Sunday, March 7, 2021

The Cancel Culture Phenomenon: Kind of Hate Hush all Over the World By Ghassan and Intibah Kadi 1 March 2021

 Our thoughts on the insanity enveloping the Western world

http://thesaker.is/the-cancel-culture-phenomenon-kind-of-hate-hush-all-over-the-world/

The ‘Cancel Culture’ phenomenon: kind of hate-hush all over the world

by Ghassan and Intibah Kadi for the Saker Blog

Who remembers the Herman’s Hermits and their 1967 song ‘There’s a Kind of Hush’? The hush the song speaks of is a hush of love, and it was a world of dreams in the sixties in the West, despite the Vietnam War, the Civil Rights protests in the USA and other global conflicts. The peace movements were strong and vibrant, and there was hope that the peace-loving youth will have their way and make a difference; because they genuinely believed in the slogan that ‘all you need is love’.

Alas, the love-hush seems now to be replaced with a hate-hush, and it is engulfing the world, particularly the West, with unprecedented anger and vile displays of demeanour, and this seems to be part of the ‘New Normal’ that some are pushing down our throats.

Not long ago, inspired by another song of the 1960’s, the article pondered where have all the flowers and peace movements gone. In such a short period since, discord and trouble has steeply risen to unprecedented levels, where we are witnessing now an ominous step forward into the abyss and a huge fall in the trajectory of humanity.

In comparison and as an example, when the Lebanese civil war erupted in 1975, it didn’t really come as a surprise to anyone as the specter of such calamity had always hung in the air and sat on the agendas of opposing political groups, as well as on the narrow minds of religious groups that held back unsettled sectarian scores for decades, even centuries.

In hindsight, it seems unfathomable as to how did the German people become so brainwashed and vulnerable to Nazi propaganda. They incrementally discarded all the humane values they had known before, replacing them with nationalist, exclusionist and supremacist values, eventually engaging, wittingly or unwittingly, in supporting or perpetrating injustices on minority groups including Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, the disabled, just to mention a few. Shockingly, when the civil war began in Lebanon, the Lebanese people actually saw a similar phenomenon happen right in front of their eyes. The world witnessed town turning against town, suburb against suburb, neighbour against neighbour, inflicting the most horrendous crimes of maiming, sniping, torturing and killing each other. The same happened again in Yugoslavia as it fell apart.

In more ways than one, latent hatred was expected to eventually manifest itself. If and when old sentiments are not dealt with and brought to closure, such an outcome of a build-up and explosion is to be expected.

But what we are witnessing today, in the West, is something quite different; a case where many people develop boiling, seething, foaming and frothing rage and hatred against others for no apparent reason or history at all.

In America at least, there are a number of actual issues that cause rage and dismay, such as unresolved racial tensions and injustices, perceptions of stolen elections, mishandling of the Corona Virus, the economy and so on. However, these issues are dealt with so vehemently, often with grave, unjust, illegal and disproportional measures, leaving many wondering if America is teetering on the brink of a civil war.

Most striking is the alarming phenomenon of other Western countries taking on board many of the divisive American-specific issues, all with the rage and social divisions that define America’s social status quo. People make ‘all or nothing’ stands and polarity on so many issues, reaching new frenetic levels each day. Even when a legitimate reason for anger exists, the expressions of these can be increasingly extreme and irrational and treated as a defining issue, one worthy of labelling, whether in America or elsewhere.

The authors observed that many people from all different sides of the political divide, within and outside the USA, when asked, are unable to rationally express the reason behind their extremely heated stands. Such a psychological situation can destroy the West; or what is left of it. Close friends, friends who have known and loved each other for decades accuse each other of the most heinous of ‘crimes’, attach labels to each other, just because they ask simple questions, trying to understand the rationale behind their feelings.

And feelings they are, because they are not well-conceived and fact-finding-based views, and their answers provided are merely emotionally based.

In the very near past, people and friends in particular, used to have deep political discussions with peers. They disagreed quite often, but such diverse views were discussed in a civil manner with the assumption that people had the right to have different views and opinions.

In the West today however, it seems that the ‘agree-to-disagree’ principle is no longer. The current rule is ‘you are either with me or against me’. Where have we heard this before? Instead of ‘me’ it was ‘us’?

Not only are we witnessing extreme and unwarranted actions between disagreeing individuals, we are also witnessing this on a collective level, one we often refer to as ‘thought-policing’. Its repercussions in recent times are rapidly morphing into what can only be described as torture ‘techniques’ such as the likes of ‘Cancel Culture’. This is exactly synonymous to the act of ‘banishment’ during the Spanish Inquisition days and the Witch-Hunt eras. Nothing much has changed, or perhaps things have gone full-circle.

In that time, ‘banishment’ meant that the banished ones lost their jobs, became socially isolated, prohibited from trading or buying goods, and quite often, this preceded being burnt alive at the stake. And, now it appears that ‘Cancel Culture’ means virtually the same thing. Whilst the victim may still be lucky enough to trade and buy commodities online, it still generally involves losing one’s job, stature, friends, memberships of associations, and facing humiliation and defamation among many other things. The only basic difference today is the absence of being put to death.

Prior to any banishment or ‘Cancel Culture’ being implemented, just like in the past where such people were branded as heretics, they are now given labels such as ‘denialists’ (disagreement with climate change theory), ‘anti-vaxxers’ (questioning the effectiveness and safety of COVID vaccines) and others. What is interesting here in all this madness, is that a person could be labelling another, only to end up themselves being labelled for something else. Someone who labels another as a ‘denialist’ may find him/herself branded as an ‘anti-vaxxer’.

What is most sinister perhaps is that, on one hand we see this violent, unexplainable, unwarranted irrational level of anger, but on the other hand, we see the West endorsing and accepting other irrational policies that can destroy it, but yet no one is batting an eyelid. Any keen observer can see that a whole myriad of changes have been imposed on the Western society, each of them alone can destroy the Western culture. Without much effort, we can see many such changes, but it suffices to mention the following:

  1. Political correctness that has gone way too far and continues to erode personal freedom of expression.
  2. The climate change debacle/hoax that elevated Greta to the level of becoming Time Magazine’s person of the year.
  3. The destruction of Western family values.
  4. The over-emphasis on LBGTI rights and all the changes imposed on the mainstream society, including such things as banning the use of words like mother and father.
  5. The COVID-thing; lockdowns, conflicting information, the vaccines that we know little about, the presence of nefarious people of influence like Fauci and Gates in decision-making.
  6. Confusing young school children with gender issues and almost encouraging them to become homosexual and/or transgender.
  7. The silence of the public regarding the censorship regulations of Facebook and Twitter.
  8. The silence of the public about the plans of the WEF’s ‘Great Reset”.
  9. The growing acceptance of thought policing and compliance to the state and media.
  10. The public indifference towards the groundless sanctions against Russia and their possible effect on global stability and peace.
  11. The public lack of knowledge and indifference about the support of their governments to Neo-Nazis in Ukraine.
  12. The West losing its industrial base under the watchful eyes of Western Governments.
  13. The West suffering from a huge drop in number of students majoring in STEM subjects.
  14. The West suffering from a growing lack of desire of young adults to have children and raise families.
  15. Giving blanket and unconditional support to abortion, even in the absence of any medical, psychological and justifiable reasons, including late-term abortion, and considering it (ie abortion) as a human right.

When people in the West are asked, why do those who do not agree with the above or accept it say nothing? The response is invariably fear, fear of being targeted and being subjected to the ‘Cancel Culture’.

Coerced to endorse the revolution of anger and phantom ideology, Westerners, especially the youth, have been socially engineered to become the corner stones of ‘controlled opposition’, all the while, they seem to have been conditioned to ‘unsee’ the real issues that threaten their survival in the future.

Coming to the crunch question; with what appears as increasing irrationality and insanity all around, have people been recently, or maybe incrementally, subjected to systemic brainwashing that renders them into such a state of irrationality, anger, volatility and blindness? If that is the case, then how was this achieved?

This brings to mind the tactic of subliminal advertising, a technique developed as early as in the 1950’s in which a person is subjected unknowingly to an advertisement. It can be sound-based or visual. A visual one is based on techniques like inserting a single advertisement frame, say of a bag of popcorn, into a movie. Movies show motion by playing a series of still frames, around twenty per second. In a single frame it is not noticeable by the conscious mind, but is picked up by the subconscious, and in this example given, will create a stimulus to buy popcorn. There is much evidence of more sinister or politically motivated subliminal messages inserted into Hollywood movies. Legal questions arose around this technique.

From such a simple, unsophisticated technique, in the same decade, a secretive project on behaviour modification was undertaken named Project MKUltra, eventually becoming the subject of an American Senate Intelligence Hearing . Mind-control technology took off, reaching ever new heights (or lows?), not just enhancing business and socio-political agenda, but becoming a crucial component of warfare, even with special strategies for social media, to target the public and their perceptions, making them compliant or malleable and even activating them to the extent this discussion indicates. Intibah Kadi’s work on this is cited in the preceding link to an academic paper.

The question is where else, apart from media and social media, have such techniques been used? What kind of technology and to what extent and what ends has this been taken to? And has such systemic brainwashing that we suggest, been ramped up in these last few years when Trump was President of the USA? This is predicated on the suspicion of Trump acting at times as the ‘disruptor” of a particular set of the ‘establishment’, or ‘swamp’ as he named it, one that either rejected him or he alienated.

This also brings to mind an old movie in 1977 by the name of Telefon, a fiction based on a few people who on the surface appear to lead a normal life, but in reality, are a team of professional assassins designated to kill certain individuals upon receiving a vocal message they had been hypnotized to respond to like robots.

Have we actually reached such days of a ‘New Normal’ in terms of the evident, debased level of social discourse, labeling, shaming and damning? Ironically, ‘New Normal’ is a term we hear every day, courtesy of world leaders, various officials and, of course, from the head of the World Economic Forum. Or is it ironic? Will brainwashing and behaviour modification techniques go far beyond that of what we commonly understand and well into the realms of Artificial Intelligence and Electromagnetism? And in these new realms, what extent, if any, do these play a role in these shocking days of ‘Cancel Culture’, the suspension of critical thinking and general mob-rule behaviour permitted for some in the West in recent years?

But above all, did the Western mind deteriorate naturally as a result of attrition or did social engineering cause it to devolve in a manner that fires it up chasing red herrings all the while being totally blind to what really matters? Or has it been manipulated by a devious master plan that makes any science fiction movie look like a Batman Comic?




Saturday, February 27, 2021

Ekaterina Blinova interviews Ghassan Kadi and Sara Sherif. Is Biden's Khashoggi Report an Attempt to 'Blackmail' Crown Prince into Accepting Iran Nuclear Deal 27 February 2021

Historian and political analyst, Ekaterina Blinova, interviews Ghassan Kadi and Sara Sherif on current regional issues involving the Biden US regime.

SPUTNIK 27 February 2021

https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/202102261082200380-is-bidens-khashoggi-report-an-attempt-to-blackmail-crown-prince-into-accepting-iran-nuclear-deal/

Is Biden's Khashoggi Report an Attempt to 'Blackmail' Crown Prince Into Accepting Iran Nuclear Deal?


Subscribe
US President Joe Biden has been increasing the pressure on the Saudi kingdom and its royal family over human rights issues and the death of Jamal Khashoggi. On the 2020 campaign trail, Biden vowed to make Riyadh a "pariah" unless they changed their policies. Middle East experts discuss Washington's new strategy toward the kingdom.

On 26 February, the Biden administration released an intelligence report linking Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to the 2018 murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. The report alleges that the crown prince "approved" the assassination. Riyadh has rejected allegations that members of the royal family were aware of the plot.

Khashoggi, a Saudi dissident and a reporter, was slain and dismembered in 2018 while inside of the Saudi embassy in the Turkish capital city of Istanbul. After a months-long investigation Saudi authorities charged eight individuals with the murder of the journalist: five were sentenced to 20 years in prison while three others received shorter prison terms. Commenting on the inquiry, Khashoggi's son Salah tweeted: "We affirm our confidence in the Saudi judiciary at all levels, that it has been fair to us and that justice has been achieved."

Biden Administration Exerting Pressure on the House Saud

"By touting the release of the report, Joe Biden is flagging a big red sign to Mohammed bin Salman, a threat, even a blackmail attempt if you wish, in order to give him a clear message that Biden is intent on making a US policy change in the region, and that should MBS not cooperate, he will be named and shamed", says Ghassan Kadi, a Middle East expert and political analyst.

Ahead of the intelligence report's publication, US President Joe Biden and Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud held a phone conversation on 25 February discussing regional security, efforts to end the war in Yemen and "destabilising activities" by Iran in the Middle East.

Earlier, the White House signaled that it would return to "counterpart to counterpart" engagement, which meant that, unlike Donald Trump, Biden would communicate directly with the king, not with the crown prince.

Other aspects of US-Saudi cooperation have also undergone changes according to Axios. The Biden administration has declared the end of Washington's support for the Saudi-led coalition and its military operations in Yemen, and has nullified Trump's attempt to designate Yemen's Houthi political opposition movement as a terror organisation, while also putting the sale of cutting edge US weapons deal to the monarchy on hold.

Assessing the developments, the Guardian suggested on 17 February that Biden seeks to "sideline" the crown prince. The media outlet hinted at the possibility that Washington may go so far as to try to force Riyadh "to change the line of succession and demote" the crown prince. 

"Biden wants to send a double message to Saudi Arabia: on the one hand, he confirms the continuation of the relations between the two countries, the other hand it appears that the White House rejects the Saudi crown prince," suggested Sara Sherif, a political analyst and Israeli affairs journalist at Al Dostor newspaper.

Biden is unlikely to snub the crown prince, offered Kadi. Washington is additionally not interested in deepening the rift between the US and the kingdom, he added.

Saudi leadership and Crown Prince Mohammed appear to be interested in reducing tensions with the new US administration, according to reports. On 10 February, a Tel Aviv-based reporter for Axios, Barak Ravid, outlined a number of "signals" sent by Riyadh to Washington following Biden's inauguration.

·         Saudi women's rights activist Loujain al-Hathloul was released from prison;

·         Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal Bin Farhan welcomed the appointment of Tim Lenderking, the new US envoy for Yemen;

·         Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad announced judicial reforms to "establish civil law in the country for the first time, in addition to Islamic law".

Two Messages to Iran: Yemen Policy & Strike on Syria

Washington's foreign policy changes concerning Yemen should be seen not as a way to demonstrate Biden's "discontent" with the crown prince but as a measure "to appease Iran and to demonstrate to the Iranians that Biden is serious about resuming talks" about the JCPOA nuclear deal, according to Kadi.

Sherif agrees: Biden's decision to remove the armed Houthi political opposition faction from the list of terrorist organizations is a "first goodwill to Iran before the start of the negotiations about the nuclear deal, and to finish the conflict which has been going on from 2015".

The Biden administration has made it clear that the president is interested in returning to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). However, Washington and Tehran still remain at odds as to who should make the first step. The Islamic republic insists that the White House must first lift all sanctions against the country. The Biden administration, however, is floating the idea of concluding a broader deal with Iran which could include the latter's ballistic missile programme.

"Any deal with Iran will not go smoothly unless America can get the acceptance of the Saudis (and Israel of course, but this is a separate issue)", Kadi suggests. "The Saudis will not accept any American policy change unless pressured, and Biden is basically demonstrating to the Iranians that he is prepared to go as far as working against the interests of Saudi Arabia."

While the Saudis believe that America is their ally, the Biden administration is using a stick-and-carrot approach toward the kingdom as a means of reaching its own objectives in the region, according to the political analyst.

At the same time, the Pentagon's 26 February strike against alleged Iranian-linked fighters in eastern Syria is a signal to Iran to reduce its influence in the Arab republic in exchange for the atomic deal, Kadi offerred. This is how the Biden administration is demonstrating to regional players that Obama-era hawks are ready to "recalibrate" US foreign policy in the Middle East, he believes.


Wednesday, January 27, 2021

How Might Balance of Power Change in Syria Under the Biden Administration? 27 January 2021

Historian and analyst Ekaterina Blinova’s article which draws from an interview with Ghassan Kadi regarding the changes in Washington DC and how Syria may be affected.

https://sputnikglobe.com/20210127/how-might-balance-of-power-change-in-syria-under-the-biden-administration-1081888136.html

How Might Balance of Power Change in Syria Under the Biden Administration?

The crew of a T-72 tank of the 10th Division, 2nd Corps of the Syrian Arab Army are on combat alert off Katana, Damascus Province - Sputnik International
Subscribe
The return of Obama-era Middle East hawks in the new Biden administration spells danger for Syria, notes Ghassan Kadi, a political analyst of Syrian descent, adding there's not much room for manoeuvre left for Washington in the region.

On 20 January, Damascus sent its first message to newly sworn-in US President Joe Biden. Addressing a virtual session of the UN Security Council Syrian permanent representative to the United Nations Bashar al-Jaafari urged the White House to "stop acts of aggression and occupation", withdraw American troops from the region, and halt any attempts "to threaten Syria's sovereignty, unity, and territorial integrity".

Trump's Withdrawal from Syria Reversed

To assess the current balance of forces in the Syrian Arab Republic one needs to take a look where each major player stands, according to Ghassan Kadi, a Middle East expert and political analyst of Syrian descent. In reference to the Syrian government, Russia, Iran, Turkey, and the US coalition, he says: 

"As far as the military forces are concerned, there is no doubt in my opinion that Damascus and Russia have the upper hand now and in the foreseeable future".

The new administration's official foreign policy agenda does not envisage withdrawing US troops from the region anytime soon. Quite the contrary, it vows to:

·         "recommit to standing with civil society and pro-democracy partners on the ground";

·         "ensure the US is leading the global coalition to defeat ISIS* and use what leverage [the US has] in the region to help shape a political settlement to give more Syrians a voice";

·         "press all actors to pursue political solutions" as well as "recommit the United States to lead on humanitarian issues".

Ahead of Biden's inauguration, a US convoy of 60 vehicles including trucks loaded with weapons entered the Syrian province of Hasakah from Iraq, the Syria Times reported on 13 January citing local sources in the town of Al-Swedeyeh.

Even if Biden puts more boots on Syrian soil, it won't be in significant numbers to change the balance of power, according to Kadi, who believes that Washington will have to re-engage in dialogue with Russia and Turkey to proceed with its Middle Eastern agenda. Moscow's five-year operations in Syria as well as its partnership with Ankara and Tehran have considerably changed the region's status quo since the beginning of the 10-year war, he believes.

How Might Balance of Power Change in Syria Under the Biden Administration? - Sputnik International
Russian forces in the city of Amuda, north Syria

Will Biden Resolve US-Turkish Divide?

However, if the Biden administration manages to mend fences with Turkey and drive a wedge between Moscow and Ankara that will change the situation on the ground, according to Kadi.

"A softer American stance towards Turkey would mean to [Turkish President Recep Tayyip] Erdogan that America supports him against the Kurds, and Erdogan has made it clear to Trump and Obama before him, that you are either on my side or the Kurds", the political analyst notes.

Under this scenario, Ankara would also expect Washington to lift the December sanctions over Turkey's acquisition of the Russian-made S-400 missile defence systems as well as Turkey's return to the Lockheed Martin F-35 programme, among other issues. Still, this does not appear to be the case, as Anthony Blinken – former senior Obama official and Biden's new secretary of state – told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on 19 January that the incoming Cabinet would maintain restrictions on Turkey and did not rule out them being expanded in the future. Similarly, it is unlikely the Biden administration will withdraw support from the Kurdish-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) given that Blinken has long been a vocal proponent of arming Kurdish militias.

There are other signs indicating that US-Turkish tensions may escalate even further under the new administration, according to CNBC. The news agency recalled that in a January 2020 interview with The New York Times Biden called Erdogan an "autocrat" and suggested the US could support Turkish opposition leaders "to be able to take on and defeat Erdogan". "Not by a coup, but by the electoral process", the then-presidential contender specified. This remark was subsequently denounced as "interventionist" by Turkey.

How Might Balance of Power Change in Syria Under the Biden Administration? - Sputnik International
A picture taken on November 10, 2019, shows an Iranian flag in Iran's Bushehr nuclear power plant, during an official ceremony to kick-start works on a second reactor at the facility. - Bushehr is Iran's only nuclear power station and is currently running on imported fuel from Russia that is closely monitored by the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency.

Washington and Tehran

Biden's plan to return to the Iran nuclear deal, howev er,may have a positive impact on the situation in Syria, according to Kadi.

"If Biden eases the tensions with Iran, then this could have a positive flow-over effect on his relationships with both Russia and Syria and possibly ease sanctions", suggests the Middle East expert. "On the other hand, this will upset Israel and possibly Turkey unless Iran will be prepared to reciprocate by pulling out of Syrian affairs, and also unless Biden simultaneously strikes a deal with Erdogan that appeases the latter".

Tehran is calling upon the White House to restore the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). According to Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, Washington "can begin by removing all sanctions imposed since Trump assumed office and seek to re-enter and abide by the 2015 nuclear deal without altering its painstakingly negotiated terms".

For its part, the Biden administration has made it clear the US is "a long way" from reviving the deal and that it will be preceded by consultations with Israel and the Gulf monarchies. In addition, Washington is planning to include Iran's ballistic missile programme in the forthcoming talks, something that Tehran strongly opposes.

The Islamic Republic has gradually suspended its compliance with the nuclear deal's limits since 2019 in response to Donald Trump's unilateral withdrawal from the agreement in May 2018.

How Might Balance of Power Change in Syria Under the Biden Administration? - Sputnik International
Israeli soldiers work on tanks in the Israeli controlled Golan Heights near the border with Syria, not far from Lebanon border, Tuesday, July 28, 2020.
Syria, Israel, & Gulf States

When it comes to other regional players, including Israel and the Gulf nations, Kadi does not see them doubling down pressure on Damascus in the near term. While the Jewish state continues to attack alleged Iranian military positions in the region, the political analyst does not rule out some sort of peace deal between Damascus and Israel, akin to the Abraham Accords, in the distant future.

"Realistically, Syria has long walked away from the concept of the 'full liberation of Palestine' and the 'eradication of Israel'", the political analyst says, suggesting that the return of the occupied Golan Heights to Syria and the return of the West Bank to Palestinians are Syria's prime objectives. "In September 2020, a senior Syrian Statesman Mehdi Dakhl-Allah clearly said that a peace deal between Syria and Israel is closer than anyone thinks", Kadi remarks.

When it comes to the Arab states of the Persian Gulf, the political analyst suggests they may potentially end up joining reconstruction efforts by Damascus. However, a lot is hanging in the balance with the advent of the Obama-era foreign policy operatives, according to him.

Still, he believes that Russia will continue to play the role of a powerful broker that will prevent the region from sliding into chaos.

"Since Russian troops entered Syria, I have been saying that President Putin had a comprehensive peace plan in mind that brings all parties to the negotiating table; and this is because Russia is the only major power that is on relatively good terms with all parties involved", Kadi concludes.

*ISIS (Daesh, Islamic State) is a terrorist organisation banned in Russia and many other countries.


Former URL How Might Balance of Power Change in Syria Under the Biden Administration? - 27.01.2021, Sputnik International (sputniknews.com)

Tuesday, December 8, 2020

AFTER TRUMP THE FLOOD By Ghassan and Intibah Kadi. December 8 2020

A look into the contradictions of so-called progressive movements and how they soon will fall apart as an alliance.

http://thesaker.is/after-trump-the-flood/?fbclid=IwAR1_Hr5VigSa5bpHKGDsEc4q9Hc49QaFGUrE5lww4fBvv0TaNrQJEhAASnc

After Trump the flood:

by Ghassan and Intibah Kadi for the Saker Blog

Whether there was indeed voter fraud and rigging, and I personally believe there was and at a huge scale, it seems that, by hook or by crook, Joe Biden will become the next President of the United States of America; and we should prepare ourselves for this, regardless of our political points of view and inclinations.

The presence of Biden in the Whitehouse will definitely change course on a number of issues, both domestically within the USA and overseas, but the objective of this article is to shed a bit of light on what is likely to happen to the current pro-Biden camp and the diverse array of supporters who have helped elevate him to this position.

In more ways than one, I have always seen in Syria a microcosm of world politics and conflicts. Long before the enemies of Syria decided to launch their attack in March 2011, the masterminds of the conspiracy put the most unlikely allies together, only united by their hatred of Syria. Back then I called them the ‘Anti-Syrian Cocktail’. Those allies each had their own agenda regarding Syria and had nothing in common other than their desire to remove President Bashar Al-Assad from office. Among the issues they disagreed on was his replacement, how to share the spoils, not to mention the alternative political system to install, Syria’s future position in the region, international alliances, and so forth.

With a whole array of enemies, Trump inadvertently caused a rounding up of a very loosely-united anti-Trump-cocktail; only united by their hatred of him. So, let’s face it and acknowledge it; they will never let him win the November 2020 elections. Though only united by their hatred of Trump, there are too many of them, they are powerful; extremely powerful, and they are very determined to get rid of him by any means possible, legal, illegal, using tactics like bribery, intimidation, threats, thuggery, and they have no one to fear because, collectively they have given each other impunity, covering each other’s backs and producing a culture where criticizing them is taboo. Crucially, the ‘law’ and the media are on their side.

With the exception of the Clintons and Bidens perhaps, the other Democrats have their traditional political opposition to Trump, even when they see and know he is making good decisions. This is the golden rule of political duopoly. But the Clintons and the Bidens have personal dirt on them and even blood on their hands that they want to keep the lid on in order to avoid prosecution and possibly even jail. They are likely to remain united after a Trump loss, but the same cannot be said about other odd couples.

Most of the other November 2020 Biden supporters are destined to be on a collision course, and they will soon enough realize that their differences are much stronger than what united them and that they were taken for fools. None will be disappointed more than the so-called ‘Progressives’.

The definition of the term progressive has morphed quite significantly over the last decade or so. Currently, it seems to include any one who stands up against Trump; and this is the primordial cause of the confusion and reason for future conflict between them. In reality, what defines the term ‘progressive’ in any existing progressive movement can be totally different from that of another movement; and the difference is not necessarily marginal. Being ‘progressive’ in the 21st Century implies the presence of a very specific agenda or slogan that may or may not be compatible with other ‘progressive’ agendas.

Take the Assange supporters for example. The moment they wake up from their deep slumber, they will realize that the man they supported to become President is actually the leader of the political party that has put Assange in jail for exposing his party’s dirt. I hope that Trump pulls the rug from underneath their feet and pardons Assange before the 20th of January 2021. But will this show the Assange supporters who is who? Not necessarily because if they wanted to open up their eyes and see, they would have seen from day one that Assange’s biggest enemy is none but Hillary Clinton and that she is the one responsible for his demise; not Trump.

But the Assange supporters did not play a major role in the elections; at least not directly, and at least not as much as their closest ‘progressives’; the peace activists.

The Democrats and their cohorts have portrayed Trump as a warmonger. When peace activists eventually see that Biden will have to serve his warlord masters and start new wars across the globe, they will have to think again. He is already touting hiring well known hawks in key positions in his forthcoming cabinet and team of advisors, with his Defense Secretary reportedly selected.

When it comes to street power however, none has been more powerful and effective as the combination of BLM and the environmentalists.

BLM activists have just fallen a tad short of blaming Trump for an American five-century long history of racism. But how much do BLM activists really care about Climate Change and specifically about Greta-type environmental vision of how the world should run? Moreover, most environmentalists, if not all of them, are anti-vaxxers. When they see that Biden is the trump card for the vaccine empire, they may wish they didn’t take to the streets to unseat the Trump card they had in the Whitehouse. If there is/was one person standing up against the malevolent “Gates vaccine”, it has to be Trump, and the single-issue anti-vaxxers are against Trump. Try to make sense of this.

This is not to forget and ignore that the Climate Change activists will soon find out, the hard way, that Biden will not come clean on the zero-emission promise; not only because he doesn’t want to, not only because he goes to bed with the petro-dollar lobby, but also because he does not have the alternative technology to replace fossil fuel with.

In and out and in between the BLM and Climate Change activists, what do the Climate Change activists have in common ideologically with BLM and at what stage will they break ranks and decide to go against one another? What will happen after either one of them accuses the other, rightfully I must say, that they have been used as pawns by the ‘Deep State’?

And who said that the BLM has more in common with the LBGTI community and activists than it does with the gun lobby? Sections of the BLM likely also love guns.

And speaking of Greta, for how much longer will she able to keep up the fallacy that her agenda and those of her friends Soros and the World Economic Forum (WEF), and its members that include Monsanto, are actually compatible?

And for the right or wrong reasons, who is to guarantee that the tens of millions of Trump supporters are going to sit and accept that the election win of Biden is legitimate and that they have to swallow it? Will this cause social strife, violence on the streets, even worse perhaps civil war and much more? We don’t know. What we do know is that a controversy about election results should have been dealt with in total transparency in order to put all concerns to rest. But this is not happening, and it is not going to happen because a decision has been made against Trump dictating that he must lose.

But the after-Trump-effect is not necessarily going to affect only America. Right-wing politics, including the extreme version of it, have been on the rise in the world, and especially in Western Europe. And if the Neo-Nazis look threatening because their ideology is based on a very dark chapter in human history, what do we really know is on the agenda of the forces that have combined the very diverse elements of the anti-Trump cocktail in order to serve its objective(s)? What is it really that they want?

Hitler was at least clear about his mission statement. He wanted an Aryan Third Reich to rule the world for a thousand years. The rest of the world did not have to wonder and ponder about his intentions. He sent a very clear message to rest of the world, a message clear enough to unite the West with the Bolsheviks against him.

But today, we have an invisible driving force that has managed to put together an array of the most unlikely partners in order to fight a common cause. Do we not at least ask the question ‘why?’

In the case of Syria, the answer to the ‘why’ question was to topple Assad, albeit without having a plan that went further, at least as a united coalition. It would have been impossible for the plotters and planners to each disclose what they had in mind. In reality, they did not have any plan at all other than replacing him with a void. Fast-forward; the get-rid-of-Trump plan is very similar; get rid of him without having a plan so as to ensure all participants are pleased and appeased, because the plan seems to also be based on replacing Trump with chaos and anarchy.

The irony here is that the anti-Trump-cocktail is not only comprised of his political opponents, mainstream media, social media, but also includes government agencies such as the DOJ, the CIA, the FBI and even some American Republicans.

Briefly put, Trump has been chosen to lose, but after him, the flood is imminent. The current allies who lobbied against him will very shortly come to the realization that they are no longer united, and some will even turn into enemies fighting over the spoils of the win.

In more ways than one, they will harvest the fruit of the seeds they planted, and they will rightfully deserve all consequences. A Biden win is the most befitting ‘punishment’ of the anti-Trump cocktail.

Apart from the hapless American populace, the biggest loser of this all is the international stature of America as the leader of the so-called Democratic Free World. In a fitting blowback for these pernicious actors, Trump would have proven without a shadow of doubt, that the Deep State is so deep and powerful, powerful enough to mobilize its own enemies to serve it. At that point, to quote the rhetoric of the “Great Reset” agenda, but again, as blowback, things will never be the same again for these dangerous characters.

Also published on some other sites as below:
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/after-trump-flood

https://www.dailyhandle.com/after-trump-the-flood/

https://newlevellers.blogspot.com/2020/12/after-trump-flood.html

https://trulytimes.com/after-trump-the-flood.html

https://understandingdeeppolitics.org/after-trump-the-flood/

https://rielpolitik.com/2020/12/13/68961/

After Trump the flood: | UPROOTED PALESTINIANS: SALAM ALQUDS ALAYKUM (wordpress.com)

https://dawsoncountyjournal.com/blog/2020/12/13/after-trump-the-flood/

https://realverifiednews.com/after-trump-the-flood/

https://www.colbynews.com/after-trump-the-flood/

https://tradeforprofit.net/2020/12/after-trump-the-flood/

https://finanz.dk/after-trump-the-flood/

https://news.stknews.com/news?s=us&n=6947680

https://thedailycoin.org/2020/12/14/after-trump-the-flood/

https://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=%22By+Ghassan+and+Intibah+Kadi+Recording+a+Thousand%22&d=4842232165631440&mkt=en-AU&setlang=en-US&w=c3vKl3ZwzNiZ_hv1imIbF1mD2OM_YZYn