RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20521/qatar-al-jazeera-terrorists

The long-term agenda looks as if the US and Qatar intend to try to elbow Israel out of any say in what “humanitarian aid” is eventually be brought into Gaza

The US seems to believe that Qatar is aligned with it; the US has its major Middle Eastern airbase there, without which Qatar would be a vulnerable target. However, the report reveals Qatar as aligned with countries such as Iran, Russia, and China, and groups such as Al Qaeda and the Taliban, which seek to replace the West. Qatar supported the Taliban until Afghan President Mohammad Ashraf Ghani fled in his plane. Then Qatar offered to mediate.

It is the same act — “first the arsonist then the firefighter” — that Qatar is putting over on the Biden administration with Hamas. First, Qatar funds Hamas to the gills, hosts Hamas’s billionaire leaders in its capital, Doha, and allows Deif to declare war on Qatar’s megaphone, Al Jazeera. Then, the Qataris pretend to be impartial mediators, and the Biden administration pretends to buy their act.

It is no secret that Qatar and its news organization Al-Jazeera have long been serving as champions, protectors and lifelines for Hamas and other terrorist groups, such as Al Qaeda affiliates and the Taliban.

“There are many channels who are biased, but this is past bias. Now Al-Jazeera is a voice for terrorists.” — Mohammed Fahmy, the former Cairo bureau chief of Al-Jazeera, reported by Eli Lake, aawsat.com, June 25, 2017.

In light of the new damning evidence of Al-Jazeera’s employing terrorists and its close connections to Hamas and other terrorist organizations, perhaps it is time for Israel and Western countries to learn from the Arabs, who understood many years ago that Qatar and its Al-Jazeera are not platforms for peace or news, but rather perpetuators of terrorism.

Qatar and its vast media network, Al Jazeera, have a long history, which, according to a report by the Middle East Research Institute (MEMRI), promote terrorism worldwide. The report notes:

“Al-Jazeera, therefore, should not be discussed as a means of telecommunications, but instead as an unyielding and forceful political tool of Qatari foreign policy under the guise of a mass media network.”

It was this communications powerhouse, the report continues, that basically drove Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak from power and in 2012 replaced him with the Muslim Brotherhood’s Mohamed Morsi, who was also driven from power a year later.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20522/feminists-hamas-sexual-violence

In November 2023, it was reported that the United Nations’ Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women and Girls, Reem Alsalem, notwithstanding overwhelming evidence to the contrary, claimed the evidence against Hamas “was ‘not solid’ enough to warrant a statement” — to which London’s Victims’ Commissioner, Claire Waxman, replied: “How can we talk about eliminating violence against women and girls if we are tacitly saying its acceptable to rape Jewish ones?”

Alsalem, from Jordan, claims the charges against Israeli forces are “reasonably credible,” but refuses to divulge the source. In reality, no credible or proven instance of this behaviour by Israel’s forces in Gaza since October 7 has been publicly recorded.

“Organizations that fight for LGBT rights condemned the country that allows freedom, and marched for a terrorist organization that punishes gay people with death.” — Jared Kushner, townhall.com, March 7, 2024.

“Above all, we must at all times remember what intellectuals habitually forget: that people matter more than concepts and must come first. The worst of all despotisms is the heartless tyranny of ideas.” — Paul Johnson, historian, thepublicdiscourse.com, January 23, 2023.

Early women’s liberation movements, forerunners to present feminist activism, were founded to proclaim women’s rights to social equality. Radical feminism, as a narrow expression of the original movement, fails spectacularly in exemplifying society’s moral and ethical precepts. Its advocates appear to prioritize narcissistic, egocentric identity ideologies over the sanctity, dignity, and ontological security of the individual woman.

“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” — Elie Wiesel, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, December 10, 1986.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/03/china_s_digital_fentanyl.html

While all eyes may be on TikTok right now as Congress debates the app’s future, this type of influence by the Chinese regime isn’t new. It goes back to the Chinese Communist Party’s goal of hegemony — to win without fighting. 

With the promise of massive profits in China, institutions like Hollywood started self-censoring for a piece of China’s market. For decades, the Chinese regime has used its soft power influence to shape perceptions in society, ultimately impacting politics. 

As French philosopher Descartes said, “I think, therefore I am.” James Scott, founder of the Center for Cyber-Influence Operations Studies wondered, “But who does one become when the thought is hijacked?”

TikTok takes that a step further, where the thought isn’t being hijacked, the thought is being planted. 

With over 170 million Americans on the app, stories of teens signing up for some laughs, but ending up dead doing challenges, have been making headlines. 

Is this just for entertainment, or is it, as some say “digital fentanyl” with deadly consequences?

That’s where soft power comes in. 

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20519/china-unrestricted-warfare

China-linked hackers appear to be looking to attack U.S. infrastructure, especially key components such as the electrical grid, water reservoirs and treatment plants, pipelines, and transportation and communications systems, among other targets.

The goal is seemingly to disrupt the U.S. everything critical to life – if you have no electricity, your cellphone will not work; no water will come out of the tap; gas pumps will not pump gas; flights and trains will stop, and disease from disabled sewage treatment plants will spread. There will be havoc and panic. The government and military will be unable to protect the nation. That is what is meant by “unrestricted warfare.” Not a bullet was fired. It did not have to be. According to Sun Tzu’s The Art of War, it is perfect.

What are some of the steps that should be taken?

The West has correctly identified the CCP as the malign threat that it is; now we have a responsibility to put into place the measures and deterrents to prevent it from attacking us through cyberspace or any other way. Let us not wait until we experience a 9/11-scale cyberattack that could be far more damaging to the U.S. than what took place on that dark day more than 20 years ago.

If there is one thing FBI Director Christopher Wray has been consistent on, it is the threat of Communist China across a wide range of fronts. At an unprecedented event on July 6, 2022, Wray and his British counterpart, MI5 Director General Ken McCallum, held a joint public appearance – the first ever — to discuss the growing security challenge posed by China. Evidently, they saw the matter as urgent.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20514/sharia-violence-against-women

“Sharia-linked violence is inflicted upon women in the Middle East, Africa, Europe, and Asia. This includes the recent extreme sexual violence committed against Israeli women in October 2023 by Hamas proven by the UN; the infliction of sexual slavery on Yezidi women by the Islamic State (IS); killing of Iranian women for not wearing the hijab; the trafficking, kidnapping, and conversion of Coptic Christian girls in Egypt; kidnapping of girls and women in Nigeria by Boko Haram; mass attacks on women in Germany in 2015; the rape of girls in the UK by the so-called ‘grooming gangs’; the forced conversion, kidnapping and murder of Hindu girls in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh to name a few.” — Press release, March 8, 2024.

Of especial importance is that the complaint shows how many aspects of Sharia directly contradict what the UN claims it stands up for. By relying heavily on UN documents, and quoting from the UN conventions that back them, the complaint essentially asks the UN to do what it should be but is not doing.

The complaint further shows that, according to the UN’s own definitions, the issues it raises cannot be deemed “Islamophobic”….

To redress these abuses, the complaint asks the UN Human Rights Council to do several things. One consists of requesting that the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), which claims to represent the Muslim world at the UN, provide a “single consolidated response” as well as “one standardized, worldwide codification of the Sharia and an explanation as to why Sharia should not be considered a fundamental cause of violation of women’s human rights.”

The complaint also requests the appointment of “two non-Muslim rapporteurs, one who is a Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief and the second, a Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women…”

Should, as is likely, the UN not respond, it will have, once again, proven itself a defunct and corrupt organization.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/03/22/leo-varadkar-vs-the-people/

‘I am no longer best man to be Irish PM’, said a BBC headline this week, summarising Leo Varadkar’s resignation speech. The truth, Leo, is that you were never the best man to be Irish PM. He was never elected by the people to be taoiseach, instead securing that seat of power by appointment and backroom dealing. And once there, once he’d been gifted the highest office in the land by his allies in Dublin 4, he wielded government not for the people, but against them. He bent Ireland to what was essentially a vast real-time experiment in social re-engineering and thought control.

An unelected ruler using his power and clout to correct the country and improve the people? There’s a word for that. And it isn’t ‘democracy’.

Varadkar announced his resignation on Wednesday. In an emotional speech he said he was stepping down as leader of Fine Gael immediately and will step down as taoiseach once his successor has been chosen. His ‘shock departure’ followed the people’s crushing defeat of the twin referendum he put forward. Overwhelming majorities rejected his proposals to alter the Irish constitution to update its definition of ‘family’ and to fix what Varadkar damned as its ‘very sexist’ reference to a woman’s ‘duties’ in the home. No thanks, said the electorate, in the biggest ever referendum loss by an Irish government.

Even the fact that Varadkar’s stepping down is widely seen as a ‘shock move’ speaks to the haughtiness, the outright unworldliness, of his political kind. To many of us it makes perfect sense that a PM would bugger off after suffering a historically unprecedented bloody nose from voters. But it seems the Varadkar clique thought they could ride it out. ‘No biggie’ was their view. Until his ‘shock departure’ on Wednesday, reports the Guardian, ‘the political fallout from the [referendum] debacle had widely been expected to be limited’.

Who expected that? I’m sure those voters who gleefully seized the opportunity of the referendum to give the middle finger to Varadkar and the rest of the establishment didn’t expect the impact of their discontent to be ‘limited’. It is a testament to the arrogance of technocracy, to the chasm that has emerged between Ireland’s rulers and Ireland’s ruled, that the Dublin establishment thought it could shrug off the largest drubbing it has ever received from voters.

In the end, tellingly, it seems it was disgruntlement from within his own party ranks, rather than the disgruntlement of the oiks, that convinced Varadkar to go. He was facing ‘increasing discontent within Fine Gael’, with some party bigwigs worried he’s an ‘electoral liability’. Everything you need to know about the man is contained in the fact that he essentially shrugged when the masses rose up against him but bolted when his fellow clerisy members criticised him. To the technocrat, the disapproval of their dinner-party circle carries far more weight than the discontent of ordinary people.

https://www.jns.org/the-russian-dictators-double-terrorism-standards/

Following Friday’s massacre at the Crocus City Hall concert venue in the outskirts of Moscow, Russian President Vladimir Putin delivered a video address to his nation. The slaying of “dozens of peaceful, innocent people … including children, teenagers and women,” he said, was a “bloody, barbaric, terrorist act.”

After praising security services, firefighters, medical teams and “ordinary citizens” who aided in rescuing the victims, he declared that “it is already obvious that we are faced not just with a carefully, cynically planned terrorist attack, but with a prepared and organized mass murder of peaceful, defenseless people.”

Yes, he added, “The criminals calmly and purposefully set out to kill, to shoot at point-blank range our citizens, our children. Just like the Nazis once carried out massacres in the occupied territories, they decided to stage a show execution, a bloody act of intimidation.”

He proceeded to vow: “All perpetrators, organizers and customers of this crime will suffer fair and inevitable punishment—whoever they are, whoever guides them. I repeat, we will identify and punish everyone who stands behind the terrorists, who prepared this atrocity, this attack on Russia, on our people.”

Not much detective work proved necessary, though, since Islamic State Khorasan (ISIS-K) promptly and proudly took credit for the heinous assault in a statement published on the Telegram channel of the group’s affiliate news agency, Amaq. This didn’t prevent Putin from a subsequent attempt to pin the event on Ukraine, despite zero evidence of Kiyiv involvement.

ttps://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20494/ukraine-unintended-consequences

Though Putin remains personally popular to a degree that would make any Western leader green with envy, the war is clearly losing popular backing. Latest polls, some sanctioned by Kremlin-controlled organs, show that the war enjoys no more than 30 to 40 percent approval among Russians. More interestingly, between 50 and 60 percent of Russians oppose a second wave of military call-up, something that the Kremlin’s military planners regard as imperative if Russia means to stay in the game.

Instead, NATO has found two new members, and not just anyone, because Finland and Sweden built part of their national identity on neutrality. Even worse for Putin, the US-led alliance is seeding up membership procedures for at least four other countries, notably Albania…

Being forced to sell its oil at a juicy discount to China is the last thing that Russia might have wanted, had it not been forced to do so because of Western sanctions.

What is amazing is that all those involved in this tragedy seem to be unable to read the runes even when plainly explained to them, notably that a war fought half-heartedly, almost as a weekend hobby, could go on without producing a winner and a loser, something without which no war can ever end.

Though Russian President Vladimir Putin remains personally popular to a degree that would make any Western leader green with envy, the war against Ukraine is clearly losing popular backing. Latest polls, some sanctioned by Kremlin-controlled organs, show that the war enjoys no more than 30 to 40 percent approval among Russians.

Even a year ago, some Russia-watchers believed that President Vladimir Putin might end his war on Ukraine with something like a victory in time before what could be his last re-election campaign.

However, now as Russians go to the polls, no victory is even remotely in sight.