HEIL HITLER!
The official blog of the site “Der Stürmer” – http://der-stuermer.org
Thursday, December 31, 2020
Sunday, December 27, 2020
Adolf Hitler About Racial Art
Art is a noble mission obligating fanaticism.
Speech of September 1, 1933 in Nuremberg
It is the task of art to be the expression of a specific spirit of the time. Blood and race will again become the wellspring of artistic intuition.
Speech of March 23, 1933 in Berlin
It is...ridiculous to think that one could find a new “life/ cultural/art style” without a world-view rejuvenation and this racial clarification, as it is ridiculous to presume that nature entrusts every average bungler with this visionary task.
Speech of September 1, 1933 in Nuremberg
So will the racially-worldview founded tendency of a time also determine the tendency and psyche of art. The race, which puts its stamp on the whole life of a folk, then also sees the tasks of art with its eyes. It solves - in a sovereign manner encompassing all the circumstances and conditions of the purpose and of the material - the work of art according to its meaning. Only the most clear human spirit can hereby find the paths to the noblest beauty.
Speech of September 1, 1933 in Nuremberg
Humanity would become deformed, culture degenerate, if the timidity failed to continue to nurture all useable hereditary factors in life goods and cultural goods, only because decadent or racially alien elements, in their spiritual anarchism or in their origin-based rejection, would love to put the torch to all the accomplishments of the past at all.
Speech of September 1, 1933 in Nuremberg
The “never there before” is no proof for the quality of an accomplishment, rather it can just as well be the proof for its never previously there inferiority. If thus a so-called artist sees his sole life task in presenting the most confusing and incomprehensible portrayal possible of the accomplishments of the past or also of the present, then only the real accomplishments of the past will remain, while the artistic mumbling of such a painting, music-making, sculpting or building character will one day only be proof of the extent of the decay of a nation.
Speech of September 1, 1933 in Nuremberg
The already in the last decades more and more pronounced struggle against the traditions of our cultural life, against the forms of expression of our inherited artistic creation, was nothing other than the rebellion from somebody who, inwardly folk-alien, faced these racially conditioned cultural works inwardly and outwardly lacking understanding and alien; but unfortunately, this sub-humanity and its Jewish intellectual leadership slowly had the say more and more.
Speech of February 7, 1934 in Berlin
But we know of ourselves that in antiquity and in the new period Aryan-Nordic man has always found the compulsive synthesis between the set task, the purpose and the given material.
Speech of September 1, 1933 in Berlin
It is... no miracle that every politically heroic age in its art immediately seeks a bridge to a no less heroic past. Greeks and Romans then suddenly become so near to Germanic people, because all have sought their roots in a basic race, and thus the immortal accomplishments of the ancient folks again and again exert their magnetic effect on the descendants racially related to them.
Speech of September 1, 1933 in Nuremberg
Just as National Socialism in Germany is the fulfillment of numerous prophetic presentiments and actual scientific knowledge, so, too, was the preparatory work done for a new artistic renaissance of Aryan man.
Speech of September 1, 1933 in Nuremberg
One can never separate the art from the man. The slogan that precisely it is international, is hollow and dumb. If one can still hold other sections of life to somehow be acquired through education, for art one must be born, that means: The basic inclination beyond all education and hence aptitude is of the most decisive importance. This aptitude, however, is a component of the hereditary makeup. Not everyone needs to therefore be a creative artist, because he racially seen - is to be counted among this capable kind; but the real genius will indeed emerge only from such a one, and just this race alone will feel and understand him.
Speech of September 1, 1933 in Nuremberg
The given purpose, the constructive ability of the present as well as the technical means, are the elements from which and with which the genuinely creative spirit shapes his works, without fear to utilize the existing and inherited property of the ancestors, courageous enough to combine with it the good new thing he found himself!
Speech of September 1, 1933 in Nuremberg
May the German artists for their part be conscious of the task, which the nation puts to them. Since foolishness and injustice appear to rule the world, we call on them to take over the most proud defense of the German folk through German art!
Speech of September 1, 1933 in Nuremberg
The present German generation, after decades of erring, purified and education by boundless suffering, again seeks the path to its own great masters.
Speech of March 6, 1934 in Leipzig
Thursday, December 24, 2020
Tuesday, December 22, 2020
Sunday, December 20, 2020
The New Protocols
by Dr. William Pierce
I was amused to note that Bill Clinton’s twin across the great water, Tony Blair, struck another blow for dee-mo-cra-cee and ee-qual-i-tee last week. On October 19, Blair’s Jewish Home Secretary, Jack Straw, announced that henceforth lunatics would be entitled to vote in all elections in the United Kingdom. Previously, people confined to lunatic asylums were not permitted to vote, the assumption being that a voter ought to be a responsible citizen who understands what he’s doing and can make a rational choice.
Of course, that was just hypocrisy; nobody really believed that voters knew what they were doing. Football fans and Jamaican immigrants and couch potatoes on the dole were allowed to vote; that’s how Tony Blair became prime minister. So why not let lunatics vote too? They can be unstrapped from their beds and given a pencil and a ballot just long enough to stab the appropriate spot on the paper. What’s wrong with that? I mean, if we really believe that everyone is equal, let’s show it!
I’m just kidding, of course, but Jack Straw isn’t. Lunatics really will be given the vote in the United Kingdom. The Jewish Home Secretary told the press last week that his move to give mental patients the vote will be „a major landmark in this country’s electoral history.“ Yes, undoubtedly it will rank right up there alongside Magna Carta.
Did you ever wonder why the Jews are such great proponents of democracy? Whether in Indonesia or Pakistan or Serbia or you name it, whenever there is some threat to universal suffrage, the Jews are ready to send the U.S. armed forces in to bomb and kill until everyone is permitted to vote.
Why is that? Why can’t the Indonesians have an Islamic theocracy if they want? Why can’t the Pakistanis have a military dictatorship? Why can’t the Serbs run their own country the way they prefer? What is the appeal in making sure that people whose minds have been wasted by Alzheimer’s Disease vote?
Well, let’s not beat around the bush: the appeal of mass democracy lies in the fact that in essentially every country in the world today, the number of persons unable to think for themselves is substantially larger than the number able to make independent decisions. Those unable to think for themselves have their thinking done for them by the people who control the mass media. Which is to say, democracy is the preferred system because it gives the political power to those who own or control the mass media and at the same time allows them to remain behind the scenes and evade responsibility for the way in which they use that power. And the more inclusive the democracy is – that is, the more Alzheimer’s sufferers and Mongoloid cretins and paranoid schizophrenics and people who live in empty packing cases in alleyways and Jamaican immigrants and football fans are able to vote – the more certain is the grip of the media masters on the political process.
Those voters who buy astrology magazines at the checkout stand and spend their time watching soap operas, game shows, and Oprah absorb their general attitudes on things through the television screen. They learn which ideas are fashionable and which are not by noticing the facial expression and tone of voice of Tom Brokaw and Dan Rather when the news is announced each day. Their opinions on specific issues are formed as they view televised sidewalk surveys taken by reporters. The only uncertainty about these people is whether or not they’ll be able to pry themselves loose from their couches long enough to vote for the designated candidates. That’s why it’s important to have lots of them.
And wherever there are lots of them, the men who control the mass media also will control the outcome of elections. It’s a much surer way of controlling governments than bribing corrupt dictators or slipping seductive whores into the king’s bedroom a la Esther and Ahasuerus – or Monica and Bill.
Believe me, one day soon the Jews on both sides of the great water will institute a web-TV voting system that allows the couch potatoes and the ball game fans to vote without having to get up from their couches, just by clicking their remote controls at their TV screens to select the next President or prime minister. That will be real democracy.
You know, back close to the beginning of this century, around 1901 or so, a book first was published containing the text of what became generally known as The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. The publisher was a Russian academic, Professor Sergei Nilus. Nilus himself allegedly had obtained The Protocols from a Russian official, who had obtained the text from a patriotic Russian noblewoman, who in turn had purchased the material from a Jew in Paris about 15 years earlier.
The Protocols purports to be a collection of minutes or reports of meetings held by the leaders of the world Jewish community, at which they summarize the progress they had made to that time in their quest for world subversion, world ownership, and world power and outline their plans for continuing the process in the future. They talk about gaining control of the banking systems of various countries, about fomenting wars and revolutions to weaken and destroy Gentile power, about corrupting music and art and education, about subverting various Gentile institutions, about taking over the press everywhere and controlling the flow of information to the masses, about undermining the family and bringing family values into disrepute, and so on. The Elders of Zion really are a satanic bunch of schemers. Reading The Protocols makes one’s flesh crawl.
We should remember that when The Protocols began circulating in Russia in the first decade of this century, that country had not yet fallen victim to Jewish Bolshevism, but that wasn’t for lack of trying on the part of the Jews. The Jews were generally recognized as a dangerously subversive element in Russia, as the schemers and stringpullers behind every attempt to damage or upset the established order in Russia, and so Professor Nilus’ publication of The Protocols found a ready market among the Russian public. After the Jewish Bolshevik revolution of 1917 overthrew the Russian government and established a communist dictatorship in Russia, anyone found with a copy of The Protocols was liable to be summarily shot. The text already had been translated into a dozen other languages and distributed far and wide outside Russia, however.
Since then it has been published in virtually every language which has a printed form and has been read by tens of millions of people around the world.
The Jews have been claiming hysterically since The Protocols first appeared that the text is „a forgery.“ I guess that’s their way of saying that it’s not what it purports to be: namely, the actual minutes of meetings of Jewish leaders discussing their plans for world domination. The great American industrialist and automaker Henry Ford was very strongly impressed by The Protocols and helped circulate the text in the United States. When told by newspaper reporters in 1921 about the Jews’ claims that The Protocols was „a forgery,“ Mr. Ford responded that all he could say about the material was that it fit what was actually happening in the world and had been happening ever since the The Protocols first appeared in print.
Of course, what Mr. Ford had especially in mind when he made that remark were two momentous things which had happened during the previous decade. One was the Jews’ success in taking over Russia and imposing communism on the Russians, and the other was the recently ended First World War: a horribly fratricidal and senseless war, which had destroyed the old order in Europe, had spilled the blood of millions of the best Europeans, and had weakened all of Europe’s long-established institutions, leaving every European country open to all manner of social, political, and cultural ills – in particular, to the further spread of communism.
Well, Henry Ford was a very hard-headed, practical sort of man, and it’s easy to understand his attitude. He had no way of knowing whether or not The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion was actually what it purported to be, but he was quite impressed by the fact that the plan for world subversion and domination by the Jews outlined in the book seemed to be happening pretty much as described.
I’ll go a step further than Henry Ford was willing to go in assessing The Protocols. I think that they very likely are not what they purport to be. In the first place the text of The Protocols doesn’t ring true. It’s too straightforward, too open. It doesn’t use the sort of deceptive, weasel- worded, self-justifying language that Jews customarily use in expressing themselves, even to one another. When a group of Jewish leaders get together to discuss their plans for the destruction of a host nation, they don’t use straightforward expressions such as „encouraging miscegenation“ and „leading the goyim to the slaughter.“ They use weasel-expressions, such as „building tolerance,“ „increasing diversity,“ and „eliminating inequality.“
In the second place, it’s difficult for me to imagine the head Jews laying out such a complete, self-contained, and pat explanation of what they’re up to. It’s just too convenient for those of us who aim at alerting our people as to what the Jews’ intentions are and then putting a monkey wrench in their gears.
I wouldn’t call The Protocols „a forgery,“ as the Jews do whenever the book is mentioned. I’m inclined to believe Professor Nilus was an astute observer of the Jews and also was a patriot. He wanted to warn the Russian people of what the Jews were planning to do to them, and so he imagined how the Jews’ plan might look if it were all laid out in straightforward language. I believe that he wrote the text he published, but that he believed it was a reasonably accurate description of what the Jews actually were doing. And the reason that The Protocols ended up being translated into hundreds of languages and read by millions of people is that many people, like Henry Ford, saw that they fitted what was happening.
Sometimes I have tried to imagine what Professor Nilus might have written if he were writing today instead of a century ago – and if he were writing still in the straightforward sort of language he used earlier. A 1999 version of The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion might read something like this:
Greetings, my fellow Elders of Zion! Today I am happy to report to you that our plan for the destruction of the hated Gentiles and the acquisition of their remaining wealth is practically complete. There remain only a few loose ends to tie up, and then the struggle in which we have been engaged for thousands of years against the filthy goyim against the Nations, against all the non-Jewish peoples of the world, finally will be victorious, and we will be able to devour everything they have created, as Yahweh, the god of our tribe, has commanded us.
Everywhere we already rule behind the scenes, with puppets completely under our control in the offices of power. In Russia, where they resisted us for so long – where the ordinary people always hated us as exploiters, as moneylenders and tax collectors and purveyors of alcohol and merchants in the sweet, white flesh of their daughters and sisters, and where the aristocrats also hated us, as subversives and troublemakers, and kept us confined to only certain areas of the country, so that we could not exploit all of the people – in Russia we used the doctrine of our dear, departed Elder of Zion, Karl Marx, to divide the Russian people against themselves and get the power into our own hands, where it remains to this day. We butchered their Czar and his whole family like the Gentile cattle they were. With the help of the common people we slaughtered all of the Russian aristocrats and took their wealth.
And then we turned on the common people. First we murdered their leaders – their writers and teachers and intellectuals and military officers – so that there would be no one able to turn them against us, and then we began murdering the common people themselves, the farmers and workers, first by the millions and then by the tens of millions in labor camps and death camps all across Russia. And most of them never did understand what was happening to them. One of them, who had been studying to become a Christian priest, we corrupted and made into our ally. His name was Stalin. Later, like the pharaoh who knew not Joseph, Stalin tried to turn against us, but one of our women was his doctor, and we poisoned him before he could harm us.
When the system based on the theory of our departed Elder Marx had bled the Russian people dry, we launched a „privatization“ scheme, which put most of the remaining wealth which had belonged to the government directly into our hands. Their gas and oil, their forests and their lumber industry, their mines and factories – and especially their television broadcasting facilities – are now owned by us acting as capitalists. Today we have a drunken, sick, old Russian clown, Boris Yeltsin, as the nominal leader of the Russians, but one of our people, Boris Abramovich Berezovsky, tells him what to do and keeps him under tight control through bribes.
In England, the country from which all of us were expelled by the king as exploiters and troublemakers just over 700 years ago, we now have another puppet, Tony Blair, in place as the nominal leader of the English, but like Yeltsin he is completely under our control. One of our people, Michael Levy, finances his election campaigns and controls his purse strings. Another of our people, Jack Straw, controls his domestic policies.
America, however, is the prize example of our success. Just as in England and in Russia, also in America we have been able to put a totally corrupt Gentile politician into the position of nominal power and then to surround him with our own people, who wield the real power. Actually running the American government, our people are in charge of America’s State Department, America’s Defense Department, America’s Federal Reserve System, and America’s Treasury Department. When one of our people, Robert Rubin, retired recently as secretary of the treasury, we simply moved another of our people, Lawrence Summers, into that position. Clinton appoints to every high office in the American government, whether the Supreme Court or his own cabinet, only those people we suggest to him, and the totally corrupt politicians of the Senate dare not disapprove anyone we suggest, lest we label them as „anti-Semites.“
We have gained nearly complete control of America’s educational system, from kindergarten through the universities. No ideas or facts may be taught unless we have given them the stamp of Political Correctness. We have made it impossible for anyone in an American university to contradict anything we have claimed, no matter how preposterous, about what happened to us during the Second World War. We now have the American government, just like every government in Europe, paying us „reparations,“ because not enough was done for us during the war.
We have succeeded in corrupting and then dominating America’s art and music and literature. We have made degeneracy the touchstone for American culture. We own the art galleries and set the standards for painting and sculpture. We have the Americans lining up and paying admission to see a „work of art“ which consists of animal dung smeared onto a crude painting of a Negress, which we tell them is their Virgin Mary. They read the depraved and trashy novels we tell them to read and believe that these novels are „literature.“ Their children listen to Negroid rhythms and chant Negroid „rap“ ditties, because we control the popular music industry.
Through the immigration policy we have imposed on America we are increasing the percentage of non-White minorities in every part of the country. Within the next few years we will succeed in making White Americans a minority in their own country.
Our success in America has been due to two things: our control of the mass media of news and entertainment, through which we control the ideas and attitudes of the masses; and the system of mass democracy, which ensures that the votes of the masses under our control determine which figurehead politicians actually make up the American government. Since the last part of the 19th century we have been gathering the power of the mass media into our hands. In those days many of us were only rag-pickers and dealers in used merchandise, recently off the boat from Russia or Poland, but whenever a Gentile newspaper got itself into financial difficulties, we were ready instantly to pool our resources and buy it out, so that henceforth it could be in the hands of one of our people.
In the 1920s, when radio was becoming a powerful medium of persuasion, we began buying broadcasting stations and putting together networks. At the same time we saw the potential for motion pictures and began moving into Hollywood. By working together with each other we were able to bankrupt or buy out every Gentile film producer except Walt Disney. We had to wait until he died to take control of his film company, but by then we already dominated the entire motion picture industry.
After the Second World War, when television became the most powerful medium of mass persuasion, we were ready to move in and dominate the TV industry from the beginning. Today no motion picture can be made and no television program can be broadcast in America without our approval. Only a few independent commercial radio stations, a few shortwave radio stations, and a handful of book and magazine publishers remain free of our control. But the American masses, for the most part, never see or hear anything we have not approved. They do not understand shortwave, and they are afraid to read any publication we have not approved, for fear that it might be „hate“ material.
There is, of course, that pesky Internet, which is not yet under our control, but we are moving rapidly to deal with that matter. We expect soon to have our puppet politicians enact „hate speech“ legislation in America, similar to that which we already have succeeded in having enforced in Europe, so that no one can say anything on the Internet that has not been approved by us. The couch potatoes will not object, because we will tell them that the new laws will make them safe from terrorism. By that time we also should have achieved our goal for the disarmament of the American population. And then, my fellow Elders of Zion, we can do to the American people what we did to the Russian people. With our power of television, we will have them voting for their own slaughter.
Long live our mass media! Long live democracy! Long live the power of triumphant Zion!
Thursday, December 17, 2020
The Dissolution of Eastern European Jewry
Source: http://holocausthandbooks.com/index.php?page_id=29
by Walter N. Sanning
2nd edition
DOWNLOAD THE BOOK IN PDF, KINDLE, EPUB FORMAT
Before the Second World War, Eastern Europe was the demographic center of World Jewry. After the war, however, only a fraction of it was left behind. What happened?
The “Holocaust,” of course, most will say.
The author of this book did not stop there, though, but thoroughly explored European population developments and shifts mainly caused by emigration as well as deportations and evacuations conducted by both Nazis and the Soviets, among other things. The book is based mainly on Jewish, Zionist and mainstream sources. It concludes that a sizeable share of the Jews found missing during local censuses after the Second World War, which have so far been counted as “Holocaust victims,” had either emigrated (mainly to Israel or the U.S.) or had been deported by Stalin to Siberian labor camps.
This is the slightly corrected second edition with an updated foreword by Prof. A.R. Butz and an important epilogue by Germar Rudolf. It compares Sanning’s study with a mainstream investigation into the numerical dimension of the Holocaust which appeared eight years after Sanning’s first edition and was designed to refute it. Both studies come to similar results of Jewish population losses in all European countries once ruled by the Nazis, except for two: Poland and the Soviet Union. These two countries harbored the vast majority of the world’s Jews prior to the war. While Sanning dedicated the majority of his book to a thorough study of both countries’ demographic developments, the mainstream book meant to refute him remains notably silent on those subjects. Also, while Sanning investigates worldwide Jewish migration patterns prior to, during and after the war, his detractors ignore the topic and simply assume that every Jew missing in Europe today was killed by the Nazis – as if there had never been Jewish emigration from Europe during and after the war.
Monday, December 14, 2020
Saturday, December 12, 2020
Wednesday, December 9, 2020
Sunday, December 6, 2020
A Killing in Iran: Who Gains from Yet Another Assassination?
Source: http://www.renegadetribune.com/a-killing-in-iran-who-gains-from-yet-another-assassination/
By Philip Giraldi
It is not often that one can agree with the pronouncements made by former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Director John Brennan, but his tweeted comment on the killing of Iranian scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh suggesting that the incident “…was a criminal act & highly reckless. It risks lethal retaliation & a new round of regional conflict. Iranian leaders would be wise to wait for the return of responsible American leadership on the global stage & to resist the urge to respond against perceived culprits” was both restrained and reasonable. Or it was at least so until sentence two, which was clearly intended to attack Donald Trump and praise the incoming Joe Biden administration, which Brennan just might be seeking to join.
Bearing in mind that John Brennan was the guiding hand behind President Barack Obama’s kill lists of Americans who were marked for death by drone it is difficult to understand what moral high ground he seeks to occupy in the slaying of Fakhrizadeh. Brennan, who was a leading critic of Trump and who may have led the clandestine effort to undermine his election and term in office, subsequently found himself in an exchange of tweets with Republican Senator from Texas Ted Cruz which degenerated into a trading of insults. Cruz responded “It’s bizarre to see a former head of the CIA consistently side with Iranian zealots who chant ‘Death to America.’ And reflexively condemn Israel. Does Joe Biden agree?” This produced a riposte by Brennan that “It is typical for you to mischaracterize my comment. Your lawless attitude & simple-minded approach to serious national security matters demonstrate that you are unworthy to represent the good people of Texas.”
The assassination of Fakhrizadeh, the “father of Iran’s nuclear program,” took place on a road near the town of Absard to the east of Tehran. According to initial accounts, the Iranian scientist, who has long been targeted by name and in public fora by Israel, was traveling in an SUV together with his wife plus bodyguards and a driver. Initial reports suggested that there was a Nissan truck parked on the opposite side of the road loaded with what appeared to be wood, though it may have turned out that the wood was concealing a bomb which may have been triggered by a signal from a surveillance satellite. The bomb was detonated to disable Fakhrizadeh’s vehicle before an attack on the car by five or six gunmen with automatic weapons who had emerged from a vehicle following the SUV began, again according to initial reports, including reporting by eye witnesses. The Iranian official news agency FARS is now claiming, however, that the attack was carried out by a remote controlled machine gun concealed on the truck, which subsequently exploded, and no human attackers were involved. It is presumed that the bodyguards and driver were killed in the exchange. Fakhrizadeh was badly wounded and died in hospital shortly thereafter. Photos of the SUV reveal shattered windows, blood streaks, and numerous bullet holes as well as other damage from what may have been the bomb.
Iranian news agencies are now reporting that at least one of the attackers has been arrested, and if that is true he will surely be made to talk regarding what he knows. They are also reporting that two of the assailants were killed in the exchange with the bodyguards, which, if true, means they will possibly be identified. Clearly, the attack was well planned, was able to employ considerable resources, and was based on intelligence that would be very hard to obtain, particularly as the Iranian government was taking steps to protect Fakhrizadeh, to include details of his travels.
The killing comes just two weeks after intelligence officials confirmed that Al Qaeda’s second-highest leader Abdullah Ahmed Abdullah was shot dead together with his daughter by alleged Israeli supplied assassins on a motorcycle on August 7th. The hit was reportedly carried out at the request of the United States based on Abdullah’s claimed involvement in the 1998 deadly attacks on two U.S. Embassies in East Africa. The claim that Iran has been harboring al-Qaeda is already being used by the Trump White House to justify increased pressure on Iran and it might possibly even serve as part of a casus belli.
The two assassinations are not linked except perhaps in terms of sending a message to high level Iranians that they are not safe even in their own country even when they are given bodyguards. The claim that Fakhrizadeh was in charge of a secret Iranian weapons program, made regularly by Israel and the U.S., is not generally believed by most authorities. Iran is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which nuclear armed Israel is not, and its facilities are subject to regular unannounced inspections.
Likewise, the killing of Qods Force commander General Qassem Soleimani in January in a U.S. drone attack was intended more regarding sending a message concerning possible consequences of reckless behavior than it was about actually killing one man. Whatever programs Fakrizadeh and Soleimani were involved in will continue without them. Nevertheless, assassination of Iranians linked to the country’s former and current nuclear program has been Israeli policy since 2010. As many as a dozen Iranian scientists and technicians reportedly have been killed. So-called “targeted killings” have been a regular feature of Israel’s “national defense” strategy. In addition to the Iranians, at least seventy Palestinians have been assassinated.
Though Israel has clearly ordered the assassinations, it is generally believed that the actual preparation for the attacks have been carried out by Mojahedin e Khalq or MEK, a Marxist cult that came into prominence at the time of the Iranian revolution against the Shah. It is generally regarded as a terrorist group that once was virulently anti-American and killed a number of U.S. officials. MEK is a curious hybrid creature in any event in that it pretends to be an alternative government option for Iran even though it is despised by nearly all Iranians. At the same time, it is greatly loved by the Washington Establishment which would like to see the Mullahs deposed and replaced by something more amenable to western and Israeli worldviews.
MEK is run like a cult by its leader Maryam Rajavi, with a number of rules that restrict and control the behavior of its members. One commentary likens membership in MEK to a modern-day equivalent of slavery. The group currently operates out of a secretive, heavily guarded 84-acre compound in Albania that is covertly supported by the United States, as well as through a “political wing” front office in Paris, where it refers to itself as the National Council of Resistance of Iran.
MEK, which is financially supported by Saudi Arabia, stages events in the United States in Europe where it generously pays politicians like John Bolton, Rudy Giuliani and Elaine Chao to make fifteen-minute speeches praising the organization and everything it does. It’s paying of inside the Beltway power brokers proved so successful that it was removed from the State Department terrorist list in 2012 by Hillary Clinton even though it had killed Americans in the 1970s. MEK also finds favor in Washington because it is used by Israel as a resource for anti-Iranian terrorism acts currently, including assassinations carried out in Tehran. Israel, in fact, directs most terrorist acts carried out by MEK inside Iran.
So those are the players and, at first glance, one might reasonably come to the Ockham’s razor conclusion, i.e. that Israel ordered MEK to kill Fakhrizadeh, an order which was then executed. But that would be to ignore some of the politics currently playing out in Washington. First of all, Israel would not have carried out the high-level assassination without the consent of the White House. Indeed, U.S. intelligence resources might well have played a key role in locating the Iranian scientist. Second, the Trump Administration has clearly adopted a policy of “maximum pressure” against Iran, which has included strangling the country’s economy through sanctions, condoning Israeli attacks in Syria and elsewhere, and destabilizing moves, to include assassinations, designed to make the nation’s leadership both vulnerable and nervous. It is the application of an Israeli strategic doctrine referred to as “Campaigns Between Wars,” meaning constant aggression to erode an enemy’s ability to fight without actually crossing a line that would start a shooting war.
A direct role by the Trump Administration in the assassination should not be ruled out as it is clearly seeking to harden Iranian antipathy towards any new comprehensive arms control or nuclear agreement with the incoming Biden team. Trump himself reportedly raised the possibility of bombing Iran earlier this month, though he was talked out of it by his national security team, but the Israeli Army meanwhile is on alert in case of an American attack. There are confirmed reports that B-52 bombers, capable of deploying the 30,000 pound penetrator bombs that can destroy targets deep underground, have been sent to the Middle East, presumably to Qatar where the U.S. has its principal airbase in the region. They would presumably be used against Iran’s main nuclear development site at Natanz.
Israel is in a strong position right now. Iran has significant military resources to respond to the killing, including the drones and missiles it developed and used in September 2019 to devastate the state-owned Saudi Aramco oil processing facilities at Abqaiq and Khurais in eastern Saudi Arabia. But if it does react robustly to the assassination and sparks a conflict that inevitably would include the United States, it would be a war that Bibi Netanyahu has long sought, destroying Iran at what he hopes would be minimal cost to Israel. If Iran does not respond, Israel will no doubt push the White House to be even more aggressive in its remaining time in office while hardliners within Iran will also demand an end to any agreements with western powers. Taken together, that would make sure that any attempt by the Biden administration to engage diplomatically with Iran would fail. The ultimate provocation by the United States would, of course, be to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities. Unthinkable? Perhaps, but perhaps not. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz is already reporting that “U.S. President Donald Trump has more than a month before he leaves the White House, and on his way out he could set the world on fire. In starting this conflagration, it seems as though he plans to strike every match in the box. Standing beside him, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would be more than happy to lend him a lighter.”
Philip Giraldi, Ph.D. is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest. Republished from Strategic Culture Foundation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)