The Genetic War!

The Genetic War!

David: This is the first part of short series of articles. The following item is just the latest, more blatant, aspect of a genetic war that has been going on, at this level at least, for decades, but which has actually been taking place for hundreds of years, millennia in fact! Part two will explain this in more detail, but the item below should be enough to convince that these “people” (if they can be called that) are SERIOUS in their plans and ultimate agenda for human-kind! Be warned!

Obama signs ‘Monsanto Protection Act’ written by Monsanto-sponsored senator
Published time: March 28, 2013 19:04
Edited time: March 30, 2013 04:11

United States President Barack Obama has signed a bill into law that was written in part by the very billion-dollar corporation that will benefit directly from the legislation.

On Tuesday, Pres. Obama inked his name to H.R. 933, a continuing resolution spending bill approved in Congress days earlier. Buried 78 pages within the bill exists a provision that grossly protects biotech corporations such as the Missouri-based Monsanto Company from litigation.

With the president’s signature, agriculture giants that deal with genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and genetically engineered (GE) seeds are given the go-ahead to continue to plant and sell man-made crops, even as questions remain largely unanswered about the health risks these types of products pose to consumers.

In light of approval from the House and Senate, more than 250,000 people signed a petition asking the president to veto the spending bill over the biotech rider tacked on, an item that has since been widely referred to as the “Monsanto Protection Act.”

“But Obama ignored [the petition],” IB Times’ Connor Sheets writes, “instead choosing to sign a bill that effectively bars federal courts from being able to halt the sale or planting of GMO or GE crops and seeds, no matter what health consequences from the consumption of these products may come to light in the future.”

James Brumley, a reporter for Investor Place, explains a little more thoroughly just how dangerous the rider is now that biotech companies are allowed to bypass judicial scrutiny. Up until it was signed, he writes, “the USDA [US Department of Agriculture] oversaw and approved (or denied) the testing of genetically modified seeds, while the federal courts retained the authority to halt the testing or sale of these plants if it felt that public health was being jeopardized. With HR 933 now a law, however, the court system no longer has the right to step in and protect the consumer.”

If the president’s signature isn’t all that surprising, though, consider the genesis of the bill itself. According to an article published Monday in the New York Daily News, US Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Missouri) “worked with Monsanto to craft the language in the bill.”

Sen. Blunt defended his bill to the News, shrugging off suggestions that it set a startling precedent that will affect all US agriculture by firing back, “What it says is if you plant a crop that is legal to plant when you plant it, you get to harvest it. But it is only a one-year protection in that bill.”

One year could be all it takes to cause catastrophic damage to the environment by allowing laboratory-produced organisms to be planted into the earth without oversight. Under the Monsanto Protection Act, health concerns that arise in the immediate future involving the planting of GMO crops won’t be able to be heard by a judge. Blunt, a junior senator that has held elected office since the late ‘90s, has good reason to whitewash the very bill he helped craft. The Center for Responsive Politics notes that Sen. Blunt received $64,250 from Monsanto to go towards his campaign committee between 2008 and 2012. The Money Monocle website adds that Blunt has been the largest Republican Party recipient of Monsanto funding as of late.

On the lawmaker’s official website, a statement explains a little more as to why he favored HR 933 and the rider within it.

“As the Ranking Member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies, Senator Blunt played a vital role in writing the fiscal year 2013 Agriculture Appropriations bill. This legislation maintained vital support for research and extension at land grant universities, capacity building grants for non-land grant colleges of agriculture, and competitive funding under the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI). The bill also included funding for conservation activities, housing and business loan programs for rural communities, domestic and international nutrition programs.”

Nowhere does the senator’s site mention the Monsanto Protection Act by name, although it claims Blunt “supports continued investments in agricultural research and engineering.”

“Did Blunt not realize that Monsanto would stand to gain significantly if section 735 survived and HR 933 was signed into law?” asks Brumley. “Not likely,”

“There’s no way of getting around the fact this is an abusive conflict of interest,” he says.

Clearly isn’t Brumley the only one that feels that way either: Blunt’s Wikipedia page was vandalized this week to read in the first paragraph, “His Senate seat was previously held by Republican Kit Bond, until Bond’s retirement, and will be sold by Blunt to Monsanto Corporation upon his retirement.”



There has been a lot in the news lately about Monsanto and GMOs. This is because people are becoming more and more aware of the facts, meaning “dangers” of course. But what “dangers”? And just how serious is all of this? More importantly WHY is this program being pushed through? This truth is stranger than “fiction” I’m afraid, and you are not going to like what follows! Read on…

One of the ultimate goals of the agenda is the control of the food supply, but even more horrific is… THE CORRUPTION OF THE FOOD SUPPLY! WHY? The answer is simple, and two-fold…

— “You are (become) what you eat!” = You eat genetically corrupted material, you absorb genetic corruption, YOUR genetic make-up becomes corrupted! This results in one of two things…

— You get sick and die! OR, IF you survive, you gradually are changed into something that is, literally, no longer human! And there is a a reason and an agenda for both of these processes!…

The first is “population control”! Or as it has been put by the elites “global population reduction” = GENOCIDE!!! (The fancy name for MASS MURDER, and it is only ONE of their methods!)

The second is even more “fantastic” and sinister, but nevertheless true I’m afraid…

(Continued in the next part to follow)

Before that however, here are several pics and links that speak thousands of words. Please take note and act accordingly, for your own health and safety.

GMOs are killing the bees in droves – not only do bees produce honey, which is extremely healthy (see pic about liver), but it has been estimated that if the bees die out, human- kind itself will be extinct within four years!

563568_366107600164584_1332774740_n bees-found-dead-elmwood-ontario-canada-large-planting-gmo-corn-seed-treated-neonicotinoid-pesticides bijen_copy1 Photo 23.5.2014 08 09 20 Photo 24.5.2014 23 01 05

Another food that is totally good for you is garlic. If they can’t get you to stop eating their crap, they just have to eliminate the good stuff (as follows below), or remove your ability to be independent and grow your own (below)!

10362359_605743092874959_4388686777916371704_n Photo 19.5.2014 09 55 40Photo 27.5.2014 12 46 36


Photo 21.5.2014 17 57 47

The following are food for thought (pun intended)!

Photo 6.5.2014 09 33 15 Photo 6.5.2014 23 15 05 Photo 8.5.2014 09 53 51 Photo 10.5.2014 07 15 06 Photo 11.5.2014 11 29 53 Photo 12.5.2014 12 15 45 Photo 17.5.2014 07 00 38 Photo 17.5.2014 07 16 39 Photo 17.5.2014 07 44 12 Photo 20.5.2014 08 42 31 Photo 24.5.2014 08 46 11 Photo 27.5.2014 20 35 41 Photo 30.5.2014 09 05 32 Photo 30.5.2014 23 38 54


Photo 12.5.2014 07 41 31 Photo 20.5.2014 08 29 57 Photo 21.5.2014 16 20 25 Photo 22.5.2014 15 49 07 Photo 23.5.2014 08 06 30 Photo 23.5.2014 08 11 28 Photo 23.5.2014 08 59 38 Photo 25.5.2014 23 09 23 Photo 28.5.2014 19 30 03 Photo 29.4.2014 23 27 48 Photo 30.4.2014 18 16 56

Comments Off on The Genetic War! Posted in Posts


Op – Edge!

In the UK, Nigel Farrage and the UKIP political party just made an “arrival statement” on the UK political scene nationwide in the Local Council elections. A clear message to the traditional “two horse race” that has dominated British politics “forever”! An increasing percentage of the British electorate are clearly looking for change from the status quo now, and it is about time!

At the same time, the UK and the rest of Europe held MEP elections for the European Parliament, and in this case UKIP left the Conservative and Labour parties “in the dust”, with the Liberal Democrats practically dropping through the floor and out of the picture entirely! (The LibDems also fared the worst in the Local Council elections, effectively losing all credibility – I suspect that this was probably due to their leader’s shambles at an attempt to debate Nigel Farrage in a live debate previously).

Nigel Farrage and his party have been staunch anti-EU for a long time, and as the results came in throughout Europe it has become clear that they are not alone in this feeling! Thank God! The anti-EU sentiment is not yet strong enough to affect the two-block leading powers of the EU Parliament it seems, but there has never been such a resounding declaration of intent from those dissatisfied, who want to return to independence for their countries and their own national sovereignty.

Back in the UK, Nigel Farrage and the UKIP have now managed to provide an alternative voice to the usual “same ol’, same ol'” of unbelievable politicians. Whether they can swing it to make a credible dent in British politics in next year’s General Elections for the British Parliament remains to be seen, but we can always hope that the groundswell of a rising tide of a desire for change continues to stir in the people. It is very needed.

Of course politics is politics, but it is refreshing to see a politician who actually believes in what he says, (another would be George Galloway MP), and whether all of those beliefs are right or wrong, good or bad, at least you are not left with much in the way of guess-work. Nigel does his homework, gets his facts and statements right on the issues that he talks about, and is far more credible than his traditional counter-parts. Best of all he is the scourge of the Eurocrats, and has been for a long time!

Let’s see…

Here are two pieces from RT on the Euro Elections, very much worth a read…

And this is more on the current crisis in the Ukraine and the farce of the elections for the Presidency that just took place there (the hypocritical rhetoric of the West continues!)…

Presidential elections also took place in Egypt, Venezuela is not getting the news coverage in the pro-Western media that it should (dirty-work going on there right now, in the US’s “backyard”!), and… The Pope advocates taking the chip!!!

Still lots going on folks! Too much to cover here, but please keep doing your own homework!

Always, David.

Comments Off on Op-Edge!… Posted in Posts

Bilderberg’s Europe!…


Bilderberg’s silent takeover of Britain’s $60bn defense budget

Beginning his working life in the aviation industry and trained by the BBC, Tony Gosling is a British land rights activist, historian & investigative radio journalist.

Democracy had another near-fatal stroke, and the military industrial complex further tightened UK defense spending with the appointment of ex-army officer and Tory hothead Rory Stewart MP as the new chairman of Westminster’s Defence Select Committee.

Last week the Home Affairs Select Committee delivered a damning verdict on Britain’s defense and secret service oversight, on taxpayer accountability. It said the refusal of the director general of MI5, Andrew Parker, to appear before them and lack of any effective supervision was “undermining the credibility of the intelligence agencies and parliament itself.”

Surely nothing could surpass the ‘Dodgy Dossier’, the criminal conspiracy that led to the US and Britain, as the Arab League put it in 2003, to ‘Opening the Gates of Hell in Iraq’? But with Stuart’s appointment to oversee public scrutiny of UK military spending just two weeks before NATO’s political cabal of which he’s a member, the Bilderberg conference, meets in Copenhagen later this month, it is clear to those who still have eyes to see that those bloody lessons have not been learned and the worse could be yet to come.

The most powerful private club in the world

In their Christmas 1987 edition, The Economist described Bilderberg as ‘Ne Plus Ultra’ the most powerful private club in the world. Its power has certainly not diminished as the decades have rolled by and neither has its secrecy. Although it began with trades unionists and powerful people it wanted to persuade, in its final days Bilderberg has boiled down to a rotten core of bankers, royalty, arms industry, oil and media barons and Rory Stuart MP, in the tradition of Kissinger, Blair, Cameron, Osborne and Balls, has thrown his lot in with them.

In 1943, half way through the war, the US power elite saw that, barring any big surprises, Hitler was going to lose World War Two, so their ‘War And Peace Studies Group’ of the Council On Foreign Relations (CFR) quietly began to prepare the Marshall Plan for the post-war world. Alongside the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), a sizable budget was set aside to fund a range of activities which would ensure Europeans didn’t vote communist and were welded economically, culturally and politically to the US for the foreseeable future.

Born in a Nazi ‘witches cauldron’ of British blood

Bilderberg’s first chairman, Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, was born into the German aristocracy. He joined the Nazi party at university, then the SS but he married into the Dutch royal family, dropping the silver deaths-head and black SS uniform before the war. His newly adopted Holland was invaded by his old Nazi friends in 1941, so he fled to Britain with Dutch Queen Wilhelmina and his wife, Princess Juliana.

As a former SS officer he was scrutinized by the Admiralty’s wartime spymaster, Ian Fleming who, after a year of watching Bernhard, signed him to the British army as a trusted Dutch liaison officer.

With 1944 came one of Bernhard’s most important jobs: to supervise the Dutch underground in the run-up to September’s liberation of large parts of Holland. Field Marshall Montgomery’s audacious airborne operation, the biggest in history, depicted in Cornelius Ryan’s 1977 film A Bridge Too Far, was codenamed ‘Market Garden’ and intended to end the war by Christmas.

As liaison officer for the coming Arnhem deliverance, Bernhard sent in Dutch spy, Christiaan Lindemans, codename ‘King Kong’, ten days beforehand to prepare resistance fighters for the allies lunge through Eindhoven, Nijmegen and over the Rhein into Arnhem.

But instead of making contact with the Dutch underground, Bernhard’s ‘King Kong’ found some German soldiers and demanded to be taken straight to the Abwehr, German military intelligence. The allies’ plans for the airborne assault were in enemy hands because Bernhard’s precious Lindemans was a double agent. He had wrecked the allies’ all-important element of surprise.

‘King Kong’ was arrested and quizzed after the war by the British but never got a chance to tell his story because, under Dutch orders, he was whisked off to Germany and died in suspicious circumstances.

Operation Market Garden went ahead on Sunday September 17, 1944, but the British paratroopers at Arnhem were quickly split and surrounded by forces containing self-propelled guns, tanks and crack SS troops, who happened to be resting nearby. Frost’s 2nd battalion held on to the bridge leaving the rest of the 1st Airborne Division surrounded in what the Nazis called the Hexenkessel or ‘witches cauldron’, pinned down in the suburb of Oosterbeek.

On Wednesday 20 September, 1944, as British airborne Colonel John Frost’s remaining paratroopers were being mauled by SS Panzers at Arnhem Bridge, the tanks of the Grenadier Guards, along with US paratroopers, were tantalizingly close, destroying the last German defenses down the road in Nijmegen. Ironically, it was a young captain, who was also to chair the Bilderberg meetings in later life, Lord Peter Carrington, who was leading the Grenadier battle group of Sherman tanks as they took the penultimate bridge. At 8 o’clock that evening, he was just a 20-minute drive from reinforcing Frost at the Arnhem Bridge, and victory.

But although they still had eight hours or so before Arnhem Bridge would finally fall into German hands, Carrington’s force, along with the Irish guards, of a hundred or so tanks inexplicably stopped, just over the Nijmegen Bridge in the village of Lent, for an eighteen hour rest. After the war, 10 SS Panzer Division General Heinz Harmel mocked Carrington saying, “The British tanks made a mistake when they stayed in Lent. If they had carried on it would have been all over for us.”

‘Colonel Frost later put the blame,’ as Stuart Hills reports in ‘By Tank To Normandy’, ‘firmly on the lack of drive by Guards Armoured,’ of which Carrington’s Grenadiers were the spearhead. ‘Comparing their relatively light casualties with those suffered by the British 1st Airborne and US 82nd. Forty years later,’ in 1984, ‘he stood on the bridge at a reunion, shook his fist and roared a question into the air for the guards. ‘Do you call that fighting!’

So Bilderberg’s first 1954 venue in Oosterbeek, Holland, was highly significant, being the same spot where a decade before the British army had suffered nearly 10,000 casualties in of one of the last Nazi bloodbaths of World War II. Bernhard had given the game away and when it looked like, despite his treachery, the brave allied soldiers might pull it off, Carrington and his corps of tanks ground to a halt for an eighteen hour tea break.

Psychos always return to the scene of the crime

Like the psychopath, who feels compelled to return to the scene of the crime, Prince Bernhard returned to Oosterbeek to chair the inaugural Bilderberg meeting in 1954. The conferences led to the signing of the Treaty of Rome, which started the European Economic Community (EEC) three years later.

Surrounded by the great and good of the post war world, the prince hoped nobody would examine his reasons for choosing Oosterbeek. At the best it was an in-joke – at the worst the battle was thrown. Whatever way you look at it sixty years on, the coded message from that first Bilderberg meeting should be clear to us now. Ten years after the war, the Nazis were back.

The seventy year Bilderberg project is almost complete
So seventy years since the Arnhem slaughter and sixty years since the first Bilderberg conference, the EEC has become the EU. NATO’s new feudal oligarchy of Western banksters and multinationals own and control all the big political parties as well as almost everything that moves both sides of the Atlantic.

Some saw it coming: former SS general Paul Hausser, who became chief of HIAG, the German SS veterans group after the war, claimed that “the foreign units of the SS were really the precursors of the NATO army.” Others detailed the Nazis’ transformation from military to financial empire including former CBS News correspondent Paul Manning in his 1981 book ‘Martin Bormann Nazi in Exile’.

Bilderberg’s latest wheeze is the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). This treaty makes voting pointless by letting multinationals sue governments and will leave only the thinnest veneer of democracy for the mainstream media to chew on both in Europe and America. The ‘nation states’ will become mere prefectures and the European Commission will be the unelected government of the United States of Europe.

As ordinary people across Europe and America cry out for decent basic standards such as fresh water, food, shelter, healthcare, heating and full employment, the mainstream media barely hear them because this is not the Bilderberg way. Instead, these pinstriped fascists bury us in debt, steal our leisure time, erode quality time with children, friends and family, and then blame us for demanding a fair share of the rewards of human progress.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

UN Ukraine report shows double standards in attempt to whitewash Kiev’s actions – Russia

Published time: May 16, 2014 09:13
Edited time: May 16, 2014 11:12

Moscow has accused a UN report on violence in Ukraine’s Odessa of being purposefully blind to hard facts and simply “carrying out a political order to whitewash” the actions of the coup-appointed government in Kiev.

The Russian foreign ministry believes that the report presented by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights is marked by a systematic and routine ignorance of any Kiev involvement in sparking the Odessa carnage, while placing all the blame unequivocally with the pro-Russian self-defense forces. The ministry statement remarks that not a single word was said about neo-Nazi elements who engaged in setting buildings on fire with people inside, shooting dead anyone who opposed them and finishing off the wounded in plain sight.

This especially concerns the events taking place in the House of the Trade Unions on May 2.

The foreign ministry believes that such “double standards” are a clear indicator of the international organization’s mission to pander to a select side in the conflict without any regard for hard evidence.

The United Nations spoke on Friday of the “alarming deterioration” of the human rights situation in eastern Ukraine. The report by the organization’s head for human rights, Navi Pillay, focuses also on the problems the Tatar minority currently faces in Crimea.

However Moscow said Pillay’s monthly report failed to mention crucial facts, starting with the burnings and the coordinated murders; the inaction by Ukraine’s law enforcement as well as the multiple arrests of individuals rallying for federalization; the multiple kidnappings and instances of torture, as well as lack of any credible evidence to back up those actions. In this interpretation, “the entire story is basically being delivered as Kiev’s official line would have been.”

The foreign ministry found it peculiar that “in some 30 pages of text, there is not one mention of any manifestation of aggressive nationalism and neo-Nazism in Ukraine.”

Russia criticized the authors of the report for violating the principles enshrined in the UN Charter, which clearly dictates that political neutrality must be exhibited whatever the situation. “When UN High Commissioner for Human Rights announced Crimea referendum ‘illegal’ following the suit of Kiev and its Western patrons, it seconded that it accepts a nation’s right to self-determination established by international human rights laws only when it is politically favorable,” said the statement.

The icing on the cake, in Moscow’s view, could be seen in the venue where the UN findings were presented – and by whom: in Kiev, by the UN secretary-general’s assistant, Ivan Shimonovich, who has a “reputation for a lack of objectivity, making sweeping judgments” and “unsubstantiated claims”.

Shimonovich’s role in the presentation is seen as “an unambiguous indication” of the OHCHR’s bias and lack of independence and objectivity.

Russia’s third largest bank moves money from Europe to Moscow for safe keeping

Published time: May 13, 2014 09:02
Edited time: May 15, 2014 06:02
Reuters / Leonhard Foeger

Gazprombank transferred client funds from Belgium and Luxembourg back to home turf, to protect against any future sanctions.

The securities were moved from Euroclear Bank (Brussels) and Clearstream Banking (Luxembourg) to the Russian Central Depository at the end of April.

The move is intended to protect customers from any forthcoming sanctions and prevent a situation where clients’ funds are frozen, the statement on the website said.

“The transfer was done to prevent possible restrictions on transactions of customers’ assets that are kept in international deposits and settlement systems,” it stated. In preparation for sanctions, in March, the bank moved nearly $7 billion to Russia’s Central Bank for safe keeping.

Russia’s Central Bank held $486 billion in international reserves as of April 1 this year, $40 billion less than one year earlier, when holdings stood at about $528 billion.

The last round of US sanctions included 17 companies, but didn’t target Gazprombank or Vnesheconombank (VEB), both state-owned lending institutions. In March, the US imposed sanctions on Bank Rossiya and its owner, Yury Kovalchuk – both have stakes in Gazprom subsidiaries.

The bank’s total assets are $110.5 billion (3.9 trillion rubles) according to RIA bank ratings. The bank is 49.6 percent owned by a Gazprom-affiliated pension fund, Gazfond, 35.5 percent owned by Gazprom OAO, and 10.2 percent owned by VEB, Russia’s state development bank.

Bank customers will still be able to make transactions with other securities that were previously stored in the European banks.

Gazprombank is chaired by Aleksey Miller, the CEO of Gazprom. Igor Sechin, the head of Rosneft, Russia’s other major state-owned oil company, was included on the previous sanctions list. Miller was not.

Many US politicians have advocated placing both Gazprom and Rosneft under sanctions, in order to strike at the heart of the Russian economy – its energy.

Comments Off on Bilderberg’s Europe!… Posted in Posts

New Cold War?

​The New Cold War: Libya, Syria, and the Ukraine

(Dr. Can Erimtan is an independent scholar residing in İstanbul, with a wide interest in the politics, history and culture of the Balkans and the Greater Middle East. He tweets at @theerimtanangle )

Syria’s not-so-civil war has been going strong for more than three years now and recently the news agency Reuters reported that “[a]t least 150,000 people have been killed” in that time span.

The figure cited by Reuters is based on data provided by the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. In spite of the fact that this source has been popping up all over the news media throughout the past three years, in the process receiving a veneer of academic impartiality and respectability, Reuters’ Mohammed Abbas disclosed at the end of 2011, that the organization is basically run by one man, Rami Abdulrahman, from his “two bedroom terraced home in Coventry”. Abbas describes Abdulrahman as “a Sunni Muslim” opposed to the Assad regime in Damascus. In fact, Abdulrahman explained his position in the following terms: “I came to Britain the day Hafez al-Assad died, and I’ll return when Bashar al-Assad goes”. Hence, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights can hardly be seen as an impartial source providing accurate data. Instead, it appears it is a propaganda outfit frantically feeding anti-Assad messages into the global news stream.

Even though the ostensible object of the armed conflict in Syria was (or is) to remove Bashar al-Assad from power, it seems abundantly clear that the reality of the conflict on the ground has been nothing but a proxy-war pitting the West, as represented by the US and its NATO and other allies, against the new unholy trinity of Russia-China-Iran. Over the past months, however, this straightforward narrative has changed ever so drastically that now the erstwhile war-on-terror has seeped into Syrian territory and the name al-Qaeda has now assumed the shape of Islamists opposing the Damascus regime and frightening western observers and leaders alike. As such, this line of argument has some time ago received unexpected confirmation by one of Europe’s senior political leaders: the French lawyer and politician Roland Dumas (serving as François Mitterrand’s Foreign Minister from 1984 to 1986 and again from 1988 to 1993) made a cable television appearance last year — on the French channel LCP or La Chaîne Parlementaire — where he said the following: “I’m going to tell you something. I was in England two years before the violence in Syria on other business [, corresponding to 2009]. I met with top British officials, who confessed to me that they were preparing something in Syria. This was in Britain not in America. Britain was organizing an invasion of rebels into Syria. They even asked me, although I was no longer minister for foreign affairs, if I would like to participate. Naturally, I refused, I said I’m French, that doesn’t interest me”. Dumas went on to say “that this operation goes way back. It was prepared, preconceived and planned [interrupted by the show’s host, Arnaud Ardoin] … in the region it is important to know that this Syrian regime has a very anti-Israeli stance”. If Dumas’ statement bears any relation to reality that would mean that Gordon Brown’s government was ultimately behind any master-plan to remove the Assad regime, and that would transform Gordon Brown into Tony Blair’s real successor, in more than one way — both are after all members of the parliamentary group Labour Friends of Israel.

But seen on a global scale, even though Dumas emphatically stressed that the plan was hatched “in Britain not in America”, it is obvious that Blair and Brown have always been more than willing lackeys of the White House. As convincingly argued for by Norman Finkelstein in his polemic book The Holocaust Industry, the US has been Israel’s main support and financial backer since the June 1967 ‘Six Day War’, as a regional doorstop against Soviet ambitions in the Middle East, and thus it would seem very unlikely indeed that Britain had been acting on its own in 2009. And in today’s world of inter-related and cross-pollinated alliances and interests, an Israeli reasoning would not necessarily negate the fact that Syria was planned as a proxy-battlefield where the New Cold War could be contested. And in this context, a speech given by retired Gen. Wesley Clark (Retired 4-star U.S. Army general, Supreme Allied, Commander of NATO during the 1999 War on Yugoslavia) at the public affairs forum the Commonwealth Club of California in San Francisco on 3 October 2007 appears most enlightening.

At the time the retired 4-star general was promoting his then newly published book A Time to Lead: For Duty, Honor and Country, and during his talk in California he reminisced about the state of the US under the Bush-Cheney Administration (2001-09). Wesley Clark quite naturally talked about the impact of 9/11, the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 that have since determined the course of the world. Clark literally stated that following the terrorist attacks there “was a policy coup … these people took control of policy in the United States”, referring to the Bush-Cheney Administration and the Neo-con cabal, known as the Project for the New American Century or PNAC (including such luminaries as Richard Armitage, John R. Bolton, Dick Cheney, Francis Fukuyama, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz). Continuing his talk, Gen. Clark added how he had been talking to an unnamed officer following 9/11, who told him of the US plan to invade Iraq in response. During the US invasion of Afghanistan, the general and the unnamed officer met again, and the officer told him about the government’s plans to invade not only into Iraq, but to “take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” The retired general next recalled a meeting with then-Under Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz in March 1991. At that stage, the men engaged in an exchange about Operation Desert Storm (17 January 1991 – 28 February 1991), when the Under Secretary said that the First Gulf War had taught the US “that we can use our military without being challenged … We’ve got about five, ten years to clean up the Soviet client regimes before another”, referring specifically to Syria, Iran, and Iraq as these ex-Soviet “client regimes”. And the fact that these states are all populated by Muslims was not coincidental either.

Pre-emption tactics

In other words, the above testimonies would indicate that the end of the Cold War, beginning with the Fall of the Berlin Wall (9 November 1989) and ending with the dissolution of the Soviet Union (8-25 December 1991), led the US to assume that might is indeed right and that future rivals should be pre-empted – in this way, the administration of Bush, Sr., prefigured the shape of things to come under Bush, Jr.

President George W. Bush’ National Security Strategy (NSS), issued 20 September 2002, was famously built around the concept of “preemption”, defined as “preemptive and preventive action”. In view of the fact that the military-industrial complex’ wheels are in dire need of perpetual movement, in order to grease the engine of commerce and fill the bank accounts of the corporations running the show, the Bush concept of “preemption” gave rise to the War On Terror.

Wolfowitz’ 1991 list of “client regimes” consisted of Middle-Eastern states, important to the world’s energy supplies and part of the Islamic world. Following the end of the Cold War, the US and NATO was suddenly left without an apparent and identifiable enemy. But luckily, after having spent a little more than three years in this desert of disorder, in February 1995, the then-NATO Secretary General Willy Claes announced that a new clear and present danger to the West had been identified, stating at an international conference in Germany that “Islamic militancy has emerged.”

Claes added that extremist Muslims oppose “the basic principles of civilization that bind North America and Western Europe.” The then-NATO secretary-general was nevertheless diplomatic enough to remark that his declaration should not be seen as a call for “a crusade against Islam”. Nevertheless, Willy Claes had let the genie out of the bottle, and, in combination with the Bush concept of “preemption”, this led to the War-on-Terror, seen and understood by many as war against Islam, irrespective of whatever assurances to the contrary had previously been made by the one-time NATO secretary-general.

New beginning

Still, Islamic fundamentalism or Islamic militancy was but a loose term, an intangible entity that could take many shapes and forms and would thus be hard to identify and eliminate. The Chicago Tribune’s chief European correspondent Ray Moseley, at the time, remarked that “there is no commonality of purpose conceivable among the Arab nations of the Middle East and North Africa, even if fundamentalists were to come to power in all of them. The political and cultural differences among them are deep-rooted, and anyone who imagines an Islamic monolith launching a Muslim version of the Crusades is simply ignorant of history”. After approximately six and a half years of this nagging uncertainty, “9/11” happened and the US was presented with a “new Pearl Harbor” that was cunningly exploited by George W. Bush to proclaim a War-on-Terror against al-Qaeda. As a result, the West became heavily embroiled in the “wider” Middle East – from Afghanistan to Iraq, from Yemen to Libya, and from Somalia to Kyrgyzstan. The War On Terror was renamed Overseas Contingency Operations, keeping the Cold War work ethic and practice alive. In fact, “[s]ince the turn of the 21st century, the United States has begun to pump more money into defense”, as expressed by the Washington Post and confirmed by Professor Kenneth Flamm, the Dean Rusk Chair in International Affairs in the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin, when he said that the “relative stability of US defense industrial output contradict the prevailing forecasts as the Cold War wound down.”

The Cold War was based on the concept of containment, which led to amassing huge stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction and the financing of proxy-conflicts, whereas in the early 21st century, the War On Terror renamed Overseas Contingency Operations by the Obama administration is fought more pro-actively by means of drone strikes and secretive armed interventions by the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), as revealed by the investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill.

Still, apparently as a result of the so-called Arab Spring (or Arab Awakening, if you’d prefer Al Jazeera’s coinage), at the dawn of the new century’s second decade, a veritable proxy-conflict is now being waged in Syria’s not-so-civil war. Following Tunisia’s Jasmine Revolution in January 2011 the events in Egypt, which sparked the wave of protests throughout the Arab world, appear to have been orchestrated rather than being a completely spontaneous uprising, or at least that is what WikiLeaks’ Cablegate files seem to suggest.

In Libya the brutal end of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi and his regime (23 August 2011) at the hands of the armed opposition, with liberal help from the US and NATO, appears like a textbook case of a military intervention. NATO’s air support of Libya’s rebels effectively turned the uprising into an “Assisted Rebellion” against an old foe of the West (harking back to the bygone days of President Ronald Reagan), even though Gaddafi had for some time been on the road to rehabilitation. The reality is however that the Libyan intervention was nothing but a Resource War according to the Global Trade Atlas, published by the International Energy Agency (IEA), in calendar year 2010, 28% of Libya’s oil exports went to Italy, 15% to France, and 10% to Spain and Germany each. The US received only 3% of Libya’s exports. In addition, Kevin Hall of McClatchy Newspapers points out that a confidential cable released by WikiLeaks reveals that the US pressurized Italy’s Silvio Berlusconi to eradicate a deal between Italy’s partly state-owned ENI and Russia’s Gazprom, a deal that would have given Vladimir Putin access to Libyan oil and an even greater share of the European market. Falling short of directly linking NATO’s air war in Libya with the US desire to curtail the Gazprom nation that is Russia, Hall nevertheless asserts that there is a certain “correlation” between these two factors.

In other words, as McClatchy’s Kevin Hall ever so slightly seems to suggest, the Libyan intervention was the conflict that transformed the War-on-Terror renamed Overseas Contingency Operations into the New Cold War, a contest between the US (and its NATO allies) and the new emerging power-houses of the 21st century, Russia and China (even though the latter appears to keep its distance lately).

After all, Russia has long-standing ties with Syria. In 2011, when Syria’s not-so-civil war first broke, the Russian navy was planning to refurbish the Soviet port of Tartus on Syria’s coastline. In 2010, the Chinese news agency Xinhua reported that “Russia did not exclude the possibility of building naval logistic facilities in Socotra Island, Yemen, as well as in Tripoli, Libya”. The conveniently timed eruption of the Arab Spring all but thwarted Putin’s designs to establish footholds in the Mediterranean, a Russian desire since the reign of Peter the Great in the early 18th century. Russian bases in Syria, Libya, and Yemen would have lent a logistical dimension to Moscow’s designs “to oppose a tangible American presence in the Arab world”. Whereas Russia plans with regard to the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden were shattered by the CIA “building a secret air base in Yemen to serve as a launching pad for armed drone strikes”. As a result, the outbreak of Syria’s not-so-civil war set the scene for the first real proxy-war of this century.

The opposition to Bashar al-Assad’s Ba’ath regime has received Western backing from the very start, with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and NATO-member Turkey acting as the conduits for the Obama administration. Iran, China, and Russia, on the other hand, have been eager supporters of Damascus. The conflict is now in its third year, and due to Russia’s skillful diplomatic intervention (securing the removal of the government’s chemical weapons stocks), a direct military strike on Damascus has been averted, allowing Assad’s forces to slowly regain the upper-hand against his armed opponents. As a result, this battleground for the New Cold War is at a stalemate, a situation which seems unlikely to produce any lasting results in the short term. The complicated nature of the Syrian conflict means that the area can no longer function as a proxy-war zone for the New Cold War, and as a result of the ongoing crisis in the Ukraine (which started in November 2013), one can see that the ideological contest between the West and Russia has now moved to the very edge of Europe.

The Ukraine crisis came into its own when the democratically-elected President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovich, was forced to flee the country and seek refuge in Russia (he left Kiev during the night of 21 February 2014). The EU relies on Russia, the ‘Gazprom Nation’, for about 20% of its gas needs, and, significantly, about 80% of that comes via the just-mentioned three pipelines crossing the Ukraine. The price of gas is of course a geo-political factor of the greatest importance, and in this instance, the BBC wisely opined that “some Western commentators [at the time] said [that] Russia was trying to punish [the Ukraine] for attempting to withdraw from Moscow’s sphere of influence and to strengthen ties with the European Union and NATO”. The subsequent Russian annexation of the Crimea, following a popular referendum indicating that the majority of the population was in favor of a return to the Russian homeland, exacerbated the tense relations with the West. But in fact, the Crimean peninsula had actually been part of the Russian sphere ever since it was annexed by Empress Catherine the Great in 1783, an annexation which turned the Black Sea into a Russian lake. Then nearly two centuries later, in 1954, the Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev transferred the peninsula from the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic to Ukraine, with the Russian Black Sea Fleet remaining stationed in the Crimea. And now, once again, the Crimea is part of the Russian Federation.

At the moment, the heavily pro-Russian eastern region of the Ukraine is the focus of the world’s media and scene of a bloody conflict, a confrontation between Ukraine’s central government and pro-Russian Ukrainian rebels that functions as the latest proxy-battle in the New Cold War – a contest that is shaping up to determine the outlook of the 21st century. The situation in eastern Ukraine is turning more and more violent every day, particularly now that elections have been scheduled to be held on 25 May. Russia, however, doubts that free and fair elections can be held in the Ukraine under present circumstance. Whether reason will prevail and President Obama sit down with President Putin to come to an agreement that would satisfy most, if not all, parties in the conflict, is still to be seen.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Comments Off on New Cold War? Posted in Posts

The 70th Post!

Another good article from my dear friend John Benjamin.

(See links at the bottom for some more enlightening info!)

Yes, it appears that the “banking gangsters” and secret old money families of the “black nobility” — the “puppeteers” from behind the scenes — are having a bit of trouble saddling their fat asses onto the 7th head of the great red dragon they’ve ridden on for so many centuries now. They helped create the monster and now it is not obeying them, and taking back territories it once ruled in order to strategically place itself in the controlling areas needed for its move toward world domination. Bit of irony there… Has the dog now turned on its master?

They are also daring to take back the oil fields stolen from them by the banking oligarchs. There is so much more going on behind the scenes here than what most people are seeing as just one country trying to take over another. — Oil, strategic locations for coming war, especially naval ports and protection around them, for “THE GREAT MOVE SOUTH” that’s coming… It will be interesting to see if they “break this bronc” or not? Perhaps they are already controlling both sides from behind the scenes, as is their usual method of “vampirezation?”

Many see NATO coming on strong and winning this tug of war. If it does it will be short lived, and I predict it won’t. According to Ezekiel 38 & 39, written by one of the greatest “seers” in history, from so long ago, the “Great Prince” of the Russian peoples will prevail here and toss out the 3 main resisting powers allied to the West that are blocking this great end-time move on the chess-board, and actually form a great alliance with the “NEW EUROPE COMING!” — A “GREAT FEDERATION!” How long it will take I don’t know, but things are moving along quite rapidly now, and events that once took a decade or two to accomplish are now beginning to occur in mere weeks or months!

So this could all go VERY FAST! If the DOLLAR IS DUMPED it will happen so fast it will look like “vaporization!” OVERNIGHT things will turn on a dime! The great coalition of Ezekiel 38:5 & 6 will form and the final events will begin to transpire in earnest. “Gomer, Togarmah (his son)” and “all their bands” (Western Europe) (Gomer’s sons ruled in Germany, Northern Italy, France and Wales long ago, and the Welsh language is even still called “Gomerag.”)

This “East – West European alliance” will form the final outgrowth of the two legs of the statue in Daniel 2, and the main “10 horns” who help the great Russian Prince rule, spoken of in Daniel 7 and Revelation 17. They will ally themselves with those the Great Russian Prince already controls and backs militarily: Persia (Iran and possibly Iraq and Syria included), Libya, and “Ethiopia” (which meant most of Africa in the days the prophecy was given… and is now almost all either Communist or Muslim, or both.) —

And all this predicted so many thousands of years ago is now falling right in place RIGHT IN FRONT OF OUR EYES! — That is — to “THOSE WHO HAVE EYES TO SEE” and “EARS TO HEAR” as “THE PRINCE OF PRINCES” so often said 2,000 years ago, in trying to get across the words of truth to those who were seeking it.

(End of John’s article)

Bible Prophecy is an extremely eye-opening and safe way of resting assured of how the outcome of current events are going to turn out. Here are three sites that could help you in your search for truth…

It continues to sadden and anger me at just how much pro-US/West BS is is yet again being foisted on the world about what is supposedly really going on in the Ukraine right now.

What people will see in Bible Prophecy however is that God very often chose and used His People’s enemies to chastise them when they got away from Him and His Will! And the reason He allowed it was because in principle they were MORE “righteous” than His Own (who SHOULD have known better, and therefore much more was required of them to live up to what they were supposed to believe)!!!

It won’t be long now before the whole world sees the hypocrites exposed and defeated for the liars that they truly are, believe me! “Evil defeats itself”, but is often aided with a little “shove” from those who are simply fed up with being “shafted” by those who have mistreated and abused them for so long!

Whatever happens, it ain’t gonna be pretty!

Comments Off on The 70th Post! Posted in Posts


A day that will live in infamy: The day Odessa citizens were savagely killed.

May 03, 2014 19:36

(Pic) A woman stands next to flowers and lit candles placed in memory of people killed in recent street battles outside a trade union building in Odessa, May 3, 2014. (Reuters / Gleb Garanich)

Yesterday – May 2, 2014 – the day that Kiev radicals supported by the US government attacked and burnt to death civilians in Ukraine, is a day which will live in infamy.

Those of us who grew up in the West after WWII believed that supporting anything resembling fascism was unthinkable. The moral degeneration of the US state and its NATO allies since that time is beyond belief. So too is the degeneration of the Washington Post, The New York Times, and other corporate media which have helped to delude large numbers of Americans into believing that Russia, which has killed or attacked no one, is somehow the aggressor in Ukraine.

In reality, and on the ground, the US government – with no mandate from the American people –is supporting the Ukrainian ‘government’ installed in a coup spearheaded by two ultra-nationalist parties, Svoboda and Right Sector. Now, in actions highly reminiscent of Hitler and his brown shirts, Right Sector oriented hooligans aided by military forces have just beaten with chains and baseball bats, and burned to death in the Trade Unions building, 39 civilians who were engaged in a protest in their own city of Odessa; civilians who were opposed to, and did not recognize, the new radical ‘government.’

I assume that if, say, the American Nazi party allied with some billionaires and took power in America, at least some Americans would also resist. They might even propose a referendum, as some eastern Ukrainian cities have, on whether to remain in the country. If you do not believe that Svoboda and Right Sector are Neo-Nazi, or that they do not now have substantial power in the ministries of the military and security apparatus of the new ‘government,’ just look them up, and look at photos of their leaders and followers with Nazi-style armbands, Nazi-style flags, and Nazi-style badges, and the use of brown-shirt style bully boys, not to mention the leader of Svoboda giving the fascist salute.

The Svoboda leader, Oleg Tyagnibok, whose party now controls key positions in the military and security apparatus of the self-appointed Ukrainian ‘government,’is on record as saying the Ukrainians who collaborated with the Nazis during WWII “were not afraid and went into the forest with their automatic rifles to kill Jews, Russians, and other filth.” He has also called for the ”cleansing” of Ukraine’s “Russkie-Jid (Jewish) mafia” and praised convicted Nazi mass murderer John Demjanjuk as a “hero.”

Following the surprise attack by the fascist Japanese government on the American naval base at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii in 1941, President Franklin Roosevelt began his speech to the American Congress with the words: “Yesterday, December 7th, 1941 – a date which will live in infamy – the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.”

After that speech, the American government and people joined with the Soviet Union, China, Britain, Canada, and other nations in the momentous struggle to defeat fascism and its attempt to impose its racist ideology, holocaust, and tyranny on the whole world.

Yesterday, the day that US-supported neo-fascists beat civilians with chains and clubs and burned them to death in a Trade Union Hall in Ukraine’s Odessa – this also is a day that will live in infamy.

Eric Sommer, for RT

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Comments Off on Infamy!!! Posted in Posts