USA

ISIS, Maliki and the Sunnis

radioyaran Iran, Iraq, USA , , , , , , , , ,

Two popular mistakes should be identified and avoided:

1. It is not merely ISIS against the Iraqi army. ISIS is the spearhead and the combat wise most experienced and effective single group of a variety of Sunni militias that are fighting the Iraqi armed forces. Not all of these 7 or 8 groups are radical islamists and sectarian. Many are tribal fighters disaffected with the central government which they accuse of having sidelined, oppressed and marginalized Sunnis for years. Others are former Baathists, thus more or less secular minded or nationalists, among them the Naqshbandy army.

2. Though it is true that especially the Maliki government is highly corrupt and has acted in sectarian ways, this is not merely because Malikis regime is backed by Iran or simply hates Sunnis. While ISIS as the name of a specific organization only exists since  a couple of years, the hatred ideology of takfiri salafism in post-Saddam Iraq is not that new. As early as in 2003 systematic and wide scale deadly attacks against Shia police, army recruits and especially ordinary civilians began to occur at least on a weekly basis. Suicide bombers and car bombs killed hundreds of Shia every month, targeting them in mosques, at market places, in Cafes and restaurants and even at funerals. Many Shia clerics were assassinated few months after the US invasion in 2003, e.g. Ayatollah Hakim:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Baqir_al-Hakim#Assassination

Not all but many instances of power abuse at the hands of Shia militias and Iraqi armed forces were a reaction to the relentless and high casualty bombings of Shia areas. Neither Iran nor the Iraqi Shia clergy brought sectarianism to Iraq. It was the „achievement“ – and not an incidental one – of Wahhabi/Salafi ideologues from the GCC countries awash in money and relying on arabic mass media in shape of several satellite channels broadcasting anti-Shia and anti-Iranian hate mongering all around the clock.

It is wrong to declare Sunni opposition to the Iraqi regime as „terrorism“ and not every Sunni insurgent fighting the Iraqi army is a takfiri. The Sunni opposition is legitimate but it suffers from being associated with ISIS and similar minded sectarian jihadists.

 

„Excellent“ US idea: (Further) arm islamists (and hope they fight RADICAL islamists)…

radioyaran Iran, Russia, Syria, USA , , , , , , ,

„Susan Rice, Obama’s national security adviser, said the US would „ramp up“ its support to the moderate Syrian opposition, Isis’s ostensible rivals for control of the Syrian resistance to Bashar Assad.“
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/11/mosul-isis-gunmen-middle-east-states?CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2

This shows the unending idiocy of a senior member of the US administration. Still, her only silly and unsubstantiated approach towards the ISIS or „radical islamist“ dilemma is to attempt to boost the laughable and tiny Syrian non-islamist opposition. An opposition with a phantom, „ghost“ character, hardly playing any role in reality.

The US admin fails to understand that any „ramp up“ of Syrias allegedly „moderates“ has almost definitely one of the following consequences:

a) The moderates sell or forward the weapons to the radicals who are the more battle-hardened and experienced fighters, willing to die (and kill ruthlessly)

b) The radicals which are not only ISIS, but also „Nusra Front“, „Islamic Front“ or „Syrian revolutionary front“ (and thus according to Israeli sources 80% of the rebels) simply overcome the CIA-vetted „moderates“ and take their weapons

c) Many formerly „moderates“ discover that their companions are opportunists merely interested in building themselves a power base (just like the afghan militias in the 90s) and decide to join the „real mujahedeen“

After 13 years of „anti-terror“ war, „enduring freedom“, „mission accomplished“ and other garbage, Al Qaeda and affiliates are stronger than ever, while the oh so bad Bashar al Assad and his Iranian and Russian backers have been the best powers to fight Al Qaeda.

„The West“ and it´s arrogance in promoting and deriding elections elsewhere

radioyaran Egypt, Syria, Ukraine, USA , , , ,

„The West“, a phrase by which mainly The US and its western European NATO allies are meant considers itself and only itself entitled and qualified to determine who deserves to be voted, boycotted and overthrown in any country.

The rules of the game are quite easy:
If the ruler is pro-Russian or his country predominantly in the Russian geopolitical hemisphere he is almost by definition illegitimate. So, if any political, religious or ethnic group raises in opposition to such a country’s government, the oppositions autonomy and separatism oriented demands are legitimate. The ruler has to give in to the alleged will of „the people“ and relinquish power. If a part of such a pro-Russian state holds a referendum and demands autonomy, western politicians will be the first to support secessionist ideas and apply pressure to the central government.
Examples are ex-Yugoslavia and Syria.

If absolutely democratic elections are held and the outcome – thus the majority will of the people – does not please „the West“, the elected government will be shunned at best and isolated and sanctioned at worst. The voters will be punished for making the „wrong“ decision. So democracy and free elections do not protect anyone from the wrath of the West, and at the same time the West does not see any violation of its otherwise proudly propagated values such as freedom of choice.
Examples are the elections of Hamas in Palestine and Mohammad Morsi in Egypt.

If you are the man of the West or at least the enemy of the West´s enemy you can forcefully remove a democratically elected government, e.g. through a military coup, and win dubious elections, sometimes with 93% of the votes and afterwards be praised by the West as legitimate winner.
Examples are the Egyptian and Ukrainian elections

So, while Assads 88% are brushed off as „farce“ or „parody of the democracy“, Sisis 93% are supposed to be regarded as serious and respectable outcome.

Beware of the „breaking news“ regarding Syria on June 2nd or 3rd

radioyaran Syria, USA , , ,

On Tuesday the Syrian presidential election is supposed to take place.
There is a good chance that „by incident“ tomorrow or the day after „activists“ will report a chemical attack or another large scale atrocity in Syria.

This article is good:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/05/30/why-are-they-afraid-of-the-syrian-elections/

„Why are Kerry and the “Friends”  so upset and fearful of Syrian elections?  If they are such a farce, then much of the public will not participate in them. If the vote is seen by the public as meaningless,  then  voter turnout will be very low such as in Egypt this week.

As to the issue of holding an election during a time of conflict, this was done right here in the USA.  The 1864 election which re-elected Abraham Lincoln was held during the midst of the extremely bloody US civil war.“

 

When the US´ favorite gets 93% of the votes, the west won´t call elections a farce

radioyaran Saudi Arabia, Syria, Ukraine, USA , , , , , , , , ,

Look at this BBC article about Egypts Sisis landslide (93%) win of the presidential elections:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-27614776

Though the article mentions that turnout was low and the powerful Muslim Brotherhood was banned, it does not quote a single western (almost always an american president or foreign secretary or their british-french counterparts) calling the elections a farce, or a fraud or a „parody of democracy“ as UKs William Hague already did with regards to the upcoming Syrian elections.

Imagine Assad would get 93%. Western press and politicians would tear apart the event and ridicule the Syrian regime.
Not however in Egypt where the darling of the US  (and Saudi Arabia) has won.

Watch out for the reports coming after Assads electoral victory in a couple of days:
You will read about „irregularities“ and manipulation, reported by „activists“. You will read that each and every Syrian was bullied and observed by a Mukhabarat thug or the notorious „Shabiha“ to intimidate him towards voting for Assad. Local „activists“ will report about having witnessed how the same Alawites travelled from one village to the neighbouring one to vote for Assad multiple times while Sunnis were prevented from voting (against Assad) by pro-Assad militiamen. You will read about Assad having allegedly received 100% of votes even from rebel strongholds. All these „facts“ that will rain down on you from various – of course – totally reliable sources inside Syria will be intended to prove to you that – unlike the elections in Ukraine or Egypt – the Syrian election was a „joke“, an insult to „millions of Syrians“ who hate Assad and love the rebels and and and…

 

Shamirs brilliant sarcasm exposes the US´ policy in Ukraine

radioyaran Ukraine, USA , , , , ,

„The new Kiev regime had dropped the last pretence of democracy by expelling the Communists from the parliament. This should endear them to the US even more. Expel Communists, apply for NATO, condemn Russia, arrange a gay parade and you may do anything at all, even fry dozens of citizens alive. And so they did.“
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/05/19/the-ukraine-in-turmoil/

It is sad but true that in fact it is that cheap and easy to make populist politics in the US and „Nato“/central Europe by simply antagonizing, polemizing and, yes, insulting Russia and Putin.
The cheapest newspapers in Germany, usually only bought by the lowest and most voyeurist elements of the society because of the naked front page girl, and at the same time many, if not most of the allegedly better upper class dailies play to the same unified, remote controlled, unsceptic tune of Putin bashing.
Nowadays, you are an intellectual human rights activist by merely stating that Putin is the „new Hitler“, no matter how faulty, misleading and free of any facts the comparison is.

Be sceptic: HRW and Amnesty International have close ties to the US government

radioyaran USA , , , ,

„Human Rights Watch characterizes itself as “one of the world’s leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights.” However, HRW’s close ties to the U.S. government call into question its independence.“
…

http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/05/14/human-rights-watchs-revolving-door-to-us-government/

 

„Mistakenly considered by many as the final word on human rights worldwide, it might surprise people to know that Amnesty International is in fact one of the greatest obstacles to real human rights advocacy on Earth…Amnesty international is indeed funded and run by not only governments, but also immense corporate-financier interests, and is not only absolutely entwined with political ideology and economic interests, it is an essential tool used for perpetuating just such interests.“
http://landdestroyer.blogspot.de/2012/08/amnesty-international-is-us-state.html

„For decades, Amnesty International has been a respected name in the cause of human rights, but its recent hiring of Suzanne Nossel, a longtime U.S. “humanitarian interventionist,” has swung the organization more behind the Afghan War and the use of U.S. military force..“
http://consortiumnews.com/2012/06/18/amnestys-shilling-for-us-wars/

„n May 2012, Amnesty International participated in a campaign to sell the war in Afghanistan under the logo: „NATO: Keep the Progress Going“. Ann Wright and Coleen Rowley discuss this campaign and the appointment of Suzanne Nossel, the new head of AI-USA and the possible source of this campaign.[6] Philip Weiss discusses the reason Amnesty might have embraced this campaign, and it has all to do with the appointment of Suzanne Nossel.[7]“
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Amnesty_International

„International community“ – The western world´s unendurable self-complacency

radioyaran Russia, USA , , , ,

I have come to the conclusion that most western people – and by this I mean mainly central Europeans and white Americans – are self-righteous racists in the sense that they are supremacists. Few of them would claim this vocally but there are clear patterns in their words, actions and minds that testimony to this impression. The anglo-saxon „white man“ is quite a narcissist, implicitly (and at times) explicitly believing in his superiority. There is wide spread belief that the western value system is inherently „good“, that westerners live up to higher moral levels, etc.


I am sure the „ordinary“ western citizen does not and cannot see what nine out of ten non-westerners living in central Europe see and feel every day. If you read and watch western (main stream) media these days you must be disgusted by a blatant lack of standard and decency. There is pogrom like polemic daily reporting on Russia and Putin. In an almost unprecedented twist of facts and total ignorance of truth a putchist, neo-Nazi junta in Ukraine has been romanticized as pro-democracy activists, simply as the „good guys“, the „legitimate“ „authorities“. It is a joke, though a sad and scandalous one, and the coverage of western European and american media is both infantile and propagandistic.


Nothing has changed: The arrogant people of the western world enjoy constructing yet another black and white phantasy world, where – as usual – they represent humanity, freedom, civilization, progress and happiness while their adversaries summarize everything bad in this world.


It is utterly laughable to hear western politicians talking about „the international community“. Who the hell makes up this self-complacent artificial entity, when major parts of the global population (China, India, Russia, wide parts of Africa, Middle East, South Asia and South America) often are not included?

Palestinian „terrorist“ vs. Ukrainian „freedom fighter“

radioyaran Israel, Russia, Ukraine, USA

The brazen double speak of most western politicians and media „experts“ knows no limits.
In order to justify Israeli violence and maintain the constant portrayal of Israel as innocent victim of the very people it occupies and suppresses since decades, every uniformed Palestinian had to be defamed as „terrorist“ or at least „with terrorist links“. This would apply to almost every member of a Palestinian security organization including traffic policemen of the Hamas rulers of Gaza.

At the same time when it comes to the worst violent, militant and at times even antisemitic mob those people are romanticized and hyped as „freedom fighters“ or „activists“ as long as they oppose pro-Russian people, be the latter a democratically elected government or citizens not sharing their anti-Russian views.

Whenever any ethnic or religious group in a pro-Russian country demanded secession or separatism US and most western European governments were the first to praise such „freedom movements“ and expect the ruling governments to immediately cede power or allow „reforms“. So, in a new climax of shamelessly biased coverage of events the removal of Ukraines elected government was cheered as a victory of democracy. So, it is legitimate to forcefully remove the regular government, but it is not legitimate for vast portions of the (East) Ukrainian population to oppose the non-elected and thus illegitimate new „government“ in Kiev?

Read this:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/04/04/ukraine-a-fascist-coup/