RISING TENSIONS (8)

Russia declares war on the Straussians

by Thierry Meyssan

Russia is not waging war on the Ukrainian people, but on a small group of people within the US power that has transformed Ukraine without its knowledge, the Straussians. It formed half a century ago and has already committed an incredible amount of crimes in Latin America and the Middle East without the knowledge of the United States. This is their story.

This article is a follow-up to : 

 1. "Russia wants to force the US to respect the UN Charter," January 4, 2022. 

 2. "Washington pursues RAND plan in Kazakhstan, then Transnistria," January 11, 2022.
 3. "Washington refuses to hear Russia and China," January 18, 2022. 

 4. "Washington and London, deafened", February 1, 2022.
 5. "Washington and London try to preserve their domination over Europe", February 8, 2022. 

 6. “Two interpretations of the Ukrainian affair”, 16 February 2022.
 7. “Washington sounds the alarm, while its allies withdraw”, 22 February 2022.

At dawn on February 24, Russian forces entered Ukraine en masse. According to President Vladimir Putin, speaking on television at the time, this special operation was the beginning of his country’s response to “those who aspire to world domination” and who are advancing Nato’s infrastructure to his country’s doorstep. During this long speech, he summarized how NATO destroyed Yugoslavia without the authorization of the United Nations Security Council, even bombing Belgrade in 1999. Then he perused the destruction of the United States in the Middle East, in Iraq, Libya and Syria. Only after this lengthy presentation did he announce that he had sent his troops to Ukraine with the dual mission of destroying the Nato-linked armed forces and ending the Nato armed neo-Nazi groups.

Immediately all the member states of the Atlantic Alliance denounced the occupation of Ukraine as comparable to that of Czechoslovakia during the “Prague Spring” (1968). According to them, Vladimir Putin’s Russia had adopted the Soviet Union’s “Brezhnev doctrine”. Therefore, the free world must punish the resurrected “Evil Empire” with “devastating costs”.

The interpretation of the Atlantic Alliance is aimed above all at depriving Russia of its major argument: although Nato is not a confederation of equals, but a hierarchical federation under Anglo-Saxon command, Russia is doing the same. It refuses Ukraine the possibility of choosing its destiny, just as the Soviets refused it to the Czechoslovakians. It is true that Nato violates the principles of sovereignty and equality of states stipulated in the UN Charter, but it should not be dissolved, unless Russia is also dissolved.

Perhaps, but probably not.

President Putin’s speech was not directed against Ukraine, or even against the United States, but explicitly against “those who aspire to world domination”, i.e. against the “Straussians” in the US power structure. It was a real declaration of war against them.

On February 25, President Vladimir Putin called the Kiev leadership “a clique of drug addicts and neo-Nazis”. For the Atlantic media, these words were those of a mental patient.

During the night of February 25-26, President Volodymyr Zelensky sent a ceasefire proposal to Russia via the Chinese embassy in Kiev. The Kremlin immediately responded by setting out its conditions: 

 arrest of all Nazis (Dmitro Yarosh and the Azov Battalion, etc.)
 removal of all street names and destruction of monuments glorifying Nazi collaborators during the Second World War (Stepan Bandera, etc.), 

 laying down of weapons.

The Atlantic press ignored this event, while the rest of the world, which knew about it, held its breath. The negotiation failed a few hours later after Washington intervened. Only then would Western public opinion be informed, but the Russian conditions would always be hidden from them.

What is President Putin talking about? Who is he fighting against? And what are the reasons that have made the Atlanticist press blind and mute?

A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE STRAUSSUIANS

Let us stop for a moment to consider this group, the Straussians, about whom Westerners know little. They are individuals, all Jewish, but by no means representative of either American Jews or of Jewish communities worldwide. They were formed by the German philosopher Leo Strauss, who took refuge in the United States during the rise of Nazism and became a professor of philosophy at the University of Chicago. According to many accounts, he had formed a small group of faithful students to whom he gave oral instruction. There is no written record of this. He explained to them that the only way for the Jews not to fall victim to a new genocide was to form their own dictatorship. He called them Hoplites (the soldiers of Sparta) and sent them to disrupt the courts of his rivals. Finally, he taught them discretion and praised the “noble lie”. Although he died in 1973, his student fraternity continued.

The Straussians began forming a political group half a century ago, in 1972. They were all members of Democratic Senator Henry “Scoop” Jackson’s staff, including Elliott Abrams, Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz. They worked closely with a group of Trotskyite journalists, also Jewish, who had met at the City College of New York and edited the magazine Commentary. Both groups were closely linked to the CIA, but also, thanks to Perle’s father-in-law Albert Wohlstetter (the US military strategist), to the Rand Corporation (the think tank of the military-industrial complex). Many of these young people intermarried until they formed a compact group of about 100 people.

Together they drafted and passed the “Jackson-Vanik Amendment” in the midst of the Watergate crisis (1974), which forced the Soviet Union to allow the emigration of its Jewish population to Israel under pain of economic sanctions. This was their founding act.

In 1976, Paul Wolfowitz [1] was one of the architects of the “Team B” charged by President Gerald Ford with assessing the Soviet threat [2]. He issued a delirious report accusing the Soviet Union of preparing to take over “global hegemony”. The Cold War changed its nature: it was no longer a question of isolating (containment) the USSR, it had to be stopped in order to save the “free world”.

The Straussians and the New York intellectuals, all of whom were on the left, put themselves at the service of the right-wing president Ronald Reagan. It is important to understand that these groups are neither truly left nor right wing. Some members have switched five times from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party and back again. What is important to them is to infiltrate power, whatever the ideology. Elliott Abrams became an assistant to the Secretary of State. He led an operation in Guatemala where he put a dictator in power and experimented with Israeli Mossad officers on how to create reserves for the Mayan Indians in order to eventually do the same thing in Israel with the Palestinian Arabs (the Mayan Resistance earned Rigoberta Menchú her Nobel Peace Prize). Then Elliott Abrams continued his exactions in El Salvador and finally in Nicaragua against the Sandinistas with the Iran-Contra affair. For their part, the New York intellectuals, now called “Neoconservatives”, created the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and the U.S. Institute of Peace, a mechanism that organized many colored revolutions, starting with China with the attempted coup d’état of Prime Minister Zhao Ziyang and the subsequent repression in Tiananmen Square.

At the end of George H. Bush’s (the father’s) term of office, Paul Wolfowitz, then number 3 in the Defense Department, drew up a document [3] based on a strong idea: after the decomposition of the USSR, the United States had to prevent the emergence of new rivals, starting with the European Union. He concluded by advocating the possibility of taking unilateral action, i.e. to put an end to the concerted action of the United Nations. Wolfowitz was undoubtedly the designer of “Desert Storm”, the operation to destroy Iraq that allowed the United States to change the rules of the game and organize a unilateral world. It was during this time that Straussians valued the concepts of “regime change” and “democracy promotion.”

Gary Schmitt, Abram Shulsky and Paul Wolfowitz entered the US intelligence community through the Consortium for the Study of Intelligence’s Working Group on Intelligence Reform. They criticized the assumption that other governments think the same way as the US government [4]. Then they criticized the lack of political leadership in intelligence, leaving it to wander into unimportant issues instead of focusing on the essential ones. Politicizing intelligence is what Wolfowitz had already done with the B-team and what he would do again in 2002 with the Office of Special Plans, inventing arguments for new wars against Iraq and Iran (Leo Strauss’ “noble lie”).

The Straussians were removed from power during Bill Clinton’s term. They then entered the Washington think tanks. In 1992, William Kristol and Robert Kagan (the husband of Victoria Nuland, widely quoted in the previous articles) published an article in Foreign Affairs deploring President Clinton’s timid foreign policy and calling for a renewal of “benevolent global hegemony” [5]. The following year they founded the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) at the American Enterprise Institute. Gary Schmitt, Abram Shulsky and Paul Wolfowitz were members. All of Leo Strauss’s non-Jewish admirers, including the Protestant Francis Fukuyama (the author of The End of History), immediately joined them.

In 1994, now an arms dealer, Richard Perle (a.k.a. “the Prince of Darkness”) became an advisor to the President and ex-Nazi Alija Izetbegović in Bosnia-Herzegovina. It was he who brought Osama Bin Laden and his Arab Legion (the forerunner of Al Qaeda) from Afghanistan to defend the country. Perle was even a member of the Bosnian delegation at the signing of the Dayton Accords in Paris.

In 1996, members of the PNAC (including Richard Perle, Douglas Feith and David Wurmser) wrote a study at the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies (IASPS) for the new Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. This report [6] advocates the elimination of Yasser Arafat, the annexation of the Palestinian territories, a war against Iraq and the transfer of Palestinians there. It was inspired not only by the political theories of Leo Strauss, but also by those of his friend, Ze’ev Jabotinsky, the founder of “revisionist Zionism”, of whom Netanyahu’s father was the private secretary.

The PNAC raised funds for the candidacy of George W. Bush (the son) and published before his election its famous report “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”. It called for a Pearl Harbor-like catastrophe that would throw the American people into a war for global hegemony. These are exactly the words that PNAC Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld used on September 11, 2001.

Thanks to the 9/11 attacks, Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz installed Admiral Arthur Cebrowski in Donald Rumsfeld’s shadow. He played a role comparable to that of Albert Wohlstetter during the Cold War. He imposed the strategy of “endless war”: the US armed forces should not win any more wars, but start many of them and keep them going as long as possible. The aim would be to destroy all the political structures of the targeted states in order to ruin these populations and deprive them of any means of defending themselves against the US [7]; a strategy that has been implemented for twenty years in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen…

The alliance between the Strausians and the revisionist Zionists was sealed at a major conference in Jerusalem in 2003, which Israeli political figures from all sides unfortunately thought they should attend [8]. It is therefore not surprising that Victoria Nuland (Robert Kagan’s wife, then ambassador to NATO) intervened to declare a ceasefire in Lebanon in 2006, allowing the defeated Israeli army not to be pursued by Hezbollah.

Some individuals, such as Bernard Lewis, have worked with all three groups, the Straussians, the Neoconservatives and the Revisionist Zionists. A former British intelligence officer, he acquired both U.S. and Israeli citizenship, was an advisor to Benjamin Netanyahu and a member of the U.S. National Security Council. Lewis, who halfway through his career assured that Islam is incompatible with terrorism and that Arab terrorists are in fact Soviet agents, later changed his mind and assured with the same aplomb that the religion preaches terrorism. He invented the strategy of the “clash of civilizations” for the US National Security Council. The idea was to use cultural differences to mobilize Muslims against the Orthodox, a concept that was popularized by his assistant at the Council, Samuel Huntington, except that Huntington did not present it as a strategy, but as an inevitability that had to be countered. Huntington began his career as an advisor to the South African secret service during the aparteheid era, and later wrote a book, The Soldier and the State [9]understanding national security needs.

After the destruction of Iraq, the Straussians were the subject of all sorts of controversies [10]. Everyone is surprised that such a small group, supported by neoconservative journalists, could have acquired such authority without having been the subject of a public debate. The U.S. Congress appointed an Iraq Study Group (the so-called “Baker-Hamilton Commission”) to evaluate its policy. It condemned, without naming it, the Rumsfeld/Cebrowski strategy and deplored the hundreds of thousands of deaths it had caused. But Rumsfeld resigned and the Pentagon inexorably pursued this strategy, which it had never officially adopted.

In the Obama administration, the Straussians found their way into Vice President Joe Biden’s cabinet. His National Security Advisor, Jacob Sullivan, played a central role in organizing the operations against Libya, Syria and Myanmar, while another of his advisors, Antony Blinken, focused on Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran. It was he who led the negotiations with Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei that resulted in the arrest and imprisonment of key members of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s team in exchange for the nuclear deal.

Regime change in Kiev in 2014 was organized by the Straussians. Vice President Biden is firmly committed to it. Victoria Nuland came to support the neo-Nazi elements of the Right Sector and to supervise the Israeli “Delta” commando [11] in Maidan Square. A telephone intercept reveals her wish to “fuck the European Union” (sic) in the tradition of the 1992 Wolfowitz report. But the leaders of the European Union do not understand and protest only weakly [12].

“Jake” Sullivan and Antony Blinken placed Vice President Biden’s son, Hunter, on the board of one of the major gas companies, Burisma Holdings, despite opposition from Secretary of State John Kerry. Hunter Biden is unfortunately just a junkie, he would serve as a front for a gigantic scam at the expense of the Ukrainian people. He would appoint, under the supervision of Amos Hochstein, several of his stoner friends to become other front men at the head of various companies and to plunder Ukrainian gas. These are the people that President Vladimir Putin called a “clique of drug addicts”.

Sullivan and Blinken relied on mafia godfather Ihor Kolomoysky, the country’s third largest fortune. Although he is Jewish, he financed the heavyweights of the Right Sector, a neo-Nazi organization that works for NATO and fought in Maidan Square during the “regime change”. Kolomoïsky took advantage of his connections to take power within the European Jewish community, but his co-religionists rebelled and ejected him from international associations. However, he managed to get the head of the Right Sector, Dmytro Yarosh, appointed deputy secretary of the Ukrainian National Security and Defence Council and to get himself appointed governor of the Dnipropetrovsk oblast. Both men would be quickly removed from any political function. It was their group that President Vladimir Putin called a “clique of neo-Nazis.”

In 2017, Antony Blinken founded WestExec Advisors, a consulting firm that brought together former senior Obama administration officials and many Straussians. The firm’s business is extremely low-key. It uses the political connections of its employees to make money; what anywhere else would be called corruption.

THE STRAUSSIANS ARE STILL THE SAME AS EVER

Since Joe Biden returned to the White House, this time as President of the United States, the Straussians have been running the show. “Jake” Sullivan is National Security Advisor, while Antony Blinken is Secretary of State with Victoria Nuland at his side. As I have reported in previous articles, she went to Moscow in October 2021 and threatens to crush Russia’s economy if it did not comply. This was the beginning of the current crisis.

Undersecretary of State Nuland resurrected Dmitro Yarosh and imposed him on President Zelinsky, a television actor protected by Ihor Kolomoysky. On November 2, 2021, he appointed him special advisor to the head of the army, General Valerii Zaluzhnyi. The latter, a true democrat, rebelled at first and finally accepted. When questioned by the press about this astonishing duo, he refused to answer and mentioned a question of national security. Yarosh gave his full support to the “white führer”, Colonel Andrey Biletsky, and his Azov Battalion. This copy of the SS Das Reich division has been staffed since the summer of 2021 by American mercenaries formerly from Blackwater [13].

Having identified the Straussians, we must admit that Russia’s ambition is understandable, even desirable. To rid the world of the Straussians would be to do justice to the million or more deaths they have caused and to save those they are about to kill. Whether this intervention in Ukraine is the right way remains to be seen.

In any case, if the responsibility for the current events lies with the Straussians, all those who let them act without flinching also have a responsibility. Starting with Germany and France, who signed the Minsk Agreements seven years ago and did nothing to ensure that they were implemented, and then with the fifty or so states that signed the OSCE declarations prohibiting the extension of Nato east of the Oder-Neisse line and did nothing. Only Israel, which has just got rid of the revisionist Zionists, has expressed a nuanced position on these events.

This is one of the lessons of this crisis: democratically governed peoples are responsible for the decisions taken for a long time by their leaders and maintained after alternations in power.

Thierry Meyssan

READ MORE:

https://www.voltairenet.org/article215855.html

READ FROM TOP.

GusNote: since its inception, this little site has exposed the Straussians and their dirty tactics. See also: 

the west's modern crusades, or what is yours is mine.....

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW...

BY Patrick J. Buchanan

In an interview with Reuters, Dmitry Peskov, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman for decades, made a startling offer. Moscow could end the Ukraine war immediately, said Peskov, if four conditions were met. Ukraine should cease all military action, recognize Crimea as part of Russia, accept the independence of the Luhansk and Donetsk separatist enclaves, and enact a constitutional commitment to “neutrality,” which would prevent Ukraine from ever joining NATO.

Were this to be done, said Peskov, the war “will stop in a moment.”

As this would restore the situation in Ukraine to the “status quo ante” that existed before Putin ordered the invasion, Peskov’s offer seemed not to be believable. Yet, according to the New York Times, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky “seemed surprisingly open to the idea.” Zelensky “said he had ‘cooled down’ on joining NATO, saying it was clear the western alliance ‘is not prepared to accept Ukraine.'” As for Luhansk, Donetsk and Crimea, said Zelensky, “We can discuss and find a compromise on how these territories will live on.”

Monday, Ukraine and Russia held a fourth session of peace talks, and expressions of optimism were heard from both sides. Ukrainian negotiator Mykhailo Podolyak volunteered that Russia is beginning to talk constructively. “I think that we will achieve some results literally in a matter of days.”

Yet, Russia’s strategic goals, manifest in its unfolding military action, seem to go far beyond the moderate demands of Peskov. Three weeks into this war, what do Russia’s goals appear to be?

First, besiege and bring down the Kyiv government of Zelensky and replace it with a Russian client regime.

Second, divide Ukraine along the lines of the Dnieper River, which bisects the country north to south, and create an East Ukraine as a pro-Russian state.

Third, seize and occupy the entire coast of the Sea of Azov, turn it into a Russian lake, and capture all of the Ukrainian Black Sea coast from the Donbas to Mariupol, Crimea, Kherson, Odessa and Transnistria, the last a slice of seceded Moldovan land Moscow now controls.

This would leave a landlocked rump state of west Ukraine, which would be a buffer between NATO nations Romania, Hungary, Slovakia and Poland—and Russia-backed East Ukraine.

The Wall Street Journal said Monday that Russia’s realization of these goals would be tantamount to victory in Putin’s war: “A Ukraine divided in two, with Russia in control of the east, and a rump, Western Ukraine cut off from the coast might look like a victory to Mr. Putin—especially if sanctions are removed in some cease-fire agreement.”

With this kind of peace in hand, Putin could then warn the NATO nations that if they attacked East Ukraine directly, or indirectly by arming insurgents, they would face “consequences you have never seen.”

As no NATO nation risked war to save Georgia from Russia in 2008, or to save Ukraine from the Crimean and Donbas amputations of 2014, it is not likely NATO would risk war with Russia, and a potential third world war, if Russia declared a truce once it got full control of eastern Ukraine.

Where would that leave the West?

The Americans and British would likely treat Putin as a pariah and never meet with him again. But would President Emmanuel Macron of France and Chancellor Olaf Scholz of Germany cut off all communication with Russia, when they have been making daily phone calls to Putin and regular visits to Moscow, even as Putin’s war of aggression was raging?

If Russia and Ukraine reached a ceasefire and a truce, would the E.U. and NATO nations of Europe not swiftly stand down themselves, rather than keep the Ukrainian resistance fighting?

If Kiev falls to a Russian strategy of encirclement and strangulation, capitulation and conquest, how long would it be before E.U. nations seek an end to Russia’s isolation and a new era of detente? Or would the continued existence of a regime headed by Putin mean permanent hostility?

Three years after Nikita Khrushchev sent Soviet tanks into Budapest to crush the Hungarian Revolution of 1956, the Soviet premier was riding up Pennsylvania Avenue in an open convertible with Dwight Eisenhower to spend the night at Blair House before a 12-day tour as the guest of the president of the United States.

As of now, the winner of this Russia-Ukraine war appears to be China. Given the severity of U.S. sanctions and the ostracism of Russia from the West, China is the only partner nation and economy to which Moscow can turn to recoup its losses. If this war continues to unfold in a manner that is slow, painful and ugly, China and Russia are likely to establish far better relations with each other than either has with the United States. But how is China, which is engaged in cultural genocide against its Uyghur minority of 10 million, a racial and ethnic persecution featuring reeducation camps, rapes, forced abortions and sterilizations, a morally superior regime to Putin’s?

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever and a founding editor of The American Conservative.

READ MORE: https://www.theamericanconservative.com/buchanan/can-putin-and-zelensky-broker-peace/

NOTE: the Russian have made this SAME offer back in November /December last year: Moscow would make a deal with Ukraine if four conditions were met. Ukraine should cease all military action (FUELLED BY THE NAZIS AND THE USA), recognise Crimea as part of Russia, accept the independence of the Luhansk and Donetsk separatist enclaves (AS PER THE MINSK AGREEMENTS), and enact a constitutional commitment to “neutrality,” which would prevent Ukraine from ever joining NATO. (Note that joining NATO has been embedded in the Ukrainian constitution... see : a red rag to a bear...)

READ FROM TOP.

SEE ALSO: 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

While observers predicted a war of Israel against one of its neighbors, the Hebrew State is not attacked from anywhere. It has opponents, but no enemy, except itself. Its political organization is not defined by any constitution and is therefore easy to overthrow. The Straussians, who are in power in the State Department and the White House, are now driving the change of its regime. Demonstrations are taking place throughout the country to prevent the country from becoming, in the words of a former Mossad director, "a racist and violent state that cannot survive". But it is probably already too late. 

The coup d’état of the Straussians in Israel

by Thierry Meyssan

For the past two years, Israelis have been divided and unable to choose a government. After five general elections, they decided to dismiss the Lapid/Gantz team and put a new coalition around Benjamin Netanyahu in power. However, two months after the formation of the new government, they have changed their minds again. A majority of Israelis already don’t want the people they chose.

Indeed, to everyone’s surprise, Benjamin Netanyahu has formed a coalition with small Jewish supremacist parties. He has promised them to :
• remove from the Basic Law clause 7a prohibiting openly racist parties from running for office.
• amend the anti-discrimination law to allow funding for gender-segregated events or structures and to allow denial of services on the basis of belief.
• compel local governments to fund ultra-Orthodox schools, even if they are not centrally controlled, do not follow the curriculum and refuse to teach basic secular subjects such as Math and English.
• to remove the allocation of food stamps from the Ministry of Social Welfare and entrust it to the Ministry of the Interior. It will apply the criterion of not paying taxes as a criterion for distributing them, knowing that the ultra-Orthodox are exempted regardless of their resources.

However, the Prime Minister was keen to distance himself from his allies. He declared that he would never allow his faith to be used to deny services to an Israeli citizen. "There will be electricity on Shabbat. There will be [mixed] swimming beaches. We will maintain the status quo. There will be no country [governed] by halakha [Jewish law]" "There will be no amendment of the Law of Return" (the Prime Minister’s allies require that any candidate for return prove that he or she has a Jewish parent in the strict sense of the word). He disavowed his son, Yair Netanyahu, for whom the judges who indicted him while he was still Prime Minister are traitors and must be punished as such. Finally, he elected the only openly gay member of parliament, Amir Ohana, president of the Knesset.

As shocking as this program is, it is not important. Benjamin Netanyahu has announced an overhaul of the judicial system that challenges the balance of power on which this unconstitutional country has been based until now, to the point that his opponents are calling it a "coup.

The demonstrations followed one another and grew in number. At first, they were only from the center and the left. Then former allies of Benjamin Netanyahu joined in, and now right-wing groups and, finally, some Arabs.

Drawing a parallel between the current Netanyahu government and the Nazi regime, former Chief of Staff General Moshe Ya’alon said, "The Jewish people paid a heavy price for the fact that in democratic elections in Germany, a government came to power that eliminated democracy, and the first thing it eliminated was the fundamental democratic principle of the independence of the judiciary.

Moshe Ya’alon is a long-time opponent of Benjamin Netanyahu, but in a few weeks, former allies of the Prime Minister have agreed.

 Former Likud justice minister and deputy prime minister under Netanyahu, Dan Meridor, spoke at the main demonstration outside the Knesset on February 20. He said, "Who would have thought that we would need to defend democracy in Israel, but it is under attack!"

 Former Mossad director Tamir Pardo, chosen by Benjamin Netanyahu at the time, is now one of the coordinators of the protests. In an interview with Kan Public Radio, he accused the Prime Minister of reforming the justice system only to escape it personally. In addition, he accused elements of the government coalition of wanting to build "a racist and violent state that cannot survive.

 Former Shin Bet director Yoram Cohen, who was also chosen by Benjamin Netanyahu at the time, told a right-wing rally: "The proposed reform will change the structure of government in Israel, since the executive branch - headed by the Prime Minister - will have unlimited power. The checks and balances necessary for a democratic society will disappear. Every citizen must be concerned about such a situation, regardless of political affiliation. The reform in its current state, [imposed] with brutality and [developed] without dialogue with all components of the nation, could lead to disaster."

Several petitions from economists and high-tech entrepreneurs have sounded the alarm that the announced reforms will scare off foreign investors. 56 world-renowned economists, including 11 Nobel Prize winners, published an open letter. They wrote: "Israel’s ruling coalition is considering a series of legislative acts that would weaken the independence of the judiciary and its power to compel government action. Many Israeli economists, in an open letter which some of us joined, expressed their concern that such a reform would harm the Israeli economy by weakening the rule of law and thus displacing Israel towards Hungary and Poland.

The justice reform plan will be carried out in four phases, of which, for the moment, only the first phase has been presented to the public.
 This phase (phase I) includes
(1) legislating an override provision that would allow the Knesset to pass a second time by a simple majority legislation that was struck down by the Supreme Court;
(2) eliminate the standard of reasonableness for judicial decisions;
(3) strengthen the power of the governing coalition in the Judicial Appointments Committee;
and (4) weaken the status of legal advisors in government ministries.
 Phase II will make the Basic Law on Human Dignity and Liberty a mere text with no more value than any other law. It can therefore be easily replaced.
 Phase III will limit the right of appeal to the Supreme Court.
 Phase IV will divide the current powers of the Attorney General. A second body, a "chief prosecutor", will be the only authority to bring politicians to justice.

This reform will change the nature of Israel completely. It is openly supported by two think tanks, the Kohelet Policy Forum and the Law and Liberty Forum. The latter is inspired by one of the groups that make up the Federalist Society in the United States; the association that secretly drafted the USA Patriot Actand imposed it on the occasion of the September 11 attacks [1]. The Law and Liberty Forum is funded by the Tikvah Fund, which is chaired by the US-Israeli neo-conservative Elliott Abrams (known for his role in the Iran-Contra affair and in numerous coups in Latin America) [2].

The Federalist Society and the Law and Liberty Forum’s strategy is to change jurisprudence by changing judges [3]. Over a period of 30 years, the Federalist Society has succeeded in legally justifying neo-liberalism, limiting the possibilities of recourse against big business, deconstructing the way in which the Democratic Party had imagined the fight against discrimination and for the right to abortion, preventing the USA from joining a number of international treaties and, finally, transforming the balance of power in the USA so that the president can wage whatever wars he wants and practice torture.

The originality of the Federalist Society’s approach was to reinterpret the principles of Anglo-Saxon law. Drawing on the writings of the philosopher Leo Strauss, it substituted "natural law" for "positive law. For example, during the 1980s, President Ronald Reagan wanted to deregulate the economy, but he was constrained by law and could not. A Federalist Society theorist, Professor Richard Epstein, argued that property was not a matter of positive law, i.e., conventions drawn up by legislators, but of natural law, i.e., that it was instituted by God. Now, any regulation of an economic activity consists in limiting the way in which certain owners behave. Therefore, any regulation is an expropriation that requires compensation.

Thus, if a law, in the interest of the community, requires industrialists to produce only products of a certain quality, it limits their property rights, and they must therefore be compensated. This interpretation of the law allowed President Ronald Reagan to deconstruct all pre-existing economic regulations.

Most of the Federalist Society’s adherents are just conservative or libertarian lawyers. They were only concerned with family law and economic law. However, within the Society, a small group became involved in international politics. It is this group that influences Israel today. In the United States, it first succeeded in making "American exceptionalism" triumph .
 [4].

This school of thought refuses to apply international treaties in domestic law; judges the behaviour of others harshly, but absolves Americans who do the same on principle; and refuses to allow any international jurisdiction to take an interest in its internal affairs. In short, it believes that, for religious reasons, the United States is not comparable to other states and should not be subject to any international law. This US ideology is perfectly compatible with the political interpretation of the theological theory of the "chosen people". If from a religious point of view this means that men who turn to God have been chosen by him, understood literally, it means that men are unequal, with the Jews being above the gentiles (in Hebrew, the "goyim").

The other major struggle of this Federalist Society group was to overturn the "non-delegation doctrine. American jurists believed that the separation of constitutional powers did not allow the executive to encroach on the privileges of the legislature and to define the criteria for the application of a law. Now, the opposite is true: the separation of powers prohibits the Legislative branch from interfering with the activities of the Executive branch. The Congress thus loses its power to control the White House. It is on the basis of this sleight of hand that President George W. Bush was able to launch a series of wars and to generalize torture.

The links between this Federalist Society group and the Israeli Likud are not new. In 2003, Elliott Abrams organized the Jerusalem Summit with the participation of almost all Israeli political groups. He said that there would be no peace in the world until Israel crushes the Palestinians’ demands [5].

Following this logic, once the Netanyahu government was formed, General Avi Bluth, commander of Israeli forces in the occupied West Bank, distributed a book to his officers: Ours in Tabu: The Secrets of Land Redeemers From Our Father Abraham to the Young Settlements. It presents as divine will the Jewish occupation of Palestine, whether by land purchase or violence, from Abraham to the illegal settlements.

The first visible consequence of this shift and propaganda occurred in the West Bank when 400 settlers from Har Bracha attacked the town of Huwara. They intended to take revenge for the murder of two of their number, allegedly by Palestinians from that town. For five hours, they pelted the inhabitants, burned several hundred cars and 36 houses. Under the eyes of the Israeli army, which sealed off the village to prevent its inhabitants from fleeing, they attacked them, injuring more than 400 people and killing one. Far from condemning the violence, the Minister of Finance, Bezalel Smotrich, regretted that private individuals had done what he said was the responsibility of the state: to "annihilate" the village.

In the statements of its leaders, the ruling coalition, already complicit in these abuses, announces that it will use the means of the state to extend them to the entire Arab population, not only Palestinians, but also Israeli Arabs.

Mass demonstrations follow one another in Israel, while foreign politicians sympathetic to Israel multiply their warnings. But nothing happens. The process is underway. Bezalel Smotrich sees the Arabs as wild animals that must be tamed by force. But the Minister of National Security, Itamar Ben-Gvir, approaches the issue from a different point of view. For him, God gave the land to the Jews who must expel the Arab squatters from it. Regardless of the points of view, all members of the coalition agree on one thing: the government is sovereign and should not be restricted by laws. This suits Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is under judicial investigation.

What is going on in Israel is not just about Israelis and Palestinians. Elliott Abrams is a historic Straussian, even more so than the US Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, and his deputy, Victoria Nuland. It is therefore foreseeable that if the "reform" of the Israeli justice system continues, the new regime will be fully aligned with the positions of the Straussians. For the time being, Israel refuses to send arms to Ukraine according to the principle of General Benny Gantz: "No Israeli arms should reach the mass murderers of Jews". The risk of an alliance between Ukrainian "integral nationalists", American "Straussians" and Israeli "revisionist Zionists" has never been greater [6]. The United States has just banned the Minister of Finance, Bezalel Smotrich, from visiting its territory. They still sanction his racist remarks, but for how long?

Thierry Meyssan

Translation 

Roger Lagassé

READ MORE:

https://www.voltairenet.org/article218957.html

READ FROM TOP.

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

Argentinian Javier Milei (president of the Republic), Marine Le Pen from France (leader of the National Rally party who ran for the 2022 presidential election), André Ventura from Portugal (president of Chega! - Enough!), Amichai Chikl (Israeli minister in charge of diaspora affairs), José Antonio Kast (president of Chile’s Republican Party) and Santiago Abascal (Spanish politician and president of Vox) will be personally attending the “Europa Viva 2024” convention, to be held at the Vistalegre palace in Madrid.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, Italy’s Georgia Meloni (President of the Council of Ministers), and from the United States Matt Schlapp and Roger Severino (both executives of the Heritage Foundation) will participate in the event via video conference.

On the eve of the European elections, the link between all these political figures is not ideological but financial. It is the US-Israeli Straussian [1], Elliott Abrams [2], co-founder of the Project for the New American Century, administrator of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and president of the Tikvah Fund [3], who is financing the event.

As the saying goes, "whoever pays the piper calls the tune."

https://www.voltairenet.org/article220893.html

READ FROM TOP.

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....