|Home||My Profile||Truth Blog||My Messages (0 )||Logout|
Please note that articles posted here in the Truth Blog are private, not public. They are copyrighted exclusives and may not be posted on the internet, emailed, or in any way disseminated. They are posted here for the eyes of TruthJihad.com subscribers only!
Tehran Conference underlines global support for Palestine — and challenges Trump
By Kevin Barrett, for American Free Press
The expression “Tehran Conference” usually refers to the historic meeting of Franklin Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, and Joseph Stalin in November, 1943. But a more recent Tehran Conference — the 6th International Conference on the Palestinian Intifada, held February 21 and 22, 2017 — may turn out to be just as historic.
Nearly 1,000 people from roughly 80 nations around the world, including heads of parliament and other high-level dignitaries, met in Tehran to vow all-out support for the Palestinian liberation struggle. And although all of Iran’s highest officials participated, including President Hassan Rouhani, Parliament Speaker Ali Laranjani, Military Chiefs Mohammed Bagheri and Mohammad Ali Jafari, and Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, it was Supreme Leader Sayyed Ali Hosseini Khamenei’s eloquent voice and long-term commitment to the Palestinian cause that carried the most weight.
I was one of nine Americans participating as part of an NGO-sponsored sub-delegation of about 50 pro-Palestine alternative writers and intellectuals from around the world. The US contingent spanned the ideological spectrum from the left (Sander Hicks) to the right (E. Michael Jones) with most falling somewhere in between.
Many of the US participants have been marginalized in their own country for voicing strong anti-Zionist positions, including critiques of Jewish tribal power that are taboo in the West. People like E. Michael Jones of Culture Wars magazine, Mark Weber of the Institute for Historical Review, and Mark Glenn of Crescent and Cross are vilified and banned from mainstream discourse in the West, yet welcomed and appreciated in Iranian intellectual circles. (Jones calls Tehran “the capital of the free world.”) Likewise, the two anti-Zionist Naturei Karta rabbis Yisroel Dovid Weiss and Ahron Cohen (whose car was destroyed in an 2014 arson attack) are despised and excluded from the American and British Jewish communities, yet wildly popular in Iran.
Ayatollah Khamenei opened the Conference by laying out the problem in no uncertain terms: “(Israel’s) entity and identity are dependent on the gradual destruction of the entity and identity of Palestine.” In other words, Zionism equals genocide. Khamenei termed Zionism a “cancerous tumor” and said the cure is fearless resistance, which will, in stages, gradually put Israel into an untenable situation, leading to a peaceful ending of the Zionist experiment in aggression, wholesale theft of land and resources, and Jewish-superiority apartheid.
All of the leading Palestinian resistance groups sent high-level representatives to the conference. These included Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Fatah, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. All of those sometimes feuding groups managed to get on the same page during the past few months, thanks in part to the Iranian commitment to bringing together all the main currents of Palestinian freedom fighters. Hezbollah, the Lebanese group fighting Israeli occupation (and ISIS) was also represented.
Iran’s commitment to unifying the world’s pro-Palestine forces is especially heroic given current political realities. In recent years, Israel has succeeded in consolidating its power not only in America and the West, but also in the backward, dictatorial portion of the Arab world. Saudi Arabia and other Gulf oil sheikhdoms are now openly allied with the Zionists.
Against this background, US President Donald Trump and some of his advisors have taken extreme anti-Iran positions that conflict with the US national interest. Two weeks after his inauguration, Trump called Iran “the world’s leading terrorist state.” Yet in reality, Iran and its ally Hezbollah are the world’s leading fighters AGAINST the only two “Islamic” militant groups that target the West: Al Qaeda and ISIS.
So why does Trump think Iran sponsors terrorism? Because his good friend Bibi Netanyahu and his Zionist son-in-law Jared Kushner tell him so. The Zionists consider anti-Israel resistance groups “terrorists.” Iran supports them. That is why the Zionist-dominated USA has gone along with Israeli efforts to label Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad “terrorists.”
The US is shooting itself in the foot by siding with the Zionists against the people of the Middle East and the world. A Chinese delegate at the conference expressed shock when I told her I was from the United States: “What? You are from America? Why do the Iranians let you in?” While American businesses are basically banned by their own Zionist-run government from trading with Tehran, other nations, led by the Chinese, are making money by dominating global trade with the Iranians, the most productive, technologically-sophisticated people in the Middle East.
Will the Trump Administration ultimately let go of its Iran hawks (like former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn) and decide to pursue America’s interests rather than those of Israel? If that day ever comes, a whole lot more Americans — businessmen and tourists, not just dissident writers like me — will be borrowing the book title from Flynt and Hillary Leverett and “Going to Tehran.”
1. Following the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Iran has been the only country in the Middle East standing against the US and pursuing independence. What’s your view on such Iranian paradigm of countering the US hegemony? Has the Islamic Republic of Iran succeeded in promoting that model and enlightening the international community about Washington’s policy of interference?
The 1979 Islamic Revolution succeeded in freeing Iran from the US empire. Its success has been largely due to the genius of Imam Khomeini, who found a way to bring Islam back into the center of public life, in the context of a modern constitutional republic, through the Wilayat al-Faqih model. Though Iran has unfortunately not succeeded in spreading the Wilayat al-Faqih model to other Muslim countries — presumably because those countries do not have scholars with the necessary courage and abilities to implement it, and also because the larger community of Muslim scholars has been unable to decisively transcend sectarianism — it has succeeded in forging an Axis of Resistance against the US-Zionist forces that dominate the region. To a lesser extent Iran has also succeeded in helping mobilize a diverse coalition of international intellectuals and activists who reject imperialism and Zionism. Many of these thinkers and activists, hopefully including myself, will be present at the 6th International Conference in Support of the Palestinian Intifada to be held February 21 and 22 in Tehran.
2. What approaches do you think the hegemons have adopted to hinder the spread of that Iranian anti-arrogance paradigm in the Middle East?
The hegemons fought back against Iran’s Islamic Revolution first by trying to stop it, then by attacking it using terrorism and the Imposed War with Iraq, and finally by using a “containment” strategy. This strategy, like the one developed by George Kennan for the containment of the USSR, attempted to stop the “expansion” of Iran’s influence using "the adroit and vigilant application of counterforce at a series of constantly shifting geographical and political points” (from Kennan’s famous “Mr. X” article). The US and Israel have supported the M.E.K. and other terrorist groups; supported other anti-Iran forces in the region; interfered in the internal politics of Middle Eastern countries to turn them against Iran; imposed blockades and sanctions against Iran; propagandized against Iran and its Islamic Revolution in both Western and controlled Middle Eastern media; and, especially after Hezbollah’s 2006 victory over Israel, incited sectarianism and Iranophobia among Middle Eastern Sunni Muslims. They have tried to steer the conversation away from the real issue: Should Middle Eastern countries be Islamic and independent, or should they be pawns of imperialists and Zionists who are not just non-Muslim, and not just actively hostile to Islam, but who are actually waging a long term war against Islam and Muslims? The Western and Zionist propagandists attempting to “contain” Iran and its revolution try to hide this, the real issue, and instead dupe Middle Eastern people into seeing the struggle in the Middle East as Shia vs. Sunni or Persian vs. Arab, all the while ignoring the Western-Zionist death grip on the region.
3. What could have happened without the revolution in Iran and in the absence of the Iranian ideology of countering arrogance? How do you think the regional and international situation would be shaped in that case?
It is hard to imagine a 2017 Middle East in which the Pahlavi dynasty still ruled Iran on behalf of Zionism and US imperialism. It is likely that such an Iran would be a bit like today’s India. It would have higher rates of poverty and illiteracy, but there might also be an economic boom for the rich and those collaborating with the imperialists. It might also be afflicted by environmental disasters, as happens wherever Western corporations are allowed to set up shop.
The Palestinians would be even worse off than they are in today’s actual world. The forces of resistance against imperialism and Zionism would not have a friendly government devoted to helping them. Israel might occupy all or most of Lebanon, and the Palestinians might have been completely expelled from historic Palestine.
Finally, and worst of all from my perspective, there would be no workable contemporary model of Islamic governance that Muslims around the world could look to and learn from. For even though Iran’s Islamic Republic has not directly inspired the creation of other independent Islamic Republics, it has shown that such a model can work, even when all of the world’s most powerful empires oppose its existence. Thanks to Islamic Iran’s example, Muslim scholars and activists in other countries may one day rise to the level of their Iranian counterparts and help their own countries become genuinely independent and Islamic.
_What is the major political challenges Clinton faces as a president inside and outside the united states?
The next presidential puppet (and the power-brokers who really run things) will face the most unstable domestic and global situation since the 1930s. Several systemic crises are about to reach their climaxes simultaneously. These crises include:
*Unpayable debt, the inevitable result of a monetary system in which a private banking cartel creates fiat currency by lending it into existence at interest.
*Accelerating inequality resulting from the usury-based economic system and the rise of automation.
*Decline of US and Western hegemony resulting from the West’s declining share of global GDP and the increasing futility of trying to solve problems with military force.
*Decline of the family as the basic social unit.
*Perhaps most importantly, the US and global public’s loss of faith in Western grand narratives or -public myths- that provide a basis for social cohesion.
The neoconservative attempt to create a new Western grand narrative making Islam the new civilizational enemy will be increasingly unable to obscure the fact that Islam offers the most viable solutions to the West’s problems by way of its:
*Absolute prohibition of usury.
*Egalitarianism and call to voluntary redistribution through charity.
*Anti-corporatism (i.e. rejection of -church- and by extension -limited liability corporation-)
*Promotion of family values.
*Time-tested monotheistic grand narrative that gives meaning to individual and social life.
*”Family resemblance” to Christianity, the core mythos of Western civilization.
_Is she able to handle them , despite of depth of problems?
The next president and his or her handlers will be unable to change the situation outlined above. It is possible that Clinton will accelerate the current crisis by trying to impose military solutions on such regional problems as Syria and Ukraine. This effort would exacerbate problems, not solve them. In the unlikely event that Trump is elected, his handlers might try to revive the neoconservative myth of the so-called Islamic threat by staging another 9/11 style false flag atrocity. This, too, would simply exacerbate the systemic problems outlined above.
While at the 9/11 Truth Film Festival in Oakland, CA I learned that someone involved with the Unitarians in Berkeley is trying to get my October 16th speech there canceled. Here is my letter to their board (firstname.lastname@example.org).
To the BFUU Board,
It has come to my attention that someone is trying to prevent me from returning to speak at BFUU, where I gave a very well-received talk last year.
Since 2006, when I was forced out of the University of Wisconsin by Republican politicians, I have been attempting to bring together people from different backgrounds, especially religious people, to question the so-called ?war on terror.? As an American Muslim, I am especially concerned that the Muslim-majority perspective on the ?war on terror? has been completely suppressed from mainstream media and even most alternative media. The majority of the world?s Muslims believe that the ?war on terror? is a hoax, being in fact a disguised war on Islam and Muslims, and that it was launched by a false flag attack committed not by ?radical Muslims,? but by the enemies of Islam and Muslims, on September 11th, 2001. Likewise, most if not all of the high-profile ?al-Qaeda? and ?ISIS? related attacks in the West are believed by most Muslims, including myself, to have been likely false flag events designed to legitimize the continuing murder of millions of Muslims all over the world. (Most of the 55 leading public intellectuals represented in my recent False Flag Trilogy agree with me, and cite facts to support their views.)
Unlike most of my fellow American Muslims, I have not been terrorized into silence. Yet everywhere I go, people attempt to silence me, slandering me and falsely attributing to me all sorts of views that I do not hold. They apparently are afraid of what will happen if ordinary Americans are ever exposed to the Muslim-majority view of the ?war on terror.?
Are the people of your social-justice-oriented congregation in Berkeley, home of the free speech movement, really afraid to hear what Muslims really think about the ?war on terror?? I find that hard to believe, given the warm reception I received last year at BFUU.
I would be happy to answer any questions about my work by email, Skype, or telephone. Feel free to email me any time, and we can set up a time to talk.
False Flag Trilogy:
Middle East Affairs and Islamic Studies expert guest at Press TV, Al-Alam, Al-Etejah, Russia Today, etc.
This is for Truth Jihad subscribers' eyes only - please do not post or share.
Dear Mr. Barrett,
I?m a reporter with The Daily Beast and I was interested in seeing what you thought of Mr. Baraka. Let me know when you get a chance. Thanks so much!
I would be happy to talk.
Feel free to send your number.
I am on vacation and my internet is dicey, but you can try me on Skype: DrKevinBarrett
"Thanks so much. Was just wondering for now what you thought of Mr. Baraka and what it?s like to work with him."
Dear Gideon Resnick,
Ajamu Baraka is one of America?s leading public intellectuals. He is a terrific radio guest, always insightful and well-informed. His essay "The Paris Attacks and the White Lives Matter Movement,? published in my edited volume ANOTHER French False Flag, is brilliant and apropos.
Ajamu Baraka's critiques of the Obama presidency have been among the most important political commentaries of the past eight years. The world would be a much better place if Ajamu Baraka rather than Barak Obama had been America?s first African-American president.
The witch-hunt against him due to his appearing in my book is ludicrous and libelous, for several reasons. First, I have never denied any of the key ?official facts? of the holocaust, much less the holocaust itself; I simply support free speech and free inquiry on ALL historical issues. Second, Ajamu Baraka ?never knew that I was a holocaust denier? because I am not one; nor did he have any way of knowing what my views on that, or thousands of other issues, might be. He should be held accountable for his own words, not for words or ideas attributed (whether falsely or accurately) to me.
You would serve your profession and your conscience well to point this out in any article you write.
"Thanks so much. What do you mean about free inquiry as it relates to the Holocaust?"
I don?t think people should be sent to prison, or have their careers destroyed, for doing revisionist historiography on that issue, or any other issue. On the contrary, I think people who challenge official versions of history should be welcomed, and their challenges should be very carefully ?sifted and winnowed? without allowing our preconceptions to weigh too heavily on our judgments.
Since I was forced out of the University of Wisconsin for my own revisionist work on 9/11 http://news.wisc.edu/archive/barrettissue/ I have been doing alternative journalism focusing on the most important issues where revisionist challenges to orthodoxy could be important. Though the holocaust debate has been way, way down my list of concerns, the fact that it is the only issue protected from free inquiry by imprisonment of dissident voices is extremely troubling. Surely journalists, who demand the right to speak, write, and think freely for themselves, should be rallying in the defense of people imprisoned for expressing their views of historical issues! Where is the outrage?!
"Do you think that in your conversations with Mr. Baraka that he views MH17 as a false flag?"
No, I don?t think he feels certain about that. But he is aware that there have been false flags and cointelpro-style deceptions in the past, so he sensibly is open to that possibility when suspicious events like the MH17 downing occur. And he is courageous and honest enough to discuss such matters. I wish more mainstream journalists were as knowledgable, ethical, and open-minded.
AND THEN THE ARTICLE APPEARED AT http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/08/17/the-wild-beliefs-of-ajamu-baraka-jill-stein-s-green-party-running-mate.html
Based on my extensive experience with ?smear the ?conspiracy theorist?? stories, I would give you an A- on this one. (To earn an A+ you would have to really break the mold, which probably wouldn?t have pleased your bosses.)
So?keep up the (relatively) good work!
PS Long version: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/08/17/beast/
Kevin, thanks. Had no intention of smearing either of you. Just that you guys believe in some things that are outside the mainstream. Thanks for your time.
OK, best wishes, and please do keep looking at ?outside the mainstream? stuff - though Newsweek said 9/11 truth was ?mainstream? way back in 2006, so I?m not sure if that qualifies ; - )
Q: Do you believe Islam as religion is responsible for such a terrorist attacks ? Are Germany leaders responsible for these attacks by not fighting against Daesh seriously?
A: Most terrorist acts in the West are not attributed to extremist Muslims. In the US, radical Muslims are blamed for only six percent of terrorist attacks, while radical Jews are blamed for seven percent, and radical leftists and hispanics for far more. http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/not-all-terrorists-are-muslims/ In Europe, 99% of terrorist attacks are not attributed to Muslims. http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/terrorism-in-europe/
The so-called Islamic terrorism problem, to the extent that it exists (mainly in the media, not in reality) is an artificial creation of Western intelligence agencies, primarily the Israeli Mossad. Western governments, led by the Zionists, and working with the Saudis and other regional allies, have created and funded extremist movements and terror groups. These groups are used to fight against and destabilize the enemies of the US and Israel. For example, al-Qaeda was created by the CIA and their Saudi allies to fight the Russians in Afghanistan and elsewhere. The CIA and its al-Qaeda mercenaries also overthrew the government of Libya.
ISIS, like al-Qaeda, is a CIA-Mossad creation. Its primary purpose is to destabilize Syria and Iraq and spread Sunni vs. Shia conflict, but it also serves Western and Zionist interests by creating massive negative publicity for Islam, and turning the Western public in favor of military intervention and attacks against Muslim-majority countries.
Q: why do immigrants do deadly attacks with axe and guns in west particularly Germany?what is their problem and what are they demanding?
A: Whenever we see a headline about a terror attack linked to Islam, we should assume that Western intelligence agencies created the incident precisely to generate those very headlines. It is very easy for people with access to mind-control technology to program their victim(s) to commit an axe attack or a mass shooting or suicide bombing. As far back as 1960, the CIA gained near complete control over the human mind, with the ability to program a ?Manchurian candidate? assassin or terrorist using drugs and hypnosis. I first learned about this in the mid-1970s through the Rockefeller Commission hearings into CIA abuses. Unfortunately the perpetrators were never prosecuted; George W. Bush was appointed to head the CIA, cover up all these scandals, and allow the perpetrators to continue and expand their activities. The Israelis, of course, have pushed such research even further. The end result is today?s Gladio B false flag terrorism project, which is responsible for virtually all of the so-called Islamic terrorism in the West today. Based on the original Gladio program, which created a wave of false flag terrorism blamed on leftists during the Cold War, the new Gladio B false flag terror program is primarily run by Israel and its agents. Its purpose is to create and maintain a ?Clash of Civilizations? pitting the West against Islam for the benefit of Israel.
Israeli agents have been pre-positioned to film several recent high-profile terrorist attacks in Europe. Israelis were pre-positioned on a balcony to film the Charlie Hebdo terrorists fleeing. They had access to the Bataclan nightclub and disseminated the horrific *blood heart* photo to the world in the wake of the November 13th Paris attacks. They were pre-positioned at the Brussels Airport to film the bombing there. Israeli agent Richard Guthjahr was pre-positioned in Nice to film the truck BEFORE it began running over people, and then turned up again in Munich to film the shopping mall shooting last week. All of this recalls how the ?Dancing Israelis? and the Israeli agent Naudet brothers were pre-positioned to film the 9/11 attacks.
All of these terror events are public relations stunts orchestrated by the Israeli Mossad and its NATO ?Operation Gladio? assets. The evidence proving this is collected in my three books: We Are NOT Charlie Hebdo (soon to be published in Farsi); ANOTHER French False Flag; and the new book being published this week, Orlando False Flag.
Q. for Dr. Barrett
If the powers that be really want to make Islam look bad in a clash with the west - and if most if not all terrorist attacks are some sort of spy agency operation - then why are practically all alleged terrorists these hopeless, petty criminal pot smoking bisexual nihilistic postmodern bums? Why not make them pious Muslims who pray 4 times a day and are well known at the Mosque?
Three possible answers:
1) It is easier to capture and brainwash loners, petty criminals and bums, especially bisexual ones, since the brainwasher establishes a dominant sexual relationship with them (as David Ferrie did with Oswald, etc. etc.) Nobody cares about such people, so nobody notices that they have been captured and brainwashed.
2) The intel agencies are staffed by people who are themselves hopeless, nihilistic postmodern bums who are too lazy to do their jobs properly.
3) It doesnt matter who they frame as the patsy. They could frame the holy sanctified corpse of Mother Theresa and the Zio media would STILL report it as a "radical Islamic extremist attack."
Hi, I?m Kevin Barrett of TruthJihad.com.
When I heard there was a shooting in Orlando, blamed on on a supposed radical Muslim who turned out to be gay himself, except the FBI doesn?t want you to know that, who supposedly killed fifty people and wounded even more with only a couple of hundred rounds in a highly improbable feat of shooting, I said: This looks like yet another Operation Gladio false flag.
Sure enough, we learned that several witnesses reported multiple shooters, and an audio tape PROVES multiple shooters. We learned that Omar Mateen worked for the notorious CIA-linked mercenary outfit G4S AKA Wackenhut and appears to have been an FBI informant as well.
And then a man named James Howell turned himself in to Santa Monica police, saying he and Omar Mateen had been trained by the CIA to stage two near-simultaneous attacks on gay events. Now Howell has disappeared into the maw of the FBI.
Can you handle the truth about the so-called war on terror? If so, please come to the E.D. Locke Public Library in McFarland Wisconsin this coming Thursday, July 7th at 6:30 p.m. Christopher Bollyn, author of Solving 9/11, will explain who is REALLY behind all those terrible, terrifying terror events that are stampeding us into wars, shredding our civil liberties, and (gasp) maybe even electing Donald Trump as President of the United States?! This is Kevin Barrett of TruthJihad.com saying, Please wake up before it?s too late so we can rise up and stop this madness. E.D. Locke Public Library in McFarland Wisconsin this coming Thursday, July 7th at 6:30 p.m.
It is Hassan from Kayhan newspaper ,the oldest and most influential newspaper in Iran.
I hope this email finds you well.
I Have two questions for you regarding Brexit ;
1)Obama said in press conference with his British counterpart that U.K should go to the back of the queue for trade with U.S if they leave E.U.How does separation of U.K from E.U affect to the political and economical ties of U.S and U.K in your point of view?
Answer: Depending on how British leadership responds, there is a significant chance of deterioration in US-UK relations. A key factor is the looming Sino-British strategic partnership. In October 2015 Chinese President Xi visited London and set the stage for a new era in which China and Britain could work together to turn the global banking system in a new direction. Additionally Britain has signaled its acceptance of the Chinese Communist government, the first time a Western country has done this. The US is reportedly displeased with the arrangement. So we could see the UK step back from its traditional role as junior partner to the US and play a more independent role in world affairs. This is one more sign that the US empire is eroding, and a multipolar world system emerging.
2)Scottish have just asked for the second independence referendum immediately after the Exit.How does Brexit lead to the divergence of whole U.K ?
Answer: The Scottish people are likely to vote for independence. The majority of Scots did not wish to leave the EU, and now the Scottish independence movement has been revived. Scotland?s likely secession from the UK will be one more nail in the coffin of the unipolar world system, since it will downgrade the UK as a world power and intensify the intensifying centrifugal tendencies pushing the world towards a new, multipolar system.
1- How and why significant was putting the Saudi Arabia in the Black List of Children?s Right Violators?
Saudia Arabia is responsible for the deaths of many hundreds, perhaps thousands of children with its indiscriminate bombing of Yemen, including dropping illegal cluster bombs on civilians. A UN human rights report called ?Children and Armed Conflict? found that Saudi Arabia was responsible for the majority of childrens? deaths in the Yemen war. Additionally, it is primarily Saudi bombing that has destroyed the civilian infrastructure of Yemen, preventing civilian access to fresh water, food, shelter and electricity ? life-support systems vital to the well-being of children. What?s more, Saudi support for Daesh in Iraq and Syria has led to widespread atrocities whose victims include children. Child rapes and forced marriages of children are among those atrocities. Obviously Saudi Arabia belongs on the blacklist of children?s rights violators.
2- What made the drop of Saudis from blacklist possible? Some Rights activist, like Philippe Bolopion, Human Rights Watch's deputy director for global advocacy, called this action ?naked politicization?. How do you think about it?
As usual, the Saudis are using their vast unearned oil wealth to bribe the world into tolerating their abuses. The Saudis donate money to UNICEF and other UN agencies. After they were put on the children?s rights violators list, they threatened to cut off funding the UN. Sadly the UN has accepted these bribes and capitulated to the Saudi threats. The UN officials whose salaries are partly paid by Saudi oil money should be ashamed of themselves for putting their own financial interests, and their material comforts, ahead of their duties to the thousands of children butchered and abused by the Saudis. What?s more, these UN officials are criminals, since the practice they are engaging in is the crime of bribery. They have allowed themselves to be bribed into complicity in the mass murder of children. They should be tried for those crimes ? bribery and complicity in the mass murder of children ? alongside the Saudis themselves in an international court of justice.
3- What are the consequences of this UN action? Doesn?t it mean the UN is politicized? Some believe that the UN decision to unblock Saudi is a blow to the credibility of the UN and in Particular, Ban Ki Moon?s?
Unfortunately the UN has been highly politicized, and subject to the bribery of the rich and powerful, since it was founded in 1945. For example, shortly after the founding of the UN, the American President Truman ? himself bribed with a suitcase containing $2 million in cash to support the creation of Israel against the unanimous opinion of his advisors ? ordered the US government to bribe and threaten the nations of the world to force them to vote for Resolution 181, which has been (falsely) interpreted as legitimizing the illegal, immoral and disastrous creation of Israel. This kind of bribery and injustice is more the rule than the exception at the UN. But the UN?s recent decision to capitulate to the Saudis, and become an accomplice in the mass murder of children, is an especially disgusting example of this kind of criminal behavior.
4- Doesn?t it mean double standard by the UN? It is while Amnesty International called it "blatant pandering" and warned that the UN was in danger of becoming "part of the problem rather than the solution." What is your opinion about the UN role and credibility in future?
The UN has never been especially credible. But with this kind of nakedly corrupt action, it is jettisoning its last shreds of credibility. When a Western-owned, foundation-funded outfit like Amnesty International ? hardly a courageous voice of truth ? issues such a stark warning, we may be assured that the UN?s decision to become complicit in the mass murder of children is disgusting even people who would normally be its allies.
5- What can Right Groups do to oppose Saudi Arabia?s inhumane actions against children and women in Yemen?
Human rights groups that whitewash the crimes of the powerful are worse than useless. Such groups need to lose their fear of offending the oligarchy that runs the world, and speak truth to power even if it means they will have to operate out of a run-down trailer in the desert. Every time a human rights group spins its narrative to ?maintain its credibility? with the elite, it makes the world worse, not better. It would be better to have no human rights groups at all than to have a ?human rights community? that systematically understates the crimes of the powerful. These people need to wake up and decide to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, or find productive work in another field of endeavor. As it stands, anyone who wants to make the world better should either be telling the full truth with no compromises, or joining resistance movements against the criminal global oligarchy. Those who work for corrupt, foundation-funded institutions should resign, join the resistance, and pick up either a bullhorn or a gun.