Facades

When walking past a house after dark, it’s always the big windows that are lit. Is this diversion or hubris? Governments display these same traits.

What’s unseen… what’s underground? What’s behind the facade, the empty room, the well-lit space?

designboom_tezuka_architects_interview_005

More to come.

On Hegel, Commies, Fascists, Terror, Liberty, Bigotry, The Left-Right Paradigm, Globalists, Populists, And TPTB* Who Brought It All To Us In Order To Take Over The World

It’s working, and why wouldn’t it? It always has.

I often wonder how it is that liberty-minded people end up supporting fascists. It’s not so hard to see, really; when presented with two choices, people have to pick, even if neither choice is optimal. This notion is the key to understanding the world as it is.

This notion is not foreign to many of us. Many governments and their elections are based on this system. It is often said that a bird needs both its wings to fly, both the left-wing, and the right-wing. Divide and conquer is the applicable cliché here. If you dislike both the liberal and the conservative candidate, what is there left for you to do but stay home? Doing that, while symbolically relevant, will not change the outcome – an outcome which will determine the course of your life despite your lack of participation in it. After all, even if only ten percent of eligible voters vote, winning six percent of the nation’s voices is enough to rule them all. That’s democracy; well not really, but that’s what democracy has come to represent to most of us these days.

Taken to another level, this dichotomy can be implemented towards much more nefarious objectives.

Take the Bolsheviks, for example. They overthrew the ruling elite, killed the Czar and his family, and decided they would share the wealth. (In reality, it didn’t have the desired effect, but I’m trying to keep this article under a million words.) What’s important here is the spirit in which the revolution was undertaken: taking the power out of the hands of the elite, and dropping it into the laps of the people. They did not know what to do with this power, and so were subverted, but we are more sophisticated than they were; or at least, we have a chance to be.

World War II and the construct of Nazism, which was almost entirely an Anglo-American creation, had at their roots many causes, but had only one aim, to stem the tide of Communism. The ruling elite did not want to see the revolutionary mind-set grow and spill over into their own countries, lest they receive the same treatment as the Czar.

[More specifically, there was open support and admiration for Hitler himself (despite the fact that National Socialist party was a party for the workers, and one which promised revolution – most knew this to be a political ploy) from such notable individuals and families as: Lord Randolph Hearst; Prescott Bush (son of the original merchant of death, Remington’s Samuel Bush, and father of George HW Bush #41, and grandfather to George W Bush #43;) the Harrimans; the Dulles’; JP Morgan; JD Rockefeller; WA Harriman; the Carnegies; the Rothschilds; the entire British royal family; and on, and on, and on, and on, and on.

coke-nazis-640x657

The list of large American businesses which dealt openly with Nazi Germany is long and staggering and includes: MGM; Coca-Cola; GM; IBM; AT&T; Nestle; Ford; Pratt and Whitney; Douglas; Bendix Corp.; Woolworth; Dow; Du Pont; Union Carbide; Westinghouse; General Electric; Gilette; Goodrich; Alcoa; Singer; Eastman Kodak; ITT; Standard Oil; Sullivan & Cromwell; Dillon Read & Co.; Chase Bank; Union Bank of New York… etc – more details here. Not to mention the large number of British, Swedish, and Swiss companies and banks which did the same.]

Therein, we have the foundation of the dichotomy which is still in play to this day, namely communism vs. fascism.

Now, one would be hard-pressed to find very many people in America (or in most of the Anglo-world) who would openly claim to be either communists or fascists, but that has not always been the case. Both movements, at certain times, had found large numbers of Americans in support. (Ironically, both the left and right movements accuse each other of fascism.)

Given the choice, and knowing what you now know about the roots of communism (don’t forget that Karl Marx was German,) would you choose to be a fascist or a commie?

There is currently a movement in the United States for the protection of constitutional rights which have been whittled down by both the Bush and Obama administrations since 9/11 and the passing of the so-called Patriot Act. The right of free speech, the right to bear arms and many other tenets of the constitution are seemingly under attack by proponents of the security state and the far-left. The people fighting to keep these rights have been labelled as the alt-right movement, or extreme conservatives. For the most part, they believe that the US is and should remain a republic instead of being a representational democracy. Many take offense at the term ‘democracy’ as it is applied to their country, as I myself learned the hard way. These people are certainly not commies in the true or the traditional sense, and they consider that an offensive term as well. Neither do they consider themselves fascists, even if others tend to label them as such, for some strange and incomprehensible reason.

Since the fall of the Soviet Union, one would be hard-pressed, outside of China, to find very many communists left. There are certainly a great deal of fascists, and Europe is considered by most to be socialistic, but the communist bogey-man has faded into the night, as it were. New terminology had to be devised, since people cannot be expected to contribute tax money to a military industry if there is nothing to defend against. Hence was the threat of terrorism born. But terrorists were not a big threat to the western world, despite demonstrations like 9/11, as lightning and five-year olds were statistically both responsible for more death and mayhem than were terrorists. More terror was needed to fuel the consumption of military-grade weapons systems by local governments to be used against their own citizens in order to keep them safe. Borders needed loosening and immigration needed to be accelerated, but not because people fleeing war zones such as Syria and Libya are terrorists, but because terrorists needed to be inserted into this population of migrants. Hence terrorism by Muslims and Sharia law could be the reason behind all the surveillance state’s new toys. [Cyber warfare is also closely related and should be quickly mentioned, but it deserves its own separate article.]

wOp1Nn1

In come the squirrels. Many issues have been raised which further divide the globs from the pops, and it seems that the most prevalent is that of religious bigotry and racism. Nothing seems to divide as well as do race and religion. Nothing seems to distract as well, either. If TPTB could use race and religion as effectively as they have used communism and fascism in the past, this globalism thing would be a cake-walk. Bush #41 started to set this up in a speech he gave on March 6th, 2001, a speech largely dedicated to promoting the success of Operation Desert Storm.

But there was inevitably going to be resistance, resistance to the influx of immigrants in these difficult economic times, to the build-up of civilian police force armaments, and to modern surveillance tactics. This resistance had to be countered, and so a new Hegelian concept needed to be introduced.

The new terms-du-jour which have emerged are globalists and populists. It is the populists who have taken up the ancient role of the communists, as the new threat to global stability, and are seen as ‘the last great problem,’ at least as far as the globalists are concerned. The globalists, of course, are the new fascists. They deny this association of course, but as we say, “If the shoe fits…” Populists fight for national sovereignty while globalists fight for a global UN parliament and a new world order (a term first used by Bush #41 ten years to the day before 9/11,) which Barack Obama referred to as an international order. Obama, Bush #43, Clinton, Bush #41, Reagan, and Carter are all globalists, and Trump is a populist. The UNPA (about which I have written much) is pushing for a global parliament to be run by non-elected political representatives and NGOs in order to better represent the voice of the people at the UN. This is disingenuous, at best. The claim is that since ordinary people have no voice at the UN in its present configuration, the people should be represented by lobbyists and corporations. This claim, despite already having been implemented in the European parliament,  is both laughable and transparent.

So where am I going with this? Well, considering that the world has, since WWII at least, been mostly split between communists and fascists (democracies being a weak compromise between the two,) and given that the new paradigm is Christianity vs. Islam, we need to take a step back and gain some perspective on this. Muslims are not the enemy, Iran or North Korea are not the enemy, Russia is most certainly not the enemy, nor is China, the left and the right are not enemies, and populists are not only not the enemy, but are the only ones who have even a slight chance of standing against the true enemy. The enemy is the same as it ever was. The enemy of liberty, the enemy of sovereignty, the enemy of financial independence is and has always been TPTB. Tyranny, plain and simple. And as long as they have us fighting each other, they can quietly go about their business, as they always have, to take it all for themselves.

When we are successful, and we will be, we have a real chance at this new world order; an order in which a credible United Nations can use its peace-keeping role to fulfill the promise and vision of the UN’s founders.

-George H.W. Bush #41

n.b. The founders of the UN just happened to be those who ‘rid’ the world of fascism: FDR, Winston Churchill, and Stalin. Fascism did not go away. The fascists won WWII, and went underground. Fascism took over Europe from Brussels. Fascism is more rampant now than it has ever been.


*TPTB = The Powers That Be

Yemen: Follow-Up

Clapper has called AQAP (Al Qaeda on the Arab Peninsula) the greatest threat to US national interests… now it’s Russia. Quite a shift in so little time. But what was the AQAP remark all about? Weapons sales, of course.

Terror has been the excuse for small corrupt governments, like that of Yemen, to milk hegemons (either global like the US, or local like Saud) of their money to combat terror. While strikes against both civilians and terror groups lead to more recruitment, the terrorists (considered by locals as freedom-fighters) are increasing acts of terror (read: liberation) to further the cycle. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy and a perpetual wheel, and US military contractors salivate at the prospect. If war is the most profitable industry, that is where capital (and capitalism) will flow… moral compass be damned. A corporation can be sued by its shareholders for acts of morality which cost the company money. Let the poor defenseless suckers pay for it all. This is disaster capitalism at its finest, the strong picking on the weak. This is why there is a wealth gap, in the first place.

Meanwhile, the poorest suffer, but they fight, for what other choice is there? Abandoning sovereignty is not a choice, it is a consequence of defeat.

America’s Dangerous Game In Yemen – (25:01)

 

Prince Charles is one of the world’s leading arms dealers (47:15) and should be brought to answer for his deeds especially concerning Saud and their war with Yemeni people. Unfortunately, there exists no legal mechanism in England to accuse any member of the royal family of having broken the law. They are the law. The UK, USA, Turkey, and Canada, amongst others, have sold the Saudis all the weapons which are now being used against the innocent people of Yemen including illegal cluster bombs and white phosphorus munitions. The mainstream media are silent and, in so being, complicit.

Prequel to this article here.

The Cremation Of Care Goes Dutch

The title of this article “Cremation Of Care” (9:41) comes from the name of the ceremony held at the Bohemian Grove every July where some of the most powerful people in the world come together for… well, for who knows what?! In front of a giant owl-god, Molech, the concept of care is burnt in effigy.

The image is of the Kindlifresser (child-eater) in the Swiss capitol of Bern, feasting on a sack full of children.

You will soon see how these two notions relate to the upcoming video.

Do you remember “Confessions Of An Economic Hit Man” (Part 1 – 53:35) in which John Perkins claims to have played a role in an alleged process of economic colonization of Third World countries?
Well, consider that the first chapter. This is the second chapter. It’s much worse.
(Original in Dutch, with English subtitles.)

Behind the Curtain

I have written much over the last two years about US support for terrorist groups. I have also written about Kerry and Syria, Israel and Turkey, Saud and Wahhabism, the fact that Syria is not a divided democracy (there is no civil war there, and never has been – Assad has the support of his electorate,) (49:34) and that mercenaries from NATO have fomented the entire situation. I have stated that Russia, and Vlad Putin, really did save the world. It would seem I was not wrong.

If there is one story the world needs to hear about it is surely this one. As usual, the main-stream media dropped the ball (on purpose) on this next non-helicopter-delivered-bombshell. Please pass this on!!

John Kerry admits US support for terrorist groups in the Middle-East. War on Terror, indeed:  (36:56)

As Voltairenet.org (Thierry Meyssan) writes,

“The support that Kerry offers to Daesh violates several UN resolutions and constitutes proof of his responsibility and that of Obama in the crimes against humanity committed by the terrorist organisation.”

And to think that the only thing which prevented him from becoming president of the USA was the election of George Bush.

It looks like both these guys, one democrat, one republican, both had the war on terror in their sights. And they say we have a choice. Skull and Bones members might, but we sure don’t. Even the Nobel Peace prize recipient Barack Obama said the USA supports ISIL and nobody batted an eyelash. They’re all on the same side, and it isn’t the one we’re on. Maybe the only reason they killed Osama bin Laden (if they did) was so that they could take over his organization.

Now let’s see what happens in Ukraine once Turkey rejects NATO and takes sides with Russia, China, and Khazakstan to join the New Silk Road. The end of the American empire is upon us. Let’s just hope they don’t drag us all down with them. Long gold, long Rubles, long VIX, watch for oil prices to spike in Europe, and stock up on supplies – this could get even uglier.

PS. (0:14)

Assange Bakes HRC’s Beans

Another must watch video, this one features world-renowned journalist and film-maker John Pilger, interviewing Julian Assange about the recent email dump.

A concise summation of the email question, the thread that runs through them all, and why it is so important.

Secret World of US Election: Julian Assange talks to John Pilger (FULL INTERVIEW)

(24:52)

.

The story behind this, and ignoring Weiner’s sexting (coulda’ been a set-up – man’s got his kinks – distraction piece,) Anthony Weiner seemed to be some sort of errand-boy for the Clintons. A subordinate with those perversions says much about their level of tolerance to such things. He is married to ‘Huma’. This is the real story. Huma Abedin’s mother and father are very interesting characters as well, and Huma’s rise was exceptional. Working for HRC is the only job she’s ever had in the USA. Her husband was Bill Clinton’s introduction. I’m not sure that ‘arranged marriage’ is the appropriate term here, but…

It was opined that a vagina nearly took out Bill Clinton. It now seems that a Weiner might take out Hillary. Bill Maher will then murder Mr. Weiner, presumably on air.

Clinton knew that Saud and Qatar financed terror, had terrible human rights records, treated women very badly, tortured prisoners… but accepted their cash and favours to the Clinton Global Initiative – which appears to be a giant money-laundering fraud. Even Chomsky said NGOs like them were the real problem in Haiti, although he didn’t name them.

Huma worked by HRC’s side for twenty years, she knew everything. Did she keep the back-ups on Weiner’s ‘puter for protection, as some sort of way to avoid jail? Some say she’s a planted spy or that HRC is really a secret muslim or a witch or a pervert?!? Well, at this point, nothing would surprise me. Would it shock me? Sure, but it wouldn’t surprise.

Of course, I will not go into the more sordid details of occult practice and paederasty said by some to be enjoyed by the Clinton inner circle, and really, the entire Washington inner circle, for that matter – see the film, “Conspiracy of Silence” (55:13). No surprise where Bill is concerned, but HRC’s involvement brings it to another level, entirely. You’d want your eyes wide shut for that.

Now, what if HRC wins? A woman whose mentor was KKK chapter founder and senator who tried to prevent the passing of the Civil Rights Act, Robert Byrd. For one, Bill might be appointed US ambassador to the UN. That’s been their plan all along according to Larry Nichols. That’s where the real money is after all, Brussels. (see the documentary “The Brussels Business.”)

After his term, Justin Trudeau could be appointed Secretary General. António Guterres only had to wreck Portugal’s economy to get the job, and severe economic times are foreseen for Canada. Wrecking your own countries’ economy is the ultimate test of loyalty. His father, Pierre, privatized money creation in Canada, I wonder what JT has in store. He has the drive, he’s definitely going for it. It’s just a matter of time. Youngest SecGen ever? Who else would it be in eight to ten years after Guterres? (Surely not a woman. GAWD!! /sarc) Say it ain’t so…

Like Barrel Bombs and Helicopters

Like barrel bombs and helicopters, everything else is also untrue, on both sides. There’s their public angry face, their country club polite face, and their, “Let’s do business.” face.

Assad has been accused, by John Kerry and everybody else, of using chemical weapons against his citizens by way of helicopters to drop chemical-filled barrel bombs, and lacing artillery shells with toxins (like depleted uranium? – no, that’s a US thing – and don’t get me started on anthrax…)

Even Wikipedia is in on it:

Barrel bomb

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A barrel bomb is an improvised unguided bomb, sometimes described as a flying IED (improvised explosive device). They are typically made from a large barrel-shaped metal container that has been filled with high explosives, possibly shrapnel, oil or chemicals as well, and then dropped from a helicopter or airplane.[1] Due to the large amount of explosives (up 1,000 kilograms (2,200 lb)), their poor accuracy and indiscriminate use in populated civilian areas (including refugee camps), the resulting detonations have been devastating.[2][3][4] Critics have characterised them as weapons of terror and illegal under international conventions.[5]

Lots of options on the content, not many options on the delivery system.

“…indiscriminate use…” but by whom?

Here’s Kerry:

“Accordingly, we have taken unprecedented steps to declassify and make facts available to people who can judge for themselves.” -John Kerry

There might be some problems with his story.

What does ‘declassify’ mean, in this context? Invent?

Official U.S. government report on the alleged use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government against rebels on Aug. 21.The document proposes a possible motive for the attack — a desperate effort to push back rebels from several areas in the capital’s densely packed eastern suburbs — and also suggests that the high civilian death toll surprised and panicked senior Syrian officials, who called off the attack and then tried to cover it up.

While unusually detailed, the assessment does not include photographs, recordings or other hard evidence to support its claims. Nor does it offer proof to back up the administration’s assertion that top-ranking Syrian officials — possibly including President Bashar al-Assad — were complicit in the attack.

“This assessment will certainly evolve as we obtain more information,” the report said.

The material, prepared by senior intelligence officials, was said to reflect the judgments of the CIA, National Security Agency and other intelligence agencies involved in gathering information on the Syrian conflict. Using understated phrasing typical of bureaucratic reports, it asserts with “high confidence” that the Assad government launched a chemical weapons attack, using what it said was “nerve agent,” a class of chemical munitions that includes sarin.

Oh, and about sarin gas, the [US] military variant is known as VX.

As it turns out, there was some truth in that report, and it was all backwards. The barrel bombs and the gas and all the WMDs are coming from the West-backed rebel side. Saddam got his chemicals from the US (ask Rumsfeld what Iraq was about covering up,) as did other allies in the region. Kerry didn’t really do anything about it either, apart from shaking his fist quite a bit.

[Next three photos are from a VT article; commentary is mine.]

These men are not Syrian government forces, they are US-backed rebels. They are not packing the bombs with explosives or the man on the left would not be smoking.

266C3E0B00000578-0-image-a-117_1425815580348-640x426

Hmm… but it can’t be the rebels. How do they drop those things if they don’t have helicopters?

All the newspapers said the same thing all along, “unguided barrel bombsdropped from Assad’s helicopters (’cause he’s the only one who had helicopters.) Remember?

gas-cylinders-explosives-1-1

Action shot.

“Seems to be coming from the clubhouse.” With that golf cart in the background, there’s gotta’ be at least a couple of white guys around… maybe four. “Just look what those Assad bastards did to the practice green. War is hell!”

aleppo-terrorist-3-warpress-info-640x461

Fighting has intensified around Aleppo and its neighboring provinces since the government sealed off the final route into rebel-controlled neighborhoods of the city. The United Nations said the encirclement of rebel-held areas of deeply divided Aleppo traps nearly 300,000 residents, making it the largest besieged area in war-torn Syria.

The rebels have launched a counteroffensive, clashing with government forces on a number of fronts. They detonated at least one large tunnel bomb underneath a government position on the southern outskirts of Aleppo on Tuesday evening, in a renewed attempt to break the government’s siege on the city’s east.

Smoke in the sky; for defense or for targeting, or for an alibi? Were they setting tire fires around hospitals?

MideastSyriaSurvivingInAleppo-dd7a7

All these articles use many terms differently. They also suggest that west-backed rebels (USA’s ISIL, al Qaeda, al Nusra, etc.) are the real thugs in this failed regime change. Turkey’s, Georgia’s, Saudi’s, Israel’s, and America’s deep states are synced in Syria. Whether or not they succeed is up to Syria (and Russia.)

After Shocking Beheading, “Moderate” Rebels Allegedly Unleashed Chemical Weapons In Syria

Syrian rebels used Sarin nerve gas, not Assad’s regime: U.N. official

NEO – Don’t Cry For Me in Aleppo

US-backed Syrian rebels responsible for toxic gas attack in Aleppo – Russian military

Aleppo Siege: Russia Claims Rebels Used ‘Toxic Gas’ in Battle for Syria’s Second City

Syrian government and rebels trade gas attack accusations

Chemical Weapons in Syria: Methods of Waging Information Wars

Chemical weapons “red line” crossed in Syria – but not by Assad!

There are different levels of funding; ISIS, ISIL, Daesh, Al Nusra, Al Qaeda, (the special forces of the rebel world) look like they live pretty high on the hog. They must all benefit from the best funding. Note the plastic wrap still on the headrest, the faux wood dash, and even a disco ball hanging off the mirror…

ISISStill

…and the lack of battle scars on any of their gear.

ISISStill3_0

These images looks like the Neiman-Marcus catalogue for zealots. This is the propaganda of Jihad and its manipulation by the West …just as long as the rifles are Russian, everything is copacetic. The repeated “We’re Number 1” kinda’ tips the bit. [They may be pointing up.]

The financing cannot be denied, however, and most of the gear and ammo comes from Uncle Sam via Incerlik and Saud. The medical care comes from Israel, mainly.

The Brits know what’s going on, they’ve even helped, but, “Tight lips sink ships” and all that.

GettyImages-520144294

The innocent victims, on the other hand, are getting little to no support. Perhaps a magnanimous superbug will come along and end it quickly for them all.

*Update*

Confirmations

*Update*

American peace delegation goes to Syria on a fact-finding mission – UN. Must watch video for the truth about Syria:

Peace Group ; NATO & U.S. Spreading ‘Disinformation on Syria’ (49:34)

 

BBC News Caught Staging FAKE News Chemical Attack In Syria (13:20)

 

Intelligence and Military Sources Who Warned About Weapons Lies Before Iraq War Now Say that Assad Did NOT Launch Chemical Weapon Attack

 

“Khan Sheikhoun incident totally fabricated..the U.S. is not serious in achieving any political solution”

Ingushetia Where?

The dark green-striped republic in the above image.

Caught between Russia to the north and Georgia to the south, North Ossetia to the west and Chechnya to the east, lies a small Caucasus republic called Ingushetia. The president of Ingushetia is Yunus-Bek Yevkurov. He’s the bad-ass’s bad-ass. He’s like Bond’s Jaws.

Some background on Yunus-Bek Yevkurov.

Yevkurov was recently (October 11, 2015) invited to sit in on a meeting between Vladimir Putin and Mohammad bin Salman Al Saud. Mohammad bin Salman Al Saud is the deputy crown prince of Saudi Arabia, second deputy prime minister and the youngest minister of defense in the world. Also included in the meeting were foreign minister Sergei Lavrov, industry and trade minister Denis Manturov, energy minister Alexander Novak, and defence minister Sergei Shoigu.

Turkey has ties to the Ukraine just as it has ties to Georgia. Turkey also has ties to IS which is seen from Syria to Chechnya. Georgia is known for many things, some of which involve smuggling. People, drugs, weapons, and now viruses have become black market currency in and through Georgia. This is why picking Sochi for the winter olympics in 2014 was such a brave move (despite being somewhat shielded by Abkhazia.) It was a move of great strength and one of great defiance. If the terrorists could be contained, Russia was impenetrable – a claim America could not make.

Ingushetia has always been used to cushion against/contain Chechen rebels. It’s a rough neighbourhood. It is, in essence, nothing but a military outpost, as it needs to be. It acts as a buffer zone between Russia and Chechyn ‘terrorists.’ It is also a passage from Russia to Turkey and Greece (Europe) through Georgia. Ingushetia is the Gibraltor of the Caucasus. If Russia ever secures South Ossetia, the focus may then shift away from Ingushetia, to a certain degree. Either that or a block will be formed of the two.

Why was Ingushetia included in this meeting? What do Saud and Caucasus terror have in common? What is Israel’s role?


This article may shed some light on the subject.

Ingushetia Proposes Measures To Crack Down On IS Recruitment, Blowback

“Local militants have shifted their allegiance from the local Islamist insurgent group, the Caucasus Emirate, to IS. In June, IS’s leadership accepted pledges of allegiance from militants in the North Caucasus, including in Ingushetia, and declared an IS “province” in the region called Wilayat al-Qawqaz.”


This article may provide some context. (Ignore the title and the call for funding at the top of the page and scroll down for the main article.)

“Washington continues to force its European vassals to impose sanctions on Russia based on the false claim that the conflict in Ukraine was caused by a Russian invasion of Ukraine, not by Washington’s coup in overthrowing a democratically elected government and installing a puppet answering to Washington.”


Finally, this article explains much.

The president of Ingushetia, who is recovering from an attempt on his life, accused on Monday the United States, Britain and Israel of seeking to destabilize the situation in the North Caucasus.

“I am miles from believing that Arabs are behind this. There are other, more serious forces there… We understand whose interests these are: the United States, Britain, and Israel too,” President Yunus-Bek Yevkurov said in an interview with the Russian News Service (RSN) radio.


Size means nothing in the world of geo-politics; what really counts is location, location, location.


 

Lincoln Lied

This is a placeholder. I have been working on an article (perhaps in several parts) which will be posted here as soon as possible.

Lincoln, contrary to popular opinion, did not free the slaves. Slavery exists in many forms and is prevalent in every corner of the globe, even especially in the Western world.

Slavery must be ended; there is no doubt about that. “How?” is the question.

There are many aspects to this issue. Be it for labour (chocolate workers in Ivory Coast, construction workers in Dubai, textile workers in India, etc,) domestic help (in Washington diplomatic circles and embassies around the world,) baby factories (in Nigeria,) or in the sex trade (Kenya, Thailand, Nigeria, eastern Europe, etc.,) slaves are being used and moved around with impunity.

The simple fact is that it is the trade routes which must be taken down. This is even more crucial than going after the people who use these slaves. We saw Boko Haram take girls from Chibok and sell them. How do a gang of local African hoods get these girls into Europe to be used as sex slaves? Networks. These networks have been active for centuries (since colonial days) and have been used to smuggle animal parts, drugs, guns, and people. It is high time to burn down the very foundations of this practice and put an end, once and for all, to the crimes being committed to our brothers, sisters, and children all around the world. No place is immune.

The revelations on this subject will absolutely shock most of you to your core, to your very essence. Some of the names will leave you speechless.

Please stay tuned as there is much more to come on this crucially important issue.

‘Guns’ and ‘Violence’ Are Not Synonymous

President Obama just went over congress’ heads, again. It’s going to get harder and harder for Americans to aquire firearms.

The missing link in all gun (firearm) stories portrayed on the MSM is mental health. The issue of mental health is often mentioned as some sort of justification but never examined.

There is no difference between having one’s firearms confiscated for no reason and having them confiscated for an accusation of mental health. In some cases, the claim may be legitimate, nevertheless, when an accusation of failing mental health is all that is needed in order to strip someone of their rights, who is to say that this power cannot and will not be used arbitrarily. Indeed, there have been many instances in which it has. Mental health issues have been used to take people’s children, lock people up indefinitely, and have the very basis of certain legal cases discounted and thrown out. There are certainly those who are a danger to themselves and others, but using this argument against everyone in order to limit the public availability of firearms is disingenuous and unreasonable.

[This point is brought to light when one considers that very large multi-national corporations such as Serco control the mental health industry, the prison system, as well as adoption and child services, all at once. A military contractor, they also control Britain’s entire nuclear arsenal, their airports, and a good deal of the British economy. It helps that they have contacts with parliament.]

The notion of ‘pre-crime’ goes against all the democratic foundations of our system of government. The case of Sammy Yatim demonstrates this perfectly. One can be in a restaurant with thirty other people holding a steak knife and not be considered a threat, but on a bus it is a whole different matter. Even though everyone was let off the bus safely, Sammy Yatim was killed for exposing himself and holding a three inch knife in a threatening manner. He was obviously not there to kill anybody. He was clearly frustrated, distressed, and crying out for help. Isn’t helping people in that situation what the police are supposed to do? There were many different non-lethal options available to the armour-clad police, and none of them were in any danger. This begs the question, why was he shot eight times before being tasered.

Clearly, a great deal of gun violence is attributable to suicide, as are a great many police shootings. It must be assumed that this would have been accomplished with or without guns. Most young people don’t shoot themselves, anyway.

Guns are offensive weapons. Unfortunately, the only way to defend against them is to shoot back. The Swiss have a high rate of gun ownership and a very low murder rate. Swiss army chief André Blattmann advises the Swiss people to arm themselves in the face of social unrest. The US is doing the opposite. Why? Over 99.9% of all ammunition is expended in non-criminal and non-violent (unless you are a deer) activities. Guns, therefore, must serve a useful purpose. Cars are more dangerous. The environmentalists will have their hands full taking people’s cars away, too.

Besides, do you really think that a young adult with social issues and no friends whose violence was attributed to video games can’t pull off a hit rate better than 17%?


From ZeroHedge: Wed, 01/06/2016

NoDebt

“I’m going to be talking to a good friend of mine in about half an hour.  He’s got an FFL (Federal Friearms License) and he’s going to give me the straight poop on what this new Executive Order means in the real world.I think the most dangerous part of these rules revolves around the “mental illness” part.  Defined by who?  To what degree?  Is ANY doctor or therapist going to be able to file a report (rightly or wrongly) and you won’t ever pass a backround check again?  What if you have to go back to him and ask him to sign off that you’re OK now?  Do you think there is even a single doctor who would put their career on the line by backing off and saying “yeah, this guy’s OK to tote around a .357 now”.  What if that person is involved in a shooting later?  I bet the doctor gets his ass sued off.

What if you suffer from aspergers syndrome?  Alcoholism (even if you are in recover for many years)?  What about a guy who sees a shrink for a few months after, say, a messy divorce or…. you’ll love this one…. loss of a good paying middle class job?

Your doctor or therapist is now being FORCED to be a government snitch just to cover their own ass in case something happens later.  Even if it’s years distrant.  They’ll over-report “mental illness” if they get even the slightest whiff of potential trouble and they’ll NEVER reverse course after that.

You act like gun sales are the end point in this.  WRONG.  This is government intrusion by deception and coercion, as per the usual for Obama.  He doesn’t give a shit about gun sales, he cares only about implementing more government control.”


 

Does Terrorism Even Exist?

Terrorism itself has had many uses and gone through many transformations throughout the ages. Terrorism has been used in order to subvert, manipulate, silence, coerce, influence, persuade, and otherwise intervene in both the operations of nation-states and the interruption of such operations. Terrorism has been used by both sides, small and large, weak and strong, defender and aggressor, antagonist and protagonist, over many issues, and in many theatres. Terrorism is a relative term.

Consider, for a moment, its definition, roughly: the act of instilling fear in order to serve a specific purpose. Thus terrorism has been used in advertising (buy this before we run out,) in child-rearing (do you want to be punished?,)  in religion (avoid this or you will go to hell,) in politics (they will hurt the economy,) and in environmentalism (the consequences would be disastrous.) Truly, terrorism has been used in all aspects of all of our lives. The degree to which it has is simply a matter of scale.

However, when we speak of or hear the term in our daily lives, we understand it to mean something more sinister, more dire, and more violent.

Terrorism is always used to describe the tactics of an opponent no matter which side of a conflict they find themselves on. One would never describe one’s allies as terrorists. Al-Qaeda would not describe members of ISIS as terrorists, just as NATO would not describe the Turkish government as such (even though some Kurds might.)

Terrorism is also a tool. Just as a hammer can be used to build a house or to tear one down, terror can be used for the purpose of (perceived) good or (perceived) evil. It all depends on whether the terrorists themselves use terror tactics or they are used by proxy. Terrorists refer to themselves as rebels or freedom fighters whereas their opponents who use those same acts by proxy refer to them as mercenaries. When acts of terror are used against one’s self, they are called false flag attacks.

Although terror has been used against populations for millenia, the nineteen-seventies saw terror take on new and different forms. For one thing, the television played a big part in bringing attention to many unknown causes, opinions, and state actors. Terrorism would fizzle out very quickly were it not for the mass media making its case. For another thing, the terrorists in the seventies knew who to target (they often went after pertinent individuals,) but the governments did not. Now the tables have been turned. The government (supposedly) knows about plots before they happen (when it is to their benefit,) governments target individuals, and the terrorists attack helpless civilians instead of those in positions of power.

One must ask the question, why do the terrorists never attack the wealthy, the elite? Why are F1 races and polo matches and horse races and film festivals not attacked? Why has Monaco never been attacked (the worse that can be said of Monaco is that there is an underlying threat from terrorism? ) Why are certain buildings never targeted, buildings in which decisions concerning global policy are struck? They must be much easier to hit than buildings like the Pentagon, the Murrah, and the big three in New York. With ISIS destroying ancient art, why are museums and art galleries never hit? Buildings like bank headquarters and world trade associations are not targeted… nobody ever hits an NGO, just civilians.

It is said that terrorists hate our freedom, but it can’t be just that (if it is at all) because there are many groups, each with their own issues. They can’t all be against freedom and only against freedom. Don’t they have other demands like sovereignty, food, peace, freedom from resource-driven oppression, water, education… ? They seek freedom too, after all, freedom from western intervention.

Terrorists used to want to get the general public on their side. They wanted sympathy towards their cause. Attacking a population is what you do when you want minorities to leave your town, or when you want to start a race war. When you have a political message to send, you target those involved, like they knew to do way back in the seventies – the ‘golden age’ of terror.

If government wanted us NOT to be afraid, state-run news agencies would ignore the attacks, not produce free advertising for the terrorists (like when they withhold a name so as not to fan the popularity fire.)

So what do we make of terror perpetrated ON the masses while being shown ad infinitum TO the masses and never injuring ANY of the elite? Conditioning? Advertising? But what are they selling? Dominance, perhaps.

We must therefore assume that terrorism, these days, is not the work of terrorists, but of ‘other’ groups that want us scared, obedient, and docile. <sarc>Who could that possibly be? And why? Why? </sarc> Of course we all know the answers to the questions posed in New York, Madrid, London, Boston, Newtown, Paris, San Bernadino, et al.; it is high time we started admitting that to ourselves. There may never have been a legitimate act of terror perpetrated in the west outside of the IRA, ever (actually, the IRA WAS involved in talks with the British government… hmmm?!)

Besides, don’t ISIS have websites? Couldn’t their ISPs shut them down or, at least, identify them? It’s not like ISIS has its own satellites.


*Update*

More truly excellent articles by George Washington from Washington’s Blog:

False Flags Are Just a Conspiracy Theory … Admitted Fact

71 Examples of false flag terrorism throughout the world:  False Flag Terrorism Isn’t a “Theory” … It’s ADMITTED and Widespread

“The head and special agent in charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles office said that most terror attacks are committed by the CIA and FBI as false flags.”


*Update*

Arjun Walia,
Waking Times Media

“The latest whistleblower is David Steele, a 20-year Marine Corps intelligence officer, and the second-highest-ranking civilian in the U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence. He is a former CIA clandestine services case officer, and this is what he had to say:”

Most terrorists are false flag terrorists, or are created by our own security services. In the United States, every single terrorist incident we have had has been a false flag, or has been an informant pushed on by the FBI. In fact, we now have citizens taking out restraining orders against FBI informants that are trying to incite terrorism. We’ve become a lunatic asylum.

Who Cops the COP?

In light of the recent attack in Paris, and with police claiming they cannot ensure the security of the many participants to COP 21 including the pope and other heads of state, no public demonstrations will be allowed. Period.

The emphasis has been on the hundreds of thousands of supposed supporters who had been expected to march in solidarity with the aims of the conference (whether or not it would have manifested.) No mention has been made, however, of those who oppose the conference and its goals. No mention will be made of them at all as they will, thanks to the new normal of global security, not even be allowed to show up. This has turned out to be a tremendously effective way to silence dissent. Is this the future of global governance?

The fear was that support for the ‘environmental’ goals would be overshadowed by those who denounce them. Public apathy on the subject is rampant and the arguments against anthropogenic global warming are gaining momentum. In no way did they want a repeat of many G-7/G-8/G-20 conferences in which protestors turned out ‘en masse’ while support for the policies was nowhere to be seen.

Surely their numbers must be substantial. The CO2 poll at the top of this blog shows that fully two thirds of respondants believe that the world would be better off if CO2 levels were not reduced.

One can only wonder, had the events of Nov. 13th in Paris not occured, just what the conference, or more precisely, the scene outside the conference, would have looked like. Just lucky, I suppose.

Since all demonstrations were banned for the reason of security (anti-terrorism,) all demonstrators will be seen as terrorists; hence, if you are a skeptic, you’re no better than a member of ISIS.

With the unelected writing policy to be sold by the elected to the electors, and with an absolute media blackout on dissent, it is difficult to see how the ‘international order’ could be headed towards a democratic future.

Sun Tzu wrote that the best way to win a war was not to fight in the first place. Wise words taken to heart in Paris. One more in a long list of debates which alarmists have done everything possible to avoid.


It all started here at COP 2.

1996: COP 2, Geneva, Switzerland

COP 2 took place in July 1996 in Geneva, Switzerland. Its Ministerial Declaration was noted (but not adopted) July 18, 1996, and reflected a U.S. position statement presented by Timothy Wirth, former Under Secretary for Global Affairs for the U.S. State Department at that meeting, which:

  1. Accepted the scientific findings on climate change proffered by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its second assessment (1995);
  2. Rejected uniform “harmonized policies” in favor of flexibility;
  3. Called for “legally binding mid-term targets”.”

Timothy Endicott Wirth

“In the State Department, he worked with Vice President Al Gore on global environmental and population issues, supporting the administration’s views on global warming. A supporter of the proposed Kyoto Protocol, Wirth announced the U.S.’s commitment to legally binding limits on greenhouse gas emissions. From 1998 to 2013, he served as the president of the United Nations Foundation, and currently sits on the Foundation’s board.”


“The United Nations Foundation was launched in 1998 with a $1 billion gift from Ted Turner to support the United Nations causes… The main issue areas that the Foundation addresses are child health, climate change & energy, sustainable development, technology, women, girls, and population, and supporting the United Nations.”


How is it that the philanthropists who are the most ardent supporters of medical programs to save more lives (especially in the 1/3 world) through health services, disease reduction, and mass vaccination, are the same alarmists who decry over-population as the number one threat to humanity in being the number one cause of climate change (0:58)? These Ehrlichians, these Holdrenites really need to clarify why they routinely spend billions funding these programs to save millions of lives while publicly stating that it is a death sentance to us all. In order for people to voluntarily agree to have no more than one or two children, poverty must be eradicated. Funding health services will only make that problem worse, if one listens to the men who share the views of the Ted Turners’ and the Bill Gates’ and the Al Gores’ of the world. When notable people say one thing yet do another, it should be noted. When objecting to these incongruencies is not tolerated, it should be feared.

 

 

Trump’s Second Chance

What’s going to happen when Trump retracts by saying he mis-spoke about the cheering Arabs? He will correct himself by saying that it was , in fact, Israelis who cheered (6:51) when the towers came down.

A damning article implicating Mossad, and this about the art students.

He will, of course, be right, and the media will have no choice but to report the fact that some Israelis claimed to have had fore-knowledge of the 9/11 attacks. This will re-open the wounds of 9/11 and all the truthers will team up with the bankster-haters to give him his landslide presidency.

After all, who knows more about New York real estate than the Donald? Who knows more building inspectors? Is this how he plans to reveal the truth about 9/11 to the American voters? In light of the current trend to buck the establishment types, perhaps this is just what the US secretly wants right now – a protectionist president who calls them like he sees them.

Expect talk of the USS Liberty to become a hot topic in the upcoming news/election cycle.

He didn’t capitalize the last time he had a chance to wrap up the election; will he do it this time?

*Update*

Step two is complete.

“The Donald: Israel, American Jews, Funding ISIS and World Terrorism

Je Suis ISIS

False Flags? G20? COP21? Strong Cities Network? Refugees?

What’s that in the fireplace?

kerry_zakaria

 

Fareed Zakaria interviewed John Kerry “…on the next steps for the U.S. response to the crisis in Syria and Iraq, whether there is still hope for the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, if Iran’s actions towards the West have improved since the P5+1 nuclear deal, and what to expect from next week’s global conference on climate change.”

The interview was posted Friday 13th, 3:36PM EST… the day of the attacks (actually, at the exact same time as the first attack) and one day before Jean Jullien’s ‘Peace for Paris’ artwork went viral. The interview had certainly taken place quite some time before this.

Did Jean Julien copy this? He seemed extremely defensive when I asked him about it. Is this a simple case of ‘plagariat,’ or there something more nefarious going on?

It is worth mentioning that this is the only one of Fareed Zakaria’s CNN interviews which is not available online.

red-flag-right

Besides,

Some soldiers were on duty in front of the Bataclan … but they did not intervene

 

And one more thing…

It bears repeating here that there are ‘terrorist’ events of this scale happening every week in Africa, Asia, and South America. These events are almost never reported unless they serve some higher purpose. Did we ever bring back Michelle Obama’s Chibok girls? Do you know? Do you remember? Does she? Boko Haram et al. have been importing young girls and boys into Europe to serve the sexual desires of the European elite ever since colonial days at the rate of thousands per year.

Middle America, now it’s a tragedy
Now it’s so sad to see, an upper class city
Having this happening (this happening)…

Paul Craig Roberts, in a recently penned article has written, “…the world is accustomed to following the lead of the West.” This is wrong. More correctly, the world has no choice but to follow the lead of the West. If it didn’t, we’d never hear about it anyhow. Emerging markets are being dragged around by the nose-ring in order to support a western narrative, western military goals, and western economic policy. In the west-centric news cycle, only white lives matter. This is why shutting the door to millions of migrants/refugees because of a single fake Syrian passport will be an easy and readily acceptable thing to do.

Is Paris the European equivalent of 9/11? Will the world have to radically change because of it? Are the lives of 100+ Parisiens that much more worthy of fighting for than the hundreds of thousands or millions of middle-easterners who have suffered at the hands of the West for centuries? Who are the terrorists and what is the true goal behind their attacks?