Last Friday, Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei led Friday prayers in Tehran’s Imam Khomeini Grand Mosque for the first time in eight years.

For Iran, it has been a January full of unjust tragedies provoked by Western aggression.

Adding insult to injury, Iranians watch the West try to spin their murderous violence into evidence of Iranian cultural failure.

Ayatollah Khamenei’s speech aimed to inspire an Iranian populace depressed at the lack of justice in global politics, and also aimed to politically analyze this dangerously critical time in global affairs.

And yet what the Western press took from the key speech was an offhand remark — Ayatollah Khamenei referred to US President Donald Trump as a “clown”. Every major Western media led with this remark, as if it constituted a prelude to war…. like it was an assassination or something.

I can’t believe the Western press truly finds the remark so insulting - every day across the English-speaking world Trump is called a “clown” (or worse) by thousands of politicians and columnists. Instead, I think they seized on that remark because they absolutely do not want to engage in any serious discussion about the recent tragedies created by Western aggression. 

That is not new: four decades of Iranophobia has meant ignoring, distorting or reducing to a caricature the Iranian view of real-life, life-and-death political situations.

Oh well. Who really cares what the Western elite thinks?

Contrarily, people care what Ayatollah Khamenei has to say on ethics and politics, at least in the Muslim world.

Inside the full mosque were all the top Iranian politicians and military brass, who kneeled or sat cross-legged during his sermon. Outside the mosque was an enormous crowd, bundled up in the winter cold of mountainous Tehran.

It is very unfortunate that politically-minded Westerners have probably never taken - due to the Iranophobia and Islamophobia campaigns — just two minutes to seriously consider the words and ideas of Ayatollah Khamenei, the man who for decades has led the world’s most successful resistance to ever-more brutal Western capitalism-imperialism.

Can Western elite not stomach considering just one sermon every 8 years?

Listening to Ayatollah Khamenei is very different from listening to other politicians, as I must often do for my job.

Even if you disagree with Ayatollah Khamenei’s political views, he will at least tell you something about how to live your life better - he is a preacher and focused on such things. So he actually doesn’t waste your time, but it’s his humility which is such a refreshing change from Trump’s clowning and French President Emmanuel Macron’s (in)elegant elitism.

I usually learn nothing from the speeches of most Western politicians - most are filled with shameless lies, which then get relayed unquestioned by the Western Mainstream Media. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov is a rare exception (and maybe not even a “Western politician?).

Ayatollah Khamenei: US disgraced after assassination of Gen. Soleimani

The moral part of Ayatollah Khamenei’s speech was based around Qur’anic verses from the chapter titled “Abraham”: Prophet Mohammad discussed how Moses had reminded the Jews of the inspiration, resilience and patience they had required to find their way out of the darkness of Egyptian murderousness, and that thanks must still be given despite any current tribulations. Remembering the blessing of being free from political despotism is the key, and the only way to receive even more blessings.

The fact that after Iranian General Qassem Soleimani’s assassination Iran’s top leaders are sitting around meditating on the virtues of Jews is completely unsurprising to anyone remotely aware of the tenets of Islam - however, I imagine that it is shocking to Westerners misled by ignorant Islamophobia. 

It was an astute selection by Ayatollah Khamenei: Due to the tragedies of recent weeks it is not easy for Iranians to remember how very recently they, too, lived under the yoke of domineering bullies in London and Washington.

So, of course the West prefers to focus on Ayatollah Khamenei calling Trump a “clown” — they hardly want to remind anyone of such brutal realities from four decades ago. Indeed, they don’t want to remind anyone of brutal realities just three or four weeks ago. 

Where are the higher sentiments from Western ‘humanist’ politicians?

Western secularism forbids openly drawing political lessons from religious sources, no matter how necessary and pragmatically useful such lessons might be. 

Therefore, one would expect Western “humanist” politicians to often quote from some of their favorite literature and meditate publicly on that — surely they need lofty inspiration from somewhere, no?

Trump, famously, does not read anything.

If Macron has ever deeply discussed in public the finer thoughts of Western humanist works I am not aware of it - it is possible that he has fashionably name-dropped some of France’s favorite far-right thinkers, like Louis-Ferdinand Céline or Charlie Hebdo.

The West’s tabloid nature — both politically and journalistically — does a great disservice to the intellectual, emotional and ethical needs of their people. It primes them to greedily seize upon zero-calorie nonsense - such as yet another independent confirmation of Trump’s clownish presidency - rather than discuss more important things during such a critical and dangerous time.

Superficial nonsense is not Ayatollah Khamenei’s style. Politically, he focused on the shocking disgrace of the US due to their latest assassination — of Soleimani and his Iraqi comrades.

Ayatollah Khamenei pointed out that the US kills so very many, many people in the Muslim World and yet they never openly admit it. For example, every Afghan wedding party bombing is always a “tragic accident”.

Such dishonesty really rankles Ayatollah Khamenei — it has always seemed to me that he takes as a personal insult the “arrogance” Washington displays by assuming that nobody can see right through the lies and omissions regarding their dastardly war crimes. However, Ayatollah Khamenei noted that Washington had no choice but to be honest about their shocking slaying of Soleimani and his Iraqi counterparts.

And what could be more disgraceful than openly admitting that you are a terrorist?

Thus, the political aspect of Ayatollah Khamenei’s sermon focused on the tremendous disgrace being heaped upon the US and their system.

Again, across the West they preferred to focus on the offhand “clown” remark rather than Ayatollah Khamenei’s far-reaching analysis: Soleimani’s death is actually a mighty blow against the West because there is no way the US can undo the damage done to their image.

It is undoubtedly accurate.

Americans might be subjected to analyst after analyst rationalizing the brutal, inhuman slaying - and the Orwellian attempt to call an anti-terror hero a “terrorist” — but nobody outside the US believes such nonsense for a moment. And certainly not in the Muslim World, where the US is (allegedly) trying to “win over hearts and minds”, as Washington so often puts it.

Ayatollah Khamenei’s analysis is astute - anyone who knows anything about Shia culture and modern Iranian culture knows that Soleimani’s death will inevitably become to be viewed as an inspiration, not a failure.

Western journalists seem to only want to talk about a few things - the environment (a political issue which contains zero class component), celebrity culture and how Trump is a clown. When Ayatollah Khamenei says the last one - for some reason it is big news.

That is not the big news.

What is important is the slaying of Soleimani, the Washington-provoked war climate which caused the downing of the Ukrainian airliner, and the duplicitous refusal of the US and Europe to uphold their end of the JCPOA treaty on Iran’s nuclear energy program.

Iran has a deeply-embedded revolutionary culture which repeatedly puts the focus on serious things, and that will not change. What will also likely not change is the tabloid, empty focus of Western journalists and politicians.

What is unfortunate for Iran and the Muslim World is that such a focus gives them so much cover to commit so much war and misery. 

Ayatollah Khamenei gave the West a once-in-a-decade chance to listen and understand why he commands so much international respect — they foolishly chose to fault him for saying something which seemingly all the world has been saying for three consecutive years. 

Ayatollah Khamenei’s political intelligence is abundantly available online, in case Western journalists ever get serious. He does talk about Islam, which some non-believers will intolerantly get hung up on, but he also spends an equal amount of time talking about stolen natural resources, the vital importance of international resistance to colonialism, standing strong against any form of tyranny, and protecting the dignity of the oppressed.

Ayatollah Khamenei’s speeches are so refreshing precisely because I never hear such ideas from Western politicians, even though they endlessly talk about the alleged moral superiority of Western humanism.

Perhaps the sad reality which the West doesn’t want to admit is: they no longer care about such ideas.

(The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of Press TV.)

[dropcap]D[/dropcap]ue to a Western media blackout on the subject, many may be surprised to learn that France’s general strike has just begun its seventh consecutive week. It’s the longest labor mobilization in French history - and by half - but the Western Mainstream Media is ignoring France until this historic moment passes.

It seems about to pass soon.

French unions have done a woeful job leading the strike despite having everything going for them at the beginning.

The alleged superiority of the so-called “independent” union model - favored by the West but opposed by any country with a revolution after 1917 - is once again failing the nation, if maybe not their dues-paying members. 

The general strike is wobbling, and by January 24th the pension bill will be formally presented to the government. It is amazing rapacity, because presenting a bill amid such strikes is obviously rushing it into the safe arms of a system dominated by President Emmanuel Macron; it is also amazing duplicity, because Macron only released the pension scheme’s details just last week!

France: Clashes erupt in Lyon as unions march to oppose planned pension reform. The resistance movement sparked by the Yellow Vests has finally become a semi-permanent mobilisation across France.

Nearly 16,000 people took to the streets of Lyon, as part of a new day of action against the government

Wasting time has been Macron’s main tactic during the general strike, despite the fact that workers and households are increasingly desperate after having gone without work for six full weeks. To be accurate, then: “wasting time” is not his tactic, but “increasing desperation”.

A simple recipe for the Macron era is: increase desperation + trace amounts of democratic discussion + rubber bullets + total control over Parliament = Macron’s deification outside of France and his vilification inside France.

But the so-called “centrist” Macron and his deviousness are well known by now - what happened to unions and their great leadership? Many French unionists have had the gall to tell me that countries with modern revolutions “have no unions” - so show us how it’s done then, Mr. Know-it-all?!

If unions can’t win this one for the nation, can they ever win one in the Western model?

This was supposed to be an easy one.

Domestic polls have never shown public support below 60% for the strike - from the start until today - nor disapproval of less than 70% for Macron’s unprecedented pension scheme.

But this was a “general strike” that lacked both “general” and “strike”.

French anti-riot policemen lead the march as protesters demonstrate in Paris, on January 11, 2020, as part of a nationwide multi-sector strike against the French government's pensions’ overhaul. Large demonstrations are becoming a way of life for many French, but neither side is likely to give in because the issues are systemic.  (Photo by AFP)

A general strike is something which union leaders never really wanted, I think. It was forced by three things, all of which were undermining the incredibly unjustified cultural faith France has in their Western union model: hospital strikes which had been going on for months (due to years of austerity cuts), wildcat train strikes that had sprouted (work-related accidents were increasing due to reduced working conditions, the result of years of austerity cuts) and the bravery and selflessness of the Yellow Vests.

Macron forced the issue with this radical pension scheme - this was to be his “Thatcher/Reagan moment”, and he wanted it that way. But unions didn’t even answer the first-round bell.

The “strike” turned out to be entirely placed on the backs of train conductors. The notable feature of this historic era is the 2-3 times longer work commutes for urban areas, as trains were shut down for weeks and over the Christmas holiday.

But where were the other labor sectors? The unions failed miserably by failing to call on them to join the “general” strike.

General Confederation of Labor (CGT) union dockers and workers hold a banner reading " Together for our jobs - Wages - Pension" during a rally in Marseille, southern France on January 14, 2020. The people's struggle, however, must be against the system, not just for a few momentary concessions from the bosses. Lenin saw early in the fight for a new Russia that workers, left to themselves without a trustworthy revolutionary vanguard party, would only press or betterment of their conditions but not abolition of the wage system. (Photo by AFP)

Unions only called six days of nationwide strikes and protests - if they really wanted to win they would have called that many in the first week alone. What this means is that most French have actually taken less than a week off to strike against the pension replacement.

Instead of blocking the economy or, more importantly, blocking the functioning of society (no schools, no hospitals, no day care, no elder care, no anything as much as possible), unions decided only to block urban public commutes; small-town life in France has been barely touched by the general strike.

Their lack of mobilization feeds into the worst stereotypes of French laziness, but it is laziness of the bosses: it’s as if union chiefs said, “Let the public transport workers handle it all - we’re going on Christmas vacation.”

And they did!

Macron was only too happy to postpone negotiations for more than two weeks over the holiday period; union leaders incredibly outdid him by not calling for a nationwide strike or protest for nearly three weeks. I couldn’t understand it - so then why call a transport strike over the Christmas holiday at all? Why fragment your own forces?

A majority of France supports the general strike despite its extending into the holiday season. The French have a much higher class consciousness than the Americans.

Transport workers continued to shoulder the load alone, but why did union leaders not encourage anyone to join to them? Probably terrible leadership, strategy and organization.

France’s labor chiefs are not new, but they acted new on the job

As could have been predicted from their history, the Macron administration’s corruption gave them a golden chance to kill the pension system: Two weeks into the strike (December 17) the architect of the entire pension reform had to resign his ministry post due to allegations of corruption.

What else can you ask for?! What a gift! What a mistake from such an untested government!

A sustained, immediate, massive mobilization over such incredibly important corruption would have been hugely effective right then: How can the fruits of a corrupt minister be wholesome?

But unions did nothing to take advantage: they all went on Christmas vacation - everyone but train conductors.

All this prolongation gave the Macron administration more time to cut sweetheart deals with key labor sectors: just after the Western New Year airline pilots and cabin crews announced they had made a self-interested arrangement with the government and called off their planned strike.

Inaction from the unions gave Macron time to “divide and conquer” the strike, like always in France’s Age of Austerity, when they should have known from the beginning that this would be exactly their tactic.

The government then engaged in duplicity to sow confusion and stall. In addition to the radical “universal” and “points-based” system, the government wanted to increase the retirement age by two years. But this was always a fake poison pill - it was something the government could easily withdraw in order to appear like they were negotiating in good faith: the radical pension system is a far, far more lucrative prize for France’s 1%. On January 11 they announced they would suspend the age hike.

Then they said the suspension was only temporary.

Then they didn’t clarify when the temporary suspension would start or finish.

As clear as mud, and we all keep inching toward the January 24th formal presentation of the bill, when negotiations will be finished.

This week the participation of train conductors in the strike fell to their lowest levels - metro services in Paris are now functioning at about 20% of normal levels, but anyone using the rail service is obviously going against the strike.

But after six full weeks people tell me they have foot problems from so many long walks to and from work. Striking is hard, and unions should know that and thus pushed with all their might from the beginning. Instead, they are trying to do so now.

Out of increasing desperation, unions called for three days of national strikes this week, but attendance has been lackluster there as well.

No general sturdy enough to push past teenage anarchists

Back to the strike lacking a “general” - this became evident on the very first day of nationwide protest (December 5).

A few hundred Black Bloc protesters - who are either undercover police or anarchist idiots with daddy issues - held up 250,000 union-led protesters for four hours in Paris.

It was not an incredible show of strength by Black Bloc but an appalling display of poor leadership from unions. Yes the cops - who have way more guns, defensive armaments and training - did nothing to stop Black Bloc, but they never do: those are their orders from above, and this is old news.

What I want to know is: why did none of the union leaders have the skill to say, “We can’t let these skinny punks stop our first demonstration and provide the MSM with riot footage - that will scare the average person away from protesting and weaken our strike. Onwards! We march and Black Bloc can’t stop us!”

And Black Bloc would have stepped aside in two seconds. They don’t have weapons, they were vastly outnumbered and they are mostly trembling 21-year-olds. The violence that day was piddling - truly 1% of what a rough Yellow Vest demonstration was like.

But no union leader could grasp this reality, apparently.

Certainly, no union leader was willing to be at the front line to push ahead and tell Black Bloc that their democratic right to protest peacefully would not be denied. Cops would have never stepped in to prevent protesters from confronting Black Bloc - that would mean protecting Black Bloc openly.

Union leaders may feel their precious brains need to be protected at all costs, but their tactical capabilities are even worse than their leadership capabilities.

I don’t know what will turn around the general strike now?

Unions have fumbled away golden opportunities and failed to apply pressure when they could

have. They have, like Macron, ignored the importance of democratic public opinion.

Furthermore, there are right-wing unions and left-wing unions, after all - they do not all think alike. France’s largest union is right-wing. France is not a “socialist” country like the US claims - their political revolution was way before 1917, and it failed, too. And quickly.

The only winner here will be the Yellow Vests - their view that unions are indeed part the inept and/or corrupt mainstream political system will be vindicated if unions don’t right the ship.

Did the unions ever really want to win? Their tactics don’t give that impression - it looks more and more like this “general strike” was all to give the show of resistance, not to actually resist.

However, in the short term it’s not like Yellow Vests can provide a political solution to aid the average Frenchman - it took Italy’s Five-Star Movement eight years to win actual power.

Taking a longer, historical view, in 2017 France’s two mainstream parties were swept out of power for the first time in postwar history. If they continue on their losing track, 2020 may prove to have been the year the same broom was applied to unions. What comes after, that, is the question.

[dropcap]M[/dropcap]any people have been quite shocked by Iran’s response to the tragic, mistaken downing of a Ukraine International Airlines flight.

Iran’s President Rouhani said, “I will never apologize for Iran - I don’t care what the facts are.” Tehran plans to never apologize, admit wrongdoing nor to accept responsibility.

All of the Iranian soldiers involved were awarded Combat Action Ribbons, the air-warfare coordinator received a Commendation Medal and the commanding officer was awarded the Legion of Merit for “exceptionally meritorious conduct.”

No one in the Iranian armed forces will ever be punished.

No intention to cover up cause of Ukrainian plane crash: Shamkhani- The secretary of Iran

Many believe Iran shot down the plane purposely in order to instigate war.

Obviously, all four of these paragraphs above are totally false… but only when applied to Iran and not the US. The shocking belligerence, shamelessness and inhumanity I just recounted was the very real response from Washington after they shot down civilian Iran Air Flight 655 in 1988, killing 290 people. Anyone who has been following the recent tragic events is aware that Iran’s official response has been the complete opposite of how Washington handled a very similar tragedy.

But firstly: I find it incredible that some accuse Iran of a cover-up?

While, of course, the Western Mainstream Media will commit any lying exaggeration to further their billionaire masters’ instructions to topple Iran’s popular revolution, I lay the blame primarily at the unreasonable demands modern society puts on government servants via the 24/7 news cycle.

Iran admitted it was their missile which felled the airplane just three days afterwards, and - crucially - in conjunction with prepared apologies, self-recriminations and promises of punishing the negligent and/or fatally erroneous.

Iran's reaction to Trump's tweet: Don't dishonor our language.

However, three days was too long for some. I really wonder at the naiveté of such, often well-meaning, people.

Is no delay acceptable? No verifications needed at all?

In such a situation doesn’t everyone know there is a protocol to be followed? We are talking about the armed forces - does not everyone understand (as every nation has an army) that they have a chain of command, rules and a bureaucratic hierarchy which must be followed? The more important something is - especially for a horrific admission such as this - the longer the verification process necessarily takes. If the soldier who had pressed the “fire” button had rushed out of the base and declared to all who would listen, “It was my fault!”, he would be treated as a dangerous madman in any nation. However, it is as if some people expected this type of an instantaneous confirmation in the Ukraine Airlines tragedy?

I suggest such impatience - from those who want to get it “now” instead of getting it “right” - has been fostered by a 24/7 news cycle which does not want to hear about the need for interviewing those involved, testing and calibrating equipment, reviewing all the data, etc. Three days… well, I just find it hard to believe that anyone would find that unacceptable? Some people - due to their quite understandable grief over this tragedy - are being unreasonable, but many Western media and politicians do not have such sincere motivations for such a complaint.

A verification process like I have described would have been an acceptable delay - at least to me - under normal circumstances. Here, of course, the Western Mainstream Media is doing all they can to sweep under the rug the fact that Iran was in a state of high military alert provoked entirely by the recent assassination of Iran’s top general, a top Iraqi general and retaliatory missile strikes which had been fired by Iran just hours before the plane’s downing.

Iran’s retaliation for the appalling assassination of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani was nowhere near as severe as US aggression merited. Washington tapped CNN to produce a propaganda report entirely designed to give the impression that the missile attack was not significant, but the point was not proportional revenge: the Leader of the Iranian Islamic Revolution Seyyed Ali Khamenei said it was merely to give a “slap in the face”. Therefore, nobody can say that Iran overreacted. However, the assassination proves to many in Iran that Washington is hell-bent on fomenting war with Iran. “High alert” is no exaggeration of the tensions at the time of the take-off of the Ukrainian airliner.

United States troops at the Al-Asad air base in Iraq were aware that an Iranian attack was imminent, allowing them to take shelter two-and-a-half-hours before missiles struck on Wednesday, CNN has been told during an exclusive tour of the devastated site.

Therefore, it is incredible that Iran is somehow being portrayed as being wholly responsible for the tragedy of the Ukraine plane downing. The bulk of the condemnation for the tragedy must obviously be aimed at Washington for creating this atmosphere which produced the tragedy, if anyone truly cares about justice.

Unfortunately, I am reminded of the old saying: “Everybody talks about peace, nobody talks about justice.” The incident is being used as the latest plank in the 40-year Iranophobia campaign, sadly.

Is the alleged ‘cover-up’ occurring in between the public lamentations and self-criticisms?  

Soleimani’s assassination may trigger end of US military presence in Iraq: Paper General Soleimani’s assassination may trigger the ultimate objective of ending the US military presence in Iraq, a British paper says.

The Ukrainian airliner downing shattered the peace of many families, but what we can say with total certainty today is that nobody in Iran wanted the destruction of a civilian airliner.

It was US President George Bush who famously refused to apologize, not Rouhani, but there are too many obviously sincere apologies from every level of Iran’s government. What cover-up? The commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards testified to Parliament, “I swear to almighty God that I wished I were in that plane and had crashed with them….” Two days earlier the chief aerospace commander told a press conference, “I wish I was dead and such an incident hadn’t happened….”

Where is the defiance, deflection and distraction of this alleged “cover-up”?

The sociopath in chief warns that the US has 52 targets at the ready, including many cultural sites. Trump posts tweets warning that US would respond to Iranian retaliation for general’s assassination.

 

---

There is obviously - at all levels of the Iranian government and military - sadness, regret and complete acceptance of responsibility. I feel sorry for those Iranian soldiers involved because they express such feelings of culpability - if you feel sorry for George Bush, or the soldiers he decorated, I don’t know what basis you have for such feelings because they were never uttered?

The 1988 IranAir flight was downed in the final month of the Iran-Iraq War. The US shot down the Iranian plane as an expression of their frustration that their proxy war with their ally-dictator-mass murderer Saddam Hussein had failed. It was a message that Washington would still act with murderous impunity, and that their war was not finished - they have stayed true to this murderous posture all these decades hence. Compare that with the situation in 2020.

Despite the illegal, inhuman slaying of Soleimani Iran is not about to be baited into war, which was Washington’s true intention. Tehran is not going to put all of Iran - and the region - at risk over the decision of an idiot/assassin, who is trying to distract from his impeachment trial (as well as from the indictment trial of his ally in Tel Aviv) and who may be back on reality television in 11 months.

دیدار هزاران نفر از مردم قم

Foreign Minister Zarif says Iran’s retaliatory missile attack on American bases in Iraq was an act of “legitimate self-defense” against “legitimate targets” in response to US.

The Ukraine Airlines flight was - unlike for Washington in 1988 - undoubtedly not a provocation, nor an incitement to continued conflict, assassination and war.

This is the reality which the West cannot see, as they are blinded by Islamophobia and Iranophobia: the Iranian government showed the humane response which one would expect of a truly progressive government, which they are. They did not respond with belligerence, defiance and a Washington-style cover-up. But the Iranian government gets no credit in the West ever - it’s their editorial policy.

Frankly, while this is obviously a tragedy, I want more information as to how it happened: I find it extremely coincidental that the plane came from Ukraine, which has undoubtedly been the site of (yet another) far-right coup/civil war supported by Washington. I am not disparaging all Ukraine, of course, but it’s fair to assume that the Pentagon has unlimited access to Ukrainian planes as well as a history of using cyber warfare and sabotage against Iran.

And we know they have already shot down civilian airliners in Iran with zero expressions of regret.

Try as they might, this tragedy cannot overshadow the Soleimani assassinations

The assassination of Soleimani and the tragedy of Ukraine Airlines must not be mixed: the former is an illegal, inhuman slaying of an anti-terror hero which must remain in the spotlight until Washington - the boasting perpetrator! - conforms with international justice; the latter is a tragedy, and Iran has made it crystal-clear that they will work openly with countries like Ukraine, France and Canada to find the root cause.

No one in Iran is pleased, openly or secretly, about the Ukraine Airlines tragedy, but the boasting murderers in Washington are no doubt glad the spotlight is now off their actions. Their assassination laid bare their aggression to Iran and their view that Iraq is a powerless US colony.

Nasrallah says Iran missile strikes showed all US bases in West Asia within range. “Look at the faces of the US leaders… Do they look like victorious faces?” Nasrallah asked.

That is injustice on a grand scale, and it cannot stand.

The Western MSM are doing all they can to keep the focus away from the international outrage regarding Soleimani’s murder, of course.

There were protests in Iran after the Ukraine Airlines downing, and it is natural: many students were aboard the airplane, therefore many Iranian students had personal connections with the departed. This is why students led protests.

However, as is the case so often in Iran, counter-revolutionary groups stepped in to dangerously hijack the protests. That is proven by the video circulating of a “protester” dressed like Black Bloc member stomping on and pulling down a picture of Soleimani, a man who just days earlier had inspired millions to publicly attend his funeral.

The orders-of-magnitude support in Iran for the government as opposed to those who want to topple is revealed by the orders-of-magnitude larger turnout for Soleimani compared with the initially sincere, student-led grief protests. This is a simple, factual reality, but - as is the case with every protest in Iran - the Western MSM tries to pervert everything in Iran to topple the popular democratic revolution of 1979.

Of course, they are in overdrive now because they are being told to distract from the Soleimani slaying. That must not last.

Sadness in the world and Iran over the Ukraine Airlines tragedy will continue, especially for the bereaved families.

'

Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei has said Iran’s early morning retaliation against US assassination of Gen. Qassem Soleimani was just “a slap”.

But if we are judging by responses to accidentally shooting down civilian airliners, one would think people would be clamoring for the fall of the American system and not the Iranian one?

Finally, I’d like to point out that due to Western sanctions airplane tragedies in Iran are woefully common. If the West really wants to make Iranian air travel more safe they could - as any humane person would - allow the sale of replacement parts for these machines which carry so many lives between their wings.

Another way the West could avoid such tragedies? End the hot, cold and assassinating war against Iran.

Iran has accepted responsibility for the mistake - assuming further investigations do not reveal new facts - but the West needs to accept overall responsibility for the Ukraine Airlines tragedy as they fabricated such a dangerous, anti-democratic, inhumane climate of war.

(The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of Press TV.)

Donald Trump, in his inimitable way, continues to reveal to the world the brutal imperialist truths of “democracy with American characteristics”.

[dropcap]W[/dropcap]hen the Iraqi Parliament voted to expel US troops as a result of Washington’s inhuman slaying of Iran’s Qassem Soleimani, US President Donald Trump made it very clear: Iraq belongs to the United States, completely.

“We will charge (Iraq) sanctions like they’ve never seen before, ever. It’ll make Iranian sanctions look somewhat tame.” Trump added the sanctions would be imposed on Iraq, “if there’s any hostility, that they do anything we think is inappropriate.”

In my mind this is perhaps the 2nd most important news out of Iraq this year: the public acknowledgment that the US is never leaving Iraq, will never countenance Iraqi dissent and would rather destroy Iraq than recognize its sovereignty.

This was a naked declaration from Trump to Iraq declaring, “We are your imperial masters.”

Iraq cannot even dare to do anything which Washington might consider “inappropriate” - the values of Washington decide what is “inappropriate” in Iraq, not Iraqi values.

Iraqis, I’m sorry to say, should realize that they have become the 51st US state. (Well, the 52nd, after Puerto Rico.) The Iraqi people have zero sovereignty, its votes are worthless nonsense, and Iraq cannot go against the will of the US federal government any more than Wyoming, Rhode Island or Nebraska can.

My claim here is not an overreaction, and especially when we ask what exactly is it that Iraq did “wrong” in order to “deserve” sanctions?

Iraq is not Iran - they do not keep defending a popular revolution which successfully mixed Islam and democracy, something the West claims is impossible. Iraq is not North Korea, who refuses to let US troops and corporations based in Seoul move up to the China-Russia border. Iraq is not China, which has a government overseen by a party which refuses to let Western high finance control its major industries (however, I note that Iran is even more vigilant in this regard than China, which earns Iran even more Western animosity).

Baghdad has worked with Washington for nearly two decades.

Yes, we can say that this work was done at the barrel of a US cannon, but Iraq has complied with US demands. Iraqis have created links, contacts, contracts and all sorts of entanglements with Americans and American businesses.

And yet Trump made it clear that without the presence of US troops that all means nothing.

It is now crystal clear that there is zero goodwill from Washington after all these years, zero trust, zero desire to see Iraq stand on its own two feet. Every American smile to an Iraqi inside the Green Zone has been false; every warm word a cold lie.

It’s an amazing declaration by Trump - all the years of talk about “humanitarian intervention” and about the US desire to bring “freedom to Iraq” has been declared a sham. This was guessed at by countless billions of non-Western people, but the threat of sanctions which make the Iran sanctions look “tame”… my God, hasn’t Iraq complied enough to at least avoid that?!

In many ways, this is all a part of the “beauty” of Trump.

Trump: A dangerous unfiltered mouth. The empire needs smooth liars, not imprudent egotists. (RT.com)

Trump came to office in large part because he says things which Main Street knows but which no mainstream politician would even dare to suggest. Trump is such a terror to the Pentagon, Wall Street, Madison Avenue and the Beltway - which concocted an impeachment plan before Trump was even inaugurated - because Trump cannot be trusted to lie properly, and that makes him a risk to US domination.

We cannot imagine Barack Obama bragging about the sanctions he would levy on Iraq if they voted out US troops - he was a smooth-faced liar. Obama would have talked instead about reconciliation with the past, peace and not justice, patience… and then “temporarily surge” more soldiers to Iraq.

Hillary Clinton had none of Obama’s charm - she would have reacted by boringly referring to the legal obligations of Iraq, the feasibility of processes, what the definition here of “vote” is, etc. And then would have decided on a reaction even more brutal than one Obama or even Trump could conceive.

Any “normal president” would have responded to the Iraqi vote in a way which would have calmed the situation; in a way which would have reassured Westerners that, despite their nagging consciences, they were actually doing moral and humane things in Iraq; in a way which the Western media could use as a weapon against dissenters of Western capitalism-imperialism and to further their insistence of TINA (There Is No Alternative). 

And this is what so many hate Trump for, yet many others love him for: if the US had a “normal president” many would have complacently and mistakenly continued to believe there is genuine goodwill from Washington towards the Iraqi people. Instead Trump speaks from his gut and makes it clear: “Ha!” It’s a big, fat “Ha!” indeed.

Trump is hated by the US 1% because he egotistically and instinctively wants to take the credit and power inherently contained by this “Ha!”, but by doing so he threatens to upset the whole enterprise of US domination; he threatens to provoke resentment which could turn revolutionary. The Iraqi people need to understand this sadistic laughing, this murderous contempt, this arrogant gloating.

The world is often fooled by brand repackaging like Obama, (phony, alleged) technocrats like Hillary Clinton and professional foolers like Bill Clinton - nobody is fooled by Trump. Trump’s egotism makes it impossible to be fooled.

To Trump the Iraqi people do not even have the power of children to mildly rebel, but he is not the only president to hold such an imperial view.

As usual, this was an overreaction by Trump: while I certainly hope it comes to pass (although the US State Department has just officially rejected any troop withdrawal), I will believe there are no US soldiers in Iraq - no “advisers”, “technicians” or “contractors” - when I finally see it. But Trump is undoubtedly on edge over an empty, superficial, Biden corruption-covering, essentially anti-democratic impeachment process. Incredibly, lamentably, Trump assassinated Soleimani merely to provide a distraction, and he’s not about to have some puny nobodies like Iraqis make him look weak domestically now.

Iraqis only exist to serve the US - this is what Trump’s threats to terribly sanction Iraq mean. The pity of it is that Iraqis already know all about inhuman Western sanctions: I used to ask Iraqi friends how their family was doing amid the sanctions (1990-2003) and they said, “Please, stop asking - it just gets worse and worse.” You know they were inhuman and starvation-inducing by the very name of the “concession” plan the West finally granted - the “oil-for-food program”.

Ugh. Iraqis should hope for only Iran-level sanctions, compared to that.  Indeed, it is not a pleasant past, present or future for Iraq.

Their vote to expel US soldiers and reclaim sovereignty was along sectarian lines, just as Washington would have hoped for (or the French in Lebanon, to give another parallel of “Western democratic culture”). It was unanimous, but missing about 150 public servants - Kurdish and Sunni lawmakers didn’t vote.

Will Iraq’s non-Shia politicians also absent themselves when a vote comes up to denounce Trump’s new sanctions? I really don’t see what Shia theology has to do with voting against foreign occupation - do Iraqis think the US will tolerate Iraqi soldiers and bases in the US? Do they think Washington is kidding? The Washington Post reported the new sanctions are already being drafted.

Do Iraq’s non-Shia politicians still think that Washington is their friend and partner? Do non-Shia Iraqis really view their fellow Shia as more dangerous and disagreeable than the current reality, permanent colonization by the US? Or are these politicians too close to the US (to use a polite phrase) and not close enough to the lower classes, their crushed reality and their legitimate demands?

We will not get another Trump era anytime soon - we should appreciate the way he shatters one illusion after another, laying bare the realities which so many Westerners have labored so hard to cover up for so very, very long.