Please visit http:TakeYourCross.wordpress.com for updates.
Google Shuts Down Anti-Obama Sites on its Blogger Platform
By Warner Todd Huston June 29, 2008 – 15:22 ET
**UPDATE** BELOW FOLD
It looks like Google has officially joined the Barack Obama campaign and decided that its contribution would be to shut down any blog on the Google owned Blogspot.com blogging system that has an anti-Obama message. Yes, it sure seems that Google has begun to go through its many thousands of blogs to lock out the owners of anti-Obama blogs so that the noObama message is effectively squelched. Thus far, Google has terminated the access by blog owners to 7 such sites and the list may be growing. Boy, it must be nice for Barack Obama to have an ally powerful enough to silence his opponents like that!
It isn’t just conservative sites that Google’s Blogger platform is eliminating. For instance, www.comealongway.blogspot.com has been frozen and this one is a Hillary supporting site. The operator of Come a Long Way has a mirror site off the Blogspot platform and has today posted this notice:
I used to have a happy internet home on Blogger: http://www.comealongway.blogspot.com. Then on Wednesday night, June 25, I received the following e-mail:
Dear Blogger user,
This is a message from the Blogger team.
Your blog, at http://comealongway.blogspot.com/, has been identified as a potential spam blog. You will not be able to publish posts to your blog until we review your site and confirm that it is not a spam blog.
The Blogger Team
It turns out that there is an interesting pattern where it concerns the blogs that Google’s Blogspot team have summarily locked down on their service. They all belong to the Just Say No Deal coalition, a group of blogs that are standing against the Obama campaign. It seems the largest portion of these blogs are Hillary supporting blogs, too.
All I can say is, WOW! If Google is willing to abuse its power like this even against fellow leftists, what does it plan against conservatives, the folks Google hates even more!?
Here is a list of the Blogspot blogs that have been frozen by Google thus far:
Blue Lyon @ http://bluelyon.blogspot.com
Come A Long Way @ http://comealongway.blogspot.com
Hillary or Bust @ http://hillaryorbust.blogspot.com
McCain Democrats @ http://mccaindemocrats.blogspot.com
NObama Blog @ http://nobamablog.blogspot.com
politicallizard.blogspot.com @ http://thelizardannex.blogspot.com
Reflections in Tyme @ http://reflections-in-tyme.blogspot.com
I have been hesitant to post this update because I cannot find a link to prove the claim, but it is starting to look like this Blogspot shut down of anti-Obama sites occurred because of a concerted effort by Obama supporters.
What they did was go to the Blogspot addresses found on the site of the NoObama coalition called Just Say No Deal and constantly hit the “mark as spam” link so that Google’s Blogger would be flooded with spam warnings. This caused Google/Blogger to freeze the sites marked.
Apparently, this campaign merely took advantage of Google/Blogger’s flawed system of finding spam blogs. So, it looks like what we have here is an Obama dirty trick to shut down political opposition. Looks like Obmatons aren’t much for that whole democracy thing, eh?
Once I find a link to an Obama site talking about this attack, I will post it.
This is similar to the purge that Google initiated against The People’s Cube.
Google supports Communism and jihad brazenly.
Nathanael Kapner, an apparent American-Jewish convert to Greek Orthodoxy, writes that Vladimir Putin signals the great renewal that will bring about the last days.
The self-professed American patriot is an ardent supporter of the faux-rightist Ron Paul, opposes American national defense because, he claims, it is part of a Zionist/New World Order conspiracy, and supports “Palestinians”.
VLADIMIR PUTIN & THE REVIVAL OF CHRISTIANITY
ON JANUARY 14 2008 Russian President Vladimir Putin made a statement at an Orthodox Christian prayer ceremony that will make the Jews shake in their shpilkies (guts): “The Russian government is indebted to the Russian Orthodox Church and will facilitate the revival of religion in Russia.”See: “State Will Repay Debt To Russian Orthodox Church” Here
While George W Bush is lighting Hanukkah candles in the White House and allowing Jew Cabinet Members like Michael Mukasey to put up mammoth Hanukkah Menorahs on the White House Lawn, Russian President Vladimir Putin is lighting Christian candles in Orthodox Christian churches! Bravo!
Jews fear strong Christian political leaders like Vladimir Putin who take a stand for Christianity. Methinks that the year 2008 is going to be the beginning of not only pie in the face of the New World Order Jews, but also a backlash against the Jewification of the Western World. And the backlash has begun with Vladimir Putin!
admin January 15, 2008 @ 12:15 pm
To William –
The Orthodox Christian Church to which I belong does not recognize “Nostradamus” or “Edgar Cayce” as having any validity whatsoever. Rather the Church considers both men to be under demonic influence.
The Orthodox Christian Church is a continuation of the revelation given by the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament and has its own prophets and teachers of the New Testament.
Thus the Holy Spirit inspired prophets and teachers have instructed us that in the last days a great world wide revival will occur throught the instrumentality of an Orthodox Christian Russia and a renewed pious Tzarist rule.
Presient [sic] Vladimir Putin is showing signs of the beginning of the great renewal.
By KGB defector Konstantin Preobrazhensky:
Americans generally believe that Russia is afraid of Islamic terrorism as much as the U.S.A. They are reminded of the war in Chechnya, the hostage crisis at the Beslan School in 2004 and at the Moscow Theater in 2002, and of the apartment house blasts in Moscow in 1999, where over 200 people were killed. It is clear that Russians are also targets of terrorism today.
But in all these events, the participation of the FSB, Federal Security Service, inheritor to the KGB, is also clear. Their involvement in the Moscow blasts has been proven by lawyer Mikhail Trepashkin, a former FSB Colonel. For this he was illegally imprisoned, and is now suffering torture and deprivation of medical assistance, from which he is not likely to survive.
A key distinction between Russian and American attitudes towards Islamic terrorism is that while for America terrorism is largely seen as an exterior menace, Russia uses terrorism as an object as a tool of the state for manipulation in and outside the home country. Islamic terrorism is only part of the world of terrorism. Long before Islamic terrorism became a global threat, the KGB had used terrorism to facilitate the victory of world Communism.
This leads to the logical connection between Russian and Islamic terrorism. The late Alexander Litvinenko, poisoned in London in November, 2006, told me that his former FSB colleagues had trained famous Al-Qaeda terrorists Ayman Al-Zawahiri and Juma Namangoniy during the 1980s and 1990s. Ayman Al-Zawahiri, one of the world’s most wanted terrorists, has been responsible for the murder of U.S. nationals outside the United States. Before his death, Juma Namangoniy (Jumabai Hojiyev), a native of Soviet Uzbekistan, was a right-hand man of Osama bin Laden in charge of the Taliban’s northern front in Afghanistan.
In 1996, Alexander Litvinenko was responsible for securing the secrecy of Al-Zawahiri’s arrival in Russia, who was trained by FSB instructors in Dagestan, Northern Caucasus, in 1996-1997.
At that time, Litvinenko was the Head of the Subdivision for Internationally Wanted Terrorists of the First Department of the Operative-Inquiry Directorate of the FSB Anti-Terrorist Department. He was ordered to undertake the delicate mission of securing Al-Zawahiri from unintentional disclosure by the Russian police. Though Al-Zawahiri had been brought to Russia by the FSB using a false passport, it was still possible for the police to learn about his arrival and report to Moscow for verification. Such a process could disclose Al-Zawahiri as an FSB collaborator.
In order to prevent this, Litvinenko visited a group of the highly placed police officers to notify them in advance. “If you get information about some suspicious Arabs arriving in the Caucasus, please report it to me before informing your leadership”, he told them.
Juma Namangoniy was once a student of the Saboteur Training Center of the First Chief Directorate of the KGB in 1989-91. The school was notorious for the international terrorists who matriculated from it. It now belongs to the FSB, and since only KGB staff officers were allowed to study there, Juma Namangoniy’s presence clearly suggests that he was much more than a civil collaborator.
Mohammed Atta, the pilot of the first plane to crash into the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, had met with a senior Iraqi intelligence agent in Prague, Czech Republic, five months before the attack. But Iraqi intelligence was just a client of Russia’s intelligence service. It brings a new understanding to the fact that President Putin was the first foreign President to call President Bush on 9/11. One may conjecture that he knew in advance what was to happen.
Russia Grows Muslim
Putin continues the traditional Russian policy of giving privileges to the Muslim elite. Today’s Russian Minister of Healthcare, Mikhail Zurabov, is a Chechen. His political agenda includes the total destruction of the Russian healthcare system, looking like revenge for the war in Chechnya. Putin shows no concern over that.
Strategically Russia is surrendering to the Muslim world. The Russian population is declining rapidly, being undermined by 70 years of Communist experiment and the cold indifference of post-communist rulers. Annually, Russia is losing 900 thousand people who are being replaced by Muslims from the Caucasus and Central Asia. Islam is now the second-largest religion in Russia, where it may total up to 28 million adherents. Because of this, Russia was able to join the Organization of the Islamic Conference in 2003.
Russia’s great qualitative population change represents both a departure from the past and a strengthening link with it. The synergies between the history of Russia’s national policies of terrorism and the radical Islamic terrorism that it is spreading around the world are natural partners that may severely impact on America’s own future.
Indeed, Russia supports al-Qaeda (as well as Hezbollah and Fatah al-Islam, among other jihadist organizations).
From Axis Information and Analysis:
Suspicious coincidence On the 18th of September, 1981, the Soviet official daily Pravda published the statement by the USSR Ministry of Foreign Affairs as to the aggravation of the relations with Egypt. In the 1950s – 1960s, this Arab country was Kremlin’s main strategic partner in the Middle East. The situation had changed after the death of the President Nasser, and Anwar Sadat’s coming into power in autumn, 1970. Step by step Moscow had lost all of its influence over Cairo. In the summer, 1972, Egyptian leader demanded a withdrawal of the thousands of Soviet troops from the country. The following year, after the war with Israel, Sadat made his final choice, when he agreed to negotiate with his adversary under the US aegis. This dialogue finished with signing the Camp David agreements. Egypt’s rapprochement with the USA, and the peace agreement with Israel caused Kremlin’s fury. Moscow finally lost its most important outpost in the Middle East. As a result, its positions in the region had been considerably weakened. Hereafter, the Soviet Union began to support almost openly the adversaries of Sadat in the Arab world. This made the relations between the two countries even more complicated. In the first half of October, 1981, several officials of the Soviet embassy were accused of espionage by the Egyptian authorities. In response, Moscow recalled its ambassador from Cairo. The staff of Egypt’s Defense Attaché Office was instructed to leave the USSR in seven days.
Publication in Pravda reflected the Kremlin’s position concerning these events. Its last passage contained a hardly concealed threat towards the Egyptian regime: “The Soviet side leaves itself the right to undertake any necessary actions directed toward protection of its interests”. After two and a half weeks, during military parade in Cairo, the President Sadat was killed by the officer, who was member of the radical Islamic organization Al-Jihad [Egyptian Islamic Jihad].
Egyptian Islamic Jihad, which has reportedly merged with al-Qaeda, was an ally of Russia’s client dictator Saddam Hussein — and was once led by the FSB agent and al-Qaeda no. 2 Ayman al-Zawahiri.
The Soviet academic Dmitry Shlapentokh wrote in the March 2008 issue of Communist and Post-Communist Studies:
The assumption that Orthodox Russians are the ‘‘older brothers’’ of the Eurasian
family is increasingly challenged by Russian Muslims of various ethnic backgrounds.
This is not due to a ‘‘clash of civilizations’’ (whatever the term might mean) but due
to the rise of Asia as an economic and demographic center, the global Muslim response
to the spread of capitalism, and the peculiar arrangements in Russia. Ethnic
Russians face an increasing challenge to their leadership of the Russian state, noted
by those who observe political/intellectual trends.
The Communist ideologist Alexander Dugin advocated explicitly the misuse of Orthodox dogma in the furtherance of Islamocialism in his 1991 essay, The Ideology of World Government:
The ideology radically opposed to mondialism can also be described on four levels.
1. Economical: priority of social justice, social protection, and “communal,” national factor in the system of production and distribution.
2. Geopolitical: a clear orientation towards the East and solidarity with the easternmost geopolitical sectors in considering territorial conflicts, and so forth.
3. Ethnic: allegiance to national, ethnic, and racial traditions and traits of peoples and states, with a special preference for “greater nationalism” of the imperial type in contrast to mini-nationalisms with separatist tendencies.
4. Religious: devotion to original and traditional religious forms – most importantly, Orthodox Christianity and Islam, which clearly identify “new religiosity,” New World Order, and Moshiah with the most sinister player in the eschatological drama, the Antichrist (Dadjal in Arabic.)
Anti-mondialist ideological warfare front must also combine in itself elements of “leftist” and “rightist” ideologies, but we must be “rightist” in political terms (in other words, “nationalists,” “traditionalists,” etc.) and “leftist” in the economical sphere (in other words, supporters of social justice, “socialism,” etc.) In fact, this very combination is not just a conventional and arbitrary political program, but a necessary condition in this stage of the struggle. Geopolitical priority of the East makes it incumbent upon us to completely renounce different “anti-asian” biases, at times held by the Russian Right under the influence of a bad and completely untimely example of the European Right. “Anti-asianism” plays only into the hands of the New World Order. And, finally, allegiance to the Church, the teachings of Holy Fathers, Orthodox Christianity is a necessary and most important element of anti- mondialist struggle, since the substance and meaning of this struggle is in choosing True God, the “right side,” the “blessed part.” And noone will be able to save us from false charm, sin, temptation, death on this terrible journey, except for the Son of God. We must become His host, His army, His servants, and His missionaries. World Government is the last rebellion of the nether world against the Divine. Short will be the instant of their triumph. Eternal will be the joy of those who will join the ranks of “last fighters for Truth and Freedom in God.”
Russia is funding domestic Islamic “education” and is permitting Hezbollah to convert Russian atheists to Islam in Moscow and in St. Petersburg; since al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Fatah-al-Islam, and possibly other jihadist organizations are agents or clients of Russia, why not?
Slain Hamas Militant Challenges Political Leadership Over Participation in Democratic Elections,
“Supporting the Christians” (June 2008) The NEFA Foundation has obtained a new video from dissident members of the Izzadeen al-Qassam Brigades – the military wing of the Hamas terrorist organization in the Palestinian territories – of their recently slain comrade Rami Abu Suweirah (a.k.a. Abu Huzaifah) condemning the political leadership of Hamas for their decision to participate in democratic elections in the Palestinian territories, and for various other “violations of Shariah.” Abu Suweirah insisted, “I… pledge my innocence before Allah from having… participat[ed] in elections, entering polytheistic councils, making visits to infidel and apostate countries, congratulating and supporting the Christians… As for their supporters, policemen, intelligence agencies, and bodyguards—to all of you, we say: we wash our hands of you, and from what you worship in place of Allah. We wash our hands of your laws and courthouses, your methodology and constitutions. We wash our hands of your governments and courthouses, your slogans and foolish symbols. We have no faith in you, and hostility and permanent hatred have arisen between us forever.” (Arabic translation by CEIFIT)
Note that this statement does not mention Jews or Israel.
It has to do only with war against Christians, polytheists, and non-Islamic politicial institutions.
“We are a Nation of Jihad and a Nation of Martyrdom”
“Muslims across the world have the right, and even the duty, to make Jerusalem their main concern and cause. Jerusalem is the sanctified city that Allah honored in His Book [the Koran] and associated it with the third holy shrine and the first qibla [direction of prayer] in Islam – the Al-Aqsa Mosque.”
[It is the mosque] where Muhammad arrived in his Israa’ [night journey], and from where the Mi’raj [Muhammad’s ascent to Heaven] began [as related in Koran 17:1] ‘Praise be to He Who took His servant for a Journey by night from the Al-Haram [the sacred] Mosque to the Al-Aqsa [the farthest] Mosque, whose precincts We blessed, in order to show him Our signs.’… “
The cause of Palestine is the Islamic nation’s cause, from Jakarta to Ribat Al-Fath [i.e. Rabat] The entire Islamic nation – with all the Arabs and the non-Arabs in it – is responsible to Jerusalem, against which plots are being hatched and conspiracies are being woven, in the dark of night and by the light of day. We see that the conspiracy against it has come out in the open…”
We see the Judaization of glorious Jerusalem. We witness this with our own eyes, and feel it with our own hands. The excavations that were carried out underneath this magnificent mosque are still going on, and we do not know how long [they will continue]. Perhaps one day it will be announced that this blessed and magnificent structure has collapsed. “
The Islamic nation is not paying heed to this. We see that the Muslims are indifferent, and that they are distracted from this most important cause. The Jews and global Zionism are exploiting the inattention of the Islamic nation, the division and the dispersion from which it suffers, and the feebleness [of the nation] – which is, as the hadith says, love of this world and hatred of death. “
They have exploited Islam’s feebleness, Arab impotence, the world’s lack [of involvement], and America’s global conspiracy supporting Israel in everything. It [America] supports it [Israel] economically, militarily, and politically. With its veto, it defends it from condemnation [by the world], even if it has evidence of its oppression, aggression, and tyranny. “
Our Muslim nation has responsibility for this cause [Palestine]. It is not fitting for us to rely on the West or on the U.S. – which some say holds 99% of the cards. It holds them but it will give us nothing. We must stand against this plot against the cause of Islam and the Muslims, like a solid building, each part of which supports the other.
This is not surprising, if one considers that the so-called “Palestinians” are a Soviet anti-American proxy, designed to trick America into supporting its own enemies and helping to set it at war with the world’s Muslims.
In 2004, Qaradhawi issued a fatwa calling for the abduction and killing of American civilians in Iraq.
[On a global scale] the main “scapegoat” will be precisely the U.S… — Alexander Dugin
Previously, Take Your Cross has covered the neo-Eurasianism of the Chekist clergy of the Moscow Patriarchate, and repeatedly covered the GRU-backed neo-Eurasianist Communist geopolitician Alexander Dugin.
Now, from Kommersant (Hat Tip: La Russophobe), evidence that Dugin and KGB agent Patriarch Alexis II have joined forces to repress resistance within Russia to the KGB state:
Russian Church Stands against Human Rights
The Russian Orthodox Church Bishops’ Council will begin tomorrow. A document will be issued by the council that will define the church’s stance on human rights, calling for resistance to the emerging system of liberal values that contains “lies, untruth and insults to religious and national values.” Opponents see a possibility that the document is being prepared as a political order, to displace secular human rights organization, and the political opposition with them.
The ruling hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church meet in Moscow once every four years to determine the further course of the church. Deputy chairman of the Moscow Patriarchate’s department of external relations Archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin said that a document was being prepared “on human rights, on the problem of freedom and dignity. We will try to answer the question of whether those who say that man is good from the start are right, and if he is completely emancipated, society itself will come to a normal life by itself.”
In 2006, at the World Council of the Russian People, the Russian Orthodox Church suggested that the concept of human right accepted in secular society should be reexamined. “In the complex of rights and freedoms of man ideas are gradually being integrated that not only contradict Christianity, but traditional moral understandings about man in general,” chairman of the world council, Metropolitan of Smolensk and Kaliningrad Kirill said at that time. A year later, Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Alexiy II echoed those thoughts in a speech before the Parliament of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg.
“This is the first document in history that officially applies Orthodox dogma to one of the most pressing socio-political problems in modern society – human right,” Orthodox political scientist Alexander Dugan [or Dugin], one of the drafters of the current document told Kommersant. He said that it would be “a powerful philosophical institution designed to influence the legal model of the Russian state.”
“We are convinced that the time has come to reexamine the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. We are against those human rights that lead to the corruption of society and contradict moral bases,” said Konstantin Bendas, business manager of the Russian Union of Christian Evangelicals. Zinovy Kogan, chairman of the Congress of Jewish Religious Organizations and Associations of Russia said, “Unfortunately, the liberal approach to human rights protects sin that contradicts human nature and God’s law. The effort of the Russian Orthodox Church to change the situation is absolutely right; we support it.”
“The church in encroaching out of its area, because only the state can limit human rights, and not a church institution,” countered Lev Levinson of the Institute for Human Rights. “It is completely possible that this is a political order.”
“Secular human rights organizations have discredited themselves so much with their double standards that it is time to displace them,” said Dugan.
Dugin co-wrote the political program of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation.
Dugin is a Communist who makes his living working with the Russian government, helping to destroy the Western political tradition as represented by the Roman Republic, the Magna Carta, and the U.S. Bill of Rights.
Dugin and the Moscow Patriarchate will make and apply dogma as Putin wishes, using the U.S. as the main scapegoat for what they perceive as the internal rot in Russia.
Claiming to be Orthodox, Dugin flaunts his gnostic affiliation and love of Hindu paganism.
When Dugin came to Johns Hopkins University in 2005, the Soviet agent lied (see here, here, and here) when he said he believed geopolitical conflict between America and Russia was not inevitable.
As for Dugin’s being an “Orthodox political scientist”, below are excerpts from his writings that are inconsistent with Christian doctrine.
From The Gnostic:
The mankind has always had two types of spirituality, two paths — “Right Hand Path” and “Left Hand Path”. The first one is characterized by the positive attitude to the surrounding world; the world is seen as harmony, equilibrium, good, peace. All the evil is viewed as a particular case, a deviation from the norm, something inessential, transient, without deep transcendental reasons. Right Hand Path is also called “The Way of Milk”. It doesn’t hurt a person, it preserves him from radical experience, withdraws from immersion into suffering, from the nightmare of life. This is a false path. It leads into a dream. The one going by it will reach nowhere…
The Left Hand Path is called “gnosis”, “knowledge”. It is as bitter, as knowledge, it generates grief and cold tragedy. Once in antiquity, when the mankind still attached decisive significance to the spiritual aspects, gnostics developed their theories at a philosophical level, as a doctrine, as cosmological mysteries, as a cult. Gradually people degraded, ceased to pay attention to the realm of thought, sank into physiology, search of privacy, homelife. But gnostics did not disappeared [sic]. They transferred the dispute to the level of things, understandable to modern average people. One of them proclaimed the slogans of “social justice”, developed the class struggle theories, communism. “The Mystery of Sofia” became “class consciousness”, “struggle against malicious Demiurg, creator of the damned world” gained the character of social battles. The threads of ancient knowledge lead [sic] to Marx, Nechaev, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Che Guevara….The Wine of socialist revolution, [the] pleasure of revolt against [the] forces of fate, sacred berserk passion to total destruction of all that is black for the sake of finding new, unearthly Light…
Others opposed the secret energy of race, the murmur of blood to the commonness. They erected the laws of cleanliness and new sacrality, proclaimed the return to the Golden Age, the Great Return against mixture, degradation. Nietzsche, Heidagger [sic], Evola, Hitler, Mussolini shrouded the gnostic will into national racial doctrines.
That’s true that communists had no particular interest in workers, and Hitler — in Germans. But by no means due to their cynicism. Both were overwhelmed by a deeper, more ancient, more absolute aspiration — common gnostic spirit, secret and terrible light of the Left Hand Path. No workers, no “aryans”… That’s horse of a different colour.
Creative personalities also invoked on the Left Hand Path, on a path of gnosis swang [sic] to and fro between the “red” and “black”, the “white” and “brown”, rushed in spiritual searches. Being confused by the political doctrines, going into extremes, being unable to express clearly the metaphysical contours of their possessions, the artists from Shakespeare up to Arteau, from Michelangelo up to Max Eemans, from troubadours up to Breton feeded [sic] themselves with a secret wine of suffering, imbibing greedily in the society, in passions, in sects and occult brotherhoods the separate fragments of the terrible doctrine depriving you of an opportunity to smile. Knights Templars, Dante, Lautreamont… They never smiled. It’s the sign of special choseness, trace of the monstruous experience, which was common to all the “travelers of the Left Hand Path”. A gnostic surveys our world with his heavy look. The same look as his precursors, links of an ancient chain of the chosen, chosen by the Horror had [sic]. The repelling pattern appears to him. The West distracted in its consumer psychosis, the East — disgusting in its slow-wittedness and miserable obedience. Drowned world, planet laying [sic] at the bottom.”
In underwater woods the impulse is useless and the gesture is ceased…” (Evgeniy Golovin)
But [the] gnostic will stay adherent to the life-work.
Never, neither today, nor tomorrow. On the contrary, there are all reasons to triumph internally.
Haven’t we told the naive “Right Hand Path” optimists where their excessive ontological trust will get them to?
Haven’t we predicted the degradation of their creative instinct into that grotesque parody which is represented by modern conservatives who have resigned to everything, that horrified their more attractive (but not less hypocritical) precursors a pair of thousands of years ago?
They haven’t listened to us…
Now let them blame only themselves and read the “New Age” books or marketing manuals.
We have forgiven nobody; we have forgotten nothing.
We have not been deceived by the change of social scenery and political actors.
We have a very good memory, we have very “long arms”.
We have a very severe tradition.
Mazes of life, spirals of ideas, vortexes of anger…
From Just Bolshevism:
We need to radically reassess the Soviet period, work out a special historiographic model, and use its framework to rewrite Soviet history in a third variant. So far, we are aware of two approaches – anti-Soviet and Soviet. Soviet approach reflects Soviet history in Marxist terms, remaining hypnotized by an alienated and complicated scholastically communist methodology, muddled up as a result of numerous leaps and periods of development of socialist doctrine. More than that, the main line of strictly Soviet historiography has been cut due to collapse of the Soviet Union, and in its place appeared a plethora of sect-like, marginal historical groupings entangled in terminology, clashing with each other, unable to come to a unitary ideological picture of the Soviet stage.
The second ideological approach coincides with the anti-Soviet view. It has two positions. One is widely known, “democratic,” “westernist.” According to this theory, socialism is a delusion and an evil, the Soviet period is an anomaly rooted in dark, archaic conditions of underdeveloped totalitarian Asiatic masses inhabiting north-west Eurasia.
Another variety of anti-Soviet model is monarchist, “White.” According to this model, normal development of a peculiar European power was artificially interrupted by a conspiracy of alien fanatics, who carried out an anti-popular coup and ruled using force and terror for long decades until the system rotted through to the end.
Different interpretations of bolshevism in these two main perspectives – Soviet and anti-Soviet – are well-known, but there is also awareness of their internal discrepancies and inherent stretches.
In fact, what we possess so far does not give the main, true approach to the bolshevik phenomenon.
Such an approach can be formed only in the event of recognition of fundamental unity, spiritual and ethical kinship between national (especially Russian) idea and the basic pathos of communism as an ideology, including Marxism. Other approaches radically distinguish nationalism and socialism (communism), view them as ideological antitheses, incompatible tendencies. And the conviction in this incompatibility is projected further on the entire course of historical reconstruction. The consequences are known – essence of the phenomenon is lost, contradictions fall on top of each other creating endless stretches and misunderstandings. It may be that the only approach close to the truth is extremist Western liberalism, characterized by maximum russophobia in conjunction with the utmost hatred for any forms of socialism or communism. Only here – although in a negated form – is correctly noted the surprising solidarity, consonance of bolshevism and the Russian Idea, deep kinship to the other side of external forms.
The problem boils down to working out not a negated form, as in the case of russophobic anti-communists, but a completely positive, apologetic historiographical model of bolshevism as a phenomenon organically combining in itself national and communist traits. I principle, the basis for such a construction was laid down by Mikhail Agursky in his priceless book “Ideology of National Bolshevism” and especially in its complete English variant “Third Rome.” Surprisingly, this brilliant work was not followed by a serious development of the given subject by other authors. Nothing but scraps, fragments, details. Although, it would seem that the creation of an entire historical school, armed with Agursky’s methodology and having in its possession a multitude of reasearch works of radical russophobic anti-socialists, whose outlines can be used as ready blocks with an automatic replacement of the ethical value of one and same phenomena from a minus to a plus, is calling for itself.
Perhaps, it is necessary to wait out for some time, until the political agiotage of supporters and opponents of socialism passes, until numerous extremely talentless historians, filling all institutions during the dismal period of late Brezhnevism(they indirectly furthered surrender of socialism!) move to the sidelines. Now, with an increasing tempo, the “monarchists” historiographical method is being discredited, while the liberal-russophobic position, notwithstanding its domination ever since perestroika, will soon become physically insecure in a situation of desparate condition of the Russian people and an inevitable social explosion. The last refuge of scoundrels remains national-capitalism, anti-socialist, anti-communist, rightist fascism (as a rule, linked with racism, xenophobia, etc.) It is contradictory and irresponsible. It is absolutely untrue and leads nowhere. This theorization of an unnatural compromise is conceptually and historically doomed. It is a deliberately amoral and unintelligent dead end, mixed up on ressentiment and/or paranoidal complexes.
On the contrary, all paths are clear for national-bolshevik historiography. It is the only one that has a future. It is an approach in which the passion for historical truth is tied with a fitting ethical choice, national pride, and an exalted social ideal.
It can already be seen that in the future the barest necessity to use the term “bolshevism” with prefix “national-” will go away. Bolshevism is already in itself national-bolshevism, since no “non-national bolshevism” has ever existed.
2. Karl Popper’s inestimable contribution
It’s difficult to imagine anything better for a difficult task of defining the essence of “national-bolshevism”, than a reference to the sociological researches of Karl Popper, and especially to his fundamental work – “Open Society and its Enemies”. In this bulky work Popper proposes a rather convincing model, according to which all the types of a society are roughly divided into two main kinds – “Open Society” and “Non – Open Society” or “Open Society Enemies’ Society”.
According to Popper, “Open Society” is based on central role of an individual and its basic characteristic features: rationality, step-type behavior (being discrete), absence of global teleology in actions etc. The sense of an “Open Society” is that it rejects all the forms of an Absolute, which are non-comparable with individuality and its nature. Such society is “open” just because of the simple fact that the combinations’ varieties of individual atoms do not have a limit (as well as no purpose or sense), and theoretically such a society should be aimed at the achievement of an ideal dynamic balance. Popper also considers himself as a convinced adherent of an “open society”.
The second type of a society is defined by Popper as a “hostile to open society”. He does not call it “closed”, foreseeing possible objections, but frequently uses the term “totalitarian”. However, according to Popper, just basing on the acceptance or rejection of an “open society” concept all political, social and philosophical teachings are classified.
The enemies of an “Open Society” are those, who advance (proclaim, put forward) variable (different) theoretical models based on the Absolute against the individual and his/her central role. The Absolute, even being instituted spontaneously and voluntaristically, instantly intrudes into the individual sphere, sharply changes the process of its evolution, violates (exercises coercion over) the individual’s atomistic integrity, submitting it to some outer individual impulse. The individual is immediately limited by the Absolute, therefore the people’s society loses its quality of the “exposure (openness)” and the perspective of free development in all directions. The Absolute dictates the aims and tasks, establishes dogmata and norms, violates (coerces) an individual, as (like) a sculptor coerces his material (stuff).
Popper starts the genealogy of the “Open Society” enemies from Plato, whom he regards as a founder of the philosophy of totalitarianism and as a father of “obscurantism”. Further, he proceeds to Schlegel, Schelling, Hegel, Marx, Spengler and other modern thinkers. All of them are unified in his classification by one indication, which is the introduction of metaphysics, ethics, sociology and economy, based on the principles, denying the “open society” and individual’s central role. Popper is absolutely right in this point.
The most important in Popper’s analysis is the point that thinkers and politicians are put in the category of the “enemies of an open society” irrespectively of, whether their convictions are “right” or “left”, “reactionary” or “progressive”. He accentuates some other, more substantial, more fundamental criterion, unifying on both poles the ideas and philosophies which at the first sight seem to be the most heterogeneous and opposite to each other. Marxists as well as conservatives and fascists, and even some social-democrats can be reckoned among the “enemies of an open society”. At the same time, liberals like Voltaire or reactionary pessimists like Schopenhauer can turn to be among the friends of open society.
So, Popper’s formula is as such: either “open society”, or “its enemies”.
3. The sacred alliance of the objective
The most felicitous and full definition of national-bolshevism will be as follows: “National-bolshevism is a superideology, common for all open society enemies”. Not just one of the hostile to such society ideologies, but it is exactly its full conscious, total and natural antithesis. The national-bolshevism is a kind of an ideology, which is built on the full and radical denial of the individual and his central role; also, the Absolute, in which name the individual is denied, has the most extended and common sense. It could be dared to say that the national-bolshevism is for any version of the Absolute, for any “open society” rejection justification. In the national-bolshevism there is an obvious trend to universalize the Absolute at any cost, to advance such kind of an ideology and such kind of a philosophical program, which would be the embodiment of all the intellectual forms, hostile to the “open society”, brought to a common denominator and integrated into the indivisible conceptual and political bloc.
Of course, throughout the history the different trends, which were hostile to open society, were also hostile to each other. The communists indignantly denied their resemblance to fascists, and conservatives refused to have anything to do with both the abovementioned trends. Practically, noone from “open society enemies” admitted their relation to the analogous ideologies, considering such comparisons as the pejorative criticism. At the same time the different versions of “open society” itself were developed jointly with one another, being clearly conscious of their ideological and philosophical relation. The individualism principle could have united the English Protestant monarchy with the democratic parliamentarianism of Northern America, where the liberalism at first was nicely combined with the slave-owning.
The national-bolsheviks were exactly the first to try grouping the different ideologies, hostile to “open society”, they revealed, as well as their ideological opponents, some common axis, uniting round itself all possible alternatives to individualism and to the individualism based society.
On that profound and scarcely fully realized impulse the first historical national-bolsheviks based their theories, using the “double criticism” strategy. The aim of that national-bolshevik criticism was the individualism, both in the “rights” and the “lefts”. (In the rights it was expressed in economics, “market theory”; in the lefts it was expressed in the political liberalism: “legal society”, “human rights” and so forth).
In other words, the national-bolsheviks grasped beyond the ideologies the essence of both the opposite and their own metaphysical position.
In philosophical language the “individualism” is practically identified with the “subjectivism”. If we apply the national-bolshevik strategy on that level, it can be asserted that the national-bolshevism is strongly against the “subjective” and strongly for the “objective”. It is not the question: materialism or idealism? The question is: the objective idealism and objective materialism (on one side!) or subjective idealism and also subjective materialism (on the other!).
So, the philosophical policy of the national-bolshevism affirms the natural unity of the ideologies, which are based on the statement of the central position of the objective, which is conferred the same status as the Absolute, without dependence on how this objective character (outness) is interpreted. It could be said that the supreme national-bolshevism metaphysical maxim is the Hinduist formula “Atman is Brahman”. In Hinduism “Atman” is the supreme, transcendent human’s “Ego”, being regardless of the individual “ego”, but inside this “ego” as its most intimate and mysterious part, slipping the immanent grasp. The “Atman” is the internal Spirit, but the objective and over-individual one. “Brahman” is the absolute reality, embracing the individual from without, the outer objective character, elevated to its supreme primary source. The identity of “Atman” and “Brahman” in the transcendent unity is the Hinduist metaphysics crown and, what is above all, it is the base for the way of spiritual becoming. This is the point, common for all the sacred doctrines, without any exception. In all of them the question is about the main aim of human’s existence, that is the self-overcoming, expanding beyond the bounds of the small individual “ego”; the way away from that “ego” either outside or inside brings to the same victorious outcome. Hence follows the traditional initiatic paradox, expressed in the famous gospel phrase: “who ruins his soul in my name, that one saves his soul”. The same sense is contained in Nietzsche`s genius statement: “The human is what should be overcome”. The philosophical dualism between the “subjective” and the “objective” affected throughout the history the more concrete sphere, the ideology, and then the politics and social order specificity. The varied versions of the “individualist” philosophy has gradually concentrated in the ideological camp of the liberals and liberal-democratic policy. This is exactly the “open society” macro-model, which Karl Popper wrote about. The “open society” is the final and the most complete individualism fruit, turned to the ideology and being fulfilled in the concrete policy. It is appropriate then to raise the problem of the maximum common ideological model for the “objective” approach adherents, of the universal political and social program for the “open society enemies”. As a result we will acquire none other than the national-bolshevism ideology.
Together with the radical novelty of that philosophical division, made in this situation vertically toward the usual schemes (such as idealism-materialism), the national-bolsheviks mark the new boundary in the politics. Both the lefts and the rights are themselves divided into two sectors. The utterly left, communists, bolsheviks, all Hegel*s successors “from the left” are combined in the national-bolshevik synthesis with the utter nationalists, estatists, “New Middle Ages” idea supporters, in short, with all Hegel`s successors “from the right”.
The open society enemies return onto their metaphysical ground, common for all of them
Only two of variety “open society enemies” doctrines were able to win a temporary victory over liberalism: It is the Soviet (and Chinese) communism and the Middle European fascism. Between them there were national-bolsheviks, as a unique and not put into life historical opportunity, as a thin streak of the clairvoyant politicians, forced to act in the periphery of fascists and communists, and deemed to see the failure of their integrationist ideological and political efforts.
In German national-socialism the deemed-to-fail, Bavarian and catholic Hitler’s policy fatally prevailed; as to Soviets, they obstinately rejected the idea to openly proclaim their ideology mystic underlying reasons, having spiritually exsanguinated and intellectually castrated the bolshevism.
The fascism fell first, then there was the last anti-liberal citadel` turn, that of the USSR. At first sight, in 1991 the last page of the book of the geo-political confrontation with Mammon, the Atlantic West demon, the perverted “cosmopolitical Capital’s angel”, is closed. However, at the same time not only the national-bolshevism metaphysical truth, but also the absolute historical correctness of its first representatives becomes crystally clear. The only political discourse of 20s-30s, which is actual till now, is ` the texts of Russian Eurasians and German “left” conservative revolutionaries. The national-bolshevism is the “open society enemies” last asylum, unless they want to persist in their outdated, not historically adequate and absolutely not effective doctrines. If “extremely left” refuse to be the venal and opportunist Social Democracy appendage, if “extremely rights” do not want to serve as substance to be recruited as an extremist fraction of the liberal system repression apparatus, if people, possessed by the faith, do not find satisfaction in the wretched moralist substitutes, with which they are regaled by the priests of the willfully mispresented cults or the primitive new-spiritualism, they all have the only way, the national-bolshevism.
Beyond “rights” and “lefts”, there’s one and indivisible Revolution, in the dialectical triad “third Rome – third Reich – third International”.
The realm of national-bolshevism, Regnum, their Empire of the End, this is the perfect accomplishment of the greatest Revolution of the history, both continental and universal one. It is angels` return, heroes` resurrection, the heart’s uprising against the reason’s dictatorship. This last revolution is a concern of the acephal, the headless bearer of the cross, sickle and hammer, crowned by eternal sun fylfot.
Previously, Take Your Cross has covered the violent reaction of Norwegians (atheists/Asatru-cult neo-pagans) to Christians.
Now, we have the Londonistani version, wherein the Leftist judge backs the jihadist.
From Metro.co.uk (Hat Tip: Dhimmi Watch):
Youth walks free after gang attack on priest
A drunken teenager who beat up a priest walked free yesterday after the judge accepted the attack was a ‘one-off mistake’.
Babul Islam was one of three Asian youths who attacked Canon Michael Ainsworth in his churchyard.
The 19-year-old punched the vicar in the head while others kicked him ‘ one all¬egedly shouting ‘f*****g priest’ ‘ only stopping when passers-by intervened.
His battered victim spent nearly two weeks in hospital after the assault, which prosecutor Carl May-Smith said ‘had a profound effect on him’.
The shop assistant admitted being extremely drunk during the attack but denied it was religiously-motivated ‘ a claim upheld by Judge Glenn Brasse.
Islam and the two other assailants set upon Mr Ainsworth in March, leaving him with cuts and bruises. When the 57-year-old clergyman returned to the congregation at St George-In-The-East church in Shadwell, east London, his face was still swollen and he had black eyes.
Islam, of nearby Limehouse, deserved a prison term for his crimes, Judge Brasse told him at Snaresbrook Crown Court. But he was told ‘under the circumstances’ a four-month suspended sentence, paying his victim £1,000 and 100 hours of unpaid work would suffice.
In the days following the attack, the Rev Alan Green, Dean of Tower Hamlets, said there were ‘faith hate’ incidents in the area every month.
In Birmingham, a priest was nearly arrested on hate-crime charges for preaching in a predominantly Muslim neighborhood.
The Archbishop of Canterbury is a first-class dhimmi.
The EUSSR is under Islamization, chiefly by The Muslim Brotherhood (as part of its world-domination scheme, known as The Project). Those who care about countering this should support New Right parties such as the Flemish Vlaams Belang, the superb Sweden Democrats, and the splendid Swiss People’s Party (SVP).
The Vlaams Belang is a wonderful organization that stands for the preservation of the West.
From The Global Politician:
Between the night of May 31 and the wee hours of the morning of June 1, 2008, between 20 and 30 black teenagers formed a mob to terrorize the citizens of Mount Clemens, Michigan.
The victim who suffered worst was not the one who was attacked at the gas station [whose blood had to be washed from the station door after a beating by a black mob]. According to a press release posted on the website of the Macomb County Sheriff’s Office:“[W]hen a 29-year old man, and his wife, were driving on North River Road . . . more than two dozen men wearing ball caps and baggy shorts spread out across the street and blocked traffic. The victim tried to drive past them and someone threw a brick in his window. He stopped his car and got out to see what happened and was beaten unconscious and left with a fractured skull.”In an article in the Macomb Daily entitled “Violence Shocks Community” (6/3/2008), the newspaper reports that “
In a 911 cellular phone call released to the media Monday, the beaten man’s frantic wife is heard screaming repeatedly as a dispatcher unsuccessfully tries to get information from her.”Macomb County Sheriff Mark Hackel said in an interview with WJR radio host Frank Beckmann on June 6, 2008, that when the wife of the victim called 911, “You could hear the sheer terror in her voice.”
The incidents were so bad that, according to one of the articles in the Macomb Daily:
“[S]ome law enforcers . . . liken the violence by the group to ‘wilding.’ The term became known to law enforcement following the April 1989 New York City rape and beating – involving as many as 50 teenagers – that left a 28-year-old female jogger near death. Those involved in ‘wilding’ travel in packs, assaulting and terrorizing their victims randomly.”
Though the police have arrested a very small fraction of the thugs who terrorized Mount Clemens, many remain on the loose. According to an article in the Detroit Free Press entitled “Mob Beat Up Driver, Police Say,” one of the victims who suffered a black eye requested not to be identified by name in the article, because “most of the mob is still at-large [and he’s] afraid they’ll attack again.”
In every single article about the mob incident in which 20 to 30 black teenagers terrorized Mount Clemens, the journalists of the Macomb Daily, Detroit Free Press, and Detroit News neglected to mention the race of the perpetrators of this horrific crime spree. In every single video and picture of the perpetrators that the Macomb County Sheriff’s Office released on their website, the thugs are unsurprisingly all black.
In the aforementioned interview with Sheriff Mark Hackel, Frank Beckmann asked:
“Sheriff, all the kids in the video I saw are African-American. All of your victims are white. Is there evidence that this was somehow [attacks based on race]?”
Hackel responded with “It’s a question that we are asking. … If it’s a hate crime and it happens to be a white person and the other people involved are African-Americans, we look at those things.”
When Beckmann inquired as to whether or not there is a “law to charge them with some kind of hate crime,” Hackel answered, “Well, that’s questionable. I don’t know if it applies to an unprotected class, and I don’t know if whites are part of that. I’m not sure.”
Beckmann was shocked to hear Hackel suggest that whites are not entitled to equal protection under the law. A taken aback Beckmann asked:
“You mentioned ‘unprotected class.’ You mean white people are not protected by hate crime legislation?”
Hackel answered that question by saying, “It doesn’t appear as such at this point and time that there is something that would qualify.”
Even though a horde of black thugs beat to the point of unconsciousness one innocent white man who was reported to have a fractured skull, threw a brick at a car that was driven by an innocent white woman, and beat up an innocent white man at a gas station to the point where employees had to clean up the bloody mess the following day, it is unlikely that the thugs will be charged with committing hate crimes, because the criminals were black and the victims were white. Because of this simple fact, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton did not seemingly arrive in Mount Clemens the very next day after the altercation to protest “racism,” and there is no “Million Man March” scheduled to protest the black-on-white crimes that occurred. If a mob of whites were to do to innocent black victims what the black mob did to innocent white victims, the American people would not hear the end of it. What happened in Jena, Louisiana, would seem insignificant, and not because Jena was insignificant, but through comparison, people would view Jena as being child’s play compared to the modern-day lynch mob that terrorized the small town in southeastern Michigan.
It is important to note that though Hackel suggested that state and federal law does not protect white folk like it does for “protected classes,” he still has vowed to hunt down and bring to justice the thugs who targeted innocent whites who did not provoke the crimes meted out to them. In interviews with the media, Hackel has described the attacks as “savage,” and has said that “Not even animals act like this.”
The Macomb County Sheriff Office is working diligently to hunt down the people who took part in the horde of black thugs. Within less than a week of the attacks by the mob, charges have already been filed against 16-year-old Jemall Davidson, 17-year-old Johnny Allor, and 18-year-old Steven Lincoln. The first two face life in prison on charges of assault with intent to murder and a 10-year felony charge of engaging in a riot, and the last one faces 10 years in prison for engaging in a riot and assault.
Read the whole article.
Compare Hackel’s statement regarding hate crimes laws to Former U.S. Civil Rights Commissioner Mary Frances Berry’s statement that “Civil rights laws were not passed to protect the rights of white men and do not apply to them”, as well as to Swedish prosecutor Goran Lambertz’s statement that: “The purpose behind the law against incitement of ethnic hatred was to ensure legal protection for minority groups of different compositions and followers of different religions. Cases where people express themselves in a critical or derogatory way about men of ethnic Swedish background were not intended to be included in this law. Because of that, the content in this article [which purported to explain that whites were racially inferior to Muslims] cannot be considered incitement of ethnic hatred.”
Iran’s main conduit in avoiding sanctions has been Dubai in the United Arab Emirates. There are historical reasons for this: since the beginning of the 20th century, Dubai and Iran have enjoyed close trade relations. Also, Dubai welcomed several waves of Iranian immigrants.
Not a week goes by without an Iranian minister or official visiting Dubai.
The 350,000 Iranians of Dubai compose the third largest community after the Indians and the Pakistanis. The large fortunes belong to families of Iranian origin. There are 8,200 Iranian companies today in Dubai compared to 6,500 in 2005.
Dubai has become Iran’s back-up base and Iranian companies that do business abroad prefer to be based in the emirate. More than 200 flights each week link Dubai to the main Iranian cities. The port ships merchandise of all kinds to Iran, from cars to electric machinery and food.
The official trade figure between the two countries is $6 billion annually, but the smuggling amounts to an estimated additional $1.2 billion a year. Out of that $1.2 billion figure about $250 million stems from U.S. goods, supposedly banned from entering Iran.
These goods are mostly transported by boat and are never controlled by U.S. warships patrolling the Gulf. Dubai authorities are very lax in enforcing any kind of trade ban and let this traffic thrive.
Dubai is not only a great trade hub for Iran but also a financial one. In recent years, Dubai has become the main place for Iranian capital. According to one economist, Dubai received 50 percent of the $20 billion that left Iran in the past 10 years. Dubai is literally the cash cow for Iran in the sense that it accepts billions of dollars of Iranian deposits in cash.
Recently a diplomat said regarding Dubai: “One can show up at a bank with $300 million in cash in a suitcase, the bank will accept the deposit without any problems.”
And this is common practice even after the United States put pressure on Dubai to give up this cash transaction business. Another worrisome trend is Iran’s ability to use investment funds domiciled in financial tax havens. There are rumors that Iran would like to open a huge $90 billion fund within the Dubai Financial International Center.
In fact, these banks that have no commercial interests in the United States are happy to do business with Iran by increasing their usual fees by 10 percent to 15 percent.
It just goes to show how difficult it is to impose worldwide sanctions on Iran.
Indeed there will always be firms or banks or governments for that matter that will see opportunities to do business with the Islamic republic. Since 2003, Iran signed for $20 billion worth of contracts with foreign companies.
Also a troubling statistic: from March 2007 to January 2008, non-oil exports have increased 13.8 percent. Also, China, Iran’s largest trading partner, is allegedly on the verge of opening a tax-free zone in the Gulf that will primarily serve Iranian clients. Interestingly, a number of U.S. companies are always present in trade shows organized in the tax-free zone of the Iranian island of Kish.
Even though it is creating small problems for Iran, the international community must now realize that the sanctions passed have had overall a negligent [sic] effect on Iran’s economy.
Unfortunately, the pressure applied to the mullah’s regime in Tehran is not having the desired effect. Tehran is far from giving up its “God-given right” to a military nuclear program and on the contrary, it actually seems even more emboldened to challenge the international community. In light of this, the odds of military action is growing by the day.
Israel has been providing intelligence and satellite images to the U.S. about a secret Syrian nuclear program for several months, according to media reports. Discussions between Israel and the United States took place last summer regarding a possible strike. But when Israel found the matter so pressing that when they realized the U.S. was not ready to act, on September 6 they attacked a Syrian nuclear site. Hence the question: what is Syria really up to or more to the point what is Iran up to?
Another proof of what transpired came from ranking Republicans on the House Intelligence and Foreign Relations committees, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Peter Hoekstra, who were briefed on the Israeli strike and sworn to secrecy. They wrote an op-ed in the October 20 Wall Street Journal clearly underlining the seriousness of the situation regarding both the North Korean and Iranian involvement in the Syrian arms program.
Finally, the fact that the Bush administration (including President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and most notably Defense Secretary Robert Gates) has been ramping up the rhetoric and taking action against Iran (including the latest sanctions against the Iranian Revolutionary Guards) in the past week, might also be linked to what really happened in Syria.
The Syrian story is far from over: in fact, on October 23, Al Seyassah ran a story about potential new secret nuclear sites in Syria. According to Western sources cited by the paper, it is possible that Syria is developing other nuclear sites with the help of North Korea, Iran and Iraqi experts, the latter who fled their country at the start of the Iraq war in 2003. In fact, observation satellites have allegedly located in Syria at least two other sites similar to the one destroyed by Israel last month.
Iran’s handwriting is all over the wall from the chemical to the nuclear arms program in Syria. Indeed, in research conducted last year as part of an article published in Washington’s The Examiner, this reporter delved into Syrian’s [sic] secret nuclear program, making the point that Syria might actually be “Plan B” for Iran. By helping develop nuclear sites in Syria, strikes on Iran might turn out to be useless. This was a smart strategy until Israel bombed the Syrian nuclear site on September 6 and made the world notice.
What would be the most logical target Iran would strike in case of a U.S. or Israeli attack on its nuclear sites?
In fact, Iranian Revolutionary guards have already threatened to attack Qatari oil and gas facilities (hence crippling the world economy by creating an oil and gas shock) by sea and air by using suicide boats and air missiles.
For Iran, it’s a no-brainer: Qatar hosts the largest U.S. base in the Middle East (8,000 U.S. soldiers are stationed there) and is also viewed by some as being friendly with Israel.
First and foremost, Qatar has been heavily using the diplomatic weapon. Its strategy is to befriend everyone: from Israel to Hamas, from Syria to France.
Even though Qatar’s deputy foreign minister Mohamed al-Ruhaimi firmly believes that “speaking to everyone allows us to have a dynamic and independent policy,” it is a recipe for disaster. For instance, Qatar has not been terror-free: in fact, in March 2005, a suicide bomber (most likely linked or inspired by al-Qaida) killed one Briton and wounded 12 people in Doha in an attack at a theater frequented by Westerners.
Finally another potential source of conflict is the sharing of the enormous offshore gas reserve of the North Field (the largest natural gas reserve in the world with 25 trillion cubic meters) between the two nations, which is bound to ignite major tension, in particular as the Iranian economy worsens.
But Qatar has also a few fail-safe measures: one of them is obviously the U.S. military presence in the country. Another one is a military treaty with France obligating the latter to intervene militarily to defend the tiny Gulf state. France would be treaty bound to send troops to the region to retaliate against Iran. Recently, Qatari diplomats have been reminding France of its commitments.
Last but not least, since March 2006 Qatari refineries and vital oil installations have been protected by batteries of Patriot missiles.
An Iranian attack on Qatar might literally plunge the world into a new global war. Gulf and Western countries are taking this scenario seriously. That is why military activity in the Gulf has been increasing tremendously in the past few months. According to British sources, the stock of weapons, missiles, and combat planes in the six neighboring countries to Iran is now three times what it was at the onset of the Iraq war in 2003. The skies are getting darker once more in the Middle East.
Writing on a hypothetical Iranian-Israeli nuclear war (Hat Tip: The Middle East Times), Anthony Cordesman — Former Director of Intelligence Assessment for the Secretary of Defense — writes that 16,000,000 to 28,000,000 Iranians would be killed in the first 21 days, and that Iranian recovery is “not possible in [the] normal sense of the term”. In an Israeli war with Syria, he writes, Syrian recovery would not be possible, either. If true, this is excellent news.
WASHINGTON — An attack on the U.S. 5th Fleet, exploding Saudi oil refineries, and a Hezbollah operation against a soft target in the Americas, Asia, or Europe. These are scenarios America’s intelligence analysts are now poring over as Israel signals its preparedness to deal with Iran‘s race for the A-bomb.
The disclosure Friday in the New York Times of Israel’s aerial training mission earlier this month over the Greek Mediterranean prompted America’s intelligence chiefs to task analysts with developing contingency plans — or what one called “nightmare scenarios” — if the Israelis were to send their F-15s and F-16s to Iran’s known nuclear enrichment facilities. While the training exercise was known at the time to American intelligence, the fact that Israel and America chose to make the mission public escalated the already high tensions between Tehran and Jerusalem.
While Europe, America, and other allies increase economic and diplomatic pressure on Iran, Israel is privately making it clear that it seeks to prevent Iran from even testing a nuclear device, as North Korea did in 2006. Most Western intelligence agencies agree that Iran’s enrichment tests at Natanz have increased the odds of Iran mastering the technology necessary to create a test explosion.
In February, the director of national intelligence, Admiral John Michael McConnell, told the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence that Iran could be between six and 12 months away from mastering the technology needed for a nuclear device but not a warhead or bomb. Later in that hearing, he conceded that weapons analysts differ on the matter, providing a range of dates for nuclear fuel cycle mastery between 2010 and 2015, and adding that America’s knowledge of the matter was incomplete.
Possible scenarios include:
A terrorist attack on the Saudi oil port of Ras Tanura, an export point for oil bound for Asia. Saudi and American officials have in the past disrupted Al Qaeda plots on the facility, such as an attack on the Abqaiq oil processing plant near Dammam, Saudi Arabia, that killed two guards.
A naval assault on the U.S. 5th Fleet in the Persian Gulf. Iran still has warships equipped with Russian-designed Shkval torpedoes that it could fire at American vessels. Another possible attack would be suicide boat sorties similar to the one that bombed the USS Cole.
The commencement of a new round in the war between Hezbollah and Israel, with Hezbollah firing its Shihab missiles into Haifa and possibly the northern suburbs of Tel Aviv.
Hezbollah or Iranian intelligence terrorist operations on soft targets, such as shopping malls and community centers, in third countries and possibly even America.
A renewed effort to stir an uprising in Iraq through Moqtada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army or the special groups controlled by Iran’s Revolutionary Guard.
In the past, Admiral McConnell has testified that Hezbollah has operatives in America. The network from Hezbollah was first disclosed in a series of federal prosecutions against the group’s illicit fund raising. In some cases, individuals who were primarily raising money for the organization were found to have trained with the organization at the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon.
A former senior counterterrorism official for both Presidents Clinton and Bush, Roger Cressey, said yesterday that it might not be in Hezbollah’s interest to do Iran’s retaliatory bidding. “As much as Iran is Hezbollah’s state patron, it is unclear whether Hezbollah would take operations at the behest of Iran inside the United States,” he said. “That is not necessarily in Hezbollah’s state interest right now.”
A more likely scenario, Mr. Cressey said, would involve Hezbollah operatives attempting to terrorize softer targets in South America, Europe, or East Asia.
“There are other targets they could hit,” he said. “You can’t discount those scenarios.”
From the Counterterrorism Blog:
On June 16, the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the opinion of a three-judge panel, rendered December 28, 2007, which overturned the landmark $156 million judgment against the Holy Land Foundation (HLF), other Islamic charities in the U.S., and an alleged Hamas fundraiser. The case arose out of the 1996 murder of David Boim, a 17-year-old American citizen, who was killed in a Hamas terrorist attack in the West Bank. David’s parents sued men who were directly involved in the murder; the Holy Land Foundation (HLF); the American Muslim Society, also known as the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP); the Quranic Literacy Institute (QLI); the United Association for Studies and Research (UASR); Saleh, the alleged Hamas fundraiser; and others (see this summary judgement order from the first trial for the complete list). The June 16 decision will result in a rehearing of the case by the entire court in the near future, thus giving the Boim family a second chance at the appellate level. Download the December 28 decision here and the June 16 decision here.
We discussed the impact of the December 28 decision at a January briefing for Congressional staff and other invitees. I posted this summary and the comments by Victor Comras and Jeffrey Breinholt (before he returned to active service in the Justice Department) and me. We also posted the following immediately after the December 28 appellate decision:
“Landmark Civil Terrorism Decision Overturned – Victory For Holy Land Foundation, Defeat For Terrorism Victims,” my post on December 29, 2007;
“Boim Case Reversal Could Be Major Blow To Victim-of-Terrorism Litigants,” Victor Comras’ post on December 29, 2007; and
“Why the Boim Ruling is a Pyrrhic Victory for the Islamic Charities,” Jeffrey Breinholt’s post on January 2, 2008.
The Counterterrorism Blog has a recording and a written summary of a wonderful panel discussion on the Holy Land Foundation’s ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. Excerpts from the written summary follow:
During the course of the trial, federal prosecutors presented an array of internal Muslim Brotherhood documents from the 1980s and early 1990s that give a first-ever public view of the history and ideology behind the operations of the Muslim Brothers (known as the Ikhwan, the Group, or the Brotherhood) in the U.S. over the past four decades. These documents, accepted as valid by the defendants and admitted at trial without protest, discuss recruitment; organization; ideology; and the development of the Group in different phases in the United States. For researchers, the documents have the added weight of being written by the Ikhwan leaders themselves, rather than interpretations of secondary sources.
The exhibits make four things clear:
1) Many of the existing organizations that have set themselves up as the interlocutors between the Islamic community in the United States and the outside world (including government, law enforcement, and other faiths) were founded and controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood from their inception. Many of them changed their names over time to achieve broader national acceptance.
2) The Brotherhood established a highly-structured organization with many different faces inside the United States while deliberately and continually seeking to hide the Brotherhood’s links to its front groups.
3) The agenda to be carried out by these groups in the United States in reality had little to do with the organizations’ publicly-proclaimed goals, such as protecting the civil rights of Muslims. Rather, the true goal is to destroy the United States from the inside and work to establish a global Islamist society.
4) The primary function of the Brotherhood structures, from the early 1990s forward, was to support, materially and politically, the Hamas movement in the Palestinian territories, as instructed by the office of the general guide of the Muslim Brotherhood in Cairo.
A defining moment for the Brotherhood in the United States (and elsewhere) was the 1987 formation of Hamas as an armed group. What set Hamas apart from other Islamist groups was its public and organic link to the Muslim Brotherhood. Article 2 of the Hamas Charter states that:
“The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the wings of the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine. The Muslim Brotherhood Movement is a universal organization which constitutes the largest Islamic movement of modern times. It is characterized by its deep understanding, accurate comprehension and its complete embrace of all Islamic concepts of all aspects of life, culture, creed, politics, economics, education, society, justice and judgment ,the spreading of Islam, education, art, information, science of the occult and conversion to Islam.”
A document titled “Annual Report for year 89-1990, Presented to the Organizational Conference,” states that:
“The Central Committee for Palestinian Activism in America is in charge of planning, directing and following up on all work related to and connected to the Group. It includes several committees and organizations, some of which are: The Islamic Association of Palestine, the Occupied Land Fund, The United Association for Studies and Research, the Office of Foreign Affairs, The Investment Committee, The Rehabilitation Committee, the Medical Committee and the Legal Committee.”
This is an unambiguous statement by the Brotherhood (Group) linking the IAP, the OLF (which later became the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development), and the United Association for Studies and Research (USAR), the Group’s main think tank for many years. The same document notes that the HLF invested $100,000 in real estate with an ICNA-affiliated group, further indications of a strong relationship In order to bolster its outreach capabilities, the Group helped form the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) in 1994. CAIR is first mentioned by name in the Brotherhood documents as part of the July 30, 1994 agenda of the Palestine Committee. CAIR would grow to become the leading Ikhwan voice in the media and become the most prominent public face of the Group. CAIR’s leadership was taken directly from the IAP and Palestine Committee.
Omar Ahmad and Nihad Awad, who co-founded CAIR and serve as CAIR’s chairman emeritus and executive director, respectively, were listed as individual members of the Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee in America. Ahmad and Awad also served as president and public relations director of the IAP, respectively. Interestingly, the exhibits show, on Oct. 5, 1994 CAIR received a $5,000 donation from the HLF, with the notation “CBS” in the memo line. Just two days before, CBS had aired a piece identifying the HLF and IAP as groups funding Hamas. The story led to a major outcry by Ikhwan-related groups, protesting the innocence of the groups, and it seems reasonable to assume that the money was given to CAIR to help fund the efforts to counter the CBS story, which included a letter-writing campaign and public protestations of the innocence of the named groups.
What makes the donation notable is that, in written testimony before the U.S. Congress, CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad stated that it was “an outright lie” to say CAIR had received any money from the HLF, as Steve Emerson of the Investigative Project had stated. In his testimony, Awad challenged Emerson to produce “even a shred of evidence to support his ridiculous claim” that his group had received any such donation. At the time the existence of the check was unknown to Congressional investigators or the law enforcement community.