Let the Truth Be Known: George H.W. Bush

Not Just an Initiation this time poppy 322 George W Bush

THE MAN WHO WASN’T THERE `GEORGE BUSH; C.I.A. OPERATIVE

Declassified in Part – Sanitized Copy
Approved for Release 2012/10/23: CIA-RDP99-01448R000401580068-7

THE MAN WHO WASN’T THERE `GEORGE BUSH; C.I.A. OPERATIVE
JOSEPH MCBRIDE

(click to enlarge)

George Bush CIA Operative

Source: https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/document/cia-rdp99-01448r000401580068-7

The Evil Has Died

By eric  December 1, 2018

A bit of good news: George H.W. Bush is dead, finally. At least he’ll do no more harm. But the harm he did do was enough.

Like the Nazis his father did good business with, Bush wanted a New World Order – and spoke of it lovingly and often. And now it’s upon us, in no small measure because of his machinations and those of his frog-torturing, mass-murdering, war criminal son – who was elevated to the position from which he was able to commit mass murder solely on the juice provided by his connected father.

The entire Bush family is a crime syndicate that puts the Corleones to shame (with George W. Bush playing the role of Fredo).

Bush Sr. – who wasn’t in Dallas on November 22, 1963 and not a CIA officer at the time – was later proved to be both of those things. His leprous fingerprints are all over the termination of the last American president who wasn’t a wholly owned subsidiary of the military industrial complex.

The Bush family was also good friends with another family. The Hinckley family. And then a curious thing happened on March 30, 1981.

Read More: https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2018/12/01/the-evil-has-died/

The Ignored Legacy of George H.W. Bush: War Crimes, Racism, and Obstruction of Justice

…He ran a racist election campaign. The name of Willie Horton should forever be associated with Bush’s 1988 presidential bid. Horton, who was serving a life sentence for murder in Massachusetts — where Bush’s Democratic opponent, Michael Dukakis, was governor —  had fled a weekend furlough program and raped a Maryland woman. A notorious television ad called “Weekend Passes,” released by a political action committee with ties to the Bush campaign, made clear to viewers that Horton was black and his victim was white.

As Bush campaign director Lee Atwater bragged, “By the time we’re finished, they’re going to wonder whether Willie Horton is Dukakis’s running mate.” Bush himself was quick to dismiss accusations of racism as “absolutely ridiculous,” yet it was clear at the time — even to right-wing Republican operatives such as Roger Stone, now a close ally of Trump — that the ad had crossed a line. “You and George Bush will wear that to your grave,” Stone complained to Atwater. “It’s a racist ad. … You’re going to regret it.”

Stone was right about Atwater, who on his deathbed apologized for using Horton against Dukakis. But Bush never did.

He made a dishonest case for war. Thirteen years before George W. Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction to justify his invasion and occupation of Iraq, his father made his own set of false claims to justify the aerial bombardment of that same country. The first Gulf War, as an investigation by journalist Joshua Holland concluded, “was sold on a mountain of war propaganda.”

For a start, Bush told the American public that Iraq had invaded Kuwait “without provocation or warning.” What he omitted to mention was that the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie, had given an effective green light to Saddam Hussein, telling him in July 1990, a week before his invasion, “[W]e have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait.”

Then there is the fabrication of intelligence. Bush deployed U.S. troops to the Gulf in August 1990 and claimed that he was doing so in order “to assist the Saudi Arabian Government in the defense of its homeland.” As Scott Peterson wrote in the Christian Science Monitor in 2002, “Citing top-secret satellite images, Pentagon officials estimated … that up to 250,000 Iraqi troops and 1,500 tanks stood on the border, threatening the key U.S. oil supplier.”

Yet when reporter Jean Heller of the St. Petersburg Times acquired her own commercial satellite images of the Saudi border, she found no signs of Iraqi forces; only an empty desert. “It was a pretty serious fib,” Heller told Peterson, adding: “That [Iraqi buildup] was the whole justification for Bush sending troops in there, and it just didn’t exist.”

He committed war crimes. Under Bush Sr., the U.S. dropped a whopping 88,500 tons of bombs on Iraq and Iraqi-occupied Kuwait, many of which resulted in horrific civilian casualties. In February 1991, for example, a U.S. airstrike on an air-raid shelter in the Amiriyah neighborhood of Baghdad killed at least 408 Iraqi civilians. According to Human Rights Watch, the Pentagon knew the Amiriyah facility had been used as a civil defense shelter during the Iran-Iraq war and yet had attacked without warning. It was, concluded HRW, “a serious violation of the laws of war.”

U.S. bombs also destroyed essential Iraqi civilian infrastructure — from electricity-generating and water-treatment facilities to food-processing plants and flour mills. This was no accident. As Barton Gellman of the Washington Post reported in June 1991: “Some targets, especially late in the war, were bombed primarily to create postwar leverage over Iraq, not to influence the course of the conflict itself. Planners now say their intent was to destroy or damage valuable facilities that Baghdad could not repair without foreign assistance. … Because of these goals, damage to civilian structures and interests, invariably described by briefers during the war as ‘collateral’ and unintended, was sometimes neither.”

Got that? The Bush administration deliberately targeted civilian infrastructure for “leverage” over Saddam Hussein. How is this not terrorism? As a Harvard public health team concluded in June 1991, less than four months after the end of the war, the destruction of Iraqi infrastructure had resulted in acute malnutrition and “epidemic” levels of cholera and typhoid.

By January 1992, Beth Osborne Daponte, a demographer with the U.S. Census Bureau, was estimating that Bush’s Gulf War had caused the deaths of 158,000 Iraqis, including 13,000 immediate civilian deaths and 70,000 deaths from the damage done to electricity and sewage treatment plants. Daponte’s numbers contradicted the Bush administration’s, and she was threatened by her superiors with dismissal for releasing “false information.” (Sound familiar?)

He refused to cooperate with a special counsel. The Iran-Contra affair, in which the United States traded missiles for Americans hostages in Iran, and used the proceeds of those arms sales to fund Contra rebels in Nicaragua, did much to undermine the presidency of Ronald Reagan. Yet his vice president’s involvement in that controversial affair has garnered far less attention. “The criminal investigation of Bush was regrettably incomplete,” wrote Special Counsel Lawrence Walsh, a former deputy attorney general in the Eisenhower administration, in his final report on the Iran-Contra affair in August 1993.

Why? Because Bush, who was “fully aware of the Iran arms sale,” according to the special counsel, failed to hand over a diary “containing contemporaneous notes relevant to Iran/contra” and refused to be interviewed in the later stages of the investigation. In the final days of his presidency, Bush even issued pardons to six defendants in the Iran-Contra affair, including former Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger — on the eve of Weinberger’s trial for perjury and obstruction of justice. “The Weinberger pardon,” Walsh pointedly noted, “marked the first time a president ever pardoned someone in whose trial he might have been called as a witness, because the president was knowledgeable of factual events underlying the case.” An angry Walsh accused Bush of “misconduct” and helping to complete “the Iran-contra cover-up.”

Read More: https://theintercept.com/2018/12/01/the-ignored-legacy-of-george-h-w-bush-war-crimes-racism-and-obstruction-of-justice/

Global-Industrial Deep State and the American Police State

Employment Under the New World Order

A New World Order: Brought to You by the Global-Industrial Deep State

John W. Whitehead
July 09, 2018

“There are no nations. There are no peoples … There is only IBM and ITT and AT&T, and DuPont, Dow, Union Carbide and Exxon. Those are the nations of the world today. The world is a college of corporations, inexorably determined by the immutable by-laws of business.”—Network (1976)

There are those who will tell you that any mention of a New World Order government—a power elite conspiring to rule the world—is the stuff of conspiracy theories.

I am not one of those skeptics.

What’s more, I wholeheartedly believe that one should always mistrust those in power, take alarm at the first encroachment on one’s liberties, and establish powerful constitutional checks against government mischief and abuse.

I can also attest to the fact that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I have studied enough of this country’s history—and world history—to know that governments (the U.S. government being no exception) are at times indistinguishable from the evil they claim to be fighting, whether that evil takes the form of terrorism, torture, drug traffickingsex trafficking, murder, violence, theft, pornography, scientific experimentations or some other diabolical means of inflicting pain, suffering and servitude on humanity.

And I have lived long enough to see many so-called conspiracy theories turn into cold, hard fact.

Remember, people used to scoff at the notion of a Deep State (a.k.a. Shadow Government), doubt that fascism could ever take hold in America, and sneer at any suggestion that the United States was starting to resemble Nazi Germany in the years leading up to Hitler’s rise to power.

We’re beginning to know better, aren’t we?

The Deep State (“a national-security apparatus that holds sway even over the elected leaders notionally in charge of it”) is real.

We are already experiencing fascism, American-style.

Not with jackboots and salutes, as Robert Kagan of the Brookings Institution notes, “but with a television huckster, a phony billionaire, a textbook egomaniac ‘tapping into’ popular resentments and insecurities, and with an entire national political party — out of ambition or blind party loyalty, or simply out of fear — falling into line behind him.”

And the United States is increasingly following in Nazi Germany’s footsteps, at least in the years leading up to Hitler’s rise to power.

Given all that we know about the U.S. government—that it treats its citizens like faceless statistics and economic units to be bought, sold, bartered, traded, and tracked; that it repeatedly lies, cheats, steals, spies, kills, maims, enslaves, breaks the laws, overreaches its authority, and abuses its power at almost every turn; and that it wages wars for profit, jails its own people for profit, and has no qualms about spreading its reign of terror abroad—it is not a stretch to suggest that the government has been overtaken by global industrialists, a new world order, that do not have our best interests at heart.

Indeed, to anyone who’s been paying attention to the goings-on in the world, it is increasingly obvious that we’re already under a new world order, and it is being brought to you by the Global-Industrial Deep State, a powerful cabal made up of international government agencies and corporations.

It is as yet unclear whether the American Police State answers to the Global-Industrial Deep State, or whether the Global-Industrial Deep State merely empowers the American Police State. However, there is no denying the extent to which they are intricately and symbiotically enmeshed and interlocked.

This marriage of governmental and corporate interests is the very definition of fascism.

Read More: https://rutherford.org/

Who Deserves to Have an Identity? Who Deserves to Have a Country?

It's Not Okay to Be White

Europe’s “refugee” crisis and the Kalergi plan for white genocide

 by   

In a recent op/ed titled “Can Europe Survive This Invasion?,” Patrick Buchanan writes:

With birth rates in this smallest and least populated of continents below replacement levels for decades, Europe is aging, shrinking and dying, as it is being invaded and altered forever. […]

Unlike America, Europe has never known mass immigration. And those pouring into Europe are Arab, African and Muslim, not European Christians or Jews. They come from other civilizations and cultures. And they are not all assimilating but rather creating enclaves in Europe that replicate the lands whence they came. […]

The threats raised by the mass migration into Europe rise to the level of the existential.

Can a civilization survive the replacement of the people who created it by people of other races, religions, and civilizations?

Ask the Native Americans.

Will Europe remain Europe if she is repopulated by Arabs, Muslims, Asians and Africans? What will hold Europe together? Free trade?

The current invasion of Europe by “refugees” from the Middle East, North Africa, and Asia is engineered and enabled by politicians (with the exception of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban), without the support of Europe’s peoples. That raises the obvious question: Why are European politicians promoting what Buchanan, Orban and any person (whose mind hasn’t been turned into mush by PC propaganda) so clearly see — the systematic destruction, via demographics, of European civilization and its people?

One explanation reaches back to the 1920s, to a plan drafted by a bi-racial Austrian-Japanese named Richard Nikolaus Eijiro, Count of Coudenhove-Kalergi (1894-1972), whose parents were the Austro-Hugarian diplomat Heinrich von Coudenhove-Kalergi and Mitsuko Aoyama, the daughter of a Tokyo oil merchant, antiques-dealer, and landowner.

Richard Nikolaus, more commonly known as Coudenhove-Kalergi, was a Free Mason and an advocate of racial mixing. He is regarded as a father of the European Union, being the founder and president for 49 years until his death of the first movement for a united Europe, the Paneuropean Union.

In his 1925 book Praktischer Idealismus (Practical Idealism), Coudenhove-Kalergi wrote that “The man of the future will be of mixed race. Today’s races and classes will gradually disappear owing to the vanishing of space, time, and prejudice.”

Though not himself a Jew according to Wikipedia, Kalergi extolled a kind of Jewish supremacism, characterizing Jews as “a spiritual nobility of Europe” — “a new race of nobility by the Grace of Spirit” formed just “when Europe’s feudal aristocracy became dilapidated,” in the crucible of antisemitism wherein “Instead of destroying European Jewry, Europe, against its own will, refined and educated this people into a future leader-nation through this artificial selection process.”

As Europe finds itself overwhelmed by the incoming hordes of “refugees” and “migrants,” some have turned to what is called the Kalergi Plan to explain why Europe’s political elites encourage and welcome the invasion.

Below is an edited translation of an Italian-language article from the blog Identità.com, which is being reblogged and cited by various websites. The article, by Riccardo Percivaldi, is titled “The Kalergi Plan: the genocide of the European peoples“. I’m presenting this on FOTM without commentary, in the interest of information and to provoke discussion.

~Eowyn

Richard N. Coudenhove-KalergiThe Kalergi Plan: the genocide of the European peoples

By Riccardo Percivaldi • Identità.com • Dec. 11, 2012 

Mass immigration is a phenomenon whose causes are still cleverly hidden by the system and which is falsely represented as inevitable by the multicultural propaganda. With this article we intend to demonstrate once and for all that mass immigration is not a spontaneous phenomenon. What appears to you as inevitable is actually the fruition of a decades-long plan to destroy completely the face of the Old Continent.

PAN EUROPA

Few people know that one of the main architects of European integration was also the one with a plan for the genocide of European peoples. He is a dark character whose existence is not known by the masses but whom the powerful consider as the founding father of the European Union. His name is Richard Coudenhove Kalergi. While he was alive, he moved behind the scenes, away from the spotlight, and managed to attract the most important heads of state in Europe, who became his supporters and promoters of European unification. In 1922, he founded the Pan Europa movement in Vienna. Its goal is to bring about a New World Order based on a federation of nations led by the United States. The unification of Europe would be the first step towards a single world government.

With the rise of fascism in Europe, the plan suffered a setback, resulting in the dissolution of the Pan-European union is forced to dissolve. After the Second World War, Kalergi redoubled his efforts and, aided by the support of Winston Churchill, the Masonic B’nai B’rith lodge, and major newspapers such as the New York Times, Kalergi succeeded in pushing his plan to the US government.

THE KALERGI PLAN

In his book Praktischer Idealismus (Practical Idealism), Kalergi declared that the people of the future “United States of Europe” will not be the original peoples of the Old Continent, but a kind of bestial subhumans made ​​by miscegenation. Kalergi stated in no uncertain terms that you must cross the peoples of Europe with Asian races and color, to create a multiethnic flock without quality and easily controllable by the ruling.

“The man of the future will be of mixed blood. The future Eurasian-Negroid race, very similar to the ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples, with a variety of personalities.”

Austrian writer Gerd Honsik describes the essence of the Kalergi plan:

Kalergi proclaims the abolition of the right of self-determination and, subsequently, the elimination of nations by means of ethnic separatist movements or mass allogeneic (genetically dissimilar) immigration. In order for Europe to be mastered by the elite, homogeneous peoples are transformed into a mixed race of whites, blacks and Asians. Kalergi characterized these mestizos as cruel and unfaithful, and maintained that the elite must deliberately create the mestizos to achieve their own superiority.

The elite will first eliminate democracy — the rule of the people. Next, the elite will eliminate the people via miscegenation, thereby replacing the white race with an easily controllable mestizo race. By abolishing the principle of equality of all before the law, avoiding and punishing any criticism of minorities, and protecting the minorities with special laws, the masses are suppressed.

In his time, politicians hearkened to Kalergi — banks and the press were based on his ideas, while U.S. intelligence financed his projects. Europe’s political leaders know that Kalergi was the author of the European Union. Though unknown to the public and untaught in schools, Kalergi is the father of Maastricht and multiculturalism, which indoctrinate Europeans to tolerate and accept subhuman migrants.

Although no school book talks of Kalergi, his ideas were the guiding principles of today’s European Union. His belief that the peoples of Europe should be mixed with blacks and Asians to destroy European identity and create a single mestizo race, is the basis of our present policy of protecting and integrating minorities. Disguised as humanitarianism, this policy is aimed at the greatest genocide [of whites] in history.

Europe’s Coudenhove-Kalergi prize was created in his honor. Every two years, Europeans who excelled in pursuing Kalergi’s criminal plan are awarded the prize, among whom are the likes of [German Chancellor] Angela Merkel and Herman Van Rompuy [former Prime Minister of Belgium and the first President of the European Council].

[White] genocide is also the basis of the UN’s welcoming policy toward millions of immigrants to compensate for Europe’s low birth rate. According to a UN report released in January 2000, entitled “Replacement Migration: a solution to declining and aging populations,” Europe would need 159 million immigrants by the year 2025. One wonders how it was possible to make such an accurate estimate if immigration was not a well-rehearsed plan. Certainly, Europe’s low birth rate can easily be reversed with appropriate measures to support families. It is equally clear that the genetic heritage of Europe cannot be protected by introducing nonEuropean migrants. On the contrary, mass immigration will only accelerate the disappearance of Europeans. The sole purpose of mass immigration, therefore, is to completely denature a people, turning them into a collection of individuals without any ethnic, historical and cultural cohesion. In short, the Kalergi Plan has been and still is the foundation of the official mass immigration policies of European governments, at the cost of the genocide of the peoples of Europe.

As G. Brock Chisholm, former director of the World Health Organization (WHO) and a good disciple of Kalergi, said [in 1955]:

“In all places, people must practice the limitation of births and racially mixed marriages so as to create a single race in a new world dependent on a central authority.”

CONCLUSION

If we look around Europe, we can see that the Kalergi Plan seems to be fully realized. We are facing a “terzomondializzazione” or Third Worldization of Europe — a “New Civilization” supported by multicultural missionaries, formed from forced mass immigration of hordes of Africans and Asians. Each year, miscegenation and mixed marriages produce thousands of new individuals of mixed race — the “sons of Kalergi”. Under the media’s dual pressure of misinformation and the propaganda of humanitarianism, Europeans are taught to deny their origins, to deny their ethnic identity.

Advocates of Globalization strive to convince us to give up our identity as a progressive and humanitarian act and to think that holding onto our ethnic and cultural identity is “racism” because they want to make us all into blind consumers. In these times, it is more necessary than ever that we expose the lies of the system so as to rekindle the spirit of rebellion in Europe. Integration is tantamount to genocide. We have no choice but to rebel for the alternative is ethnic suicide.

See also:

 

Read More: https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2015/11/12/europes-refugee-crisis-and-the-kalergi-plan-for-white-genocide/

Total Control: UN-elected One-World Government: UN Agenda 2030

UN Agenda 2030

The United Nations 2030 Agenda decoded: It’s a blueprint for the global enslavement of humanity under the boot of corporate masters

(NaturalNews) This week, Michael Snyder published an important article entitled The 2030 Agenda: This Month The UN Launches A Blueprint For A New World Order With The Help Of The Pope.

That article references this UN “2030 Agenda” document that pushes a blueprint for so-called “sustainable development” around the world.

This document describes nothing less than a global government takeover of every nation across the planet. The “goals” of this document are nothing more than code words for a corporate-government fascist agenda that will imprison humanity in a devastating cycle of poverty while enriching the world’s most powerful globalist corporations like Monsanto and DuPont.

In the interests of helping wake up humanity, I’ve decided to translate the 17 points of this 2030 agenda so that readers everywhere can understand what this document is really calling for. To perform this translation, you have to understand how globalists disguise their monopolistic agendas in “feel good” language.

Here’s the point-by-point translation. Notice carefully that nowhere does this document state that “achieving human freedom” is one of its goals. Nor does it explain HOW these goals are to be achieved. As you’ll see here, every single point in this UN agenda is to be achieved through centralized government control and totalitarian mandates that resemble communism.

More: https://www.naturalnews.com/051058_2030_Agenda_United_Nations_global_enslavement.html

Flashback 1988: “Get Ready For A World Currency by 2018″ – The Economist Magazine!

The Rise of the Phoenix world currency from the ashes of national fiat currencies ie. destruction of fiat currencies via hyperinflation. “Phoenix” is of course an occult metaphor. Out of the destruction, the ashes of the old world order, the Luciferian New World Order will rise like a Phoenix!

Economist Magazine 1988 cover - One World Currency

Title of article: Get Ready for the Phoenix
Source: Economist; 01/9/88, Vol. 306, pp 9-10
THIRTY years from now, Americans, Japanese, Europeans, and people in many other rich countries, and some relatively poor ones will probably be paying for their shopping with the same currency. Prices will be quoted not in dollars, yen or D-marks but in, let’s say, the phoenix. The phoenix will be favoured by companies and shoppers because it will be more convenient than today’s national currencies, which by then will seem a quaint cause of much disruption to economic life in the last twentieth century.

At the beginning of 1988 this appears an outlandish prediction. Proposals for eventual monetary union proliferated five and ten years ago, but they hardly envisaged the setbacks of 1987. The governments of the big economies tried to move an inch or two towards a more managed system of exchange rates – a logical preliminary, it might seem, to radical monetary reform. For lack of co-operation in their underlying economic policies they bungled it horribly, and provoked the rise in interest rates that brought on the stock market crash of October. These events have chastened exchange-rate reformers. The market crash taught them that the pretence of policy co-operation can be worse than nothing, and that until real co-operation is feasible (i.e., until governments surrender some economic sovereignty) further attempts to peg currencies will flounder.

The new world economy
The biggest change in the world economy since the early 1970’s is that flows of money have replaced trade in goods as the force that drives exchange rates. as a result of the relentless integration of the world’s financial markets, differences in national economic policies can disturb interest rates (or expectations of future interest rates) only slightly, yet still call forth huge transfers of financial assets from one country to another. These transfers swamp the flow of trade revenues in their effect on the demand and supply for different currencies, and hence in their effect on exchange rates. As telecommunications technology continues to advance, these transactions will be cheaper and faster still. With unco-ordinated economic policies, currencies can get only more volatile.
….
In all these ways national economic boundaries are slowly dissolving. As the trend continues, the appeal of a currency union across at least the main industrial countries will seem irresistible to everybody except foreign-exchange traders and governments. In the phoenix zone, economic adjustment to shifts in relative prices would happen smoothly and automatically, rather as it does today between different regions within large economies (a brief on pages 74-75 explains how.) The absence of all currency risk would spur trade, investment and employment.

The phoenix zone would impose tight constraints on national governments. There would be no such thing, for instance, as a national monetary policy. The world phoenix supply would be fixed by a new central bank, descended perhaps from the IMF. The world inflation rate – and hence, within narrow margins, each national inflation rate- would be in its charge. Each country could use taxes and public spending to offset temporary falls in demand, but it would have to borrow rather than print money to finance its budget deficit. With no recourse to the inflation tax, governments and their creditors would be forced to judge their borrowing and lending plans more carefully than they do today. This means a big loss of economic sovereignty, but the trends that make the phoenix so appealing are taking that sovereignty away in any case. Even in a world of more-or-less floating exchange rates, individual governments have seen their policy independence checked by an unfriendly outside world.

As the next century approaches, the natural forces that are pushing the world towards economic integration will offer governments a broad choice. They can go with the flow, or they can build barricades. Preparing the way for the phoenix will mean fewer pretended agreements on policy and more real ones. It will mean allowing and then actively promoting the private-sector use of an international money alongside existing national monies. That would let people vote with their wallets for the eventual move to full currency union. The phoenix would probably start as a cocktail of national currencies, just as the Special Drawing Right is today. In time, though, its value against national currencies would cease to matter, because people would choose it for its convenience and the stability of its purchasing power.
…..
The alternative – to preserve policymaking autonomy- would involve a new proliferation of truly draconian controls on trade and capital flows. This course offers governments a splendid time. They could manage exchange-rate movements, deploy monetary and fiscal policy without inhibition, and tackle the resulting bursts of inflation with prices and incomes polices. It is a growth-crippling prospect. Pencil in the phoenix for around 2018, and welcome it when it comes.

A Failing Empire: Russia and China’s Military Strategy to Contain the US

Fragmented States of America

Looking at the global political landscape over the last month, two trends are becoming more apparent. The infamous military and economic power at America’s disposal is declining, whereas in the multipolar field, an acceleration has occurred in the creation of a series of infrastructures, mechanisms and procedures to contain and limit the negative effects of America’s declining unipolar moment. This series of three articles will focus firstly on the military aspect of these ongoing changes, then the economics at play, and finally, how and why smaller countries are transitioning from the unipolar camp to the multipolar field.

One of the most tangible consequences of the decline of US military power can be observed in the Syrian conflict. Over the past few weeks, the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) and its allies have completed the historic and strategic liberation of Deir ez-Zor, a city besieged for more than five years by Islamists belonging to Al Qaeda and Daesh. The focus has now shifted to the oilfields south of the liberated city, with a frantic rush by both the US-supported Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and the SAA to free territories still held by Daesh. The final goal is to claim Syria’s resources and strengthen a weak US position (the US is not even part of the Astana peace talks) in future negotiations concerning the country’s future. To understand how much the US dream of partitioning Syria is failing, one only need note repeated US failures as seen in the liberation of Aleppo and then Deir Ez-Zor, and now the crossing of the Euphrates river. In spite of American intimidation, threats, and sometimes even direct aggression, the Syrian army continued to work against Daesh in the province of Deir Ez-Zor, advancing on oil rich sites. Thanks to the protection given by the Russian Federation Air Force during the conflict, Damascus has obtained a protective umbrella necessary to withstand attempts by the US of balkanize the country.

Further confirmation of Washington’s failed strategy to divide the country a la Yugoslavia appears evident from the strategic realignment of the most loyal allies of Washington in the region and beyond. In the course of the last few weeks, several meetings have taken place in Astana and Moscow between the likes of Putin and Lavrov with their TurkishSaudi, and Israeli counterparts. These meetings outlined the guidelines for Syria’s future thanks to Moscow’s red lines, especially regarding Israel’s desire to pursue regime change in Syria and an aggressive attitude towards Iran. Even the most loyal allies of the United States are beginning to plan a future in Syria with Assad as president. US allies have started showing a pragmatic shift towards a reconciliation with the factions that are clearly winning the war and are going to call the shots in the future. The long-held dreams and desires of sheikhs (Saudi-Qatar) and sultans (Erdogan) to reshape Syria and the Middle East in their image are over, and they know it. Washington’s allies have been let down, with the US incapable of keeping its promises of fulfilling a regime change in Damascus. The consequences for the US have just begun. Without a military posture capable of bending adversaries and friends to her will, the US will have to start dealing with a new reality that involves compromise and negotiation, something the US is not accustomed to.

An example of what can happen if Washington decides to go against a former friend can be seen with the Gulf Crisis involving Qatar. Since the beginning of the aggression against Syria, the small emirate has been at the center of plots and schemes aimed at arming and financing jihadists in the Middle East and Syria. Five years later, after billions of dollars spent and nothing to hold onto in Syria, the Gulf Cooperation Council, as expected, has plunged into a fratricidal struggle between Qatar and other countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE and Egypt. The latter accuse Doha of funding terrorism, an undeniable truth. But they omit to acknowledge their own ties to the jihadists (Egypt in this framework is excluded, fighting continually with terrorists inspired by the Muslim Brotherhood in the Sinai), showing a hypocrisy that only the mainstream media can rival.

The consequences of Riyad’s actions against Doha, backed up by a large part of the American establishment, seems, almost six months later, to have finally pushed Qatar and Iran together, reopening diplomatic ties…..

Read More: www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/09/25/failing-empire-russia-and-chinas-military-strategy-contain-us.html

Daniel Spaulding on North Korea, Antifa and the Alt Right

Daniel Spaulding returns to Our Interesting Times to discuss the latest war scare regarding North Korea and its alleged nuclear weapons program. We talk how the Korean peninsula was set up by the New World Order to be one of several perennial “hot spots” to legitimize “collective security” and promote the Anglo-American Cold War agenda. Later we discuss some domestic issues including latest assault on Southern culture, the Charlottesville disturbance and the various oligarch financed riots. Daniel earned a BA in English literature from Bridgewater State University. He currently works and lives in Seoul, South Korea, where he began contributing to several online projects, including The Soul of the East and Alternative Right. His writings focus on foreign policy, politics, philosophy, and Eastern and Western culture.

COMMON SENSE – 2017 (PART TWO) – The Burning Platform

“Until an independence is declared the continent will feel itself like a man who continues putting off some unpleasant business from day to day, yet knows it must be done, hates to set about it, wishes it over, and is continually haunted with the thoughts of its necessity.” – Thomas Paine, Common Sense

Declaration of independence Deplorables?
Were the founding fathers deplorable to the establishment?
COMMON SENSE – 2017 (PART TWO) – The Burning Platform

In Part One of this article I explored Thomas Paine’s critical role in the creation of our nation. His Common Sense pamphlets inspired the common people to uncommon acts of courage and heroic feats of valor; leading to the great experiment we call the United States of America. Paine, Franklin and the other Founding Fathers produced a republic, if we could keep it.

John Adams championed the new Constitution precisely because it would not create a democracy, as he knew a democracy “soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself.” Their herculean efforts, sacrifices, and bloodshed have been for naught as we allowed our republic to devolve into a democracy and ultimately into our current corporate fascist warfare/welfare surveillance state. Sadly, we were unable to keep the republic Franklin and his fellow revolutionaries gave us.

Some might contend Paine’s Common Sense arguments against a despotic monarchy two and a half centuries ago, with an audience of two and a half million colonists, couldn’t be pertinent today in a divided nation of 325 million people. But when you examine the events, actions and catalysts inspiring Paine to pen Common Sense, you see the parallels with the events, decisions and facilitators of our current Crisis.

For more than a decade before the eruption of open hostilities, tensions had been building between colonists and the British authorities. An overbearing far flung British Empire began to pillage the colonies to pay for their corrupt kingdom by shaking them down through the Stamp Act of 1765, the Quartering Act of 1765, the Townshend Tariffs of 1767 and the Tea Act of 1773.

This taxation without representation was met with passionate protest among many colonists, who resented their lack of representation in Parliament and demanded the same rights as other British subjects. These demands were met with arrogant indifference by the monarchy and a haughty parliament. Forcing colonists to feed and house the very soldiers who were being paid with their taxes to repress them was the ultimate insult.

Initially, the colonists just fumed at the domineering disrespect shown them by the British ruling establishment. The pillaging of their hard earned wealth by distant oppressors prompted the colonists to initially organize nonviolent resistance and embargoing British luxury goods. As anger against their authoritarian overseers boiled over, the British cracked down harder in their version of a colonial surveillance state. Colonial resistance eventually led to bloodshed in 1770, when British soldiers opened fire on a mob of colonists, killing five men in what became known as the Boston Massacre.

Parliament eventually backed down and repealed all of the duties except for one symbolic duty on tea. In December 1773 the Samuel Adams inspired Sons of Liberty, dressed as Mohawk Indians, boarded British ships and dumped 342 chests of tea into Boston Harbor. An outraged Parliament passed a series of measures known as the Intolerable or Coercive Acts, designed to reassert imperial authority in Massachusetts. In response, a group of colonial delegates (including George Washington of Virginia, John and Samuel Adams of Massachusetts, Patrick Henry of Virginia and John Jay of New York) met in Philadelphia in September 1774 to give voice to their grievances against the British crown.

Read More