including those taken hostage. (The 1,400 was later reduced to 1,200 after it turned out that 200 of the dead were members of Hamas, not Israeli victims). The New York Times had a long article by Jeffrey Gettleman on 26 March giving all the horrific details, saying that rape was an essential part of the Hamas attack on 7 October, 2023. This article was based, in part, on the UN report by Pramila Patten, who wrote what the Israelis told her. She did some checking, and said that while mass rape was proven, not all of the Israeli claims could be verified, but most were obviously true. She admitted she had absolutely no evidence, only information, meaning a few of the Israeli stories had contradictions and so could not possibly be true, but she accepted all those not provably false as true. The New York Times accepted all the Israeli claims as irrefutably proven: not only did Hamas rape and kill many women, many of the hostages were also raped while in captivity, as the women released are reported (by Israel) to have testified (the women are so traumatised they cannot be interviewed).

The Grayzone has many articles by Max Blumenthal et al. saying there is no evidence of any rape, the accusation of rape is Israeli policy, since many of those learning about the attack agree that rape justifies the Israeli Occupation Force (IOF) punishment of Palestinians more than mere murder. I heard one reporter testify that he had seen the videos of the rapes, some taken and released by Hamas and some by Israelis who had hidden themselves and turned their videos over to Israeli authorities, so those rapes were provably true. But the Grayzone says those videos can be found on YouTube dated 2022 (meaning the YouTube date of posting, not a date in the video which might not be correct). So yes, Israel has real videos of real rapes that they gave to those studying what Hamas did on 7 October 2023, but none of those rapes occurred on 7 October, 2023 during the Hamas attack.

Israel has a propaganda department that worked hard to manufacture the story of mass rapes. The women hostages released by Hamas had a chance for a few brief words before being taken into Israeli custody, and never mentioned being raped.

Azadeh Moaveni concludes that, while some rapes by Hamas indisputably occurred, not all the rapes reported by Israel were real. She read the Grayzone pieces about the rapes by Max Blumenthal, but dismissed him as a fringe reporter, and noted that none of the mainstream media accept any of his work. She said that Bret Stephens of the New York Times said that Blumenthal is an example of ‘rape denialism’ by a ‘useful idiot’.

Although, if they bothered reading Max Blumenthal...

But why would they do that, when they've got a great story to write about the horrible Hamas atrocities reported to them by Israel (who do not allow them to verify any of those atrocities, but no need, the mainstream media know that Israelis cannot tell a lie).

More about the Ukraine and the Ghaza

I grew up with my teachers telling me that humans were divided into 5 races, in alphabetical order: Black, Brown, Red, White, and Yellow.

As I wrote before, I no longer believe that.

But the Nazis said the Europeans, all white, were divided into three races: Aryan, Slav, and Jew. The book, My Struggle, written in the 1920s (mostly, it got revised until his death by suicide) by the man elected Chancellor of Germany in 1933, only has one or two paragraphs about the Slavs, saying they must all be killed for Lebensraum. Most of the book is about how the author started thinking the Jews were just different, but (he wrote) he learned they were evil and all of Europe must be Judenfrei. I believe he wanted to achieve that by deporting all the Jews, but the US and UK both said that Jews are a problem, and European Jews are a European problem, so they prohibited Europe from deporting their Jews to afflict any other part of the world. After WWII started in 1940, the first thing the Nazis did was cut food to the Jews in Concentration Camps, and, as they starved, their immune systems weakened and they began developing infectious diseases and spreading them to the people working in the Concentration Camps, so the Nazis decided to kill them all and burn the bodies, the Final Solution.

No one knows exactly how many Jews the Nazis killed, since they tried to keep the Death Camps secret, but the standard guess is 6 million. No one (except the Slavs) cares how many Slavs the Nazis killed, but at least 26 million. Canada recently honoured a member of the Waffen SS for killing Slavs during WWII.

After the war, the US announced that all the Jews in Western Europe must be sent to Palestine, a land that was only for Jews. The US/UK understanding was that the Arabs are all Bedouin, with no permanent homes, they just wander, following their camels and goats from one grazing place in the desert to another grazing place when the current one is completely eaten, and the Arabs all live in tents, and they could wander in other Arab lands, anyplace except Palestine. The fact that Palestine is in the Fertile Crescent, so the Palestinians had permanent homes in which they wanted to remain was not known to the Americans, nor did they care. Israel became a very nice, unsinkable aircraft carrier for the US, from which they could dominate Arabia and control the oil and Palestinians were easily expendable. Expending the Palestinians has continued since 1948 by Israelis with full US/UK/European support.

***

Meanwhile, there was a story from the 1990s: "I was born in Austria. I went to school in Poland. I got my first job in the Soviet Union. And I retired in the Ukraine."

"You must have done a lot of travelling."

"I never left the village where I was born."

Before the 18th century, the Russian Empire ended at the Dnieper River. West of the Dnieper River was Poland, which was in a political mess in the 18th century so Russia annexed part, a total of about 60% of what had been the Commonwealth of Poland and Lithuania (the other 40% was split between the Austrian and Hungarian Empire and Prussia). After WWI, the victorious UK and France redrew all the boundary lines of Europe, reforming Poland (Lithuania became the three Baltic countries, since they neither liked Poland nor each other) and creating lots of new states like Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia.

Then, after WWII, Stalin took back all that had been part of the Russian Empire plus some of what had been Austria and all of East Prussia. Some of this became the Soviet Socialist Republic of the Ukraine. But to what had been the Ukraine, Lenin, Stalin, and Khrushchev added parts of the Soviet Socialist Republic of Russia. The idea was to get a mixture of Ukrainians and Russians who didn't much care for each other and so could not unify and try to rebel against the USSR.

The Ukraine that Lenin, Stalin, and Khrushchev created consisted of people who considered themselves Aryans, Slavs, and Jews, which meant they couldn't agree on much. Then, in 2014, the US came in and gave money and weapons to the Aryans and said, 'You can kill all the Slavs for Lebensraum, but if you touch a Jew, we'll kill you.' Victoria Nuland named an Aryan as President of the Ukraine (the previous president, presumably a Slav, had to flee), and the Aryans, having all the money and weapons, started killing off the Slavs for Lebensraum. The new president also said that the Russians, who had been squatting on the naval bases in the Crimea, would be evicted and those naval bases returned to their rightful owner: NATO.

So, for starters, Putin declared that Crimea, transferred by Khrushchev from the Socialist Soviet Republic of Russia to the Soviet Socialist Republic of the Ukraine in 1954, was returning to Russia. A small military force entered the Crimea, and the entire Crimean military surrendered without a shot being fired. It is not clear why NATO allowed Russia to do this, other than the fact that Russia have more nukes than all of NATO, but NATO let this go, promising the Ukraine that they'd eventually get all of the Crimea back, just be patient.

The Constitution of Russia, which consists of more of the old USSR than any other country, says that Russia must protect ethnic Russians in the former USSR. So Putin demanded and got the Minsk Agreement, signed by the Ukraine, Germany, and France, which said the Ukraine would respect ethnic Russians in the Donbass. In the Donbass, ethnic Russians could speak Russian and practice the Russian Orthodox religion, and the Donbass would remain part of the Ukraine. Putin agreed that Slavs could be killed off in the rest of the Ukraine, but not in the Donbass. Merkel and Holland, Chancellor of Germany and President of France in 2014, both said they signed the Minsk agreements to trick Russia into leaving the Donbass alone while the Ukrainian military was reorganised and given advanced arms. Russian officers were fired and replaced with Aryan officers, and NATO trainers upgraded the fighting skills of the Ukrainian military.

With Russia complaining that the Ukraine was run by Nazis, the US had an 'election' and named a Jewish actor named Zelensky as the new 'president'. Zelensky knows how to follow the scripts the US give him, and the US can say that no Nazi would ever accept a Jewish president. The killing of Slavs would continue, but the Jews in the Ukraine would be safe.

By 2021, it was clear that the Ukrainian military was trying to kill off all the ethnic Russians in the Donbass, and in December Putin sent letters to the US and NATO in Europe asking them to please stop the Ukraine from killing ethnic Russians. The US and NATO said that, if the Ukraine wanted to kill off all the ethnic Russians and join NATO and have nuclear NATO bases pointed at Moscow so close they could hit Moscow before Moscow could respond, the Ukraine and NATO had every right to do this. So in 2022, Russia invaded the Ukraine.

Under the Russian Constitution, this was mandatory. Under NATO law, this was an egregious violation.

The Western media have been saying that the Ukrainians, with NATO weapons, destroyed the entire Russian military in a few weeks, so Putin drafted young boys and old men to continue his stupid and evil idea of rebuilding the USSR, then the Warsaw Pact, and then march West and take the rest of Europe. Fortunately, draft after draft of Russians were all killed, since NATO weapons have twice the range and better accuracy than the weapons available to the Russians, which are all old Soviet and even Czarist weapons. The Ukraine have only lost about 31,000 soldiers, and are ready, willing, and able to destroy anything and everything Russia send against them.

The Western press note that the evil, appeasement Congress of 2023 and early 2024 cut off the supply of materiel for the Ukrainian military and they suffered some minor setbacks, but, fortunately, the Congress finally did the right thing and sent both the Ukraine money to kill off the Russian invaders in the Ukraine and Israel money to kill off the 2.3 million terrorists in the Ghaza.

Fox News figure the Ukraine is pretty much worthless, so why are the US wasting $61 billion trying to take it all back from Russia, but cheer that the US are now supporting Israel's killing off all 2.3 million terrorists in the Ghaza.

The rest of the mainstream Western media, e.g., CNN, BBC, France24, etc., etc., all agree that Putin was trying to reform the old USSR, then the Warsaw Pact, then take the rest of Europe, so it's great that the Congress gave the Ukrainians the money they need to finish the defeat of Russia, who are almost out of troops given their massive losses. And all the dying on the anti-Russian side has been by Ukrainians, not a single US soldier has been killed in the Ukraine, and Russia are very near total defeat and unconditional surrender, and after that defeat, Russia will be broken up into 30 or more small, unarmed statelets with all the oil and gas returned to their rightful owners, US oiligarchs.

But the rest of the Western media want Israel to try to avoid killing the Ghazan women and children, and only kill Hamas terrorists. They admit that, until Hamas release all the Israeli hostages, the killing must continue, so really, all the dead women and children are the fault of Hamas, not the US/NATO/Israel.

The fact that none of the Western media are telling the slightest hint of the truth is something that one can now discover on TikTok, so the US plan to destroy TikTok ASAP.

There are a few places (TikTok, tuckercarlson.com) where one can find that Airman Jack Teixeira posted a TS/SCI/NOFORN document that Ukrainian losses have been at least 10 times more than Russian losses, and Russian weapons are more advanced than NATO weapons, but no decent Western person would read a TS/SCI/NOFORN document without proper authorisation, so continue reading the Western media that Russia are very close to complete defeat, and the Israelis have only killed terrorists in Ghaza, all those women and children deaths are either Hamas lies or Hamas victims.

Ghaza: History and Future?

 It is said that not all Jews are Zionists, which is clearly correct, and not all Zionists are Jews, which depends on whose definition of 'Zionist' one uses. Some Jews believe all Jews should have Israel where there used to be a British colony called Palestine, and these are clearly Zionists. Far more Christians than Jews believe that all Jews must be in what used to be the British colony of Palestine, but Wikipedia says they are properly called 'Restorationists' because they want to restore all the Jews back to the land G_d gave to Abraham according to the Torah; however, many now call all those a Zionist who figure that what used to be the British colony of Palestine is for Jews, and all Jews should be in Palestine, whether the person is Jewish or goy.

It was in 1843 that the Anglican clergyman Rev. Keith wrote that all the Jews in the UK must go to Palestine, 'A land without a people for a people without a land.' Most British Anglicans accepted this, because every Jew is a deicide, but they have the 'mark of Cain,' so they must not be allowed to remain in the UK but they cannot be killed, so all must be deported back to Palestine. But most UK Jews did not accept this until the end of the 19^th century.

In the late 19^th century, Herzl, a Serbian Jew who had moved to Bohemia, coined the term Zionism, which, at first, meant that, because of European antisemitism, Jews must have a homeland somewhere, anywhere, where they would be safe, but, eventually, Herzl decided that place must be in the Ottoman vilayet of Syria, and he presented this idea at a conference in Switzerland in 1897.

After the Ottomans lost WWI, much of what had been the Ottoman Empire was chopped up by the UK and France, with Ottoman Syria divided by Sykes and Picot into regions with a mixture of Sunni Arabs, Shia Arabs, and Kurds, who all disliked each other, making it easy to run the colony since the inhabitants hated each other more than they hated the European Imperialists. Majority Sunni colonies had Shia governments installed, and majority Shia colonies had Sunni governments (Kurds were split among so many different colonies, plus Turkey, that there were no Kurdish majority colonies.)

The UK created one colony called Palestine, inhabited mostly by Palestinians, a word now banned in the US where they must be called either Arabs or terrorists, and then tried to get all the UK Jews to go there, so the colony would be a mixture of Palestinians and Jews who would spend more time fighting each other than fighting the British Imperialists. Sadly, the UK Jews didn't get the message and did things like blowing up the hotel where the senior British Imperial officers of British Palestine were staying.

The British also said that Palestine was only for British Jews and would not allow Russian Jews fearing pogroms to enter. Nor did they allow Jews to enter after the Nazis said that all of Europe must be Judenfrei, but at first, the Nazis wanted to deport all the Jews, not kill them. However, the US and UK said that Jews are a big problem, but European Jews are a European problem and Europe must not be allowed to inflict European problems on any other part of the world. So the Nazis came up with their Final Solution in 1940, after trying unsuccessfully to get the Jews to leave from 1933 until 1940, since the UK and US made it impossible for European Jews to leave Europe.

After Germany lost WWII, the US announced that all the Jews in Western Europe must be sent to Palestine. No choice, all the surviving Jews had to go. Of course, quite a few Jews were killed from 1940 to 1945, but no one is sure how many (the most common estimate is six million). And, of course, if the UK and US had let them leave, the Nazis would have preferred to deport the Jews rather than kill them.

So the Jews in Western Europe who had survived the Holocaust ended up in Palestine, later Israel, and the US figure it would be best if a) Israel was 100% Jewish; and b) 100% of the world's Jews were in Israel, and the UK agreed. Also much of Europe plus the UK are all US neocolonies, so whatever the US want, the chief executives of the European states (and the UK), handpicked by the US elite, always agree to do.

The Jews were heavily armed by the US, UK, and France (for starters) and managed to defeat the Arabs easily (many Arab states tried to keep Palestine as a primarily Arab state, split among Syria, Jordan, and Egypt, but their militaries were very poorly armed in comparison with the European Jews).

Then, of course, many Arab states made their Jewish citizens unwelcome, so they went to Israel.

And, finally, after the breakup of the USSR, which prohibited emigration, many Soviet Jews went to Israel since the successor states of the USSR were happy to see them leave.

And, again, the US and other Zionists want all the Jews to go to Israel and all the goyim to leave Israel, since they believe this will cause Jesus to return.

So, in the Western media, everyone in Ghaza is a terrorist. There are no Palestinians in Israel, only terrorists. Children are taught from birth that their duty is to kill every Jew in the world, starting with every Jew in Israel. Toddlers who cannot walk crawl with knives or small pistols, looking for Jews to kill. Schoolbooks for the terrorist children in Ghaza (and the West Bank) don't waste time on maths or science or history, they only teach the students that it is their duty to kill every Jew. Not true, of course, maybe not even believed by Israelis, but it's still a good Israeli talking point for why every Ghazan who won't leave voluntarily must be killed. And one hears this reiterated incessantly on Fox.

So Israel have not killed a single innocent in Ghaza, the claim that Israel killed 35,000, mostly women and children, is just a lie by Hamas: everyone killed by Israel was a terrorist, since only terrorists live in the Ghaza. And one can hear this reiterated by Fox and many other Western media outlets on a daily basis.

Israel did not destroy a single hospital in Ghaza, because Hamas did not allow any hospitals in Ghaza, all were military bases disguised as hospitals from which Hamas fired rockets to kill Jews. And this is the only  version one gets on Fox, and one often gets this version on other Western media channels.

In real life, Israel have killed at least 35,000, mostly women and children, and destroyed most of the hospitals, killing medical staff and patients, but it's illegal to write or broadcast this in the Western media.

Western Media on Ukraine and Ghaza

Ukraine

In the Western Media, the Ukraine are winning. The New York Times ran a letter from the Republican Senator J. D. Vance, saying the Ukraine are losing and the US are doing the Ukrainians a disservice by sending them $billions they use to send their men to die with no chance of winning. Almost all of the letters by subscribers in response to the Senator's letter denounced the Senator as a danger to democracy: the Ukraine are winning, but they will lose unless the US keep sending $100s of billions every year, and if the Ukraine lose, this will mean the US will have to go to war with Russia. Now the US are only funding the war, the Ukrainians are doing all the work. Some have died, of course, as happens in war, but not too many. NATO weapons have twice the range and much greater accuracy than Russian weapons, so the Ukrainians have been able to destroy the entire Russian military invading force, losing only a small fraction as many as the Russians, about 31,000 Ukrainians have died, compared to more than 300,000 Russians. Of course, Putin is drafting more young Russians to be forcibly shipped to the Ukraine to die, so the US must keep supporting the Ukraine with weapons and ammunition, and anyway, all the money ends up back in the US with our defence industry workers. If we stop the money, the Ukraine will lose, Putin will send the Red Army to attack the NATO countries in Europe, and Americans will have to go to Europe and do the dying instead of Ukrainians.

Hence, according to the New York Times and the overwhelming majority of their readers, the US Congress must do the right thing and get another $60 billion in matériel to the Ukraine ASAP. 

New York Times readers believe the New York Times coverage of the war in the Ukraine, so they're sure the Ukrainians are winning, Russia are on the brink of total defeat and the breakup of Russia from one large, militaristic threat to the US into 32 small countries, all disarmed and absolutely no threat. So all that money going to the Ukraine (well, not really money to the Ukraine, mostly matériel) is saving a lot of US lives (and providing a lot of well-paying jobs for Americans). The fact that the New York Times coverage of the war in the Ukraine has no relation to reality is something the Senator tried to tell them, but almost all the New York Times readers reject reality in favour of the New York Times depiction of what is happening in the Ukraine.

****

Ghaza

Lionel is a newscaster who goes just by "Lionel". He is  an antiZionist Jew, but he notes that he has many Zionist friends who used to watch MSNBC but now watch Fox. MSNBC isn't sure about what is happening in the Ghaza, and that upsets the staunch Zionists. They are liberals in most things and used to hate Fox, but now their Zionism trumps everything else.

Fox say that the starvation in Ghaza has nothing to do with Israel: Israel allow huge amounts of food into Ghaza, but Hamas take it all then sell most of it and use the money to buy weapons and leave the civilians to starve. Hamas have converted all the hospitals in the Ghaza into military bases, shooting rockets into Israel and killing Jews, since every single person in the Ghaza is taught from infancy to be a rabid antiSemite who must kill every last Jew. The Ghazan schoolbooks all teach that the only purpose in life for Palestinians is to kill as many Jews as they can. Mosques and churches are used as covers for Hamas military bases. Israel only targets Hamas terrorists, but the Hamas  terrorists keep themselves surrounded by human shields as they are shooting rockets into Israel and killing Jews, so, to protect the innocent Jews in Israel, the Israeli Occupation Force (IOF) have no choice but to bomb the rocket-launching facilities, which kills a few of the human shields Hamas keep inside the facility, but this is the only way the IOF can protect the innocent Jews living in Israel. Armies talk about collateral damage, the percentage of innocent civilians killed by their war against the enemy military. For the US, this is 70%. When the US bomb and kill, 70% were innocent civilians. For the IOF, this number is just 10%, so when the IOF kill, 90% of them were Hamas terrorists and only 10% were innocent civilians. This is the lowest amount of collateral damage of any military anywhere.

Fox note that the number of dead Ghazans is given by Hamas, who lie, so do not believe any of the numbers of dead Ghazans you read in the left-wing antiSemitic press. Do not believe that the IOF have killed more than 15,000 children. They consider everyone 19 years old or younger to be innocent children, when Hamas have 5 year old terrorists, armed and doing all they can to kill Jews, including the IOF soldiers trying to bring peace to Ghaza. We have no idea how many have actually been killed in Ghaza, since we have no independent sources other than Hamas, but Israel and Fox agree that almost all were Hamas terrorists, very few were innocent civilians. 

Fox say President Biden is a rabid antiSemite since he had the US abstain when the Security Council voted that Israel must give Hamas a ceasefire, allowing them to kill more Jews when the IOF is forced to stop pursuing the murderous Hamas terrorists firing rockets at Israel, so please elect someone who is not an antiSemite in November. The fact that Biden said the Security Council resolution was nonbinding wasn't enough, the US should have had the Security Council vote that the UN is behind Israel and supports the brave IOF attempt to protect Israel from the murderous antiSemites in Ghaza.

Even the Israeli press isn't as rabidly antiGhazan as Fox.

Other US news channels are all pro-Israel, but not nearly as much as Fox, and, according to Lionel, the Zionist Jews want 110% pro-Israel news coverage, so they watch Fox. Actually, one can toss in the Christian Zionists, who are also inclined to accept the Fox version of what is happening, but most of the Zionists Lionel knows are Jewish. The actual religion of Zionists is mostly Christian, not Jewish, because there are a lot more Christians than Jews, and some Christians have been preaching Zionism for at least 200 years that we have records of, starting with the British Rev. Keith who wrote in the early 19th century that the UK should send all the British Jews to Palestine, "A land without a people for a people without a land." (I figure, if he were still around, the Rev. Keith would watch Fox along with the BBC.)

The Fox version of the Israeli war on Ghaza has absolutely no connection to reality, but reality is not something the rabid Zionist, Jewish or Christian, wants to see or hear.

Ukraine and Ghaza

Airman Jack Teixeira was sentenced to 16 year in gaol for putting some Top Secret information in an Internet Room for his friends, one of whom posted it publicly. One of the documents says the Russians have lost 10 times as many soldiers as the Ukrainians, and have lost more than 90% of their men and more than 80% of their materiel, and should soon be defeated. Another says the Ukraine have lost 10 times as many men and 10 times as much materiel as Russia and should soon be defeated. Tucker Carlson was fired for saying we must believe the second version, that the Ukraine are losing. All the Western media still reiterate that the Russians are already defeated, their army men and materiel destroyed, and Russia will very soon collapse so that NATO can break Russia up into 10 or 20 small states with 110% of all their energy owned by American oiligarchs, as well that energy should be. 

But independent sources say the other report is the accurate one: Russia have destroyed the Ukrainian/NATO military, with most of the Ukrainian soldiers dead and most of their materiel destroyed. Russia will take all the Slavic parts of the Ukraine and leave the subsequently impoverished Aryan parts for the West to subsidise. While every Western media source I can find says this is false, that the Russians are losing badly, will soon be required to surrender unconditionally, all the non-Western media support this version of reality, and the objective reports seem to indicate that the Russian version is the accurate one: so it is likely Russia will definitely win the Donbas and probably all that is littoral Ukrainian.

***

Israel have not achieved their main objective in the Ghaza: a total military defeat of Hamas. But it looks like famine will do the job the Israeli Occupation Force (IOF) could not, and kill off just about all the Philistines in the Ghaza, after which the Ghaza can return to full Israeli control of all the oil and gas and transportation facilities. Plus, Israel want the Ghaza as a new maritime port to challenge the Suez in Egypt, and this could happen fairly quickly once the Ghaza is rid of Philistines.

***

Eid Mubarak to all those who celebrate Eid.