Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

🚨 كلام مهم وخطير جدا… للمرة الثانية! (للنشر على أوسع نطاق) ما يجري في الساحل السوري لم يعد خافيا ولا يمكن السكوت عنه! تحت مسميات مثل “أنصار طرطوس”، “أنصار بانياس”، و“أنصار جبلة”، تم تسليح فصائل رديفة من مدنيين مقربين من الهيئة في الساحل، بعد إخضاعهم لدورات تدريبية عسكرية في...

NemesisSYR_'s profile picture

NEMESIS – نيميسس

24,040 subscribers

11,523 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Note: English translation below 🔴 حماة الآن، مشهد يتحدى العقل ويصدم الضمير الإنساني. منع دفن مواطن من الطائفة العلوية الكريمة، في انتهاك صارخ لأبسط حقوق الإنسان. حتى حق الوداع الأخير لم يُحترم، وكأن الكراهية لم تكتفِ بالموت وحده. ما جرى ليس حادثًا عابرًا، ولا خلافًا محليًا، بل إذلال ممنهج ورسالة ترهيب واضحة. حين يُمنع الدفن، فنحن أمام جريمة ضد الإنسانية، لا تقبل التأويل ولا التبرير. الصمت عن هذه الجرائم ليس حيادًا، بل تواطؤ كامل معها. Hama, now, a scene that defies reason and shocks the human conscience. The burial of a citizen from the respected Alawite community was deliberately denied, in a blatant violation of basic human rights. Even the right to a final farewell was stripped away, as hatred pursued the body beyond death. This was not an isolated incident or a local dispute, but systematic humiliation and deliberate intimidation. When burial is denied, this constitutes a clear crime against humanity, with no room for justification. Silence in the face of such crimes is not neutrality, it is complicity. #حماة #سوريا #حماية_الأقليات #جريمة_ضد_الانسانية #الابادة_العلوية #Hama #Syria #ProtectMinorities #CrimesAgainstHumanity #StopAlawiteGenocide
0:28

Note: English translation below 🔴 حماة الآن، مشهد يتحدى العقل ويصدم الضمير الإنساني. منع دفن مواطن من الطائفة العلوية الكريمة، في انتهاك صارخ لأبسط حقوق الإنسان. حتى حق الوداع الأخير لم يُحترم، وكأن الكراهية لم تكتفِ بالموت وحده. ما جرى ليس حادثًا عابرًا، ولا خلافًا محليًا، بل إذلال ممنهج ورسالة ترهيب واضحة. حين يُمنع الدفن، فنحن أمام جريمة ضد الإنسانية، لا تقبل التأويل ولا التبرير. الصمت عن هذه الجرائم ليس حيادًا، بل تواطؤ كامل معها. Hama, now, a scene that defies reason and shocks the human conscience. The burial of a citizen from the respected Alawite community was deliberately denied, in a blatant violation of basic human rights. Even the right to a final farewell was stripped away, as hatred pursued the body beyond death. This was not an isolated incident or a local dispute, but systematic humiliation and deliberate intimidation. When burial is denied, this constitutes a clear crime against humanity, with no room for justification. Silence in the face of such crimes is not neutrality, it is complicity. #حماة #سوريا #حماية_الأقليات #جريمة_ضد_الانسانية #الابادة_العلوية #Hama #Syria #ProtectMinorities #CrimesAgainstHumanity #StopAlawiteGenocide

NEMESIS – نيميسس

34,196 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

🔴 مشهد يوجع القلب قبل أن يُغضب العقل… مجموعة من شبّان “عرب الشاطئ” في طرطوس، المعروفين بلقب “عرب جحيش”، يظهرون ببث مباشر وكأنهم سلطة مستقلة فوق الدولة وفوق المجتمع، يفاخرون ويؤكّدون أن لا رادع ولا محاسبة ولا جهة توقف هذا الانفلات. لا أهل يضبطون، ولا دولة تحاسب، ولا قانون يردع… وفي المقابل، يعيش المدنيون تحت هذا الفلتان وكأن المدينة أصبحت مساحة مفتوحة بلا مسؤولية. احفظوا هذه الوجوه جيدًا… فكل بث مباشر يكشف كيف تتآكل هيبة القانون وكيف تُصنع الفوضى على عين الدولة. ونتمنى أن يرى “أبو هاني” هذا المشهد ليعرف تمامًا كيف أصبح شكل “العيش المشترك” والعدالة على الهواء المباشر في طرطوس. A scene that shocks the mind before it angers the heart… A group from the so-called “Arab al-Shate’” in Tartous, known locally as “Arab Jaheesh,” appeared in a livestream acting as if they were an independent authority—above the state and beyond accountability—openly displaying a level of lawlessness that has become the new normal. No families intervening, no state oversight, no legal consequences… Meanwhile, civilians are left to face this chaos as if the city has become an open space without responsibility. Remember these faces well… every livestream exposes how the rule of law is collapsing and how chaos is brewing openly. And we hope “Abu Hani” sees this broadcast, to understand exactly what “coexistence” and “justice” now look like on livestream in Tartous. #سوريا #طرطوس #توثيق #فوضى_أمنية #Security #Syria #Tartous #Documentation
2:08

🔴 مشهد يوجع القلب قبل أن يُغضب العقل… مجموعة من شبّان “عرب الشاطئ” في طرطوس، المعروفين بلقب “عرب جحيش”، يظهرون ببث مباشر وكأنهم سلطة مستقلة فوق الدولة وفوق المجتمع، يفاخرون ويؤكّدون أن لا رادع ولا محاسبة ولا جهة توقف هذا الانفلات. لا أهل يضبطون، ولا دولة تحاسب، ولا قانون يردع… وفي المقابل، يعيش المدنيون تحت هذا الفلتان وكأن المدينة أصبحت مساحة مفتوحة بلا مسؤولية. احفظوا هذه الوجوه جيدًا… فكل بث مباشر يكشف كيف تتآكل هيبة القانون وكيف تُصنع الفوضى على عين الدولة. ونتمنى أن يرى “أبو هاني” هذا المشهد ليعرف تمامًا كيف أصبح شكل “العيش المشترك” والعدالة على الهواء المباشر في طرطوس. A scene that shocks the mind before it angers the heart… A group from the so-called “Arab al-Shate’” in Tartous, known locally as “Arab Jaheesh,” appeared in a livestream acting as if they were an independent authority—above the state and beyond accountability—openly displaying a level of lawlessness that has become the new normal. No families intervening, no state oversight, no legal consequences… Meanwhile, civilians are left to face this chaos as if the city has become an open space without responsibility. Remember these faces well… every livestream exposes how the rule of law is collapsing and how chaos is brewing openly. And we hope “Abu Hani” sees this broadcast, to understand exactly what “coexistence” and “justice” now look like on livestream in Tartous. #سوريا #طرطوس #توثيق #فوضى_أمنية #Security #Syria #Tartous #Documentation

NEMESIS – نيميسس

231,940 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

🔴 خبر مهم يخص الاقليات السورية… لكنه يحمل ظلما صارخا.. سُمح لمعظم الاقليات الدينية في سوريا بالتقدم بطلبات اللجوء الانساني في اوروبا وعدد من دول العالم، في حين جرى استثناء الطائفة السنية الكريمة بحجة ان سوريا اصبحت “امنة” لهم. المفارقة المؤلمة ان الاوروبيين، ومعهم العالم اجمع، يعلمون تماما ما يجري داخل سوريا، لكنهم اختزلوا الطائفة السنية كلها في من يحكم البلاد اليوم، وهذا بحد ذاته اجحاف كبير وظلم واضح. الحقيقة ان شريحة واسعة من السنة متضررة بعمق، ومحرومة حتى من حق النقد او التعبير، وتعيش تحت الخوف والقمع، تماما كغيرها، وربما اكثر. العدالة لا تكون بتعميم الاتهام، ولا بحماية جماعة على حساب اخرى، بل بالاعتراف ان الضحية في سوريا ليست طائفة بعينها، بل انسان مسحوق تحت سلطة الامر الواقع. Important news for Syrian minorities… but with a grave injustice Most religious minorities in Syria are now allowed to apply for humanitarian asylum in Europe and other parts of the world. However, the Sunni community has been excluded, under the claim that Syria is now “safe” for them. The painful irony is that Europe — and the world at large — fully understands what is happening in Syria, yet they have collectively equated the entire Sunni community with those ruling the country today. This is, in itself, a clear injustice. In reality, large segments of Sunni civilians are deeply affected, denied even the right to criticize or speak freely, and living under fear and repression — no less, and perhaps more, than other groups. Justice cannot be built on collective blame, nor on protecting one group while ignoring another. The true victim in Syria is not a specific sect, but a crushed human being living under imposed power. #سوريا #حقوق_الانسان #اللجوء_الانساني #حماية_الاقليات #Syria #HumanRights #HumanitarianAsylum #ProtectMinorities
1:05

🔴 خبر مهم يخص الاقليات السورية… لكنه يحمل ظلما صارخا.. سُمح لمعظم الاقليات الدينية في سوريا بالتقدم بطلبات اللجوء الانساني في اوروبا وعدد من دول العالم، في حين جرى استثناء الطائفة السنية الكريمة بحجة ان سوريا اصبحت “امنة” لهم. المفارقة المؤلمة ان الاوروبيين، ومعهم العالم اجمع، يعلمون تماما ما يجري داخل سوريا، لكنهم اختزلوا الطائفة السنية كلها في من يحكم البلاد اليوم، وهذا بحد ذاته اجحاف كبير وظلم واضح. الحقيقة ان شريحة واسعة من السنة متضررة بعمق، ومحرومة حتى من حق النقد او التعبير، وتعيش تحت الخوف والقمع، تماما كغيرها، وربما اكثر. العدالة لا تكون بتعميم الاتهام، ولا بحماية جماعة على حساب اخرى، بل بالاعتراف ان الضحية في سوريا ليست طائفة بعينها، بل انسان مسحوق تحت سلطة الامر الواقع. Important news for Syrian minorities… but with a grave injustice Most religious minorities in Syria are now allowed to apply for humanitarian asylum in Europe and other parts of the world. However, the Sunni community has been excluded, under the claim that Syria is now “safe” for them. The painful irony is that Europe — and the world at large — fully understands what is happening in Syria, yet they have collectively equated the entire Sunni community with those ruling the country today. This is, in itself, a clear injustice. In reality, large segments of Sunni civilians are deeply affected, denied even the right to criticize or speak freely, and living under fear and repression — no less, and perhaps more, than other groups. Justice cannot be built on collective blame, nor on protecting one group while ignoring another. The true victim in Syria is not a specific sect, but a crushed human being living under imposed power. #سوريا #حقوق_الانسان #اللجوء_الانساني #حماية_الاقليات #Syria #HumanRights #HumanitarianAsylum #ProtectMinorities

NEMESIS – نيميسس

18,189 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

للنشر… كي لا تُمحى الحقيقة، وكي لا يُغسل الدم بتقارير صاغها القاتل نفسه… نوجّه هذا النداء إلى المجتمع الدولي، وإلى كل الحقوقيين، الإعلاميين، والقانونيين حول العالم، وإلى لجان حقوق الإنسان والمنظمات الدولية: 🔻 نُعلن رفضنا الكامل لما ورد في تقرير لجنة تقصي الحقائق في الساحل السوري، تقريرٌ كُتب بيد الجلاد، لا لتوثيق الحقيقة، بل لتبرئة القاتل وإدانة الضحية. 🔻 هذا التقرير لن يُضمد جراح السيدة المكلومة بابنها غدير، بل زاد ألمها وألم آلاف العائلات التي تنتظر الحقيقة والعدالة. 🔻 ونطالب بتشكيل لجنة أممية مستقلة ومحايدة، تضم نخبة من الخبراء الحقوقيين والقانونيين تحت إشراف الأمم المتحدة، لإجراء تحقيق دولي شفاف في مجازر الساحل والسويداء. ما حدث ليس شأناً محلياً، ولا فصلاً عارضاً في مأساة مستمرة، بل جريمة ضد الإنسانية لا يُغلق ملفها بتقرير مزوّر صادر عن الجاني. 🔴 فعّلوا هذا الهاشتاغ: #نطالب_بلجنة_تحقيق_دولية_في_سوريا To be published… So that the truth is not erased, and the blood not washed away by reports authored by the killers themselves… We address this call to the international community, to all human rights defenders, journalists, and legal professionals around the world, and to human rights committees and international organizations: 🔻 We categorically reject the findings of the so-called Fact-Finding Committee on the Syrian Coast — a report written by the executioner himself, not to document the truth, but to absolve the killer and condemn the victim. 🔻 This report will not heal the wounds of the grieving mother of Ghadeer — on the contrary, it has only deepened her pain, as well as the pain of thousands of families still waiting for truth and justice. 🔻 We demand the formation of an independent and impartial international committee, composed of top legal and human rights experts, under the supervision of the United Nations, to conduct a transparent investigation into the massacres in the Syrian coast and Sweida. This is not a local matter, nor a passing chapter in a prolonged tragedy — it is a crime against humanity, and its file cannot be closed with a falsified report issued by the perpetrator. 🔴 Activate this hashtag: #WeDemand_An_International_Investigation_In_Syria #مجزرة_الساحل #مجازر_الساحل_السوري #الابادة_العلوية #الابادة_الجماعية_العلوية_2025 #الطائفة_العلوية_الكريمة #الجولاني_الارهابي #الامن_العام_الارهابي #لجنة_تقصي_الحقائق #جريمة_ضد_الانسانية #سوريا #توثيق #حماية_الأقليات #SyrianCoastalMassacres #StopAlawiteGenocide #CrimesAgainstHumanity #JolaniCrimes #HTSCrimes #JolaniIsAGlobalTerrorist #AlawitePersecution #SyriaMassacres #IndependentInvestigation #MinorityProtection #UN #UNSC #UN_HRC #EU #HRW #AmnestyInternational #InternationalCriminalCourt #SaveSyria #JusticeForSyria
0:56

للنشر… كي لا تُمحى الحقيقة، وكي لا يُغسل الدم بتقارير صاغها القاتل نفسه… نوجّه هذا النداء إلى المجتمع الدولي، وإلى كل الحقوقيين، الإعلاميين، والقانونيين حول العالم، وإلى لجان حقوق الإنسان والمنظمات الدولية: 🔻 نُعلن رفضنا الكامل لما ورد في تقرير لجنة تقصي الحقائق في الساحل السوري، تقريرٌ كُتب بيد الجلاد، لا لتوثيق الحقيقة، بل لتبرئة القاتل وإدانة الضحية. 🔻 هذا التقرير لن يُضمد جراح السيدة المكلومة بابنها غدير، بل زاد ألمها وألم آلاف العائلات التي تنتظر الحقيقة والعدالة. 🔻 ونطالب بتشكيل لجنة أممية مستقلة ومحايدة، تضم نخبة من الخبراء الحقوقيين والقانونيين تحت إشراف الأمم المتحدة، لإجراء تحقيق دولي شفاف في مجازر الساحل والسويداء. ما حدث ليس شأناً محلياً، ولا فصلاً عارضاً في مأساة مستمرة، بل جريمة ضد الإنسانية لا يُغلق ملفها بتقرير مزوّر صادر عن الجاني. 🔴 فعّلوا هذا الهاشتاغ: #نطالب_بلجنة_تحقيق_دولية_في_سوريا To be published… So that the truth is not erased, and the blood not washed away by reports authored by the killers themselves… We address this call to the international community, to all human rights defenders, journalists, and legal professionals around the world, and to human rights committees and international organizations: 🔻 We categorically reject the findings of the so-called Fact-Finding Committee on the Syrian Coast — a report written by the executioner himself, not to document the truth, but to absolve the killer and condemn the victim. 🔻 This report will not heal the wounds of the grieving mother of Ghadeer — on the contrary, it has only deepened her pain, as well as the pain of thousands of families still waiting for truth and justice. 🔻 We demand the formation of an independent and impartial international committee, composed of top legal and human rights experts, under the supervision of the United Nations, to conduct a transparent investigation into the massacres in the Syrian coast and Sweida. This is not a local matter, nor a passing chapter in a prolonged tragedy — it is a crime against humanity, and its file cannot be closed with a falsified report issued by the perpetrator. 🔴 Activate this hashtag: #WeDemand_An_International_Investigation_In_Syria #مجزرة_الساحل #مجازر_الساحل_السوري #الابادة_العلوية #الابادة_الجماعية_العلوية_2025 #الطائفة_العلوية_الكريمة #الجولاني_الارهابي #الامن_العام_الارهابي #لجنة_تقصي_الحقائق #جريمة_ضد_الانسانية #سوريا #توثيق #حماية_الأقليات #SyrianCoastalMassacres #StopAlawiteGenocide #CrimesAgainstHumanity #JolaniCrimes #HTSCrimes #JolaniIsAGlobalTerrorist #AlawitePersecution #SyriaMassacres #IndependentInvestigation #MinorityProtection #UN #UNSC #UN_HRC #EU #HRW #AmnestyInternational #InternationalCriminalCourt #SaveSyria #JusticeForSyria

NEMESIS – نيميسس

21,847 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

#رصد نتائج الزيارة الإيرانية تظهر يوماً بعد يوم، وهذا يؤكد ما نردده دائماً: أن النظام السياسي الحالي في بغداد لا يمتلك زمام الأمور، وأن قرار نزع سلاح الفصائل وحصره بيد الدولة لا يُتخذ في بغداد، بل يُبحث ويُحسم في إيران. والأهم من ذلك أن هذا التصريح صدر عن المتحدث الرسمي باسم الحكومة العراقية، وليس عن صحفي أو إعلامي، ما يجعله تعبيرًا عن موقف النظام السياسي في بغداد، وليس مجرد رأي إعلامي. ولا يمكن إخراج العراق من دائرة الهيمنة السياسية ما لم توضع خطة حقيقية لإعادة تشكيل النظام السياسي، بعد أن أصبحت إيران مهيمنة على مفاصل أساسية فيه، وتمتلك نفوذاً واسعاً على قراراته. The consequences of the Iranian visit are becoming increasingly evident day by day, confirming what we have consistently argued: that the current political system in Baghdad does not have control over its own affairs, and that the decision to disarm the armed factions and place their weapons under state control is not being made in Baghdad, but is instead being discussed and decided in Iran. More importantly, this statement was made by the official spokesperson of the Iraqi government, not by a journalist or media commentator, which makes it an expression of the position of the political system in Baghdad rather than merely a media opinion. Iraq cannot be freed from the grip of political influence unless a genuine plan is developed to restructure the political system, after Iran has established influence over key institutions and become capable of controlling a significant part of its political decisions. So, is it time to replace Iran’s political arm in Baghdad? The armed wing will not change as long as political leaders loyal to Iran continue to control the key levers of political decision-making in Iraq. While the United States, along with Syria and other concerned parties, continues to watch the Iraqi scene without decisive action, Iranian leaders continue to shape Iraq’s future through bloodshed, forcing us, as Iraqis, to pay the price for their conflicts and influence. The alternative exists, and the tools are available to the United States. All that is missing is the political decision. So, is it time to make that decision and help Iraq reclaim its sovereignty and its own political decision-making, rather than simply watching what is happening? Ambassador Tom Barrack Department of State Secretary Marco Rubio
1:18

#رصد نتائج الزيارة الإيرانية تظهر يوماً بعد يوم، وهذا يؤكد ما نردده دائماً: أن النظام السياسي الحالي في بغداد لا يمتلك زمام الأمور، وأن قرار نزع سلاح الفصائل وحصره بيد الدولة لا يُتخذ في بغداد، بل يُبحث ويُحسم في إيران. والأهم من ذلك أن هذا التصريح صدر عن المتحدث الرسمي باسم الحكومة العراقية، وليس عن صحفي أو إعلامي، ما يجعله تعبيرًا عن موقف النظام السياسي في بغداد، وليس مجرد رأي إعلامي. ولا يمكن إخراج العراق من دائرة الهيمنة السياسية ما لم توضع خطة حقيقية لإعادة تشكيل النظام السياسي، بعد أن أصبحت إيران مهيمنة على مفاصل أساسية فيه، وتمتلك نفوذاً واسعاً على قراراته. The consequences of the Iranian visit are becoming increasingly evident day by day, confirming what we have consistently argued: that the current political system in Baghdad does not have control over its own affairs, and that the decision to disarm the armed factions and place their weapons under state control is not being made in Baghdad, but is instead being discussed and decided in Iran. More importantly, this statement was made by the official spokesperson of the Iraqi government, not by a journalist or media commentator, which makes it an expression of the position of the political system in Baghdad rather than merely a media opinion. Iraq cannot be freed from the grip of political influence unless a genuine plan is developed to restructure the political system, after Iran has established influence over key institutions and become capable of controlling a significant part of its political decisions. So, is it time to replace Iran’s political arm in Baghdad? The armed wing will not change as long as political leaders loyal to Iran continue to control the key levers of political decision-making in Iraq. While the United States, along with Syria and other concerned parties, continues to watch the Iraqi scene without decisive action, Iranian leaders continue to shape Iraq’s future through bloodshed, forcing us, as Iraqis, to pay the price for their conflicts and influence. The alternative exists, and the tools are available to the United States. All that is missing is the political decision. So, is it time to make that decision and help Iraq reclaim its sovereignty and its own political decision-making, rather than simply watching what is happening? Ambassador Tom Barrack Department of State Secretary Marco Rubio

أحمد العلواني

24,060 Aufrufe • vor 9 Tagen

🔥 لماذا هذا الإرهابي ما زال حرًّا طليقًا؟ من هو “أبو الميش السراوي” الذي ظهر في مقاطع مصوّرة يتباهى بنفسه، يهدد، ويعترف علنًا بالقتل وكأنه يستعرض بطولة؟ 🔴 بعد أنباء غير مؤكدة عن توقيفه في حلب للتحقيق معه بتهم خطيرة، بينها “تهديد السلم الأهلي وإثارة النزاعات الطائفية”، لم يصدر أي توضيح رسمي، ولم نرَ أي إجراء حقيقي. ❓لماذا تم تكليف “لجنة تحقيق الساحل” بالملف، ثم نام تقريرها في الأدراج وكأن شيئًا لم يكن؟ ❓أين المجرمون الحقيقيون الذين أراقوا الدماء؟ ❓ولماذا يُترك أمثال السراوي طلقاء بينما يُلاحق الأبرياء بلا ذنب؟ هذه ليست قضية فردية… بل وصمة عار تكشف حجم التواطؤ مع من يعبثون بالسلم الأهلي ويزرعون الفتنة الطائفية بين الناس. إذا لم يُحاسَب السراوي وأمثاله، فأي عدالة بقيت في سوريا؟ 🔥 Why is this terrorist still free? Who is “Abu Al-Mish Sarawi”, the man seen in videos bragging, threatening, and openly admitting to killings as if they were heroic acts? 🔴 Reports claimed he was briefly detained in Aleppo for charges including “undermining civil peace and inciting sectarian strife”, yet no official statement was issued and no real action was taken. ❓Why was the “Coastal Investigation Committee” assigned his case, only for its report to disappear in silence? ❓Where are the real criminals who spilled innocent blood? ❓Why are people like Sarawi roaming free while innocents are relentlessly targeted? This is not just an individual case… it is a stain of shame that exposes the collusion with those fueling sectarian division. If Sarawi and his likes are never held accountable, what justice remains in Syria? #سوريا #الساحل #ابو_الميش_السراوي #جرائم #Syria #Sarawi #Coast #Crimes #WarCrimes #Justice
1:16

🔥 لماذا هذا الإرهابي ما زال حرًّا طليقًا؟ من هو “أبو الميش السراوي” الذي ظهر في مقاطع مصوّرة يتباهى بنفسه، يهدد، ويعترف علنًا بالقتل وكأنه يستعرض بطولة؟ 🔴 بعد أنباء غير مؤكدة عن توقيفه في حلب للتحقيق معه بتهم خطيرة، بينها “تهديد السلم الأهلي وإثارة النزاعات الطائفية”، لم يصدر أي توضيح رسمي، ولم نرَ أي إجراء حقيقي. ❓لماذا تم تكليف “لجنة تحقيق الساحل” بالملف، ثم نام تقريرها في الأدراج وكأن شيئًا لم يكن؟ ❓أين المجرمون الحقيقيون الذين أراقوا الدماء؟ ❓ولماذا يُترك أمثال السراوي طلقاء بينما يُلاحق الأبرياء بلا ذنب؟ هذه ليست قضية فردية… بل وصمة عار تكشف حجم التواطؤ مع من يعبثون بالسلم الأهلي ويزرعون الفتنة الطائفية بين الناس. إذا لم يُحاسَب السراوي وأمثاله، فأي عدالة بقيت في سوريا؟ 🔥 Why is this terrorist still free? Who is “Abu Al-Mish Sarawi”, the man seen in videos bragging, threatening, and openly admitting to killings as if they were heroic acts? 🔴 Reports claimed he was briefly detained in Aleppo for charges including “undermining civil peace and inciting sectarian strife”, yet no official statement was issued and no real action was taken. ❓Why was the “Coastal Investigation Committee” assigned his case, only for its report to disappear in silence? ❓Where are the real criminals who spilled innocent blood? ❓Why are people like Sarawi roaming free while innocents are relentlessly targeted? This is not just an individual case… it is a stain of shame that exposes the collusion with those fueling sectarian division. If Sarawi and his likes are never held accountable, what justice remains in Syria? #سوريا #الساحل #ابو_الميش_السراوي #جرائم #Syria #Sarawi #Coast #Crimes #WarCrimes #Justice

NEMESIS – نيميسس

22,964 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

"Israeli leadership must realise that there is no military solution to its security concerns." — King Abdullah of Jordan in Cairo One minute into his speech at the Cairo Summit, King Abdullah switched from Arabic "for our friends in Europe and around the world, my message is for them." Full video of his remarks and transcript below: Peace, God’s mercy and blessings be upon you. This is how Muslims and Arabs greet others: with a wish for the other to be blessed with peace and the mercy of God. Our religion came with a message of peace. The Pact of Omar, issued at the gates of Jerusalem almost 15 centuries ago, more than a thousand years before the Geneva Conventions, ordered Muslim soldiers not to kill a child, a woman or an old person, not to destroy a tree, not to harm a priest, not to destroy a church. Those are the rules of engagement that Muslims must accept and abide by, as should all those who believe in our common humanity. All civilian lives matter! I am outraged and grieved by those acts of violence waged against innocent civilians in Gaza, in the West Bank, and Israel. The relentless bombing campaign underway in Gaza as we speak is cruel and unconscionable—on every level. It is collective punishment of a besieged and helpless people. It is a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law. It is a war crime. Yet, the deeper the crisis cuts of cruelty, the less the world seems to care. Anywhere else, attacking civilian infrastructure and deliberately starving an entire population of food, water, electricity, and basic necessities would be condemned. Accountability would be enforced, immediately, unequivocally. And it has been done before—recently, in another conflict. But not in Gaza. It’s been two weeks since Israel put in place the complete siege of the Gaza Strip. And still, for the most part, global silence. Yet the message the Arab world is hearing is loud and clear: Palestinian lives matter less than Israeli ones. Our lives matter less than other lives. The application of international law is optional. And human rights have boundaries—they stop at borders, they stop at races, and they stop at religions. That is a very, very dangerous message, as the consequences of continued international apathy and inaction will be catastrophic—on us all. We cannot let raw emotions dictate the moment; our priorities today are clear and urgent: First: An immediate end to the war on Gaza, the protection of civilians, and the adoption of a unified position that indiscriminately condemns the targeting of all civilians, in line with our shared values and international law, which loses all value if it is implemented selectively. Second: The sustained and uninterrupted delivery of humanitarian aid, fuel, food, and medicines to the Gaza Strip. Third: The unequivocal rejection of the forced displacement or internal displacement of the Palestinians. This is a war crime according to international law, and a red line for all of us. This conflict, my friends, did not start two weeks ago, and it will not stop if we continue down this blood-soaked path. We know all too well that it will only lead to more of the same—a zero-sum game of death and destruction, of hatred and hopelessness played on repeat. Today, Israel is literally starving civilians in Gaza, but for decades, Palestinians have been starved of hope, of freedom, and a future. Because when the bombs stop falling, Israel is never held accountable, the injustices of occupation continue and the world walks away, until the next round of violence. The bloodshed we are witnessing today is the price of that, of failing to make tangible progress towards a political horizon that brings peace for Palestinians and Israelis alike. Israeli leadership must realise that there is no military solution to its security concerns, that it cannot continue to sideline the five million Palestinians living under its occupation, denied of their legitimate rights, and that Palestinians lives are no less valuable than Israeli lives. The Israeli leadership must realise, once and for all, that a state can never thrive if it is built on the foundations of injustice. Over the past 15 years, we have seen how the dreams of a two-state solution and the hopes of an entire generation have turned into despair. This has been the policy of hardline Israeli leadership—to focus solely on security over peace and create new illegal realities on the ground that render an autonomous Palestinian state unviable. In the process, it has empowered extremists on both sides. But we must not—we cannot—write off this conflict as too far gone, for the sake of both the Palestinians and the Israelis. Our collective and unified message to the Israeli people should be: We want a future of peace and security for you and for the Palestinians, where your children and Palestinian children should no longer live in fear. It is our duty as the international community to do whatever it takes to restart a meaningful political process that can take us to a just and sustainable peace on the basis of the two-state solution. The only path to a safe and secure future for the people of the Middle East and the entire world—for the Jewish people, for Christians, for Muslims alike—starts with the belief that every human life is of equal value and it ends with two states, Palestine and Israel, sharing land and peace from the river to the sea. The time to act is now.
8:01

"Israeli leadership must realise that there is no military solution to its security concerns." — King Abdullah of Jordan in Cairo One minute into his speech at the Cairo Summit, King Abdullah switched from Arabic "for our friends in Europe and around the world, my message is for them." Full video of his remarks and transcript below: Peace, God’s mercy and blessings be upon you. This is how Muslims and Arabs greet others: with a wish for the other to be blessed with peace and the mercy of God. Our religion came with a message of peace. The Pact of Omar, issued at the gates of Jerusalem almost 15 centuries ago, more than a thousand years before the Geneva Conventions, ordered Muslim soldiers not to kill a child, a woman or an old person, not to destroy a tree, not to harm a priest, not to destroy a church. Those are the rules of engagement that Muslims must accept and abide by, as should all those who believe in our common humanity. All civilian lives matter! I am outraged and grieved by those acts of violence waged against innocent civilians in Gaza, in the West Bank, and Israel. The relentless bombing campaign underway in Gaza as we speak is cruel and unconscionable—on every level. It is collective punishment of a besieged and helpless people. It is a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law. It is a war crime. Yet, the deeper the crisis cuts of cruelty, the less the world seems to care. Anywhere else, attacking civilian infrastructure and deliberately starving an entire population of food, water, electricity, and basic necessities would be condemned. Accountability would be enforced, immediately, unequivocally. And it has been done before—recently, in another conflict. But not in Gaza. It’s been two weeks since Israel put in place the complete siege of the Gaza Strip. And still, for the most part, global silence. Yet the message the Arab world is hearing is loud and clear: Palestinian lives matter less than Israeli ones. Our lives matter less than other lives. The application of international law is optional. And human rights have boundaries—they stop at borders, they stop at races, and they stop at religions. That is a very, very dangerous message, as the consequences of continued international apathy and inaction will be catastrophic—on us all. We cannot let raw emotions dictate the moment; our priorities today are clear and urgent: First: An immediate end to the war on Gaza, the protection of civilians, and the adoption of a unified position that indiscriminately condemns the targeting of all civilians, in line with our shared values and international law, which loses all value if it is implemented selectively. Second: The sustained and uninterrupted delivery of humanitarian aid, fuel, food, and medicines to the Gaza Strip. Third: The unequivocal rejection of the forced displacement or internal displacement of the Palestinians. This is a war crime according to international law, and a red line for all of us. This conflict, my friends, did not start two weeks ago, and it will not stop if we continue down this blood-soaked path. We know all too well that it will only lead to more of the same—a zero-sum game of death and destruction, of hatred and hopelessness played on repeat. Today, Israel is literally starving civilians in Gaza, but for decades, Palestinians have been starved of hope, of freedom, and a future. Because when the bombs stop falling, Israel is never held accountable, the injustices of occupation continue and the world walks away, until the next round of violence. The bloodshed we are witnessing today is the price of that, of failing to make tangible progress towards a political horizon that brings peace for Palestinians and Israelis alike. Israeli leadership must realise that there is no military solution to its security concerns, that it cannot continue to sideline the five million Palestinians living under its occupation, denied of their legitimate rights, and that Palestinians lives are no less valuable than Israeli lives. The Israeli leadership must realise, once and for all, that a state can never thrive if it is built on the foundations of injustice. Over the past 15 years, we have seen how the dreams of a two-state solution and the hopes of an entire generation have turned into despair. This has been the policy of hardline Israeli leadership—to focus solely on security over peace and create new illegal realities on the ground that render an autonomous Palestinian state unviable. In the process, it has empowered extremists on both sides. But we must not—we cannot—write off this conflict as too far gone, for the sake of both the Palestinians and the Israelis. Our collective and unified message to the Israeli people should be: We want a future of peace and security for you and for the Palestinians, where your children and Palestinian children should no longer live in fear. It is our duty as the international community to do whatever it takes to restart a meaningful political process that can take us to a just and sustainable peace on the basis of the two-state solution. The only path to a safe and secure future for the people of the Middle East and the entire world—for the Jewish people, for Christians, for Muslims alike—starts with the belief that every human life is of equal value and it ends with two states, Palestine and Israel, sharing land and peace from the river to the sea. The time to act is now.

Yashar Ali 🐘

6,058,489 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

🔥 فضيحة من العيار الثقيل‼️ المستشار السابق لأسامة بن لادن والحالي للجولاني أحمد موفق زيدان ظهر عبر قناة العربية مبرراً مجازر الساحل السوري بقوله: “معقول بعد ضرب 82 ألف برميل متفجر و217 ضربة كيماوية أن تدخل الفصائل المسلحة للساحل بعد التحرير دون قيامها بمذابح ومجازر؟!” 🔴 هذا ليس تحليلاً سياسياً بل تبرير علني للإبادة الجماعية، واعتراف صريح بأن المجازر كانت قراراً منظماً وليست مجرد تجاوزات. 📌 المعنى القانوني: •تبرير المجازر = تحريض مباشر على جرائم حرب. •الحديث يؤكد أن ما جرى في الساحل السوري تم بأوامر ممنهجة. •المسؤولية لا تقع فقط على الفصائل المسلحة، بل أيضاً على كل من غطى أو برّر هذه الجرائم. 📢 إن هذا الفيديو وثيقة دامغة يجب أن تُعتمد أمام: •الأمم المتحدة UN •مجلس حقوق الإنسان UN_HRC •مجلس الأمن UNSC •المحكمة الجنائية الدولية ICC •المنظمات الحقوقية (HRW، Amnesty International) 🔴 إذا لم يتحرك المجتمع الدولي، فإن الصمت = شراكة في الجريمة. دماء العلويين الطائفة الكريمة في الساحل السوري ستبقى شاهداً على خذلان العدالة وتقاعس الضمير العالمي. 🔥 A scandal of the highest order Former advisor to Osama bin Laden and current advisor to Jolani, Ahmad Mowafaq Zaidan, appeared on Al Arabiya justifying the massacres of the Syrian coast, stating: “After 82,000 barrel bombs and 217 chemical strikes, is it reasonable for armed factions to enter the coast after ‘liberation’ without committing massacres?!” 🔴 This is not political analysis but an explicit justification of genocide — an admission that the massacres were systematically ordered, not random excesses. 📌 Legal implications: •Justifying massacres = direct incitement to war crimes. •Confirms that coastal massacres were carried out under organized orders. •Responsibility extends to the factions involved and to anyone who covered or justified these atrocities. 📢 This video is a damning piece of evidence that must be presented to: •United Nations (UN) •Human Rights Council (UN_HRC) •UN Security Council (UNSC) •International Criminal Court (ICC) •Human rights organizations (HRW, Amnesty International) 🔴 If the world fails to act, silence = complicity. The blood of the Alawite noble sect in the Syrian coast will remain a testimony to global justice betrayed. #سوريا #الساحل_السوري #مجازر_الساحل #ابادة_علوية #الابادة_الجماعية_العلوية_2025 #الهولوكوست_العلوي #حماية_الأقليات #محاكمة_الجولاني_الارهابي_الدولي #StopAlawiteGenocide #SyriaMassacres #WarCrimes #CrimesAgainstHumanity #UN #UN_HRC #UNSC #ICC #HRW #AmnestyInternational #EU #StateDept #francediplo_EN #FCDOGovUK
1:06

Sensitive content

🔥 فضيحة من العيار الثقيل‼️ المستشار السابق لأسامة بن لادن والحالي للجولاني أحمد موفق زيدان ظهر عبر قناة العربية مبرراً مجازر الساحل السوري بقوله: “معقول بعد ضرب 82 ألف برميل متفجر و217 ضربة كيماوية أن تدخل الفصائل المسلحة للساحل بعد التحرير دون قيامها بمذابح ومجازر؟!” 🔴 هذا ليس تحليلاً سياسياً بل تبرير علني للإبادة الجماعية، واعتراف صريح بأن المجازر كانت قراراً منظماً وليست مجرد تجاوزات. 📌 المعنى القانوني: •تبرير المجازر = تحريض مباشر على جرائم حرب. •الحديث يؤكد أن ما جرى في الساحل السوري تم بأوامر ممنهجة. •المسؤولية لا تقع فقط على الفصائل المسلحة، بل أيضاً على كل من غطى أو برّر هذه الجرائم. 📢 إن هذا الفيديو وثيقة دامغة يجب أن تُعتمد أمام: •الأمم المتحدة UN •مجلس حقوق الإنسان UN_HRC •مجلس الأمن UNSC •المحكمة الجنائية الدولية ICC •المنظمات الحقوقية (HRW، Amnesty International) 🔴 إذا لم يتحرك المجتمع الدولي، فإن الصمت = شراكة في الجريمة. دماء العلويين الطائفة الكريمة في الساحل السوري ستبقى شاهداً على خذلان العدالة وتقاعس الضمير العالمي. 🔥 A scandal of the highest order Former advisor to Osama bin Laden and current advisor to Jolani, Ahmad Mowafaq Zaidan, appeared on Al Arabiya justifying the massacres of the Syrian coast, stating: “After 82,000 barrel bombs and 217 chemical strikes, is it reasonable for armed factions to enter the coast after ‘liberation’ without committing massacres?!” 🔴 This is not political analysis but an explicit justification of genocide — an admission that the massacres were systematically ordered, not random excesses. 📌 Legal implications: •Justifying massacres = direct incitement to war crimes. •Confirms that coastal massacres were carried out under organized orders. •Responsibility extends to the factions involved and to anyone who covered or justified these atrocities. 📢 This video is a damning piece of evidence that must be presented to: •United Nations (UN) •Human Rights Council (UN_HRC) •UN Security Council (UNSC) •International Criminal Court (ICC) •Human rights organizations (HRW, Amnesty International) 🔴 If the world fails to act, silence = complicity. The blood of the Alawite noble sect in the Syrian coast will remain a testimony to global justice betrayed. #سوريا #الساحل_السوري #مجازر_الساحل #ابادة_علوية #الابادة_الجماعية_العلوية_2025 #الهولوكوست_العلوي #حماية_الأقليات #محاكمة_الجولاني_الارهابي_الدولي #StopAlawiteGenocide #SyriaMassacres #WarCrimes #CrimesAgainstHumanity #UN #UN_HRC #UNSC #ICC #HRW #AmnestyInternational #EU #StateDept #francediplo_EN #FCDOGovUK

Syrian Witness شاهد سوري

197,883 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

🚨Why Russia launched “Special Military Operation” I publicly announced the reasons for and the main goal of Russia’s actions. It is to help our people in Donbass, who have been subjected to real genocide for nearly eight years in the most barbarous ways, that is, through blockade, large-scale punitive operations, terrorist attacks and constant artillery raids. Their only guilt was that they demanded basic human rights: to live according to their forefathers’ laws and traditions, to speak their native language, and to bring up their children as they want. During these years, the Kiev authorities have ignored and sabotaged the implementation of the Minsk Package of Measures for a peaceful settlement of the crisis and ultimately late last year openly refused to implement it. They also started to implement plans to join NATO. Moreover, the Kiev authorities also announced their intention to have nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles. This was a real threat. With foreign technical support, the pro-Nazi Kiev regime would have obtained weapons of mass destruction in the foreseeable future and, of course, would have targeted them against Russia. There was a network of dozens of laboratories in Ukraine, where military biological programmes were conducted under the guidance and with the financial support of the Pentagon, including experiments with coronavirus strains, anthrax, cholera, African swine fever and other deadly diseases. Frantic attempts are being made to conceal traces of these secret programmes. However, we have grounds to assume that components of biological weapons were being created in direct proximity to Russia on the territory of Ukraine. Our numerous warnings that such developments posed a direct threat to the security of Russia were rejected with open and cynical arrogance by Ukraine and its US and NATO patrons. In other words, all our diplomatic efforts were fully in vain. We have been left with no peaceful alternative to settle the problems that developed through no fault of ours. In this situation, we were forced to begin this special military operation. The movement of Russian forces against Kiev and other Ukrainian cities is not connected with a desire to occupy that country. This is not our goal, as I pointed out openly in my statement on February 24. As for the combat tactics drafted by the Defence Ministry of Russia and the General Staff, this has fully justified itself. Our fellows – soldiers and officers – are displaying courage and heroism and are doing all they can to avoid civilian losses in Ukrainian cities. This is what I would like to say for the first time: at the very start of the operation in Donbass, the Kiev authorities were offered opportunities to avoid hostilities, via different channels, to simply withdraw their troops from Donbass as an alternative to bloodshed. They did not want to do this. Well, this was their decision; now they will understand what is happening in reality, on the ground. The operation is being carried out successfully, in strict conformity with the approved plan. I must note that, encouraged by the United States and other Western countries, Ukraine was purposefully preparing for a scenario of force, a massacre and an ethnic cleansing in Donbass. A massive onslaught on Donbass and later Crimea was just a matter of time. However, our Armed Forces have shattered these plans. Kiev was not just preparing for war, for aggression against Russia – it was conducting it. There were endless attempts to stage acts of subversion and organise a terrorist underground in Crimea. Hostilities in Donbass and the shelling of peaceful residential areas have continued all these years. Almost 14,000 civilians, including children have been killed over this time. As you know, there was a missile strike at the centre of Donetsk on March 14. This was an overt bloody act of terror that took over 20 lives. Shelling has been ongoing during the past few days. They are striking randomly at squares with the fervor of fanatics and the exasperation of the doomed. They are acting like the Nazis did when they tried to drag as many innocent victims as they could to their graves. But what is shocking in its extreme cynicism is not just Kiev’s blatant lies and statements that Russia allegedly launched this missile at Donetsk (they have gone as far as this), but the attitude of the so-called civilised world. The European and American press did not even notice this tragedy in Donetsk, as if nothing happened. This is how they have been hypocritically looking the other way over the past eight years as mothers buried their children in Donbass, as elderly people were killed. This is simply moral degradation, complete de-humanisation. It was no longer possible to tolerate this outrageous attitude towards the people of Donbass. To put an end to this genocide, Russia recognized the people’s republics of Donbass and signed treaties of friendship and mutual aid with them. Based on these treaties, the republics appealed to Russia for military aid in rebuffing the aggression. We rendered this aid because we simply could not do otherwise. We had no right to act otherwise. I would like to emphasise this point and draw your attention to it: if our troops had acted only within the people's republics and helped them liberate their territory, it would not have been a final solution, it would not have led to peace and would not have ultimately removed the threat – to our country, this time to Russia. On the contrary, a new frontline would have been extended around Donbass and its borders, and shelling and provocations would have continued. In other words, this armed conflict would have continued indefinitely. It would have been fuelled by the revanchist hysteria of the Kiev regime, as NATO deployed its military infrastructure faster and more aggressively. In this case, we would have been faced with the fact that the attack, the offensive weapons of the alliance were already at our borders. I will repeat – we had no alternative for self-defence, for ensuring Russia's security, to this special military operation. We will reach the goals we set. We will certainly ensure the security of Russia and our people and will never allow Ukraine to be a bridgehead for aggressive actions against our country.
8:03

🚨Why Russia launched “Special Military Operation” I publicly announced the reasons for and the main goal of Russia’s actions. It is to help our people in Donbass, who have been subjected to real genocide for nearly eight years in the most barbarous ways, that is, through blockade, large-scale punitive operations, terrorist attacks and constant artillery raids. Their only guilt was that they demanded basic human rights: to live according to their forefathers’ laws and traditions, to speak their native language, and to bring up their children as they want. During these years, the Kiev authorities have ignored and sabotaged the implementation of the Minsk Package of Measures for a peaceful settlement of the crisis and ultimately late last year openly refused to implement it. They also started to implement plans to join NATO. Moreover, the Kiev authorities also announced their intention to have nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles. This was a real threat. With foreign technical support, the pro-Nazi Kiev regime would have obtained weapons of mass destruction in the foreseeable future and, of course, would have targeted them against Russia. There was a network of dozens of laboratories in Ukraine, where military biological programmes were conducted under the guidance and with the financial support of the Pentagon, including experiments with coronavirus strains, anthrax, cholera, African swine fever and other deadly diseases. Frantic attempts are being made to conceal traces of these secret programmes. However, we have grounds to assume that components of biological weapons were being created in direct proximity to Russia on the territory of Ukraine. Our numerous warnings that such developments posed a direct threat to the security of Russia were rejected with open and cynical arrogance by Ukraine and its US and NATO patrons. In other words, all our diplomatic efforts were fully in vain. We have been left with no peaceful alternative to settle the problems that developed through no fault of ours. In this situation, we were forced to begin this special military operation. The movement of Russian forces against Kiev and other Ukrainian cities is not connected with a desire to occupy that country. This is not our goal, as I pointed out openly in my statement on February 24. As for the combat tactics drafted by the Defence Ministry of Russia and the General Staff, this has fully justified itself. Our fellows – soldiers and officers – are displaying courage and heroism and are doing all they can to avoid civilian losses in Ukrainian cities. This is what I would like to say for the first time: at the very start of the operation in Donbass, the Kiev authorities were offered opportunities to avoid hostilities, via different channels, to simply withdraw their troops from Donbass as an alternative to bloodshed. They did not want to do this. Well, this was their decision; now they will understand what is happening in reality, on the ground. The operation is being carried out successfully, in strict conformity with the approved plan. I must note that, encouraged by the United States and other Western countries, Ukraine was purposefully preparing for a scenario of force, a massacre and an ethnic cleansing in Donbass. A massive onslaught on Donbass and later Crimea was just a matter of time. However, our Armed Forces have shattered these plans. Kiev was not just preparing for war, for aggression against Russia – it was conducting it. There were endless attempts to stage acts of subversion and organise a terrorist underground in Crimea. Hostilities in Donbass and the shelling of peaceful residential areas have continued all these years. Almost 14,000 civilians, including children have been killed over this time. As you know, there was a missile strike at the centre of Donetsk on March 14. This was an overt bloody act of terror that took over 20 lives. Shelling has been ongoing during the past few days. They are striking randomly at squares with the fervor of fanatics and the exasperation of the doomed. They are acting like the Nazis did when they tried to drag as many innocent victims as they could to their graves. But what is shocking in its extreme cynicism is not just Kiev’s blatant lies and statements that Russia allegedly launched this missile at Donetsk (they have gone as far as this), but the attitude of the so-called civilised world. The European and American press did not even notice this tragedy in Donetsk, as if nothing happened. This is how they have been hypocritically looking the other way over the past eight years as mothers buried their children in Donbass, as elderly people were killed. This is simply moral degradation, complete de-humanisation. It was no longer possible to tolerate this outrageous attitude towards the people of Donbass. To put an end to this genocide, Russia recognized the people’s republics of Donbass and signed treaties of friendship and mutual aid with them. Based on these treaties, the republics appealed to Russia for military aid in rebuffing the aggression. We rendered this aid because we simply could not do otherwise. We had no right to act otherwise. I would like to emphasise this point and draw your attention to it: if our troops had acted only within the people's republics and helped them liberate their territory, it would not have been a final solution, it would not have led to peace and would not have ultimately removed the threat – to our country, this time to Russia. On the contrary, a new frontline would have been extended around Donbass and its borders, and shelling and provocations would have continued. In other words, this armed conflict would have continued indefinitely. It would have been fuelled by the revanchist hysteria of the Kiev regime, as NATO deployed its military infrastructure faster and more aggressively. In this case, we would have been faced with the fact that the attack, the offensive weapons of the alliance were already at our borders. I will repeat – we had no alternative for self-defence, for ensuring Russia's security, to this special military operation. We will reach the goals we set. We will certainly ensure the security of Russia and our people and will never allow Ukraine to be a bridgehead for aggressive actions against our country.

Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil

21,050 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Why Russia launched “Special Military Operation” I publicly announced the reasons for and the main goal of Russia’s actions. It is to help our people in Donbass, who have been subjected to real genocide for nearly eight years in the most barbarous ways, that is, through blockade, large-scale punitive operations, terrorist attacks and constant artillery raids. Their only guilt was that they demanded basic human rights: to live according to their forefathers’ laws and traditions, to speak their native language, and to bring up their children as they want. During these years, the Kiev authorities have ignored and sabotaged the implementation of the Minsk Package of Measures for a peaceful settlement of the crisis and ultimately late last year openly refused to implement it. They also started to implement plans to join NATO. Moreover, the Kiev authorities also announced their intention to have nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles. This was a real threat. With foreign technical support, the pro-Nazi Kiev regime would have obtained weapons of mass destruction in the foreseeable future and, of course, would have targeted them against Russia. There was a network of dozens of laboratories in Ukraine, where military biological programmes were conducted under the guidance and with the financial support of the Pentagon, including experiments with coronavirus strains, anthrax, cholera, African swine fever and other deadly diseases. Frantic attempts are being made to conceal traces of these secret programmes. However, we have grounds to assume that components of biological weapons were being created in direct proximity to Russia on the territory of Ukraine. Our numerous warnings that such developments posed a direct threat to the security of Russia were rejected with open and cynical arrogance by Ukraine and its US and NATO patrons. In other words, all our diplomatic efforts were fully in vain. We have been left with no peaceful alternative to settle the problems that developed through no fault of ours. In this situation, we were forced to begin this special military operation. The movement of Russian forces against Kiev and other Ukrainian cities is not connected with a desire to occupy that country. This is not our goal, as I pointed out openly in my statement on February 24. As for the combat tactics drafted by the Defence Ministry of Russia and the General Staff, this has fully justified itself. Our fellows – soldiers and officers – are displaying courage and heroism and are doing all they can to avoid civilian losses in Ukrainian cities. This is what I would like to say for the first time: at the very start of the operation in Donbass, the Kiev authorities were offered opportunities to avoid hostilities, via different channels, to simply withdraw their troops from Donbass as an alternative to bloodshed. They did not want to do this. Well, this was their decision; now they will understand what is happening in reality, on the ground. The operation is being carried out successfully, in strict conformity with the approved plan. I must note that, encouraged by the United States and other Western countries, Ukraine was purposefully preparing for a scenario of force, a massacre and an ethnic cleansing in Donbass. A massive onslaught on Donbass and later Crimea was just a matter of time. However, our Armed Forces have shattered these plans. Kiev was not just preparing for war, for aggression against Russia – it was conducting it. There were endless attempts to stage acts of subversion and organise a terrorist underground in Crimea. Hostilities in Donbass and the shelling of peaceful residential areas have continued all these years. Almost 14,000 civilians, including children have been killed over this time. As you know, there was a missile strike at the centre of Donetsk on March 14. This was an overt bloody act of terror that took over 20 lives. Shelling has been ongoing during the past few days. They are striking randomly at squares with the fervor of fanatics and the exasperation of the doomed. They are acting like the Nazis did when they tried to drag as many innocent victims as they could to their graves. But what is shocking in its extreme cynicism is not just Kiev’s blatant lies and statements that Russia allegedly launched this missile at Donetsk (they have gone as far as this), but the attitude of the so-called civilised world. The European and American press did not even notice this tragedy in Donetsk, as if nothing happened. This is how they have been hypocritically looking the other way over the past eight years as mothers buried their children in Donbass, as elderly people were killed. This is simply moral degradation, complete de-humanisation. It was no longer possible to tolerate this outrageous attitude towards the people of Donbass. To put an end to this genocide, Russia recognized the people’s republics of Donbass and signed treaties of friendship and mutual aid with them. Based on these treaties, the republics appealed to Russia for military aid in rebuffing the aggression. We rendered this aid because we simply could not do otherwise. We had no right to act otherwise. I would like to emphasise this point and draw your attention to it: if our troops had acted only within the people's republics and helped them liberate their territory, it would not have been a final solution, it would not have led to peace and would not have ultimately removed the threat – to our country, this time to Russia. On the contrary, a new frontline would have been extended around Donbass and its borders, and shelling and provocations would have continued. In other words, this armed conflict would have continued indefinitely. It would have been fuelled by the revanchist hysteria of the Kiev regime, as NATO deployed its military infrastructure faster and more aggressively. In this case, we would have been faced with the fact that the attack, the offensive weapons of the alliance were already at our borders. I will repeat – we had no alternative for self-defence, for ensuring Russia's security, to this special military operation. We will reach the goals we set. We will certainly ensure the security of Russia and our people and will never allow Ukraine to be a bridgehead for aggressive actions against our country.
8:03

Why Russia launched “Special Military Operation” I publicly announced the reasons for and the main goal of Russia’s actions. It is to help our people in Donbass, who have been subjected to real genocide for nearly eight years in the most barbarous ways, that is, through blockade, large-scale punitive operations, terrorist attacks and constant artillery raids. Their only guilt was that they demanded basic human rights: to live according to their forefathers’ laws and traditions, to speak their native language, and to bring up their children as they want. During these years, the Kiev authorities have ignored and sabotaged the implementation of the Minsk Package of Measures for a peaceful settlement of the crisis and ultimately late last year openly refused to implement it. They also started to implement plans to join NATO. Moreover, the Kiev authorities also announced their intention to have nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles. This was a real threat. With foreign technical support, the pro-Nazi Kiev regime would have obtained weapons of mass destruction in the foreseeable future and, of course, would have targeted them against Russia. There was a network of dozens of laboratories in Ukraine, where military biological programmes were conducted under the guidance and with the financial support of the Pentagon, including experiments with coronavirus strains, anthrax, cholera, African swine fever and other deadly diseases. Frantic attempts are being made to conceal traces of these secret programmes. However, we have grounds to assume that components of biological weapons were being created in direct proximity to Russia on the territory of Ukraine. Our numerous warnings that such developments posed a direct threat to the security of Russia were rejected with open and cynical arrogance by Ukraine and its US and NATO patrons. In other words, all our diplomatic efforts were fully in vain. We have been left with no peaceful alternative to settle the problems that developed through no fault of ours. In this situation, we were forced to begin this special military operation. The movement of Russian forces against Kiev and other Ukrainian cities is not connected with a desire to occupy that country. This is not our goal, as I pointed out openly in my statement on February 24. As for the combat tactics drafted by the Defence Ministry of Russia and the General Staff, this has fully justified itself. Our fellows – soldiers and officers – are displaying courage and heroism and are doing all they can to avoid civilian losses in Ukrainian cities. This is what I would like to say for the first time: at the very start of the operation in Donbass, the Kiev authorities were offered opportunities to avoid hostilities, via different channels, to simply withdraw their troops from Donbass as an alternative to bloodshed. They did not want to do this. Well, this was their decision; now they will understand what is happening in reality, on the ground. The operation is being carried out successfully, in strict conformity with the approved plan. I must note that, encouraged by the United States and other Western countries, Ukraine was purposefully preparing for a scenario of force, a massacre and an ethnic cleansing in Donbass. A massive onslaught on Donbass and later Crimea was just a matter of time. However, our Armed Forces have shattered these plans. Kiev was not just preparing for war, for aggression against Russia – it was conducting it. There were endless attempts to stage acts of subversion and organise a terrorist underground in Crimea. Hostilities in Donbass and the shelling of peaceful residential areas have continued all these years. Almost 14,000 civilians, including children have been killed over this time. As you know, there was a missile strike at the centre of Donetsk on March 14. This was an overt bloody act of terror that took over 20 lives. Shelling has been ongoing during the past few days. They are striking randomly at squares with the fervor of fanatics and the exasperation of the doomed. They are acting like the Nazis did when they tried to drag as many innocent victims as they could to their graves. But what is shocking in its extreme cynicism is not just Kiev’s blatant lies and statements that Russia allegedly launched this missile at Donetsk (they have gone as far as this), but the attitude of the so-called civilised world. The European and American press did not even notice this tragedy in Donetsk, as if nothing happened. This is how they have been hypocritically looking the other way over the past eight years as mothers buried their children in Donbass, as elderly people were killed. This is simply moral degradation, complete de-humanisation. It was no longer possible to tolerate this outrageous attitude towards the people of Donbass. To put an end to this genocide, Russia recognized the people’s republics of Donbass and signed treaties of friendship and mutual aid with them. Based on these treaties, the republics appealed to Russia for military aid in rebuffing the aggression. We rendered this aid because we simply could not do otherwise. We had no right to act otherwise. I would like to emphasise this point and draw your attention to it: if our troops had acted only within the people's republics and helped them liberate their territory, it would not have been a final solution, it would not have led to peace and would not have ultimately removed the threat – to our country, this time to Russia. On the contrary, a new frontline would have been extended around Donbass and its borders, and shelling and provocations would have continued. In other words, this armed conflict would have continued indefinitely. It would have been fuelled by the revanchist hysteria of the Kiev regime, as NATO deployed its military infrastructure faster and more aggressively. In this case, we would have been faced with the fact that the attack, the offensive weapons of the alliance were already at our borders. I will repeat – we had no alternative for self-defence, for ensuring Russia's security, to this special military operation. We will reach the goals we set. We will certainly ensure the security of Russia and our people and will never allow Ukraine to be a bridgehead for aggressive actions against our country.

Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil

47,164 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten

كي لا ننسى… ولن ننسى هؤلاء الأطفال الذين سقطوا في مجازر الساحل السوري لم يكونوا مقاتلين، ولم يكونوا طرفًا في أي نزاع. لكنهم وُصِموا بعبارة “فلول النظام” وقُتلوا بدمٍ بارد فقط لأنهم ينتمون إلى بيئة مستهدفة، إلى طائفة كريمة أراد المتطرفون إبادتها باسم الثورة والدين زورًا. هؤلاء ليسوا أرقامًا ولا سطورًا من الماضي. هم شهداء السابع من آذار 2025، ذُبحوا على يد جماعات تكفيرية متطرفة، جاءت تحمل مشروعًا طائفيًا دمويًا لا يشبه سوريا ولا شعبها. واليوم، الجلاد نفسه — الجولاني ومرتزقته — يقدّم ما يسميه “تحقيقًا” لتبرئة نفسه وإعادة كتابة الجريمة برواية مفبركة. تحقيق بلا عدالة، ولا شرعية، ولا ضمير. نحن نرفض هذه المهزلة. ونطالب بـ تحقيق دولي عاجل، مستقل، شفاف، بعيدًا عن أي تدخل من الجناة أو سلطاتهم. دم الشهداء أمانة في أعناقنا، وقضيتهم ليست شأنًا محليًا، بل جريمة ضد الإنسانية، تُدين من قتل، ومن صمت، ومن تواطأ. Lest We Forget… and We Will Not Forget The children who fell in the Syrian coastal massacres were not fighters. They were not part of any conflict. But they were branded as “remnants of the regime” and executed in cold blood simply because they came from a targeted community, from a noble sect that extremist militants sought to erase — falsely in the name of revolution and religion. They are not numbers. They are not forgotten lines in history. They are the martyrs of March 7, 2025 — slain by sectarian jihadist groups who brought with them a bloody project of extermination that has nothing to do with Syria or its people. And today, the butcher himself — Jolani and his militias — offers what he calls an “investigation” to clear himself and rewrite the crime in a fabricated narrative. An investigation with no justice, no legitimacy, and no conscience. We categorically reject this farce. We demand an urgent, independent, and transparent international investigation, free from any interference by the perpetrators or their authorities. The blood of the martyrs is a sacred trust. Their case is not a local issue, but a crime against humanity — one that condemns not only the killers, but also those who were silent, those who justified, and those who colluded. #مجزرة_الساحل #مجازر_الساحل_السوري #الابادة_العلوية #الابادة_الجماعية_العلوية_2025 #الطائفة_العلوية_الكريمة #الجولاني_الارهابي #الامن_العام_الارهابي #لجنة_تقصي_الحقائق #جريمة_ضد_الانسانية #سوريا #توثيق #حماية_الأقليات #SyrianCoastalMassacres #StopAlawiteGenocide #CrimesAgainstHumanity #JolaniCrimes #HTSCrimes #JolaniIsAGlobalTerrorist #AlawitePersecution #SyriaMassacres #IndependentInvestigation #MinorityProtection #UN #UNSC #UN_HRC #EU #HRW #AmnestyInternational #InternationalCriminalCourt #SaveSyria #JusticeForSyria
1:53

كي لا ننسى… ولن ننسى هؤلاء الأطفال الذين سقطوا في مجازر الساحل السوري لم يكونوا مقاتلين، ولم يكونوا طرفًا في أي نزاع. لكنهم وُصِموا بعبارة “فلول النظام” وقُتلوا بدمٍ بارد فقط لأنهم ينتمون إلى بيئة مستهدفة، إلى طائفة كريمة أراد المتطرفون إبادتها باسم الثورة والدين زورًا. هؤلاء ليسوا أرقامًا ولا سطورًا من الماضي. هم شهداء السابع من آذار 2025، ذُبحوا على يد جماعات تكفيرية متطرفة، جاءت تحمل مشروعًا طائفيًا دمويًا لا يشبه سوريا ولا شعبها. واليوم، الجلاد نفسه — الجولاني ومرتزقته — يقدّم ما يسميه “تحقيقًا” لتبرئة نفسه وإعادة كتابة الجريمة برواية مفبركة. تحقيق بلا عدالة، ولا شرعية، ولا ضمير. نحن نرفض هذه المهزلة. ونطالب بـ تحقيق دولي عاجل، مستقل، شفاف، بعيدًا عن أي تدخل من الجناة أو سلطاتهم. دم الشهداء أمانة في أعناقنا، وقضيتهم ليست شأنًا محليًا، بل جريمة ضد الإنسانية، تُدين من قتل، ومن صمت، ومن تواطأ. Lest We Forget… and We Will Not Forget The children who fell in the Syrian coastal massacres were not fighters. They were not part of any conflict. But they were branded as “remnants of the regime” and executed in cold blood simply because they came from a targeted community, from a noble sect that extremist militants sought to erase — falsely in the name of revolution and religion. They are not numbers. They are not forgotten lines in history. They are the martyrs of March 7, 2025 — slain by sectarian jihadist groups who brought with them a bloody project of extermination that has nothing to do with Syria or its people. And today, the butcher himself — Jolani and his militias — offers what he calls an “investigation” to clear himself and rewrite the crime in a fabricated narrative. An investigation with no justice, no legitimacy, and no conscience. We categorically reject this farce. We demand an urgent, independent, and transparent international investigation, free from any interference by the perpetrators or their authorities. The blood of the martyrs is a sacred trust. Their case is not a local issue, but a crime against humanity — one that condemns not only the killers, but also those who were silent, those who justified, and those who colluded. #مجزرة_الساحل #مجازر_الساحل_السوري #الابادة_العلوية #الابادة_الجماعية_العلوية_2025 #الطائفة_العلوية_الكريمة #الجولاني_الارهابي #الامن_العام_الارهابي #لجنة_تقصي_الحقائق #جريمة_ضد_الانسانية #سوريا #توثيق #حماية_الأقليات #SyrianCoastalMassacres #StopAlawiteGenocide #CrimesAgainstHumanity #JolaniCrimes #HTSCrimes #JolaniIsAGlobalTerrorist #AlawitePersecution #SyriaMassacres #IndependentInvestigation #MinorityProtection #UN #UNSC #UN_HRC #EU #HRW #AmnestyInternational #InternationalCriminalCourt #SaveSyria #JusticeForSyria

Syrian Witness شاهد سوري

13,167 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

The US is playing a very dangerous game in the South China Sea, where instead of trying to appease tensions like a responsible power should do, it backs maximalist claims that violate International Law, and lies egregiously for that purpose. Here is Nicholas Burns, the US ambassador to China, saying in an interview 2 weeks ago ( “You've seen over the last couple of months some 10 standoffs between Filipino naval forces and both Chinese coastguards and Chinese military vessels at a place called Second Thomas Shoal and also in Scarborough Shoal. Now it's important for everybody on this zoomcast to understand that the International Court of Justice, which is the relevant legal body, ruled in July 2016 decisively in favour of the Philippines. And so that that territory is the sovereign territory of the Philippines and that China’s legal claim to it has no basis in international law. All the rest of the world understands that and recognises that this is sovereign Filipino territory.” This is absolutely packed with lies. First of all, it was NOT the International Court of Justice (ICJ) but the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) that made the July 2016 ruling ( This is a very important distinction because rulings by the PCA - unlike rulings by the ICJ - do NOT carry the weight of international law. Furthermore, in this case, China declined to participate in the arbitration. Secondly the PCA ruling in question absolutely does NOT confirm the Scarborough Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal as "sovereign Filipino territory". For the simple reason that the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which is the international law framework the PCA was asked to arbitrate under, “does not address the sovereignty of states over land territory”. In fact the PCA, in its ruling, specifically said that it had “not been asked to, and does not purport to, make any ruling as to which state enjoys sovereignty over any land territory in the South China Sea, in particular with respect to the disputes concerning sovereignty over the Spratly Islands [where the Second Thomas Shoal is] or Scarborough Shoal”! This is all the more ironic because the US is one of the rare countries out there that refused to sign or ratify UNCLOS, contrary to China... What the ruling DID say with regards to the Scarborough Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal is as follows: - For the Scarborough Shoal, it ruled that they are rocks that cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own, do not generate an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) or continental shelf entitlements beyond their 12-nautical-mile territorial sea. It also ruled that both Chinese and Filipino fishermen, among others, had traditional fishing rights in the area and that no party should prevent the other from exercising these rights. - For the Second Thomas Shoal, the ruling declared that it is a "low-tide elevation", that "does not generate entitlements to a territorial sea, exclusive economic zone, or continental shelf" but that it is "within the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf of the Philippines", with the consequence that the Philippines have rights over the resources in these areas. That's it, it's a ruling about maritime entitlements under UNCLOS, not about the sovereignty over these territories. Thirdly, Burns’ statement that “all the rest of the world understands that and recognises that this is sovereign Philippine territory” is even more egregious. This is patently untrue, even for US allies. For instance Britain, France and Germany in their 2020 "note verbale" to the UN on the matter ( specifically wrote that they “take no position” over the “disputed territorial sovereignty to naturally formed land features and to areas of the continental shelf in the South China Sea”. In fact, until this declaration by Burns, this would have been untrue for the US themselves! Their position so far had been that - just like Britain, France and Germany - they did not take a position on the sovereignty claims themselves. The main reason is because these claims do not only involve the PRC and the Philippines but also the ROC (Taiwan), who also claim both the Scarborough Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal, as well as Vietnam and Malaysia who have also made claims over other parts of the Spratly Islands archipelago (of which the Second Thomas Shoal is part of). As such, unilaterally siding with one of the claimants over the others is a rather bizarre position for Washington. Lastly, if the US wanted to be constructive here, instead of backing one state or the other in its maximalist claims in order to fuel conflict, it should encourage the negotiation of the Code of Conduct (CoC) for the South China Sea that's currently being discussed between ASEAN countries and China. This is a diplomatic effort to end disputes. Why not support that instead of siding with one party against others, which can only fuel the disputes? The answer is simple: this is part of a broader and immensely worrying trend which we see in U.S. conduct generally (be it in Ukraine, Gaza, Taiwan, etc.) where the U.S. 1) jumps on all opportunities to sabotage diplomacy and fan the flames of conflict and war and 2) support the arbitrary and ever-changing self-interested rules of its "rules-based order" in opposition of International Law. Why do they do that? I genuinely think we need to seriously ask ourselves if the U.S. doesn't want to recreate a WW2-type scenario where the whole world is in flames and the U.S., protected by its immensely favorable geography, ends up reaping the benefits. If there's a "great reset" initiative going on, that might be the one. WW2 placed the U.S. at the top of the global pecking order: at a time when this "leadership" is crumbling down, it's not inconceivable that they wouldn't mind a remake...
1:07

The US is playing a very dangerous game in the South China Sea, where instead of trying to appease tensions like a responsible power should do, it backs maximalist claims that violate International Law, and lies egregiously for that purpose. Here is Nicholas Burns, the US ambassador to China, saying in an interview 2 weeks ago ( “You've seen over the last couple of months some 10 standoffs between Filipino naval forces and both Chinese coastguards and Chinese military vessels at a place called Second Thomas Shoal and also in Scarborough Shoal. Now it's important for everybody on this zoomcast to understand that the International Court of Justice, which is the relevant legal body, ruled in July 2016 decisively in favour of the Philippines. And so that that territory is the sovereign territory of the Philippines and that China’s legal claim to it has no basis in international law. All the rest of the world understands that and recognises that this is sovereign Filipino territory.” This is absolutely packed with lies. First of all, it was NOT the International Court of Justice (ICJ) but the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) that made the July 2016 ruling ( This is a very important distinction because rulings by the PCA - unlike rulings by the ICJ - do NOT carry the weight of international law. Furthermore, in this case, China declined to participate in the arbitration. Secondly the PCA ruling in question absolutely does NOT confirm the Scarborough Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal as "sovereign Filipino territory". For the simple reason that the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which is the international law framework the PCA was asked to arbitrate under, “does not address the sovereignty of states over land territory”. In fact the PCA, in its ruling, specifically said that it had “not been asked to, and does not purport to, make any ruling as to which state enjoys sovereignty over any land territory in the South China Sea, in particular with respect to the disputes concerning sovereignty over the Spratly Islands [where the Second Thomas Shoal is] or Scarborough Shoal”! This is all the more ironic because the US is one of the rare countries out there that refused to sign or ratify UNCLOS, contrary to China... What the ruling DID say with regards to the Scarborough Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal is as follows: - For the Scarborough Shoal, it ruled that they are rocks that cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own, do not generate an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) or continental shelf entitlements beyond their 12-nautical-mile territorial sea. It also ruled that both Chinese and Filipino fishermen, among others, had traditional fishing rights in the area and that no party should prevent the other from exercising these rights. - For the Second Thomas Shoal, the ruling declared that it is a "low-tide elevation", that "does not generate entitlements to a territorial sea, exclusive economic zone, or continental shelf" but that it is "within the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf of the Philippines", with the consequence that the Philippines have rights over the resources in these areas. That's it, it's a ruling about maritime entitlements under UNCLOS, not about the sovereignty over these territories. Thirdly, Burns’ statement that “all the rest of the world understands that and recognises that this is sovereign Philippine territory” is even more egregious. This is patently untrue, even for US allies. For instance Britain, France and Germany in their 2020 "note verbale" to the UN on the matter ( specifically wrote that they “take no position” over the “disputed territorial sovereignty to naturally formed land features and to areas of the continental shelf in the South China Sea”. In fact, until this declaration by Burns, this would have been untrue for the US themselves! Their position so far had been that - just like Britain, France and Germany - they did not take a position on the sovereignty claims themselves. The main reason is because these claims do not only involve the PRC and the Philippines but also the ROC (Taiwan), who also claim both the Scarborough Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal, as well as Vietnam and Malaysia who have also made claims over other parts of the Spratly Islands archipelago (of which the Second Thomas Shoal is part of). As such, unilaterally siding with one of the claimants over the others is a rather bizarre position for Washington. Lastly, if the US wanted to be constructive here, instead of backing one state or the other in its maximalist claims in order to fuel conflict, it should encourage the negotiation of the Code of Conduct (CoC) for the South China Sea that's currently being discussed between ASEAN countries and China. This is a diplomatic effort to end disputes. Why not support that instead of siding with one party against others, which can only fuel the disputes? The answer is simple: this is part of a broader and immensely worrying trend which we see in U.S. conduct generally (be it in Ukraine, Gaza, Taiwan, etc.) where the U.S. 1) jumps on all opportunities to sabotage diplomacy and fan the flames of conflict and war and 2) support the arbitrary and ever-changing self-interested rules of its "rules-based order" in opposition of International Law. Why do they do that? I genuinely think we need to seriously ask ourselves if the U.S. doesn't want to recreate a WW2-type scenario where the whole world is in flames and the U.S., protected by its immensely favorable geography, ends up reaping the benefits. If there's a "great reset" initiative going on, that might be the one. WW2 placed the U.S. at the top of the global pecking order: at a time when this "leadership" is crumbling down, it's not inconceivable that they wouldn't mind a remake...

Arnaud Bertrand

411,023 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

EU gave €225 million to projects in #Gaza between 2021-2023, a place that was under the full control of #Hamas since 2006. How much of the EU money given to projects in Gaza ended up in the hands and pockets of this terrorist organisation? I asked Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi this and other questions in the Budgetary Control committee on October 26, 2023. Watch and share this video along with the transcript. MEP Cristian Terheș: "Thank you so much. Before I go into my questions I just want to make a note that this committee has on paper 55, 54 MEPs, and we are in this room, right now, only five [MEPs] and two over there. I think it is outrageous that, for an important topic like this, that is discussing about how the Commission is spending or wasting people's money, apparently the Left is not interested in see[ing] what exactly and how exactly people's money was spent. Going back to the questions, I have six specific questions. The first one is related to the books printed under the supervision or under the authority of the Palestinian Authority. And I saw, I carefully read the answer from the European Commission, which pretty much acknowledged that there was a problem, and I restate that, that there was, in the past, a problem with these books. And the answer says that "EU has stepped up its engagement with the Palestinian Authority to ensure that further curriculum reform addresses problematic issues identified in the shortest possible timeframe". So the "further curriculum" will address this issue. Well, here's an example of a book. This is a literature book for the fifth grade that is used in the UNRWA schools. In this book, this is what the Arab kids are learning. If you're not aware of who this person is, her name is Dalal Mughrabi. On March the 11th, 1978, along with other terrorists, [she] hijacked two busses. And when the Israeli authorities tried to free those people, they blew themselves up and killed 38 Israelis, including 13 children, and over 70 people were wounded. So how is it possible that now, in 2023, and I'm not talking about past books… This is 2023. These kids are still learning that this is a role model for them. And now, out of the blue, we are surprised that people are blowing themselves up and killing innocent people. I'm not interested what are you going to do in the future. I hope that you will do something and we will make sure that you will do something. But what have you done so far to make sure that these Arab kids, these Palestinian kids are not indoctrinated with this kind of evil figures? The second question is about the "Pay for Slay". #PayForSlay According to the Palestinian law if a Palestinian person is killing a Jew, his or her family is getting a pension. So we are rewarding terrorist activities. And this was done for years. A few years ago, when Trump was president, a U.S. military guy was killed in one of these terror attacks. And U.S. Congress passed a law called "Taylor Force Act", which is conditioning any U.S. money for the Palestinian Authority to make sure that these families of the terrorists are not getting reimbursed for life after these terror activities. Why aren’t we imposing exactly the same rules? Because, according to the answer from the Commission, we are paying pension and pensions to these people. Third question, the issue of Gaza. According to your official answer, you're stating, and I quote: "Between 2021 and [20]23, EU funded €681 million for the Palestinian Authority and UNRWA. A third of this money went to Gaza." A third means €225 million from 2021 to 2023. But we know for a fact that in 2005, when Israel withdrew from Gaza, after 2006 or [200]7, Gaza is under the control of Hamas. You said here that you will run a survey or whatever, an analysis to see how the money was spent. What have you done already? Hamas was called, and recognized and acknowledged as a terrorist organisation. How was it possible to pour €225 million in a place that is fully controlled by a terrorist organisation and nobody did anything or said anything? It is absolutely absurd! Forth question. Following reports about stealing of pipelines for rocket production and fuel for hospitals, to what extent can the European Commission or the Court of Auditors verify or assess the damage caused to EU and European funded projects in Gaza? Fifth question. Following news that Hamas is directing money for social allowances to members of this terrorist organisation, how do you verify that such money gets to those really in need? Nevertheless, following reports about control of Hamas of the teacher unions and UNRWA workers union, what are the steps you are taking to verify that EU money for UNRWA is not used to serve Hamas agenda? Thank you." Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi: "Madam Chair. I want to assure all the participating members of this committee that I very much appreciate their presence and their engagement with us. And I think that this is very important that we have this discussion, no matter how many members of the committee are here. Now, first of all, on the Gaza project. Let me make it very clear what has been done in Gaza since 2006 when the IDF and Israel has left the Gaza Strip. I fully agree with you. The control and the governance of that strip has been de facto exercised by the Hamas. Unfortunately! And it was for that reason that all institution financing activity has been stopped and it is for that reason that only projects of public interest have been continued in the Gaza Strip. Now, with the emergence of the horror that we have seen instigated by Hamas, the review also has a very clear message to those projects that we have tried for many, many years to create for the benefit of the people in Gaza, like the Gas for Gaza project or the desalination plant creating fresh water for the people in the Gaza Strip or building a new hospital in the Gaza Strip, that are on hold. And it is not possible even physically to continue on those projects. And we will have to wait until the end of this war to see what engagement would still be considered in the in the Gaza area, if feasible. Now, in relation to the broader question of the review, what is the timeline? The timeline is that we are already doing it. We have a methodology established and our review is carried out by the whole House, mainly the DG Near, but also other parts of the Commission, DG Budget and also the other external family members of the Commission. The result of the review is going to be presented to the College [of Commissioners]. So the College is going to take the conclusions of these findings and they will be, I very much hope, endorsed by the College. In terms of its cost, we do not foresee any additional cost for this, and we want to act rapidly because, as I said, given the very fragile security situation, we have to act immediately to filter out all those who have, even indirectly, participated or contributed to the violence that we have seen emerge. Now, when it comes to the textbooks, to be honest with you, it's very difficult to answer your question because this is the question I have been putting since the very beginning of my mandate. How is it possible to embed hatred and nurture hatred in textbooks? How is it possible to teach kids to hate? How is it possible? And we have been sitting down several times with the Palestinian Authority. We have run a study that came to the same conclusion as you have. And we have had difficult discussions also in this House. But now I see that there is a change in the position of this House, which is, I think, very important. And it is not only very important, but we took very, very careful note of a request from the Parliament, because there is also a request adopted by the plenary, to look into this issue. And this is what we are going to do and this issue will have to be addressed. The result that we have achieved was that we have raised the issue with the Palestinian Authority, and I don't think there's disagreement between us and them that this is an issue. Second, we are working very closely with our partners in UNRWA. I'm very sad to see that this is a training material or education material that you have shown today, which is used by UNRWA, because UNRWA was the one who not only was able to talk about this problem, but undertook commitments with us to eradicate any material, any views expressed, including on social media or in the territories of the schools of this kind, glorification of terrorists, glorification of hatred, anti-Semitism. And this is why we have concluded a three year financing contract with UNRWA. This was a very important element for us that UNRWA started to cooperate and we have seen results coming in. But, of course, I agree with you. We cannot rest until the very last of these materials disappear. And I'm fully committed to deliver on that, including in the discussions for next year. On the "Pay for Slay". We have a list to check that direct beneficiaries do not appear on any of the terrorist list. But, if there is one, I wouldn't like to draw any conclusions of the review, but, if there is one issue to look at is, of course, that we do not create the possibility of indirect benefit for those who are involved in terrorist activities or for those who have been even convicted for such acts. And this is what we are addressing also in our review. Now, on the on the damage to our projects in Gaza, I cannot tell you now. What we see is that there is clearly devastation in the northern part, serious level of damage in the south, but it will be only after that the war will stop that we can go back and take a look at that. Now, on the humanitarian aspect and how to guarantee that our humanitarian aid is not going to be misused. If you look back at the statement the European Council has adopted just last weekend, you see also a very clear call for them to make sure. And this is why our decision has been to channel our humanitarian aid through our own institutions; DG Echo is delivering on the ground and in-kind. So we are providing help, in-kind, not providing financing. We're not providing other items that could be used for other purposes. And we are coordinating our work with international organisations only, so to ensure that it doesn't get to the wrong hands. So there was one more question about the breakdown of the €103 million, and I think I can confirm what you said that we have composed the €103 million by €50 million that were allocated in support of payments of salaries and pensions. These are going directly as direct budget support into the budget of the Palestinian Authority. However, we want to check the final beneficiaries and we have a list. And now we're looking at indirect beneficiaries as well as part of the review. The 40 million… The other element is the €40 million support for the most vulnerable families. Again, this is this is paid in the form of direct budgetary contribution. And the third and lastly, the €13 million, this is the remaining part of 103 [million], is financing the East Jerusalem hospitals that we have paid already in April 2023 to keep the health care system running in East Jerusalem. I hope with this I have answered all the questions that have been raised. Thank you."
16:12

EU gave €225 million to projects in #Gaza between 2021-2023, a place that was under the full control of #Hamas since 2006. How much of the EU money given to projects in Gaza ended up in the hands and pockets of this terrorist organisation? I asked Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi this and other questions in the Budgetary Control committee on October 26, 2023. Watch and share this video along with the transcript. MEP Cristian Terheș: "Thank you so much. Before I go into my questions I just want to make a note that this committee has on paper 55, 54 MEPs, and we are in this room, right now, only five [MEPs] and two over there. I think it is outrageous that, for an important topic like this, that is discussing about how the Commission is spending or wasting people's money, apparently the Left is not interested in see[ing] what exactly and how exactly people's money was spent. Going back to the questions, I have six specific questions. The first one is related to the books printed under the supervision or under the authority of the Palestinian Authority. And I saw, I carefully read the answer from the European Commission, which pretty much acknowledged that there was a problem, and I restate that, that there was, in the past, a problem with these books. And the answer says that "EU has stepped up its engagement with the Palestinian Authority to ensure that further curriculum reform addresses problematic issues identified in the shortest possible timeframe". So the "further curriculum" will address this issue. Well, here's an example of a book. This is a literature book for the fifth grade that is used in the UNRWA schools. In this book, this is what the Arab kids are learning. If you're not aware of who this person is, her name is Dalal Mughrabi. On March the 11th, 1978, along with other terrorists, [she] hijacked two busses. And when the Israeli authorities tried to free those people, they blew themselves up and killed 38 Israelis, including 13 children, and over 70 people were wounded. So how is it possible that now, in 2023, and I'm not talking about past books… This is 2023. These kids are still learning that this is a role model for them. And now, out of the blue, we are surprised that people are blowing themselves up and killing innocent people. I'm not interested what are you going to do in the future. I hope that you will do something and we will make sure that you will do something. But what have you done so far to make sure that these Arab kids, these Palestinian kids are not indoctrinated with this kind of evil figures? The second question is about the "Pay for Slay". #PayForSlay According to the Palestinian law if a Palestinian person is killing a Jew, his or her family is getting a pension. So we are rewarding terrorist activities. And this was done for years. A few years ago, when Trump was president, a U.S. military guy was killed in one of these terror attacks. And U.S. Congress passed a law called "Taylor Force Act", which is conditioning any U.S. money for the Palestinian Authority to make sure that these families of the terrorists are not getting reimbursed for life after these terror activities. Why aren’t we imposing exactly the same rules? Because, according to the answer from the Commission, we are paying pension and pensions to these people. Third question, the issue of Gaza. According to your official answer, you're stating, and I quote: "Between 2021 and [20]23, EU funded €681 million for the Palestinian Authority and UNRWA. A third of this money went to Gaza." A third means €225 million from 2021 to 2023. But we know for a fact that in 2005, when Israel withdrew from Gaza, after 2006 or [200]7, Gaza is under the control of Hamas. You said here that you will run a survey or whatever, an analysis to see how the money was spent. What have you done already? Hamas was called, and recognized and acknowledged as a terrorist organisation. How was it possible to pour €225 million in a place that is fully controlled by a terrorist organisation and nobody did anything or said anything? It is absolutely absurd! Forth question. Following reports about stealing of pipelines for rocket production and fuel for hospitals, to what extent can the European Commission or the Court of Auditors verify or assess the damage caused to EU and European funded projects in Gaza? Fifth question. Following news that Hamas is directing money for social allowances to members of this terrorist organisation, how do you verify that such money gets to those really in need? Nevertheless, following reports about control of Hamas of the teacher unions and UNRWA workers union, what are the steps you are taking to verify that EU money for UNRWA is not used to serve Hamas agenda? Thank you." Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi: "Madam Chair. I want to assure all the participating members of this committee that I very much appreciate their presence and their engagement with us. And I think that this is very important that we have this discussion, no matter how many members of the committee are here. Now, first of all, on the Gaza project. Let me make it very clear what has been done in Gaza since 2006 when the IDF and Israel has left the Gaza Strip. I fully agree with you. The control and the governance of that strip has been de facto exercised by the Hamas. Unfortunately! And it was for that reason that all institution financing activity has been stopped and it is for that reason that only projects of public interest have been continued in the Gaza Strip. Now, with the emergence of the horror that we have seen instigated by Hamas, the review also has a very clear message to those projects that we have tried for many, many years to create for the benefit of the people in Gaza, like the Gas for Gaza project or the desalination plant creating fresh water for the people in the Gaza Strip or building a new hospital in the Gaza Strip, that are on hold. And it is not possible even physically to continue on those projects. And we will have to wait until the end of this war to see what engagement would still be considered in the in the Gaza area, if feasible. Now, in relation to the broader question of the review, what is the timeline? The timeline is that we are already doing it. We have a methodology established and our review is carried out by the whole House, mainly the DG Near, but also other parts of the Commission, DG Budget and also the other external family members of the Commission. The result of the review is going to be presented to the College [of Commissioners]. So the College is going to take the conclusions of these findings and they will be, I very much hope, endorsed by the College. In terms of its cost, we do not foresee any additional cost for this, and we want to act rapidly because, as I said, given the very fragile security situation, we have to act immediately to filter out all those who have, even indirectly, participated or contributed to the violence that we have seen emerge. Now, when it comes to the textbooks, to be honest with you, it's very difficult to answer your question because this is the question I have been putting since the very beginning of my mandate. How is it possible to embed hatred and nurture hatred in textbooks? How is it possible to teach kids to hate? How is it possible? And we have been sitting down several times with the Palestinian Authority. We have run a study that came to the same conclusion as you have. And we have had difficult discussions also in this House. But now I see that there is a change in the position of this House, which is, I think, very important. And it is not only very important, but we took very, very careful note of a request from the Parliament, because there is also a request adopted by the plenary, to look into this issue. And this is what we are going to do and this issue will have to be addressed. The result that we have achieved was that we have raised the issue with the Palestinian Authority, and I don't think there's disagreement between us and them that this is an issue. Second, we are working very closely with our partners in UNRWA. I'm very sad to see that this is a training material or education material that you have shown today, which is used by UNRWA, because UNRWA was the one who not only was able to talk about this problem, but undertook commitments with us to eradicate any material, any views expressed, including on social media or in the territories of the schools of this kind, glorification of terrorists, glorification of hatred, anti-Semitism. And this is why we have concluded a three year financing contract with UNRWA. This was a very important element for us that UNRWA started to cooperate and we have seen results coming in. But, of course, I agree with you. We cannot rest until the very last of these materials disappear. And I'm fully committed to deliver on that, including in the discussions for next year. On the "Pay for Slay". We have a list to check that direct beneficiaries do not appear on any of the terrorist list. But, if there is one, I wouldn't like to draw any conclusions of the review, but, if there is one issue to look at is, of course, that we do not create the possibility of indirect benefit for those who are involved in terrorist activities or for those who have been even convicted for such acts. And this is what we are addressing also in our review. Now, on the on the damage to our projects in Gaza, I cannot tell you now. What we see is that there is clearly devastation in the northern part, serious level of damage in the south, but it will be only after that the war will stop that we can go back and take a look at that. Now, on the humanitarian aspect and how to guarantee that our humanitarian aid is not going to be misused. If you look back at the statement the European Council has adopted just last weekend, you see also a very clear call for them to make sure. And this is why our decision has been to channel our humanitarian aid through our own institutions; DG Echo is delivering on the ground and in-kind. So we are providing help, in-kind, not providing financing. We're not providing other items that could be used for other purposes. And we are coordinating our work with international organisations only, so to ensure that it doesn't get to the wrong hands. So there was one more question about the breakdown of the €103 million, and I think I can confirm what you said that we have composed the €103 million by €50 million that were allocated in support of payments of salaries and pensions. These are going directly as direct budget support into the budget of the Palestinian Authority. However, we want to check the final beneficiaries and we have a list. And now we're looking at indirect beneficiaries as well as part of the review. The 40 million… The other element is the €40 million support for the most vulnerable families. Again, this is this is paid in the form of direct budgetary contribution. And the third and lastly, the €13 million, this is the remaining part of 103 [million], is financing the East Jerusalem hospitals that we have paid already in April 2023 to keep the health care system running in East Jerusalem. I hope with this I have answered all the questions that have been raised. Thank you."

Cristian Terhes MEP

33,649 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

Tension and uncertainty among Russians are growing. In the spring of 2026, Russian polling agencies recorded a noticeable decline in several key indicators: approval of Putin's performance, trust in him, and the overall emotional mood. The most intriguing point was the closure of Russian Public Opinion Research Center’s (VCIOM) open trust rating: when respondents are asked to name politicians they trust without being prompted with names. In March 2026, this indicator for Putin fell to 29.5% - the lowest level since the start of the full-scale war. After that, VCIOM did not publish the figures for April and May. The gap between the open trust rating (29.5%) and the closed trust rating (72-73%) is roughly 1:2.5. It reflects the distance between Putin's actual political weight and the ritual of loyalty to the "tsar." The reason is simple: Russians do not want a loser president. Putin's ratings were sustained not simply by war, but by the prospect of a victorious war. He traded Russia's development and prosperity for greatness, but now Russians see neither greatness nor prosperity. Let’s take a closer look at what is happening within Russian society. First, most Russians continue to support the war. This is illustrated by Levada Center's May data. Support for the actions of the Russian army, which had been declining since the end of last year, suddenly rebounded by six points in May, reaching 74%. At the same time, the share of those favoring peace negotiations, which had remained at around two-thirds since December, has been slowly shrinking for three consecutive months - down seven points, to six out of ten. Meanwhile, the camp supporting the continuation of military operations has grown to 30%. The main motive among supporters of peace has not changed: "too many casualties and heavy losses." What happened? Television stopped talking about peace negotiations. As long as negotiations seemed realistic, peace appeared to be a way out. Once they collapsed, part of Russian society obediently switched back to supporting the war. This is conformism. Russians do not want peace or war - they want to be on the side of the winner. The demand for negotiations was, in fact, a demand for a victorious peace. Since no victorious peace was granted, they have taken back the war. However, there is a dangerous trap here for the Kremlin: Russians agree to war, but not to a war without victory. They agree to anything except a compromise that would be perceived as defeat. This is dangerous for the Kremlin because it calls into question the legitimacy of the entire system of power - and Putin above all - if Russian society is no longer given proof of greatness and victory. Putin is doomed to constant escalation. The situation is further complicated by public fatigue and rising anxiety among Russians. The state of the Russian economy is deteriorating, while the defense sector is no longer able to offset the decline in the civilian economy. This is especially noticeable in the regions. By the end of 2025, the deficit of consolidated regional budgets had reached a record 1.48 trillion rubles ($20.56 billion) - 3.6 times more than a year earlier. Seventy-four regions, including Moscow and the oil and gas districts, ended up in deficit. The first months of 2026 did not reverse the trend: industry is stagnating, construction is shrinking, corporate profits are falling, and debt burdens are increasing. The accompanying symptoms include a sharp rise in wage arrears, large-scale revisions of regional budgets for 2026 involving spending cuts, primarily social, as well as a hidden employment crisis - where there is no work, but employees are not laid off; instead, they are shifted to reduced working weeks and unpaid leave. Official unemployment statistics barely reflect this. Yet since December 2025, part-time employment has been rising at large and medium-sized enterprises: 4.6 million out of 33 million workers. The map of Russian society’s concerns, which the Levada Center publishes annually, looks telling in May 2026. At the top - for twenty years in a row - is rising prices: 55%. The "special military operation" and related issues worry 35%. And then comes the most interesting part - the destruction of a comfortable life and the feeling of war at home have become additional drivers of tension: fear of explosions and terrorist attacks has jumped by 8 points since November - to 27%. One in five (22%) cites internet restrictions and the blocking of social media as among the most pressing issues - on the list of problems, the digital blockade now ranks alongside poverty and lack of access to healthcare (both at 19%). The state has managed to turn a disabled messenger app into a social problem on the level of poverty. That takes some doing. Many Western observers have been inspired by rumors of elite dissatisfaction in Russia. Indeed, Moscow's economic circles have seen unusually open criticism of the government from parts of the financial elite. However, I suggest we avoid wishful thinking: no direct scenario of a political crisis emerges from this data. The most realistic scenario is the continuation of the war, coupled with a search for political doping: events that can be sold to society as victories, as proof that Russia is moving in the right direction. The problem is that the bar has risen - what would have been considered a triumph a year ago would now look like capitulation. Therefore, stronger doses of doping will be required: escalation in Ukraine aimed at maximizing destruction, a military adventure somewhere in Europe, new strikes, nuclear signaling, or provocations against the West. The ground has already been prepared: 54% of Russians believe that the war in Ukraine could escalate into an armed conflict with NATO - half the population is living in anticipation of a major war. The Kremlin’s logic is as old as time: unite through fear. Putin may also be saved by an "unexpected event" - a black swan, as has already happened when the U.S. started a war with Iran. Here, it’s not even necessary to do anything: it’s enough to interpret it skillfully. A U.S. defeat or stalemate in the war with Iran could be presented as a victory of Russia and its allies over America - because in the minds of Russians, the war with Ukraine has long been just a fragment of a larger Russian war with the West. Within this worldview, any failure by Washington automatically counts as a point for Moscow, regardless of whether it had a hand in it. There is also a third scenario - not for Putin, but against him. This is not a scenario of popular uprising, but one of self-preservation by the Russian elites. But such an option is possible only under a sharp convergence of several factors: military defeat, economic collapse, the loss of the ability to allocate resources, and the emergence of a figure or group capable of guaranteeing the elite’s security after the transition. So far, there are few such signs.
1:54

Tension and uncertainty among Russians are growing. In the spring of 2026, Russian polling agencies recorded a noticeable decline in several key indicators: approval of Putin's performance, trust in him, and the overall emotional mood. The most intriguing point was the closure of Russian Public Opinion Research Center’s (VCIOM) open trust rating: when respondents are asked to name politicians they trust without being prompted with names. In March 2026, this indicator for Putin fell to 29.5% - the lowest level since the start of the full-scale war. After that, VCIOM did not publish the figures for April and May. The gap between the open trust rating (29.5%) and the closed trust rating (72-73%) is roughly 1:2.5. It reflects the distance between Putin's actual political weight and the ritual of loyalty to the "tsar." The reason is simple: Russians do not want a loser president. Putin's ratings were sustained not simply by war, but by the prospect of a victorious war. He traded Russia's development and prosperity for greatness, but now Russians see neither greatness nor prosperity. Let’s take a closer look at what is happening within Russian society. First, most Russians continue to support the war. This is illustrated by Levada Center's May data. Support for the actions of the Russian army, which had been declining since the end of last year, suddenly rebounded by six points in May, reaching 74%. At the same time, the share of those favoring peace negotiations, which had remained at around two-thirds since December, has been slowly shrinking for three consecutive months - down seven points, to six out of ten. Meanwhile, the camp supporting the continuation of military operations has grown to 30%. The main motive among supporters of peace has not changed: "too many casualties and heavy losses." What happened? Television stopped talking about peace negotiations. As long as negotiations seemed realistic, peace appeared to be a way out. Once they collapsed, part of Russian society obediently switched back to supporting the war. This is conformism. Russians do not want peace or war - they want to be on the side of the winner. The demand for negotiations was, in fact, a demand for a victorious peace. Since no victorious peace was granted, they have taken back the war. However, there is a dangerous trap here for the Kremlin: Russians agree to war, but not to a war without victory. They agree to anything except a compromise that would be perceived as defeat. This is dangerous for the Kremlin because it calls into question the legitimacy of the entire system of power - and Putin above all - if Russian society is no longer given proof of greatness and victory. Putin is doomed to constant escalation. The situation is further complicated by public fatigue and rising anxiety among Russians. The state of the Russian economy is deteriorating, while the defense sector is no longer able to offset the decline in the civilian economy. This is especially noticeable in the regions. By the end of 2025, the deficit of consolidated regional budgets had reached a record 1.48 trillion rubles ($20.56 billion) - 3.6 times more than a year earlier. Seventy-four regions, including Moscow and the oil and gas districts, ended up in deficit. The first months of 2026 did not reverse the trend: industry is stagnating, construction is shrinking, corporate profits are falling, and debt burdens are increasing. The accompanying symptoms include a sharp rise in wage arrears, large-scale revisions of regional budgets for 2026 involving spending cuts, primarily social, as well as a hidden employment crisis - where there is no work, but employees are not laid off; instead, they are shifted to reduced working weeks and unpaid leave. Official unemployment statistics barely reflect this. Yet since December 2025, part-time employment has been rising at large and medium-sized enterprises: 4.6 million out of 33 million workers. The map of Russian society’s concerns, which the Levada Center publishes annually, looks telling in May 2026. At the top - for twenty years in a row - is rising prices: 55%. The "special military operation" and related issues worry 35%. And then comes the most interesting part - the destruction of a comfortable life and the feeling of war at home have become additional drivers of tension: fear of explosions and terrorist attacks has jumped by 8 points since November - to 27%. One in five (22%) cites internet restrictions and the blocking of social media as among the most pressing issues - on the list of problems, the digital blockade now ranks alongside poverty and lack of access to healthcare (both at 19%). The state has managed to turn a disabled messenger app into a social problem on the level of poverty. That takes some doing. Many Western observers have been inspired by rumors of elite dissatisfaction in Russia. Indeed, Moscow's economic circles have seen unusually open criticism of the government from parts of the financial elite. However, I suggest we avoid wishful thinking: no direct scenario of a political crisis emerges from this data. The most realistic scenario is the continuation of the war, coupled with a search for political doping: events that can be sold to society as victories, as proof that Russia is moving in the right direction. The problem is that the bar has risen - what would have been considered a triumph a year ago would now look like capitulation. Therefore, stronger doses of doping will be required: escalation in Ukraine aimed at maximizing destruction, a military adventure somewhere in Europe, new strikes, nuclear signaling, or provocations against the West. The ground has already been prepared: 54% of Russians believe that the war in Ukraine could escalate into an armed conflict with NATO - half the population is living in anticipation of a major war. The Kremlin’s logic is as old as time: unite through fear. Putin may also be saved by an "unexpected event" - a black swan, as has already happened when the U.S. started a war with Iran. Here, it’s not even necessary to do anything: it’s enough to interpret it skillfully. A U.S. defeat or stalemate in the war with Iran could be presented as a victory of Russia and its allies over America - because in the minds of Russians, the war with Ukraine has long been just a fragment of a larger Russian war with the West. Within this worldview, any failure by Washington automatically counts as a point for Moscow, regardless of whether it had a hand in it. There is also a third scenario - not for Putin, but against him. This is not a scenario of popular uprising, but one of self-preservation by the Russian elites. But such an option is possible only under a sharp convergence of several factors: military defeat, economic collapse, the loss of the ability to allocate resources, and the emergence of a figure or group capable of guaranteeing the elite’s security after the transition. So far, there are few such signs.

Anton Gerashchenko

36,205 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

“I do this for you until you learn to do it for yourself,” says the American lead character in Citizen Vigilante to the Europeans he is protecting. It is a sharp and memorable closing statement that captures the film’s core message. Basically, the entire film only works because its central character is American. A German, French, or British protagonist in that role would have made the story feel false from the first scene. Europe has spent decades cultivating a culture of hesitation and submission. Citizens have been trained to wait, to doubt themselves, and to accept whatever restrictions, failures, or chaos the state imposes. This is not noble restraint. It is a deep-seated habit of passivity and obedience that leaves people in Europe unable to imagine acting decisively against disorder or abuse of power. It also leaves them unable to rise up and resist regimes even when those regimes begin to turn tyrannical. That Untertan mentality, that reflex of obedience to authority, is part of the darker socio-cultural DNA of Europe, and especially of Germany’s political history. “Just following orders” is not just a phrase. It is a warning about what happens in Europe when obedience replaces conscience. The United States developed in the total opposite direction, largely because of the Second Amendment and the self-confidence of the American people toward Washington, D.C. That provision was never meant to be a narrow legal technicality. It was designed as a permanent structural limit on government authority. An armed population was understood to be the final safeguard against a state that might one day turn against its own citizens. In America, this is not merely theory. Americans privately own roughly 500 million firearms, while the entire military and all law enforcement agencies combined possess only 5.5 million firearms. That makes it clear where ultimate power still resides: with the people, not the state. Europe has no equivalent. Germany’s Article 20 paragraph 4 of the Basic Law offers, almost as an alibi, a weak theoretical right to resistance, but only under conditions so restrictive that the clause becomes almost useless in practice. It would likely apply only after the damage is already irreversible. Too little, too late, as so often in Europe. This difference in civilizational outlook explains why the hero of the film had to come from America. The character is shaped by a culture that still values personal responsibility, armed self-reliance, and the willingness to confront threats directly rather than deferring to authority or process. The same gap appears in military and police culture. The United States has maintained elite units and a broad respect for service for generations. Soldiers, police officers, the National Guard, and the Coast Guard are still viewed with pride when they truly protect and serve the people. In much of Europe today, police forces are increasingly viewed as tools of political enforcement and selective suppression rather than neutral protectors of order. When officers prioritize censorship, speech restrictions, and biased enforcement over actual crime, they lose the moral standing that once came with the uniform. An American protagonist fits this story because he operates from a different set of assumptions. He does not wait for permission or consensus. He acts when the situation demands it, and he is not afraid to resist state overreach, corrupt institutions, or officials who have abandoned justice. That is very much in the spirit of the American constitutional tradition. The irony is that German authorities have now increased the film’s reach. By blocking the official release, they triggered exactly the kind of attention they wanted to avoid. This is a textbook Streisand effect. What began as a mostly European discussion is now spreading to larger American X accounts and beyond. It would not be surprising if even Elon Musk eventually comments on the case. Germany’s attempt to suppress the film has turned it into a wider free-speech issue. In the end, the story illustrates a larger pattern. European societies in general, and many of their citizens in particular, have become remarkably passive in the face of rising disorder and institutional failure. Europe increasingly lets everything happen to it. Without real resistance. Without serious pushback. The Old World seems to have forgotten how to defend itself and how to push back effectively. Whether that changes on its own, or whether the necessary impulse to resist must again come from the New World helping its origins one last time, remains to be seen.
0:21

“I do this for you until you learn to do it for yourself,” says the American lead character in Citizen Vigilante to the Europeans he is protecting. It is a sharp and memorable closing statement that captures the film’s core message. Basically, the entire film only works because its central character is American. A German, French, or British protagonist in that role would have made the story feel false from the first scene. Europe has spent decades cultivating a culture of hesitation and submission. Citizens have been trained to wait, to doubt themselves, and to accept whatever restrictions, failures, or chaos the state imposes. This is not noble restraint. It is a deep-seated habit of passivity and obedience that leaves people in Europe unable to imagine acting decisively against disorder or abuse of power. It also leaves them unable to rise up and resist regimes even when those regimes begin to turn tyrannical. That Untertan mentality, that reflex of obedience to authority, is part of the darker socio-cultural DNA of Europe, and especially of Germany’s political history. “Just following orders” is not just a phrase. It is a warning about what happens in Europe when obedience replaces conscience. The United States developed in the total opposite direction, largely because of the Second Amendment and the self-confidence of the American people toward Washington, D.C. That provision was never meant to be a narrow legal technicality. It was designed as a permanent structural limit on government authority. An armed population was understood to be the final safeguard against a state that might one day turn against its own citizens. In America, this is not merely theory. Americans privately own roughly 500 million firearms, while the entire military and all law enforcement agencies combined possess only 5.5 million firearms. That makes it clear where ultimate power still resides: with the people, not the state. Europe has no equivalent. Germany’s Article 20 paragraph 4 of the Basic Law offers, almost as an alibi, a weak theoretical right to resistance, but only under conditions so restrictive that the clause becomes almost useless in practice. It would likely apply only after the damage is already irreversible. Too little, too late, as so often in Europe. This difference in civilizational outlook explains why the hero of the film had to come from America. The character is shaped by a culture that still values personal responsibility, armed self-reliance, and the willingness to confront threats directly rather than deferring to authority or process. The same gap appears in military and police culture. The United States has maintained elite units and a broad respect for service for generations. Soldiers, police officers, the National Guard, and the Coast Guard are still viewed with pride when they truly protect and serve the people. In much of Europe today, police forces are increasingly viewed as tools of political enforcement and selective suppression rather than neutral protectors of order. When officers prioritize censorship, speech restrictions, and biased enforcement over actual crime, they lose the moral standing that once came with the uniform. An American protagonist fits this story because he operates from a different set of assumptions. He does not wait for permission or consensus. He acts when the situation demands it, and he is not afraid to resist state overreach, corrupt institutions, or officials who have abandoned justice. That is very much in the spirit of the American constitutional tradition. The irony is that German authorities have now increased the film’s reach. By blocking the official release, they triggered exactly the kind of attention they wanted to avoid. This is a textbook Streisand effect. What began as a mostly European discussion is now spreading to larger American X accounts and beyond. It would not be surprising if even Elon Musk eventually comments on the case. Germany’s attempt to suppress the film has turned it into a wider free-speech issue. In the end, the story illustrates a larger pattern. European societies in general, and many of their citizens in particular, have become remarkably passive in the face of rising disorder and institutional failure. Europe increasingly lets everything happen to it. Without real resistance. Without serious pushback. The Old World seems to have forgotten how to defend itself and how to push back effectively. Whether that changes on its own, or whether the necessary impulse to resist must again come from the New World helping its origins one last time, remains to be seen.

Torsten Prochnow

84,282 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten