Segue nostro Telegram.

Il nome di Carrie Prejean Boller non dirà molto al pubblico italiano. Modella di fama nazionale e già miss California nel 2009 e seconda classificata a miss USA lo stesso anno.

Fu proprio in quell’anno che, alla notorietà conquistata attraverso sfilate e riviste patinate, si aggiunse una risonanza tutta politica: nel pieno svolgimento del concorso di bellezza statunitense, incalzata dal membro della giuria Perez Hilton — influente blogger del mondo dell’intrattenimento e quindi sacerdote in carica di uno dei principali dogmi del politicamente corretto — in merito ai matrimoni tra persone dello stesso sesso, osò infrangere il tabù: “Beh, penso che sia fantastico che gli americani possano scegliere in un modo o nell’altro. Viviamo in un paese in cui si può scegliere tra matrimonio omosessuale o matrimonio eterosessuale. E, sapete cosa, nel mio paese, nella mia famiglia, credo che il matrimonio debba essere tra un uomo e una donna, senza offesa per nessuno. Ma è così che sono stato cresciuto e credo che debba essere tra un uomo e una donna”. Qualche anno più tardi ricorderà: “Quando ho risposto alla domanda, si sono sentiti molti applausi, ma anche qualche sussulto, probabilmente perché la gente non riusciva a credere che una ragazza cristiana di ventun anni della California osasse dire la sua verità”.

La presa di posizione di Prejean, come immaginabile, le fece guadagnare la sgradita attenzione dell’intera industria del mainstream statunitense, la cui maggioranza, a trazione liberal, è, ancora ad oggi, un efficace organo di pressione politicamente corretta. Lo scopo era quello di indurla verso la ritrattazione, previa pubblica umiliazione, per poi consegnarla al trattamento della Cancel Culture ante litteram: “Mi veniva chiesto – di fronte al mondo intero – di dare una risposta sincera a una domanda seria. Sapevo che se avessi detto la verità, avrei perso tutto ciò per cui ero in lizza: la corona, l’appartamento di lusso a New York, l’ingente stipendio – tutto ciò che comportava il titolo di Miss USA. Sapevo anche, o almeno sospettavo, di essere la favorita, e se avessi stretto i denti e dato la risposta politicamente corretta, avrei potuto essere Miss USA”.[1]

Titolo che infatti le fu precluso e da cui scaturirono aspre battaglie legali.

D’altronde, la stessa Prejean, fu messa in guardia dagli stessi responsabili del concorso, i quali le avrebbero detto di “non avrebbe dovuto parlare” della sua fede. Gli stessi che, a seguito della sua affermazione, l’avrebbero pesantemente pressata affinché si scusasse.

Nulla di nuovo sotto il sole morente d’occidente, solo un tuffo nel pieno del politicamente corretto di stampo progressista.

All’epoca fu proprio Donald Trump, già titolare della quota maggioritaria di Miss Universe Organization, a prendere le sue difese. Oltre all’attuale presidente, dalla parte di Prejean si schierarono anche alcune influenti organizzazioni conservatrici: in primis National Organization for Marriage, già sulle barricate contro i matrimoni dello stesso sesso. Le fu poi concesso di presentare una premiazione al Gospel Music Association del 2009 e intervenne, con un discorso, alla Liberty University, l’importante università evangelica statunitense.

Il dado era tratto, Prejean era ormai passata dalle sfilate di moda all’agone politico nazionale, inoltre, la strenua renitenza rispetto alle richieste di scuse, da parte del mondo progressista, contribuì a far crescere l’apprezzamento delle frange conservatrici. Fu infatti ospite delle più importanti trasmissioni nazionali come The View e The Today Show. A novembre dello stesso anno, Regnery Publishing, una casa editrice conservatrice, pubblicò il suo libro: Still Standing: The Untold Story of My Fight Against Gossip, Hate, and Political Attacks.

L’avventura politica di Prejean è caratterizzata dalla vicinanza a Donald Trump: da sostenitrice di spicco dell’agenda trumpiana, in cui, attraverso le numerose apparizioni su Fox News e l’attivismo sui social media, rimarca con forza la sua prospettiva valoriale cristiana, nel 2020 diviene membro ufficiale del Comitato Consultivo della Campagna Trump, fino a rappresentare la Women for Trump 2020. Nel 2021 prese posizioni contro le imposizioni sanitarie tese ad arginare la pandemia da Covid-19 e nel 2022 attaccò con forza gli spettacoli Drag Queen dai consigli scolastici locali: “Abbiamo chiamato in causa ognuno di questi membri del consiglio per quello che sono esattamente. Sono degli adescatori”.[2]

A Pasqua 2025, Prejean si converte al cattolicesimo.

Il mantenimento dello status quo. E i suoi mantenitori.

Quanto sommariamente esposto fin qua, altro non è che il ritratto dello scontro tra le due parti in causa che però giocano rigorosamente seguendo le regole della partita. Fin qualche tempo fa, il politicamente corretto è stato l’argomento prediletto di un certo tipo di mondo conservatore, il quale, con un certo grado di ragione, ne denunciava la deriva censoria e la metodologia para-mafiosa, capace di ridurre al silenzio gli avversari politici.

Il dispositivo del politicamente corretto è però assai più complesso, come si è cercato di spiegare in altre occasioni: questo è infatti, prima di tutto, un raffinato strumento di controllo teso a incidere profondamente sull’aspetto antropologico dell’uomo occidentale, in pieno ossequio agli interessi economico-finanziari: la transizione da consumatore, degno rappresentante della classe media del Mondo Libero, a “Uomo residuo” come centro fluidificante del mondo unipolare, ne costituisce la rappresentazione plastica.

E se il Politicamente Corretto, si presenta con la struttura della religione civile roussoviana, uno dei principali dogmi inviolabili non è certo quello, di minor grado, violato dalla nostra Prejean nel lontano 2009: lo scontro tra i “valori” liberal da una parte e conservatori dall’altra, si cura di restare costantemente entro una determinata cornice… occidentale.

Il peccato capitale del Politicamente Corretto

Non si tratta più di morale privata. Non si tratta più di famiglia o identità sessuale. Qui si entra nel campo della politica estera (del dogma del geopoliticamente corretto), del rapporto tra Stati Uniti, e quindi Occidente-tutto, e Israele, e del confine — sempre più labile — tra critica geopolitica e accusa di antisemitismo, tra critica religiosa e agibilità sociale e politica.

L’ex Miss California, il 9 febbraio, si è macchiata del peccato più grave. Per l’occasione citiamo una fonte d’eccellenza: The Times of Israel: “L’attivista di destra cattolica Carrie Prejean Boller è stata rimossa dalla Commissione per la libertà religiosa della Casa Bianca a causa di quella che il presidente ha definito la sua “agenda politica” durante un’udienza pubblica sull’antisemitismo questa settimana”.

In un incontro sull’antisemitismo negli Stati Uniti, tenutosi presso il Museum of the Bible di Washington, Prejean si è schierata con decisione a favore di due volti estremamente noti al pubblico internazionale e già strenui critici sia di ciò che definiscono interferenze Stati Uniti che delle politiche della stessa Sion: Candace Owens e Tucker Carlson, entrambi accusati di essere antisemiti.

L’incontro si è surriscaldato nel confronto con alcuni eminenti sionisti, tra cui Yitzchok Frankel, Rabbi Ari Berman e Shabbos Kestenbaum, un ex studente di Harvard ebreo, già noto per aver querelato la stessa Harvard sostenendo che l’università non ha protetto gli studenti ebrei e israeliani da molestie e discriminazioni antisemite.

Prejean, che indossava al petto una spilla con la bandiera americana accanto a una bandiera palestinese in segno di solidarietà con i civili di Gaza, ha osato addirittura chiedere se le critiche a Israele, l’opposizione al sionismo o le proteste contro la guerra genocida di Israele contro i palestinesi nella Striscia di Gaza debbano essere considerate “antisemite”.

Ottenendo un “sì”, come risposta.

E ancora, citando il sionismo — tematica radioattiva — nel pieno della ridefinizione di “antisemitismo” coniata dall’IHRA[3] e in via di recepimento in alcuni contesti legislativi europei, tra cui il nostro: “I cattolici non abbracciano il sionismo, tanto per essere chiari. Dunque, secondo voi, tutti i cattolici sono antisemiti?”

Ottenendo un altro “sì”, come risposta, in uno scambio di affermazioni tra le parti evidentemente teso.

E ancora: “Essere antisionisti equivale ad essere antisemiti?”

Ottenendo un altro “sì”, arricchito dall’inaggirabile necessità di riconoscere lo Stato di Israele come condizione, come risposta.

Prejean, dopo la concatenazione di affermazioni da parte della controparte sionista, incalza con la domanda decisiva: “Allora [dal vostro punto di vista] i cattolici sono antisemiti?”

A togliere la controparte sionista dall’evidente imbarazzo interviene Dan Patrick, che presiede la stessa commissione.

A queste posizioni Prejean risponde appellandosi al Primo emendamento: “Costringere le persone ad affermare il sionismo come condizione per partecipare non è solo sbagliato, è direttamente contrario alla libertà religiosa. […] Ho la libertà religiosa di rifiutare il sostegno a un governo che bombarda civili e affama famiglie a Gaza, e questo non fa di me un antisemita”.

Mercoledì 11 febbraio, la Commissione per la libertà religiosa della Casa Bianca del presidente Trump ha estromesso dai suoi membri Carrie Prejean Boller. Ad annunciarle l’allontanamento è il vicegovernatore del Texas Dan Patrick, che presiede la commissione: “Carrie Prejean Boller è stata rimossa dalla Commissione per la libertà religiosa del presidente Trump. Nessun membro della Commissione ha il diritto di dirottare un’udienza per i propri interessi personali e politici su qualsiasi questione. Questo è chiaramente, senza ombra di dubbio, ciò che è accaduto lunedì nella nostra udienza sull’antisemitismo in America. Questa è stata una mia decisione”.

Dimostrando la stessa caparbietà che l’aveva resa celebre qualche anno prima, Prejean non solo si è rifiutata di dimettersi, come ai tempi si rifiutò di scusarsi, ma, pretendendo che sia piuttosto il presidente Trump a sollevarla dall’incarico, ha twittato: “Non mi inginocchierò mai davanti allo Stato di Israele. Mai.” E ancora un ringraziamento all’ondata di sostegno ricevuta: “Grazie a tutti per l’amore e il sostegno che ho ricevuto. Continuerò a oppormi alla supremazia sionista in America. Sono una cattolica orgogliosa. In nessun modo sarò costretta ad abbracciare il sionismo come compimento della profezia biblica. Sono un’americana libera. Non una schiava di una nazione straniera”.

Prevedibile la solita canea, particolarmente feroce da parte repubblicana, sebbene la frattura, proprio sulle ingerenze dello Stato di Israele, sia sempre più evidente nella galassia conservatrice statunitense. Mentre, citando la fonte prediletta di chi spesso si sforza di mostrare il lato mediatico presentabile di Israele, Haaretz, pubblica un articolo dal seguente titolo: “Sono antisemita? Ex modella rimossa dal panel sulla religione della Casa Bianca dopo aver “dirottato” un incontro per denunciare Israele e il sionismo”.[4]

Dov’è lampante l’operazione di framing della stessa notizia: Carrie Prejean è una “ex modella” che “dirotta” un incontro su Israele e il sionismo: la guerra al terrorismo è, per definizione, una guerra giusta e infinita.

Tra l’altro, si noti come il termine “dirottare” sia stato utilizzato dallo stesso Dan Patrick, presidente della commissione, nel comunicato in cui ha ufficializzato l’allontanamento della Prejean.

Carrie Prejean nel 2009 sfidò un dogma morale e subì un violento attacco ma era comunque parte di una delle due componenti in gioco. Era nel perimetro concesso. Nel 2026 ha invece osato sfiorare il dogma religioso per eccellenza e il verdetto è stato immediato. Come già scritto in altre occasioni, con l’amministrazione trumpiana, il meccanismo non è cambiato, si è solo adeguato alle necessità di ridefinizione del declinante impero statunitense: ciò che non può essere messo in discussione, Israele e relativa questione religiosa, la distinzione tra sionismo e giudaismo[5], rimangono i caposaldi dell’ordine occidentale post 1945. E quando una religione civile si sente minacciata, non distingue più tra dissenso e colpa.

“Preferirei morire piuttosto che inginocchiarmi davanti a Israele”.

Firmato Carrie Prejean.

Cattolica.

[1] Interviewing Carrie Prejean Boller. The Conservateur. 2/6/2020

[2] Amelia Hansford. Former Miss USA contestant says pro-LGBTQ+ school board should be jailed. PinkNews. 16/10/2022.

[3] La definizione di antisemitismo è oggetto di dibattito politico e civile negli Stati Uniti — ad esempio, la definizione IHRA, che è conosciuta e adottata in alcuni ambienti, è stata criticata da molte organizzazioni per potenziale conflazione tra critica a Israele e antisemitismo. (Per approfondire: Cfr. Antisemitism Awareness Act). E anche: Working definition of antisemitism. holocaustremembrance.com.

[4] Ben Samuels. ‘Am I an Antisemite?’ Ex-model Removed From White House Religion Panel After ‘Hijacking’ Meeting to Denounce Israel and Zionism. Haaretz. 1/2/2026.

[5] Per approfondire, tra gli altri, si veda: Israel Shahak. Storia ebraica e giudaismo. Il peso di tre millenni. Centro Librario Sodalitium. 1997.

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

The oppression of women has been at the core of the CIA’s propaganda attacks against Iran since the Islamic Revolution of 1979. All the media outlets, think tanks, NGOs, parties, and personalities that make up the CIA’s extensive payroll accuse Iran of oppressing women. This campaign of demagoguery reached alarming levels when the U.S. government decided to attempt a coup through a failed color revolution and now bombards the Persian nation incessantly.

Daily events, however, invariably demolish this demagoguery and cruelly expose its hypocrisy.

This artificial feminist movement is even authorized by its sponsors to denounce Trump’s sexism or Netanyahu’s violence when such denunciations have no power to affect the general policy of imperialism and represent no serious confrontation with those governments. Or when Democrats and liberals want to undermine the power of the far right solely to reap electoral benefits. In any case, this phenomenon amounts to nothing more than an imperialist pawn.

The dominant slogans about the oppression of women follow to the letter the script of the great bankers and capitalists, especially the European and American ones. The same applies to the demagoguery surrounding the oppression of Black people, homosexuals, Indigenous peoples, immigrants, and the various “minorities.”

It is enough to see that this monstrous propaganda apparatus, which made such a spectacle against Trump’s sexism, fully supports the imperialist aggressions led by the president of the United States. Or did anyone see CNN, BBC, DW, and Rede Globo denouncing the kidnapping of the Venezuelan first lady and deputy Cilia Flores along with Nicolás Maduro? Is it possible to find a greater oppression against women than the massacre of at least 150 girls at the school in Minab, in southern Iran, carried out by a U.S. bombing launched from a base in the United Arab Emirates? And among the more than 1,300 people killed in U.S. and Israeli attacks against Iran, how many hundreds were women?

The imperialist aggression against Iran is being fully supported by the feminist demagoguery industry made in the USA. Part of it even criticized Israel’s genocide in Gaza, but only so as not to lose the little credibility it still manages to maintain, thanks to the blindness of the majority of the petty bourgeoisie. Yet from the moment the regime responsible for the extermination of around 15,000 Palestinian women—the terrorist regime of Israel—launched aggression together with the United States against Iran, Jeffrey Epstein’s colleagues suddenly turned into liberators of Iranian women.

Of course, all these immaculate fighters against fake news will not say that Iran is one of the most progressive countries in the Middle East, where women have achieved rights that they do not have in most neighboring countries, where they enjoy broad access to higher education, the labor market, leisure, and freedom to dress in ways found in no other country of the Gulf. Rights won by the Revolution of 1979.

What the imperialists have never accepted is precisely the fact that Iran carried out a revolution that freed it from the slavery imposed on the overwhelming majority of the world’s peoples by the very same forces that present themselves as liberators of women. And in the face of the constant aggressions of those slave masters, that revolution has only grown stronger—to the point that, at this moment, it is paying back with interest all the provocations, threats, and attacks it has suffered over decades.

The actions of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps have no precedent in modern history. By destroying or severely damaging U.S. and NATO military bases, embassies, and other facilities—and by bombing the largest of them (the land stolen from Palestine called “Israel”)—Iran is striking a monumental blow against the imperialist presence in the Middle East.

“We have no choice but to put an end to the American presence in the Gulf,” said the Persian deputy foreign minister, Sayed Khatibzadeh. These words express Iran’s conviction that its war is not merely a war of definitive independence against aggressive powers—though that alone would already justify fighting it. It is an even more sacred war: a war to free the entire region from the colonial domination of the United States and other imperialist powers, which are there only to plunder its oil and natural wealth and to control one of the arteries of the global capitalist system.

Since the late nineteenth century, in order to guarantee the plunder of those peoples, the imperialist powers imposed puppet dictatorships that would control the populations with weapons, training, technology, and full political, diplomatic, and economic support from the United States and European imperialist nations. They even artificially created many of those countries.

The regimes of the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Yemen, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, the Palestinian Authority, and of course Israel remain in power only because of the strong military presence of the United States and NATO. Without it, they would never exist. The governments of most of these countries are monarchies or military dictatorships where political rights and democratic freedoms do not exist and where, obviously, women live in the deepest darkness. At this stage, of course, “progressive” demagoguery will not utter a word, but it is difficult to believe that Iranian women are more oppressed than Saudi women.

By attacking imperialist installations in those countries, Iran is undermining the foundations of colonial domination over their peoples. It not only weakens the U.S. military presence but also, consequently, the very puppet regimes created to more conveniently exploit their wealth. These artificial and oppressive regimes become increasingly fragile as Iran expels imperialism. The weakening of these regimes means the weakening of exploitation over their peoples. Iran’s expulsion of imperialism opens the path for the fall of this entire system of oppression, especially the regimes themselves.

It will not be long before the peoples of the entire Middle East hail the Islamic Republic of Iran. And women will be freer than ever, following the example of Iranian women.

Únete a nosotros en Telegram , Twitter  y VK .

Escríbenos: info@strategic-culture.su

La opresión de la mujer forma parte del eje central de los ataques propagandísticos de la CIA contra Irán desde la Revolución Islámica de 1979. Todos los medios de comunicación, think tanks, ONG, partidos y personalidades que componen la extensa nómina de la CIA acusan a Irán de oprimir a las mujeres. Esta campaña de demagogia alcanzó niveles alarmantes cuando el gobierno estadounidense decidió impulsar un golpe mediante una revolución de color fallida y ahora bombardea incesantemente a la nación persa.

Los acontecimientos cotidianos, sin embargo, invariablemente echan por tierra esta demagogia y desenmascaran su hipocresía de manera cruel.

Este movimiento feminista artificial incluso recibe autorización de sus financiadores para denunciar el machismo de Trump o la violencia de Netanyahu cuando esas denuncias no tienen el poder de afectar la política general del imperialismo y no representan ningún enfrentamiento contundente con esos gobiernos. O cuando los demócratas y liberales quieren minar el poder de la extrema derecha únicamente para cosechar beneficios electorales. En cualquier caso, este fenómeno no pasa de ser una masa de maniobra imperialista.

Las consignas dominantes sobre la opresión de la mujer siguen al pie de la letra el guion de los grandes banqueros y capitalistas, sobre todo los europeos y estadounidenses. Lo mismo ocurre con la demagogia en torno a la opresión de los negros, de los homosexuales, de los indígenas, de los inmigrantes y de las diversas “minorías”.

Basta ver que todo ese aparato monstruoso de propaganda, que tanto teatro hizo contra el machismo de Trump, presta todo su apoyo a las agresiones imperialistas encabezadas por el presidente de Estados Unidos. ¿O acaso alguien vio a CNN, BBC, DW y Rede Globo denunciando el secuestro de la primera dama y diputada venezolana, Cilia Flores, junto con Nicolás Maduro? ¿Será posible encontrar una opresión mayor contra las mujeres que la masacre de al menos 150 niñas en la escuela de Minab, en el sur de Irán, ejecutada por un bombardeo estadounidense proveniente de una base en los Emiratos Árabes? Y, de las más de 1.300 víctimas fatales de ataques de Estados Unidos e Israel contra Irán, ¿cuántos centenares eran mujeres?

La agresión imperialista contra Irán está siendo apoyada íntegramente por la industria de la demagogia feminista made in USA. Parte de ella incluso criticó el genocidio de Israel en Gaza, pero solo para no perder el poco de credibilidad que todavía logra mantener, gracias a la ceguera de la mayoría de la pequeña burguesía. Sin embargo, desde el momento en que el responsable del exterminio de cerca de 15.000 palestinas, el régimen terrorista de Israel, inició la agresión junto con Estados Unidos contra Irán, ¡los colegas de Jeffrey Epstein se transformaron en libertadores de las mujeres iraníes!

Por supuesto, todos esos inmaculados combatientes de las fake news no dirán que Irán es uno de los países más progresistas de Oriente Medio, donde las mujeres han alcanzado derechos que no poseen en la mayoría de los países vecinos, donde tienen amplio acceso a la educación superior, al mercado laboral, al ocio y libertad para vestirse como en ningún otro país del Golfo. Derechos conquistados por la Revolución de 1979.

Lo que los imperialistas jamás aceptaron es precisamente el hecho de que Irán haya realizado una revolución que lo liberó de la esclavitud impuesta a la aplastante mayoría de los pueblos del mundo por los mismos que se presentan como libertadores de las mujeres. Y, frente a las constantes agresiones de esos señores de esclavos, aquella revolución solo se fortaleció, hasta el punto de que, en este momento, está devolviendo con creces todas las provocaciones, amenazas y ataques que sufrió a lo largo de décadas.

La acción del Cuerpo de los Guardianes de la Revolución Islámica no tiene precedentes en la historia moderna. Al destruir o dañar gravemente las bases militares, embajadas y demás instalaciones de Estados Unidos y de la OTAN, además de bombardear la mayor de ellas (la tierra robada de Palestina llamada “Israel”), Irán está asestando un golpe monumental contra la presencia imperialista en Oriente Medio.

“No tenemos otra opción que poner fin a la presencia estadounidense en el Golfo”, afirmó el viceministro de Relaciones Exteriores persa, Sayed Khatibzadeh. Estas palabras expresan la convicción iraní de que su guerra no es solo una guerra de independencia definitiva contra potencias agresoras —si fuera solo eso, ya valdría la pena librarla—. Es una guerra aún más sagrada: la guerra para liberar a toda la región del dominio colonial de Estados Unidos y de las demás potencias imperialistas, que no están allí sino para saquear su petróleo y sus riquezas naturales y controlar una de las arterias del sistema capitalista mundial.

Desde finales del siglo XIX, para garantizar el saqueo de aquellos pueblos, las potencias imperialistas impusieron dictaduras títeres que controlaran a las poblaciones con armas, entrenamiento, tecnología y todo el apoyo político, diplomático y económico de Estados Unidos y de las naciones imperialistas europeas. Incluso crearon artificialmente buena parte de esos países.

Los regímenes de los Emiratos Árabes, Baréin, Kuwait, Catar, Arabia Saudita, Omán, Yemen, Jordania, Líbano, Siria, la Autoridad Palestina y, por supuesto, Israel se sostienen en el poder solo gracias a la fuerte presencia militar de Estados Unidos y de la OTAN. De no ser por ello, jamás existirían. Los gobiernos de la mayoría de esos países son monarquías o dictaduras militares donde no existen derechos políticos ni libertades democráticas y donde, obviamente, las mujeres viven en la más profunda oscuridad. A estas alturas, por supuesto, la demagogia “progresista” no dirá ni una palabra, pero es difícil creer que la mujer iraní esté más oprimida que la saudí.

Al atacar las instalaciones imperialistas en esos países, Irán está minando las bases de la dominación colonial sobre sus pueblos. No solo debilita la presencia militar de Estados Unidos, sino también, como consecuencia, a los propios regímenes títeres creados para explotar con mayor comodidad sus riquezas. Estos regímenes artificiales y opresores se debilitan de manera marcada a medida que Irán expulsa al imperialismo. El debilitamiento de estos regímenes significa el debilitamiento de la explotación sobre sus pueblos. La expulsión del imperialismo por parte de Irán abre el camino para la caída de todo este sistema de opresión, especialmente de los propios regímenes.

No tardará mucho y los pueblos de todo Oriente Medio gritarán vivas a la República Islámica de Irán. Y las mujeres serán más libres que nunca, siguiendo el ejemplo de la mujer iraní.

Únete a nosotros en Telegram , Twitter  y VK .

Escríbenos: info@strategic-culture.su

Existe un mito propagado por los principales medios de propaganda imperialista (el “periodismo”) según el cual Donald Trump es una anomalía fascista en un régimen democrático como el de los Estados Unidos. Y por eso esa anomalía sería repudiada por los representantes legítimos de la democracia, como Kamala Harris y el Partido Demócrata. O por los gobiernos de Europa Occidental. Emmanuel Macron se habría convertido en el gran baluarte de la democracia europea y de la crítica al unilateralismo norteamericano, del cual los supuestos antifascistas y antiautoritarios del mundo entero se declaran enamorados. El Partido Laborista británico ha sido presentado como un paradigma de gobierno de izquierda, que administra un imperio, combate los extremismos y aplica la “censura del bien” en Internet. Incluso el conservador Friedrich Merz sería un ejemplo de derecha civilizada. Todos se opondrían al autoritarismo del lunático Trump.

Pues bien, todos se abrazaron con Trump y se pusieron a sus órdenes. “Tomaremos medidas para defender nuestros intereses y los de nuestros aliados en la región, potencialmente lanzando misiles y drones contra su origen” —dice la declaración conjunta de los tres patetas en respuesta a la guerra defensiva de Irán contra la agresión criminal desencadenada por Estados Unidos y por su apoderado apodado “Israel”. “Acordamos trabajar conjuntamente con EE. UU. y aliados en la región sobre este asunto”, completó la nota del trío europeo.

Está claro que uno de los pretextos centrales de esa alianza con el líder antidemocrático, misógino y extremista de Estados Unidos es derrocar al régimen antidemocrático, misógino y extremista de Irán.

“Jamenei era un dictador sanguinario que oprimió a su pueblo, humilló a mujeres, jóvenes y minorías, y fue recientemente responsable de la muerte de miles de civiles en su país y en la región. Por lo tanto, solo podemos satisfacernos con su muerte”, declaró la portavoz del gobierno francés —el mismo gobierno que hasta ahora buscaba presentarse como amigo de las naciones africanas, asiáticas y latinoamericanas, fingiendo oponerse a las agresiones de Estados Unidos para reciclar su imagen colonial después de que las tropas francesas fueran expulsadas del Sahel.

Sir Keir Starmer condenó a Irán por atacar países vecinos donde hay ciudadanos británicos, ignorando los ataques iniciales de EE. UU. e Israel y a los ciudadanos británicos que se encuentran en Irán. El guion ya está listo, el viejo guion de las agresiones imperialistas a gran escala: el culpable es Irán, por bombardear a sus vecinos, matar inocentes y violar los intereses de los países imperialistas en la región, que responderán en autodefensa y en defensa de sus aliados. “La única manera de detener la amenaza es destruir los lanzadores y depósitos de misiles” de Irán, dijo el primer ministro.

El político laborista, en el colmo de su hipocresía, aseguró que el Reino Unido no participará en ninguna “acción ofensiva”, sino que solo permitirá la utilización de sus instalaciones militares en Oriente Medio a pedido del gobierno estadounidense. La retórica de los halcones imperialistas —a ambos lados del Atlántico— es conocida desde hace décadas: bombardear a Irán, que se está defendiendo de la agresión de Estados Unidos e Israel, no es “acción ofensiva”, sino mera “autodefensa colectiva”. Y esa “autodefensa” será ejercida con participación directa de Londres únicamente si sus instalaciones son atacadas por Teherán.

Pero Irán ya declaró públicamente que cualquier instalación utilizada por Estados Unidos para atacarlo es un objetivo legítimo. Y si Irán ataca una instalación militar británica, Starmer tendrá una excusa para modificar su supuesto plan inicial y entrar de lleno en la guerra de agresión. Por eso, en su discurso a la nación, escogió bien las palabras: “no nos uniremos a acciones ofensivas AHORA”.

Esa misma noche llega la noticia de un ataque con drones contra la base aérea británica de Akrotiri, en Chipre. Puede ser el Pearl Harbor o el Tonkín de Starmer.

Esa postura, natural y previsible, de las tres grandes potencias imperialistas de Europa, demuestra de manera irrefutable y por enésima vez que no es solo el gobierno de Estados Unidos ni tampoco únicamente Donald Trump el gran enemigo de los pueblos del mundo.

Demuestra también la inexistencia de la dicotomía entre democracia y fascismo. Los supuestos demócratas son los gestores y sostenedores del fascismo. La década de 1930 lo demostró, con todo el apoyo financiero, político y propagandístico de los grandes capitalistas mundiales a Hitler y con la copia de sus métodos por Churchill en la India o por Roosevelt y sus campos de concentración para japoneses en EE. UU., así como la aniquilación instantánea de cientos de miles en Hiroshima y Nagasaki mediante las bombas atómicas autorizadas por Truman.

Pero Stalin celebraba la “victoria de la democracia y de la paz” contra el fascismo.

Pasados ochenta años, se sigue difundiendo el viejo mantra de la lucha existencial de la democracia contra el fascismo, incluso después de que la democracia haya instalado dictaduras fascistas en América Latina, empleado una guerra terrorista en Argelia y destruido Vietnam, Irak y Afganistán.

El genocidio en Gaza, llevado a cabo por el fascista Netanyahu con la total complicidad, armamento, financiamiento e incentivo de los demócratas estadounidenses y europeos, ha abierto los ojos de mucha gente en todo el mundo. La guerra imperialista colectiva de demócratas y fascistas estadounidenses y europeos derribará ese mito de una vez por todas. Sobre todo cuando los pueblos oprimidos de todo el mundo, empezando por los de Oriente Medio, se levanten en armas contra los verdaderos tiranos sanguinarios que los esclavizan en nombre de la defensa de las minorías, de los derechos humanos y de la democracia.

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Anyone who still believes in Switzerland must support the lawyers who have filed a lawsuit against Cassis.

It was not long ago that Switzerland could be proud of playing a role in the world. As a recognized neutral power, it could contribute to ending conflicts through discreet mediation or by hosting negotiations between warring parties. As the depositary state of the Geneva Conventions, it advocated for respect for international law in wars and enjoyed high esteem. It placed highly qualified personnel at the service of international justice to punish war criminals. In the Balkans, Carla Del Ponte is still regarded as an icon of justice today. Thanks to her, around a hundred high-ranking Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, and Albanian officials from Kosovo were convicted of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Neutrality and the defense of the rule of law were two pillars of Swiss identity and its reputation in the world.

A break occurred in 2022 when Bern, under pressure from the EU, adopted unnecessary sanctions against Russia. Between 2014 and 2022, we had contented ourselves with ensuring that European and American sanctions were not circumvented. This system preserved the credibility of our neutrality. Why could this system not simply have been continued after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, a conflict that is not ours? This was never explained to us. The break with Swiss tradition continued during the Gaza war, triggered by the massacres committed by Hamas and other Palestinian militias on October 7, 2023. The International Court of Justice very quickly established on January 26, 2024, that there was a risk that the violence of the Israeli retaliation could constitute genocide. International law is clear: every state must do everything in its power to prevent genocide. This is something we failed to do in the 1940s when the Holocaust occurred.

Nevertheless, Bern has continued to authorize the sale of dual-use goods—items intended for both civilian and military purposes—to Israel. These goods could have been used to destroy 90 percent of schools, 80 percent of hospitals, and more than 70 percent of residential buildings in Gaza. And of course, some of these Swiss products may also be responsible for the deaths of 70,000 people in Gaza, including 83 percent civilians—figures confirmed by Israel. Authorizing the sale of these dual-use goods is akin to giving bullets to a person suspected of murder.

Furthermore, the Federal Council sees no problem with private and public institutions investing heavily in the Israeli arms industry. Elbit, which sold the famously non-functional drones to the Swiss Armed Forces (VBS), is a major beneficiary of these financial flows. This, despite the fact that this company has cost Swiss taxpayers 300 million. But even though Switzerland lost a lot of money on this purchase, some are not shy about profiting from it. The former head of Armasuisse, Jakob Baumann, is now Chairman of the Board of Directors of Elbit Systems Switzerland. Financing the Israeli arms industry is like giving money to someone suspected of murder so they can buy a gun.

One could argue that the defense of the law is a legal war, a form of lawfare. But then, should no murderer be brought to justice because they might be a victim of an unjust system? One could claim that in the Trump era, the law is worthless anyway, that everything is a matter of power relations. But what would be the consequence of abandoning our identity-forming values of neutrality and the rule of law? Renouncing what distinguishes us is the direct path to Switzerland’s subjugation to American and European interests.

Therefore, anyone who still believes in Switzerland must support the lawyers who have filed a lawsuit against Cassis.

Original article:  weltwoche.ch

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Tech giant Apple has quietly paid nearly $2 billion for a ‘pre-speech’ tech company whose employees helped Israel commit genocide in Gaza.

And Apple has paid this money, the second-biggest deal in its history, for a company that doesn’t have a product, doesn’t have any revenues and whose website is a single page containing 15 words.

The company, Q.ai, is developing sensors which map the imperceptible movements of a human face to determine the words someone is thinking before they’re spoken.

They call it silent speech.

Or pre-speech.

And it’s exactly as sinister as you think it is.

Q.ai was founded by Aviad Maizels, Avi Barliya and Yonatan Wexler, all of whom honed their skills by testing technologies of apartheid on Palestinians. Maizels is a former commander of Unit 81, the IDF division which builds Israel’s offensive cyber weapons. Barliya, according to his LinkedIn, was an intelligence officer in the Israeli air force, while Wexler is a former Unit 8200 agent.

Apple’s genocide intake

In a blog post announcing the deal, Tom Hulme, an executive at Google Ventures, one of the company’s early investors, revealed that 30% of Q.ai’s more than 100 staff were called up to participate in the genocide of Gaza.

This admission means dozens of people implicated in genocidal acts who served under the political command of Yoav Gallant, an ICC indicted war criminal, are now Apple employees.

It should be a huge scandal. The biggest company in the US, one of the world’s most recognisable names, has folded into its staff dozens of people who served in a military during the period it committed genocide, according to all of the world’s most acclaimed rights experts.

But every single mainstream article which covered news of the deal, from Reuters to the FT, ignored this fact.

Mainstream coverage also ignored a number of other extremely cogent elements to the story, including the nature of the deal and the technology itself.

Apple has paid two billion dollars for something that barely appears to exist.

Q.ai’s website consists of just 15 words.

To find out exactly what the company does you have to look beyond the press releases to the patents Q.ai and its founders have filed.

And these patents read like plot lines from the bleakest dystopian futures.

Sensing silent speech

Q.ai’s technology centres around silent speech.

This is the idea that before we vocalise words and move our mouths to emit sounds, our brain has already sent signals to muscles in our throat and face determining what we’re going to say. Q.ai claims to have invented infrared sensors that can pick up these pre-speech micro-movements.

One filing talks about a “sensing device configured to fit an ear of a user, with an optical sensing head which senses light reflected from the face and outputs a signal in response. Processing circuitry processes the signal to generate a speech output.”

Tech bloggers have suggested Apple has bought the company to enable non-verbal control of an iPhone and other devices via its airpod earphones or smart glasses. An annotated diagram included with the patent shows a person wearing glasses and an earpiece integrated with the technology.

Indeed Apple is no stranger to adopting the technologies of Israeli apartheid, and in fact the company is extremely familiar with Maizels himself.

In 2013, Apple bought Maizels’s first company, PrimeSense, a developer of 3D sensing technology. PrimeSense technology went on to become the foundation for Apple’s Face ID system on its newer iPhone and iPad models.

Nonetheless, two billion dollars for a non-existent technology and a three-year old company, is unprecedented. What isn’t unprecedented, however, is a US tech giant overpaying for an Israeli company.

Overpriced Israeli tech

At this price, however, Israel received a huge $5 billion tax windfall. At the time Zionists crowed it would help the country buy more warplanes and missiles to commit genocide.

The deal for Q.ai, while a lot smaller, will still generate significant tax income for Israel’s struggling economy.

And Israel is critical to Apple.

The company has a large R&D campus in the country, its second-biggest outside the US, into which large numbers of Unit 8200 and Unit 81 graduates are funnelled. Apple CEO Tim Cook is a devoted Zionist, has visited Israel on numerous occasions, and in 2018 received an award from Zionist lobby group the ADL for his efforts to censor anti-Israel speech. Apple has made good on that promise over the last two years, sacking staff for expressing pro-Palestine, anti-genocide views. Cook has never spoken about Gaza.

The price for a ghost company with a few patents, then, looks as much about politics as it does about technology.

That’s not to say Q.ai’s technology won’t be commercialised for consumer applications. It probably will be. And if the tech is realised, the implications for privacy and data collection are frightening.

As are the security state and military applications.

A pre-crime future

A few days after the Q.ai deal, the head of neurotechnology at Israel’s directorate of defense research and development, the country’s equivalent to the US’s DARPA programme, gave her first-ever interview to Israeli media. In the interview she referenced Q.ai and said the Israeli military is working on similar technology. The US has a DARPA project known as Silent Talk which is also working to develop pre-speech sensing and non-verbal control technologies.

Once the technology is developed, and pre-speech established as a legitimate biological human function, how far behind will pre-crime be?

Given the frenzied efforts we’ve seen to shut down and criminalise criticism of Israel under the guise of antisemitism, one can easily imagine a future of pre-speech sensing technology being rolled out to identify would-be critics of Israel. Or the US. Or Europe. Or imperialism in general.

You can imagine it now. “Based on our silent speech detector we have determined you were going to say something hateful or antisemitic or un-American and are therefore under arrest.”

The most dystopian technologies continue to flow out of Israel. And they continue to flow because Israel is empowered by the US and Europe to maintain a system of apartheid built upon invasive and authoritarian technologies of control.

It is therefore no surprise that the creators of Q.ai are veterans of Israel’s genocidal military security state, or that the largest company in the US sees these technologies as essential to its AI future.

And while this story may be no surprise, we should never get used to, and must resist, technologies of apartheid and genocide, and their creators, becoming embedded in our devices, our economies and our lives.

Original article: donotpanic.news

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Amid the largest genocide of this century in Gaza and the violent ethnic cleansing on the West Bank, two prominent Jewish historians believe that one democratic secular state in Palestine is not only achievable but inevitable, writes Stefan Moore.

Two prominent Jewish historians have recently written from different perspectives — one economic and political; one largely theological and moral — that the state of Israel is doomed and living on borrowed time.

Despite coming in the midst of the largest genocide of this century in Gaza and the violent ethnic cleansing on the West Bank, they believe that one democratic secular state in Palestine is not only achievable but inevitable.

In his latest book, Israel on the Brink: Eight Steps for a Better Future, llan Pappé writes that Israel is self-destructing economically, militarily and politically as it finds itself abandoned internationally.

According to Pappé, the farcical two-state solution is “a rotting corpse” and the only way forward is decolonisation, the return of Palestinian refugees to their land, accountability for those who have committed crimes and a new model of statehood for Palestine and the region.

A corollary to Pappé is the moral and religious critique of Zionism by Canadian Jewish historian and biblical scholar Yakov Rabkin who holds that the Zionist movement is a death trap for Jews, the region and the world.

In his recent book, Israel in Palestine: Jewish Rejection of Zionism and his earlier work, What is Modern Israel, Rabkin relates how the Jewish state represents a complete repudiation of the most fundamental values of Judaism.

In Israel, he says, values such as tolerance, morality and humility have been replaced with a new muscular Jewish identity that extols nationalism, aggression, violence and conquest. Traditional Jewish culture is looked upon with contempt.

Rabkin recounts how Zionist leader Vladimir Jabotinsky, the founder of the terrorist Jewish militia Irgun, described transforming the “Yid” from the shtetels of Eastern Europe into the New Hebrew:

“Our starting point is to take the typical Yid of today and to imagine a diametrical opposite…because the Yid is ugly, sickly, and lacks decorum, we shall endow the ideal image of the Hebrew with masculine beauty. The Yid is trodden upon and easily frightened and, therefore, the Hebrew ought to be proud and independent. … The Yid has accepted submission and, therefore, the Hebrew ought to learn how to command.”

If you hear echoes of Nazi master race philosophy, it’s no accident. Jabotinsky is channeling the views of early Zionist eugenicists such as Arthur Ruppin who sought “the purification of the [Jewish] race” and “maintained his ties with the German theoreticians of racial science even after the National Socialist regime took power.”

As for the Jewish religion, Rabkin dismantles the Zionist myth that the land of Israel was a God-given promise to the Jews – a claim “based on a literal interpretation of the bible that diverged drastically from the teachings of Rabbinical Judaism.”

Yakov M. Rabkin, 2017. (Alexandr Shcherba /Wikimedia Commons/ CC BY-SA 4.0)

To begin with, he explains, Palestine was never a homeland for Jews who, in fact, came from Mesopotamia and Egypt and migrated to Canaan (Palestine).  There, according to the Talmud (the foundational source of Jewish theology) Abraham and his descendants were instructed by God to disperse to the four corners of the earth and never to return “en masse and in force” to the land of Israel until they had become spiritually purified.

In other words, until the coming of the messiah, Jews should stay where they are, which, in fact, is exactly where they have been.

Ashkenazi Jews have lived in Europe since Roman times and had been thoroughly assimilated into European culture.  In the 19th century, many were socialists, communists and members of the Jewish Labour Bund which emphasized the right to thrive in their own culture, speak their own language (Yiddish) and fight for justice in the countries they inhabited, Rabkin says.

As a result, when Zionism emerged as a movement at the end of the 19th century, most Jews viewed it as a reactionary cult and a bourgeois adventure opposed to the interest of the Jewish working class, the author argues.

But some of the strongest opposition, Rabkin writes, came from religious Jews who believed Zionism is in direct conflict with the values of Judaism, which teaches that the Torah (the Jewish bible), and not a nation, is what binds Jews together. In the words of one Orthodox Jewish scholar, Zionism was “a spiritual corruption…that borders on blasphemy,” Rabkin says.

The opposition to Zionism, of course, was muted with the Holocaust — a genocide that Zionists immediately seized upon as an opportunity for nation building in Israel.  Not only did Zionists actively thwart Jews from emigrating to other countries during and after the war, they used the Holocaust as a lever to bolster the Jewish population in Palestine, argues Rabkin.

In fact, Nazi anti-Semites and Zionists became joined at the hip. “The anti-Semites wished to be rid of the Jews, the Zionists sought to gather the Jews in the Holy Land,” writes Rabkin.

Leopold von Mildenstein in Palestine in 1933. (Wikimedia Commons/ Public Domain)

In 1933, Rabkin recounts, the high-ranking Nazi SS officer Baron Leopold Elder von Mildenstein travelled to Palestine with his good friend German Zionist Federation leader Kurt Tuchler. After his return, Mildenstein wrote laudatory articles about the Zionist enterprise and a special medal was coined to commemorate his visit.  On one side was a Swastika, on the other, The Star of David.

Today, the Zionist ideology first espoused by Theodore Herzl in 1896 and transmitted through every Israeli leader from David Ben-Gurion, Menahem Begin, Ariel Sharon and onward has morphed into the most right-wing, militant and genocidal government in Israel to date.

The rabidly racist cabinet ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben Gvir are now followers of a new messianic movement called National Judaism – what Rabkin describes as “the dominant ideology of vigilante settlers who have harassed, dispossessed and murdered Palestinians in the West Bank and encourage the starvation of Palestinians in Gaza.”

“Since its inception in the late 19th century, critics of Zionism warned that the Zionist state would become a death trap, endangering both the colonisers and the colonised alike,” writes Rabkin. “For those voices…the Zionist experiment was seen as a tragic mistake [and] the sooner it ended … the better for humanity as a whole.”

Concluding with his own reflection as an observant Jew he writes:

“Jewish teachings frequently attribute the root causes of communal suffering to internal moral failings. In this light, Israel’s current trajectory –- marked by impunity, hubris and cruelty, all of which contradict Jewish values –- appears destined for moral and political ruin.”

One Democratic, Multiethnic State

Ilan Pappe at the University of Exeter, April 2023. (Fjmustak/Wikimedia Commons/ CC BY-SA 4.0)

Pappé shares Rabkin’s view that Israel is in a suicidal spiral that will ultimately lead to its collapse. But, then, he takes a giant leap into the future to look at what he envisions emerging from the ruins – one democratic, multiethnic state in Palestine.

Israel on the Brink starts with the disastrous events from the time of the 1917 Balfour Declaration and the founding of the Israeli state in 1948 to the rise of the religious right settler movement in recent years.

Like a building engineer surveying a crumbling structure, Pappé points out the fatal cracks in the foundations of the Israeli state that will ultimately widen and lead to the collapse of the Zionist project – an event that he believes “could well change the course of world history in this century.”

Crack No. 1 — a very big one, according to Pappé — is the rise of messianic Zionism — the belief the Holy Land was given to the Jewish people by God to hasten redemption. Pioneered by Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak Kook (1865-1935) it was

“the most extreme form of Zionism: a fusion of messianic ideas with unashamed racism towards the Palestinians and contempt for secular and Reform Judaism.”

Kook’s disciples form a direct line from his son, Tzvi Yehuda HaKohen Kook to today’s far-right West Bank settlers and the dominant political coalition including ministers Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich.

This movement, writes Pappé, represents one of the most serious cracks in Israel’s unstable political foundations –- a schism between religious right and political Zionists that, ironically, despite their differences, shares the same goal of maintaining Jewish supremacy in Palestine.

Other foundational cracks exposed by Pappé are: the “unprecedented support for the Palestinian cause around the world,” deepening economic troubles as the wealth gap widens, investment dries up and the most affluent professionals flee the country (estimated to be over half a million since 2023).

Rabbi Zvi Yehuda Kook with Israeli forces at the Western Wall shortly after Israeli forces captured it in 1967. (Wikimedia Commons/Public Domain)

Added to the list are the “glaring inadequacy” of the Israeli military that, while capable of bombing Gaza to rubble, is not trained for real combat and unable to defeat Hamas; and the crumbling civilian apparatus that is incapable of adequately housing the thousands of Israelis displaced by the wars in Gaza and Lebanon.

Finally, there’s the biggest crack of all – the rise of a new Palestinian Liberation Movement at the same time that the Zionist project “is careening towards a cliff edge.” This is a movement of energised young Palestinians who, “instead of pursuing a two-state solution, as the Palestinian Authority has done fruitlessly for several decades, … are seeking a genuine one-state solution.”

The challenge, according to Pappé, will be to meld youthful fervour with a clear political agenda. “Every successful revolution in history arrived when the creative energy of the masses met the programmatic vision of a confident organisation that could voice their demands,” he writes, “what Leon Trotsky described as ‘the inspired frenzy of history.’”

The guiding principle at the centre of this revolution is justice —transitional justice which involves legally addressing systemic human rights violations and holding the guilty accountable and restorative justice to provide restitution to their victims, Pappé says .

First and foremost, this means giving the 6 million Palestinian refugees who were driven off their land since 1948 the right of return to their towns and villages.

Next, is the dismantling of Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Isolated outposts occupied by fanatical settlers will require total demolition but the sprawling urban settlements built since 1967 will present bigger challenges.

In any case,

“transitional justice will involve deconstructing the legal framework of the apartheid state and supplanting it with one that does not discriminate between Jews and non-Jews in property ownership, urban planning and land use.”

But perhaps Pappé’s most sweeping vision of all is reconnecting Palestine with the entire Eastern Mediterranean, the Mashreq, “which were organically linked to each other by cultural, social, economic, historical and ideological ties dating back centuries.”

This entire region, where Muslims, Christians and Jews lived together in relative harmony for thousands of years before the European colonial powers carved it up with artificial boundaries, could be reconnected with Palestine inspiring “a wider revolution in all the Mashreq.”

In regard to the millions of Jews who will remain living in post-Israel Palestine, Pappé believes they will be willing to contribute to the building of this new future: “The way other Jewish communities elsewhere in the world view themselves as part of their respective countries can be replicated in post-Israel Palestine.”

Envisioning a Future

Gaza solidarity demonstration in Berlin on Nov. 4, 2023, organized by Palestinian and Jewish groups. (Streets of Berlin – Free Palestine will not be cancelled/Wikimedia Commons/ CC BY-SA 2.0)

Israel on the Brink concludes by conjuring up a post-Israel Palestine in the form of a fictional diary where Pappé is both observer and participant in the building of a future society — beginning in 2027 and culminating in 2048, 100 years after the founding of the Israeli State.

Over this time, he witnesses Israel becoming increasing isolated internationally; the nations of the world imposing crippling sanctions and cutting off diplomatic relations; the mass exodus of Israeli citizens; towns and streets being given back their Arab names; new political coalitions being formed between Palestinian and Jewish parties; fears that the capitalist model will leave power in the hands of an affluent Jewish and Palestinian elite creating a new form of apartheid; the creation of a new educational system and the recognition of returning Palestinian refugees as full citizens.

Is this just wishful thinking to imagine the brutal, racist stain of Zionism will be washed away in the foreseeable future and a new democratic state emerge in its place?

The roadblocks are formidable  –-  from the continued military occupation of Gaza under Trump’s Orwellian Board of Peace to the massive 82 percent support among Jewish Israelis for the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, making Israel what American political scientist Norman Finklestein calls “a whole society that has been effectively Nazified.”

Neither Ilan Pappé nor Yakov Rabkin are under illusions about the obstacles; they only believe that the creation of the State of Israel was a tragic historical mistake and, in the interest of the Palestinian people and all humanity, it must come to an end.

One way, as Palestinian author Ghada Kharmi has written is that, “The U.N. that made Israel must now unmake it, not by expulsion and displacement as in 1948, but by converting its bleak legacy into a future of hope for both peoples in one state.”

This would certainly be a first step on the road to the one-state solution that Pappé and Rabkin envision – one that we can only hope to see the beginnings of in our lifetime.

Original article:  consortiumnews.com

Jeffrey  SACHS

Únete a nosotros en Telegram , Twitter  y VK .

Escríbenos: info@strategic-culture.su

La historia presenta ocasionalmente momentos en los que la verdad sobre un conflicto se expone con tanta claridad que resulta imposible ignorarla. El discurso del ministro de Asuntos Exteriores iraní, Abbas Araghchi, el 7 de febrero en Doha, Qatar (transcripción aquí) debería ser uno de esos momentos. Sus importantes y constructivas declaraciones respondieron al llamamiento de Estados Unidos para que se entablaran negociaciones exhaustivas, y presentó una sólida propuesta para la paz en Oriente Medio.

La semana pasada, el secretario de Estado estadounidense, Marco Rubio, pidió negociaciones exhaustivas: «Si los iraníes quieren reunirse, estamos dispuestos».

Propuso que las conversaciones incluyeran la cuestión nuclear, la capacidad militar de Irán y su apoyo a grupos proxy en toda la región. A primera vista, parece una propuesta seria y constructiva.

Las crisis de seguridad de Oriente Medio están interrelacionadas, y es poco probable que una diplomacia que aísle las cuestiones nucleares de la dinámica regional más amplia pueda perdurar.

El 7 de febrero, el ministro de Asuntos Exteriores iraní, Araghchi, respondió a la propuesta de paz integral de Estados Unidos. En su discurso en el Foro Al Jazeera, el ministro de Asuntos Exteriores abordó la causa fundamental de la inestabilidad regional: «Palestina… es la cuestión determinante de la justicia en Asia Occidental y más allá», y propuso un camino a seguir.

La declaración del ministro de Asuntos Exteriores es correcta. El fracaso a la hora de resolver la cuestión de la creación de un Estado palestino ha alimentado, de hecho, todos los conflictos regionales importantes desde 1948.

Las guerras árabe-israelíes, el auge de la militancia antiisraelí, la polarización regional y los repetidos ciclos de violencia se derivan de la incapacidad de crear un Estado de Palestina junto al Estado de Israel.

Gaza representa el capítulo más devastador de este conflicto, en el que la brutal ocupación de Palestina por parte de Israel fue seguida por el ataque de Hamás contra Israel el 7 de octubre de 2023 y, posteriormente, por el genocidio de Israel contra el pueblo de Gaza.

En su discurso, Araghchi condenó el proyecto expansionista de Israel «perseguido bajo la bandera de la seguridad». Advirtió sobre la anexión de Cisjordania, que los funcionarios del Gobierno israelí, como el ministro de Seguridad Nacional, Ben Gvir, reclaman continuamente y para la que la Knesset ya ha aprobado una moción.

Araghchi también destacó otra dimensión fundamental de la estrategia israelí, que es la búsqueda de la supremacía militar permanente en toda la región. Afirmó que el proyecto expansionista de Israel requiere que

los países vecinos se vean debilitados —militar, tecnológica, económica y socialmente— para que el régimen israelí disfrute permanentemente de la ventaja.

Se trata, de hecho, de la doctrina Clean Break del primer ministro Netanyahu, que se remonta a hace 30 años. Ha sido apoyada con entusiasmo por Estados Unidos a través de 100 000 millones de dólares en ayuda militar a Israel desde 2000, la cobertura diplomática en la ONU mediante repetidos vetos y el rechazo sistemático por parte de Estados Unidos de las medidas de rendición de cuentas por las violaciones del derecho internacional humanitario por parte de Israel.

La impunidad de Israel ha desestabilizado la región, alimentando la carrera armamentística, las guerras por poder y los ciclos de venganza. También ha corroído lo que queda del orden jurídico internacional. El abuso del derecho internacional por parte de Estados Unidos e Israel, con gran parte de Europa guardando silencio, ha debilitado gravemente la Carta de las Naciones Unidas, dejando a la ONU al borde del colapso.

En las conclusiones de su discurso, ofreció a Estados Unidos una solución política y un camino a seguir.

El camino hacia la estabilidad es claro: justicia para Palestina, responsabilidad por los crímenes, fin de la ocupación y del apartheid, y un orden regional basado en la soberanía, la igualdad y la cooperación. Si el mundo quiere la paz, debe dejar de recompensar la agresión. Si el mundo quiere estabilidad, debe dejar de permitir el expansionismo.

Esta es una respuesta válida y constructiva al llamamiento de Rubio a una diplomacia integral.

Este marco podría abordar todas las dimensiones interrelacionadas del conflicto de la región. El fin de la expansión y la ocupación de Palestina por parte de Israel, y el retorno de Israel a las fronteras del 4 de junio de 1967, pondrían fin a la financiación y el armamento externos de los grupos proxy en la región.

La creación de un Estado palestino junto al Estado de Israel mejoraría la seguridad de Israel y la de sus vecinos. Un acuerdo nuclear renovado con Irán, que limite estrictamente a Irán a actividades nucleares pacíficas y que vaya acompañado del levantamiento de las sanciones de Estados Unidos y la Unión Europea, añadiría un pilar crucial para la estabilidad regional.

Irán ya aceptó ese marco nuclear hace una década, en el Plan de Acción Integral Conjunto (JCPOA) que fue adoptado por el Consejo de Seguridad de las Naciones Unidas en la Resolución 2231. Fue Estados Unidos, durante el primer mandato de Trump, y no Irán, quien se retiró del acuerdo.

Una paz integral refleja los fundamentos de la doctrina moderna de seguridad colectiva, incluida la propia Carta de las Naciones Unidas. Una paz duradera requiere el reconocimiento mutuo de la soberanía, la integridad territorial y las garantías de seguridad iguales para todos los Estados.

La seguridad regional es responsabilidad compartida de todos los Estados de la región, y cada uno de ellos se enfrenta a una obligación histórica. Esta propuesta de paz integral no es nueva, sino que ha sido defendida durante décadas por la Organización de Cooperación Islámica (57 países de mayoría musulmana) y la Liga de los Estados Árabes (22 Estados árabes).

Desde la Iniciativa de Paz Árabe de 2002, todos estos países han respaldado, cada año, el marco de «tierra por paz». Todos los principales Estados árabes e islámicos, aliados de los Estados Unidos, han desempeñado un papel crucial en la facilitación de la última ronda de negociaciones entre los Estados Unidos e Irán en Omán. Además, Arabia Saudita ha recordado claramente a los Estados Unidos que solo normalizará sus relaciones con Israel a condición de que se establezca un Estado palestino.

Los Estados Unidos se enfrentan a un momento de la verdad. ¿Realmente quieren la paz o quieren seguir el extremismo de Israel? Durante décadas, Estados Unidos ha seguido ciegamente los objetivos equivocados de Israel.

Las presiones políticas internas, las poderosas redes de presión, los errores de cálculo estratégicos y quizás un poco de chantaje acechando en los archivos de Epstein (¿quién sabe?) se han combinado para subordinar la diplomacia estadounidense a las ambiciones regionales de Israel.

La sumisión de Estados Unidos a Israel no beneficia a los intereses estadounidenses. Ha arrastrado a Estados Unidos a repetidas guerras regionales, ha socavado la confianza mundial en la política exterior estadounidense y ha debilitado el orden jurídico internacional que el propio Washington ayudó a construir después de 1945.

Una paz integral ofrece a Estados Unidos una oportunidad única para corregir el rumbo. Mediante la negociación de una paz regional integral basada en el derecho internacional, Estados Unidos podría recuperar la diplomacia genuina y ayudar a establecer una arquitectura de seguridad regional estable que beneficie a todas las partes, incluidos Israel y Palestina.

Oriente Medio se encuentra en una encrucijada entre la guerra sin fin y la paz integral. El marco para la paz existe.

Requiere, ante todo, la creación de un Estado palestino, garantías de seguridad para Israel y el resto de la región, un acuerdo nuclear pacífico que restablezca el acuerdo básico adoptado por la ONU hace una década, el levantamiento de las sanciones económicas, la aplicación imparcial del derecho internacional y una arquitectura diplomática que sustituya la fuerza militar por la cooperación en materia de seguridad.

El mundo debería unirse en torno a un marco integral y aprovechar esta oportunidad histórica para lograr la paz regional.

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

“We found nothing of Saad. Not even a body to bury. That was the hardest part.”

An investigation conducted by Al Jazeera based on evidence collected by the Civil Defense in the Gaza Strip has concluded that nearly 3,000 Palestinians have been “evaporated” by Israel through the use of thermal weapons—some of them supplied by the US.

As reported by Al Jazeera on Tuesday, the investigation found that 2,842 Palestinians were killed due to Israel’s “systematic use of internationally prohibited thermal and thermobaric weapons, often referred to as vacuum or aerosol bombs, capable of generating temperatures exceeding 3,500 degrees Celsius [6,332 degrees Fahrenheit].”

The heat generated by these weapons is so intense, investigators noted, that they leave behind almost no detectable human remains other than blood stains or pieces of flesh.

Israel’s use of such weapons was flagged last year in a social media post by Omar Hamad, a Gaza pharmacist who posted a video purportedly showing a thermobaric bomb being detonated in Beit Hanoun.

Mahmoud Basal, spokesperson for the Gaza Civil Defense, said hat the investigation was not a mere estimate of Palestinians incinerated by thermal and thermobaric weapons, but the result of painstaking forensic work.

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Israel’s government is completely evil

It is not for nothing that most of the world both abhors and condemns Israeli behavior, whether it be measured by the never-ending genocide in Gaza or the similarly driven terrorizing and deportation of the Palestinian population on the West Bank. Israel is intent on taking full control of historic Palestine and is willing to do whatever it takes to bring that about and unfortunately the United States has been its all too often enthusiastic accomplice in that effort. Beyond that, Israel has bombed and otherwise killed its neighbors in Lebanon and Syria while also enticing Washington to join in the effort to attack Iran and bring about regime change in Tehran. Apartheid Israel, which has declared itself legally and ethnically a Jewish state, intends to become that in reality by eliminating all non-Jews from its ever expanding territory and it is willing to do whatever it takes to bring that about.

There is something that is a tad peculiar about the Jewish state’s sense of identity in that it does not regard killing those who are non-Jews by any means possible as either a crime, or, more to the point, as a sin in spite of the prohibition included in its own Ten Commandments. Nor does Israel consider any agreements it enters into with other countries to be in any way binding on it and its leaders, witness the regular violation of the two ceasefires that Tel Aviv has entered into over Gaza, or its behavior regarding similar arrangements with neighbors Lebanon and Syria. In Lebanon and Syria, Israel is currently spraying “unidentified” though apparently toxic chemicals on farmland near the border to drive away local residents through destruction of their livelihoods. Israel does what Israel does and the United States, which was a guarantor of all the ceasefires as well as of the ongoing peace process, never says a word when Israel breaks the agreements and goes about killing more local inhabitants.

Israel’s latest ploy is to bring about a United States attack on Iran to destroy that country’s ability to strike Israel, making the Jewish state by default the regional dominant military and political power. Israel reportedly convinced Donald Trump not to attack Iran several weeks ago because there was concern that Iran would, as part of its defense, attack targets inside Israel that had the ability to support the American effort. In other words, Israel was seeking a solution to Iran that would not put itself at risk and would instead put the onus on the United States. One might point out that this is hardly the appropriate behavior for a country that is repeatedly praised as Washington’s “best friend and closest ally.” It is anything but that while Trump and the politicians are either too stupid or corrupted to realize that, or too intimidated by the Lobby, to respond as they should if the US interest were truly their priority in relationship to an Iran which does not threaten America in any way.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has now called for a meeting with Donald Trump for later this week, which would be the ninth meeting between the two since Trump’s inauguration, far more than with any other foreign politician. Netanyahu has asked to meet with Trump to discuss options for the ongoing indirect discussions with the Iranians. Netanyahu’s office released a statement that “The prime minister believes that all negotiations must include limiting the Iranian ballistic missiles, and ending support for the Iranian axis” of Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis, which Israel perceives at the principal threats against it.

In any event, it is generally conceded that Trump will do what Israel wants. Netanyahu will also be seeking a plan of action whereby the US will attack and bring about regime change in Iran while also neutralizing its offensive capabilities. Israel meanwhile will stay out of the fight to avoid any damage from the Iranian arsenal. Neat, and any dead Americans resulting from that formula, most probably on US bases in the Persian Gulf region, will just be the cost of doing business with Netanyahu who will be leaving from his sessions with Trump with a smile.

Netanyahu is smiling because he always wins when dealing with American presidents while simultaneously treating the United States like a bit of dirty laundry that can easily be discarded or ignored whenever it is is not useful as a source of money, weapons and protection. Note the disregard for the damage done to the United States by the Jeffrey Epstein conspiracy which was without question a major blackmail operation up to the US presidential level run by Mossad to favorably influence policies towards the Jewish state. Even now with many incriminating documents revealed there is total resistance on the part of the Trump regime and the opposition Democrats to honestly expose what was done by our “good friends” in Israel.

But I have described Israel as uniquely evil and there is plenty of evidence for that outside of its treatment of the United States of America as some kind of vassal state that is a source of money and political and military support. As observed above, Israel has never complied with any agreement that it makes with foreign countries. During the course of the current ceasefire it has blocked the entry of food or medicines while also continuing to bomb and shoot Gazans, killing close of 600, including many children. Meanwhile, far from withdrawing its army from Gaza it has increased its foothold in the Strip, occupying close to 60% of the total area as a “Yellow” security zone, presumably leaving the rest as eventually intended for the Trump Gaza Resort or for Israeli settlers who have been appearing in the area in increasing numbers and even staking out new settlements.

As a gesture to indicate some measure of compliance with the ceasefire, last week Israel agree to partially open the Rafah Crossing from Gaza to Egypt which it controls, and the first to pass through were supposed to be those Gazans suffering from injuries and wounds requiring advanced medical treatment. Something like 22,000 Gazans were registered or lined up seeking passage and a long line of ambulances from the Egyptian side were waiting to help. Israel then closed the Crossing in spite of its commitment to open it and reportedly only let 150 injured Gazans pass through it with 50 Gazans who were already in Egypt allowed to return home from the other side.

Another story making the rounds is how the Israeli military has now conceded that its multi year offensive in Gaza has killed approximately 70,000 Gazans, a number that is being praised in some circles because it is considered an honest, though unfortunately brutal, appraisal. Some believe, however, it is meant to throw out a lower number so the real number will never be revealed. The 70,000 number is much higher than what has appeared in the Zionist controlled western media up until now but it is far below other estimates from reliable sources like the British medical journal The Lancet that place the deaths at 186,000, with most of the bodies still buried under the rubble. Some other conservative estimates believe that fully 12% of the original 2 million Gazan population has been killed, meaning close to 240,000.

And when one speaks of how evil Israel is, there is another issue which might be considered. Israel is sometimes described as the leading country in providing resources for organ replacements, a procedure sometimes euphemized as “organ harvesting.” That appears to be true because the thousands of Palestinians who are held without charges in Israeli prisons are treated abominably, to include having their organs removed for marketing purposes if they die and even when they are still living. The evidence for that horrific behavior consists of the bodies of Palestinians that are released from prisons and given to their families for burial. Those bodies frequently have what are presumed to be their viable body organs as well as corneas or even skin removed prior to being returned. The organs are then marketed worldwide. The result is that organ donation in “Israel” is among the highest in the world, despite some religious restrictions and a relatively small population.

So I rest my case. These are not the sorts of things that countries with any sense of morality or respectability embrace. And unfortunately Israel is able to drag Donald Trump and the US Congress along with it, even making Washington do the real dirty work when it comes to confronting nations like Iran. But there are signs that the American public has become tired of the whole charade and Israel’s role in it. The litmus test will come with the handling of the situation with Iran and we should be seeing what will happen there in the next week or two.

Original article:  www.unz.com