SOME WORDS OF MODERATION, IS IT ALL LEADING TO THE SAME RESULTS ???

After few weeks of political maneuvering, Benjamin Netanyahu said he has formed a government in Israel, putting him on the brink of leading the most right-wing fascist administration in the country's history, and playing dangerously with the entire peace process within Israel, the illegally occupied territories, and the entire Middle-East. 

I received lately this letter from a knowledgeable and concerned party from within, I'm copying it verbatim and letting you be the judges.     

J Street . 

  

The past few weeks here in Israel have brought a series of frightening announcements as Benjamin Netanyahu assembles the most extreme, right-wing government in our history. 

 Itamar Ben Gvir -- who has encouraged violence against Palestinians and Arab Israelis and was once described as the “go-to” defense lawyer for violent settlers -- is in line to be Israel’s Minister for National Security, with authority over the police. 

Bezalel Smotrich -- a settler activist who has called for full annexation of the West Bank and has supported Arab-Jewish segregation within Israel -- looks set to be in charge of the settlements and the Occupied Territory.

Avi Maoz -- who has mocked trans colleagues, opposed gender equality laws and wants to cancel the Jerusalem Pride parade -- will likely play a significant role in the education ministry. 

This new government could do terrible damage to democratic rights and freedoms within Israel, not to mention in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. While the final government is still a few days from taking office, we already know we’re going to need a strong, effective response from the Biden Administration. 

 Together, we must show the Biden Administration that pro-Israel Americans are deeply worried about Israeli democracy -- and want our leaders to stand up to Netanyahu’s band of extremists. It’s not just human rights advocates and progressives sounding the alarm. The former deputy of the Shin Bet security agency, Roni Alsheikh, has said Ben Gvir’s pending appointment makes him “anxious for the fate of the State of Israel.” 

 Amos Gilad, a former chief of Israeli military intelligence, has said that Smotrich would be “a major disaster” if he pursued his hardline proposals within the Ministry of Defense. 

 The Jerusalem Post Editorial Board said that Avi Maoz’s “blatant homophobia” and hostility to women and progressive Jews make him “unfit to have authority on Israel's education system.” 

 If leading, mainstream Israelis are comfortable pushing back against Netanyahu’s extremist allies, then we should expect similar leadership from a White House that has committed itself to equal measures of freedom, security and dignity for all Israelis and Palestinians. Please, let's all consider an end-of-year contribution to J Street to help push the Biden Administration to stand up for what’s right. Every donation strengthens our movement >> . 

True leadership from the US means standing up for the shared values at the heart of the US-Israel relationship, including equal rights and democratic freedoms. It means a clear red line against home demolitions, settlement expansion and annexation -- steps that lead to endless conflict and injustice. 

 Thank you, sincerely, for your support. Nadav Tamir Executive Director, J Street Israel.

As always my profound gratitude to all my good readers, stay safe and well. 

A GOOD ANALYSIS FROM THE LEVANT .....

Ghassan Salibi from Annahar Newspaper - November 29, 2022

The Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran , Ayatollah Ali Khamenei , considered that "Iran's policy succeeded in Lebanon, Iraq and Syria ," which led to what he described as "the defeat of the United States" in these countries, stressing that " The Iranian role in the three countries contributed to the failure of the American project to strike Iran through them. 

In his speech last Saturday before the "Popular Mobilization Forces," the Iranian leader stressed the importance of "geographical and geopolitical characteristics" for his country's policy, noting that "the Islamic Revolution changed the hearts of Iran's neighboring countries. And Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Sudan and Somalia," boasting from this standpoint that "the Islamic revolution spread to the peoples of the region and neighboring countries and brought about change in them."

Khamenei stressed that negotiating with the United States will not end the unrest that the country has been witnessing for two months, "because Washington will always demand more."

It is not new for an Iranian official to acknowledge his country's control over a group of Arab countries. What is new is that Khamenei personally states this clearly. Perhaps because his regime is being shaken by the popular uprising today, he wanted to send a message of "pride" in his achievements, to his people first, and to the outside world second, who accuse him of inciting the uprising. Khamenei's statement clarifies the Iranian role, which is to "thwart the American project," but not in defense of the Arab countries, as Nasrallah claims, for example, but rather because the American project was intended to "strike Iran through them." In other words, Khamenei does not pay any attention to the entities of these countries, in which interference, without their will, of course, is a way to defend Iran in the face of the United States of America. Knowing that the American-Israeli project did not fail, it is the sectarian fragmentation of the region, and this is exactly what the Iranian role that Khamenei praises has led to.

However, Khamenei again contradicts himself when he boasts that the Islamic Revolution has moved to neighboring countries, meaning that his presence in these countries was aimed at expanding the Islamic Revolution, and not with the motive of thwarting the American project. He aspires to change "the hearts of neighboring countries", that is, to Islamize them according to the doctrine of the rule of the jurist, and he considers that he has succeeded in that.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said in an interview he made a few days before Khamenei's statement, with a group of journalists "away from the limelight", "unveiling" him: "We supported Hezbollah, and we still support it, and we will continue to support it because it is a strategic ally of ours," expressing " Fearing for Lebanon and its future in light of the current reality, because it is the main side of Syria, and stability in it is very important for Syria.

The Assad regime has never hidden its interference in Lebanon or its support for Hezbollah, not out of concern for the Lebanese people or Lebanon, but because the latter is the "flank" of Syria. The Assad regime has always acted as if Lebanon was not an independent entity governed by a state.

Of course, it is remarkable that the two statements, which have their own impact in Lebanon, coincided with the election of a president of the republic, who seems to be pending a regional and international agreement, which evidence does not indicate is imminent, with Khamenei questioning the feasibility of negotiating with the United States, which always demands “more.” Perhaps Khamenei was hinting at Iran's recent concessions, by demarcating the borders with Israel in Lebanon, and facilitating the election of a president and the formation of a government in Iraq. Instead of rewarding it for that, the United States is now demanding more in the wake of the popular uprising in Iran, which it is accused of fueling.

Only two days after the statements of Khamenei and Al-Assad, Patriarch Mar Beshara Boutros Al-Rahi asked in his Sunday sermon from the Church of Maron in Rome: “What is meant? I erase the active Christian role in general and the Maronite in particular? The government immediately after the end of binding consultations? Is it more important than the head of state?”, warning that “Lebanon cannot wait for others to come to elect its president, especially since what is happening in the region does not necessarily promise solutions to existing problems, but rather the danger remains of the emergence of new wars that would lead to The complexity of the Lebanese solution.

The Patriarch is right to fear for the Christian and Maronite role, after all the developments in the region and in Lebanon. His fear was likely exacerbated by Khamenei's statement of "changing hearts" and the transmission of the Islamic Revolution to the peoples of the region. But the words of al-Assad and Khamenei are actually more dangerous than that, as they abolished the Lebanese entity in their statements. Will the patriarchate defend the entity that is subject to extinction, by adhering to the Christian-Maronite role only, even though most of the Lebanese are keen on the Christian role and the perpetuation of the entity, and they are resentful of the Iranian role? ? And if the opponent, who is linked to Khamenei and Assad, allows the Christians to maintain the position of the presidency, in the event that the demand is limited to this obsession, then will the patriarch accept a Christian president who resembles Emile Lahoud and Michel Aoun, as Nasrallah wants? Did the Maronite Patriarchate's reluctance to demand the overthrow of Lahoud and Aoun in the past protect the Christian role and save the entity from falling?

The Maronite community, headed by the Patriarchate, “made” the Lebanese entity with the aim of protecting the Christian and Maronite role, after the community expanded demographically, geographically, and economically. Is the concern today reversed, that is, protecting the role, even in the likeness of an entity, homeland, and state?

And if this new position is the result of the decline of the Christian presence and influence at all levels, and the lack of reliance currently on the guarantee provided by the entity and the existing central system in the constitution, after the dominance of "Hezbollah" over the state, then is it not better to express the position clearly, which is the preference for the system Expanded decentralization and work to endorse it, instead of just launching ambiguous positions, as if its owners were ashamed to propose what is commensurate with their current and strategic interest? Does moderation at the stage of exposing the entity to danger, in turn encourage the opponent to moderation? Previous experiences indicated the opposite. Here is the excellent Jaafari Mufti, Sheikh Ahmad Qabalan, and as usual after every statement by the patriarch, he confirms that "Lebanon's neutrality is forbidden, the time of Louis XIV is over, and broad decentralization is an existential danger."

What applies regarding the necessity of strategically correcting the positions of the Maronite Patriarchate also applies to the positions of most of the "change forces", which are still dealing with the presidential election and the fate of the entity, with a lightness that the supporters themselves can no longer bear. I have expanded on the analysis of this dilemma in my new book, published by Dar Saer Al-Mashreq, entitled “The Labyrinths of Change in the Age of Rejection.”

With repeated voting with the white paper, the white color "Bach" became yellowish, which deepened with the statements of Khamenei and Assad. And because we are in the World Cup football season, I borrow from him the meaning of the yellow card, which is the yellow card that the referee raises in the face of a player to warn him after he commits a mistake. And here are the deputies of the "defiance" raising the yellow card in the face of the parliament, to warn it against trying to repeat its fatal mistake against the "defiance", which is the commitment to the rules of democracy.

My, as always, gratitude to all my readers for their time with the blogs, stay safe and well. 

A DIFERENT POLITICAL BRAINWASHING AND PROPAGANDA STYLE.......

As President Macron and the French first lady are in an official Sate visit to America's President, surrounded by great friendship and pomp, I felt like exposing some of the opposing tactics and manipulations of the propaganda machines working day and night to obstruct and upset politicians and politics opposing their policies and maintaining of absolute power... 

I received lately an Arabic text claiming to be a recent authentic translation of President Macron of France speech, initially I couldn't believe the language, nor the insinuations in the report, checking and Googling the site I found that the speech was delivered the 26 of Sept 2017, and it was a good futuristic plan for Europe, with no allusion to many new topics and modern type political twists this modern translation claims, it is a cheap propagandist effort by specialized black rooms and propagandist paid by the other side, i.e. nowadays the Russian Putin camps and their affiliates, it's spreading powerfully in many parts of the world, more so in the Arabic world. I present you here with my translation of the Arabic report I received, just to have an idea of the little poisonous intrusions, and if you would google the link at the end, and read in English the original speech, up to you to make your own conclusions, but it's a good show of modern tactics to brainwashing minds efforts....      (Guo Rong (ID:xuu 5336)

Dangerous speech by the president of France

France, Europe and America.
The French President's internal speech came out and shocked the world!!

I highly recommend that you take your time to read this article as it foretells of future events that are likely to occur.

The opinions expressed fully express those of the current French President Emmanuel Macron!

Recently, at an internal meeting, Macron made a general analysis of the current international situation. He sighed: "Western domination is coming to an end!"

How do you see the transformation of the superpower in the world today? Macron's closed speech was very valuable.

Macron:

We live together in this world, and the envoys here know this world better than I do.

Yes, the international order is upending in a whole new way, and I am sure this is a major upheaval in our history, with far-reaching consequences in almost all regions.

It is a shift in the international system, geopolitical integration, and strategic reorganization.

Yes, I must admit that Western hegemony may be coming to an end.

Since the eighteenth century, we have become accustomed to an international system based on Western domination.

This France is inspired by the Enlightenment of the 18th century.

This is Britain from the nineteenth century led by the Industrial Revolution.

This America emerged from the twentieth century after two world wars.

France, the United Kingdom, and the United States made the West great for 300 years.

France is culture, England is industry and America is war.

We are used to this grandeur that gives us absolute dominance over global economics and politics.

But things are changing.
Some crises come from our mistakes in the West, while others come from the challenges of emerging countries.

Within Western countries, the many wrong choices the United States has made in the face of crises have severely shaken our hegemony.

Note that this didn't just start with the Trump administration, other US presidents made other wrong choices long before Trump, Clinton's China policy, Bush war policy, Obama's global financial crisis, and quantitative easing.

The misguided policies of these American leaders are all fundamental mistakes that shake Western hegemony. However, on the other hand, we have greatly underestimated the emergence of emerging forces.

They underestimated the rise of these emerging powers, not just two years ago, but ten or twenty years ago.

We underestimated them from the start!

We must admit that China and Russia have had great success over the years under different leadership styles.

India is also rapidly emerging as an economic power and at the same time it has also become a political power, China, Russia and India, these countries compared to the United States, France and the United Kingdom.

Let's not say anything else, just their political imagination is much stronger than Westerners today. Having strong economic power, they begin to search for their "philosophy and culture".

They no longer believed in Western politics, but began to pursue their "national culture". This has nothing to do with democracy or not. India is a democratic country, and it is doing the same too, searching for its "national culture".

When these emerging nations find their national culture and begin to believe in it, they will gradually get rid of the "philosophical culture" that Western hegemony instilled in them in the past.

This is the beginning of the end of Western hegemony!

The end of Western hegemony lies not in economic decline, nor in military decline, but rather in cultural decline.

When your values ​​can no longer be exported to emerging countries, this is the beginning of your decline.

I think the political imagination of these emerging countries is higher than our imagination.

Political imagination is very important. It has strong and coherent connotations and can lead to further political inspiration.

Whether we are more daring in politics, the political imagination of emerging countries far exceeds the imagination of Europeans today, all this shocked me deeply!!!

China has lifted 700 million people out of poverty, and more poverty will be lifted in the future, but in France, the market economy is increasing income inequality at an unprecedented rate.

The outrage of the middle class last year brought profound changes to the French political system, and since the 19th century, French life has been in a sort of equilibrium.

Personal liberty, democracy, and a wealthy middle class, these three are the tripods that balance France's politics, but the crisis was born when the middle class was no longer the cornerstone of our country, when the middle class believed that its interests were in jeopardy.

They will have fundamental doubts about democracy and the market system. Can such a system give me a better life?

They have the right to be highly skeptical and they have the right to join a radical political movement.

In the United Kingdom, the downfall of the political system is becoming more and more apparent.

The resounding slogan of Brexit, Take Back Control, says it all.

People believe that their fate is no longer in their hands, so they want to "take back control."

The straightforward way to "take back control" is to leave the European Union. They hate the European Union, they hate old politics, and they want something more politically creative.

In the final analysis, the political system of the past failed to benefit the British and even made their lives worse and worse, but the political leaders at the top did not realize this.

So they failed.

As for the United States, although Americans belong to the Western camp, they always have different humanitarian standards (meaning religion) than Europe.

Americans' sensitivity to issues of climate, equality, and social balance does not exist in the same way as Europe (which means that the gap between rich and poor in the United States is much larger than it does in Europe).

There is a clear gap between American civilization and European civilization. Although the United States and Europe are closely allied, our differences have always existed.

Trump's rise to power has amplified the original differences.

I must stress that Europe is different from the United States.

Of course, neither Hungarian Catholics nor Russian Orthodox Christians can decide on the plan for European civilization, but Europe's long-term pursuit of the United States to expel Russia from the European continent is not necessarily true.

The United States needs to confront Russia and Europe, but does Europe need it?

Europe is cooperating with the United States to expel Russia, which may be Europe's biggest geopolitical mistake of the 21st century.

The consequence of expelling Russia is that Putin has no choice but to embrace China, and this only gives China and Russia a chance to warm up.

Let one of our competitors combine with another to create a big problem, which is what the Americans do.

If Europe had not expelled Russia, Russia's policies would not have been anti-Western at all. Now, in terms of geopolitics, it is impossible to provide much assistance to the great powers of the East.

But Europe's problem is the military problem.

Because of the existence of NATO, it becomes very difficult for Europe to form another European army, and as long as the “European army” does not exist, Europe will be under the control of the political orders of the United States.

Unfortunately, when I spoke about this with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, we were all pessimistic. In Europe, no one has the ability to form a European army, and no one has the ability to form a European army. Politics, giving investment.

But the European military is the main point of check and balance in the United States. Without the European army, Europe would never have true independence.

Yes, the United States is an ally, a long-term ally of us, but at the same time it is an ally that has been hijacking us for a long time.

France is a powerful diplomatic power, a permanent member of the Security Council, and the heart of the European Union.

Pushing Russia out of Europe could be a far-reaching strategic mistake.

If France cannot pull Russia back into Europe, it will also be reluctant to continue its involvement, inflaming tensions and isolating Russia.

At the moment, neither Russia nor that eastern power has an interest in forming an alliance, but no one is sure whether the Western world is pressing more and more.

Will China and Russia still say with certainty that we will not form an alliance?

Is the enemy of our friend necessarily our enemy?

Russia is the enemy of the United States, so should it be the enemy of Europe?

We need to build the new structure of trust and security for Europe, because if we do not facilitate relations with Russia, there will be no peace on the continent.

Americans say a country that invests heavily in weapons and equipment, is a declining country in demographics.

Americans ask me, are we afraid of this country? Should we come to terms with such a country?

I asked the Americans, what about swapping the positions of Russia and Canada?

In addition to economic turmoil and geopolitical turmoil, the third major turmoil we are seeing now is undoubtedly the turmoil of the technological revolution.

The Internet of Big Data, Social Media, and Artificial Intelligence, When big intelligence spreads in globalization, the progress of information technology is developing at an unprecedented speed.

One of the problems with the globalization of intelligence is the globalization of emotion, violence, and even hatred.

The technological revolution has brought us profound anthropological changes, and it has created us a new space, a space that requires humans to re-examine and formulate rules.

This is an area of ​​rules for new technology that the world has never touched, and it is also a rule of the international system of the Internet with which everyone must agree and participate.

But before this new set of rules was fully established, the new technological revolution brought us not only economic imbalances, but also anthropological class contradictions and ideological contradictions.

Ultimately, it will lead to severe disruption and instability of our proud democracy.

All envoys here can see economic turmoil, geopolitical turmoil, information technology turmoil and democratic turmoil.

All of these disturbances occur at the same time, but what do we do?

What should we do now? Will we continue to be spectators, commentators, or take on the responsibilities that we have to take on?

But one thing is for sure, if we all lose our political imagination and let the customs of past decades or even centuries dictate our strategies, we...

President, minister, diplomat, soldier, everyone in this room continues to do so as in the past.

That's for sure, we will "lose control".

And after "getting out of control", what awaits us is disappearance.

Civilization fades, Europe fades, and with it the moment of Western domination.

In the end, the world will revolve around two poles: America and China, and Europe will have to choose between these two rulers.

Europe will completely lose control, so I believe in only one thing for now, and that is courage - the political strategy of daring to break through and take risks.

This kind of political strategy that is different from the old Europe of the past, will lead to the failure of many things now, and there are also a large number of commentators in the country, and critics say it will not work.

But what is fatal is not the comments and criticism, but the loss of “brave heart” and “imaginative thinking”, and I believe that only by experiencing some courageous and imaginative policies can reflect the French national spirit in depth, in the best way.

Only France can re-establish a deep European civilization; Only France can consider the question of European survival from the perspective of European strategy and international politics.

The French spirit is the spirit of stubborn resistance and the pursuit of a different world. The spirit of resistance will never succumb to the inevitability and adaptability of things

This kind of execution is carried out in the extraordinary spirit of the French people, and the historical trend that only France can change the historical trend that is gradually engulfing Europe has formed “poles”.

After that, France will have several important directions on the agenda. The first is the Eurasian Agenda.

France will promote a better integration of China's New Silk Road with the European Communication Strategy, but this integration must be done with respect for our sovereignty and our rules.

Ten years ago, we made some mistakes in the integration of Europe and Asia. When Europe was dealing with the great financial crisis, in order to get help, it had to carry out privatization to reduce some of Europe's sovereignty.

From Italy in the south to England in the north, but we don't blame the clever Chinese, we can only blame ourselves for being stupid.

In addition, in the face of the rise of China, France must also develop a "French strategy" with the United States in the Indo-Pacific region.

This is a "complement" to France's strategy of welcoming the Chinese Silk Road.

If we help our opponent in one place, we have to check and balance it in other places. This is the usual way in politics.

France should establish "French influence" in the Indo-Pacific to counterbalance the rise of China's power in the region. After all, France has millions of residents and about 10,000 soldiers in the region.

France wants to become one of the major naval powers at sea.

France's second important agenda is to prioritize the establishment of European sovereignty.

I have spoken to many people that European sovereignty is by no means an empty word, but we have already made the mistake of leaving the voice of sovereignty to the nationalists.

Nationalists in no way represent our sovereignty, which is a good word, and the core of our democracy. But if the government loses control of everything, there is nothing left for sovereignty.

So the nationalists have the right to make their voices heard, but they in no way represent European sovereignty.

For decades, Europe has established a strong and friendly market, but at the same time, we are also the most open and naïve.

And when we discuss European sovereignty, we must also include the United Kingdom deeply. Regardless of the final outcome of Brexit, European sovereignty includes the United Kingdom.

The other direction of European sovereignty is national defense. With regard to European defense, there has been no progress since the 1950s, and it is even forbidden to discuss it.

But it is time to build an initiative with more sovereign nations for national defense, drawing on European money and European militaries.

I think this is the best time in decades to discuss "European Defense Sovereignty," which requires all envoys here to work even harder.

Another focus of European sovereignty is Europe's thinking about borders, which will also extend to the topic of population and migration.

As Europe has experienced an unprecedented migration crisis since 2015, we must move away from an emergency management system for refugees in order to create a sustainable talent intake mechanism.

Most importantly, we must work with the International Organization for Migration to revive the immigration nomination work we did in Paris.

The last part is about economic and financial sovereignty.

We are now actively talking about Iran and continue to defend our claims to the Iranian agenda.

But the US dollar has its "specialty", so even if we decide to protect Iran, our companies will rely on the US dollar to move forward.

Note, I'm not saying that we have to fight the dollar, but that we need to build "real euro supremacy".

But this process is very slow, we are progressing very slowly!

And when creating digital c, Europe also needs to reconsider, because digital currency will also affect future economic sovereignty.

Rebuilding European sovereignty, economic sovereignty, national defense sovereignty and border sovereignty is the only way to truly advance European integration without interference from other countries abroad.

Ladies and gentlemen, let us have strong and coherent diplomacy, and at a time when Western hegemony is being challenged, we must use our political imagination.

Control the fate of the Europeans and return control to our people.

I count on you to play an important role in diplomacy, and I am grateful for these requests.

I will always be by your side to keep France at the center of leading a range of important political issues.

Let our envoys have strong representative power around the world to defend our national interests, override our national interests, and let our values ​​spread around the world.

I thank you!

Long live the republic and long live France!

- Emmanuel Macron

This article is very important, be sure to read it carefully. I hope everyone can watch this article and share it with friends and family, so that it can help more people.

This article was copied from the public account: Guo Rong (ID: xuu5336)

I urge all my readers to Google and read the initial talk of Sept. 2017 of President Macron , it will be chocking to most to see the obvious manipulation displayed clearly with this claimed version of it. 

As always, my profound thanks to all for your time sharing this blog.