Saturday, March 28, 2026

ICE and the U.S. Border Patrol are becoming an American Gestapo

 

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has been authorized to operate nationwide since its creation in March 2003.
It is important to differentiate between ICE and the U.S. Border Patrol (which is part of Customs and Border Protection - CBP). The 100-mile "border zone" rule frequently discussed often applies more specifically to Border Patrol agents, not ICE.
Key Historical Shifts
  • March 2003 (Creation of ICE): ICE was established by the Homeland Security Act of 2002 following 9/11, combining the investigative arms of the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and the U.S. Customs Service. Unlike the Border Patrol, whose primary focus is on the border, ICE was created as an interior enforcement agency with jurisdiction over the entire United States.
  • 1952/1953 (Border Patrol Expansion): The authority to board and search conveyances for undocumented individuals anywhere in the country was established in 1952. In 1953, the Department of Justice defined "reasonable distance" for warrantless stops by immigration officers (Border Patrol) as 100 air miles from the border.
  • 1996 (Increased Authority): The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 expanded the ability to deport individuals and increased the ability to deputize local law enforcement for immigration work.
Key Distinctions in 2026
  • ICE (Interior Enforcement): ICE operates nationwide to investigate, detain, and remove individuals already in the interior of the U.S..
  • Border Patrol (100-Mile Zone): Border Patrol agents are generally limited to searching vehicles without a warrant within 100 miles of a border or coastline.
  • Recent Trends (2025-2026): Under the second Trump administration, Border Patrol agents have increasingly been deployed into the interior of the country to support ICE's nationwide deportation efforts, effectively blurring the lines between their traditional jurisdictions.
As of early 2026, both ICE and CBP are utilizing expanded enforcement strategies following the "mass influx" declaration under the Trump administration, which authorizes DHS to deputize local law enforcement to assist in immigration enforcement across all 50 states.

Friday, March 27, 2026

Is this true? "Iran says countries expelling US and Is*aeli ambassadors get free Hormuz passage"

 

Yes, this is true. As of March 2026, Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has officially stated that Arab or European countries that expel U.S. and Israeli ambassadors will be granted full freedom and safe passage through the .
Context of the Policy
This announcement comes amid an active conflict involving Iran, the United States, and Israel that began in late February 2026.
  • Political Alignment: Iran is using access to the world's most critical energy chokepoint as strategic leverage to force diplomatic shifts against its adversaries.
  • Selective Access: While ships from "hostile" nations (U.S., Israel, and their allies) are blocked or targeted, Iran has reportedly already granted safe passage to vessels from "friendly" nations such as , and .
  • Economic Impact: The Strait of Hormuz typically handles roughly 20% of the world's oil supply. The current disruptions have caused oil prices to surge and insurance premiums for shipping in the region to skyrocket.
"War Tolls" and Passage Conditions
Beyond diplomatic requirements, Iran has begun formalizing its control over the waterway through new economic measures:
  • Transit Fees: Iranian lawmakers have proposed a "war toll" or transit fee, with reports of some vessels being charged up to $2 million for safe passage.
  • Vetting System: The IRGC has implemented a vetting process where approved vessels must submit cargo and crew details to intermediaries to receive an escort and a transit code.
  • International Reaction: The U.S. and other international bodies have condemned these fees as a violation of the U.N. Law of the Sea, which generally guarantees "innocent passage" through international straits.
  • This image appeared in my Facebook timeline...


Thursday, March 26, 2026

Iran -- Nation or Empire?

 Twitter by Daniel Foubert

Trump thinks he can solve a clash of ancient civilisations that started more than 2500 years ago. 

The Israelis are Mesopotamians, and the Iranians are Indo-Europeans.

Abraham is explicitly from Ur of the Chaldees, which is in southern Iraq, near modern Basra. There is no meaningful genetic discontinuity between the people of ancient Mesopotamia and the people who became Canaanites who became Israelites.

Hebrew is a Semitic language. The Semitic language family originated in Mesopotamia and the Arabian Peninsula. Hebrew, Aramaic, Akkadian, Arabic, Babylonian — all branches of the same tree. Hebrew and Babylonian Akkadian are cousin languages the way Spanish and Italian are cousins. They share root words, grammatical structures, and conceptual vocabulary going back thousands of years before the Bible was written.

The foundational myths of Judaism — creation, the flood, paradise, the first man, the tower — all have direct Mesopotamian predecessors that are older. The ethical and legal framework — the covenant structure, the law codes — mirrors Mesopotamian forms. The calendar is Babylonian. The alphabet is Aramaic-Mesopotamian. The very concept of recording sacred history in written texts is a Mesopotamian invention.

El — the chief god of the early Israelites and the root of the word Elohim, one of the Hebrew names for God — was a Canaanite/Mesopotamian deity. The word Israel itself contains El. The angels, the cosmic hierarchy, the idea of a divine council — all have deep Mesopotamian roots. Early Israelite religion before the exile looks very much like a local variant of broader Mesopotamian religious culture, with Yahweh gradually absorbing the attributes of El, Baal and others into a single deity.

"Iran" comes directly from "Aryana" — land of the Aryans. The Iranians were Indo-European, not Semitic. This is the foundational distinction. Where the Semitic world — Sumerians absorbed by Akkadians, Babylonians, Canaanites, Jews, Arabs — emerged from the Fertile Crescent and Arabian Peninsula, the Iranians came from somewhere completely different.

The Iranian peoples were part of the great Indo-European migration — a population that originated on the Pontic Steppe, the grasslands north of the Black Sea and Caspian Sea, in what is now Ukraine, southern Russia and Kazakhstan. Around 2000–1500 BC these steppe peoples began expanding in all directions on horseback, carrying their languages with them. One branch went west and became the Greeks, Romans, Celts, Germans, Slavs. Another branch went south and east and split into two streams — one into India becoming the Vedic civilization, one into Iran becoming the Persians and Medes.

Old Persian, Sanskrit, Greek, Latin and all their descendants are branches of the same tree. The word for father in Persian is "pedar," in Latin "pater," in Greek "patér," in Sanskrit "pitár," in English "father." The word for god in Persian is related to the Sanskrit "deva." The Iranian god Mithra appears in Roman religion as Mithras and possibly echoes in the Vedic Mitra. These are not coincidences — they reflect a common origin perhaps 5,000 years ago on the Eurasian steppe.

The two main Iranian tribes that entered history were the Medes in the northwest and the Persians in the south. The Medes formed the first Iranian empire around 700 BC, destroying the Assyrian Empire — the superpower of its day — in alliance with the Babylonians. Then the Persians under Cyrus the Great overthrew the Medes in 550 BC and built the Achaemenid Empire.

In 651 AD the Sassanid Persian Empire — the last great pre-Islamic Persian dynasty — was destroyed by the Arab Muslim armies in one of the fastest conquests in history. Iran was Islamicized. Arabic became the language of religion and high culture. Yet something remarkable happened — unlike Egypt, like North Africa, like the Levant, which gradually became Arabized in language and identity, Iran kept its language. Persian survived. Within two centuries Iranians were writing sophisticated poetry, philosophy and science in Persian — using the Arabic script but their own language. The Persian cultural identity proved resilient enough to absorb Islam without being dissolved by it.

The Persian literary renaissance of the 9th-10th centuries produced figures like Ferdowsi, whose Shahnameh — Book of Kings — deliberately reconstructed pre-Islamic Persian identity and mythology. It was a conscious act of cultural preservation remarkably similar to what the Jewish scribes did with the Torah in Babylon. A conquered people writing their way back into existence.

So you have two civilizational streams that met in the Middle East:

The Semitic stream — out of Arabia and the Fertile Crescent, producing Sumerians, Akkadians, Babylonians, Canaanites, Jews, Arabs. Urban, agricultural, text-centered from very early, building civilization in river valleys.

The Indo-European Iranian stream — out of the Eurasian steppe, mounted, pastoral, bringing a completely different cosmology, a dualistic theology, a warrior aristocratic culture that then learned to govern sedentary civilizations from the Semitic world.

Modern Iranians are the descendants of that Indo-European Iranian stream, heavily mixed with the pre-existing Elamite and Semitic populations of the region, then further shaped by Arab Islamic conquest. Genetically they are distinct from Arabs — closer to South Asians and Europeans than to Semitic Arabs in certain markers, reflecting that ancient steppe origin. Linguistically Persian is closer to English than it is to Arabic — both are Indo-European, while Arabic is Semitic.

Which makes the current conflict between Iran and Israel — between the heirs of the Indo-European Iranian world and the heirs of the Semitic Mesopotamian-Canaanite world — in some sense a resumption of the oldest cultural fault line in the Middle East. The same two civilizational streams that first encountered each other when Cyrus walked into Babylon in 539 BC, when he freed the Jews and sent them home. Except then they were allies. And the Iranian was the liberator of the Semite.

History has a very dark sense of humor.



Tuesday, March 24, 2026

How is fascism different from other forms of government?

 

Fascism is distinct from other forms of government primarily because of its extreme focus on hyper-nationalism and the total subordination of the individual to the state.
Here are the key ways it differs from other systems:
  • Vs. Democracy: Fascism explicitly rejects liberalism and elections. While democracies prioritize individual rights and the rule of law, fascism centers all power in a single charismatic dictator and suppresses any dissent through force.
  • Vs. Communism: Although both are authoritarian, they differ on property and class. Communism seeks a classless society and state ownership of production. Fascism preserves private property and social hierarchies, provided they serve the national interest and the military.
  • Vs. Absolute Monarchy: Unlike traditional monarchies that rely on divine right or bloodlines, fascism is a mass movement. It relies on constant mobilization of the public, using propaganda and staged spectacles to maintain a sense of permanent crisis or national rebirth.
  • Totalitarian Control: It seeks to control not just the government, but all aspects of life—including the economy, family, and personal beliefs—aiming to create a unified national "will."



Sunday, March 22, 2026

Noam Chomsky has gone silent

At 95, the voice that once dissected empires, exposed propaganda, and awakened generations has gone silent.

 Noam Chomsky can no longer speak or write. The man who spent more than seven decades using language as a scalpel—cutting through official lies, corporate myths, and historical amnesia—has lost the very tool that defined his existence. Yet the words he left behind continue to burn, refusing to fade even as the man who shaped them can no longer add to them.

Here are some of the clearest, most unflinching lines he ever wrote or spoke:

“There are no poor countries, only failed systems of resource management.”  

A single sentence that dismantles the myth of “underdevelopment” and places responsibility where it belongs: on structures of power, extraction, and deliberate inequality.

“No one will place the truth in your mind; it is something you must discover for yourself.”  

He never offered easy answers or spoon-fed certainties. He demanded intellectual labor—because real understanding cannot be outsourced.

“If you want to control a people, create an imaginary enemy that appears more dangerous than you, then present yourself as their savior.”  

Written long before the post-9/11 era, this remains one of the most precise descriptions of manufactured consent and perpetual war ever articulated.

“One of the clearest lessons of history: rights are not granted; they are taken by force.”  

No sugar-coating. No illusion that power yields because it is polite. Rights come from struggle, not benevolence.

“There is a purpose behind distorting history to make it seem like only great men achieve significant things. It teaches people to believe they are powerless and must wait for a great man to act.”  

He saw the cult of the heroic individual as a pacification strategy—a way to keep ordinary people from recognizing their collective capacity.

“The world is a mysterious and confusing place. If you are not willing to be confused, you become a mere replica of someone else’s mind.”  

He celebrated intellectual discomfort. Certainty, he argued, is often the enemy of thought.

“To control people, make them believe they are responsible for their own misery and present yourself as their savior.”  

The psychology of neoliberalism distilled into nineteen words.

“The West will one day regret its shallow ideas that alienate people from their true nature. One must seek the right religion and the right belief.”  

A late-life reflection that surprised many who assumed Chomsky was purely secular. He was critiquing not faith itself, but the spiritual void left by materialism and consumerism—a void that leaves people vulnerable to authoritarian answers.

These are not isolated aphorisms. They form a coherent worldview built over decades of relentless analysis. Chomsky never stopped asking: Who benefits? Who pays the price? Whose voices are erased? Whose suffering is made invisible? He treated power not as an abstraction but as a concrete, observable force—something that can be mapped, named, and resisted.

His intellectual range was staggering. He revolutionized linguistics with the theory of generative grammar, showing that humans are biologically wired for language. He applied the same rigor to politics, exposing how media, corporations, and governments manufacture consent. He documented U.S. foreign policy not as a series of “mistakes” but as a consistent pursuit of dominance—whether in Vietnam, Central America, the Middle East, or beyond. He refused the comforting narratives that protect the powerful.

And he paid for it. He was surveilled by the FBI, denounced as a traitor, accused of being an apologist for genocide, denied platforms, and marginalized by mainstream media even as his books sold in the millions. He never softened his critique to gain acceptance. He never traded clarity for comfort.

Now, at 95, aphasia has taken his speech and much of his ability to write. The mind that once produced thousands of pages of analysis, hundreds of lectures, and countless interviews is no longer able to express itself in words. Yet the work remains. The books are still in print. The lectures are still watched. The ideas are still debated, still resisted, still used by people fighting for justice in every corner of the world.

His silence now is not defeat. It is the final chapter of a life spent insisting that truth is not something handed down from authority—it is something ordinary people must discover, defend, and act upon together.

We no longer hear his voice.  

But we can still hear the echo of what he asked us to do:  

Question everything that protects the powerful.  

Refuse to accept manufactured enemies.  

Recognize that rights are never given—they are taken.  

And never stop being confused long enough to become someone else’s replica.

That is the legacy he leaves. Not a monument. Not a statue.  

A set of questions that refuse to die.

And a quiet, persistent demand:  

Keep looking, thinking, and keep fighting.

Because the truth is still out there.  

And it still needs to be discovered.