Archives mensuelles : août 2014

Ukraine. Towards a two state’s solution. The South-East and Kiev living separately in peace. Endgame.

Merkel’s agenda is so ambiguous that she is as reliable as a pierced basket. The latest round concerns French first former minister of Economy’s potential nomination as EU commissioner, Pierre Moscovici, who has proved the whole extension of his vacuity inside French government. In the beginning, Germany said « no way this could be possible ».
Now, we are hearing a different music, something like « may be, it is possible ». What had happened in between ? Don’t ask, don’t tell. Corruption is underway.
Once upon a time, Germany used to be honest. Now that Merkel is operating military in the Middle East, selling arms like the BIG 3 World destabilizers, (France, UK and America), Germany is no longer « uber alles in the World », morally speaking. The country has joined with International Gangsterism.
Those corrupt leaderships are the reason why European people are backing the far right again. Not surprising the phenomenon is higher inside the two big ganster’s states : UK and France. The last european  election has ratified the fact. With Merkel joining the Band, watch the revival of Hitlerism in Germany, next. This is a fatal shot, a corrupt leader’s legacy. A big mess.
Poor Ukraine, lost in corrupt territories with its oligarchs. It is heartbreaking to witness how a peaceful country is going to split, because of a demoniacal leadership.
This is a desolation. Read what looks like an endgame here below.
ENDGAME. By Global Research.
“The separatists are backed, trained, armed, financed by Russia. Russia determined that it had to be a little more overt in what it had already been doing, but it’s not really a shift.”Obama, 29 August 2014.

”If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth. – Joseph Goebbels (Hitlers Propaganda Minister)

Interestingly, most of us who are seeking the truth are primarily attempting to undo the lies – lies umpteen times repeated, lies about “Russian invasions”, first proclaimed by Poroshenko, Ukraines oligarch leader (sic), lies of Russia “not respecting Ukraines sovereignty”, demonization directed against President Putin, Malaysian airliners downed by Russia and-so-on.

The latest accusation is that JP Morgan and four other Wall Street banks have been hacked. And the culprit is…. Of, course Russia, according to the presstitute MSM.

It doesnt matter whether what Poroshenko said and is repeated the world over was based on a translation error (according to the German Tagesschau, the German mainstream TV news) or whether it is just a conventional lie continuously repeated until it becomes the truth à la Goebbels the western bought propaganda machine takes full advantage of this hundreds of years old simple strategy of deception.

The interesting part, however, is that hardly anyone on that very occasion is presenting the counter-weight, so to speak, namely to what extent Kiev is assisted by US paid mercenaries, CIA military and strategic advisers and their equipment, all paid for in one way or another by the State Department, CIA, or NATO. And these are facts. Not inventions for deception.

There is enough proof about who caused the 22 February 2014 coup (Maidan) Madame Nuland, Kerrys assistant, bragged about it at the Washington Press club remember the US$ 5 billion “investment” in Ukraines regime change that cannot be let go down the drain because of the f….ing Europeans. She was caught hot-handed or hot-voiced on the phone with the US Ambassador in Kiev.

Ever since that infamous coup, the US / NATO and the EU have had their dirty hands in Kiev’s Nazi killer junta – otherwise the Kiev thugs would have never had either the courage or the military knowledge to advance to the Donbas area of Ukraine, where they were literally ordered to kill their brothers. Some of them with some conscience defected early on; then they were accompanied under threats of life by CIA advisers. Eventually they defected by the thousands because of lack of food and ammunition and the resulting low-low morale.

It is actually irrelevant whether Russia has troops and armory in East Ukraine. In fact it would be well justified for Russia to defend her countrymen from savage slaughter, as many Donbas citizens are originally Russians. But – they don’t, as Mr. Putin is too smart to spoil his diplomatic assets on a war that is already lost by Kiev.

Be this as it may, why do we, truth seekers, at a time of Obamas lie exclamations and countless media repetitions not present more frequently the US / NATO invasion in Ukraine and their assistance to the Kiev murderers, rather than always being on the defensive, undoing lies in defense of Russia?

The truth of what the US-NATO killing machine, its vassal EU states and its paid mercenaries are up to in Ukraine, and that they wont let go regardless of what Obama mutters to tranquilize the world — the truth is in one way or another Washington is committed to its financial and corporate elite to achieve Full Spectrum Dominance, meaning complete subjugation of the world to Washingtons masters, the military-security industrial complex and the war financing monetary system FED-Wall Street-IMF, the latter being a mere extension of the US Treasury.

The Endgame means encircling Russia and China with more NATO bases, including Ukraine and Moldova, as close as possible to Moscows doorsteps; and, foreseen by 2015, with 60% of the US naval fleet in the South China Sea.

We should not be detracted by the day-to-day details and lies, by the fires that flare up here and there, though all horrible, killing thousands of people; we should not be confused by who is doing what? But rather focus on the Big Picture, the intentions behind the US / NATO killing machine, not so much by denying the obvious lies, but rather by describing actual facts and the long-term strategy behind them.

Obama screamed again wolf today, literally shouting Russia has invaded Ukraine, Russias military and equipment are in Ukraine, Russia is funding the separatists — then adds, but its not in the cards for America to intervene now.

Dont be fooled. Obama and his masters wont go away. He says the same about American intervention in Syria its not the right time, while arming and bombing (as a disguise) at the same time ISIS, created and funded in 2007 by Washington under successively different names to further confuse the public at large. At that time they came out of Turkey as Syrian Freedom Fighters, later they converted into the AlNusra Front of rebels, and now they are the ISIS, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, also called the Islamic State of the Levant.

This will do until the public needs to be again confused with a new group of Islamic terrorists to justify continuous wars on terror to feed continuously the fat profit accounts of the eternal war lords. But only, if we the people let them confuse and deceive and divide us.

At the same time, Washingtons warmonger-in-chief, encourages his EU puppets to intervene and sending their troops into Ukraine, and imposing still more sanctions on Russia. Let Europe take the hit if there is war. Not for nothing are NATO bases spiked throughout Europe, convenient targets for Russian missiles. One could wonder are the Europeans blind or just dont care or their leaders (sic) bought to the point where they hope to just disappear to Americas paradise when Russian rockets hit their countries NATO bases – and let their people smolder under nuclear dust?

We the 99.99% have all the powers to stop these US instigated murderous aggressions, by rejecting the continuously lying and deceiving propaganda machine, by rejecting and refusing to listen to the corporate presstitute media.

A few weeks ago there was hope that German Chancellor Merkel would see the light, would abandon the bandwagon of the sanctioners, because not only did she get a lot of pressure from German industrialists, but also the German people are worried about their energy supply especially this coming winter. Germany depends by up to 40% on Russia for their energy supplies.

Unfortunately we were wrong. Madame Merkel bent over backwards to please Obama. The naked emperor convinced her not to leave his sinking ship. What does he have up his imaginary sleeve? Anything he may have discovered by eavesdropping on her cellphone conversations? – So strong to sway her away from reason to the detriment of all of Europe? – These latest sanctions are backlashing on the EU, especially the farmers, a multiple times harder than they hit Russia. European agriculture and mostly small farmers, are losing billions of euros worth on stalled exports to Russia of meat, vegetables, fruit and other food stuff, because Russia retaliated by blocking imports from the EU. Russia is now establishing new trade routes with Latin America.

On 18 September Obama will meet at the White House with Poroshenko, to be sure he stays in line and doesnt sway Putins way, because corrupt oligarchs tend to be not very reliable. Obama may promise him premature entry to NATO and all the fake fiat dollars that come with it.

It would not be a surprise if Obama were also to receive Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of the new ISIS caliphate, to assure him of Americas continuous support, if he lets him bomb them, the ISIS troops that is, ever so often, just for show and to confuse the public mind – and, of course, as a disguise to bomb Syria to eventually topple Baschar al-Assad for regime change.

Obama may also promise the ISIS a key role in the new Syrian government provided he succeeds in regime change (for now unlikely) similar as he did to the rebels and other Islamic fractions of Libya. What Obama needs are not well-organized new regimes, but civil wars, fighting sections of societies to keep populations dying, and those still alive on their toes, fighting for their daily survival and fleeing across borders into refugee camps of other lands, thereby swallowing up neighboring countries resources and creating anger in the local population the old divide to rein tactic.

The Big Picture is important. The people need to see it, the End Game what is expecting them, if they we, the 99.99% – are not taking actions to prevent Full Spectrum Dominance from succeeding.


Russian Invasion Screaming Wolf! Strategy of Deception. Lies Repeated Umpteen Times. What is the Endgame?

Global Research, August 30, 2014

Peter Koenig is an economist and former World Bank staff. He worked extensively around the world in the fields of environment and water resources. He writes regularly for Global Research, ICH, the Voice of Russia and other internet sites. He is the author of Implosion An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed fiction based on facts and on 30 years of World Bank experience around the globe.

 Copyright © 2014 Global Research –


Get more.

Ukraine Troops Suffer Catastrophic Defeat in Novorossiya. Kiev Regime in Disarray


Démission d’Arnaud Montebourg. Il n’y a pas et il n’y a jamais eu d’austérité en France, ni même de rigueur budgétaire.

Arnaud Montebourg doit se rendre à l’évidence :

1 – le socialisme est mort : c’était la dernière idéologie du 20ème siècle.

2 – la France n’est pas pauvre, elle est mal gérée.

3 – L’offre et la demande ne s’opposent pas, mais elles sont en équilibre – du moins le devraient-elles- dans tout système marchand et donc économique.

4 – L’économie ne se réduit pas à son versant technocratique ; elle a aussi une dimension politique. Tout ce jargon Bruxellois qu’il critique par ailleurs : exemple la déflation sont des termes qui visent à impressionner, sans plus. Toutes ces équations contestables disant qu’en temps de crise (austérité dans sa bouche), il faut laisser filer les déficits ne servent pas la cause du politique et de la pensée au pouvoir.

5 – Il faut savoir ! La France a signé le Traité de Maastricht qui fixait à 3% le seuil acceptable des déficits pour un fonctionnement loyal des Nations regroupées dans la zone euro. Dès lors qu’une d’entre elles s’exonère en permanence d’une obligation qu’elle a elle-même signée, étant par ailleurs en position de moteur avec l’Allemagne de cette zone euro, il faut en tirer les conclusions qui s’imposent : se conformer à sa signature, l’honorer pour garder son rang de leader, voire de premier de la classe ou de locomotive qui montre l’exemple ou voter Marine, c’est-à-dire la sortie de l’euro. De quel côté se situe Montebourg ? On avait cru qu’il était du côté de « l’exemplarité ». Apparemment, il est du côté des passe-droits. C’est exactement le contraire de  son positionnement. Nous aurait-il trompé sur la marchandise ? La Responsabilité politique c’est aussi la cohérence et le respect des engagements pris.

6 – Alors, il nous dit que certains européens à la tête de l’Europe disent la même chose que lui, y compris Mme Lagarde ? Il est mieux placé pour savoir que la mauvaise politique européenne et son louvoiement pour ne pas dire ses accommodations à l’égard de la France sont les principaux maux de la zone euro.

Et puis, lorsqu’on pense que c’est cette même Union Européenne qui est allée foutre le bazar en Ukraine plongeant le pays dans le chaos, alors, on tremble sur sa jugeotte. Lire ce billet qui rend compte de la stupeur en Ukraine. Le monde selon Ravanello : Ukraine : les irréductibles pro-russes. Tout cela pour corrompre des dirigeants. C’est honteux.

Comme si cela ne suffisait pas, l’Allemagne va encore aggraver ce chaos en vendant des armes à Kiev. Que restera-t-il de l’intégrité territoriale de l’Ukraine, après la confrontation impitoyable qui se poursuit entre les deux parties du pays.

7 – Le débat sur l’austérité vs croissance a été tranché depuis. Intellectuellement, il n’est pas possible d’opposer ces deux-là. L’austérité peut mener à la croissance. L’austérité est un terme dévoyé : on le présente comme une punition. En réalité, c’est une correction des fausses trajectoires et une recherche d’un meilleur équilibre économique. Il appartient à chaque Etat de trouver ce meilleur équilibre. On entre alors dans le Structurel voire le Structurant. D’où les réformes structurelles indépassables.

8 – la France a des problèmes structurels persistants et ils n’ont pas été attaqués de front par le président Hollande, même si le pacte de responsabilité va dans ce sens.

On ne va pas (re)faire de politique, mais ce qui a été fondamentalement reproché à Hollande c’est d’avoir détricoter les mesures de Nicolas Sarkozy sur la compétitivité (la TVA) et sur le pouvoir d’achat (les heures supplémentaires défiscalisées) d’une manière haineuse et méprisante. Mais passons.

Considérons cet extrait du Point pour avancer :

Qui a tort, qui a raison ? Faut-il s’en tenir au pacte de responsabilité deFrançois Hollande, essentiellement destiné à favoriser l’offre, c’est-à-dire les conditions de production des entreprises ? Ou faut-il, au contraire, le rééquilibrer vers la demande via le pouvoir d’achat des ménages, comme en rêve le ministre sortant de l’Économie Arnaud Montebourg ? Pour le dire autrement, est-il nécessaire de consacrer 50 milliards d’économies à réduire le déficit tout en baissant les impôts et les charges des entreprises à hauteur de 41 milliards d’euros (d’ici à 2020) comme ont prévu le chef de l’État et Manuel Valls ou vaut-il mieux les répartir en trois tiers : quelque 17 milliards pour la réduction du déficit, 17 pour la stimulation du pouvoir d’achat des ménages et 17 pour la diminution des charges des entreprises ? 



Commençons par la fin du texte :

Pour le dire autrement, est-il nécessaire de consacrer 50 milliards d’économies à réduire le déficit tout en baissant les impôts et les charges des entreprises à hauteur de 41 milliards d’euros (d’ici à 2020) comme ont prévu le chef de l’État et Manuel Valls  ,


Il y a eu des bémols à la réalisation de ce cercle vertueux :

1. les entreprises ne jouent pas le jeu, elles cherchent toujours à tricher sur le fisc voire à délocaliser quels que soient les avantages ou encore à se garder le fric pour leurs directoires, bonus et compagnies. Bref, les fameux effets d’aubaine. Soit. Pour ne pas être piégé, le gouvernement a demandé des contreparties d’avance.

J’ai émis des réserves sur la méthode des contreparties d’avance. Un pacte de confiance se construit et la confiance on la donne ou pas. On ne peut pas la donner et en même temps commencer à la conditionner, alors même que l’expérience n’a pas encore commencé. Un peu comme si je te donne, en te mettant un couteau sur la gorge. Non. On ne construit aucun rapport positif de cette manière.

En revanche, les Etats-Unis ont un modèle : on sanctionne les mauvais joueurs. Dernier exemple hexagonal,  la BNP. On fait confiance mais on sanctionne les dérives.

2 – on a reproché à ce pacte, puisqu’il s’agit de lui, de négliger les plus démunis. Il y a eu un  ajustement social. Bon, on prend.

Alors question à Montebourg ? De quel pouvoir d’achat parle-t-il lorsqu’il invoque les ménages les plus démunis ? Au demeurant, il n’y a pas que ce pacte de responsabilité qui porte la solidarité ; cela ne devrait pas même être son objet : la solidarité est prise en charge par d’autres dispositifs. Mais, admettons, c’est l’esprit culturel Français.

Considérons à présent le topo de Montebourg en suivant les axes du Point.

« ou vaut-il mieux les répartir en trois tiers : quelque 17 milliards pour la réduction du déficit, 17 pour la stimulation du pouvoir d’achat des ménages et 17 pour la diminution des charges des entreprises ? 

J’ai qualifié cela hier d’économie du passé : celle qui creuse la dette et les déficits. Le saupoudrage : un petit peu par ici et un petit coup par là est ce qu’on a fait depuis des années et ça ne marche pas, puisque c’est de l’instantané, même pas du conjoncturel. Ca retombe à plat très rapidement, même si politiquement, cela ressemble à de la générosité. Il faudrait dire que c’est de la générosité démagogique. 

Pour que ce saupoudrage fonctionne, il  faut reprendre l’exercice régulièrement – disons tous les 5 ans et ainsi de suite. Au final, on accumule la dette et ne résout rien. Hier, je concluais un article par ceci :



Hier, Hollande a sifflé la fin de la récréation. Sauf qu’on a toujours un problème structurel.


La France vit au-dessus de ses moyens, comparativement à sa productivité (Jean Arthuis).

1. Quid de l’abolition des privilèges excessifs qui accompagnent ce train de vie sans rapport avec la productivité ?

2. Quid des obligations des banques ? Où est la réforme bancaire et quel peut en être le contenu ? Au lieu d’empiler une BPI (Banque Publique d’Investissement) sur le réseau, il faut que les banques aient des obligations de prêter et non leurs succursales pilleuses qui font des prêts à la consommation prédateurs. Quid du financement des entreprises notamment des plus petites ? C’est aussi comme cela qu’on créé un environnement et un climat favorable aux  affaires.

3. S’agissant de la productivité, quid de la simplification et quid du détournement des institutions à des fins personnelles et corporatistes voire claniques ? Je pense aux partis politiques et aux syndicats en particulier.

4. Et enfin, on va terminer par l’offre et la demande et leur écart en France où il semblerait que les entreprises se plaignent d’une absence de la demande et donc d’une sous-activité. Quelles entreprises ? Quelle activité ? Quels produits ? La demande n’est pas un acquis. Le monde bouge et les envies des consommateurs aussi. Où sont les nouveaux produits proposés aux consommateurs ? Où est l’innovation en France ? Où sont les Apple, les Samsung, les Nokia, les Toyota pour ne citer que ceux-là ? L’économie et l’Industrie en France sont  restés au stade antique.

Un Redressement Productif ne se conduit pas avec les outils du passé mais avec ceux d’aujourd’hui. Et là, le débat est ouvert. Les idéologies n’ont pas de place dans ce débat.

J’ai envie de dire Vive la France ! Mais vous l’avez certainement dit avant moi.

En son temps, j’avais fait des propositions sur une économie de l’offre institutionnelle dans le « clonage institutionnel » rebaptisé « Défaire la société des rentiers ». Ce livre traitait également des « Freins à la croissance ».

Puisqu’on est dans la rentrée littéraire, je vous conseille de le consulter et de le commander chez Amazon. Il vaut le détour.  Lisez la partie intitulée « la spirale contreproductive d’une gouvernance rentière et patrimoniale » qui souligne les paradoxes d’une gestion à la Française. Chapitre IX.Clonage


 1. Vous avez dit Austérité ?

2. Les menteries de la France sur l’Austérité

3. Austérité, le faux débat.




1 – BONNE NOUVELLE : Guerre à Gaza: l’entraîneur du Maccabi Tel Aviv démissionne. (AFP)

L’entraîneur espagnol de l’équipe israélienne de football du Maccabi Tel Aviv FC, Oscar Garcia, a démissionné en raison de « la situation actuelle de la sécurité » créée par la guerre à Gaza, a annoncé mardi son club.


2 – Rubble Bucket Challenge Is Gaza’s Answer To The Ice Bucket Craze – Les Palestiniens se moquent de l’Ice Bucket crazy. Ils ont inventé le Débris bucket et se renversent un saut de débris sur la tête. L’Occident ridiculisé en direct.

Lire et voir dans le Huffpost. 

3- Ferguson. Michael Brown a été enterré hier dans le calme. Les leaders noirs auraient pris l’engagement de « se prendre en main » tout seuls. Il était temps. Entre les jérémiades, l’attentisme, l’idolâtrie de l’homme blanc auxquels ils sont soumis et qui s’amusent avec eux comme des pions, il fallait bouger. L’Histoire des Noirs ne s’est pas arrêtée avec Martin Luther King. Elle ne faisait que commencer.

Lorsque j’écris ici quelque chose sur Rihanna ou sur Beyoncé – c’est entre nous et maintenant elles le comprennent et on se comprend entre blacks. Je les aime bien en fait et elles ont compris, surtout Beyoncé. Rihanna est plus jeune, mais elle commence à comprendre.

La surprise est celle-ci, dans l’esprit tordu de l’homme blanc haineux et envieux qui ne peut vivre sans aller visiter le cul des blacks pour mieux le sonder, dans tous les sens du terme, lorsque je poste une photo de moi, tout de suite, une black est trouvée par des médias et des TV pas seulement ici en France que je ne citerais pas pour superposer tout et rien par-dessus. On a donc un article de France qui parle politique et Arnaud Montebourg mais qui met Rihanna en photo. La psychologie petit blanc quoi. Si Rihanna est idiote, elle croira  qu’on l’adore en France.

Pauvre chérie, tu n’es que du beurre pour des épinards Français à la sauce racolage public.

Pas étonnant que ce business des rats ait trouvé aux States des Célébrités et des Avocats qui veillent à ce que leurs images ne soient pas associées gratos – volées par des pirates – à des basses besognes. Question de mentalité culturelle. Au passage, si on parle de Kim Kardashian, c’est en raison de son association à Kanye. Une façon de l’adopter pour de vrai. Elle le sait et elle a fait son choix en conséquence, y compris celui du XXL en paquetage. Ceci étant, on ne fera jamais passer le mauvais goût et la vulgarité extrême pour du bon goût ou pour un modèle à suivre par les jeunes filles. C’est notre responsabilité d’aînées de protéger les petites filles et de veiller à leur équilibre futur. Du moins, il faut essayer, au lieu de subir les choix guidés exclusivement par le marketing et la hiérarchie raciale, y compris lorsque celle-ci s’exprime à l’envers.

Culture, culture.


Funeral for Michael Brown. Today.

WATCH CNN: Mourners are arriving at the funeral for Michael Brown, the teen fatally shot on August 9 by a Ferguson, Missouri, police officer. Brown is being eulogized at the Friendly Temple Missionary Baptist Church in St. Louis. 

Family attorney Benjamin Crump will read a message from the Brown family. Funeral organizers released a list of invited guests. It includes the Rev. Al Sharpton; Martin Luther King III and the Rev. Bernice King; the Rev. Jesse Jackson; the families of Trayvon Martin and Sean Bell; and celebrities Spike Lee, Diddy and Snoop Lion. (CNN)



2. Holocaust survivors accuse Elie Wiesel of « Abuse of History. »

The International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network, a group of 327 Jewish Holocaust survivors and descendants, has compared Israel to Nazi Germany in a full-page ad in Sunday’s New York Times.

​The group, which has been critical of Israel in the past, placed the ad in response to a letter published by another Holocaust survivor, Elie Wiesel, that accused Hamas of “child sacrifice” and comparing the terror group to the Nazis.

The network’s published statement accuses Wiesel of “abuse of history” in order to justify Israel’s actions in the Gaza Strip and refers to “Israel’s wholesale effort to destroy Gaza.”

Their letter also says, “Genocide begins with the silence of the world. … Never again must mean never again for anyone.”

Read the whole story at Eurasianews.

It looks like Benjamin Netanyahu is loosing ground and credit even among Jews. Absolutly great !

Time ago, we wrote  an article Mr. Elie Wiesel wanted to hijack. Read here. ISRAEL HAS COMMITTED A GENOCIDE IN GAZA. THE TIME FOR ANOTHER NURENBERG IS AHEAD.

3. France is  facing a political crisis. The PM has presented the resignation of his gov to the president who accepted it. The move comes after the Minister of the french jolted economy spoke out against the government’s wanderings. This was to much for the PM. The result is a reshuffle of the entire gov. The new team is awaited for tomorrow.

This evening, Paris is the theater of the festivities celebrating the 70th anniversary of the French Liberation by the General de Gaulle.

4 – Dangerous Crossroads: US-NATO To Deploy Ground Troops, Conduct Large Scale Naval Exercises against “Unnamed Enemy”

Global Research, August 24, 2014

The World is at a dangerous Crossroads.

The Western military alliance is in an advanced state of readiness. And so is Russia.

Russia is heralded as the “Aggressor”. US-NATO military confrontation with Russia is contemplated.

Enabling legislation in the US Senate under “The Russian Aggression Prevention Act (RAPA) has “set the US on a path towards direct military conflict with Russia in Ukraine.”

Any US-Russian war is likely to quickly escalate into a nuclear war, since neither the US nor Russia would be willing to admit defeat, both have many thousands of nuclear weapons ready for instant use, and both rely upon Counterforce military doctrine that tasks their military, in the event of war, to preemptively destroy the nuclear forces of the enemy. (See Steven Starr, Global Research, August 22, 2014)

The Russian Aggression Prevention Act (RAPA) is the culmination of more than twenty years of US-NATO war preparations, which consist in the military encirclement of both Russia and China:

From the moment the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the United States has relentlessly pursued a strategy of encircling Russia, just as it has with other perceived enemies like China and Iran. It has brought 12 countries in central Europe, all of them formerly allied with Moscow, into the NATO alliance. US military power is now directly on Russias borders. (Steven Kinzer, Boston Globe, March 3, 2014, emphasis added)

Have more at Global Research.

President Obama’s “overt” support to Syria’s Al Qaeda rebels “opens up a can of worms” : ISIS !

In our latest post, we underlined that Obama is a Clinton or a Bush or a Carter or a Reagan, or a Nixon. See below how things match to perfection.

Yesterday, we were told that « Airstrikes alone are insufficient to deal a final blow to Isis ».

Was The defense Secretary (US) preparing the opinion to a scenario where al-qaeda will fight Isis ? Is that Al-Qaeda the « indigeneous figure » needed on the ground to stop Isis definitely ? The temptation to answer Yes at those two questions is strong.

Supporting one Terrorism (al-Qaeda) to fight another terrorism (ISIS). Where does the game stop ? Where, When and How ? It looks like an Impasse.

Below are some tracks of answers  brought by Prof. Chossudovsky.

Before reading them, some facts of the day :

1. Germany, France and the UK are drafting a resolution at the UN for a cease fire in Gaza. What are the chances of this resolution to be adopted ? What about the US vetoing it? And how are they going to implement it, assuming the resolution passed ? Is it a move for another smokescreen ? We will not prejudge at this stage.

2. By the way, Melbourne is the best place in the World to live in. Australia, Canada, Finlande, New Zeland harbor the best cities in the World. Africa got the Worst of them. Douala (Cameroon), Lagos (Nigeria), Abidjan (Ivory Coast) and Alger are worst places in the World to live in, inside Africa. Tripoli and Syria are undergoing wars. Their ranking is not that important.

Interesting, no city from the Imperialistic World is on the top 10.

World’s most liveable city 2014 is …(CNN)

3. Hamas has eliminated some insider traitors who have been informing Israel, making it easy for this criminal state (Israel) to locate the Heads of Hamas. Any Palestinian embarked on spying for Israel to derail and endanger a right cause such as the Fight For Freedom is a demon.

Israel presents itself as too Big to talk with the little boys of Hamas. How is it they got that low and coward to adopt the poor method of infiltrating the commandment of Hamas for firsthand and secret information ? Their so-called « strong intelligence » is all about smallnesses ? Is this the Great Israel fearing the little Hamas to the point of going rampant ? Disappointing. On one hand, America is helping along with the entire European World. On the other, « collaborators » inside Hamas are also helping to so-called « strong military nation » : Israel. Too mean, for the « strongest military nation of the World ». Left alone, Israel is a small state in the region. This is what the death of those 3 Hamas’ commanders stand for.

4. Gen. Dempsey: ISIS Cannot be Defeated Without Going Into Syria. Road to destroy Isis runs through Syria (Newsmax). So how to do that without the Syrian Gov authorisation or a clear violation of the Syrian territory ?  Yesterday an enemy, today… ? This is what you got with irresponsible and erratic diplomacy.

James Foley would have been saved with the sollicitation of Assad’s legal forces’ help, during the rescued mission that failed.

BBC is mentioning the price of any rapprochement of Assad by the previous enemy (US and its allies) is to stop the narrative asking « Assad to go ». Isn’t it ironical ? History works as a Doomsday. Here we are.

5. Russian humanitarian convoy is in Ukraine. After a week of Ukrainian authorities’ and customs’ checking tergiversations, it was wide past time to move forward. At this stage, any turning back was simply out of question.

Don’t forget that the US/EU coup led in Kiev is now translating into an humanitarian crisis for Russia to fund and take care. Many Ukrainians have crossed the border to find safety in Russia. For this reason, Russia has a say in Ukrainian business.

To our knowledge, the UN never condemned this horrible treacherous of Democracy and is not assisting the Displaced Ukrainians in Russia.

6. Ferguson. a) Look at this for a laugh. Conservatives literally make stuff up to smear Michael Brown A right-wing blogger used a generic CT scan found online and claimed it was a scan of Darren Wilson. The Daily Kos.

b) CNN reports « Broken Eye Socket » didn’t happen.


 Fighting Al Qaeda by Supporting Al Qaeda in Syria: The Obama Administration is a “State Sponsor of Terrorism”

 By Prof Michel Chossudovsky

Global Research, August 22, 2014
First published by GR on June 19, 2013

A major transition in US counter-terrorism doctrine is unfolding.

While Barack Obama, following in the footsteps of George W. Bush, remains firmly committed to waging a “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT), his administration is now openly supporting selected rebel units in Syria which are part of the Al Qaeda network.

Known and documented, Al Qaeda is a creation of the CIA, which has covertly supported the “Islamic Terror Network” since the heyday of the Soviet Afghan war.

While Al Qaeda is a US sponsored “intelligence asset”, a “New Normal” has been established.

An Al Qaeda affiliated organization, namely Syria’s Al Nusrah, is being supported “overtly” by the US President, rather than “covertly” by the CIA.

The support of Al Nusrah, an affiliate of al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), is no longer channeled in secrecy as part of a CIA-MI6 covert operation, it is now being supported –in a semi-official fashion– as part of a US foreign policy agenda. The latter is also part of America’s diplomatic discourse, implemented in consultation with Britain, Canada, Germany and France. Although Al Nusrah was not mentioned explicitly, “support to the Syrian rebels” was the main topic of debate at the June 2013 G-8 meetings in Northern Ireland.

While intelligence covert ops continue to perform an important role, Washington’s support to Al Qaeda in Syria is now “out in the open”, within the public domain. It is no longer part of a secret undertaking. It is part of the mainstay of US foreign policy, carried out under the helm of Secretary of State John Kerry.

“Support to the rebels” is also debated in the US Congress. It is the object of a bill which has already been adopted by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Senator Corker who co-sponsored the bill stated that:

“The future for Syria is uncertain, but the U.S. has a vested interest in trying to prevent an extremist takeover, which poses a very real risk for us and the region,” (emphasis added)

In a twisted logic, the bill purports to prevent “an extremist takeover” by supporting an Al Qaeda terrorist formation.

The Senate Committee on Foreign Relations voted 15-3 in favor of the proposed bill.

Ironically, the pro-Israeli lobby was also actively involved in lobbying in favor of aid to jihadist rebels.

Israel has supported Al Nusrah militarily in areas adjacent to the occupied territories of the Golan Heights.

Senator Rand Paul from Kentucky (left) voted against the bill, warning:

You will be funding today the allies of al Qaeda” (quoted by RT)

Al Qaeda, Osama and “The Blowback”

Everybody knows that Al Qaeda is now directly supported by the US government.

The implications are far-reaching. Obama’s decision not only undermines the legitimacy of the “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT), it also casts doubt on the “blowback” thesis.

Moreover, it begs the embarrassing question: Why is the US president supporting Al Nusrah, which is on the US State Department list of terrorist organizations?

The CIA refers to the so-called “blowback” thesis whereby an “intelligence asset”, (i.e. the Islamic jihad) is said to “have gone against its sponsors”; ”

The sophisticated methods taught to the Mujahideen, and the thousands of tons of arms supplied to them by the US – and Britain – are now tormenting the West in the phenomenon known as `blowback’, whereby a policy strategy rebounds on its own devisers. (The Guardian, London, September 15, 2001).

“What we’ve created blows back in our face.” The US government and the CIA are portrayed as the ill-fated victims. The CIA had been tricked by a deceitful Osama. It’s like “a son going against his father”.

While the CIA acknowledges that the late Osama bin Laden, leader of Al Qaeda, was an “intelligence asset” during the Cold War, the relationship is said to “go way back”. In the wake of 9/11, news reports would invariably dismiss these Osama-CIA links as part of the “bygone era” of the Soviet-Afghan war. They are invariably described as “irrelevant” to an understanding of the post-9/11 era:

Bin Laden recruited 4,000 volunteers from his own country and developed close relations with the most radical mujahideen leaders. He also worked closely with the CIA, … Since September 11, [2001] CIA officials have been claiming they had no direct link to bin Laden. (Phil Gasper, International Socialist Review, November-December 2001)

Afghan Mujahideen Commanders meet with President Ronald Reagan

While the “blowback” thesis is an obvious fabrication, it has nonetheless served to provide legitimacy to the “Global War on Terrorism”. With “overt” support channeled by the US government to an Al Qaeda affiliated organization, the blowback thesis falls flat, it is no longer credible.

The evidence amply confirms that the CIA never severed its ties to the “Islamic Militant Network”. Historically, US covert support to terrorists was a safely guarded secret, unknown to the broader public. Moreover, the CIA would never channel its support directly. It would proceed through its intelligence counterparts in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

Since the end of the Cold War, these covert intelligence links have not only been maintained, they have become increasingly sophisticated.

The broad political and media consensus in the wake of the 9/11 attacks was built around the blowback: Al Qaeda had attacked America.

The Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) against Al Qaeda and its affiliates had been launched. Yet the evidence amply confirms that US intelligence continues to harbor several terrorist organizations which are on the US State Department’s list.

Paradoxically, covert support to the terrorists by Western intelligence agencies (including the CIA, MI6, Germany’s BND) is an essential instrument of the “Global War on Terrorism”. Namely the war on terror to protect the Homeland is waged by using US-NATO sponsored terrorists and mercenaries as foot-soldiers of the Western military alliance.

The support provided covertly to “jihadist” terrorist organizations in a large number of countries (e.g. former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Yemen, Libya, Syria, Niger, Mali, Algeria, Egypt, etc.) has been used by the US-NATO alliance to destabilize sovereign states.

Obama and Al Nusrah. The “State Sponsors of Terrorism”

Al Qaeda was identified as the mastermind of the 911 attacks on the World Trade Center Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Afghanistan in the wake of 9/11 was immediately identified as a “state sponsor of terrorism” leading to the bombing and invasion of Afghanistan by US and NATO forces on October 7, 2001. In turn, a gamut of counterterrorism legislation and executive orders were put in place in the immediate wake of the 9/11 attacks.

Executive Order 13224, signed by President George W. Bush on September 23, 2001 “authorizes the seizure of assets of organizations or individuals designated by the Secretary of the Treasury to assist, sponsor, or provide material or financial support or who are otherwise associated with terrorists.” (Sept. 23, 2001).

The US Congress passed the USA PATRIOT Act 2001, signed into law by President George W. Bush on October 26, 2001. The legislation was in response to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, which allegedly had been perpetrated by Al Qaeda.

According to the 2001 Patriot Act, those “who pay for the bomb“, namely those who fund affiliates of Al Qaeda, are terrorists. In the words of George W. Bush on September 11, 2001, “We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.”

The Act pertains to the harboring and financing of terrorist organizations. Al Qaeda and its affiliates are defined in the PATRIOT Act as a terror network. Persons and organizations which support or abet Al Qaeda are considered as terrorists.

The forbidden question: Does the substance of Executive order 13224 and the PATRIOT legislation quoted above apply to a US president, a Secretary of State, a Member of the US Congress?

The Department of Justice “has prosecuted individuals and organizations for providing material support to the terrorist organization, while the Department of Treasury has frozen the assets of dozens of terrorist financiers and networks.” (See Council on Foreign Relations)

Similar measures, including the freezing of assets or organizations supportive of terrorism, were adopted in the European Union. “Since 2007, Britain’s Ministry of Finance has frozen the assets (PDF) of hundreds of individuals and organizations connected to al-Qaeda via its Asset Freezing Unit.” (Ibid)

National governments which provide support to Al Qaeda are categorised as “State-sponsors of terrorism”.

The designation is determined by the US State Department. In fact, the Secretary of State, namely John Kerry has the authority “to determine that the government of such country has repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism.” (State Department List), See also the Counterterrorism Bureau)

Barack Obama and John Kerry: Are They “Terror Suspects”?

Now let us examine in more detail the Al Nusrah Front, which constitutes the main rebel fighting force in Syria. Al Nusrah is affiliated to Al Qaeda. The leader of Al Nusra, Abu Mohammad al-Golani, has pledged his allegiance to Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri, who replaced Osama bin Laden after his death.

According to the State Department Bureau of Counter-terrorism, Jabhat al Nusrah, the main rebel force in Syria is a terrorist organization, an affiliate of Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI).

The State Department has issued a “prohibition against knowingly providing, or attempting or conspiring to provide, material support or resources to, or engaging in transactions with, al-Nusrah Front, and the freezing of all property and interests in property of the organization that are in the United States, or come within the United States or the control of U.S. persons.” (emphasis added).

It is understood that US State Department Counter-terrorism policy also applies to “state sponsors of terrorism”.

Al Nusrah is financed by Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Israel in close consultation with NATO and the Pentagon.

The Obama administration has openly confirmed its support for the Syrian rebels with most of this aid channeled to Al Nusrah.

The PATRIOT Act “prohibits knowingly harboring persons who have committed or are about to commit a variety of terrorist offenses”.

Moreover, an entire gamut of executive orders as well as the 2001 Patriot legislation prohibit “the harboring of terrorists”.

According to the US Justice Department:

The Patriot Act imposed tough new penalties on those who commit and support terrorist operations, both at home and abroad.” The terror threat emanates both from “the terrorist who pays for a bomb as by the one who pushes the button”.

According to the Patriot legislation, those “who pay for the bomb”, namely funding affiliates of Al Qaeda, constitutes a terrorist act.

In other words, the Obama administration and its allies are harboring a terror organization which is on the US State department list.

In this regard, President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry could be held responsible for knowingly providing, or attempting or conspiring to provide, material support or resources to, or engaging in transactions with, al-Nusrah Front:

“The [PATRIOT] Act created a new offense that prohibits knowingly harboring persons who have committed or are about to commit a variety of terrorist offenses”, yet the Obama administration is openly supporting a terrorist entity, in violation of its own counter-terrorism legislation.

Media Complicity

According to CNN, quoting intelligence sources, Al Nusrah is “the best-equipped arm of the terror group” in Syria, with an estimated 10,000 forces. Where do they get their money and weapons? CNN does not provide any details as to Why Al Nusrah is the best equipped, in relation to the various so-called moderate rebels factions, which from a military standpoint are broadly inoperative.

How many of these Al Nusrah forces remain operative following the government’s counteroffensive remains to be established.

Ironically, this latest CNN report (June 18, 2013 suggests that the rebels rather than the government have chemical weapons in their possession:

“They [Al Nusrah] are making desperate attempts to get chemical weapons,” the analyst told CNN, noting that in the past few weeks, security services in Iraq and Turkey arrested [Al Nusrah] operatives who were “trying to get their hands on sarin.”

In relation to the later, Turkish Police confirmed that the arrested Al Nusrah operative was in possession of sarin gas.

CNN contradicts its own reports. The same CNN article which intimated that the rebels were “attempting to get” chemical weapons, makes the case for “arming the rebels”:

The Obama administration announced last week that it will start arming rebels because Syria crossed a “red line” by using chemical weapons — including sarin gas — against the opposition.

The development is likely to be at the center of the Group of Eight summit in Northern Ireland on Monday, setting a riveting backdrop to the meeting after Syria’s longtime ally Russia said the move supports “those who kill their enemies and eat their organs.”

…Obama has not detailed the increased military support, but Washington officials told CNN that the plan includes providing small arms, ammunition and possibly anti-tank weapons to the rebels.

The Broader Implications of Obama’s Support of Al Nusrah

The blowback thesis is now defunct. The US has never ceased to support Al Qaeda. These terrorist organizations were created by US intelligence and supported by Washington. The blowback thesis is refuted not only by Obama’s “overt support” of Al Nusrah but also with regard to the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), an Al Qaeda affiliate, which was directly supported by NATO from the outset of the insurgency and Libya bombing campaign in 2011.

The “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT) has become an increasingly fragile concept. Waging a “War on Terrorism” with the active participation of an Al Qaeda affiliated organization constitutes an obvious fallacy, a big lie, a non sequitur.

The propaganda and media disinformation campaign behind the “Global War on Terrorism” has also entered a dead alley. Going after the terrorists by supporting the terrorists? Will the American public support a government which funnels billions of tax dollars to a terrorist organization as a means to “combating terrorism”?

The Pentagon’s post-911 military doctrine is predicated on the “Global War on Terrorism”. It is a consensus within US military. It is used in the recruitment, training and indoctrination of US forces.

Will American servicemen and women accept to swallow the big lie and fight in what visibly constitutes a fake “war on terrorism”.

The Criminalisation of the US State

President Obama’s “overt” support to Syria’s Al Qaeda rebels “opens up a can of worms”.

How are we to categorize an American President who says he is committed to fighting Al Qaeda, while at the same time supporting Al Qaeda?

The entire Homeland Security doctrine tumbles like a deck of cards.

The US government is in blatant violation of its own counter-terrorism legislation.

Order Directly from Global Research

America’s “War on Terrorism”

Michel Chossudovsky

originalIn this new and expanded edition of Michel Chossudovskys 2002 best seller, the author blows away the smokescreen put up by the mainstream media, that 9/11 was an attack on America by Islamic terrorists. Through meticulous research, the author uncovers a military-intelligence ploy behind the September 11 attacks, and the cover-up and complicity of key members of the Bush Administration.

The expanded edition, which includes twelve new chapters focuses on the use of 9/11 as a pretext for the invasion and illegal occupation of Iraq, the militarisation of justice and law enforcement and the repeal of democracy.

According to Chossudovsky, the war on terrorism is a complete fabrication based on the illusion that one man, Osama bin Laden, outwitted the $40 billion-a-year American intelligence apparatus. The war on terrorism is a war of conquest. Globalisation is the final march to the New World Order, dominated by Wall Street and the U.S. military-industrial complex.

September 11, 2001 provides a justification for waging a war without borders. Washingtons agenda consists in extending the frontiers of the American Empire to facilitate complete U.S. corporate control, while installing within America the institutions of the Homeland Security State.

Also available other formats

For PDF format, click here

For Kindle edition, click to visit

Special: Americas War on Terrorism + Globalization of Poverty (Buy 2 books for 1 price!)

Copyright © 2014 Global Research

Jim Foley. Islamic extremism is the baby of America and Israel : a couple of gays.

Jim Foley’s end is A despicable ACT. And we are really moved by this DECAPITATION. I haven’t seen the video and feel like  being lucky. Just to imagine this, saddened me to the utmost. Condolences to the family. No word can heal this. Only time can.
Some experts have been invited at the TV to explain the unexplainable : decapitation and death sentence for a non-existent crime. One of those experts, talking at CNN – the moment I was watching – somebody from London caught my attention. I found the argumentation a little bit confused. For those of you interested, you can turn on to rewind the  shooting.
Here is a clue : the expert was an Extremist in his past life and now, he is a pro-Israeli advocate and newly converted. He said Israel and the US connection  – see below, our previous post – was not responsible for Islamic Extremism which stands alone.
How is it 400 Britain citizens – the higher number on developed nations – have turned out Extremists and volonteers in Syria and in Iraq ?  More, the warning voice (of the video recorded by the TVs) sounds so british. No insight was brought and we went to the conclusion that : this was another moment of pro Israeli propaganda which earned the man an invitation to join the talk – may I say the system ?
Islamic extremism is the baby of the Zionist connection – meaning the baby of America and Israel : a couple of gays. In fact, the two states are married. That is why Gay mariage is end of the Road and was imposed upon YOU/US as a cursing.
Latest on the topic : Gay and lesbian couples in Virginia will not be able to legally wed after the U.S. Supreme Court put same-sex marriage in the state on hold. Various Virginia state officials had asked the justices to grant a stay on enforcement. CNN
Now, what about the 400 British citizens ? For the same reasons Black men and the community have been experiencing and enduring those 15 years, at least : the search of their identity and souls in a place where they are considered persona non grata IN FACT AND DE JURE. Some of those reasons were listed here.
Civil rights respect. The latest.
 » A police officer from St. Ann, Missouri, has been relieved of duty and suspended indefinitely after pointing an assault rifle at a peaceful protester in Ferguson, the St. Louis County Police Department said in a statement.Ferguson has been the site of protests and turmoil since the August 9 shooting death of 18-year-old Michael Brown. Ferguson police named Officer Darren Wilson as the person who shot Brown » CNN.
Meanwhile, Russia is now home for refugees camps’ to assist Ukrainians who flee their homes and native territory under a savage war weighed by their own government , « installed by the US this February ». One of the coup’s boys, the Ukrainian PM is asking money  to rebuild the nation to the IMF, under US obedience. They will get the money and, as usual, that money will fill their Oligarchs’ pockets first.
When you hear that Kiev gov. criticising Russia, think about this Global Research info you are about to read.
Ukraine Atrocities. : The Illegal Use of White Phosphorous Fire Bombs Against Donetsk Civilians.
Global Research, August 19, 2014

report on August 15th from Russian Television alleged that the Ukrainian government that the U.S. installed in February of this year was resorting to internationally banned white phosphorous firebombs in order to help destroy the million people who lived in the now Ukrainian separatist capital of Donetsk. It lands super-hot and starts fires and burns to death almost anyone it touches.

The Ukrainian separatists are the residents in Ukraine’s southeast, where Viktor Yanukovych, the Ukrainian President, was elected overwhelmingly by the votes of the people in this region in 2010. They reject the government that Obama installed, and are therefore seeking independence from it. They reject that government not so much because Obama is forcing it on them, as because that government is trying to exterminate them.

Here is the original televised news report on the alleged August 14th firebombing of the Leninsky District in Donetsk:

And here is a raw video of this August 14th firebombing, taken from the distance:

A separate local Donetsk video of it is here:

That video opens with this picture, but doesn’t say whether the fire shown in it resulted from the apparent firebombing:

And here is alleged to be a picture of the resulting burnt rubble.

Since this type of thing has been going on for months, there has been a mass-evacuation of the area by the families, leaving only their fathers who are the resistance fighters, and when an OSCE official from the western “democracies” came to visit the former residents, at refugee camps in Russia, these refugees were asking why only Russia is offering them any help.

Meanwhile, Russia opens more refugee camps, and the West blocks Russia from sending aid into the Ukrainian cities that are being bombed: food, water, and medicines.

But then, a news report on August 16th from eturbonews was headlined “Alleged War Crime: White Phosphorus Used in Residential Areas of Donetsk?” and it reported why there had not been immediate news-reporting of the results of this firebombing, if it had indeed occurred:

“According to eTN sources in Donetsk, WP bombs landed in residential areas in Donetsk at the Lenin district of Donetsk city, Petrovski district of Donetsk city and near the railway station Mandrykino. … The situation in Luhansk without electricity, water and food can be compared with activities used when committing genocide. Ukrainian forces isolated [the] East Ukrainian city and are not allowing water, food and medicine through after destroying electricity and communication services. According to an eyewitness statement Ukrainian army check points let travelers drive to the Eastern Ukraine, but no one is able to leave the Eastern part of the country. It’s like a big prison with hundred[s of] thousands of people and without food, water and electricity. … Scenes of devastation are emerging from across the city, with many buildings burned out or riddled with shell-holes. A large number of private homes in Donetsk have been burned down as firefighters fail to extinguish fires caused by shelling.” So, their source confirmed it.

report had, indeed, been uploaded on August 14th, the very night of the attack, indicating that “the Lenin district of Donetsk” was among the specific areas firebombed, and it’s the second one shown above:

So: the Ukrainian regime that the U.S. installed has simply been blocking off any ability of official ‘news’ media into Donetsk to report on the massacre. In other words: anyone who is still waiting for ‘news’ media to tell them about this firebombing will be waiting until everyone is dead and no one even cares, because it’ll then no longer be even ‘news’ at all — by then it’ll be only history. But that’s what it indeed will be.

And so will the people who had lived in Donetsk, just history, like the people who lived in Hiroshima, or in Dresden, or who were bombed to death by Germany’s Nazis in London, etc. Of course, the determinant of whether the victims here will be viewed sympathetically by history will be which side ultimately writes the history books on this war. But did the residents of Dresden and Hiroshima have any guilt that justified their being destroyed in this way? Perhaps one might say that most of them were either fascists or nazis and supported such barbarians, who would do such things.

However, one can’t even assert that here, because these victims in southeast Ukraine were instead trying to protect themselves from Ukraine’s nazis, who are our people in Ukraine. It’s “our side” that are the barbarians, the nazis, here. The victims are trying to protect themselves from us — from the people that the U.S. installed into power.

Are we guilty? If we support this government, we certainly are. Those of us who support it are the guilty ones here; those are the people who willingly share in Obama’s clear guilt on this matter (Obama being the person who appointed the persons, Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, who appointed the person, Victoria Nuland, who appointed the person, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who appointed the new Ukrainian Defense Minister, Mikhail Koval, who designed this ethnic-cleansing program and who even announced it to the public. And anyone in the U.S. House of Representatives who fails to introduce an impeachment resolution against Obama for his nazism in this regard is certainly guilty, along with Obama. If Obama isn’t even impeached and removed from office for bringing about and endorsing the perpetrators of this and other such atrocities in Ukraine, as he has done, then Americans have no reason to expect ultimately to be treated any better by the nazis that we then allow to remain in power over us Americans. Nazism is profoundly un-American.

Any member of the U.S. House of Representatives who opposes impeaching Obama over this should certainly be removed by his or her voters this fall. That’s crystal clear, because Obama is the first-ever U.S. President to install a nazi regime anywhere in the world. He is veritably spitting not only onto the graves of all U.S. soldiers who died fighting nazis in World War II; he is even spitting onto the graves of America’s Founders, who would be shocked and appalled that between America’s greatness in WW II and today, America has descended so, from heaven, into hell.

What we do now will determine whether that’s where we will stay and where we belong. Because any country that continues to back this, belongs in hell. That’s for sure.

As to why Obama is doing that, I have written many articles about that, such as here and here. And that produces this, which produces this.

As they used to say: “Never again.” But this time, it’s up to us, not up to Germans or anybody else. It’s up to us, alone, to stop doing this.

On which side of this will the American people be? America’s heroic Founders, and our heroic soldiers who were killed in WWII, ask us this question from the beyond. Are we on this side, or on Obama’s? Each American, and especially each member of the U.S. House of Representatives, must ask and answer that question.

These are extraordinary times, if for no other reason that this is the first U.S. President who has ever been (despite his deceptively liberal rhetoric) a nazi in the White House. No other one has ever done this.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of Theyre Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRISTS VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

 Copyright © 2014 Global Research

Signs of the dawn of this post-nazism civilisation led by Israeli psychology and racket mentality point out from the present chaotic World tansitioning.

Alone Again, Naturally.  The New York Times.


« The first U.S. President who has ever been a Nazi in the White House » . The first ?
Obama is the successor of a long list of presidents after WWII acting in the name of America under the New dominant Axis which emerged from the debris. The Jewish Civilisation took over the Nazie. Amazingly, just like Post-Colonialism in Africa succeeded Colonialism, Zionism is a post-nazism. Obama is a Clinton or a Bush or a Carter or a Reagan, or a Nixon. Kennedy may be the only exception on the list of American Nazi Presidents. 
The problem with Obama is he was elected precisely to change this awful paradigma and American paradoxe tending to establish as the New Doxa. The New fake Norm. In fact, an Imposture.
Obama was expected to be the first president of the 21st century ; he was elected to break up the suffocating System. Gorbatchev and his Perestroïka could have helped a lot. instead, the President went ill-adviced by his Jewish (1) entourage and the flow of money coming from the Israeli Wall-Street banksters during the campaign trail, was a poisoned gift. The price of it is a « gilded jail » as quoted by the NYT (left alone)
The passion of the reform has gone. So is the energy. The poesy, the magic, the strenght and the happening. The president looks like crunching under Big signs of fatigue.
The whole American political class, including the Congress is concerned. To dare envisioned an impeachment is a terrible hypocrisy and merely ridiculous. Total nonsense for the GOP. As usual.
Read our post of the 5th August. Israel is a parodic nazism. 
(1) When I say Jewish, don’t look at it physically but view it as a psychology.
Officer to protesters: ‘I will f–king kill you’  – Watch the video at the Daily Kos
Beyond racism, you got stupidity.
1 – The ransom business
ISIS Demanded Ransom From U.S. Before Killing Reporter – Kidnapping Europeans has become the main source of revenue for Al Qaeda and its affiliates, which have earned at least $125 million in ransom payments in the past five years alone.
The policy of not making concessions to terrorists and not paying ransoms has put the United States and Britain at odds with other European allies, who have routinely paid significant sums to win the release of their nationals — including four French and three Spanish hostages who were released this year after money was delivered through an intermediary, according to two of the victims and their colleagues.
2 – Missouri National Guard to Withdraw From Ferguson as Tensions Ease.

FERGUSON, Mo. — As tensions on the streets here seemed to ease on Thursday, Gov. Jay Nixon ordered the Missouri National Guard to begin withdrawing from the city.

“I greatly appreciate the men and women of the Missouri National Guard for successfully carrying out the specific, limited mission of protecting the Unified Command Center so that law enforcement officers could focus on the important work of increasing communication within the community, restoring trust, and protecting the people and property of Ferguson,” Mr. Nixon said in a statement.

DANTE DIVINE COMEDY. The Zionist connection or The Terror Bombing: White House and Zionist Complicity root out.

Following what we wrote today, we couldn’t imagine another following than this indepth, to understand Israeli arrogance in the Middle-East. This is an alliance, the Mafia style aiming at leading the World to Death. It looks like The DANTESQUE DIVINE COMEDY.



Consider this excerpt to weigh the density of the anal ysis:

« The Terror Bombing: White House and Zionist Complicity

Every level of the US government was aware that Arab extremists were planning a spectacular armed attack in the United States. The FBI and the CIA had their names and addresses; the Presidents National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice publicly admitted that the Executive branch knew that a terrorist hijacking would occur…only they had expected, she claimed, a traditional hijacking and not the use of airliners as missiles. The Attorney General John Ashcroft was acutely aware and refused to fly on commercial airliners. Scores of Israeli spies were living blocks away from some of the hijackers in Florida , informing headquarters on their movements. Overseas intelligence agencies, notably in Germany , Russia , Israel and Egypt claimed to have provided information to their US counterparts on the terrorist plot. The Presidents office, the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency and the FBI allowed the attackers to prepare their plans, secure funding, proceed to the airports, board the planes and carry out their attacks…all carrying US visas (mostly issued in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia once a prominent site for processing Arabs to fight in Afghanistan) and with pilots who were US-trained. As soon as the terrorists took control of the flights, the Air Force was notified of the hijacking but top leaders inexplicably delayed moves to intercept the planes allowing the attackers to reach their objectives…the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

The military-driven empire builders and their Zionist allies immediately seized the pretext of a single military retaliatory attack by non-state terrorists to launch a worldwide military offensive against a laundry list of sovereign nations. Within 24 hours, ultra-Zionist Senator Joseph Lieberman, in a prepared speech, called for the US to attack Iran , Iraq and Syria without any proof that any of these nations, all full members of the United Nations, were behind the hijackings. President Bush declared a Global War on Terror (GWOT) and launched the invasion of Afghanistan and approved a program of extraterritorial, extrajudicial assassinations, kidnappings and torture throughout the world. Clearly the Administration put into operation a war strategy, publicly advocated and prepared by Zionist ideologues long before 9/11. The President secured nearly unanimous support from Congress for the first Patriot Act, suspending fundamental democratic freedoms at home. He demanded that US client-states and allies implement their own versions of authoritarian anti-terrorist laws to persecute, prosecute and jail any and all opponents of US and Israeli empire building in the Middle East and elsewhere. In other words, September 11, 2001 became the pretext for a virulent and sustained effort to create a new world order centered on a US military-driven empire and a Middle East built around Israeli supremacy ».

Could you imagine such a diabolic simulation or simulacrum ?

Five days ago, we wrote America is THE major threat to international peace today. How to change the course ? Time for History is NOW.

Provocations as Pretexts for Imperial War: From Pearl Harbor to 9/11

Global Research, August 19, 2014

Article first published by GR in August 2008

Wars in an imperialist democracy cannot simply be dictated by executive fiat, they require the consent of highly motivated masses who will make the human and material sacrifices. Imperialist leaders have to create a visible and highly charged emotional sense of injustice and righteousness to secure national cohesion and overcome the natural opposition to early death, destruction and disruption of civilian life and to the brutal regimentation that goes with submission to absolutist rule by the military.

The need to invent a cause is especially the case with imperialist countries because their national territory is not under threat. There is no visible occupation army oppressing the mass of the people in their everyday life. The enemy does not disrupt everyday normal life as forced conscription would and does. Under normal peaceful time, who would be willing to sacrifice their constitutional rights and their participation in civil society to subject themselves to martial rule that precludes the exercise of all their civil freedoms?

The task of imperial rulers is to fabricate a world in which the enemy to be attacked (an emerging imperial power like Japan) is portrayed as an invader or an aggressor in the case of revolutionary movements (Korean and Indo-Chinese communists) engaged in a civil war against an imperial client ruler or a terrorist conspiracy linked to an anti-imperialist, anti-colonial Islamic movements and secular states. Imperialist-democracies in the past did not need to consult or secure mass support for their expansionist wars; they relied on volunteer armies, mercenaries and colonial subjects led and directed by colonial officers. Only with the confluence of imperialism, electoral politics and total war did the need arise to secure not only consent, but also enthusiasm, to facilitate mass recruitment and obligatory conscription.

Since all US imperial wars are fought overseas far from any immediate threats, attacks or invasions – -US imperial rulers have the special task of making the causus bellicus immediate, dramatic and self-righteously defensive.

To this end US Presidents have created circumstances, fabricated incidents and acted in complicity with their enemies, to incite the bellicose temperament of the masses in favor of war.

The pretext for wars are acts of provocation which set in motion a series of counter-moves by the enemy, which are then used to justify an imperial mass military mobilization leading to and legitimizing war.

State provocations require uniform mass media complicity in the lead-up to open warfare: Namely the portrayal of the imperial country as a victim of its own over-trusting innocence and good intentions. All four major US imperial wars over the past 67 years resorted to a provocation, a pretext, and systematic, high intensity mass media propaganda to mobilize the masses for war. An army of academics, journalists, mass media pundits and experts soften up the public in preparation for war through demonological writing and commentary: Each and every aspect of the forthcoming military target is described as totally evil hence totalitarian – in which even the most benign policy is linked to demonic ends of the regime.

Since the enemy to be lacks any saving graces and worst, since the totalitarian state controls everything and everybody, no process of internal reform or change is possible. Hence the defeat of total evil can only take place through total war. The targeted state and people must be destroyed in order to be redeemed. In a word, the imperial democracy must regiment and convert itself into a military juggernaut based on mass complicity with imperial war crimes. The war against totalitarianism becomes the vehicle for total state control for an imperial war.

In the case of the US-Japanese war, the US-Korean war, the US-Indochinese war and the post-September 11 war against an independent secular nationalist regime (Iraq) and the Islamic Afghan republic, the Executive branch (with the uniform support of the mass media and congress) provoked a hostile response from its target and fabricated a pretext as a basis for mass mobilization for prolonged and bloody wars.

US-Japan War: Provocation and Pretext for War

President Franklin Delano Roosevelt set high standards for provoking and creating a pretext for undermining majoritarian anti-war sentiment, unifying and mobilizing the country for war. Robert Stinnett, in his brilliantly documented study, Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor, demonstrates that Roosevelt provoked the war with Japan by deliberately following an eight-step program of harassment and embargo against Japan developed by Lt. Commander Arthur H. McCollum, head of the Far East desk of the Office of Naval Intelligence. He provides systematic documentation of US cables tracking the Japanese fleet to Pearl Harbor, clearly demonstrating that FDR knew in advance of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor following the Japanese fleet virtually every step of the way. Even more damaging, Stinnett reveals that Admiral H.E. Kimmel, in charge of the defense of Pearl Harbor, was systematically excluded from receiving critical intelligence reports on the approaching movements of the Japanese fleet, thus preventing the defense of the US base.

The sneak attack by the Japanese, which caused the death over three thousand American service men and the destruction of scores of ships and planes, successfully provoked the war FDR had wanted. In the run-up to the Japanese attack, President Roosevelt ordered the implementation of Naval Intelligences October 1940 memorandum, authored by McCollum, for eight specific measures, which amounted to acts of war including an economic embargo of Japan, the shipment of arms to Japans adversaries, the prevention of Tokyo from securing strategic raw materials essential for its economy and the denial of port access, thus provoking a military confrontation.

To overcome massive US opposition to war, Roosevelt needed a dramatic, destructive immoral act committed by Japan against a clearly defensive US base to turn the pacifist US public into a cohesive, outraged, righteous war machine. Hence the Presidential decision to undermine the defense of Pearl Harbor by denying the Navy Commander in charge of its defense, Admiral Kimmel, essential intelligence about anticipated December 7, 1941 attack. The United States paid the price with 2,923 Americans killed and 879 wounded, Admiral Kimmel was blamed and stood trial for dereliction of duty, but FDR got his war. The successful outcome of FDRs strategy led to a half-century of US imperial supremacy in the Asia-Pacific region. An unanticipated outcome, however, was the US and Japanese imperial defeats on the Chinese mainland and in North Korea by the victorious communist armies of national liberation.

Provocation and Pretext for the US War Against Korea

The incomplete conquest of Asia following the US defeat of Japanese imperialism, particularly the revolutionary upheavals in China , Korea and Indochina , posed a strategic challenge to US empire builders. Their massive financial and military aid to their Chinese clients failed to stem the victory of the anti-imperialist Red Armies. President Truman faced a profound dilemma how to consolidate US imperial supremacy in the Pacific at a time of growing nationalist and communist upheavals when the vast majority of the war wearied soldiers and civilians were demanding demobilization and a return to civilian life and economy. Like Roosevelt in 1941, Truman needed to provoke a confrontation, one that could be dramatized as an offensive attack on the US (and its allies) and could serve as a pretext to overcome widespread opposition to another imperial war.

Truman and the Pacific military command led by General Douglas Mac Arthur chose the Korean peninsula as the site for detonating the war. Throughout the Japanese-Korean war, the Red guerrilla forces led the national liberation struggle against the Japanese Army and its Korean collaborators. Subsequent to the defeat of Japan , the national revolt developed into a social revolutionary struggle against Korean elite collaborators with the Japanese occupiers. As Bruce Cumings documents in his classic study, The Origins of the Korean War , the internal civil war preceded and defined the conflict prior to and after the US occupation and division of Korea into a North and South. The political advance of the mass national movement led by the anti-imperialist communists and the discredit of the US-backed Korean collaborators undermined Trumans efforts to arbitrarily divide the country geographically. In the midst of this class-based civil war, Truman and Mac Arthur created a provocation: They intervened, establishing a US occupation army and military bases and arming the counter-revolutionary former Japanese collaborators. The US hostile presence in a sea of anti-imperialist armies and civilian social movements inevitably led to the escalation of social conflict, in which the US-backed Korean clients were losing.

As the Red Armies rapidly advanced from their strongholds in the north and joined with the mass revolutionary social movements in the South they encountered fierce repression and massacres of anti-imperialist civilians, workers and peasants, by the US armed collaborators. Facing defeat Truman declared that the civil war was really an invasion by (north) Koreans against (south) Korea . Truman, like Roosevelt, was willing to sacrifice the US troops by putting them in the direct fire of the revolutionary armies in order to militarize and mobilize the US public in defense of imperial outposts in the southern Korean peninsula.

In the run-up to the US invasion of Korea , Truman, the US Congress and the mass media engaged in a massive propaganda campaign and purge of peace and anti-militarist organizations throughout US civil society. Tens of thousands of individuals lost their jobs, hundreds were jailed and hundreds of thousands were blacklisted. Trade unions and civic organizations were taken over by pro-war, pro-empire collaborators. Propaganda and purges facilitated the propagation of the danger of a new world war, in which democracy was threatened by expanding Communist totalitarianism. In reality, democracy was eroded to prepare for an imperial war to prop up a client regime and secure a military beachhead on the Asian continent.

The US invasion of Korea to prop up its tyrannical client was presented as a response to North Korea invading South Korea and threatening our soldiers defending democracy. The heavy losses incurred by retreating US troops belied the claim of President Truman that the imperial war was merely a police action. By the end of the first year of the imperial war, public opinion turned against the war. Truman was seen as a deceptive warmonger. In 1952, the electorate elected Dwight Eisenhower on his promise to end the war. An armistice was agreed to in 1953. Trumans use of military provocation to detonate a conflict with the advancing Korean revolutionary armies and then using the pretext of US forces in danger to launch a war did not succeed in securing a complete victory: The war ended in a divided Korean nation. Truman left office disgraced and derided, and the US public turned anti-war for another decade.

The US Indochinese War: Johnsons Tonkin Pretext

The US invasion and war against Vietnam was a prolonged process, beginning in 1954 and continuing to the final defeat in 1975. From 1954 to 1960 the US sent military combat advisers to train the army of the corrupt, unpopular and failed collaborator regime of President Ngo Dinh Diem. With the election of President Kennedy, Washington escalated the number of military advisers, commandos (so called Green Berets) and the use of death squads (Plan Phoenix). Despite the intensification of the US involvement and its extensive role in directing military operations, Washington s surrogate South Vietnam Army (ARNV) was losing the war to the South Vietnamese National Liberation Army (Viet Cong) and the South Vietnamese National Liberation Front (NLF), which clearly had the support of the overwhelming majority of the Vietnamese people.

Following the assassination of President Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson took over the Presidency and faced the imminent collapse of the US puppet regime and the defeat of its surrogate Vietnamese Army.

The US had two strategic objectives in launching the Vietnam Was: The first involved establishing a ring of client regimes and military bases from Korea, Japan, Philippines, Taiwan, Indochina, Pakistan, Northern Burma (via the KMT opium lords and Shan secessionists) and Tibet to encircle China, engage in cross border commando attacks by surrogate military forces and block Chinas access to its natural markets. The second strategic objective in the US invasion and occupation of Vietnam was part of its general program to destroy powerful national liberation and anti-imperialists movements in Southeast Asia, particularly in Indochina , Indonesia , the Philippines . The purpose was to consolidate client regimes, which would provide military bases, de-nationalize and privatize their raw materials sectors and provide political and military support to US empire building. The conquest of Indochina was an essential part of US empire-building in Asia . Washington calculated that by defeating the strongest Southeast Asian anti-imperialist movement and country, neighboring countries (especially Laos and Cambodia ) would fall easily.

Washington faced multiple problems. In the first place, given the collapse of the surrogate South Vietnam regime and army, Washington would need to massively escalate its military presence, in effect substituting its ground forces for the failed puppet forces and extend and intensify its bombing throughout North Vietnam , Cambodia and Laos . In a word convert a limited covert war into a massive publicly declared war.

The second problem was the reticence of significant sectors of the US public, especially college students (and their middle and working class parents) facing conscription, who opposed the war. The scale and scope of military commitment envisioned as necessary to win the imperial war required a pretext, a justification.

The pretext had to be such as to present the US invading armies as responding to a sneak attack by an aggressor country ( North Vietnam ). President Johnson, the Secretary of Defense, the US Naval and Air Force Command, the National Security Agency, acted in concert. What was referred to as the Gulf of Tonkin Incident involved a fabricated account of a pair of attacks, on August 2 and 4, 1964 off the coast of North Vietnam by naval forces of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam against two US destroyers the USS Maddox and the USS Turner Joy. Using, as a pretext, the fabricated account of the attacks, the US Congress almost unanimously passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution on August 7, 1964, which granted President Johnson full power to expand the invasion and occupation of Vietnam up to and beyond 500,000 US ground troops by 1966. The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution authorized President Johnson to conduct military operations throughout Southeast Asia without a declaration of war and gave him the freedom to take all necessary steps, including the use of armed force to assist any member or protocol state of the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty requesting assistance in defense of freedom.

On August 5, 1964 Lyndon Johnson went on national television and radio announcing the launching of massive waves of retaliatory bombing of North Vietnamese naval facilities (Operation Pierce Arrow). In 2005, official documents released from the Pentagon, the National Security Agency and other government departments have revealed that there was no Vietnamese attack. On the contrary, according to the US Naval Institute, a program of covert CIA attacks against North Vietnam had begun in 1961 and was taken over by the Pentagon in 1964. These maritime attacks on the North Vietnamese coast by ultra-fast Norwegian-made patrol boats (purchased by the US for the South Vietnamese puppet navy and under direct US naval coordination) were an integral part of the operation. Secretary of Defense McNamara admitted to Congress that US ships were involved in attacks on the North Vietnamese coast prior to the so-called Gulf of Tonkin Incident .

So much for Johnsons claim of an unprovoked attack. The key lie, however, was the claim that the USS Maddox retaliated against an attacking Vietnamese patrol boat. The Vietnamese patrol boats, according to NSA accounts released in 2005, were not even in the vicinity of the Maddox they were at least 10,000 yards away and three rounds were first fired at them by the Maddox which then falsely claimed it subsequently suffered some damage from a single 14.5 mm machine gun bullet to its hull. The August 4 Vietnamese attack never happened. Captain John Herrick of the Turner Joy cabled that many reported contacts and torpedoes fired appear doubtful…No actual visual sightings (of North Vietnamese naval boats) by Maddox.

The consequences of the fabrication of the Tonkin Gulf incident and provocation was to justify an escalation of war that killed 4 million people in Indochina, maimed, displaced and injured millions more, in addition to killing 58,000 US service men and wounding a half-million more in this failed effort in military-driven empire-building. Elsewhere in Asia, the US empire builders consolidated their client collaborative rule: In Indonesia, which had one of the largest open Communist Party in the world, a CIA designed military coup, backed by Johnson in 1966 and led by General Suharto, murdered over one million trade unionists, peasants, progressive intellectuals, school teachers and communists (and their family members).

What is striking about the US declaration of war in Vietnam is that the latter did not respond to the US-directed maritime provocations that served as a pretext for war. As a result Washington had to fabricate a Vietnamese response and then use it as the pretext for war.

The idea of fabricating military threats (the Gulf of Tonkin Incident ) and then using them as pretext for the US-Vietnam war was repeated in the case of the US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan . In fact Bush Administration policy makers, who launched the Afghan and Iraq wars, tried to prevent the publication of a report by the top Navy commander in which he recounted how the NSA distorted the intelligence reports regarding the Tonkin incident to serve the Johnson Administrations ardent desire for a pretext to war.

Provocation and Pretext: 9/11 and the Afghan-Iraq Invasions

In 2001, the vast majority of the US public was concerned over domestic matters the downturn in the economy, corporate corruption (Enron, World Com etc..), the bursting of the dot-com bubble and avoiding any new military confrontation in the Middle East . There was no sense that the US had any interest in going to war for Israel , nor launching a new war against Iraq , especially an Iraq , which had been defeated and humiliated a decade earlier and was subject to brutal economic sanctions.

The US oil companies were negotiating new agreements with the Gulf States and looked forward to, with some hope, a stable, peaceful Middle East, marred by Israel s savaging the Palestinians and threatening its adversaries. In the Presidential election of 2000, George W, Bush was elected despite losing the popular vote in large part because of electoral chicanery (with the complicity of the Supreme Court) denying the vote to blacks in Florida. Bushs bellicose rhetoric and emphasis on national security resonated mainly with his Zionist advisers and the pro-Israeli lobby otherwise, for the majority of Americans, it fell on deaf ears.

The gap between the Middle East War plans of his principle Zionist appointees in the Pentagon, the Vice Presidents office and the National Security Council and the general US publics concern with domestic issues was striking. No amount of Zionist authored position papers, anti-Arab, anti-Muslim rhetoric and theatrics, emanating from Israel and its US based spokespeople, were making any significant impact on the US public. There was widespread disbelief that there was an imminent threat to US security through a catastrophic terrorist attack which is defined as an attack using chemical, biological or nuclear weapons of mass destruction. The US public believed that Israel s Middle East wars and their unconditional US lobbyists promotion for direct US involvement were not part of their lives nor in the countrys interest.

The key challenge for the militarists in the Bush Administration was how to bring the US public around to support the new Middle East war agenda, in the absence of any visible, credible and immediate threat from any sovereign Middle Eastern country.

The Zionists were well placed in all the key government positions to launch a worldwide offensive war. They had clear ideas of the countries to target (Middle East adversaries of Israel ). They had defined the ideology (the war on terror, preventive defense). They projected a sequence of wars. They linked their Middle East war strategy to a global military offensive against all governments, movements and leaders who opposed US military-driven empire building. What they needed was to coordinate the elite into actually facilitating a catastrophic terrorist incident that could trigger the implementation of their publicly stated and defended new world war.

The key to the success of the operation was to encourage terrorists and to facilitate calculated and systematic neglect to deliberately marginalize intelligence agents and agency reports that identified the terrorists, their plans and methods. In the subsequent investigatory hearings, it was necessary to foster the image of neglect, bureaucratic ineptness and security failures in order to cover up Administration complicity in the terrorists success. An absolutely essential element in mobilizing massive and unquestioning support for the launching of a world war of conquest and destruction centered in Muslim and Arab countries and people was a catastrophic event that could be linked to the latter.

After the initial shock of 9/11 and the mass media propaganda blitz saturating every household, questions began to be raised by critics about the run-up to the event, especially when reports began to circulate from domestic and overseas intelligence agencies that US policy makers were clearly informed of preparations for a terrorist attack. After many months of sustained public pressure, President Bush finally named an investigatory commission on 9/11, headed by former politicians and government officials. Philip Zelikow, an academic and former government official and prominent advocate of preventative defense (the offensive war policies promoted by the Zionist militants in the government) was named executive director to conduct and write the official 9-11 Commission Report. Zelikow was privy to the need for a pretext, like 9/11, for launching the permanent global warfare, which he had advocated. With a prescience, which could only come from an insider to the fabrication leading to war, he had written: Like Pearl Harbor , this event would divide our past and future into a before and after. The United States (sic) might respond with draconian measures, scaling back civil liberties, allowing wider surveillance of citizens, detention of suspects and use of deadly force (torture), (see Catastrophic Terrorism Tackling the New Dangers , co-authored by Philip Zelikow and published by Foreign Affairs in 1998).

Zelikow directed the commission report, which exonerated the administration of any knowledge and complicity in 9/11, but convinced few Americans outside of the mass media and Congress. Polls conducted in the summer of 2003 on the findings of the Commission proceedings and its conclusions found that a majority of the American public expressed a high level of distrust and rejection especially among New Yorkers. The general public suspected Government complicity, especially when it was revealed that Zelikow conferred with key figures under investigation, Vice President Cheney and Presidential Guru Karl Rove. In response to skeptical citizens, Zelikow went on an insane rage, calling the sceptics pathogens or germs whose infection needed to be contained. With language reminiscent of a Hitlerian Social Darwinist diatribe, he referred to criticisms of the Commission cover up as a bacteria (that) can sicken the larger body (of public opinion). Clearly Zelikows pseudoscientific rant reflects the fear and loathing he feels for those who implicated him with a militarist regime, which fabricated a pretext for a catastrophic war for Zelikows favorite state Israel .

Throughout the 1990s the US and Israeli military-driven empire building took on an added virulence: Israel dispossessed Palestinians and extended its colonial settlements. Bush, Senior invaded Iraq and systematically destroyed Iraqis military and civil economic infrastructure and fomented an ethnically cleansed Kurdish client state in the north. Like his predecessor Ronald Reagan, President George H.W. Bush, Senior backed anti-communist Islamic irregulars in their conquest of Afghanistan via their holy wars against a leftist secular nationalist regime.. At the same time Bush, Senior attempted to balance military empire building with expanding the US economic empire, by not occupying Iraq and unsuccessfully trying to restrain Israeli colonial settlements in the West Bank .

With the rise of Clinton , all restraints on military-driven empire building were thrown over: Clinton provoked a major Balkan war, viciously bombing and dismembering Yugoslavia , periodically bombing Iraq and extending and expanding US military bases in the Gulf States . He bombed the largest pharmaceutical factory in Sudan , invaded Somalia and intensified a criminal economic boycott of Iraq leading to the death of an estimated 500,000 children. Within the Clinton regime, several liberal pro-Israel Zionists joined the military-driven empire builders in the key policy making positions. Israeli military expansion and repression reached new heights as US-financed colonial Jewish settlers and heavily armed Israeli military forces slaughtered unarmed Palestinian teenagers protesting the Israeli presence in the Occupied Territories during the First Intifada. In other words, Washington extended its military penetration and occupation deeper into Arab countries and societies, discrediting and weakening the hold of its client puppet regimes over their people.

The US ended military support for the armed Islamic anti-communists in Afghanistan once they had served US policy goals by destroying the Soviet backed secular regime (slaughtering thousands of school teachers in the process). As a consequence of US-financing, there was a vast, loose network of well-trained Islamic fighters available for combat against other target regimes. Many were flown by the Clinton regime into Bosnia where Islamic fighters fought a surrogate separatist war against the secular and socialist central government of Yugoslavia . Others were funded to destabilize Iran and Iraq . They were seen in Washington as shock troops for future US military conquests. Nevertheless Clinton s imperial coalition of Israeli colonialists, armed Islamic mercenary fighters, Kurdish and Chechen separatists broke up as Washington and Israel advanced toward war and conquest of Arab and Muslim states and the US spread its military presence in Saudi Arabia , Kuwait and the Gulf States .

Military-driven empire building against existing nation-states was not an easy sell to the US public or to the market-driven empire builders of Western Europe and Japan and the newly emerging market-driven empire builders of China and Russia . Washington needed to create conditions for a major provocation, which would overcome or weaken the resistance and opposition of rival economic empire builders. More particularly, Washington needed a catastrophic event to turn around domestic public opinion, which had opposed the first Gulf War and subsequently supported the rapid withdrawal of US troops from Iraq in 1990.

The events, which took place on September 11, 2001, served the purpose of American and Israeli military-driven empire builders. The destruction of the World Trade Center buildings and the deaths of nearly 3,000 civilians, served as a pretext for a series of colonial wars, colonial occupations, and global terrorist activities, and secured the unanimous support of the US Congress and triggered an intense global mass media propaganda campaign for war.

The Politics of Military Provocations

Ten years of starving 23 million Iraqi Arabs under the Clinton regimes economic boycott, interspersed with intense bombing was a major provocation to Arab communities and citizens around the world. Supporting Israel s systematic dispossession of Palestinians from their lands, interspersed with encroachment on the Islamic holy sites in Jerusalem was a major provocation, which detonated scores of suicide bomb attacks in retaliation. The construction and operation of US military bases in Saudi Arabia , home of the Islamic holy city of Mecca , was a provocation to millions of believers and practicing Muslims. The US and Israeli attack and occupation of southern Lebanon and the killing of 17,000 Lebanese and Palestinians were a provocation to Arabs.

Ruled by pusillanimous Arab regimes, servile to US interests, impotent to respond toward Israeli brutality against Palestinians, Arabs and devout Muslim citizens were constantly pushed by the Bush and especially Clinton regime to respond to their continued provocations. Against the vast disproportion in fire-power between the advanced weaponry of the US and Israeli occupation forces (the Apache helicopter gun ships, the 5,000 pound bombs, the killer drones, the armored carriers, the cluster bombs, Napalm and missiles) the secular Arab and Islamic resistance had only light weaponry consisting of automatic rifles, rocket propelled grenades, short-range and inaccurate Katusha missiles and machine guns. The only weapon they possessed in abundance to retaliate was the suicidal human bombs.

Up to 9/11, US imperial wars against Arab and Islamic populations were carried out in the targeted and occupied lands where the great mass of Arab people lived, worked and enjoyed shared lives. In other words, all (and for Israel most) of the destructive effects of their wars (the killings, home and neighborhood destruction and kinship losses) were products of US and Israeli offensive wars, seemingly immune to retaliatory action on their own territory.

September 11, 2001 was the first successful large-scale Arab-Islamic offensive attack on US territory in this prolonged, one-sided war. The precise timing of 9/11 coincides with the highly visible takeover of US Middle East war policy by extremist Zionists in the top positions of the Pentagon, the White House and National Security Council and their dominance of Congressional Middle East policies. Arab and Islamic anti-imperialists were convinced that military-driven empire builders were readying for a frontal assault on all the remaining centers of opposition to Zionism in the Middle East, i.e. Iraq , Iran , Syria , Southern Lebanon, the West Bank, Gaza , as well as in Afghanistan in South Asia and Sudan and Somalia in North-East Africa .

This offensive war scenario had been already spelled out by the American Zionist policy elite headed by Richard Pearl for the Israeli Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies in a policy document, entitled A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm. This was prepared in 1996 for far-right Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu prior to his taking office.

On September 28, 2000, despite the warnings of many observers, the infamous author of the massacre of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon , General Ariel Sharon profaned the Al Aqsa Mosque with his huge military entourage a deliberate religious provocation that guaranteed Sharon s election as Prime Minister from the far right Likud Party. This led to the Second Intifada and the savage response of the Israelis. Washington s total support of Sharon merely reinforced the worldwide belief among Arabs that the Zionist Solution of massive ethnic purges was on Washington s agenda.

The pivotal group linking US military-driven empire builders with their counterparts in Israel was the major influential Zionist public policy group promoting what they dubbed the Project for a New American Century (PNAC). In 1998 they set out a detailed military-driven road map to US world domination (the so-called Project for a New American Century), which just happened to focus on the Middle East and just happened to coincide exactly with Tel Avivs vision of a US-Israel dominated Middle East. In 2000 the PNAC Zionist ideologues published a strategy paper Rebuilding Americas Defenses, which laid down the exact guidelines which incoming Zionist policy makers in the top spheres of the Pentagon and White House would follow. PNAC directives included establishing forward military bases in the Middle East, increasing military spending from 3% to 4% of GNP, a military attack to overthrow Saddam Hussein in Iraq, and military confrontation with Iran using the pretext of the threats of weapons of mass destruction.

The PNAC agenda could not advance without a catastrophic Pearl Harbor type of event, as US military-driven empire builders, Israelis and US Zionist policy makers recognized early on. The deliberate refusal by the White House and its subordinate 16 intelligence agencies and the Justice Department to follow up precise reports of terrorist entry, training, financing and action plans was a case of deliberate negligence: The purpose was to allow the attack to take place and then to immediately launch the biggest wave of military invasions and state terrorist activities since the end of the Indochina War.

Israel , which had identified and kept close surveillance of the terrorists, insured that the action would proceed without any interruption. During the 9/11 attacks, its agents even had the presumption to video and photograph the exploding towers, while dancing in wild celebration, anticipating Washingtons move toward Israels militarist Middle East strategy.

Military-Driven Empire Building : The Zionist Connection

Militaristic empire building preceded the rise to power of the Zionist Power Configuration (ZPC) in the George W. Bush Administration. The pursuit of it after 9/11 was a joint effort between the ZPC and long-standing US militarists, like Rumsfeld and Cheney. The provocations against Arabs and Muslims leading up to the attacks were induced by both the US and Israel . The current implementation of the militarist strategy toward Iran is another joint effort of Zionist and US militarists.

What the Zionists did provide, which the US militarists lacked, was an organized mass-based lobby with financing, propagandists and political backing for the war. The principle government ideologues, media experts, spokespeople, academics, speechwriters and advisers for the war were largely drawn from the ranks of US Zionism. The most prejudicial aspects of the Zionist role was in the implementation of war policy, namely the systematic destruction and dismantling of the Iraqi state. Zionist policymakers promoted the US military occupation and supported a massive US military build-up in the region for sequential wars against Iran , Syria and other adversaries of Israeli expansion.

In pursuit of military driven empire building in accord with Israels own version, the Zionist militarists in the US government exceeded their pre-9/11 expectations, raising military spending from 3% of GNP in 2000 to 6% in2008, growing at a rate of 13% per year during their ascendancy from 2001-2008. As a result they raised the US budget deficit to over $10 trillion dollars by 2010, double the 1997 deficit, and driving the US economy and its economic empire toward bankruptcy.

The Zionist American policy makers were blind to the dire economic consequences for US overseas economic interests because their main strategic consideration was whether US policy enhanced Israel s military dominance in the Middle East . The cost (in blood and treasure) of using the US to militarily destroy Israel s adversaries was of no concern.

To pursue the Zionist-US military-driven imperial project of a New Order in the Middle East, Washington needed to mobilize the entire population for a series of sequential wars against the anti-imperialist, anti-Israeli countries of the Middle East and beyond. To target the multitude of Israeli adversaries, American Zionists invented the notion of a Global War on Terrorism. The existing climate of national and international opinion was decidedly hostile to the idea of fighting sequential wars, let alone blindly following zealous Zionist extremists. Sacrificing American lives for Israeli power and the Zionist fantasy of a US-Israeli Co-Prosperity Sphere dominating the Middle East could not win public backing in the US, let alone in the rest of the world.

Top policymakers, especially the Zionist elite, nurtured the notion of a fabricated pretext an event which would shock the US public and Congress into a fearful, irrational and bellicose mood, willing to sacrifice lives and democratic freedoms. To rally the US public behind a military-driven imperial project of invasion and occupation in the Middle East required another Pearl Harbor .

The Terror Bombing: White House and Zionist Complicity

Every level of the US government was aware that Arab extremists were planning a spectacular armed attack in the United States. The FBI and the CIA had their names and addresses; the Presidents National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice publicly admitted that the Executive branch knew that a terrorist hijacking would occur…only they had expected, she claimed, a traditional hijacking and not the use of airliners as missiles. The Attorney General John Ashcroft was acutely aware and refused to fly on commercial airliners. Scores of Israeli spies were living blocks away from some of the hijackers in Florida , informing headquarters on their movements. Overseas intelligence agencies, notably in Germany , Russia , Israel and Egypt claimed to have provided information to their US counterparts on the terrorist plot. The Presidents office, the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency and the FBI allowed the attackers to prepare their plans, secure funding, proceed to the airports, board the planes and carry out their attacks…all carrying US visas (mostly issued in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia once a prominent site for processing Arabs to fight in Afghanistan) and with pilots who were US-trained. As soon as the terrorists took control of the flights, the Air Force was notified of the hijacking but top leaders inexplicably delayed moves to intercept the planes allowing the attackers to reach their objectives…the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

The military-driven empire builders and their Zionist allies immediately seized the pretext of a single military retaliatory attack by non-state terrorists to launch a worldwide military offensive against a laundry list of sovereign nations. Within 24 hours, ultra-Zionist Senator Joseph Lieberman, in a prepared speech, called for the US to attack Iran , Iraq and Syria without any proof that any of these nations, all full members of the United Nations, were behind the hijackings. President Bush declared a Global War on Terror (GWOT) and launched the invasion of Afghanistan and approved a program of extraterritorial, extrajudicial assassinations, kidnappings and torture throughout the world. Clearly the Administration put into operation a war strategy, publicly advocated and prepared by Zionist ideologues long before 9/11. The President secured nearly unanimous support from Congress for the first Patriot Act, suspending fundamental democratic freedoms at home. He demanded that US client-states and allies implement their own versions of authoritarian anti-terrorist laws to persecute, prosecute and jail any and all opponents of US and Israeli empire building in the Middle East and elsewhere. In other words, September 11, 2001 became the pretext for a virulent and sustained effort to create a new world order centered on a US military-driven empire and a Middle East built around Israeli supremacy.

Provocations and Pretexts: the Israeli-US War Against Iran

The long, unending, costly and losing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan undermined international and national support for the Zionist-promoted New American Century project. US militarists and their advisers and ideologues needed to create a new pretext for the US plans to subdue the Middle East and especially to attack Iran . They turned their propaganda campaign on Iran s legal non-military nuclear energy program and fabricated evidence of Iran s direct military involvement in supporting the Iraqi resistance to US occupation. Without proof they claimed Iran had supplied the weapons, which bombed the American Green Zone in Baghdad. The Israeli lobby argued that Iranian training and weapons had been instrumental in defeating the American-backed Iraqi mercenaries in the major southern city of Basra. Top Zionists in the Treasury Department have organized a worldwide economic boycott against Iran . Israel has secured the support of top Democrat and Republican Congressional leaders for a military attack on Iran . But is Iran s existence a sufficient pretext or will a catastrophic incident be necessary?

Conclusion: Provocations and Imperial Wars:

Behind every imperial war there is a Great Lie One of the most important political implications of our discussion of the US governments resort to provocations and deception to launch imperial wars is that the vast majority of the American people are opposed to overseas wars. Government lies at the service of military interventions are necessary to undermine the American publics preference for a foreign policy based on respect for self-determination of nations. The second implication however is that the peaceful sentiments of the majority can be quickly overturned by the political elite through deception and provocations amplified and dramatized through their constant repetition through the unified voice of the mass media. In other words, peaceful American citizens can be transformed into irrational chauvinist militarists through the propaganda of the deed where executive authority disguises its own acts of imperial attacks as defensive and its opponents retaliation as unprovoked aggression against a peace loving United States.

All of the executive provocations and deceptions are formulated by a Presidential elite but willingly executed by a chain of command involving anywhere from dozens to hundreds of operatives, most of whom knowingly participate in deceiving the public, but rarely ever unmask the illegal project either out of fear, loyalty or blind obedience.

The notion, put forward by upholders of the integrity of the war policy, that given such a large number of participants, someone would have leaked the deception, the systematic provocations and the manipulation of the public, has been demonstrated to be false. At the time of the provocation and the declaration of war when Congress unanimously approved Presidential Authority to use force, few if any writers or journalists have ever raised serious questions: Executives operating under the mantle of defending a peaceful country from unprovoked treacherous enemies have always secured the complicity or silence of peacetime critics who choose to bury their reservations and investigations in a time of threats to national security. Few academics, writers or journalists are willing to risk their professional standing, when all the mass media editors and owners, political leaders and their own professional cohorts froth over standing united with our President in times of unparalleled mortal threat to the nation as happened in 1941, 1950, 1964 and 2001.

With the exception of World War Two, each of the subsequent wars led to profound civilian political disillusion and even rejection of the fabrications that initially justified the war. Popular disenchantment with war led to a temporary rejection of militarism…until the next unprovoked attack and call to arms. Even in the case of the Second World War there was massive civilian outrage against a large standing army and even large-scale military demonstrations at the end of the war, demanding the GIs return to civilian life. The demobilization occurred despite Government efforts to consolidate a new empire based on occupation of countries in Europe and Asia in the wake of Germany and Japan s defeat.

The underlying structural reality, which has driven American Presidents to fabricate pretexts for wars, is informed by a military-driven conception of empire. Why did Roosevelt not answer the Japanese imperial economic challenge by increasing the US economic capacity to compete and produce more efficiently instead of supporting a provocative boycott called by the decaying European colonial powers in Asia ? Was it the case that, under capitalism, a depression-ridden, stagnant economy and idle work force could only be mobilized by the state for a military confrontation?

In the case of the US-Korean War, could not the most powerful post-World War US economy look toward exercising influence via investments with a poor, semi-agrarian, devastated, but unified, Korea, as it was able to do in Germany, Japan and elsewhere after the war?

Twenty years after spending hundreds of billions of dollars and suffering 500,000 dead and wounded to conquer Indochina, European, Asian and US capital entered Vietnam peacefully on the invitation of its government, hastening its integration into the world capitalist market via investments and trade.

It is clear that Platos not-so noble lie, as practiced by Americas Imperial Presidents, to deceive their citizens for higher purposes has led to the use of bloody and cruel means to achieve grotesque and ignoble ends.

The repetition of fabricated pretexts to engage in imperial wars is embedded in the dual structure of the US political system, a military-driven empire and a broad-based electorate. To pursue the former it is essential to deceive the latter. Deception is facilitated by the control of mass media whose war propaganda enters every home, office and classroom with the same centrally determined message. The mass media undermine what remains of alternative information flowing from primary and secondary opinion leaders in the communities and erode personal values and ethics. While military-driven empire building has resulted in the killing of millions and the displacement of tens of millions, market-driven empire building imposes its own levy in terms of massive exploitation of labor, land and livelihoods.

As has been the case in the past, when the lies of empire wear thin, public disenchantment sets in, and the repeated cries of new threats fail to mobilize opinion. As the continued loss of life and the socio-economic costs erodes the conditions of everyday life, mass media propaganda loses its effectiveness and political opportunities appear. As after WWII, Korea , Indochina and today with Iraq and Afghanistan , a window of political opportunity opens. Mass majorities demand changes in policy, perhaps in structures and certainly an end to the war. Possibilities open for public debate over the imperial system, which constantly reverts to wars and lies and provocations that justify them.


Our telegraphic survey of imperial policy-making refutes the conventional and commonplace notion that the decision making process leading up to war is open, public and carried out in accordance with the constitutional rules of a democracy. On the contrary, as is commonplace in many spheres of political, economic, social and cultural life, but especially in questions of war and peace, the key decisions are taken by a small Presidential elite behind closed doors, out of sight and without consultation and in violation of constitutional provisions. The process of provoking conflict in pursuit of military goals is never raised before the electorate. There are never investigations by independent investigatory committees.

The closed nature of the decision making process does not detract from the fact that these decisions were public in that they were taken by elected and non-elected public officials in public institutions and directly affected the public. The problem is that the public was kept in the dark about the larger imperial interests that were at stake and the deception that would induce them to blindly submit to the decisions for war. Defenders of the political system are unwilling to confront the authoritarian procedures, the elite fabrications and the unstated imperial goals. Apologists of the military-driven empire builders resort to irrational and pejorative labeling of the critics and skeptics as conspiracy theorists. For the most part, prestigious academics conform closely to the rhetoric and fabricated claims of the executors of imperial policy.

Everywhere and at all times groups, organizations and leaders meet in closed meetings, before going public. A minority of policymakers or advocates meet, debate and outline procedures and devise tactics to secure decisions at the official meeting. This common practice takes place when any vital decisions are to be taken whether it is at local school boards or in White House meetings. To label the account of small groups of public officials meeting and taking vital decisions in closed public meetings (where agendas, procedures and decisions are made prior to formal open public meetings) as conspiracy theorizing is to deny the normal way in which politics operate. In a word, the conspiracy labelers are either ignorant of the most elementary procedures of politics or they are conscious of their role in covering up the abuses of power of todays state terror merchants.

Professor Zelikow Where do we go from here?

The key figure in and around the Bush Administration who actively promoted a new Pearl Harbor and was at least in part responsible for the policy of complicity with the 9/11 terrorists was Philip Zelikow. Zelikow, a prominent Israel-Firster, is a government academic, whose expertise was in the nebulous area of catastrophic terrorism events which enabled US political leaders to concentrate executive powers and violate constitutional freedoms in pursuit of offensive imperial wars and in developing the public myth. Philip Shenons book, The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation pinpoints Zelikows strategic role in the Bush Administration in the lead up to 9/11, the period of complicit neglect, in its aftermath, the offensive global war period, and in the governments cover-up of its complicity in the terror attack.

Prior to 9/11 Zelikow provided ablueprint for the process of an executive seizing extreme power for global warfare. He outlined a sequence in which a catastrophic terrorist event could facilitate the absolute concentration of power, followed by the launching of offensive wars for Israel (as he publicly admitted). In the run-up to 9/11 and the multiple wars, he served as a member of National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rices National Security Council transition team (2000-2001), which had intimate knowledge of terrorist plans to seize US commercial flights, as Rice herself publicly admitted (conventional hijackings was her term). Zelikow was instrumental in demoting and disabling the counter-terrorism expert Richard Clark from the National Security Council, the one agency tracking the terrorist operation. Between 2001-2003, Zelikow was a member of the Presidents Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board. This was the agency, which had failed to follow-up and failed to pursue the key intelligence reports identifying terrorist plans. Zelikow, after playing a major role in undermining intelligence efforts to prevent the terrorist attack, became the principle author of the 2002 National Security Strategy of the United States, which prescribed Bushs policy of military invasion of Iraq and targeted Syria, Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas and other independent Arab and Muslim countries and political entities. Zelikows National Security Strategy paper was the most influential directive shaping the global state terrorist policies of the Bush regime. It also brought US war policies in the closest alignment with the regional military aspirations of the Israeli state since the founding of Israel . Indeed, this was why the former Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu stated at Bar Ilan University that the 9/11 attack and the US invasion of Iraq were good for Israel (see Haaretz, April 16, 2008).

Finally Zelikow, as Bushs personal appointee as the Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission, coordinated the cover-up of the Administration policy of complicity in 9/11 with the Vice Presidents office. While Zelikow is not considered an academic heavyweight, his ubiquitous role in the design, execution and cover-up of the world-shattering events surrounding 9/11 and its aftermath mark him as one of the most dangerous and destructive political influentials in the shaping and launching of Washingtons past, present and future catastrophic wars.

James Petras forthcoming book, Zionism and US Militarism, is due from Clarity Press, Atlanta , in August 2008.

Copyright © 2014 Global Research

Jay Nixon is an incompetent governor. The right answer is Justice not Cynical Forces.

Is the Governor racist ? Apparently yes. Is he cynical ? Yes, putting the black puppet, Captain Johnson at the fake position of the Leader of Police forces coupled with his status of spokeperson of the state and Ferguson forces. A parrot.

Excerpt (see below)

For a community that is 2/3 African American, there are only three black officers on the 53 person police force. According to the Missouri Attorney General annual report on policing, although blacks make up 63% of the population of Ferguson, they make up 86% of police stops. Blacks are almost two times as likely to be searched and are arrested twice as often as whites although whites are more likely to possess contraband (Kevin Zeese). 

Captain Johnson can be black. It represents the Racist board of direction at Ferguson using a black man to lie to the people over their truly nature and intentions. Calling the military federal unit at the time the second autopsy on Brown is showing the young man was shot 6 times – 3 bullets at the head is insane and ultimately provocative and contemptuous.

How many autopsies the Attorney General is going to conduct before the Officer is brought to Justice ? This third autopsy looks like a joke. Are the coroners also incompetent ? Crazy.

Until Justice is done, demonstrations will not end. Justice is not a favor, it is a Constitutional Citizen Right, Black or White and a Duty for a well governing State. By the way A curfew can be attacked in Court in regard to the respect of individual rights related to freedom of circulation and meeting in public places.


Lootings  are part of the whole showdown.

Some have said Michael brown was a theft and he had threatened a little police man who happened to be white with his 1,93 height and 135 weight. Michael Brown was apparently marching towards the little police man, who, caught by fear to be eaten by the Black ogre, found itself in a position of legitime defence in front of an unarmed teenager of 18. The wrong instructed Zimmerman’s case is back. Another case of incompentence by some grand Jury. What about Trayvon ?

If you call this a police man, being afraid of an unarmed boy, then this man was not at the right place.

I invite you to take a look at this article by Eurasia news:



By  and 

The killing of Michael Brown by a Ferguson, MO police officer, who was identified Friday as Darren Wilson, and the aftermath in which nonviolent protesters and reporters were met with a violent and militarized police force have exposed something that has been building for years. Many have written about the militarization of the police and the disproportionate impact they have on people of color, but now more Americans are seeing this reality and cannot escape it.

Capture-nO-mORE-nAMESMichael Brown is one of four unarmed black men killed in the last month by police. On July 17, Eric Garner was killed by an illegal chokehold in New York. On August 5, John Crawford was shot in a store in Beavercreek, OH. Just after Brown’s death, on August 9Ezell Ford, a young man with known mental illness, was shot in Los Angeles. These are four examples of many, according to a recent study, a black man is killed every 28 hours by police, security guards or vigilantes. The whole nation is experiencing these tragedies; reality is being forced upon us.

The public reaction to the event has been immense. On Thursday evening protests were held from coast-to-coast expressing solidarity with the people of Ferguson and grief for the death of Michael Brown and the deaths of others across the nation killed by police. There are now increasing calls for the demilitarization of the police by the Attorney General and elected officials. And, the DOJ has announced a broad review of police practices that lead to deadly force. People are taking action pressuring the DOJ to act, see: Tell The Department of Justice to end racist and militaristic policing.

This is a teachable moment and an opportunity to advance the cause of transforming the police. Hundreds of thousands of Americans watched events unfold in Ferguson. They saw the police tear gassing a community in mourning, firing at them with rubber bullets and using sound canons to disperse them. They saw military-style police chase them into neighborhoods where they continued to fire tear gas and rubber bullets. They saw reporters abused and arrested as a SWAT team took over a McDonald’s where they were reporting from and other reporters attacked with tear gas and then the police dismantling the journalist’s equipment.

These events led to news outlets reporting on the actions of the police with even greater intensity. In response to the arrest of one of their reporters, Ryan Grim wrote an official Huffington Post statement about the journalist’s arrest which made a key point: “Police militarization has been among the most consequential and unnoticed developments of our time.” The police in Ferguson did an excellent job of drawing the nation’s attention to the reality of 21st Century policing and the need to dramatically change its direction.

The rhetoric of a “war” on drugs and “war” on crime is no longer mere rhetoric.

Over the last few decades police forces in the United States, down to small town forces, have been militarized by the federal government.  Militarization has been part of the escalating clampdown on dissent; and the targets of these extreme policing practices are disproportionately communities of color.  Practices like ‘stop and frisk’ and ‘driving while black,’ as well as policies focused on Arabs and Muslims, have shown that racially-based policing is the intentional policy of police across the country.

Much of this has been growing in police departments in secret without transparency or public debate.

Would the public want a militarized police force if they had a voice in the decision? Without a democratic process, the US has essentially created a standing army that violates the fundamentals of the US Constitution. The military police force applies the law unequally, violating equal protection of the laws and undermining the justice system as police take on the role of judge and executioner.

How Did We Get Here?

Racist policing is not new. 

As Victor E. Kappeler points out, “the St. Louis police were founded to protect residents from Native Americans in that frontier city” and “in 1704, the colony of Carolina developed the nation’s first slave patrol.” These patrols developed into the first police departments.  The purpose of the first police was to control the slave population and protect the property interests of slave holders. This disastrous racial legacy continues to this day.

Ferguson is not unusual when it comes to racially unfair policing, tensions between police and the African American community has been building for years. For a community that is 2/3 African American, there are only three black officers on the 53 person police force. According to the Missouri Attorney General annual report on policing, although blacks make up 63% of the population of Ferguson, they make up 86% of police stops. Blacks are almost two times as likely to be searched and are arrested twice as often as whites although whites are more likely to possess contraband. While these are ugly statistics, the state of Missouri is even worse.The NAACP sued St. Louis for the racial disparity in its traffic stops. One resident told the Washington Post: “Everybody in this city has been a victim of DWB [driving while black].”

The militarization of police is a more recent phenomenon.  

Peter Kraska of the University of Eastern Kentucky has been writing about this since the early 1990s. He documents the rapid rise of Police Paramilitary Units (PPU’s, informally SWAT teams) which are modeled after special operations teams in the military.  PPU’s did not exist anywhere until 1971when Los Angeles under the leadership of the infamous police chief Daryl Gates, formed the first one and used it for demolishing homes with tanks equipped with battering rams.  By 2000, there were 30,000 police SWAT teams; Kraska reports that by the late 1990s, 89% of police departments in cities of over 50,000 had PPUs, almost double the mid-80s figure; and in smaller towns of between 25,000 and 50,000 by 2007, 80% had a PPU quadrupling from 20% in the mid-80s.

And Kraska reported that SWAT teams were active with 45,000 deployments in 2007 compared to 3,000 in the early 80s.  The most common use he found was for serving drug search warrants where they were used 80% of the time, but they were also increasingly used for patrolling neighborhoods. These numbers are consistent with a recent report by the ACLU.

Another important chronicler of the rise of militarism in policing is Radley Balko, author ofRise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America’s Police Forces.  He reported a “1,500% increase in the use of SW AT teams over the last two decades” and wrote in the ABA Journalin 2013that “SWAT teams violently smash into private homes more than 100 times per day.” Their use of flash-bang grenades has caused injuries to children and aseven year old was shot and killed in her sleep when a SWAT team forced entry into the wrong house. There are many examples of similar abuses.

Colin Jenkins points out in Coming Home to Roost: American Militarism, War Culture, and Police Brutality, that this was a gradual process. There was never a debate about militarizing the police but instead a series of decisions around the late 60s protest movement, the drug war and post 9/11 policing. The trend became particularly noticeable in the 1980s when the Reagan-era drug war created exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act, a Reconstruction Era law that kept the military out of domestic enforcement. This is when SWAT teams began to be used to serve drug search warrants. The post-9/11 era gave police even greater power under the Patriot Act and seemingly unlimited resources to fight terrorism. Of course militarized police have rarely been used to fight domestic terrorism because there really is not much terrorism in the US to fight.

Jenkins points out billions of dollars of military equipment have flowed to police departments across the country: “They possess everything from body armor to high-powered weaponry to tanks, armored vehicles, and even drones.” He asks why, pointing out that it is not because of safety, noting there are 50 fatalities annually out of 900,000 officers nationwide. That is 1 out of 18,000 police maliciously killed each year (the odds of being killed by lightning in your lifetime are 1 out of 3,000).  He blames the US war culture and believes police have become militaristic because they have shifted from defense to offense where they aggressively confront and repress the people, rather than protect and serve the community.

The problem may also be compounded by programs such as the Chamber of Commerce’s ‘Hiring our Heroes,’ that intentionally seek out active military and veterans to work in police departments. The DoJ has a program called ‘COPS’ that fast tracks members of the military into police work. The San Antonio Police Departments boasts that military personnel transition smoothly into police work. Perhaps it is because they are using the same equipment and techniques. This raises concerns about what effect police work in a militarized environment has on veterans who experience Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Then there is the problem of police steroid use which has psychological impact, i.e. “roid rage.”

It is important to emphasize that we got to this point without public debate.


A lot of the para-military law enforcement activities are conducted with multi-agency task forces that also lack transparency.

The police are ruling themselves, rather than being ruled by the people in any democratic way.

Another area where militarized police are used is in cracking down on political dissent. 

During the occupy encampments there was aggressive use of militarized police across the country as part of the forced closing of the encampments. Again, this occurs in part through federalization of local policing operating as part of Joint Terrorism Task Forceswith federal agencies like the FBI or Homeland Security.  It not only affected Occupy but the military was on call for both the Democratic and Republican Conventions in 2012again operating with local police under the auspices of the Joint Terrorism Task Forces as part of the military’s Northern Command.

What is needed to end militarized policing?  



Julian Assange is announcing he is going to leave the Ecuador Embassy SOON. Ah han. He needs treatment and freedom.

Gaza/Israel, the stalemate is looming. Israel needs State’s Men to lead this overmilitarised nation, enrolling teens, by force, in its paramilitary society. So far Palestinians have had to deal with the Israeli cabinet’s post-nazism fanaticized ideologues.

The lifting of Gaza Blockade is non negociable. Gazans are not beasts but Human Beings.

Israel security is not a precondition to peace but a consequence of that.

On this point read our previous posts :

Netanyahu, the Terminator angel.


Blocus of Gaza = Boycott of Israel.


America is THE major threat to international peace today. How to change the course ?

1. THE CLINTONS FACTOR. THE ECONOMY OF WAR. Cut down neo-Cons in Washington DC.

Listening French authorities and PM Cameron going to war move to arm Kurds, the first idea coming in mind is « America has reopened the can of worms in Iraq and vultures are prawling ». Second, we wonder whether this has been done with the save passage by the Iraqi president seemingly under unfluence due to his unability to fight back Isis.

Judging by the way al-Maliki was forced to resign, Iraqi president has been instructed on what to do and probably, this was a condition for the assistance of his masters coming to help – humanitarian first and, inevitably – like it has always been the case – evolving into military equipment sales.

Al-Maliki didn’t unite the nation. But this wasn’t a reason not to respect the constitution in replacing him. Under pressure, Iraqi president lacked tact. Al-Maliki could have improved his way of governing. But, for the interest of the nation, let it be.

What is the position of the Iraqi parliament over the Kurd’s demand of arms supply abroad ?

The occasion of selling arms and many dirty tools is unmissable for the Hawkish states in the planet. For France, this is a matter of economic survival. The deficit can not be reduced to fit the Eurozone standards and France is asking for clemency. Unemployment is untackled and untackable. All the indicators are red . Growth is zero.

With Russian sanctions lashing back, what are the eurozone economic outlook ? Another slowdown or a crash down ? « Eurozone didn’t grow at all in last three months » (the BBC).

The UK is apparently in better economic condition, eventhough this best comes in detrimental to the wages. Is the UK specialising into poor workers, as Germany was before adopting a minimum wage for working people to live a decent living ?

Germany economy is hurt but the nation is not going warry, just like the Pavlov dogs sniffing places to sell gears of death. Arms are like drugs : once you are in, the sellers will keep feeding you in order to create an addiction, good for the expansion of blood – on your neighborhood – and, for them, this translates into an influx of bloody money. Pirats are heartless and poor-minded. Don’t expect them to step back.

America is always at the Lead of this Game. They are first on the field as pionneers. The day after, Britain is present. Two days later, France is joining them. The trio is everywhere a war is looming. And sometimes, to push the game on more bizarre territories, the US is subsidising France in fighting terrorism in… AFRICA (Mali and Central Africa) – 10 million (dollars) have been allocated to France  by  president Obama using his constitutionnal superpowers dismaying the US Congress, cornered in a room. While president Obama is handling 10 million to the French president, Kenyan president, Kenyatta is helplessly fighting Al-Shabab and calling for an international approach. So far, only Uganda is helping. But, because Uganda is not gay-friendly, Kenya will  not be helped. London is badly influencing the process behind-the-scenes.

Interesting to see the ties between arms sellers and gays’ communities. Very interesting. Where does all this connect ? I hope not in macabre scenarios.

If you write African culture and essence consider it positively not to encourage gays practices, Number 10 will justify its arms’ selling saying « they  consider positively » the demand of Kurds for arms. Why are they sitting at the Brussels EU Foreign ministers’ meeting today ? They have already decided what they have got to do. Oligarchs are one of a kind. I’m paraphrasing Barack Obama praising the passing away of Robin Williams.

Read this excerpt (a commentary) I invited you to consider yesterday  – I will underline some key sentences :

It is positively refreshing to read such an intelligent analysis as Dr. Johnson’s of Vladimir Putin and his valiant attempts to reconstruct Russia in the face of such wrong-headed meddling by the West. All readers of this article will benefit by reading it several times.Even-handed and free of cant, the article should make thoughtful Americans (I assume there are a few) reflect on the parlous state of our own country, now being run by a gang of oligarchs (the Kochs being a prime example) who have nothing higher in mind than looting America for their own benefit and to promote their own interests. Dr. Johnson says nothing about the latest evidence of wrong-headed meddling by the U.S. in Ukraine, but it is clear that the egregious lies dominating the American and European press, and aimed at making the long-suffering Putin look bad, need vigorous correction.

The situation now is very serious. This very week, the US is running nuclear war exercises for, as far as I know, the first time since 1991. Such exercises must mean something, and one shudders to think that there are neo-Cons in Washington DC who think we could “eliminate” Russia as a world power by means of a nuclear exchange that they believe we could win.

Back in the bad Reagan days, we had nut cases who believed such things. It is infinitely depressing to see these ideas gaining new currency. It is even more depressing to know that the United States, far from being a benign hegemon, is THE major threat to international peace today. Most depressing of all is the fact that far too many Americans continue to believe in their government’s non-existent good motives.It is always so tempting to find the source of the evil outside of oneself. As for the manipulated and lied-to Ukrainians, one can only hope they will wake up before the IMF and American corporations have looted their country and destroyed any possibility of a decent life for them. 


Now we can move ahead with the Clintons Factor.


Global Research, August 13, 2014

In 1936, I declared that it was not the Covenant of the League that was at stake, but international morality…The Charter of the United Nations expresses the noblest aspirations of man: abjuration of force in the settlement of disputes between states; the assurance of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion; the safeguarding of international peace and security. Haile Selassie (1892-1975), address to the United Nations, Oct 6, 1963.

The beauty of the Glass-Steagall act, after all, was its simplicity: banks should not gamble with government insured money. Even a six-year-old can understand that… Luigi Zingales (1963- ), (A Capitalism for the People, 2014).

Today, Congress voted to update the rules that have governed financial services since the Great Depression and replace them with a system for the 21st century…This historic legislation will better enable American companies to compete in the new economy. Lawrence H. Summers (1954- ), U.S. Treasury Secretary, November 12, 1999.

“We are aware that NATO membership for a unified Germany raises complicated questions. For us, however, one thing is certain: NATO will not expand to the east.” Hans-Dietrich Genscher (1927- ), the German foreign minister, (February 10, 1990, promising Russia that NATO would not expand to Eastern Europe.)

“I think it is the beginning of a new cold war. I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely and it will affect their policies. I think it is a tragic mistake. There was no reason for this whatsoever…It shows so little understanding of Russian history and Soviet history. Of course there is going to be a bad reaction from Russia, and then [the NATO expanders] will say that we always told you that is how the Russians are — but this is just wrong.” George F. Kennan, (1904-2005), U.S. diplomat and Russia specialist, (in 1998, after the U. S. Senate voted to extend NATO to include Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic.)

An eye-popping new book has alleged that U.S. President Bill Clinton had his White House phones tapped in real time, for the benefit of the Israeli government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The book also reveals how the Israeli Prime Minister could have used taped conversations of the American president regarding Mr. Clintons 1990s sexual scandal in the White House, to exert pressure on him to release from prison a convicted Israeli spy, Jonathan Pollard, who had been arrested in 1985, for espionage against the United States. In fact, the Israeli surveillance activities in the United States may be very widespread.

I suspect that such illegal activities and the fact that an American president (and other members of the U.S. administration) could have been placed under electronic surveillance and could have been potentially blackmailed by a foreign country will not go down well with ordinary patriotic Americans, if this becomes widely known. This comes after it has been discovered that theCIA, which works closely in tandem with the Israeli Mossad, has been illegally and unconstitutionally spying on U.S. senators.

These revelations can also encourage us to cast a second look at some crucial decisions made by the Clinton administration, fifteen years ago, because the consequences of such decisions are very much with us today.

Indeed, the fuses of three major crises still smoldering were lit during the U.S. Clinton administration (1992-2000), especially during Clintons second term (1996-2000). People tend to forget such matters while they concentrate their attention solely on current events. However, it often happens that what we are witnessing in current times has been years in preparation, long after the initiators have left the political scene. What the George W. Bush administration did and what Barack Obama is doing have been a continuation of policies that the Bill Clinton administration initiated in the first place.

What are these three crises that one can trace back to innovations introduced by the Bill Clinton administration in the late 1990s?

1- First, there is the Clinton Kosovo Precedent of wars for humanitarian reasons.

The current crisis of multiple wars being waged today around the globe, in direct violation of the United Nations Charter, originates largely in that precedent initiated by Bill Clinton.

The Preamble solemnly establishes the main objective of the 1945 U.N. Charter when it says We the Peoples of the United Nations determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war… and to this end, armed force(s) shall not be used, save in the common interest…

As the current United Nations Secretary General, Mr. Ban Ki-Moon reminded the world last year, according to the U.N. Charter, agreed by all the member countries, the use of force is only legal when it is in self-defense [against an armed attack] or with a [formal] U.N. Security Council authorization.

That is what international law says.

Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, indeed, formally prohibits any war that is not to maintain or restore international peace (Article 42) or that is not undertaken in individual or collective self-defense (Article 51). There are no exceptions for preventive wars, so-called humanitarian wars or any kind of war of aggression.

However, in 1998 and in 1999, the Democratic Clinton administration decided unilaterally to join the on-going Kosovo War in Yugoslavia without an explicit mandate from the U.N. Security Council, instead relying for the first time not on legality but on an extra-judicial arbitrary argument of political legitimacy for humanitarian motives to protect human rights.

This was done without even a resolution by the U.S. Congress, and with the sole reliance on the NATO alliance as an instrument of military intervention. (In that case, it was NATO air military operations.) The Kosovo War has been described as the first war for values and has opened the Pandora Box of wars of choice, outside of the international legal framework of the United Nations Charter.

Since the Kosovo Precedent of unilateral humanitarian intervention, war of aggression has become a matter of political will rather than of strict legality, the intervening countries using different versions of their national interests. In other words, the world has gone back to before 1945, before the creation of the United Nations, when powerful countries could go to war whenever they felt that it was in their national interests to do so.

The demise of the United Nations as a legal framework against war was greatly accelerated by the Bill Clinton administrations decision to sidestep the U.N. Charter in favor of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The world is less secure now that the United Nations has been de facto sidelined in its principal mission of preventing and stopping wars.

2- Then there is the Repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act in 1999

In the 1990s, super large American banks launched a $300 million campaign of lobbying efforts to have the Roosevelt-era-Glass-Steagall act repealed. That important 1933 law had prevented American banks from gambling with government insured money by merging risky and uninsured investment banks that underwrite securities and commercial banks that take insured deposits.

However, powerful bankers, some of them having important posts within the Clinton administration, such as Robert Rubin, Treasury Secretary (1995-1999) and a previous co-chairman from 1990 to 1992 of the large investment bank Goldman Sachs, argued that things had changed and that the limitations imposed by the Glass-Steagall act on their banking activities were hindering their capabilities to innovate in the types of financial products they could create and sell to investors, not only in the U.S. but all over the world, thus preventing them from being competitive internationally.

Initially, the Clinton administration was reluctant to gut an act that had prevented the abuses and predatory banking practices that had preceded the Great Depression. However, after some tremendous pressure had been exerted on the Clinton administration, from outside and from within, President Bill Clinton finally signed the repeal of the Glass-Steagall act, on November 12, 1999, as a bill newly renamed the Gramm-Leach Bliley Act under the names of Senate Banking Committee Chair Phil Gramm (R-Texas), House Banking Committee chair James Leach (R-Iowa), and Virginia Representative Thomas Bliley (R-Virginia).

This allowed commercial banks, investment banks, securities firms, and insurance companies to consolidate, but without giving the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC), or any other financial regulatory agency for that matter, the authority to regulate large investment bank holding companies.

Largely unregulated super large banks and large insurance companies used the newly acquired liberty to engage in Ponzi finance practices, as they have often done historically and as it should have been expected.

Indeed, they proceeded with creating new financial derivative products that turned out to be very toxic and which became an important cause of the subprime financial crisis of 2007-09.

What we know, moreover, is that the 2007-2008 financial crisis has resulted in income and wealth losses of trillions of dollars by American families and of subsidies in the trillions of dollars for large banks, thus resulting in a massive wealth transfer anddamaging the U.S. economy for years to come.

3- Thirdly, there is the cancellation of the Bush I-Baker promise to Russian Prime Minister Gorbachev not to expand NATO

As the German foreign minister Genschers quote above indicates, it is widely accepted that after the Warsaw Pact, (the Eastern Europe military alliance), was dissolved in the early 1990s, and after the German reunification, it was at the very least implicitly promised that NATO would not take advantage of the situation to encircle Russia militarily by expanding in Eastern Europe. For example, it was reported that U.S. Secretary of State James Baker in the George H. Bush administration and German foreign minister Genscher, after a meeting on February 10, 1990, had agreed that there was to be no NATO expansion to the East.

Moreover, this was also the understanding of Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet president at the time, when he said that there was a promise not to expand NATO as much as a thumb’s width further to the East. In the past, Jack Matlock, the US ambassador in Moscow at the time, confirmed that Moscow was given a clear commitment to that effect. Therefore, Gorbachevs mistake may have been to have taken the western politicians word too much at its face value instead of requesting a formal agreement.

In any case, the informal agreement not to expand NATO to encompass Russias former partners in the Warsaw Pact held for a few years, that is until President Bill Clinton, on October 22, 1996, saw it to his advantage during his 1996 reelection campaign to promise to enlarge NATO to include Poland, Hungary, and Czechoslovakia.

In other words, in 1996, Clinton stopped enforcing the promise made by his predecessor. The rest is history, and NATO was from then on transformed from a defensive military alliance into an offensive military alliance under American control. It went on to include not only Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia, but also countries such as Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Latvia, and Slovenia, among others, thus pushing its military infrastructure right up to the Russian border. Recent attempts to draw Ukraine into NATO are only a continuation of an aggressive policy of expanding NATO and of isolating Russia, initiated by the Bill Clinton administration in the late 1990s.

Under the influence of American Neocons, Clinton rejected the idea of a peace dividend to be reaped after a reduction in military expenditures due to the lessening of the Soviet threat and the end of the Cold War.


The geopolitical global chaos that the world has been going through in the beginning of this 21st Century, the devastating 2008 financial crisis that imposed such heavy losses on so many people, and the threatening resurgence of the old Cold War with Russia, all have causes that can be traced back to short-sighted and disastrous decisions made by the Clinton administration in the 1990s.

The failed subsequent administrations of George W. Bush and of Barack H. Obama merely followed in the path open during the Clinton era. This is something that future historians will need to consider closely when attempting to understand the thread of events that created the apparent current chaos in many fields today.

Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay is an international economist and author, whose last two books are:

The Code for Global Ethics, Prometheus Books, 2010; and

The New American Empire, Infinity Publishing, 2003.

To read Dr. Tremblays blog, please visit:

Copyright © 2014 Global Research


For the following sections, just follow the links to make up your mind by yourself.


which foods are off Russians menu ? By CNN. 

Behind Russia, lies the last fight of Western quatuor – US/EU/NATO/Israeli Wall Street hegemony over the World. They want to maintain their lead upon the World to keep on their track. A unipolarised World is an absurdity. Russia represents the danger of the Emergency (BRICS). The western quatuor have already submitted the EU. Ukraine is already enslaved.

It goes like that, you obey the Great Western Manitou or be grilled by the press alike.


President Plevneliev for FT: Our Oligarchs Are Addicted to State Money – Money is the principal motives to doing politics not only in Bulgaria, but everywhere.

What could a gang of oligarchs understand about the international law ? Gang and Law are totally opposite. A lawful gang is an inexistent concept.


Israël s’arme pour un autre combat, avec les juges

– À Gaza, le droit est-il impuissant ? Gaza, 2 000 morts, à 83 % des civils. Peut-on espérer que soient punis un jour les crimes de guerre commis dans ce conflit interminable ?

Ukraine is also concerned with the issue of war crimes punishment on the two fronts : domestically and internationally. Images of war crimes  can jump on our throats anytime soon.

We are still waiting for the black boxes analysis of the MH17 crash conducted by UK.



BEHIND EBOLA AFRICAN poor governance and lack of public health policy and care taker RESPONSIBILITY.


Latest. GOOD NEWS – Reuters is announcing an agreement over the Russian humanitarian aid in Ukraine mediated by the Finland president, Sauli Niinisto. Read Here.

— No Russian military convoy crossed border into Ukraine, Russian Defense Ministry says, state news agency reports. CNN

Mix messages over this convoy after other strange messages concerning the announcement of a military Russian armored column squashed by Ukrainian forces inside Ukraine.

Time for INTOX. In the meantime, western press is not issuing pictures of scenes of war, allowing Kiev to buy enough time to clean some evil places. The Bible says, Truth always prevails on lies.

Kiev should be forced to open his borders and allow press and humanitarian aid in. One way or another.

DSC_0418The Russian humanitarian convoy is nearing Ukrainian and since this morning the power usurpators  – who came into power through a coup – calling themselves Kiev’s authorities are sending rotten messages, calling their people « bandits », forgetting they are the first who brought banditism in Ukraine.

The PM, who resigned and yet he is still officing – in whose name ? – didn’t stop insulting Ukrainian people, he moved to point fingers to Russian authorities he qualified authors of a « cynical  humanitarian move ».

Kiev must learn that, time for coups, harsh censorship and black out is over. So is slavery, massacres and jailing a huge amount of people for civic desobedience. This gives me the opportunity to tell a word over calling some Ukrainians « pro-separatists ». Everybody listening this is inclined to consider those people as trouble-makers or secessionists.

As long as the nation was respecting a minimum of political civilised rule, there were little problems in Ukraine. Orange Revolution was the first intrusion of the can of worms. Since then, the Nation never really recovered the route of an apease democracy – if the world still means something in our post-modern times. Charlie Chaplin said « Democraacy is strunk ».

Pro-Russians is more appropriate as Kiev neighborhood are pro-europeans and non-separatists. Probably it is too late to modify the language on this point. Pro-Russians rebel is biaised either.

President Poroshenko had the opportunity to bring peace in Ukraine, but he chose to espouse the iron course of war and show of power. Odessa massacres were the first Poroshenko’s answer to the people opposing the move towards Europe.

You are a pro-separatist when you ask for separation without any democratic revendication. You cease to be, if you feel like you are being sold as slaver to another nation or part of the World you don’t belong to ; this without being either consult for a say through democratic standards.

At the moment when those standards broke up, no obligation, no links, no ties stand anymore.

Now, the World must oblige Kiev to let a third party inside the nation : Russia is entitled to as well as the Press to let the World know what is going on inside Ukraine.

Even at the heat of Lybian crisis, Gaddafi opened the country to the press to see what was going on in the field.

This is International law, norms and standard. Israel has never respected those standards. Now it is Kiev’s turn.

Knowing that Kiev has bombed the MH17 and is covered up by the CIA/NATO/US/GB coalition ; those supplying and sponsoring Kiev ‘sregime to kill pro-Russians people, there is no reason to trust Kiev  until they open their borders and the battlefields in the Eastern Ukraine.

This Kiev’s regime is ready to let his people die,  if they don’t obey them. Laws of War and the international law must turn this Machiavelic ruling.

What is for sure, if Kiev doesn’t comply with those laws (international and wars), then any Invasion by Russia to save those territories with people in danger is welcome and will be fully supported and motivated by the Symbolic Obligation of life and lives protection.

Washington’s Ukrainian Stooges Shot Down The Malaysian Airliner.

Where are the British conclusions over the MH17 ?



Is Iraq heading towards Lybian scenario bis repetita. Arms are supplied to Kurds by France again as it was the case in Lybia.  Where are those arms going to land after Kurdistan ?

Are the allies looking for a partition of Iraq with an independant Kurdistan like Koweit was stolen to Iraq ?

What is the US plan and strategy ? The US must not allow those desordely interventions. Arms supply should come at last resort. They are useless, as long as American shelling Isis position is efficient. You can  not advocate « no boots on the ground » and allow arms in. The US helicopters are already dealing with ISIS. No needs for arms. The situation could spillover dangerously and inflame the whole region with instability. The case of Mali.

Unless this is the US strategy, President Obama and vice president Joe Biden should frame this intervention in order to avoid another mess with each european nation playing its selfishness games just as if Iraq was the New playing field for dangerous war games.

Why Al-Maliki is out remains a mystery.  Why is he abandoned by his friends including Iran ? In politics, always beware of your best friends during 30 years.

Lybia, the chief of Police has been assassinated. Read at El Watan. I guess Hillary is hearing and appreciating the consequence of a Terminator foreign policy inside Lybia at the time she was in office as Secretary of State.

In French, you will say Time is a killer. An excellent song by a french singer Véronique Sanson. When singers were not lip singing and abusing playing back. They wore clothes as a symbol of the amplitude of their voice. Today, singers are as nake as their voice is kind of evaporation. So they have to compensate. Desperately. 

Note that she is not crying like a crazy  woman. She is authentic, powerful, touching, aerial and smooth.

Jet crash in Brazil with Eduardo Campos, running for presidential election, inside. The man was an ex-ally of Dilma Rousseff, during the last presidential election and was credited of 10%, on third position. Reuters info.


Hamas should not lower their guard in face of a vicious Israel ; the nation specialised in endless duration of simulated talks with the Palestinian Authority.

Israel is not a trusthful interlocuteur. For this nation, talks is another occasion to push the wear job forward. It is either their way or the status quo.

Hamas should pay attention at that and start to think to go back on the field of war : Israel is looking for colonies named Gaza and West Bank. It was the case before, it remains the case today and will be tomorrow.

The only language Israel understands is terror or cynicism. So, if Egypt is ready to help Gaza, they must reopen the tunnels to enable Gaza to help itself and be helped by some brothers around the Word like America, the UK, France, Germany are helping Israel with arms supply.

Hamas will get nothing from Israel. Talks with Israel are the road to nowhere. A waiste of time. The same applies to Kiev.

Malcom XLesson of History : Nobody gives you freedom. You fight for it alone. In other words, You take it (Malcom X fighting racism in America) what ever the cost is. Capiche ?

Africa, South America, Asia went through this road and, in the end they won. Of course, they were casualties. But they had no choice but to stand on the way of the colonialists.

Israel remains the only colonial state in the World. Meanwhile, America, the land where black people have suffered the burden of slavery and ultra racism – still operating today – is cautioning those Israeli vampiric policies. And a black man is the president of the US. Dirty campaign money could kill the World.

Gaza and West Bank must be decolonised. Politically, it translates by territories sovereignties and total freedom of circulation, travelling, trading and bilateral or multilateral cooperation.

Israel has no choice but to sign a peace-deal and an agreement to end the blockade immediately and the occupation progressively. For the time being,  Israel must pay a tax for illegal occupation to THE Palestinian people.

This should be the starting point for any lasting truce including the security of Israel.



Thursday 14th. Militants’ Siege on Mountain in Iraq Is Over, Pentagon Says. (the NYT).

Lybian parliament is calling the international community for help to protect Civilians in danger.

Réuni à Tobrouk, dans l’est du pays, le Parlement libyen a adopté, hier, à une majorité de 111 voix sur 124 présents, une résolution appelant la communauté internationale à intervenir rapidement pour protéger les civils en Libye. C’est ce qu’indique l’AFP, citant un député, Abou Bakr Bira. Source El Watan.

What is wrong with Lybia ? Have the Mc Cain/Clinton duettists backedBenghazi boys failed to reunite the country like Al-Maliki in Iraq?

Lybia is threatened by a partition and Islamism.

« En parallèle, le pays est menacé de partition, à savoir la Cyrénaïque, la Tripolitaine et le Fezzan et la montée de l’islamisme ». (El Watan)

Blocus of Gaza = Boycott of Israel.

« A boycott of academic and trading links with the state of Israel now seems to be inevitable consequence of the atrocities carried out in Gaza ».
Israeli colonisation pursuit is a reminder of the South African Apartheid regime downed by an international boycott. As long as Israel will keep on insisting the blockade – called it an open jail – is the only way to ensure Hamas is not getting arms from outside, a pretext to maintain their grisps on the Strip, the World should respond with a Boycott.
It is inadmissible to give way to this Israeli demand.
Once again, and we are getting used of the fact, the UN is totally dismissed and overshadowed by American immoral warmongering ideology.
What has left from the UN ? The body seemingly built to prevent and heal States’ crimes in order to build a global peace. Answer: a planetarium nursery and a wall of lamentations staging at the UNSC.
The symbol of a UN is down and low : either they serve western interests and propaganda and the body is tolerated, either they engage into a global rights watch and justice and they are obliterated by the bloc of Western nations ;the same bloc at the genesis of the Global Mess the World is mired in.
With a voiceless and helpless UN Israel can bomb at his guise, in total disrespect , on one hand, and, on another hand, a ruthless bloc of heartless westerner nations, the burden is on the shoulders of the Peoples of the World to prevent the World to enter another Big Collapse phase. Call it WWIII, if you want.
Imagine a second, Putin bringing help to the people of Eastern Ukrainian threatened by starvation and Kiev’s constriction march, what would America do ? The World is in bad shape and Israel is not helping to change the pattern.
So is the Humanitarian wall of lamentations-UN transformed useless to bring about peace and resolve conflicts. The death of the UN is in line with the disappearance of the Symbolic Value.
Take this recent example : after Putin’s sanctions in response to the EU’s first and second row, some people have said : Putin’s small muscles can do no harm. Really ? How is it the EU sanctionned nations are calling to the WTO arbitrage ? First.
How is it the stocks plummeted in Germany (CNN reports) ? Second.
Even more so, some french outlets are laughing at the fact that Russians can not go without drinking some champagne and having some french products. Really ?
What about Russian caviar in France ?
They even added Frustrated Russians people deprived of « made in France » products will go after Putin with anger. Come on, for champagne ?
To push forward such food argument reminds us over Maslow’s pyramid of needs. Are we really speaking the same language meaning, sharing the same values anymore ? This is the place for Symbolism.
To the rich people of the World, would you consider yourself mean if you don’t get your french champagne ?
If your answer is Yes, then go Hell ! You are not a true rich but a new rich. There is a great difference. The Symbolic precisely.
I will leave it here as we can talk a lot about that interesting topic to look around and inform the morphing of our post-modern times.
Global Research, August 07, 2014

1. Binyamin Netanyahu claims to speak for the majority of world Jewry although, in fact, he represents only a minority of Jewish Israelis and Americans those who support his right-wing, Likud Party. To many others, particularly in Europe, he is considered a US-financed, Zionist rabble-rouser with an extremist political agenda that rejects any Palestinian state and requires the transfer of all indigenous Arabs out of former Palestine.

2. Israeli policies such as the illegal settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem (to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state); the 8 year blockade of essential supplies into Gaza; the mis-labelling of exported fruit and vegetables to Europe and the horrific killing of hundreds of defenceless women and children in Gaza all have the effect of exacerbating antisemitism around the world. The agenda of the Israeli government against the indigenous Arab population being the primary driver of anti-Jewish feeling both in Europe and globally.

3. Netanyahu is well aware of this link and the detrimental effect of his policies on the security of Jewish communities worldwide, and on public opinion, but he also knows that the greater the increase in antisemitism the more French, British and other Jewish nationals will be forced to sell their homes and reluctantly leave the countries of their birth to seek sanctuary in Israel. This is a key principle of the Netanyahu government agenda that all American, European and diaspora Jews should be ‘persuaded’ to emigrate to the Israeli state together with their assets.

4. However, this agenda is also partly supported by millions of evangelist, Christian Zionists in America, who believe in the literal word of the bible and whose goal is for all 14 million Jews in the world to be relocated to the Israeli state where they can be baptised and converted, en masse, into the Christian church! The Israeli government ministers smile knowingly behind their hands as they accept this support without which their economy would collapse.

5. The Israel lobby in America comprises over a dozen organisations including AIPAC, the primary Zionist political pressure group with links into the White House that heavily influences US foreign policy around the world.

However, for many integrated European Jewish communities, Mr Netanyahus alleged war crimes in Gaza plus his violent, expansionist agenda with its consequent rise in antisemitism, are very bad news indeed.

The head of UNICEF said yesterday, that 392 children had been killed in the conflict between Israel and Hamas, and that about 370,000 children had been traumatised.

A boycott of academic and trading links with the state of Israel now seems to be inevitable consequence of the atrocities carried out in Gaza.

Source. Copyright © 2014 Global Research

 Highlights of the day – Our post-modern times

>>> Anti-Israel tweets cost professor new job at University of Illinois, rep says(CNN). Support the professor. Call the vice-president Joe Biden and the College.

>>> A 72 hours truce between the Hamas and Israel is holding, since yesterday 10 pm (London time).

>>> Erdogan has won Presidential elections over the promise for a New Turkey. Out of Kemalism ?

>>> CNN is reporting « Iraqi President Fuad Masum appoints Haider al-Abadi as Iraq’s new PM, in an event shown live on state television. The timing of this replacement is flawed. Al Maliki’s head has been marked « Wanted » by the West. He is facing the hard Saddam Hussein’s line. First, you are used as a friend and if you failed to obey, you are no longer. Al Maliki wasn’t a man of consensus. But, he is not responsible for the ISIS fabrication and its subsequent terror. 

American agenda is ajustable to its interests. First, the US was friend of the sunnite (Saddam) then they changed with Al-Maliki (chiite) and now it is the Kurdish time. Take care, this tactics of dividing to reign blew up Africa. Recovery was and still is an endless road to National Unity. 

>>> Uganda is caught with gay pride fever. Those are stupid africans. Good at nothing except running after anal sex and immigration. I don’t know  which I prefer : Boko Haram’s boys or peados. The first ones have some balls and the second just an ass. Africa is facing some big challenges and what some Uganda’s lost men have found urgent to do is entering a parody of homosexuality adoration. 

Who is going to tell them that this is a luxurous stand for western dispassionated and delusioned  people under intensive drugs consumption or slaves of money, not to talk about the western consumerist societies and their pervasive/perverse aspects badly hurting the overexposed ?

>>> Here  is an anthem for the Uganda’s pride gay community : Touch my body. Big Monkeys. This is what happens inside a society ruled by corrupt institutions, the kind of that Ugandan Constitutionnal Council ruling under Westerner obedience to contradict the President, Museveni, and the Parliament. Death penalty was strong but this legalisation is laughable and contradicts the essence of African culture, nature, soul, spirit and identity, considered positively.

At the time South African adopted this same rule of gay legalisation, corruption sat in the ANC for long.





Take a look at this NYT issue.

How Hamas Beat Israel in Gaza


The militant group had clear goals and achieved them. Meanwhile, Israel’s deterrence has been damaged.


President Obama’s Africa Push

A landmark summit meeting was a splashy event that advertised the continent’s economic potential. But major follow-through is necessary to achieve results.