Protégé

*Most people don’t remember this day.* POWERFUL AFRICA On September 23, 2009, Muammar Gaddafi walked into the most guarded chamber on Earth — not to seek approval, but to confront power itself. In a hall filled with presidents, kings, diplomats, and the architects of global order, he did the unthinkable: he tore pages of the UN Charter before the world. It was not madness. It was rebellion. It was an African leader refusing to kneel. As the torn pages fell, so did the illusion that the international system treats all nations equally. Behind him sat the guardians of the establishment, watching in disbelief as one man exposed what many nations had suffered in silence for decades. Gaddafi called out the hypocrisy of the UN Security Council — a system where five powerful nations hold permanent authority over the destiny of the rest of humanity. A world where some countries decide which wars are “legal,” which nations deserve sanctions, and which people are allowed to suffer in silence. They gave him 15 minutes to speak. He spoke for more than 100. Because truth does not ask permission from empire. He spoke for Africa. For nations looted for centuries. For countries forced to obey rules they never helped create. For a continent rich in resources, yet denied real power at the global table. He reminded the world that the UN Charter was written in 1945 — when much of Africa was still under colonial rule. The rules were drafted without African voices, yet Africa is expected to live under them forever. Fifty-four African nations. Over 1.4 billion people. Zero veto power. Africa can speak in the General Assembly, but it cannot stop decisions imposed by the powerful few. One veto from a permanent member can silence the collective voice of an entire continent. And that was Gaddafi’s real crime: Not corruption. Not dictatorship. But defiance. The global system does not fear weapons as much as it fears leaders who refuse to bow. For decades, Africa has demanded reform through the Ezulwini Consensus — calling for permanent African representation and equal veto power on the Security Council. Yet the gates of power remain closed. The world calls it “international order.” But many Africans still see the shadows of colonial hierarchy wearing modern suits. Whether one agreed with Gaddafi or not, one truth remains undeniable: On that day, an African leader stood before the world and said what many nations were too afraid to say. RULES ARE RULES. AFRICA MUST RISE, UNITE, AND DECIDE ITS OWN DESTINY. #Gaddafi #AfricanSovereignty #UNReform #PanAfricanism #AfricaRising #powerfulafrica

A historically illiterate analogy. If Palestine had lost 25% of its territory in 1948 in response to instigating a world war that cost 60 million lives and that continues to serve as a by-word for depravity almost a century later, this charlatan might have a point worth discussing. As it happens Palestinians lost 78% of their homeland in 1948, during which at least 75% of its population was ethnically cleansed, as a result of their country being occupied by Great Britain during the First World War and subsequently governed by London to promote the interests of an ethnonationalist ideological movement that originated on a different continent. In sharp contrast to Nazi Germany, Palestinians didn't attack, invade, or occupy any foreign territory, but were themselves invaded, occupied, and dispossessed. And like those in occupied Europe, they responded accordingly. Does this historically illiterate charlatan really expect the Palestinian people to just roll over and die?

It is completely crazy that people actually believe this US-Iran war is just another "spontaneous" and "dumb" decision from the Trump administration. Understand that the U.S. military cannot simply wake up one morning and decide to launch a massive theater-wide campaign like "Operation Epic Fury". The sheer scale of physics, supply chains, and international diplomacy required for this campaign makes it utterly impossible. Reports from US policymakers in Washington D.C. show that the US has been planning and preparing for this military campaign for at least 20 years. To see this, simply read the Brookings Institution's 2009 publication: "Which Path to Persia? Options for a New American Strategy toward Iran." For context, the Brookings Institution is one of Washington D.C.'s most influential think tanks. The authors of this report were heavyweights in U.S. foreign policy and intelligence, including former CIA analysts, National Security Council directors, and Middle East envoys. Think tanks like Brookings write the manuals that the Pentagon, the State Department, and the CIA read and the authors of these reports often rotate in and out of government positions depending on which administration is in power. This 156-page report details exactly how the United States could legitimize a war against Iran in the eyes of the global community. This is because US policymakers understand that an unprovoked preemptive strike would isolate the U.S. and fracture alliances. To solve this, the report suggested that before taking military action, the U.S. should make a diplomatic offer to Iran that appears exceptionally generous to the international community, but which includes terms Iran's leadership fundamentally cannot accept. When Iran inevitably rejects the deal, the U.S. can then tell its allies that they tried "diplomacy" but Iran is "unreasonable". As the report explicitly noted: "Any military operation against Iran will likely be very unpopular around the world and require the proper international context. The best way to minimize international opprobrium and maximize support is to strike only when there is a widespread conviction that the Iranians were given but then rejected a superb offer." In addition to this, the 2009 report explicitly detailed the mechanics of dismantling the Iranian state from within. This proves that regime change is not a term unique to Trump, but rather a strategy masterminded by US policymakers. The report even dedicated a whole chapter to funding insurgencies and discussed the pros and cons of arming and funding ethnic minority insurgent groups, such as Kurdish, Baluch, or Ahwazi Arab separatists, to bleed the Iranian military internally. They even suggested using the Mujahedin-e Khalq, the MEK, as a proxy force to conduct assassinations and sabotage inside Iran. The MEK is a militant group that was exiled from Iran after the 1979 Islamic Revolution. This group was actually on the U.S. State Department's terrorist list at the time, but the MEK was later removed from the terror list in 2012. This clearly shows that think tank recommendations were actively being followed by the State Department. The 2009 report also went further to evaluate the exact kind of military action involved in major operations against Iran. It coldly calculated the number of sorties required, the exact targets to hit like nuclear facilities, Revolutionary Guard bases, and air defenses, and the likely Iranian retaliation. So the blind hate targeted at the Trump administration for this war is completely unjustified. This is a pre-written and pre-calculated contingency plan that was inevitably going to happen regardless of who was in power. Finally, the US knows that in a full scale war against Iran in the Middle East, Iran's immediate response would be to fire hundreds of ballistic missiles and drones at U.S. bases and allied infrastructure across the region. Washington understands this perfectly. That is exactly why, for the last several years leading up to this 2026 conflict, the U.S. worked obsessively to build the Middle East Air Defense Alliance(MEAD). This involved linking the radar feeds and anti air batteries of Israel, the U.S., Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE into a single, unified grid. Securing these agreements, integrating the radar systems, and practicing the defense protocols requires years of intense, back channel diplomatic and military coordination. This again proves that this war was mapped out years in advance. Furthermore, the US military does not just look at a map of Iran or satellite feeds alone to drop bombs. First, they need to develop what are called "Target Packets", which are detailed lists of coordinates to bomb. Developing the "Target Packets" for deeply buried Iranian missile silos and nuclear enrichment sites takes years of intelligence gathering. It requires shifting satellite orbits, inserting covert operatives on the ground to paint targets, and mapping out the enemy's air defense grids so strike packages can fly right through the blind spots. Developing these Target Packets is just 50% of the job. Military planners also have to coordinate the shutdown or rerouting of commercial air traffic. They have to arrange mid air refueling tracks for hundreds of jets, establish command and control orbits, and coordinate electronic warfare planes to jam enemy radar. I can go on forever, but the point is already made. This war has been meticulously planned and arranged over the last two decades. It is absolutely not just a spontaneous decision by the Trump administration.

Some years ago I wrote that African politicians can loot state coffers and once in while, organize a charity event. And people will still celebrate them and say “well at least he is a generous thief”. That is how most of our first ladies on this continent became distributors of sanitary pads and plastic buckets in so-called charity activities, handing back crumbs of what was stolen from the very people receiving them, and being applauded for the generosity of the gesture. I realised today that the exact same logic applies to foreign powers looting our resources. They can extract hundreds of billions over decades, assassinate our leaders, control our currencies, poison our waters and then return with a token pledge of meager investments at a summit they organised to rehabilitate their own image, and people will say: “well, at least they were kind enough to host the event here because hotels were sold out”. When you have been conditioned long enough to expect nothing, a crumb looks like a banquet.

The ones that collapsed in the 1990s succumbed to SAP, while those that managed to survive that but collapsed in the 2000s probably succumbed to NEPA's privatization. No region of the world can undergo this level of deliberate deindustrialization and survive while sustaining a rising birth rate. You can draw a straight line between this and the crisis over there.

@realJudebela The same thing he did for the Palestinians, and the Cubans, and the Lebanese.

We’ve heard all these before. What are you going to do about it? How do you plan on stopping the second scramble for Africa because it is already underway.

Every race's negative obsession with Africans is an admission of their inferiority complex...

Everyone wants a piece of Africa, except the Africans themselves. They want to go to heaven.

This is the proven fraudster behind the new "Civil Commission" report on Oct 7 sexual violence which the entire US mainstream media is reporting without any critical detachment. During a Harvard presentation, Cochav Elkayam-Levy falsely presented an old photo of female Kurdish fighters killed in combat as images of Israeli women at the Nova music fest. When I exposed her, she simply blocked me and moved on without acknowledging her error. Then she proceeded to spin out more lies, such as that fetuses were cut from pregnant mothers by Hamas fighters. Israeli media has since exposed Elkayam-Levy as a grifter who deceived donors, lied about Hamas atrocities, and set up a fake "Civil Commission" which served as a corrupt fundraising mechanism for herself. Her new report is contradicted at numerous points by previous ones by the "Dinah Project" – another Israeli rape hoax PR org – as well as by the UN's Pramila Patten "fact-finding mission," and others which the Israeli gov't itself has promoted. In spite of her long and growing record of lying and corruption, the NYT, CNN, ABC and Washington Post are still taking Elkayam-Levy at her word.

The word "stability" in American foreign policy discourse is doing the same work as "civilization" did in the 19th century. Civilization meant: the arrangement of society in ways that serve European interests. Stability means: the arrangement of society in ways that serve American interests. A country with brutal inequality, with multinational corporations extracting its resources, with a government that suppresses labor organizing and maintains the investment climate, that country is "stable." A country where a popular movement is threatening to nationalize its oil, or default on its debt, or renegotiate its trade relationships, that country is in "crisis." Facing "instability." In need of "outside concern." The language is elegant because it sounds like it's describing a condition. It is actually prescribing a preference. The preference is: keep the arrangement that works for us. The description is: anything that threatens the arrangement is disorder. And the population that absorbs this language absorbs, with it, the politics encoded in it. They are not learning about the world. They are learning to see the world from a specific address.

Haiti, you asked the most important question. What happens when Black people say we do not want to be friends with you monsters? Will you actually leave us alone? The answer is no. They will not. Because they do not see us as equals. They see us as tools. Just like slavery. Just like colonialism. Just like the IMF. The relationship has never changed. Only the methods. France admits it cannot survive without Africa. That means Africa leaving would collapse France. So they will never leave us alone. They will beg. They will threaten. They will sanction. They will stage coups. They will do everything except respect our sovereignty. Haiti knows this better than anyone. You fought. You won. And they made you pay for centuries. The only country in the world forced to pay reparations to slave masters. That is not a coincidence. That is a warning. But the warning cuts both ways. Haiti survived. Africa will too. Not by begging for friendship. By building power they cannot ignore. By uniting so they cannot divide. By becoming too strong to be treated as tools ever again. Haiti and Africa. Same struggle. Same enemy. Same future. Together. ✊🏿🇭🇹

Hate to break it you but it's not just our parents, we all need to massively decolonize

what happened over the past few days is pretty amazing. The Israeli regime knew Nick Kristof was going to publish his NYT piece on their actual systematic rape of Palestinians including children and the use of dogs to rape, so they fabricated a new "report", the most insane one yet copy-pasted together by a proven fraud that repeats all the already debunked falsehoods and relies entirely on known proven hoaxers, and they actually got the NYT, BBC, CNN, AP, Reuters to launder it for them a day after the Kristof piece came out to bury it. They own the entire media class completely.

They call it "spreading democracy." What they mean is: installing the outcome they prefer and calling that outcome democratic. When the vote goes the right way, it's "democracy flourishing." When the vote goes the wrong way, when a country elects a socialist, a nationalist, anyone who intends to use national resources for national benefit rather than international capital's benefit, it becomes a "crisis requiring outside intervention." The democracy they're spreading is not the process. It's the result. And the result is always the same: a government that will sign the trade agreements, allow the military bases, keep the IMF appointments, maintain the correct relationship to the global dollar system. That government can be as brutal as it wants. Call it a democracy loudly enough and the Senate will confirm the ambassador. The Somozas, the Pahlavis, the Pinochets: all "friends of democracy." The democratic leaders who wanted to own their country's resources: all "threats to stability." The pattern is not subtle. It has just been very successfully relabeled.

@DailyMail Just like the Holly, you're going to "discover new horrors" about Oct 7th everytime Jews need a PR boost.

The reason they make these imperial statements on live TV and then algorithmically amplify them on social media platforms is simply because they want you to channel your aggression and hate toward the wrong people. In the past, it would technically be correct to blame Britain, France, or the Portuguese for the extraction of African resources. Today, however, this line of reasoning is false. Modern imperialism has evolved so much that even the presidents of France or America are merely foot soldiers in the global financial complex and the billionaire-led digital aristocracy. To my African brothers and sisters fighting this imperial subjugation and the extraction of our continent, please understand that Macron, Zelensky, or Trump are not the ones in charge of things. The energy you are wasting on these people should be channeled into the decolonization of African minds. The emerging modern empire needs our cobalt to power EV batteries, lithium for smartphone storage, tantalum for high-performance electronics, uranium for nuclear reactors, and gold to back their global financial hedges. These people will not have a change of heart because of insignificant protests and hashtags on social media. It is only when we properly educate our people and push toward the greater African Revolution that we will be truly free from the pangs of their imperialism.

Most Americans who consider themselves anti-imperialist would be surprised, if they sat with it honestly, how much of their worldview is still structured by imperial assumptions. The assumption that political instability in other countries requires an external explanation: foreign interference, corrupt leaders, tribalism, rather than being a rational response to conditions imposed from outside. The assumption that international institutions represent neutral, universal authority rather than codified power arrangements. The assumption that "the international community" means something other than "the United States and the countries that vote with it." The assumption that their analysis of another country's political situation, formed from articles, podcasts, think tank reports, all produced within a specific cultural and geopolitical framework, is more accurate than the analysis of the people living inside that situation. Anti-imperialism is not a position you arrive at once and then possess. It is a continuous excavation. Most people stop digging when it gets uncomfortable. That is where the furniture is.

The most honest version of American exceptionalism would say: We are exceptional at building systems that extract value from the majority of humanity and concentrate it among a minority, while constructing a story about those systems so compelling that the majority either don't notice, or notice and feel powerless, or notice and feel implicated, or notice and are offered a comfortable enough position inside the arrangement that their critique never quite reaches the level of action. We are exceptional at that. Not at freedom. Other countries are free. Many of them more free, by every measurable index. Not at democracy. Other countries are democratic. Many more responsive to their populations. Not at prosperity. The prosperity is real for some, and is purchased at a cost that is paid by others who are not consulted. Exceptional at the story. Exceptional at making the story feel like reality. Exceptional at making reality, the full, documented, sourced, evidenced reality, feel like "enemy propaganda." That is the exceptionalism that exists. The other kind is a chapter in the textbook.

I know I'm unreasonably enthusiastic about wind turbines but I genuinely think people tend to dismiss them a bit too easily. Check this new floating wind turbine China just installed 👇 First of all, it's floating so it's extremely easy to install, like mooring a boat somewhere (ok, fair enough, a bit more complex but still orders of magnitude easier than drilling into the seabed). Secondly, this single turbine is expected to generate approximately 44.65 gigawatt-hours (GWh) of electricity each year. That's enough to power a small town of 24,000 homes. And that's a single turbine. Thirdly it takes zero space. I calculated, this single turbine will produce as much electricity in a year as roughly 71,000 solar panels. At ~2m² per panel that's about 142,000 m² of surface area... replaced by one floating turbine 70 km out at sea. And fourthly, offshore wind is one of the cheapest forms of energy out there, even cheaper than nuclear. Not Western nuclear - Chinese nuclear, the cheapest in the world. So to sum up we have a way to generate electricity that a) you literally float into position, b) powers an entire town per turbine, c) takes up zero land and d) is super cheap. And e) incidentally, is sustainable. How is that NOT a no-brainer? You'd need just about 150 of these to match the output of your average nuclear power plant. Except you'd install them in weeks instead of 10 years 🤷‍♂️ Given the renewed strategic importance of electricity, I don't understand why China seems to be one of the only countries out there that's genuinely enthusiastic about it. At some point I'm afraid some countries' cost of electricity is just going to become a tax on stupidity. Src: reneweconomy.com.au/china-complete…

It is not just trying to rebrand itself. France is actively in search of new colonies. This is not speculation or Pan-Africanist conspiracy theory. Two years ago, Macron presented a plan to his own parliament explicitly identifying anglophone and lusophone African countries as France’s new strategic frontier, the next territory to be brought into the orbit of French influence now that francophone Africa has had the dignity to show it the door. The methodology might be different because we are not 1946. The vocabulary will be partnership, investment, security cooperation, cultural exchange. But the result will be identical because the logic has never changed. So to our “anglophone and lusophone” brothers and sisters across the continent, congratulations on your new status as France’s next strategic frontier. That status earned our countries labelled as “francophone” 7 places out of the top 10 poorest countries in Africa. It really pays to speak fluent “comment allez vous?”.