#REALLY hoping to do one of Saker as well | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

mistresspotterhead · 3 years ago

Text

The American Ymbryne- Chap. 1

Alma Peregrine x fem!reader

Warnings: Yelling, slamming hands on a table, being outed (kind of)

Words: 1,900 on the dot

A/N: Wow, this took a lil bit. Alma doesn’t appear until the very end of this chapter, but she’ll be in the next one a lot. Everyone has been so kind, and that has helped a lot <3. Also: Miss Saker indicates the type of bird you are, not your given name. I hope you guys like this. 😊😊😊

Tags: @itsonlydana @evil-feather @merci-bitch @multimilfs @escapetodreamworld @gay-and-sad-tm @multifandomfix @romanottsmaximoff @n0thing-is-real-exe @theaudreymere

(ask if you want to be added/removed)

In a strange way, Cairnholm reminded you of the Chicago loop you and your wards had just fled from. They were both very dreary, cold, and, from what you could tell from those on the ferry, the people would rather be anywhere else.

“M-miss Saker? I’m cold.” The bundle of talking coats shivered next to you.

“I know, Astrid. We’re almost there, though.” You sighed and looked out toward the slowly approaching coastline. Your surviving children, Elina, Alexander, Leonard, and, of course, Astrid, all huddled closer to you. You stared at Cairnholm for a while longer, until the ferryman’s voice suddenly called out.

“Alright everyone, ‘ere we are! The… lovely… Cairnholm!” He steered the small ferry over to the somehow smaller docks, and you led your children out.

“Is everyone here? Astrid, Leo, Elina, Alex?” David, Beth-Anne, Lisa, Frankie, June, Stefanie, Josef, Alice, Rosie, Reggie. You suppressed the urge to call out their names as well.

“Yes, Miss Saker,” they called in long-suffering voices- you were very adamant about attendance. It was good to see something was normal.

“All right then. Leo, can you see where the loop is? And Alex, are there any other peculiars near?” Ah yes, your diviners. It was very lucky for all of you that they were two of those that survived the wight’s invasion of your loop.

Your Chicago loop near the Art Institute was one of the last surviving loops in America maintained by an Ymbryne, along with your South Side, McKinley Park, and St. Louis loops, though the latter was run mainly by its older wards and reset once a week.

As of a fortnight ago, though, the Art Institute loop was the only one you had. McKinley Park was attacked by Wights and Hollows in December, with South Side following close in early January. Samuel, the sole survivor of McKinley Park, was what Syndrygasti call a Librarian. He could see hollows and alerted you to them when you were traveling to St. Louis for reset. The problem with this, though, was that Sammy was only five years old, and so frequently got distracted.

It wasn’t hard to understand- Illinois in 1975 was very colorful. Sammy was gone now, though, as were all most all of your children. Speaking of…

“There aren’t any other peculiars on the island, Miss Saker- at least not in this time,” Alex said, startling you out of your thoughts.

“Thank you, dear. How are you faring, Leo? Have you located the loop? I don’t like being out in the open for this long.” For emphasis, Elina gave a giant, chattering shiver that was surely exaggerated.

“Indeed, but it is on the other side of the island, and the night is fast approaching.”

You looked over and scowled at the sun; if you couldn’t get rest, then why was it allowed to?

“Well then. It looks like we’ll have to go into town.” Immediately, protests arose.

“Aw, no!”

“Come on, Miss Saker! We can make camp out here!”

“Because that sounds comfortable,” Leo deadpanned to Astrid.

“Well, it’s better than town! There probably isn’t even a hotel!”

“Actually, Astrid, that’s where you’re wrong.” Astrid looked shocked at the suggestion that she could ever be incorrect at something. “There is a hotel. It’s called the….” You took out the crumpled guidebook the ferryman had given to each tourist. “Preist Hole. What kind of hotel is called the Priest Hole?” You muttered that last part to yourself. “Anyway, off we go. Come along, single file now.”

Your ducklings dutifully arranged themselves from youngest to oldest, seven-year-old Elina closest to you and sixteen-year-old Leo at the back.

You hoped that the food was at least good.

Nope. Everything on the Preist Hole’s menu was covered with vinegar. You wondered if that was a Welsh thing or a Cairnholm thing. Maybe the owner just liked vinegar. Next to you, Elina was grimacing with every bite. On a whim, you decided to flag the bartender down.

“Hey, Kev, was it?” He grinned widely at you. You gave him a small smile in return.

“Yes, ma’am, that’s me. What can I do for you ‘n yer bunch today?”

“I was just wondering if you had some fries- sorry, chips- with less vinegar. My youngest is still picky.”

“Hmm. Well, I’ll talk to Arnie ‘n see what he can whip up fer ye. He’s the cook, ye see.”

“Thank you so much, sir.” You attempted a bigger smile, but it still felt forced.

“Naw, it ain’t a problem, really. ‘N please, call me Kev. Sir sounds like I’m fifty- ‘n I’ve still got twenty years ‘fore that,” he chuckled.

“Well then, you must call me y/n.”

“Of course, ma’am- y/n, sorry.” He rubbed the back of his neck.

“It’s alright, Kev.” This time, your smile was a small bit genuine- his hesitancy was endearing.

“Yeh. Well, um, I’d better talk teh Arnie now. I’ve kinda been lingering here for a while.”

“Of course. I wouldn’t want to keep you from work, anyway.”

“I mean, I wouldn’t object if yeh did,” Kev concluded, winking before walking away.

Once he was out of earshot, Astrid started chittering.

“Ooh, was that flirting I saw, Miss Saker?” You rolled your eyes, and Alex guffawed into his water.

“Miss Saker? Flirt with a guy? I think Elina would drink an entire bottle of vinegar before that happened.” You turned your head sharply in his direction, but not before Astrid snapped back at him.

“What’s that supposed to mean?” You jerk your head toward her now.

“Well, Miss Saker isn’t really the type to, ah, dabble in the male gene pool.” It was like you were watching tennis, really, with all this head-turning.

“That doesn’t make any-”

“ENOUGH!” You stood up, placing your hands on the bar. “This is not a discussion we are having, especially not here and now. Alex, I told you that information in confidence, and I am severely disappointed that you have betrayed that. Astrid, whether or not I am flirting with someone, and really my love life in general, is none of your concern. Do you both understand?”

They nodded, Alex looking especially ashamed of himself.

“Sorry, Miss Saker. It just slipped out.”

You sighed and ignored all the stares you and your wards were getting because of your outburst.

“Alright, Alex. Just… you can’t share things that people tell you privately.”

“Yes, Miss Saker.” He was quiet after that, poking at his food.

It bothered you that he had shared that information, though it didn’t seem as if the other wards had understood. Of course, Leo was the only one you would expect to, as he was sixteen, but he had been sheltered in your loop his entire life. All of your wards had, really.

Just as you were beginning to sink into your past again, Kev came out with Elina’s new plate of fr- chips.

“Here ye are, little lady. I hope you like these better.” He smiled at Elina, tugging a small one out in return. You both watched expectantly as she took a tentative bite. And another. And another. Until the plate was almost gone, and she was rubbing her stomach in contentment.

“Well, that was fast.”

“It was good, Miss Saker. I wasn’t going to let it cool.” You laughed at the disapproving look on her face.

“Alright, alright. I suppose you have a good point.” You turned to Kev. “Thank you again, sir, for-”

“Kev.”

“...right. Thank you for doing this. How much will it cost?” You were ruffled at his interruption, but he didn’t notice. He pretended to think for a moment.

“Hmm… how much will makin’ a little girl ‘n her mam happy cost? I dunno.” He smiled at you. “It’s on the house. I can see that ye haven’t had such a good day, so….”

“Really? Are you sure? I mean, I have the money….”

“I’m completely sure. It’s good te make someone happy once in a while.”

“Well, I truly do thank you. It also seems that we’ll need a room, if that’s alright?”

“Sure. Room four was just recently vacated. It’s right up here.” He led you up the stairs, the kids trailing behind.

The room was small for five people, but it seemed like a mansion to the children, who only had their old, overcrowded loop to compare it to. There were four rickety beds, though they did seem to be clean, and a barren nightstand next to each of them.

“Ah… I forgot that this only had four beds. I can get ye another room, or-”

“No, no, this is fine. Thank you for your help, Kev.” You subtly ushered him toward the door.

“Oh- well, if ye need anythi-”

“Yes, of course. Ta, then! Have a nice day!” You shut the door, leaving him very confused.

Alex was wheezing on the floor behind you.

“That… that was absolutely amazing Miss Saker! You are an absolute icon!”

What in Abaton does that mean? You never could understand the new slang terms that the 1970s held.

Elina yawned, setting off all the other children and alerting you to their needs.

“Alright then, time for bed.” Immediately, they were completely awake.

“I’m not tired at all, Miss Saker, therefore I shan’t be able to fall asleep.”

“The fact that your accent is coming out very strongly tells me that you are indeed tired, Leo.” You crossed your arms. “Bed. now.” Your wards slouched, and grudgingly picked out a bed each.

“Miss Saker, where will you sleep tonight?” Astrid asked as you were tucking her covers in.

“On the floor, of course. Now, did you remember to take off your gloves?”

“But it won’t be comfortable! The floor is so hard and cold and dirty and-”

“Your gloves, Astrid.” She was very talkative, even late at night, though you had come to enjoy it. Sometimes.

She took off the gloves that helped control her peculiarity and was about to start chattering again when Elina suddenly spoke up from her bed in the corner.

“I could make you a nest with a spare blanket, Miss Saker?” You gave her one of your very rare genuine smiles.

“That would be lovely, Elina.”

“Wait- how did she know you were going to sleep in bird form?” Alex asked, finally catching on. You smiled again at Elina and kissed her on the forehead.

“She’s made me a little nest before when I fall asleep in my study while in bird form.”

“And that happens often?”

“Surprisingly so. Now, snuggle in and no more talking.” As the children said their goodnights, you finally transformed into your bird form; a stunning saker falcon. You jumped lightly onto Elina’s bed, careful not to hurt her with your razor-sharp talons or accidentally hit her with your wing (which had happened on more than one occasion).

Though you nestled into the warm bunch of blankets right away, you didn’t fall asleep until much later, and even then, you were restless all night.

---

Little did you know, in the old manor that you would trek to the next day, a group of peculiars and one very curious ymbryne had observed all of this. Alma LeFay Peregrine set her watch and gave the children a reassuring smile while she pondered what this meant and why her stomach had fluttered when you gave that dazzling smile.

#tw yelling #tw slamming hands down #tw being outed #alma peregrine x reader #miss peregrine x reader #alma peregrine #wow im so gay for her

209 notes · View notes

annoyed-galaxy · 4 years ago

Note

Mentor, Skill, Will, Strength and Coronation ^^

Oops I meant to answer these earlier but got caught up in the Sparrow fight. xD

Anyways, more time to scream about Aelyn mwhahahah.

Mentor

After her mother died and Logan became king, Walter took up the parental figure spot for her, especially after Logan became more and more distant. Walter knew how upset Aelyn was that she couldn’t spend more time with Logan so he tried to make that up for her by always being by her side and starting to teach her how to become a Hero. Aelyn threw herself into learning the sword, wanting to be just like her mother, and Walter guided her all the way through it. Walter helped Aelyn get through the worst of everything especially after the events in the throne room. Walter was concerned, however, that Aelyn would not want to lead a revolution considering it was against her brother and he knew how close they were.

Nevertheless, Aelyn did everything to the best of her abilities. When the time in Aurora came, Aelyn was scared because Walter was scared. A man she looked up to and thought couldn’t be scared of anything was terrified. Their time in Shadelight Temple was rough and scarred Aelyn. When Walter was taken, the Darkness formed images of him being killed. It also showed her friends Page and Ben Finn, and even her brother being murdered. Fear almost consumed her until she heard Walter’s real voice and she found him. Saving him was her top priority and this is where magic became its strongest, with her lashing out with both flame and blade. However, the effort became tiresome on her body. Even still, Aelyn refused to leave Walter behind and dragged him as far as she could. Despite his protests, she would not leave him behind. But she knew that was a fool’s wish. They were too slow and Aelyn was already tired after using so much of her power and the sun was bearing down on them. Aelyn swore to Walter she would come back for him at all costs and cried as she ran off, looking for help.

Aelyn now understood what happened to Logan when he came to Aurora and why he changed so drastically. When she returned to Albion and became Queen, she kept a close eye on Logan and Walter to see how the were reacting to the coming Darkness. So of course, her heart shattered when Walter was possessed and she was forced to fight him. He screamed at her, telling her to fight him, to save him from this Darkness. Fighting Walter was awful. She was holding back, even though she knew could easily take him.When she finally did manage to land the killing blow and held Walter in her arms, she felt like she had failed. How could she have this happen? Even though he told her he was proud, Aelyn still felt like she had let him down, failed him.

His funeral was almost too much to bear. It’s there where she yelled at Logan for thinking he could leave her. Almost every other day, Aelyn visits the statue and cries for a good minute, wishing she could have done better.

Skill

Aelyn and Ben Finn weren’t close to begin with, but as the revolution grew, she found a liking to him. He was a silver lining in what she considers the darkest time of her life. He cheered her up a lot and she loved his playful attitude. She loved listening to his stories, whether or not they were true, and she just enjoyed being by his side. They became close friends and Aelyn asked him if he ever returned from his adventures if he wanted to become head of the army. He said he’d think about it, but a few years later, he returned and accepted the offer. He visits Aelyn a lot, along with Page, and hang out just talking. Sometimes, they’ll even go off on some adventures when Aelyn has a clear schedule or really does not feel like dealing with noble bullshit. Ben Finn reminds her a lot of a less pompous Elliot and is what helped fill up that small hole of Elliot’s death.

Aelyn and Ben Finn aren’t in a relationship, cause for once Ben is too nervous to ask the Queen of Albion on a date (also cause Logan is extremely overprotective and just because he’s not a tyrannical king anymore doesn’t mean he isn’t terrifying), but they do tease each other a lot and the feeling is there, but neither act upon it yet.

Will

Page and Aelyn didn’t get along at first. Page assumed Aelyn would turn out just like her brother, a tyrannical piece of shit and Aelyn disliked the idea that Page wanted Logan dead for a time. Page didn’t trust Aelyn to actually go through with the revolution, calling her love for her brother a weakness. She also thought Aelyn was indecisive after hearing about the events in the throne room that led to both Elliot and the protestors’ deaths. However they grudgingly worked together, but when the time came for Reaver’s party, Page garnered some respect for Aelyn. She realized that Aelyn had spent all her time away from the castle perfecting the skills of a Hero and being able to fight. But they still weren’t friends.

It wasn’t until after Aelyn kept her promises that Page began to like her. Page was thoroughly against the idea of Logan being pardoned of all crimes and felt like Aelyn was too soft-hearted. But the way Aelyn stood up against Reaver in court and was passionate about keeping her promises and protecting the people of Albion made Page realize that Aelyn’s soft heart, wasn’t a weakness; it was a strength. Page started to warm up to Aelyn and liked her even more when Aelyn was having none of the nobles’ bullshit when she raised taxes for them and them alone.

Despite their rocky beginnings, Aelyn and Page did become very close friends and have attended parties together. Also, Aelyn has never had a female friend before so it was nice to talk about girl stuff with her and joke about the boys all the time.

Strength

Because of Aelyn’s big heart, she is close with all of her allies. She kicked Saker’s ass and spared him because she knew she needed him, but also because she would never kill an unarmed man. She loves how crazy Sabine is and respects the man for leading his people so valiantly despite all the hardships they faced. Kalin was a calm anchor for Aelyn knowing that the Darkness was coming, but knowing that Kalin’s people had been dealing with it for so long.

Then there’s Jasper. Jasper was once her mother’s servant, but became Aelyn’s after Sparrow died. Jasper didn’t take care of her the way Walter and Logan had in the past, but was always there to offer words of wisdom when she needed them the most. Jasper helped her in her grieving process as well by taking over Hobson’s spot for a time being, knowing that the weasel would stress Aelyn out.

Coronation

Growing up, Aelyn didn’t recognize the difference between herself and someone living in the Old Quarter. She didn’t understand why people would bow to her or treat her differently. She knew she was a princess and that her mother was a very powerful woman both in the fact that she was a queen and a Hero. Aelyn was pretty naive to her position. Logan, being the eldest, was the one being taught all about becoming a monarch and ruling, although he really didn’t want to be. So of course, when Aelyn is thrown into a revolution, forced to rebel against her brother, she doesn’t realize at the time that she’ll replace him. It never really sunk in that that’s what she was doing.

When it was time to become queen, she was terrified. She knew now that she was being judged by thousands of people and that her word could destroy thousands of people’s livelihoods. She knew that even being a good queen, there would still be pressure because you couldn’t make everyone happy. She knew that the people were looking up to her for a lot of things. She knew she had to fill Logan’s shoes and fix the mistakes he made. Not to mention the Darkness was on its way. Aelyn was stressed out the first few days and of course, her first act as queen was to decide her brother’s fate. When the people cried out for his death, Aelyn knew she needed him by her side. He was the one with all the monarch training after all. And she needed the emotional support more than ever.

So of course she made him an advisor. Having him by her side helped ease things, but when it came to actual decision making, she was left on her own. She didn’t really like being queen and understood why Logan was finally relieved to be rid of the throne. She also understood the hard choices Logan had to make, but after the Darkness was defeated, she managed to get used to the role. Of course, she would go out adventuring with Logan, Ben Finn, and Page to get away from royal duties, much to Hobson’s annoyance. Her rule was a peaceful one and the people loved her and she hopes she can keep it up.

End

Sorry for the long post yet again, also I ramble a lot so if some of it doesn’t make sense, my bad, my thoughts literally just dumped onto the keyboard and ran with it. But thank you for these I love talking about Aelyn and Sparrow.

#Fable #Fable 3 #Fable HOBW #Hobw #Fable Walter #Walter beck #Ask game

3 notes · View notes

rocksolidnarwhal · 7 years ago

Note

top 5 (or more, it's up to you) quotes from your friend group (u know which one)

gurl bab fam you know this will just be a fuckton long list where I drag you and nobody else, I hope you’re ready

“You’re the cute in execution” (aww)

“True friends share everything, even ice cream - that’s why I’m eating yours too” (you’re such a Character you know)

“Elderflower lemonade is a gateway drug to white wine” (sometimes I just don’t know why you say the things you do you know)

“I don’t have any enemies in particular, I’m enemies with the power” (love it love the confidence)

“When I was younger … I was smaller” (well yeah)

“SATAN IS IN MY CEILING” (this was about a tiny spider, and I know I can’t really call you out for it, but)

“Collaboration means cake for both” (trUE)

“Why play when you can spit on the table” (or in the ceiling amiright)

“På tal om saker som rullar bort, typ livet” (bmood)

“We’re so past me being polite just to seem nice, when we all know I’m really mean” (nooo you’re not) (except for when you eat my ice cream)

“I don’t wait for the pie, the pie waits for me” (?? I mean??? I’m?)

“I laughed with you only you weren’t laughing” (………..)

“Det är sällan jag sett så många Fjällräven-ryggsäckar på samma ställe” (en Klassiker från F!-picknick 2014 eller whenever det var)

*sad laughter* “I have to stop being so gay" (no)

“I’m married to the gay movement” (yes)

"It’s not gay if it’s a coincidence” (it really is)

“Bergakungens skal” (jag har ingen aning om context eller varför det är så roligt men det är det)

“yeah I’m a boob punch we all know this” (yup)

“I’m the light of my own party … please forget that I said that” (but I never forgot)

“I’m so hilarious it hurts” (I’ve pretty much never agreed more)

“Too bad your Satan” (thanks honey love you too)

“We don’t have afterparties, our whole life is a party” (wow! one that someone else, aka @friendlyneighbourhoodlucifer, said!)

then we have the good pure ones featuring both of yout: now where’s that whipped cream e: I don’t know what you want me to say?t: this is improv, you can say whatever you wante: have a good night, grandma

e: (ang väska) är facken stängda?t: japp, arbetarna gör revolt

and then the most classic of all classicse: I haven’t eaten crisps this weekt: IT’S MONDAY

#thanks for always making my day <3 #broccolia #thisverygayuniverse #friendlyneighbourhoodlucifer #food mention

9 notes · View notes

newsnigeria · 6 years ago

Text

Check out New Post published on Ọmọ Oòduà

New Post has been published on http://ooduarere.com/news-from-nigeria/world-news/saker-interview-with-michael-hudson-venezuela/

Saker interview with Michael Hudson on Venezuela, February 7, 2019

[This interview was made for the Unz review]

Introduction: There is a great deal of controversy about the true shape of the Venezuelan economy and whether Hugo Chavez’ and Nicholas Maduro’s reform and policies were crucial for the people of Venezuela or whether they were completely misguided and precipitated the current crises. Anybody and everybody seems to have very strong held views about this. But I don’t simply because I lack the expertise to have any such opinions. So I decided to ask one of the most respected independent economists out there, Michael Hudson, for whom I have immense respect and whose analyses (including those he co-authored with Paul Craig Roberts) seem to be the most credible and honest ones you can find. In fact, Paul Craig Roberts considers Hudson the “best economist in the world“! I am deeply grateful to Michael for his replies which, I hope, will contribute to a honest and objective understanding of what really is taking place in Venezuela. The Saker

The Saker: Could you summarize the state of Venezuela’s economy when Chavez came to power?

Michael Hudson: Venezuela was an oil monoculture. Its export revenue was spent largely on importing food and other necessities that it could have produced at home. Its trade was largely with the United States. So despite its oil wealth, it ran up foreign debt.

From the outset, U.S. oil companies have feared that Venezuela might someday use its oil revenues to benefit its overall population instead of letting the U.S. oil industry and its local comprador aristocracy siphon off its wealth. So the oil industry – backed by U.S. diplomacy – held Venezuela hostage in two ways.

First of all, oil refineries were not built in Venezuela, but in Trinidad and in the southern U.S. Gulf Coast states. This enabled U.S. oil companies – or the U.S. Government – to leave Venezuela without a means of “going it alone” and pursuing an independent policy with its oil, as it needed to have this oil refined. It doesn’t help to have oil reserves if you are unable to get this oil refined so as to be usable.

Second, Venezuela’s central bankers were persuaded to pledge their oil reserves and all assets of the state oil sector (including Citgo) as collateral for its foreign debt. This meant that if Venezuela defaulted (or was forced into default by U.S. banks refusing to make timely payment on its foreign debt), bondholders and U.S. oil majors would be in a legal position to take possession of Venezuelan oil assets.

These pro-U.S. policies made Venezuela a typically polarized Latin American oligarchy. Despite being nominally rich in oil revenue, its wealth was concentrated in the hands of a pro-U.S. oligarchy that let its domestic development be steered by the World Bank and IMF. The indigenous population, especially its rural racial minority as well as the urban underclass, was excluded from sharing in the country’s oil wealth. The oligarchy’s arrogant refusal to share the wealth, or even to make Venezuela self-sufficient in essentials, made the election of Hugo Chavez a natural outcome.

The Saker: Could you outline the various reforms and changes introduced by Hugo Chavez? What did he do right, and what did he do wrong?

Michael Hudson: Chavez sought to restore a mixed economy to Venezuela, using its government revenue – mainly from oil, of course – to develop infrastructure and domestic spending on health care, education, employment to raise living standards and productivity for his electoral constituency.

What he was unable to do was to clean up the embezzlement and built-in rake-off of income from the oil sector. And he was unable to stem the capital flight of the oligarchy, taking its wealth and moving it abroad – while running away themselves.

This was not “wrong”. It merely takes a long time to change an economy’s disruption – while the U.S. is using sanctions and “dirty tricks” to stop that process.

The Saker: What are, in your opinion, the causes of the current economic crisis in Venezuela – is it primarily due to mistakes by Chavez and Maduro or is the main cause US sabotage, subversion and sanctions?

Michael Hudson: There is no way that’s Chavez and Maduro could have pursued a pro-Venezuelan policy aimed at achieving economic independence without inciting fury, subversion and sanctions from the United States. American foreign policy remains as focused on oil as it was when it invaded Iraq under Dick Cheney’s regime. U.S. policy is to treat Venezuela as an extension of the U.S. economy, running a trade surplus in oil to spend in the United States or transfer its savings to U.S. banks.

By imposing sanctions that prevent Venezuela from gaining access to its U.S. bank deposits and the assets of its state-owned Citco, the United States is making it impossible for Venezuela to pay its foreign debt. This is forcing it into default, which U.S. diplomats hope to use as an excuse to foreclose on Venezuela’s oil resources and seize its foreign assets much as Paul Singer hedge fund sought to do with Argentina’s foreign assets.

Just as U.S. policy under Kissinger was to make Chile’s “economy scream,” so the U.S. is following the same path against Venezuela. It is using that country as a “demonstration effect” to warn other countries not to act in their self-interest in any way that prevents their economic surplus from being siphoned off by U.S. investors.

The Saker: What in your opinion should Maduro do next (assuming he stays in power and the USA does not overthrow him) to rescue the Venezuelan economy?

Michael Hudson: I cannot think of anything that President Maduro can do that he is not doing. At best, he can seek foreign support – and demonstrate to the world the need for an alternative international financial and economic system.

He already has begun to do this by trying to withdraw Venezuela’s gold from the Bank of England and Federal Reserve. This is turning into “asymmetrical warfare,” threatening what to de-sanctify the dollar standard in international finance. The refusal of England and the United States to grant an elected government control of its foreign assets demonstrates to the entire world that U.S. diplomats and courts alone can and will control foreign countries as an extension of U.S. nationalism.

The price of the U.S. economic attack on Venezuela is thus to fracture the global monetary system. Maduro’s defensive move is showing other countries the need to protect themselves from becoming “another Venezuela” by finding a new safe haven and paying agent for their gold, foreign exchange reserves and foreign debt financing, away from the dollar, sterling and euro areas.

The only way that Maduro can fight successfully is on the institutional level, upping the ante to move “outside the box.” His plan – and of course it is a longer-term plan – is to help catalyze a new international economic order independent of the U.S. dollar standard. It will work in the short run only if the United States believes that it can emerge from this fight as an honest financial broker, honest banking system and supporter of democratically elected regimes. The Trump administration is destroying illusion more thoroughly than any anti-imperialist critic or economic rival could do!

Over the longer run, Maduro also must develop Venezuelan agriculture, along much the same lines that the United States protected and developed its agriculture under the New Deal legislation of the 1930s – rural extension services, rural credit, seed advice, state marketing organizations for crop purchase and supply of mechanization, and the same kind of price supports that the United States has long used to subsidize domestic farm investment to increase productivity.

The Saker: What about the plan to introduce a oil-based crypto currency? Will that be an effective alternative to the dying Venezuelan Bolivar?

Michael Hudson: Only a national government can issue a currency. A “crypto” currency tied to the price of oil would become a hedging vehicle, prone to manipulation and price swings by forward sellers and buyers. A national currency must be based on the ability to tax, and Venezuela’s main tax source is oil revenue, which is being blocked from the United States. So Venezuela’s position is like that of the German mark coming out of its hyperinflation of the early 1920s. The only solution involves balance-of-payments support. It looks like the only such support will come from outside the dollar sphere.

The solution to any hyperinflation must be negotiated diplomatically and be supported by other governments. My history of international trade and financial theory, Trade, Develpoment and Foreign Debt, describes the German reparations problem and how its hyperinflation was solved by the Rentenmark.

Venezuela’s economic-rent tax would fall on oil, and luxury real estate sites, as well as monopoly prices, and on high incomes (mainly financial and monopoly income). This requires a logic to frame such tax and monetary policy. I have tried to explain how to achieve monetary and hence political independence for the past half-century. China is applying such policy most effectively. It is able to do so because it is a large and self-sufficient economy in essentials, running a large enough export surplus to pay for its food imports. Venezuela is in no such position. That is why it is looking to China for support at this time.

The Saker: How much assistance do China, Russia and Iran provide and how much can they do to help? Do you think that these three countries together can help counter-act US sabotage, subversion and sanctions?

Michael Hudson: None of these countries have a current capacity to refine Venezuelan oil. This makes it difficult for them to take payment in Venezuelan oil. Only a long-term supply contract (paid for in advance) would be workable. And even in that case, what would China and Russia do if the United States simply grabbed their property in Venezuela, or refused to let Russia’s oil company take possession of Citco? In that case, the only response would be to seize U.S. investments in their own country as compensation.

At least China and Russia can provide an alternative bank clearing mechanism to SWIFT, so that Venezuela can by pass the U.S. financial system and keep its assets from being grabbed at will by U.S. authorities or bondholders. And of course, they can provide safe-keeping for however much of Venezuela’s gold it can get back from New York and London.

Looking ahead, therefore, China, Russia, Iran and other countries need to set up a new international court to adjudicate the coming diplomatic crisis and its financial and military consequences. Such a court – and its associated international bank as an alternative to the U.S.-controlled IMF and World Bank – needs a clear ideology to frame a set of principles of nationhood and international rights with power to implement and enforce its judgments.

This would confront U.S. financial strategists with a choice: if they continue to treat the IMF, World Bank, ITO and NATO as extensions of increasingly aggressive U.S. foreign policy, they will risk isolating the United States. Europe will have to choose whether to remain a U.S. economic and military satellite, or to throw in its lot with Eurasia.

However, Daniel Yergin reports in the Wall Street Journal (Feb. 7) that China is trying to hedge its bets by opening a back-door negotiation with Guaido’s group, apparently to get the same deal that it has negotiated with Maduro’s government. But any such deal seems unlikely to be honored in practice, given U.S. animosity toward China and Guaido’s total reliance on U.S. covert support.

The Saker: Venezuela kept a lot of its gold in the UK and money in the USA. How could Chavez and Maduro trust these countries or did they not have another choice? Are there viable alternatives to New York and London or are they still the “only game in town” for the world’s central banks?

Michael Hudson: There was never real trust in the Bank of England or Federal Reserve, but it seemed unthinkable that they would refuse to permit an official depositor from withdrawing its own gold. The usual motto is “Trust but verify.” But the unwillingness (or inability) of the Bank of England to verify means that the formerly unthinkable has now arrived: Have these central banks sold this gold forward in the post-London Gold Pool and its successor commodity markets in their attempt to keep down the price so as to maintain the appearance of a solvent U.S. dollar standard.

Paul Craig Roberts has described how this system works. There are forward markets for currencies, stocks and bonds. The Federal Reserve can offer to buy a stock in three months at, say, 10% over the current price. Speculators will by the stock, bidding up the price, so as to take advantage of “the market’s” promise to buy the stock. So by the time three months have passed, the price will have risen. That is largely how the U.S. “Plunge Protection Team” has supported the U.S. stock market.

The system works in reverse to hold down gold prices. The central banks holding gold can get together and offer to sell gold at a low price in three months. “The market” will realize that with low-priced gold being sold, there’s no point in buying more gold and bidding its price up. So the forward-settlement market shapes today’s market.

The question is, have gold buyers (such as the Russian and Chinese government) bought so much gold that the U.S. Fed and the Bank of England have actually had to “make good” on their forward sales, and steadily depleted their gold? In this case, they would have been “living for the moment,” keeping down gold prices for as long as they could, knowing that once the world returns to the pre-1971 gold-exchange standard for intergovernmental balance-of-payments deficits, the U.S. will run out of gold and be unable to maintain its overseas military spending (not to mention its trade deficit and foreign disinvestment in the U.S. stock and bond markets). My book on Super-Imperialism explains why running out of gold forced the Vietnam War to an end. The same logic would apply today to America’s vast network of military bases throughout the world.

Refusal of England and the U.S. to pay Venezuela means that other countries means that foreign official gold reserves can be held hostage to U.S. foreign policy, and even to judgments by U.S. courts to award this gold to foreign creditors or to whoever might bring a lawsuit under U.S. law against these countries.

This hostage-taking now makes it urgent for other countries to develop a viable alternative, especially as the world de-dedollarizes and a gold-exchange standard remains the only way of constraining the military-induced balance of payments deficit of the United States or any other country mounting a military attack. A military empire is very expensive – and gold is a “peaceful” constraint on military-induced payments deficits. (I spell out the details in my Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire (1972), updated in German as Finanzimperium(2017).

The U.S. has overplayed its hand in destroying the foundation of the dollar-centered global financial order. That order has enabled the United States to be “the exceptional nation” able to run balance-of-payments deficits and foreign debt that it has no intention (or ability) to pay, claiming that the dollars thrown off by its foreign military spending “supply” other countries with their central bank reserves (held in the form of loans to the U.S. Treasury – Treasury bonds and bills – to finance the U.S. budget deficit and its military spending, as well as the largely military U.S. balance-of-payments deficit.

Given the fact that the EU is acting as a branch of NATO and the U.S. banking system, that alternative would have to be associated with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, and the gold would have to be kept in Russia and/or China.

The Saker: What can other Latin American countries such as Bolivia, Nicaragua, Cuba and, maybe, Uruguay and Mexico do to help Venezuela?

Michael Hudson: The best thing neighboring Latin American countries can do is to join in creating a vehicle to promote de-dollarization and, with it, an international institution to oversee the writedown of debts that are beyond the ability of countries to pay without imposing austerity and thereby destroying their economies.

An alternative also is needed to the World Bank that would make loans in domestic currency, above all to subsidize investment in domestic food production so as to protect the economy against foreign food-sanctions – the equivalent of a military siege to force surrender by imposing famine conditions. This World Bank for Economic Acceleration would put the development of self-reliance for its members first, instead of promoting export competition while loading borrowers down with foreign debt that would make them prone to the kind of financial blackmail that Venezuela is experiencing.

Being a Roman Catholic country, Venezuela might ask for papal support for a debt write-down and an international institution to oversee the ability to pay by debtor countries without imposing austerity, emigration, depopulation and forced privatization of the public domain.

Two international principles are needed. First, no country should be obliged to pay foreign debt in a currency (such as the dollar or its satellites) whose banking system acts to prevents payment.

Second, no country should be obliged to pay foreign debt at the price of losing its domestic autonomy as a state: the right to determine its own foreign policy, to tax and to create its own money, and to be free of having to privatize its public assets to pay foreign creditors. Any such debt is a “bad loan” reflecting the creditor’s own irresponsibility or, even worse, pernicious asset grab in a foreclosure that was the whole point of the loan.

The Saker: Thank you very much for taking the time to reply to my questions!

#Venezuela

0 notes

famedubaitravl · 4 years ago

Text

The durable Mr. Broad | Cricbuzz.com

Broad endures even as the scrutiny over him seldom subsides. ©Getty

There’s a yarn Graham Said likes to tell about Stuart Broad’s time at Hoppers Crossing CC, a club situated about half an hour’s drive from Melbourne. In between opening the batting and bowling for the club during the winter of 2004, Broad helped out with Said’s handyman business to earn a few extra bucks.

One day, Broad was mowing lawns on the side of a hill. He had just completed a section and walked over to ask Said something. But Broad had forgotten to secure the lawnmower. He and Said watched aghast as it rolled down the hill, perfectly bisected the gap between two parked cars and kept rolling across a busy road before coming to a halt on the other side. Remarkably, no damage was done.

It’s a good job, then, that Broad made it as a cricketer. He probably wouldn’t have cut it as a gardener.

Sixteen years after his winter at Hoppers, Broad is England’s second highest Test wicket taker with 485 wickets. He will almost certainly become only the fourth fast bowler ever to pass the 500-wicket mark. Some of the most iconic and extraordinary spells of English Test match bowling have come from Broad’s right hand and his union with James Anderson has resulted in one of the greatest bowling combinations in the history of Test cricket.

But despite a record that puts him in the rarefied company of Glenn McGrath, Courtney Walsh and Dale Steyn, Broad’s exploits are often underappreciated. Firstly, there’s the Anderson problem. In any other era, Broad would have been the undisputed star of England’s show. Instead, he’s often portrayed as the Robin to Anderson’s Batman, judged not on his own merits, but in light of those of his opening partner.

Then there’s the questioning of his place, the assumption that others could do better, which has bubbled under the surface of his entire career. If you Google ‘Stuart Broad should be dropped’ you will see a host of former players who have, at one time or another, called for him to be left out.

Even now, his place continues to be under pressure. Despite a stellar 2019, there was a chance that he could be left out for the second Test in South Africa this winter after a quiet opening game of the series. The scrutiny on Broad has rarely ever let up.

And yet, he has endured, for 138 Test matches and counting. How has he done it, and as the end of his career draws ever nearer, what will his legacy be?

***

Broad was just 18 when he played at Hoppers the winter before he made his first-class debut. Hoppers’ Mark Craig had played for Edgerton Park in Melton Mowbray, Broad’s junior club, a couple of years before as part of an exchange agreement between the two clubs. “Broady was probably about 5′ 9″ then, tubby, bowled fourth change and wanted to be a batsman,” Craig remembers of his time in the UK. “Two years later, when he arrived at Melbourne airport, he was 6’4″. With that extra height he was really sending them down.”

On the pitch, Broad had a decent, if unspectacular, season in Australia but he remains in touch with many at the club, including Said and his wife Sue. Unbeknown to the players, he went back to watch the first XI during one Ashes tour. When the short-leg called for a helmet, Broad put one on and ran it onto the pitch. The players all wondered who this random bloke was in jeans and a shirt, until Broad took off the helmet, handed it to the short-leg and ran back off the field.

“He hasn’t changed,” Craig says. “For who he has become, a worldwide name, he still remembers these people. There’s not one person who has ever had a bad word to say about him.”

A few months after arriving home from Australia, Broad made his Championship debut for Leicestershire. Ottis Gibson, who would go on to become England’s bowling coach on two separate occasions, was opening the bowling for the midlands county. “He was a tall, skinny guy who wanted to bowl fast,” Gibson remembers. “His action was all over the place. But he steamed in.”

Broad had come late to fast bowling, seeing himself as a batting all-rounder even when he first signed for Leicestershire. But gradually, his bowling became his strongest suit. “The one thing that I was always quite impressed with was how hungry he was to learn stuff,” Gibson says. “He was quite ambitious, even from that young age. He would tell me he wanted to play for England.”

His Test debut came two and a half years later, in Colombo, but his first two years in international cricket were a struggle. After 21 Tests he was averaging in the high 30s with the ball and had taken more than three wickets in an innings just twice. The final Test of the 2009 series against Australia, at the Oval, was therefore a vital game both for Broad’s immediate Test future and, with the series tied at one apiece, England’s Ashes hopes.

Coming on fifth change, Broad took five wickets in four overs to decimate Australia’s first innings, setting up an Ashes reclaiming victory. It was the first of Broad’s magic spells. It would not be the last.

The Oval Test of 2009 – a turning point for Stuart Broad. ©Getty

In all, Broad has taken five wickets or more in a single Test spell seven times. No other seamer in his generation comes close to matching this feat. Since Broad’s debut, Anderson has done it four times, while the likes of Steyn – who is known for his ability to change a match – has three five-wicket spells in that time.

“On one of those rolls, the surprise is not that (Broad) takes wickets but the deliveries that don’t,” says Mike Selvey, the former England seamer who has watched most of Broad’s career as a journalist. “I’ve seen no other England bowler do that so consistently and perhaps only Curtly Ambrose beyond that.”

It has become a cliche to say that Broad is having one of his days when he runs in, kicking his knees up high like pistons in a steam engine. But the knees do have a bearing. “We always talked about attacking the crease,” Gibson says. “When he gets too stretched out in his run-up, he starts to reach for the crease and that’s where his front arm tends to sweep him out of his action a little bit.

“When he keeps his running nice and compact and he stays centred at the crease, stays tall, that’s when he gets the best out of himself. When he’s picking his knees up, he’s actually beautiful to watch from side on and he really gets his action right.”

David Saker, England’s bowling coach from 2010 to 2015, picks out Broad’s 6 for 22 in 9.3 overs during the Ashes Test at Chester-le-Street in 2013 as his most memorable spell. “He was just charging in,” Saker says. “He had the crowd behind him and he was like the ringleader of the circus. He was just in control of the game.”

Gibson chooses Trent Bridge in 2015 when Broad took eight Australian wickets for 15 runs before lunch on the first day. It was an Ashes spell for the ages that almost didn’t happen. Broad wanted to bat first if England won the toss. “I am looking around thinking, jeez I’d love to be bowling in these conditions,” Gibson laughs. Thankfully Alastair Cook won the toss and bowled.

Five months after his Trent Bridge heroics, Broad took 6 for 17 at the Wanderers against South Africa, which included a spell of five wickets for one run, to essentially decide both the match and series. Find a clip of the ball that dismissed AB de Villiers. Woof. Of all his famous spells, Broad regards the Wanderers one as his most satisfying.

***

Amongst those magic spells, however, have been difficult matches and difficult series. That is no surprise during such a long career and by Broad’s own admission, some of the criticism directed his way has been justified.

He struggled badly in the early Tests of the 2011 home summer against Sri Lanka, for instance. Perhaps it was a hangover from the disappointment of being ruled out of the previous winter’s Ashes tour after just one and a half Tests. Broad was bowling well at the time. Australia’s Brad Haddin reckoned Broad’s spell with Anderson on the third afternoon at the Gabba as the toughest bowling he had ever faced. But then a side injury struck and Broad had to deal with sitting out the business end of an historic overseas victory.

Eighteen months later, on the 2012 tour of India, Broad played another bit part in England’s first win in the country for 27 years, dropped after two wicketless Tests. His relative lack of control at that stage of his career had been exposed. “That’s probably the only time I’ve ever seen Stuart really struggle with his confidence,” Saker says. “He’s a pretty confident guy but for the first time he seemed a little bit down on himself, he was trying to look for answers why it wasn’t working.”

A few years later, Broad had a barren run of 26 Tests without a five-wicket haul between early 2016 and March 2018. The magic spells had gone AWOL. He struggled on the 2017-18 Ashes tour, averaging close to 50, and admitted to being at a career cross-roads. “I never felt like he had a shocking tour actually,” Shane Bond, England’s bowling consultant for that series, says. “I thought he bowled consistently. I couldn’t fault Stu’s attitude, the way he ran in, tried stuff. Sometimes it just doesn’t go for you.”

Do these quiet periods prove Broad has inherent fallibilities as a bowler? Or does his reaction to them prove that he is a champion cricketer? After all, following nearly every setback he has faced, Broad has come out fighting.

When the jury was out on him as a Test bowler in 2009, he came up with an Ashes winning spell. He steamrollered India in 2011 to the tune of 25 wickets in four Tests – which included a hat-trick at Trent Bridge – following that poor series against Sri Lanka. After the disappointment of the tour to India at the end of 2012, he took 62 wickets the following calendar year from just 14 matches.

The ‘celebrappeal’ comes out when Broad’s on a roll ©

In the two years since the poor 2017-18 Ashes tour, Broad has shortened his run-up, worked on his action and wrist position and taken 86 wickets in 24 Tests at an average of 24.66. Such resilience is the preserve of the very best players.

“There’s a reason why you bounce back and it’s that attitude,” Bond says. “That’s what stood out about Stuart for me and why he’s been a brilliant bowler for so long. He has got that competitive nature, he keeps coming in and he doesn’t give up.”

“He seems to be very good at coping with pressure,” Luke Fletcher, a longtime teammate at Nottinghamshire, adds. “He doesn’t speak about it but I think he knows. That’s when he steps it up. He’s got that drive to step it up, some other people would struggle. It’s almost that he likes to be in that position weirdly. It gets the best out of him.”

***

Competitiveness is a word that crops up whenever you talk to people who know Broad. He loves nothing more than being centre stage, taking on the responsibility to try and make a difference. “In the 2015 World Cup, I know we got beaten quite heavily in the first game against Australia, but the one man that stood up with the ball, big crowd, big occasion, was Stuart,” Saker says. “He just seemed to always rise to those big occasions.”

He’s the same in county cricket. “His competitiveness is what puts him above the rest,” Fletcher says. “He has bowled spells where I have thought it doesn’t seem like he’s bowling any different to any other county bowler. But then in the same game, when it’s on the line, he will have a spell where he completely rips a team out. He’s always close to doing something remarkable.”

A number of Broad’s most memorable Test spells have come when a series or match is up for grabs. The Oval Test was the first example. The 8 for 15 at Trent Bridge was another, coming at a crucial juncture in that Ashes series; England were two-one up but Australia, who had won the second Test by 405 runs at Lord’s, were far from out of it. “We said we needed one or two wickets early to claim the initiative,” Gibson remembers. “Stuart ended up getting eight early ones.” The spell at the Wanderers a few months later had a similar impact on that series.

The competitive spirit that has driven these performances has sometimes put people’s noses out of joint. His ‘celebrappeal’, where he begins celebrating a perceived wicket without turning to the umpire, has irked a few purists. In 2010, he recklessly threw the ball at Pakistan wicket-keeper Zulqarnain Haider and was fined. Following that incident, Broad worked with England’s psychologist to develop a tactic for when he gets angry or frustrated. Now, he will look out of the ground to settle himself down.

Famously not walking in the first Ashes Test of 2013, when he edged the ball to slip via a deflection off the wicket-keeper, enraged the Australians. It prompted Darren Lehmann to say that he wanted Australian spectators to make Broad cry on the 2013-14 tour to Australia which followed. “We are not playing for a cheese sandwich,” Broad said at the time. “We are playing in an Ashes series.” Tellingly, Broad performed outstandingly well on that subsequent tour of Australia despite a five-nil defeat and constant abuse from the Australian crowds.

Sometimes Broad has bristled at the criticism sent his way. Former England captain Michael Vaughan said Broad should be dropped during the 2018 home series with Pakistan, prompting Broad to call Vaughan and have it out. “I’m very open to criticism and I’m not going to hold a personal grudge, particularly if I feel like I deserve it, but I didn’t feel like I deserved that,” Broad said at the time.

Age has mellowed him but he is still feisty, as a few verbals with Faf du Plessis in the fourth Test against South Africa earlier this year showed. But which fast bowler worth their salt isn’t? Broad would be half the bowler without his competitive edge.

***

Anderson, Botham, Willis & Broad: The pantheon of England’s fast-bowling greats ©Getty

For the first few years of his career, Broad was a genuine quick. Fletcher remembers a match against Somerset in 2010 in which Broad bowled the quickest spell Fletcher has ever seen live. “It was absolutely rapid,” he says. “He got a five-for in a spell. He was hitting people in the face, gloving people off.”

Broad still has the ability to bowl quick and aggressively – indeed Saker thinks he should bowl his bouncer more – but he has reigned things back in search of greater control. “He didn’t have quite the control of a top class fast bowler like a Glenn McGrath,” Saker says of when he first worked with Broad. “If you watch him now, his control and the ability to manipulate the ball wherever he wants is quite amazing. He’s learnt that.”

His consistency comes from an action that repeats but there are plenty of tricks in Broad’s bag too. He can seam and swing the ball. He can bowl cutters – see the deliveries to Ricky Ponting at the Oval in 2009 and de Villiers at the Wanderers – and wobble seam deliveries. He changes his pace subtly. Over the past year, he has bowled a fuller length, bringing strong returns.

Broad has also become the best in the world at bowling round the wicket to left-handers. He spent two days during the 2015 Ashes working on it with Gibson after losing the ability to swing the ball back into the left-handers from over the wicket. For England, Selvey reckons only Fred Trueman has been as proficient as Broad is at that line of attack. After last summer’s Ashes, when he was dismissed seven times by Broad, David Warner would probably agree.

Even now, Broad continues to want to develop. England players who face him in the nets notice how he always asks them how the ball is coming out, explains what he is trying to do so they can give him feedback. Broad often posts videos of bowling drills on Instagram as he grooves his technique. He is open-minded with coaches but will question and challenge if he doesn’t agree. He wants to be shown why. “Players who continue to keep an open mind, develop, try stuff, they’re the ones who have continued success,” Bond says.

At 34-years-old, Broad is arguably bowling as well as he ever has done. He played a crucial role in England’s series victory over South Africa this winter and should be an automatic pick for the upcoming series against West Indies. He has spoken about wanting to play on until next winter’s Ashes. If he keeps up his current form, and his body holds firm, there is no reason why he can’t get there.

Nonetheless, Stuart Broad is in the final straight of a storied career. He has time yet to add a final flourish or two – going out with an Ashes win would be nice – but his place in history is already secure. A bowler of great spells, yes. But a truly great Test match bowler as well.

CBQueue.push(function(){ (function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.async = true; js.defer = true; js.src = "https://connect.facebook.net/en_GB/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v6.0&appId=30119633160"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk')); });

The post The durable Mr. Broad | Cricbuzz.com appeared first on FameDubai Magazine | Your daily dose of Lifestyle, Shopping & Trends in UAE.

from WordPress https://famedubai.com/the-durable-mr-broad-cricbuzz-com/

#Sport

0 notes

zeroviraluniverse-blog · 7 years ago

Text

Australia on Rabada: 'His arm speed is quite amazing'

Visit Now - http://zeroviral.com/australia-on-rabada-his-arm-speed-is-quite-amazing/

Australia on Rabada: 'His arm speed is quite amazing'

Seldom within a series do opponents line up to praise a fast bowler in public. But even more seldom do they do so in the knowledge that the same bowler will not be available for the remainder of the series through suspension, meaning all their worries about giving away a “mental edge” to the opposition stand cancelled.

That, however, is exactly the case for Australia and Kagiso Rabada, the South African spearhead now sidelined due to an ICC code of conduct ban for repeated issues with celebrating a little too exuberantly in the faces of dismissed batsmen and, in the case of the touring captain Steven Smith, making physical contact. The qualities Rabada demonstrated in Durban and in particular Port Elizabeth led numerous Australian players and coaches to hold forth on his skills, and also on the wicket-celebration troubles that have nixed him from the remainder of the series.

The fielding coach, Brad Haddin

As a wicketkeeper batsman, Haddin hammered plenty of the world’s best and fastest pacemen, and knows a special talent when he sees one. But he also thinks how Rabada comes back after missing two important Tests – which will leave him “hurting” – will be key.

“He’s very impressive. For someone so young, the smarts he has the with ball in his hand, knowing when to go up and down gears… Looking from the sidelines, it looks like he really understands how to set up a batsman. For someone so young that’s quite impressive. I thought the spell in the second innings [in Port Elizabeth] to go after [David] Warner and the openers – that was a pretty placid wicket, and from where I was sitting that was some pretty hostile bowling. He took it on himself there to get the big wicket of Davey. He is impressive. It’s disappointing for the game that he’s not playing, but from our point of view it’s a bonus because he is a class act. It was a conscious effort [by Rabada] to go hard at him and it was a good ball that got him [Warner] in the end.

“Everyone needs to take a step back. Let’s start playing cricket more on skill and less on emotion. Both sides have been guilty of things they’re probably not proud of over the last two Test matches. But we’re 1-1, it’s time to play some cricket on skill and leave that other stuff to the side. It’s disappointing for Rabada. I know the South Africans, playing us, I’ve heard them say a couple of times this is their big series, and now he’s got to sit back and watch what’s going on out there. It will be interesting to see how he comes back after that, because he’ll be hurting, no doubt, over the next couple of Test matches.”

Kagiso Rabada appeals, AB de Villiers dives, Shaun Marsh hopes AFP

The bowling coach, David Saker

With Victoria, England and now Australia, Saker has worked closely with a host of high-class pacemen. His views of Rabada are more technical, and also in line with the view that when a great talent crosses your path, one of the best things a coach can do is to get out of the way – except, of course, when it comes to send-offs.

“I wouldn’t change a thing, it’s a great product. Even two or three years ago when I first saw the guy… He’s still a kid now, he’s just pretty exciting, he’s got raw pace, his arm speed is quite amazing, he keeps running in and, like a lot of good bowlers, he gets wickets in clumps and puts a lot of pressure on the new batters. He’s obviously hard to start against because of his pace. You wouldn’t be changing a thing, he’s a really exciting cricketer and South Africa are very blessed to have him in their team.

“I wouldn’t be changing his action or his product. His discipline in the game you would have to change and I’m sure they would look at that, they’ll put people and things in place you would think. Fortunately for us that’s not our problem and I’ll let South Africa deal with that one.”

The rival, Mitchell Starc

For most of the past three years, Starc has been arguably the world’s most feared fast man when he gets it right, and certainly the quickest at his peak. To watch Rabada at work, including having to face him, has been an experience both good and bad for Starc. He also had some useful advice to offer, from the perspective of a fast man who, as a younger player, gave his share of send-offs and ran into trouble for doing so.

“He’s a pretty good bowler, isn’t he? What’s he got now, four 10-fors? Dale has got five in [many] more Test matches. His record is pretty good, it speaks for itself. He’s their spearhead, the one they go to, and he’s done the job time after time. They’ve got two guys who are in the mix who have taken 300 and 400 Test wickets. They’ve got plenty of bowlers in their stocks. But if he’s not playing in the rest of this series, he’s going to be a big loss for them.

“I think that’s the biggest one, how close you get to the batsmen these days. It’s very much a no-no. He’s only young and made a couple of mistakes, but I’m sure he’ll learn going forward that you just can’t get that close to the batter and the [umpires] are going to be on you at all times. He’s a fantastic bowler to watch when he’s in full flight, and he’s going to keep taking wickets and keep celebrating. Maybe [he needs to be] just moving away from the batter a little bit, which I think I’ve learnt in the past as well when I was a bit younger.”

The batsman, Shaun Marsh

At St George’s Park, Marsh was undone by the full range of Rabada’s skills with a reversing ball, pinned lbw in the first innings with a ball swerving back sharply at him, and then coaxed into following and edging a second-innings delivery of similar length that curled away towards the slips.

“He’s obviously a world-class bowler, isn’t he? His stats say that. He’s been a good challenge for us the first two Test matches. Obviously not playing the next two. He bowls good pace and can swing it both ways.

“I guess it’s obviously two nations going pretty hard out on the ground. It’s Test cricket and sometimes tensions do boil over. It is what it is sometimes. We’ve just got to keep playing good cricket and keep playing on skill.”

#Sports News

0 notes

famedubaitravl · 4 years ago

Text

The durable Mr. Broad | Cricbuzz.com

Broad endures even as the scrutiny over him seldom subsides. ©Getty

It’s a good job, then, that Broad made it as a cricketer. He probably wouldn’t have cut it as a gardener.

And yet, he has endured, for 138 Test matches and counting. How has he done it, and as the end of his career draws ever nearer, what will his legacy be?

***

“He hasn’t changed,” Craig says. “For who he has become, a worldwide name, he still remembers these people. There’s not one person who has ever had a bad word to say about him.”

The Oval Test of 2009 – a turning point for Stuart Broad. ©Getty

***

The ‘celebrappeal’ comes out when Broad’s on a roll ©

***

Anderson, Botham, Willis & Broad: The pantheon of England’s fast-bowling greats ©Getty

The post The durable Mr. Broad | Cricbuzz.com appeared first on FameDubai Magazine | Your daily dose of Lifestyle, Shopping & Trends in UAE.

from WordPress https://famedubai.com/the-durable-mr-broad-cricbuzz-com/

#Sport

0 notes

famedubaitravl · 4 years ago

Text

The durable Mr. Broad | Cricbuzz.com

Broad endures even as the scrutiny over him seldom subsides. ©Getty

It’s a good job, then, that Broad made it as a cricketer. He probably wouldn’t have cut it as a gardener.

And yet, he has endured, for 138 Test matches and counting. How has he done it, and as the end of his career draws ever nearer, what will his legacy be?

***

“He hasn’t changed,” Craig says. “For who he has become, a worldwide name, he still remembers these people. There’s not one person who has ever had a bad word to say about him.”

The Oval Test of 2009 – a turning point for Stuart Broad. ©Getty

***

The ‘celebrappeal’ comes out when Broad’s on a roll ©

***

Anderson, Botham, Willis & Broad: The pantheon of England’s fast-bowling greats ©Getty

The post The durable Mr. Broad | Cricbuzz.com appeared first on FameDubai Magazine | Your daily dose of Lifestyle, Shopping & Trends in UAE.

from WordPress https://ift.tt/2DiTSAj via IFTTT

#IFTTT #WordPress

0 notes

newsnigeria · 5 years ago

Text

Check out New Post published on Ọmọ Oòduà

New Post has been published on http://ooduarere.com/news-from-nigeria/world-news/the-rise-and-fall-of-isis/

The Rise and Fall of ISIS

by Ghassan Kadi for Ooduarere via The Saker Blog

A year or two ago, I would have never imagined that I would be writing an article with this title, at least not this soon; but things change.

If anything, my previous articles about ISIS which I wrote back between 2014 and 2017 were very alarming and predicted the worst, but again, things change, and back then there were many reasons to feel alarmed.

I have reiterated in that era of the past that the ISIS ideology had deep roots in fundamentalist Islam, and I still have this view. I have professed many times that this fundamentalist doctrine had been in place long before Christopher Columbus set a foot on American soil and that we cannot blame the CIA, Israel, the UK, or the West in general for the creation of this ideology, and I am not retracting. I have also said that those fundamentalist views do not represent real Islam, and there is no change in heart on this aspect either. So what has changed?

In this context, we are talking about the ideological rise and fall of ISIS. We are not talking about the political aspects and the horde of players who helped create, manipulate and employ ISIS for different reasons and agendas. With all of those players however, ISIS needed the support base, and that support base was the Muslim youth who are disenchanted by world events and the manner the world views Islam. Furthermore, they are disgruntled by the governments of the Muslims World and their links to the West: links they consider as treasonous and shameful. It was this mindset that was the recruitment base for ISIS; not the Pentagon.

So for the benefit of clarification, I must herein emphasize that there has always been a perverted version of Islam that founded itself on violence; in total contradiction to the Quranic teachings that clearly forbid coercion and oppression. This version was finally committed to a written doctrine, written by Ibn Taymiyyah; the founding doctrine of the Wahhabi Saudi sect.

When the West “discovered” this doctrine, it tried to employ it to its advantage, and this was how Al-Qaeda and ISIS were created, with Al-Qaeda’s role to hurt the USSR in Afghanistan, and ISIS to topple the legitimate and secular Syrian Government.

The not so funny thing about ISIS was that when the proclamation of creating the Islamist state back in mid-2014, the Caliphate passion became something easy to grow and self-nurture in the hearts and minds of many Sunni Muslims across the globe; including moderate ones.

Harking back at what happened back then; one honestly cannot blame them much. After all, many of the then Iraqi ISIS commanders and fighters were former Saddam-era Iraqi Army personnel. Many of them have even actually walked away from the “dictator” in the hope that the “regime change” was going to be for the better, only to soon realize the state of mess and mayhem that the American invasion created.

Before ISIS “had the chance” to show its ugly face, may moderate Muslims thought that this new force emerging out of Mesopotamia, one that does not recognize the border lines that Western colonialists have drawn between Sham (Syria) and Iraq, one that wants to unite Muslims, is perhaps “the one” to go for and support.

Ironically, most of those Muslims today look back at those days and either forget or wish to forget that at one stage, at some level, deep down in their hearts they supported ISIS, albeit not fully knowing what it stood for.

It was this subtle and covert support for ISIS by some elements of the global Sunni rank-and-file that gave ISIS a fertile ground for luring in recruits and that was the major cause for concern.

If anyone looks for evidence that supports this statement, then he/she need not go further than looking at the recent history of terror attacks in the EU (especially France) and the UK.

After the horrendous Bastille Day attack in Nice in the summer of 2016, a new direction for terror was established, and the perpetrator proved that one does not need a weapon to kill. His weapon was a truck, and he didn’t even need to buy it. He rented it.

After this infamous attack and what followed it, I among many others, predicted more of such events, and they continued for a while, and then suddenly they stopped. Why? This is the question.

For ISIS to be have been able to keep its momentum and growing support base, it needed to gain the hearts and minds of Muslims. But to do so, it needed to score victories and be able to revive Muslim nostalgia. Both are equally important.

In the beginning, it boasted its victories and the biggest of which was the takeover of Mosul; Iraq’s second largest city. This was how the ears of many Muslims worldwide pricked up and poised themselves to hear more. Some jumped on the band wagon straight away, but the majority braced and waited for more evidence that ISIS in general, and Baghdadi in specific, are the right ones to trust and follow.

What followed the capture of Mosul by ISIS however was nothing short of disgrace for ISIS; one that exposed its true inner ugliness. And instead of being able to capitalize on its initial momentum and promising to achieve more of it by adopting at least some of the virtues of Islam, ISIS turned its inability to achieve further military victories into a blood bath, looting and a sex slave market.

Before too long, even some of the most ardent Muslim supporters of ISIS turned away from it, and then against it, to the degree that they now even forget or deny that they once supported its baby steps.

What is interesting to note is that the move from secularism to Islam has not changed in the Muslim world. An increasing number of Muslim girls are wearing the Hijab with or without ISIS, but ISIS itself has lost its sway with the general Sunni Muslim populace.

What is interesting to see is that the definition of what is a “real Muslim” is changing, and changing quickly. And whilst the move towards Hijab and all what comes with it is still going full steam ahead, there seems to be a growing trend in the Muslim World towards moderation.

The ISIS fundamentals of black and white doctrine seem to be becoming increasingly tolerant of certain shades of grey. Even some personal Facebook friends and friends of friends who have brandished their photos performing Pilgrimage at Mecca don’t seem to be at dis-ease posting other photos brandishing a Heineken. To someone outside the Muslim Faith this may not sound like a big deal, but in reality, it is.

This all sounds good, but what has happened here really?

ISIS has definitely lost the plot. Fortunately for the world, irrespective of who are/were the people “behind” ISIS, its recruitment base had to come from Muslims; especially the youth. Having lost the ability to draw more recruits and enthusiasts who pledge their actions and lives to Baghdadi without even having to be formal ISIS members, ISIS as an organization and a name is now a spent force, and dare I say a figment of the past.

This however does not mean that the Muslim community has “immunized” itself against potential new ISIS-like organizations and agendas.

The initial rise of ISIS could have well been the result of a nostalgic remnant of a certain belief system that many Muslims did not even want to investigate and study properly to see if it really and truly conforms with the Teachings of Islam and all other religions. The fall of ISIS however heralds a new unprecedented era in the Muslim mind, and this calls for great optimism.

Perhaps for the first time in the history of Islam ever since its inception, Muslims are now beginning to examine some teachings they inherited. Even Saudi Arabia and its infamous Saudi Crown Prince Mohamed Bin Salman (MBS) seem to be sick and tired of the old rules and dogmas that allow this and prohibit that; based on no foundation at all. I have never been a fan of MBS, but having lived in Saudi Arabia for a while, I had always thought that this country would never allow women to drive, never ever. The fact that he changed this is a great step in the right direction. This does not take away from MBS’s genocidal activities in Yemen of course, but on the dogmatic side of things, this is a huge step towards reform. In Saudi Arabia there is also a call to have a second take on the Hadith (the spoken word of Prophet Mohamed) in an attempt to identify certain teachings that promote violence and that are incompatible with Islam. The rationale behind this is that they were never the words of the Prophet to begin with and that they might have been injected into the huge discourse by others with political agendas. Such an initiative was totally unfathomable only up till a few years ago.

Does this mean that we are seeing the end of Muslim fundamentalist-based violence? Hopefully we are, but the real answer to this question is for the whole Muslim community to answer.

The truth is that ISIS may be done and dusted, but the ideology behind lives on.

It is hoped for that the actions of ISIS will be remembered for eternity. It is hoped that Muslims realize that if they truly want to pursue the fundamentalist dreams of conquest and world dominion, then they cannot distance themselves from the legacy of ISIS. It is hoped that they look forward to a new world that is open to all religions and doctrines.

I am a firm believer that God created man in His own image, and part of this image is goodness and love of goodness; and Muslims are part of this creation. After all, Muslims, all Muslims believe in the Hadith that says: “The best people are those who most benefit to other people”. Russia and Syria might have won the military war on ISIS, but it is Muslims who have won the spiritual fight. Muslims: 1, ISIS: 0.

#ISIS

0 notes

newsnigeria · 5 years ago

Text

Check out New Post published on Ọmọ Oòduà

New Post has been published on http://ooduarere.com/news-from-nigeria/world-news/boris-johnson-brexit-deep-state/

Boris Johnson, Brexit and the Deep State

by Nick Griffin for Ooduarere viaThe Saker Blog

Nick Griffin, a life-long opponent of the European Union and former Member of the European Parliament, explains why – after three years of believing that the rulers of Britain would block Brexit, he now believes it is more likely than not to be delivered.

Are the British people really going to get Brexit? For years, the answer given by well-informed realists has had to be ‘No!’ The UK’s ruling elite was so thoroughly Europhile that they would do whatever it took to block the will of the British people, and Brussels would go along with this deceit, just as they did when the French, the Dutch and the Irish were sold out to the EU by their own masters.

But today I’m going to tell you that it is now more likely than not that Brexit WILL happen. Indeed, assuming the new Boris Johnson regime manages to cling on to power, or is forced into a general election in which Johnson reaches some sort of deal with Nigel Farage, it is now virtually guaranteed.

Of course, there is a faint possibility that the whole Johnson business is a giant game of three-dimensional chess, and that he’s running an elaborate scam with no intention of getting Britain out. But, realistically, if that was the plan, there would be absolutely no purpose in delaying such a betrayal, still less in raising so many expectations.

To encourage and then dash such hopes would be ludicrously self-defeating, so we have to assume that Johnson and Co are serious and that – barring a series of events outside of their control, they WILL deliver Brexit.

So what has changed? Has the Europhile British elite suddenly had a change of heart and decided to do the decent thing by the people who pay their inflated salaries?

Of course not. Leopards don’t change their spots. But, in the case of the UK elite, it was always divided into two leopards, with very different spots. One of them, for years now the stronger animal, was blue with yellow, spots – a thoroughly European beast.

The colours of the, until recently, smaller animal are harder to discern. At first glance, they could be seen to resemble the American flag although, of course, that’s just part of the camouflage. Look closer and the thing’s coat actually looks more like a mass of intertwined dollar signs and Israeli flags!

Even within the USA, opinion has been divided on Britain’s membership of the European Union. Obama, for example, more or less ordered the Brits to vote to Remain – a factor in the decision of quite a few of them to vote to Leave! The neo-cons, by contrast, have become much more hostile to Brussels – particularly since the EU started to display alarming degrees of sympathy for the Palestinians.

It wasn’t always like that. During the Cold War, the US elite was more or less unanimously in favour of British membership of the EU, which right from the start was consistently promoted by the CIA as a block to balance the Soviet Union.

When the Communist regime collapsed in 1989, the US power elite gradually shifted its position on the EU. It moved from fervent support to a sort of agnostic, nothing to do with us boredom. But then it gradually became clear that the European Union was steadily becoming the pawn of the German industrial complex.

Even worse, the Germans were beginning to cosy up to Russia. Within just a few years, the combination of German manufacturing, the European market and Russia’s raw materials were clearly presenting a future threat to the global hegemony of Wall Street, the Federal Reserve and the American military-industrial complex.

On top of this, the in-built liberal-socialist majority within the EU was making it an increasingly large stumbling block to the globalist privatisation free-for-all favoured by the ultra-capitalist ideology promoted by the extremely influential followers of Ayn Rand.

Franco-German moves to create a European Army were seen as a challenge to NATO and to its Stateside leadership, and only served to strengthen the arguments of the anti-EU faction within the US elite.

All this led a significant section of the US Deep state to move towards hostility to the European Union, and to put in place measures to undermine it. From about 2008, this included the relentless media promotion (and, no doubt, funding) of dissident, Euro-sceptic political movements, particularly UKIP in Britain and the Five Star Movement in Italy.

Extremely well-funded globalist and neo-con think tanks, particularly the Henry Jackson Society and the London-based Policy Exchange, began to organise. Their mission – to lay the theoretical groundwork for a globalist, economically liberal, Atlanticist faction within British politics to challenge the pro-EU majority.

To cut a long story short, that faction has just grabbed control of the British ship of state! The Europhile elite have not changed their minds, the highly honed survival instinct of the British Conservative party, which has made it the oldest political party in the world, has simply handed the reins of power to a different bunch of politicians, in hock to a different foreign power. The UK just lurched even further out of the orbit of the Brussels bureaucrats and even closer to the Anglo-Zionist Empire.

Johnson and his gang really do appear committed to delivering Brexit, but before those who voted for it in the first place get too excited, it has to be said that, in delivering the letter of what the people voted for, this bunch will go on to drive a coach and horses through the spirit of that vote.

Because the British people voted Brexit fundamentally in a collective cry of anger and pain over being turned into marginalised outsiders in their own country. Brussels rule was conflated not just with losing our traditional weights and measures, but with the destruction of the old industries – fishing, coal, steel, ship-building – and the devastation of the working class communities that relied on them.

And, of course, with mass immigration, including that from former British colonies in the Third World, an influx which if anything was slowed down by the more recent arrival of generally far more assimilable East Europeans, courtesy of the EU.

On top of that was all the unease of millions of normal people over the political elite’s Gaderene rush to embrace social ultra-liberalism, in particular dripping wet law and order policies and a mania for LGBTQ+ triumphalism. Relentless newspaper headlines about crackpot rulings by the European Court of Justice led to ‘Europe’ getting the blame for a breakdown in law and order and in traditional justice.

Finally, with the majority of the political class urging people to vote to Remain, voting to Leave became a way of punishing the political elite, not just in Brussels, but in Westminster as well.

And yet, looking at the new Boris Johnson cabinet, and listening to his first few speeches as new Prime Minister, it is already all too clear that, while we are going to get Brexit, it certainly will not be the Brexit that the majority of Brits thought they were voting for!

To illustrate this, let’s take a brief, non-exhaustive look at some of the key players in the Johnson regime.

Let’s start with the man himself, noting the speed with which he spoke out about his pride in his partial Turkish Muslim and east European Jewish ancestry and the way in which, if ‘Islamophobia’ or ‘anti-Semitism’ rear their heads, he automatically finds himself thinking in terms of those ancestral loyalties, rather than what is good for Britain – as the British people are surely entitled to insist on in their Prime Minister.

Then, in one of his final campaign speeches, Johnson told the LGBT+ Conservatives (the tautology neatly sums up the state of the party and, more generally, Britain’s ruling political and media classes) that he has their back:

“I will continue to champion LGBT+ equality, get tough on hate crime and ensure that we break down barriers to a fairer society,” Johnson said, according to the group.

“We must do more to ensure that trans rights are protected and those who identify as trans or intersex are able to live their lives with dignity,” he continued, noting that he was one of the first senior party leaders to support same-sex marriage.

Following his meeting with the queen to officially accept the premiership, Johnson specifically mentioned the LGBTQ+ community in his speech outside No. 10 Downing Street.

“[The U.K.’s] brand and political personality is admired and even loved around the world for our inventiveness, for our humour, for our universities, our scientists, our armed forces, our diplomacy for the equalities on which we insist — whether race or gender or LGBT …….. and for the values we stand for around the world,” he said

Once upon a time, British political leaders justified going to war by speaking of making the world safe for democracy. Boris Johnson started his premiership by committing Britain to a global struggle to make the world safe for buggery!

Nor is this fixation with LGBTQ+ new. Although the never-satisfied ‘gay’ lobby is whining about a couple of throwaway ‘homophobic comments’ he made decades ago, Johnson voted in 2003 to repeal Section 28 of the Local Government Act of 1988, by which Margaret Thatcher prohibited local authorities from “promoting homosexuality” or “pretended family relationships.”

This vote opened the door to the indoctrination of school-children with homosexual propaganda. Johnson also voted for civil partnerships for homosexuals and attacked the institution of marriage as ‘bourgeois convention’.

Johnson has also wasted no time reiterating his support for an amnesty for huge numbers of illegal immigrants and boasting of sharing the views of pro-immigration Labour party MPs. Ominously, he has also refused to pledge even to attempt to stick to the upper limits on immigration promised – but of course not delivered – by his predecessor Theresa May.

With Brexit making it harder for Poles and Hungarians to come to Britain, it is already clear from Johnson’s waffle about making the UK ‘open’ and ‘welcoming immigrants’, that, far from stopping immigration as millions of voters expected, Johnson’s Brexit will merely swap Polish immigrants for more Pakistanis, Bulgarians for Botswanans.

Johnson probably will set Britain free from Brussels, but he is also openly committed to speeding up the process by which the duly ‘liberated’ Brits are replaced in their own country by a further flood of immigrants. And the social liberals posing as Johnson’s fake conservatives will urge the stupid Brits to suck it up and celebrate their added diversity.

We’ve already seen the start of this process in Johnson creating what he refers to as a “cabinet for modern Britain” – wording that The Guardian’s Kehinde Andrews rightly described as a “euphemism for non-white”.

Leading Johnson’s Great Replacement charge will be Home Secretary Priti Patel, who has spoken gushingly of how the new government will “ continue to push for a dynamic, global Britain that is outward looking ……Our vision is for a truly global country – one where we welcome the brightest and best, where we are more outward facing, and where we decide who comes here based on what they have to offer.”

The Brits can’t say they weren’t warned. Because capitalism demands not just cheap labour, but also an endless supply of new consumers. Even the worse educated and least assimilable featherless biped on the planet thus has plenty to offer big business. The door is going to open wide to them all.

Patel was forced to resign two years ago after holding secret meetings with Israeli ministers. The meetings included a visit to an Israeli army field hospital in the occupied Golan Heights, where wounded Al Qaeda and ISIS fighters were patched up and sent back to continue fighting against the pro-Christian government in Syria. Patel asked officials within her department to look into whether British aid money could be funneled into this medical centre.

The same dangerous obsequiousness to Israel has also been shown by Johnson’s new Chancellor, Sajid Javid. Two years after becoming MP, Javid told the Conservative Friends of Israel annual lunch that as a British born Muslim if he had to go and live in the Middle East, he would not go to a Muslim majority country: “There is only one place I could possibly go. Israel. The only nation in the Middle East that shares the same democratic values as Britain”.

He is talking, let us remind ourselves, about the last openly racist state on the planet, whose supporters around the world insist on the right of Jews to have their own exclusive homeland, at the very same time as denouncing any attempt by any white nation to restrict immigration or preserve traditional ethnic identities as ‘neo-Nazi’. And the state which has done more than any other –except Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Barak Obama’s White House – to fund, arm and aid the Islamist head-cutters at war in Syria.

In her resignation letter Patel admitted she “fell below the high standards that are expected of a Secretary of State.” Not for the first time! In the past she has been criticised for taking trips to Bahrain funded by that country’s repression Salafist regime, and attending a conference in Washington paid for by the Henry Jackson society.

As already noted, the Henry Jackson operation is one of the best-funded and most dangerous of all the trans-Atlantic neo-con think tanks. It constantly agitates for hostility to Russia, Iraq-war style meddling in the Middle East on behalf of Eretz Israel and Big Oil, and for a poisonous mixture of ultra-right-wing economics and social liberalism – including the privatisation of national assets and the promotion of LGBTQ+ agendas at the expense of traditional values.

The same sort of poison is promoted in Britain by the closely connected Policy Exchange think-tank. This was founded by Michael Gove, who Johnson just appointed as Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, in many ways his political Chief of Staff in parliament.

Gove’s counterpart within the government itself is Munira Mirza, who Johnson just appointed Director of the Number 10 Policy Unit. She was previously Development Director at Policy Exchange and also worked on a range of its publications, including Living Apart Together: British Muslims and the paradox of multiculturalism.

As with all the other material coming out of the Johnson camp about multi-culturalism, this argued that the chief problem with Islam is that it hinders ‘integration’ – i.e. the process by which traditional British cultural and ethnic identity is replaced by the ultimate corporate dream of an atomised mass of rootless, identical consumers. And by which the traditional values once upheld by Christians and now defended mainly by Muslims are to be replaced by the anti-morality of the LGBTQ+ brigade and corporations greedy for pink pounds and rainbow dollars.

As with so many neo-cons on both sides of the Pond, Mirza started off as a Trotskyite. She was a member of the Revolutionary Communist Party. When it was dissolved in 1987 she followed other key comrades into the Living Marxism operation and then Spiked magazine, which has very successfully operated a policy of entryism into what passes for politica thought in Britain. Her Wiki entry quotes an article in the London Review of Books which noted that “Many of Munira’s ex party members have become influential in Conservative or Eurosceptic circles since the dissolution of their party, whilst remaining closely associated with each other’s endeavours.”

This includes the former party leader Frank Furedi, whose wife Ann is one of Britain’s most powerful abortionists. Strange ‘conservatives’ indeed! But, there again, one reading of these ‘ex’-Trotskyites’ new-found fondness for ultra-right-wing economics and privatisation is that the resulting exploitation and public anger will lead to the revolutionary crisis that eluded them when they were all wearing Che T-shirts in the late sixties! Or perhaps, it just pays better!

Coming back closer to Johnson, his campaign chief was Gavin Williamson. When Defence Secretary, Williamson was a notorious hawk against Russia and China, and for greater UK involvement in the Middle East. He also spoke out vigorously against Britain’s continued participation in Galileo, the global navigation satellite system created by the European Union. He is one of those pushing for a new UK system, compatible with the American GPS, and fully integrated with Five Eyes, the intelligence alliance between Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United States and the UK. As with all such manoeuvres, it is hard to see where money gives way to ideology and power-politics and, of course, they are hopelessly entangled.

It is Williamson who has given one of the clearest glimpses into the Atlanticist obsession of the new regime: “Tthe cornerstone of European security is not the European Union, it is Nato. Let’s be absolutely clear. Our involvement in Nato is going to be there, long, enduring and for many, many defence secretaries after me.”

Another part of the Anglo-American elite can also be seen when you turn over another stone in the Johnson camp.

.Andrew Griffith, the new chief business adviser to Number 10 is a former Rothschild investment banker who joined Rupert Murdoch’s Sky in 1999, and became finance chief for the group in 2008.

Johnson has been spending up to 13 hours a day at Griffith’s lavish £9.5m townhouse,

A Johnson campaign source said Griffith had kindly opened up his home to let members of the transition team meet there. If paying the piper leads to the donor calling the tune, how much more power accrues to the Rothschild/Murdoch man providing the dancers with a 9.5 million pound house?

Finally, we just have time to consider Johnson’s new Chief Whip, Mark Spencer. Taking the new regime’s enthusiasm for LGBTQ+ issues towards its logical liberal intolerant end, he has said that Christian teachers who dare to voice opposition to same-sex marriage should be subject to ‘Extremism Disruption Orders’. In other words, legislation brought in supposedly to stop Islamist hate-preachers recruiting terrorists is to be used against Christians who stand by the teachings of the Bible!

So, yes, we can now expect Brexit from Johnson. But Britain is also going to get more mass immigration. And ruthless demonization of anyone who dares oppose it. More LGBTQ+ propaganda for children – and ruthless repression of anyone who dares oppose it.

More pressure for British participation in neo-con, Zionist and Salafist wars in Syria, Iran and Yemen. More insane and dangerous sabre-rattling against traditionalist and Christian Russia.

And more looting of what remains of Britain’s common wealth by the privatisation vultures. Finishing off the monetisation of the NHS is sure to surface as a great ambition for this corporate puppet regime sooner rather than later. Almost certainly a couple of months before Johnson delivers Brexit and obliterates Jeremy Corbyn in a snap general election.

It remains to be seen whether the globalist kleptomaniacs behind the new regime will also find a way to turn the removal of EU subsidies into an opportunity to arrange a massive transfer of farmland in Britain from farmers, workers’ pension funds and the old landed aristocracy and into the hands of global corporations. If that’s on the agenda too, remember where you heard it first!

All the above presupposes, of course, that the juvenile and utterly irresponsible anti-Russian, anti-Iranian and anti-Chinese sabre-rattling – of which the Johnson regime is as guilty as its predecessors – doesn’t actually start World War Three. Because, if it does, there’ll be nothing left to privatise and loot except the last tin of beans in the irradiated rubble.

Don’t get me wrong: This is not to condemn Brexit. The British people voted for it, and its delivery will be a Good Thing (not least because it has added, and will continue to add, to the instability in the EU which has disrupted the efforts of its bureaucratic rulers to maintain a firmly anti-Russian line, and because, however imperfect, Brexit is a blow for national sovereignty against a particularly nasty little imperial project.

All of us who, one way or another, helped set in motion or advance the process which defeated the pro-EU whores who had sold Britain to Brussels can be rightly proud of having done their bit to break the claws of the largest leopard in the London-based elite.

But you can also be sure that the British majority are going to be mightily disappointed with the new Johnson regime leopard and how Brexit turns out. They voted to restore the old Britain, particularly the Old England. What they will get instead is an even faster dissolution than we saw under EU rule.

They voted against ‘political correctness gone mad’ and in a bid to cling on to traditional values. What they will get is a quasi-Trotskyite cultural Marxist regime – all the more destructive for having the label ‘conservative’ – which grinds their faces – and especially the faces of their children and grandchildren – in LGBTQ+ filth.

They voted Brexit hoping to stop immigration. Instead, the next ten years will see an absolutely swamping change in Britain’s demographics, as the dying early Baby Boomers are replaced with Johnson’s ‘New Britons’ from all corners of the world.

They voted to kick out a Brussels Occupation Government. What they will get instead is a New York Occupation Government. Which is a polite way of putting it, for there is in fact really nothing American about America’s neocons.

“Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss”, is how the Who put it. But it was all summed up even better by the great English visionary William Morris, in A Dream of John Ball, his revolutionary classic about the very first English Peasants’ Revolt against an alien elite:

“I pondered all these things, and how men fight and lose the battle, and the thing that they fought for comes about in spite of their defeat, and when it comes turns out not to be what they meant, and other men have to fight for what they meant under another name.”

#u.k

0 notes

newsnigeria · 5 years ago

Text

Check out New Post published on Ọmọ Oòduà

New Post has been published on http://ooduarere.com/news-from-nigeria/world-news/syria-proxy-war/

Proxy WAR, Syria: Explaining Russia’s Position on Idlib

by Ollie Richardson Ooduarre via The Saker Blog

Over the past five years my work in the information space has been consciously aimed at explaining why the Russian military does and doesn’t do certain things, whether it be in relation to Ukraine, Yemen, Iraq, Syria, Venezuela, etc, and why demanding that Putin bombs everything in sight is exactly what the CIA wants so-called “pro-Russians” to say. Yet I haven’t exhausted (maybe I never will exhaust it?) this topic because it is so vast and, ultimately, complex. And it is because of this seemingly insurmountable complexity that questions like “Why doesn’t Russia liberate all of Ukraine”, “Why doesn’t Russia save Donetsk and Lugansk in the same way it saved Crimea?”, “Why doesn’t Russia boot America out of Syria?”, etc are asked on social media.

But one statement that I haven’t really addressed (until now) is “Why doesn’t Russia liberate all of Idlib in one fell swoop?”. Many “geniuses” like to say that Putin is in bed with the “Ottoman butcher” Erdogan and has thus “betrayed Syria”, similar to how shaking hands with Netanyahu means that Putin is a Zionist and has “betrayed Syria”, or even that a visit of the Saudi King to Moscow means that Putin has the blood of Yemen on his hands.

So, those “pro-Russian” readers who fear that they may be one step ahead of the Kremlin and can see an iceberg on the horizon needn’t worry – another Putin-esque zugswang is in progress!

When Russia sent its aviation to Hmeymim airbase in Syria in 2015 the primary mission was simple: remove Turkey – the main belligerent – from the game. Ankara benefited from ISIS’ theft of Syrian oil and controlled many jihadist groups on the ground (Ahrar al-Sham being the main one). Then in November 2015 the CIA (via the PM at the time Ahmet Davutoğlu) decided to float a test balloon and see how Russia would react to a carefully designed scenario. A Turkish F-16 shot down a Russian Su-24. It didn’t matter if the Turkish jet was in Syrian airspace or not, as Moscow knew exactly what had happened, and all the other players knew that Moscow knew. The actual murder of one of the ejecting Russian pilots was carried out by a proxy (a Grey Wolf), and not by a Turkish soldier. But in any case, this test miserably failed, because Russia did not react in a way that would contravene international law (the immediate response happened hours after the shootdown – Russian “advisors” and Syrian troops went to Latakia with MLRS and wiped out the “terrorists who were responsible”, who just happened to be Turkmen). Since military operations generally take place within the framework of economic conflicts (securing assets), the manner in which Russia responded to Turkey in the format état-à-état was the equivalent of what the lunatic Zhirinovsky suggested to do, just without the war crimes.

youtube

The sanctions on Turkey (aimed at the CIA-Gulen bloc in reality) negated what Ankara was gaining from stealing Syrian oil, and so the Syrian theater became a zero-sum game for Erdogan. In May 2016 Davutoğlu was removed from the picture. Erdogan was forced to take part in the Astana Agreement and start the process of throwing his proxies in Syria under the bus (or onto green buses!) within the framework of what was given the reputation-saving name of “de-escalation zones”.

This was Moscow’s way of countering the game orchestrated by John Kerry, where a pocket in Eastern Syria would magically open (ISIS would go on an offensive) at a time when al-Nusra was on the ropes in Western Syria. This tactic hoped to tire out the Syrian Army and Russian “advisors” and maximise their casualties. Whilst never admitted in public by Moscow (naturally), “de-escalation zones” actually meant “we will liberate Aleppo and thus recapture all of the ‘useful’ (where most people live, in the West) part of Syria, after which the pace of the theater will have been slowed down enough to start work on eliminating the other players”.

After Aleppo was liberated (the Turkish-controlled groups magically withdrew), Russia continued, via the “de-escalation zones”, to whittle down the large list of terrorist groups into two categories: terrorists no longer supported by Turkey (loyal to al-Nusra leader Jolani) and tame terrorists still supported by Turkey. The former category would be shipped to Idlib via green buses, and the latter category would be used to keep the trecherous Kurds and the CIA-Mossad “Rojava” plan at bay.

In parallel to this, the Astana group managed to smash the Gulf bloc into fragments, liquidating their pet terrorist proxies in Syria and forcing them one by one to normalise relations with Assad, since the dollar is becoming a suitcase without a handle.

The question of the S-400 is more complex and isn’t just about defending Turkish skies. It symbolises more a commitment to play by the rules of the newly emerging world order (based on self-defence and international law) and to no longer indulge in the casino known as “Responsibility to Protect” (or in simpler terms – multipolarity vs unipolarity). Similarly, Turkish Stream is another example of Moscow thrusting a lance through the rotting corpse of NATO. In general, Turkey is geographically positioned almost in the center of the battle of superpowers. For Ankara, bearing in mind that the US tried to stage a coup there in 2016 and had a hand in the assasination of Andrey Karlov, the Russian ambassador to Turkey, it is more profitable to look East than it is to look West, and this was why Turkey wasn’t in a hurry to join the EU, since it saw the geopolitical storm brewing on the horizon and wasn’t prepared to kiss the ass of the IMF anymore.

So, returning back to the Syrian timeline, whilst al-Nusra was being herded into Idlib, and since Trump cut aid to US-backed terrorists, Turkey was able to monopolise the “Free Syrian Army” aesthetics (abandoned by the US) and occupy areas of Northern Syria whilst making it look like they are “Syrian rebels” and not Turkish proxies, all for the purpose of preventing the Kurds from travelling any more Westward than they already have. And here is where the array of interests becomes interesting:

Russia and Iran have basic diplomatic relations with the YPG/SDF (they are Syrian citizens after all) and want them to abandon the US/Tel Aviv/Riyadh;

The Syrian State wants the YPG/SDF to return to the bosom of the state and hand over the territories they occupy back to the Syrian Army;

Turkey wants the YPG/SDF removed from the picture/disbanded entirely, but has developed ties with Russia and Iran;

The YPG/SDF will not negotiate with Turkey unless it can hide behind America’s skirt;

Formally, Syria views Turkey as an aggressor, although behind the curtain Damascus has a pragmatic consensus with Moscow, which gave Turkey the green light to enter Syria in order to quell Rojava, and which is trying to stabilise the region and include all regional players in the Eurasian bloc;

Yes, it’s complicated. But here is a simple fact that helps the layperson to understand the situation: America has nuclear weapons. This is why Russia cannot stop the US from occupying Northeast Syria (which was plan B, plan A being a replica of Gaddafi’s removal, which failed after Russia cemented the Minsk Agreements in Ukraine). It can squash its proxies that are West of the Euphrates, yes, but it cannot touch US (non-proxy) assets, in the same way that Washington cannot touch Russian (non-proxy) assets. Or rather – they can directly touch each other’s assets, but any “victory” will be completely pyrrhic. From Russia’s perspective, the aim is to make friends with everyone, since the fewer enemies one has, the better.

While the core of the Turkish proxies is busy caging in (so-called “outposts”) al-Nusra militants in Idlib governorate, repelling the Kurds, and occasionally killing US soldiers, a kind of negotiation game between Turkey and Russia is ongoing:

Turkey needs a terroristified Idlib as leverage against all players but is happy to hand the governorate over to Assad piece by piece in exchange for pieces of the S-400/Turk Stream/general Eurasian bloc project;

Russia occasionally bombs Idlib in order to exercise its superior leverage over Turkey (the media presents this as “there were talks, but Russia continues to bomb Idlib”), the interim “ceasefire deals” are simply checkpoints in these grand negotiations;

Turkey turns a blind eye to al-Nusra’s oil operations (which feed their occupation of the governorate);

As an act of “hybrid war”, Russia and friends assist in the process of assassinating the commanders of al-Nusra in Idlib, since the less leverage Turkey has, the quicker the Idlib circus can end;

The West broadcasts propaganda about hospitals being bombed simply to cover up the fact that they have been arming and funding Al Qaeda for decades.

The “x-factor” in this conundrum is Trump’s “pull-out”. If US troops pull out of Northeast Syria completely, it would be in Russia’s interests if Turkey filled the void and proverbially herded the Kurds back towards Assad. For America, the sooner this war ends the quicker US troops can return home, but Trump won’t exit without getting something in return. However, there is a big problem – Zionism. Tel Aviv tries to keep America in Syria. Netanyahu didn’t spend all that time begging Uncle Sam to invade Iraq just for him to leave when the going got tough. Moreover, Iraq is already falling into the hands of Iran, and sooner or later the S-400 will be sat in Mesopotamia. Not to mention the fact that Russia is entrenching itself in Lebanon. Did I mention that Trump’s (purposeful?) decisions (and failed “deals of the century”) are strengthening the Palestinian resistance (example)? So what in all honesty does Israel hope to do?

Well, since everything that happened in the Middle East since 2001 (and arguably even earlier) is mainly in Israel’s interests, especially the Syrian war, it’s not a surprise that 8 years of full-scale local proxy warfare has reduced to… Israel taking aerial pot shots at a limited slice of Syrian territory. I have already explained why Russia doesn’t react to these airstrikes in the way that social media guerrillas would like, and all that has happened since is Netanyahu’s election victory. I would only add that bombing Syria became even riskier for Tel Aviv, since the SAA air defence units gain more experience with each new raid. Moscow managed to make a nice gesture to Israel, recovering from Syria the remains of an Israeli soldier missing since the 1982 war in Lebanon, but it wasn’t done for the purpose of stopping the airstrikes. It was simply a typical Russian diplomatic move based on the concept of “violence doesn’t beget violence”. Deflecting Israel’s airstrikes is the job of the Syrian air defences. The Israeli media presents this as “Russia has friendly relations with Israel and knows that Jerusalem considers Iran its leading existential threat, so does not block Israeli strikes at Iranian targets and those of its proxies, but on one condition: Stay out of Russia’s way and give ample warning so there won’t be a repeat of incidents like the one in which Syria shot down a Russian spy plane, possibly because of confusing signals by Israel”. However, in reality Russia wants Syria to become an independent adult, capable of defending itself without requiring Russia’s help, and it is only in this way that Syria will be able to successfully integrate itself into the Eurasian bloc. Of course, logically speaking, if Israel just left Syria alone and minded its own business, then Iranian forces wouldn’t even be in Syria. But I think that most know by now that Israel wanted (and maybe still wants) to carve Syria into 3 pieces along sectarian lines.

Another layer of the Israel problem is the fact that America is standing behind it (and thus the diplomatic support of many banana republics) and an illegal nuclear program, so it’s leverage when compared to Syria’s is superior, hence why the airstrikes happen in the first place. The incident with the downing of the Russian surveillance plane didn’t really change much, because Moscow knows that apartheid Israel is the main troublemaker in the Middle East (and even more so in Ukraine – those who truly understand Ukrainian history will understand why I say this), and the Syrian war coming to an end (whilst strengthening Israel’s neighbours in parallel) is in itself a blow to Tel Aviv.

What is very common to see now is countries seemingly sat on two chairs – the West and Eurasia. For example: Serbia, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia show signs of looking both West and East. What is going on in reality is many tugs of war between superpowers, and the stronger Russia’s military and China’s economy become, the more it tips the scales in their favour, and the more “multipolar” the world becomes. It’s not that the US’ influence in a “converted” country disappears (the creation of NGOs is not illegal, and liberalism as an ideology cannot be physically destroyed), but more that the influence becomes less as the country adjusts to the new global economic reality. Although if Trump is indeed playing 4D chess with the “deep state” and is deliberately de-globalising the planet, then this shrinking of influence may be more fluid and less volatile than it seems.

In summary: Turkey – the driving force behind the Anglo-Israeli proxies in Syria – was forced to abandon its plans in Syria after NATO’s Su-24 shootdown gambit failed; Ankara and Moscow now mutually exchange a piece of Idlib for a piece of S-400; the Syrian war is now at the “exit negotiations” stage, but Israel doesn’t want to be left alone with a stronger Syrian Army, Hezbollah, and Palestinian resistance at its border; Russia isn’t in a hurry to liberate Idlib, since an alternative plan is to let the jihadists kill each other like spiders in a jar, thus the lives of SAA soldiers are not put in danger unnecessarily.

PS I am well aware that Turkey creates local councils, military adminstrations, and civilian infrastructure in North Syria, and I am not an advocate of such behavior but I don’t pretend to be more qualified than the Kremlin when it comes to solving such problems. I doubt that the Kurds would have behaved any different had they succeeded to create “rojava” in the summer of 2016. As for America, just look at what it has done to Raqqa and Mosul. Out of these options, I would prefer a temporary Turkish occupation, knowing that in the near future the situation would improve.

#Syria

0 notes

newsnigeria · 6 years ago

Text

Check out New Post published on Ọmọ Oòduà

New Post has been published on http://ooduarere.com/news-from-nigeria/world-news/behold-the-breathtaking-weakness-empire/

Behold the breathtaking weakness of the Empire!

[this article was written for the Unz Review]

The Empire has suffered painful defeats in Afghanistan and Iraq, but one has to admit that these are “tough” countries to crack. The Empire also appears to have lost control of Libya, but that is another complex country which is very hard to control. We also saw all the pathetic huffing and puffing with the DPRK. But, let’s be honest, the USA never stood a chance to bully the DPRK into submission, nevermind invading or regime-changing it. Syria was much weaker, but here Russia, Iran and Hezbollah did a world class job of repelling all the AngloZionist attacks, political and military. Besides, I for one will never blame Trump for not listening to Bolton and not triggering WWIII over Syria (yet?)

But Venezuela?!

No Hezbollah or Iran backing Maduro there. And Venezuela is way too far away from Russia to allow her to do what she did in Syria. In fact, Venezuela is in the proverbial “backyard” of the USA and is surrounded by hostile puppet regimes. And yet, tonight, it appears that the US puppet Guaidó has failed in his coup attempt.

Moon of Alabama did a great job covering the events of the day, so I will refer you to the excellent article “Venezuela – Random Guyaidó’s New Coup Attempt Turns Out to Be A Dangerous Joke“. I fully concur that today’s coup was both a joke and very dangerous.

Russian readers can also check out this article by Vzgliad which also gives a lot of interesting details, including the fact that Guaidó launched his coup from the Colombian Embassy in Caracas (see here for a machine translation).

But the thing which amazes me most tonight is the truly breathtakingly pathetic weakness of the clowns who launched this latest failed operation: Pompeo and Mr MAGA. Check them out:

Let’s begin with Pompeo.

According to him, the coup failed because of Russia (what else is new?)! Not only that, but Maduro had already decided to run to Cuba, but then the Russians stopped him.

Really?

So are we to believe that the coup was a stunning success, yet another feather to the CIA’s “hat” of failed successful covert operations? Apparently so.

After all, why would Maduro want to run unless he realized that the situation was hopeless?

But then “Russia” called him and told him to stay put. The conversation must gone something like this:

Putin: Mr Maduro – you don’t need to worry about a thing. Just do what we tell you and stay put. Maduro: but my people hate me! They all turned against me! The military is behind the coup! Putin: no, no, it’s all under control, just stay put. Maduro: but the mob will lynch me if I stay!!!! Putin: no worries, nobody will touch you.

Does that dialog look credible to you? I sure hope not! I think that anybody with a modicum of intelligence ought to realize that Maduro’s decision to stay in place could only have been based on one of two possible considerations:

The coup has failed and Maduro is safe or

The coup is successful and Maduro will stay and fight till his last breath (like Allende did)

But tonight Maduro is safe in Caracas and the coup plotters are on the run.

The truth is that only a loser and imbecile like Pompeo could come up with such a lame excuse in a desperate attempt to “cover his ass” and blame his failure on the Neocon’s favorite scapegoat: Russia.

Now let’s check what his boss had to say:

Trump does not blame Russia. Instead, he blames Cuba!

I don’t know what kind of silly scenarios Mr MAGA ran in his head to come up with “the Cubans did it” but that is even more ridiculous than “the Russians did it”. Reading this “tweets” (how appropriate for this bird-brain!) one could get the impression that the Cubans launched a full-scale military attack (involving both the Cuban military and “militias”) and that they orchestrated a brutal crack-down on the Venezuelan people.

In the real world, however, Cuba did nothing of the sort.

But, really, who cares?!

In the Empire of Illusions fact don’t matter. At least to the leaders of the AngloZionist Empire who continue to believe that only spin matters.

In the case of Venezuela, spin alone failed.

So what’s next?

According to the typical scenario revealed to us by John Perkins, the next step should be a full-scale US invasion. And yes, he is right, that would be what the Empire would have done in its heyday. But nowadays?

Check out this interesting news snippet: Eric Prince wants Blackwater to send 5,000 mercenaries to Venezuela(does anybody know why and how these clowns came up with the 5,000 figure? First Bolton, now Prince. Do they *really* think that this is enough?!).

The point is not whether Prince will ever get to send mercenaries to Venezuela or whether the Trump administration is inclined to accept this offer. The point is that Prince would have never made this offer in the first place if the US military was up to the task. It is not, and Prince knows that very well.

As for Maduro, he seems to have the support not only of a majority of his people, but of the Venezuelan armed forces. As for the armed forces, they are clearly enjoying the support of the people.

This is a very bad combination for the Empire. Here is why:

Yes, Venezuela has immense problems. And yes, both Chavez and Maduro have made mistakes. But this is not about Chavez or Maduro, this is about the rule of law inside and outside Venezuela. This is about the people of Venezuela, even the suffering ones, not willing to renounce the sovereignty of their country. Yes, Chavez did not solve all of Venezuela’s problems, but to deliver the country to the Empire would mean crushing any hope of true, real, people power. The Venezuelan people apparently have no illusions about their Yankee neighbors and they don’t want the Empire-style “democracy” to turn Venezuela into the next Libya.

I should never say never, and God only knows what tomorrow (May 1st) will bring (Guaido has called for a mass protests) but my gut feeling is that the Empire “injected” itself into Venezuela just enough to trigger an immune reaction, like a vaccine, but not enough to infect Venezuela with a toxin powerful enough to kill it.

In the meantime, US aircraft carriers are in the Mediterranean trying to scare Russia, Syria and Iran all at the same time. I can just imagine the disgusted contempt with which this latest sabre-rattling with outdated hardware is received in Moscow, Damascus or Tehran. Even Hezbollah remains utterly unimpressed.

The truth is that the only people who have not come to the realization that the Empire is broken and defeated are the rulers of the Neocon deep state and those who still watch the legacy Ziomedia.

By now everybody else has realized who utterly impotent the Empire has become.

Conclusion:

The Empire only *appears* to be strong. In reality it is weak, confused, clueless and, most importantly, run by a sad gang of incompetent thugs who think that they can scare everybody into submission in spite of not having won a single significant war since 1945. The inability to break the will of the people of Venezuela is only the latest symptom of this mind-boggling weakness.

I will leave the last word to this charming lady who really said it all:

The Saker

#anglozionist #U.S.A #Venezuela

0 notes