Latest Entries »

The Opportunity

Image result for oil pipelines of the future in the middle east

The Ukraine story – torpedo Russian Oil Pipeline to Europe.



Demonizing Russia

Image result for oil pipelines of the future in the middle east


Middle East Oil Reserves


Pipelines in the works


Image result for oil pipelines of the future in the middle east

Image result for oil pipelines of the future in the middle east

Bomber bases for prosecuting War in Syria

5,848 kms from Deigo Garcia to Syria

B1 Bomber Range 9400 kms

B2 Bomber Range 11,000 kms



The New Israel?


Image result for greater israel




Welcome to the Future of the Middle East – Spot the new boundaries.


The Cost: 250 million dead, permanent nuclear contamination, the end of society as we know it.


Image result for Stop war now


Image result for Stop war now

Image result for Stop war now

Image result for Stop war now




Beyond the bluster of the main stream media and the inane propaganda demonizing Russia, the West headed by vicious financial cartels and their proxies -governments from the US, UK, NATO and their poodles,are to launch a full scale nuclear attack on Syria, Russia and Iran. The hardware is in place and the large scale genocide of vast swaths of humanity will commence soon. Repercussions of these strikes are unknown at this time. Language which we have seen in the, ‘media’ include the Orwellian terms of , Freedom, Democracy, Liberation, Terrorism, War Crimes etc etc. We call on all our readers to take cognizance of these plans which will be in motion ASAP. God bless you all.

To all you thinkers out there – Jai Hind


Neocons Are Stealing Our Souls

By Jack Speer-Williams
Most Americans believe many popular untruths and have a resistance to unpopular truths. Too many of us are led by popular opinions, which are usually incorrect.
By the end of the Ronald Reagan administration, in 1989, the Soviet Union was falling apart. Soon America would have no enemies in the world, at least none who could seriously harm us. Such an idyllic state was, however, intolerable to the controlling Neocons (US/Israeli* dual citizens), who have long directed the disastrous domestic and foreign policies of America. *These US/Israeli dual citizens should be called Israeli citizens as their total allegiance is to Israel, the Rothschilds, and the One World government, with obvious contempt for gullible America.

The term Neocon is a misnomer as Neocons are not conservative. The word Neocon has come to mean (to those in the know) the dual-citizen Jews (US/Israeli) who are appointed to high positions in all three branches of the American federal government, including the Supreme Court, in spite of the fact that Jews comprise only about two to three percent of the US population.

Since it is politically incorrect to call a bunch of psychopathic Jews what they really are (psychopathic Jews), they are called Neocons. The Jewish-owned media has made sure that none of this can be discussed, as Americans have been trained (yes, actually trained) to feel uncomfortable whenever hearing about Jewish crimes. Even pointing out that most Neocons are Jewish is an affront to many mind-controlled Americans.

These Neocons have no place in their hearts for a better, safer, and happier world. They spend trillions of dollars on bringing about ruination, poverty, starvation, and death, but not a farthing on peace or prosperity for those other than themselves. In point of fact, five years ago Time Magazine estimated that America had spent five trillion (5,000,000,000,000) dollars on our concocted war on terror.

First of all, that cost was estimated five years ago; those costs have exploded to much higher heights since then. Secondly, who knows how much higher our war costs will go?
Thirdly, and most importantly, these war expenses are ruining our economy, causing our infrastructure to fall apart, while tent cities are springing up all across our country.

What have the Neocons given us in return for their interminable wars on terror? National security? What a joke. The United States of America and her citizens have never in history been less secure than today, with each succeeding day making us more vulnerable to nationwide disasters. The Neocons, with their control of television, have conned Americans into such a surreal existence, that few of us try to understand who we are fighting or why.

Are we fighting al Qaeda, ISIS, Boko Haram, ISIL, al-Nusra, or the Islamic State? It is all purposely made complex so we will turn a blind eye to the daily crimes committed by those who run our Department of Defense – the Neocons. You might find it difficult to believe, but the Defense Department lists sixty terrorist organizations, more than enough to keep the Rothschild-owned military/industrial complex busy, with both dead bodies and bucks piling up.How many of us even know that five trillion dollars is five million dollars times a million – an incomprehensible figure for any human being.

The Neocons have no interest in any of that money being used for practical facilities, such as desalination plants, which could make the deserts bloom and help end starvation and death in our world. There is no sane reason the Blacks of Africa have to continually suffer with starvation, disease, and genocide; a fraction of the trillions of US dollars the Neocons have spent on destruction and death, they could have used to end hunger in Africa. The Neocons have never wanted peace and prosperity anywhere, especially in the Middle East; they chose instead to make the hot, struggling lands of the Muslim people war zones of perpetual destabilization and deadly chaos.

Certainly the Rothschilds, who control the US Neocons, have a huge interest in stealing the oil and other natural resources of the Middle East, but total destabilization is their prime objective on their way to hegemonic control of the world. To accomplish their never-ending conflicts and chaos throughout the Middle East, the Neocons directed US/Israeli dark undercover agents to sow bloodshed and hatred between various sects of the Muslim religion.

Additionally, with secret funding, direction, equipping, and organization, the Neocons (who have long run the American federal government) created terrorism with religious radicals and mercenaries brought in from as far away as the nations of Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and other countries.These fledgling foreign terrorists were and are brainwashed for as long as six months with all sorts of insane and perverted “Islamic lessons” until they were and are ready to kill those who will not join their jihad. Most of these foreign terrorists are brought into countries like Syria and Libya where they are called by the Neocon controlled media moderates, rebels, or even freedom fighters who are fighting against cruel oppressive governments. This allows cover for the Neocon-controlled Western militaries to give air and supply support to all terrorists, while claiming they are only aiding freedom fighters who want and deserve our support.

Certainly you have heard the words rebels, moderates, or freedom fighters used by the Neocon’s lap-dog media dozens if not scores of times. The next time you hear those terms, just replace them all with far more correct words: CIA/Mossad terrorists. With their control of the US press and the mainstream media, these black-hearted Neocons have convinced most Americans that the terrorists hate all Americans for their freedoms. This absurdity was even repeated by the Neocon’s puppet, Little George Bush, while the freedoms Americans once enjoyed were falling away daily.

American politicians spend a lot of time lying about how we should up our war effort against terrorism, without ever saying a word about indicting, prosecuting, and convicting US/Israeli Neocon terrorists of murder, espionage, misleading Congress, perjury, public corruption, organizing and providing material assistance to terrorists, and obstruction of justice. After all, the Neocons are the real terrorists of our world.

Of course, it would be difficult for our US political leaders to prosecute the Neocons, as Israel’s Mossad has video proof of many of them engaged in sex or hiding some sort of financial crime.Moreover, most of our congressmen and senators have been elected with Jewish oligarch campaign funds, which I suspect came to them from Israel. And from whom did Israel get so much money? From American taxpayers in the form of US foreign aid.
Without these dauntingly large campaign donations, by way of the Zionists, no honest, patriotic US representative or senator can be elected.

Since WW II, America has given Israel (in non-inflation-adjusted dollars) over $125 billion. This fact, added to all the other destructive Neocon policies, has gone a long, long way in demolishing the American economy.Americans, whether they realize it or not, are giving their permission to be abused by their own government by actually paying for it. This makes Americans guilty of the murder and slaughter of millions of people around the world, with their own ignorance being at the base of their crimes.

The US crimes against humanity in the Middle East, however, did not begin in earnest until the industrial/military complex (owned by the Rothschild tribe) lost their “cold war” foe – the Soviet Union. Then in 1990, the insane, death-loving Neocons quickly whipped up a casus belli with Iraq, using our American ambassador, April Glaspie, as their instrument of war.

The Neocons wanted to bomb a lot of human beings, with the support of a majority of the American people.

On the 5th of January, 2011, a message from the Veterans for Common Sense was released to the world. Its text is reprinted below.

A secret July 25, 1990, [US] State Department Cable [was widely] released by Wikileaks. [It] shows how US Ambassador April Glaspie told Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein the U.S. had “no position” on the Iraq – Kuwait border dispute, where Kuwait was allegedly stealing oil from Iraq [by slant drilling]. At the time, the U.S. supported Iraq’s recently ended war with Iran (1980–1988) that had ruined Iraq’s economy. On August 2, 1990, Iraq invaded Kuwait. On January 12, 1991, prompted by a massive propaganda campaign, the U.S. began bombing Iraq, and never stopped. More than 20 years later [now 25 years] the war continues with deadly consequences for Kuwait, Iraq, and the U.S.

Based on the State Department cable, the facts are clear: in 1990, then President George H[erbert} W[alker] Bush’s administration [and Ms. Glaspie], failed to denounce Iraq’s intended military action against Kuwait in July 1990. The silence encouraged Iraqi’s Saddam Hussein to invade Kuwait in August 1990. The Gulf War was left unfinished for thirteen years, with an embargo, sanctions, and “no-fly” zones.*

In 2003, then President George W. Bush lied about Iraq possessing weapons of mass destruction and launched a second invasion [called Shock and Awe].*It has been estimated, and later confirmed by Us Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, that our post war sanctions against Iraq resulted in the deaths of over 500,000 Iraqi children. The first US/NATO bombings of Iraq consisted of 100,000 sorties dropping an estimated 88,500 tons of bombs on Iraq and her people.

The Neocons called their second, 2003, bombings of Iraq – Shock and Awe!
Those bombings were meant to totally terrorize, paralyze, demoralize, cripple, or kill all Iraqi men, women, and their children. The incomprehensible death and destruction committed by the US military was a crime against humanity Americans will forever have to bear all because we allowed the psychopathic Neocons to control our government, as they still do.

The American crimes against Iraq have become so obvious that both of the presidential candidates of 2016 have denied they supported those wars. Hillary lied. The widely reported media use of the words smart bombs, complete with careful targeting and precision strikes was not something the Neocons ever thought Americans would believe, as only fools would believe such a rash of nonsense. The term smart bombs was used so Americans could push the crimes out of their minds, thus making us unknowingly as criminal as our government.The other spiritual trap for Americans was the Neocon’s media use of the misleading words collateral damage, which allowed many Americans to think, “Well … it’s understandable that a few good people will get killed while we’re going after the bad guys.”

Another aspect of the Neocon’s dark strategy included having their media reporters tell us (with serious voices) how few civilians were just accidently killed while US forces were defending themselves against the wild and fierce Republican Guard of the evil Saddam Hussein.

The Neocon’s Iraqi slaughter-of- human-life scenario have been played out again and again in the countries of Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria, with their hired mercenaries maintaining chaos, creating fear and starvation, homelessness, disease, and death throughout the brutally bombed and devastated nations. The prime targets, via their secret proxy terrorists, has been the horror and death they spread amongst innocent civilians.

Now the stage has been set for the Neocons in Europe and America to destroy the White Christian cultures and civilizations of both America and Europe with millions of immigrants, mostly from the sub-Saharan African continent. These immigrants are falsely called Syrian refugees by the Neocon’s media, when in actuality they are not refugees, nor are most of them from Syria. They are mostly young, ignorant, unskilled, uneducated black men, with I.Q.s that are estimated to range from 60+, with few women or children to be seen.The Neocons, however, did not set these Zionist goals; they only try to implement them. No one can prove who set the goals of destroying the Middle East, Europe, and America, but the Rothschild banking tribe ranks as high as can easily be proven.

But there can be no denying that many Jews have been and are being used to destroy, Islam, Christianity, and other religions, with both Black and White Christians ignorantly going along with it. Perhaps the world’s best known terrorist in existence is Philadelphia reared and MIT educated Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who claims to have written a book entitled Fighting Terrorism. If Bibi really wanted to defeat terrorism, he’d have Mossad stop helping the CIA to create it.

Jews the world over would be wise to speak out against the Rothschilds and their Neocons, as has researcher and writer Mr. Bernie Suarez.Below, Bernie Suarez lists 5 Master Crimes You’ll Have to Explain to Future Generations – all attributable directly to American Neocons and their cultural Marxists in government and the media:

Over a decade of geoengineering and in-your-face weather manipulation.

A generation without justice on 9/11 crimes.

Open genetic (GMO) contamination of the food supply of the species.

Tons of toxin-laced vaccines injected directly into newborns … no accountability, no proof of safety, no problem!

Choosing impractical top-down tyranny over small/self-goverance.

But what actual chance do Americans have against their foremost enemies – the Neocons?
I feel confident that Vladimir Putin of Russia understands and disagrees with the Rothschild push for world hegemony. Please tell me why else would the Rothschilds’ Western media so unjustly continue to attack Putin and his country?
The Rothschilds well know, with his growing military might, Putin and his country may actually become the hope of the world, as Edgar Cayce long ago predicted. Unfortunately, however, Neocon war initiatives could mean the physical destruction of America, especially with the warmongering, mentally unstable Hillary Clinton as our president.
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts has said that Russia has bombs that are 17,000 times more powerful than the ones we dropped on Japan. And that just one of those terrible bombs could level three-quarters of the entire state of New York – killing most plant, animal, and human life for perhaps billions of years.

And yet, the Neocons want to throw dice with our futures by continually poking the Russian bear in his eyes in Syria and Ukraine. Already the US has missiles on Russia’s western border, with the ridiculous claim they are for protection against Iran. How much more will Russia take from the US Neocons? More ludicrous yet, the Neocons have been asserting that America could win a nuclear war with Russia. Is that not an idiot’s remark? Is it not a statement of provocation? It is not patriotic to support preposterous national policies or crimes against humanity – crimes against all life forms.One of these batshit crazy Neocons asked, “What’s the use of having nuclear bombs if you don’t use them?” That is insanity; deep insanity. Have these demented psychos never heard of MAD – the old doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction? Have there ever been truer words spoken or written than these?

Certifiably insane, dual-citizen terrorists are running our government and implementing its seriously dangerous policies. Please understand something of supreme importance: due to our sloth and ignorance, the US/NATO/Israeli combine have become the force of the archfiend Satan. We now all need God, and our religion, more than ever before.

May God bless and spare us.

What happens to a society when thinking is eviscerated and is disdained in favor of raw emotion? [1] What happens when political discourse functions as a bunker rather than a bridge? What happens when the spheres of morality and spirituality give way to the naked instrumentalism of a savage market rationality? What happens when time becomes a burden for most people and surviving becomes more crucial than trying to lead a life with dignity? What happens when domestic terrorism, disposability, and social death become the new signposts and defining features of a society? What happens to a social order ruled by an “economics of contempt” that blames the poor for their condition and wallows in a culture of shaming?[2] What happens when loneliness and isolation become the preferred modes of sociality? What happens to a polity when it retreats into private silos and is no longer able to connect personal suffering with larger social issues? What happens to thinking when a society is addicted to speed and over-stimulation? What happens to a country when the presiding principles of a society are violence and ignorance? What happens is that democracy withers not just as an ideal but also as a reality, and individual and social agency become weaponized as part of the larger spectacle and matrix of violence?[3]

The forces normalizing and contributing to such violence are too expansive to cite, but surely they would include: the absurdity of celebrity culture; the blight of rampant consumerism; state-legitimated pedagogies of repression that kill the imagination of students; a culture of immediacy in which accelerated time leaves no room for reflection; the reduction of education to training; the transformation of mainstream media into a mix of advertisements, propaganda, and entertainment; the emergence of an economic system which argues that only the market can provide remedies for the endless problems it produces, extending from massive poverty and unemployment to decaying schools and a war on poor minority youth; the expanding use of state secrecy and the fear-producing surveillance state; and a Hollywood fluff machine that rarely relies on anything but an endless spectacle of mind-numbing violence. Historical memory has been reduced to the likes of a Disney theme park and a culture of instant gratification has a lock on producing new levels of social amnesia.

As we learned in the recent debate between Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton (a billionaire and millionaire), ignorance is the DNA of authoritarianism, serving to subvert the truth and obscure the workings of power. Willful ignorance has become a normalized political tool and form of public pedagogy that both provides the foundation for what Noam Chomsky labels as the rise of the “stupid party” and which works incessantly to create a “stupid nation.”[4] Trump, of course, proves that stupidity is in fashion and deeply entrenched within the larger culture while Hilary capitalizes on her penchant for disingenuousness by claiming support for policies she really disdains, i.e., stating she will raise taxes on her buddies from Goldman Sachs and other members of the financial elite. Hardly believable from a woman who “has earned millions of dollars from speeches to Wall Street banks and investment firms (and) was paid $675,000 for a series of speeches to Goldman Sachs.”[5] No hints of the radical imagination here, or the truth for that matter. Only the politics of stupidity and evasion and a media spectacle supporting the celebration of corrupted and limited and pathologized political horizons.

Manufactured ignorance also makes invisible the corruption of the financial elite, allowing them to plunder resources and define the accumulation of capital as a divine blessing. It gets worse. Manufactured ignorance aided by the voracious seductions of commodified corporate-driven disimagination machine that promotes a culture of empty pleasures through and endless regime of consuming and discarding. American society is now dominated by a pervasive commodified landscape of disimagination machines that extends from Hollywood movies and video games to mainstream television, magazines, news, and the social media. These mind-numbing desiring machines which thrive on speed and sensation function mostly as workstations of ignorance to create a fog of distractions that promote forms of social amnesia that erase from memory and public discourse the structural, systemic and social forces that reinforce what can be called organized powerlessness and massive human suffering. This is the stuff of a politics of disappearance that erases the presence of the poor, unemployed, the “approximately 11 million Americans cycle[d] through jails and prisons each year,” black youth, immigrants, ecological disasters, class warfare, acts of state sponsored terrorism, the rise of the police state, and the rise of the warfare state.[6] As the machinery of social death accelerates, America’s most precious investment, youth, also disappear. As neoliberal disimagination machines such as Fox News make clear youth as a social investment no longer count in a society that disdains long term investments and their messy calls for being included in the script of democracy. As such, the current war on youth is about erasing the future, at least any alternative future and any notion of imagination that might summon one into view.

When coupled with an age of precarity and endless uncertainty in which young people have few decent jobs, are strangulated by debt, face a future of career-less jobs, and isolation, young people have little room for politics because they are more concerned with trying to survive rather than engaging in political struggles, or imagining a different future. At the same time, armies of the unemployed or underemployed are caught in a spiral of receding wages, diminished social provisions, and increasingly find themselves paralyzed by anxiety and free-floating anger. In such situations, thinking and informed action become more difficult while a politics wedded to economic and social justice is eviscerated. Moreover, politics becomes toxic when dominated by unapologetic discourses of racism and hatred and is on full display in the Trump campaign. Tapping into such anger and redirecting away from the real problems that produce it has become the central script in the rise of the new authoritarians. This poisonous discourse gains momentum and accelerates as it moves between white supremacist incantations of Trump and his zealots and the deceptive vocabulary of Hillary Clinton and her financial elite backers who embrace a savage neoliberalism with its false claims to freedom, choice, and the virtues of militarization. Civic death is on full display as the ideals of democracy disappear in an election in which authoritarianism in its various forms rules without apology. As thinking dangerously and acting with civic courage wanes, state violence, disposability and voicelessness become the dominant registers of an authoritarian politics that has intensified in American life producing neo-fascist movements in American society that have moved from the fringes to the center of political life.

Tragedy looms large in American society as the forces that promote powerlessness and voicelessness intensify among those elements of the population struggling just to survive the symbolic violence of a culture of cruelty and the material violence of a punishing state. The issue of losing one’s voice either to the forces of imposed silencing or state repression weaken dissent and open the door to the seductions of a dogmatism that speaks in the language of decline, making America great again, while touting the coded vocabulary of white nationalism and racial purity. How else to explain Trump’s call for imposing racial profiling as a way to boost the notion of law and order.

Thinking undangerously is the first step in the triumph of formalism over substance, theater over politics, and the transformation of politics into a form of celebrity culture. The refusal to think works in the service of a form of voicelessness, which is another marker of what it means to be powerless. Within this moral and political vacuum, the codes, rhetoric, and language of white supremacy is on the rise wrapped in the spectacle of fear-mongering and implied threats of state repression. In this instance, emotion become more important than reason, ideas lose their grip on reality, and fashion becomes a rationale for discarding historical memory, informed arguments, and critical thought. Reflection no longer challenges the demands of commonsense. In the mainstream media, the endless and unapologetic proliferation of lies become fodder for higher ratings, informed by suffocating pastiche of talking heads, all of whom surrender to “the incontestable demands of quiet acceptance.”[7] Within such an environment, the truth of an event is not open to public discussion or informed judgment at least in the official media apparatuses producing, distributing and circulating ideas that parade as commonsense. As a result, all that remains is the fog of ignorance and the haze of political and moral indifference.

Americans occupy a historical moment in which it is crucial to think dangerously, particularly since such thinking has the power to shift the questions, provide the tools for offering historical and relational contexts, and “push at the frontiers…of the human imagination.”[8] Stuart Hall is right in insisting that thinking dangerously is crucial “to change the scale of magnification. … to break into the confusing fabric that ‘the real’ apparently presents, and find another way in. So it’s like a microscope and until you look at the evidence through the microscope, you can’t see the hidden relations.”[9] In this instance, the critical capacity for thinking becomes dangerous when it can intervene in the “continuity of commonsense, unsettle strategies of domination,” and work to promote strategies of transformation.[10]

As Adorno observes, such thinking “speaks for what is not narrow-minded—and commonsense most certainly is.”[11] As such, dangerous thinking is not only analytical in its search for understanding and truth, it is also critical and subversive, always employing modes of self and social critique necessary to examine its own grounds and those poisonous fundamentalisms in the larger society haunting the body politic. As Michael Payne observes, thinking dangerously (or critical theory in this instance) should be cast in the language of hints, dialogue, and an openness to other positions, rather than be “cast in the language of orders.”[12] Of course, this is not to suggest that thinking dangerously guarantees action, but at the same time, any action that distances itself from such thinking is bound to fail.

In an age when shouting, rage, and unchecked emotions shape public discourse, self-reflection becomes a liability and suppresses the axiom that critical thought should function to “lift…human beings above the evidence of our senses and sets appearances apart from the truth.”[13] Salmon Rushdie is right in viewing thinking dangerously as a type of political necessity whose purpose is to “push boundaries and take risks and so, at times, to change the way we see the world.”[14] As Hannah Arendt noted, thoughtfulness, the ability to think reflectively and critically is fundamental to radical change and a necessity in a functioning democracy. Put differently, formative cultures that make such thinking possible along with the spaces in which dialogue, debate, and dissent can flourish are essential to producing critically literate and actively engaged citizens.

Unfortunately, thinking undangerously cuts across ideological and political divides. For instance, there is a new kind of historical and social amnesia overtaking some elements of resistance in the United States. Many progressives have forgotten the lessons of earlier movements for real change extending from the anti-Vietnam War and Black Freedom movements to the radical feminist and gay rights movements of the sixties. History as a repository of learning with vast resources to enable people to build on historical legacies, develop mass movements, and take seriously the pedagogical task of consciousness raising, is in decline. Too much of contemporary politics has become more personal, often reducing agency to the discourses and highly charged emotions of trauma. These historical legacies of resistance did not limit their politics to a call recognition and security within the confines of isolated political issues. Instead, they called for a radical transformation of capitalist and other authoritarian societies. Moroever, they understood that the truth of domination lie in understanding the totality of a society and how various issues were connected to each other. George Monbiot exemplifies this issue in arguing against responding to the varied crisis associated with neoliberalism as if they emerged in isolation—a response that contributes to neoliberalism’s anonymity. He writes:

Its anonymity is both a symptom and cause of its power. It has played a major role in a remarkable variety of crises: the financial meltdown of 2007?8, the offshoring of wealth and power, of which the Panama Papers offer us merely a glimpse, the slow collapse of public health and education, resurgent child poverty, the epidemic of loneliness, the collapse of ecosystems, the rise of Donald Trump. But we respond to these crises as if they emerge in isolation, apparently unaware that they have all been either catalyzed or exacerbated by the same coherent philosophy; a philosophy that has – or had – a name. What greater power can there be than to operate namelessly?[15]

This politics of the disconnect is exacerbated by the fact that mass social movements run the risk of undermining by a politics that has collapsed into the personal. For example, for too many progressives personal pain represents a retreat into an interiority that focuses on trauma. Robin Kelley provides a caveat here in pointing out that all too often “managing trauma does not require dismantling structural racism” and the larger issues of “oppression, repression, and subjugation” get replaced with “words such as PTSD, micro-aggressions, and triggers.” [16] Kelley is not suggesting that the pain of personal suffering be ignored. Instead, he warns “against … the consequences of framing all grievances in the ‘language of personal trauma.’”[17]

Personal trauma in this case can begin with legitimate calls for spaces free of racism, sexual harassment, and various other forms of hidden but morally and politically unacceptable assaults. And at its best, such a politics functions as an entry into political activism; but when it becomes less a justifiable starting point than an endpoint it begins to sabotage any viable notion of radical politics. Kelley is right in insisting that “trauma can easily slip into thinking of ourselves as victims and objects rather than agents.”[18] Moreover, the language of safe spaces, personal trauma, and triggers can easily become a topsy-turvy discursive universe of trick mirrors and trapdoors that end up reproducing a politics of intimidation and conformity, while forgetting that pedagogical practices and a corresponding politics in the service of dramatic transformation are always unsettling and discomforting.

Progressives must avoid at all cost is the rebirth of a politics in which how we think and act is guaranteed by the discourses of origins, personal experience, and biology. When individuals become trapped within their own experiences, the political imagination weakens, and a politics emerges that runs the risk of inhabiting a culture of exclusion and hardness that shuts down dialogue, undermines compassion, kills empathy, makes it more difficult to listen to and learn from others. A politics that puts an emphasis on personal pain can become blind to its own limitations and can offer falsely a guaranteed access to the truth and a comforting embrace of a discourse of political certainty.

In such cases, the walls go up again as the discourses of biology and exclusion merge to guard the frontiers of moral righteousness and political absolutism. Put differently, the registers of militarization are on full display in such alleged sites of resistance such as higher education where a growing culture of political purity marks out a space in which the personal becomes the only politics there is housed within a discourse of “weaponized sensitivity” and “armed ignorance.”[19] The first causality of armed ignorance is a kind of thoughtfulness that embraces empathy for the other, a willingness to enter into public discussion, and dialogue with those who exist outside of the bunkers of imagined communities of exclusion. Leon Wieseltier is right in arguing that “grievance is sometimes the author of blindness, or worse.”[20]

Under such conditions, empathy wanes and only extends as far as recognizing those who mirror the self, one that endlessly narrates itself on the high ground of an unassailable moralism and stultifying orbits of self-interests. In addition, politics collapses into the privatized orbits of a crude essentialism that disdains forms of public discourse in which boundaries break down and the exercise of public deliberation is viewed as fundamental to a substantive democracy. Of course, there is more at work here than what might be called the atrophy of critical thought, self-reflection, and theory, there is also the degeneration of agency itself.

What does thinking look like when it is transformed into a pedagogical parasite on the body of democracy? At one level, it becomes toxic, blinding the ideological warriors to their own militant ignorance and anti-democratic rhetoric. At the same time, it shuts down any attempt to develop public spheres that connect rather than separate advocates of a politics walled in by suffocating notions of essentialism dressed up in the appeal to orthodoxy parading as revolutionary zeal. What must be remembered is that thinking undangerously mimics a pedagogy of repression that falsely assumes a revolutionary stance when in fact everything about it is counter-revolutionary. In the end this suggests a kind of theoretical helplessness, a replacing of the courage to think dangerously with the discourse of denunciation and a language overflowing with the comforting binary of good and evil.

There is more at risk here than legitimating the worse forms of thoughtlessness, there is also the intolerable potential for both the moral collapse of politics and the undermining of any vestige of democracy. Thinking dangerously as a critical enterprise is about both a search for the truth and a commitment to the recognition that no society is ever just enough and hence is fundamental to the always unfinished struggle, making the impossible all the more possible. Not one or the other but both. Such thinking should be used to both understand and engage the major upheavals people face and to connect such problems to larger political, structural, and economic issues.

Thinking dangerously can make the pedagogical more political by mapping the full range of how power is used and how it can be made accountable in all of its uses. Thinking dangerously is about more than doing a critical reading of screen culture and other texts, it is also about how knowledge, desire, and values become invaluable tools in the service of economic and political justice, how language provides the framework for dealing with power and what it means to develop a sense of compassion for others and the planet. Dangerous thinking is more than a mode of resistance, it is the basis for a formative and pedagogical culture of questioning and politics that takes seriously how the imagination can become central to the practice of freedom, justice, and democratic change.


[1] This essay draws upon a number of ideas in Henry A. Giroux, Dangerous Thinking in the Age of the New Authoritarianism (New York: Routledge, 2015).

[2] I have borrowed this term from Jeffrey St. Clair, “The Economics of Contempt,” Counterpunch (May 23, 2014).

[3] Brad Evans and I have taken up the issue of violence in its various valences in Brad Evans and Henry A. Giroux, Disposable Futures: The Seduction of Violence in the Age of the Spectacle (San Francisco: City Lights Books, 2015). Also, see Henry A. Giroux, America’s Addiction to Terrorism (New York: Monthly Review Press, 2016).

[4] Noam Chomsky, “Corporations and the Richest Americans Viscerally Oppose the Common good,” Alternet (Sep9tember 29, 2014). Online:

[5] Chris Cillizza , “The New York Times just perfectly explained Hillary Clinton’s Goldman Sachs speech problem,” The Washington Post (February 26, 2016). Online:

[6] Rebecca Gordon, “There Oughta Be a Law…Should Prison Really Be the American Way?,” (September 25, 2016). Online:

[7] Brad Evans and Julien Reid, “The Promise of Violence in the Age of Catastrophe,” Truthout (January 5, 2014. Online:

[8] Arundhati Roy, Power Politics (Cambridge, Ma: South End Press, 2001), P. 1

[9] Stuart Hall and Les Back, “In Conversation: At Home and Not at Home”, Cultural Studies, Vol. 23, No. 4, (July 2009), pp. 664-665.

[10] I have taken this phrases from an interview with Homi Bhaba in Gary Olson and Lynn Worsham, “Staging the Politics of Difference: Homi Bhabha’s Critical Literacy JAC ((1999), p. 9.

[11] Zygmunt Bauman, Liquid Life (London: Polity Press, 2005), p.139.

[12] Michael Payne, “What Difference Has Theory Made? From Freud to Adam Phillips,” College Literature 32:2 (Spring 2005), p. 7.

[13] Ibid., Bauman, Liquid Life, 151.

[14] Salman Rushdie, “Whither Moral Courage?” The New York Times, (April 28, 2013)

[15] George Monbiot, “Neoliberalism – the ideology at the root of all our problems,” The Guardian, (April 15, 2016) Online:

[16] Robin D.G. Kelley, “Black Study, Black Struggle – final response,” Boston Review, (March 7, 2016). Online:

[17] Ibid., Robin D.G. Kelley, “Black Study, Black Struggle – final response.” Boston Review.,

[18] Robin D.G. Kelley, “Black Study, Black Struggle,” Boston Review, (March 7, 2016) Online:

[19] The notion of weaponized sensitivity is from Lionel Shriver, “Will the Left Survive the Millennials?” New York Times (September 23, 2016). Online. Armed ignorance was coined by my colleague Brad Evans in a personal correspondence.

[20] Leon Wieseltier, “How voters’ personal suffering overtook reason – and brought us Donald Trump,” Washington Post, (June 22, 2016). Online:

Henry A. Giroux currently holds the McMaster University Chair for Scholarship in the Public Interest in the English and Cultural Studies Department and a Distinguished Visiting Professorship at Ryerson University. His most recent books are America’s Education Deficit and the War on Youth (Monthly Review Press, 2013) and Neoliberalism’s War on Higher Education (Haymarket Press, 2014). His web site is


Why the US Had to Kill the Syrian Ceasefire

There are several sound reasons for concluding that the US-led air strike on the Syrian army base near Deir Ezzor last weekend was a deliberate act of murderous sabotage. One compelling reason is that the Pentagon and CIA knew they had to act in order to kill the ceasefire plan worked out by US Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.

The compulsion to wreck the already shaky truce was due to the unbearable exposure that the ceasefire plan was shedding on American systematic involvement in the terrorist proxy war on Syria.

Not only that, but the tentative ceasefire was also exposing the elements within the US government responsible for driving the war effort. US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter – the head of the Pentagon – reportedly fought tooth and nail with Obama’s top diplomat John Kerry while the latter was trying to finalize the ceasefire plan with Russia’s Lavrov on the previous weekend of September 9 in Geneva.

While Sergey Lavrov and media reporters were reportedly kept waiting several hours for Kerry to finally emerge to sign off on the deal, the American foreign secretary was delayed by intense haggling in conference calls with Carter and other military chiefs back in Washington. Even days before Kerry’s diplomatic shuttle to Geneva, Carter was disparaging any prospective deal with Russia on a Syrian ceasefire.

It is well documented that both the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency have been running clandestine programs for arming and training anti-government militants in Syria since the outset of the war in March 2011. Officially, Washington claims to be only supporting «moderate, vetted opposition». However, on occasion, Western media reports allude to the deeper sinister connections between the US military and terrorist groups when it has been reported that American weaponry «accidentally» finds its way into the hands of extremist jihadist networks.

This pretense by the US – and its other NATO and Arab allies – of supporting «moderate rebels» and of having no involvement with recognized terror groups like Al Nusra and Daesh (ISIS) was being exposed by the latest ceasefire.

It is conceivable that the diplomatic corps of the Obama administration, including President Barack Obama and his foreign emissary John Kerry, may be benighted about the full extent of America’s dirty war in Syria and its systematic connections to the terrorist brigades. Perhaps, this Obama flank is gullible and venal enough to believe in Washington’s propaganda of a dichotomy between «moderate rebels» and «terrorists».

Thus, when Kerry announced the ceasefire plan with Lavrov in Geneva on September 9, the American diplomat’s calls for the US-backed «moderate rebels» to separate themselves from the terror groups may have been made out a naive notion that such a distinction might exist. How else could we explain such a futile public appeal?

Not so, though, the Pentagon and CIA. The covert warmongers in the Pentagon and at Langley know the vile truth all along. That is, that all the militant groups in Syria are integrated into a terrorist front, albeit with a plethora of different names and seeming differences in commitment to al Qaeda Wahhabi ideology. The masters of war know that Washington is a sponsor of this terrorist front, along with its NATO and Arab allies.

Anyone with an informed knowledge about the origins of Al Qaeda from CIA authorship in Afghanistan during the 1980s would not be surprised in the slightest by such a systematic American role in the Syrian conflict.

This perspective reasonably explains why Carter. and the US military generally, were making conspicuous objections to Kerry’s ceasefire plan with Russia. They knew the ceasefire was not only infeasible because of the systematic links between the US and the terror groups, but also that a failing ceasefire would furthermore expose these systematic connections, and create wider public awareness about American complicity in the Syrian war.

And, as it transpired, the apprehensions of the Pentagon and the CIA terrorist handlers were indeed founded. Within days of the Kerry-Lavrov ceasefire being implemented on September 12, the following was undeniable: there was no separation of «moderates» and «terrorists». All militant groups were continuing to violate the nominal truce in the northern battleground city of Aleppo and in other locations across Syria.

The US and Western media then began venting about the Syrian «regime» and its Russian ally not delivering on giving humanitarian aid access to insurgent-held areas of eastern Aleppo. But that rhetorical gaming could not disguise the fact that the ceasefire was being breached by all the militant groups, which made it impossible for humanitarian aid convoys to enter Aleppo. Another factor played down by the Western media was that the Turkish government refused to coordinate with the Syrian authorities in the routing of UN truck convoys from the Turkish border into Aleppo. Given Turkey’s past documented involvement in using «humanitarian aid» as a cover for supplying weapons to insurgents, the vigilance demanded by Damascus is understandable.

The floundering ceasefire was thereby providing a withering world exposure of American terrorist complicity in Syria. The US lie about backing «moderates» as opposed to «terrorists» was being shown once and for all to be a cynical delusion. Evidently, US claims of supporting a «legitimate» opposition were seen for what they are – an utter sham. That leads to an even more damning conclusion that the US government is a sponsor of a terrorist proxy army in Syria for its criminal objective of regime change in that country. In theory at least, this disclosure warrants legal prosecution of Washington and its allies for the commission of war crimes against the state of Syria.

Given the grave stakes for American international standing that the ceasefire was endangering, it is reasonable to posit that a decision was taken by the Pentagon to sabotage. Hence, on September 17, American, British and Australian warplanes struck the Syrian Arab Army elite forces’ base near Deir Ezzor,  in eastern Syria, killing over 60 personnel and wounding nearly 100 more.

The US, Britain and Australia have since claimed that it was an accident, and that their aircraft were intending to attack Daesh militants in the area. The US-led coalition claims it will carry out an investigation into the air strike. As with many times before, such as when the US devastated a hospital in Afghanistan’s Kunduz killing more than 30 people last year, we can expect a cover-up.

Briefly, a few factors for doubting the US coalition’s claim of an accident are: why did the Daesh militants reportedly launch an offensive operation on the Syrian army base less than 10 minutes after it was struck by F-16s and A-10s? That suggests coordination between the coalition air forces and the terrorists on the ground.

Secondly, it defies credibility that sophisticated air power and surveillance could mistake an army base and adjacent air field containing hundreds of troops for ragtag guerrilla units.

Thirdly, as Russian military sources point out, the US coalition had previously not been active in that area over the past two years of flying operations. The Syrian army was known to be recently waging an effective campaign against Daesh around Deir Ezzor. That suggests that the US air power was being deployed to defend the terrorist units, as the Syrian and Russian governments were quick to claim after the US-led air strike on Deir Ezzor. That is consistent with the broader analysis of why and how the entire Syrian war has been fomented by Washington for regime change.

But perhaps the most telling factor in concluding that the US and its allies carried out the massacre at Deir Ezzor deliberately is the foregoing argument that the Pentagon and CIA war planners knew that the flawed ceasefire was exposing their terror tentacles in Syria. And certainly, if any US-Russian joint anti-Daesh operations were to take place as envisaged by the Kerry-Lavrov plan, then the charade would definitely be blown apart.

In that case, only one thing had to be done as a matter of necessity. The unwieldy, discomfiting ceasefire had to be killed off. And so the Pentagon decided to make a «mistake» at Deir Ezzor – a «mistake» that has gutted any minimal trust between the US and Russia, unleashing recriminations and a surge in ceasefire violations.

The American and Western media respond in the usual servile way to aid the cover-up. The massacre at Deir Ezzor is being largely ignored as a news story, with much more prominence given to a relatively minor bombing incident in New York City on the same weekend in which no-one was killed. Or, when reported on, the US media in particular have automatically accepted without question that the air strike was an accident. CNN also dismissed out of hand Syrian government claims of it being proof of American collusion with terrorists as «absurd». A claim that would otherwise seem fairly logical.

The New York Times had this gloss to paint over the air strike:

«The United States’ accidental bombing of Syrian troops over the weekend has put it on the defensive, undercutting American efforts to reduce violence in the civil war and open paths for humanitarian relief».

The American so-called newspaper-of-record then adds:

«The United States had thought that if a deal to ease hostilities in Syria, struck by Secretary of State John Kerry and his Russian counterpart in Geneva nine days ago, fell apart, it would reveal Russia’s duplicity in the war, in which Moscow has supported the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad».

How ironic. According to The New York Times, the Americans anticipated that the ceasefire deal would reveal «Russia’s duplicity in the war». Maybe, they calculated that Russia and Syria would not abide by the cessation, which they very much did during the first week, showing discipline and commitment to finding a peaceful settlement.

Far from revealing Russia’s «duplicity», it is Washington that emerged as the culprit, as the Pentagon and CIA had feared all along because of their deep complicity with the terrorist proxies.

Killing the Syrian ceasefire was like the necessity to extinguish a spotlight that had suddenly come on and begun exposing the putrefaction and bloodied hands in America’s dirty war.