Part 2: US outgunned by Russia? The Armata tank

My translation of the next part of “US outgunned by Russia?”

http://inosmi.ru/military/20170302/238812175.html

T-14 the Armata

2917, 3-15 armata

The T-14 Armata is an ultimate weapon platform, which can function, among other things, as a tank, air defense, artillery gun and combat engineering machine.

© AP Photo, Alexander Zemlianichenko

The T-14 Armata tank during rehearsal for the parade in honor of the victory in the Great Patriotic War [WW II—Don] in Moscow

According to a report of the British Intelligence Service, it will be very difficult for the British military forces to resist against the Armata in battle. Internal documents written by high-ranking intelligence officers state: “without exaggeration, it can be said that the Armata represents the most revolutionary breakthrough in the development of tanks for the past half-century.” The report then says that “it is not surprising that this tank became a sensation.”  At the same time, it criticized the inability of the UK to create a combat vehicle comparable to the Armata.

The Armata first saw the light in 2015, when its prototype took part in the annual May parade. According to the report, the tank is revolutionary because its crew is protected from fire by a tower of innovative design.

It is also believed that the tank is lighter, faster and has a lower profile than its competitors.

The report also says that the tank will be equipped with a radar system, which is used on new Russian fighters, and is protected by armor made of modern composite materials.

CONTEXT

Rehearsal of the Victory Parade in Red Square

The Sarmat – the killer of American missile defense?

The National Interest16.02.2017

The Armata – a formidable force on the battlefield

The National Interest 09.11.2016

A missile deal without Russia

Habertürk 21.02.2017

Russia’s enemies are afraid of the cruise missile Caliber

The National Interest 24.01.2017

Armata and tank rearmament

Russian service BBC0.06.06.2016

According to the publication The National Interest, however, the Armata has many problems. One of them is that the tank is too expensive. Russia simply does not have enough money to produce these machines in large quantities. According to the British report, Russia will be able to produce 120 new Armatas a year. According to Mike Kofman of CNA Corporation, a well-known expert on Russian military affairs, it will take Russia 21 years to replace all 2,500 tanks that are currently in service with the Armata, but that’s only in the event the Kremlin has the means to do so, which, according to the National Interest, is unlikely.

End of translation

Should the US join the Belt and Road?

Should the US join the Belt and Road, as recommended by the LaRouche PAC? Of course it should. But in the Trump era, that is a hard sell. Trump is the tail wagging the dog, just as Dubya was. Only in Trump’s case, the propaganda is even more potent because Trump has set himself up as anti-Establishment and most Americans just swallowed this as gospel truth. It is true that Trump opposes certain aspects of the Establishment, but he also has named a 100% Neocon cabinet. NOTHING anti-Establishment about that. On the other hand, several top State Department officials have been fired, However, which of the Trump Neocons will name their successors and does it matter?

Saker sees what most other observant observers see. However, he never mentions the underlying cause of our malaise. Like many others, he seems to think the US Deep State/Shadow Government is just crazy and wants to foster chaos everywhere.  I analyzed the cause of this madness here.

The empire should be placed on suicide watch

http://www.unz.com/tsaker/the-empire-should-be-placed-on-suicide-watch/

Leader of Iraqui Christian militia exposes Saudis rottenness, shows Iran’s help in defeating terror

Here is a video the leader of the Christian militia in Iraq. They fight Iraq. This guy says Iran is helping fight ISIS in Iraq and has saved a lot of lives. Yet we are told – even by the Trump administration – that Iran is the biggest terror supporter in the world. Actually, the US – in tandem with Saudi Arabia — is the biggest terror supporter in the world. Iran has never supported the Taliban, Al-Qaeda or ISIS, which are by far the biggest terror groups. Saudi Arabia is the most active supporter of terror. Without the US and SA, there would be no ISIS. The video makes it clear:

http://russia-insider.com/en/christian-iraqi-militia-leader-iran-gave-us-weapons-fight-isis-us-did-nothing/ri19186

What you “know” about Aleppo is not true

Aleppo war hypocrisy uncovered

translation and commentary by Don Hank

Featured below is my translation of an article on the site of Movimento 5 Stelle (m5s), an increasingly popular anti-Establishment party which, if it comes to power in the vacuum created by Prime Minister Renzi’s resignation, is likely to take Italy out of the euro. Unlike the UK, whose leaders tenaciously still cling to the EU following the Brexit, Italy’s exit from the euro could be more brusque and throw the EU into a tailspin. Of the major anti-elite parties in the EU core countries, m5s is the boldest, most astute and most brutally honest in its critical analysis of western military and foreign policy. The article below should be book-marked for reference because it lists casualty estimates for the “good” war in Mosul and the “bad” war in Aleppo and shows that the numbers of civilians killed in US-waged wars and the Israeli conflicts with Palestine are extremely high, making Western criticism of Russia and the Syrian government look hypocritical. The article does not list the casualties in Aleppo simply because we hear or read about these every day thanks to the media dutiful reporting them in a tone clearly condemnatory of Russia (and Assad), as if only Russian wars entailed collateral damage.  This article sets the record straight, highlighting the rank hypocrisy of the US and allies.

I took the trouble to investigate independently the casualty statistics listed by Fulvio Scaglione in his article below. Here are links to 3 months of UN figures cited:

http://www.iraqinews.com/features/unami-announces-death-toll-iraq-september/

http://reliefweb.int/report/iraq/un-casualty-figures-iraq-month-october-2016-enar

http://reliefweb.int/report/iraq/un-casualty-figures-iraq-month-october-2016-enar

Not all of the deaths can be attributed directly to US intervention. However, ISIS and its opponents killed a very large number of people as a result of the Obama administration’s refusal to prevent ISIS from entering the towns and cities. He did, however, provide arms to “moderate” terrorists in Syria.

While many conservatives take a dim view of the UN, this organization is the only one providing data of t his kind. Without the UN, the world would be reliant mostly on biased data from outlets loyal to the US government that caused  much of the suffering.

Sadly, from my personal association with prominent and less prominent Brexit activists I have seen that only a minority of them understand that declaring their independence from the EU is only half the battle. They seem unaware that the real enemies are the US and NATO, which constantly beat the war drums against Russia and Assad, despite their own illegal and failed invasions in the Middle East, Ukraine and Kosovo, which leave the world infinitely less safe than before their interventions.

I receive alerts from the main anti-EU parties and after reading their literature, for years in some cases, I would rank them as follows in terms of their grasp of the geopolitical reality, particularly regarding US-waged wars. From most aware to least aware, they are:

Movimento 5 Stelle (m5s) (founded by Beppe Grillo. they will field a candidate for prime minister)

Front National  (founded by Marine LePen, who is eyeing a run for president of France)

Partij voor de Vrijhijd /Freedom Party (founded by Geert Wilders, who is eying a run for prime minister of Holland)

I am not including UKIP (UK Independent Party) in this list because Brits are split on their feelings toward the Atlanticist Establishment; while UKIP was instrumental in bringing about the exit of the UK from the EU, they were only one of several influential groups in that endeavor.   I would put Nigel Farage personally high on the list, because he is in line with Donald Trump – willing to deal with, rather than demonize, the Russians and Syrians. He has in fact traveled to the US to endorse Trump. However, the Brexit groups are divided with regard to remaining in NATO. Some think NATO is necessary for “defence,” despite the fact that all of NATO’s actions in recent years have been offensive and have violated international law regarding sovereignty of states. I also am not including the AfD because there is, at this point, virtually no chance that Germany will exit the EU any time soon.

 

http://www.beppegrillo.it/2016/12/la_guerra_di_aleppo_non_e_solo_come_ve_la_raccontano.html

What they’re not telling you about the war in Aleppo

Movimento 5 Stelle /5 Star Movement   The blog of the stars

by Fulvio Scaglione for TPI

The battle of Aleppo, with the bloodshed of recent days and the terrible years that preceded them, marked among other things the collapse of the Western information system , which is almost indistinguishable from partisan propaganda at this point. Everything in the Western narrative about Aleppo smacks of fraud and deceit. Since the publication of unfiltered and unverified data provided by the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, founded and headed by an adversary of Bashar al-Assad and maintained by the British government, the word “siege” has been applied liberally for Aleppo but only in recent months, and never in the over three years that the city was attacked from three sides by rebels and jihadis, who came to occupy 60 percent of the urban territory.

But in a way, these are small details. The real issue is the refusal to confront a reality which can be summarized as: what happened in Aleppo in recent weeks is not at all exceptional. On the contrary, it is the norm of contemporary war. Don’t believe us? Then let’s have a look around. Take Mosul, the largest Iraqi city, which has been occupied by ISIS for two and a half years.

In mid-October the offensive to free it from the jihadists got underway (finally). Great fanfare, triumphant tones, exultation for civilians who “were being freed” from areas previously under the control of militants (while civilians in Aleppo who come from the neighborhoods dominated by al-Nusra Front, are not liberated but rather “escape”). Now, two months later, everything has come to a standstill and no one is talking about liberating Mosul. Not only that, the offensive by Americans, Kurds and Iraqis has been halted to such an extent that ISIS has removed 4-5 thousand fighters from the Iraqi front and sent them to retake Palmyra in Syria. Why?

The answer is very simple. The two and a half years of grueling bombing campaign gave ISIS plenty of time to organize the defenses in the city. The roads were mined or boarded up or replaced by galleries known only to the militia fighters. Some buildings were demolished to clear lines of fire; elsewhere walls were built to block the lines of fire and passage of the attackers. Finally, thousands of civilians were trapped to be used as human shields.

To be “liberated” Mosul will have to become another Aleppo: the bombings, civilian casualties, children torn apart by the strikes, and so on. There is an alternative, namely, house to house combat with hundreds and hundreds of dead Iraqis and Kurds — which has already been going on, even if military operations are almost at a standstill.

The UN Mission for assistance to Iraq (UNAMI), directed by Jan Kubis, former Foreign Minister of Slovakia (2006-2009), has made available mind-boggling data on the number of Iraqi deaths, civilian and other, of the last few months. In September, ie before the offensive on Mosul, the number of Iraqi civilians killed was 609 (951 injured); the number rose to 1,120 (with 1,005 injured) in October and to 926 (930 injured) in November.

As for the military and other combatants, the figures are: 394 killed (208 injured) in September, 672 killed (353 injured) in October, 1959 killed (and 450 injured) in November. Result? Everything blocked, meaning further suffering for imprisoned civilians in Mosul and more time for ISIS to continue building up.

Of course, nouveaux philosophes [a group similar to the Neocons in the US—Don Hank] and other clowns can harp on atrocities and human rights violations in Aleppo. But they are nothing but hypocrites. In 2004, the US Army fought two battles to “liberate” the Iraqi city of Fallujah, in fact occupied by the militants of al-Qaeda, the forerunners of the militants of al-Nusra, which play such an important role in the battle of Aleppo.

According to the independent NGO Iraq Body Count, between 572 and 616 civilians died in the first battle (April 2004); between 581 and 670 died in the second (November 2004) battle. The Americans used phosphorus arms and apparently depleted uranium. Have you ever heard of any new philosophers rending their garments over this? Do you recall Corriere de Sera [an establishment newspaper–Don] ever mentioning “slaughterhouse” in headlines about Fallujah, as it did referring to Aleppo?

 

And what about Gaza? According to the most conservative data, which are those published by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, only 45 percent of the 2,100 Palestinians killed in the Gaza Strip during the 2014 war were real civilians and non-combatants. That’s still 945 unarmed people killed in two months of clashes.

Thus it was the very countries that now cry foul over the Aleppo operations, that block motions censure Israel at the UN.  And isn’t Gaza a perfect copy of the eastern districts of Aleppo, attacked with bombs by the Russians and by Assad’s Syrians?

And yet UNICEF has informed us that in the first six months of 2016, Afghanistan had a record number of civilian casualties: 1,601 dead and 3,565 wounded. The worst half-year since the anti-Taliban invasion in 2001. According to UN estimates, 60 percent of Afghan civilians are vulnerable to attack by the Taliban and other insurgent groups and criminals.

But 40 percent of 1,601 deaths is still 640 deaths, or 640 innocent Afghans killed in six months (more than 3 per day) by troops arriving from our countries, that is, by those who are supposed to be protecting and “liberating” them. But everyone is silent; these dead do not deserve the indignation reserved for the dead of eastern  Aleppo.

Thus the war of our times is utterly disgusting. Those who pretend to believe that in Chechnya and Aleppo different things were done than elsewhere, for example in Fallujah or Gaza, are quite simply lying. All of today’s wars are fought on the backs of civilians. All of them.

And in all wars, the armed men, with or without uniforms, are, at the most, collateral victims. Politicians, military people and terrorists know this quite well. So the real issue is to avoid wars as much as possible, not to pretend that there are good wars and bad wars.

(translation from the Italian by Don Hank)

 

Another rah rah moment in American history

Trump victory: another rah rah moment

by Don Hank

I wonder if you will recall that the GW Bush wars were started by rah rah talk, as when Dubbya stood at ground zero and, with his arms draped around two NY firemen, proclaimed “the people who knocked down these buildings are going to hear from us.”

So ask yourself: Did “the people who knocked down these buildings” really hear from us? Now every American who experienced that moment lived through the wars that followed. But remember that the “people who knocked down these buildings” were mostly Saudis because it was they who founded and funded – together with the US Deep State – Al-Qaeda. But instead of declaring war on the Saudis, our real enemy, we attacked the enemies of our enemy, the Taliban (which had around that time plotted to oust the Saudi royals) and Saddam, who ran a secular type government with little or no emphasis on Shariah and even had a Christian in his cabinet. The Saudis hate secular leaders and the US helps them eliminate them. (Here is a clue as to why we are so obliging to them: http://laiglesforum.com/how-the-petrodollar-perpetuates-islamic-terror-2/3315.htm).

Thus, absurdly, Dubbya was aiding and abetting the “people who knocked down these buildings” and killed up to 3000 Americans.  And he and his Neocon pals had to know that the Christians and other large groups would leave Iraq in droves if we “won,” and that chaos would ensue, forcing the US to occupy.

And how about that Afghanistan? What a great victory! Rah rah. Not. US and allied troops are still there and the carnage is heart-wrenching – for all but the arms industry and its financiers.

Thus we can state with confidence that, facing the TV cameras at ground zero that day, George W. Bush was thumbing his nose at a bleeding America. (This fits in perfectly with Bush’s cover-up of the Saudi role in 9-11 as reported subsequently by the Washington Post ).

Now with that deception in mind, you will note the unbridled euphoria over the Trump election. Rah rah. Millions of Americans were relieved that we would now have peace.

And in fact, we might.

But we might not either.

Yes, Donald Trump had promised he would cooperate with Russia. The prospect of peace that this signaled is one important reason many Democrats crossed over to vote for him, for example.

But what many of us have forgotten is the eerily similar rah rah moments of the Bush years and what rah rah moments usually mean in our great country. The greatness often lies solely in the rah rah, not in the situation on the ground, in the aftermath, our bleeding hearts and pocket books.

Some exceptionally alert observers are already pointing out that Trump has picked two rank Neocons for his cabinet, who have both warned about “Russian aggression” in Ukraine, despite the fact that it was the US and Europe who started and supported the bloody coup in Kiev for the obvious purpose of goading Russia into a defensive action that could be spun by our media into “aggression.”

Trump’s presumptive defense secretary has warned that the Russian “aggression” in Ukraine is “worse than we think.” This is a lie, as you know if you follow the web site that provides regular sitreps on the conflict in E. Ukraine. Bookmark this site and go there at least once a week. If enough Americans did, our “leaders” would not dare arm the Kiev fascists. Even, if you followed the OSCE’s regular Ukraine reports, you would also know the aggressor is Kiev’s troops (many of which are fascists, eg, the Azov Battalion) that the US government supports.

But Mattis is not the only one beating the war drums against the country Trump promised to “cooperate with.” Mike Pompeo, Trump’s pick for CIA director, recently returned from a trip to Kiev, and after fruitful discussions with the Neo-Nazis there, says that “Putin’s aim is to take over Ukraine” (Mike would have fit in nicely in a Clinton cabinet) , implying that Russia wants to attack Ukraine militarily. If that were true, Putin would have done the job a long time ago before NATO had deployed troops all over Eastern Europe, including 30,000 at the Russian borders (reminding Russians of Hitler’s Operation Barbarossa that destroyed much of Russia and killed millions of Russians). No one is saying that a Ukraine thoroughly disgruntled with US and EU lies, like the false promise to let the country join the EU, might not voluntarily ally itself with Russia. It would be hard to paint that as Russian aggression, but recent anti-Russian (hence racist) drivel from the Western msm shows that no lie is too big for the warmongering elites to manage.

The latest E. Ukraine (Novorossia is the real name) sitrep shows that the Neo-Fascist sympathizers the US government supports in Kiev are now recruiting Lumpenproletariat, common thugs, with promises of free land, stolen from Russian speakers.

Now we are at another crossroads, another rah rah moment in American history. The euphoria over the Trump victory is great. Many are willing to go along with anything this leader wants. Like Bush, the Evangelicals have anointed him as God’s servant. The chessboard is arrayed exactly as before.

The question is: will you forget the lessons that Dubbya taught us and say to yourself: this time is different and the rah rah heralds a better world? Or will you recognize the rah rah moment for what it is: a time for you to say “not this time!”?

Postscript:

Writing for a news and opinion site is an endless job, as it should and must be. Since this was written, Trump is reportedly eyeing shifty arch-Neocon Mitt Romney for the position of Secretary of State.

So what’s wrong with that you ask? Here is a video featuring Mitt saying “Russia is our worst geopolitical foe” who always “lines up with the world’s worst actors”, among whom he counts Assad, the most pro-Christian leader in the Middle East, who is fighting for  his country’s life against Al-Qaeda and ISIS, groups that are armed and trained by our “ally” Saudi Arabia.

Trump has said he will cooperate with the same Putin that Romney has spent much of his career smearing.

 

Next US president must understand the Putin Principle

The disarmingly simple Putin Principle in foreign policy

by Don Hank

One of the cardinal points raised by Sun-tzu in his “Art of War” is the proposition of knowing the enemy. I will take that a step further and say that sometimes knowing the enemy leads to the discovery that he is not the enemy after all. And one further step: to the discovery that one is one’s own enemy.

The US government is the classic example.

There seem to be an alarming number of people who actually believe that hoax email making its rounds claiming that Hillary’s emails have been hacked by Russia.

First off, the story originated with a well-known hoaxster with the pseudonym Sorcha Faal, who specializes in these Russian fairy tales.

Secondly, if Americans do not have the ability and resources to hack into Hillary’s server, how in heaven’s name would they be able to hack into the Kremlin server?

The Kremlin is not run like the Washington government. No official would dare to let down his guard enough for a Westerner to hack into Kremlin emails. The offender would not get a smack on the wrist, the way Hillary did. Russians are serious about their government. Sadly, Americans have degenerated to the extent that very few care any more or believe that any government could possibly be serious about protecting its people. Why would any government be more honest than ours?, they reason.

The whole idea behind this fake story is that the Kremlin wants to interfere in our elections.

Nothing could be further from the truth. You will recall that when Putin was asked his opinion of Donald Trump, he ventured to say that Trump was clever (Trump later expanded this compliment claiming Putin had called him a “genius”), but in his very next breath, Putin made it clear that Russia has a policy of non-interference in the affairs of other countries. He was thereby establishing an unmistakable contrast between Russia and the Washington government.

I will attempt in a few lines here to explain a somewhat complex cultural and political situation in Russia as well as the mind of President Vladimir Putin.

One of the most important things you need to know about Putin is that he is serious about government business. Unlike our demented officials, he does not play irresponsible games. I am just now reading his biography, and recently came across an anecdote about his early days in the KGB school in Leningrad, now Saint Petersburg (BTW, Putin was not a spy, but rather an intel analyst). A few of his class mates — senior classmen — were discussing a certain hypothetical order that they might receive in the field.

When it came his turn to add his opinion, Putin said “that order is illegal.” Their attitude was “so what? It is an order.”

He said, “it is still illegal.”

That brief anecdote speaks volumes about who Vladimir Putin is and why he is respected in his own country (his popularity is still in the 80% range) and. increasingly, abroad.

Now, taking this further, Putin saw many years ago that the Washington government lies and cheats. It makes its own laws as it goes and enforces laws that are not on the books. All illegal in the international sphere. (Example: James Baker promised Gorbachev that the US would never encroach on Russian borders. Once an agreement was reached with Russia regarding relations with the US, the US broke that promise, and it is still doing so, with NATO building up heavy forces along Russia’s western border). Americans have been brainwashed into believing that lawless behavior in Washington is a good thing because America is “exceptional.” But this slipshod attitude toward the serious matter of international law – which, after all, governs the circumstances that lead to either war or peace – has led to the near-total destruction of Kosovo (in case you missed these, see: http://laiglesforum.com/so-youre-fond-of-nato-eh-mr-cruz-check-out-these-videos-of-nato-in-kosovo/3690.htm and http://laiglesforum.com/look-whats-happening-in-the-european-region-that-nato-defended/3786.htm), Libya, Syria and Ukraine.

Putin discovered long ago that the US was on the wrong track and set about to develop a strategic policy for his country that would restore legality to geopolitics and so impress the rest of the world that they would eventually trust Russia more than any other country. I like to call this policy the Putin Principle. The Kremlin calls it soft power.

It is the iron-clad implementation of this simple principle that led to Russia’s policies in Ukraine (particularly in the former Ukrainian territory of Crimea) and Syria.

The Western press and political class has brainwashed an astounding number of Westerners into believing that Russia is promoting lawlessness in these regions when in fact, even in its military operations, it is respecting sovereignty of nations and ethnic groups and their territories.

The West claims in unison that the accession of Crimea to Russia was an “annexation,” whereby Russia simply snatched territory in a selfish expansionist move. And yet no serious party in this same Western world protested the referendum in Scotland or claimed it was illegal. The US and Europe were all prepared to accept whatever the outcome might be, including Scotland’s separation from the UK, based on the principle that Scotland had a right to sovereignty, even though it was technically part of the UK. And once that vote became official, the Crimean people were free to accede to Russia.

Yet what was perfectly legal in Scotland was “aggression” in Crimea, even though over 90% of Crimeans (the vast majority of whom are Russian speakers and consider themselves Russian) voted in this referendum to break away from Ukraine – and for the same reasons that many Scots (just short of a majority) wanted to break away from the UK, namely, cultural identity.

Thus, by our own Western logic as applied to Scotland, what the Crimeans did was legal and not in any way reprehensible.

Russia simply accepted the will of the Crimean people and honored their sovereignty. But of course, Russia is illegal by definition in the West.

Likewise, in Syria – in contradistinction to the US, which waded into an internal conflict without any invitation from the Syrian people – Russia entered the conflict only when the duly elected president of Syria invited it to do so. In fact, it made a similar offer to the Iraqi government but stayed out of that conflict when the Iraqis declined the offer, choosing instead to allow the US to pretend to fight ISIS there and create one of their  trademark messes.

The “exceptional” US government went into Syria illegally while Russia entered as an invited guest. The US was exceptionally lawless. Yet it accuses Russia of “expansionism,” just as England – the most expansionist country that ever existed, touting an empire on which the sun never set – had once accused Russia of expansionism during the conflict with Turkey in the 19th Century.

Thus the West has always written its own laws as it goes, based on nothing but bare-faced propaganda.

Note that Putin not only wants to apply this more-righteous and in fact, more common-sense international policy of strict adherence to international law to Russia but at the same time, to use this higher virtue as an arm of soft power by contrasting it with the West’s ad hoc law of the Wild West. He and his government, often via the mouthpiece of foreign minister Sergey Lavrov, use every opportunity (eg, UN speeches, speeches before the Valdai Club, press conferences, interviews, RT) to drive this concept home.

The American public will perhaps be the last to grasp this simple concept, not because they are stupid but because they have been brow-beaten into feeling that facing the truth about foreign affairs is somehow unpatriotic. But elsewhere, including in Europe, there are high ranking actors who seem to understand it. And they respect Russia for what must be called a superior approach to geopolitics. After all, ISIS would not be a threat if the Russian principle had been applied in the West.

Slapdown of Erdogan propagandist

The owner of a Turkish web site recently wrote the pro-Islamist email shown below to a group of his readers. I responded as follows and as shown in brackets and bold typeface in his message:

Ahmet,

In our quaint culture, when a person like you presents arguments to us, it is our custom to respond with arguments of our own — unless, of course, your side has a knife at our throat, as has typically been the case in the past.

Unfortunately, despite the best efforts to beautify the pig’s face, there is a gradual shift in Western opinion toward Russia and against Turkey in the issue of the downing of the Russian plane over northern Syria.

The story of Recep Tayyip Erdo?an and son Bilal’s funding of ISIS is now firmly implanted in our Western consciousness (your unconfirmed diversionary assertion that Assad also participated in trade with ISIS is irrelevant to the emerging narrative regarding Turkey because Turkey is our coalition “partner” and fellow NATO member, thanks to the suicidal tendencies of our “leaders”). BTW, it is interesting how similar your arguments are to those of our own Neocons, who also make liberal use of diversionary tactics.

To tell you the truth, Ahmet, Islam is such an absurd idea to most Westerners that it can only be spread by terror, as you well know and as Mohammed also knew. That is how the Turks managed to spread it in the 14th century, not by means of intellectual arguments but by murdering Byzantine Christians and other kafir wholesale, as laid out masterfully by Bill Warner in his book and in this video.

The early Muslims knew that if they relied solely on apologetics in an appeal to the intellect and the spiritual senses (ie, the approach taught by Jesus), they would never have gotten to first base with Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, etc, which is why you folks massacred us. You were wise enough to know that dead people don’t debate.

As for why Muslim apologetics is ineffectual, I have shown here why the message of Islam fails to convince unless the sword is applied generously by our debating opponents.

My responses to your attempted arguments are in red typeface below.

I can see that you read some of the Western press in order to formulate your arguments. I would like to see at least some deeper thought go into your pro-terror propaganda in the future, because for one thing, I like a challenge and your diversionary Neocon arguments are anything but intellectually challenging, and secondly, if you start analyzing more deeply, you will realize that you can’t provide to sentient Westerners any attractive arguments in favor of Muslim terror and countries that fund and support it. I am sorry that you compel me to point out the obvious.

I am hoping and praying that you and your fellow Muslims –  and especially your allies in NATO – will open their eyes to the truth and heed the clear message of President Vladimir Putin and foreign minister Sergey Lavrov, the only leaders in the world sincerely and effectively opposing terror — even as Washington and Brussels dither and slither.  If you still think you can create propaganda to defend your terror-supporting regime through an appeal to the intellect of the non-brainwashed, you will need to find out what the civilized side says that is swaying world opinion. You may try this site. Once you have heard the other side, you may then be better informed in preparing your truth-resistant arguments.

Thank you for the opportunity to discuss this topic. I look forward to your disingenuous and ineffectual response.

Best,

Don Hank

 

 

PUTIN: “The breakup of the USSR was the greatest tragedy of the 20th century.” [Westerners don’t say this, so it is irrelevant to us, although in terms of fighting terror and barbarism, if the countries of the former Soviet Union could back today’s re-Christianized Russia in defending the West, we probably would not be seeing such an uncontrollable proliferation of terror, the hordes of “refugees” flooding Europe or the US-style wars that sow chaos everywhere]

FACT: As a matter of fact, the greatest tragedy of the 20th century was the breakup of the Ottoman Empire. With the empire gone, flocks of sheep numbering millions of people and inhabiting a geography that extends from Bosnia-Hercegovina to Yemen and from Morocco to Iraq, were left without their shepherd. All of the man-made catastrophes and crises in recent history are directly connected with the power vacuum left behind by the Ottoman Empire. These include the Yugoslav civil war, the Iraqi civil war, the Syrian civil war, the Libyan civil war, Greece’s bankruptcy, the Crimea crisis, the rise of the Wahhabi/Salafist creed and so-called “Islamic” terrorism. [The Ottoman Empire was created by massacring our fellow Christians, as shown above. I am amazed that you think the revival of this cruel despotic empire could be an attractive idea to civilized people at all, let alone Christians. Whom did you think you were addressing here?]

PUTIN: “The Russian jet never violated Turkey’s air space and was shot down without warning.”

FACT: In the last 18 months, the Russians had intentionally violated the air space of many allied countries including the UK. In Turkey’s case, they had been bombing Turkey’s allies in Syria [The coalition was formed to fight terror. If by your “allies,” you are referring to the Turkish speaking Syrian minority (erroneously reported to be descended from the people of Turkmenistan), these are people fighting the troops of Bashar Al-Assad, the legitimate, duly elected president of the Syrians. These allies of yours were an ethnic minority fighting the Syrian people and their government. The peoples of the Western world have no interest in supporting their illicit and criminal behavior — such as the cold blooded murder of a coalition pilot. Further, Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov had already made it clear that Russia does not accept the absurdity of “good” terrorists vs “bad” terrorists, and Obama knew that when he allowed Russia to form the coalition. Turkey had to know it as well. The Turkish speaking fighters in Syria are terrorists, and given Erdo?ans known support for ISIS, it is not surprising that he would have warm feelings toward these terrorists in northern Syria. He is clearly the friend of all Sunni Muslim terrorists and is completely out of place in NATO], then flying over Turkish air space and thumbing their noses at the Turks. They needed the lesson. The warnings issued by the Turkish fighter jet were heard by US pilots flying in the region. One of the recordings circulating in the Internet was supplied by a pilot flying for the Lebanese airline MEA.

[The problem for you is that when coalition planes are participating in a shared mission, it is absurd on its face for one coalition member to intentionally shoot down another coalition member’s plane and the UN has already condemned the Turkish action on these grounds, so that’s that. The self-defense argument is moot. Turkey knew that its own country was not threatened by planes of its own coalition. Nor did coalition members have the mission of protecting certain terror groups in Syria].

PUTIN: “Turkey arms Isis, buys Isis oil.”

FACT: This week the US published a report saying that Russia’s ally Assad was buying most of the Isis oil to supply its troops. The Americans also identified and blacklisted the middle man who made this trade possible. As Putin knows well, Turkey’s leading energy supplier is none other than Russia. That is not all. The tanks and infantry vehicles used by Isis fighters are Russian. The rifles they hang over their shoulders and the AA guns they mount behind their pickup trucks are also Russian. This equipment can only be maintained with Russian spare parts and loaded with Russian ammunition. [There were Russian weapons all over the Middle East and they fell into the hands of terrorists. Unless you have concrete evidence that the Russians knowingly supplied these weapons to their own enemies (which you know very well they did not), this argument only serves as a distraction. (It is strangely similar to the kind of childish arguments regularly made by US Neocons). In the case of the Turkish purchase of oil, there is satellite imaging proving beyond any doubt that Turkey purchased ISIS oil, whereas here is no such evidence that Assad bought the ISIS oil. Putin showed these images to all members of the G20. This enraged Erdo?an at the time but it also led to the destruction of the oil trucks that were enriching him and his son, enraging him beyond his limits of self control. These were key factors in his desperate decision to shoot down a coalition plane and murder its pilot. He then made the stupid blunder of defending the murder, making him look complicit in a war crime. Finally, it is clear to anyone with knowledge of US military and foreign policy that our “leaders” also clandestinely support terror, in tandem with your country (as evidenced, for example, here,  here and here or by googling, for example, the terms: benghazi turkey gun running.) Therefore, the peoples of the West are locked in a death grip with our own renegade governments and also with Muslim terror groups and countries like Turkey that fund them. We can only win with God’s help and with the pure unadulterated truth as our weapon of choice. But while your master has endorsed the use of lies (taqiyya) when dealing with non-believers, our Master has said: ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.]

 

Dear Fox News: Has Russia left the planet?

Is there still a country called Russia?

I was once an avid viewer of Fox News. I still watch when my wife tunes in. A lot of my friends are in the same category with me, having once seen Fox as conservative and as fair and balanced. A long time ago, you presented the “other” side of the news and declared yourselves “fair and balanced.” Yet some of us saw you drift far from your base, like the GOP and most everything else.

I have a Masters in Russian and am a perpetual student of Russian, language, literature and current affairs. I follow Russian news in Russian and English. Years ago I noticed that whatever really big important events were happening in Russia were studiously ignored in the US press. Perhaps that is to be expected given the deplorable state of the msm. But Fox says it is different. Balanced and all that. Yet, ironically, I am now hearing more -balanced views on CNN, the channel that I was escaping from when I switched to Fox, back when you first went on the air. For example, I heard Christiane Amanpour remind her audience that France was not the only recipient of ISIS jihadism but that ISIS had also bombed a Russian airliner over the Sinai. I was almost overcome by emotion that a Western reporter would even mention that.

This is a sad state of affairs.

A few days ago I read in a foreign online site that Russia had doubled its air strikes, adding large bombers flying directly from Russia to Syria, and also making some pinpoint strikes with missiles from ships in the Mediterranean and Caspian Seas. The report mentioned that 600 jihadis were killed and that the ISIS commanders were forced to bury the dead in latrines. No one had ever come anywhere near this close to defeating ISIS. It was earth shattering news. Yet these intensified raids received precious little coverage in the US but a few sites in Britain (such as express.co.uk , theglobalnews and an Irish site) managed to carry the story.

I tuned in to your fair and balanced station and found a “military expert” opining that only the US could defeat ISIS but that our president would not attack them with sufficient vigor to make a difference. I waited to hear your coverage of the above-cited story of the doubled Russian attacks but did not catch it. I then did a search with the terms:

fox news russian bombers syria

and found no reports at all on Fox about these latest air strikes or any mention of the fact that Russia had doubled its number of active bombers. I was only able to find a report that a Russian aircraft had buzzed the USS Ronald Reagan over a month ago. Your loyal listeners and readers no doubt think that the uses of Russian air force jets are limited to buzzing American ships.

Therefore I conclude that, in Fox’s world, Russia has ceased to exist. I am asking that you re-investigate that view and see if you cannot find some information indicating that Russia has not yet left planet earth.

Best Regards,

Don Hank

laiglesforum.com

We are being played: French strikes confirm my warning

by Don Hank

In this commentary, written the day after the recent terror attacks in Paris, I warned that French president Hollande may use the Paris terror attacks to overthrow Assad. I based this in part on the aftermath of the 911 attacks, reminding:

… GW Bush used the 911 attacks as a pretext to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, which had not aided the 911 perpetrators in any known way. He stood on ground zero in NY and said “the people who knocked down these buildings are going to hear from us,” thereby setting the stage for a false connection in the minds of Americans, most of whom unthinkingly supported the ensuing non-sequitur and disastrous wars, which led, incidentally, to the creation of ISIS. The 911 perpetrators had been mostly Saudi terrorists, supported by Saudi money, but the Saudis did not “hear from us” at all, did they? The State Department did not so much as breathe a hint of caution in their direction. The Saudi conspirators and perpetrators were in fact fully absolved of all blame, which was heaped instead on scapegoats, at a tragic cost of American blood, treasure and prestige.

I saw an analogy with the Paris attacks, where the Saudis, the true perpetrators in the 911 attacks, represent ISIS, the true perpetrators in the French attacks, and the war on Iraq, falsely purporting to be revenge for those attacks (even though Iraq had nothing to do with them), representing the attack on Syria with the full intent of destroying the government of President of Assad, one of the last truly secular regimes in the Middle East that is not aligned with the US government.

Meanwhile, European cable TV stations like the French channel TV5, German Deutsche Welle, BBC, Italy’s RAI and US media outlets are constantly showing how nations all over the world are showing their solidarity with France, illuminating their monuments with the colors of the tricolore and of course, in the midst of this international blend of grief, solidarity and hysteria, no one anywhere (except me) dares to point out that the EU’s open borders and quotas for refugees from the Muslim world are some of the main reasons for terror attacks of the kind the world saw playing out in Paris.

Last night France did indeed execute 150 air strikes against the supposed ISIS stronghold Raqqa. They did so illegally, without the permission of the Syrian people, as I had suggested they would in my article.

Meanwhile ISIS spokespeople have said that the the targets were no longer occupied by ISIS.

The uninitiated would expect ISIS to be lying. So how can we check on this? I decided to do a web search and find out whether Russia had already struck in Raqqa. Indeed, Russian planes, acting legally at the invitation of the Syrian people, had struck Raqqa in early October and again on Oct. 15, as reported here. Reuters reports on Nov 6 of further Russian strikes in Raqqa.

This report from Oct. 5 shows that Russia had already knocked out an ammo dump in Raqqa. Yet the French claim that last night’s strikes knocked out an ISIS munitions dump in the same town.

Since I was able to find reports of at least 3 raids by Russia on ISIS targets in Raqqa, it seems odd that France would need to strike again. Certainly, Russia’s strikes would have left few targets for the French, and that would seem to corroborate ISIS’ claim that the French hit empty targets. Why would they do that? No doubt to claim those areas for the “rebels” fighting Assad. If the rebels reach those areas first, would the legitimate Syrian army dare to challenge them – even with Russia backing them up?

Whereas at that time of Russia’s strikes, the US insisted that the Russian strike only hit “moderates,” the Russians said they had hit ISIS targets. One side was lying. Surely our own State Department would never lie to We the People, would they?

This site promptly showed the State Department was indeed lying:

“The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a monitoring group, said at least 12 ISIS jihadists from the Islamic State group were killed in the Raqqa attack.”

Now it had been reported earlier that Syrian “rebels” (“moderates” supported by US but operating illegally under international law) intended to attack ISIS in Raqqa.

Now that France has struck again, perhaps striking no actual ISIS members (which the Russians may have routed completely in its October and November strikes in Raqqa), the “rebels.” supported by Washington and Europe, will have the propaganda advantage because the perpetually lying and treacherously deceitful Western media can claim that anyone opposing these US-backed Syrian terrorists are besmirching the memory of the dead in Paris.

You see what a despicable game is being played to gain power in Syria illegally and against the will of the Syrian people? You see how the French are preparing the ground to claim that it was they and not the Russians who liberated Raqqa – despite the fact that Russia had repeatedly struck ISIS in Raqqa throughout October and again in November and destroyed most of the targets France claimed to strike last night? We are being played just as we were in Iraq and in the Arab Spring, eg, Libya, Egypt, Syria….

If we the people again fail to see through the ruse, we will get what we deserve. That is, if indeed the Western powers are only pretending to fight ISIS, as Obama did in Syria by dragging his feet and even “accidentally” air dropping arms to ISIS, and as Hollande is obviously doing in France, by pretending to attack ISIS when in fact his actual target is Assad, the protector of Christians and minorities in Syria, ISIS will continue to grow unopposed and the Western world will be in thrall to these people whom Donald Trump aptly calls “cockroaches.”

Did the French choose to bomb Raqqa so that the anti-Assad rebels could get there first and claim it as theirs? The evidence is piling up to confirm this thesis.

I believe the Paris attacks were indeed used as a pretext to attack Syria without permission from the Syrian legitimate government for the purpose of claiming the very important city of Raqqa for the rebels. This is an indirect attack on Assad, exactly as I had foreseen in yestereday’s commentary.

 

Will Russia be first to unite the Middle East?

Will Russia be the first to bring Shiites and Sunnis together?

 

by Don Hank

 

Today’s situation in the Middle East is very confusing to the uninitiated because US policy is secretly based on a decivilizing and disordering strategy that, to survive, must masquerade as being beneficial to all and designed to bring peace and justice. A major challenge for deceitful policy makers. For example, Obama originally had decided not to send arms and troops to the Syrian “rebels,” but when he saw the Russians bombing rebel bases, he decided to send more troops and arms (perhaps to appease the Neocons or perhaps because he has become one), as reported here.

BTW, note that Israel has apparently done the same, as reported here.

A few months ago Ted Cruz addressed a group of Syrian Christians living in the US. Like many naive Americans, he assumed that the Middle East Jews and Christians share the same plight and therefore sympathize with each other. However, the Christian-killing terrorists in Syria have the moral support of many Israelis and the Israeli government because these terrorists are, for now, also opposed to Hezbollah and Iran, which the Israelis see as enemies. This complexity is overwhelming for most Westerners because the pertinent dots are never connected in our media.

The ingenuous Cruz was surprised at these Christians’ hostile response when before this crowd of Syrian Christians, he repeated the shibboleth “I stand with Israel,” indicating that, like nearly all US politicians, he hasn’t a clue as to Syrian sentiments and the reality there. (Ben Carson, unlike Trump, also wants to ratchet up the cold war).

To state this reality as simply as possible, the Shiites (the Iranian people and the Syrian government–supported by Russia) are perceived as enemies of Israel while the Sunnis (essentially the Saudis, Gulf states and Turkey), who hate the Shia, are perceived as allies.

This unintentionally pits US supporters of Syrian Christians against Israel in the sense that to support these Christians, one naturally supports Russia’s efforts to defeat ISIS and the rebels, but Israel perceives Russia as a threat because she is defeating their Sunni “allies” in ISIS. Thus, when Israelis hear Americans sympathizing with the Syrian Christians, many of them tend to get nervous. On the other hand, US Christians and others who mouth the slogan “I stand for Israel” make Syrians nervous because this suggests that the person who says this is seen as a threat to the Syrian Christians and other minorities.

Thus far, geopolitically illiterate Western politicians (the vast majority) and by far the majority of US analysts, seem to think that not only are Sunnis and Shia irreconcilable, but that in the outside chance they could be brought together, their newfound unity could threaten US interests.

Yet they also perceive perpetual war to be in the US interest, a proposition that is counterintuitive and morally untenable. I have tried to explain here how this absurd and dangerous idea came about and why it has been perpetuated for a half-century with almost no opposition in politics and media.

So how can both sides be brought together?

Putin is an unrivaled statesman who obviously wants to do unite these enemies of long standing. He recognizes that the US-aggravated rivalry between the Sunnis and Israel on the one hand and the Shia and Russia on the other is untenable in the long run and will lead to war. He is clearly trying to defuse the tension nurtured by the US. While attacking the Syrian terrorists who have the tacit support of Israel, he has shown Israel his support by meeting with and speaking with Netanyahu and by agreeing with the latter to involve Russia in the extraction of the Leviathan gas deposit, part of which is claimed by Israel. This tacitly implies several important things:

1—Russia accepts Israel’s existence as a nation

2—Russia agrees with Israel’s claim to its share of Leviathan even though Israel has stretched international law by extending its waters from 12 miles to 200 miles to include the relevant part of the deposit.

3—Russia will not allow encroachment on this deposit during its extraction and will protect any portions of the pipeline that cross Israeli territory.

It is a virtual military protection agreement for Israel. Further, none of this will come as a surprise for Russia watchers of the non-Neocon variety because Putin had visited Israel years ago and gave a press conference relating to this trip in which his respect for the Jews and the people of all faiths is reflected. This video of the conference best illustrates the fact that Putin is by his very disposition a true uniter of peoples and a man of good will.

It was only a matter of time before Israel’s tenuous support of the Sunni terrorists would be discovered and would therefore backfire mightily.

The US and Israel were playing with fire by cultivating Sunni Saudis and, by extension, the Saudis’ pets in ISIS,as their main allies (with the US all the while pretending to fight ISIS for cosmetic purposes). They had set a trap for themselves that has now been sprung by Russia.

Russia is now the only country in the world that intends to bring the Sunni world – and  its allies Israel and the US – and the Shia world – ie, the Iranian people and Syrian government – together as clearly suggested by this report showing that in September, Putin either spoke by phone or met with not only the Shia leaders of Iran and Syria but also their supposed arch enemies the leaders of the Sunni countries Palestine, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Jordan, and most amazingly, Israel. This convergence of the Middle East in Moscow represented nothing short of an epoch making plate shift but went almost completely unreported in the West, a benighted region which still seeks answers solely in policies that divide the Middle East and make it more barbaric, supposedly to benefit US interests but in fact to no one’s benefit.

After years and years of relentless brainwashing, the idea of a relatively peaceful Middle East is now alien to Americans, most of whom would scoff at the idea.

Putin, however, understands the commonality of these seemingly divergent peoples (if only based on economic expediency) and his effort to unite all of their leaders is by far the most ingenious, monumental and momentous peace effort ever attempted in the Middle East. Yet no one, not even the brightest and best of geopolitical analysts, seems to have noticed. They are too busy taking sides in an effort to prop up a falling empire.

Some will say that my analysis is weighted in favor of our one-time enemy Russia. Yet what I have shown suggests a happier ending for the US than most would admit to.

Putin continues to refer to the US as a partner, and if only for economic reasons, he is deadly serious about this.

Putin knows that an economically failed US does not favor Russia or its Eurasian partners, all of whom are seeking the greatest prosperity for all, if for no other reason than to benefit from trade with us. After all, what is the percentage in trading with poor countries?

This came in since I wrote the above and it substantiates my commentary:

http://journal-neo.org/2015/11/12/saudi-russo-rapprochement-back-on-track/

 

Is Putin a sincere Christian? The Bible says it doesn’t matter

Is Putin a sincere Christian? The Bible says it doesn’t matter

by Don Hank

If your young child were drowning in the surf and a swimmer ran toward the water’s edge to save him, would you consider stopping the would-be rescuer and asking him whether he was a Christian before allowing him to proceed to save your precious child?

Of course not. You’d allow even a dog to save the child and you wouldn’t think twice about the worthiness of the rescuer. And yet, the entire world is watching someone save Christians and other minorities in Syria and some Christians are crying “foul” because they think that Putin may not be completely sincere and therefore not morally worthy of saving them. They want only Christians to save Christians. Yet none of them is going to Syria to save these desperate people. Such hypocrisy cries out for a strong response (and even perhaps a severe lashing).

Some Americans keep insisting that Russian President Vladimir Putin must prove his sincerity. Oddly these same people never speak of “sincerity” when assessing US candidates. This is because US candidates are typically insincere and have made us cynical. Many of us assume deceit is part and parcel of politics.

I don’t know whether Putin is sincere, but as I keep saying, he does not owe us an explanation of his faith. He is a political leader of a secular government. Remember that all attempts to create a Christian theocracy have failed. The Chiliastic Christians of the Dark Ages wanted a theocracy. Thinking they were sent by God to save Europe from the autocratic Catholics and feeling called to usher in the Millennium, they massacred priests, burned churches, plundered shamelessly, and finally were subdued and their leaders executed. (I say this as a Protestant. Truth is truth. Life is not a football game where one is obliged to root for the “home team”).

How could such people believe God would bless their bloody endeavors? Such runs counter to Christ’s teachings of free-will choice, whereby each of us makes his or her personal choice whether to accept or reject Him or how to worship Him.

Putin has professed his Christianity, whatever that may mean to him. He has said that he is not publicly entering into detail about his faith because it is a personal matter. This stance is in no way incompatible with Christ’s teachings when we consider that Jesus said we are to pray in the closet instead of flaunting our faith. Why is that commandment almost universally ignored among Christians, many of whom are rushing to be seen as saviors of mankind, even starting foundations and asking shamelessly for donations supposedly in an attempt to “restore a Christian America,” something they must know they will never accomplish? Is it not in fact all about them? Do they not in fact desire to be worshiped? Yet many of these same people condemn Putin for a lack of sincerity! It often seems as if they are vying for the title of Mr. or Mrs. Hypocrisy.

The important thing is not whether Putin is sincere but how his actions are furthering God’s work. We all know how. It is obvious. Traditional Christianity — including the true definition of marriage — is flourishing in Russia and Syrian Christians are being saved from ISIS only because Putin intervened. Once any of Putin’s critics have done this much, they are free to pile on him. Otherwise they are nothing but hypocrites.

God chooses people to do His work and does not have any religious requirements for this.

Nebuchadnezzar and Constantine are good examples.

Historians are not certain whether Constantine was a Christian but he was indisputably enormously instrumental in legitimizing Christianity in Europe and elsewhere. If that is not enough, let his critics do better.

Many readers will be surprised to learn that in another woefully neglected passage, Paul taught that it does not matter whether the one who delivers Christ’s message is sincere or not.

Philippians 1:

…17 the former proclaim Christ out of selfish ambition rather than from pure motives, thinking to cause me distress in my imprisonment. 18 What matter? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed; and in this I rejoice. Yes, and I will rejoice, 19 for I know that this will turn out for my deliverance through your prayers and the provision of the Spirit of Jesus Christ…

Though I can’t prove it, I believe that Putin is not acting solely out of selfish ambition. There is abundant evidence that he is working for the good of his people (as well as for a better world — a world he calls multipolar, where no country lords it over others). If the Russians had good reason to suspect otherwise, they would not have reelected him so many times. If only the West had even one leader who did likewise!

Honi soit qui mal y pense.

 

 

Are the Russians upsetting the “balance” in the Middle East?

Are the Russians upsetting the “balance” in Middle East?

 

Don Hank

 

Neocons shriek that the Shiite Assad is evil and the Neocon Obama insists that anyone messing with his Sunni pets in ISIS in Syria is “upsetting the balance” in the region. (Neocons described here).

But what balance?

The balance in the entire Muslim world had been upset since 632 AD, with Sunnis, the overwhelming majority, lording it over the less-radical Shiites. Thus of these 2 branches, Sunnis are by far the more violent and intolerantOnly Sunnis currently invade other countries (with US assistance) and kill non-believers such as Christians. Backed up by the compliant media, the Neocon Ministry of Propaganda, keeps feeding us the line that all Muslims are equally evil but that the Saudis (whose proxies ISIS, al Qaeda, al Nusra, and the McCain-funded “rebels” etc, keep slitting Christian throats) are necessary to American freedom.

As a quick reference, note that there are 600 Christian churches in Shiite Iran but none in Saudi Arabia (not saying, of course, that Iranian sharia law courts are in line with Western rules of niceness).

So if Russia and its Shiite allies Syria and Iran succeed in upsetting the “balance,” which currently gives the more evil of the two Islams enormous power over the less evil, then how is that a bad thing?

Without the Shia-Sunni schism in 632, there might well be little or no war in the Arab world. But in 1973 the US signed a secret pact with the Saudis, who are Sunni, and worse, are of the Wahhabi sect, arguably the most violent and destructive ideology in the world, whereby the US agreed to support them militarily in exchange for their propping up the falling dollar. Supposedly, the pact was only intended to protect the Saudi royals and the oil fields, but yet every conflict fought by the US military in the Muslim world since then has benefited not the security of the Saudis but the spread of their violent and repressive religion. Actions speak louder than words on paper. Of course, this was cloaked in patriotic language by the presidents and state department — nonsense like “bringing them democracy” or “freedom”. But the answer to the question cui bono was invariably: Sunni (Wahhabist) Islam, the religion behind ISIS, Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

The US military had become a de facto mercenary force bought and paid for by Saudi Arabia.

The salient example of how the US actually supported Sunni Islam is Kosovo, where it invented a charge of “genocide” against a Christian country, Serbia, and went to a war that resulted in the creation of a Sunni Muslim state from a region with Christian roots going back centuries. (Read the “bloody truth” about Kosovo here: http://www.salon.com/1999/12/14/kosovo_11/.)

This is complicated by the fact that many Kosovars converted to Catholicism years ago, although Catholics and Orthodox have been at odds since the East-West schism in 1054. This puts Russia at odds with mainstream Western politicians in two ways:

1—Russia is Orthodox, like the Serbs and the Middle East Christians, which it supports.

2—Russia is allied with the Shiites in Iran and Syria.

That makes the Russians underdogs in two ways, and being Americans, we normally support the underdog. But the problem has been that Americans are unaware of these details because we know little history and little about the cultures of the countries that Washington seeks to control. I keep hearing from my readers that little details are unimportant.

But details are pieces of a puzzle. By discarding some pieces that appear useless when we first start assembling the puzzle, we make it impossible to insert those pieces later when we see how they fit into the whole.

When anyone expresses doubts as to the wisdom of demonizing Russia and its allies Iran and Syria, the sly Neocons invariably remind their zombie followers that “all Muslims are evil,” thereby sanctioning the killing of Iranians and Syrians. Yet they are strangely silent with regard to the Saudis and their support of the world’s most dangerous terror groups by far. Ignoring the details of Middle East culture – the missing puzzle pieces, most Americans are impotent to oppose this fallacy.

Here is how the deception works.

When Neocons discuss Iran, for example, “all Muslims are evil.” But when discussing the Saudis, they have little or nothing to say. So the real trouble makers in the Muslim world get an invisible pass while their opponents, who are now fighting ISIS, are labeled as evil and Joe Sixpack goes along with the meme. As a result, the people and their keepers perpetuate the age-old imbalance among Muslims, but this imbalance is portrayed by sly US politicians and the media as a “balance,” which may not be upset for fear of some undefined consequence.

The going narrative is full of holes. But they know that if you know the truth, you can free yourselves of their grip, help end the US’s pro-Sunni wars around the globe and help heal the Arab world and the West. As long as you believe this pernicious myth that “all Muslims are equal,” you can think that killing Muslims anywhere is a benefit to the West, giving the Neocons in Washington carte blanche to choose whichever branch of Islam to attack while granting the other – the real trouble maker – immunity. In fact, these unbalanced and one-side wars that ultimately benefit terror drive people out of their homelands and to Europe and the US, creating still more problems and solving none.

But Russians know the truth about history and culture and that is why ISIS is finally being challenged over the protests of the Western elitists desperate to save the dollar at the expense of peace in a perpetual blood-for-dollars strategy.

Jesus said: ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.

Want to be finally free?

You can start by learning the truth about the petrodollar deception, for example, by reading this and about the Sunni-Shia divide by reading

this and this.