Showing posts with label Charlie Hebdo. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Charlie Hebdo. Show all posts

Monday, 16 February 2015

Another alleged killer shot by police

There is a pattern evolving, from Sydney, to the Charlie Hebdo killings in Paris, and now, in Copenhagen.  In each case the alleged killer was 'known to police' and was shot dead by the police.

Copenhagen shootings suspect was 'known to police'
Suspect shot dead in Denmark’s capital after one person was gunned down at cafe and another at a synagogue


From al-Jazeera

19 February, 2014

The gunman shot dead by police after a double terror attack on a cafe and a synagogue in Copenhagen that claimed two lives was known to Danish intelligence, the head of the country’s security service has said.

Jens Madsen said the suspected killer may have been “inspired by militant Islamist propaganda issued by IS [Islamic State] and other terror organisations”, but it was not yet known whether he had travelled to Iraq or Syria before the attacks.


The suspect was from Copenhagen but has not been named. He had been “on the radar” of the intelligence services, police said. They have recovered a weapon believed to have been used in the first attack.

Armed Danish police raided an internet cafe in a major operation in Copenhagen near the spot where officers killed the suspected gunman behind fatal shootings, local media said.

TV2, which reported from the scene, showed footage of armed officers in dark uniforms outside the internet cafe and said at least two people had been taken away by police. “It’s part of our investigation,” a police official told broadcaster DR.


The killings began at about 3.30pm local time on Saturday, when a man attacked the Krudttønden cafe during a debate featuring the controversial Swedish artist Lars Vilks, who had depicted the prophet Muhammad in cartoons. Finn Nørgaard, 55, a film director attending the event, was reportedly shot dead at close range after going outside for an unknown reason at the time the attacker struck.

At about 1am, 37-year-old Dan Uzan was killed while guarding the synagogue in Krystalgade during a bat mitzvah celebration. Two police officers were also hit, but their injuries were said not to be life-threatening.

The Danish prime minister, Helle Thorning-Schmidt, condemned what she called “a cynical act of terror” and said she was “happy and relieved that police have disarmed the suspected perpetrator behind the two shootings”. She said Denmark had “lived through some hours which we will never forget”.

Vilks, who was unhurt after the gunman was unable to enter the cafe, said he believed he was the target of the first attack.



What other motive could there be? It’s possible it was inspired by Charlie Hebdo,” he said, referring to the killing of 12 people at the offices of the Paris-based satirical magazine by Islamist terrorists last month. Vilks depicted Muhammad as a dog in 2007 and has been the subject of repeated attacks and death threats.

A police operation was under way on Sunday, with officers searching a flat in the residential area of Mjølnerparken, in the Nørrebro district of the city, near where the suspect was shot and killed in the early hours of the morning.



Israel’s prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, said the attack at Copenhagen’s main synagogue should encourage Jews to leave Europe, in comments that disappointed Jair Melchior, Denmark’s chief rabbi.

This wave of attacks is expected to continue,” Netanyahu said. “Jews deserve security in every country, but we say to our Jewish brothers and sisters, Israel is your home. We are preparing and calling for the absorption of mass immigration from Europe.”


His reaction was in stark contrast to that of Thorning-Schmidt, who called for unity in Denmark. Speaking outside the synagogue on Sunday morning, she said: “The Jewish community is a large and integrated part of Danish society … We are together with you in your grief … Together we will shield Denmark from the kind of attack we saw last night.”

The British prime minister, David Cameron, condemned the attacks, writing on Twitter: “Free speech must always be protected. My thoughts are with the Danish people.”

In Washington, the White House said the attack was deplorable and offered assistance in the investigation.

A photo issued by Danish police showing a suspect in the Copenhagen shootingclA photo issued by Danish police showing a suspect in the Copenhagen shooting. Photograph: Copenhagen Police/AP



The first attack was thought to have been an attempt to murder Vilks, who survived after taking shelter in a cold store. Three police were wounded in the shooting, in which the cafe was sprayed with bullets. 

The event at the cafe, known for its jazz concerts, had been organised by Vilks. It was entitled Art, Blasphemy and the Freedom of Expression and had been subject to tight security, with people searched as they entered.

Police later shot dead a suspect who had arrived at an inner-city address they had under surveillance. Officers described the deceased man as “a person who could be interesting in relation to the investigation”. They said after police called out to him near a railway station in the inner-city neighbourhood of Nørrebro “he opened fire against the police and was thereafter shot”.

Police said afterwards they believed the suspect was responsible for both attacks and, while investigations continued, they had no initial indications that more than one person was involved.

Dan Rosenberg Asmussen, the head of Copenhagen’s Jewish community, paid tribute to the man killed at the synagogue. He told the Danish newspaper Berlingske: “Dan and his family have paid an unreasonably high price. We are grateful for people who do something to ensure we can conduct Jewish service

Dan was one of those. Many people can be grateful that he was there last night.”
The French ambassador to Denmark, François Zimeray, was at the cafe when the first shooting took place. “They fired on us from the outside. It was the same intention as Charlie Hebdo except they didn’t manage to get in,” he told Agence France-Press.

Bullets went through the doors and everyone threw themselves to the floor. Intuitively I would say there were at least 50 gunshots, and the police here are saying 


Helle Merete Brix, one of the organisers of the event, told TV2 News that she and Vilks hid in the cold store of the cafe during the attack.

She said: “I was in a cold room and kept hold of Lars Vilks’s hand. He was very cool. We stood and told each other bad jokes. His bodyguards did a tremendous job. It is a dramatic and unpleasant reminder of what we are up against in these times.”

Later she told the Associated Press that she had seen a masked man running past. She added: “I clearly consider this as an attack on Lars Vilks,” saying she was eventually ushered away with Vilks by one of his Danish police guards.

Police examine the bullet-marked cafe where the first attack took place.

Police examine the bullet-marked cafe where the first attack took place. Photograph: Mathias Oegendal/EPA


On Saturday night, reports suggested police had found a VW Polo abandoned a short drive from the city’s cultural centre, which may have been the getaway car in the first attack.

Jodie Ginsberg, the chief executive of Index on Censorship, said: “The use of violence on a gathering exploring the intersection of religious and artistic freedom should send shivers down our spines. The Charlie Hebdo murders inspired intensified public debate about free speech and its value.

Many people who had previously given little thought to free speech were drawn for the first time into online discussions or attended events to help them get a better understanding of the issues. It would be terrible if violent acts such as that in Copenhagen shut down free speech even further.”

An armed policeman on guard at the site of the attack.






Vilks, 68, provoked condemnations from governments including those of Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Egypt and Jordan when he depicted the prophet Muhammad as a dog in 2007, and has since faced several attacks and death threats.

He has described himself as a constant target. Several art galleries in Sweden declined to show the drawings, citing security concerns and fear of violence.

A Pennsylvania woman received a 10-year prison term last year for a plot to kill Vilks, while in 2010 two brothers tried to burn down his house in southern Sweden. He has lived since under heavy security and now travels with police protection when in Denmark.

After the Charlie Hebdo attack, Vilks told the Associated Press that even fewer organisations were inviting him to give lectures. He also said he thought Sweden’s Säpo security service, which deploys bodyguards to protect him, would step up his security. “This will create fear among people on a whole different level than we’re used to,” he said. “Charlie Hebdo was a small oasis. Not many dared do what they did.”

Vilks also spoke to the Wall Street Journal about the Charlie Hebdoattacks, and said he refused to hide away. He added: “Police protection doesn’t offer a 100% guarantee as we saw with Charlie Hebdo but it goes pretty far. I don’t have to lie awake at night listening for odd sound.”

Denmark has seen a number of controversies featuring the prophet Muhammad. In 2005, the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten depicted him as a terrorist with a bomb, sparking widespread unrest. Vilks was not one of the artists involved.


Monday, 26 January 2015

Persecution and double standards in France

Glorification of terrorism: a teenager prosecuted in France because of a cartoon on Facebook


by numerama, 17/1/2015
Translated by 
Jenny Bright for Tlaxcala 



25 January, 2015

A 16 year-old teenager in France was indicted for glorifying terrorism after he published a cartoon representing a character with the Charlie Hebdo journal, hit by bullets, with an accompanying ironic comment. 

The current situation is, to say the least, paradoxical. Last weekend, following the terrible attacks that took place right in the middle of Paris, large rallies were held throughout the country to denounce terrorism and to remind the world of France's commitment to the fundamental principles of freedom of expression and freedom of the press.


But since last week, it has become clear that a stiffening is taking place in France with the appearance of dozens of lawsuits based on the “defense or glorification of terrorism” offense, which carries a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment and a fine of 75,000 euros (or 7 years in prison and 100,000 euros fine if the Internet is involved, because the latter is 
now an aggravating circumstance).

For example, midweek, the Associated Press identified 54 legal proceedings running on that ground, sometimes with other grievances held against those arrested. In some cases, the judgment has already been made: fifteen months imprisonment for this Ardennes inhabitant, 
three months imprisonment for this one living in Toulon or a year imprisonment for this Nanterre inhabitant.

The number of cases has since increased. 
Le Monde listed 70 in an article published a few hours after that of the AP.

A CARTOON ON FACEBOOK 

Lately, a young man of 16 was arrested and placed in custody. 
France 3 indicates that on Thursday, the teenager was presented before a juvenile judge to decide if he should be indicted for glorifying terrorism. For its part, the Public Prosecutor’s Department for minors of the city of Nantes asked the next day for his release on bail until the Court hearing.

His fault? Having published on his Facebook profile "
a cartoon representing a character with the Charlie Hebdo journal, hit by bullets, accompanied by an ironic commentary" the TV channel explained.

[Here is the cartoon, 
as published by Norman Finkelstein, and which was widely pubished on the Net]




FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND ITS LIMITS 

The multiplication of procedures for glorification of terrorism poses the question of the limits of freedom of expression, which seems to be getting cracked down on since the attacks. A situation that alarms many non-governmental organisations such as the League of Human Rights, which 
fears the reflex of drastic security measures, and Amnesty International.

“Freedom of expression does not have favourites. Now is not the time for knee-jerk prosecutions, but measured responses that protect lives and respect the rights of all” 
explains the NGO, which fears that some arrests made ​​in the heat of emotion and firmness in fact violate freedom of expression.

Because although everyone may agree to defend freedom of expression when it's all plain sailing into the wind, we should not forget that it also applies to messages that may be unpleasant or revolting. “
If we do not believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we do not believe in it at all[1]” explains philosopher Noam Chomsky.

Does this mean that we must stand idly by? No, of course not. Some cases likely deserve legal punishment if there is anything to punish (especially if other grievances are included in the procedure). But the emotion aroused by the attacks raises fears of a general lack of discernment that does not contribute to the administration of justice in good conditions



[1] Interview by John Pilger on BBC's The Late Show, November 25, 1992. See also : “If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don't like. Goebbels was in favor of freedom of speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you're in favor of freedom of speech, that means you're in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise.” Noam Chomsky, in Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media, 1992.


Friday, 23 January 2015

The Rothschild family took over Charlie Hebdo in December

I'm not normally given to conspiracy theory regarding the Roithschilds and the NWO, but I found this interesting

Media report: Rothschild family took over Charlie Hebdo in December
Medienbericht: Rothschild-Familie übernahm Charlie Hebdo im Dezember


19 January, 2015

According to reports, the Dutch business magazine "Quote" means the Rothschild banking family took over the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. The editors of the magazine Critical religion had been attacked on 01/07/2015 by several Islamist bombers. In this case, 13 people died, including the chief editor of the magazine. According to "Quote" there have been discussions  about the acquisition of the publishing company and ultimately a take-over was op;ted for.


"There were some serious objections to the takeover frommy uncle Baron Edouard de Rothschild. Some relatives wanted to block the purchase because that would make us a political force in the media . We want to void this at all costs. We have nothing to do with politics. Ultimately, the critics in the family were overruled.”


The interview was about the purchase of the French newspaper "Liberation", which now published with the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. A million was spent on this. The magazine was launched on Wednesday with a million copies and reached worldwide fame. According to "Quote" Philippe de Rothschild has had a majority stake in the newspaper chain which incorporates the Charlie Hebdo editorila baord is now housed, since December, . The interview was published on 18/12/2014.

Rothschild is the name of a Jewish family whose roots from 1500 can be found in in the German archives. Member of the family have been known since the 18th century, mainly as bankers. They were among the 19th century's most influential and important financiers of European countries. The parent company of the banking business was MA Rothschild & Sons in Frankfurt. The family continues to serve on various successor institutions in the banking business, mainly in  the area of investment banking and asset management. Today the banking family plays a much smaller role. The banks and institutions that are still family owned, are hardly related any more and form little market share. 

Nevertheless, the family is one of the richest in the world.


The original article is HERE


DE ROTHSCHILD'S DRUKKEN CHARLIE HEBDO: ’WIJ TWIJFELDEN OF WE KRANT MOETEN UITGEVEN'



Thursday, 22 January 2015

RECOMMENDED: the Secret Agenda behind Charlie Hebdo

I recommend that EVERYONE watch this video, whatever version of events you believe.

Charlie Hebdo - The Hidden Agenda Exposed [UPDATED 1-20-15]




Wednesday, 21 January 2015

Michael Khazin on the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attacks in France

Who Stands to Benefit From Terrorist Attacks in France?

by Mikhail Khazin


translation by: Mikhael (thanks a lot Mikhael!! The Saker)


The scale of the events in France and the intensity of the ensuing panic turned out to be so massive that even the most politically unprepared people realized that the stability of EU is facing an enormous threat. And it doesn’t even matter if the French authorities are successful in neutralizing the current situation – it may repeat on a much larger scale. It is impossible to stop this process within the framework of the modern “tolerant democracy” – placing well armed professional security units in front of every building in every city is simply not an option and everything else would be ineffective. An honest assessment of risks associated with similar events, even just in terms of insurance claims, will show that the entire economy is at risk of going down the drain. And I am talking about world-wide economy. Since I have written here a forecast that, among other things, contains some information about year 2015, I am obliged to add some commentary. The first question that begs an answer is: who stands to profit?

Here I will simply list possible beneficiaries. First choice – the US. The authorities in that country realized that the influence of opposition elites (the ones I wrote about in my forecast) is increasing so much that it is not only jeopardizing the agreements around the Trans Atlantic Free Trade Area (TAFTA), but also becoming a threat to the pro-American elites’ hold on power in Europe. Orban in Hungary, Zeman in Czech Republic, Marin Le Pen in France… All of these represent very negative processes for the US. Therefore, the situation must be blown up, “democracy” must be tucked away and a strict dictatorship must be established. A pro-American dictatorship that is, which will thoughtlessly follow orders from Washington without the need to engage in any kind of “democratic” procedures. In other words, install “pinochets” in every EU country complete with all the “bells and whistles” that always accompany these types of regimes: “death squadrons”, rollback of all social security standards, removal of state regulations – that is total liberalization. And, of course, along with these developments a free trade area with the US will be established. By the way, the refusal by French authorities to allow “Front populaire” to participate in the “unity march” fits the above scenario very neatly – what kind of “democracy” and “unity” is this when a quarter of the native French (!) population is being rudely shoved aside.

I also would like to note that within the US elite there are several groups each of them having their own channels which could be used to stimulate and organize terrorist attacks that will fit their agenda. Each group has their own partners (British Windsors, world financial elites, China and many others), as well as their own interests, and all of this requires a very detailed and thorough analysis.

Second possibility – Britain (or, to be more specific, the House of Windsor). They might be worried about a scenario where Merkel will completely give in to US pressure and push Brussels to sign the TAFTA agreement, which will put an end to the idea of creating alternative non-dollar currency zones and will force the British financial system (“rothschilds”) to lose control over interzonal transactions. Which basically means that a more or less independent British financial system will cease to exist, just as London will lose its status as a world financial center.

Third possibility – continental European elites (“black internationale”, or the Vatican - in conspirological terms). For them, TAFTA is a catastrophe, and they have already gained enough influence to try and bring nationally oriented opposition elites to power. Once the number of EU countries where this handover of power happens passes a critical threshold, pro-American elites in Brussels would be forced out and the EU as we know it will be finished. It is possible that the ideas of Franco-German-Russian domination in Europe play a certain role in this scenario. Within imperial, and not liberal-democratic framework, of course.

Fourth possibility – Germany. They could have gotten anxious that Hollande will back out (of plans previously coordinated with Merkel) under the threat of losing power and they created a situation that allows to “tighten the screws” and substantially limit the influence and capabilities of the anti-American group led by Le Pen.

Fifth possibility is the one that is currently being “fed” to the masses, which is what makes it the least probable. This version implies that islamists are behind the attack - ISIS, “Al Qaeda”, etc. It has its own intricacies because wherever we see a mention of “Al Qaeda”, we must also look for traces of CIA and British intelligence involvement. “Al Qaeda” does not have enough power and resources to carry out such an attack independently, without outside help.

Sixth possibility – Saudi Arabia. Today it is taking a serious hit and it must find a way to survive. A number of scenarios which are being developed by US imply liquidation of the Saudi state with the ultimate goal of creating a Sunni caliphate, which would subsequently be used in an attack on Israel and Iran. These scenarios must be prevented. The easiest way is to tie up US resources on as many fronts as possible, forcing them to abandon the plans to remove Saudis from power. Israel is helping Saudis in this situation, but keeping a low profile.

Seventh possibility – us (Russia). Having failed to persuade Merkel to drop sanctions and realizing that she is firmly under US control, we decided to “blow up” EU. And started with France as it appears to be the first major European country ready to leave the US confrontation scheme against Russia. This gives Hollande an alibi and support for his anti-American actions (“What can we do, - he will tell Obama, - you didn’t help, while Russia is supporting us”), and so on. It is also possible that we already have agreements with some of the parties mentioned above.

And the eights possibility, as we are moving further East – is China. This would mean that the attack was a “blowback” for Ukraine and other actions directed against the new Silk Road. In other words, it would imply China’s entry into the big political “game” on a world-wide scale.

Theoretically all of the above mentioned possibilities are still not out of the question. As time goes by, more and more information will become available and the picture will become clearer, but we need to pay close attention. Many of the mentioned parties have their own ideological agendas, which were symbolically presented to the public during the last two days. The symbols included candles (for some reason no one in EU lighted candles to commemorate victims in Donbass, Odessa or Mariupol even though all of these places are also located in Europe and there are more people dying there every day, than in France), flowers, staged “unity marches” that reeked of fakeness so badly that one must wonder why it was impossible to prepare better!

Here is Russia things are starting to move as well – just look at the bickering between Venediktov and Kadyrov! However, I still don’t see any constructive course of action being undertaken, but it is possible that it will never happen – because there is no one to implement such a course of action. By the way, I found Khodorkovsky’s statement very indicative of what is happening here right now. He was clearly used to provoke the public and this distinctly showed that he is not an independent political figure. Furthermore, those who are using him are obviously no longer considering him a valuable asset.


George Galloway on Charlie Hebdo

George Galloway MP on Charlie Hebdo & Freedom of Speech




Tuesday, 20 January 2015

Russia- a change of heart?

Trolling Russia

By Israel Shamir 

19 January, 2015


The edifice of world post-1991 order is collapsing right now before our eyes. President Putin’s decision to give a miss to the Auschwitz pilgrimage, right after his absence in Paris at the Charlie festival, gave it the last shove. It was good clean fun to troll Russia, as long as it stayed the course. Not anymore. Russia broke the rules.

Until now, Russia, like a country bumpkin in Eton, tried to belong. It attended the gathering of the grandees where it was shunned, paid its dues to European bodies that condemned it, patiently suffered ceaseless hectoring of the great powers and irritating baiting of East European small-timers alike. But something broke down. The lad does not want to belong anymore; he picked up his stuff and went home - just when they needed him to kneel in Auschwitz.

Auschwitz gathering is an annual Canossa of Western leaders where they bewail their historic failure to protect the Jews and swear their perennial obedience to them. This is a more important religious rite of our times, the One Ring to rule them all, established in 2001, when the Judeo-American empire had reached the pinnacle of its power. The Russian leader had duly attended the events. This year, they will have to do without him. Israeli ministers already have expressed their deep dissatisfaction for this was Russia’s Red Army that saved the Jews in Auschwitz, after all. Russia’s absence will turn the Holocaust memorial day into a parochial, West-only, event. Worse, Russia’s place will be taken by Ukraine, ruled by unrepentant heirs to Hitler’s Bandera.

This comes after the French ‘Charlie’ demo, also spurned by Russia. The West hinted that Russia’s sins would be forgiven, up to a point, if she joined, first the demo, and later, the planned anti-terrorist coalition, but Russia did not take the bait. This was a visible change, for previously, Russian leaders eagerly participated in joint events and voted for West-sponsored resolutions. In 2001, Putin fully supported George Bush’s War on Terrorism in the UN and on the ground. As recently as 2011, Russia agreed with sanctions against North Korea and Iran. As for coming for a demonstration, the Russians could always be relied upon. This time, the Russians did not come, except for the token presence of the foreign minister Mr. Lavrov. This indomitable successor of Mr. Nyet left the event almost immediately and went - to pray in the Russian church, in a counter-demonstration, of sorts, against Charlie. By going to the church, he declared that he is not Charlie.

For the 
Charlie Hebdo magazine was (and probably is) explicitly anti-Christian as well as anti-Muslim. One finds on its pages some very obnoxious cartoons offending the Virgin and Christ, as well as the pope and the Church. (They never offend Jews, somehow).

A Russian blogger who’s been exposed to this magazine for the first time, wrote on his page: I am ashamed that the bastards were dealt with by Muslims, not by Christians. This was quite a common feeling in Moscow these days. The Russians could not believe that such smut could be published and defended as a right of free speech. People planned a demo against the Charlie, but City Hall forbade it.

Remember, a few years ago, the 
Pussy Riot have profaned the St Saviour of Moscow like Femen did in some great European cathedrals, from Notre Dame de Paris to Strasbourg. The Russian government did not wait for vigilante justice to be meted upon the viragos, but sent them for up to two years of prison. At the same time, the Russian criminal law has been changed to include ‘sacrilege’ among ordinary crimes, by general consent. The Russians do feel about their faith more strongly than the EC rulers prescribe.

In Charlie’s France, Hollande’s regime frogmarched the unwilling people into a quite unnecessary gay marriage law, notwithstanding 
one-million-strong protest demonstrations by Catholics. Femen despoiling the churches were never punished; but a church warden who tried to prevent that, was heavily fined. France has a long anti-Christian tradition, usually described as “laic”, and its grand anti-Church coalition of Atheists, Huguenots and Jews coalesced in Dreyfus Affair days. Thus Lavrov’s escape to the church was a counter-demonstration, saying: Russia is for Christ, and Russia is not against Muslims.

While the present western regime is anti-Christian and anti-Muslim, it is pro-Jewish to an extent that defies a rational explanation. France had sent thousands of soldiers and policemen to defend Jewish institutions, though this defence antagonises their neighbours. While Charlie are glorified for insulting Christians and Muslims, 
Dieudonné has been sent to jail (just for a day, but with great fanfare) for annoying Jews. Actually, Charlie Hebdo dismissed a journalist for one sentence allegedly disrespectful for Jews. This unfairness is a source of aggravation: Muslims were laughed out of court when they complained against particularly vile Charlie’s cartoons, but Jews almost always win when they go to the court against their denigrators. (Full disclosure: I was also sued by LICRA, the French Jewish body, while my French publisher was devastated by their legal attacks).

The Russians don’t comprehend the Western infatuation with Jews, for Russian Jews have been well assimilated and integrated in general society. The narrative of Holocaust is not popular in Russia for one simple reason: so many Russians from every ethnic background lost their lives in the war, that there is no reason to single out Jews as supreme victims. Millions died at the siege of Leningrad; Belarus lost a quarter of its population. More importantly, Russians feel no guilt regarding Jews: they treated them fairly and saved them from the Nazis. For them, the Holocaust is a Western narrative, as foreign as JeSuisCharlie. With drifting of Russia out of Western consensus, there is no reason to maintain it.

This does not mean the Jews are discriminated against. The Jews of Russia are doing very well, thank you, without Holocaust worship: they occupy the highest positions in the Forbes list of Russia’s rich, with a combined capital of $122 billion, while all rich ethnic Russians own only $165 billion, according to the Jewish-owned 
source. Jews run the most celebrated media shows in prime time on the state TV; they publish newspapers; they have full and unlimited access to Putin and his ministers; they usually have their way when they want to get a plot of land for their communal purposes. And anti-Semitic propaganda is punishable by law – like anti-Christian or anti-Muslim abuse, but even more severely. Still, it is impossible to imagine a Russian journalist getting sack like CNN anchor Jim Clancy or BBC’s Tim Willcox for upsetting a Jew or speaking against Israel.

Russia preserves its plurality, diversity and freedom of opinion. The pro-Western Russian media – 
Novaya Gazeta of oligarch Lebedev, the owner of the British newspaper Independent – carries the JeSuis slogan and speaks of the Holocaust, as well as demands to restore Crimea to the Ukraine. But the vast majority of Russians do support their President, and his civilizational choice. He expressed it when he went to midnight Christmas mass in a small village church in far-away province, together with orphans and refugees from the Ukraine. And he expressed it by refusing to go to Auschwitz.

2

Neither willingly nor easily did Russia break ranks. Putin tried to take Western baiting in his stride: be it Olympic games, Syria confrontation, gender politics, Georgian border, even Crimea-related sanctions. The open economic warfare was a game-changer. Russia felt attacked by falling oil prices, by rouble trouble, by credit downgrading. These developments are considered an act of hostility, rather than the result of “the hidden hand of the market”.

Russians love conspiracia, as James Bond used to say. They do not believe in chance, coincidence nor natural occurrences, and are likely to consider a falling meteorite or an earthquake - a result of hostile American action, let alone a fall in the rouble/dollar exchange rate. They could be right, too, though it is hard to prove.

Regarding oil price fall, the jury is out. Some say this action by Saudis is aimed at American fracking companies, or alternatively it’s a Saudi-American plot against Russia. However, the price of oil is not formed by supply-demand, but by financial instruments, futures and derivatives. This virtual demand-and-supply is much bigger than the real one. When hedge funds stopped to buy oil futures, price downturn became unavoidable, but were the funds directed by politicians, or did they act so as Quantitative Easing ended?

The steep fall of the rouble could be connected to oil price downturn, but not necessarily so. The rouble is not involved in oil price forming. It could be an action by a very big financial institution. Soros broke the back of British pound in 1991; Korean won, Thai bath and Malaysian ringgit suffered similar fate in 1998. In each case, the attacked country lost about 40% of its GDP. It is possible that Russia was attacked by financial weapons directed from New York.

The European punitive sanctions forbade long-term cheap credit to Russian companies. The Russian state does not need loans, but Russian companies do. Combination of these factors put a squeeze on Russian pockets. The rating agencies kept downgrading Russian rating to almost junk level, for political reasons, I was told. As they were deprived of credit, state companies began to hoard dollars to pay later their debts, and they refrained from converting their huge profits to roubles, as they did until now. The rouble fell drastically, probably much lower than it had to.

This is not pinpoint sanctions aimed at Putin’s friends. This is a full-blown war. If the initiators expected Russians to be mad at Putin, they miscalculated. The Russian public is angry with the American organisers of the economical warfare, not with its own government. The pro-Western opposition tried to demonstrate against Putin, but very few people joined them.

Ordinary Russians kept a stiff upper lip. They did not notice the sanctions until the rouble staggered, and even then they shopped like mad rather than protested. In the face of shrinking money, they did not buy salt and sugar, as their grandparents would have. Their battle cry against hogging was “Do not take more than two Lexus cars per family, leave something for others!”

Perhaps, the invisible financiers went too far. Instead of being cowed, the Russians are preparing for a real long war, as they and their ancestors have historically fought – and won. It is not like they have a choice: though Americans insist Russia should join their War-on-Terrorism-II, they do not intend to relinquish sanctions.

The Russians do not know how to deal with a financial attack. Without capital restrictions, Russia will be cleaned out. Russian Central bank and Treasury people are strict monetarists, capital restrictions are anathema for them. Putin, being a liberal himself, apparently trusts them. Capital flight has taken huge proportions. Unless Russia uses the measures successfully tried by Mohammad Mahathir of Malaysia, it will continue. At present, however, we do not see sign of change.

This could be the incentive for Putin to advance in Ukraine. If the Russians do not know how to shuffle futures and derivatives, they are expert in armour movements and tank battles. Kiev regime is also spoiling for a fight, apparently pushed by the American neocons. It is possible that the US will get more than what it bargained for in the Ukraine.

One can be certain that Russians will not support the Middle Eastern crusade of NATO, as this military action was prepared at the Charlie demo in Paris. It is far from clear who killed the cartoonists, but Paris and Washington intend to use it for reigniting war in the Middle East. This time, Russia will be in opposition, and probably will use it as an opportunity to change the uncomfortable standoff in the Ukraine. Thus supporters of peace in the Middle East have a good reason to back Russia.
Israel Shamir works in Moscow and Jaffa; he can be reached on adam@israelshamir.net 
Language editing Ken Freeland