Western dialectics are beyond any doubt the pinnacle of human achievements. “Democracy” means “rule of corporations and oligarchs,”+ “Law” means “what civil servants need for their own profit”* while dictionaries define Ev·i·dence [noun] 1: False claim made by a government.
“Terrorists” are those fighting Western regimes; “freedom fighters” are those fighting for Western regimes. All others are slaves to be exploited by their governments.
The large image below belongs to the Ronald Reagan Library, where it is catalogued “President Reagan meeting with Afghan Freedom Fighters to discuss Soviet atrocities in Afghanistan. 2/2/83” According to His Honorable Eminency, the President of the USA and its Colonies Reagan, the Afghani Mujahideen fighting against the illegitimate Soviet occupation were Freedom Fighters while their spinoff, the Taliban, were defined “terrorists” after they liberated their country.
Mercenaries in Aleppo, Syria
Picture by Hamid Khatib, Reuters
The Reagan Doctrine: Sources of American Conduct in the Cold War’s Last Chapter
OK, this is easy to understand, Your Honor. By the way, who were the terrorists, the Apaches or the Anglos?
Western dialectics are the pinnacle of human achievements; no other culture had surpassed its treachery and indefatigable++ rape of humanity.
USA President Reagan and Mujahideen Friends in the White House
Formally: President Reagan meeting with Afghan Freedom Fighters to discuss Soviet atrocities in Afghanistan. 2/2/83.—Ronald Reagan Library Related: Royal Israel, Plebeian Syria? Shin Beth: Netanyahu in the Cross Hairs
Humanity’s super achievers never rest. Specially designed think-tanks, secret-organizations, and super-computers relentlessly work in the eternal search for better ways to fool the people while living on salaries paid by the people’s taxes.
After the slightly disguised Operation Barbarossa, wrongly nicknamed by its Western masters “Arab Spring,”** reached Syria, the proverbial Western inventiveness reached its Everest, when the tiresome “terrorist” and “freedom fighter” became “mercenary” and “rebel.”
In sheer awe, we humble humanity, unworthy of being called people, saluted the West, and adopted the new definitions. By the way, who were the terrorists, the Spanish or the Quechua? The Dutch or the Indonesians? The French or the Laotians? We, the People, know that Western Powers falsely claim to hold the definition rights on Freedom, Democracy and Truth.+
Despite their might, all Western Terror Think-Tanks, secret organizations and super-computers missed the obvious; Syria is neither Libya nor Tunisia. Western mercenaries cannot juggernaut the old lands where key parts of human civilization were born while shouting “only we are right!”
On September 9, Russian President Putin threw a diplomatic bombshell. He proposed to avert an American strike by having President Bashar al-Assad of Syria turn over chemical weapons to the international community, the latter accepted. In a masterful strike, both leaders forced the pin back into the USA’s chemical grenade.
The events since then prove that the attack on Syria is over. Kerry mumbled, Netanyahu became mute and the Shin Beth Night of the Long Knives threatens Netanyahu.
Articles in the Hebrew media have already defined America’s failure in Syria as the turning point in the aftermath of the Cold War; the moment that forced America to recognize that it is not the world’s policeman. One of the articles was entitled “Sinking Empire,” a truly Titanic choice.
Dissolving the Mercenary/Terrorists/Rebels CIA Club
As claimed from the beginning of the attack, and consistently proven by reports in the over two years that passed since then, the mercenaries were a loose coalition held together by especially sticky dollar bills.
A few months ago, their commander openly cried, “The West left us alone to be killed”. After they failed to deliver, the flow of Western weapons and money dried faster than dew in the desert.
History Of Egypt Chaldea, Syria, Babylonia, and Assyria
General Idris forgot to check out the reputation of those paying his salary.
The disintegration of the rebels was imminent, with unending reports on tiny spinoffs appearing sporadically. On September 26, the New York Times acknowledged the defeat of the West.
“A collection of some of the country’s most powerful rebel groups publicly abandoned the opposition’s political leaders,” said The New York Times. “The fractured nature of the opposition, the rising radical Islamist character of some rebel fighters, and the increasing complexity of Syria’s battle lines have left the exile leadership with diminished clout inside the country and have raised the question of whether it could hold up its end of any agreement reached to end the war,” it added.
The Jerusalem Post was no less clear, quoting Reuters, “A group of powerful rebel units have rejected the authority of the Western-backed Syrian opposition leadership abroad and called for it to be reorganized under an Islamic framework,” adding “At least 13 rebel factions were said to have endorsed the statement, including the al-Qaida-linked Nusra Front and the powerful Islamist battalions Ahrar Asham and the Tawheed Brigade.”
The newspaper summarized “Whatever their ideological background, many Syrian opposition groups inside Syria are skeptical and resentful of the Western and Gulf Arab-backed National Coalition.”
In the new situation, no peace agreement would be achieved since the Syrian Government has nobody to sign with. The splitting and re-splitting of the CIA’s cannon fodder is slowly dissolving into the sands that vomited them out. The spring sand-storm that blinded the world is giving way to that Middle Eastern scorching summer that foreigners cannot survive.
“War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.” George Orwell wrote this words in his description of the London Regime in 1984. I wonder, in this Western Doublethink,$ how should one define “defeat?”
+ Does the USA keep the Separation of Powers that is essential to the proper function of a state? The very obvious classification of American judges upon partisan lines tells us that not. The American judiciary system is an extension of its political system and subordinated to it; its judges have been degraded to mere politruks—Soviet political officers—cleansing society from undesired opinions.
On December 12, 2000, the landmark United States Supreme Court decision on the case Bush v. Gore resolved the USA 2000 Presidential Elections in favor of George W. Bush. It was the fourth election in which the electoral vote winner did not also receive a plurality of the popular vote. The decision was taken by a judge appointed by the would-be-president’s father, who was also a president. It is hard to see here democracy in action (we all remember the ridiculous recounting process in Florida) or even justice in action. In America’s questionable legal system, nepotic politruks run the scene. See Prison America.
* Most Israelis do not understand the concept of illegitimate laws. A law may pass through all the tedious processes of legislation. It may be approved by the Knesset Legislation Committee, and afterwards by the Knesset’s General Assembly. It may be published by “Reshumot” (Israel’s official publication announcing new laws) and afterwards be brutally enforced by civil servants. Everything may look “kosher” on paper, and still the law can be illegitimate, demanding automatic disobedience by the public. No government can pass a law violating Human Rights, which are International Law since 1994. No government operating under the Criminal Law system can legislate laws claiming to prevent a future crime.
Oppressive laws designed to benefit the few while violating the many cannot be accepted as legitimate. They are legal in the same way that the Nazi laws were legal, but they are not legitimate. Israel crossed the threshold from legal laws to illegitimate laws many years ago. They remember Hitler only when it is profitable. As Israel teaches regarding the Nazi Regime, illegitimate laws must be disobeyed.
A special law, Nazis and Nazi Collaborators Punishment Law (Hok Le’Asiat Din BaNatzim) from August 1, 1950, enables the execution of Nazis, had been applied. Between 1950 and 1961, this law was used to prosecute 29 Jewish Holocaust survivors alleged to have been Nazi collaborators. The first and only time it was used to execute a person, was in the Adolf Eichmann case. He was illegally kidnapped by Mossad from Argentina in 1960 and two years later was hanged. What makes this a special event from a legal point of view is that this law is a retroactive and extraterritorial law, since the State of Israel didn’t exist during WWII. Moreover, the alleged crimes were neither committed in Israel nor against Israeli citizens.
An ex post facto law (Latin for “after the fact”), or retroactive law, is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences of actions committed prior to the enactment of the law. Ex post facto laws are expressly forbidden by the United States Constitution, though some countries accept them. These laws cannot be accepted as fair practice, regardless of the justifications used for their approval. Simply, how can one protect himself against a law that has not been legislated? Imagine the USA legislating in 2012 a new law declaring all bubble-gum chewing performed before 2012 a crime.
Then the government would declare all citizens guilty unless proven otherwise, and fine them $1.00 automatically. States applying this horror assume that people have the power of precognition (Israel did that again recently, see Minority Report: IDF arrests Palestinian prisoner released in Shalit swap).
Thus, the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators Punishment Law cannot be accepted as a legitimate law, especially due to its geopolitical consequences. If we accept this, we will be forced also to accept a Laotian law sentencing Americans chewing bubble-gum in Honduras to death (no offense intended to any of the abovementioned nations).
A closely related fact is that governments often rely on the ignorance of their citizens; this ignorance is easily supported by an irrelevant educational system controlled by the same governments. How can they expect the People to obey laws that are not taught? Are we still living in the days of the Roman Empire and its obsolete legal principles?
I refer to ignorantia iuris non excusat (a.k.a. ignorantia legis non excusat and ignorantia legis neminem excusat) a legal principle whereby ignorance of a law does not allow one to escape liability. It sounds like the ultimate state-entrapment technique (“I legislated that two minutes ago! You are guilty!” The government said to the citizen who stepped on a cockroach).
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness….
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government…” (from the Preamble to the United States Declaration of Independence).
++ Four catchy phrases ruined Shimon Peres political life, relegating him to the simple formalities of Israel’s Presidency. “Yes and No” was coined by Sefy Rivlin, and cost Peres the 1981 and 1984 elections. A Peres puppet was shown answering “yes and no” to every question asked. Before that, in 1977, Yitzhak Rabin called Peres an “indefatigable conspirator.” Since this article is in English, I won’t analyze the brilliance of the Hebrew saying; in the feat of his lifetime, Rabin ruined Peres with three words. The other two phrases are related to Shimon Peres’ attempt in 1990 to replace Shamir’s government—of which he was Minister of Finances—by a narrow government led by Labor and supported by ultra-Orthodox parties. Peres failed, and Rabin hit again. He called the affair the “Dirty Trick” (literally “The Stinking Exercise”). In the popular protests that followed, the fourth slogan appeared: “Mush’hatim, nim’astem!” (roughly “corrupt people, we’re fed up with you!”). Rabin used it as the Labor slogan for the 1992 election, which he won. It was obvious that he included Peres in the culprits at whom the slogan was aimed.
** Spring in the Middle East is not a good season, since it is when sand storms arrive from the surrounding desert. Sand storms are difficult to imagine. They exist in various versions in the Middle East and the Mediterranean; thus the plethora of names describing them add to their powdery confusion.
In the Holy Land they are caused by winds coming from the east, thus in the Bible they are called “East Wind” (“ruah kadim,” this also means “Forward Wind” since Hebrew looks at the East as its main direction). In Arabic, they are known as “hamsin” (fifty), making allusion to the length of their season.
In Hebrew and Arabic cultures, East is the main direction, thus “ruah kadim” can also be translated as “Forward Wind,” the wind which comes from the eastern desert. A strong wind passing over sand picks up a lot of it, creating a sand storm along its path. It looks like a yellowish fog in the air.
This is easy to imagine and photograph, but the feeling of the eerie event is a different story. The temperature may rise by twenty degrees as soon as the storm starts. It creates an almost unbearable oppressiveness; breathing is unpleasant. Storms are short; they last between a few hours to a couple of days. Afterwards, the hamsin “is broken;” the temperatures drop immediately and a remarkably strong, but short, rain washes the sand from the sky. Cars parked on the street get covered by a generous amount of sand.
$ Doublethink “The keyword here is blackwhite. Like so many Newspeak words, this word has two mutually contradictory meanings. Applied to an opponent, it means the habit of impudently claiming that black is white, in contradiction of the plain facts. Applied to a Party member, it means a loyal willingness to say that black is white when Party discipline demands this.
But it means also the ability to believe that black is white, and more, to know that black is white, and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary. This demands a continuous alteration of the past, made possible by the system of thought which really embraces all the rest, and which is known in Newspeak as doublethink. Doublethink is basically the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.” George Orwell, 1984
Mr. Tov Roy is one of the frequent contributors for The 4th Media.