web analytics

Saudi Arabia and BRICS

No one serious considers the Saudi monarchy to be a model of anything positive.

Although Ibn Abdul-Wahhab is considered to be the father of Wahhabism, it was actually the British who initially impregnated him with the ideas of Wahhabism and made him its leader for their own sinister purposes to destroy Islam and the Muslim Ottoman Empire. The intricate details of this intriguing British conspiracy, are to be found in the memoirs of its master spy, titled “Confessions of a British Spy”.

How do you explain the potential inclusion of Saudi Arabia in the BRICS and the Global South-led drive toward de-dollarization?

Isn’t that bad?

No one serious considers the Saudi monarchy to be a model of anything positive.

But if there is ever going to be systemic change in the Gulf (which I think is inevitable at some point), it is much more likely to come about through integration with the Global South, not the imperial core.

It was the British and US empires that created the Saudi regime in the first place, protected it, and prevented any systemic change for the past century.

Moreover, it has arguably been the United States that has historically pressured and/or forced the Saudi regime to implement its most reactionary foreign policies, such as Riyadh’s support for Salafi-jihadist contras (in Afghanistan in the 1980s, the former Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria, etc.), or its collaboration with Israeli colonialism, bombing of Yemen, sectarian anti-Shia propaganda campaign, and war drive against Iran.

If Saudi Arabia maintains a more independent, non-aligned foreign policy, that helps strengthen the resurgent Non-Aligned Movement, and is certainly good for West Asia.

That doesn’t make the reactionary monarchy desirable in any way — or directly help the largely South Asian migrant workers who keep the country running through brutal slave-like exploitation — but it does mean the possibility for potential peace in the region after decades of US-led neocolonial wars, a weakening of the US-led campaign to normalize Israeli colonialism, and a likely end to the wars on Yemen and Iran.

The fact of the matter is simply that, as one of the world’s leading oil producers, and the de facto leader of OPEC, Saudi Arabia’s inclusion in the Global South-led drive toward de-dollarization is very important.

The petrodollar is absolutely fundamental in undergirding the US-led imperial system of economic domination, which is built around the dollar as the global reserve currency.

An end to Saudi petrodollar backing, even if only partially, would be a major blow to US economic hegemony.

If that imperial system does eventually collapse, whether or not the Saudi regime (or the UAE, Qatar, or any other Gulf monarchy) survives is up in the air as well — given how crucial US military support has been historically for protecting the Gulf monarchies.

But as long as the US empire was propping up the Saudi regime, it was not going anywhere.

Blinken’s normalisation delusion

Iran-Gulf rapprochement is shattering US and Israeli dreams

Earlier this month, Saudi Arabia and other major oil producers announced that starting in May they will cut production by more than 1 million barrels a day. The cuts will continue until the end of the year.

Anyone hearing the statements being made these days by US officials — especially Secretary of State Anthony Blinken — about Washington’s stepped-up efforts to normalise relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel could be excused for thinking they inhabit a different planet.

They seem completely oblivious to the radical changes sweeping the region, especially the accelerating momentum towards ending US political and military influence in the Middle East and especially the Gulf.

Addressing Zionist lobbyists in Washington on Monday, Blinken declared the US “has a real national security interest in promoting normalisation” between Israel and Saudi Arabia.

 “We believe that we can – and indeed we must – play an integral role in advancing it,” he said, adding ” we remain committed to working toward that outcome, — including during his current visit to Riyadh.

This was part of a speech in which Blinken reiterated the US’ unstinting support for Israel and warned that “all options are on the table” to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

The most eloquent rejoinder to these optimistic delusions came in the form of four developments in the past few days that will have shocked and horrified the US and Israel, and Blinken personally.

— The announcement by Iranian navy commander Admiral Shahram Irani that his country and four Gulf states -(Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, and Qatar) plan to form a naval alliance that will also include Pakistan and India. (Oman signed a naval treaty with Iran years ago).

— Tuesday’s reopening of the Iranian embassy in Riyadh at a ceremony attended by senior officials from both sides including Ambassador Alireza Enayati, a high-ranking diplomat whose appointment reflects the extent of the bilateral interests involved.

— Confirmation that Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin-Farhan will visit Iran in the next few days to discuss strengthening trade and security ties and formally invite President Ebrahim Raisi to Riyadh.

— The signing by Saudi Arabia and Russia’s energy ministers of an agreement to bolster their ‘OPEC+’ deal by cutting oil production in order to maintain fair prices.

The move led to an immediate rise in oil prices and belied Western press reports about oil-related disagreements between Riyadh and Moscow.

These developments, which were not out-of-the-blue or unexpected, are obviously bad news for the US.

The planned naval alliance, in particular, makes redundant all US and European claims about protecting the Gulf states from an Iranian threat, or any justification for maintaining a massive naval presence in the region and large military bases in Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and Kuwait.

Henceforth, the countries of the region will rely on their own navies and militaries to safeguard the security of their territory and waters.

They no longer need to be subjected to US extortion.


The Iranian ‘bogeyman’ has become an ally, the Sunni-Shia sectarian rift which the US exploited for decades is being healed, a historic reconciliation has been achieved, and a strong new partnership is being built on a solid basis.

I confess I did not expect the Saudi/Gulf reconciliation with Iran to develop so rapidly.

It shatters Netanyahu’s dream of turning the so-called Abraham Accords into an Israeli-led military and security alliance, and the Gulf region into a massive market for Israeli arms, especially the Iron Dome and David’s Sling systems — whose failings were exposed by the resurgence of Palestinian resistance, along with the myth of Israeli ‘exceptionalism’ in security expertise.

Now there is to be a naval security alliance between Iran and its Gulf neighbours.

Next, we could have an industrial and military-industrial partnership involving the exchange of expertise and technology, including in the nuclear field.

After that, joining forces in a single front to confront and terminate Western hegemony over the region and the common enemy Israel.

Blinken would be well advised not to go too far in committing to normalisation between Saudi Arabia and the occupier state.

He would do better to try to preserve his own country’s normalisation, presence, and alliances in the region, at a time when most states of the Middle East — including Saudi Arabia and the UAE — are flocking towards the BRICS grouping, the Shanghai treaty, and the new world order led by China and Russia.

But the US’ overbearing arrogance ensures he will neither listen to nor act on that advice.

GOP Goons Introduce Bill To Scrap Last Nuclear Arms Treaty With Russia

“We should withdraw from the treaty and bolster our nuclear forces,” 

MAY 22, 2023 

Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) introduced a piece of legislation last week that would formally accuse Russia of violating New START and call on the US to withdraw from the treaty.

New START is the last nuclear arms control treaty remaining between the US and Russia and places limits on the deployment of nuclear warheads and launchers.

Russia suspended its participation in the treaty earlier this year but has said it will continue to abide by its limits.

In a press release, Cotton slammed President Biden for agreeing with Russian President Vladimir Putin to extend New START for five years back in 2021.

“President Biden should never have extended this treaty that has only made Russia and China stronger and America weaker. 

We should withdraw from the treaty and bolster our nuclear forces,” Cotton said.

The legislation would also place conditions on future arms control negotiations. 

It would require any deals that place limits on the US and Russia’s nuclear arsenals to include China, although Beijing’s nuclear arsenal is vastly smaller.

The bill would prohibit “unilateral reductions and prohibit the bargaining away of US missile defenses.”

It would also ban “the use of funds to implement the New START Treaty or any future arms control agreement unless it meets the bill’s required stipulations.”

So far, the legislation has gained 10 Republican co-sponsors, including Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID), the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

“Our legislation will correct these mistakes by conditioning future arms control agreements with Russia to include all classes of nuclear weapons as well as China. 

We must be prepared for a strategic environment in which the United States faces two nuclear peers – China and Russia,” Risch said.

Responding to the legislation, the Kremlin said there has been no serious talks with the US on arms control. 

“We can now only state with regret that there are no serious, substantive contacts on these issues between Moscow and Washington,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.

“Let’s just say that the last remnants of the international legal framework in this area are slipping away.”

In the decades leading up to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the US unilaterally withdrew from several arms control treaties with Russia, including the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, and Open Skies.

China has shattered the assumption of US dominance in the Middle East

CNN — 

With a grandiose diplomatic flourish China brokered a rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran, in the process upending US calculus in the Gulf and beyond.

While the United States has angered its Gulf allies by apparently dithering over morality, curbing arms supplies and chilling relations, Saudi Arabia’s King-in-waiting Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, known as MBS, has found a kindred spirit in China’s leader Xi Jinping.

Both are bold, assertive, willing to take risks and seemingly share unsated ambition.

Friday’s announcement that Riyadh and Tehran had renewed diplomatic ties was unexpected, but it shouldn’t have been. It is the logical accumulation of America’s diplomatic limitations and China’s growing quest to shape the world in its orbit.

Beijing’s claim that “China pursues no selfish interest whatsoever in the Middle East,” rings hollow.

It buys more oil from Saudi Arabia than any other country in the world.

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman pictured in October 2021.

Xi needs energy to grow China’s economy, ensure stability at home and fuel its rise as a global power.

His other main supplier, Russia, is at war, its supplies therefore in question.

By de-escalating tensions between Saudi and Iran, Xi is not only shoring up his energy alternatives but, in a climate of growing tension with the US, also heading off potential curbs on his access to Gulf oil.

Xi’s motivation appears fueled by wider interests, but even so the US State Department welcomed the surprise move, spokesman Ned Price saying, “we support anything that would serve to deescalate tensions in the region, and potentially help to prevent conflict.”

Iran has buy-in because China has economic leverage.

In 2021 the pair signed a trade deal reportedly worth up to $400 billion of Chinese investment over 25 years, in exchange for a steady supply of Iranian oil.

Tehran is isolated by international sanctions and Beijing is providing a glimmer of financial relief.

And, in the words of Iran’s Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei last year, there’s also the hope of more to come as he sees geopolitical power shifting east.

“Asia will become the center of knowledge, the center of economics, as well as the center of political power, and the center of military power,” Khamenei said.

Saudi has buy-in because war with Iran would wreck its economy and ruin MBS’s play for regional dominance.

His bold visions for the country’s post fossil-fuel future and domestic stability depend on inwardly investing robust oil and gas revenues.

US State Department spokesman Ned Price pictured in July 2022.

US influence on the wane

It may sound simple, but the fact the US couldn’t pull it off speaks to the complexities and nuance of everything that’s been brewing over the past two decades.

America’s wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have burned through a good part of its diplomatic capital in the Middle East.

Many in the Gulf see the development of the war in Ukraine as an unnecessary and dangerous American adventure, and some of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s territorial claims over Ukraine not without merit.

Chinese and Saudi flags in Riyadh in December 2022.

What the global West sees as a fight for democratic values lacks resonance among the Gulf autocracies, and the conflict doesn’t consume them in the same way as it does leaders in European capitals.

Saudi Arabia, and MBS in particular, have become particularly frustrated with America’s flip-flop diplomacy: dialling back relations over the Crown Prince’s role in the murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi (which MBS denies); then calling on him to cut oil production swiftly followed by requests to increase it.

These inconsistencies have led the Saudis to hew policy to their national interests and less to America’s needs.

During his visit to Saudi last July, US President Joe Biden said: “We will not walk away and leave a vacuum to be filled by China, Russia, or Iran.”

It seems now that the others are walking away from him.

China steps up

On Beijing’s part, China’s Gulf intervention signals its own needs, and the opportunity to act arrived in a single serving.

Xi helped himself because he can. The Chinese leader is a risk taker.

His abrupt ending of austere Covid-19 pandemic restrictions at home is just one example, but this is a more complex roll of the dice.

Mediation in the Middle East can be a poisoned chalice, but as big as the potential gains are for China, the wider implications for the regional, and even global order, are quantifiably bigger and will resonate for years.

US President Joe Biden (center-left) and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (center) in Jeddah in July 2022.

Yet harbingers of this shake-up and the scale of its impact have been in plain sight for months.

Xi’s high-profile, red-carpet reception in Riyadh last December for his first overseas visit after abandoning his domestic “zero-Covid” policy stirred the waters.

During that trip Saudi and Chinese officials signed scores of deals worth tens of billions of dollars.

China’s Foreign Ministry trumpeted Xi’s visit, paying particular attention to one particular infrastructure project: “China will deepen industrial and infrastructure cooperation with Saudi Arabia (and) advance the development of the China-Saudi Arabia (Jizan) Industrial Park.”

The Jizan project, part of China’s belt and road initiative, heralds huge investment around the ancient Red Sea port, currently Saudi’s third largest.

Jizan lies close to the border with Yemen, the scene of a bloody civil war and proxy battle between Riyadh and Tehran since 2014, sparking what the United Nations has described as the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.

Significantly since Xi’s visit, episodic attacks by the Iran-backed Houthi rebels on Jizan have abated.

There are other effects too: the plans to upscale Jizan’s container handling puts Saudi in greater competition with the UAE’s container ports and potentially strains another regional rivalry, as MBS drives to become the dominant regional power, usurping UAE’s role as regional hub for global businesses.

Xi will have an interest seeing both Saudi Arabia and the UAE prosper, but Saudi is by far the bigger partner with higher potential global economic heft and, importantly, massive religious clout in the Islamic world.

Rivals share common ground on Iran policy

Where the UAE and Saudi align strongly is eschewing direct conflict with Tehran.

A deadly drone attack in Abu Dhabi late last year was claimed by the Houthis, before the rebels quickly rescinded it.

But no one publicly blamed the Houthis’ sponsors in Tehran.

A once shaky ceasefire in Yemen now also seems to be moving toward peace talks, perhaps yet another indication of the potential of China’s influence in the region.

Beijing is acutely aware of what a continued war over the Persian Gulf could cost its commercial interests – another reason why a Saudi/Iran rapprochement makes sense to Xi.

Iran blames Saudi for stoking the massive street protests through its towns and cities since September.

Saudi denies that accusation, but when Iran moved drones and long-range missiles close to its Gulf coast and Saudi, Riyadh called on its friends to ask Tehran to de-escalate.

Russia and China did, the threat dissipated.

Questions remain over nuclear weapons

Tehran, despite US diplomatic efforts, is also closing in on nuclear weapons capability and Saudi’s MBS is on record saying he’ll ensure parity, “if Iran developed a nuclear bomb, we will follow suit as soon as possible.”

Late last week US officials said Saudi was seeking US security guarantees and help developing a civilian nuclear program as part of a deal to normalize relations with Israel, an avowed enemy of Iran’s Ayatollahs.

Indeed, when US Secretary of State Antony Blinken visited Israel late January, concerned over a rising Palestinian death toll in a violent year in the region, potential settlement expansions and controversial changes to Israel’s judiciary Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke to Blinken about “expanding the circle of peace,” and improving relations with Arab neighbours, including Saudi Arabia.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken (left) with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in May 2021.

But as Saudi seems to shift closer to Tehran, Netanyahu’s mission just got harder.

While both Saudi and Israel strongly oppose a nuclear-armed Iran, only Netanyahu seems ready to confront Tehran.

“My policy is to do everything within Israel’s power to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons,” the Israeli leader told Blinken.

Riyadh favors diplomacy. As recently as last week the Saudi foreign minister said: “It’s absolutely critical … that we find and an alternative pathway to ensuring an (Iranian) civilian nuclear program.”

By improving ties with Tehran, he said, “we can make it quite clear to the Iranians that this is not just a concerns of distant countries but it’s also a concern of its neighbors.”

For years this is what America did, such as brokering the Iran nuclear deal, or JCPOA, in 2015.

Xi backed that deal, the Saudis didn’t want it, Iran never trusted it, Biden’s predecessor Donald Trump’s withdrawal confirmed Iran’s fears and sealed its fate, despite the ongoing proximity talks to get American diplomats seated at the table again.

Iran has raced ahead in the meantime, massively over-running the bounds of the JCPOA limits on uranium enrichment and producing almost weapons-grade material.

What’s worse for Washington is that Trump’s JCPOA withdrawal legacy tainted international perceptions of US commitment, continuity and diplomacy.

All these circumstances perhaps signaled to Xi that his time to seize the lead on global diplomacy was coming.

Yet the Chinese leader seems to accept what Netanyahu won’t and what US diplomacy is unable to prevent: that sooner, rather than later, Iran will have a nuclear weapon.

As such, Xi may be fostering Saudi-Iran rapprochement as a hedge against that day.

So Netanyahu looks increasingly isolated and the Israeli leader, already under huge domestic pressure from spiking tensions with Palestinians and huge Israeli protests over his proposed judicial reforms, now faces a massive re-think on regional security.

Pieces of regional puzzle shifting

The working assumption of American diplomatic regional primacy is broken, and Netanyahu’s biggest ally is now not as hegemonic as he needs. But by how much is still far from clear.

It’s not a knockout, but a gut blow, to Washington. How Xi calculates the situation isn’t clear either.

The US is not finished, far from it, but it is diminished, and both powers are coexisting in a different way now.

Earlier this month, the Chinese leader made unusually direct comments accusing the US of leading a campaign against China and causing serious domestic woes.

“Western countries led by the United States have contained and suppressed us in an all-round way, which has brought unprecedented severe challenges to our development,” Xi told a group of government advisers representing private businesses on the sidelines of an annual legislative meeting in Beijing.

Meanwhile, Biden has defined the future US-China relationship as “competition not confrontation,” and he has built his foreign policy around the tenets of standing up for democracy.

It is striking that neither Xi, nor Khamenei, nor MBS are troubled by the moral dilemmas that circumscribe Biden.

This is the big challenge the US president warned about, and now it’s here. An alternative world order, irrespective of what happens in Ukraine.






China reports: Israel thugs begin to reduce electricity supplies to Gaza

The New World Order will not like this

JERUSALEM, June 19 (Xinhua) — Israel on Monday started reducing the electricity supply to the Gaza Strip, after the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) cut down its payment for electricity supply to the Hamas-run enclave.

A spokeswoman for the Israel Electric Corporation confirmed that the cut down has started, in accordance with the PNA’s decision to cover only 70 percent of the cost of the power that Israel provides to Gaza.

According to a statement by the Gaza Electricity Distribution Company (GEDCO), the electricity supply from Israel to Gaza was reduced by 6.7 percent.

Last Sunday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s security cabinet decided to instruct the state-owned Electric Corporation to start limiting the power.

Top 30 Netanyahu GIFs | Find the best GIF on Gfycat

Ramallah: Israeli colonists are deliberately poisoning water wells in West Bank villages, towns and cities, pushing indigenous Palestinian residents off their land to pave way for an Israeli takeover. Jewish Rabbis have issued religious edicts permitting the poisoning of water wells, according to the human rights group, Breaking the Silence, an organisation of veteran Israeli soldiers. Palestinian residents have spotted colonists pouring poison into their water wells and there have been reports of illnesses and deaths as a result.

The move came despite local and international human rights organization warned that a humanitarian crisis might break out if power supply to the besieged enclave would be further restricted.

According to Gisha, an Israel-based human rights group, Israel has been selling 120 megawatts to Gaza, supplied through ten power lines, with each line carrying 12 megawatts.

Since this morning, Israel cut supply on two lines from 12 to eight megawatts, the group said.

At the same time, Israel continues to “severely limit entrance of generators and spare parts needed for their repair to Gaza, as well as entrance of transformers and equipment needed to repair an electricity network nearing collapse,” the group said.

The PNA’s decision is largely seen as a mean to pressure the Palestinian Islamist movement of Hamas.

Russia Destroys The Greater Israel Dream

Silverstein wrote about what Netanyahu had said:

“… Israel should have taken advantage of the suppression of the demonstrations in China [Tiananmen Square], when the world’s attention was focused on what was happening in that country, to carry out mass expulsions among the Arabs of the Territories. However, to my regret, they did not support that policy that I proposed, and which I still propose should be implemented.”

The grand plan was going swimmingly. 

The concept of endless wars for Greater Israel was working and producing impressive results. 

Opportunistically, through aggravation of war after war, chunk by chunk of Arab land was usurped and the map of Greater Israel was slowly materializing. 

No matter the unstable chaos surrounding the State of Israel for the past seven decades, and no matter the undying Palestinian resistance and the violent Intifadas that erupted internally, the Zionist dream of Greater Israel remained consistently intact and was progressing unabated and unchallenged by anyone.

But dreams, by their diaphanous nature are easily interruptible – can easily turn into sudden nightmares. 

Indeed, dreams do, in the blink of an eye, simply end.

Nobody expected the Zionist dream to come to a sudden halt like this. 


Israel in turmoil

Nobody expected Russia, literally in the blink of an eye, to suddenly assert itself militarily in the Levant and in the process turn the Zionist dream into a geopolitical and existential nightmare. 

No further territorial expansions are even remotely possible now with Russia’s military presence in the Levant. 

The Russian army is in the Levant to stay and the Israelis know it. 

In the Zionist universe, it’s as if a mighty big-footed contender had suddenly appeared in the dream and instantly stepped on the Greater Israel map like it was a castle made of sand.

Russia is not a declared enemy of Israel. 

Russia did not squelch The Greater Israel dream on purpose. 

The destruction of the Zionist dream is the result of an unintended consequence that purely serves the regional and global interests of Russia. 

Happenstance that the Zionist dream was in the way of Russian ambitions, that’s all.  Dog eat dog world.

But what are Russia’s interests in lassoing  the Levant?

Well, first, Putin intends to re-fulfill the old Russian dream of establishing sizable military foundations and bases in the ‘warm waters’ of the world, in the Mediterranean, to be more precise, in order to pivot and project power westwards with practical ease. 

And also, to use Mediterranean naval bases as a first line of defense against a Western creep towards its own territory. 

Russia’s growing military presence in Syria is a matter of  “national security”, Putin has declared several times over. 

Establishing multiple bases in the Mediterranean has not been possible for Russia to do since the 1967 Arab-Israeli war when it lost the Middle East chess game to America, symbolized by Egypt, a major Soviet client at the time having its Soviet military hardware devastated by Israeli-operated, made-in-USA weaponry. 

Russia today considers its growing presence in Syria to be a most vital geopolitical maneuver for re-establishing a seat of power again in the Middle East, in tandem with its progress into future Superpowerdom. 

In the current uncontrollable chaos of the Levant, this is an ambition that Russia must begin implementing immediately, lest the region falls dangerously under ISIS and Zioconism, making it thus harder for Russia’s old dream to be realized.

Secondly, Putin sees the cloth of American Empire as fast fading, especially in the Middle East, and he’s taking advantage of this: putting forth a challenging proposition to the American Emperor. 

Yes, Vladimir Putin, president of Russia, a man considered to be a cold-blooded realist, is aware of America’s weaknesses, but he’s also aware of its current strengths and he is in Syria as a power salesman – he’s in Syria to make a deal with Empire Americana. 

Respectfully, but firmly, he is pitching to Empire: ‘Look, you remain supremely powerful,  but you are hemorrhaging in the Middle East and the situation is now critical. 

You cannot afford a new large-scale war in the Middle East that may or may not reassert your hold on the region;  and you have lost all your proxy wars there as well – there are no more black-clad joker cards in your deck.   

You cannot continue on this disadvantageous path, you cannot stand still either and you also cannot withdraw from the region. 

All these are strategically inferior options and will not stop the bleeding of your powers. 

The only way out is through pragmatism. 

The only remedy is to share control of the Middle East with us, Russians. 

We have together shared power in the Middle East under the shadow of the Cold War and yes it created dangers and complexities for both our countries in the past. 

But today is different: there is no official Cold War between us and so our new partnership can only serve to strengthen us both’. 

This, dear reader is Russia’s diplomatic speak, received with quiet relief by the White House and cussed and scorned by the Ziocons in DC. 

Simplified, Putin is in Syria and his realist message to America is:  ‘Share the Middle East with us now or we both fall in the future’.  

And it looks like Obama has quietly taken heed, in the interest of Empire and realism and not out of cowardice or submission to Putin. 

Obama’s problem is that although he begrudgingly agrees with Putin’s analysis and remedy, he cannot be seen to be supporting it in public because the Neocons would immediately set the dogs of treason on him, bogging him down with political obtrusion and smear campaigns in his last 15 months of power – possibly damaging his party’s winning chances at the next elections.

Thirdly, in my opinion, Russia is in Syria also for the purpose of redressing Russian military image and history. 

After the devastating defeat of the Soviet Union at the hands of the American-backed Afghani Mujahedeen, and considering the profound nationalism that Russian society feels especially towards its military institutions,  it behooves any modern Russian leader thus to conceive and create a military victory against a modern version of the same old enemy who had previously defeated them – a military morale-booster both for the Russian populations and for the history books. 

A utilization of the sentiments of the ‘comeback kid’ for mass consumption so as to boost levels of nation devotion. 

Russia, being the largest nation in the world, landmass-wise, it has to regularly make grand spectacles and gestures in the name of national unity enhancement. 

Killing Takfiri terrorists in Syria, nay smashing them to smithereens with Russian Air Power is an opportune event to balance out and positively update Russian history books.

Yes, the Russian military buildup in Syria, especially in marine and air power, now looks to be, relatively speaking, permanent. 

And this is what is causing Israel and its Ziocon friends in Washington sleepless nights and hectic, nefarious group-brainstorming sessions. 

They know that the dream of a Greater Israel cannot be realized with Russia dominating the skies and waters of the Levant. 

This is the current and silent inescapable reality. 

This is the wall that suddenly sprung up and instantly separated Zionists from their beloved Greater Israel dream. 

Because of a ‘wall’, the dream is now impossible.

Some would call this, poetic justice.

The ‘dream destroyed’ being the current unspoken reality, Israel is left with no expedient and transforming choices. 

It cannot go to direct war with a more powerful Russia and win back domination over Levant skies and waters.

  It couldn’t even defeat Hezbollah who lack any form of Air Power back in 2006. 

Nasrallah: Hezbollah Stronger Than in 2006 Victory over Israel | News | teleSUR English

  And more frustratingly for Israel, it cannot blackmail, coerce or buy President Putin either. 

Moreover, presently under the leadership of Obama, it is clear that America is not prepared to go to direct war with any nation, let alone Russia, on behalf of Israel. 

The current architects of  expansionist Zionism are at a complete and utter loss to recognize all these chokehold factors – blood is draining from their faces. 

No more meetings over what Arab country to genocide next so as to steal more land and resources, the issue now is not when and how the Zionist dream can be finally fulfilled, but how to safely bring the corpse-dream back from the dead without anyone noticing.

Alas, there are no clever Zionist ideas on the architects’ table. 

They are truly and absolutely in utter speechless shock.

And what compounds this hectic catatonia that the Zionist Sensei are currently experiencing is the fact that they know that Israel’s global credibility is at its lowest ever, and that sooner or later, the international community – seeing Israel’s geopolitical weakness – will start pressing hard, even imposing the 2-State solution on Israel, based on the 1967 borders. 

This is the double nail in the Greater Israel dream coffin. 

Not only will Israel be unable to expand territory, but it will also be forced into giving up territory currently under its (illegal) control. 

Something that the Israeli public are psychologically not prepared for, nor is there any political will in the Israeli halls of power to do so either.

Observations of the behaviorism of Zionists tell us that what they cannot change, they usually endeavor to spoil. 

And the only thing they are still capable of doing is spoiling it for Arabs. 

They will undoubtedly attempt to expand the current regional conflicts into another one hundred years of Arab on Arab wars. 

This is a given – they breathe to spoil life for their Arab neighbors. 

And we also observe that when Zionists are not willing or able to go to war, they usually endeavor to send other capable and willing nations to war on their behalf. 

Ukraine proxy war between Russia and USA.

But as noted a few passages above, this is currently impossible under the Obama administration. 

The dream of Greater Israel remains smashed.

What to do then?  What is the ultimate solution? 

Would Israel prefer that America directly and militarily confront Russia in the Levant?  I call it a yes. 

Even at the cost of causing World War Three?  Yes. 

Even at the risk of igniting a nuclear war?  Yes.

Yes, yes, and a triple yes.  The global Zionist congress pathology shows every indication of this.

  ‘The tribe above all’ is their core belief. 

They are Masadian-ISISians in suits with basements full of nukes.  Their narcissistic intentions are always clear – their motives and maneuvers are never to be trusted.

We are currently at a very serious and sobering point in the fast-evolving dramas taking place in the Levant and the Middle East at large. 

Everyone concerned is standing shoulder-to-shoulder with the unknown. 

This alignment of overwhelming unknowns is rare in history. 

The geopolitical stress and distress levels – despite the equalizing Russian presence in the Levant – remain excruciatingly high for all parties concerned. 

All actors have so much to lose with a single wrong move. 

A cluster of unknowns is forcing everyone into extreme caution. 

Hesitant steps are made then quickly unmade. 

If you were to privately ask Obama or Putin what would happen to the world the day after a war between their two nations ignites, they would both be likely to look you somberly in the eye and say, ‘I don’t know’.

The unknown is upon us and we are upon the unknown.


For now, Zionist masterminds plan on keeping the death of the dream of Greater Israel a secret, in the hope that the next American president would be more malleable and more reactionary than Obama. 

israel_trump_3 - Conservative Post

They will be quietly biding their time and hoping that the next President of America would be more Zionist that Theodore Herzl. 

More ideologically violent than ISIS and Tarantino. 

Hoping against all hope that the tiny state of Israel would survive a Word War Three catastrophe with little damage inside its boundaries. 

Hoping against all hope that the Arab world surrounding Israel, all of it would literally be bombed back into the stone ages, while Israel continues to be the hi-tech bride of the Middle East. 

Hoping against all hope that Russia would again be defeated by America in the Middle East – just so that Israel can again dominate the skies and waters of the Levant, allowing it thus to revive the corpse of the Greater Israel project. 

Hoping against all hope that igniting World War Three would actually solve all of Israel’s problems.

A touch fantastical?  Maybe not.

This is what happens when tribal madmen dream.

How Jewish Is the War Against Russia?

Let’s be honest about who is promoting it

By Philip Giraldi | The Unz Review

Five years ago, I wrote an article entitled “America’s Jews Are Driving America’s wars.”

It turned out to be the most popular piece that I have ever written and I was rewarded for it by immediately being fired by the so-called American Conservative magazine, where I had been a regular and highly popular contributor for fourteen years.

I opened the article with a brief description of an encounter with a supporter whom I had met shortly before at an antiwar conference.

The elderly gentleman asked “Why doesn’t anyone ever speak honestly about the six-hundred-pound gorilla in the room?

Nobody has mentioned Israel in this conference and we all know it’s American Jews with all their money and power who are supporting every war in the Middle East for Netanyahu?

Shouldn’t we start calling them out and not letting them get away with it?”

In my article I named many of the individual Jews and Jewish groups that had been leading the charge to invade Iraq and also deal with Iran along the way.

They used fake intelligence and out-and-out lies to make their case and never addressed the central issue of how those two countries actually threatened the United States or its vital interests.

And when they succeeded in committing the US to the fiasco in Iraq, as far as I can determine only one honest Jew who had participated in the process, Philip Zelikow, in a moment of candor, admitted that the Iraq War, in his opinion, was fought for Israel.

There was considerable collusion between the Israeli government and the Jews in the Pentagon, White House, National Security Council and State Department in the wake of 9/11.

Under President George W. Bush, Israeli Embassy staff uniquely had free access to the Pentagon office of Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, not being required to sign in or submit any security measures.

It was a powerful indication of the special status that Israel enjoyed with top Jews in the Bush Administration.

It should also be recalled that Doug Feith’s Office of Special Plans was the source of the false WMD information used by the Administration to justify invading Iraq, while that information was also funneled directly to Vice President Dick Cheney without any submission to possibly critical analysts by his chief of Staff “Scooter” Libby.

Wolfowitz, Feith and Libby were of course Jewish as were many on their staffs and Feith’s relationship with Israel was so close that he actually partnered in a law firm that had a branch in Jerusalem.

Feith also served on the board of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), which is dedicated to nurturing the relationship between the US and Israel.

Currently, the top three State Department officials (Tony Blinken, Wendy Sherman and Victoria Nuland) are all Zionist Jews.

The head of the Department of Homeland Security, which is hot on the trail of domestic “terrorist” dissidents, is also Jewish as is the Attorney General and the president’s chief of staff.

They and their boss Joe Biden do not seem concerned that their client Ukraine is no democracy.

The nation’s current government came into power after the 2014 coup engineered by President Barack Obama’s State Department at an estimated cost of $5 billion.

The regime change carried out under Barack Obama was driven by State Department Russophobe Victoria Nuland with a little help from international globalist George Soros.

It removed the democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych who was, unfortunately for him, a friend of Russia.

Ukraine is reputedly both the poorest and most corrupt country in Europe, witness the Hunter Biden saga.

The current President Volodymyr Zelensky, who is Jewish and claims to have holocaust victims in his family tree, is a former comedian who won election in 2019.

He replaced another Jewish president Petro Poroshenko, after being heavily funded and promoted by yet another fellow Jew and Ukraine’s richest oligarch Ihor Kolomoyskyi, who is also an Israeli citizen and now lives in Israel.

It all sounds like deja vu all over again, particularly as many of the perpetrators are still around, like Nuland, priming the pump to go to war yet again for no reason.

And they are joined by journalists like Bret Stephens at the New York Times, Wolf Blitzer and Jake Tapper at CNN, and also Max Boot at the Washington Post, all of whom are Jewish and can be counted on to write regular pieces both damning and demonizing Russia and its head of state Vladimir Putin, which means it is not only about the Middle East anymore.

It is also about weakening and even bringing about regime change in nuclear armed Russia while also drawing some lines in the sand for likewise nuclear armed China.

And I might add that playing power games with Russia is a hell of a lot more dangerous than kicking Iraq around.

To put it bluntly, many US government and media Jews hate Russia and even though they benefited substantially as a group by virtue of their preeminent role in the looting of the former Soviet Union under Boris Yeltsin and continue to be among the most prominent Russian oligarchs.

Many of the oligarch billionaires, like Boris Berezovsky, self-exiled when Vladimir Putin obtained power and began to crack down on their tax avoidance and other illegal activity.

Many moved to Western Europe where some bought up football teams while others went south and obtained Israeli citizenship.

Their current grievances somewhat reflect their tribe’s demand for perpetual victimhood and the deference plus forgiveness of all sins that it conveys, with the self-promoted tales of persecution going back to the days of the Tsars, full of allegations about pogroms and Cossacks arriving in the night, stories that rival many of the holocaust fabrications in terms of their lack of credibility.

Many Jews, particularly younger Jews, are finding it difficult to support apartheid Israel and the constant wars being initiated and fought for no particularly credible reason by both Democratic and Republican parties when in power, which is a good thing.

But Jewish power in Washington and across the US is difficult to ignore and it is precisely those Jewish groups and individuals who have been empowered through their wealth and connections who have been the most vocal leading warmongers when it has come to the Middle East and to Russia.

Interestingly, however, some pushback is developing.

The Jewish peace group Tikkun has recently published a devastating article by Jeffrey Sachs on the Jews who have been agitating for war.

It is entitled “Ukraine Is the Latest Neocon Disaster” and describes how “The war in Ukraine is the culmination of a 30-year project of the American neoconservative movement.

The Biden Administration is packed with the same neocons who championed the US wars of choice in Serbia (1999), Afghanistan (2001), Iraq (2003), Syria (2011), Libya (2011), and who did so much to provoke Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

The neocon track record is one of unmitigated disaster, yet Biden has staffed his team with neocons.

As a result, Biden is steering Ukraine, the US, and the European Union towards yet another geopolitical debacle…”

Tikkun explains how “The neocon movement emerged in the 1970s around a group of public intellectuals, several of whom were influenced by University of Chicago political scientist Leo Strauss and Yale University classicist Donald Kagan.

Neocon leaders included Norman Podhoretz, Irving Kristol, Paul Wolfowitz, Robert Kagan (son of Donald), Frederick Kagan (son of Donald), Victoria Nuland (wife of Robert), Elliott Abrams, and Kimberley Allen Kagan (wife of Frederick).”

It might be added that Kimberley Kagan heads the Institute for the Study of War, which is often cited in media coverage and even in Congress to explain why we must fight Russia.

It has long been recognized by many that a particular antipathy directed against Russia permeates the so-called neoconservative world view.

The neocons are hugely overrepresented at the top levels of government and, as noted above, a number of them are running the State Department while also holding high level positions elsewhere in the Biden Administration as well as in the foreign policy think tanks, including Richard Haass at the influential Council on Foreign Relations.

Likewise, the intensely Russophobic US and Western media, foundations and social networking sites are disproportionately Jewish in their ownership and staffing.

And beyond that, Ukraine is to a certain extent a very Jewish-identified place.

The Jewish media in the US and elsewhere has been showering Zelensky with praise, referring to him as a genuine “Jewish hero,” a modern Maccabee resisting oppression, a David versus Goliath.

T-shirts bearing his image are being sold that read “Resisting tyrants since Pharaoh” while the largely Orthodox Jewish community in New York City has already been raising millions of dollars for Ukrainian aid.

The Jewish Telegraphic Agency reports that a “2020 demographic survey estimated that besides a ‘core’ population of 43,000 Jews, around 200,000 Ukrainians are technically eligible for Israeli citizenship, meaning that they have identifiable Jewish ancestry.

The European Jewish Congress says that number could be as high as 400,000.”

If that is true, it is one of the largest Jewish communities in the world and it includes at least 8,000 Israelis, many of whom have returned to Israel.

As US-Russian negotiations leading up the current fighting were clearly designed to fail by the Biden Administration, one therefore has to wonder if this war against Russia is largely a product of a long enduring ethno-religious hatred coupled with a belief in the necessity for a strong American military applied as needed to dominate the world and thereby protect Israel.

The neocons are most visible, but equally toxic are the Jews who would prefer to describe themselves as neoliberals or liberal interventionists, that is liberals who promote a strong, assertive American leadership role to support the basically phony catchwords “democracy” and “freedom.”

Both neocons and neoliberals inevitably support the same policies so they have both ends of the political spectrum covered, particularly concerning the Middle East and against Russia.

They currently dominate the foreign policy thinking of both major political parties as well as exercising control over media and entertainment industry coverage of the issues that concern them, largely leaving the American public with only their viewpoint to consider.

There is plenty of other evidence that prominent Jews both inside and outside the Administration have been stirring things up against Russia with considerable success as President Biden has now declared insanely that his Administration is engaged in “a great battle for freedom.

A battle between democracy and autocracy. Between liberty and repression.”

He has confirmed that the US is in Ukraine’s war against Russia until we “win.”

How else does one explain the ridiculous trip by Attorney General Merrick Garland to Kiev in late June to help set up a war crimes investigation directed against Russia?

As Garland is supposed to be the US Attorney General, it might first be useful to investigate crimes relating to the United States.

He might start with American war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan or Israeli war crimes using Washington provided weapons in Lebanon and Syria, not to mention the human rights violations using those same weapons that occur on a daily basis directed against the Palestinians.

Some conservatives are also wondering why the Attorney General spends his time pursuing “white supremacists” and has failed to investigate the rioting, looting and killing that rocked the nation in the BLM Summer of 2020.

Nevertheless, an undeterred and fearless Garland announced while in Kiev that Eli Rosenbaum, Jewish of course, and a 36-year veteran of the Justice Department who previously served as the director of the Office of Special Investigations, which was primarily responsible for identifying, denaturalizing and deporting Nazi war criminals, will lead a War Crimes Accountability team made up of DOJ experts in investigating Russian human-rights abuses.

After the obligatory photo op sucking up to Zelensky, the diminutive but steely eyed Attorney General declared that “There is no hiding place for war criminals.

The US Justice Department will pursue every avenue of accountability for those who commit war crimes and other atrocities in Ukraine.

Working alongside our domestic and international partners, the Justice Department will be relentless in our efforts to hold accountable every person complicit in the commission of war crimes, torture and other grave violations during the unprovoked conflict in Ukraine.”

And if any further evidence required to demonstrate the Jewishness of that week in Kiev, actor Ben Stiller, also a Jew, visited Zelensky and gave him a big hug.

If Eli Rosenbaum is still seriously interested in finding Nazis he will find many more of them in Ukraine than within the Russian Army.

So, one has to ask “Whose war is it and who is making it happen?” Can you please explain Joe Biden? Or, given your perpetual blank look, should I ask Merrick Garland or Tony Blinken or maybe even Victoria Nuland?

New RAND Report Says a Long War in Ukraine Is Against US Interests

The report says a prolonged war in Ukraine hampers the US ability to focus on its ‘competition with China’

The RAND Corporation issued a new report that warns against a “protracted conflict” in Ukraine and says a prolonged war is against US interests, breaking from the view of many hawks in Washington that the US should support the fight against Russia for the long term.

RAND is funded directly by the US military and often shapes US policies, including hawkish ones toward Moscow.

A 2019 report titled “Extending Russia” examined the risks and benefits of ways the US could try to “extend” Russia, and many of those policies have been implemented, including the provision of “lethal aid” to Ukraine, sanctions on Russia, and “hindering” the country’s gas and oil exports.

The new report from RAND titled “Avoiding a Long War” examines the risks of the current conflict and acknowledges a protracted conflict heightens the risk of nuclear war.

A summary of the new report reads: “Discussion of the Russia-Ukraine war in Washington is increasingly dominated by the question of how it might end.

To inform this discussion, this Perspective identifies ways in which the war could evolve and how alternative trajectories would affect US interests.

The authors argue that, in addition to minimizing the risks of major escalation, US interests would be best served by avoiding a protracted conflict.”

The authors say the war in Ukraine makes it harder for the US to focus on its efforts to prepare for a future conflict with China.

 “The US ability to focus on its other global priorities — particularly, competition with China — will remain constrained as long as the war is absorbing senior policymakers’ time and US military resources,” the report reads.

The report says that the major risk of a long war in Ukraine is that there would be “a prolonged elevated risk of Russian nuclear use and a NATO-Russia war.”

It says that “avoiding these two forms of escalation is the paramount US priority.”

When it comes to Ukraine retaking more of the territory that Russia captured, the report says this is only a “less significant benefit” and that “avoiding a long war is also a higher priority for the United States than facilitating significantly more Ukrainian territorial control.”

It places “weakening Russia” as a greater benefit to the US than Ukrainian gains, but still not worth the risk of a long war.

The report recognizes that there is currently little hope for peace talks and suggests that the US could “condition future military aid on a Ukrainian commitment to negotiations.”

Another suggestion to foster negotiations is for the US to establish conditions for sanctions relief for Russia.

The authors acknowledge the Biden administration has made no effort to push the warring sides toward peace talks.

The conclusion says that due to the political situation in the US, a “dramatic shift” in US policy toward Ukraine is unlikely.

But the authors say that “developing these instruments now and socializing them with Ukraine and with US allies might help catalyze the eventual start of a process that could bring this war to a negotiated end in a time frame that would serve US interests.”

US Military and Japan to Prepare for War With China

GIF world war ii - animated GIF on GIFER

The US and Japanese militaries are increasing cooperation to prepare for a possible war with China over Taiwan or other areas in the Asia Pacific, the top US Marine Corps general in Japan told Financial Times.

Lt. Gen. James Bierman, commander of the Third Marine Expeditionary Force (III MEF) and of Marine Forces Japan, said the US military was preparing for a future conflict in the region the same way it did in Ukraine in 2014 following the US-backed ouster of former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych.

“Why have we achieved the level of success we’ve achieved in Ukraine? A big part of that has been because after Russian aggression in 2014 and 2015, we earnestly got after preparing for future conflict: training for the Ukrainians, prepositioning of supplies, identification of sites from which we could operate support, sustain operations,” Bierman said.

“We call that setting the theater. And we are setting the theater in Japan, in the Philippines, in other locations,” the general added.

Bierman’s comments came after Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida announced a major overhaul of the Japanese armed forces that involves doubling Tokyo’s military budget. A new security strategy issued by Kishida’s government names China “the biggest strategic challenge” and includes language that can justify military action in defense of the US, breaking from Japan’s post-World War II pacifism.

The Marines Corps has been undergoing an overhaul of its own as it is shifting its focus on preparing for war in the western Pacific rather than fighting counterinsurgencies in the Middle East. Bierman’s III MEF is at the center of the revamp, which is focused on creating smaller units that can move quickly around the islands of the western Pacific as the Marines operate within the range of China’s missiles.

Bierman said that cooperation with allies in the region is vital to the new Marine Corps strategy, and the Marines have been operating more closely with Japanese forces during drills. The US and Japan are set to discuss strengthening their alliance even more during a meeting of their defense ministers this week, and Kishida is set to meet with President Biden in Washington this Friday.

The US is also planning to build five new military facilities in the Philippines as part of its buildup around China, where it will be able to preposition more weapons and equipment. Bierman said the buildup in the Asia Pacific will give the US “a leverage point, a base of operations, which allows you to have a tremendous head start in different operational plans.”

Local officials in the Philippines said the US might return to Subic Bay, which was once the site of the largest US naval base in Asia that closed 30 years ago. But Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. is also looking to maintain good relations with China and may not sign off on the establishment of a major US military base.

China and Russia roll out new global financial system

The Eurasian Economic Community (Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan + Armenia for certain provisions) and China will create a new global economic and financial system, the foundations of which they will set at the end of March 2022.

This new system should have a reference currency whose rate would be established from a basket of currencies of the founding Member States (therefore dominated by the Chinese yuan).

Say Hello to Russian Gold and Chinese Petroyuan-

It was designed by Sergey Glazyev (photo) and is intended to replace the Bretton Woods system, after Russia’s exclusion as part of the “sanctions” for its operation against the Ukrainian banderites [1].

The emergence of two competing economic and financial systems should bring globalization to a halt and divide the world in two.

‘Palestinians ready to engage with Chinese to tell them our story’

Beijing needs allies to ward off US pressure, thus needs to win support of Muslim countries, says expert

Riyaz ul Khaliq   |30.10.2021

As China attempts to expand its reach into the Middle East through its “Belt and Road Initiative” – a massive programme initiated by Beijing to build trade and infrastructure links across Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Europe, any turbulence between Israel and Palestine would be a cause for concern, Li Guofu, a researcher at the China Institute of International Studies, said.


Palestinians are ready to engage with the Chinese government and people to “tell them our story,” speakers and experts told an Istanbul conference on Saturday.

However, a formal engagement with Beijing also requires platforms and vibrant activism, they added.

“We are ready and willing to engage with Chinese lawmakers to explain our story,” said Sheikh Hamid Al-Ahmar, addressing the first international conference on China and the Palestinian cause.

Al-Ahmar is the president of the Association of Parliamentarians for Al-Quds.

He also said Palestinians need to “take into consideration China’s Belt and Road Initiative which requires pure environment without violence and support from everybody.”

“We can build on Pakistan’s relation with China to help Palestine,” he suggested.

“Parliamentarians for Al-Quds look forward to an invitation from the Chinese side to engage with them on Palestine,” he added.

Mousa Abu Marzook, the vice-president of the Palestinian group Hamas, said Palestinians have “ethical, most organized resistance which defends our people.”

“Latest battle for Al-Quds is another example of it,” he said.

Earlier this year in May, Israel launched fresh attacks on Gaza Strip, killing nearly 300 people, including women and children, and left behind a trail of destruction. Health centers and media offices, as well as schools, were among the structures targeted.

Calling Hamas a “main player” in the Palestinian conflict, Marzook said the group has a relationship with “many people in public as well as behind the cameras, we appreciate that gesture.”

He said Palestinians look to a multi-polar world “where we do not have to face wrongs done by the US,” warning China that its “relations with Israel may have short term benefits but it will harm in long term.”

“Roots of terrorism lie in Israel,” Marzook alleged.

“We have historic relations with China and want Beijing away from Israel (…) And we want to enhance bilateral relations with Beijing,” he added.

Referring to the withdrawal of US-led foreign forces from Afghanistan, Marzook said Beijing is going to “fill gap vacuum like this.”

He told Anadolu Agency that Hamas enjoyed the relationship with Chinese people in the past “but it has come down in past one decade because of growing Beijing-Israel relations and opposition by the Palestinian Authority to our relations with Beijing.”

“After the battle of Saif Al-Quds, they (Chinese) contacted us and we are going to make good relations with China,” he added, referring to the latest attacks by Israel against Gaza.

China would need allies in new Cold War era

Sami Al-Arian, Palestinian academic and activist, told the conference the US “will not allow China to yield influence,” referring to forming of new military alliances around China by Washington.

“The US is forming military alliances to besiege China,” he said, adding that Washington “does not allow any country to be neutral.”

“Australia wanted to remain neutral but was forced to choose between security and trade,” he said, referring to the recent AUKUS military pact among the US, UK, and Australia.

Al-Arian, who leads the Istanbul-based Center for Islam and Global Affairs think tank, said that the US has 11 military fleets, and “seven are rotating around the world while Beijing is now building Blue Water Navy to counter Washington.”

Keeping in view the situation which the US is creating around China, al-Arian said, “Beijing would need allies to ward off the pressure on China in new Cold War era.”

“Supporting the struggle of Palestine along the struggle of Kashmiris in their struggle against fascist India would endear China to the Muslim world and defeat the attempt (of the US) to isolate China. But China also needs to resolve the problem of the Uyghurs in a balanced and fair way to receive the support of the Muslim world and beyond,” said Al-Arian, who is also a public affairs professor at Istanbul Sabahattin Zaim University.

“China has to choose to side with people,” he added.

Referring to the economic cooperation of countries like Turkey, Pakistan, and Iran with China, al-Arian said: “This could turn into possible military alliances.”

“It is in the best interest of China to support Palestine and create dynamics in the region and change nature of the conflict,” he said.

Struggle for Pakistani homeland bedrock for support to Palestine

Mustafa Hyder Sayed, who leads Pakistan-China Institute, told the participants the unprecedented support for Palestine in Pakistan was “because the forefathers of the country themselves struggled for an independent state led by Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah.”

Dubbing the Palestinian conflict “a very black and white issue,” he said the issue was “not about Islam or religion but it is about humanity, human rights, right to life for next generation of Palestinians who do not know whether their children will survive.”

Sayed urged a formalized engagement by Palestinians with Beijing.

“There is no reason that China will not take a strong stand on Palestine, however, it requires coordinated efforts from countries that want to take it forward,” Sayed said, asking Palestinians to use the upcoming China-Arab summit for lobbying with Chinese people.

Gao Shangtao, the director of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies at the China Foreign Affairs Ministry University, told the conference that China supports the two-state solution on 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as the capital of an independent Palestine state.

Uncle Sam is ‘Sick Man’ of the West

March 16, 2021

As American economic power continues to decline, a division has emerged within the U.S. political establishment as to which of its designated adversaries is to blame for the country’s woes — Russia, or China.

The dispute came to a head during each of the last two presidential elections, with the Democratic Party first blaming Moscow for Hillary Clinton’s shocking defeat in 2016 over unproven “election meddling” by the Kremlin.

After Joe Biden’s equally controversial victory over Donald Trump this past November, the GOP has retaliated by portraying the 46th president as “soft on China” just as their counterparts drew critical attention to Trump’s alleged ties to Russia — even though both men have taken tough stances toward each respective country.

As a result of this neo-McCarthyist political atmosphere, détente has been criminalized.

In order to understand what is driving this interwar between factions of the Anglo-American elite amid the rise of China and Russia on the world stage, a revisiting of the history of relations between the three nations is necessary.

From the first millennia until the 19th century, China was one of the world’s foremost economic powers.

Today, the People’s Republic has largely recaptured that position and by the end of the decade is expected to overtake the U.S. as the world’s largest economy, a gain that may be expedited by the post-pandemic U.S. recession compared with China’s rapid recovery.

Unfortunately, the Western attitude toward China remains stuck in the ‘century of humiliation’ where from the mid-19th century until the Chinese Revolution in 1949, it was successively raped and plundered by the Western, Japanese, and Russian imperial powers.

The reason the English-speaking world clings to this backwards view is because apart from that centennial period, the West has always been second place to China as the world’s most distinguished country providing the global standard in infrastructure, technology, governance, agriculture, and economic development.

Even at the peak of the Roman Empire, the Han dynasty where the ancient Silk Road began was vastly larger in territory and population.

For two consecutive years in the early 1930s, the best-selling fiction book in the U.S. was Pearl S. Buck’s The Good Earth which depicted the extreme poverty and famine of rural peasant life in pre-revolutionary China.

In many respects, the picture of China in the Western mind remains a composite impression from Buck’s Nobel Prize-winning novel.

The former Chinese Empire underwent its ‘hundred years of humiliation’ after suffering a series of military defeats in the Opium Wars which funded Western industrialization, where the ceding of territories and war reparations in unequal treaties left China subjugated as the “sick man of Asia.”

Like Russia which lagged behind Europe after the Industrial Revolution until the Soviet centralized plans of the 1930s, China was able to transform its primarily agricultural economy into an industrial giant after its communist revolution in 1949.

However, it was only a short time until the Sino-Soviet split in 1961 when China began to forge its own path in one of the most widely misunderstood geopolitical developments of the Cold War.

In 1956, Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev gave what is commonly known as his “Secret Speech” to the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, a report entitled “On the Cult of Personality and Its Consequences”, where the Ukrainian-born politician denounced the excesses of his deceased predecessor, Joseph Stalin.

The news of the shocking address to the Politburo did not just further polarize an international communist movement already divided between Trotskyists and the Comintern but had geopolitical consequences beyond its intended purpose of accommodating Washington to deescalate the arms race.

At first, China took a relatively neutral stance toward the Soviet reforms during its Hundred Flowers Campaign, even as Mao encouraged the USSR to put down the 1956 counter-revolution in Hungary.

The real turning point in Sino-Soviet relations came when the bureaucratic placation of the Khrushchev Thaw began to discourage movements in the developing world living under Western-backed dictatorships from taking up arms in revolutionary struggle.

With the support of Enver Hoxha and Albania, China began to fiercely criticize de-Stalinization and accused the Soviet Union of “revisionism” for prioritizing world peace and preventing a nuclear war over support for national liberation movements, becoming the de facto leader of ‘Third Worldism’ against Western imperialism.

Moscow reciprocated by freezing aid to China which greatly damaged its economy and relations soured between the world’s two biggest socialist countries, transforming the the Cold War into a tri-polar conflict already multifaceted with the Non-Aligned Movement led by Yugoslavia after Josep Broz Tito’s falling out with Stalin.

As the PRC continued to break from what Mao viewed as the USSR’s deviation from Marxism-Leninism, China went down the primrose path of the Cultural Revolution during the 1960s amid the rise of the Gang of Four faction who took the anti-Soviet policies a step further by condemning the USSR as “social imperialist” and an even greater threat than the West.

This led to several huge missteps in foreign policy and a complete betrayal of internationalism, as China aligned with the U.S. in support of UNITA against the MPLA in the Angolan civil war, the CIA-backed Khmer Rouge genocidaires in Cambodia against Vietnam, and the fascist Augusto Pinochet regime in Chile.

After years of international isolation, U.S. President Richard Nixon and his war criminal Secretary of State Henry Kissinger were received as guests in 1972.

Despite the initial reasons for the Sino-Soviet split, it was ironically the Soviet Union which ended up carrying the mantle of national liberation as the USSR backed numerous socialist revolutions in the global south while China sided with imperialism.

In hindsight, the Cold War’s conclusion with the demise of the USSR was arguably an inevitable result of the Sino-Soviet split. Ultimately, mistakes were made by both sides that are recognized by the two countries today, as can be seen in the Communist Party of the Russian Federation’s negative historical view of Khrushchev and the denunciation of the Cultural Revolution and Gang of Four by the CPC (not “CCP”).

In fact, China has since even apologized to Angola for its support of Jonas Savimbi.

Nevertheless, the break in political relations with Moscow also set the process in motion for China to develop its own interpretation of Marxism-Leninism that diverged from the Soviet model and eventually allowed a level of private enterprise which never occurred under the USSR, including during the short-lived New Economic Policy of the 1920s.

If truth be told, this may have been the very thing which prevented China from meeting the same fate.

Starting in 1978, China began opening its economy to domestic private enterprise and even foreign capital, but with the ruling party and government retaining final authority over both the private and public sectors.

The result of implementing market-oriented reforms while maintaining mostly state ownership of industry was the economic marvel we see today, where China has since become the ‘world’s factory’ and global manufacturing powerhouse.

For four decades, China’s real gross domestic product growth has averaged nearly ten percent every year and almost a billion people have been lifted out of poverty, but with capital never rising above the political authority of the CPC.

Unfortunately, the success of Deng Xiaoping’s reform of the Chinese socialist system was not replicated by perestroika (“restructuring”) in the USSR under the leadership of Mikhail Gorbachev who completely failed to revive the Soviet economy and eventually oversaw its dissolution in 1991.

During the 1990s, Russia underwent total collapse as its formerly planned enterprises were dismantled by the same neoliberal policies to which Margaret Thatcher once phrased “there is no alternative” (TINA).

The restoration of capitalism sharply increased poverty and unemployment while mortality fell by an entire decade under IMF-imposed ‘shock therapy’ which created an obscenely wealthy new class of Russian “oligarchs” overnight.

So much so, the fortunes of the Semibankarschina (“seven bankers”) were compared to the boyars of tsarist nobility in previous centuries.

This comprador elite also controlled most of the country’s media while funding the election campaigns of pro-Western President Boris Yeltsin who transformed the previously centralized economy into a free market system.

That was until his notorious successor assumed power and brought the energy sector back under control of the Russian state which restored wages, reduced poverty, and expelled corrupt foreign investors like Bill Browder.

Needless to say, the U.S. was not pleased by Vladimir Putin’s successful revival of the Russian economy because the U.S. already faced a geopolitical contender in China.

As China has been the world’s ascending economic superpower through its unique mixture of private and state-owned enterprises, the U.S. economy has shrunk as trade liberalization and globalization de-industrialized the Rust Belt.

Simultaneously, the expense of the military budget has grown so gargantuan that it can’t be audited while rash imperialist wars in the Middle East following 9/11 marked the beginning of the end for American hegemony.

In 2016, Donald Trump rose to power railing against the political establishment over its “endless wars” and anti-worker free trade deals, abandoning the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) on his first day in office and imposing protectionist tariffs which kickstarted a U.S.-China trade war.

Unfortunately, any efforts to return U.S. productive power outsourced to China by multinationals and scale back American empire-building were destined to fail.

Trump was also politically persecuted by the Democrats and the intelligence community for daring to embrace détente with Moscow as a candidate and spent his entire administration trying to appease the deep state in Washington with little result.

Oddly enough, it was reportedly none other than Henry Kissinger who encouraged Trump to ease the strained relations with Russia as a strategy to contain China, the traditional enemy he once convinced Richard Nixon to make steps toward peace with.

The GOP, representing the interests of the military-industrial complex, has reciprocated the anti-Russia hysteria by accusing incumbent Joe Biden of being weak on China, even though the previous Obama-Biden administration presided over an unprecedented military buildup in the Pacific as part of the U.S. “pivot to Asia.”

The views of constituents from both parties also seem to fall on partisan lines, as indicated in a recent Gallup poll where only 16% of Democrats held a positive view of Russia and a mere 10% of Republicans regard China favorably.

The rise of Russia and China on the global stage presents such a threat to Washington’s full spectrum dominance that the head of U.S. Strategic Command, Admiral Charles Richard, recently warned of the very real possibility of a nuclear war in the future with both countries.

Under the administration of Xi Jinping, China has reshaped the geopolitical order with its ambitious Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) infrastructure project, also known as the New Silk Road.

At the same time, Russia has reintegrated several of the former Soviet republics with the formation of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU).

Conceivably, the return of Russia to world politics has the potential to transform the sphere of competition between the U.S. and China into a multipolar plane where the balance of power can shift toward a more stable geopolitical landscape in the long run.

Nevertheless, the challenge made by the Xi-Putin partnership to the dominion of Western capital is the basis for the bellicosity toward Eurasia by the U.S., as is their joining forces to repair the Sino-Russian political relations broken decades ago.

When the Soviet Union dissolved, the tentative US–China alliance effectively ended and Sino-Russian rapprochement began.

But what prevented the PRC from going the same route as the Eastern Bloc?

Why did Deng succeed and Gorbachev fail?

After all, the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests were concurrent with the numerous ‘Color Revolutions’ behind the Iron Curtain, even though the Western narrative about the June Fourth Incident omits that among the “pro-democracy” demonstrators were many Maoists who considered Deng’s market reforms a betrayal of Chinese socialism.

As it happens, Xi Jinping himself correctly identified one of the main reasons why the USSR dissolved in a 2013 speech:

“Why did the Soviet Union disintegrate?

Why did the Soviet Communist Party fall from power?

An important reason was that the struggle in the field of ideology was extremely intense, completely negating the history of the Soviet Union, negating the history of the Soviet Communist Party, negating Lenin, negating Stalin, creating historical nihilism and confused thinking.

Party organs at all levels had lost their functions, the military was no longer under Party leadership. In the end, the Soviet Communist Party, a great party, was scattered, the Soviet Union, a great socialist country, disintegrated. This is a cautionary tale!”

Xi is correct in that China, unlike the Soviet Union, never made the crucial error of playing into the hands of the West through the condemnation of its own history as Khrushchev did in his “Secret Speech.”

Despite the fact that the report by the Soviet leader contained demonstrable falsehoods such as the absurd claim that Stalin, one of Russia’s most formidable bank robbers as a revolutionary, was a coward deathly afraid of the Nazi invasion as it neared Moscow during WWII, the self-serving speech split the international communist movement and laid the internal groundwork for the USSR’s eventual downfall.

As for the economic reasons for the different outcomes, the late Marxist historian Domenico Losurdo explained:

“If we analyse the first 15 years of Soviet Russia, we see three social experiments.

The first experiment, based on the equal distribution of poverty, suggests the “universal asceticism” and “rough egalitarianism” criticised by the Communist Manifesto.

We can now understand the decision to move to Lenin’s New Economic Policy, which was often interpreted as a return to capitalism.

The increasing threat of war pushed Stalin into sweeping economic collectivisation.

The third experiment produced a very advanced welfare state but ended in failure: in the last years of the Soviet Union, it was characterised by mass absenteeism and disengagement in the workplace; this stalled productivity, and it became hard to find any application of the principle that Marx said should preside over socialism — remuneration according to the quantity and quality of work delivered.

The history of China is different: Mao believed that, unlike “political capital,” the economic capital of the bourgeoisie should not be subject to total expropriation, at least until it can serve the development of the national economy.

After the tragedy of the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, it took Deng Xiaoping to emphasise that socialism implies the development of the productive forces. Chinese market socialism has achieved extraordinary success.”

Since China’s economic upswing has been simultaneous with the downturn of American capitalism, it has left the U.S. with only one option but to equate the PRC with its own crumbling system.

Sadly, in most instances it is the Eurocentric pseudo-left which has parroted the propaganda of Western think tanks that China is “state capitalist” and even “imperialist.”

This also means that its unparalleled economic gains must therefore be a result of capitalism, not state planning, which is another fabrication.

Has there ever been a clearer case of neocolonial projection than the baseless accusation of “debt-trap diplomacy” hurled at China’s BRI by the West?

It is true that China seeks to profit in the global south, but based on terms of mutual benefit for developing nations previously plundered by Western financial institutions which actually impose debt slavery on low income countries.

In reality, Beijing is only guilty of offering a preferable win-win alternative to states exploited under the yoke of imperialism.

Once upon a time, the U.S. itself envisioned a peaceful world of mutual cooperation and trade under Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s Good Neighbor Policy, a forgotten legacy that Xi’s BRI is fulfilling.

None of this is to say China is undeserving of any criticism. To the contrary, its paradoxes are as deep as its achievements and it would be naive to think that Chinese capital, if left unchecked, doesn’t have the potential to be as predatory as the Western variety.

Free enterprise is so inherently unstable that its destructive nature will be impossible to contain forever even by a party like the CPC and must be disassembled eventually.

Without the retention of a large state sector maintaining vital infrastructure and public services, the market relations in China would wreak havoc as it did in post-Soviet Russia.

Not to mention, the biggest progress made by the PRC was in the years prior to the pro-market reforms and ultimately served as the foundation upon which “socialism with Chinese characteristics” is able to thrive.

The lesson of the fall of the USSR is that even a society capable of the most incredible human advancements is not invincible to a market environment.

The Soviet Union withstood an invasion by more than a dozen Allied nations during the Russian Civil War and an onslaught by the Nazi war machine in WWII, but succumbed to perestroika.

While Russia may be under the free market, both nations are a threat to Western capital because they represent a new win-win cooperative model in international relations and an end to American unipolarity.

The Anger Campaign Against China

Nothing was permitted that might prevent the successful recruitment of American soldiers for a war that only the Jews wanted.

Larry Romanoff • August 6, 2020


It shouldn’t be a secret, though it still seems to be, that neither of the two World Wars were started (or desired) by Germany, but were the creation of a group of European Zionist Jews with the stated intent of the total destruction of Germany.

However, that thesis is not the purpose of this essay and I will not expand on it here, but the content should prove to the average reader that World War I certainly fits this description.

The main purpose of this essay is to demonstrate not only that ‘history repeats itself’ but that the history being repeated today is a mass grooming of the Western world’s people (but most especially Americans) in preparation for World War III – which I believe is now imminent.

In 1940, these European Zionist and media owners (hiding behind the stage-set of the UK government) initiated what they called an “anger campaign” with the stated cause of “instilling personal hatred against the German people and Germany”, the related parties pleased that the original 6% of the British population that ‘hated Germany’ increased to over 50% by the end of the campaign, and it didn’t stop there.

The radio waves were full of descriptions of the “cruelty and blackness of the German soul”.

There were articles in the British newspapers advocating the “systematic extermination of the entire German nation” to be carried out after the war ended.

Thus, after victory over Germany, every person of German extraction was to be executed and the nation of Germany itself to disappear forever.

Those executions were actually begun – Eisenhower’s Death Camps, followed by the Morgenthau Plan, both of which eventually failed.

The methods of “instilling personal hatred” of Germany was perhaps too successful.

The anti-German hysteria became so severe that King George V had to change his German name of ‘Saxe-Coburg’ to ‘Windsor’, and relinquish all his German titles.

It wasn’t only the US and UK where this hatred of Germans was being propagated.

In countries all around the world, the media spread the same message of hatred against Germany and the Germans.

Teams of ‘specialists’ were following the same script in most other nations, all instilling massive hatred for the Germans who were in every nation vehemently portrayed as evil incarnate, this nature stemming merely from the fact of their being of German origin.

In Brazil, anti-German demonstrations and riots consumed the country, with German businesses being destroyed and Germans being assaulted and killed.

In almost every nation, the German-language press and use of the German language completely disappeared during the war from fear of reprisal, as did all German schools and most businesses.

None re-opened. Brazil initially was determined to remain neutral, but a newly-created university student union was co-opted and used with such great effectiveness that within a year Brazil declared war on Germany.[9]

In Brazil, the US, Canada and Australia, many names of towns, streets, foods, were changed to eliminate their German origin.

Throughout the world, as in the US, false wartime propaganda was used during both World Wars to incite entire populations into an irrational hatred of everything German, even to the extent of powerful media recommendations that the entire German race be exterminated – in all nations.

With all of this and much more, America was a hotbed of hatred for the entire German population.

After the Second World War, Germany was widely accused of using propaganda against the Jews, while our history books have airbrushed out the massive and unspeakably evil storm of worldwide hate propaganda against Germans by the Jews prior to and during both World Wars. Details below.

The Origins of Mass Manipulation of the Public Mind

Many years ago, the Jewish-American political commentator Walter Lippmann realised that political ideology could be completely fabricated, using the media to control both presentation and conceptualisation, not only to create deeply-ingrained false beliefs in a population, but also to entirely erase undesirable political ideas from the public mind.

This was the beginning of not only the American hysteria for freedom, democracy and patriotism, but of all manufactured political opinion, a process that has been operative ever since.

Lippmann created these theories of mass persuasion of the public, using totally fabricated “facts” deeply insinuated into the minds of a gullible public, but there is much more to this story.

An Austrian Jew named Edward Louis Bernays who was the nephew of Sigmund Freud, was one of Lippmann’s most precocious students and it was he who put Lippmann’s theories into practice.

Bernays is widely known in America as the father of Public Relations, but he would be much more accurately described as the father of American war marketing as well as the father of mass manipulation of the public mind.

Bernays claimed “If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind” it will be possible “to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing about it”.

He called this scientific technique of opinion-molding the ‘engineering of consent’, and to accomplish it he merged theories of crowd psychology with the psychoanalytical ideas of his uncle Sigmund Freud.

Bernays regarded society as irrational and dangerous, with a “herd instinct”, and that if the multi-party electoral system (which evidence indicates was created by a group of European elites as a population control mechanism) were to survive and continue to serve those elites, massive manipulation of the public mind was necessary.

These elites, “invisible people”, would have, through their influence on government and their control of the media, a monopoly on the power to shape thoughts, values, and responses of the citizenry.

His conviction was that this group should flood the public with misinformation and emotionally-loaded propaganda to “engineer” the acquiescence of the masses and thereby rule over them.

According to Bernays, this manufactured consent of the masses, creating conformity of opinion molded by the tool of false propaganda, would be vital for the survival of “democracy”. Bernays wrote:

“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society.

Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.

People are governed, their minds molded, their tastes formed, their ideas suggested, largely by men they have never heard of.

This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner .

In almost every act of our daily lives we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses.

It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.”

In his main work titled ‘Propaganda’, which he wrote in 1928, Bernays argued that the manipulation of public opinion was a necessary part of democracy because individuals were inherently dangerous (to the control and looting of the elites) but could be harnessed and channeled by these same elites for their economic benefit.

He clearly believed that virtually total control of a population was possible, and perhaps easy to accomplish. He wrote further that:

“No serious sociologist any longer believes that the voice of the people expresses any … wise idea.

The voice of the people expresses the mind of the people, and that mind is made up for it by … those persons who understand the manipulation of public opinion.

It is composed of inherited prejudices and symbols and clichés and verbal formulas supplied to them by the leaders.

Fortunately, the … politician is able, by the instrument of propaganda, to mold and form the will of the people.

So vast are the numbers of minds which can be regimented, and so tenacious are they when regimented, that [they produce] an irresistible pressure before which legislators, editors, and teachers are helpless.

And it wasn’t only the public masses that were ‘inherently dangerous’, but a nation’s leaders fit this description as well, therefore also requiring manipulation and control.

Bernays realised that if you can influence the leaders of a nation, either with or without their conscious cooperation, you can control the government and the country, and that is precisely where he set his sights. Bernays again:

“In some departments of our daily life, in which we imagine ourselves free agents, we are ruled by dictators exercising great power.

There are invisible rulers who control the destinies of millions.False Prophets Invisible People mLP - YouTube

It is not generally realized to what extent the words and actions of our most influential public men are dictated by shrewd persons operating behind the scenes.

Nor, what is still more important, the extent to which our thoughts and habits are modified by authorities.

The invisible government tends to be concentrated in the hands of the few because of the expense of manipulating the social machinery which controls the opinions and habits of the masses.”

And in this case, the “few” are the wealthy industrial elites, their even wealthier banker friends, and their brethren who control the media, publishing and entertainment industries.

Until the First World War, these theories of creating an entirely false public opinion based on misinformation, then manipulating this for population control, were still only theories, but the astounding success of propaganda by Bernays and his group during the war laid bare the possibilities of perpetually controlling the public mind on all matters.

The “shrewd” designers of Bernays’ “invisible government” developed a standard technique for what was essentially propaganda and mind control, or at least opinion control, and infiltrated it throughout the US government, its departments and agencies, and its leaders and politicians.

Coincident with this, they practiced infecting the leaders of every identifiable group – fraternal, religious, commercial, patriotic, social – and encouraging these men to likewise infect their supporters.

Many have noted the black and white mentality that pervades America.

Much of the blame must be laid on Bernays’ propaganda methods.

Bernays himself asserted that propaganda could produce rapid and strong emotional responses in the public, but that the range of these responses was limited because the emotional loading inherent in his propaganda would create a kind of binary mentality, eventually forcing the population into a programmed black and white world – which is precisely what we see in the US today.

This isn’t difficult to understand. When Bernays flooded the public with fabricated tales of Germans shiskababbing babies, the range of potential responses was entirely emotional and would be limited to either abhorrence or perhaps a blocking of the information.

In a sense, our emotional switch will be forced into either an ‘on’ or ‘off’ position, with no other reasonable choices.

The elite few, as Bernays called them, realized early on the potential for control of governments, and in every subsequent US administration the president and his White House staff, the politicians, the leaders of the military and intelligence agencies, all fell prey to this same disease of shrewd manipulation.

Roosevelt’s “intense desire for war” in 1939 was the result of this same infection process and, once infected, he of course approved of the infection of the entire American population.

Walter Lippmann and Edward Bernays succeeded beyond their wildest expectations.

Bernays – Marketing War

In the discovery of propaganda as a tool of public mind control and in its use for war marketing, it is worthwhile to take a quick look at the historical background of Bernays’ war effort.

At the time, the European Zionist Jews had made an agreement with England to bring the US into the war against Germany, on the side of England, a favor for which England would grant the Jews the possession of Palestine as a location for a new homeland.

Palestine did not ‘belong’ to England, it was not England’s to give, and England had no legal or moral right to make such an agreement, but it was made nevertheless.

US President Wilson was desperate to fulfill his obligations to his handlers by putting the US into the First World War as they wished, but the American population had no interest in the European war and public sentiment was entirely against participating.

To facilitate the desired result, Wilson created the Committee on Public Information (The Creel Commission), to propagandise the war by the mass brainwashing of America, but Creel was merely the ‘front’ of a group that consisted of specially hand-picked men from the media, advertising, the movie industry, and academia, as well as specialists in psychology.

The two most important members were Walter Lippman, whom Wilson described as “the most brilliant man of his age”, and Bernays who was the group’s top mind-control expert, both Jews and both aware of the stakes in this game.

Bernays planned to combine his uncle Freud’s psychiatric insights with mass psychology blended with modern advertising techniques, and apply them to the task of mass mind control.

It was Bernays’ vast propaganda schemes and his influence in promoting the patently false idea that US entry to the war was primarily aimed at “bringing democracy to all of Europe”, that proved so successful in altering public opinion about the war.

Thanks to Edward Bernays, American war marketing was born and would never die.

Note to Readers: Some portion of the immediately following content which details the specifics of the propaganda of Lippman and Bernays for World War I is not my own work. It was extracted some years ago from a longer document for which I cannot now locate the original source. If a reader is able to identify this source, I would be grateful to receive that information so I can properly credit the author for his extensive research.

“Wilson’s creation of the CPI was a turning point in world history, the first truly scientific attempt to form, manipulate and control the perceptions and beliefs of an entire population.”

With Wilson’s authority, these men were given almost unlimited scope to work their magic, and in order to ensure the success of their program and guarantee the eventual possession of Palestine, these men and their committee carried out “a program of psychological warfare against the American people on a scale unprecedented in human history and with a degree of success that most propagandists could only dream about”.

Having received permission and broad authority from the US President and the White House to “lead the public mind into war”[21] and, with their success threatened by widespread anti-war sentiment among the public, these men determined to engineer what Lippman called “the manufacture of consent”.

The committee assumed the task to “examine the different ways that information flowed to the population and to flood these channels with pro-war material”.

Their effort was unparalleled in its scale and sophistication, since the Committee had the power not only to officially censor news and withhold information from the public, but to manufacture false news and distribute it nationally through all channels.

In a very short time, Lippman and Bernays were well enough organised to begin flooding the US with anti-German propaganda consisting of hate literature, movies, songs, media articles and much more.

According to Bernays, the key was to dehumanize and demonize the German people by filling American minds with fabricated tales of horror.

The compliant media, largely Jewish-owned, obediently carried fake stories of poisoned candy being dropped from airplanes, German soldiers skewering babies like shish kebabs, the raping of nuns, and so much more.

Eventually, the stories were accepted as true and the public’s natural resistance to war was overcome.

They [Bernays and his group] practiced revealing fabricated stories of atrocities, false accusations of terror and brutality against any nation or people they wanted the public mind to view as “the enemy”, then tested and evaluated public reactions to their manipulations of this false propaganda.”

In his 1922 book Public Opinion, Lippman wrote, “The only feeling that anyone can have about an event he does not experience is the feeling aroused by his mental image of that event … For it is clear enough that under certain conditions men respond as powerfully to fictions as they do to realities.”

And it was this psychological manipulation that these men employed to turn an entire nation of peaceful Americans into rabid war-mongers.

The historical record of this years-long tapestry of lies and hate has been quite well buried, and the White House, Congress and the Committee conspired after the war to destroy most of the evidence of their crimes, but I believe both America and the Jews will one day need to openly acknowledge this chapter of history.

Because of Bernays, atrocity propaganda – the deliberate spreading of fabricated evils and inhuman war crimes – became the foundation of the Committee’s efforts. Harold Lasswell wrote,

“So great are the psychological resistances to war in modern nations that every war must appear to be a war of defense against a menacing, murderous aggressor. There must be no ambiguity about who the public is to hate … if at first they do not enrage, use an atrocity.

It has been employed with unvarying success in every conflict known to man.”

Of course, the causes and aims of the propaganda were far more evil than anything the supposed ‘enemy’ had contemplated, but the goal was to not only invent an enemy but to make that enemy “appear savage, barbaric, and inhumane”, and thus worthy of destruction.

“Halt communist aggression in Vietnam” United Front in Support of South Vietnam, 1968

Usually, the compliant media repeat and embellish the stories without attempt at confirmation and, in virtually every instance, later attempts to confirm the atrocity tales prove fruitless with researchers able to uncover no evidence whatever of the events, the Bryce Report being typical, the entire catalogue of “authoritative documentation of German atrocities” suddenly disappearing without a trace when time came to confirm them.

Lippman and Bernays divided their Committee into nineteen ‘divisions’, each responsible for a different type of propaganda, and each utilizing the abilities of vast numbers of psychologists, advertising experts and media personnel.

The intention was to flood every means of communication with the goal of inciting hatred of everything German and to promote American entry into the war as the only option for patriotic Americans.

Their new Committee produced tens of thousands of articles filled with anti-German hate propaganda and literally stuffed every part of US print media with them .

In an average week more than 20,000 newspaper columns carried entirely false propaganda articles produced by the Committee, promoting hatred of Germany and Germans, describing atrocities that had never occurred and painting Germans as vicious and inhuman monsters.

The Committee enforced a powerful self-censorship in the American media by implementing “voluntary guidelines” meant to suppress contradictory content.

They created a ‘Syndicated Features’ Division employing popular writers to produce essays containing “official” propaganda, and which reached 10 to 15 million people each month.

Another division was responsible for the cartoon sections of newspapers and other media, with the stated intention to “mobilize and direct the scattered cartoon power of the country for constructive war work”.

They employed thousands of cartoonists who “achieved new heights in hate-mongering”, picturing the Germans as primitive and evil animals who stole, killed or raped everything they encountered.[28]

They created a similar Division for cinema that resulted in the production of dozens of outrageous and virulently anti-German movies, hate films containing completely fictional tales of atrocities and bestialities committed by the Germans.

This was the source of the movie scenes where Germans (and Japanese) machine-gunned brave American pilots while parachuting to the ground.

None of these tales were ever true; these and many more were total fabrications.

Then, as now, the motion picture industry in the US was mostly controlled by Jews, who were eager to assist.

One Jewish editorial stated that “every individual at work in this industry wants to do his share” and that “through slides, film leaders and trailers, posters and newspaper publicity they will spread that propaganda so necessary to the immediate mobilization of the country’s great resources”.

In addition to movies produced by the film studios, the CPI created its own Film Division which produced 60 or 70 “official” films that were viewed by many tens of millions of people each week.

They created an Advertising Division to influence general commercial advertising, and which inserted anti-German war propaganda into advertising in newspapers and magazines which often gave them free space, with almost every major US publication carrying a large quota of these ads.

They also produced and distributed many thousands of ‘official’ press releases, virtually functioning as the information arm of the US government and were in fact the major provider of war news to the nation.

They enlisted the aid of most of America’s Christian religions that were more than eager to cooperate in warmongering as they had always done.

Lippmann and Bernays organised the “Four Minute Men”, with 75,000 volunteers delivering nearly 8 million prepared brief speeches on German atrocities in schools, movie theaters, churches, synagogues, union halls, anywhere and everywhere.

Bernays claimed they delivered nearly 8 million speeches to about 315 million people. A huge amount of this was conducted by Jews. See the extensive note

They created a ‘Division of Work With The Foreign Born’ to reach all immigrants in the country in their own languages, and used members of these communities to propagandize their own people, and especially targeted all military-age foreigners who might be conscripted in a war. Lippman and Bernays wrote:

“It is a matter of pride to the Committee on Public Information, as it should be to America, that the directors of English, French, and Italian propaganda were a unit in agreeing that our literature was remarkable above all others for its brilliant and concentrated effectiveness”.

They used farmers to appeal to farmers and businessmen to appeal to businessmen. In total, their speakers gave more than 7 million speeches to more than 300 million Americans, all provoking hatred of Germany and Germans, and urging war.

After many of these emotional travesties, people from the audience would gather into mobs that would attack and destroy German homes and businesses in their city.

The Committee particularly targeted women, establishing a major women’s Division to counter female resistance, from fear that women “might constitute a subversive element in the nation, detrimental to wartime unity and the smooth functioning of [mandatory military conscription]”.

Through their close media contacts, they controlled the cover and much of the content of many women’s magazines, which they used to encourage women to send their sons to war, claiming he would return as “a man” instead of as a corpse.

They created a music division and hired thousands of songwriters to create songs with anti-German lyrics, then again milked their media contacts to have these played constantly on the nation’s radio stations.

Another division was responsible for public library content, tasked with the removal of all German books, including the works of famous German authors and philosophers.

Everything favorably German was censored, removed from public accessibility, or destroyed.

Perhaps the division most indicative of the moral bankruptcy of these men was their work with public school children.

They heavily utilised psychologists in programs to spread hatred of Germany throughout America’s public school system where small children were taught the full gamut of Bernays’ hateful propaganda, then used as traveling salesmen to visit other schools and spread the propaganda to their classmates, instilling totally fabricated tales of German atrocities into the minds of all small children.

After these inflamed propaganda sessions, many American children demonstrated their “patriotism” by attacking German-Americans in groups and stoning them, sometimes being congratulated by local newspapers for “doing their duty”.

Bernays’ group published many thousands of children’s books and comics containing the most vile and hateful propaganda lies.

Sunday School children were given coloring books depicting and encouraging violence against Germans. Libraries sponsored anti-German children’s’ ‘story hours’ that used hate propaganda supplied by Bernays.

Bernays’ Public literature attacked everything German in America, including schools and churches.

In many schools the German language was forbidden to be taught to “pure Americans”, and administrators were urged to fire “all disloyal teachers”, meaning any Germans.

The names of countless towns and cities were changed to eliminate their German origin: Berlin, Iowa became Lincoln, Iowa.

German foods and food names were purged from restaurants; sauerkraut became ‘liberty cabbage’; dachshunds became ‘liberty dogs’ and German Shepherds became ‘Alsatians’.

All American orchestras were ordered to eliminate from their performances any music by classic German composers like Beethoven, Bach and Mozart.

In some states, the use of the German language was prohibited in public and on the telephone.

German professors were fired from their universities, German-language or German-owned local newspapers were denied advertising revenue, constantly harassed, and often forced out of business.

The ‘patriotic’ Boy Scouts of America contributed to the effort by regularly burning bundles of German newspapers that were on sale, and Germans were regularly insulted and spat upon by other citizens.

Bernays instituted a program of questioning the patriotism and loyalty of all Germans in America, labeling any with anti-war views as prima facie evidence of treason.

Germans were forced to gather in public meetings and denounce Germany and its leaders.

They were forced to purchase war bonds and publicly declare their allegiance to the US flag. As Bernays’ rhetoric reached dangerous levels, the anti-German hysteria and violence increased proportionately.

Many Germans were forcibly removed from their homes, often torn from their beds during the night, taken out into the street and stripped naked, beaten and whipped, then forced to kneel and kiss the American flag.

Many were tarred and feathered, then forced to leave their cities or towns. Some were lynched from trees. Priests and pastors were dragged out of their churches and beaten for giving sermons in German.

The anti-German hysteria had people seeing spies everywhere, with House and Bernays greatly inflaming this trend by preparing Wilson’s infamous “Flag Day” speech where he claimed “The military masters of Germany have filled our unsuspecting communities with vicious spies and conspirators and have sought to corrupt the opinion of our people”.

Newspaper editors were screaming that all Germans were spies who were poisoning American water supplies or infecting medical shipments to hospitals, and that most “ought to be taken out at sunrise and shot for treason”.

Congressmen recommended hanging or otherwise executing all Germans in America, State Governors urging the use of firing squads to eliminate “the disloyal element” from the entire state.

The US Secretary of the Navy Josephus Daniels stated that Americans would “put the fear of God into the hearts” of these people.

Most Americans are aware that during the [again Bernays-induced] national hysteria during the Second World War the US government forced more than 100,000 US-born Japanese into concentration camps, but history has deleted the fact that many more Germans were interned in concentration camps in the US prior to and during the First War, and again during the Second World War, after which all their assets were seized.

While Bernays was “making the world safe for democracy”, that safety was not meant for Americans.

Under the coaching of Col. E. M. House who was Wilson’s Jewish handler, Wilson passed oppressive legislation including the Espionage Act and Sedition Act that were entirely fascist in content and which made illegal anything that might hinder American entry into the war.

Freedom of speech and assembly, and press freedom virtually disappeared from America during this time, it eventually becoming illegal to say or write anything critical of the US government, its officials and even its “symbols”.

Any expression of objection to American entrance into the war would result in a fine of $10,000 (ten years’ average wages at the time) or 20 years in prison, with much of the policing power given to what were in effect private vigilante groups like the infamous American Protective League that operated virtually without oversight.

The suppression of public opinion and of dissent, and the control exercised on anti-war communication was universal.

The Espionage Act stated “Every letter, writing, circular, postal card, picture, print, engraving, photograph, newspaper, pamphlet, book, or other publication, matter or thing of any kind containing any matter which is intended to obstruct the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States is hereby declared to be non-mailable.”

Nothing was permitted that might prevent the successful recruitment of American soldiers for a war that only the Jews wanted.

With all of this and much more, Bernays and Lippman turned America into a hotbed of hatred for the entire German population, accomplishing the goal of the Zionist Jews to use the US military as a tool, their own private army, in the European war to fulfill their ambition for Palestine, and thus these two men changed the course of history.

This wouldn’t be the last time Lippman and Bernays would use these techniques against Germany.

This massive attack was repeated little more than ten years later to destroy Germany and push it into yet another war the Germans didn’t want.

In the 1930s, the same Jewish European bankers with largely the same agenda wanted the US to join another war they planned to initiate against Germany .

In 1933 they embarked on an extensive worldwide commercial war intended to destroy Germany financially, with newspaper headlines reading “Judea Declares War on Germany”.

[33][34][35][36] They had already induced in Roosevelt “an intense desire for war”, but were having the same problem again with the unwilling American public, hence the “anger campaign” referred to earlier, and they repeated the German atrocity stories in all Western countries until almost the entire world wanted to kill all Germans.

Bernays theories and the template for the manipulation of public opinion would form the plan and pattern that the US government would use repeatedly for the next century to successfully deceive the American public about its motivations and actions in more than 100 military adventures, and to blind everyone to the tragic results of America’s brutal foreign policy.

In all of this, Lippman and Bernays were not working independently or without guidance.

Prior to their massive ‘war effort’ in the US for World War I, they had operated a successful pilot test case in the UK, using British newspapers owned by Rothschild and other Jews, to determine the efficacy of their methods.

The plan to mass-engineer public opinion began in a propaganda factory at Wellington House in London in the early 1900s, with Lords Northcliffe and Rothmere, Arnold Toynbee, and of course our two war-marketing geniuses Lippman and Bernays.

It was from this source that the scheme was hatched to force the Rothschild’s privately-owned Federal Reserve banks onto the US Congress, and that trained and coached Lippman and Bernays on the methods of molding American public opinion to push the US into the First World War for the promotion of Zionism.

Bernays’ book ‘Propaganda’ offers a clear vision of his training, not only for war marketing but for the pathology of American consumption, automobiles, the hysteria of patriotism and much more.

Wellington House eventually morphed into the Tavistock Institute, which was created at Oxford University in London by the founders of the Royal Institute of International Affairs and the Round Table, and was essentially a kind of mass brainwashing facility beginning as a psychological warfare bureau.

It was the Tavistock Institute’s studies in psychological programming that were used to create and then exploit a grand mass hysteria during the cold war, evoking fearful delusions of a nuclear conflict with the Soviet Union that even led to millions of Americans building bomb shelters in their back yards.

In Tye’s biography of Bernays, he wrote that “It is impossible to fundamentally grasp the social, political, economic and cultural developments of the past 100 years without some understanding of Bernays and his professional heirs.”

Funding reportedly came from the UK Royal Family, the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers, and eventually included the formation of trans-Atlantic relationships.

At various periods, memberships in the Tavistock Institute, the Royal Institute of International Affairs, the Rothschild’s Round Table, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Club of Rome, the Stanford Research Institute, the Trilateral Commission and NATO, were interchangeable.

They also created the ideology for the large American Foundations like Rockefeller and Carnegie that today play a silent but major role in population management.

Many dirty things emerged from this rat’s nest of Satan-worshippers, one being Britain’s Psychological Warfare Bureau which hatched a plan to destroy Germany not by attacking the military but by virtual genocide of the population.

It seems that international bankers owned munitions plants and other valuable military targets on both sides of the war fence, and wanted their property maintained in working order in spite of the war.

The Jewish solution recommended to Churchill was saturation bombing of the civilian population to collapse the morale of the German people.

These ‘scientific sociologists’ determined that the destruction of 65% of German housing, usually including its occupants, would be sufficient to achieve such a collapse.

This was the origin of the fame of the British aviation hero “Bomber” Harris, who carried out these night raids – always at night – that culminated in the fire-bombing of Dresden.

The explanation of night raids is usually given as safety for the bomber crews, but its purpose was mostly to engender more terror among the civilian population.

Harris himself testified that his directive was to not specifically aim at anything, but just “blast German cities as a whole. Working class housing areas were targeted because they had a higher density and firestorms were more likely.”

This would disrupt the German workforce and Germany’s ability to produce war materials in its defense.

Harris’ widespread deliberate massacres of German civilians – and those by the Americans as well – were desperately kept secret from the public and still appear nowhere in history books in useful detail or with any sincere attempt to accurately estimate civilian casualties.

This was the plan that US General Curtis Lemay was following, the same low-level night raids attempting to exterminate the populations of Japan and Korea.

Everything we have read above about the marketing of war during preparation for the two World Wars, is from a template created by Lippman and Bernays exclusively to support the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine and to promote the agenda of Zionism.

That template has been in constant use by the US government (as the Bankers’ Private Army) since the Second World War, ‘engineering consent and ignorance’ in the American and Western populations to mask almost seven decades of atrocities, demonizing innocent countries and peoples in preparation for 60 or 70 politically-inspired color revolutions or ‘wars of liberation’ fought exclusively for the financial and political benefit of a handful of European bankers using the US military as a private army for this purpose, resulting in the deaths and miseries of hundreds of millions of innocent civilians.

Bernays carries the blame for more than American entry into the two world wars, having been instrumental in paving the way for the US cannibalization and military colonization of much of the world, and for the US installing and supporting the dozens of brutal military dictatorships around the world.

His first international project was helping to engineer the US overthrow of the popular elected government of Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala.

The US government launched a coup against the elected government of Guatemala on the flimsy grounds of Guatamala becoming a hotbed for Soviet/Communist activity when in reality it was really a powerful American owned company that had its business interests threatened.

At the time, the Rockefellers’ United Fruit Company and various US elites and international financiers owned most of Guatemala including 70% of all the arable land, the communications facilities, the only railroad and shipping port, and controlled most exports.

When Arbenz commenced expropriations and land redistribution, Bernays developed a massive propaganda campaign that colored Arbenz as communist, a terrorist, an enemy to democracy, a blot on humanity, and much more, to the extent that American public opinion supported an outrageous travesty and one of the most brutal violations of human rights in US history.

Bernays’ template has been used about 70 times with US invasions of that many nations, which is one source of the vast disconnect between what the American people believe their government has done and what it has actually done.

As a side note, Guatemala appealed to the United Nations to stop the Americans’ massive interference in their country, a plea that was sympathetically received by UN Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjold who proved troublesome for the US. He would do so again a few years later, and would be assassinated by the CIA for his trouble.

Quick Summary

Many of us have seen stories of German soldiers skewering babies on bayonets, of machine-gunning parachuting soldiers, tales of tubs-full of eyeballs collected by the Nazis, of Germans slashing off the breasts of every woman they encountered, of eating babies, of rendering the bodies of massacred civilians for fat and glycerine to make weapons.

After the war, Bernays openly admitted that he used fabricated atrocities to provoke hatred against Germany and, in both World Wars, no evidence was ever discovered to prove any of these outrageous accusations.

We can easily think of George W. Bush’s demonisation of Iraq, the sordid tales of mass slaughters, the gassing of hundreds of thousands and burial in mass graves, the nuclear weapons ready to launch within 15 minutes, the responsibility for 9-11, the babies tossed out of incubators, Saddam using wood shredders to eliminate political opponents and dissidents.

We can think of the tales of Libyan Viagra, all proven to have been groundless fabrications – typical atrocity propaganda. Vietnam, Afghanistan, Syria, Iran and dozens of other wars and invasions followed this same template to get the public mind onside for an unjustified war launched only for political and commercial objectives.

Fast Forward to 2020

We are at the same place today, with the same people conducting the same “anger campaign” against China in preparation for World War III. John Pilger agrees with me, evidenced in his recent article “Another Hiroshima is coming – unless we stop it now.” And so does Gordon Duff.

The signs now are everywhere, and the campaign is successful. It is necessary to point out the need for an ‘anger campaign’ as opposed to a ‘hate campaign’.

We are not moved to action from hate, but from anger. I may thoroughly despise you, but that in itself will do nothing.

It is only if I am moved to anger that I want to punch your lights out. And this, as Lippman and Bernays so clearly noted, requires emotionally-charged atrocity propaganda of the kind used so well against Germany and being so well used against China today.

Since we need atrocity propaganda to start a war, there seems to be no shortage.

Then we have Huawei, the world’s single most dangerous spying entity, who are no doubt responsible for “Beijing trying to ‘steal’ the American COVID-19 vaccine” but, in further breaking news, the Chinese are “Trying to steal everything”.

Not only that, but China recently hacked into the Vatican, and here’s why they did it.

Everyone knows that Hong Kong’s new Security Law spells “the death knell of freedom and democracy in Hong Kong”.

We have read much of China’s “threatening militarism” in its own China Pond, but not everyone knows that China is presenting the Japanese air force with “a relentless burden” with 947 (count them) incursions into Japanese airspace “in the last fiscal year ending in March.”

I didn’t know that provocative military incursions operated on a fiscal year, but maybe things are different in Japan.

Then, Mr. Pompeo tells us, “The truth is that our policies . . . resurrected China’s failing economy, only to see Beijing bite the international hands that were feeding it.”

Further, that (due to COVID-19) China “caused an enormous amount of pain, loss of life,” and the “Chinese Communist Party will pay a price”. Of course, we all know that “China” stole the COVID-19 virus from a lab in Winnipeg, Canada, then released it onto the world – and Pompeo has proof, and even “A Chinese virologist has proof” that “China” engaged in a massive cover-up while contaminating the world and then “fleeing Hong Kong” because “I know how they treat whistle-blowers.”

And of course, “China needs to be held accountable for Covid-19’s destruction” which is why everyone in the US wants to sue “China”. “Australia” demands an international criminal investigation of China’s role in COVID-19.What a surprise.

And of course we have an almost unlimited number of serious provocations, from Hong Kong, Tibet, Xinjiang, Taiwan, the South China Seas, to Chinese consulates, media reporters, students, researchers, visa restrictions, spying, Huawei, the trade war, all done in the hope of making the Chinese leaders panic and over-react, the easiest way to justify a new war.

The list could continue for several hundred pages. Never in my life have I seen such a continuous, unabating flood of hate propaganda against one nation, surely equivalent to what was done against Germany as described above to prepare for US entry into the First World War.

And it’s working, doing what it is intended to do. Canada, Australia, the UK, Germany, India, Brazil, are buying into the war-mongering and turning against China. More will follow.

The Global Times reported “Mutual trust between Australia and China at all-time low”.

“Boycott China” T-shirts and caps are flooding India, Huawei is being increasingly banned from Western nations, Chinese social media APPs like Tik-Tok are being banned, and Bryan Adams recently slammed all Chinese as “Bat-eating, wet-market-animal-selling, virus-making, greedy bastards”

In a recent poll (taken because we need to measure the success of our handiwork in the same way Bernays and the Tavistock Institute did as noted earlier), half of all ethnic Chinese in Canada have been threatened and harassed over COVID-19.

About 45% of Chinese in Canada said they had been ” threatened or intimidated in some way”, fully 50% said they had recently been insulted in public, 30% said they had experienced . . . “some kind of physical altercation”, and 60% said the abuse was so bad “they had to reorganise their daily routine to avoid it”. One woman in her 60s said a man told her and her daughter “Every day I pray that you people die”.

This deliberate, systematic targeting of China and the Chinese (by the Jewish media, I’m sorry to say) has resulted in a 700% increase in hate crimes against Chinese, and Canada is by no means the only country experiencing this phenomenon.

It is not better in the US, the UK, Australia, and much of Europe. It would seem the laws against hate speech are only for the benefit of the Jews, certainly not for the Chinese. Lippmann and Bernays would be proud.

Several years ago, CNN was sued by one of their news anchors for being ordered to lie in the newscasts. CNN won the case.

They did not deny ordering the news anchor to lie. Their defense was based simply on the position that American news media have “no obligation to tell the truth”.

And RT recently reported that nearly 9 out of 10 Americans see a “medium or high” bias in all media coverage, yet, as we can see, most of those same people, and a very large portion of the population of many nations still succumb to the same hate propaganda.

I would add four final points to this essay.

(1) There is no way to avoid the conclusion that history is indeed repeating itself, demonizing yet another nation, deliberately engendering sufficient hatred and anger to justify another world war.

(2) While the impetus for this is surely from the US, the Americans are not entirely to blame because they are merely following orders.

The root of all this absolutely resides in Europe among the cabal of International Jews and Zionists, with the Americans once again being “The Bankers’ Private Army”.

Our New World Government cannot come into existence without the destruction of both China and Russia (and Iran), but China is the primary stumbling block and must be eliminated.

World War Three will have China and Russia on the same side and, with luck, both will be destroyed in one swoop. That is the plan. Your belief in it is not material to its execution.

(3) The International Jews have some reason (in their minds) to resent China.

For one, China was intended to be dismembered and turned into a perpetual cash cow, a plan frustrated by Mao and his revolution.

Everyone is aware that the Jews had been evicted from many countries many times over many hundreds of years, but no one seems aware that two of these evictions occurred relatively recently, one from Japan immediately prior to World War Two (the source of the huge Jewish Ghetto in Shanghai, not escapees from Hitler as the myths tell us), and the second from China.

It was not “the British” but the International Jewish banking families, the Rothschilds, Sassoons, Kadoories and others that were entirely responsible for China’s 150 years-long opium travesty.

I won’t go into details here, but immediately after World War Two, one of Mao’s first acts was to expel all the Jews from China and confiscate all their opium assets – including all of the city of Shanghai and the Mainland Branches of the HSBC. They haven’t forgotten, and they want their money back.

(4) Given the source of the push for a Third World War and the planned destruction of China, one is left to consider what, if anything, can be done to prevent a third worldwide holocaust.

Even knowing the sources, it is hardly practical to declare war on at most a few thousand individuals scattered among perhaps ten nations.

I know of only one way to prevent the World War Three that is now imminent: make Israel pay for it.

If in the final position of authority, I would call in the Israeli ambassador and inform him that if my nation were pushed into a war with the US, my first retaliation would be not against the US but against Israel, that I would apply whatever portion of my nuclear arsenal was necessary to achieve that.

It is my thesis that Israel is too important to these people to be sacrificed, and that faced with such a threat deemed credible, they would back off. With everything I know, I do not believe a third world war can be otherwise prevented.


[1] https://hofs.online/david-irving-churchills-war/

[2] https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2020/01/13/germanys-war-chapter-4-the-allied-conspiracy-to-instigate-prolong-wwii/

[3] https://thegreateststorynevertold.tv/the-war-criminal-churchill/

[4] ttps://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/schul05.htm

[5] “Germany is getting too strong. We’ve got to smash her.” – Winston Churchill speaking during a private lunch in 1936. Reminiscenses in 1961 of General Robert E. Wood. World War II. By Carl J. Schneider, Dorothy Schneider. Page 15.

[6] “We will force this war upon Hitler, if he wants it or not.” – Winston Churchill (1936 broadcast). “This war is an English war and its goal is the destruction of Germany.” – Winston Churchill (Autumn 1939 broadcast)

[7] “You must understand that this war is not against Hitler or National Socialism, but against the strength of the German people, which is to be smashed once and for all, regardless of whether it is in the hands of Hitler of a Jesuit priest.” – Winston Churchill [1940]; Emrys Hughes, Winston Churchill, His Career in War and Peace p. 45); This book was published in Great Britain in 1950 under the title “Winston Churchill in war and peace.” The American version titled “Winston Churchill: British bulldog : his career in war and peace”, was published in 1955 and was an edited version with selected quotations removed.

Russia: US Will Never Succeed in Extending Iran Arms Embargo

Russian permanent representative to the UN Vasily Nebenzia said the US draft resolution on extending the United Nations’ arms embargo on Iran has no chance of succeeding.

Russia and China have already voiced their opposition to the draft resolution.

“This resolution has very sad prospects. I mean, they just do not exist,” Nebenzia said in an open online interview on Thursday, Sputnik reported.

According to the diplomat, Russia told the US as soon as the latter started working on the resolution that it has “absolutely no chance of being adopted.”

“The adoption of such a resolution would put an end to the JCPOA. It is clear that Iran will never accept that, and it has the right to do so,” Nebenzia added.

In June, the United States introduced a draft resolution at the UN Security Council to extend the arms embargo on Iran before it expires in mid-October.

COVID Spells End of US Globalist Horror Show …

Russia and China Are Equal Players Now

It really doesn’t matter who, it doesn’t matter if we like them or not. What’s needed is a balance of power in the world.

The balance of power theory in international relations suggests that states may secure their survival by preventing any one state from gaining enough military power to dominate all others.[1] If one state becomes much stronger, the theory predicts it will take advantage of its weaker neighbors, thereby driving them to unite in a defensive coalition. Some realists maintain that a balance-of-power system is more stable than one with a dominant state, as aggression is unprofitable when there is equilibrium of power between rival coalitions.[1]

The days of the US as the number one international superpower are finally over. There is nothing more symbolic of that than the US accepting humanitarian aid from Russia and China.

This is going to bring hell on earth for all of us, but it does feel great to see the system that brought us such things as child trannies, endless wars, multiculturalism, feminism and Rise of Skywalker finally ending.

And it is poetic that it is ending in a nonsensical panic over

Russia is sending a plane filled with medical equipment to the United States to help fight the coronavirus following a phone conversation between President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday.

The Russian Embassy Tuesday posted on its social media channels that “Russia may send a plane with medical equipment and protection gear to the United States already on Tuesday,” citing the Russian news agency TASS.

 Reuters later reported that Russian state TV was saying the flight had taken off early Wednesday morning.

This comes after Trump indicated, without much context, that Russia was sending some sort of medical aid in his Monday coronavirus task force briefing.

“And I have to say, we’ve had great relationships with a lot of countries,” Trump said. “China sent us some stuff, which was terrific.

 Russia sent us a very, very large planeload of things, medical equipment, which was very nice.”

The American government’s “aid” regime was the symbol of its global dominance. Now it is the one receiving aid. And Russia is going to get a lot more opportunities for this.

They have made the decision to not completely collapse their economy. And due to the sanctions that have been going on since 2014, as well as the nature of Russia, their economy is not unstable in the way the US economy is unstable.

They also do not have tens of millions of brown people to create endless chaos in their country if something goes wrong.

Of course, the Jew media knows what this means, and they’re mad, implying it is some sort of plot.

It’s not a plot.

You people wanted to keep the cold war going, and you turned a victory into a loss.

The jig is up.

It will be so much fun to watch the realization set in among the media class of just what they have done.

The time of it mattering if they don’t like Russia, or don’t like something else, or want a war in Syria or Iran, or want more child trannies – that is all over.

Nothing they say is going to matter anymore.

Bonus video

William Powell Lear was an American inventor and businessman. He is best known for founding the Lear Jet Corporation, a manufacturer of business jets. He also invented the battery eliminator for the B battery, and developed the 8-track cartridge, an audio tape system.
Concerned About Nuclear Weapons Potential, John F. Kennedy Pushed for Inspection of Israel Nuclear Facilities, unaware that no one has such authority over the Jews. All the actors (Kennedy was against their interests) beyond them worked under the authority of the Jews. LBJ, Bush, Dulles and all the people working under their authority. So I believe Lear on this topic.

Italy and UK rely on help from America’s Enemies – as US steps up brutal sanctions

While Cuba, China, and Venezuela — countries targeted by US economic warfare — are helping the world contain the coronavirus outbreak, Washington itself is working overtime to monopolize any potential treatments, so it can profit from them.

By Ben Norton

The sanctions that the United States has imposed on dozens of countries around the world, in an attempt to overthrow their independent governments, have only made the global coronavirus pandemic worse.

But at the same time, some of these nations targeted by US economic warfare have taken the lead in the effort to contain the Covid-19 outbreak.

In fact, the local government in the north of Italy, a member of the European Union and NATO, has officially requested medical help from China, Cuba, and Venezuela — all countries demonized by the United States and EU, which in turn have provided Italy with little support.

The Italian government lamented that “not a single EU country” has responded to its request for medical equipment — unlike China, which immediately helped.

And it is not just Italy; Britain has also relied on Cuba to help it battle the contagious virus.

The northern Italian region of Lombardy has been particularly hard hit by coronavirus, with tens of thousands of cases and more than 1,000 deaths. The pandemic has devastated the region, which is the richest and most populous area in the country.

On March 15, Italy recorded 368 new deaths in just one day — more than the deadliest day in Wuhan, China, which successfully contained the virus.

In response to the crisis, Lombardy’s government requested that China, Cuba, and Venezuela send doctors and other medical personnel to help to contain the outbreak.

“We are in touch with Cuba, Venezuela, and China, who have made doctors available,” said Lombardy’s health minister, Giulio Gallera, in a press conference.

Havana’s embassy declared “Cuban solidarity with Italy,” and Cuba’s Foreign Affairs Ministry published a notice confirming Gallera’s request and announcing it will be sending “Cuban personnel specialized in dealing with contagious diseases.”

The local government in the major Italian city Milan has also relied on shipments of medical equipment from China.

A team of Chinese doctors arrived in Italy on March 12.

European Union abandons Italy, after pushing privatization of health systems

The European Union, on the other hand, has left Italy out to dry.

Italy’s ambassador to the EU, Maurizio Massari, published an op-ed noting that his country requested support through the body’s Mechanism of Civil Protection, seeking medical equipment to contain the coronavirus outbreak.

“But, unfortunately, not a single EU country responded to the Commission’s call. Only China responded bilaterally,” Massari wrote.

In fact the European Union has done the opposite of help. The European Commission, which leads the EU, called on member states to cut medical spending and privatize health services at least 63 times between 2011 to 2018.

The EU’s obsession with cutting and privatizing state institutions has greatly weakened the continent’s health infrastructure, making it much more susceptible to deadly pandemics like coronavirus.

Britain relies on Cuban help to dock coronavirus-infected ship


Cuba has been under an illegal US embargo since 1960 — which every country in the world (excluding Israel) votes to denounce each year at the United Nations. But this blockade has not stopped the small country from developing the best health system in all of Latin America.

Even the United Kingdom, one of the richest countries on the planet, has relied on Cuban help to contain the coronavirus.

The British government asked numerous countries in the Caribbean to let the cruise ship MS Braemar dock in their port, after there were several reports of coronavirus among its more than 1,000 passengers.

CNN noted that “British officials launched an intense diplomatic effort to find a country willing to take the” infected ship, but were rejected by Barbados and the Bahamas.

On March 16, Cuba agreed to assist Britain, offering to dock the MS Braemar in a Cuban port and help fly the passengers back to the UK.

Cuba’s Foreign Affairs Ministry declared in a statement, “These are times of solidarity, of understanding health as a human right, of strengthening international cooperation to face our common challenges, values that are key to the humanist practices of the Revolution and of our people.”

US fights for control of potential coronavirus treatment and vaccine

While Cuba, China, and Venezuela — countries targeted by US economic warfare — are helping the world contain the coronavirus outbreak, Washington itself is working overtime to monopolize any potential treatments, so it can profit from them.

A California-based pharmaceutical corporation, Gilead Sciences, has developed an experimental drug that medical experts think could potentially treat coronavirus.

The Chinese government’s Wuhan Institute of Virology applied for a patent so it can produce this drug, which is called remdesivir. But the US company has been fighting tooth and nail to prevent Beijing from being able to manufacture it.

Why? Because Gilead Sciences’ stocks are skyrocketing, and investors are saying the corporation may soon be making a fortune.

The US government has also tried to bribe a German medical company that may be on the verge of developing a coronavirus vaccine.

President Donald Trump reportedly offered “large sums of money” to the German firm, CureVac, so that the United States could have exclusive rights to the treatment — which it could then sell to the rest of the world.

US sanctions prevent Venezuela and Iran from importing medicine and medical equipment

And while the Trump administration and US pharmaceutical companies are seeking to profit from the coronavirus pandemic, Washington is doubling down on its destructive economic warfare.

Venezuela’s attorney general, Tarek William Saab, gave a press conference denouncing Washington for preventing Caracas from buying medicine and medical equipment that would help it fight Covid-19.

“It is ethically unacceptable that such sanctions be maintained against Venezuela,” Saab said. He called on Colombia and Brazil to stop their coup attempts against Caracas and to instead work together to contain the virus.

US sanctions have also greatly hindered Iran’s effort to fight Covid-19. Hundreds of Iranians have died, with thousands more affected, and Washington has prevented the country from buying much-needed medicine and medical equipment.

Iran’s foreign minister, Javad Zarif, denounced the US sanctions as a form of “medical terrorism.”

“Efforts to fight COVID19 pandemic in Iran have been severely hampered by US sanctions,” Zarif added. “It is IMMORAL to let a bully kill innocents.”

In a letter to Secretary-General António Guterres, Zarif called on the United Nations and member states to ignore the “inhuman US sanctions” on Iran and push for them to be lifted.

China has also forcefully spoken out against the US sanctions on Venezuela and Iran.

In a press conference on March 13, a spokesman for China’s Foreign Affairs Ministry, Geng Shuang, condemned Washington’s blockade of Caracas.

“At a crucial moment in which the governments and peoples of all countries are fighting together against the epidemic of a new coronavirus, the American side, however, is determined to continue shaking the stick of sanctions against Venezuela, which is going against the minimum spirit of humanity,” the Geng said.

The Chinese government spokesperson likewise denounced US sanctions on Iran.

Noting that Beijing had sent a team of medical experts to help Iran contain Covid-19, the Foreign Affairs Ministry added, “We urge the US to immediately lift unilateral sanction on Iran. Continued sanction is against humanitarianism and hampers Iran’s epidemic response.”

European Union abandons Italy, after pushing privatization of health systems

The European Union, on the other hand, has left Italy out to dry.

Italy’s ambassador to the EU, Maurizio Massari, published an op-ed noting that his country requested support through the body’s Mechanism of Civil Protection, seeking medical equipment to contain the coronavirus outbreak.

“But, unfortunately, not a single EU country responded to the Commission’s call. Only China responded bilaterally,” Massari wrote.

In fact the European Union has done the opposite of help. The European Commission, which leads the EU, called on member states to cut medical spending and privatize health services at least 63 times between 2011 to 2018.

The EU’s obsession with cutting and privatizing state institutions has greatly weakened the continent’s health infrastructure, making it much more susceptible to deadly pandemics like coronavirus.

Britain relies on Cuban help to dock coronavirus-infected ship

Cuba has been under an illegal US embargo since 1960 — which every country in the world (excluding Israel) votes to denounce each year at the United Nations. But this blockade has not stopped the small country from developing the best health system in all of Latin America.

Even the United Kingdom, one of the richest countries on the planet, has relied on Cuban help to contain the coronavirus.

The British government asked numerous countries in the Caribbean to let the cruise ship MS Braemar dock in their port, after there were several reports of coronavirus among its more than 1,000 passengers.

CNN noted that “British officials launched an intense diplomatic effort to find a country willing to take the” infected ship, but were rejected by Barbados and the Bahamas.

On March 16, Cuba agreed to assist Britain, offering to dock the MS Braemar in a Cuban port and help fly the passengers back to the UK.

Cuba’s Foreign Affairs Ministry declared in a statement, “These are times of solidarity, of understanding health as a human right, of strengthening international cooperation to face our common challenges, values that are key to the humanist practices of the Revolution and of our people.”

US fights for control of potential coronavirus treatment and vaccine

While Cuba, China, and Venezuela — countries targeted by US economic warfare — are helping the world contain the coronavirus outbreak, Washington itself is working overtime to monopolize any potential treatments, so it can profit from them.

A California-based pharmaceutical corporation, Gilead Sciences, has developed an experimental drug that medical experts think could potentially treat coronavirus.

The Chinese government’s Wuhan Institute of Virology applied for a patent so it can produce this drug, which is called remdesivir. But the US company has been fighting tooth and nail to prevent Beijing from being able to manufacture it.

Why? Because Gilead Sciences’ stocks are skyrocketing, and investors are saying the corporation may soon be making a fortune.

The US government has also tried to bribe a German medical company that may be on the verge of developing a coronavirus vaccine.

President Donald Trump reportedly offered “large sums of money” to the German firm, CureVac, so that the United States could have exclusive rights to the treatment — which it could then sell to the rest of the world.

US sanctions prevent Venezuela and Iran from importing medicine and medical equipment

And while the Trump administration and US pharmaceutical companies are seeking to profit from the coronavirus pandemic, Washington is doubling down on its destructive economic warfare.

Venezuela’s attorney general, Tarek William Saab, gave a press conference denouncing Washington for preventing Caracas from buying medicine and medical equipment that would help it fight Covid-19.

“It is ethically unacceptable that such sanctions be maintained against Venezuela,” Saab said. He called on Colombia and Brazil to stop their coup attempts against Caracas and to instead work together to contain the virus.

US sanctions have also greatly hindered Iran’s effort to fight Covid-19. Hundreds of Iranians have died, with thousands more affected, and Washington has prevented the country from buying much-needed medicine and medical equipment.

Iran’s foreign minister, Javad Zarif, denounced the US sanctions as a form of “medical terrorism.”

“Efforts to fight COVID19 pandemic in Iran have been severely hampered by US sanctions,” Zarif added. “It is IMMORAL to let a bully kill innocents.”

In a letter to Secretary-General António Guterres, Zarif called on the United Nations and member states to ignore the “inhuman US sanctions” on Iran and push for them to be lifted.

China has also forcefully spoken out against the US sanctions on Venezuela and Iran.

In a press conference on March 13, a spokesman for China’s Foreign Affairs Ministry, Geng Shuang, condemned Washington’s blockade of Caracas.

“At a crucial moment in which the governments and peoples of all countries are fighting together against the epidemic of a new coronavirus, the American side, however, is determined to continue shaking the stick of sanctions against Venezuela, which is going against the minimum spirit of humanity,” the Geng said.

The Chinese government spokesperson likewise denounced US sanctions on Iran.

Noting that Beijing had sent a team of medical experts to help Iran contain Covid-19, the Foreign Affairs Ministry added, “We urge the US to immediately lift unilateral sanction on Iran. Continued sanction is against humanitarianism and hampers Iran’s epidemic response.”

From Russia with Love

With united Europe MIA in its Covid-19 response, worst-hit nations turn to ‘evil’ Russia & China for help

And thank heavens for Russia and China, because if either Italy or Spain had been looking to the EU — or the USA for that matter — for real, on-the-ground assistance that would enable them to simply stop people dying in their thousands in overcrowded hospitals, then they would have found themselves waiting in vain.

Iran rejects Trump’s virus aid offer: “The American leaders are liars, manipulators, impudent and greedy … They are charlatans,” he said, also labeling them “absolutely ruthless” and “terrorists”. The American proposals “to help us with medicines and treatments, provided we ask for them, are strange”, he said, noting that the United States itself suffers from “a horrible shortage not only of disease prevention equipment but also of medicines”.*

23 Mar, 2020

Brussels has all but abandoned them to their fates, so is it any wonder that Italy, Spain and other European countries have turned to Moscow and Beijing for meaningful support in terms of expert advice and medical supplies?

When this coronavirus pandemic has passed and the nations of the European Union are counting the cost of decimated populations, shattered public health infrastructures and economic meltdowns, one thing is certain: the dynamics within the bloc will have changed forever.

Before the global outbreak of this killer virus, Russia and China were always the West’s undisputed bogeymen. Troublemakers, always up to mischief, playing dangerous geopolitical games intended to undermine Western democracies and divide allies in the EU and NATO.

The Chinese are not seeking to destroy Americans’ way of life. The Chinese accept fundamental aspects of our capitalist marketplace, and they have similar interests in halting climate change, fighting terrorists, and combating pandemics. China should be regarded as a serious rival as well as a crucial partner.

Many in the Western mainstream media are addicted to a daily fix of either Russian or Chinese conspiracy, so they probably don’t appreciate the irony here. Because things have changed.

In a big way.

It’s largely due to the generosity of these two “tricksy” outsider superpowers that some European nations, fully paid-up, long-term members of the EU, have even a remote chance of getting to grips with the immense public health demands caused by the outbreak of the coronavirus.

And thank heavens for that, because if either Italy or Spain had been looking to the EU — or the USA for that matter — for real, on-the-ground assistance that would enable them to simply stop people dying in their thousands in overcrowded hospitals, then they would have found themselves waiting in vain.

Sure, the ECB weighed in only last week, with an unprecedented fiscal bazooka aimed at reducing the economic impact that is being caused by the virus (ar at least by the measures governments are taking to try to stop it). But that’s fighting the virus in one manner only, very much after the fact and certainly not on the frontline.

This significance of that fiscal help will only really be apparent once the health crisis is over and the full, disastrous economic consequences are realized. And the fact that it is far from over right now is what needs immediate attention, like providing more medical staff, personal protection gear, ventilators, hospitals and, obviously, a vaccine.

But the message from Brussels to Italy, Spain and other EU members is clear: in dealing with the pandemic and the thousands of dead citizens it leaves in its wake, you are on your own.

The EU’s abject hopelessness and indifference started to become clear some weeks back in the face of the escalating virus, when the export beyond national borders of facemasks and medical equipment was banned by some EU members, including Germany.

A blow to Washington… China to invest $280 billion in Iranian sectors targeted by sanctions

It only takes one person to stand up to a bully – and it only takes one country to stand up to the bullying, sanctioning, war-mongering United States of America.

After US Threatens China/Russia interests in Venezuela, US Now Claims Russia and China a Threat to US

Goodbye War on Terror, Hello China and Russia

Guiado’s constitutional claim to the presidency of Venezuela was a scheme cooked up in collusion with Washington, made in the USA, with Secretary of State Pompeo, John Bolton and Sen. Marco Rubio signing on, and President Trump signing off. This was Plan A.

But if Plan A does not succeed, and Maduro, with America’s prestige on the line, defies our demand that he yield, what do we do then? What is Plan B?

“Assad must go!” said Barack Obama. Well, Assad is still there — and Obama is gone.

Russia, Iran, China: to the Victor Goes the Spoils

“Russia has become the major power broker in the Middle East”

Propping up Assad was a message to the West that leaders cannot be deposed by outside force — an attempt that Putin is believed to fear the West is trying to orchestrate in Russia. The military campaign was also a way for Russia to reestablish influence in the Middle East, show off its reconstituted military might and help brand itself a resurgent great power.

The losers are scurrying around to different places, different battles, battles they can win, perhaps.

Little by little, the partisans of the Cebrowski doctrine are advancing their pawns. If they must cease creating wars in the Greater Middle East for Israel, they’ll just turn around and inflame the Caribbean Basin. Above all, the Pentagon is planning to assassinate an elected head of state, ruin his country, and undermine the unity of Latin-America. Not cool.

“If they withdraw from Afghanistan it will not have a security impact because in the last 4 1/2 years the Afghans have been in full control,” Ghani’s spokesman, Haroon Chakhansuri, said via social media… Haha, US hasn’t won anything there…

The Tide Is Turning: Israel Is Losing on Two War Fronts.. haha

Battle Between Israel and Iran Shifting From Syria to Lebanon …Hezbollah is a big boy so I don’t think so.

The US withdrawal from Syria and Afghanistan, as well as the resignation of General Mattis, attest to the upheaval that is shaking the current world order. The United States are no longer the leaders, either on the economic or the military stage. They refuse to keep fighting for the sole interests of the transnational financiers. The alliances that they used to lead will begin to unravel, but without their erstwhile allies admitting the powerful ascension of Russia and China.


The US Air Force is condemned to defeat if it confronts the Syrian Arab Army, which now has in its possession Russian anti-air materials, the best in the world. The US’s only viable option is to leave, sparing itself any humiliation.
History is repeating itself.

Once before, in Iraq, the United States had used Kurdish combatants, promising them a State before letting them be massacred by Saddam Hussein. Today the US lets other Kurds to whom it has also promised a State, face up to Turkey alone. _ In a few months the war will be over. After eight years of fighting and tens of thousands of Islamist mercenaries being sacrificed, ZIO-Nato’s dream of destroying Syria’s state structures will have failed.

States addressed in the Report as the instigators of war crimes are the imperialist states and their

collaborationists which we are used to see where there is war in the World.

A week ago, two S-300 rocket missiles were deployed in Deir Ez-zor, in East Syria. Immediately after, the intensity of the US-led coalition flights decreased by 80% in North East Syria. Since 18 September 2018, the Israeli Air Force has not carried out any more raids in Syria’s airspace.

A delegation from the Israeli army, led by General Major Aharon Haliva (Head of Operations), went to Moscow for talks with Major General Vasily Trushin (Joint Chief of Operations of the Russian Army). Relations between the two armies have deteriorated after the destruction of the Russian airplane IL-20 during the attack on Syrian targets near the Russian air base of Hmeymim by the Israeli F-16.

The Israeli delegation went to Moscow because it had not succeeded in finding the gaps in the no fly zone, imposed by the new system of Syrian Defense delivered by Russia. The Israelis thought they could coax the Russians to obtain the security codes for Syrian missiles. Russia, quite clearly, refused to give these codes to them.

What are the elements of the automatized management of the Syrian air space that prevent the Israelis and Americans from acting? Syria has received 6 to 8 S-300/PMU2 missiles, with an action range of 250 km. The missiles guarantee the security of planes and Syrian military land targets. However, they are not the most important element.

Management is assured by the automatized management system, Polyana D4M1. The role of the automatized management system is a necessary interface for the Syrian air units and anti-Air Defense apparatus to work at the same time. Polyana D4M1 can cover an area of 800 km2, following 500 air targets and ballistic missiles and establishing 250 of them. It is thanks to the Polyana D4M1 that command centres of the army of the Syrian Air Force also receive external information from the Russian airplane A-50U (AWACS) and Russian satellites of surveillance.

The memory of the Polyana D4M1 computer servers stock the radar imprint of all the air targets including the cruise missiles and the allegedly “invisible” F-35 plane.

When an air target is detected by a radar in Syria, the automatized system Polyana D4M1 posts information for all the detection radars and systems for guiding planes and Syrian and Russian anti-air artillery. Once identified, the air targets are automatically assigned to be struck down. This automatized system ensures that the oldest Syrian missiles of the Soviet era (S-200, S-75, S-125, etc.) become almost as precise as the S-300 missile.

The Polyana D4M1 network also includes the following:
• the Krasukha-4 for jamming the radars on the ground
• AWACS aircrafts
• reconnaissance planes with or without pilots.

The network also uses the Zhitel R-330ZH systems for interfering with NAVSTAR (GPS), the apparatus of navigation. This equips the means of attack (planes, helicopters, cruise missiles, guided bombs, etc.).

What is the consequence of Russia implementing the automatized management of the Syrian air space?

The US military air bases in Syria consist essentially of troops for special operations. By this we mean a light infantry, without any armour or support. They could not therefore ward off any land attack carried out by the Syrian army supported by the Air Force. Having understood that the US Air Force will not be able to pass the Syrian anti-air barrage without unacceptable losses, any US intervention becomes inappropriate.

This is why the US has just announced that it will start to withdraw 2,000 soldiers from Syria [1]. At the same time, Turkey, supported by Russia, is getting ready to launch a new offensive against the YPG in Northern Syria. These new circumstances ensure the Syrian Army will fight on the side of Turkey. The YPG, trained and supported by the United States, is quickly losing all the territories that it had taken from the Islamic State which itself had taken from Syria.

End to US-Zio Law of the Jungle

American defense planning of 21st century is based upon “America is the nation at war” doctrine intended to run outdated unipolar hegemony by hook and crook.

Image result for russia china cooperation

China and Russia Sign Military Cooperation Roadmap


The U.S. led “Law of the Jungle” has created the series of endless wars and regional conflicts. More than 60 independent and sovereign states were destroyed directly and indirectly by Washington interference to usher the uni-centric World Order with Western allies in this 21st century. American defense planning of 21st century is based upon “America is the nation at war” doctrine intended to run outdated unipolar hegemony by hook and crook.

Therefore America has not only executed “law of the jungle” to run world affairs unilaterally  but now to save Washington power-centric hegemony, it is using third degree methods to keep control over world nations. But this hawkish rhetoric has fueled chaos all-around the world from Africa to Asia.

 America has involved in attempts to bring regime change in different countries around the globe to achieve its geopolitical objectives through color revolutions. While in many countries it has launched direct military option to install puppet regimes.

The situation in Iraq, Libya, Syria and Afghanistan is the witnessed of it that how America assaulted unilaterally on these sovereign states to alter regional map.  Now it has trying to extend ground based strategic defense missile system from Europe to Asia with the construction of American defense system complex also known as European Interceptor Site (EIS) in Poland for Europe and the installation of THAAD on South Korean soil for Asia.

Related image

This is Zionism

Bluntly speaking, the U.S. is attempting to breakdown of world peace by posing nuclear war threat with global missile program which is a direct threat to Eurasian superpowers Russia and China.  Although the US has projected this global missile system hosted by Poland and Korea for defense purposes but the fact is that this is a deliberately attempt to undermine or weaken Russia and China’s strategic nuclear deterrent.

Both countries agree that the deployment of such ground based American defense systems in Europe and Asia is simply sharp-cut venture to tear down the geostrategic balance of the power that guaranteed the safety of humanity from the major conflict, over past 71 years.

Now America on the name of defense is fueling aggression with the installation of ground based missile systems having ability to penetrate distance of up to 1000 Km and then further depends on the advancement of technology. This is a clear cut massage that America is going to violate the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty negotiated by President Reagan and Soviet General Secretary Gorbachov in 1987.

First time publicly Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian president Vladimir Putin discussed briefly to secure the peace of world by adopting new global security model for multipolar world during the Chinese President’s recent state visit of Russia.  Both have not only opposed THAAD installation but declared it against the common security of the Asia-pacific.

Hence why both are filling the international leadership vacuum  with the construction of a multipolar world security framework and new mechanisms for international relations featuring win-win cooperation through  defeating the “law of the jungle” which was imposed by the US/NATO on the world.

Chinese President Xi Jinping, during his address to 70the session of UN General Assembly, already issued a loud warning in saying that the “law of the jungle” should not be the way for countries to conduct relations – warmongering will backfire.  Now both countries have rejected the shrill American call for global action to a global threat because both have already assembled world nations with their international and regional multipolar institutions.

Interlinking EEU and OBOR together with multipolar institutions 

Put simply, Russia and China have created a new window of opportunities for the world by zipping their respective dreams of “Grand Eurasia” and “Modernization of the Ancient Silk Road” together with multipolar international institutions. Therefore, they are shaping the future of the new world through extending and strengthening multipolar world institutions i.e. BRICS, SCO and AIIB as alternates to unipolar institutions such as the IMF, World Bank, NATO and ADB.

In fact the US’ global Hybrid War strategy against China’s Silk Road known as One Belt One Road (OBOR) and Russia’s Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) brought China and Russia close together in establishing an alternative security system resisting the US/NATO-led Cold War mentality. Both Moscow and Beijing have promised to end-up the US dominance over seas and skies.

First time in history, Chinese naval ships participated in Russian hosted naval wargames from Baltic Sea to Mediterranean Sea while both have vowed to protect each other sovereignty from Black Sea to South China Sea. Hence why both are not only ready for an imminent war but they are also collaborating on different ways to minimize possible damage to the security of multipolar world.

Both Eurasian powers have joined hands to protect world as they are developing and proposing a substantive mechanism in Eurasia with multilateral institutions, which will include security issues, development of relations between the states, organization of the economy, social sphere, management system and search for new drivers of the growth.

For this purpose they are making institutional arrangements to interlink EEU and OBOR together intended to cover common economic space.  Russia, Kazakhstan and China have already framed trilateral mechanism to boost the process of interlinking Eurasian Economic Union with Belt Road Initiatives. Although it needs a lot of work and it will take a time but the process has begun to fill the room with mutual collaboration.  If it happens it would be a great geopolitical significance as the part of wide economic integration contour.

Despite this Russia and China are also shaping the new future of world by repelling the US led trade wars with their regional and global multilateral intuitions. As I wrote in one of my article about Eurasian Multilateral institutions that Russia and China have founded the one Eurasia’s powerful geo-strategic alliance, known as Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) which considers the security guard of Eurasia while the West also views SCO as alternative to the NATO. Now with the submission of Pakistan and India, SCO has become more powerful than NATO by keeping four nuclear powers; Russia, China, India and Pakistan under one umbrella.

To minimize the monopoly of Western international institutions World Bank and IMF, Russia and China have formulated the powerful economic institution of the BRICS. The world fastest growing economies, Brazil, Russia, China, India and South Africa are the part of it. Like SCO, the BRICS is also on the expansion mode as China has proposed BRICS plus idea to align other world fastest growing economies with BRICS. Not sure but my calculation lead me that BRICS is the interested to collaborate individually and collectively with the NEXT 11 also known as N-11 emerging economies.

 Russia and China have already great strategic and economic influence on these rising economies of 21st century which includes Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Turkey, South Korea, and Vietnam. If Russia and China succeeds to work with these nations, then it will give positive geographical diversification covering Europe, Latin America, Africa, South-East Asia, and the Middle East. For this purpose, BRICS New Development Bank can invest on infrastructure projects in these countries to replace IMF and World Bank.  Beside this for the development in Asia, China has also established the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) as alternate to Japan-led Asian Development Bank (ADB).

               Trade wars and New Multipolar Investment Regime System

Thirsty blood sanctions war against multipolar world countries; Russia, Iran, North Korea hinted that America is using existing international investment regime system dominated by WTO, IMF and WB as tool of trade war to destroy the economy geopolitical opponents.  Beside these countries, the US trade war against China has also become visible and there is an also a threat sooner or later sanctions would also be extended to the enormous economic power of China.

Being the architectures of multipolar world, China and Russia were aware of such bloody economic war, therefore they had already formulated an alternative mechanism of international trade and economic law through bypassing Washington controlled international economic institutions. They had already challenged the monopoly of dollar as international currency by establishing the international trade in national and local currencies with their alternative economic institutes. BRICS has given preference to national currencies while Russia and China are also working on de-dollarization by introducing petrogold instead of petrodollar.

Russia being the one of biggest oil and gas exporter has introduced alternative energy trade system to minimize petrodollar hegemony over the organization of petroleum exporting (OPEC) countries. In 1975 all of the OPEC nations had agreed to sell their oil in the US dollars in exchange for American weapons and military protection. Unfortunately this “oil for dollars” system created the artificial American dominance around the globe due to demand for the US dollars.

But with the passage of time, oil exporter countries realized that oil for dollars was a biggest global blunder because they were accepting worthless paper currency for their worthy oil. Russia raised a voice against this petrodollar system by introducing an ancient wisdom; trade in gold. Russia’s proposed Oil for Gold attracted many oil exporters. Today, Russia, Iran, Syria and Venezuela appeared as pressure group on OPEC. They have chosen their national currencies and gold for energy supply. Additionally, like other nations China and India as the biggest energy importers also given a preference to pay in their own currencies.

In fact Dollarization of world appeared immediately after the WW2 with aim to regulate war-torn international economic system by establishing the International Bank of Reconstruction and Development (IBRD, later known as the World Bank), The International Monetary Fund and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT, later known as the World Trade Organization, or WTO). In all this institutional process, the US Dollar played a central role and these economic institutions introduced new fixed exchange rate regime with Dollar.

Hence why, all global currencies were pigged to the US Dollar.  But today, the de-dollarization trend has become very popular. This trend was accelerated by the common efforts of Moscow and Beijing as they formulated anti-dollar alliance. Russian President Putin was personally behind the establishment of anti-dollar alliance as in 2014, he sent the governor of the Russian Central Bank, Elvira Nabiullina to Beijing for the establishment of a system of multilateral swaps.

Ruble-Yuan swap deal turned BRICS into anti-dollar alliance. Therefore now currency swaps between the BRICS central banks are facilitating trade financing while completely bypassing the dollar. This new alternative system will also act as a de facto replacement of the IMF, because it will allow the members of the alliance to direct resources to finance the weaker countries. In other words, Russia and China by using the potential of BRICS have got success to replace existing international investment regime system with new multipolar investment regime system.

Welcome to the post-Westphalian world

It is plain silly to pretend that we don’t know when we all know that we all know.

Image result for China, Russia, India and Turkey give finger to US meme

The era of Western domination is coming to an end.” Western elites “should lift their sights from their domestic civil wars and focus on the larger global challenges. Instead, they are, in various ways, accelerating their irrelevance and disintegration.”

Western elites cannot but worry when central banks in China, Russia, India and Turkey actively increase their physical gold stash; when Moscow and Beijing discuss launching a gold-backed currency system to replace the US dollar; when the IMF warns that the debt burden of the global economy has reached $237 trillion; when the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) warns that, on top of that there is also an ungraspable $750 trillion in additional debt outstanding in derivatives.

Mahbubani states the obvious: “The era of Western domination is coming to an end.” Western elites, he adds, “should lift their sights from their domestic civil wars and focus on the larger global challenges. Instead, they are, in various ways, accelerating their irrelevance and disintegration.”

Meanwhile, Eurasian integration, as depicted in Diesen’s book, is slowly but surely redefining the future.

June 6, 2018

Key economic forums in cities across Eurasia point the way to new power structures rising to challenge Western dominance

Ahead of the crucial Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Qingdao this coming weekend, three other recent events have offered clues on how the new world order is coming about.

The Astana Economic Forum in Kazakhstan centered on how mega-partnerships are changing world trade. Participants included the president of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) Jin Liqun; Andrew Belyaninov from the Eurasian Development Bank; former Italian Prime Minister and president of the EU Commission Romano Prodi; deputy director-general of the WTO Alan Wolff; and Glenn Diesen from the University of Western Sydney.

Diesen, a Norwegian who studied in Holland and teaches in Australia, is the author of a must-read book, Russia’s Geoeconomic Strategy for a Greater Eurasia, in which he analyzes in excruciating detail how Moscow is planning “to manage the continent from the heartland by enhancing collective autonomy and influence, and thus evict US hegemony directed from the periphery.”

In parallel, as Diesen argues, Moscow aims “to ensure the sustainability of an integrated Eurasia by establishing a balance of power or ‘balance of dependence’ to prevent the continent from being dominated by one power, with China being the most plausible candidate.”

In a nutshell; this New Great Game installment revolves around “Russia’s strategy to enhance its bargaining power with the West by pivoting to the East.”

Concerning Astana, Diesen told me that the AIIB’s Liqun “took the hardest stance in defense of diversifying financial instruments, while Belyaninov was very critical of anti-Russian sanctions.”

Diesen argues that: “The emergence of economic mega-blocks actually improves economic relations by creating more symmetry. For example, China’s CIPS (Cross-Border Interbank Payment System) undermined the ability of SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication) to be used for economic coercion, while CIPS and SWIFT still cooperate. Similarly, the EAEU [Eurasia Economic Union] gets its strength from the ability to integrate with other regions as opposed to isolating itself.”

And here’s the clincher: “China’s cooperation with the EAEU mitigates Russian concerns about asymmetries, and enables greater EAEU-BRI [Belt and Road Initiative] integration under the stewardship of the SCO. Also, unlike the EU, the EAEU provides great benefit to non-members (non-zero sum) by creating an effective transportation corridor with harmonized tariffs, standards, etc.”

Diesen remarked how Liqun, a key character in the whole game, “is very positive about the Eurasian Economic Union and insistent on the positive-sum game of integration of regions.” Liqun is “direct, honest and forceful” and does not refrain from criticizing the Trump administration, arguing “there is not a trade war between the US and China, it is a US trade war against the world.”

Add to the debate the crucial Astana headline, ignored by Western corporate media: Iran signed a provisional free-trade-zone agreement with the EAEU, lowering or abolishing customs duties, and opening the way for a final deal in 2021. For Iran, that will be a golden ticket to do business way beyond Southwest Asia, integrating it further with Russia and also Kazakhstan, which happens to be a key member of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

All about Eurasian integration

The St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF) is the annual Russian equivalent of Davos. Predictably, coverage on Western media was appalling – at best rehashing bits and pieces of the joint press conference held by presidents Vladimir Putin and Emmanuel Macron.

There was no mention, as Asia Times previously reported, of how Moscow was instrumental in ironing out differences between North and South Korea at the Far East summit in Vladivostok last September, impressing the need for a win-win regional business plan; the integration of the Trans-Siberian with a future Trans-Korean railway, a key plank of Eurasia integration.

When it comes to tracking Eurasia integration, SPIEF is invaluable. The St Petersburg get-together has also been a traditional forum for key SCO discussions. One panel illustrated how the Shanghai forum is fast advancing on the trade and economic front; new members India and Pakistan are now very much active in the SCO Business Council. The discussion of the business, industrial and technological agenda for observer states was also important; that’s where Iran, a future full SCO member, fits in.

Eurasia integration also featured on another panel about new logistical routes opened by international transport corridors – very much the stuff BRI and the EAEU are made of.

And the BRICS revival was also part of the picture, as attested by this panel on the BRICS in Africa “leveraging the Fourth Industrial Revolution” for economic development, featuring the president of the BRICS’s New Development Bank (NDB), Kundapur Kamath, and Jiakang Sun, the executive vice-president of Chinese giant COSCO Shipping Corp.

Yet the clincher in terms of possible game-changing relations between Russia and Europe came from Finance Minister and first deputy Prime Minister Anton Siluanov: “As we see, restrictions imposed by the American partners are of an extraterritorial nature. The possibility of switching from the US dollar to the euro in settlements depends on Europe’s stance toward Washington’s position.”

So once again the EU was on the spot – on both crucial fronts, Iran and Russia. Siluanov left the door wide open: “If our European partners declare their position unequivocally, we could definitely see a way to use the European common currency for financial settlements, such as payments for goods and services, which today are often subject to restrictions.”

Siluanov did not fail to mention that Russia, as much as China and Iran, is already bypassing the US dollar. That accounts for three crucial nodes of Eurasian integration, and that’s the way to go for BRI, EAEU, SCO and BRICS.

The Indo-Pacific enigma

Meanwhile, the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore has been the top venue for defense diplomacy debate in the Asia-Pacific since 2001.

With the “Indo-Pacific” concept is hyped to the extreme, it was up to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the keynote speaker, to strike a deft balancing act.

Even as Modi said the Indo-Pacific should not develop as an exclusive club, he took pains to stress that “Asia and the world will have a better future when India and China work together in trust and confidence. No other relationship of India has as many layers as our relationship with China.”

China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi dismissed the “Indo-Pacific” push as an “attention-grabbing idea” that will “dissipate like ocean foam,” as he hopes that the Quad – US, India, Japan, Australia – does not focus on targeting China, like the previous Obama administration “pivot to Asia.”

The problem is the Indo-Pacific focus, in practice, amounts to a military counterpunch to BRI, with no wide-ranging economic cooperation dimension apart from sketchy plans for a “new global infrastructure.” Compare it, for instance, with China financing over 130 projects within the Lancang-Mekong Cooperation framework, integrating Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam into the Chinese economy.

BRI is a multi-trillion-dollar, multinational, decades-long, inclusive project. As Wang Yiwei, a senior research fellow at the Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies of the Renmin University of China, said “All SCO members are participating in BRI, and this organization [SCO] is the initiative’s security guarantee.”

Yet when it comes to the Indo-Pacific sphere, the US, Japan and Australia are not SCO members. And India still refuses to acknowledge the SCO is interlinked with BRI.

Moreover, everything about BRI cannot but clash front-on with the depth and reach of the US across Asia. So the security stress is inevitable. The 10-nation ASEAN, caught in the middle, is adopting at best a “wait and see” strategy. Indonesia at least is venturing a step ahead, promoting a non-confrontational “Indo-Pacific cooperation concept.”

The bottom line is that China’s relentless drive to multiply Chinese-organized solutions in international relations is unstoppable. As in Wang Yi’s discreet but forceful diplomacy leading to Kim Jong-un’s first visit to China; President Xi solidifying his role as the go-to leader of globalization 2.0; and the Chinese leadership as a whole arguing that the future of Asia-Pacific security cannot be hostage to a Cold War 2.0 mentality.

US Defense Secretary James Mattis’ warning to China in Singapore of “much larger consequences” if its sovereignty expansion across virtually the whole South China Sea is not contained may be an idle threat. Beijing has no intention to restrict freedom of navigation in the South China Sea; for a mercantile giant, that would be counter-productive. The whole game is about high-stakes geopolitical control. Even the new head of the renamed US Indo-Pacific Command, Admiral Philip Davidson, had to admit to the US Senate that short of war between China and the US, Beijing will prevail in the South China Sea.

Welcome to the post-Westphalian world

In his latest, avowedly “provocative” slim volume, Has the West Lost It? former Singaporean ambassador to the UN and current Professor in the Practice of Public Policy at the National University, Kishore Mahbubani frames the key question: “Viewed against the backdrop of the past 1,800 years, the recent period of Western relative over-performance against other civilizations is a major historical aberration. All such aberrations come to a natural end, and that is happening now.”

It is enlightening to remember that at the Shangri-la Dialogue two years ago, Professor Xiang Lanxin, director of the Centre of One Belt and One Road Studies at the China National Institute for SCO International Exchange and Judicial Cooperation, described BRI as an avenue to a ‘post-Westphalian world.’

That’s where we are now. Western elites cannot but worry when central banks in China, Russia, India and Turkey actively increase their physical gold stash; when Moscow and Beijing discuss launching a gold-backed currency system to replace the US dollar; when the IMF warns that the debt burden of the global economy has reached $237 trillion; when the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) warns that, on top of that there is also an ungraspable $750 trillion in additional debt outstanding in derivatives.

Mahbubani states the obvious: “The era of Western domination is coming to an end.” Western elites, he adds, “should lift their sights from their domestic civil wars and focus on the larger global challenges. Instead, they are, in various ways, accelerating their irrelevance and disintegration.”

Meanwhile, Eurasian integration, as depicted in Diesen’s book, is slowly but surely redefining the future.