TimoMalum.com

Thirty Years Of Warmongering By Benjamin Netanyahu.

Israel's Prime Minister has been lying for decades about threats to his nation. On Friday, June 13 he launched an illegal and unprovoked attack on Iran, using the frequently debunked claim that Iran is developing nuclear weapons as the excuse for his actions. Israel is now paying a terrible price for letting this psychopath run their nation.

To show that Netanyahu's latest claims aren't isolated incidents, here's a compilation of his greatest hits; thirty years of warmongering caught on video.

A Friendship Made In Hell: Donald Trump & Benjamin Netanyahu.

It's Monday night / Tuesday morning as I write this, the end of a long day full of news from the Middle East. A few days ago, Israel launched illegal attacks against Iran, using their worn out excuse that they had to do it for "self-defense". Innocent Iranians were killed. Nations around the world condemned the attacks as violations of international law, which they clearly are. But Prime Minister Netanyahu doesn't care about international law, as evidenced in the ongoing genocide in Gaza, a brutal ethnic cleansing operation launched by Israel after a false-flag attack they engineered and then executed on October 07, 2023. Somehow, the most heavily guarded border in the world was left unguarded for several hours, allowing Hamas soldiers to conveniently cross over and begin killing and kidnapping Israelis. Israeli Defense Forces stood down and let it happen, and when they did finally respond, they shot and killed many of their own citizens in "friendly fire" incidents. Netanyahu claims to this day that the continuing operation in Gaza is to rescue the remaining hostages, but hardly anyone believes him. Entire neighborhoods have been flattened into concrete dust, and Netanyahu's best friend, Donald Trump, has publicly stated that he wants to force the remaining Palestinians out and then turn Gaza into a seaside resort, most likely constructed with U.S. taxpayer money. After more than 55,000 deaths the genocide goes on, with Trump happily sending cash and bombs to Israel to keep it going.

Now we're being told by both Trump and Netanyahu that Iran is developing a nuclear bomb, something the war hawks in the deep state have been claiming for decades. Yet Trump's own Director of Homeland Security, Tulsi Gabbard, said this in March: “Iran is not building a nuclear weapon.” But Trump isn't listening to her and as recently as today proclaimed, "America first means many great things, including the fact that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon." Netanyahu also makes false claims that Iran is close to building their own nuclear weapon. And what does it matter if they do have one (or more)? Israel has several, using plans they allegedly stole from the United States, although being the dishonest people that they are, they haven't officially admitted to having any. But the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates that Israel has approximately 90 intact nuclear weapons, and they aren't afraid to recklessly use them. On 7 November 2023, Heritage Minister Amihai Eliyahu said during a radio interview that a nuclear strike would be "one way" to deal with Gaza. [source: Wikipedia] If Israel is willing to use nuclear weapons against unarmed people, there's little doubt they'd use them against Iran, one of the few nations in the world that actually stands up to the Zionist death cult.

In fact that's probably why Netanyahu is willing to sacrifice his own citizens in a war with Iran. He is obsessed with the "Greater Israel" plan that would expand Israel into becoming the dominant political and military entity in the Middle East, and he'll have to steal more land to do it, including much of Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt, Iraq, and the remaining territories still occupied by Palestinians. Iran, and to some degree, Yemen, have been the only nations that have pushed back against Israel's colonialism and genocide, and that has made them constant targets of baseless propaganda and Mossad terror operations.

But now it's come to all-out war. Iran has responded to Israel's attacks by sending nightly barrages of hypersonic missiles into Tel Aviv and various strategic targets. Israel, being like the school bully who can't figure out why no one likes him, has continued with their attacks while claiming to be the victim of a war they started. At first the world watched it all and hoped it would remain a regional conflict that would soon burn out one way or the other (although Iran has much greater military capabilities than Israel, if you exclude Israel's nukes). But Netanyahu figured out he was in over his head and he asked Trump to rescue him, a pathetic act everyone expected would happen. And today Trump dramatically left the G7 meeting and flew back to Washington DC where he had the National Security Council standing by ready to implement whatever maniacal plan Trump has thought up to save his friend. There has been much speculation but the general belief is that the United States will be brought into Israel's war whether we like it or not, and it will be sold to us through more lies or possibly even a false flag event in which we're told Iran has attacked a U.S. Navy ship, one of the many military bases in the Middle East, or even a terror attack in an American city. (It won't be the first time a government has attacked its own people to justify a war.)

Once we're fully involved in this illegal war, no one can predict what comes next. Some fear that Israel will drop a nuclear bomb on Tehran, creating outrage around the world. Real terror attacks could occur on U.S. soil. A long war with Iran could result in thousands of American troops being killed. Expensive military hardware will be destroyed. We could enter an economic depression and experience rationing of food and fuel. Other nations could decide to join Iran, turning the conflict global. One of the nations that has shown support for Iran is China, and they have the ability to send missiles right into the heart of America, or at the very least, they could cut off our supplies of computer chips, phones, medicines, and everything else we currently rely on them for.

Or, we could get lucky and cooler heads within the National Security Council will convince Trump that we need to sit this one out. Let Israel fight its own battles for a change without our help. But are there cooler heads in the NSC, or are they the same kind of war-crazed sociopaths that lied about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and took us into a war that was a total disaster?

Unfortunately I predict Trump will get his way and the NSC will nod their heads like happy dogs while giving the commands to murder the innocent people of Iran. And Netanyahu will dance in ecstasy at the thought of adding more dead kids to his score card.

The world is being led by psychopaths, demons, and those who willingly obey. In the case of Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu, it truly looks like a friendship made in Hell.

If you've never prayed before, this might be a good time to start.

The Moral Rot At The Heart Of Civilization.

by Nate Bear

This civilization is letting a genocide happen.

Israel and the west are to blame for the genocide but not one country, bar Yemen, has come to the material aid of the Palestinians.

Not one government in the entire world has done anything.

Shout-out to Hezbollah and a few militant groups in Iraq. Well done South Africa for bringing the ICC case against Netanyahu and his fellow Zionazis.

But no government on Earth used its state capacity, used its navy or its air force or its army to do anything to help the Palestinians.

A military mission to stop Israel would have been nice. No-fly zones and the like, with the threat of force. But in the absence of that, many of us would have settled for a humanitarian mission, a country or countries sending a fleet of ships and planes to deliver aid, come what may.

These vehicles could have been unarmed. The country or countries could have made it very clear to Israel this was solely a humanitarian mission, it would have called their bluff and created a stark binary choice: bomb unarmed aid ships of a nation state, effectively a declaration of war, or let them through.

But no, nothing. Looking at a list of the roughly two hundred countries in the world, well over half would have the capacity to send aid via air force or navy assets.

On the ladder of complicity in genocide, the western states supplying Israel with the military equipment and political cover for genocide sit on the top rung, but the countries with the greatest capacity to have done something, to have carried out a humanitarian mission, must sit on the next rung down.

In the end it has just been empty words of condemnation and a few symbolic gestures on trade.

In the end it has come down to a handful of activists on a crowdfunded sailing boat to be the moral conscience of the world and do something not one single country in the world did.

It’s hard to get your head around.

This inaction and apathy in the face of an actual genocide, in response to twenty months of 4k videos of children being shredded, blown up, ripped apart, beheaded, burnt alive and starved, signals a deeper moral rot at the heart of our societies.

A moral rot that cannot be separated from neo-liberalism and how money and profit have come to dominate our brains, dominate our political systems and dominate our world.

When it comes to a unifying vision for society, the only thing most of us ever hear from our governments is one word: growth.

Growth is the spiritual center around which the entirety of our politics is orientated. And it doesn’t mean anything at all! We can’t be richer. We have all the food and technology and money we could possibly need. We have never lived in more abundant times. The richest people are richer than countries. Footballers and tennis players are billionaires. The idea that if we just had another one, five, ten percent of economic growth we could create that extra bit more we need and solve all the problems is actually a comical insult to our intelligence.

Yet this is the myth and the legend that underpins all of modern politics. This is the story that so many people fall for and buy in to. Growth is the secular religion for an areligious age. And as such, it must be worshiped. Anything that creates growth is to be lauded and encouraged, and anything that hampers it is to be rejected. To speak out against growth is a crime against the religion.

Even a genocide must be no obstacle to growth.

Which is why, just a few days after the UK’s defense secretary David Lammy said the country had suspended trade talks with Israel (because even the genocide enablers in the British government couldn’t justify starving children), the UK’s trade envoy to Israel was live tweeting from Tel Aviv about his trade mission to the country.

The moral cesspit of neo-liberalism looks at a genocide on the one hand, and a percentage point of growth on the other, and chooses growth every time.

A few weeks ago I revealed that the son of the attorney general for the Conservative Party in the UK, (Lord) David Wolfson, who was a minister in Boris Johnson’s government, is a soldier in the IDF. Sam Wolfson went to Israel to join the IDF in 2022, participated in the genocide, and only returned to London earlier this year. He’s now working at the right-wing neo-liberal think tank Policy Exchange, because killing civilians and doing a new holocaust, rather than being an obstacle to a career path, is a valued skill. The more death you create, the more doors you open and the richer and more powerful you can be.

Neo-liberalism enthusiastically rewards death-eating immorality.

Just look around!

From Donald Trump to Elon Musk to Tony Blair to Joe Biden to Zuckerberg to Peter Thiel to Jeff Bezos to the bank bosses to the arms company bosses to the fossil fuel CEOs. Boringly the list goes on and on and on and on. Some of quite literally the worst people in the history of the world with the most blood on their hands are the richest people with the most power.

Neo-liberal economics has created a moral cesspit of a civilization in which there’s no financial upside in stopping a genocide.

On the contrary, the financial upside is in genocide.

From the American mercenaries running the sham aid distributions centers in Gaza, to the software being provided by Google, Microsoft and Meta to smooth the genocide, to the AI being provided by Palantir to track the Palestinians, to the missiles being provided by Lockheed Martin to liquify them.

The money is in the killing, not the saving.

The money is in the enabling, not the stopping.

The money is in the trade deals and the good relations.

Morality is all downside.

This is why I cannot stand to look at the faux moral posturing over Ukraine by the west. The truth? The money is in keeping that war going, funding Ukraine, rearming Europe. Latest estimates are that the war has caused 1.4 million casualties. These are absolutely horrifying numbers. Wanting more dead young men isn’t moral. Supporting Ukraine has nothing to do with good or bad, right or wrong. It’s only about blood money, resources and strategic interests.

And this moral cesspit of a civilization is one in which we all swim, whether we like it or not.

How many times have you said to someone “X should happen because it would be good” or “Y shouldn’t happen because it’s bad” and their sincere response, hollowed of all morality, has been along the lines of: but who would pay for it/there’s no money in it.

Our brains and value systems have been rewired to think about the world only in terms of money and profit.

This is why the foundations of our existence as biological beings - the air, the soil, the water - are being demolished. The money is in death, not in life. Good or bad and right or wrong don’t enter the calculation.

It’s hard to look at this civilization, a civilization tearing down the pillars of our own existence, a civilization that allowed a genocide to happen in such a visible way, and see any redeeming features.

People are worth saving. Beauty is worth saving. The animals and the rivers and the seas and the ecology are worth saving. But from the political to the economic to the legal, institutionally there’s nothing worth saving.

The liberals and the centrists have had their shot at reforming this mess. But the contradictions at the heart of their ideology (capitalists, but good ones!) couldn’t be resolved, and they’ve only ended up perpetuating the horrors of the system.

I’ve said it before but I’ve never felt it more keenly than after watching the west collaborate on genocide and the rest of the world do nothing to stop it: the future will be radically pro-social and anti-capitalist or there won’t be a future at all.

[republished by permission of Nate Bear / 'Do Not Panic' on Substack]

Netanyahu Is A War Criminal.

It is day 437 of Israel's savage genocide against Gaza. 45,028 people have been killed in Gaza, and 106,962 have been injured, orchestrated by the madman Benjamin Netanyahu. There has been no meaningful action taken by any nation on Earth to try and stop the killing. And with Donald Trump being the president-elect in the United States, there's little chance the Zionists will be restrained by the man who seems fully supportive of Israel's expansion across the Middle East.

This is a barbaric event of historical significance. But not enough people care.

#GazaGenocide

The System Won't Reform Itself.

A country run by banks will always be in debt. Health care controlled by big pharmaceutical companies will never cure disease. A state run by war will never know peace. A nation run by the media will never know the truth.

[content source: Revellati Online]

Which Candidate Will Shrink The Federal Government? Let's Take A Look.

As a lifelong libertarian, I've always felt that the biggest obstacle to a free and prosperous society is an oppressive and parasitic government. In the United States we have a federal government that began with good intentions more than 200 years ago, but has since become a hostile, angry monster that can never be fed enough. The size of the government is staggering: as of 2022, "the federal government employs nearly 9.1 million workers, comprising nearly 6 percent of total employment in the United States. The figure includes nearly 2.1 million federal employees, 4.1 million contract employees, 1.2 million grant employees, 1.3 million active duty military personnel, and more than 500,000 postal service employees." [source: The Hill] There are more federal employees than the total population of Austria. The federal budget for 2024 is $6.9 trillion, and that number is expected to grow no matter who is elected president in November. The national debt is currently more than $35 trillion [source: Statista] and that number rises by another trillion dollars every 100 days. The federal debt to GDP ratio is now at 122%, meaning we're broke.

The United States is a bankrupt nation that functions on debt and the intimidation of the world through our military. This is an unsustainable situation, and an economic crash is inevitable unless drastic action is taken to reign in the spending. Painful decisions will have to be made to ensure the long-term security of the nation. But politicians don't like to make decisions that cause pain. They'd rather kick the proverbial can down the road and hope someone else comes up with a real solution, after they've left office.

And beyond the financial woes, our monstrous government is a burden on society, imposing oppressive laws, rules, regulations, and red tape that cripple our ability to get anything useful done. Picture Star Wars' 'Jabba the Hut' sitting on a throne and eating everything in sight and you'll have a good idea of what our government has become.

It's critical that we reign in this obese monster before it destroys and consumes everything it can reach. But will anyone do it? Does anyone have the courage? I decided to take a look at the campaign platforms of the top four candidates and see if any of them are taking the situation seriously with plans to shrink the government. 

Kamala Harris (and the establishment players she represents), offers little hope or change in the size of the federal government. She is the face of the deep state, the entrenched bureaucrats who remain in power for decades and run the nation un-Constitutionally via policies and regulations. Harris is the vice-president because of the deep state, so you can bet she won't do anything to upset them. One of the first items in her platform says she will "make affordable health care a right, not a privilege by expanding and strengthening the Affordable Care Act" (socialism). She claims she will "make millionaires and billionaires pay their fair share in taxes", although she doesn't say what a "fair share" is. She brags about the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the CHIPS and Science Act, the Inflation Reduction Act, and the American Rescue Plan, all of which combined added trillions to the national debt. 

Unfortunately for us, Harris' platform contains very little other than references to things she did in the past. On issue after issue, her website talks about what she did as a prosecutor in California or as a member of Congress. There are no specific plans listed for what she will do in the future, except vague statements such as promising to work on the (alleged) climate crisis, or saying she'll end the fentanyl crisis by "signing the bipartisan border bill that will fund detection technology to intercept even more illicit drugs". 

So we're left wondering what she'll actually do. But we know her ideology is rooted in Marxism, so it's a fair guess to say a Harris presidency will be one of taxing, spending, unfettered government growth, and more intrusions into our lives.

Jill Stein of the Green Party, starts out with drastic cuts to our military (50-75%). I applaud her desire to close military bases overseas, disband NATO, and stop military funding of Israel and Ukraine. But she then pledges those funds as a "peace dividend" to a number of spending plans, such as the bogus "climate change" agenda and "universal access to basic human needs for food, clean water and sanitation, education, and health care for every human being on Earth". Stein is promising to build 15 million green, union-built, publicly-owned homes, expand HUD and US Department of Agriculture (USDA) Rural Development Programs for first-time home buyers, guarantee lifelong free public education for all institutions of learning, including trade schools and Pre-K through college and graduate school, and guarantee free childcare. 

In other words, Jill Stein loves a big government, as long as that government is administering far-left social programs instead of wars. Her platform doesn't mention the federal budget or the national debt at all, except to recommend that we "tax the ultra-wealthy and giant corporations heavily". Unfortunately for Stein, even if the government stole every penny of every wealthy person in the country, it still wouldn't make a dent in the $35 trillion debt. 

Our next Marxist candidate is Cornel West. His platform repeats the word "justice" 17 times just in the category list alone. This should give you some idea of where a West presidency would end up. His platform mentions universal basic income, an expansion of parental leave & disability benefits, "fostering businesses that embody the principles of collective ownership" (communism), a "vow to significantly amplify funding for maternal health initiatives tailored to the needs of Black women (racism), free tuition for higher education, "climate reparations to recognize the deep injustices of climate change" (fake science), on top of a number of other so-called "green" initiatives that you and I will have to pay for. Like Stein, West proposes cuts to the military, including "disbanding NATO" and closing overseas bases. But then he says we need to cancel the debts of developing nations, despite the U.S. itself being bankrupt. It's hard to make the math work on his Marxist vision for America.

Cornel West loves a big government that taxes heavily, spends freely, and imposes itself upon us at every turn. That's not much different than what we already have. The only real difference is what the money gets spent on.

As the MAGA Republican candidate, we should expect Donald Trump to be the candidate most likely to tame the savage beast that is our government. But what does he have to say about it?

He says he wants to "stop outsourcing and turn the United States into a manufacturing superpower". Reducing imports and increasing exports would certainly help our situation, but Trump offers no details on how he will actually do this. Will it involve more government spending or the creation of a new trade agency? He doesn't say. Unfortunately he does say he will increase military spending, including by building a "great iron dome missile defense shield over our entire country". Such a system, which has proven to be a failure in Israel, will cost us billions of dollars...possibly trillions, and isn't needed since we have no enemies with intercontinental missiles who are foolish enough to start World War 3. An iron dome is nothing but a hand-out to the military industrial complex, the same people who have helped to bankrupt our nation and have kept wars going throughout the 20th and 21st centuries. 

Trump also says he will "rebuild our cities", but again doesn't say how he'll do it. Is this another spending program? It sure looks like it to me.

I wish I could tell you more, but Trump's platform is completely lacking in details. It's a collection of grand words and concepts. But I can tell you there's nothing in it that mentions shrinking the government, cutting spending, or reducing the debt.

If you dig a little deeper, you can find the Republican Party's platform which is different in some ways than what you'll find on Trump's campaign website. There, you will see the Republican's promise to "rein in wasteful federal spending: Republicans will immediately stabilize the economy by slashing wasteful government spending and promoting economic growth." How will it be slashed? They don't say. They also promise to "cut costly and burdensome regulations: Republicans will reinstate President Trump's deregulation policies, which saved Americans $11,000 per household, and end Democrats’ regulatory onslaught that disproportionately harms low and middle-income households." That one statement alone is the most encouraging thing I've seen on any of the platforms. But I question why it's on the Republican Party's platform but not on Trump's website.

Another positive note on the Republican's platform is this: "Republicans will end Democrats’ unlawful and un-American crypto crackdown and oppose the creation of a Central Bank Digital Currency. We will defend the right to mine Bitcoin, and ensure every American has the right to self-custody of their digital assets, and transact free from government surveillance and control." That's a huge statement, and I hope the Republicans have the guts to follow through. 

While there isn't much in either Trump's or the RNC's platforms that suggest they'll cut spending, (and Trump's platform has the wasteful "Iron Dome" boondoggle) their agendas do appear to have the goal of stimulating the economy, reducing the trade deficit, ending at least some of the government's burdensome regulations, and protecting the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. None of the other three candidates are proposing anything similar.

My reservation with Donald Trump and the Republican Party is we've had a lot of promises in the past and an equal amount of disappointments. We don't need four more years of excuses. We need results. And we need results that will last beyond the next election season. 

And it's important to note that none of the candidates have said anything in their campaign platforms about reversing Joe Biden's massive funding increase to the IRS that would enable up to 80,000 new agents to be hired. None of the candidates mention eliminating or greatly downsizing any of the "three letter agencies" such as the CIA, the FBI, the CDC, or the FDA, that have done so much harm to the American people in the past several years. They won't even touch easy targets such as cutting funding to Planned Parenthood or NPR.

But after reading the campaign platforms, I can say without any doubt that the only candidate who has a chance of controlling the "hostile, angry monster that can never be fed enough" is Trump. The other three candidates don't even pretend to care about the problem.

Vote accordingly.