Mary Carmel News
There are Many reasons why Israel could have bombed Syria last week, and none of them are acceptable. Please listen below.
Mary Carmel News
There are Many reasons why Israel could have bombed Syria last week, and none of them are acceptable. Please listen below.
See original article at:
Mary Carmel News
Discussion of “The Greater Israel Project” and UN Resolution to stop Israeli Settlement
Please donate to support our research! Thank you!
By Paul Craig Roberts
As readers know, I have seen some optimism in voters support for Trump and Sanders as neither are members of the corrupt Republican and Democratic political establishments. Members of both political establishments enrich themselves by betraying the American people and serving only the interest of the One Percent. The American people are being driven into the ground purely for the sake of more mega-billions for a handful of super-rich people.
Neither political party is capable of doing anything whatsoever about it, and neither will.
The optimism that I see is that the public’s support of outsiders is an indication that the insouciant public is waking up. But Americans will have to do more than wake up, as they cannot rescue themselves via the voting booth. In my opinion, the American people will remain serfs until they wake up to Revolution.
Today Americans exist as a conquered people. They have lost the Bill of Rights, the amendments to the Constitution that protect their liberty. Anyone, other than the One Percent and their political and legal servants, can be picked up without charges and detained indefinitely as during the Dark Ages, when government was unaccountable and no one had any rights. Only those with power were safe. In America today anyone not politically protected can be declared “associated with terrorism” and taken out by a Hellfire missile from a drone on the basis of a list of human targets drawn up by the president’s advisers. Due process, guaranteed by the US Constitution, no longer exists in the United States of America. Neither does the constitutional prohibition against the government spying on citizens without just cause and a court warrant. The First Amendment itself, whose importance was emphasized by our Founding Fathers by making it the First Amendment, is no longer protected by the corrupt Supreme Court. The Nine who comprise the Supreme Court, like the rest of the bought-and-paid-for-government, serve only the One Percent. Truth-tellers have become “an enemy of the state.” Whistleblowers are imprisoned despite their legal protection in US law.
The United States government has unaccountable power. Its power is not accountable to US statutory law, to international law, to the Congress, to the judiciary, to the American people, or to moral conscience. In the 21st century the war criminal US government has murdered, maimed, and dislocated millions of people based on lies and propaganda. Washington has destroyed seven countries in whole or part in order to enrich the American elite and comply with the neoconservative drive for US world hegemony.
Americans live in a propaganda-fabricated world in which a brutal police state is cloaked in nice words like “freedom and democracy.” “Freedom and democracy” is what Washington’s war machine brings with sanctions, bombs, no-fly zones, troops, and drones to countries that dare to cling to their independence from Washington’s hegemony.
Only two countries armed with strong military capability and nuclear weapons—Russia and China—stand between Washington and Washington’s goal of hegemony over the entire world.
If Russia or China falter, the evil ensconced in Washington will rule the world. America will be the Anti-Christ. The predictions of the Christian Evangelicals preaching “end times” will take on new meaning.
Russia is vulnerable to becoming a vassal state of Washington. Despite a legion of betrayals by Washington, the Russian government has just proposed a joint US/Russia cooperation against terrorists.
One wonders if the Russian government will ever learn from experience. Has Washington cooperated with the agreement concerning Ukraine? Of course not. Has Washington cooperated in the investigation of MH-17? Of course not. Has Washington ceased its propaganda about a Russian invasion of Crimera and Ukraine? Of course not. Has Washington kept any agreement previous US governments made with Russia? Of course not.
So why does the Russian government think Washington would keep any agreement about a joint effort against terrorism?
The Russian government and the Russian people are so unaware of the danger that they face from Washington that they let foreigners control 20 percent of their media! Is Russia unaware that Washington has Russia slated for vassalage or destruction?
China is even more absurd. According to the Chinese government itself, China has 7,000
foreign-financed NGOs operating in China! Foreign financed NGOs are what Washington used to destabilize Ukraine and overthrow the elected government.
What does the Chinese government think these NGOs are doing other than destabilizing China?
Both Russia and China are infected with Western worship that creates a vulnerability that Washington can exploit. Delusions can result in inadequate response to threat.
All of Europe, both western, eastern and southern, the British Pacific such as Australia and New Zealand, Japan and other parts of Asia are vassal states of Washington’s Empire. None of these allegedly “sovereign” countries have an independent voice or an independent foreign or economic policy. All of Latin America is subject to Washington’s control. No reformist government in Latin America has ever survived Washington’s disapproval of putting the interests of the domestic populations ahead of American corporate and financial profits. Already this year
Washington has overthrown the female presidents of Argentina and Brazil. Washington is currently in the process of overthrowing the government in Venezuela, with Ecuador and Bolivia waiting in the wings. In 2009 Killary Clinton and Obama overthrew the government of Honduras, an old Washington habit.
As Washington pays the UN’s bills, the UN is compliant. No hand is ever raised against Washington. So why does anyone on the face of the earth think that an American election can change anything or mean anything?
We know that Killary is a liar, a crook, an agent for the One Percent, and a warmonger. Let’s now look at Trump.
Are there grounds for optimism about Trump? In the West “news reporting” is propaganda, so it is difficult to know. Moreover, we do know that, at least initially, the response of the Republican Establishment to Trump is to demonize him, so we do not know the veracity of the news reports about Trump.
Without belaboring the issue, two news reports struck me. One is the Washington Post report that the Zionist multi-billionaire US casino owner Sheldon Adelson has endorsed Donald Trump for President. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/sheldon-adelson-i-endorse-donald-trump-for-president/2016/05/12/ea89d7f0-17a0-11e6-aa55-670cabef46e0_story.html
Other reports say that Adelson has mentioned as much as $100 million as his political campaign contribution to Trump.
Anyone who gives a political campaign $100 million dollars expect something in exchange, and the recipient is obligated to provide whatever is desired. So are we witnessing the purchase of Donald Trump? The initial Republican response to Trump, encouraged by the crazed neoconservatives, was to abandon the Republican candidate and to vote for Killary.
Is Adelson’s endorsement a signal that Trump can be bought and brought into the establishment?
Additional evidence that Trump has sold out his naive supporters is his latest statement that Wall Street should be deregulated: https://ourfuture.org/20160519/populist-trump-wants-to-deregulate-wall-street
It is extraordinary that Trump’s advisers have not told him that Wall Street was deregulated back in the 20th century during the Clinton regime. The repeal of Glass-Steagall deregulated Wall Street. One source of the 2008 financial crisis is the deregulated derivative market. When Brooksley Born attempted to fulfill the responsibility of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and regulate over-the-counter derivatives, she was blocked by the Federal Reserve, the US Treasury, the SEC, and the US Congress.
Nothing has been done to correct the massive mistake of financial deregulation. The Dodd-Frank legislation did not correct the massive financial concentration that produced banks too big to fail, and the legislation did not stop Wall Street’s reckless casino gambling with the US economy. Yet Trump says he will dismantle even the weak Dodd-Frank restrictions.
The American print and TV media are so corrupt that these reports could be false stories, the purpose of which is to demoralize Trump’s supporters. On the other hand, should we be surprised if a billionaire aligns with the One Percent?
Elections are an unlikely means of restoring government that is accountable to the people rather than to the One Percent. Even if Trump is legitimate, he does not have the experience in foreign and economic affairs to know who to appoint to his government in order to implement change. Moreover, even if he knew, unless Trump candidates also replace the Senate, Trump could not get his choices confirmed by a Senate accountable only to the One Percent.
Americans are a conquered people. We see this in the appeal from RootsAction to the rest of the world to come to the aid of the American people. Unable to stop the lawlessness of their own “democratic” government, Americans plea for help from abroad: http://act.rootsaction.org/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=12247
The plea from RootsAction indicates that committed activists now acknowledge that change in America cannot be produced by elections or be achieved internally through peaceful means.
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. Roberts’ latest books are The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West, How America Was Lost, and The Neoconservative Threat to World Order.
See featured article at:
US General claims Russia and Syria are “weaponizing” migration to destabilize the continent
I have a very uneasy feeling that the US President is about to set off a chain of events that will literally blow up the Middle East. Earlier I’ve detailed the very careful steps, seductions and actions of key players of the Obama Administration, from the President himself to Secretary of State John Kerry to CIA director, John Owen Brennan, to Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman, General Joseph “Fightin’ Joe” Francis Dunford, Jr., Washington dirty tricks specialist and now UN Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs Jeffrey D. Feltman, and numerous others not in the spotlight. Their reactions to the provocative actions of Turkish Sultan-in-waiting, now mere Turkish President, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, as well as to Saudi Arabian King-in-waiting, Defense Minister Prince Mohammed Salman, in the months since the surprise Russian entry into the Syria war on the side of legitimately-elected President Bashar al-Assad, are clearly not result of a bumbling Washington policy disorder. Washington has set a huge, deadly trap for the delusional Saudi monarchy’s Prince Salman and his bosom buddy, Erdoğan. Now it looks like they are about to spring their trap.
First it’s useful to look a bit more closely into the UN-sponsored Geneva III “peace talks” which began the first week of February. The talks, despite Russian and Syrian efforts, have been a farce from the onset. The key UN point-person guiding the Geneva sabotage agenda is UN Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs Jeffrey D. Feltman.
Feltman is a US State Department dirty tricks specialist who was Ambassador to Lebanon at the time of the 2005 Harari assassination. Before that Feltman served in Iraq in the aftermath of the US military invasion. Even earlier, he was posted to Yugoslavia, in the early 1980’s to play a role in Washington’s dismemberment of that country. His résumé suggests that he is a Washington specialist in their very-loved and very-often-practiced art of national dismemberment. Destruction of the Bashar al Assad regime is his current obsession. Not exactly a neutral peace mediator.
Indeed, in 2008, Feltman authored a secret plan with former Saudi Ambassador to Washington, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, nicknamed “Bandar Bush” by George W. Bush for his intimate ties to the Bush family. That Feltman-Bandar Plan was revealed in internal documents hacked in 2011 from the thousands of files of STRATFOR, the murky US “strategic intelligence” consultancy to the Department of Defense and military industry.
That Feltman Plan, financed by a reported $2 billion from Bandar’s Saudi piggy bank, describes in detail what has ensued since Washington, under then-Secretary of State Hillary R. Clinton, launched war in Syria in March 2011, after destroying Qaddafi’s Libya. The Feltman-Bandar plan “strategically” depended on the exploitation of peoples’ legitimate desire for freedom, dignity and getting rid of corruption by turning these wishes into a revolt against Assad.
The Feltman-Bandar plan called for dividing Syria into different ethnic groups–Alawite, Sunni, Shi’ite, Kurd, Christian, and dividing the country into three areas: big cities, small cities and villages. Then the USA and Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and selected allies would begin covert training and recruiting of five levels or networks of actors, controlled by the CIA and Saudi intelligence, which Bandar later headed, to execute the destruction or national dismemberment of Syria. The plan outlined the five networks they would manipulate:
1- The “Fuel”: educated and unemployed youths who are to be linked in a decentralized way.
2- The “Thugs”: outlaws and criminals from remote areas, preferably non-Syrians.
3- The “Ethnic-Sectarians”: young people with limited education representing ethnic communities that support or oppose the president. They must be under the age of 22.
4- The “Media”: some leaders of civil society institutions which have European funding not American, to conceal US role.
5- The “Capital”: traders, company owners, banks and commercial centers in Damascus, Aleppo and Homs only.
The aim of that 2008 Feltman-Bandar “plan” according to knowledgeable sources was to bring Syria back to the “stone age.” It called for each sect the Saudis and CIA recruited “to commit horrible bloody massacres against violators. These crimes must be filmed and posted to the media as soon aspossible.” If we view the countless photos of Syrian cities, villages and towns today, that is pretty much what has been accomplished in now almost five years of war.
And now, as UN Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs, Jeffrey Feltman cannot be expected, like the proverbial leopard, to have changed his spots. In fact the UN Under-Secretary-General at the Geneva III talks can be expected to skillfuly sabotage any positive outcome in terms of an enduring ceasefire in Syria that might prepare the way for peaceful national elections free of Saudi or Turkish or Qatari malfeasance.
Blaming the Russians and Assad
In Geneva, the Saudi-backed “opposition”, the pompous-sounding High Negotiations Committee (HNC), whose members were hand-picked by the Saudi monarchy as Sunni tribal Saudi loyalists, referred to in the media as “the most important opposition alliance,” has done nothing but disrupt, insisting that no Geneva talks can go forward unless the UN end the “crimes” of the Syrian government as a condition for their participation.
Finally, on February 2, the hand-picked Saudi HNC delegation to Geneva pulled out of the talks, de facto collapsing the entire effort. Their justification was a lie. They claimed as reason for walking out the continued Russian support bombing in Syria to liberate Aleppo and other terrorist-beseiged towns, blaming Russia and Assad for violation of “international law.” They didn’t specify which law they had in mind.
Specifically, High Negotiations Committee spokesperson,Farah al-Atassi, charged, quite falsely, that an ongoing Syrian-Russian offensive against DAESH or IS and the terrorist Al Qaeda Syria group called Al Nusra Front was the group’s reason for declining the meeting: “Our objective is to ensure the immediate implementation if paragraphs 12 and 13 of UN Security Council resolution 2254 before the start of any negotiation. It’s clear from the current situation that the regime and its allies — in particular Russia — are determined to reject the UN’s efforts to implement international law.”
Paragraph 12 of that December 2015 UN Security Council Resolution is excerpted here: “12. Calls on the parties to immediately allow humanitarian agencies rapid, safe and unhindered access throughout Syria by most direct routes, allow immediate, humanitarian assistance to reach all people in need, in particular in all besieged and hard-to-reachareas…” That humanitarian relief effort with emergency food and medical airdrops by the Syrian Air Force has been constantly sabotaged by precisely DAESH and Al Nusra and other Saudi-tied terror groups.
Moreover, Paragraph 13 does not say anything about a full ceasefire BEFORE Geneva talks can even begin. Paragraph 13 is excerpted here: “13. Demands that all parties immediately cease any attacks against civilians and civilian objects as such, including attacks against medical facilities and personnel, and any indiscriminate use of weapons, including through shelling and aerial bombardment,welcomes the commitment by the ISSG to press the parties in this regard, andfurther demands that all parties immediately comply with their obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law asapplicable.”
Now, with perfect orchestration by Washington, their UN man, Feltman, Prince Salman and Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey, the fuse is about to be lit on what is shaping up to be one of the most dramatic instances of “national dismemberment” since 1939.
Only, while the only-too-clever Prince Salman and Erdogan are convinced, by all the soft, subtle encouragement from John Kerry, from Joe Biden and those in Washington that they have a green light to invade and take over the rich oil and gas fields of Syria and of Turkey’s next-door neighbor Iraq and its huge Mosul oil riches, in fact they are about to fall into a horrendous trap.
That trap will likely see the map of the entire Middle East redrawn fundamentally for the first time since the secret British-French (and Russian until the Bolshevik seizure of power in 1917) Sykes-Picot Plan. As in 1916, it will not be Riyadh or Ankara’s cartographers and geographers drawing the new boundaries. It will by Anglo-American ones, at least that is the game plan. It seems we Americans these days can only organize wars. We used to make quality cars, steel, machine tools to build our industry.
F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
See featured article at:
“The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al-Qaeda, and any informed intelligence officer knows this. But, there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an intensified entity representing the ‘devil’ only in order to drive TV watchers to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the United States.” – Former British Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook
Since the deadliest terrorist attack in Asia on October 12th, 2002 at two Bali resortnightclubs killed 202 people targeting mostly Western tourists (88 Australians and seven Americans died) followed three years later by the October 2005 Bali suicide bombings killing 23 more innocent victims at three restaurants, Indonesia has largely managed to avoid major deadly outbreaks of terrorism on its own soil. The 19th largest geographical nation in the world comprised of more than 17,000 archipelago islands in Southeast Asia contains the planet’s fourth largest population of over a quarter billion people behind only China, India and the United States. Its current fast rising census to date is 265,278,532. With 86% of its residents identifying themselves as Muslim, Indonesia is the home of more Muslims than any other nation on earth.
More than 500 known Indonesian citizens have fought as Islamic State jihadists in Iraq and Syria. In the face of growing terrorism around the world where typically Islamic extremists are the purported suspects, Indonesia’s national government has received international praise for its diligent efforts over the years to combat terrorism. This latest terrorist attack follows on the two-day heels of yet another ISIS terrorist act in Istanbul.
The relative calm in recent years was suddenly broken late Thursday morning when terrorist attacks in multiple locations rocked the capital city Jakarta where more than ten million Indonesians reside, marking the worst act of terrorism in Jakarta since the July 2009 bombings that killed seven people and injured fifty inside the two Western chain hotel lobbies of the Ritz Carlton and Marriot Hotels. But on Thursday the dreaded inevitability of yet more Islamic State terrorists shattered the peace carrying out a number of grenade explosions and gunfire in several locations within a busy Jakarta district.
National police spokesman General Anton Charilyan stated the overwhelming likelihood that the suspects were ISIS militants based on the simultaneously coordinated blasts being similar to last November’s Friday the 13th attacks in Paris. He also alluded to Islamic State’s warning in late November that “there will be a concert” in Indonesia foreshadowing more ISIS attacks to come. Additionally, in December multiple Indonesian arrests were made thwarting terrorist plots two of which involved ISIS planned for the New Year’s festivities. In all 150,000 soldiers and police were on duty during the new year holiday guarding churches, airports and other public places, 9000 in Bali alone.
The Telegraph stated that a suicide bomber exploded his device at a Starbucks café in Central Jakarta shattering glass and injuring customers. This particular area of the city includes many Western chain businesses surrounded by downtown office buildings. Another blast took place outside a movie theater shopping mall. Indonesia’s Istana Negara presidential palace is but one mile down the road from where the explosions occurred with the US Embassy also nearby. There was also gunfire reported in a number of locations between the suspects and police quickly converging on the scene. It was eventually determined that five separate blasts struck busy downtown central Jakarta Thursday morning. The city was on immediate lockdown for the next several hours. An hour and a half after the first bomb went off, gunfire in the area could still be heard.
Islamic State jihadists believed responsible for today’s series of attacks made recent threats through social media to expand its worldwide terrorism campaign to include not only the usual soft target civilian population often aimed at popular Western tourist locations but also targeting airports and specifically security forces. Not surprisingly then, today’s initial blast reported by CNN took place at a police outpost where one police officer is said to have died. CNN earlier released information that the one police officer, five civilians and at least four terrorists were confirmed dead in the brazen attacks but that was subsequently changed as more information came in.
When it was all said and done, Jakarta police claimed that all five attackers were killed by antiterrorism police, two being suicide bombers and three gunmen. The police also maintain that the only other dead in the attacks were one Dutch citizen and one Indonesian citizen with an additional ten others injured (though CNN states 19 were wounded). Jakarta police spokesperson Col. Muhammad Iqbalconcluded, “We believe there are no more attackers around Sarinah. We have taken control.” Despite Iqbal’s confident claim designed to quell public concern, various media outlets report that it’s still unclear if any further suspects remain at large.
What is most important in this very early aftermath is that virtually every act of terrorism committed in modern history is state sponsored by the Western intelligence community. It’s worth mentioning that the reign of terror in Indonesia brought on by the 1965 coup that overthrew then President Sukarno leading to the murderous ethnic cleansing over a half million Indonesians was the result of the CIA and America’s state sponsored terrorism. So the far bigger picture and pattern to understand here is the Hegelian do-loop of the state created crises, deep state’s reaction framed as the proposed solution that then promotes further draconian tyrannical control under the false pretense of national security and counterterrorism.
Though the actual people pulling the triggers in these terror acts may be Islamic extremists, in every case there are invisible imperialistic government forces from the West that are pulling the strings from behind the scenes, most often CIA handlers who coordinate state sponsored covert operations working directly with the alleged terrorist patsies, financing, arming and training them. Former career military intelligence and CIA officer and whistleblower Robert David Steele said:
Most terrorists are false flag terrorists, or are created by our own security services. In the United States, every single terrorist incident we have had has been a false flag, or has been an informant pushed on by the FBI. In fact, we now have citizens taking out restraining orders against FBI informants that are trying to incite terrorism. We’ve become a lunatic asylum.
Though Thursday’s terrorism in Jakarta right now is too fresh to broadcast any overtly emerging anomalies that invariably surface soon after such events, if it’s like every other major act of terrorismthis century, it will not be long before they do. The global pattern of terrorist attacks particularly in recent years maintains a constant thread of continuity that smacks of New World Disorder’s increasing reign of terror designed only to further consolidate and centralize the ruling elite’s power and control over every corner of the globe to in turn further enslave the entire human population.
Joachim Hagopian is a West Point graduate and former US Army officer. He has written a manuscript based on his unique military experience entitled “Don’t Let The Bastards Getcha Down.” It examines and focuses on US international relations, leadership and national security issues. After the military, Joachim earned a master’s degree in Clinical Psychology and worked as a licensed therapist in the mental health field with abused youth and adolescents for more than a quarter century. In recent years he has focused on his writing, becoming an alternative media journalist. His blog site is athttp://empireexposed.blogspot.co.id/
The original source of this article is Global Research
Copyright © Joachim Hagopian, Global Research, 2016
See featured article at:
A Jewish Defector Warns America:
Benjamin Freedman Speaks on Zionism
This should do it! For the second and last time we are updating the transcript of Ben Freedman’s 1961 speech at the Willard Hotel.
The piece has been posted for over a
year now. A few months ago, a person challenged the authenticity of the transcript, because his version stated that Samuel Untermeyer had used the Columbia Broadcasting studios when he declared a worldwide boycott against Germany — in his words: ‘A Holy War’. We could not debate the issue, having never heard the actual recording of Mr. Freedman’s speech. Today, I discovered that we have a cassette tape of the speech, so I listened to the entire tape while reading the posted transcript. According to Mr. Freedman the radio station used by Untermeyer was, in fact, ABC.
There had also been some simple rearrangements of sentence structure in that transcript, and a line or two omitted in places. For the sake of authenticity, the corrections have been made. The transcript is now word for word from Mr. Freedman’s speech.
The original transcriber had ‘tidied up’ Mr. Freedman’s responses during the Q&A period, omitting superfluous and repetitious words. For the most part, we’ve left the tidied up version as it was, since it didn’t change the response, and actually helped to clarify Mr. Freedman’s answers. If the names were changed, he could have been making that speech yesterday. — Jackie — April 8, 2003
Here is our first update notice, about a year ago:
The original posting of this speech was taken from an existing web site. In going through our files we recently discovered a full transcript of the speech and realized the original posting was not complete. Here is the transcript from our files, with additional text at the beginning – some within the body of the speech – and a question and answer section at the end that had not been included in the original posting. There will be further postings from other writers and quotes that will confirm much of what Mr. Freedman said here. Many of you will see the truth of it, as it stands. — Jackie —
The Truth will stand on its own merit
A Jewish Defector Warns America:
Benjamin Freedman Speaks
by Benjamin H. Freedman
Introductory Note — Benjamin H. Freedman was one of the most intriguing and amazing individuals of the 20th century.
Mr. Freedman, born in 1890, was a successful Jewish businessman of New York City who was at one time the principal owner of the Woodbury Soap Company. He broke with organized Jewry after the Judeo-Communist victory of 1945, and spent the remainder of his life and the great preponderance of his considerable fortune, at least 2.5 million dollars, exposing the Jewish tyranny which has enveloped the United States.
Mr. Freedman knew what he was talking about because he had been an insider at the highest levels of Jewish organizations and Jewish machinations to gain power over our nation. Mr. Freedman was personally acquainted with Bernard Baruch, Samuel Untermyer, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Joseph Kennedy, and John F. Kennedy, and many more movers and shakers of our times.
This speech was given before a patriotic audience in 1961 at the Willard Hotel in Washington, D.C., on behalf of Conde McGinley’s patriotic newspaper of that time, Common Sense. Though in some minor ways this wide-ranging and extemporaneous speech has become dated, Mr. Freedman’s essential message to us — his warning to the West — is more urgent than ever before. — K.A.S. —
A CHRISTIAN VIEW OF THE HOLOCAUST
Ladies and gentlemen, you are about to hear a very frightening speech. This speech is an explanation of the plans now being laid to throw the United States into a third world war. It was made a short time ago before a large group in the Congressional `Room of the Willard Hotel in Washington, D.C. Both the speech and the question and answer period later so electrified the audience that a group of patriots has transferred it to two long-playing records which you may buy to play for friends, clubs, and your church group in your community. The speaker is Mr. Benjamin Freedman, noted authority on Zionism and all of its schemes. Mr. Freedman is a former Jew, and I mean a FORMER Jew. He has fought the Communist world conspiracy tooth and nail, and stands today as a leading American patriot. We now take you to the speaker’s platform to present Benjamin Freedman.
What I intend to tell you tonight is something that you have never been able to learn from any other source, and what I tell you now concerns not only you, but your children and the survival of this country and Christianity. I’m not here just to dish up a few facts to send up your blood pressure, but I’m here to tell you things that will help you preserve what you consider the most sacred things in the world: the liberty, and the freedom, and the right to live as Christians, where you have a little dignity, and a little right to pursue the things that your conscience tells you are the right things, as Christians.
Now, first of all, I’d like to tell you that on August 25th 1960 — that was shortly before elections — Senator Kennedy, who is now the President of the United States, went to New York, and delivered an address to the Zionist Organization of America. In that address, to reduce it to its briefest form, he stated that he would use the armed forces of the United States to preserve the existence of the regime set up in Palestine by the Zionists who are now in occupation of that area.
In other words, Christian boys are going to be yanked out of their homes, away from their families, and sent abroad to fight in Palestine against the Christian and Moslem Arabs who merely want to return to their homes. And these Christian boys are going to be asked to shoot to kill these innocent [Arab Palestinians] people who only want to follow out fifteen resolutions passed by the United Nations in the last twelve years calling upon the Zionists to allow these people to return to their homes.
Now, when United States troops appear in the Middle East to fight with the Zionists as their allies to prevent the return of these people who were evicted from their homes in the 1948 armed insurrection by the Zionists who were transplanted there from Eastern Europe… when that happens, the United States will trigger World War III.
You say, when will that take place? The answer is, as soon as the difficulty between France and Algeria has been settled, that will take place. As soon as France and Algeria have been settled, that will take place. As soon as France and Algeria have settled their difficulty, and the Arab world, or the Moslem world, has no more war on their hands with France, they are going to move these people back into their homes, and when they do that and President kennedy sends your sons to fight over there to help the crooks hold on to what they stole from innocent men, women and children, we will trigger World War III; and when that starts you can be sure we cannot emerge from that war a victor. We are going to lose that war because there is not one nation in the world that will let one of their sons fight with us for such a cause.
I know and speak to these ambassadors in Washington and the United Nations — and of the ninety-nine nations there, I’ve consulted with maybe seventy of them — and when we go to war in Palestine to help the thieves retain possession of what they have stolen from these innocent people we’re not going to have a man there to fight with us as our ally.
And who will these people have supporting them, you ask. Well, four days after President Kennedy — or he was then Senator Kennedy — made that statement on August 28, 1960, the Arab nations called a meeting in Lebanon and there they decided to resurrect, or reactivate, the government of Palestine, which has been dormant more or less, since the 1948 armed insurrection by the Zionists.
Not only that… they ordered the creation of the Palestine Army, and they are now drilling maybe a half a million soldiers in that area of the world to lead these people back to their homeland. With them, they have as their allies all the nations of what is termed the Bandung Conference Group. That includes the Soviet Union and every Soviet Union satellite. It includes Red China; it includes every independent country in Asia and Africa; or eighty percent of the world’s total population. Eighty percent of the world’s population. Four out of five human beings on the face of the earth will be our enemies at war with us. And not alone are they four out of five human beings now on the face of this earth, but they are the non-Christian population of the world and they are the non-Caucasians… the non-white nations of the world, and that’s what we face.
And what is the reason? The reason is that here in the United States, the Zionists and their co-religionists have complete control of our government. For many reasons too many and too complex to go into here at this — time I’ll be glad to answer questions, however, to support that statement — the Zionists and their co-religionists rule this United States as though they were the absolute monarchs of this country.
Now, you say, ‘well, that’s a very broad statement to make’, but let me show what happened while you were — I don’t want to wear that out — let me show what happened while WE were all asleep. I’m including myself with you. We were all asleep. What happened?
World War I broke out in the summer of 1914. Nineteen-hundred and fourteen was the year in which World War One broke out. There are few people here my age who remember that. Now that war was waged on one side by Great Britain, France, and Russia; and on the other side by Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey. What happened?
Within two years Germany had won that war: not alone won it nominally, but won it actually. The German submarines, which were a surprise to the world, had swept all the convoys from the Atlantic Ocean, and Great Britain stood there without ammunition for her soldiers, stood there with one week’s food supply facing her — and after that, starvation.
At that time, the French army had mutinied. They lost 600,000 of the flower of French youth in the defense of Verdun on the Somme. The Russian army was defecting. They were picking up their toys and going home, they didn’t want to play war anymore, they didn’t like the Czar. And the Italian army had collapsed.
Now Germany — not a shot had been fired on the German soil. Not an enemy soldier had crossed the border into Germany. And yet, here was Germany offering England peace terms. They offered England a negotiated peace on what the lawyers call a status quo ante basis. That means: “Let’s call the war off, and let everything be as it was before the war started.”
Well, England, in the summer of 1916 was considering that. Seriously! They had no choice. It was either accepting this negotiated peace that Germany was magnanimously offering them, or going on with the war and being totally defeated.
While that was going on, the Zionists in Germany, who represented the Zionists from Eastern Europe, went to the British War Cabinet and — I am going to be brief because this is a long story, but I have all the documents to prove any statement that I make if anyone here is curious, or doesn’t believe what I’m saying is at all possible — the Zionists in London went to the British war cabinet and they said: “Look here. You can yet win this war. You don’t have to give up. You don’t have to accept the negotiated peace offered to you now by Germany. You can win this war if the United States will come in as your ally.”
The United States was not in the war at that time. We were fresh; we were young; we were rich; we were powerful. They [Zionists] told England: “We will guarantee to bring the United States into the war as your ally, to fight with you on your side, if you will promise us Palestine after you win the war.”
In other words, they made this deal: “We will get the United States into this war as your ally. The price you must pay us is Palestine after you have won the war and defeated Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey.”
Now England had as much right to promise Palestine to anybody, as the United States would have to promise Japan to Ireland for any reason whatsoever. It’s absolutely absurd that Great Britain — that never had any connection or any interest or any right in what is known as Palestine — should offer it as coin of the realm to pay the Zionists for bringing the United States into the war.
However, they made that promise, in October of 1916. October, nineteen hundred and sixteen. And shortly after that — I don’t know how many here remember it — the United States, which was almost totally pro-German — totally pro-German — because the newspapers here were controlled by Jews, the bankers were Jews, all the media of mass communications in this country were controlled by Jews, and they were pro-German because their people, in the majority of cases came from Germany, and they wanted to see Germany lick the Czar.
The Jews didn’t like the Czar, and they didn’t want Russia to win this war. So the German bankers — the German-Jews — Kuhn Loeb and the other big banking firms in the United States refused to finance France or England to the extent of one dollar. They stood aside and they said: “As long as France and England are tied up with Russia, not one cent!” But they poured money into Germany, they fought with Germany against Russia, trying to lick the Czarist regime.
Now those same Jews, when they saw the possibility of getting Palestine, they went to England and they made this deal. At that time, everything changed, like the traffic light that changes from red to green. Where the newspapers had been all pro-German, where they’d been telling the people of the difficulties that Germany was having fighting Great Britain commercially and in other respects, all of a sudden the Germans were no good. They were villains. They were Huns. They were shooting Red Cross nurses. They were cutting off babies’ hands. And they were no good.
Well, shortly after that, Mr. Wilson declared war on Germany.
The Zionists in London sent these cables to the United States, to Justice Brandeis: “Go to work on President Wilson. We’re getting from England what we want. Now you go to work, and you go to work on President Wilson and get the United States into the war.” And that did happen. That’s how the United States got into the war. We had no more interest in it; we had no more right to be in it than we have to be on the moon tonight instead of in this room.
Now the war — World War One — in which the United States participated had absolutely no reason to be our war. We went in there — we were railroaded into it — if I can be vulgar, we were suckered into — that war merely so that the Zionists of the world could obtain Palestine. Now, that is something that the people in the United States have never been told. They never knew why we went into World War One. Now, what happened?
After we got into the war, the Zionists went to Great Britain and they said: “Well, we performed our part of the agreement. Let’s have something in writing that shows that you are going to keep your bargain and give us Palestine after you win the war.” Because they didn’t know whether the war would last another year or another ten years. So they started to work out a receipt. The receipt took the form of a letter, and it was worded in very cryptic language so that the world at large wouldn’t know what it was all about. And that was called the Balfour Declaration.
The Balfour Declaration was merely Great Britain’s promise to pay the Zionists what they had agreed upon as a consideration for getting the United States into the war. So this great Balfour Declaration, that you hear so much about, is just as phony as a three dollar bill. And I don’t think I could make it more emphatic than that.
Now, that is where all the trouble started. The United States went in the war. The United States crushed Germany. We went in there, and it’s history. You know what happened. Now, when the war was ended, and the Germans went to Paris, to the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, there were 117 Jews there, as a delegation representing the Jews, headed by Bernard Baruch. I was there: I ought to know. Now what happened?
The Jews at that peace conference, when they were cutting up Germany and parceling out Europe to all these nations that claimed a right to a certain part of European territory, the Jews said, “How about Palestine for us?” And they produced, for the first time to the knowledge of the Germans, this Balfour Declaration. So the Germans, for the first time realized, “Oh, that was the game! That’s why the United States came into the war.” And the Germans for the first time realized that they were defeated, they suffered this terrific reparation that was slapped onto them, because the Zionists wanted Palestine and they were determined to get it at any cost.
Now, that brings us to another very interesting point. When the Germans realized this, they naturally resented it. Up to that time, the Jews had never been better off in any country in the world than they had been in Germany.
You had Mr. Rathenau there, who was maybe 100 times as important in industry and finance as is Bernard Baruch in this country. You had Mr. Balin, who owned the two big steamship lines, the North German Lloyd’s and the Hamburg-American Lines. You had Mr. Bleichroder, who was the banker for the Hohenzollern family. You had the Warburgs in Hamburg, who were the big merchant bankers — the biggest in the world. The Jews were doing very well in Germany. No question about that. Now, the Germans felt: “Well, that was quite a sellout.”
It was a sellout that I can best compare — suppose the United States was at war today with the Soviet Union. And we were winning. And we told the Soviet Union: “Well, let’s quit. We offer you peace terms. Let’s forget the whole thing.” And all of a sudden Red China came into the war as an ally of the Soviet Union. And throwing them into the war brought about our defeat. A crushing defeat, with reparations the likes of which man’s imagination cannot encompass.
Imagine, then, after that defeat, if we found out that it was the Chinese in this country, our Chinese citizens, who all the time we thought they were loyal citizens working with us, were selling us out to the Soviet Union and that it was through them that Red China was brought into the war against us. How would we feel, in the United States against Chinese? I don’t think that one of them would dare show his face on any street. There wouldn’t be lampposts enough, convenient, to take care of them. Imagine how we would feel.
Well, that’s how the Germans felt towards these Jews. “We’ve been so nice to them”; and from 1905 on, when the first Communist revolution in Russia failed, and the Jews had to scramble out of Russia, they all went to Germany. And Germany gave them refuge. And they were treated very nicely. And here they sold Germany down the river for no reason at all other than they wanted Palestine as a so-called “Jewish commonwealth.”
Now, Nahum Sokolow — all the great leaders, the big names that you read about in connection with Zionism today — they, in 1919, 1920, ’21, ’22, and ’23, they wrote in all their papers — and the press was filled with their statements — that “the feeling against the Jews in Germany is due to the fact that they realized that this great defeat was brought about by our intercession and bringing the United States into the war against them.”
The Jews themselves admitted that. It wasn’t that the Germans in 1919 discovered that a glass of Jewish blood tasted better than Coca-Cola or Muenschner Beer. There was no religious feeling. There was no sentiment against those people merely on account of their religious belief. It was all political. It was economic. It was anything but religious.
Nobody cared in Germany whether a Jew went home and pulled down the shades and said “Shema’ Yisrael” or “Our Father.” No one cared in Germany any more than they do in the United States. Now this feeling that developed later in Germany was due to one thing: that the Germans held the Jews responsible for their crushing defeat, for no reason at all, because World War One was started against Germany for no reason for which they [Germans] were responsible. They were guilty of nothing. Only of being successful. They built up a big navy. They built up world trade.
You must remember, Germany, at the time of Napoleon, at the time of the French Revolution, what was the German Reich consisted of 300 — three hundred! — small city-states, principalities, dukedoms, and so forth. Three hundred little separate political entities. And between that time, between the period of. . . between Napoleon and Bismarck, they were consolidated into one state. And within 50 years after that time they became one of the world’s great powers. Their navy was rivalling Great Britain’s, they were doing business all over the world, they could undersell anybody and make better products. And what happened? What happened as a result of that?
There was a conspiracy between England, France, and Russia that: “We must slap down Germany”, because there isn’t one historian in the world that can find a valid reason why those three countries decided to wipe Germany off the map politically. Now, what happened after that?
When Germany realized that the Jews were responsible for her defeat, they naturally resented it. But not a hair on the head of any Jew was harmed. Not a single hair. Professor Tansill, of Georgetown University, who had access to all the secret papers of the State Department, wrote in his book, and quoted from a State Department document written by Hugo Schoenfelt, a Jew who Cordell Hull sent to Europe in 1933 to investigate the so-called camps of political prisoners. And he wrote back that he found them in very fine condition.
They were in excellent shape; everybody treated well. And they were filled with Communists. Well, a lot of them were Jews, because the Jews happened to be maybe 98 per cent of the Communists in Europe at that time. And there were some priests there, and ministers, and labor leaders, Masons, and others who had international affiliations.
Now, the Jews sort of tried to keep the lid on this fact. They didn’t want the world to really understand that they had sold out Germany, and that the Germans resented that.
So they did take appropriate action against them [against the Jews]. They. . . shall I say, discriminated against them wherever they could? They shunned them. The same as we would the Chinese, or the Negroes, or the Catholics, or anyone in this country who had sold us out to an enemy and brought about our defeat.
Now, after a while, the Jews of the world didn’t know what to do, so they called a meeting in Amsterdam. Jews from every country in the world attended in July 1933. And they said to Germany: “You fire Hitler! And you put every Jew back into his former position, whether he was a Communist, no matter what he was. You can’t treat us that way! And we, the Jews of the world, are calling upon you, and serving this ultimatum upon you.” Well, the Germans told them. . . you can imagine. So what did they [the Jews] do?
They broke up, and Samuel Untermyer, if the name means anything to people here. . . (You want to ask a question? — Uh, there were no Communists in Germany at that time. they were called ‘Social Democrats.)
Well, I don’t want to go by what they were called. We’re now using English words, and what they were called in Germany is not very material. . . but they were Communists, because in 1917, the Communists took over Germany for a few days. Rosa Luxembourg and Karl Liebknecht, and a group of Jews in Germany took over the government for three days. In fact, when the Kaiser ended the war, he fled to Holland because he thought the Communists were going to take over Germany as they did Russia, and that he was going to meet the same fate that the Czar did in Russia. So he left and went to Holland for safety and for security.
Now, at that time, when the Communist threat in Germany was quashed, it was quiet, the Jews were working, still trying to get back into their former — their status — and the Germans fought them in every way they could, without hurting a hair on anyone’s head. The same as one group, the Prohibitionists, fought the people who were interested in liquor, and they didn’t fight one another with pistols, they did it every way they could.
Well, that’s the way they were fighting the Jews in Germany. And, at that time, mind you, there were 80 to 90 million Germans and there were only 460,000 Jews. . . less than one half of one percent of Germany were Jews. And yet, they controlled all of the press, they controlled most of the economy, because they had come in and with cheap money — you know the way the Mark was devalued — they bought up practically everything.
Well, in 1933 when Germany refused to surrender, mind you, to the World Conference of Jews in Amsterdam, they broke up and Mr. Untermeyer came back to the United States — who was the head of the American delegation and the president of the whole conference — and he went from the steamer to ABC and made a radio broadcast throughout the United States in which he said:
“The Jews of the world now declare a Holy War against Germany. We are now engaged in a sacred conflict against the Germans. And we are going to starve them into surrender. We are going to use a world-wide boycott against them, that will destroy them because they are dependent upon their export business.”
And it is a fact that two thirds of Germany’s food supply had to be imported, and it could only be imported with the proceeds of what they exported. Their labor. So if Germany could not export, two thirds of Germany’s population would have to starve. There just was not enough food for more than one third of the population.
Now in this declaration, which I have here, it was printed on page — a whole page — in the New York Times on August 7, 1933, Mr. Samuel Untermyer boldly stated that: “this economic boycott is our means of self-defense. President Roosevelt has advocated its use in the NRA” . [National Recovery Administration] — which some of you may remember, where everybody was to be boycotted unless they followed the rules laid down by the New Deal, which of course was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court at that time.
Nevertheless, the Jews of the world declared a boycott against Germany, and it was so effective that you couldn’t find one thing in any store anywhere in the world with the words “made in Germany” on it.
In fact, an executive of the Woolworth Company told me that they had to dump millions of dollars worth of crockery and dishes into the river; that their stores were boycotted. If anyone came in and found a dish marked “made in Germany,” they were picketed with signs: “Hitler”, “murderer”, and so forth, and like — something like these sit-ins that are taking place in the South.
R. H. Macy, which is controlled by a family called Strauss who also happen to be Jews. . . a woman found stockings there which came from Chemnitz, marked “made in Germany”. Well, they were cotton stockings. They may have been there 20 years, because since I’ve been observing women’s legs in the last twenty years, I haven’t seen a pair with cotton stockings on them. So Macy! I saw Macy boycotted, with hundreds of people walking around with signs saying “MURDERS” and “HITLERITES”, and so forth.
Now up to that time, not one hair on the head of any Jew had been hurt in Germany. There was no suffering, there was no starvation, there was no murder, there was nothing.
Now, that. . . naturally, the Germans said, “Why, who are these people to declare a boycott against us and throw all our people out of work, and our industries come to a standstill? Who are they to do that to us?” They naturally resented it. Certainly they painted swastikas on stores owned by Jews.
Why should a German go in and give their money to a storekeeper who was part of a boycott who was going to starve Germany into surrender into the Jews of the world, who were going to dictate who their premier or chancellor was to be? Well, it was ridiculous.
That continued for some time, and it wasn’t until 1938, when a young Jew from Poland walked into the German embassy in Paris and shot one of the officials [a German official] that the Germans really started to get rough with the Jews in Germany. And you found them then breaking windows and having street fights and so forth.
Now, for anyone to say that — I don’t like to use the word ‘anti-Semitism’ because it’s meaningless, but it means something to you still, so I’ll have to use it — the only reason that there was any feeling in Germany against Jews was that they were responsible: number one, for World War One; number two, for this world-wide boycott, and number three — did I say for World War One, they were responsible? For the boycott — and also for World War II, because after this thing got out of hand, it was absolutely necessary for the Jews and Germany to lock horns in a war to see which one was going to survive.
In the meanwhile, I had lived in Germany, and I knew that the Germans had decided [that] Europe is going to be Christian or Communist: there is no in between. It’s going to be Christian or it’s going to be Communist. And the Germans decided: “We’re going to keep it Christian if possible”. And they started to re-arm.
And there intention was — by that time the United States had recognized the Soviet Union, which they did in November, 1933 — the Soviet Union was becoming very powerful, and Germany realized: “Well, our turn is going to come soon, unless we are strong.” The same as we in this country are saying today, “Our turn is going to come soon, unless we are strong.”
And our government is spending 83 or 84 billion dollars of your money for defense, they say. Defense against whom? Defense against 40,000 little Jews in Moscow that took over Russia, and then, in their devious ways, took over control of many other governments of the world.
Now, for this country to now be on the verge of a Third World War, from which we cannot emerge a victor, is something that staggers my imagination. I know that nuclear bombs are measured in terms of megatons. A megaton is a term used to describe one million tons of TNT. One million tons of TNT is a megaton. Now, our nuclear bombs have a capacity of 10 megatons, or 10 million tons of TNT. That was when they were first developed five or six years ago. Now, the nuclear bombs that are being developed have a capacity of 200 megatons, and God knows how many megatons the nuclear bombs of the Soviet Union have.
So, what do we face now? If we trigger a world war that may develop into a nuclear war, humanity is finished. And why will it take place? It will take place because Act III. . . the curtain goes up on Act III. Act I was World War I. Act II was World War II. Act III is going to be World War III.
The Jews of the world, the Zionists and their co-religionists everywhere, are determined that they are going to again use the United States to help them permanently retain Palestine as their foothold for their world government. Now, that is just as true as I am standing here, because not alone have I read it, but many here have read it, and it’s known all over the world.
Now, what are we going to do? The life you save may be your son’s. Your boys may be on their way to that war tonight; and you you don’t know it any more than you knew that in 1916 in London the Zionists made a deal with the British War Cabinet to send your sons to war in Europe. Did you know it at that time? Not a person in the United States knew it. You weren’t permitted to know it.
Who knew it? President Wilson knew it. Colonel House knew it. Other ‘s knew it. Did I know it? I had a pretty good idea of what was going on: I was liaison to Henry Morgenthau, Sr., in the 1912 campaign when President Wilson was elected, and there was talk around the office there.
I was ‘confidential man’ to Henry Morgenthau, Sr., who was chairman of the Finance Committee, and I was liaison between him and Rollo Wells, the treasurer. So I sat in these meetings with President Wilson at the head of the table, and all the others, and I heard them drum into President Wilson’s brain the graduated income tax and what has become the Federal Reserve, and also indoctrinate him with the Zionist movement.
Justice Brandeis and President Wilson were just as close as the two fingers on this hand, and President Woodrow Wilson was just as incompetent when it came to determining what was going on as a newborn baby. And that’s how they got us into World War I, while we all slept.
Now, at this moment… at this moment they may be planning this World War III, in which we don’t stand a chance even if they don’t use nuclear bombs. How can the United States — about five percent of the world — go out and fight eighty to ninety percent of the world on their home ground? How can we do it… send our boys over there to be slaughtered? For what? So the Jews can have Palestine as their ‘commonwealth’? They’ve fooled you so much that you don’t know whether you’re coming or going.
Now any judge, when he charges a jury, says, “Gentlemen, any witness that you find has told a single lie, you can disregard all his testimony.” That is correct. I don’t know from what state you come, but in New York state that is the way a judge addresses a jury. If that witness said one lie, disregard his testimony.
Now, what are the facts about the Jews?
The Jews — I call them Jews to you, because they are known as Jews. I don’t call them Jews. I refer to them as so-called Jews, because I know what they are. If Jesus was a Jew, there isn’t a Jew in the world today, and if those people are Jews, certainly our Lord and Savior was not one of them, and I can prove that.
Now what happened? The eastern European Jews, who form 92 per cent of the world’s population of those people who call themselves Jews, were originally Khazars.
They were a warlike tribe that lived deep in the heart of Asia. And they were so warlike that even the Asiatics drove them out of Asia into eastern Europe — and to reduce this so you don’t get too confused about the history of Eastern Europe — they set up this big Khazar kingdom: 800,000 square miles. Only, there was no Russia, there were no other countries, and the Khazar kingdom was the biggest country in all Europe — so big and so powerful that when the other monarchs wanted to go to war, the Khazars would lend them 40,000 soldiers. That’s how big and powerful they were.
Now, they were phallic worshippers, which is filthy. I don’t want to go into the details of that now. It was their religion the way it was the religion of many other Pagans or Barbarians elsewhere in the world.
Now, the [Khazar] king became so disgusted with the degeneracy of his kingdom that he decided to adopt a so-called monotheistic faith — either Christianity, Islam — the Moslem faith — or what is known today as Judaism — really Talmudism. So, like spinning a top and calling out “eeny, meeny, miney, moe,” he picked out so-called Judaism. And that became the state religion.
He sent down to the Talmudic schools of Pumbedita and Sura and brought up thousands of these rabbis with their teachings, and opened up synagogues and schools in his kingdom of 800,000 people — 800,000 thousand square miles — and maybe ten to twenty million people; and they became what we call Jews. There wasn’t one of them that had an ancestor that ever put a toe in the Holy Land, not only in Old Testament history, but back to the beginning of time. Not one of them! And yet they come to the Christians and they ask us to support their armed insurrection in Palestine by saying:
“Well, you want to certainly help repatriate God’s chosen people to their Promised Land, their ancestral homeland, It’s your Christian duty. We gave you one of our boys as your Lord and Savior. You now go to church on Sunday, and kneel and you worship a Jew, and we’re Jews.”
Well, they were pagan Khazars who were converted just the same as the Irish [were converted]. And it’s just as ridiculous to call them “people of the Holy Land,” as it would be. . . there are 54 million Chinese Moslems. Fifty four million! And, Mohammed only died in 620 A.D., so in that time, 54 million Chinese have accepted Islam as their religious belief.
Now imagine, in China, 2,000 miles away from Arabia, where the city of Mecca is located, where Mohammed was born. . . imagine if the 54 million Chinese called themselves ‘Arabs’. Imagine! Why, you’d say they’re lunatics. Anyone who believes that those 54 million Chinese are Arabs must be crazy. All they did was adopt as a religious faith; a belief that had its origin in Mecca, in Arabia.
The same as the Irish. When the Irish became Christians, nobody dumped them in the ocean and imported from the Holy Land a new crop of inhabitants that were Christians. They weren’t different people. They were the same people, but they had accepted Christianity as a religious faith.
Now, these Pagans, these Asiatics, these Turko-Finns. . . they were a Mongoloid race who were forced out of Asia into eastern Europe. They likewise, because their king took the faith — Talmudic faith — they had no choice. Just the same as in Spain: If the king was Catholic, everybody had to be a Catholic. If not, you had to get out of Spain. So everybody — they lived on the land just like the trees and the bushes; a human being belonged to the land under their feudal system — so they [Khazars] all became what we call today, Jews!
Now imagine how silly it was for the Christians. . . for the great Christian countries of the world to say, “We’re going to use our power, our prestige to repatriate God’s chosen people to their ancestral homeland, their Promised Land.”
Now, could there be a bigger lie than that? Could there be a bigger lie than that?
And because they control the newspapers, the magazines, the radio, the television, the book publishing business, they have the ministers in the pulpit, they have the politicians on the soap boxes talking the same language . . . so naturally you’d believe black is white if you heard it often enough. You wouldn’t call black black anymore — you’d start to call black white. And nobody could blame you.
Now, that is one of the great lies. . . that is the foundation of all the misery that has befallen the world. Because after two wars fought in Europe — World War I and World War II — if it wasn’t possible for them to live in peace and harmony with the people in Europe, like their brethren are living in the United States, what were the two wars fought for? Did they have to — like you flush the toilet — because they couldn’t get along, did they have to say, “Well, we’re going back to our homeland and you Christians can help us”?
I can’t understand yet how the Christians in Europe could have been that dumb because every theologian, every history teacher, knew the things that I’m telling you. But, they naturally bribed them, shut them up with money, stuffed their mouths with money, and now. . . I don’t care whether you know all this or not. It doesn’t make any difference to me whether you know all these facts or not, but it does make a difference to me. I’ve got, in my family, boys that will have to be in the next war, and I don’t want them to go and fight and die… like they died in Korea. Like they died in Japan. Like they’ve died all over the world. For what?
To help crooks hold on to what they stole from innocent people who had been in peaceful possession of that land, those farms, those homes for hundreds and maybe thousands of years? Is that why the United States must go to war? Because the Democratic Party wants New York State — the electoral vote? Illinois, the electoral vote? And Pennsylvania, the electoral vote?… which are controlled by the Zionists and their co-religionists?. . . the balance of power?
In New York City there are 400,000 members of the liberal party, all Zionists and their co-religionists. And New York State went for Kennedy by 400,000 votes. Now, I don’t blame Mr. Kennedy. I’m fond of Mr. Kennedy. I think he’s a great man. I think he can really pull us out of this trouble if we get the facts to him. And I believe he knows a great deal more than his appointments indicate he knows. He’s playing with the enemy. Like when you go fishing, you’ve got to play with the fish. Let ’em out and pull ’em in. Let ’em out and pull ’em in. But knowing Mr. Kennedy’s father, and how well informed he is on this whole subject, and how close Kennedy is to his father, I don’t think Mr. Kennedy is totally in the dark.
But I do think that it is the duty of every mother, every loyal Christian , every person that regards the defense of this country as a sacred right, that they communicate — not with their congressman, not with their senator, but with President Kennedy. And tell him, “I do not think you should send my boy, or our boys, wearing the uniform of the United States of America, and under the flag that you see here, our red, white and blue, to fight there to help keep in the hands of these that which they have stolen”. I think everyone should not alone write once, but keep writing and get your friends to write.
Now, I could go on endlessly, and tell you these things to support what I have just asked you to do. But I don’t think it’s necessary to do that. You’re above the average group in intelligence and I don’t think it’s necessary to impress this any more.
But. . . I want to tell you one more thing. You talk about… “Oh, the Jews. Why the Jews? Christianity. Why, we got Christianity from the Jews and the Jews gave us Jesus, and the Jews gave us our religion”. But do you know that on the day of atonement that you think is so sacred to them, that on that day… and I was one of them! This is not hearsay. I’m not here to be a rabble-rouser. I’m here to give you facts.
When, on the Day of Atonement, you walk into a synagogue, the very first prayer that you recite, you stand — and it’s the only prayer for which you stand — and you repeat three times a short prayer. The Kol Nidre. In that prayer, you enter into an agreement with God Almighty that any oath, vow, or pledge that you may make during the next twelve months — any oath, vow or pledge that you may take during the next twelve months shall be null and void.
The oath shall not be an oath; the vow shall not be a vow; the pledge shall not be a pledge. They shall have no force and effect, and so forth and so on.
And further than that, the Talmud teaches: “Don’t forget — whenever you take an oath, vow, and pledge — remember the Kol Nidre prayer that you recited on the Day of Atonement, and that exempts you from fulfilling that”.
How much can you depend on their loyalty? You can depend upon their loyalty as much as the Germans depended upon it in 1916.
And we’re going to suffer the same fate as Germany suffered, and for the same reason. You can’t depend upon something as insecure as the leadership that is not obliged to respect an oath, vow or pledge. Now I could go on and recite many other things to you, but I would have a little respect for your time, and you want to really, uh, get through with all of this. Tomorrow’s going to be a long day.
Now I want to say one thing. You ask me. . . well, you think to yourself: “well how did this fellow get mixed up in this the way he got mixed up in it.” Well, I opened my mouth in 1945, and I took big pages in newspapers and tried to tell the American people what I’m telling you. And one newspaper after another refused the advertisement. And when I couldn’t find a newspaper to take them — I paid cash, not credit — what happened? My lawyer told me, “There’s an editor over in Jersey with a paper who will take your announcement”. So, I was brought together with Mr. McGinley, and that’s how I met him.
So somebody told me the lawyer who introduced me, who was the son of the Dean of the Methodist Bishop, he said: “Well, I think he’s a little anti-Semitic. I don’t know whether I can get him over here. So he brought him over to my apartment and we hit it off wonderfully, and have since then.
Now, I say this, and I say it without any qualifications. I say it without any reservations. And I say it without any hesitation. . . if it wasn’t for the work that Mr. Conley McGinley did with “Common Sense” — he’s been sending out from 1,800,000 to 2,000,000 every year — if it wasn’t for the work he’s been doing sending those out for fifteen years now, we would already be a communist country. Nobody has done what he did to light fires. Many of the other active persons in this fight learned all about if for the first time through “Common Sense”.
Now, I have been very active in helping him all I could. I’m not as flush as I was. I cannot go on spending the money. . . I’m not going to take up a collection. Don’t worry. I see five people getting up to leave. (laughter)
I haven’t got the money that I used to spend. I used to print a quarter of a million of them out of my own pocket and send them out. Mr. McGinley, when I first met him, had maybe 5,000 printed and circulated them locally. So I said, “With what you know and what I know, we can really do a good job”. So I started printing in outside shops of big newspaper companies, a quarter of a million, and paid for them. Well, there’s always a bottom to the barrel. I suppose we’ve all reached that at times.
I’m not so poor that I can’t live without working and that’s what worries the Anti-Defamation League. I can just get by without going and asking for a job or getting on the bread line. But Mr. McGinley is working. He’s sick and he’s going at this stronger than ever. And all I want to say is that they want to close up “Common Sense” more than any other single thing in the whole world, as a death-blow to the fight Christians are making to survive.
So I just want to tell you this. All they do is circulate rumors: “Mr. Benjamin H. Freedman is the wealthy backer of ‘Common Sense’.” The reason they do that is to discourage the people in the United States: don’t send any money to Common Sense. They don’t need it. The’ve got the wealthy Mr. Freedman as a backer. That all has strategy. They don’t want to advertise me so that people that have real estate or securities to sell will come and call on me. They just want people to lay off “Common Sense”. And all I’m telling you is, I do try to help him, but I haven’t been able to. And I will be very honest. One thing I won’t do is lie. In the last year I’ve had so much sickness in my family that I could not give him one dollar.
How he’s managed to survive, I don’t know. God alone knows. And he must be in God’s care because how he’s pulled through his sickness and with his financial troubles, I don’t know. But that press is working. . . and every two weeks about a hundred or a hundred-fifty-thousand of “Common Sense” go out with a new message. And if that information could be multiplied. . . if people that now get it could buy ten or twenty five, or fifty, give them around. Plow that field. Sow those seeds, you don’t know which will take root, but for God’s sake, this is our last chance.
[Freedman then discusses the importance of people forgoing unnecessary purchases to ‘buy more stuff’, play golf, etc., and use the money to keep “Common Sense” going. He explains that the paper is going in debt; could be closed down and he (Freedman) no longer has the funds, having spent some $2,400,000 in his attempt to bring the information to the American public and elected officials. He then asks for questions from the audience.)
Freedman: All right, I’ll comment on that. This is rather deep, but you all have a very high degree of intelligence, so I’m going to make an attempt. In the time of Bible history, there was a geographic area known as Judea. Judea was a province of the Roman Empire. Now, a person who lived in Judea was known as a Judean, and in Latin it was Judaeus; in Greek it was Judaius. Those are the two words, in Greek and Latin, for a Judean.
Now, in Latin and Greek there is no such letter as ‘j’, and the first syllable of Judaeus and Judaius starts ‘ghu’. Now, when the Bible was written, it was first written in Greek, Latin, Panantic, Syriac, Aramaic… all those languages. Never Was the word Jew in any of them because the word didn’t exist. Judea was the country, and the people were Judeans, and Jesus was referred to only as a Judean. I’ve seen those early… the earliest scripts available.
In 1345, a man by the name of Wycliffe in England thought that it was time to translate the Bible into English. There was no English edition of the Bible because who the Devil could read? It was only the educated church people who could read Latin and Greek, Syriac, Aramaic and the other languages. Anyhow, Wycliffe translated the Bible into English. But in it, he had to look around for some words for Judaeas and Judaius.
There was no English word because Judea had passed out of existence. There was no Judea. People had long ago forgotten that. So in the first translation he used the word, in referring to Jesus, as ‘gyu’, “jew”. At the time, there was no printing press.
Then, between 1345 and the 17th century, when the press came into use, that word passed through so many changes… I have them all here. If you want I can read them to you. I will. That word ‘gyu’ which was in the Wycliffe Bible became. . . first it was ‘ gyu ‘, then ‘ giu ‘, then ‘ iu ‘ (because the ‘ i ‘ in Latin is pronounced like the ‘ j ‘. Julius Caesar is ‘ Iul ‘ because there is no ‘j’ in Latin) then ‘ iuw ‘, then ‘ ieuu ‘, then ‘ ieuy ‘, then ‘ iwe ‘, then ‘ iow ‘, then ‘ iewe ‘, all in Bibles as time went on. Then ‘ ieue ‘, then ‘ iue ‘, then ‘ ive ‘, and then ‘ ivw ‘, and finally in the 18th century… ‘ jew ‘. Jew.
All the corrupt and contracted forms for Judaius, and Judaeas in Latin. Now, there was no such thing as ‘Jew’, and any theologian — I’ve lectured in maybe 20 of the most prominent theological seminaries in this country, and two in Europe — there was no such word as Jew. There only was Judea, and Jesus was a Judean and the first English use of a word in an English bible to describe him was ‘gyu’ — Jew. A contracted and shortened form of Judaeus, just the same as we call a laboratory a ‘lab’, and gasoline ‘gas’… a tendency to short up.
So, in England there were no public schools; people didn’t know how to read; it looked like a scrambled alphabet so they made a short word out of it. Now for a theologian to say that you can’t harm the Jews, is just ridiculous. I’d like to know where in the scriptures it says that. I’d like to know the text.
Look at what happened to Germany for touching Jews. What would you, as a citizen of the United States, do to people who did to you what the so-called Jews — the Pollacks and Litvaks and Litzianers — they weren’t Jews, as I just explained to you. They were Eastern Europeans who’d been converted to Talmudism. There was no such thing as Judaism. Judaism was a name given in recent years to this religion known in Bible history as Torah [inaudible]. No Jew or no educated person ever heard of Judaism. It didn’t exist. They pulled it out of the air. . . a meaningless word.
Just like ‘anti-Semitic’. The Arab is a Semite. And the Christians talk about people who don’t like Jews as anti-Semites, and they call all the Arabs anti-Semites. The only Semites in the world are the Arabs. There isn’t one Jew who’s a Semite. They’re all Turkothean Mongoloids. The Eastern european Jews. So, they brainwashed the public, and if you will invite me to meet this reverend who told you these things, I’ll convince him and it’ll be one step in the right direction. I’ll go wherever I have to go to meet him.
Yes, ma’am. Well… I can answer that. First of all, your first premise is wrong. Your first premise that all the Jews are loyal to each other is wrong. Because, the Eastern European Jews outnumber all the rest by so many that they create the impression that they are the Jewish ‘race’; that they are the Jewish nation; that they are the Jewish people. . . and the Christians swallow it like a cream puff.
But in 1844 the German rabbis called a conference of rabbis from all over the world for the purpose of abolishing the Kol Nidre from the Day of Atonement religious ceremony. In Brunswick, Germany, where that conference was held in 1844, there was almost a terrific riot. A civil war.
The Eastern Europeans said, “What the hell. We should give up Kol Nidre? That gives us our grip on our people. We give them a franchise so they can tell the Christians, ‘Go to hell. We’ll make any deal you want’, but they don’t have to carry it out. That gives us our grip on our people”. So, they’re not so united, and if you knew the feeling that exists. . .
Now, I’ll also show you from an official document by the man responsible for. . . uh, who baptized this race. Here is a paper that we obtained from the archives of the Zionist organization in New York City, and in it is the manuscript by Sir James A. Malcolm, who — on behalf of the British Cabinet — negotiated the deal with these Zionists.
And in here he says that all the jews in England were against it. The Jews who had been there for years, the [inaudible – probably Sephardim], those who had Portuguese and Spanish ad Dutch ancestry… who were monotheists and believed in that religious belief. That was while the Eastern European Jews were still running around in the heart of Asia and then came into Europe. But they had no more to do with them than. . . can we talk about a Christian ‘race’? or a Christian religion?… or are the Christians united?
So the same disunity is among the Jews. And I’ll show you in this same document that when they went to France to try and get the French government to back that Zionist venture, there was only one Jew in France who was for it. That was Rothschild, and they did it because they were interested in the oil and the Suez Canal
[Question inaudible] Freedman: You know why? Because if they don’t, they’re decked up. They come around and they tell you how much you must give, and if you don’t . . . oh, you’re anti-Semitic. Then none of their friends will have anything to do with them, and they start a smear campaign. . . and you have got to give.
In New York city, in the garment center, there are twelve manufacturers in the building. And when the drive is on to sell Israel Bonds, the United Jewish Drive, they put a big scoreboard with the names of the firms and opposite them, as you make the amount they put you down for, they put a gold star after the name. Then, the buyers are told, “When you come into that building to call on someone and they haven’t got a gold star, tell them that you won’t buy from them until they have the gold star”. BLACKMAIL. I don’t know what else you can call it.
Then what do they do? They tell you it’s for ‘humanitarian purposes’ and they send maybe $8 billion dollars to Israel, tax exempt, tax deductible. So if they hadn’t sent that eight billion dollars to Israel, seven billion of it would have gone into the U.S. Treasury as income tax. So what happens? That seven billion dollars deficit — that air pocket — the gullible Christians have to make up.
They put a bigger tax on gas or bread or corporation tax. Somebody has to pay the housekeeping expenses for the government. So why do you let these people send their money over there to buy guns to drive people out of their ancient homeland? And you say, “Oh, well. The poor Jews. They have no place to go and they’ve been persecuted all their lives”. They’ve never been persecuted for their religion. And I wish I had two rows of Rabbis here to challenge me. Never once, in all of history, have they been persecuted for their religion.
Do you know why the Jews were driven out of England? King Edward the First in 1285 drove them out, and they never came back until the Cromwell Revolution which was financed by the Rothschilds. For four-hundred years there wasn’t a Jew. But do you know why they were driven out? Because in the Christian faith and the Moslem faith it’s a sin to charge ‘rent’ for the use of money. In other words – what we call interest [usury] is a sin.
So the Jews had a monopoly in England and they charged so much interest, and when the Lords and Dukes couldn’t pay, they [Jews] foreclosed. And they were creating so much trouble that the king of England finally made himself their partner, because when they they came to foreclose, some of these dukes bumped off the Jews. . . the money-lenders. So the king finally said — and this is all in history, look up Tianson [Tennyson?] or Rourke, the History of the Jews in England; two books you can find in your library. When the king found out what the trouble was all about, and how much money they were making, he declared himself a fifty-percent partner of the money lenders. Edward the First. And for many years, one-third of the revenues of the British Treasury came from the fifty-percent interest in money-lending by the Jews.
But it got worse and worse. So much worse that when the Lords and Dukes kept killing the money-lenders, the King then said, “I declare myself the heir of all the money-lenders. If they’re killed you have to pay me, because I’m his sole heir”. That made so much trouble, because the King had to go out and collect the money with an army, so he told the Jews to get out. There were 15,000 of them, and they had to get out, and they went across to Ireland, and that’s how Ireland got to be part of the United Kingdom.
When King Edward found out what they were doing, he decided to take Ireland for himself before someone else did. He sent Robert Southgard with a mercenary army and conquered Ireland. So, show me one time where a Jew was persecuted in any country because of his religion. It has never happened. It’s always their impact on the political, social, or economic customs and traditions of the community in which they settle.
[Question inaudible] Freedman: Yes, sir. Well, they say most of those things themselves. It was unnecessary for Benjamin Franklin to say it. Most of those things they say themselves. But Benjamin Franklin observed, and by hearsay understood, what was happening in Europe.
When Russia, in 920 was formed, and gradually surrounded the Khazar Kingdom, and absorbed them, most of the well-to-do Khazars fled to Western Europe and brought with them the very things to which you object and I object and a lot of other people object. The customs, the habits, the instincts with which they were endowed.
When Benjamin Franklin referred to them as Jews because that’s the name that they went by, and when the Christians first heard that these people who were fleeing from Russia — who they were — that they had practiced this Talmudic faith — the Christians in Western Europe said, “They must be the remnants of the lost ten tribes!”
And Mr. Grutz, the greatest historian amongst the Jews, said that — and he’s probably as good an authority on that subject as there is. So when Ben Franklin came to Europe in the 18th century, he already saw the results of what these people had done after they left their homeland. And every word of it is true… they say it themselves. I can give you half a dozen books they’ve written in which they say the same thing: When they have money they become tyrants. And when they become defeated, they become ruthless. They’re only barbarians. They’re the descendants of Asiatic Mongols and they will do anything to accomplish their purpose.
What right did they have to take over Russia the way they did? The Czar had abdicated nine or ten months before that. There was no need for them. . . they were going to have a constitutional monarchy. But they didn’t want that. When the constitutional monarchy was to assemble in November, they mowed them all down and established the Soviet Union.
There was no need for that. But they thought, “Now is the time”, and if you you will look in the Encyclopedia Britannica under the word ‘Bolshevism’, you’ll find the five laws there that Lenin put down for a successful revolution. One of them is, “Wait for the right time, and then give them everything you’ve got”. It would pay you to read that.
You’d also find that Mr. Harold Blacktree, who wrote the article for the Encyclopedia Britannica states that the Jews conceived and created and cultivated the Communist movement. And that their energy made them the spearhead of the movement. Harold Blacktree wrote it and no one knew more about Communism than he. And the Encyclopedia Britannica for 25 years has been printing it.
[Question inaudible] Freedman: Well, I can’t advocate that you do anything that’s criminal, but I can tell you this. You can start what I call an endless chain. If you can get your friends to write, objectively, here is the statement: Mr. Kennedy’s office gave me this himself. Mr. Smith, who succeeded Mr. Kennedy, took over his office — was in his office — and gave me this. He delivered this on the 25th, and it says here:
“For release to AM (that means morning papers), August 25th”. “Israel is here to stay. It is a national commitment, special obligation of the Democratic Party. The White House must take the lead. American intervention. We will act promptly and decisively against any nation in the Middle East which attacks its neighbor. I propose that we make clear to both Israel and the Arab states our guarantee that we will act with whatever force and speed are necessary to halt any aggression by any nation”.
Well, do you call the return of people to their homeland [the Arab Palestinians] aggression? Is Mr. Kennedy going to do that? Suppose three million Mexicans came into Texas and drove the six million Texans into the deserts of Arizona and New Mexico. Suppose these Mexicans were slipped in there armed — the Texans were disarmed — and one night they drove them all out of Texas and declared themselves the Republic of the Alamo. What would the United States say?
Would we say it’s aggression for these Texans to try to get their homes back from the Mexican thieves? Suppose the Negroes in Alabama were secretly armed by the Soviets and overnight they rose up and drove all the whites into the swamps of Mississippi and Georgia and Florida. . . drove them out completely, and declared themselves the Republic of Ham, or the Republic of something-or-other. Would we call it aggression if these people, the whites of Alabama, tried to go back to their homes?
Would we. . . what would we think if the soviet Union said, “No, those Negroes now occupy them! Leave them there!”, or “No, those Mexicans are in Texas. they declared themselves a sovereign state. Leave them there. You have plenty of room in Utah and Nevada. Settle somewhere else”.
Would we call it aggression if the Alabama whites or the Texans wanted to go back to their homes? So now, you’ve got to write to President Kennedy and say, “We do not consider it aggression in the sense that you use the word, if these people want to return to their homes as the United Nations — fifteen times in the last twelve years — called upon the Zionists in occupation of Palestine to allow the Arab Palestinians to return to their former homes and farms”.
[End of transcript of Benjamin Freedman speech, given in 1961 at the Willard Hotel in Washington, D.C., on behalf of Conde McGinley’s patriotic newspaper of that time, Common Sense.]
By Rick Wells
Editor Dustin Bond / MC News
George Soros is playing a major role in enabling and orchestrating the Islamic invasion of Europe and North America and with it the social chaos and degradation that now threatens the very nature and survival of civilization across the globe. For him it’s somehow personal, having taken a lead advocacy and funding position and laid out his own six-step plan for the invasion to continue and grow. He argues for the unimpeded march to full Islamist domination of the planet, or at a minimum to the level that suits the achievement of whatever devious schemes of his are in the works.
He appears to recognize that the opposition to his destruction of our nation, our continents and whatever planetary harmony remains is building and identified the primary threats to his anti-American efforts. It’s not surprising that those he is targeting are among the leadership of the political outsiders, those he has no control over, Donald Trump and Ted Cruz.
It’s ironic that the premise of his op-ed against rational self-defense and in support of submission to the invasion is predicated upon an insistence that we not give in to the instinct to survive. He admits that even he, the most pervasive of political predators could only stop himself from an urge to respond to the terrorist threat that he is creating by remembering that it must be irrational to follow the wishes of your enemies. He makes that ironic statement as a component of his effort to persuade us to do nothing; to simply wait to be victimized by the hordes of terrorists he and his UN, EU elitist comrades are pouring across the civilized West. Liberal Marxists seem to be blind to their hypocrisy or to at a minimum believe their victims are.
Soros is the enemy of free men everywhere. It’s almost laughable that he urges us to follow his wishes as he applauds not following his wishes. But it’s not funny. What he and his comrades are up to is quite serious and immensely threatening to our relatively peaceful civilized world. The fundamental change he promised through his surrogate Hussein Obama is upon us and we’re not going to like it.
In a Monday op-ed published in The Guardian, Soros equated those who respond in a natural, survivalist manner to terrorism with the terrorists, offering up the nonsense that the only logical response to the murderous thugs he’s enlisting as his “agents of change” is to ignore them and hope they’ll grow tired of killing, raping, stealing and brutalizing their way to power.
Somehow that doesn’t seem like a viable option for continuing to enjoy a full and productive life, but Soros never claimed that our survival was a consideration. In fact he goes so far as to suggest that acting to save your life is an irrational response to fear.
He gets into a little psycho-analysis of the civilized world in the process, encouraging us to ignore the instinctive urge to survive in the interest of the greater, more enlightened, collective good. The Marxist would-be king of the world wrote:
Open societies are always endangered. This is especially true of America and Europe today, as a result of the terrorist attacks in Paris and elsewhere, and the way that America and Europe, particularly France, have reacted to them.
Jihadi terrorist groups such as Islamic State and al-Qaida have discovered the Achilles heel of our western societies: the fear of death. Through horrific attacks and macabre videos, the publicists of Isis magnify this fear, leading otherwise sensible people in hitherto open societies to abandon their reason.
Scientists have discovered that emotion is an essential component of human reasoning. That discovery explains why jihadi terrorism poses such a potent threat to our societies: the fear of death leads us and our leaders to think – and then behave – irrationally.
Science merely confirms what experience has long shown: when we are afraid for our lives, emotions take hold of our thoughts and actions, and we find it difficult to make rational judgments. Fear activates an older, more primitive part of the brain than that which formulates and sustains the abstract values and principles of open society.
The open society is thus always at risk from the threat posed by our response to fear. A generation that has inherited anopen society from its parents will not understand what is required to maintain it until it has been tested and learns to keep fear from corrupting reason. Jihadi terrorism is only the latest example. The fear of nuclear war tested the last generation, and the fear of communism and fascism tested my generation.
The jihadi terrorists’ ultimate goal is to convince Muslim youth worldwide that there is no alternative to terrorism. And terrorist attacks are the way to achieve that goal, because the fear of death will awaken and magnify the latent anti-Muslim sentiments in Europe and America, inducing the non-Muslim population to treat all Muslims as potential attackers.
And that is exactly what is happening. The hysterical anti-Muslim reaction to terrorism is generating fear and resentment among Muslims living in Europe and America. The older generation reacts with fear, the younger one with resentment; the result is a breeding ground for potential terrorists. This is a mutually reinforcing, reflexive process.
The hysterical anti-Muslim reaction to terrorism is generating fear and resentment among Muslims in Europe and America
How can it be stopped and reversed? Abandoning the values and principles underlying open societies and giving in to an anti-Muslim impulse dictated by fear certainly is not the answer, though it may be difficult to resist the temptation. I experienced this personally when I watched the last Republican presidential debate; I could stop myself only by remembering that it must be irrational to follow the wishes of your enemies.
To remove the danger posed by jihadi terrorism, abstract arguments are not enough; we need a strategy for defeating it. The challenge is underscored by the fact that the jihadi phenomenon has been with us for more than a generation. Indeed, gaining a proper understanding of it may be impossible. But the attempt must be made.
Consider the Syrian conflict, which is the root cause of the migration problem that is posing an existential threat to the European Union as we know it. If it was resolved, the world would be in better shape. It is important to recognize that ISIS is operating from a position of weakness. While it is spreading fear in the world, its hold on its home ground is weakening. The United Nations Security Council has unanimously adopted a resolution against it, and the leaders of ISIS are aware that their days in Iraq and Syria are numbered.
Of course, the outlook for Syria remains highly uncertain, and the conflict there cannot be understood or tackled in isolation. But one idea shines through crystal clear: it is an egregious mistake to do what the terrorists want us to do. That is why, as 2016 gets underway, we must reaffirm our commitment to the principles of open society and resist the siren song of the likes of Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, however hard that may be.
Since those siren songs are part of the human DNA and critical to our survival, it may be hard for people to choose tyranny and death over the songs of survival. Soros understands that lemmings who think and act in their own interests are no longer truly lemmings and only of limited usefulness to their masters.
His echoing of his UN/US comrade Hussein Obama’s claims that ISIS is operating from a position of weakness are intended to persuade us into complacency, to believe and accept their deception rather than the truth presented by our own “lying eyes” and rational thought.
His claim that everything is fine, we’re safe because the UN Security Council is on the job only serves to expose another aspect of the nature of his message, to build trust in the global government enemy as they work towards our destruction.
Soros is, in fact, helping to expand the level of trust on the part of the American people, but not in the way he intended. We’re increasingly more confident of the motivations of the very individuals he’s vilifying. They’re becoming more evident as being the few national leaders, aside from Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), who truly have our best interest at heart. If George Soros is against Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, there’s a strong chance they are on the right side of things, that they are among the handful in our leadership who truly care about our future and the future of our nation.
His is a backhanded political endorsement we’ll be sure to make appropriate note of.
I’m Rick Wells – a conservative writer who recognizes that our nation, our Constitution and our traditions are under a full scale assault from multiple threats. I’m not PC; I call it like I see it. – Please “Like” me on Facebook, “Follow” me on Twitter or visit www.rickwells.us & www.truthburgers.com.
See featured article at:
The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 gave birth to a dangerous American ideology called neoconservativism. The Soviet Union had served as a constraint on US unilateral action. With the removal of this constraint on Washington, neoconservatives declared their agenda of US world hegemony. America was now the “sole superpower,” the “unipower,” that could act without restraint anywhere in the world.
The Washington Post neoconservative journalist Charles Krauthammer summed up the “new reality” as follows:
“We have overwheming global power. We are history’s designated custodians of the international system. When the Soviet Union fell, something new was born, something utterly new–a unipolar world dominated by a single superpower unchecked by any rival and with decisive reach in every corner of the globe. This is a stagering new development in history, not seen since the fall of Rome. Even Rome was no model for what America is today.”
The staggering unipolar power that history has given to Washington has to be protected at all costs. In 1992 top Pentagon official Undersecretary Paul Wolfowitz penned the Wolfowitz Doctrine, which became the basis for Washington’s foreign policy.
The Wolfowitz Doctrine states that the “first objective” of American foreign and military policy is “to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat [to US unilateral action] on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power.” (A “hostile power” is a country sufficiently strong to have a foreign policy independent from Washington’s.)
The unilateral assertion of American power begin in ernest during the Clinton regime with the interventions in Yugoslavia, Serbia, Kosovo, and the no-fly zone imposed on Iraq. In 1997 the neoconservatives penned their “Project for a New American Century.” In 1998, three years prior to 9/11, the neoconservatives sent a letter to President Clinton calling for regime change in Iraq and “the removal of Saddam Hussein from power.” Neoconservatives set out their program for removing seven governments in five years. http://www.globalresearch.ca/we-re-going-to-take-out-7-countries-in-5-years-iraq-syria-lebanon-libya-somalia-sudan-iran/5166
The events of September 11, 2001, are regarded by informed people as “the new Pearl harbor” that the neoconservatives said was necessary in order to begin their wars of conquest in the Middle East. Paul O’Neil, President George W. Bush’s first Treasury Secretary, has stated pubicly that the agenda of President Bush’s first meeting with his cabinet was the invasion of Iraq. This invasion was planned prior to 9/11. Since 9/11 Washington has destroyed in whole or part eight countries and now confronts Russia both in Syria and Ukraine.
Russia cannot allow a jihadist Caliphate to be established in an area comprising Syria/Iraq, because it would be a base for exporting destabilization into Muslim parts of the Russian Federation. Henry Kissinger himself has stated this fact, and it is clear enough to any person with a brain. However, the power-crazed fanatical neoconservatives, who have controlled the Clinton, Bush, and Obama regimes, are so absorbed in their own hubris and arrogance that they are prepared to push Russia to the point of having their Turkish puppet shoot down a Russian airplane and to overthrow the democratically-elected government in Ukraine that was on good terms with Russia, substituting in its place an American puppet government.
With this background, we can understand that the dangerous situation facing the world is the product of the neoconservative’s arrogant policy of US world hegemony. The failures of judgment and the dangers in the Syrian and Ukrainian conflicts are themselves the consequences of the neoconservative ideology.
To perpetuate American hegemony, the neoconservatives threw away the guarantees that Washington gave Gorbachev that NATO would not move one inch to the East. The neoconservatives pulled the US out of the ABM Treaty, which specified that neither the US nor Russia would develop and deploy anti-ballistic missiles. The neoconservatives re-wrote US war doctrine and elevated nuclear weapons from their role as a retaliatory force to a pre-emptive first strike force. The neoconservatives began putting ABM bases on Russia’s borders, claiming that the bases were for the purpose of protecting Europe from non-existent Iranian nuclear ICBMs.
Russia and Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, have been demonized by neoconservatives and their puppets in the US government and media. For example, Hillary Clinton, a candidate for the Democratic nomination for president, declared Putin to be “the new Hitler.” A former CIA official called for Putin’s assassination. Presidential candidates in both parties are competing in terms of who can be the most aggressive toward Russia and the most insulting toward Russia’s president.
The effect has been to destroy the trust between nuclear powers. The Russian government has learned that Washington does not respect Washington’s own laws, much less international law, and that Washington cannot be trusted to keep any agreement. This lack of trust, together with the aggression toward Russia spewing from Washington and the presstitute media and echoing in the idiotic European capitals, has established the ground for nuclear war. As NATO (essentially the US) has no prospect of defeating Russia in conventional war, much less defeating an alliance of Russia and China, war will be nuclear.
To avoid war, Putin is non-provocative and low-key in his responses to Western provocations. Putin’s responsible behavior, however, is misinterpreted by neoconervatives as a sign of weakness and fear. The neoconservatives tell President Obama to keep the pressure on Russia, and Russia will give in. However, Putin has made it clear that Russia will not give in. Putin has sent this message on many occasions. For example, on September 28, 2015, at the 70th anniversary of the United Nations, Putin said that Russia can no longer tolerate the state of affairs in the world. Two days later Putin took command of the war against ISIS in Syria.
The European governments, especially Germany and the UK, are complicit in the move toward nuclear war. These two American vassal states enable Washington’s reckless aggression toward Russia by repeating Washington’s propaganda and supporting Washington’s sanctions and interventions against other countries. As long as Europe remains nothing but an extension of Washington, the prospect of Armegeddon will continue to rise.
At this point in time, nuclear war can only be avoided in two ways. One way is for Russia and China to surrender and accept Washington’s hegemony. The other way is for an independent leader in Germany, the UK, or France to rise to office and withdraw from NATO. That would begin a stampede to leave NATO, which is Washington’s prime tool for causing conflict with Russia and, thereby, is the most dangerous force on earth to every European country and to the entire world. If NATO continues to exist, NATO together with the neoconservative ideology of American hegemony will make nuclear war inevitable.
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. Roberts’ latest books areThe Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West, How America Was Lost, and The Neoconservative Threat to World Order.
While the left continues to demagogue conservatives for calling for a “pause” in Muslim migration, until we can ensure that our vetting process is working, they seem strangely silent about their own bigoted behavior.
America’s liberals seem excited to receive several hundred thousand Muslim Syrians over the next few years, but when asked to take in a handful of Christians they become rather more reticent.
America is about to accept 9000 Syrian Muslims, refugees of the brutal war between the Assad regime and its Sunni opposition, which includes ISIS, Al Qaeda, and various other militias. That number is predicted to increase each year. There are no Christian refugees that will be admitted.
Why? Because the Department of State is adhering with all the rigidity of a Soviet era bureaucracy to the rule that only people at risk from massacres launched by the regime qualify for refugee status. The rapes of Christian women and the butchery of Christian children do not count. No matter how moved Americans were this Christmas season by the plight of their fellow Christ followers in Syria and Iraq, no matter how horrific the visuals of beheadings, enslavement, and mass murder, the Christians fleeing death do not engender the compassion of this president.
The Christians are being raped, tortured, and murdered by militias, not by the Syrian government. This technicality condemns them to continue to be victims without hope. And this technicality is being adhered to with all the tenacity with which President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s State Department manipulated quotas and created subterfuges to keep out the Jews fleeing the oppression of Nazi Germany. Obama no more wants the Middle East’s Christian refugees than Roosevelt wanted Europe’s Jewish refugees.
It is deplorable, even monstrous, that the group most affected by the evils of ISIS (and other Muslim groups) are the one groups receiving the least amount of consideration from the Obama administration. Christians are being eradicated in historic numbers, an entire population is being systematically wiped from the earth… and the Obama administration (and their liberal cronies) does nothing. We conservatives may get the bad rap for being willing to speak honestly about the dangers of Muslim migration, but the true bigots are the liberals who are allowing , nay encouraging by their inaction, the genocide of an entire people.
See featured article at:
Although this is a positive development for Syria, US hardliners and their Middle Eastern allies, who tried to push through a “regime change” scenario in Syria, are not happy about it.
“Obama finally ceded to the more democratically defensible position that the Syrian people should pick their own leaders. After all, if Obama is right about how much the Syrian people hate Assad, elections would empower them to implement their own ‘regime change’ through the ballot box,” the analyst observed. “But that uncertain outcome is not what the [neocons] want. They want a predetermined result – Assad’s ouster – regardless of the Syrian people’s wishes.”
Parry’s opinion piece came in response to a Washington Post editorial, chastising the Obama administration for what they see as an about-face following four years of a (failed) “Assad-must-go” strategy.
“The more immediate issue is the Post’s fury over the prospect that the Syrian people would be allowed to vote on Assad’s future rather than have it dictated by neocon think tanks, Islamic jihadist rebels and their Turkish-Saudi-Qatari-Israeli-CIA backers,” the journalist noted.For the Washington Post, democratic elections in Syria are “a likely recipe for an impasse.” The United Nations Security Council does not see it this way.
On Friday, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted a resolution designed to create a roadmap towards peace in the war-torn country. The agreement sets a timeframe for a ceasefire followed by the UN supervised “free and fair” elections in Syria.
The document does not say whether Assad can or cannot take part in the election, but Saudi Arabia, Turkey and other Sunni states will make every effort to prevent him from running.
Assad “is an Alawite, an offshoot of Shia Islam. Further condemning Assad in their eyes, he seeks to maintain a secular government that protects Christians, Alawites, Shiites and other minorities,” Parry explained.
Middle Eastern powers, who want to see Assad gone, share this sentiment with Israel and Official Washington’s alliance of neoconservatives and liberal interventionists, as the journalist describes them.The latter “have made Assad’s ouster a cause célèbre despite the disastrous experiences overthrowing other secular regimes in Iraq and Libya,” Parry observed.
In the past, the US president, according to the investigative journalist, “has been highly sensitive” to what this group thinks. But recent developments suggest that Obama might have opted for pragmatism instead of “neocon/liberal-hawk ideological desires.”
See featured article at:
The United States military is serving the Anglo-Roman-Khazarian Empire as its potent force in controlling other nation-states around the globe, in parallel with paramilitary groups, private mercenaries and terrorist organizations.
The whole enterprise fabricates its own conflict through false flags in one hand, while another arm offers resolution to the same conflict in a manner than can be considered as outright extortion. This common mafia tactic that is backed up by a fully armed military component is the root cause of the present conflict in the Middle East and elsewhere
There are only few truly free countries today and those countries are being treated as outcasts. Foreign regressive interventions are as clear as day.
The world is looking up to the Americans to stand up against the evil forces in control of their government, and all those that are working behind the scenes, so that peace could return to this world.
What is taking so long?
Are the Green Light promoters going chicken?
A Curative for Washington’s Terror Treachery is Here
Phil Butler — Here’s a look inside the dark nightmare that has become international détente. At the end, I offer a searing summary with a ray of hope. The curative I mention, it’s called truth.
The truth of world relationships today lies at the end of a trail of bread crumbs leading straight to Moscow. As strange as that may sound coming from an American writer, I say “the truth is where you find it.” The “truth” I speak of is, the United States of America has in large measure created most of our current conflicts. The reasons are manifest, and mostly have to do with big business. This has been argued, and illustrated, widely. But some very wise experts, and catalogs of events now reveal just how precarious the world governing systems are today. I shall outlined at length, what I feel are the central issues.
Is Fort Knox Empty?
New Eastern Outlook (NEO) contributor F. William Engdahl now outlines the economic reasons for Washington’s desperation here. What the noted economics researcher and historian reveals is essentially a “broke” America. And he’s not the only one saying this. Presidential hopeful, Donald Trump has alluded to this many times in the past few years. If you ever wondered at Barack Obama’s relentless harping against Putin or Assad, there it is. If Russia, China and the BRICS exit the dollar, if other pressures intensify, we are over. This is fundamentally unarguable. The United States cannot operate as she has in the past, if the dollar crashes. This says nothing for the internal turmoil, the strife that would affect Americans.
Engdahl’s argument is sound. The US Dollar is based on trust only. There is nothing standing behind it, except the “word” of the Federal Reserve Bank, that is. America is in effect, one big printing press for world markets. This is why you see billions plugged into all these leaders’ and nations’ causes. Aid packaged, defense spending, it is all just printed like toilet paper. What you are witnessing is an American hegemony bought with air, this is the reality. Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping know this all too well, but it’s not necessarily in their country’s best interest, if the dollar goes belly up. The moves we see to converting to new world currencies is not an attack, it’s a defense against Babylon falling. I’ve heard rumors Fort Knox is all but empty, and if this is true Obama’s actions can be more easily explained.
The Proof is in — the Jury’s Out
Zero Hedge’s infamous Tyler Durden has provided us with a fact sheet on high treason. Durden lays out the Russian MoD’s case against Turkey’s leadership. The short version of Durden’s revelation is, the US State Department is lying. US officials know full well ISIL is shipping massive quantities of oil via truck convoys from east Syria toward Turkey in direction Al-Qamishli´. The Obama administration’s knowingly misleading the people of the United States, it’s a far more disturbing and dangerous issue though.
I’ll turn now to Alex Jones of InfoWars, for a snapshot of how many Americans feel at this moment. While Jones often veers off into extreme theories at times, more and more lately the radio host and documentary filmmaker described as “America’s leading conspiracy theorist” — he’s broadcast common sense dissent on America’s current political meltdown. Sunday night’s timely Obama address, from the Oval Office framed Jones’ fear Washington will carve up the 2nd amendment of the US Constitution over the San Bernardino massacre. Here’s the gist of Jones’ warning to the hundreds of thousands who follow him:
“Obama is using terror to end due process and strip you of your rights, it’s reprehensible!”
Mr. Obama’s address contains many disturbing points. His onerous twisting of truth is not only grievous, but dangerous. As Jones suggests, this whole 2nd amendment issue is the latest stretching of the US Constitution by his administration. NSA spying, bailing out the banks, CIA torture and “black sites”, rescinding the rights of citizens, deploying the Supreme Court on gay marriage, no president in history has infringed on more American freedoms. I should not have to delve more deeply into these allegations, Mr. Obama argues all my points from his own lips, each time he says; “That’s not who we are.” Well, dealing underhanded, destroying America’s credibility and friendships at every turn, and blaming the hen house for what the fox is doing, this is not who “we the people are.” Of that I am certain.
Obama interjects his own malfeasance in Sunday’s speech. By asserting once again “national security” is at stake, the president damns his administration and that of George W. Bush’s as well. Study his framing of a national threat here:
“The need to act could not be more clear. From 2004 to 2014, for example, 2,000 people on the terror watch list were able to purchase guns.”
“Are these people incompetent or intent on creating terror and havoc?” This is the logical question which arises from Obama’s nonsensical pleas these days. If trillions and trillions have been spent fighting terror, and with Homeland Security and the NSA usurping constitutionally guaranteed freedoms, someone explain how there are 2,000 potentially dangerous people armed to the teeth in the United States? Barack Obama just admitted we have not been protecting Americans. He just admitted America is defenseless even after Afghanistan, Iraq, Arab Spring, and Guantanamo. The president goes on in this speech to outline other “measures” to defeat ISIL and terror. But the overriding question arises continually; “Why were these measures not already taken?”
Donald Trump Versus Humpty Dumpty
The “war on terror” was never about protecting America, we were never really in danger, before now that is. So my point one is made here. Whether the elites in London and Washington intend to destroy the United States in some new world order scheme, or if our leadership is just this corrupt and stupid, the outcome is the same. We’re seeing a desperation battle waged against an emerging Russia and BRICS inevitability. The “cover up” Tyler Durden’s Zero Hedge piece cements, it’s mirrored in a cover up to hide monstrous economic disaster. As far back as 2012 Donald Trump was predicting a “writing down” of America’s debt, and an ensuing “financial ruin,” citizens would have to deal with. But what Trump speculates will happen is a boom economy compared to some predictions. New York Times bestselling author, Robert Wiedemer’s book Aftershock reveals a veritable Economic Armageddon when the house of cards falls. To summarize his arguments is difficult, but a recent interview tells us why Vladimir Putin and Russia move away from the dollar. Wiedemer tells us why the confidence in the dollar (and America) being lost, is the real emergency. Here’s a segment of a recent discussion the author had:
“You know, one of the strange things about how people view the dollar and its strength is that they don’t understand what gives the dollar its strength. They think the dollar has strength because people love the U.S., or we have a very stable economy, and that’s partly true, but what most gives the dollar the strength is that people buy them.”
When it was discovered the Obama administration and western elites had declared war on Russia’s ruble, it seemed only natural for Vladimir Putin to ramp up the Eurasian Union initiative. I originally though; “It’s all Putin could do to counter Obama’s financial attack.” But I was wrong. Russia, China and the rest of the BRICS did not reach monumental accord in an effort to hurt America. Putin’s 2014 trip was portrayed in western press as a “power” move by the Russian president. As it turns out, BRICS policy is probably aimed at defense against an American economic collapse, against Humpty Dumpty taking the big fall.
Damascus or Bust!
I said I would hem all this up in a tight summary, so here it is. We know now the so-called “War on Terror” is nothing of the sort. There were no “weapons of mass destruction.” The Taliban is still ravaging Afghanistan. ISIL and jihadism are more widespread today than on September 11th, 2001. Now Europe faces a refugee crisis of unprecedented scale. Governments from Morocco to Pakistan bear scars from the overt and covert actions of a single nation. America has, by Barack Obama’s own admission; twisted arms, tortured, drone killed, sanctioned, and tried to marginalize every nation on this world. This president’s executive leadership has shaken the confidence of every intelligent American, and that of the world’s peoples. He makes my summary for me with this:
“For seven years, I have confronted this evolving threat each morning in my intelligence briefing. And since the day I took this office, I have authorized U.S. forces to take out terrorists abroad precisely because I know how real the danger is. As Commander-in-Chief, I have no greater responsibility than the security of the American people.”
William Engdahl fears the world will abandon the dollar soon. And the world will, before the currency is finally depreciated to near nothing. Tyler Durden, who probably really is Daniel Ivandjiiski, says the Russian Ministry of Defense assuredly proved the Turks receive ISIL oil trucks. Tyler, or Daniel, is correct in his contention, and the United States Government has flown air cover for ISIL and Al-Qaeda, supposedly our sworn enemies. Alex Jones fears Obama has declared war on the US Constitution, and he is right. This 2ndamendment issue is the tipping point, a preparatory move to ensure economic chaos will not end in revolution. As conspiratorial as that sounds, I assure you the danger is real. If Barack Obama attempts to bridge citizen’s right to bear arms, ISIL will be the least of America’s problems. This would mean open revolution, tens of millions of my countrymen would never stand for it. But this is too broad to discuss here. I promised you a glimmer of hope, so I leave you with it.
For about two years now I’ve been writing and analyzing from the “dissenting” point of view on this new west-east crisis. For a long time my friends and colleagues back in the US did not understand. Many were quite concerned, I assure you. New media there that once welcomed my editorials or news, they soon shunned any copy from me. Friends and business went awry for us, it has not been easy arguing against Obama’s policies. That said, a Facebook share this weekend signaled something extraordinary happening. The silent majority in my country has been awakened. A friend, a former school superintendent and public figure from “down home” came forward on a photo commentary I made about Vladimir Putin. I was discussing his incomparable appeal, his obvious affinity for kids. This is what I got in an unexpected answer on character and conviction:
“You are so right, Phil. I’ve followed as closely as my time allows and Putin is a man of strong convictions- and character.”
We are seeing a “do or die” effort by a western hegemony play out over the top of Damascus, Syria. But with so much catastrophic news bombarding us, the comment by my friend in Georgia in the US is a bright spark. The people where I come from are not convinced easily. It took a lot for them to fall in behind Barack Obama in the first place. George Soros’ money, and Oprah Winfrey evangelizing in stadiums in South Carolina, it was PR and massive business powers that got Obama elected. The glimmer of hope is this though. With the silent majority paying attention now, we’re only one wrong decision away from a regime change. My Georgia friend is but one, of thousands I see questioning now.
I hope for the sake of my country, the rulers in Washington realize this. But then, maybe a revolution was their ultimate end game all along? Like I said, we’ve a ray of hope for peace and a return to the republic.
What we are noticing though is that those who were saying years ago that a revolution is brewing in America are instead joining the social media protest crowd instead of really doing the hard work behind the scenes like organizing community groups and conducting militia training.
What’s worse, the last time we posted about militia updates right here, we were accused of fear-mongering and calling us paid shills. To our accuser, don’t blame us for your own shortcomings.
Asian secret societies have been squeezing the purses of the war mongers so that it would be much easier for Western patriots to kill the beast, and yet nobody, it seems, wants to finish the job for good.
The Russians, through the able leadership of Putin and have been risking their necks and limbs, even paying with real blood from shot down civilian airliner and parachuting pilot, while the rest of the world could only do as much as clap their hands and cheer on when the actual job at hand requires everybody.
The beast is sitting right in your own doorsteps, rampaging in your own backyard, throwing insults to injury by denying wrongdoings with a smile on live TV, and all you can do is murmur and protest?
Instead you blame the immigrants for stealing your opportunities, forgetting you are among them; shooting the desperate at the border instead of shooting those that are already inside the territory pretending to be public servants.
Don’t you think that when you have eliminated the suit and tie parasites inside America, there won’t any more be illegal immigrants as their lives would greatly improve sans US geopolitical intervention in their own home country?
That is the burden that every American must carry today.
You have enjoyed the good life for decades while the rest of the world are living in slums, makeshift houses after war of democracy tore down their homes to rubble.
You can keep dreaming on, but a police state that you have allowed to exist in your “land of the free” cannot be defeated through daily protests, or online petitions.
Those who told you that meditation is enough to repel the evils of our society have studied the inner workings of the mind, and they know how to provide a good excuse for not joining an armed struggle.
There is only one truth that must be cherished at this point in time. Meditation alone did not give birth to the First American Republic. It was fought for by selfless armed patriots against a mighty empire.
That’s the template from which Americans can proceed to a real, meaningful change. That’s the only thing that has been proven to work so far.
The pen is mightier against the sword only when it successfully aroused the nation to an armed struggle and will be willing to fight for a noble cause to the very end.
Armed militia groups don’t need to show off their gears in a worthless street march and replicate a military exercise to condemn the series of false flag operations. That’s the Unites States government’s job.
The time for counter-propaganda is too late; the time for action is long overdue.
“And it is true whichever existential or grave world threat you may emphasize. For some people it is climate change, for others it is human rights, for some it is the spread of democracy. For me, for quite a while, it has been the new kind of terrorism that afflicts the world today. These terrorists are no longer ‘non-state actors.’ These guys are organized, they have an army, they have a self-professed state, they have ample funds and they have the ability to hurt us gravely in many parts of the world. Everyone seems to have forgotten 9-11 and Boston, but Paris should have reminded us of what’s at stake,” Professor Cohen underscored in his speech given at San Francisco Commonwealth Club on November 18, 2015.
The professor called attention to the fact that today terrorists are using conventional weapons, bombs, mortars and guns. It cannot be excluded that one day terrorists might even use radioactive materials in their attacks.
“This kind of threat cannot be diminished, contained, much less eradicated unless we have a partner in the Kremlin,” Stephen F. Cohen stressed.
However, instead of viewing Russia as a partner in America’s battle against international terrorism, Washington turns its back on Moscow. Furthermore, some Washington policymakers are fuelling what is in fact a new Cold War between Russia and the United States.
The roots of this unproductive approach to the Russo-American relationship lay in a post-Cold War period, according to the professor.
“The chance for a durable Washington-Moscow strategic partnership was lost in the 1990s after the Soviet Union ended. Actually it began to be lost earlier, because it was Reagan and Gorbachev who gave us the opportunity for a strategic partnership between 1985-89. And it certainly ended under the Clinton administration, and it didn’t end in Moscow. It ended in Washington — it was squandered and lost in Washington. And it was lost so badly that today, and for at least the last several years (and I would argue since the Georgian war in 2008), we have literally been in a new Cold War with Russia,” the American academic underscored.
The result of an unwise and pernicious “winner-takes-all” approach adopted by the Clinton administration in the 1990s is a new reality where virtually no rules of mutual conduct and no red lines exist.
The professor noted that after the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, Washington and Moscow developed certain rules-of-mutual conduct — thus, each side knew where the other’s red line was.
“One of the things that Putin and his predecessor President Medvedev keep saying to Washington was: You are crossing our Red Lines! And Washington said and continues to say, ‘You don’t have any red lines. We have red lines and we can have all the bases we want around your borders, but you can’t have bases in Canada or Mexico. Your red lines don’t exist’,” Stephen Cohen pointed out.
According to the professor, there is a number of US policies that have “most offended Russia and still offend it today”: the decision to expand NATO right to Russia’s borders; the refusal on the part of Washington to negotiate on European missile defense with Moscow; and meddling in Russia’s internal affairs in the name of so-called “democracy promotion.”
“Are there any red lines left anymore when it comes to our behavior toward Russia? Do we have the right to say or do anything we wish?” Professor Cohen asked rhetorically and added: “This extends to everything, and it certainly extends to politics. The White House simply can’t keep its mouth shut, being egged on by vested anti-Russian lobbies and mainstream media.”
To complicate matters further, in recent years the world has seen almost three proxy wars between the United States and Russia, he continued. First, in Georgia in 2008, then in Ukraine, beginning in 2014, and prior to the hideous November 13 massacre in Paris it appeared that Syria would be the third.
“We don’t know yet what position Washington is going to take on Syria. Hollande made his decision; he declared a coalition with Russia,” the US academic noted.
To break the stalemate and improve the situation the professor proposed a series of steps: to ensure the accomplishment the Minsk agreements in order to settle the Ukraine crisis; to grasp a chance to form a wide anti-Daesh coalition in Syria together with Russia and major European powers; and to renegotiate the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction initiative aimed at reduction of weapons of mass destruction.
Meanwhile, the White House and US State Department are expressing their deep concerns about Russia’s diminishing America’s leadership in the world and focusing on how to counter Moscow’s actions in Syria.
“We in the United States cannot lead the world alone any longer, if we ever could. Long before Paris, globalization and other developments have occurred that ended the mono-polar, US-dominated world. That world is over. A multi-polar world has emerged before our eyes, not just in Russia but in five or six capitals around the world. Washington’s stubborn refusal to embrace this new reality has become part of the problem and not part of the solution. This is where we are today…. even after Paris,” the American academic concluded.
One lesson from military history is that once mobilization for war begins, it takes on a momentum of its own and is uncontrollable.
This might be what is occuring unrecognized before our eyes.
In his September 28 speech at the 70th Anniversity of the United Nations, Russian President Vladimir Putin stated that Russia can no longer tolerate the state of affairs in the world. Two days later at the invitation of the Syrian government Russia began war against ISIS.
Russia was quickly successful in destroying ISIS arms depots and helping the Syrian army to roll back ISIS gains. Russia also destroyed thousands of oil tankers, the contents of which were financing ISIS by transporting stolen Syrian oil to Turkey where it is sold to the family of the current gangster who rules Turkey.
Washington was caught off guard by Russia’s decisiveness. Fearful that the quick success of such decisive action by Russia would discourage Washington’s NATO vassals from continuing to support Washington’s war against Assad and Washington’s use of its puppet government in Kiev to pressure Russia, Washington arranged for Turkey to shoot down a Russian fighter-bomber despite the agreement between Russia and NATO that there would be no air-to-air encounters in Russia’s area of air operation in Syria.
Although denying all responsibility, Washington used Russia’s low key response to the attack, for which Turkey did not apologize, to reassure Europe that Russia is a paper tiger. The Western presstitutes trumpeted: “Russia A Paper Tiger.” http://www.wsj.com/articles/turkey-shoots-down-a-paper-tiger-1448406008
The Russian government’s low key response to the provocation was used by Washington to reassure Europe that there is no risk in continuing to pressure Russia in the Middle East, Ukraine, Georgia, Montenegro, and elsewhere. Washington’s attack on Assad’s military is being used to reinforce the belief that is being inculcated in European governments that Russia’s responsible behavior to avoid war is a sign of fear and weakness.
It is unclear to what extent the Russian and Chinese governments understand that their independent policies, reaffirmed by the Russian and Chinese presidents On September 28, are regarded by Washington as “existential threats” to US hegemony.
The basis of US foreign policy is the commitment to prevent the rise of powers capable of constraining Washington’s unilateral action. The ability of Russia and China to do this makes them both a target.
Washington is not opposed to terrorism. Washington has been purposely creating terrorism for many years. Terrorism is a weapon that Washington intends to use to destabilize Russia and China by exporting it to the Muslim populations in Russia and China.
Washington is using Syria, as it used Ukraine, to demonstrate Russia’s impotence to Europe— and to China, as an impotent Russia is less attractive to China as an ally.
For Russia, responsible response to provocation has become a liability, because it encourages more provocation.
In other words, Washington and the gullibility of its European vassals have put humanity in a very dangerous situation, as the only choices left to Russia and China are to accept American vassalage or to prepare for war.
Putin must be respected for putting more value on human life than do Washington and its European vassals and avoiding military responses to provocations. However, Russia must do something to make the NATO countries aware that there are serious costs of their accommodation of Washington’s aggression against Russia. For example, the Russian government could decide that it makes no sense to sell energy to European countries that are in a de facto state of war against Russia. With winter upon us, the Russian government could announce that Russia does not sell energy to NATO member countries. Russia would lose the money, but that is cheaper than losing one’s sovereignty or a war.
To end the conflict in Ukraine, or to escalate it to a level beyond Europe’s willingness to participate, Russia could accept the requests of the breakaway provinces to be reunited with Russia. For Kiev to continue the conflict, Ukraine would have to attack Russia herself.
The Russian government has relied on responsible, non-provocative responses. Russia has taken the diplomatic approach, relying on European governments coming to their senses, realizing that their national interests diverge from Washington’s, and ceasing to enable Washington’s hegemonic policy. Russia’s policy has failed. To repeat, Russia’s low key, responsible responses have been used by Washington to paint Russia as a paper tiger that no one needs to fear.
We are left with the paradox that Russia’s determination to avoid war is leading directly to war.
Whether or not the Russian media, Russian people, and the entirety of the Russian government understand this, it must be obvious to the Russian military. All that Russian military leaders need to do is to look at the composition of the forces sent by NATO to “combat ISIS.” As George Abert notes, the American, French, and British aircraft that have been deployed are jet fighters whose purpose is air-to-air combat, not ground attack. The jet fighters are not deployed to attack ISIS on the ground, but to threaten the Russian fighter-bombers that are attacking ISIS ground targets.
There is no doubt that Washington is driving the world toward Armageddon, and Europe is the enabler. Washington’s bought-and-paid-for-puppets in Germany, France, and UK are either stupid, unconcerned, or powerless to escape from Washington’s grip. Unless Russia can wake up Europe, war is inevitable.
Have the totally evil, dumbshit neocon warmongers who control the US government taught Putin that war is inevitable?
Written by Selwyn Duke
No-go zones — elitist media and politicians claim they don’t exist. But they’d better tell that to Da’esh (ISIS), which, in a recently uncovered manifesto, brags that it has been using Western refugee programs to sneak terrorists into Europe with the aim of creating no-go zones. Perhaps even better described as Sharia-dominant mini-caliphates, Da’esh’s intent is to use the areas as bases from which to launch attacks such as the November 13 Paris massacre and the jihadist killings in San Bernardino yesterday.
In the 99-page manifesto entitled Black Flags from Rome, the social-media-savvy Da’esh boasts, “There were small armies of the Islamic State within every country of Europe by late 2014, and the intelligence agencies didn’t even know about it!” As InfoWars’ Paul Joseph Watson reports:
At least three individuals who posed as “refugees” have now been connected to the Paris attacks, including the mastermind behind the plot, Abdelhamid Abaaoud, who brazenly revealed how he exploited the migrant red carpet to plot bloodshed.
“My name and picture were all over the news yet I was able to stay in their homeland, plan operations against them and leave safely when doing so became necessary,” Abaaoud told Dabiq magazine.
The first Stade de France suicide bomber, Ahmad Almohammad, also used a fake Syrian passport to enter Europe as an asylum seeker via Greece.
“No doubt, some of these refugees were undercover fighters of Al Qa’idah and the Islamic State,” the ISIS manifesto states. “They were quick to take the opportunity of entering into the different countries of Europe (most probably as early as 2012). All this was happening under the nose of the European intelligence services whose job during this time (2012) was only to prevent European Muslims from entering Syria. (This shows how quick the Islamic groups were in planning ahead. Years before Europe even knew where its Muslim citizens were going — experienced Islamic fighters had already found safety in Europe.)”
And it has arrived, in devastating style. As The Investigative Project on Terrorism writes, providing more details about the manifesto’s claims:
These highly trained fighters were instructed to form secret cells [in Europe] and wait until called on by the Islamic State’s self-proclaimed caliph, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. At that time they would “continue the Jihad and … seek revenge for the Western occupation of Muslim lands.” “Black Flags From Rome” claims the sleeper agents were well-trained in urban combat tactics similar to this month’s Paris attacks. It proudly contrasts past Al-Qaida’s terrorists with its fighters, whom it describes as “untrained” and “vulnerable,” noting that Western intelligence agencies never faced professionally trained fighters with combat experience.
“These young Europeans had been professionally trained, and given training most specific to the context of the war they would battle within Europe,” the manifesto says.
ISIS training included instruction on buying and firing weapons and making improvised explosives. Such training could explain the sophistication of the Paris attacks and the attackers’ competence in making suicide vests, which experts say takes weeks of training.
“Their locations were unknown, and police raids wouldn’t even have the same impact as unarmed lone wolf terrorists’ (sic), because these young men were armed and able to shoot back in groups…, the manifesto says.
Note that yesterday’s San Bernardino terrorist incident smacks of the above, at least to an extent. The two perpetrators, 28-year-old Syed Farook and 27-year-old Tashfeen Malik, not only carried four firearms — two of which were illegally obtained — but also were dressed in tactical gear and had an explosive device. It was a well-planned attack.
In a less publicized part of the Da’esh manifesto, the group expressed its intention to take its jihad global. As the Indian Express reports:
“The Islamic State would now expand beyond Iraq and Syria,” states the manifesto. “It would now expand into … India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan (and several other countries).”
… Future Islamic State battles, it claims, “will rage in every country, and this is why there is (sic) over one-and-a-half billion Muslims in the world”.
“They will fight the New World Order in every land and every place. The peak of this war against the New World Order will be the battle against al-Dajjal” [the false messiah in Islam].
As for the mini-caliphates known as “no-go zones,” Western authorities’ official line is that they don’t exist; after all, what government will admit that, due to weakness, it has lost control over parts of its territory? But as this writer has reported, the zones can be found in much of Western Europe. The Daily Caller informed last year, for instance, that primarily Muslim immigrant gangs now control 55 areas in Sweden; in fact, it is now claimed that Swedish paramedics may need body armor to enter such areas. And in France, wrote American Thinker in January, “There are 751 neighborhoods the French government believe [sic] they don’t fully control.”
Moreover, while mainstream media and other elitist sources claim that the mini-caliphate story is a rightist meme, the reality is that theNew York Times practically originated the story.
And the story gets bigger all the time. As Watson also reported on the Da’esh claims, “‘Al Qa’idah, the Islamic State and many Mujahideen groups thrived in areas where there was lawlessness because they could buy smuggled goods from the black market and train without fear of police. If police did come, the people in the area would inform everyone because this was a no-go zone for the police,’ states the manifesto.”
Unfortunately, the biggest no-go zone in today’s West is the Truth. As Dr. Thomas Sowell wrote earlier this year, the West’s tragic mistake “of importing millions of people from a culture hostile to the fundamental values of Western culture” won’t be reconsidered by elites “until disastrous consequences become far too big to ignore — which is to say, until it is too late.”
Until then, we’ll hear talk about gun control, “racism,” and “safe spaces,” as the elites make the whole nation a very unsafe space for everyone.
Turkey’s unprovoked shoot-down of a Russian military aircraft over Syria raises interesting questions. It seems unlikely that the Turkish government would commit an act of war against a much more powerful neighbor unless Washington had cleared the attack. Turkey’s government is not very competent, but even the incompetent know better than to put themselves into a position of facing Russia alone.
If the attack was cleared with Washington, was Obama bypassed by the neocons who control his government, or is Obama himself complicit? Clearly the neoconservatives are disturbed by the French president’s call for unity with Russia against ISIL and easily could have used their connections to Turkey to stage an event that Washington can use to prevent cooperation with Russia.
Washington’s complicity is certainly indicated, but it is not completely out of the question that the well-placed Turks who are purchasing oil from ISIL took revenge against Russia for destroying their oil tanker investments and profitable business. But if the attack has a private or semi-private origin in connections between gangsters and military, would Turkey’s president have defended the shoot-down on such spurious grounds as “national defense”? No one can believe that one Russian jet is a threat to Turkey’s security.
Don’t expect the presstitutes to look into any such questions. The presstitutes, such as the BBC’s Moscow correspondent Sarah Rainsford, are spinning the story that the loss of the Russian aircraft, and earlier the airliner, proves that Putin’s policy of air strikes against iSIL has backfired as Russians are not safer.
The responses to the shoot-down are also interesting. From what I heard of Obama’s press conference, Obama’s definition of “moderate Syrian rebels” includes all the extremist jihadish groups, such as al Nursa and ISIL, that are the focus of the Russian attacks. Only Assad is an extremist. Obama, following the neocon line, says that Assad has too much blood on his hands to be allowed to remain president of Syria.
Obama is not specific about the “blood on Assad’s hands,” but we can be. The blood is the blood of ISIL forces fighting the Syrian army. Obama doesn’t refer to the blood on ISIL’s hands, but even the presstitutes have told us the horror stories associated with the blood on ISIL’s hands, with whom Obama has allied us.
And what about the blood on Obama’s hands? Here we are talking about a very large quantity of blood: the blood of entire countries—Libya, Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria, and the blood that Obama’s puppet government in Kiev has spilled of the ethnic Russian inhabitants of Ukraine, not to forget the Palestinian blood spilled by Israel using US supplied weapons.
If the blood on Assad’s hands disqualifies Assad from office, the much greater quantity on Obama’s hands disqualifies Obama. And Cameron. And Hollande. And Merkel. And Netanyahu.
Throughout the entire Washington orchestrated conflicts in the Middle East, Africa, and Ukraine, the Russian government has spoken reasonably and responded in a diplomatic manner to the many provocations. The Russian government relied on European governments realizing that Europe does not benefit from conflicts generated by Washington and separating themselves from a policy that is against their interests. But Europe proved to be a collection of American vassals, not independent countries capable of independent foreign policies.
In its campaign against ISIL in Syria, the Russian government relied on the agreement made with NATO countries to avoid engaging in the air. Now Turkey has violated this agreement.
I will be surprised if the Russian government any longer places any trust in the words of the West and any hope in diplomacy with the West. By now the Russian government and the Russian people will have learned that the Wolfowitz doctrine means what it says and is in force against Russia.
From the Ukrainian attack on Crimea’s power supply and the blackout that is affecting Crimea, the Russian government has also learned that Washington’s puppet government in Kiev intends further conflict with Russia.
Washington has made it clear from the beginning that Washington’s focus is on overthrowing Assad, not ISIL. Despite the alleged attack on France by ISIL, the US State Department press spokesperson, Admiral John Kirby, said that Russia cannot be a member of the coalition against ISIL until Russia stops propping up Assad.
To the extent that the shoot-down of the Russian military aircraft has a silver lining, the incident has likely saved the Russian government from a coalition in which Russia would have lost control of its war against ISIL and would have had to accept the defeat of Assad’s removal.
Each step along the way the Russian government has held strong cards that it did not play, trusting instead to diplomacy. Diplomacy has now proven to be a deadend. If Russia does not join the real game and begin to play its strong cards, Russia will be defeated.
See feature article at:
MCN recommends that you read other pertinent articles by Paul Craig Roberts HERE.
“Among seven areas that Syrian state media listed as targets of Russian strikes, only one—an area east of the town of Salamiyah in Hama province—has a known presence of Islamic State fighters. The other areas listed are largely dominated by moderate rebel factions or Islamist groups, such as Ahrar al-Sham and the al Qaeda-affiliated Nusra Front.”
The US is now supplying anti-tank weapons and other munitions to the rebels fighting in Aleppo and those weapons are being used to kill these very same Shiite militiamen who are driving US tanks, fighting alongside the Iraqi army, and indirectly receiving US assistance just across the border in Iraq.
So thanks to Washington’s twisted foreign policy, they are friends on one side of the Syria-Iraq border and mortal enemies on the other.
The Al-Nusra Front, Al-Qaeda’s affiliate in Syria, has released a grateful video, where they openly thank the Free Syrian Army (FSA), which the US has touted as a “moderate opposition group”, for supplying them with US-made anti-tank TOW missiles (“Tube-launched, Optically tracked, Wire-guided”).
Through this alliance several militant groups like the Al-Nusra Front and the Ahrar al-Sham movement have been given access to FSA’s US-made heavy weaponry, which has been supplied to the militant group by the US, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
Russia doesn’t want to fight a war with Turkey, so Russian generals devised a simple, but effective plan to discourage Turkey from taking any action that could lead to a clash between the two nations.
Last week, Russian warplanes intruded into Turkish airspace twice. Both incidents caused consternation in Ankara and send Turkish leaders into a furor. On both occasions, officials in Moscow politely apologized for the incursions claiming they were unintentional (“navigational errors”) and that they would try to avoid similar intrusions in the future.
Then there was a third incident, a more serious incident, that was not a mistake. It was clearly intended to send a message to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Here’s a short summary of what happened from an article at the World Socialist Web Site:
“Turkish officials claimed a third incident on Monday, when an unidentified MiG-29 fighter jet locked its radar for four and a half minutes on eight Turkish F-16 jets that were on patrol on their side of the border, in apparent preparation to open fire.” (“US, NATO step up threats to Russia over Syria“, World Socialist Web Site)
This was no mistake. The only time a fighter pilot adopts these protocols is when he plans to take down an enemy plane. This was a message, and while it might have been over-the-heads of the politicians and the media but, I assure you, every general in the Turkish High-Command knows what’s it means. This is a wake-up call. Moscow is indicating that there’s a new sheriff in town and that Turkey had better behave itself or there’s going to be trouble. There’s not going to be any US-Turkey no-fly zone over North Syria, there’s not going to be any aerial attacks on Syrian sites from the Turkish side of the border, and there certainly is not going to be any ground invasion of Turkish troops into Syria. The Russian Aerospace Defence Forces now control the skies over Syria and they are determined to defend Syria’s sovereign borders. That’s the message. Period.
This is a good example of how “preemption” can actually prevent conflicts rather than starting them. By firing a shot over Turkey’s bow, Moscow has dampened Erdogan’s plan to annex part of N. Syria and declare it a “safe zone”. Turkey will have to scrap that plan now realizing that any attempt to seize-and-hold Syrian territory will trigger a swift and powerful Russian retaliation. Seen in this light, Russia’s incursion looks like an extremely effective way to prevent a broader war by simply telegraphing to potential adversaries what they can and can’t do. Simply put: Putin has rewritten the rules of the game in Syria and Erdogan had better comply or else. Here’s more on Turkey from Patrick Cockburn in The Independent:
“A Turkish ground invasion into Syria, though still a possibility, would now be riskier with Russian aircraft operating in areas where Turkey would be most likely to launch an incursion.
The danger for the Turks is that they now have two Kurdish quasi-states, one in Syria and one in Iraq, immediately to the south. Worse, the Syrian-Kurdish one…is run by the Democratic Union Party (PYD) which is effectively the Syrian branch of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) which has been fighting the Turkish state since 1984. Any insurgency by the PKK in Kurdish areas in south-east Turkey in future will be strengthened by the fact that the PKK has a de facto state of its own.
It appears that Turkey’s four-year attempt to overthrow President Bashar al-Assad has failed. It is unclear what Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan can do about this since support from Nato is at this stage purely rhetorical. As for Turkey’s relations with Russia, Mr Erdogan says that any attack on Turkey is an attack on Nato and that “if Russia loses a friend like Turkey with whom it has co-operated on many issues, it will lose a lot.” But in Syria, at least, it appears that it is Turkey that is the loser.” (“Russia in Syria: Russian Radar Locks on to Turkish Fighter Jets“, The Unz Review)
Poor Erdogan. He rolled the dice and came up snake-eyes. He figured he could expand his would-be Ottoman Empire into Northern Syria, and now his dream is in a shambles. Should he deploy his warplanes to N Syria and openly challenge the Russian airforce? No, he’s not that foolish. He’s going to stay on his side of the border, stomp his feet, and lash out at “evil Putin”, but at the end of the day, he’ll do nothing.
And Washington’s not going to do anything either. Yes, Hillary and McCain have been calling for a no-fly zone over Syria, but that’s not going to happen. Putin won’t allow it and neither will the Security Council. And, on what pretext anyway? Is Obama really going to request a no-fly zone on the basis that Putin is killing “moderate” terrorists along with the “extreme” terrorists? That’s not a very compelling argument, in fact, even the American people are having a hard time swallowing that one. If Obama wants something from Putin, he’s going to have sit-down at a bargaining table and hash out a deal. So far, he has refused to do that, because he still thinks regime change is within his grasp. There are signs of this everywhere like this article in Turkey’s Today’s Zaman titled “İncirlik base to increase capacity by 2,250 to accommodate new personnel”:
“A tent city within İncirlik has been undergoing reconstruction for modern prefabricated houses, which will host 2,250 US military personnel, the Doğan news agency reported on Friday. During the Gulf War of 1991, a tent city was established to accommodate military personnel serving with Operation Provide Comfort (OPC) and was shut down with the end of the OPC.
On Aug. 20, work began to transform the site of the tent city into a new area named “Patriot Town.” After construction is completed, the İncirlik base will have the largest capacity among the US bases in Europe…
The expansion of the İncirlik base’s capacity comes at a time when Russia has launched the biggest intervention in the Middle East in decades….Moscow’s intervention means the conflict in Syria has been transformed from a proxy war.. into an international conflict in which the world’s main military powers… are directly involved in fighting.” (“İncirlik base to increase capacity by 2,250 to accommodate new personnel“, Today’s Zaman)
This article smacks of US ambitions in the Middle East. As readers can plainly see, Washington is gearing up for another war just like it did in 1991. And the US air war is going to be launched from “Patriot Town” at Incirlik just like we’ve been predicting since July when the deal was finalized. Here’s more background from an article at Hurriyet:
“U.S. Air Force Central Command has started deploying search and rescue helicopters and airmen at Turkey’s southeastern Diyarbakır Air Base in order to help with recovery operations in neighboring Iraq and Syria, it has announced….
NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander in Europe and the commander of U.S. European Command, Gen. Phillip Breedlove, has said the mission will be temporary.
“We will be guests of the government of Turkey at Diyarbakir Air Base. There are no plans for a permanent U.S. presence at this location … This marks yet another successful cooperative effort between the Turkish and U.S. militaries,” Breedlove said.” (“US deploys recovery aircraft in Turkey’s southeast“, Hurriyet)
“US Search and rescue helicopters” just a couple miles from Turkey’s southeastern border?
Yep. In other words, if an F-16 is shot down somewhere over Syria while trying to impose an illegal no-fly zone, then– Presto– the search and rescue helicopters are just 20 minutes away.
So you can see that– even though Putin has thrown a wrench in the works– the Obama team is still moving ahead with its “Topple Assad” plan. Nothing has changed, the Russian intervention just makes the future much more uncertain which is why frustrated geopolitical strategists, like Zbigniew Brzezinski, have begun to pop-up in the op-ed pages of leading newspapers blasting Putin for sabotaging their plans for regional hegemony. It’s worth noting that Brzezinski is the spiritual godfather of Islamic extremism, the man who figured out how religious nutcases could be used to foment hysteria and advance US geopolitical objectives around the world. Thus, it’s only natural that Brzezinski would want to offer his advice now in a desperate effort to avoid a legacy of failure and disgrace. Check out this clip from Politico:
“The United States should threaten to retaliate if Russia does not stop attacking U.S. assets in Syria, former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote in a Financial Times op-ed published Sunday, urging “strategic boldness,” with American credibility in the Middle East and the region itself at stake….And if Russia continues to pursue non-ISIL targets, the U.S. should retaliate, he added.
“In these rapidly unfolding circumstances the U.S. has only one real option if it is to protect its wider stakes in the region: to convey to Moscow the demand that it cease and desist from military actions that directly affect American assets,” he said.” (“Brzezinski: Obama should retaliate if Russia doesn’t stop attacking U.S. assets“, Politico)
The people who Brzezinski breezily refers to as “American assets” in Syria are terrorists. It’s that simple. Putin doesn’t distinguish between the “moderate” terrorists and the “radical” terrorists, the good terrorists and the bad terrorists. It’s a joke. They’re all in the same pool and they’re all going to meet the same fate. They all have to be rooted out, apprehended or killed. End of story.
By tweaking the war on terror narrative in a way that supports some, but condemns others, the Obama administration has backed themselves into an ideological cul de sac from which there is no way out. What they are doing is wrong and they know it is wrong. And that’s why it’s going to be so difficult to make the case for war. In a recent “must see” interview, Putin called out Obama on this very point. Here’s what he said:
“President Obama frequently mentions the threat of ISIS. Well, who on earth armed them? And who created the political climate that facilitated the current situation? Who delivered arms to the area? Do you really not know who is fighting in Syria? They’re mercenaries mostly. They are paid money. Mercenaries work for whatever side pays more. We even know how much they are paid. We know they fight for awhile and then see that someone else pays a little more, so they go there…..
The US says “We must support the civilized, democratic opposition in Syria”. So they support them, arm them, and then they join ISIS. Is it impossible for the US to think one step ahead? We do not support this kind of policy at all. We think it’s wrong.” (Putin explains who started ISIS, you tube, 1:38 to 4:03)
See? Everyone knows what’s going on. Barack Obama is not going to initiate a confrontation with Russia to defend a fundamentally immoral CIA program that has gone south. He will, however, do what the US always does when dealing with an adversary that can actually defend itself. He’s going to hector, harass, threaten, demean, demonize, ridicule, and bully. He might launch another attack on the ruble, or fiddle with oil prices or impose more economic sanctions. But he’s not going to start a war with Russia, that’s just not going to happen.
But don’t give up hope just yet, after all, there is a silver lining to this fiasco, and all of the main players know exactly what it is.
It’s called Geneva. Geneva is the endgame.
Geneva is the UN-backed road map for ending the war in Syria. Its provisions allow for the “establishment of a transitional governing body”, the “participation of all groups… in a meaningful national dialogue,” and “free and fair multi-party elections.”
The treaty is straightforward and uncontroversial. The one sticking point, is whether Assad will be allowed to participate in the transitional government or not.
Putin says “Yes”. Obama says “No”.
Putin is going to win this battle. Eventually, the administration will cave in and withdraw their demand that Assad step down. Their plans for regime change through the use of jihadi-proxies will have failed, and Putin will have moved the Middle East one step closer to a lasting peace and genuine security.
That’s the silver lining and that’s how the war in Syria will end.
More articles by:
U S A
The Great Game Continues ….
STRATFOR Chief Reveals Zio-Anglo-American Plot For World Domination
Global Geopolitical Chessboard:
Psychopathic Players and Cynical Moves
Guarantee a Future of Perpetual War
“From the Black Sea to the Baltic”
Explosive Presentation Hosted by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs Reveals What No Government Official, No Political Representative, No NGO Executive and No Think Tank Director Has Ever Said Before in Public
The preceding map of Eastern Europe and Western Asia represents the most active part of the current global geopolitical chessboard. The few colored lines illustrate the very essence of the Anglo-American geopolitical strategy to maintain world domination and global economic control. This map was shown as a slide at a critical speech given by STRATFOR founder George Friedman. It was taken as a screenshot in case the exceedingly volatile and incriminating video is removed from the internet.
George Friedman presented his speech to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs on February 4th, 2015, which was then followed by a quite telling Q&A period. There is perhaps no other public presentation ever recorded that has so clearly delineated the militaristic geopolitical agenda of the Anglo-American Empire. Friedman explains in unusual detail the manner in which the Western powers have set up the global chessboard to their (Anglo-American Axis) seemingly never-ending advantage. Of course, it is the Russian Federation that is, once again, on the losing side of this Great Game … in the words of George Friedman.
According to the neocon narrative, Germany sits squarely, once again, in the middle of the two superpowers — the USA and Russia. German destiny has put the nation in the position to literally determine the future fate of the world. The last century saw two very graphic examples of the same dramatic geopolitical dynamic. Both World Wars I and II put the same three power-players on full display.
Now, fast forward to 2015 and the civil war in the Ukraine and bankruptcy of Greece. Both have occurred alongside the greatest immigration crisis in European history as the European chessboard is being fastidiously set up. What is especially crucial at this very moment is Germany’s rapidly evolving position and movement on the board. The whole world watches and waits to witness the next moves that Chancellor Angela Merkel will make. This current status of this highly consequential geopolitical chess match is further depicted by the map below.
For those who are uninitiated in the history and arcana of the Great Game, it is not from New York City or Washington D.C. that the moves are made today on this centuries-old geopolitical chessboard, it is Chicago. Both Leo Strauss and Milton Friedman made the University of Chicago their academic home. Leo Strauss, the Father of Neoconservatism, was the political philosopher who spawned an underground movement that has aggressively used the U.S. Military-Industrial Complex to create a de facto American Empire, sometimes promoted as Pax Americana. Milton Friedman provided the foundational blueprint for the necessary political economy which would support such a perpetual war economy. Chicago is where the real action is, especially because of the immigration hub that it has always been for highly educated eastern and central European immigrants, as well as disaffected Russian intellectuals and oligarch wannabes.
Herein lies the real problem. There has long been a network of Eastern Europeans who have harbored an inveterate hatred toward all things Russian. This hatred is at once irrational, intense and without any substantive basis. These lifelong Russophobes have been plotting against the Russian Motherland for decades; their ancestors had likewise conspired over the centuries. Toward that end they have enlisted a whole host of nations which comprise an unspoken alliance known as the Anglo-American Axis (see glossary) which has been and is now arrayed against Russia and her allies.
That President Barack Obama (who hails from Chicago) is surrounded by the same jaded characters is quite problematic. It fully explains why a Nobel Peace Prize winner would go out of his way to antagonize Russia and restart the Cold War. George Soros (originally from Hungary) funded both of Obama’s presidential campaigns while Zbigniew Brzezinski (originally from Poland) functioned as his primary foreign policy advisor. He has also appointed a whole slew of neocon operatives and Chicago politicos to key positions throughout both of his Administrations.
For example, feisty Mayor of Chicago Rahm Emmanuel of Jewish Romanian ancestry was Obama’s first Chief of Staff. Penny Pritzker, whose Jewish family founded Hyatt Hotels and originally emigrated from Kiev, Ukraine, was national finance chair of Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign. Chicago attorney and Obama political consultant David Axelrod’s father was a Jewish immigrant who escaped the pogroms in Eastern Europe. Even Obama’s community organizing past was heavily influenced by the deceased Saul Alinsky, a community organizer from Chicago whose Jewish family immigrated from Russia.
Then there is the current First Family of Neoconservatism, Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and her husband Robert Kagan. Victoria’s father, Shepsel Ber Nudelman, was born to immigrant Russian Jewish parents Meyer and Vitsche Nudelman. Needless to say, Victoria “F**K the EU” does not present the necessary diplomacy to function as the Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs. She will also be forever remembered for singlehandedly restarting the Cold War by hand-delivering cupcakes and cookies to virulent anti-Russian Ukrainians executing a CIA-coordinated coup in Kiev’s Maidan Square which led to the ongoing civil war. Victoria Nuland’s family ties: The Permanent Government in action
The two key figures behind the unrivaled campaign chests amassed by Obama prior to both of his presidential elections were George Soros and Zbigniew Brzezinski. Only by understanding the true forces behind these two characters will the current war against Russia be properly understood. Suffice to say, that both individuals harbor an intense and irrational hatred toward Russia, as do all of their Cold Warrior co-conspirators who have colluded to collapse the Russian state.
(Source: Anglo-American Axis Wages Financial/Economic War Against Russia)
Those central and eastern European émigrés who came to America were mostly liberal, urban intelligentsia who once lived within the Russian orbit. Because of their shared Russophobic sentiments, they naturally bonded together in common cause to bring down Russia, which they did once by way of their carefully planned Bolshevik Revolution. The ‘Russian Revolution’ actually had very little to do with indigenous Russians, and a lot to do with this rogue group of European Russophobes. The Bolshevik Revolution was in fact conceived and manufactured, financed and promoted in both New York City and the City of London. Without American war financing and British military intelligence, the Soviet Union would never have been established.
*Russophobia in this particular context was quite purposefully manufactured (as in Made in the USA) over generations as a ruse to justify the exploitation of the Russian Motherland. By fabricating fear toward the “Russian Bear”, it is easy to marshall worldwide opinion against her. Friedman refers to how ‘scary’ a strong Russia would be, especially when closely allied with Germany.
The original group of hardened Russophobes was primarily Jewish. They were bankers and businessmen, scientists and academics, lawyers and doctors; and always transplants from Central or Eastern Europe. Around this nucleus of rabidly anti-Russian activists (e.g. George Soros) came other sympathizers. Subsequently, educated conservative Catholics (e.g. Zbigniew Brzezinski) from the same eastern European countries joined the cause. George Friedman’s history fits into this pattern as per the bio that follows:
“Friedman’s childhood was shaped directly by international conflict. He was born in Budapest, Hungary to Jewish parents who survived the Holocaust. His family fled Hungary when he was a child to escape the Communist regime, settling first in a camp for displaced persons in Austria and then immigrating to the United States, where he attended public schools in New York City, and was an early designer of computerized war games.
With this essential background the following video of George Friedman’s speech is provided on 4 different channels for the reader’s serious consideration. Two of these have German subtitles; the last one has a Czech translation. There are 3 different YouTube videos shown below; the first being the short version. The second one captures his entire presentation with the relevant material beginning at the 52:30 mark. At the very least, it is well worth watching the first 13-minute video clip. Only by viewing this presentation can one apprehend the true depth and breadth of this multi-century conspiracy. In short, this video captures the very essence of American exceptionalism gone awry and U.S. hegemonic ambition at its very worst.
For those who are unable to watch or listen to this video, please note the following transcription of the most important statements made by Mr. Friedman. These are presented in chronological order and have been rendered exactly as he stated them. Because his command of the English language is rather uncertain at times, some of his utterances require the reader’s own translation.
*** Video Transcription begins below the line ***
Friedman: No place is really pacific [at peace and without war] for very long neither the United States … We have constant wars, okay. Europe will I suspect, not return to the 31 years but will return to humanity. They will have their wars. They will have their peace. They will live their lives. There will not be 100 million dead but the idea of the European exceptionalism I think, is the one suffering the first death. There will be conflict. There was conflict in Yugoslavia and there certainly now is conflict in the Ukraine.
As to the relationship to the United States we no longer have a relationship with Europe. We have a relationship with Romania. We have a relationship with France. There is no Europe to have a relationship with.
Question: Is Islamic extremism really the major threat to the United States, and will it die on its own, or will it keep growing?
Friedman: It is a problem to the United States it is not an existential threat. It has to be dealt with, but it has to be dealt with proportionately. We have other foreign policy interests. So, the primordial interest of the United States over which for a century we have fought war, the first, second, and Cold War has been the relationship between Germany and Russia, because united they’re the only force that could threaten us, and to make sure that that doesn’t happen. If you’re a Ukrainian is essentially reach out to the only country that will help you which is the United States.
Last week, ten days ago, General Hodges, Commander US Army Europe visited the Ukraine. He announced that US trainers would now officially be becoming, not just unofficially coming. He actually pinned medals on Ukrainian fighters, which by protocol of the military; foreigners don’t get to pin on medals, but ‘he did’ showing that this was ‘his’ army. He then left and in the Baltics announced that the United States would be pre-positioning armor, artillery, and other equipment in the Baltics, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria, which is a very interesting point. So the United States, yesterday the United States announced it that it would be sending weapons, tonight of course they denied it, but they are, the weapons will go.
In all of this, the United States has acted outside the context of NATO because NATO has to have a 100 percent vote, any one country can veto anything, and the Turks will veto just for giggles. The point is that the United States is prepared to create a cordon sanitaire around Russia. Russia knows it. Russia believes that the United States intends to break the Russian Federation. I think that as Peter Lawrie put it, “We don’t want kill you, we just want to hurt you a little bit.” Either way, we are back at the old game. And if you go ask a Pole, or a Hungarian, or a Romanian, they live in a totally different universe from a German, and they live in a totally different universe from a Spaniard. So, there’s no commonality in Europe, but if I were a Ukrainian I would do exactly what they doing — try to draw the Americans in.
Friedman: The United States has a fundamental interest. It controls all the oceans of the world. No power has ever done that. Because of that we get to invade people and they don’t get to invade us; it’s a very nice thing. Maintaining control of the sea and control of space is the foundation of our power. The best way to defeat an enemy fleet is to not let it be built.
The way the British managed to make certain that no European power could build a fleet was to make sure the Europeans were at each other’s throats. The policy that I would recommend is the one that Ronald Reagan adopted toward Iran and Iraq. He funded both sides so they would fight each other, and not fight us. This was cynical, it was certainly not moral, it worked, and this is the point. The United States cannot occupy Eurasia.
The moment the first boots hits the ground the demographic differential is that we are totally outnumbered. We can defeat an army; we cannot occupy Iraq. The idea that of 130,000 men would occupy a country of 25 million well, the ratio in New York of cops to citizens was greater than we had deployed in Iraq. So, we don’t have the ability to go across but we do have the ability to first, support various contending powers so they are concentrated [supported] themselves with political support, some economic support, military support, advisors, and in extremists, do what we did in Japan, in Vietnam, in Iraq, and in Afghanistan … spoiling attacks. The spoiling attack is not intended to defeat the enemy it is intended to throw them off-balance. What we did in each of these wars, in Afghanistan, for example, is we threw Al Qaeda off-balance. The problem we have, since we’re young and stupid, is that having thrown them off-balance instead of saying okay job well done let’s go home, we said, well that was easy. Why don’t we build a democracy here? This was the moment dementia that came in.
The answer, therefore, is that the United States cannot constantly be intervening throughout Eurasia, it must be selectively intervening and very rarely. That is the extreme moment. We cannot as the first step send American troops, and when we send American troops we have to truly understand what the mission is, limit it to that, and not develop all sorts of psychotic fantasies. So hopefully we’ve learned that this time, it takes a while for kids to learn lessons, but I think you’re absolutely right, we cannot as an Empire do that, Britain didn’t occupy India, it took various Indian states and turned them against each other, and provided some British officers for an Indian Army.
The Romans did not send vast armies out there, it placed Kings like … um … you know various kings it created under the Emperor and those kings were responsible for maintaining the peace. Pontius Pilate was an example. So, Empires that are directly governed by the Empire liked the Nazi Empire failed. No one has that much power. You have to have a level of cleverness; however, our problem is not yet that, it is actually admitting that we have an Empire, so we haven’t even got to that point where we don’t think we can kinda go home and it’ll be over and done. And so we’re not even ready for chapter three of the book.
Question: So I infer from your comments that the Euro as the currency will not survive.
Friedman: The question on the table for the Russians is will they retain a buffer zone that at least neutral, or will the West penetrate so far in the Ukraine that they’re 70 miles away from Stalingrad, and 300 miles away from Moscow. For Russia the status of Ukraine is an existential threat, and the Russians cannot let go. For the United States, in the event that Russia holds onto the Ukraine, where will it stop? Therefore it’s not an accident that General Hodges, whose been appointed to be blamed for all of this, is talking about pre-positioning troops in Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, and the Baltics. This is the Intermarium from the Black Sea to the Baltic that Piłsudski dreamt of.
See the slide below depicting the Intermarium which was taken from the same video presentation by George Friedman:
Międzymorze (Polish pronunciation: [mjɛnd͡zɨˈmɔʐɛ]), known inEnglish as Intermarium, was a plan, pursued after World War I by Polish leader Józef Piłsudski, for a federation, under Poland‘s aegis, of Central and Eastern European countries. Invited to join the proposed federation were the Baltic states(Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia), Finland,Belarus, Ukraine, Hungary, Romania, Yugoslavia andCzechoslovakia.
The proposed federation was meant to emulate the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, stretching from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea, that, from the end of the 16th century to the end of the 18th, had united the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania.
Intermarium complemented Piłsudski’s other geopoliticalvision—Prometheism, whose goal was the dismemberment of the Russian Empire and that Empire’s divestment of its territorial conquests.
Intermarium was, however, perceived by some Lithuanians as a threat to their newly established independence, and by some Ukrainians as a threat to their aspirations for independence, and was opposed by Russia and by most Western powers, except France.
Within two decades of the failure of Piłsudski’s grand scheme, all the countries that he had viewed as candidates for membership in the Intermarium federation had fallen to theSoviet Union or Nazi Germany, except for Finland (which nonetheless suffered some territorial losses in the Winter War).
Friedman: This is the solution for the United States. The issue, to which we don’t have the answers, what will Germany do? So, the real wild card in Europe is that as the United States builds itscordon sanitaire, not in Ukraine, but to the west, and the Russians try to figure out how to leverage the Ukrainians out; we don’t know the German position. Germany is in a very peculiar position. Its former Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder is on the board of Gazprom. They have a very complex relationship to the Russians. The Germans themselves don’t know what to do. They must export, the Russians can’t take up the export. On the other hand, if they lose the free trade zone, they need to build something different.
For the United States the primordial fear is Russian capital, Russian technology … I mean, German technology and German capital, Russian natural resources, Russian manpower, as the only combination that has for centuries scared the hell out of the United States. So how does this play out? Well, the US has already put its cards on the table. It is the line from the Baltics to the Black Sea.
For the Russians, their cards have always been on table. They must have at least a neutral Ukraine, not a pro-Western Ukraine. Belarus is another question. Now, whoever can tell me what the Germans are gonna do, is gonna tell me about the next 20 years of history, but unfortunately the Germans haven’t made up their mind, and this is the problem of Germany always. Enormously economically powerful, geopolitically very fragile, and never quite knowing how to reconcile the two. Ever since 1871 this has been the German question, the question of Europe. Think about the German question, because now it’s coming up again. That’s the next question that we have to address and we don’t know how to address it, we don’t know what they are going to do.
*** End of Transcription ***
Vital Qualification of George Friedman’s Answers: What was NOT said
Obviously, Friedman did not give away critical pieces of their (neocon’s) historical war strategies. Nor did he reveal the key elements of their future warmongering plans. The point is that the neocon war plans have always included controlling both side of the battlefields. Not only do they earn enormous profits from war financing, they also generate massive revenue streams from the subsequent disaster capitalism.
The much more important point is what Friedman conveniently left out of his responses regarding the likes of Al Qaeda. In all intelligence circles — WORLDWIDE — it is well known that Al Qaeda is really Al CIAda. The neocons have created all the bad guys out there in the world. ISIS, ISIL and the Islamic State are perfect examples of their most recent bogeyman creations. So are the original Mujahideen in Afghanistan which was specifically formed and funded by the CIA to fight the Russians during the Soviet-Afghan War.
What is also very important to note is that the neocon cabal is extremely proficient in utilizing the darks art of Divide and Conquer and its many odious tactics. There is absolutely nothing that they will not do in the interest of advancing their war-making schemes. Therefore, government-sponsored terrorism has become their primary MO and preferred trick of the trade. No other strategy and/or tactic produces quicker results than the fear generated by their incessant terrorizing of nations and societies everywhere.
It is crucial to bear in mind that this misguided agenda, dedicated to maintaining the American Empire, is quite in vogue throughout all of the urban centers of this nation. New York City and Washington D.C., Chicago and Los Angeles each play their integral roles in the advancement of this imperial plan. The entire U.S. political class and banking industry together with theMilitary-Industrial Complex and key transnational corporations are all in sync.
The Military-Industrial Complex, quite unfortunately, is only prosperous when there is war … LOTs of war. What is there to do for them during peace-time? How can they justify the humongous budget appropriations year after year when there’s no bogeyman out there to attack and subjugate? The hallmark of empire is this inevitable tendency toward perpetual war.
Because a neoconservative political agenda has been so seamlessly wedded to a neoliberal economic scheme, there is now a dangerous juggernaut that steamrolls across the planetary landscape with virtual impunity. Given its current form and formidability, there is no countervailing force that can meaningfully oppose it on any battlefield. It has only been contained by the nuclear weapon deterrents possessed by Russia, the financial leveraging via Treasuries executed by China and the collective economic prowess of all the BRICS-aligned countries.
Essential Takeaways from Friedman’s Speech; U.S. Foreign Policy Laid Bare
The following 10 points represent the most chilling revelations from George Friedman’s talk. Ergo, if the reader remembers nothing else from this exposé, these are the most important. Keeping them in mind will greatly inform the correct understanding of weighty current events, especially those which are occurring anywhere on the largest landmass in the world — Eurasia.
(1) Russia must be contained and controlled in any way possible so as not to even pose a potential threat to the USA’s sole superpower status.
(2) Germany must be prevented from entering into an economic union with Russia; fabricating false pretexts by the USA in order to levy economic sanctions against Russia drives a wedge between both nations.
(3) A German-Russian alliance would challenge U.S. world domination as no other combined force on Earth. The marriage of German capital and technology with Russian human and natural resources would be invincible.
(4) The best way to preclude a close collaboration between Russia and Germany is to bring war to their borders, especially through the employment of “spoiling attacks” (read: terrorist attacks). Russia has experienced this with Chechnya, Georgia, South Ossetia, and the Ukraine.
(5) By inciting wars among Russian neighbors and conflicts between the concerned Eurasian powers, USA world supremacy is assured (e.g. the Ukraine conflict was started after Russian peacemaking initiatives in Syria).
(6) Just as the British Empire controlled its many colonies throughdivide and rule, the U.S. must use the same MO and military tactics. Rome used the same divide and conquer strategy appointing local kings to maintain the peace.
(7) Pilsudski’s Intermarium delineates the ideal way of containing Russia at the European border, which could then be used as a springboard to conquer the Motherland. Pushing Russia’s Western front close to Moscow poses an existential threat.
(8) Channeling the hatred of the defunct USSR, found within the Baltic states and ex-Soviet satellites, toward the 25-year old Russian Federation will help secure the Intermarium.
(9) Maintaining a cordon sanitaire around Russia will neutralize its military force, limit its alliances and minimize its economic influence throughout the world. Forever keeps Russia on the defensive.
(10) Russia and Germany must be kept apart even if it means starting World War III. The first two world wars served the very same purpose; the Ukraine Civil War can be expanded at any time in order to preoccupy the concerned nations as it was chosen for its volatility.
The statements and responses made by George Friedman are both reckless and reprehensible to the extreme. As a highly paid advisor to the U.S. Federal Government and various NGOs, his services ought to be discontinued post haste. His casual references to upsetting world peace and committing naked acts of aggression toward foreign nations in the interest of rapacious neocon conquest are completely unacceptable.
The lawless coterie of government officials, military officers, think-tank executives, NGO presidents, corporate CEOs, university chancellors and media moguls needs to be exposed for implementing such a malevolent and destructive agenda. Truly, an overwhelmingly nefarious neocon/neoliberal conspiracy has been exposed on video by Stratfor’s George Friedman. Whether this was done by design or by accident can only be guessed at; nonetheless, its exposure will be critical to bringing about its final termination. After all, when the last century’s “Cold Warriors” are removed from the chess game, there cannot be a 21st century version of the Cold War.
The indisputable proof regarding those Russophobes who instigated the Cold War is now available for all to hear. A dyed-in-the-wool neocon divulges ‘classified’ dark secrets which rarely, if ever, see the light of day. The evidence is so strong here that criminal prosecutions (as in The Hague’s International Criminal Court) can now proceed on the basis of those many illegal wars, which were provoked and prosecuted by the U.S. Federal Government, in the advancement of this patently neocon agenda. There are also those numerous military conflicts, carried out by foreign proxies and treasonous surrogates, which occurred as an outworking of the same game plan.
It’s of vital important to understand that geopolitical ‘experts’ like George Friedman walk through virtually any door they want to in Washington, D.C. The influence they assert within the U.S. Government and Corporate America is far too extensive given the moral bankruptcy of their profoundly defective political philosophy and fundamentally flawed foreign policy. These are the same “chickenhawks” who started the Iraq War, as well as the Afghanistan War before that. Hence, it is imperative that they be removed immediately from public life as they have proven themselves to be a terrible menace to society.
Likewise, all the various parties associated with this murderous and larcenous enterprise ought to be apprehended expeditiously before they can inflict any more damage. The USA and Russia, Europe and the Middle East have all seen enough of their handiwork. Each co-conspirator in the neocon cabal ought to be identified by name and organizational affiliation, and then posted on a dedicated internet site under the heading:
Only in this manner will the world-at-large be saved from more war and the inevitable mayhem that is left in its wake.
State of the Nation
September 11, 2015
Soon after publishing this piece, SOTN happened upon an article at Global Research that contained information which has led us to believe that George Friedman is unaware of his serious indiscretions. It has been very difficult to understand how anyone in his capacity could speak such unvarnished and ‘dangerous’ truths in a public forum. It now appears that he is not in complete control of his faculties, particularly his ability to discriminate between what can and what cannot not be spoken of in public.
Whether this lack of discrimination is due to medication or dementia or some other affliction, it is clear that the “Universe” has used him to disclose forbidden truths. What has been shared in this post should never have been sourced from an NGO that is known in some circles as a “private CIA”. George Friedman was also a tad indiscrete when he said that the Kiev coup d’état was “the most blatant coup in history”. As follows:
We owe it to SOTT.net for bringing this exceptionally revealing video to our attention. The Facebook video posted above appeared in a comment under an SOTN article on Syria’s Bashar al-Assad which SOTT.net featured on their site. It must be acknowledged that Syria, too, has suffered the very same fate as planned by the same rogue criminal elements which infest the American Government.
 George Friedman
The Anglo-American Axis is represented, first and foremost, by the major English-speaking countries of the world: USA, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Israel. The European member nations of NATO, such as Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands are also closely aligned with the AAA as are all the Scandinavian countries. So are the Asian Pacific Rim nations of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, Kuwait, Jordan, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, and Qatar also owe their allegiance to the AAA but some of these may be changing. The World Shadow Government is an ultra-secret, supranational organization which completely controls the Anglo-American Axis, as well as the European Union, NATO, among many other institutional entities which constitute the Global Control Matrix.
(Source: Vladimir Putin’s Russia: Perfect Foil To The Anglo-American Axis And Their New World ‘Order’)
See Addendum HERE
MCN recommends that you read other pertinent articles at:
The handling of the Ukrainian conflict, and the second-rate attempt to antagonize Vladimir Putin and paint him as an aggressor has failed, if the terse opinion of one of America’s oldest diplomats is any indication.
Henry Kissinger, now 92 years old, remains one of the staunchest insiders in the smoky room, always a move ahead in the game for New World Order dominance.
During the Nixon administration, it was Secretary of State Henry Kissinger who “opened up” Communist China to American diplomacy.
With escalating tensions between the U.S. and Russia, Kissinger blasted the American handling of the Ukraine situation for “backing Kiev at any cost” and basically antagonizing Putin without keeping focus of “long term order” and instead acting recklessly for short-term interests.
Make no mistake, Kissinger – a top envoy for such shadowy globalist organizations as Bilderberg and an advocate of real politik – plays the long game. Long term world order is part of his calculus. Ultimately, Kissinger now suggests, Ukraine will remain a buffer or middle ground between U.S. interests in Europe (via NATO) and the traditional Russian sphere of influence.
RT reported on his lengthy statements, and their significance for the bungled effort in Ukraine:
Former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger has hit out at American and European Ukraine policy, saying it ignores Russia’s relationship with its neighbor, and has called for cooperation between the White House and the Kremlin on the issue.
“Breaking Russia has become an objective [for US officials] the long-range purpose should be to integrate it,” the 92-year-old told The National Interest in a lengthy interview…
“The relationship between Ukraine and Russia will always have a special character in the Russian mind. It can never be limited to a relationship of two traditional sovereign states, not from the Russian point of view, maybe not even from Ukraine’s. So, what happens in Ukraine cannot be put into a simple formula of applying principles that worked in Western Europe.”
What this means is that American leaders under the Obama regime have been clumsy, and handled Russia far too simply. The negotiations are three dimensional, not two dimensional.
Despite the brazen attempt to insert a puppet in Kiev via Poroshenko, use false flags and agitation in Ukraine and lure Putin into direct confrontation by using conflict over natural gas, oil and energy – they have simply miscalculated.
After all, total global integration is the long term goal, and even Kissinger wouldn’t dream of going too far with Russia, particularly at the expense of a working global order.
Clearly, Kissinger is suggesting a much different and more accommodating tact with Putin, and tacitly acknowledging the all out failure to secure Ukraine for the West:
With the armed conflict in Ukraine still showing no signs of resolution, Kissinger repeated his previous proposal for Ukraine to become a buffer, or mediator state between Russia and the West.
“We should explore the possibilities of a status of nonmilitary grouping on the territory between Russia and the existing frontiers of NATO,” Kissinger stated.
“The West hesitates to take on the economic recovery of Greece; it’s surely not going to take on Ukraine as a unilateral project. So one should at least examine the possibility of some cooperation between the West and Russia in a militarily nonaligned Ukraine.”
Kissinger … called for the West to stop backing Kiev at all costs, even as the victims of the conflict pile up. “The Ukraine crisis is turning into a tragedy because it is confusing the long-range interests of global order with the immediate need of restoring Ukrainian identity.”
Obama officials deflected Kissinger’s criticisms.
Former U.S. Ambassador to Russia until 2014 when he resigned, Michael McFaul claimed the tensions arose when Putin “rejected” U.S. terms to “reset relations.” (Ahostile Twitter crowd countered McFaul, suggesting that the “deal” was always on U.S. terms for NATO interests/dominance.)
Someone as long in the tooth and as deep seated in secrecy and intrigue as Dr. Kissinger understands the fine art of a poking a bear in ways that this administration does not.
Moreover, with the inside track, Kissinger often signifies the official word of the secret establishment – deals that often go over the head of the president and his cabinet officials.
Deep behind the scenes, Putin and Kissinger are working towards the same global government, and Russia won’t be so easily cut out of its construction. Such vehicles as the BRICS development bank reveal a new chapter that is not marked by American hegemony and U.S. imperialism alone. Instead, a basket of world powers will hammer out the new world together.
Welcome to the new world order. It is coming, but Kissinger won’t live to see his dark promise land.
Paul Craig Roberts | May 18, 2015
There is much speculation about US Secretary of State John Kerry’s rush visit to Russia in the wake of Russia’s successful Victory Day celebration on May 9. On May 11, Kerry, who was snubbing Russia on the 9th, was on his way to Russia, and Putin consented to see him on May 12.
As time passes we will find out why Kerry was snubbing Putin on May 9 and 3 days later was criticizing Washington’s puppet regime in Ukraine. For what is known at this time, a possible explanation is that Washington is coming to its senses.
If you watched the 1 hour 20 minute video of the Victory Day Parade, you are aware that the celebration sent a powerful message. Russia is a first class military power, and Russia is backed by China and India, whose soldiers marched with Russia’s in the parade.
So, while the increasingly irrelevant West, absorbed in its own self-importance, snubbed
the celebration of the victory that the Red Army gave them over Hitler, the three largest countries in the world were present united. Russia has the largest land mass, and China and India, also large land masses, have the world’s largest populations.
The celebration in Moscow made it clear that Washington has failed miserably to isolate Russia. What Washington has done is to make the BRICS more unified.
With the President of China sitting at the right hand of Putin, the celebration also made it completely clear even to the morons in the Obama regime that Washington is no longer the Uni-power.
Consider now the impact on Washington’s vassal states in Europe, the crux of the American Empire. Europeans are aware that two of the most powerful military states in history did not survive their invasions of Russia. Napoleon lost the Grande Army in Russia, and Hitler lost the Wehrmacht in Russia. It has dawned on Europeans that they are being shoved into conflict with Russia in the interest of Washington’s claim to be the World Hegemon. Europeans are accustomed to obey Washington, but when it came to being forced into conflict with Russia, Europeans began to express dissent. Signs of an independent European foreign policy appeared with Merkel and Hollande’s meeting with Putin to resolve the Ukrainian crisis orchestrated by Washington.
Faced with the failure of its policy of isolating Russia and the emergence of an independent foreign policy in Europe, Washington sent Kerry as a supplicant to Putin to work out a way to de-escalate the Ukrainian crisis. Putin being a peacemaker will permit Washington to save face. But this will not please the neoconsevatives or the military/security complex. The former are invested heavily in claims of Amerika Uber Alles, and the latter are lusting for the abundant revenues from a new cold, or hot, war.
Obama, Kerry, and Cameron have to become magicians. They have to transition from demonizing Putin to working with him.
Having failed with force against Russia, the West is now employing seduction. If Western peoples hope to escape from the Police State that Washington has imposed on the entire Western World, we must pray that Putin does not fall for the seduction.
There is no world leadership in the West. There is only selfishness and hubris. Western “leadership” is exploitative. The West loots the non-West and is now turning on itself with its looting of Ireland and Greece, with Italy, Spain, and Portugal the next targets for looting. The American public itself has been looted of its jobs, career aspirations, and civil liberties.
The Western model of “democratic capitalism” turns out to be neither democratic nor capitalist, but a form of fascism ruled by an oligarchy. The United States is where regime change is most badly needed.