Vladimir Putin recently made comments on the seriousness of global conflicts that can lead to nuclear conflict. Patriots worldwide should pay close attention as the globalists build their dangerous nuclear arsenal.
In stark contrast to attempts in numerous western countries to stifle free speech online, Russian President Vladimir Putin defended Internet freedom during a conference...
A prominent Swedish lawmaker asserts that Hungarian billionaire George Soros's influence on European politics and policies make him "one of the most dangerous men,"
Those behind the terrorist attack at the Ahvaz military parade
will face “unforgettable vengeance,” Iran’s Revolutionary Guards said,
as Tehran persists in accusing Washington and its regional allies of
orchestrating the assault.
Up to 29 people were
killed and more than 60 others injured after gunmen fired
indiscriminately at the crowd during a military parade in the
southwestern Iranian city of Ahvaz on Saturday. Several terrorist groups
and the separatist ‘Patriotic Arab Democratic Movement in Ahwaz’ have
claimed responsibility for the attack; all four gunmen were killed in
the ensuing stand-off.
Now the influential Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) says it
knows who organized the attack, while adding they are willing to pursue
the attackers “regionally and beyond.” “Considering
[the Guards’] full knowledge about the centers of deployment of the
criminal terrorists’ leaders... they will face a deadly and
unforgettable vengeance in the near future,” the IRGC said in a statement Sunday.
The
senior IRGC commanders said that the militants that carried out the
attack were trained by the Gulf states and were ultimately backed by the
US.
Tehran has, meanwhile, openly blamed the US and its allies in the Middle East for backing the attackers. Washington seeks to “create chaos and turmoil” in Iran so that the US can “take charge”
of the Islamic Republic, the Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said on
Sunday, before leaving for New York to attend a UN General Assembly
meeting.
“The Persian Gulf states are providing monetary, military and political support for these groups,” he added, while accusing the US of being “the sponsor of all these small mercenary countries in the region.” At the same time, he said that Iran’s response to “these crimes” will be “within the framework of law.” Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, also called the attack a “continuation of the plots of the regional states that are puppets of the United States.”
Washington has denied all the accusations and said that the incident has become the result of the Iranian government’s “oppressive” policies.
“He can blame us all he wants. The thing he’s got to do is look at the mirror,” the US envoy to the UN, Nikki Haley told CNN’s ‘State of the Union,’ referring to Rouhani. She also said that Washington “is not looking to do regime change in Iran” or “anywhere” else.
Her words came just a day after the US presidential lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, said that the Iranian government will be toppled. “I don’t know when we’re going to overthrow them … but it’s going to happen,” he told the members of Iranian expat and dissident communities in the US at a so-called ‘Iran Uprising Summit’.
US will overthrow Iranian govt once socio-economic conditions there are ripe for revolution - Trump’s lawyer https://t.co/pETYdlsgfT
That event was held on the day of the deadly attack in Ahvaz. The US
State Department, however, rushed to distance itself from Giuliani’s
comments, stating that Donald Trump’s personal lawyer does not speak for
the administration.
Meanwhile, Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS)
which earlier claimed responsibility for the incident, released a video
that purports to show the alleged assailants planning to carry out the
attack. The authenticity of the footage cannot be independently
verified.
A minute-by-minute account of the Il-20 downing shows Israel's
culpability and either its military bosses' lack of appreciation of
relations with Moscow, or their control of commanding officers, the
Russian defense ministry said.
"We believe that the blame for the Russian Il-20 aircraft tragedy lies entirely with the Israeli Air Force,"
said spokesman Major General Igor Konashenkov, before revealing a
detailed account of events leading to the downing of the Russian Il-20
military aircraft on September 17. The plane was shot down by the Syrian
air defense units as Israeli's F-16s effectively used it as a cover
during the attack on its neighbor.
The report featured previously
undisclosed radar data and details of communications between Russian and
Israeli militaries, and concluded that "the military leadership of
Israel either has no appreciation for the level of relations with
Russia, or has no control over individual commands or commanding
officers who understood that their actions would lead to tragedy."
On the evening of
September 17, the Russian Ilyushin IL-20 with 15 crew on board was
circling over the Idlib de-escalation zone on a special reconnaissance
mission, when four Israeli F-16 fighter jets left their country's
airspace and flew over the neutral Mediterranean waters towards the
Syrian coast. The Israeli Air Force gave the Russian side less than a
minute's warning before dropping the precision-guided glide bombs,
leaving virtually no time for any safety maneuvers, Konashenkov said,
calling such actions "a clear violation of the 2015 Russian-Israeli agreements."
Moreover,
the Israeli military failed to provide the location of their jets or
properly specify their targets, claiming they were going to attack
several 'industrial facilities' in northern Syria, close to the Il-20’s
area of operation. The misinformation prompted the Russian Command to
order the recon plane back to the Khmeimim air base. The Israeli jets,
however, instead almost immediately attacked the western Syrian Latakia
province.
"The misleading information provided by the
Israeli officer about the area of strikes did not allow the Russian
Il-20 airplane to move timely to a safe area."
Once
the Syrian air defenses responded to the initial strike, the Israeli
jets switched on radar jamming and pulled back, apparently preparing for
another attack. One of the jets then approached the Syrian coast –and
the Russian plane which at that time was preparing to land– again.
The Israeli pilot must have been well aware of the fact that the Il-20
has a much larger radar cross-section than his F-16, and would become a "preferred target"
for the Syrian air defense units, who use different friend-or-foe
systems with the Russians, Konashenkov said. Thus, for the Syrians, the
reconnaissance plane could appear as a group of Israeli jets.
"The Israeli jets saw the Russian Ilyushin Il-20 and used it as a shield against the anti-aircraft missiles, while they carried on maneuvering in the region," Konashenkov said during the news briefing.
"The actions of the Israeli fighter pilots,
which led to the loss of life of 15 Russian servicemen, either lacked
professionalism or were an act of criminal negligence, to say the least."
Finally,
the Israeli jets carried out their maneuvers in the immediate vicinity
of the Khmeimim air base, which is used both by military and civilian
aircraft, including passenger planes, the ministry's spokesman
emphasized, saying that the reckless actions of the Israeli pilots could
also have posed a threat to any passenger or transport aircraft that
may have happened to be there at that time.
Israel 'crossed the line of civilized relations' with 'ungrateful response'
Israel's
negligent behavior amounts to a flagrant violation of the very spirit
of cooperation between the countries, Konashenkov stated, noting that
Russia has never broken its commitment to the deconfliction agreement –
it has always informed Israel about their missions in advance and has
never used its air defense capabilities against the Israelis, even
though their airstrikes sometimes put the Russian servicemen in danger.
Russia has sent as many as 310 notifications to the Israeli Air Force
Command, while the latter appeared to be reluctant to show the same
level of commitment, notifying only 25 times even though its jets
carried out more than 200 strikes against targets located in Syria over
the past 18 months alone.
"This is an extremely ungrateful
response to all that has been done by the Russian Federation for Israel
and the Israeli people recently," Konashenkov said.
The Russian military supported the Syrian military operation in the Golan Heights to "ensure there were no shelling attacks on Israeli territory" anymore, thus allowing the UN peacekeeping mission to resume patrolling of the contested border between Syria and Israel after "a six-year hiatus."
Russia also managed to secure the withdrawal of all Iran-backed groups from the Golan Heights to a "safe distance for Israel," more than 140 kilometers to the east of Syria, the spokesperson said, adding that this was done at the request of Tel Aviv. "A
total of 1,050 personnel, 24 MLRSs and tactical missiles, as well as
145 pieces of other munitions and military equipment were withdrawn from
the area," Konashenkov told journalists.
The Russian Defense
Ministry had provided assistance in preserving Jewish sacred places and
graves in the city of Aleppo. Putting Russian Special Forces soldiers'
lives in danger, it also organized the search for the remains of some
Israeli servicemen that died during the past conflicts in an area where
the Syrian forces were combating Islamic State (IS, former ISIS)
terrorists at that time.
"In view of the above, the hostile actions
committed by the Israeli Air Force against the Russian Ilyushin Il-20
aircraft cross the line of civilized relations."
While
Israel said that it mourned the deaths of Russian troops, the IDF
statement following the incident shifted all the blame for the incident
solely on Damascus, and its Iranian and Lebanese allies.
Spokesperson for the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs Maria Zakharova conducts her weekly press briefing on current foreign affairs in St. Petersburg.
Leftists Demand Japan “Embrace Multiculturalism” Because a Mixed Race Player Won the US Open
Daily Beast writer wants ‘xenophobic’ country with low immigration & low crime to open its borders
Leftists have begun demanding
that Japan, a country with low levels of immigration and a low crime
rate, begin accepting “multiculturalism” after a half-Japanese tennis
player with a Haitian-American father won the US Open.
Naomi Osaka became the first Japanese
tennis player to win a Grand Slam singles tournament when she defeated
Serena Williams in the final in New York City last weekend.
The fact that her win was greeted
enthusiastically by some in Japan and that Osaka is mixed race provided
leftists with an immediate excuse to insist that Japan open its borders
to mass immigration.
In an article entitled Japan Needs ‘Foreigner Blood’ Like Naomi Osaka’s,
the Daily Beast’s Jake Adelstein acknowledges that limited immigration,
ethnically homogenous Japan has a low crime rate and that shootings
remain in the single digits every year, but claims this is due to strong
policing and gun control laws.
Asserting that “xenophobia runs deep”
in Japan, Adelstein urges the country to “create the multiracial society
it needs to survive and thrive as a nation” due to its declining birth
rates, adding that the fact Osaka can barely speak Japanese shouldn’t be
an issue.
“With a dwindling population but a
slightly increasing number of international marriages, Japan has to
decide how to combat racism, embrace multiculturalism and tolerance if
it wants to survive,” he concludes, drawing attention to a UN migration
plan that suggests in order to keep the size of the working-age
population constant, Japan “would need 33.5 million immigrants from 1995
through 2050.”
Noticeably absent from Adelstein’s
argument is the fact that the vast majority of immigrants do not go on
to become star athletes. In reality, in most European countries that
have opened their borders to mass immigration, migrants go on welfare
and are significantly overrepresented in crime statistics.
Two example stand out. In Sweden,
which has suffered a rise in sexual assaults, grenade attacks and other
forms of violent crime since accepting a new wave of “refugees” in 2015,
58% of welfare payments go to migrants despite them making up 16% of the population.
Meanwhile, in Germany, which has seen
recent protests against mass immigration, violent crime has risen over
the last two years and 90% of it is due to migrants, according to the
German government’s own statistics.
The Japanese population itself is also
largely hostile to mass immigration, a view validated by the fact that
despite accepting extremely few Muslim refugees, two of them were arrested in the suspected gang rape of a woman in Tokyo in 2016.
A recent poll
of big and midsized firms found that only 38% favor allowing in
unskilled migrants despite Japan’s population decrease and the
opportunity to import cheap labor.
The number of foreigners living in
Japan has doubled in the past decade to 1.3 million, but that remains
below 2% of the work force.
As is documented in the video below,
not a million miles away in South Korea, well over 500,000 people
recently signed a petition saying they reject all Muslim immigration
into their country. Protesters took to the streets carrying signs that
said, “don’t be like Europe.”
Infowars has been banned by Facebook. Please help by sharing this article on your own Facebook page.
Iran's representative to the United Nations slams the United States for
its illegal military presence in Syria, describing it as an act of
aggression.
Gholam-Ali Khoshrou who was speaking at the Security Council’s special
session on Syria said Iran is on the ground in that country on an
invitation by Damascus. He added that Tehran is playing a constructive
role in bringing peace and prosperity to Syria and supports all efforts
toward a political solution. During the meeting held on Russia’s
request, US ambassador Nikky Haley accused Russia and Iran of failing to
protect civilians in Idlib province. She also threatened the use of
force if the Syrian army uses chemical weapons. In reaction, the Russian
ambassador accused the extremist groups of planning to launch a false
flag chemical attack in Idlib.
Filming of staged chemical attack in Syrian Idlib begins - Russian MoD
Footage, meant to serve as proof that the Syrian government has
conducted a chemical weapons attack in Idlib, Syria, is to be handed to
global news outlets by the end of Tuesday, the Russian military claims.
Several Middle East TV
channels and a US news channel have been sent to Jisr al-Shughur in
Syria’s Idlib Governorate to produce the footage needed for the
provocation, a statement by the Russian Center for Syrian Reconciliation
said. It added the intelligence came from local residents of Jisr
al-Shughur.
“All the footage of the staged provocation in Jisr
al-Shughur is to be delivered to the newsrooms of TV channels, which are
to broadcast it after its publication on social media,” the statement claimed.
It also said that an Islamist group was provided with two canisters of a “chlorine-based chemical” for the purpose of the operation.
The
Russian military said the footage would include scenes of White Helmets
operatives treating supposed victims of an apparent barrel bomb
chemical weapon attack by Damascus.
Moscow has repeatedly warned
that a false flag chemical weapon attack was being prepared in Idlib,
giving the US and its allies justification to attack Syrian government
forces. Senior US officials have threatened
Damascus with retaliation if it uses chemical weapons in Idlib and even
preemptively assigned the blame for any such attack to the government.
Speaking
at the UN security Council meeting on Tuesday, Russia’s Ambassador
Vassily Nebenzya, stressed that Damascus did not possess any chemical
weaponry to begin with. Any incident with such weaponry would only
benefit the militants, fighting Syria’s government.
“The
false-flag attack by the adversaries of Damascus, who count on foreign
armed support, is very possible. We have irrefutable evidence of
preparations [for it],” the official stated.
Russia Was Right: The US Spits Upon Peace in Korea
A Russia Truth exclusive article by Adam Garrie
Late last year, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov questioned whether America’s goal for the Korean peninsula is peace or whether it is simply to consummately provoke? He further lambasted US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley for delivering “a really blood-soaked tirade” against North Korea at the UN Security Council.
Today, it has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the US bluff has been called by Pyongyang and consequently the only reaction the US can muster is one of continued hostility, insults and childish brinksmanship.
North and South Korean officials have reopened their direct phone line in preparation for further talks. It is not beyond the realm of possible that Kim Jong-un may hold a phone conversation with South Korean President Moon Jae-in, sometime in the near future.
While the two Korean states have developed along entirely different political paths, many foreign observers forget that as a single Korean people, there is no animosity between individuals on opposite sides of the border.
North Korean songs about unification are neither violent nor boastful, they are generally melancholic pieces about the absence of one’s fellow man and the hope for a more fraternal future.
Likewise, South Korea’s population is overwhelmingly in favour of peace and reconciliation. Demonstrations against the US militarisation of the Korean peninsula are becoming ever more common in the South as ordinary people make impassioned stands in the name of peace and comradeship.
The latest developments include a possible olive branch from Pyongyang to the South in what seems to be the early stages of a renewed Sunshine policy, in the form of a DPRK offer to participate in the forthcoming Winter Olympics in South Korea.
One of the major differences between the possible Sunshine Policy of 2018 and the one which began in 1998, is that this time, the first overture was initiated by North Korea’s leader, whilst 20 years ago, South Korea’s Kim Dae-jung made the first move towards political openness with Pyongyang.
This is significant because it proves that for all the talk of how “mysterious” North Korea is, in reality the North Korean government has done everything it said it would.
North Korea’s position can be summarised in the following way:
Once North Korea has developed a fully functional nuclear deterrent capable of striking the US mainland, in order to counter US nuclear weapons which can strike anywhere in the world—subsequently, Pyongyang will engage in peace talks with any party that approaches it with respect and does not demand an end to its nuclear deterrent.
North Korea has also stated that it will only begin to entertain Russian President Vladimir Putin’s proposals for a tripartite economic initiative encompassing Russia and the two Korean states, once Pyongyang is satisfied that Seoul does not seek to undermine the DPRK’s security. Such statements were initially offered by the North Korean delegation to the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok, in September of 2017.
It would appear that North Korea’s overtures of South Korea in January of 2018 are an indication that sufficient trust has been secured and Pyongyang will now take the early steps which are necessary in order to begin participation in Putin’s tripartite economic initiative—an initiative which South Korea’s President has also received positively.
For a region described as “unstable” and in spite of constant threats from the US to “destroy” North Korea, things are progressing in a surprisingly orderly fashion. It could be said that “everything is going according to plan” and certainly from the perspective of North Korea, Pyongyang’s officials are doing everything they said they would do while South Korea under Moon Jae-in has proved itself to be genuinely interested in cooperation and peace rather than confrontation and provocation.
Russia and China meanwhile have encouraged cross-border cooperation and dialogue as both nations have developed positive relations with South Korea. In China’s case, it could be argued that at this point in time, relations between Beijing and Seoul are smoother than those between Beijing and Pyongyang. That notwithstanding, both Russia and China are certain to welcome the re-commencement of dialogue between the two Koreas.
Indeed, any nation interested in genuine peace would welcome the latest moves, but one large nation stands alone in protesting the latest positive developments on the Korean peninsula. Predictably, this nation is the United States.
In taking a pessimistic and indeed threatening attitude to North Korea, as expressed in outrageous Tweets from Donald Trump and statements from Nikki Haley made after Kim Jong-un committed himself to dialogue and reconciliation with South Korea, the US has revealed a truth that many, including Russia’s Foreign Minister, have long acknowledged: peace is not the American goal for the Korean peninsula.
Instead, the US wants a perpetually frozen conflict which occasionally bushes up against disaster in order to maintain a powerful military presence in South Korea. The reason for this is because the US is intent on disrupting economic connectivity between the two Koreas who in turn would link up with both Russia and China as part of the One Belt—One Road initiative.
This is the main goal of the US in the region. It is one that seeks to perpetuate conflict in order to retard China’s economic progress with its neighbours and all with the benefit of increasing the sale of overpriced weapons to countries like Japan.
The two Koreas, China and Russia must not be deterred by the United Sates. Ultimately, it is up to the leaders in Seoul, Pyongyang, Beijing and Moscow to forge a successful and pragmatic peace plan which ultimately could only be destroyed if the US became mad enough to start a new war in the region—something it seems even Trump’s regime is not willing to risk.
In spite of talk of “de-nuclearisation”, at this point in time, such a goal is unrealistic. The most important aim ought to be the creation of an economically integrated environment where the
importance of such weapons becomes minimised based on an atmosphere of trust.
North Korea is now ready to trust South Korea, in spite of its distrust of the US. US officials only have themselves to blame for alienating North Korea as much as they have.
Palestine wakes the
sleeping giant that is the UN General Assembly
By Adam Garrie - 19th December 2017
For decades, discussions about reforming the United Nations
have often been more amplified than debates about world peace, poverty
alleviation and disease control, which ought to be the primary topics of debate
at such a body.
That being said, it is not difficult to see why so many
countries are exasperated with the UN. The UN continues to be dominated by the
United States and its allies who sit as permanent members on the Security
Council.
Until 1971, the Security Council was little more than a
consummately deadlocked chamber where four countries typically lined up against
the lone Soviet Union among the five permeant members who wield veto power.
This was due to the farcical situation of Chinese Taipei
(aka the Republic of China/Taiwan) holding the Chinese seat at the UN, even
after the People’s Republic of China became the authentic Chinese state in 1949.
Today’s typically 3 against 1 deadlocked Security Council is
at least slightly more representative than it was in the 1950s and 1960s, when
the PRC had no seat at the UN, but as yesterday’s Security Council vote on
Al-Quds demonstrates, all it takes is one US veto to effectively shatter the
democratic legitimacy of the UNSC.
Yesterday, the entire Security Council voted to affirm the
lack of legitimacy behind Washington’s move to recognise Al-Quds as the Israeli
capital. The only problem is that the US invoked its veto power, thus negating
the democratic will of the rest of the Security Council.
Subsequent to the US vote, Palestinian Presidential advisor Nabil
Abu Rdeneh, slammed the US veto a “provocation”.
Palestine has called
for an emergency meeting of the UN General Assembly to vote on the same matter.
There, the motion rendering Trump’s decision illegitimate will likely pass in a
landslide vote.
The events of the past few days make a strong case for
Libyan Revolutionary leader Muammar Gaddafi’s argument for total UN reform
which would see the General Assembly becoming the highest constituent element
of the UN, thus incorporating the current functions of the Security Council,
while the UNSC would simply exist as an executive body which would automatically
ratify decisions made by a democratic vote in the General Assembly.
Gaddafi spoke before the General Assembly in 2009 and
proposed the following reform measure,
“This Assembly is our democratic
forum and the Security Council should be responsible before it; we should not
accept the current situation. These are the legislators of the Members of the
United Nations, and their resolutions should be binding. It is said that the
General Assembly should do whatever the Security Council recommends. On the
contrary, the Security Council should do whatever the General Assembly decides.
This is the United Nations, the Assembly that includes 192 countries. It is not
the Security Council, which includes only 15 of the Member States. How can we
be happy about global peace and security if the whole world is controlled by
only five countries?
We are 192 nations and countries,
and we are like Speakers’ Corner in London’s Hyde Park. We just speak and
nobody implements our decisions. We are mere decoration, without any real
substance. We are Speakers’ Corner, no more, no less. We just make speeches and
then disappear. This is who you are right now. Once the Security Council
becomes only an executive body for resolutions adopted by the General Assembly,
there will be no competition for membership of the Council. Once the Security
Council becomes a tool to implement General Assembly resolutions, there will be
no need for any competition. The Security Council should, quite simply,
represent all nations. In accordance with the proposal submitted to the General
Assembly, there would be permanent seats on the Security Council for all unions
and groups of countries. The 27 countries of the European Union should have a
permanent seat on the Security Council. The countries of the African Union
should have a permanent seat on the Security Council.
The Latin American and ASEAN
countries should have permanent seats. The Russian Federation and the United
States of America are already permanent members of the Security Council. The Southern
African Development Community (SADC), once it is fully established, should have
a permanent seat. The 22 countries of the Arab League should have a permanent
seat. The 57 countries of the Islamic Conference should have a permanent seat.
The 118 countries of the Non-Aligned Movement should have a permanent seat.
Then there is the G-100; perhaps the small countries should also have a
permanent seat. Countries not included in the unions that I have mentioned
could perhaps be assigned a permanent seat, to be occupied by them in rotation
every six or twelve months”.
If Gaddafi’s plan was implemented, there is no doubt that
yesterday’s Security Council motion would have been passed overwhelmingly. Even
among traditional US allies, it received votes of support.
The reason that the UN is in the stronghold of the United
States, is because the structure of the Security Council allows certain nations
to hold all others at ransom. The fact that the UN is on US soil, is another
reason for this unfair advantage. Gaddafi likewise proposed moving the UN to a
more globally central and political neutral location.
Ultimately, the current structure of the Security Council
has rendered the UN undemocratic while Gaddafi’s proposals would instantly made
the UN a fully democratic body.
One of the biggest worries in such a situation, is that
Russia and China, who typically vote against the US and its allies, would lose
their veto power. While fears about surrendering an important privilege which
is typically used to prevent aggressive and provocative US drafted resolutions
from gaining ascension, is a real fear, it negates something far more
important.
The majority of the world is more sympathetic to the Russian
and Chinese positions than that of the United States and its increasingly few
allies. Africa, almost all of Asia, southern and parts of Eastern Europe as
well as most of Latin America have only suffered due to the neo-imperial
tactics of aggressive war profiteering that the US attempts to legitimise with
a UN rubber stamp.
In this sense Palestine has awoken the world to the real
potential of the UN which is enshrined in the preamble of the UN Charter but
which is systematically absent in the mechanics and procedural rules of the
UN’s day-to-day operation.
While many deride the UN for not being able to back up its
pronouncements with actions, this is a view that tends to underestimate the
power of a truly global-democratic quorum of nations speaking in a singular
voice.
On the issue of Palestine, the United States has drawn a
line between Washington and Tel Aviv on one side and virtually the entire world
on the other.
It was for just such moments that an unbound General
Assembly could demonstrate that no matter how wealthy, violent or powerful any
nation is, one can still be isolated, rejected and condemned.
When the General Assembly inevitably votes in favour of
justice for Palestine, it will be wise to remember the sage proposals of
Gaddafi who understood the power of actual democracy, far more than the
imperialists who so frequently preach it in order to cover the trail of blood
and tears they have created throughout Asia, Africa, the Middle Eastand Latin America.
Liberteon