#War of Independence Victory Column

[awesome-casuallyfamouscollector]

War of Independence Victory Column (Vabadussõja võidusammas), Tallinn, December 5, 2022. Photo by D.P.

[postcardsfromwanderings]

The War of Independence Victory Column in Tallinn, Estonia

This column celebrates Estonia's independence war from Soviet Russia during 1918-1920

[hero-israel]

I'm not well versed in military history, so I'm hoping you can answer this question. Is Israel the only nation to win wars in which it was not the aggressor, but have to give back land it won?

I don't know of any precise match. The USSR gained a lot of vassal states during its counterattack through Eastern Europe, and those went independent decades later as it fell apart. Japan attacked and occupied Hong Kong, which was won back by the UK, which would later cede it to China... but the UK had been the aggressor in a different war centuries earlier to get it in the first place. Those are the best I can come up with. It is certainly not a typical demand, and this was noted in a famous LA Times column after the Six Day War:

"Other nations when victorious on the battlefield dictate peace terms. But when Israel is victorious, it must sue for peace. Everyone expects the Jews to be the only real Christians in this world."

[pureamericanism]

Whenever I've contemplated the recent Canadian MAID policies, my mind has inevitably wandered to Robert W. Chambers' justly revered weird tale "The Repairer of Reputations" and the Government Lethal Chambers that are such a key thematic element therein. I am not going to imply that the Canadian health services have fallen under the sway of the Yellow Sign (although...), but I've always noticed in reading and listening to other moderns' response to the story that there's important period context that gets largely missed. This is understandable - most people haven't read nearly as many fin-de-siècle and Edwardian era 'Scientific Romances' as I have, for the good reason that most of them are really quite bad.

But without historical context, it's easy to miss exactly what the alternate future New York City that the story may or may not be set in represents. It's a whole collection of relatively common Progressive era tropes representing peoples' hopes and fears about the immediate future, arranged in an optimistic (even Utopian) key. The obsession with civic beautification, the gleaming fleets of battleships that are almost an extension of the "good architecture [that] was [everywhere] replacing bad," the optimistic hope that race problems could be settled for all times and peaceably without any then-unseemly 'mixing' (Indian scouts! an "independent negro state of Suanee"! checking of immigration!), a militarism that's as much about pomp & love of regimentation as about actual wars, the "colossal Congress of Religions" that "laid [bigotry and intolerance] in their graves" and "began to draw warring sects together", a love of orderly centralization... This is all the sort of stuff that moderate, bien-pensant Progressives and Fabians of Chambers' day would have cheered on. Even the "war with Germany," involving an unlikely occupation of the Virginia coast, is an optimistic take on the Invasion Story subgenre that was becoming common at the time (the scars it left "had been forgotten in the joy over repeated naval victories, and the subsequent ridiculous plight of General Von Gartenlaube's forces in the State of New Jersey.") It's all of a piece, an expression of boundless Columbian Exposition optimism and faith in Reason and Progress to bring forth an Earthly Paradise.

And so are the Lethal Chambers. They are reasonable, and graceful, and beautiful, solutions to the problem of hopelessness. Reasonably, why should a person not have a right "to end an existence which may have become intolerable to him, through physical suffering or mental despair"? Too, "the community will be benefited by the removal of such people from their midst." And the Chamber is beautiful, placed in a verdant park, decorated with Grecian columns and marble statues, designed to make one's exit from this world as rationally elegant as possible. It's all done discreetly, in the best possible taste.

This is why the story is given this whole setup, why it begins with what seems today to be a very disorienting bit of archeofuturistic world-building. In the context of this world of rational hopes rationally filled, not only is Castaigne's descent into madness more shockingly out of place, but it also represents an irruption into that world of something else, something old and strange and powerful. There is a reason that Wilde & Castaigne invoke the trappings of the archaic medievalism that the Progressive world sought to do away with forever, and a reason why Wilde deals (or claims to deal) in blackmail and conspiracy. All the flotsam and jetsam that, it was hoped, could be swept away like the old slums, bob inevitably to the surface.

As something of a reactionary, I'm inclined to take a political reading of this - "don't immanentize the eschaton!" as the slogan goes. But, like all really good fiction, "The Repairer of Reputations" is about something deeper than politics. I leave further interpretation as an exercise to the reader.

[stairnaheireann]

#OTD in 1892 – Birth of General Eoin O’Duffy, near Castleblaney, Co Monaghan.

Birth of Eoin O’Duffy, IRA man, Commissioner of the Garda Síochána and General Franco supporter, near Lough Egish, Co Monaghan. O’Duffy first came to fame when he led an IRA group which captured the first RIC barracks at Ballytrain taking from it weapons and explosives, during the War of Independence. Also present at this victory were Ernie O’ Malley who went on to organise flying columns and the…

[artthatgivesmefeelings]

Sir Joshua Reynolds (English, 1723 - 1792) Lady Elizabeth Keppel, 1761

Full length, decorating Term of Hymen; in bridesmaids dress of flowered satin; a Black attendant holds flower wreath; at foot of column is a burning censer; curtain draped over tree. 2nd state of 5: on upper step of pedestal 4 Latin lines.

Reynolds’s “sitter-book” records eight appointments with Lady Keppel (1739–1768). The woman who accompanies her had two independent morning sittings in December 1761 (both after Keppel had been painted). We do not know her name, in place of which Reynolds entered a single word—“negro”—in his notebook. This terse archival trace confirms that she, like Lady Keppel, was painted from life. She is shown handing Keppel a garland of flowers with which to deck a statue of Hymen, the god of marriage. This detail alludes to Keppel’s recent role as a bridesmaid at the wedding of George III and Queen Charlotte. The dress worn by the servant may either be of glazed cotton, British silk, or possibly painted Chinese silk. If the woman was indeed Keppel’s servant, her dress may be a hand-me-down from her mistress, as was common in this period. The portrait (now at Woburn Abbey, UK) was exhibited at the Society of Artists as Whole length of a lady, one of her majesty’s bride maids. It was paid for by Lady Keppel’s brother, the third Earl of Albemarle (1724–1772). In 1762, shortly after the painting was finished, he would command British forces at the Battle of Havana, which resulted in Spain’s surrender of Cuba. This key victory of the Seven Years’ War reshaped the balance of power in the Atlantic. Gallery label for Figures of Empire: Slavery and Portraiture in Eighteenth-Century Atlantic Britain (Yale Center for British Art, 2014-10-02 - 2014-12-14).

[mariacallous]

There are plenty of reasons to believe that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is nearing the end of his political career. His poll numbers are in the basement. He’s carrying around the legacy of the worst security blunder in the country’s history—one that allowed Hamas militants to cross the border from the Gaza Strip last month and brutally kill at least 1,200 Israelis. He’s presiding over a war in Gaza whose objectives could well be unrealistic and irreconcilable. And he remains a defendant in three separate corruption cases.

And yet, with every day that passes since the horrors of Oct. 7, Netanyahu seems to be a little more determined—and possibly better positioned—to remain in power well after the war is over. His strategy seems to be threefold: to deflect blame for the security lapses that allowed the Hamas attack, keep his governing coalition intact at any cost, and bide his time until he can point to concrete achievements.

“He hopes the military campaign will go well, and he is counting on time to be the best thing to heal [the country],” said Aviv Bushinsky, a political commentator who worked as an advisor to Netanyahu for nearly a decade.

Over the weekend, Hamas released about 50 Israeli hostages in exchange for some 150 Palestinian prisoners held in Israel and a pause in the fighting. The deal has wide support in the country, although Israelis remain deeply anguished over the many hostages left in Gaza.

The worst crisis in Netanyahu’s long political career began when Hamas fighters invaded Israel on Oct. 7, carrying out widespread atrocities and abducting about 240 people. It was the bloodiest attack in the country’s history. Israel responded with devastating airstrikes and ground operations, killing some 15,000 people, many of them women and children, according to Palestinian officials in Gaza. The figures could not be independently verified.

While Israel Defense Forces chief of staff Herzi Halevi and Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar acknowledged responsibility for the disaster, Netanyahu has refused to do so, despite a swell of public anger. Officials and analysts have called for an Israeli commission of inquiry to investigate the debacle and hold people accountable. In the meantime, Netanyahu has said it is not the moment to apportion responsibility since all energies must be directed toward victory over Hamas.

Yossi Alpher, a veteran political and strategic commentator who writes a column for the dovish Americans for Peace Now group, said it was noteworthy that no one in Netanyahu’s Likud party has yet challenged his leadership.

“He is busy maneuvering, and he’s good at it,” he said, referring to the political adroitness of Israel’s longest-serving premier, who survived mass protests earlier this year over his controversial bid to grab power from Israel’s judiciary.

“There are too many dynamics we don’t know at this point. It’s not a given that he’s finished,” he said.

In the short term, Netanyahu seems to be benefiting from an axiom related to politics and war: You don’t topple a leader while fighting is underway. But Amnon Abramovich, a veteran commentator for Channel 12, said survival considerations might induce Netanyahu to prolong the war beyond what is strategically necessary. “I can’t determine this with certainty, but I don’t entirely rule it out as a possibility,” he said.

Netanyahu’s office did not respond to a request for comment.

To be sure, with plummeting poll numbers and fears of embarrassing interactions with the public that have kept him away from military funerals, Netanyahu’s rehabilitation seems far away at the moment.

Still, he seems to have assured his immediate survival by drawing into his war cabinet last month two opposition figures from the National Unity party with strong security credentials: Benny Gantz and Gadi Eisenkot.

That helps Netanyahu and his associates to cast this as a wide national campaign for survival against those who would destroy Israel and undercut the idea that decisions might have anything to do with Netanyahu’s survival. “It is not Netanyahu against Hamas. It is Israel against terrorism,” said Likud legislator Boaz Bismuth, a member of the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. “We are a nation whose neighbors do not even accept our presence here. This is not a question of Netanyahu.”

But seven weeks into the war, the perception that Netanyahu bears responsibility for Hamas’s empowerment in recent years is still strong. For years, Netanyahu has allowed the group to receive millions of dollars in funding from Qatar, even as his government withheld tax revenue from the more moderate Palestinian Authority in the West Bank at times over the years. The policy is seen as Netanyahu’s way of stoking Palestinian divisions and heading off international pressure on Israel to make peace with the Palestinians.

“Strengthening Hamas was his concept,” said Gadi Shamni, a retired general who served as Israel’s military attaché in Washington. “He belongs in the garbage bin of history.”

Bushinsky said his old boss likely fears that any statement of responsibility would turn into a sound bite and be used against him by political rivals. Alpher said Netanyahu is also wary of incriminating himself in advance of any commission of inquiry.

In public remarks aired on Israeli media earlier this month, Netanyahu said “now is the time to deal with one thing only, achieving victory, eliminating Hamas, returning the hostages, and ensuring another regime in Gaza.” At the same time, he apparently views pinning the blame on others as key to his survival. He recently tweeted that senior security officials, including the heads of military intelligence and internal security, are responsible for the disaster because they repeatedly assured him that Hamas was deterred from striking at Israel. Netanyahu later deleted the tweet and apologized.

Against the backdrop of public discontent, a poll whose findings were released on Channel 12 on Nov. 16 showed Netanyahu’s Likud-led coalition losing power, dropping from 64 seats in last November’s election to 45. Gantz’s National Unity party scored 36 seats in the poll, up from 12, and Likud tallied only 17, down from 32. Asked who they favored for prime minister, 41 percent said Gantz and 25 percent said Netanyahu.

Bismuth said the poll is not indicative of public sentiment. “There is always a gap between surveys, the media, and the street. I travel around. There are many people who are hurting, but their spirits are high.”

And within Likud, Netanyahu’s standing is still strong, Bushinsky said. “In Likud, if you go against the leader, the constituents punish you. Netanyahu is still the iconic leader of the Likud brand.”

Moreover, Netanyahu is still seen as a master in maneuvering coalition politics and keeping his partners on board—including the ultra-Orthodox and ultranationalist parties. Thus, he is endorsing the continued flow of budget allocations to ultra-Orthodox institutions despite criticism that the monies now need to be spent on costs associated with the displacement of Israelis at the start of the war and other crisis needs. “He knows the national priorities, but he also knows how to keep his relations with the Orthodox and that on a rainy day he will need them,” Bushinsky said. Since elections aren’t scheduled for another three years, a rebellion by coalition partners might be the only thing that could unseat Netanyahu.

Similarly, Netanyahu stopped short of sacking far-right cabinet minister Amichai Eliyahu of the pro-settler Jewish Power party for suggesting Israel should drop a nuclear bomb on Gaza. Netanyahu wants to keep both Jewish Power and another far-right party, the Religious Zionist Party, firmly in his camp. To that end, he is unlikely to take meaningful action regarding settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank—despite calls to do so from Washington.

The poll from Nov. 16 shows a further move to the right among voters, with 32 percent of Israelis favoring the reestablishment of Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip. The settlements were dismantled in 2005 and their 8,000 residents relocated back to Israel after then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon decided their presence was no longer viable.

If the drift to the right is sustained, Netanyahu could try to work it to his advantage by casting himself as a strong leader willing to defy American and international pressure on aspects of the war, postwar arrangements, or the Palestinian issue in general. Netanyahu has already ruled out a role for the Palestinian Authority in postwar Gaza, brushing aside positions outlined by the Biden administration.

Netanyahu “has to hope that people won’t remember” Oct. 7 and his prior policy toward Hamas, Alpher said.

“He needs to have something that can be called the defeat of Hamas. He needs a reasonable outcome for those abducted, and he needs something for Gaza’s future which he can say is good for Israelis,” Alpher said.

[renee-writer]

I Fought the Law Chapter 49 Reality Bites

AO3

He fusses, at first, about taking the formula. “It isn’t as sweet as the goat milk we were given him.” Claire comments as she tries to get the baby to take the bottle.

“Goat milk? Well, I guess there were no nursing mam’s about?” She raises her chestnut eyebrows up. Claire, having finally gotten Fergus to accept the bottle, answers honestly.

“I didn’t want to share him. From the moment I held him in my arms, I knew he belonged to me. I know it sounds nuts but, it is the truth.”

“Weel, you didn’t stop Dougal so maybe the reason you went was to find him.” The baby lays against his mam, taken the bottle. His dark curls lay on Claire ‘s chest, his brown eyes are closed in concentration, his tiny hands are fisted , laying against her breast. He is adorable in his bodysuit. He now looks like he is from this time.

“Maybe. What else has changed with Dougal ‘s actions?

“Lets see.” Geillis picks up her tablet and starts to search.

They have Column brought into an interview room. He sits, smirking at them. “So, my brother was successful, I see.”

“Partly. I killed him before he could take the other Dougal's place.” Jamie carefully watches his reaction. His smirk fades as, just for an instant anger and loathing slip in. He straightens it immediately.

“He helped the Scott’s beat the bloody English. That was what was important.”

“Yes, he did change history. I admit as much. To what degree, we are still figuring out. But, the question is, now what to do with you. The Portal will be closed. If we have to explode the old castle over it.” Murtagh replies.

“You can’t do that!” he slams his cuffed hands down on the table, “It is my property!”

“Not anymore. The government has confiscated it as part of terroristic property. You were using it for the purpose of acts of terrorism so we have the right to cease it.”

“Terrorism?” he sits back, “ You will have to prove it in court. Good luck with that.”

He is right and they both know it. They can hold him for just awhile more. His barrister will have him out soon. Then what? They can’t legally do anything to Castle Leoch, not until the court determines its status. He can assign people to guard it, but that is all that can be done right now.

“We just wanted to tell you of your brother’s death.” Jamie says, returning his smirk. He is lead back to his cell leaving Murtagh and Jamie to decide how to precede.

“The hand of God, that is how history refers to Dougal ‘s explosion. That the battle was turned by the hand of God, allowing the Scott’s an unexpected victory, a victory that lead to a full victory against the English, making Scotland a free nation. “ Geillis reads as Claire lifts a full Fergus up to wind him before laying him down in the cot they bought for him.

“The hand of God. It makes sense. It was quite a huge explosion. We felt it and heard it a good two kilometers away.”

“Oh listen to this, ‘The Scott’s victory gave raise to other countries rebelling against the power of Great Britain. The colonies , several African nations, and Ireland, also declared their independence. England, tired of fighting, let them go without a fight.”

Claire takes the tablet from her and reads. “Wow, it seems he might have done a good thing. No revolutionary war, no Troubles with Ireland, no colonist issues in Africa. We will have to see how it plays out but maybe it was the right thing.”

“Maybe. At work, the Scottish Health Services is very much like the NHI was. That is all I know.” She puts her arm about her, “That and I am happy my mate made it back. In honesty, we thought, with the changes.” Claire hugs her.

“I understand. I would have thought the same. I am happy to be back too. I would rather raise Fergus here then in his original time.”

“Agree, but how are you going to explain him?”

Claire sighs. It is a grand question. “A relative died and left me him. You know like on that movie, ah, Baby Boom.”

“They had paperwork. A will. Custody papers. The child’s birth certificate.”

“Right. Know any good forgers?”

[brookstonalmanac]

Events 9.17 (before 1920)

1111 – Highest Galician nobility led by Pedro Fróilaz de Traba and the bishop Diego Gelmírez crown Alfonso VII as "King of Galicia". 1176 – The Battle of Myriokephalon is the last attempt by the Byzantine Empire to recover central Anatolia from the Seljuk Turks. 1382 – Louis the Great's daughter, Mary, is crowned "king" of Hungary. 1462 – Thirteen Years' War: A Polish army under Piotr Dunin decisively defeats the Teutonic Order at the Battle of Świecino. 1543 – The first Finnish-language book, the Abckiria by Mikael Agricola, is published in Stockholm. 1577 – The Treaty of Bergerac is signed between King Henry III of France and the Huguenots. 1620 – Polish–Ottoman War: The Ottoman Empire defeats the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth during the Battle of Cecora. 1631 – Sweden wins a major victory at the Battle of Breitenfeld against the Holy Roman Empire during the Thirty Years' War. 1658 – The Battle of Vilanova is fought between Portugal and Spain during the Portuguese Restoration War. 1683 – Antonie van Leeuwenhoek writes a letter to the Royal Society describing "animalcules", later known as protozoa. 1775 – American Revolutionary War: The invasion of Quebec by the Continental Army begins with the Siege of Fort St. Jean. 1776 – The Presidio of San Francisco is founded in New Spain. 1778 – The Treaty of Fort Pitt is signed. It is the first formal treaty between the United States and a Native American tribe. 1787 – The United States Constitution is signed at Independence Hall in Philadelphia, bringing the Constitutional Convention to an end. 1793 – War of the Pyrenees: France defeats a Spanish force at the Battle of Peyrestortes. 1794 – Flanders Campaign: France completes its conquest of the Austrian Netherlands at the Battle of Sprimont. 1809 – Peace between Sweden and Russia in the Finnish War; the territory that will become Finland is ceded to Russia by the Treaty of Fredrikshamn. 1849 – American abolitionist Harriet Tubman escapes from slavery. 1859 – Joshua A. Norton declares himself "Norton I, Emperor of the United States." 1861 – Argentine Civil Wars: The State of Buenos Aires defeats the Argentine Confederation at the Battle of Pavón. 1862 – American Civil War: George B. McClellan's Army of the Potomac halts the first invasion of the North by Robert E. Lee and his Army of Northern Virginia in the single-day Battle of Antietam, the bloodiest day in American military history. 1862 – American Civil War: The Allegheny Arsenal explosion in Lawrenceville, Pennsylvania results in the single largest civilian disaster during the war. 1894 – Battle of the Yalu River, the largest naval engagement of the First Sino-Japanese War. 1900 – Philippine–American War: Filipinos under Juan Cailles defeat Americans under Colonel Benjamin F. Cheatham Jr. at Mabitac. 1901 – Second Boer War: A Boer column defeats a British force at the Battle of Blood River Poort. 1901 – Second Boer War: Boers capture a squadron of the 17th Lancers at the Battle of Elands River. 1908 – The Wright Flyer flown by Orville Wright, with Lieutenant Thomas Selfridge as passenger, crashes, killing Selfridge, who becomes the first airplane fatality. 1914 – Andrew Fisher becomes Prime Minister of Australia for the third time. 1914 – World War I: The Race to the Sea begins. 1916 – World War I: Manfred von Richthofen ("The Red Baron"), a flying ace of the German Luftstreitkräfte, wins his first aerial combat near Cambrai, France.

[bobmccullochny]

History

October 30, 1905 - To counter the spread of revolutionary movements in Russia, Czar Nicholas II took a step toward constitutional government by allowing for an elected parliament (Duma) with legislative powers and guaranteeing civil liberties.

October 30, 1938 - The War of the Worlds radio broadcast panicked millions of Americans. Actor Orson Welles and the Mercury Players dramatized the story by H.G. Wells depicting a Martian invasion of New Jersey. Their script utilized simulated radio news bulletins which many listeners thought were real.

October 30, 1990 - For the first time since the Ice Age, Great Britain was connected with the European continent, via a new rail tunnel under the English Channel.

Birthday - John Adams (1735-1826) the 2nd U.S. President was born in Braintree, Massachusetts. He served from March 4, 1797 to March 3, 1801. He had been George Washington's vice president, and was the father of John Quincy Adams, the 6th President. He died on July 4, 1826, the same day as Thomas Jefferson, on the 50th anniversary of adoption of the Declaration of Independence.

Birthday - Emily Post (1872-1960) was born in Baltimore, Maryland. She wrote influential books on etiquette and a syndicated newspaper column giving advice on manners in specific situations.

Birthday - Admiral William "Bull" Halsey (1882-1959) was born in Elizabeth, New Jersey. He was the American fleet commander during World War II in the Pacific and played a leading role in the defeat of the Japanese. In 1942, he launched the Doolittle Raid, the first air raid on Japan. From 1942-44, he coordinated successful attacks on the Solomon Islands and New Guinea. In 1944, he led the U.S. fleet to victory at the Battle of Leyte Gulf, the largest naval battle in history.

[thenapoleonicwars]

VICE-ADMIRAL HORATIO NELSON

(29th September, 1758 – 21st October, 1805)

Nelson was born into a moderately prosperous Norfolk family and joined the navy through the influence of his uncle, Maurice Suckling, a high-ranking naval officer.

Nelson rose rapidly through the ranks and served with leading naval commanders of the period before obtaining his own command at the age of 20, in 1778.

He developed a reputation for personal valour and firm grasp of tactics, but suffered periods of illness and unemployment after The American War of Independence.

The outbreak of the French Revolutionary Wars allowed Nelson to return to service, where he was particularly active in the Mediterranean. He fought in several minor engagements off Toulon and was important in the capture of Corsica, where he was wounded and partially lost sight in one eye, and subsequent diplomatic duties with the Italian states.

In 1797, he distinguished himself while in command of HMS Captain at the Battle of Cape St Vincent. Shortly after that battle, Nelson took part in the Battle of Santa Cruz de Tenerife, where the attack failed and he lost his right arm, forcing him to return to England to recuperate.

The following year he won a decisive victory over the French at the Battle of the Nile and remained in the Mediterranean to support the Kingdom of Naples against a French invasion.

In 1801, Nelson was dispatched to the Baltic Sea and defeated neutral Denmark at the Battle of Copenhagen.

He commanded the blockade of the French and Spanish fleets at Toulon and, after their escape, chased them to the West Indies and back but failed to bring them to battle.

After a brief return to England, he took over the Cádiz blockade, in 1805. On 21st October, 1805, the Franco-Spanish fleet came out of port, and Nelson's fleet engaged them at the Battle of Trafalgar.

The battle became one of Britain's greatest naval victories, but Nelson, aboard HMS Victory, was fatally wounded by a French sharpshooter. His body was brought back to England, where he was accorded a state funeral.

Nelson's death at Trafalgar secured his position as one of Britain's most heroic figures.

His signal just prior to the commencement of the battle, "England expects that every man will do his duty," is regularly quoted and paraphrased.

Numerous monuments, including Nelson's Column in Trafalgar Square, London, and the Nelson Monument in Edinburgh, have been created in his memory.

(Information From Wikipedia)

[apas-95]

Sometime, perhaps this winter, when the war is over, and Russia doesn't annex Ukraine - as the whole point is that they don't want a border with NATO, and would prefer buffer states - it's going to be presented in the west as a victory for Ukraine. Something like: 'Russia was going to annex Ukraine, but we fought them off,' even as the L/DPR remain independent and with limited international recognition.

And, I mean, god, we're in for it, aren't we? In a decade or two, when the breakdown of imperialism has escalated from these proxy conflicts into global war, we'll be awash with coverage on how every single setback was actually a victory. It won't be an opinion, it'll be unquestionable, the basic framing - one that every liberal you know won't have to consciously consider. Consider this: Ukraine completely defeated Russia's troops in the Donbass. Then, they dealt decisive blows against them near Odessa. They obliterated column after column of Russian tanks advancing on Kiev. Finally, the heroic troops in Kiev bravely held them off. Victory after victory, even as the front line is pushed backwards!

Every supposed liberal principle was cast aside the second blood was drawn - misinformation was openly declared permissible, if in service of the war effort; blocking refugees from escaping, supported if it meant more conscripts; war crimes, none specifically - just any war crimes, defended as a tactic. The fascist paramilitaries, previously rallied against as an issue by every liberal outlet, denied, then downplayed, and finally, simply, accepted as a necessary evil.

There's nothing, really, to say, here. I think everyone can see where history is leading us. It's a farce. The world powers tried to put their masks back on, after the horrors of the last century, but the bloodstains on them are as clear as day. For good or for bad, we will see the end of it all. In socialism, or in extinction.

[inqilabi]

Zionism is thus a very young movement; it is the youngest of the European national movements. That does not prevent it from pretending, even more than all other nationalism, that it draws its substance from a far distant past. Whereas Zionism is in fact the product of the last phase of capitalism, of capitalism beginning to decay, it pretends to draw its origin from a past more than two thousand years old. Whereas Zionism is essentially a reaction against the situation created for Judaism by the combination of the destruction of feudalism and the decay of capitalism, it affirms that it constitutes a reaction against the state of things existing since the fall of Jerusalem in the year 70 of the Christian era. Its recent birth is naturally the best reply to these pretensions. As a matter of fact, how can one believe that the remedy for an evil existing for two thousand years was discovered only at the end of the nineteenth century? But like all nationalisms—and even more intensely—Zionism views the historic past in the light of the present. In this way, too, it distorts the present-day picture...Zionism has never seriously posed this question: Why, during these two thousand years, have not the Jews really tried to return to this country? Why was it necessary to wait until the end of the nineteenth century for a Herzl to succeed in convincing them of this necessity? Why were all the predecessors of Herzl, like the famous Sabbatai Zebi, treated as false Messiahs? Why were the adherents of Sabbatai Zebi fiercely persecuted by orthodox Judaism?

In reality just so long as Judaism was incorporated in the feudal system, the “dream of Zion” was nothing but a dream and did not correspond to any real interest of Judaism. The Jewish tavern owner or “farmer” of sixteenth-century Poland thought as little of “returning” to Palestine as does the Jewish millionaire in America today. Jewish religious Messianism was no whit different from the Messianism belonging to other religions. Jewish pilgrims who went to Palestine met Catholic, Orthodox, and Moslem pilgrims. Besides it was not so much the “return to Palestine” which constituted the foundation of this Messianism as the belief in the rebuilding of the temple of Jerusalem. All of these idealist conceptions of Zionism are naturally inseparable from the dogma of eternal anti-Semitism. “As long as the Jews will live in the Diaspora, they will be hated by the natives.” This essential point of view for Zionism, its spinal column so to speak, is naturally given different nuances by its various currents. Zionism transposes modern anti-Semitism to all of history; it saves itself the trouble of studying the various forms of anti-Semitism and their evolution...The national movement of the European bourgeoisie is the consequence of capitalist development; it reflects the will of the bourgeoisie to create the national bases for production, to abolish feudal remnants. The national movement of the European bourgeoisie is closely linked with the ascending phase of capitalism. But in the nineteenth century, in the period of the flowering of nationalisms, far from being “Zionist,” the Jewish bourgeoisie was profoundly assimilationist. The economic process from which the modern nations issued laid the foundations for integration of the Jewish bourgeoisie into the bourgeois nation.

One must be stricken with an incurable juridical cretinism to believe that the creation of a small Jewish state in Palestine can change anything at all in the situation of the Jews throughout the world, especially in the present period. The situation after the eventual creation of a Jewish state in Palestine will resemble the state of things that existed in the Roman era only in the fact that in both cases the existence of a small Jewish state in Palestine could in no way influence the situation of the Jews in the Diaspora. In the Roman era, the economic and social position of Judaism in the Diaspora was very strong, so that the disappearance of this Jewish state did not in any way compromise it. Today the situation of the Jews in the world is very bad; so the reestablishment of a Jewish state in Palestine cannot in any way restore it. In both cases the situation of the Jews does not at all depend on the existence of a state in Palestine but is a function of the general economic, social, and political situation. Even supposing that the Zionist dream is realized and the “secular injustice” is undone-and we are still very far from that—the situation of Judaism throughout the world will in no way be modified by that. The temple will perhaps be rebuilt but the faithful will continue to suffer...The Jewish masses began to understand that Zionism not only could not seriously improve their situation, but that it was furnishing weapons to the anti-Semites by its theories of the “objective necessity of Jewish emigration.” The imperialist war and the triumph of Hitlerism in Europe are an unprecedented disaster for Judaism. Judaism is confronted with the threat of total extinction. What can Zionism do to counteract such a disaster? Is it not obvious that the Jewish question is very little dependent upon the future destiny of Tel Aviv but very greatly upon the regime which will be set up tomorrow in Europe and in the world? The Zionists have a great deal of faith in a victory of Anglo-American imperialism. But is there a single reason for believing that the attitude of the Anglo-American imperialists will differ after their eventual victory from their prewar attitude? It is obvious that there is none. Even admitting that Anglo-American imperialism will create some kind of abortive Jewish state, we have seen that the situation of world Judaism will hardly be affected...But Zionism wishes precisely to resolve the Jewish question independently of the world revolution. By misconstruing the real sources of the Jewish question in our period, by lulling itself with puerile dreams and silly hopes, Zionism proves that it is an ideological excrescence and not a scientific doctrine

Abram Leon, The Jewish Question: A Marxist Interpretation. 1942, shortly before he was executed by the nazis at the age of 26.

[scotianostra]

On the 8th February 1429 a contingent of a thousand Scots, commanded by the brothers John and William Stuart, headed to the relief of the beleaguered French garrison at Orleans.

The friendship between France and Scotland was well known; indeed there had long been an alliance between them more popularly known as the Auld Alliance (Vieille Alliance). This friendship was forged because the two countries were at war with England though for different reasons.

Charles V was the first king to employ Scotsmen in his bodyguard, but it is principally with Charles VII that the alliance was properly employed by the creation of the first elements of Scot Guards (Garde Écossaise) who were maintained by tradition in the King’s Household until the 18th century and again under the Restoration.

In 1420, a contingent of 6,000 Scotsmen had disembarked at La Rochelle to assist the Dauphin. John Stewart, Earl of Buchan, the son of the Duke of Albany, regent of Scotland, commanded this contingent. John Stewart was made Constable of France in 1423, after his victory at Baugé. He was killed at Verneuil in 1424. He should not be confused with todays John Stuart of Darnley.

At the beginning of the siege, in October 1428, Orleans sheltered a strong Scottish contingent appointed by the king, since the accounts of the Treasurer for War, master Raguier, noted the presence of companies commanded by three Scottish knights: William Hamilton, Thomas Houston, John Wischard – alias Oulchard –, and five squires: Thomas Blair, Henry Galoys, Edward Lennox, David Melvill and Alexander Norwill.

On 8th February 1429 important reinforcements led by William d'Albret arrived, with a strong contingent of 1,000 Scots commanded by the brothers John Stewart of Darnley and William Stewart of Castelmilk. Alas, a few days later there occurred the disaster of Rouvray-Saint-Denis, in the open country of Beauce.

An English supply convoy was sent from Paris towards Orleans under the protection of John Fastolf. A messenger from the Orleans garrison informed Charles de Bourbon, Count of Clermont, who commanded French troops in the region. It was decided that French troops should be assembled to intercept the convoy. The principle commander, Charles de Bourbon ordered that the French captains leaving Orleans should not take independent action without his support. The Bastard of Orleans, Xaintrailles and La Hire, but especially John Stuart, impatient to cross swords, did not wait and hurled themselves on the "goddamns". Behind the improvised defences of wagons and barrels full of fish, the English bowmen awaited the enemy. Demoralized, Charles de Bourbon retreated and resumed his responsibility in the lamentable check of this battle.

Once more, the impetuous attack of the cavalry cut deeply into the Franco-Scottish Army. The outcome of this fatal day, left among scattered fish on the battlefield, the bodies of 250 soldiers of the French army, including the Stuart brothers. 12th February 1429 is remembered in history under the name of *Battle of the Herrings*.

Nevertheless the renown of the Scottish bowmen was such that they were charged with protecting the relief column from Blois to Orleans accompanied by Joan of Arc, under the command of Patrick Ogilvy of Auchterhouse, Sheriff of Angus, who held the title of Constable of the Scottish Army in France.

John Stewart of Darnley was buried in the Sainte-Croix Cathedral, Orléans a memorial plaque marks this, I can find no details of his brother, William but would assume he is also interred there.

More pics and info here https://www.warhistoryonline.com/instant-articles/elite-scottish-warriors-helped.html

[stairnaheireann]

#OTD in 1892 – Birth of General Eoin O’Duffy, near Castleblaney, Co Monaghan.

#OTD in 1892 – Birth of General Eoin O’Duffy, near Castleblaney, Co Monaghan.

Birth of Eoin O’Duffy, IRA man, Commissioner of the Garda Síochána and General Franco supporter, near Lough Egish, Co Monaghan. O’Duffy first came to fame when he led an IRA group which captured the first RIC barracks at Ballytrain taking from it weapons and explosives, during the War of Independence. Also present at this victory were Ernie O’ Malley who went on to organise flying columns and the…

[jacobsvoice]

Property Rights and Political Wrongs in Jerusalem

The violent eruption in Jerusalem, sparked by the pending eviction of four Palestinian families from their Jewish-owned homes in the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah, reveals the continuing struggle between Israelis and Arabs over the ancient Jewish Holy City.

It began following the Six-Day War with the return of Jews to the Jewish Quarter of the Old City, from which they had been forcibly evicted by Arabs during Israel’s Independence War in 1948. Former Jewish neighborhoods outside Old City walls – Sheikh Jarrah among them – also came under Arab control. But a Supreme Court ruling subsequently upheld the right of Jewish families to reclaim Jewish-owned property there.

Sheikh Jarrah was not a random neighborhood claimed by conquering Israelis. It was the site of the tomb of Shimon HaTzadik, the renowned Jewish High Priest during the Second Temple era. For centuries it was the destination of Jewish pilgrimages. In 1876 Jews purchased the burial cave and adjoining land, where Yemenite Jewish families built their homes. But the property was confiscated by Arabs following Israel’s Independence War.

In 2008 the Jerusalem District Court ruled that it belonged to the Sephardi Jewish community. One year later the Supreme Court upheld that ruling. The pending question now under litigation is whether law (to say nothing of history) matters. Predictably, the New York Times has joined in the fray, the better to blame Israel. In full-page coverage (May 8) of the most recent eruption of Palestinian violence, Jerusalem Bureau Chief Patrick Kingsley began by blaming Israeli police for spraying “so much skunk water, a noxious liquid used to deter demonstrators,” that “its stench lingered over nearby streets.”

For Kingsley the question is not who are the legitimate owners of the Sheikh Jarrah property, and whether six Palestinian families will be evicted from property they do not own, but whether the Supreme Court will decide in favor of the Times most evil of people: “Jewish settlers.”

Five columns later - surrounding four photographs arranged to blame Israeli security forces for responding to Palestinian violence inside and outside the Old City – Kingsley notes that “the dispute in Sheikh Jarrah” is grounded in the 19th century land purchase by “two Jewish trusts” from its Arab land owners. This suggests that the question, ignored by Kingsley, is whether Jewish property owners will be able to regain the property that is legally theirs.

As Palestinian violence spread to the Temple Mount the Times predictably blamed Israel. Kingsley is oblivious to its place in Jewish history as the site of the First and Second Temples, dating back to the reign of King Solomon in the 10th century BCE. Destroyed by the Babylonian Empire in 586 BCE, the Second Temple, rebuilt half a century later, was demolished by the Romans in 70 CE. Eight centuries later Moslems, determined to erase Jewish history from its holiest site, chose it for their own (third) holiest site, to be known as the Dome of the Rock.

Fast forward to the Six-Day War in 1967, when victorious Israeli soldiers reached the Temple Mount. Lt. General Motta Gur, their commander, reported excitedly: “The Temple Mount is in our hands” – for the first time in nearly two thousand years. But in perhaps the most astonishing surrender in Jewish history Defense Minister Moshe Dayan, meeting with the Muslim Waqf, returned the Mount to their control. Jews would be forbidden to worship at their holiest site. It was a gift that only a secular Jew could have bestowed.

Following their victory the Knesset passed a law permitting Jewish families that had been forced from their homes by Jordanians to regain them with proof of ownership if their current inhabitants were unable to do so. Accordingly, the Israeli Supreme Court recently ruled that these homes in Sheikh Jarrah must be returned to their legal (Jewish) owners.

Whether Israel, now under Hamas siege, will permit Jews to reclaim their Sheikh Jarrah homes will determine whether Zionism still flourishes in the ancient holy city of the Jewish people.

Algemeiner (May 12, 2021)

Jerold S. Auerbach is the author of twelve books, including Print to Fit: The New York Times, Zionism and Israel 1896-2016, selected for Mosaic by Ruth Wisse and Martin Kramer as a Best Book for 2019