Tag Archives: Gaza

by | October 16, 2025 · 4:35 pm

Who Is Hamas? The Truth About Gaza’s Rulers

Ordinary people in Gaza hate Hamas and want to get rid of it. But how easy is that when we all know they rule Gaza with an iron fist? If you disagree with them, they will simply silence you. Or kill you. And that’s what’s happening in Gaza right now.

Once Hamas claims to seek peace with Israel, it soon turns its weapons on its own people. Who, then, is Hamas, and what are they really doing?

Origins of Hamas

Hamas (Ḥarakat al-Muqāwamah al-ʾIslāmiyyah — “Islamic Resistance Movement”) was founded in 1987 during the First Intifada. It grew out of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, promoting a radical Islamist ideology that rejects Israel’s right to exist.

Its 1988 charter openly called for Israel’s destruction and the creation of an Islamic state over all of historical Palestine. From the beginning, Hamas mixed social welfare with terrorism, using religious faith and nationalism to recruit followers and strengthen control.

Brainwashing and Indoctrination

We can ask ourselves where all this hate comes from. But it’s not hard to understand when you see how Hamas uses propaganda and fear to shape generations.

The Nazis once said that a lie repeated enough times becomes the truth. The same can be said about Hamas.

In schools, mosques, and media, they constantly repeat messages of hatred against Jews and Israel. Children are taught that dying as a “martyr” is the greatest honor. The organization glorifies violence and uses religion as a tool of manipulation. This is how the terrorist organization Hamas is recruiting suicide bombers to attack innocent people in Israel.

The Years of Terror

Before Israel built its security barrier (the wall) along the Gaza border, Hamas repeatedly sent young suicide bombers into Israel, especially during the Second Intifada (2000–2005). Civilians were the main targets. People on buses, in cafés, markets, and restaurants.

Some of the worst attacks included:

  • Jerusalem Sbarro Restaurant bombing (2001): 15 killed, over 100 injured.
  • Dolphinarium disco bombing (2001): 21 young people killed.
  • Hebrew University bombing (2002): 9 killed, including U.S. citizens.

Even before Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza in 2005, militants in Gaza, including Hamas, began firing rockets and mortars into southern Israel. Towns like Sderot and Ashkelon have lived under constant threat ever since.

In 2006, Hamas fighters kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, holding him captive for over five years before finally releasing him in exchange for over 1,000 Palestinian prisoners, many of whom had blood on their hands.

Hamas’s Control Over Gaza

Since taking full control of Gaza in 2007, Hamas has turned the area into both a fortress and a prison. They suppress political opponents, control the media, and punish anyone who dares to speak against them.

Billions in international aid meant for rebuilding homes and hospitals have instead been used to build tunnels, buy rockets, and train new fighters.

Ordinary Gazans are the real victims. Trapped between Hamas’s authoritarian rule and the consequences of its endless wars.

What`s disappointing about this case is the legacy media`s unbalanced reports from the conflict. We often hear from poor civilians in Gaza. They usually lie, and sometimes they say people have no home and that it’s cold in Gaza. The fact is that the weather is hot.

The Hidden Face of Hate: When “Support for Gaza” Becomes Antisemitism

In the weeks and months following every escalation in Gaza, television screens, social media feeds, and newspaper headlines fill with global protests and statements of “solidarity with Gaza.” Many of these come from people who genuinely care about the suffering of civilians, and compassion is vital.
But somewhere along the way, something darker has mixed in: a growing wave of disguised antisemitism, hate hidden beneath the surface of supposed “support.”

From Sympathy to Scapegoating

It begins with empathy. People reacting to images of destruction, mourning the deaths of children, and demanding peace. But in protest slogans and online comments, empathy often turns into something else:

  • “Zionists” becomes a code word for “Jews.”
  • Calls for “Free Palestine” are twisted into chants like “From the river to the sea,” which deny Israel’s right to exist.
  • Jewish students, shops, and synagogues in Europe and the U.S. face vandalism or threats, even though they have nothing to do with the Israeli government.

This isn’t solidarity. It’s scapegoating. The line between political protest and racial or religious hate has blurred.

How Hate Disguises Itself

Modern antisemitism rarely looks like the open hatred of the 1930s. Today, it hides behind political and moral language, calling itself “anti-Zionism,” “human rights activism,” or “decolonization.”
But the pattern is the same: blame all Jews for the actions of a few, question their right to safety, and deny their history.

  • In some university protests, Jewish students have been told to “go back to Poland.”
  • Online, “pro-Gaza” threads are flooded with conspiracy theories about Jews controlling governments or media.
  • In demonstrations, Israeli flags are burned alongside slogans calling for “intifada” or “death to the occupiers.”

These aren’t calls for justice. They’re echoes of history, and they’re dangerous.

A Moral Test for the West

True solidarity with Palestinians means demanding an end to terror and manipulation. Not cheering for those who fire rockets from schoolyards. Genuine peace means condemning antisemitism wherever it appears, even when it hides behind fashionable activism.

The West now faces a moral test:
Can we support innocent people in Gaza without reviving one of humanity’s oldest hatreds?
Can we tell the difference between compassion and hate?

The answer depends on honesty and courage. Because antisemitism doesn’t vanish when it changes its name. It only grows stronger in the shadows.

The Media’s Blind Spot

Mainstream media often amplifies this confusion. In their effort to highlight humanitarian crises, many journalists avoid distinguishing between legitimate criticism of Israeli policy and antisemitic rhetoric.
As a result, the public conversation becomes one-sided: Israeli military actions are headline news, while Hamas’s use of human shields, executions of civilians, and years of rocket attacks barely make the front page.

This selective storytelling doesn’t just distort reality. It feeds resentment. It reinforces the false idea that Jews are “the oppressors” and Palestinians “the victims,” without showing that both societies suffer under extremists like Hamas.

The Echo of Lies: How Hate Survives Through Propaganda

Hate rarely starts as hate. It begins as a whisper — a repeated story, a single narrative told again and again until it becomes a kind of truth. History has shown us this pattern many times before. The Nazis understood it all too well: “Repeat a lie often enough, and it becomes the truth.” That same dark psychology is alive today, in new forms and new places.

We see it in Gaza, where Hamas indoctrinates generations through education, media, and religion. Not to seek peace, but to preserve conflict. From childhood, people are taught not only to distrust but to despise. Over time, these beliefs stop feeling like opinions and start feeling like identity. When that happens, reason and compassion disappear.

But this manipulation doesn’t end there. Across the world, much of what we see in legacy media now echoes a similar distortion — not always intentional, but often biased. The story becomes simplified: one side good, one side evil. Complex truths are ignored because they don’t fit the headline. And beneath this imbalance, something ancient and dangerous grows, a modern form of antisemitism disguised as “support for the oppressed.”

People march in the streets, believing they are standing for justice, yet their chants echo the slogans of those who would destroy, not build. Sympathy for innocent civilians in Gaza, which is both human and necessary, is twisted into hatred toward Jews as a whole. It’s a trap of perception, built by years of selective narratives and emotional manipulation.

Meanwhile, Hamas continues to spend vast sums on weapons and tunnels instead of schools and hospitals. Iran and other foreign actors feed this machine of destruction, funding the tools of war while ordinary people suffer in poverty. And still, the cameras turn, the slogans spread, and the lie grows louder.

Propaganda doesn’t only distort the truth. It divides humanity. It turns empathy into anger, and understanding into fear. To fight it, we must learn to question what we’re told. We must see beyond the headlines, beyond the slogans, beyond the images carefully designed to provoke outrage.

The path forward isn’t found in hate, but in clarity. In seeing the difference between the innocent and the manipulative, between compassion and deception. Because if lies can echo, so can truth.

As Plato warned: “Those who are able to see beyond the shadows and lies of their culture will never be understood, let alone believed, by the masses.” That is why seeking truth is never easy, but it is always necessary.

Conclusion: The Real Enemy of Gaza’s People

Hamas is more than a militant group. They are the ruling power in Gaza with a dual role: political/social authority, and armed resistance. But their priorities often harm the people they claim to represent.

If peace or justice is ever to come, Gaza’s people need rules that protect them, accountability, transparency, and a governing power that places civilian needs above military ambition.

When the world watches the suffering in Gaza, it’s easy to blame Israel. But behind every destroyed building and every tragic image, there’s a more profound truth: Hamas has built its power on the suffering of its own people.

It’s not Israel that keeps Gaza poor and oppressed. It’s Hamas. Until they are gone, peace and freedom will remain out of reach for both Palestinians and Israelis.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee the accuracy of this information. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by | October 13, 2025 · 7:17 pm

A Historic Day for the Middle East: Defense, War, and the Challenge of Perspective

It is a very historic day for the Middle East today. A «Long and painful nightmare» is over, Trump says. Trump arrived in Tel Aviv to mark the release of Israeli hostages by the terrorist organization called Hamas.

Trump is very proud of this moment. Maybe the best moment of his life. Trump has done something that nobody before him has achieved. Trump has made peace in the Middle East. He released 20 living hostages. A day that none of their families thought would come.

Trump delivered a speech in which he said America joined its ally in two «everlasting vows»: Never forget, and never again.» He also said that the war is over. A war that was ugly, but Hamas is not alone.

Iran is the leading foreign backer of Hamas, whose attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, saw 1.200 people killed and hundreds taken hostage. Weapons taken out of Libya during the chaotic post-2011 period ended up in many places.

UN and expert reporting show Libyan arsenals were looted and trafficked to many different places. According to author Hanne Nabintu Herland, Norway dropped 588 bombs in Libya, where millions of civilians were killed. Thousands of bombs were given to the terrorist organization Hamas after the war in Libya.

Israel has the right to defend itself, and Israel`s response and the ensuing war have left more than 67.000 Palestinians dead, including thousands of civilians, according to Gaza`s Health Ministry.

Gaza itself has been largely destroyed, with most buildings in ruins. It looks like Hiroshima during World War II. About 80% of Gaza has been destroyed. Is this the right thing to do? People and legacy media have criticized Israel for what they have done in Gaza. Was what Israel has done in Gaza Okay?

Let`s start with Israel. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is one of the most complex and emotionally charged disputes in modern history. Few elements symbolize this tension more than the wall — or security barrier — that separates Israel from the Palestinian territories.

To understand why this wall exists and why Hamas remains at the heart of the story, we have to look back at what happened before its construction and how events unfolded afterward.

Israel built the wall because the terrorist organization Hamas attacked civilians in Israel. For many Palestinians, Hamas presented itself as a movement of resistance and social welfare — running schools, hospitals, and charity networks, especially in Gaza, where poverty and unemployment were widespread. But for Israel and much of the international community,

Hamas’s violent actions and refusal to recognize Israel’s right to exist made it a terrorist organization, a designation now shared by the United States, the European Union, Canada, and several others. So, the Israeli war was against the terrorists in Gaza. Not civilians in Gaza.

Before the Wall: Years of Violence

The 1990s and early 2000s were some of the bloodiest years in Israeli history, marked by a wave of suicide bombings, shootings, and other attacks carried out by Hamas and other militant groups. The Second Intifada (2000–2005) became a turning point.

Hamas’s attacks were frequent and devastating:

  • Bus bombings in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv targeted civilians commuting to work or school.
  • Restaurants, shopping malls, and markets were attacked, turning ordinary places into sites of tragedy.
  • The Sbarro restaurant bombing (2001) killed 15 people and injured more than 100.
  • The Dolphinarium discotheque bombing (2001) took the lives of 21 teenagers.
  • At the Hebrew University bombing (2002), nine were killed, including American students.

By the early 2000s, hundreds of Israeli civilians had been killed in suicide bombings. For Israelis, daily life became a constant state of alert. Ordinary activities — riding a bus, eating in a café, or sending a child to school — carried real danger.

Hamas justified these attacks as “resistance,” while Israel viewed them as terrorism designed to destroy peace efforts.

The Decision to Build the Wall

In 2002, amid the peak of the Second Intifada, Israel began constructing the security barrier — a combination of concrete walls, fences, and checkpoints — along the West Bank. The stated goal was simple: to stop suicide bombers and other infiltrations from Palestinian territories into Israeli cities.

The wall was — and still is — controversial.
For Israel, it was a defensive necessity that saved lives. After its construction, suicide bombings dropped by more than 90%. For Palestinians, however, it represented occupation and separation, cutting them off from farmland, workplaces, and family on the other side. The wall physically entrenched a psychological divide that had already existed for decades.

The Gaza Factor and Hamas’s Rise to Power

While the wall focused on the West Bank, Gaza was undergoing its own transformation. After years of pressure and violence, Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, removing settlements and military presence. The expectation was that Palestinians would take this opportunity to build a functioning, peaceful society.

Instead, political infighting erupted between Hamas and Fatah — the dominant Palestinian political faction led by Mahmoud Abbas. In 2007, Hamas violently seized control of Gaza, expelling Fatah forces and establishing a de facto Islamist government.

From that moment, Gaza’s relationship with Israel changed completely. Hamas began developing rocket capabilities, importing weapons, and digging tunnels under the border to carry out attacks or smuggle goods. The nature of the threat shifted from suicide bombings to indiscriminate rocket fire targeting southern Israel.

Towns like Sderot, Ashkelon, and Be’er Sheva faced years of rocket attacks. Israel responded with airstrikes and, on several occasions, full-scale military operations — each causing widespread destruction in Gaza and significant civilian casualties.

The Human Cost

Both sides have suffered immensely.
For Israelis, the threat from Gaza remains constant — alarms, shelters, and the fear of sudden attacks are part of daily life.
For Palestinians in Gaza, life is defined by poverty, unemployment, and blockades that restrict movement and trade. Thousands of civilians have been killed or displaced in repeated conflicts.

Hamas continues to reject Israel’s right to exist and invests heavily in military infrastructure — rockets, tunnels, and paramilitary forces — while ordinary Gazans struggle to access clean water, electricity, and healthcare.

Israel, for its part, argues that the blockade is a necessary security measure to prevent Hamas from rearming. Critics, including human rights groups, counter that it amounts to collective punishment and fuels further resentment.

A Cycle Without End

The wall did succeed in its primary purpose — it stopped most terrorist infiltrations into Israel. Yet, it also reinforced the sense of division, mistrust, and hopelessness between the two peoples. Hamas’s control over Gaza has created a political stalemate: Israel refuses to negotiate with a group committed to its destruction, while Hamas uses Israel’s restrictions to rally anger and support among Palestinians.

Every few years, the cycle repeats: rocket attacks, Israeli airstrikes, and devastating humanitarian crises. Each side claims victory; neither side wins peace.

Conclusion: Fear and Freedom

The story of Hamas, Israel, and the wall is not simply about terrorism or defense — it is about fear and survival, two emotions that dominate the landscape of the Middle East.
Israel built a wall because it felt it had no other choice. Hamas attacks because it believes violence is the only path to freedom. Between them are millions of people — Israelis and Palestinians — who simply want to live ordinary lives.

In the end, walls may stop bombers, but they cannot build trust. The challenge for both sides remains the same as it was before the first stone was laid: to find a way to balance security and justice, defense and dignity, fear and hope — the hardest balance of all.

So, why do nearly everybody criticize Israel for what they are doing in Gaza?

When Defense Becomes a Crime: A Double Standard in How the World Sees War

Today, it seems nearly every news outlet is focused on criticizing Israel for civilian casualties in Gaza. Headlines scream about women and children killed, often implying moral failure or injustice. And yet, when we look back at modern history, we see a striking pattern: war almost always claims innocent lives, no matter who is involved.

Take the 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia. During 78 days of airstrikes, hundreds of civilians were killed, including children. The death of three-year-old Milica Rakić in her home in Batajnica became emblematic of the human cost of war. Serbia now has memorials, statues, and ceremonies honoring the children who died. Dozens of names are remembered publicly as a symbol of lives lost during the campaign. Cluster munitions, unexploded ordnance, and indiscriminate bombing caused these deaths — the same tragic consequences we lament in other conflicts today.

NATO was acting in what it claimed to be defense and stabilization, yet civilian casualties were inevitable. And yet, when similar actions are taken by other nations in their own defense, the global narrative often shifts. Israel, for example, builds walls and conducts targeted operations against groups like Hamas, whose own record includes attacks on civilians and using human shields. Israel emphasizes its right to protect its citizens from terrorism, just as NATO justified its actions in Serbia and elsewhere. But public opinion and media framing frequently focus only on one side of the equation.

The pattern is not new. History is full of wars where civilians suffered while the aggressors were vilified and the defenders celebrated — or vice versa, depending on perspective. What often changes is the narrative: who tells the story, which victims are remembered, and which are ignored. In Serbia, memorials commemorate the children killed by NATO; in Israel, civilians caught in crossfire are highlighted in international media. Both are real tragedies. Both are consequences of war.

At the heart of this is human nature. When a society or individual is threatened, defense is instinctive. If harm persists, measures escalate. Walls are built. Armies act. Lives are lost. History shows repeatedly that the morality of defense is complicated by the inevitability of collateral damage. Civilian deaths are always tragic, yet they are not always evidence of moral failure — often, they are evidence of the harsh realities of conflict.

The lesson is clear: to truly understand war and peace, we must look honestly at all sides. Criticism must be proportional, and we must remember that war does not spare innocence. Nations act to survive; civilians sometimes pay the price. Recognizing this complexity is not the same as justification — it is acknowledgment of reality.

If the global community wishes to promote peace, it must do so consistently. Selective outrage, when only certain wars or victims are highlighted, distorts understanding and prevents meaningful solutions. Every civilian life lost, whether in Serbia, Gaza, Iraq, or elsewhere, deserves remembrance. Every act of defense, every effort to protect citizens, deserves careful analysis.

War is tragic, complex, and unavoidable in human history. Only by recognizing its patterns, learning from them, and holding ourselves to consistent moral standards can we hope to reduce suffering and approach a more peaceful world.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | October 3, 2025 · 7:27 am

Diplomacy or Weapons as the Way to Peace?

“Every war begins with the illusion of victory. Every peace begins with the courage of dialogue. Which will we choose?”

History has already shown us the price of arrogance. Twice in the last century, the world descended into total war because nations believed they had no choice but to fight and that they had to win. Today, as leaders repeat the same words, we stand once again at the edge of disaster.

The world has already witnessed two devastating global conflicts — the First and Second World Wars. Now, many fear that we stand on the brink of a Third. The war in Ukraine rages on, while violence flares in Israel and Gaza. What is striking is that leaders on all sides declare that they must win. Even NATO’s former Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has insisted that “weapons are the way to peace.”

But have we truly learned nothing from history?

After the First World War, nations attempted to chart a new course. The Treaty of Versailles of 1919 and the creation of the League of Nations were intended to establish an international order in which diplomacy, rather than war, would resolve conflicts. The idea was collective security: dialogue, negotiation, and the prevention of another catastrophic war.

And yet, within two decades, the world was plunged into an even deadlier conflict. The League of Nations failed because nationalism, greed, and great-power rivalry proved stronger than the will to compromise. Diplomacy was drowned out by ambition, unresolved grievances, and economic instability.

It feels eerily similar today. We see frozen conflicts, festering grievances, and leaders proclaiming that victory — and only victory — is the only acceptable outcome. But as history shows, not everyone can win.

Think of a football match: two teams, both determined to be victorious. Only one side can claim the win after 90 minutes. But wars do not have a clock. Wars end only when destruction, exhaustion, or overwhelming force brings them to a halt. In the past, that sometimes meant entire armies fighting to the last man. In the 20th century, it meant the atomic bomb. It was not diplomacy that ended the Second World War — it was unprecedented violence.

This raises an unsettling truth: humans often respond more to fear than to reason. Diplomacy, without urgency, is easily dismissed. But when fear peaks — when cities are destroyed, when civilians suffer, when nuclear annihilation looms — only then do leaders suddenly discover the language of negotiation.

If history repeats itself, then humanity may once again stumble toward self-destruction. The tragic irony is that while weapons may bring silence to the battlefield, they rarely bring true peace. Peace, lasting peace, requires the courage to pursue diplomacy before fear takes control.

Because if “weapons are the way to peace,” we may find that peace comes only after there is nothing left to save.

Fear, it seems, is the actual driver of humanity. Diplomacy is too often dismissed until it is too late. And when diplomacy fails, fear and destruction rule.

History is clear: bombs may end wars, but they do not prevent them from happening. Dialogue does.

Diplomacy is not a sign of weakness – it is a sign of wisdom. If history teaches us anything, it is this: bombs can end wars, but only dialogue can prevent them. The choice is ours, and the clock is ticking.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee the accuracy of this information. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by | May 20, 2019 · 9:58 pm

Eurovision Song Contest is a sircus with clowns we cannot trust

Music is a huge part of my life and will always be. Eurovision Song Contest (ESC) is not the hottest thing on this planet, but I`m watching it every year. The Grand Final of ESC 2019 took place in Tel Aviv last Saturday, and 26 countries competed for the trophy.

The winner of the 64th ESC this time was Duncan Laurence from Netherlands with the song «Arcade». This is the fifth time the Netherlands wins ESC, and last time they won the ESC was 44 years ago where Teach-In won with «Ding-A-Dong», in 1975.

The Netherlands hosted the contest in 1958, 1970, 1976, 1980 and will host the contest in 2020, thanks to Duncan Laurence who sounds a bit like Chris Martin (Coldplay). Not a bad song, but was a clear winner? Not at all, and you should take the winner at this sircus as a pinch of salt.

Last year, Israel won with the song «Toy» by Netta Barzilai. Was it a clear winner? Not at all. The best song was «Fuego» by Eleni Foureira from Cyprus, and that`s still a big hit. So, there is something wrong here.

Netta Barzilai got 317 points from the Televoters, and 212 point from National juries. In other words; the National juries from all the countries in Europe didn`t have Netta as their favorite, but the majority of the people in Europe had. Random people woted for Israel by sending an SMS. Huh… Is this something we can trust?

Let`s take a look at another winner. In 2006, Finland won with the song «Hard Rock Hallelujah» by Lordi. They got 292 points, and it was all by Televoting while Monaco and Albania used juries. They were breaking the previous record for the highest tally in Contest history.

Lordis song is the second Eurovision song with the word Helleluhay in its title. The first one is Israels Hallelujah, which got first place at the 1979 ESC. The difference is the text. Lordi`s text is about blood and sticky floors.

A girl with a face of an angel, and an urge to kill. She was sanctified by death, and dont you mess with the devils bride. Cant you feel the darkness falling? Cant you hear the heavens roaring? The deadite girls gone wild. Shes a demon in heat. And so goes the text.

Can someone tell me who the televoters is?

Netherlands won Eurovision 2019 despite Sweden won the jury votes. But there is more to come. Norway won the tele votes and this is very odd. Norway got 47 points from the National jury, but jumped to the 5th place with 291 points from the televoters.

Who is the televoters?

Many people in Europe hate the Eurovision because they believe it`s corrupt and borderline racist. The problem with the National jury is the geo-political games countries play when awarding each other marks. Greece and Cyprus give eatch other 12 points while Britain and Ireland treat each other well during the troubles. So can be said about Serbia, Poland, Croatia and Russia (post cold war).

On top of that, they say it is a «non-political» event, but it is. This time, Madonna did not have permission to make a political statement about the Israel-Palestine conflict during her performance at the Eurovision. Madonna`s dancers were seen wearing Israeli and Palestinian flags on their backs at the final in Tel Aviv Saturday.

The dancer with the Palestinian flag on the back was Mona Berntsen from Norway. It is well known what the majority of the people in Norway thing about Israel. According to author Hanne Nabintu Herland, Norway missed thousands of bombs after the bombing in Libya. Later on, it was revealed that they gave the bombs to Hamas who is a Palestinian Sunni-Islamist fundamentalist organization. Hamaz have only one goal: Genocide.

Norway have so far supported Palestinians with about $1 billion and Mads Fredrik Gilbert has been lauded as a «hero» in Norwegian media for his work in Gaza. Gilbert has a broad range of experience from international humanitarian work.

Since the 1970`s, he has been actively involved with solidarity work concerning Palestinians, and he has served as a doctor for several periods in the Palestinian territories. He has written a book about Gaza, but he has also been subject for controversy for his political activism.

In a statement made to Dagbladet in the wake of the September 11 attacks, Gilbert stated: «The attack on New York did not come as a surprise with the politics the West has followed the last decades. I am upset by the terrorist attack, but I am at least as upset over the suffering that the US has caused.

It is in this context that 5000 dead has to be seen. If the U.S government has a legitimate right to bomb and kill civilians in Iraq, the oppressed has a moral right to attack the U.S with the weapons they may creatae as well. Dead civilians are the same wether they are Americans, Palestinians or Iraqis.»

When asked if he supported a terrorist attack against the US he answered; «Terror is a poor weapon, but my answer is yes, within the context I have mentioned.»

Robert Mueller was the boss at the FBI at that time and he is the one that said Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. But it was a big lie. So don`t blame on Bush and his organization. Nor the U.S government.

I assume we will hear more about that and the Deep State very soon. That being said: Trump warned about a was in Iraq. He was against it and said it will destebalize the Middle Eeast and he was right.

Madonna ended her performance at the Eurovision Song Contest 2019 with these words: Wake UP!

Jon Ola Sand from Norway is the European Broadcasting Unions Executive Supervisor of the European Song Contest, and he havent comented on the political act yet.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shiny bull. The author has made every effort to ensure accuracy of information provided; however, neither Shiny bull nor the author can guarantee such accuracy. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities or other financial instruments. Shiny bull and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by | January 12, 2018 · 4:00 am

World Economic Forum`s motto is “Committed to improving the state of the world,” and President Trump will attend

Every year at the end of January, it is time for World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos. The forum was founded in 1971 by Klaus Schwab. A German-born business professor at the University of Geneva. First named the “European Management Forum”, and then it changed its name to the World Economic Forum in 1987.

Its mission is cited as “committed to improve the state of the world by engaging business, political, academic, and other leaders of society to shape global, regional, and industry agendas”. President Trump is a business man and he will join the elite at the forum in Davos this time.

The meeting at Davos is synonymous with wealth and elite prestige and Presidents have therefore been concerned to participate because it would send wrong signals. Mr Trump will be the fist sitting President since Bill Clinton in 2000 to attend. Mr Trump is a business man and have an agenda. A message.

That being said; don`t forget the forums motto: “Committed to improving the state of the world.”

Mr Trump is finish with his first year as a President at the White House, and so far he has done a lot of good things, not only for the USA, but also for the rest of the world. But this is only the beginning.

The meeting in Davos brings together some 2,500 top business leaders, international political leaders, economists, and journalists for up to four days to discuss the most pressing issues facing the world.

But Trump`s agenda is not to make the world great again, but the USA. He will also try to sell his «America first» agenda to the world leaders. It is not difficult to understand that he also want to promote his policies to strengthen American businesses, their industry and their workers.

What Trump is doing in the U.S will also affect the rest of the world. For instance, a corporate tax cut in the U.S will also affect other countries. For all I know, maybe other countries will follow his strategy and cut the taxes as well.

Trump is also a great negotiator and he told Stoltenberg at NATO to pay the bills to the U.S Navy, and you know what; they did. This is brilliant. He is making USA more safe, but also NATO members and the European Union more safe.

I think Mr Trump will try to sell his economic growth agenda on the world stage and speak with the World Bank and the IMF, and I really look forward to his speech. It can be full of surprises. His administration said that Trump`s delegation to Davos will be large.

Mr Trump recognized Jerusalem as Israels capital. That can also be an issue if you think of the forums motto: “Committed to improving the state of the world.” We have seen this before.

At the 1994 annual meeting, Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres and PLO chairman Yasser Arafat reached a draft agreement on Gaza and Jerico. Two years earlier, South African President F.W de Klerk met with Nelson Mandela and Chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi, which was the first joint appearance outside South Africa.

North Korea was invited to Davos in 2016, “in view of positive signs coming out of the country,” the WEF noted. North Korea has not been attending the WEF since 1998. The invitation was accepted but after their nuclear test on January 6, 2016 (only days before the meeting), the invitation was revoked.

North Korea`s delegation was made subject to “existing and possible forthcoming sanctions.”

The country protested and called the decision by the WEF managing board a “sudden and irresponsible” move, but the WEF committee maintained the exclusion because under these circumstances there would be no opportunity for international dialogue.

Last year, a head of state from the People`s Republic of China was invited to the alpine resort. With the backdrop of Brexit, an incoming protectionist US administration and significant pressure on free trade zones and trade agreements, President Xi Jinping defended the global economic scheme, and portrayed China as a responsible nation and a leader for environmental causes.

President Xi Jinping rebuked the current populist movements that would introduce tariffs and hinder global commerce, warning that such protectionism could foster isolation and reduced economic opportunity. This is still a hot potato.

Two year ago, the forum announced the opening of its new Center for the Fourth Industrial Revolution in San Francisco. They said the center will “serve as a platform for interaction, insight and impact on the scientific and technological changes that are changing the way we live, work and relate to one another.” Great news at that time.

What about the crypto currency revolution? The cryptobank boom? All this decentralized coins and banking industry with tokens and their «smart contracts» that is flooding the market. Will the world leaders talk about it, and will the central banks answer with a centralized version in the future?

 

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shiny bull. The author has made every effort to ensure accuracy of information provided; however, neither Shiny bull nor the author can guarantee such accuracy. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities or other financial instruments. Shiny bull and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

———————————————–advertisement——————————————————-

 

Polo Shirt

High quality Polo shirt with Shinybull logo. This version is made from breathable 100% cotton. Short sleeves and ribbed armbands.

$125.00

Polo Shirt

High quality Polo shirt with Shinybull logo. This version is made from breathable 100% cotton. Short sleeves and ribbed armbands.

$125.00

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics, Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,