Le site Bellaciao: coloré, multiple, ou le meilleur cotoie fort heureusement le pire, mélangé, bizarre, picabien et dadaîste, explorant toutes sortes de registres et de régimes rhétoriques, drole et polémiqueur, surréaliste: rencontre d'un parapluie et d'une machine à coudre sur une table de dissection, têtes de Lénine sur le clavier d'un piano Steinway ou Bosendorfer...
Senal en Vivo
with Bellaciao
Bellaciao hosted by
To rebel is right, to disobey is a duty, to act is necessary !
Bellaciao  mobile version   |   Home  |   About us   |   Donation  |   Links  |   Contact  |   Search
The Daniel Pipes apologetic article from Flemming Rose/Jyllands Posten

by : Sept
Monday February 6, 2006 - 02:38

Flemming "Muhammad cartoons" Rose traveled to Philadelphia in 2004 in order to meet Daniel Pipes (the neo con who’s advocating to keep US muslims in concentration camps). Here’s the translation of the article that ensued.

Translation by Nina.

The Threat of Islamism by Flemming Rose Jyllands-Posten 29. Oktober 2004

According to Daniel Pipes, the Muslim world at the moment is trying, for the third time, to define itself in relation to the West. The two first attempts aimed at (or resulted in) imitating various aspects of the West. The third represents a totalitarian ideology, commensurate to fascism and communism.

Philadelphia. There is no name sign on the door, and it is locked. The visitor must pop in at a neighbor’s to verify that the address is correct. Yes, that it is for sure. The Middle East Forum and Daniel Pipes are staying on the tenth floor of an anonymous skyscraper, just a stone’s throw away from the building where the Fathers of the Nation assembled in 1787 to set down the country’s foundation. Down on the street, a few middle-aged women are trudging away with voting posters in favor of John Kerry, who is in town to kick off the finish of his campaign. Pennsylvania is one of the so-called "swing states” (proper expression?) that may well determine the outcome of the presidential election next Tuesday.

For Daniel Pipes himself, there is no doubt where his sympathy lies. He will vote for George W. Bush and describes himself as conservative. The 54-year-old historian, whose areas of special interest are the Middle East and the Middle Ages, has since 1994 headed the think tank "The Middle East Forum”, which aims at "defining and facilitating American interests in the Middle East”. Pipes spoke and wrote about the threat of islamists long before September 11. Already in 1995 he observed that they had initiated an undeclared war on the U.S. and Europe.

Pipes’ voice is so quiet that it is almost drowned out by the buzzing noise of the air conditioner in the modest office, but nevertheless, this voice, soft as velvet, has caused uproar in academical, left- wing and certain muslim circles. When Pipes talks about militant islam at universities, his critics threaten with uproar and boycott. His appointment last year by President Bush as leader of the government’s think tank, US Institute of Peace, triggered great clamor, and it is not coincidental that there is no name sign on the front door of the think tank’s office.

A totalitarian ideology

For 20 years, Pipes has written and talked about militant islam as a totalitarian ideology commensurate to fascism and communism. His perspective on ideas, history and politics does not stem from far away. Daniel Pipes’ father is Richard Pipes, one of the 20th century’s foremost experts in Russian and Soviet history, who, opposed to the spirit of the 1960s and 1970s, insisted on the totalitarian nature of the Soviet regime and its hostile attitude towards the liberal democracies of the West.

The son recognizes his father’s influence. "The islamists’ agenda is way different from that of communists or fascists. It is about belief, and as opposed to communism and fascism, they don’t have large countries such as the Soviet Union or Germany behind them; but if you look at their methods and their goals, the likenesses are striking”, Daniel Pipes says. "All three ideologies are radical utopias which, at their core, have a theory for how the human race can be improved. No more, no less. All three are dominated by a small, chosen elite that shall bring the great idea to life. They are ready to resort to all conceivable means; they are true believers, fanatics, and they don’t hesitate to resort to force and brutality to accomplish their project. They do not respect other perspectives and wish to control all sides of life. Once they have succeeded in one country, their ambitions are to extend it to other [countries]", he adds. "It makes sense to look at the current conflict between the civilized world and militant islam in the light of the two earlier confrontations with communism and fascism. One of them we were able to defeat in a total war over a relatively short period of time, whereas the other conflict, the Cold War, lasted for decades. In this third confrontation, militant islam is the challenge. The core of militant islamic ideology is hidden in the expression "el Islam wul hal”, which means: Islam is the solution. No matter what the context, education, upbringing, romance, work, public or private matters - Islam has the answer. This is a recipe for a totalitarian ideology.”

Something else than terror

Daniel Pipes’ fascination for islam and the Middle East started when he lived in Egypt in the early 1970s. Back then, he did not perceive islamism as a threat. That first happened with the islamic revolution in Iran in 1979, the assassination of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat two years later and a surge of violations of American interests in the region.

Pipes thinks that it is misleading to talk about the current conflict with islamists as a war against terror. He points out that wrong definitions and terms lead to erroneous proposed solutions. When President Bush cites the numbers of killed Al Qaida leaders to state how well the war on terror is going, he misses the mark (goes in the wrong direction). "That does not say anything - or at least very little. It is a euphemism, a paraphrase, to talk about a "terror threat” or a "war against terror”. Terror is a policy, not an enemy. We don’t say either, here in the U.S., that the Second World War was about sneak attacks. It was a war against fascism”, argues Pipes.

Moderates must be supported

He stresses that the conflict is not directed at islam as a personal belief, but at militant islam, an aggressive political ideology striving for the establishment of islamic law, sharia, throughout the world. This difference bears in itself the seed of the conflict’s solution. "If militant islam is the problem, then the opposite, namely moderate islam, must be the solution”, Daniel Pipes concludes. "I don’t mean to say that islam, once and for all, is condemned to be on a collision course with the modern world. The majority of muslims do not wish to live in a regime such as under the Taliban in Afghanistan. We have millions of muslims on our side. If you look at it this deeply (?), the current conflict is one that must be fought out and won within the muslim world.” According to Daniel Pipes, it is now important to find alternative leaders and ideas that can take up the fight against militant islam. "In the confrontations with fascism and communism, we were victorious because we succeeded in marginalising the enemy’s ideology and making it look repulsive in the majority’s eyes. In 1991, the Soviet leaders no longer believed in their system. We are also obliged to convince the islamists of the fact that they are wrong. We have to find alternative leaders in the islamic world, in the same way that Konrad Adenauer emerged in Germany and Boris Yeltsin in Russia. There are two steps: on the one hand, we must overthrow the ideology by force of arms and by means of education, media and information; and on the other hand, we must support anti-islamist muslims, who wish to keep their faith, but do not wish to live under islamic law - in much the same way as we supported Anti-Communists and Anti-Nazis in the Soviet Union and Germany respectively. In the end, it is a fight between two visions about the muslims’ place in the world.”

Not in the nature of Islam

Daniel Pipes recognizes that the current situation does not exactly gives rise to optimism, but he is nevertheless convinced that the muslim world will, sooner or later, define itself in a positive way in relation to the modern world. "The existing situation does not arise from to the nature of islam. On principle, Judaism is also a (lovbærende? "law-bearing”) religion just like Islam, but they succeeded in finding a coexistence with modern life. Islam’s current situation is the result of an historical development. If you and I were having this conversation in the 1930s, we would have singled out Germany’s and Japan’s problems with modern life, but those were temporary. We would also, maybe, have been attached (?) to the Turk leader Kemal Atatürk’s attempt to build an alternative, secular model for the islamic world. At this moment, this idea is unfortunately not considered especially attractive in the Middle East. The islamists’ ideas seem so much more timely and attractive”, declares Pipes.

Third attempt

He subsequently gives us a course in the history of the islamic world
 at lightning speed. "The first 600 years of the history of Islam, being a muslim was like playing in the winning team. It was an advanced society that got along well, materially as well as spiritually. It was a rich, powerful and healthy world. During the next 600 years, the islamic world shut itself in and lost all connections to what happened in other places, not least Europe. When muslims in the 19th century discovered the wealth and power of the West, they asked themselves, perplexed and shocked: What went wrong, and how do we fix it? During the first 120-130 years, that means up to the 1930s, they tried to imitate the liberal West, most of all France and Great Britain. During the next 60 years, they tried on the contrary to imitate the non-liberal West, i.e. fascist and communist movements. Now, for the third time, they try to answer the challenge of the West, and this time they have turned towards the primal, non-liberal Islam. This also will live through its time and fail, and so they will try a different way again. I believe that the next attempt will more closely resemble the first one - the imitation of the liberal West - than the two others”, says Pipes with controlled optimism.

Europe baffles

But that should not be seen as a reason to lean back and wait for things to happen by themselves, Pipes thinks. He is amazed that Europe is not more alarmed about the challenge that Islam poses, considering plummeting birth rates and a weakened perception of its own history and culture. "This is one of the biggest stories in our time. The reactions in Europe are bafflingly relaxed. There is much denial at work. It is paradoxical that muslims come from countries that are weaker in economic and political terms, but within the rich and strong Europe, show more cultural ambitions than the Europeans. That baffles me as an American. Europe has been the driving force of history throughout the past 500 years, but now it looks as though it will go the other way. Here in the U.S., the situation is far from being as dramatic.” According to Daniel Pipes, muslims do not account for more than about one per cent of the (U.S.) population, 3 to 4 million people, and their social status is different from what it is in Europe. "There are groups that speak for islam at schools and intimidate politicians and muslims who insist on their right to free speech. Militant islam has an extensive non-violent agenda. Muslims in the U.S. consist of two groups, immigrants and Americans converted to islam. Muslim immigrants have a higher social and economic status than they have in Europe. There are doctors, engineers and others with professional education making serious money.”

Failed research

Daniel Pipes has taken on a large part of the academic world. He is critical of much of the research undertaken in the Middle East studies and thinks it has overseen or ignored important movements, but in other areas have been all too quick to ascribe a modernising or democratising effect to fundamentalists. It has, he thinks, often been politicising with a liability to a left-wing twist. "Left- wingers are unhappy with the society formed in the West, but conservatives are content. Left-wingers’ discontent and feelings of guilt often makes them go too far in their accommodation of opponents. They seek understanding and compromise, whereas conservatives are more inclined to take on a confrontation. People in Middle East Studies have not perceived the hostile and violent elements in radical Islam. They have ignored Saddam Hussein’s brutal regime, widespread anti-Semitism, slavery in Sudan, the cultural repression of Berbers in North Africa, and they have attempted to convey the impression that the word "Jihad” means something entirely different than military efforts to extend Islam’s territory. Some simply think that Jihad is about becoming a better person. As if the Palestinians’ Islamic Jihad uses the word in the sense of becoming better men.”

Facts ("blue book”)

Daniel Pipes, 54 years. Educated in history at Harvard University. Has held positions in the Department of State and the Department of Defense. Since 1994, he has concentrated on the operation of the think tank "Middle East Forum”, as well as of an unusually popular website, www.danielpipes.org, that receives more than 2 million hits per year. Pipes also has 20.000 subscribers to a free newsletter on the web. He established the Middle East Forum at his home with two friends, but during the day, he stays at a select address in central Philadelphia, has 15 employees and a budget of more than 1 million dollars. Pipes has authored 12 books, the latest being "Minatures: Views of Islamic and Middle Eastern Politics”.

Leave a comment
Print this article

Commentaires de l'article

> The Daniel Pipes apologetic article from Flemming Rose/Jyllands Posten
Monday February 6 - 04:53 - Posted by 1f594868df24cd30...

This gem of interpretation from the BBC today:

’The row over the Danish cartoons is yet another dramatic illustration of the huge gap between secular liberal values in the West and the predominantly religious outlook of Middle Eastern societies.’


No, it’s not. What the hell do you think would happen if large-circulation dailies like the Irish Times or El Pais or the Chicago Tribune published cartoons showing Jesus getting a blowjob from Mary Magdalene or Moses using the Ten Commandments as a dildo or snorting cocaine or something? [Use your imagination to think of offensive things Moses could be depicted doing.]

As for the West’s liberal values, these have been dramatically revised in recent decades to the extent that in practice they only apply to Zionists and their allies. Ask the Holocaust revisionists - those currently incarcerated including Germar Rudolf, David Irving and Ernst Zundel - what they have learned from experience about the West’s ’liberal values.’

Come to think of it, imagine if the Jyllands-Posten actually took on the West’s REAL religion, the Holocaust. What kind of furore do you think would erupt if cartoonists depicted Auschwitz as one big sex orgy or the Warsaw ghetto as a pedophile utopia?

Can you seriously imagine the Danish prime minister telling Jewish lobby groups that Jyllands-Posten had the right to publish cartoons of starving and emaciated Jews having sex with three-year-olds or - even worse - not agreeing to with the Jewish lobbyists to talk about the issue at all?

The furore over the Danish cartoons is, in fact, yet another dramatic illustration of the West’s double standards.

Everything will be done to accommodate Zionist sensibilities and to placate Zionist demands - and to facilitate Zionism’s war on Islam.

But nothing will be done to accommodate Muslim sensibilities or to placate Muslim demands.

 Social Democracy Now

> The Daniel Pipes apologetic article from Flemming Rose/Jyllands Posten
Monday February 6 - 06:02 - Posted by e61eac47b53e027d...

BINGO...WELL STATED!!!! and SOOOOOOOO accurate!!!

> The Daniel Pipes apologetic article from Flemming Rose/Jyllands Posten
Monday February 6 - 22:10 - Posted by 8ffa0422f214ce81...

links about Magazinet that published cartoons









Ulf Ekman


Ulf Ekman (born 8 December 1950 in Göteborg, Sweden), is a controversial Swedish pastor and the founder of the equally controversial extremist church Livets Ord. The church, which brought the charismatic christian movement to Sweden, was founded in Uppsala 1983 and Ekman remained as local pastor until passing on the pastorship to Robert Ekh in 2000 to focus on international work.

Before becoming an evangelist, Ekman was briefly a member of KFML(r). (Communist Party (Sweden))

> The Daniel Pipes apologetic article from Flemming Rose/Jyllands Posten
Tuesday February 7 - 15:04 - Posted by 78985bece9a9744d...

Pipes is quite a critter however a bit to anal retentive for my tastes. However, as a convert to Islam and a former Jew, it is quite normal that I disagree with 99.99% of his assumptions, even if his cv is loved by the neocon(artists).
I especially disagree with his comment that,” On principle, Judaism is also a (lovbærende? "law-bearing”) religion just like Islam, but they succeeded in finding a coexistence with modern life.” Law bearing; yes, if you are referring to the Torah and orthodox Jews. Reformed Jews are free to take it or leave it and basically just go with traditions. The finding of a coexistence with modern life essentially means watering down beliefs. Islam, has coexisted or shall I say, other religions co-existed with Islam for centuries. Aba Eban rightfully called the 8 centuries or so of Jewish life under Islamic spain, the Golden Period because Jews flourished in medicine, arts and life in general. Unfortunately, Zionists have conveniently left that part of history out of there occupation and oppression policies.
Muslims are peacefully living in nearly every society and they are not all immigrants. I personally believe the nightmares that people like pipes, rose and others suffer from stems from what I call the ‘absoluteness of Islam’. No other belief is so firmly rooted and unchanged. There are no dark corners in Islam. People have flaws, all of us, but not Islam. Plenty shall disagree with that, that is obvious, yet, many more do not and that is why we continue to witness people from every nation and walks of life entering Islam; many without anyone discussing with them. Some, will undoubtedly do a bit of research after the most recent efforts to give credence to the paranoid ideation of a ‘clash of civilizations’ with the manipulation of the Danish media and the stupid cartoons heralding their beloved freedom of speech ( and freedom of sex, homosexuality, drugs, etc….) and will likely come to Islam. It happened after 911 and frankly, it happens every day. Islam is self perpetuating, no fees, no hard sell, no written contracts or free gifts to join! This is another sign of its Divine source. So, yes, pipes, the free living Danes, and others have a reason to be afraid. Not because of violence but the opposite of it. Morality for starters, something lacking in Denmark. I understand this point well because I lived a raucous lifestyle and nothing in this life could take me away from it accept for something much more powerful then myself and my desires.
The issue of violence is an important one but separate the actions from the religion. To employ th logic of detractors of Islam then every organized religion can be labeled based upon deviants from within. Shall we call the Pope a pediophile because of deviant priests, or all Jews as occupiers, etc.,? No, of course not. We know these beliefs do not call for these acts against humanity. So, why only label Islam this way? Because, it’s threat lies in its pristine Truth, not in the actions of some Muslims who either misunderstand or misinterpret Islam, or are just plain pissed off. (Being ‘pissed off’ is not an excuse; if one commits murder in Islam be the victim muslim or non-muslim, he/she must pay the price according to Shar’ia law).
Islam does not call for blatant murder of ‘infidels’; if it did there is a good chance I would not have been alive to become a muslim.
Pipes, as all Muslims know and many non-Muslims understand just hates Islam. It is quite simple. His allegiance is clear and he uses his position to further his own ‘jihadist’ views of how to deal with the ‘growing threat’ of truth, justice and morality; which is what Islam is and why Allah sent it down for all of humanity.

> The Daniel Pipes apologetic article from Flemming Rose/Jyllands Posten
Wednesday February 8 - 11:06 - Posted by 602df9a10a218014...

the stirring of this pot is a bit too convenient. Consider Rose, the writer of this Pipes article is the cultural editior of Jyllands Posten and also the person okayed the publication of the cartoons.

> The Daniel Pipes apologetic article from Flemming Rose/Jyllands Posten
Wednesday February 8 - 17:55 - Posted by f8532e896eebf040...

Pipes must be out - the office staff must be out for this to get on. Good reply! Where can you get the best Holocaust cartoons? 911 cartoons would probably upset most Americans - any takers if we commissioned a few?

> The Daniel Pipes apologetic article from Flemming Rose/Jyllands Posten
Saturday February 11 - 18:08 - Posted by b5ab10fbace1ea4e...

Your using an extreme analogy to make your point. Who wouldn’t be offended in the west with anyone doing something sexually with anything. The world, including Europeans would be offended if Mohamid was depicted having sex with three-year-olds like you stated in your post. I know you tried to make the point but I didn’t get the comparison you were trying to make.

"starving and emaciated Jews having sex with three-year-olds or - even worse - not agreeing to with the Jewish lobbyists to talk about the issue at all?"

You see, all I saw that was offensive was the depiction of Mohamid with a bomb in his turban. I know there was several time I saw Jesus pertrayed with a dunce cap instead of a crown of thorns and I though that was over the top. I never had it in my heart to cut off someones hands for it or behead that cartoonist. Maybe I’m not that religious but I hunged around alot of Saudi’s in college and we did some heavy drinking and so i though they were just like us when it comes to these matters.


> The Daniel Pipes apologetic article from Flemming Rose/Jyllands Posten
Wednesday February 15 - 23:43 - Posted by f0885d3a0447ef9c...

What utter tripe and nonsense! Asserting militant islamists want to establish worldwide Sharia law has got to be the "mother" of all conspiracy theories. Mr. Pipes is quite the comedian.


> The Daniel Pipes apologetic article from Flemming Rose/Jyllands Posten
Monday February 20 - 23:25 - Posted by 1c90a1ea01150c2c...

There is some truth to Pipes wholesale distorted propaganda. Islam does require Muslims to establish a "homeland" for the Muslims where Allah is the legislator of the land, ie. Islamic Sharia is implemented on the citizens of that "homeland", be they Muslim or non-Muslim. But is life under the Taliban or the Al-Saud Monarchy or Iranian Clergy, an example of this healthy life within the "Islamic homeland"? No.
There is not one "Islamic State" (also known as Islamic Khilafah) in existance today that fully implements the tenets of Islam. People too often have a tendency to drown themselves in the details of capital punishment and civil liberties when they investigate Islam. And even that with distorted (secularized) information at best.
The big picture is quite straight forward:
Islam: Sovereignty belongs to Allah alone! Of the 3 branches of human governance (Executive, Judicial and Legislative), the Legislative branch belongs to Allah and not subjected to the fancy or bias of any people or elite. The people are obliged in the other 2 branches to govern the citizens in the Islamic Khilafah within the limits set by Sharia (which has been legislated by Allah).
There is no clergyship in Islam. The people elect their rulers and judges via various means. And yes an individual is presumed innocent until proven guilty with *real* and not hidden or circumstantial evidence. Eves-dropping and sying within the Khilafh is forbidden, period! This list goes on with many more laws that actually emancipate humans from modern day secular-feudalism.
Speaking of capital punishment, in Islamic Sharia the State is required to spare the life of a proven and convicted murderer if the victim’s family/guardian chooses to forgive the murderer.
So as one of the above responses to the article mentioned: it is the "truth" of Islam (that humans have free agency to submit their will to The Creator rather than to the whims and desires of humans) that is the real "threat" to Daniel Pipes and company’s secular ideology of human slavery.

> The Daniel Pipes apologetic article from Flemming Rose/Jyllands Posten
Friday February 24 - 06:15 - Posted by 2931e061f40e0629...

Pipes argues that "radical" (versus "moderate") Islam poses a threat not only to the nations of the West but to the citizens, particularly the female citizens, of countries in the Middle East. While one can easily, indeed whole-heartedly, agree with his point about the suppression of women in Islamist states, the preponderance of the female population in the countries of the Middle East seem unlikely to join the National Organization of Women if allowed to do so. Moreover, in their present state of military preparedness the nations of the Middle East cannot in any sober assessment be considered to represent a military threat the U.S. or any nation that enjoys its protection. Admittedly, they are capable of the kind of asymmetric (terrorist) military initiatives associated with bin Laden and al-Zarqawi. How that is most effectively dealt with is a most contentious point, though it does not appear that anyone has the answer to it, least of all England or Israel, both of whom have been the target of terrorism for a generation. Pipes appears to think that it is best dealt with by an all out pre-emptive war.

Pipes argues that Islam is compatible with democratic government—though radical, or fundmentalist, or Wahabist, Islam is not. While Islamic countries appear to be thoroughly besotted with Jihadist attitudes at present, Pipes calls attention to the genuinely surprising changes that were effected in Japan and Germany in the aftermath of WWII. I do not know if one is entitled to suppose that Pipes is endorsing an all out war against Pakistan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Syria of the kind waged against Germany and Japan as an acceptable means by which to bring about the displacement of radical elements. It would however appear that Pipes has no moral objection to a war in which the nations of the West combine against those that profess "militant" Islamic values, a war in which perhaps millions of human beings would need to be killed for their own good and the good the the West.

The objective of this war, presumably, would be the imposition of pro-Western governments whose values harmonize easily with those of the aggressor nations, the ones that pre-emptively (and high-mindedly) invaded these countries en masse. These governments, not incidentally, would be more to the liking of people like Pipes and other neo-conservatives. In the name of Western style liberalism these governments would be permitted to stand only if they agreed in advance to prevent those who favor a theocratic "Islamist" government from achieving their end. It would very likely be necessary to suspend the self-styled allegiance of the West to the democratic process for as long as it takes to assure that, when democracy is implemented, the majority of those allowed to vote would hold the line against the fundamentalists—if any are be left standing—in their midst.

This I genuinely understand to be the position endorsed by Pipes. If I have no misunderstood him, my question is this: Does not the present state of affairs in Iraq attest the naivety of his position? The invasion of Iraq was predicated on the supposition that, when the bad fellows were rooted out, the good ones would create (or agree to) a government along the lines thought desirable by the architects of this war. We see now that the situation is infinitely more complex, infinitely more costly in blood and treasure, infinitely less susceptible of being effected by military means than was thought at the advent of the war by its neo-conservative architects. I pause for a reply.

Public Apology to Women of the World from The American Republic (Hypatia of Alex
Monday 31 - 15:21
by Willam Morgan
Sunday 23 - 18:32
Hillary Clinton will be first female President 2017
Monday 10 - 17:21
by Willam Morgan
Police Shootings: Law, Policy, and Accountability
Thursday 6 - 14:22
by William John Cox
Thursday 29 - 18:02
Back to School for Fascist Dupont-Aignan
Thursday 15 - 11:32
by Nouveau Comité de Vigilance des Intellectuels Antifascistes
The Presidency: Character Matters
Friday 9 - 15:06
by William John Cox
Tuesday 30 - 18:08
Remake of Ben Hur in 2020 planned by new motion picture studio
Friday 26 - 15:50
by Wallace
Monday 22 - 19:32
Thursday 11 - 06:42
by David R. Hoffman, Legal Editor of Pravda.Ru
Friday 5 - 00:47
by David R. Hoffman, Legal Editor of Pravda.Ru
Friday 29 - 18:13
A message of your fellow striking workers from France
Tuesday 12 - 20:49
by Info’Com-CGT
The Right to Vote, Effectively
Friday 8 - 22:20
by William John Cox
Fourth of July Lies
Sunday 3 - 19:41
by June C. Terpstra
Who Should Make Political Policy, the People or the Politicians?
Friday 24 - 15:14
by William John Cox
Hollow Women of the Hegemon Part II: Atrocity Enabling Harpies
Tuesday 21 - 18:49
by Dr. June Terpstra
The American Republic Manifestum book is being made into a Movie
Saturday 11 - 15:54
by William Morgan
Write-in Voting and Political Protest
Wednesday 1 - 15:05
by William John Cox
Yves Bouvier art battle plays out in online and social media arena
Tuesday 31 - 21:12
by Dean Bagley
Damaged Candidate Clinton Can’t Call Out Trump
Friday 27 - 13:53
by Daniel Patrick Welch
Tuesday 24 - 21:53
by David R. Hoffman, Legal Editor of Pravda.Ru
Thursday 19 - 00:53
by David R. Hoffman, Legal Editor of Pravda.Ru
Monday 16 - 15:35
Monday 16 - 15:26
Oligarchs Won’t Let You Vote Their Wars Away
Wednesday 11 - 20:24
by Daniel Patrick Welch
Monday 9 - 20:40
Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton support the American Republic Manifestum
Monday 9 - 16:37
by William Morgan
Transformation: A Student-Led Mass Political Movement
Monday 25 - 19:28
by William John Cox
Algerian Feminists react to ’Hijab Day’ in Paris 2016
Monday 25 - 01:13
Friday 22 - 18:45
US is real superpredator pretending to be victim
Monday 18 - 22:23
by Daniel Patrick Welch
Gaiacomm International has accidently created a fusion reaction/ignition.
Sunday 17 - 17:01
by William Morgan
Clinton’s Campaign Continues to Highlight Horrible Hillary
Saturday 9 - 00:57
by Daniel Patrick Welch
Armoiries racistes à Harvard : Plaidoyer pour la réflexion socio-historique
Thursday 7 - 18:56
by Samuel Beaudoin Guzzo
Wednesday 6 - 02:02
by David R. Hoffman, Legal Editor of Pravda.Ru
The PKK in Iraq: “We are ready to fight ISIS everywhere in the world”
Monday 4 - 14:33
by InfoAut
Clinton Crashes and Burns, Sanders Will Win (But hold off on the applause)
Friday 1 - 22:33
by Daniel Patrick Welch
Confirming Supreme Court Justices and Electing Presidents
Friday 1 - 20:59
by William John Cox

home | webmaster

Follow-up of the site's activity
RSS Bellaciao En

rss FR / rss IT / rss ES

Bellaciao hosted by DRI

Organize, agitate, educate, must be our war cry. Susan B. Anthony
Facebook Twitter Google+
I, European citizen, won’t let refugees be rejected in my name
Thursday 10 March
©Olivier Jobard/Myop I, European citizen, won’t let refugees be rejected in my name THE RIGHT TO ASYLUM IS A RIGHT In the phrase « right to asylum », every word matters. Under the law, every person who is persecuted because of his or her political opinions or because of his or her identity, every person that is endangered by violence, war or misery has a RIGHT to seek asylum in another country The aim of this petition is to collect (...)
Neo-Nazis and far-right protesters in Ukraine 3 live-stream
Friday 24 January
The far-right in Ukraine are acting as the vanguard of a protest movement that is being reported as pro-democracy. The situation on the ground is not as simple as pro-EU and trade versus pro-Putin and Russian hegemony in the region. When US Senator John McCain dined with Ukraine’s opposition leaders in December, he shared a table and later a stage with the leader of the extreme far-right Svoboda party Oleh Tyahnybok. This is Oleh Tyahnybok, he has claimed a "Moscow-Jewish mafia" (...)
Hugo Chavez is dead (video live)
Wednesday 6 March
by : Collective BELLACIAO
1 comment
President Hugo Chavez companeros venezueliano died after a long battle with cancer.
International initiative to stop the war in Syria Yes to democracy, no to foreign intervention!
Thursday 13 December
Your support here: http://www.peaceinsyria.org/support.php We, the undersigned, who are part of an international civil society increasingly worried about the awful bloodshed of the Syrian people, are supporting a political initiative based on the results of a fact-finding mission which some of our colleagues undertook to Beirut and Damascus in September 2012. This initiative consists in calling for a delegation of highranking personalities and public figures to go to Syria in order to (...)
Monday 12 November
by : David R. Hoffman, Legal Editor of Pravda.Ru
At first glance, the results of America’s 2012 election appear to be a triumph for social, racial, and economic justice and progress in the United States: California voters passed a proposition requiring the rich to shoulder their fair share of the tax burden; Two states, Colorado and Washington, legalized the recreational use of marijuana, while Massachusetts approved the use of marijuana for medical purposes; Washington and two other states, Maine and Maryland, legalized same-sex (...)
Sunday 28 October
by : David R. Hoffman, Legal Editor of Pravda.Ru
In a 2004 episode of Comedy Central’s animated series South Park, an election was held to determine whether the new mascot for the town’s elementary school would be a “giant douche” or a “turd sandwich.” Confronted with these two equally unpalatable choices, one child, Stan Marsh, refused to vote at all, which resulted in his ostracization and subsequent banishment from the town. Although this satirical vulgarity was intended as a commentary on the two (...)
Friday 28 September
by : David R. Hoffman, Legal Editor of Pravda.Ru
PART I PART II PART III If there is one major inconsistency in life, it is that young people who know little more than family, friends and school are suddenly, at the age of eighteen, supposed to decide what they want to do for the rest of their lives. Unfortunately, because of their limited life experiences, the illusions they have about certain occupations do not always comport to the realities. I discovered this the first time I went to college. About a year into my studies, I (...)
Friday 28 September
by : David R. Hoffman, Legal Editor of Pravda.Ru
PART I PART II PART IV Disillusioned with the machinations of so-called “traditional” colleges, I became an adjunct instructor at several “for-profit” colleges. Thanks largely to the power and pervasiveness of the Internet, “for-profit” colleges (hereinafter for-profits) have become a growing phenomenon in America. They have also been the subject of much political debate and the focus of a Frontline special entitled College Inc. Unlike traditional (...)
Friday 28 September
by : David R. Hoffman, Legal Editor of Pravda.Ru
PART I PART III PART IV Several years ago, a young lady came into the college where I was teaching to inquire about a full-time instructor’s position in the sociology department. She was advised that only adjunct positions were available. Her response was, “No thanks. Once an adjunct, always an adjunct.” Her words still echo in my mind. Even as colleges and universities raise their tuition costs, they are relying more and more on adjunct instructors. Adjuncts are (...)
Friday 28 September
by : David R. Hoffman, Legal Editor of Pravda.Ru
PART II PART III PART IV When The Bill of Rights was added to the United States Constitution over two hundred years ago, Americans were blessed with many rights considered to be “fundamental.” One conspicuously missing, however, was the right to an education. This was not surprising given the tenor of the times. America was primarily an agrarian culture, and education, especially higher education, was viewed as a privilege reserved for the children of the rich and (...)
Monday 30 July
by : David R. Hoffman, Legal Editor of Pravda.Ru
If there is one universal question that haunts all human beings at some point in their lives, it is, “Why do we die?” Death, after all, is the great illogic. It ultimately claims all, the rich and the poor, the mighty and the small, the good and the evil. Death also has the capability to make most human pursuits—such as the quest for wealth, fame and power—vacuous and fleeting. Given this reality, I have often wondered why so many people are still willing to (...)
Thursday 28 June
by : David R. Hoffman, Legal Editor of Pravda.Ru
How much corruption can a “democracy” endure before it ceases to be a democracy? If five venal, mendacious, duplicitous, amoral, biased and (dare I say it) satanic Supreme Court “justices”—John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Anthony Kennedy—have their way, America will soon find out. In several previous articles for Pravda.Ru, I have consistently warned how the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision is one of the (...)
Tuesday 12 June
by : David R. Hoffman, Legal Editor of Pravda.Ru
1 comment
Imagine, if you will, that the United States government passes a law banning advertisers from sponsoring commercials on Rush Limbaugh’s radio show or Rupert Murdoch’s Fox (Faux) “News” Network. On one hand, there would be two decided advantages to this ban: The National IQ would undoubtedly increase several percentage points, and manipulative pseudo-journalists would no longer be able to appeal to the basest instincts in human nature for ratings and profit while (...)
Thursday 7 June
by : David R. Hoffman, Pravda.Ru Legal Editor
LIVE, from the State that brought you Senator Joseph McCarthy, Wisconsin voters now proudly present, fresh from his recall election victory, Governor Scott Walker! At first glance, it is almost unfathomable that anyone with a modicum of intelligence would have voted to retain Scott Walker as Wisconsin’s governor. This, after all, is a man who openly declared he is trying to destroy the rights of workers through a “divide and conquer” strategy; who received 61% of the (...)
Tuesday 13 March
by : David R. Hoffman, Legal Editor of Pravda.Ru
A question I’ve frequently been asked since I began writing for Pravda.Ru in 2003 is, “Why did you become disillusioned with the practice of law?” This question is understandable, particularly since, in most people’s minds, being an attorney is synonymous with wealth and political power. I’ve always been reluctant to answer this question for fear it will discourage conscientious and ethical people from pursuing careers in the legal profession—a (...)