shoebat--2020-07-10--Supreme Court Rules That About Half Of Oklahoma Is Indian Land

In a fascinating ruling with major long-term potential consequences , NPR reports that the Supreme Court has ruled that much of eastern Oklahoma is Indian territory .
The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that about half of the land in Oklahoma is within a Native American reservation , a decision that will have major consequences for both past and future criminal and civil cases .
The court ’ s decision hinged on the question of whether the Creek reservation continued to exist after Oklahoma became a state .
“ Today we are asked whether the land these treaties promised remains an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law .
Because Congress has not said otherwise , we hold the government to its word , ” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the majority opinion .
The decision was 5-4 , with Justices Gorsuch , Sonia Sotomayor , Ruth Bader Ginsburg , Elena Kagan and Stephen Breyer in the majority , while Justices John Roberts , Brett Kavanaugh , Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented .
The ruling will have significant legal implications for eastern Oklahoma .
Much of Tulsa , the state ’ s second-largest city , is located on Muscogee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( Creek ) Nation cheered the court ’ s decision .
“ The Supreme Court today kept the United States ’ sacred promise to the Muscogee ( Creek ) Nation of a protected reservation , ” the tribe said in a statement .
“ Today ’ s decision will allow the Nation to honor our ancestors by maintaining our established sovereignty and territorial boundaries.
” In a dissenting opinion , Roberts , the chief justice , wrote that the decision “ will undermine numerous convictions obtained by the State , as well as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ serious crimes committed in the future , ” and “ may destabilize the governance of vast swathes of Oklahoma.
” he ruling has a number of significant consequences for criminal law in the relevant portion of Oklahoma .
The first is that going forward , certain major crimes committed within the boundaries of reservations must be prosecuted in federal court rather than state court , if a Native American is involved .
So if a Native American is accused of a major crime in downtown Tulsa , the federal government rather than the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ serious crimes involving Native Americans on American Indian land will be handled in tribal courts .
This arrangement is already common in Western states like Arizona , New Mexico and Montana , said Washburn .
Then there ’ s the issue of past decisions — many of them are now considered wrongful convictions because the state lacked jurisdiction .
A number of criminal defendants who have been convicted in the past will now have grounds to challenge their convictions , arguing that the state never had jurisdiction to try them .
The case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , concerned Jimcy McGirt , an enrolled member of the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma who was convicted of sex crimes against a child on Creek land .
In post-conviction proceedings , McGirt argued that the state lacked jurisdiction in the case and that he must be retried in federal court .
The high court agreed .
The ruling will affect lands of the Muscogee and four other Oklahoma tribes with identical treaties .
Civil court issues are also affected .
It ’ s important to note that the case concerned jurisdiction , not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are in fact reservations “ doesn ’ t mean the tribe owns all the land within the reservation , just like the county doesn ’ t own all the land within the county .
In fact , it probably doesn ’ t own very much of that land , ” Washburn explained .
“ That ’ s not what a reservation is these days.
” The potential impact of this ruling can not be stated enough , because it speaks directly to a question of authority and legal legitimacy .
I did some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the states generally do not have jurisdiction over crimes occurring in “ Indian country ” with three exceptions .
Public Law 280 ( 18 U.S.C .
§ 1162 ) in 1953 authorized states to exercise jurisdiction over offenses by or against Indians .
It provided for broad state-concurrent criminal jurisdiction on those states and reservations impacted by Public law 280 ( both mandatory states and those states which opted to assume PL280 jurisdiction ) .
In addition , some tribes have been affected by federal legislation in which states have received a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Public Law 280 such through state-wide enactments , restoration acts , or land claims settlement acts .
Likewise , when it comes to crimes between “ non-Indians ” , the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled , such as in United States v. McBratney , 104 U.S. 621 ( 1881 ) , and Draper v. United States , 164 U.S. 240 ( 1896 ) , that state courts have the jurisdiction to punish wholly non-Indian crimes in Indian country .
This supreme court ruling significantly changes this relationship because as it says that states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concerns crimes committed by Indians , it brings in federal authority as opposed to state authority and in some cases , actions which might be treated as a criminal action in federal or state court may need to be treated as civil actions in a tribal court for Indians or non-Indians .
This may be due to many factors , including legal jurisdiction limitations ( such as the lack of tribal jurisdiction over non-Indians ) , practical jurisdictional limitations ( such as Public Law 280 ) , and resource limitations .
The basic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Indian country ” and their advocates are potentially not subject to the natural procession of American law by way of local , state , and then federal courts , but my have to take up disputes either in a tribal , federal , or civil court outside of traditional proceedings .
But the complications do not end with the simple execution of criminal justice .
What about all forms of state or local ordinances , and the question of if they are enforceable is another issue that is going to have to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such as loans , fines , and minor offenses .
With jurisdictional power handed over to the federal government and tribes , are municipal and state police going to be allowed to continue the enforcement of law , and if so , what particular laws under what conditions ?
What this ruling has done is to open a major window for the ongoing process of the federalization of police , taking authority away from local enforcement agents and transferring it instead to Washington .
This is not a means of securing order and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ federal police have limited abilities to enforce law , it is rather a means to balkanize large regions of the country by the removal of the effective enforcement of the law save for concentrated urban areas where the presence of federal authorities could be effectively executed .
There are more consequences to this than what one can even think of as to how the relationship between the enforcement of law is able to function .
What one can say is that this is not “ Making American Great Again ” , or as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Making American Broke Again ” , but as a very serious matter , is “ Making America Balkanized ” .
Perhaps it is more effectively described as making America like much of Russia east of the Urals , by way of using the strong arm of central control from the capitol ( Washington instead of Moscow ) to keep control on an ever-divided nation while crime and degeneracy increase to disturbing levels with a lot of it going unsolved or without the will to solve it .
Donate now to help support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you donate , you are not donating to just any commentary group , but one that is endlessly observing the news , reading between the lines and separating hysteria and perception from reality .
In shoebat.com , we are working every day , tirelessly investigating global trends and providing data and analysis to tell you what lies for the future .
CLICK HERE TO FOLLOW OUR NEW SHOEBAT FACEBOOK PAGE

In a fascinating ruling with major long-term potential consequences, NPR reports that the Supreme Court has ruled that much of eastern Oklahoma is Indian territory.
The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that about half of the land in Oklahoma is within a Native American reservation, a decision that will have major consequences for both past and future criminal and civil cases. The court’s decision hinged on the question of whether the Creek reservation continued to exist after Oklahoma became a state. “Today we are asked whether the land these treaties promised remains an Indian reservation for purposes of federal criminal law. Because Congress has not said otherwise, we hold the government to its word,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the majority opinion. The decision was 5-4, with Justices Gorsuch, Sonia Sotomayor, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan and Stephen Breyer in the majority, while Justices John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented. The ruling will have significant legal implications for eastern Oklahoma. Much of Tulsa, the state’s second-largest city, is located on Muscogee (Creek) land. The Muscogee (Creek) Nation cheered the court’s decision. “The Supreme Court today kept the United States’ sacred promise to the Muscogee (Creek) Nation of a protected reservation,” the tribe said in a statement. “Today’s decision will allow the Nation to honor our ancestors by maintaining our established sovereignty and territorial boundaries.” In a dissenting opinion, Roberts, the chief justice, wrote that the decision “will undermine numerous convictions obtained by the State, as well as the State’s ability to prosecute serious crimes committed in the future,” and “may destabilize the governance of vast swathes of Oklahoma.” … he ruling has a number of significant consequences for criminal law in the relevant portion of Oklahoma. The first is that going forward, certain major crimes committed within the boundaries of reservations must be prosecuted in federal court rather than state court, if a Native American is involved. So if a Native American is accused of a major crime in downtown Tulsa, the federal government rather than the state government will prosecute it. Less serious crimes involving Native Americans on American Indian land will be handled in tribal courts. This arrangement is already common in Western states like Arizona, New Mexico and Montana, said Washburn. Then there’s the issue of past decisions — many of them are now considered wrongful convictions because the state lacked jurisdiction. A number of criminal defendants who have been convicted in the past will now have grounds to challenge their convictions, arguing that the state never had jurisdiction to try them. The case before the court, McGirt v. Oklahoma, concerned Jimcy McGirt, an enrolled member of the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma who was convicted of sex crimes against a child on Creek land. In post-conviction proceedings, McGirt argued that the state lacked jurisdiction in the case and that he must be retried in federal court. The high court agreed. The ruling will affect lands of the Muscogee and four other Oklahoma tribes with identical treaties. Civil court issues are also affected. It’s important to note that the case concerned jurisdiction, not land ownership. Ruling that these lands are in fact reservations “doesn’t mean the tribe owns all the land within the reservation, just like the county doesn’t own all the land within the county. In fact, it probably doesn’t own very much of that land,” Washburn explained. “That’s not what a reservation is these days.” Washburn compares a reservation to a county — terms that describe jurisdictional boundaries. (source)
The potential impact of this ruling cannot be stated enough, because it speaks directly to a question of authority and legal legitimacy .
I did some research on this, and it seems that the states generally do not have jurisdiction over crimes occurring in “Indian country” with three exceptions. Public Law 280 (18 U.S.C. § 1162) in 1953 authorized states to exercise jurisdiction over offenses by or against Indians. It provided for broad state-concurrent criminal jurisdiction on those states and reservations impacted by Public law 280 (both mandatory states and those states which opted to assume PL280 jurisdiction). In addition, some tribes have been affected by federal legislation in which states have received a federal mandate to exercise jurisdiction outside of Public Law 280 such through state-wide enactments, restoration acts, or land claims settlement acts. Likewise, when it comes to crimes between “non-Indians”, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled, such as in United States v. McBratney, 104 U.S. 621 (1881), and Draper v. United States, 164 U.S. 240 (1896), that state courts have the jurisdiction to punish wholly non-Indian crimes in Indian country.
This supreme court ruling significantly changes this relationship because as it says that states lack jurisdiction over Indian territory when it concerns crimes committed by Indians, it brings in federal authority as opposed to state authority and in some cases, actions which might be treated as a criminal action in federal or state court may need to be treated as civil actions in a tribal court for Indians or non-Indians. This may be due to many factors, including legal jurisdiction limitations (such as the lack of tribal jurisdiction over non-Indians), practical jurisdictional limitations (such as Public Law 280), and resource limitations. The basic point is that victims of crime in “Indian country” and their advocates are potentially not subject to the natural procession of American law by way of local, state, and then federal courts, but my have to take up disputes either in a tribal, federal, or civil court outside of traditional proceedings.
But the complications do not end with the simple execution of criminal justice. What about all forms of state or local ordinances, and the question of if they are enforceable is another issue that is going to have to be raised, especially in civil matters such as loans, fines, and minor offenses. With jurisdictional power handed over to the federal government and tribes, are municipal and state police going to be allowed to continue the enforcement of law, and if so, what particular laws under what conditions?
What this ruling has done is to open a major window for the ongoing process of the federalization of police, taking authority away from local enforcement agents and transferring it instead to Washington. This is not a means of securing order and the rule of law, but since federal police have limited abilities to enforce law, it is rather a means to balkanize large regions of the country by the removal of the effective enforcement of the law save for concentrated urban areas where the presence of federal authorities could be effectively executed.
There are more consequences to this than what one can even think of as to how the relationship between the enforcement of law is able to function. What one can say is that this is not “Making American Great Again”, or as I have humorously commented many times, “Making American Broke Again”, but as a very serious matter, is “Making America Balkanized”. Perhaps it is more effectively described as making America like much of Russia east of the Urals, by way of using the strong arm of central control from the capitol (Washington instead of Moscow) to keep control on an ever-divided nation while crime and degeneracy increase to disturbing levels with a lot of it going unsolved or without the will to solve it.
print


shoebat--2020-07-11--The Hagia Sophia: Moscow’s Struggle For Power And The Decline Of Constantinople

My thoughts on the recent shift of statues for the Hagia Sophia : The making of Hagia Sophia into an official mosque , again , is a sign of Turkey ’ s aspirations to return to her glory days , when the Church that so symbolized the glory of Christendom , was taken by Islamic hands .
With the rise of Turkey comes also the rise of Russia , Istanbul ’ s biggest enemy .
The tension between Turkey and Russia is not at just the governmental level , but at the ecclesiastical level as well .
There is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is going to be the head of the Orthodox Church .
This is a rivalry that has been going on for decades .
In order to have a better understanding of this , its essential to know how Russia sees herself within the Orthodox world .
The Russian Orthodox Church sees Moscow as the “ third Rome ” .
In fact , the Russian church believes that Moscow has been the third Rome since 1453 when the Ottomans invades Constantinople .
We find this belief held in Russia going as far back as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Moscow , Zosima , in a foreword to his 1492 Presentation of the Paschalion , praises Ivan III as : “ the new Tsar Constantine of the new city of Constantine — Moscow.
” In the 16th century the monk , Philotheus , wrote to the king as such : They see the Vatican and Constantinople as the two Romes that have fallen , and Moscow as the third and perpetual Rome .
It is of no surprise , then , to see that for a long time Moscow and Constantinople have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ authority .
A clear demonstration of this rivalry was what happened last year when the Constantinople Patriarchate announced that the Ukrainians would be allowed to have an Orthodox Church independent of the Moscow Patriarchate , after which the Russian Orthodox Church did a schism from Constantinople in 2018 .
For four centuries the Ukrainian church had been under Moscow , but then — under Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople — it was allowed to sever from the Russians .
As we read in the New York Times : The Ukrainians enthusiastically accepted the permission @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it was truly a political decision that gave them a sense of national empowerment and liberation from Russian influence .
The nationalism of the Ukrainians ’ was made evident when the Ukrainian parliament — not too long after the Ukrainian church broke away from Moscow — voted in favor of the government to force the Russian Orthodox parishes that are located in Ukraine to be under the title of “ Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine.
” The vote was done with nationalist declarations of “ Glory to Ukraine !
” by parliamentarians .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the forming of an independent Ukrainian church was not something that simply came from Bartholomew ’ s own accord , but was the result of massive pressure on the Constantinople Patriarchate from the Turks who pressured the Orthodox Church at the request of the Americans as part of a negotiation to end the sanctions that the US was imposing on Ankara .
According to a report from Modern Diplomacy : “ One of Washington ’ s main conditions for lifting the sanctions is Brunson ’ s release .
However , there is another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the Ukrainian Orthodox Church ( UOC ) , the author states .
In April , Kyiv , which strives to break away from the Russian Orthodox Church and create an independent Ukrainian Church , addressed the Ecumenical Patriarchate with an appeal to grant the autocephaly .
According to Patriarch Bartholomew , who delivered a speech after the recent Sunday service , the still-ongoing official process is to yield the results shortly .
The previous week , in an interview to BBC Ukraine , the leader of Crimean Tatars and a member of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Erdogan had confirmed his support in the process of granting autocephaly to the Ukrainian Church .
“ I told him that today Moscow is like a Mecca for the Orthodox but after the UOC becomes independent Istanbul will take the place of Moscow , ” Dzhemilev noticed .
According to him , when he and Ukrainian president Poroshenko met with Erdogan on July 12 , the Turkish leader assured that he would do “ everything possible ” for the Ukrainian autocephaly and said that he understood the importance of this issue for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Erdogan was acting as pope over Bartholomew himself , taking control of the church to exasperate tensions with the Russians .
What we were seeing at that time was an intense rivalry between Istanbul and Moscow through the competition between two Orthodox Patriarchates .
It was a manifestation of the clear deterioration of the relationship between Moscow and Constantinople , which was truly seen in the previous year , October of 2018 , when the Moscow Patriarchate did a literal schism from Constantinople .
Russia decided to break communion with Constantinople after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to give independence ( autocephaly ) to the Ukrainians , allow the Ukrainian church to ordain the Metropolitan of Kiev ( instead of Moscow , which is how it was for centuries ) , and to lift the excommunications of two Ukrainian churches which were operating independent of Moscow and considered schismatics by the Moscow Patriarchates .
When Russia made its decision in the 15th of October , 2018 , the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church banned all members of the Moscow Patriarchate from partaking in communion , baptism , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Constantinople .
The Russian Orthodox Church threatened to break off from any Orthodox church that recognized the Ukrainian church .
In October of 2019 , the Greek Orthodox Church ’ s Archbishop Leronymos II of Athens , wrote a letter declaring his recognition of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church .
In November 2019 , Patriarch Kirill of Moscow did not say the name of the primate of the Church of Greece in the liturgy , thus removing him from the diptych .
In December of that year , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Alexandria , Egypt , after it also recognized the Ukrainian Orthodox Church .
And who caused all of this schism ?
Erdogan and his American backers .
The anger over an independent Ukrainian church is understandable given the past history of Ukraine as the spiritual head of all Russia .
In January of 2019 , Patriarch Kirill explained : “ Ukraine is not on the periphery of our church .
We call Kiev ‘ the mother of all Russian cities.
’ For us Kiev is what Jerusalem is for many .
Russian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ circumstances can we abandon this historical and spiritual relationship .
The whole unity of our Local Church is based on these spiritual ties.
” When Russia lost control over Ukraine after the fall of the Soviet Union , the Russian Orthodox Church began to promote the idea of Russkiy mir ( “ Russian world ” ) , or the unity of all peoples descended from the Kievan Rus .
As one Orthodox site explains : So , the Russian struggle to control the Ukrainian church is about fulfilling an ideological goal of Russian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The Turks and Americans , through the Constantinople Patriarchate , split the Ukrainian church from the Moscow Patriarchate , thus fragmenting the unity of the Russian Orthodox Church and accelerating tensions between Russians and Ukrainians .
What has been occurring between Russia and Istanbul in the struggle over the Ukrainian church has occurred similarly before , only except with Estonia .
The Russian Orthodox Church wanted to maintain control over the Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church ( EAOC ) , which was under the authority of the Constantinople Patriarchate .
In 1940 the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ EAOC went into exile to Sweden .
In 1945 , the Russian Orthodox Church abolished the autonomy of the EAOC which recounted : “ [ t ] he autonomy of the Orthodox Church of Estonia , accorded in 1923 by the Oecumenical Patriarch Meletios , was abolished in March 9 , 1945 by force , unilaterally without respecting the canonical order and without informing the Oecumenical Patriarch about it nor waiting for his consentment ” .
In 1991 the EAOC gained independence from the Russian church with the approval of Patriarch Bartholomew who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In response to this , Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow severed all ties with Bartholomew .
On February 24th 1996 , Bartholomew wrote a letter to Alexy condemning Russia ’ s schism and also reminded Alexy of the power goals of Russia through the institution of its church : The Americans understood — and still understand — that there were ( and are ) definite tensions between Moscow and Constantinople .
A 2004 cable from the US Consul General in Istanbul details the tensions between the two Patriarchates : In May of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issue and ended the schism .
Notwithstanding this , the schism was a reflection of the conflict between Moscow and Constantinople .
The tensions never ended ; for the two patriarchates are now in another schism the cause of which was influenced by American and Turkish agitation .
If the creation of an independent Ukrainian church was done by Bartholomew at the pressure of Turkey and the US , it makes one wonder what is behind the curtains of Turkey making the Hagia Sophia into a mosque again .
Regardless , what we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recent action is to the benefit of Russia .
It further weakens the Constantinople Patriarchate ’ s position since the icon of Orthodoxy — the Hagia Sofia — is now an official mosque , and strengthens the position of the Moscow Patriarchate .
On paper , the Constantinople Patriarchate is the head of the Orthodox Church ; but in practice , all of the vibrancy of Orthodoxy is in Russia .
When Christians were being slaughtered by ISIS in Syria and Iraq , it was Russia — not Istanbul — that the Christian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hope .
The Russian Orthodox Church ( unlike the Constantinople Patriarchate ) has an entire military apparatus alongside her , with entire armies of soldiers who go to the Orthodox Church for Communion and hope ; thus , the zeal of the Orthodox Church is alive in Russia .
With the Hagia Sophia made into a mosque , the Orthodox world will turn to Russia as the savior of the Hagia Sophia .
Russia will use this to her advantage to gather the Orthodox world under her influence .
When looking at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it under the same light of the Ukrainian church being allowed to sever from the Moscow Patriarchate under the pressures of Turkey ( and Russia , as a response , breaking from Constantinople ) : it is part of a struggle for power and influence between Russia and Turkey .

By Theodore Shoebat
My thoughts on the recent shift of statues for the Hagia Sophia:
“Holy Father, keep through Your name those whom You have given Me, that they may be one as We are.” (John 17:11)
The making of Hagia Sophia into an official mosque, again, is a sign of Turkey’s aspirations to return to her glory days, when the Church that so symbolized the glory of Christendom, was taken by Islamic hands. With the rise of Turkey comes also the rise of Russia, Istanbul’s biggest enemy. The tension between Turkey and Russia is not at just the governmental level, but at the ecclesiastical level as well.
There is a rivalry between Russia and Constantinople over who is going to be the head of the Orthodox Church. This is a rivalry that has been going on for decades. In order to have a better understanding of this, its essential to know how Russia sees herself within the Orthodox world. The Russian Orthodox Church sees Moscow as the “third Rome”. In fact, the Russian church believes that Moscow has been the third Rome since 1453 when the Ottomans invades Constantinople. We find this belief held in Russia going as far back as 1491. For example, Metropolitan of Moscow, Zosima, in a foreword to his 1492 Presentation of the Paschalion, praises Ivan III as: “the new Tsar Constantine of the new city of Constantine — Moscow.” In the 16th century the monk, Philotheus, wrote to the king as such:
“So know, pious king, that all the Christian kingdoms came to an end and came together in a single kingdom of yours, two Romes have fallen, the third stands, and there will be no fourth.”
They see the Vatican and Constantinople as the two Romes that have fallen, and Moscow as the third and perpetual Rome. It is of no surprise, then, to see that for a long time Moscow and Constantinople have been in a continuous war over influence and authority. A clear demonstration of this rivalry was what happened last year when the Constantinople Patriarchate announced that the Ukrainians would be allowed to have an Orthodox Church independent of the Moscow Patriarchate, after which the Russian Orthodox Church did a schism from Constantinople in 2018. For four centuries the Ukrainian church had been under Moscow, but then — under Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople — it was allowed to sever from the Russians. As we read in the New York Times:
“The spiritual leader of Eastern Orthodox Christians worldwide recognized the independence of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine in a four-hour ceremony in Istanbul on Sunday, formalizing a split with the Russian church to which it had been tied for more than four centuries. Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I, the spiritual leader, handed a Tomos of Autocephaly containing a decree of independence to the newly appointed Metropolitan Epiphanius of Ukraine, cleaving millions of Ukrainians from the Russian Orthodox Church.”
The Ukrainians enthusiastically accepted the permission given to them by Constantinople, because it was truly a political decision that gave them a sense of national empowerment and liberation from Russian influence. The nationalism of the Ukrainians’ was made evident when the Ukrainian parliament — not too long after the Ukrainian church broke away from Moscow — voted in favor of the government to force the Russian Orthodox parishes that are located in Ukraine to be under the title of “Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine.” The vote was done with nationalist declarations of “Glory to Ukraine!” by parliamentarians. What was not widely reported was how the forming of an independent Ukrainian church was not something that simply came from Bartholomew’s own accord, but was the result of massive pressure on the Constantinople Patriarchate from the Turks who pressured the Orthodox Church at the request of the Americans as part of a negotiation to end the sanctions that the US was imposing on Ankara. According to a report from Modern Diplomacy:
“One of Washington’s main conditions for lifting the sanctions is Brunson’s release. However, there is another one – the autocephaly [independence] for the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC), the author states. In April, Kyiv, which strives to break away from the Russian Orthodox Church and create an independent Ukrainian Church, addressed the Ecumenical Patriarchate with an appeal to grant the autocephaly. According to Patriarch Bartholomew, who delivered a speech after the recent Sunday service, the still-ongoing official process is to yield the results shortly. The previous week, in an interview to BBC Ukraine, the leader of Crimean Tatars and a member of the Ukrainian Parliament Mustafa Dzhemilev said that President Erdogan had confirmed his support in the process of granting autocephaly to the Ukrainian Church. “I told him that today Moscow is like a Mecca for the Orthodox but after the UOC becomes independent Istanbul will take the place of Moscow,” Dzhemilev noticed. According to him, when he and Ukrainian president Poroshenko met with Erdogan on July 12, the Turkish leader assured that he would do “everything possible” for the Ukrainian autocephaly and said that he understood the importance of this issue for the Crimean Tatars.”
In other words, Erdogan was acting as pope over Bartholomew himself, taking control of the church to exasperate tensions with the Russians. What we were seeing at that time was an intense rivalry between Istanbul and Moscow through the competition between two Orthodox Patriarchates. It was a manifestation of the clear deterioration of the relationship between Moscow and Constantinople, which was truly seen in the previous year, October of 2018, when the Moscow Patriarchate did a literal schism from Constantinople. Russia decided to break communion with Constantinople after the latter announced that it was going to give independence (autocephaly) to the Ukrainians, allow the Ukrainian church to ordain the Metropolitan of Kiev (instead of Moscow, which is how it was for centuries), and to lift the excommunications of two Ukrainian churches which were operating independent of Moscow and considered schismatics by the Moscow Patriarchates.
When Russia made its decision in the 15th of October, 2018, the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church banned all members of the Moscow Patriarchate from partaking in communion, baptism, and marriage in any churches under the authority of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Constantinople. The Russian Orthodox Church threatened to break off from any Orthodox church that recognized the Ukrainian church. In October of 2019, the Greek Orthodox Church’s Archbishop Leronymos II of Athens, wrote a letter declaring his recognition of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. In November 2019, Patriarch Kirill of Moscow did not say the name of the primate of the Church of Greece in the liturgy, thus removing him from the diptych. In December of that year, the Russians severed ties with the Orthodox Church of Alexandria, Egypt, after it also recognized the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.
And who caused all of this schism? Erdogan and his American backers.
The anger over an independent Ukrainian church is understandable given the past history of Ukraine as the spiritual head of all Russia. In January of 2019, Patriarch Kirill explained: “Ukraine is not on the periphery of our church. We call Kiev ‘the mother of all Russian cities.’ For us Kiev is what Jerusalem is for many. Russian Orthodoxy began there, so under no circumstances can we abandon this historical and spiritual relationship. The whole unity of our Local Church is based on these spiritual ties.” When Russia lost control over Ukraine after the fall of the Soviet Union, the Russian Orthodox Church began to promote the idea of Russkiy mir (“Russian world”), or the unity of all peoples descended from the Kievan Rus. As one Orthodox site explains:
“In addressing the ongoing political and ecclesiastical conflict in Ukraine, many have rightly brought up the Russkiy Mir (“Russian world”) ideology promoted by many in the leadership of the Russian Orthodox Church. This ideology, concocted as a reaction to the loss of Russian control over Ukraine and Belarus after the fall of the Soviet Union, seeks to assert a spiritual and cultural unity of the peoples descended from the Kievan Rus, presumably under Russian leadership.”
So, the Russian struggle to control the Ukrainian church is about fulfilling an ideological goal of Russian unity and also to maintain Russian hegemony. The Turks and Americans, through the Constantinople Patriarchate, split the Ukrainian church from the Moscow Patriarchate, thus fragmenting the unity of the Russian Orthodox Church and accelerating tensions between Russians and Ukrainians. What has been occurring between Russia and Istanbul in the struggle over the Ukrainian church has occurred similarly before, only except with Estonia.
The Russian Orthodox Church wanted to maintain control over the Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church (EAOC), which was under the authority of the Constantinople Patriarchate. In 1940 the Soviet Union annexed Estonia and after1944 the EAOC went into exile to Sweden. In 1945, the Russian Orthodox Church abolished the autonomy of the EAOC which recounted: “[t]he autonomy of the Orthodox Church of Estonia, accorded in 1923 by the Oecumenical Patriarch Meletios, was abolished in March 9, 1945 by force, unilaterally without respecting the canonical order and without informing the Oecumenical Patriarch about it nor waiting for his consentment”.
In 1991 the EAOC gained independence from the Russian church with the approval of Patriarch Bartholomew who installed for Estonia an Archbishop in 1996. In response to this, Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow severed all ties with Bartholomew. On February 24th 1996, Bartholomew wrote a letter to Alexy condemning Russia’s schism and also reminded Alexy of the power goals of Russia through the institution of its church:
“the Patriarchate of Russia during those years trespassed in countries under the spiritual jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, namely, Estonia, Hungary and elsewhere, always by the power of the Soviet army. The Church of Russia did not at the time seek the opinion of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, nor was any respect shown it. The annexation of the Orthodox Church of Estonia into the Most Holy Church of Russia happened arbitrarily and uncanonically. And it is certain that events which are uncanonical at one particular time are never blessed, never seen as efficacious, and never would they set a precedence.”
The Americans understood — and still understand — that there were (and are) definite tensions between Moscow and Constantinople. A 2004 cable from the US Consul General in Istanbul details the tensions between the two Patriarchates:
“Even assuming that the Patriarch can secure the viability of its Istanbul seat, however, Bartholomew faces another major challenge from Moscow-based Russian Patriarch Alexy II for ecclesiastical authority in the wider Orthodox world. Styling itself as the “Third Rome,” Moscow claims that it assumed authority within the Orthodox community beginning in the 15th century with the fall of Constantinople, the Byzantine Empire, and much of the Orthodox Balkans to the Ottoman Muslims and the subsequent elevation of Metropolitan Job of Moscow to the rank of Patriarch. Although temporarily suspended by the Soviet regime’s oppression of the Russian Orthodox Church for much of the 20th century, the Moscow church’s efforts to extend its influence beyond its geographic jurisdiction have continued unabated. With abundant sources of income among its vibrant community of over 100 million faithful, three seminaries in which to train new generations of clergy, and open political support from the Russian government, Alexy is well-placed to challenge Bartholomew on a number of fronts.”
In May of 1996, Moscow and Constantinople resolved the issue and ended the schism. Notwithstanding this, the schism was a reflection of the conflict between Moscow and Constantinople. The tensions never ended; for the two patriarchates are now in another schism the cause of which was influenced by American and Turkish agitation. If the creation of an independent Ukrainian church was done by Bartholomew at the pressure of Turkey and the US, it makes one wonder what is behind the curtains of Turkey making the Hagia Sophia into a mosque again.
Regardless, what we do know is that Turkey’s recent action is to the benefit of Russia. It further weakens the Constantinople Patriarchate’s position since the icon of Orthodoxy — the Hagia Sofia — is now an official mosque, and strengthens the position of the Moscow Patriarchate. On paper, the Constantinople Patriarchate is the head of the Orthodox Church; but in practice, all of the vibrancy of Orthodoxy is in Russia. When Christians were being slaughtered by ISIS in Syria and Iraq, it was Russia — not Istanbul — that the Christian world was turning to for help and hope. The Russian Orthodox Church (unlike the Constantinople Patriarchate) has an entire military apparatus alongside her, with entire armies of soldiers who go to the Orthodox Church for Communion and hope; thus, the zeal of the Orthodox Church is alive in Russia. With the Hagia Sophia made into a mosque, the Orthodox world will turn to Russia as the savior of the Hagia Sophia. Russia will use this to her advantage to gather the Orthodox world under her influence.
When looking at the Hagia Sophia situation, we can see it under the same light of the Ukrainian church being allowed to sever from the Moscow Patriarchate under the pressures of Turkey (and Russia, as a response, breaking from Constantinople): it is part of a struggle for power and influence between Russia and Turkey.
print


shoebat--2020-07-11--Turkey Making The Hagia Sophia Into A Mosque Is Part Of The War Between Moscow And Istanbul And Is G

Turkey Making The Hagia Sophia Into A Mosque Is Part Of The War Between Moscow And Istanbul And Is Going To Empower Russia As Leader Of The Orthodox World

The making of Hagia Sophia into an official mosque , again , is a sign of Turkey ’ s aspirations to return to her glory days , when the Church that so symbolized the glory of Christendom , was taken by Islamic hands .
With the rise of Turkey comes also the rise of Russia , Istanbul ’ s biggest enemy .
The tension between Turkey and Russia is not at just the governmental level , but at the ecclesiastical level as well .
There is a rivalry between Russia and Constantinople over who is going to be the head @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a rivalry that has been going on for decades .
In order to have a better understanding of this , its essential to know how Russia sees herself within the Orthodox world .
The Russian Orthodox Church sees Moscow as the “ third Rome ” .
In fact , the Russian church believes that Moscow has been the third Rome since 1453 when the Ottomans invades Constantinople .
We find this belief held in Russia going as far back as 1491 .
For example , Metropolitan of Moscow , Zosima , in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Paschalion , praises Ivan III as : “ the new Tsar Constantine of the new city of Constantine — Moscow.
” In the 16th century the monk , Philotheus , wrote to the king as such : They see the Vatican and Constantinople as the two Romes that have fallen , and Moscow as the third and perpetual Rome .
It is of no surprise , then , to see that for a long time Moscow and Constantinople have been in a continuous war over influence and authority .
A clear demonstration of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when the Constantinople Patriarchate announced that the Ukrainians would be allowed to have an Orthodox Church independent of the Moscow Patriarchate , after which the Russian Orthodox Church did a schism from Constantinople in 2018 .
For four centuries the Ukrainian church had been under Moscow , but then — under Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople — it was allowed to sever from the Russians .
As we read in the New York Times : The Ukrainians enthusiastically accepted the permission given to them by Constantinople , because it was truly a political decision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ empowerment and liberation from Russian influence .
The nationalism of the Ukrainians ’ was made evident when the Ukrainian parliament — not too long after the Ukrainian church broke away from Moscow — voted in favor of the government to force the Russian Orthodox parishes that are located in Ukraine to be under the title of “ Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine.
” The vote was done with nationalist declarations of “ Glory to Ukraine !
” by parliamentarians .
What was not widely reported was how the forming of an independent Ukrainian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from Bartholomew ’ s own accord , but was the result of massive pressure on the Constantinople Patriarchate from the Turks who pressured the Orthodox Church at the request of the Americans as part of a negotiation to end the sanctions that the US was imposing on Ankara .
According to a report from Modern Diplomacy : “ One of Washington ’ s main conditions for lifting the sanctions is Brunson ’ s release .
However , there is another one – the autocephaly [ independence ] for the Ukrainian Orthodox Church ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In April , Kyiv , which strives to break away from the Russian Orthodox Church and create an independent Ukrainian Church , addressed the Ecumenical Patriarchate with an appeal to grant the autocephaly .
According to Patriarch Bartholomew , who delivered a speech after the recent Sunday service , the still-ongoing official process is to yield the results shortly .
The previous week , in an interview to BBC Ukraine , the leader of Crimean Tatars and a member of the Ukrainian Parliament Mustafa Dzhemilev said that President Erdogan had confirmed his support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Ukrainian Church .
“ I told him that today Moscow is like a Mecca for the Orthodox but after the UOC becomes independent Istanbul will take the place of Moscow , ” Dzhemilev noticed .
According to him , when he and Ukrainian president Poroshenko met with Erdogan on July 12 , the Turkish leader assured that he would do “ everything possible ” for the Ukrainian autocephaly and said that he understood the importance of this issue for the Crimean Tatars.
” In other words , Erdogan was acting as pope @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the church to exasperate tensions with the Russians .
What we were seeing at that time was an intense rivalry between Istanbul and Moscow through the competition between two Orthodox Patriarchates .
It was a manifestation of the clear deterioration of the relationship between Moscow and Constantinople , which was truly seen in the previous year , October of 2018 , when the Moscow Patriarchate did a literal schism from Constantinople .
Russia decided to break communion with Constantinople after the latter announced that it was going to give independence ( autocephaly ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ church to ordain the Metropolitan of Kiev ( instead of Moscow , which is how it was for centuries ) , and to lift the excommunications of two Ukrainian churches which were operating independent of Moscow and considered schismatics by the Moscow Patriarchates .
When Russia made its decision in the 15th of October , 2018 , the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church banned all members of the Moscow Patriarchate from partaking in communion , baptism , and marriage in any churches under the authority of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Constantinople @ @ @ @ @ @ @ break off from any Orthodox church that recognized the Ukrainian church .
In October of 2019 , the Greek Orthodox Church ’ s Archbishop Leronymos II of Athens , wrote a letter declaring his recognition of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church .
In November 2019 , Patriarch Kirill of Moscow did not say the name of the primate of the Church of Greece in the liturgy , thus removing him from the diptych .
In December of that year , the Russians severed ties with the Orthodox Church of Alexandria , Egypt , after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And who caused all of this schism ?
Erdogan and his American backers .
The anger over an independent Ukrainian church is understandable given the past history of Ukraine as the spiritual head of all Russia .
In January of 2019 , Patriarch Kirill explained : “ Ukraine is not on the periphery of our church .
We call Kiev ‘ the mother of all Russian cities.
’ For us Kiev is what Jerusalem is for many .
Russian Orthodoxy began there , so under no circumstances can we abandon this historical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of our Local Church is based on these spiritual ties.
” When Russia lost control over Ukraine after the fall of the Soviet Union , the Russian Orthodox Church began to promote the idea of Russkiy mir ( “ Russian world ” ) , or the unity of all peoples descended from the Kievan Rus .
As one Orthodox site explains : So , the Russian struggle to control the Ukrainian church is about fulfilling an ideological goal of Russian unity and also to maintain Russian hegemony .
The Turks and Americans , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ukrainian church from the Moscow Patriarchate , thus fragmenting the unity of the Russian Orthodox Church and accelerating tensions between Russians and Ukrainians .
What has been occurring between Russia and Istanbul in the struggle over the Ukrainian church has occurred similarly before , only except with Estonia .
The Russian Orthodox Church wanted to maintain control over the Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church ( EAOC ) , which was under the authority of the Constantinople Patriarchate .
In 1940 the Soviet Union annexed Estonia and after1944 the EAOC went into exile to Sweden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Church abolished the autonomy of the EAOC which recounted : “ [ t ] he autonomy of the Orthodox Church of Estonia , accorded in 1923 by the Oecumenical Patriarch Meletios , was abolished in March 9 , 1945 by force , unilaterally without respecting the canonical order and without informing the Oecumenical Patriarch about it nor waiting for his consentment ” .
In 1991 the EAOC gained independence from the Russian church with the approval of Patriarch Bartholomew who installed for Estonia an Archbishop in 1996 .
In response to this , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ties with Bartholomew .
On February 24th 1996 , Bartholomew wrote a letter to Alexy condemning Russia ’ s schism and also reminded Alexy of the power goals of Russia through the institution of its church : The Americans understood — and still understand — that there were ( and are ) definite tensions between Moscow and Constantinople .
A 2004 cable from the US Consul General in Istanbul details the tensions between the two Patriarchates : In May of 1996 , Moscow and Constantinople resolved the issue and ended the schism .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ reflection of the conflict between Moscow and Constantinople .
The tensions never ended ; for the two patriarchates are now in another schism the cause of which was influenced by American and Turkish agitation .
If the creation of an independent Ukrainian church was done by Bartholomew at the pressure of Turkey and the US , it makes one wonder what is behind the curtains of Turkey making the Hagia Sophia into a mosque again .
Regardless , what we do know is that Turkey ’ s recent action is to the benefit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Constantinople Patriarchate ’ s position since the icon of Orthodoxy — the Hagia Sofia — is now an official mosque , and strengthens the position of the Moscow Patriarchate .
On paper , the Constantinople Patriarchate is the head of the Orthodox Church ; but in practice , all of the vibrancy of Orthodoxy is in Russia .
When Christians were being slaughtered by ISIS in Syria and Iraq , it was Russia — not Istanbul — that the Christian world was turning to for help and hope .
The Russian Orthodox Church @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an entire military apparatus alongside her , with entire armies of soldiers who go to the Orthodox Church for Communion and hope ; thus , the zeal of the Orthodox Church is alive in Russia .
With the Hagia Sophia made into a mosque , the Orthodox world will turn to Russia as the savior of the Hagia Sophia .
Russia will use this to her advantage to gather the Orthodox world under her influence .
When looking at the Hagia Sophia situation , we can see it under the same light of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the Moscow Patriarchate under the pressures of Turkey ( and Russia , as a response , breaking from Constantinople ) : it is part of a struggle for power and influence between Russia and Turkey .

By The Walid & Theodore Shoebat
“Holy Father, keep through Your name those whom You have given Me, that they may be one as We are.” (John 17:11)
The making of Hagia Sophia into an official mosque, again, is a sign of Turkey’s aspirations to return to her glory days, when the Church that so symbolized the glory of Christendom, was taken by Islamic hands. With the rise of Turkey comes also the rise of Russia, Istanbul’s biggest enemy. The tension between Turkey and Russia is not at just the governmental level, but at the ecclesiastical level as well.
There is a rivalry between Russia and Constantinople over who is going to be the head of the Orthodox Church. This is a rivalry that has been going on for decades. In order to have a better understanding of this, its essential to know how Russia sees herself within the Orthodox world. The Russian Orthodox Church sees Moscow as the “third Rome”. In fact, the Russian church believes that Moscow has been the third Rome since 1453 when the Ottomans invades Constantinople. We find this belief held in Russia going as far back as 1491. For example, Metropolitan of Moscow, Zosima, in a foreword to his 1492 Presentation of the Paschalion, praises Ivan III as: “the new Tsar Constantine of the new city of Constantine — Moscow.” In the 16th century the monk, Philotheus, wrote to the king as such:
“So know, pious king, that all the Christian kingdoms came to an end and came together in a single kingdom of yours, two Romes have fallen, the third stands, and there will be no fourth.”
They see the Vatican and Constantinople as the two Romes that have fallen, and Moscow as the third and perpetual Rome. It is of no surprise, then, to see that for a long time Moscow and Constantinople have been in a continuous war over influence and authority. A clear demonstration of this rivalry was what happened last year when the Constantinople Patriarchate announced that the Ukrainians would be allowed to have an Orthodox Church independent of the Moscow Patriarchate, after which the Russian Orthodox Church did a schism from Constantinople in 2018. For four centuries the Ukrainian church had been under Moscow, but then — under Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople — it was allowed to sever from the Russians. As we read in the New York Times:
“The spiritual leader of Eastern Orthodox Christians worldwide recognized the independence of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine in a four-hour ceremony in Istanbul on Sunday, formalizing a split with the Russian church to which it had been tied for more than four centuries. Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I, the spiritual leader, handed a Tomos of Autocephaly containing a decree of independence to the newly appointed Metropolitan Epiphanius of Ukraine, cleaving millions of Ukrainians from the Russian Orthodox Church.”
The Ukrainians enthusiastically accepted the permission given to them by Constantinople, because it was truly a political decision that gave them a sense of national empowerment and liberation from Russian influence. The nationalism of the Ukrainians’ was made evident when the Ukrainian parliament — not too long after the Ukrainian church broke away from Moscow — voted in favor of the government to force the Russian Orthodox parishes that are located in Ukraine to be under the title of “Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine.” The vote was done with nationalist declarations of “Glory to Ukraine!” by parliamentarians. What was not widely reported was how the forming of an independent Ukrainian church was not something that simply came from Bartholomew’s own accord, but was the result of massive pressure on the Constantinople Patriarchate from the Turks who pressured the Orthodox Church at the request of the Americans as part of a negotiation to end the sanctions that the US was imposing on Ankara. According to a report from Modern Diplomacy:
“One of Washington’s main conditions for lifting the sanctions is Brunson’s release. However, there is another one – the autocephaly [independence] for the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC), the author states. In April, Kyiv, which strives to break away from the Russian Orthodox Church and create an independent Ukrainian Church, addressed the Ecumenical Patriarchate with an appeal to grant the autocephaly. According to Patriarch Bartholomew, who delivered a speech after the recent Sunday service, the still-ongoing official process is to yield the results shortly. The previous week, in an interview to BBC Ukraine, the leader of Crimean Tatars and a member of the Ukrainian Parliament Mustafa Dzhemilev said that President Erdogan had confirmed his support in the process of granting autocephaly to the Ukrainian Church. “I told him that today Moscow is like a Mecca for the Orthodox but after the UOC becomes independent Istanbul will take the place of Moscow,” Dzhemilev noticed. According to him, when he and Ukrainian president Poroshenko met with Erdogan on July 12, the Turkish leader assured that he would do “everything possible” for the Ukrainian autocephaly and said that he understood the importance of this issue for the Crimean Tatars.”
In other words, Erdogan was acting as pope over Bartholomew himself, taking control of the church to exasperate tensions with the Russians. What we were seeing at that time was an intense rivalry between Istanbul and Moscow through the competition between two Orthodox Patriarchates. It was a manifestation of the clear deterioration of the relationship between Moscow and Constantinople, which was truly seen in the previous year, October of 2018, when the Moscow Patriarchate did a literal schism from Constantinople. Russia decided to break communion with Constantinople after the latter announced that it was going to give independence (autocephaly) to the Ukrainians, allow the Ukrainian church to ordain the Metropolitan of Kiev (instead of Moscow, which is how it was for centuries), and to lift the excommunications of two Ukrainian churches which were operating independent of Moscow and considered schismatics by the Moscow Patriarchates.
When Russia made its decision in the 15th of October, 2018, the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church banned all members of the Moscow Patriarchate from partaking in communion, baptism, and marriage in any churches under the authority of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Constantinople. The Russian Orthodox Church threatened to break off from any Orthodox church that recognized the Ukrainian church. In October of 2019, the Greek Orthodox Church’s Archbishop Leronymos II of Athens, wrote a letter declaring his recognition of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. In November 2019, Patriarch Kirill of Moscow did not say the name of the primate of the Church of Greece in the liturgy, thus removing him from the diptych. In December of that year, the Russians severed ties with the Orthodox Church of Alexandria, Egypt, after it also recognized the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.
And who caused all of this schism? Erdogan and his American backers.
The anger over an independent Ukrainian church is understandable given the past history of Ukraine as the spiritual head of all Russia. In January of 2019, Patriarch Kirill explained: “Ukraine is not on the periphery of our church. We call Kiev ‘the mother of all Russian cities.’ For us Kiev is what Jerusalem is for many. Russian Orthodoxy began there, so under no circumstances can we abandon this historical and spiritual relationship. The whole unity of our Local Church is based on these spiritual ties.” When Russia lost control over Ukraine after the fall of the Soviet Union, the Russian Orthodox Church began to promote the idea of Russkiy mir (“Russian world”), or the unity of all peoples descended from the Kievan Rus. As one Orthodox site explains:
“In addressing the ongoing political and ecclesiastical conflict in Ukraine, many have rightly brought up the Russkiy Mir (“Russian world”) ideology promoted by many in the leadership of the Russian Orthodox Church. This ideology, concocted as a reaction to the loss of Russian control over Ukraine and Belarus after the fall of the Soviet Union, seeks to assert a spiritual and cultural unity of the peoples descended from the Kievan Rus, presumably under Russian leadership.”
So, the Russian struggle to control the Ukrainian church is about fulfilling an ideological goal of Russian unity and also to maintain Russian hegemony. The Turks and Americans, through the Constantinople Patriarchate, split the Ukrainian church from the Moscow Patriarchate, thus fragmenting the unity of the Russian Orthodox Church and accelerating tensions between Russians and Ukrainians. What has been occurring between Russia and Istanbul in the struggle over the Ukrainian church has occurred similarly before, only except with Estonia.
The Russian Orthodox Church wanted to maintain control over the Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church (EAOC), which was under the authority of the Constantinople Patriarchate. In 1940 the Soviet Union annexed Estonia and after1944 the EAOC went into exile to Sweden. In 1945, the Russian Orthodox Church abolished the autonomy of the EAOC which recounted: “[t]he autonomy of the Orthodox Church of Estonia, accorded in 1923 by the Oecumenical Patriarch Meletios, was abolished in March 9, 1945 by force, unilaterally without respecting the canonical order and without informing the Oecumenical Patriarch about it nor waiting for his consentment”.
In 1991 the EAOC gained independence from the Russian church with the approval of Patriarch Bartholomew who installed for Estonia an Archbishop in 1996. In response to this, Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow severed all ties with Bartholomew. On February 24th 1996, Bartholomew wrote a letter to Alexy condemning Russia’s schism and also reminded Alexy of the power goals of Russia through the institution of its church:
“the Patriarchate of Russia during those years trespassed in countries under the spiritual jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, namely, Estonia, Hungary and elsewhere, always by the power of the Soviet army. The Church of Russia did not at the time seek the opinion of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, nor was any respect shown it. The annexation of the Orthodox Church of Estonia into the Most Holy Church of Russia happened arbitrarily and uncanonically. And it is certain that events which are uncanonical at one particular time are never blessed, never seen as efficacious, and never would they set a precedence.”
The Americans understood — and still understand — that there were (and are) definite tensions between Moscow and Constantinople. A 2004 cable from the US Consul General in Istanbul details the tensions between the two Patriarchates:
“Even assuming that the Patriarch can secure the viability of its Istanbul seat, however, Bartholomew faces another major challenge from Moscow-based Russian Patriarch Alexy II for ecclesiastical authority in the wider Orthodox world. Styling itself as the “Third Rome,” Moscow claims that it assumed authority within the Orthodox community beginning in the 15th century with the fall of Constantinople, the Byzantine Empire, and much of the Orthodox Balkans to the Ottoman Muslims and the subsequent elevation of Metropolitan Job of Moscow to the rank of Patriarch. Although temporarily suspended by the Soviet regime’s oppression of the Russian Orthodox Church for much of the 20th century, the Moscow church’s efforts to extend its influence beyond its geographic jurisdiction have continued unabated. With abundant sources of income among its vibrant community of over 100 million faithful, three seminaries in which to train new generations of clergy, and open political support from the Russian government, Alexy is well-placed to challenge Bartholomew on a number of fronts.”
In May of 1996, Moscow and Constantinople resolved the issue and ended the schism. Notwithstanding this, the schism was a reflection of the conflict between Moscow and Constantinople. The tensions never ended; for the two patriarchates are now in another schism the cause of which was influenced by American and Turkish agitation. If the creation of an independent Ukrainian church was done by Bartholomew at the pressure of Turkey and the US, it makes one wonder what is behind the curtains of Turkey making the Hagia Sophia into a mosque again.
Regardless, what we do know is that Turkey’s recent action is to the benefit of Russia. It further weakens the Constantinople Patriarchate’s position since the icon of Orthodoxy — the Hagia Sofia — is now an official mosque, and strengthens the position of the Moscow Patriarchate. On paper, the Constantinople Patriarchate is the head of the Orthodox Church; but in practice, all of the vibrancy of Orthodoxy is in Russia. When Christians were being slaughtered by ISIS in Syria and Iraq, it was Russia — not Istanbul — that the Christian world was turning to for help and hope. The Russian Orthodox Church (unlike the Constantinople Patriarchate) has an entire military apparatus alongside her, with entire armies of soldiers who go to the Orthodox Church for Communion and hope; thus, the zeal of the Orthodox Church is alive in Russia. With the Hagia Sophia made into a mosque, the Orthodox world will turn to Russia as the savior of the Hagia Sophia. Russia will use this to her advantage to gather the Orthodox world under her influence.
When looking at the Hagia Sophia situation, we can see it under the same light of the Ukrainian church being allowed to sever from the Moscow Patriarchate under the pressures of Turkey (and Russia, as a response, breaking from Constantinople): it is part of a struggle for power and influence between Russia and Turkey.
print


shoebat--2020-07-11--Coronavirus Is Proof That Sharia Law Will Never Take Over America

Sharia is not going to take over America…

Pakistani Government Signs Law That Would Put People In Prison For Life For "Blaspheming" Muhammad The government of Pakistan just signed a law that could...


shoebat--2020-07-11--Two-Thirds Of People Disagree With Trump’s Handling Of The COVID-19 Coronavirus

Two-thirds is the majority needed in order to veto a law that the President will not sign .
It also represented a more-than significant bloc of people for any group , opinion , or matter , regardless of the situation .
That said , it is of interest that during an election year , in a time of national crisis , when presidents usually do very well and are able to harness the instability as a way to demonstrate their leadership , what should be an opportunity for Trump to demonstrate his prowess as a leader has become a failure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a two-thirds majority of the country in disagreement with him over his handling of the COVID-19 coronavirus outbreak .
President Donald Trump is facing broad disapproval for his management of the two major crises gripping the nation , with two-thirds of Americans giving him low marks for both his response to the coronavirus pandemic and his handling of race relations , according to a new ABC News/Ipsos poll released Friday .
Evaluation of Trump ’ s oversight of the COVID-19 crisis reached a new low since ABC News/Ipsos began surveying on the coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of his efforts .
One-third of the country approves of the president ’ s oversight of the pandemic .
Over nearly four months of polling , Trump ’ s approval has mostly held steady , except for one week in mid-March , when it spiked above 50 % .
In the last month , Trump ’ s approval dipped to a range between the high 30s and low 40s , as the U.S. saw a resurgence of coronavirus cases , particularly across the south and west .
In the newest poll , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ABC News using Ipsos ’ Knowledge Panel , Trump ’ s approval rating on his job dealing with the coronavirus dropped another rung , driven by plunging support among independents and even waning support among Republicans .
Democrats have always been highly skeptical .
Trump ’ s approval among independents lands at 26 % in the survey , a sharp drop from 40 % in mid-June , the last time the question was asked .
Trump ’ s disapproval among independents has risen to 73 % , up from 59 % in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Republicans are less inclined to back him in the newest poll , with only 78 % approving of the president ’ s handling of the coronavirus , compared to 90 % in mid-June .
His disapproval of 22 % in the new poll is a more than two-fold increase from last month .
In a variety of demographic groups , there are clear and consistent shifts in support away from the president .
Men ( 66 % ) and women ( 67 % ) , in near equal measure , disapprove of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which represents a double-digit increase among men since the June poll , when 54 % disapproved .
Even white Americans without a college degree , considered to be a core constituency of Trump ’ s base , are split in their approval of the president ’ s handling , with 50 % disapproving and 49 % approving , compared to 42 % disapproving and 57 % approving in that last poll .
The newest numbers come as Trump continues to downplay the threat posed by the virus , even as confirmed cases climb @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very bad for Trump , and he knows it .
This is not really about the virus , but rather the complete chaos that has been his administration .
While it is true that division and racism have benefited Trump ’ s campaign for a time , it seems to be yielding negative returns at this point .
People don ’ t want racial tension or frustration- they want to live in a society that is somewhat normal , and not completely destabilized by constant tension with their neighbors because contrary to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not racist , and the constant talk of racism only serves to potentially engender racism where it is not .
The biggest problem that Trump faces is in “ battleground states ” , which more have emerged as migration- not of “ illegals ” , but of white , non-hispanic American-born citizens from “ Democrat strongholds ” -continues throughout the country .
States such as Arizona , Georgia , and North Carolina have become what Florida was two decades ago and Pennsylvania ten years ago , the latter two of which are barely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In total there are nine states that are considered “ battlegrounds ” ( Arizona , Florida , Georgia , Michigan , North Carolina , Ohio , Pennsylvania , Virginia , and Wisconsin ) and of which Trump has to win a majority in order to take the White House again .
This does not even consider the situation in Texas , which due to the same demographic shifts is not yet , but likely will become a battleground state by the next election .
Trump is in real trouble .
If he does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see how the numbers work out , because as I have noted , at this point , it may take election-year 2000 tier nonsense to ensure his victory , and knowing that Trump has already well defined his presidency by all kinds of nonsense , at this point there is nothing which is not potentially out of the question .
Donate now to help support the work of this site .
When you donate , you are not donating to just any commentary group , but one that is endlessly observing the news @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hysteria and perception from reality .
In shoebat.com , we are working every day , tirelessly investigating global trends and providing data and analysis to tell you what lies for the future .
CLICK HERE TO FOLLOW OUR NEW SHOEBAT FACEBOOK PAGE

Two-thirds is the majority needed in order to veto a law that the President will not sign. It also represented a more-than significant bloc of people for any group, opinion, or matter, regardless of the situation. That said, it is of interest that during an election year, in a time of national crisis, when presidents usually do very well and are able to harness the instability as a way to demonstrate their leadership, what should be an opportunity for Trump to demonstrate his prowess as a leader has become a failure where Trump has according to ABC News a two-thirds majority of the country in disagreement with him over his handling of the COVID-19 coronavirus outbreak.
President Donald Trump is facing broad disapproval for his management of the two major crises gripping the nation, with two-thirds of Americans giving him low marks for both his response to the coronavirus pandemic and his handling of race relations, according to a new ABC News/Ipsos poll released Friday. Evaluation of Trump’s oversight of the COVID-19 crisis reached a new low since ABC News/Ipsos began surveying on the coronavirus in March, with 67% disapproving of his efforts. One-third of the country approves of the president’s oversight of the pandemic. Over nearly four months of polling, Trump’s approval has mostly held steady, except for one week in mid-March, when it spiked above 50%. In the last month, Trump’s approval dipped to a range between the high 30s and low 40s, as the U.S. saw a resurgence of coronavirus cases, particularly across the south and west. In the newest poll, which was conducted by Ipsos in partnership with ABC News using Ipsos’ Knowledge Panel, Trump’s approval rating on his job dealing with the coronavirus dropped another rung, driven by plunging support among independents and even waning support among Republicans. Democrats have always been highly skeptical. Trump’s approval among independents lands at 26% in the survey, a sharp drop from 40% in mid-June, the last time the question was asked. Trump’s disapproval among independents has risen to 73%, up from 59% in the June poll. Within his own party, Republicans are less inclined to back him in the newest poll, with only 78% approving of the president’s handling of the coronavirus, compared to 90% in mid-June. His disapproval of 22% in the new poll is a more than two-fold increase from last month. In a variety of demographic groups, there are clear and consistent shifts in support away from the president. Men (66%) and women (67%), in near equal measure, disapprove of the president’s coronavirus response, which represents a double-digit increase among men since the June poll, when 54% disapproved. Even white Americans without a college degree, considered to be a core constituency of Trump’s base, are split in their approval of the president’s handling, with 50% disapproving and 49% approving, compared to 42% disapproving and 57% approving in that last poll. The newest numbers come as Trump continues to downplay the threat posed by the virus, even as confirmed cases climb. (source)
These numbers are very bad for Trump, and he knows it.
This is not really about the virus, but rather the complete chaos that has been his administration. While it is true that division and racism have benefited Trump’s campaign for a time, it seems to be yielding negative returns at this point. People don’t want racial tension or frustration- they want to live in a society that is somewhat normal, and not completely destabilized by constant tension with their neighbors because contrary to the narrative being pushed, most people are not racist, and the constant talk of racism only serves to potentially engender racism where it is not.
The biggest problem that Trump faces is in “battleground states”, which more have emerged as migration- not of “illegals”, but of white, non-hispanic American-born citizens from “Democrat strongholds” -continues throughout the country. States such as Arizona, Georgia, and North Carolina have become what Florida was two decades ago and Pennsylvania ten years ago, the latter two of which are barely in the grip of Republican control. In total there are nine states that are considered “battlegrounds” (Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wisconsin) and of which Trump has to win a majority in order to take the White House again. This does not even consider the situation in Texas, which due to the same demographic shifts is not yet, but likely will become a battleground state by the next election.
Now it is true that Trump does have advantages over Biden in that (a) he is an incumbent (they always have the advantage over a contender regardless of political race, (b) Biden is just awful because aside from his unclear platform he shows clear signs of what appears to be dementia or another form of physiological or cognitive decline, and (c) there may still be something enough left of a base in key areas to win an election under the current circumstances. Nevertheless, looking at the history of past races such as those of Bush I in 1992 and Carter in 1980, Trump is in real trouble. If he does win, it will be interesting to see how the numbers work out, because as I have noted, at this point, it may take election-year 2000 tier nonsense to ensure his victory, and knowing that Trump has already well defined his presidency by all kinds of nonsense, at this point there is nothing which is not potentially out of the question.
print


shoebat--2020-07-11--US Sets ANOTHER New COVID-19 Record With Sixty-Nine Thousand Cases

It seems that with each day the spread of COVID-19 continues to grow , with more new cases being reported .
According to ThomsonReuters , another new record was set again at sixty-nine thousand cases .
July 10 ( Reuters ) – New cases of COVID-19 rose by over 69,000 across the United States on Friday , according to a Reuters tally , setting a record for the third consecutive day as Walt Disney Co stuck to its plans to reopen its flagship theme park in hard-hit Florida .
A total of nine U.S. states – Alaska , Georgia , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Ohio , Utah and Wisconsin – also reached records for single-day infections .
In Texas , another hot zone , Governor Greg Abbott warned on Friday he may have to impose new clampdowns if the state can not stem its record-setting caseloads and hospitalizations through masks and social distancing .
“ If we don ’ t adopt this best practice it could lead to a shutdown of business , ” the Republican governor told local KLBK-TV in Lubbock , adding it was the last thing he wanted .
California announced on Friday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inmates early from prisons to slow the spread of COVID-19 inside the facilities .
At San Quentin State Prison , outside San Francisco , half of the facility ’ s roughly 3,300 prisoners have tested positive for the virus .
The Walt Disney Co said the theme parks in Orlando would open on Saturday to a limited number of guests who along with employees would be required to wear masks and undergo temperature checks .
The park also cancelled parades , firework displays and events that typically draw crowds .
Disney ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she believed the rules would allow guests to visit the park safely .
Roughly 19,000 people , including some theme park workers , have signed a petition asking Disney to delay the reopening .
The union representing 750 Walt Disney World performers has filed a grievance against the company , claiming retaliation against members over a union demand that they be tested for COVID-19 .
Other theme parks opened in Orlando in June , including Comcast Corp ’ s Universal Studios Orlando and SeaWorld Entertainment Inc ’ s SeaWorld .
Florida remains one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the nation and is among a handful of states where deaths are rising , based on a Reuters analysis of fatalities in the last two weeks , compared with the prior two weeks .
On Thursday , the state reported a record 120 deaths and added another 92 on Friday .
It recorded 11,433 new coronavirus cases on Friday , just short of the state ’ s record , and nearly 7,000 hospitalizations .
( source )

It seems that with each day the spread of COVID-19 continues to grow, with more new cases being reported. According to ThomsonReuters, another new record was set again at sixty-nine thousand cases.
July 10 (Reuters) – New cases of COVID-19 rose by over 69,000 across the United States on Friday, according to a Reuters tally, setting a record for the third consecutive day as Walt Disney Co stuck to its plans to reopen its flagship theme park in hard-hit Florida.
A total of nine U.S. states – Alaska, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Louisiana, Montana, Ohio, Utah and Wisconsin – also reached records for single-day infections.
In Texas, another hot zone, Governor Greg Abbott warned on Friday he may have to impose new clampdowns if the state cannot stem its record-setting caseloads and hospitalizations through masks and social distancing.
“If we don’t adopt this best practice it could lead to a shutdown of business,” the Republican governor told local KLBK-TV in Lubbock, adding it was the last thing he wanted.
California announced on Friday the state will release up to 8,000 inmates early from prisons to slow the spread of COVID-19 inside the facilities. At San Quentin State Prison, outside San Francisco, half of the facility’s roughly 3,300 prisoners have tested positive for the virus. The Walt Disney Co said the theme parks in Orlando would open on Saturday to a limited number of guests who along with employees would be required to wear masks and undergo temperature checks. The park also cancelled parades, firework displays and events that typically draw crowds.
Disney’s chief medical officer said earlier this week she believed the rules would allow guests to visit the park safely.
Roughly 19,000 people, including some theme park workers, have signed a petition asking Disney to delay the reopening. The union representing 750 Walt Disney World performers has filed a grievance against the company, claiming retaliation against members over a union demand that they be tested for COVID-19.
Other theme parks opened in Orlando in June, including Comcast Corp’s Universal Studios Orlando and SeaWorld Entertainment Inc’s SeaWorld.
Florida remains one of the worst hotspots for the virus in the nation and is among a handful of states where deaths are rising, based on a Reuters analysis of fatalities in the last two weeks, compared with the prior two weeks.
On Thursday, the state reported a record 120 deaths and added another 92 on Friday. It recorded 11,433 new coronavirus cases on Friday, just short of the state’s record, and nearly 7,000 hospitalizations. (source)


shoebat--2020-07-11--Local Governments Intensify COVID-19 Enforcement

The COVID-19 coronavirus has caused a split among many people , with a large number resisting the wearing of masks or social distancing .
Enforcement of it has been sporadic , inconsistent , and mixed in many cases .
However , as Bloomberg Law reports , it appears some municipalities are intending to push down harder on enforcement of said regulations .
They tried the proverbial carrot , but it wasn ’ t enough .
Now , governors and city leaders who want people to stay six feet apart , wear masks , and change their business practices to slow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the stick .
Faced with surging case numbers , defiant businesses , and quarantine-fatigued residents , some officials have increased enforcement efforts throughout the country .
A California county , for example , this week approved penalties of as much as $ 10,000 for businesses violating Covid-19 public health orders .
In Arizona , liquor licenses at one gym chain were suspended for refusing to close as the governor directed .
Michigan Gov .
Gretchen Whitmer ( D ) on Friday ordered that people who don ’ t wear a face covering @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even in parts of the state where most businesses have been allowed to reopen .
In New Mexico , Gov .
Michelle Lujan Grisham said July 1 that she wanted to enforce a mask mandate with peer pressure over punishment , but “ that isn ’ t working.
” “ So now we ’ re going to do enforcement and hold people accountable , ” Lujan Grisham ( D ) said , announcing a $ 100 fine for violators .
Washington Gov .
Jay Inslee ( D ) has focused on the moral @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up .
Along with a new order Tuesday extending mandatory masks in all indoor public places to be enforced by businesses came a new refrain : No mask , no service .
“ If people are not wearing a mask , simply don ’ t ring up the sale , ” Inslee said at a news conference .
“ This is a key to keep businesses open.
” Those who don ’ t comply can face civil penalties of up to $ 70,000 as a workplace violation .
Violating a gubernatorial proclamation carries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nearly a year in jail , Inslee Press Secretary Mike Faulk said .
Enforcement Key In Ohio , the Columbus City Council on Monday passed an ordinance adding penalties ranging from $ 25 for individuals to up to $ 1,000 for businesses for violating Mayor Andrew Ginther ’ s mask mandate .
The move contradicts Ginther ’ s ( D ) initial stance that police wouldn ’ t fine violators , though he Tweeted support for the changes .
The cities of Santa Monica and West Hollywood in California announced July 2 that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ penalties ranging from several hundred to several thousand dollars for violators .
Experts say the tougher approaches need to protect both public health and individual rights .
Still , the government ’ s ability to enforce orders during an emergency is key , said Leila Barraza , associate professor of public health at the University of Arizona .
Voluntary compliance is ideal , but states must consider hospital capacity and the virus spread when considering stronger measures , Barraza said .
Violations of closure orders without consequences can render the orders ineffective , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no enforcement , people see that , ” Barraza said .
Some fear fines and citations can do more harm than good .
Violators may not understand why they need a mask , might not own one , and could struggle to pay a penalty , said Lisa Foster , co-director of the Fines and Fees Justice Center .
“ There ’ s no evidence that fining someone $ 1,000 changes behavior , ” she added .
( source )

The COVID-19 coronavirus has caused a split among many people, with a large number resisting the wearing of masks or social distancing. Enforcement of it has been sporadic, inconsistent, and mixed in many cases. However, as Bloomberg Law reports, it appears some municipalities are intending to push down harder on enforcement of said regulations.
They tried the proverbial carrot, but it wasn’t enough. Now, governors and city leaders who want people to stay six feet apart, wear masks, and change their business practices to slow the spread of the coronavirus are turning to the stick.
Faced with surging case numbers, defiant businesses, and quarantine-fatigued residents, some officials have increased enforcement efforts throughout the country.
A California county, for example, this week approved penalties of as much as $10,000 for businesses violating Covid-19 public health orders. In Arizona, liquor licenses at one gym chain were suspended for refusing to close as the governor directed.
Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) on Friday ordered that people who don’t wear a face covering be fined up to $500, even in parts of the state where most businesses have been allowed to reopen.
In New Mexico, Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham said July 1 that she wanted to enforce a mask mandate with peer pressure over punishment, but “that isn’t working.”
“So now we’re going to do enforcement and hold people accountable,” Lujan Grisham (D) said, announcing a $100 fine for violators.
Washington Gov. Jay Inslee (D) has focused on the moral responsibility to family and community to mask up. Along with a new order Tuesday extending mandatory masks in all indoor public places to be enforced by businesses came a new refrain: No mask, no service.
“If people are not wearing a mask, simply don’t ring up the sale,” Inslee said at a news conference. “This is a key to keep businesses open.”
Those who don’t comply can face civil penalties of up to $70,000 as a workplace violation. Violating a gubernatorial proclamation carries fines of up to $5,000 and nearly a year in jail, Inslee Press Secretary Mike Faulk said.
Enforcement Key
In Ohio, the Columbus City Council on Monday passed an ordinance adding penalties ranging from $25 for individuals to up to $1,000 for businesses for violating Mayor Andrew Ginther’s mask mandate. The move contradicts Ginther’s (D) initial stance that police wouldn’t fine violators, though he Tweeted support for the changes.
The cities of Santa Monica and West Hollywood in California announced July 2 that they would strengthen mask mandates and add penalties ranging from several hundred to several thousand dollars for violators.
Experts say the tougher approaches need to protect both public health and individual rights. Still, the government’s ability to enforce orders during an emergency is key, said Leila Barraza, associate professor of public health at the University of Arizona.
Voluntary compliance is ideal, but states must consider hospital capacity and the virus spread when considering stronger measures, Barraza said. Violations of closure orders without consequences can render the orders ineffective, she said.
“If there is no enforcement, people see that,” Barraza said.
Some fear fines and citations can do more harm than good. Violators may not understand why they need a mask, might not own one, and could struggle to pay a penalty, said Lisa Foster, co-director of the Fines and Fees Justice Center.
“There’s no evidence that fining someone $1,000 changes behavior,” she added. (source)


shoebat--2020-07-13--Major Retailers Refuse To Pay Rent For Mall And Shopping Center Space

In many mall settings , there are ‘ core ’ retailers and then additional stores that set up around them .
When a ‘ core ’ retailer leaves , it can destroy an entire shopping center .
This is a major problem with COVID-19 , as due to a long-term combination of debt , income decline , and business closures due to the virus , many stores have seen sharp declines in revenue , including ‘ core ’ stores .
Nordstroms retailers , which is one of those stores , has recently announced according to Zero Hedge that because of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ telling their landlords to wait until next year before they start paying full rental income again , and only to expect half the amount for now .
Nordstrom June 3 notified landlords of its full-line and off-price Rack stores that it will pay only half the occupancy costs for the remainder of the year , according to a letter from President of Stores Jamie Nordstrom to property owners , which was obtained by Retail Dive .
A Nordstrom spokesperson didn ’ t immediately respond to Retail Dive ’ s request for more information @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the company also said it will use store comps as the basis for any “ true up rent payment , up to a full reconciliation should 2020 sales reach 90 % of sales made in that location in 2019.
” The department store said it “ will continue to maintain insurance coverage , pay utilities on which we are the account holder , and maintain your building ( s ) as required by the lease.
” Separately , Nordstrom on Wednesday confirmed that it ’ s “ realigning and reducing our workforce to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our corporate support teams.
” The layoffs are part of a 20 % reduction “ to non-occupancy related overhead expenses , ” a spokesperson told Retail Dive in an email , but declined to say how many people are affected .
Sourcing Journal last week , citing unnamed sources , said plans are to cut up to 25 % of its workforce .
Those don ’ t include layoffs at the 16 stores slated for permanent closure , according to that report .
In 2019 , the retailer employed about 68,000 full- or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a very real impact on Nordstrom , accelerating the importance of our market strategy and capabilities we ’ ve invested in for years , ” the Nordstrom spokesperson said Wednesday , noting the company ’ s recent permanent store closures and executive salary cuts .
“ Our new operating model helps us serve customers across our business as one company , while enabling us to be more agile and flexible .
We ’ ll continue to invest in critical capabilities across technology , data analytics and supply chain to deliver for our customers.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the company is flirting with litigation , warns Nick Egelanian , president of retail real estate firm SiteWorks .
Simon Property Group , Brookfield and others in recent weeks have gone to court to force rents out of their retail tenants .
Nordstrom ’ s letter was sent out en masse “ apparently with no forewarning or prior discussion , ” Egelanian said .
Along with ominous signs of the depth of Nordstrom ’ s struggles — including the pullback of its fleet and under-merchandising in some locations that Egelanian said has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ costs and stem losses at those stores — the letter was an inelegant attempt at negotiation , he said .
“ Many landlords , apparently unimpressed with the company ’ s slipshod approach to rent reduction and generally less enamored with a company once considered the gold standard in service and apparel retailing , are opposing Nordstrom ’ s action vigorously , ” he told Retail Dive in an email .
In addition to possibly heading to court with its landlords , Nordstrom “ has become the subject of wide-spread speculation that it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reorganization before the story of the pandemic is fully written.
” ( source ) This is interesting , since if major stores can not pay their bills , not only does it affect businesses , but can cause major problems for the entire real estate industry , which is something that I have discussed on Shoebat.com before , since many of the properties are leveraged with credit and a decline in rental income affects the ability of the renters to pay their mortgages , which then could push mall properties or other major @ @ @ @ @ @ @ causes backups in the courts .
Years ago , the “ Rent Is Too Damn High ” party with Jimmy McMillian made waves at the Gubernatorial debates , and while it was a masterful public act of comedy , it also illustrates a real point- the rent is too high in proportion to actual versus perceived values of property , income , assets , and real value , but because of the binding of major loans to said values at said overvalued rates , it works well when things seem to be fine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is no room for tolerance outside of the established norm , and it leads to financial problems and even bankruptcy .
The entire US economy is built on a “ house of cards ” supported by debt .
If those debts were to collapse , and they are in the process of doing that right now , then it triggers a series of defaults on all kinds of loans , of which the retail and real estate markets are highly vulnerable to shocks .
The Nordstroms situation will be interesting to watch , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ major retailers right now , and if they have more serious problems , such as especially those which would be caused by a second wave of the virus , it would mean certain disaster for many malls , shopping centers , and a lot of the real estate market .
Donate now to help support the work of this site .
When you donate , you are not donating to just any commentary group , but one that is endlessly observing the news , reading between the lines and separating hysteria and perception @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are working every day , tirelessly investigating global trends and providing data and analysis to tell you what lies for the future .
CLICK HERE TO FOLLOW OUR NEW SHOEBAT FACEBOOK PAGE

In many mall settings, there are ‘core’ retailers and then additional stores that set up around them. When a ‘core’ retailer leaves, it can destroy an entire shopping center. This is a major problem with COVID-19, as due to a long-term combination of debt, income decline, and business closures due to the virus, many stores have seen sharp declines in revenue, including ‘core’ stores. Nordstroms retailers, which is one of those stores, has recently announced according to Zero Hedge that because of the decline in income, they are telling their landlords to wait until next year before they start paying full rental income again, and only to expect half the amount for now.
Nordstrom June 3 notified landlords of its full-line and off-price Rack stores that it will pay only half the occupancy costs for the remainder of the year, according to a letter from President of Stores Jamie Nordstrom to property owners, which was obtained by Retail Dive. A Nordstrom spokesperson didn’t immediately respond to Retail Dive’s request for more information or comment. In the letter, the company also said it will use store comps as the basis for any “true up rent payment, up to a full reconciliation should 2020 sales reach 90% of sales made in that location in 2019.” The department store said it “will continue to maintain insurance coverage, pay utilities on which we are the account holder, and maintain your building(s) as required by the lease.” Separately, Nordstrom on Wednesday confirmed that it’s “realigning and reducing our workforce to support our market strategy, including in our corporate support teams.” The layoffs are part of a 20% reduction “to non-occupancy related overhead expenses,” a spokesperson told Retail Dive in an email, but declined to say how many people are affected. Sourcing Journal last week, citing unnamed sources, said plans are to cut up to 25% of its workforce. Those don’t include layoffs at the 16 stores slated for permanent closure, according to that report. In 2019, the retailer employed about 68,000 full- or part-time employees. … “COVID-19 has had a very real impact on Nordstrom, accelerating the importance of our market strategy and capabilities we’ve invested in for years,” the Nordstrom spokesperson said Wednesday, noting the company’s recent permanent store closures and executive salary cuts. “Our new operating model helps us serve customers across our business as one company, while enabling us to be more agile and flexible. We’ll continue to invest in critical capabilities across technology, data analytics and supply chain to deliver for our customers.” But with its outreach to landlords, the company is flirting with litigation, warns Nick Egelanian, president of retail real estate firm SiteWorks. Simon Property Group, Brookfield and others in recent weeks have gone to court to force rents out of their retail tenants. Nordstrom’s letter was sent out en masse “apparently with no forewarning or prior discussion,” Egelanian said. Along with ominous signs of the depth of Nordstrom’s struggles — including the pullback of its fleet and under-merchandising in some locations that Egelanian said has been part of an effort to cut costs and stem losses at those stores — the letter was an inelegant attempt at negotiation, he said. “Many landlords, apparently unimpressed with the company’s slipshod approach to rent reduction and generally less enamored with a company once considered the gold standard in service and apparel retailing, are opposing Nordstrom’s action vigorously,” he told Retail Dive in an email. In addition to possibly heading to court with its landlords, Nordstrom “has become the subject of wide-spread speculation that it could end up in Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization before the story of the pandemic is fully written.” (source)
This is interesting, since if major stores cannot pay their bills, not only does it affect businesses, but can cause major problems for the entire real estate industry, which is something that I have discussed on Shoebat.com before, since many of the properties are leveraged with credit and a decline in rental income affects the ability of the renters to pay their mortgages, which then could push mall properties or other major developments into bankruptcy, which in turn causes backups in the courts.
Years ago, the “Rent Is Too Damn High” party with Jimmy McMillian made waves at the Gubernatorial debates, and while it was a masterful public act of comedy, it also illustrates a real point- the rent is too high in proportion to actual versus perceived values of property, income, assets, and real value, but because of the binding of major loans to said values at said overvalued rates, it works well when things seem to be fine, but when problems appear, there is no room for tolerance outside of the established norm, and it leads to financial problems and even bankruptcy.
The entire US economy is built on a “house of cards” supported by debt. If those debts were to collapse, and they are in the process of doing that right now, then it triggers a series of defaults on all kinds of loans, of which the retail and real estate markets are highly vulnerable to shocks.
The Nordstroms situation will be interesting to watch, because it is representative of many other major retailers right now, and if they have more serious problems, such as especially those which would be caused by a second wave of the virus, it would mean certain disaster for many malls, shopping centers, and a lot of the real estate market.
print


shoebat--2020-07-12--Junipero Serra And The Real Hatred For The Native Americans

My thoughts on the recent church burning in California and Junipero Serra :