|Home||My Profile||Truth Blog||My Messages (25 )||Logout|
This is an early version of an article scheduled to appear in the next issue of Crescent International, for subscribers only. Do not share or distribute, thanks! -KB
Will the Anglo-Zionist Empire Declare War on Russia and China?
Kevin Barrett, for Crescent International
Some call it the US empire. Others, more accurate, follow geopolitical analyst The Saker in calling it the Anglo-Zionist empire; for its capitals are not just Washington, New York, and Hollywood, but also London and Tel Aviv.
Whatever one calls it, the self-appointed unipolar global hegemon seems to have made Samuel Huntington’s forecast of a “clash of civilizations” a self-fulfilling prophecy. In 2001, the Empire launched a long-term war on Islam—a campaign whose primary beneficiary was Israel—with its 9/11 false flag operation. Then Obama and his mentor Brzezinski, recognizing the foolishness of that crusade, tried to “pivot to Asia.” The pivot’s main purpose was to confront a rising China, using a combination of diplomatic, economic, and military power. In 2017, Donald Trump took over and forfeited both diplomatic power (by playing the buffoon) and economic power (by withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership)—leaving military power, coupled with an ineffectual trade war, as the Empire’s only Asian option.
Meanwhile, Syria, one of the “seven countries in five years” targeted by the 9/11 false flag, proved resistant to regime change. Iran, the next domino on the neocon hit list, stepped up to support Damascus. So did Russia. The war on Syria lost momentum and fizzled out.
The Empire’s failure in Syria exposed it as a toothless tiger. In a desperate attempt to wrest global annihilation from the jaws of defeat, the Empire’s masters began playing nuclear brinksmanship games with Russia, raising the very real prospect of a World War III that would likely kill hundreds of millions of people and put an end to most of what passes for modern “civilization.” Simultaneously, on the Chinese front, tensions over Korea—where the Empire’s occupation of the southern half of the country has long been a thorn in the side of China—have combined with jockeying in the South China Sea to raise tensions higher than they have been at any time since Deng Xiaoping began reforming the country in the 1980s.
Such considerations raise the question: Will the Empire launch (or blunder into) a war against Russia and/or China, despite the likelihood that such a war would amount to civilizational suicide? To understand why this terrible and absurd prospect is a real one, we need to understand the worldview of the Empire’s “Platonic guardians.” These are the people who, like the famous guardians in Plato’s Republic, task themselves with protecting their states from foreign and domestic enemies, and believe that lying and murder, including the mass murder of innocents, are noble means to that end.
The Guardians of today’s declining Unipolar Empire oscillate between opposite poles of hard-nosed geopolitical realism on the one hand, and messianic fanaticism on the other. Some, like the late Brzezinksi, lean toward the realism side; while others, notably the so-called neoconservatives, are card-carrying messianic fanatics. Unfortunately, neither the realists nor the neocons respect any moral limits. Like the vast majority of today’s Western elites, they are atheists, followers of Machiavelli and Nietzsche who believe there is no metaphysical grounding for ethics and morality.
Both the realists and the fanatics accept the geopolitical paradigm founded by Mahan’s The Influence of Sea Power Upon History (1890) and Mackinder’s The Geographical Pivot of History (1904). According to this paradigm, it is only by a fluke of history that Britain, a small island in the Atlantic, followed by the slightly larger island of North America, managed to found globe-straddling empires dominating the vast supercontinent of Eurasia-Africa. Brzezinksi’s The Grand Chessboard (1998) underlines the difficulty of ruling the world from North America, and suggests that radical measures, such as a Pearl Harbor style event selling the illusion of a “massive, direct external threat” to the gullible public, would be necessary to mobilize sufficient military resources to prolong the Empire’s dominance for even a few more decades.
Ironically, the massive military mobilization following 9/11 may have hastened, rather than delayed, the Empire’s decline and fall. That mobilization was hijacked by neoconservative Zionist fanatics who, despite their high positions in the US government, harbor undisguised loyalty to Israel. These ideologues are driven by a messianic madness which is consciously or unconsciously rooted in distorted interpretations of the distorted extant version of the Torah (Old Testament), as explained by Laurent Guyénot in his magisterial From Yahweh to Zion. They profess a noxious witch’s brew concocted from a toxic mixture of Israeli exceptionalism and its only slightly less rabid twin, American exceptionalism.
The neocons, to Brzezinski’s chagrin, wasted American blood, treasure, and prestige on a bloody attempt to destroy the Middle East on behalf of the Zionist entity. Meanwhile Russia, which had been plundered and reduced to Third World status during the 1990s, rebuilt and re-armed; while China charted a course of long-term double-digit economic growth which, in tandem with a military buildup it can easily afford, put it on course to eclipse the US as the world’s biggest power by around 2030. Worst of all, from the Empire’s perspective, was that its post-9/11 bellicosity drove Russia, China, and Iran into a de facto alliance to defend the emerging multipolar world. Brzezinski’s imperial imperative number one—“prevent the barbarians from uniting”—had been turned on its head; the “barbarians” (meaning independent powers outside the Empire) have been forced to unite!
Today, the declining Anglo-Zionist Empire believes it still possesses an irresistible military force. Yet the inexorable rise of an economically-united and militarily-powerful Eurasia is an immovable object. Which will prevail, and how?
Whatever military edge the Anglo-Zionists may once have possessed is rapidly eroding. Russia, China, and Iran are rapidly modernizing and taking advantage of asymmetric warfare opportunities offered by advances in anti-ship missiles. Today the globe-straddling US Navy, built in response to Admiral Mahan’s outdated observations about the importance of sea power, is a fleet of sitting ducks. And the Empire’s prospects for winning a land war on the Eurasian continent are even more nonexistent than the chances of its ships surviving more than a few hours of all-out war.
The Empire’s only real military card, its ace in the hole, is its purported nuclear first strike capability. US-NATO planners have been bullying the world for decades with nuclear first strike threats, and they continue to underline their ongoing threat against Moscow by ringing Russia with first-strike systems. Naturally the Russians have responded with new weapons designed to deter a US first strike by ensuring that massive retaliation would ensue.
So the underlying dynamic driving the Empire’s increasingly harsh policies towards Russia and China is a “use it or lose it” imperative: Fight World War III now while there is still a chance of “victory” (however pyrrhic), or surrender to reality and accept the Empire’s slow demise. Unfortunately, those who, like the late Brzezinski, have counseled patience in the face of the inevitable, are currently sidelined, while such arch-neocon lunatics as John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, and Benjamin Netanyahu (whose influence is exerted through Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner) are riding high.
Top Russian officials are saying the current moment is more dangerous than the Cuban Missile Crisis. On April 11, Donald Trump endorsed that view, tweeting that “Our relationship with Russia is worse now than it has ever been, and that includes the Cold War.”
Despite the mad messianic fantasies of the Zionists and exceptionalists, one thing is clear to all rational, well-informed analysts: We will have a multipolar world, or none at all. By ignoring the advice of the Qur’an and Sunnah, and failing to insist that power be reserved for the best rather than the worst, we have set ourselves up for planetary disaster.
The article below is for TruthJihad.com subscribers only, please do not distribute. Thanks! -Kevin
Youtube Shooter: Casualty of anti-Iran Culture War?
By Kevin Barrett, for American Free Press
According to The New York Times, her videos were “famous among Iran’s YouTube and Instagram influencers.” We are told that Nassim Aghdam “fled her native Iran decades ago” in search of freedom, glamour, and creative opportunities. As a rising YouTube star, she branded herself “Green Nassim” and put out slick, stylish videos advocating animal rights, healthy living, and veganism.
But then something went wrong. As the New York Times video “Who Was the YouTube Shooter?” tells us: “She explains that even though she was a member of the Bahai faith, which is a persecuted faith in Iran, she doesn’t really like life in the United States. And she says ‘in Iran they kill you with an axe; in the United States they kill you with cotton’—an Iranian expression saying she’s dying a slow death in the United States.” “Welcome to freedom of speech,” Nassim says sarcastically. “Do you think Iran is better than the USA or the USA is better than Iran?”
The issue that finally drove her over the edge was YouTube censorship: “I’m being discriminated against, I’m filtered on YouTube. I’m not the only one,” she said in her final message before attacking YouTube’s headquarters in San Bruno, California, and then killing herself.
YouTube has indeed been censoring alternative media outlets. Many leading independent channels, including British broadcaster Richie Allen’s, have been shut down on ludicrously flimsy pretexts—a clear violation of the First Amendment, since YouTube, owned by CIA asset Google, has a de facto monopoly and therefore must be considered a public utility, not a private company.
But why would YouTube try to bury Nassim Aghdam’s “stylishly sexy Iranian girl promotes healthy living” videos? To understand the likely answer, we need to know more about the Zionist-driven culture war against the Islamic Republic of Iran.
At the behest of Israel and its American assets, the US government has been spending billions of US taxpayer dollars to beam pornography and decadence into the minds of the Iranian people. A massive US/Zionist Farsi-language media operation, based in the Los Angeles area, produces programming ranging from hardcore pornography to sexually-titillating fluff, all of it designed to undermine traditional values and promote the idea that the USA is a rich, liberated, sex-saturated paradise. Why? To brainwash hormone-addled Iranian young people into rebelling against their “repressive” Islamic culture and government.
When Nassim Aghdam began making YouTubes, they fit this paradigm reasonably well—so the CIA-Google powers-that-be gave her a free pass, or perhaps even tweaked the algorithms to promote her. The commissars overseeing the anti-Iran culture war must have loved the videos showing “sexy Nassim” dancing happily in front of American and Israeli flags.
But then Aghdam grew disillusioned with American life. She started telling her viewers (most of them in Iran) that the USA is definitely not paradise, that in fact it isn’t any better than Iran. Suddenly, for no discernable reason, the number of views drawn by her videos began to drop. Aghdam, no idiot, realized what was happening. She protested, growing ever-more-critical of the US and the phony “freedom” it pretends to offer. And the more she protested, the more CIA-Google tweaked their algorithms to bury her videos and destroy her career. In a final, desperate gesture of misguided protest, she shot up YouTube’s headquarters and took her own life.
In the same April 8 issue of The New York Times featuring the video about Aghdam, another article appeared headlined “Many People Taking Antidepressants Discover They Cannot Quit.” The article quoted Edward Shorter, a historian of psychiatry at the University of Toronto: “We’ve come to a place, at least in the West, where it seems every other person is depressed and on medication. You do have to wonder what that says about our culture.”
No need to wonder. What it says is obvious: Western culture has gone completely insane. The New World Order’s orchestrated destruction of tradition and religion has created a world that may look like paradise on the outside—as Nassim Aghdam’s early videos suggested—but is rotting and dying on the inside.
The CIA-Google mind-controllers want Iranians to rise up against their country, destroy their religious traditions, turn Tehran into a third-rate replica of Los Angeles…and start taking anti-depressants to cope with the anomie. Maybe it’s a conspiracy by the pharmaceutical companies looking for new markets.
If Americans were aware of what is being done to them, they would rise up in revolution against the New World Order oligarchs who are dumbing them down, annihilating their religion and spirituality, and robbing their lives of value, purpose, and meaning. In so doing, Americans would be following in the footsteps of the people of Iran, who successfully revolted against the NWO’s hellish materialism and decadence back in 1979.
By Kevin Barrett, for Crescent International (reproduced here for my subscribers only - please do not share until it is published at https://crescent.icit-digital.org )
It was supposed to be a triumphal tour. Mohammed Bin Salman, the Crown Prince and de facto despot of “Saudi” Arabia, spent vast sums of money stolen from his people to splatter London with gigantic images of his own pompously grinning face. Billboards and circulating panel trucks vaunted his vivacious visage, singing the young prince’s praises, offering him warm words of welcome, and suggesting that Riyadh would be the perfect place for British investments.
The irony of Bin Salman paying for his own welcome messages—in effect, spending millions of Euros to welcome himself to London—struck some observers as pathetic, others as hilarious. The Saudis have always been the stupidest people in the world with money, and Bin Salman seems to be outdoing his elders at least in this regard. But will such lavish displays really convince the City of London to bail out the bankrupt Saudis from the hole they have dug for themselves in Yemen? Will hard-headed bankers and businesspeople, gazing at the sorry spectacle of BS throwing his unearned money around like an idiot while creating the worst humanitarian catastrophe on the planet, really decide that it’s time to reverse the flow of the world’s biggest financial current, and pump wealth into “Saudi” Arabia rather than out of it? That prospect is about as likely as reversing the flow of the Amazon.
The BS PR message is pure obsequious beggary: “We are modernizing, diversifying, privatizing, embracing neoliberalism and Hollywoodism and Zionism. We will lick the boots of banksters, kowtow to Netanyahu, grope Illuminati orbs with Trump, and build futuristic cities peopled by female robots in bikinis. So don’t worry, we aren’t even pretending to be Muslims any more. Give us more weapons and money!”
This is the first time a Saudi ruler has ever taken a trip hat in hand, begging for cash. Until now, the Saudis always dished out vast sums wherever they went. But today the kingdom is going broke, thanks to BS’s monumental blunder in Yemen. That billion-dollar-a-day Saudi-inflicted genocide couldn’t have come at a more inopportune moment: the new era of low oil prices cooked up by the Anglo-Zionist empire’s plunge protection team, using financial chicanery and unsustainable shale oil mining to target Iran, Russia, and Venezuela. In a monumental case of blowback, the Empire’s own oil spigot, the Saudi regime, is suffering worse collateral damage than the intended targets of the PPT oil-price-collapse operation. But unlike Maduro, who has created the Venezuelan Petro—a new crypto-currency backed by Venezuela’s vast oil reserves—Bin Salman, enslaved to the Rothschild petrodollar, has no choice but to grovel before his Western masters begging for vast sums of money that are unlikely to ever materialize.
Alongside Bin Salman’s orgy of self-gratifying welcome billboards, other equally large signs, paid for by actual British people, protested his visit. “ATTENTION! THE UK SHOULD NOT WELCOME WAR CRIMINAL MOHAMMAD BIN SALMAN” read the messages on signs and panel trucks. When BS arrived for his three-day UK visit on March 6, huge throngs of protestors gathered in front of Parliament and Downing Gate holding signs reading: “May! Tell Saudi Prince, stop the slaughter,” “Do Not Welcome Killers,” “Bin Salman Is a War Criminal,” “Hands Off Yemen.”
After three days of high level meetings marred by protests, the harvest of mainstream media headlines was hardly what the clown prince intended: “Saudi prince Mohammed bin Salman can expect angry protest mob at Downing Street” (The Times); “Why Mohammed bin Salman's Visit to London was a Fiasco” (Middle Eastern Eye); “Hundreds Gather Outside Downing Street to Protest Against Crown Prince’s State Visit” (The Independent); “Saudi crown prince’s visit to London turns into a bitter and awkward PR battle about his policies” (The Washington Post); “For a Change, Saudi Arabia Is Begging for Money” (Haaretz); “Saudi Crown Prince’s UK Visit Prompts Heavy Criticism” (The Guardian); “Ad blitz masks unease over Saudi prince's visit to UK” (Financial Times); “PM raises human rights concerns in Saudi crown prince visit” (BBC); “'Bizarre' PR drive launched by Saudi Crown Prince” (The Independent).
Following his disastrous UK tour, Mr. Royal BS fled with his tail between his legs across the Atlantic. Arriving in Washington, DC on March 19, he met with his egomaniacal American counterpart Donald Trump the next day, with New York—and Zionist crime kingpin buddy Jared Kushner—next on the itinerary.
While Bin Salman’s crude Machiavellian ruthlessness seems to have served him well in his climb to the top of the Saudi power pyramid (over the bodies and fortunes of his peers) the same gangster mentality may not serve him well in his attempt to trick the US into bailing out his bankrupt kingdom. Though BS seems to think his close ties to the President’s kosher nostra son-in-law Kushner are his biggest asset, they will almost certainly turn out to be an even bigger liability. All available evidence indicates that Kushner, a prime target of more than one federal investigation, will be increasingly sidelined from power, and may even be headed for prison, following in the footsteps of his crime capo father. Kushner’s real estate and suspected money laundering empire, like Bin Salman’s oil empire, is staring bankruptcy in the face, thanks to the worst investment in the history of real estate: 666 Fifth Avenue. Kushner bought the satanically-numbered building shortly before the 2008 collapse, took out huge loans with a ten-year due date to cover the losses, and is now scrambling to find a way to pay the piper. In a comic folie-à-deux, Kushner and BS each thinks the other can bail him out. More likely they will both go down together.
Kushner is also the key figure in the risible Trump-Bin Salman “Mideast peace plan.” Of all of BS’s many missteps, the biggest may be his monumentally foolish embrace of the Trump-Kushner scheme to forcibly impose “Mideast peace” by unilaterally handing Jerusalem al-Quds to the Zionists. Since Trump-Kushner announced their impending move of the US embassy to Occupied al-Quds, the Palestinians—along with all other legitimately interested parties, including the world’s 1.8 billion Muslims—have permanently rejected the US as a broker. Even Mahmoud Abbas, not previously known for biting the hand that feeds him, has lashed out at the US and called its ultra-Zionist ambassador David Friedman a “son of a dog.” Obviously this “peace plan” is going nowhere. Like all of BS’s rash moves, including his war on Syria, attack on Yemen, blockade of Qatar, and kidnapping of Lebanese PM Hariri, the peace-through-Kushner effort was a predictable train wreck from the get-go.
Since Jared Kushner cannot save BS from the consequences of his many missteps, the Clown Prince’s last hope is to blow smoke in the eyes of the world by hyping phantasmagorical techno-utopias while announcing “reforms” that, in some cases, seem to amount to an open repudiation of Islam. While most of the Saudi Royals have never been especially Islamic in their behavior, excuse the understatement, BS now wants the whole kingdom to adopt the culture and values of Disney World, Hollywood, and Silicon Valley. BS’s family of overweight, decadent sybarites has always followed the law school of “Shaykh Yerbouti” (and they have plenty of booty, in both senses, to shake). But his efforts to out-Dubai Dubai and turn Riyadh, not to mention the holy places, into party-hearty central are not going to go over well with much of the population of the Arabian Peninsula and the larger Muslim East. A fair number of richly misguided young people, their brains addled by hormones, designer drugs, and unearned bling, may join the new Prince and “party like it’s 1999.” But as Richard Heinberg’s book on impending Saudi oil depletion suggests, it won’t be long before The Party’s Over…at which point the Clown Prince will either suffer the fate of Anwar Sadat and then some, or perhaps join his role models Elvis Presley and Jim Morrison in a drug-inflicted premature demise, in which case his neo-Wahhabi epitaph, scribbled with a stick in desert sand, might read: “Lived fast, died young, left a good-looking corpse.”
BS says “only death” can stop him—meaning he will never give up his absolute power by peaceful means. But regardless of whether the young autocrat goes into exile, prison, or the grave, the demise of his autocracy is easily predictable. What is less predictable is whether the Anglo-Zionist empire will bother making heroic efforts to delay the inevitable.
American Traitors Incite Treason in Iran
By Kevin Barrett, for American Free Press (reproduced here for Truth Jihad subscribers only - please don't share)
Thomas Jefferson’s foreign policy doctrine—restating the key line from George Washington’s farewell speech—was simple and sensible: "Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations—entangling alliances with none." The Founding Fathers’ credo held sway until World War II. Since then, the US has strangled itself in a cat’s cradle of entangling alliances. Worse, it has allowed one of those alliances, the unofficial one with Israel, to drag it into a series of disastrous Middle Eastern wars.
The American agents of Israel who helped orchestrate 9/11 are guilty of treason, which is defined in the Constitution as “levying war against the United States.” They blew up the World Trade Center and bombed the Pentagon in order to trick the US into attacking Israel’s regional enemies: the “seven countries in five years” mentioned by General Wesley Clark, who has cited a neocon memo suggesting that the purpose of 9/11 was “to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.”
In order to “take out” those countries the neocon-run post-9/11 USA has had to work closely with the relatively small number of Iraqis, Syrians, Lebanese, Libyans, Somalis, Sudanese, and Iranians who are willing to commit treason against their own nations. Iraq, Syria, Libya, Somalia, and Sudan have been effectively destroyed by American agents of Israel and their bought-and-paid-for local traitors. Lebanon and Iran are next in their gunsights.
But Tehran is putting up a stiff fight. Since 1979 Iran has managed to persist as the Middle East’s only fully independent country, only genuine democracy, and most formidable opponent of Israel.* More than three times the size of Iraq, Iran boasts a population of 80 million. When under attack, Iranians will unite and put their lives on the line for their country, as they proved during the 1980s war with Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. Currently Iran boasts many strategic advantages including thousands of the latest and most lethal anti-ship missiles, which are dug deeply into the mountainous terrain overlooking the Persian Gulf. Using those missiles, Iran can sink all US ships in the Gulf and shut down 20% of the world’s oil supply, inducing a catastrophic global depression.
A December 2004 Atlantic article reported on a series of war games simulating a US-Iran conflict. The result was simple: “You have no military solution for the issues of Iran,” according to lead participant Sam Gardiner.
Yet pro-Israel traitors in the US government continue plotting to destroy Iran. According to neoliberal Zionist Thomas Friedman of The New York Times, the US has given Israel the green light to launch another huge war on Lebanon, with the aim of expanding the war to Iran. (This “US green light,” of course, was actually given not by actual patriotic Americans, but by Israel’s neocon agents.)
Meanwhile the mainstream American media, also dominated by Zionists, relentlessly tries to stir up sedition in Iran. The minuscule minority of Iranians who are actively opposed to their nation’s Islamic Republican constitution are given grotesquely disproportionate, fawningly favorable coverage; while ordinary Iranians, who protest over economic issues and corruption but would die to defend their nation and its constitution, are ignored.
Iraqi traitors like the swindler Chalabi helped the neocons murder more than a million of his countrymen and destroy his country as a modern, technologically advanced society. Somali traitors cooperated with the US-Israeli-orchestrated Ethiopian invasion, occupation, and destruction of their nation. Sudanese traitors helped the neocons orchestrate the vivisection of their country, including the amputation of the resource-rich south which is now occupied by Israel and its friends. Libyan traitors helped Hillary Clinton and her Zionist controllers destroy that country, which formerly featured the highest living standards in Africa. Syrian traitors assisted in the destruction of that nation by an Israel-orchestrated, US-assisted ISIS rampage.
Are there enough traitors in Iran to force “regime change”? No chance. They all fled with the Shah in 1979 and are now living side by side with their Zionist friends in the rich neighborhoods of Los Angeles. Some of them dream of returning to help overthrow the Islamic Republic. But the Iranian people will have none of it. The 2009 “Green Revolution” fizzled, as did recent CIA-Mossad attempts to hijack legitimate demonstrations and turn them into riots.
When will the traitors at home stop inciting treason abroad? When we arrest, try, and sentence them for their crimes, starting with 9/11.
*Israel, which has ethnically cleansed the majority of its rightful voters, is neither a democracy nor a legitimate nation. Though its creation was recommended by the UN General Assembly, it was never implemented by the Security Council. Israel has violated dozens of UN Resolutions thereby eliminating any possible claim to legitimacy.
Mr. Barrett, could you tell us a little about the events of the Day of Ashura and what one can learn from those events?
Ashura commemorates the martyrdom of Imam Hussain, one of the great tragedies of history. We can learn many things from the events of Karbala, including: *We should try to emulate the example of Imam Hussain and other prophets, saints, and wisdom teachers who have chosen to stand for truth and justice regardless of the odds against them; *We must recognize that the the transformation of the early Islamic polity from a divinely-guided community under the Prophet Muhammad SAAS into an empire led by corrupt power-hungry individuals illustrates the unfortunate fact that large-scale political organization always tends towards corruption. *We are forced to recognize the painful fact that to gain in the next world we may sometimes have to lose battles in this world.
How do you personally feel about Imam Hussein (AS) and his martyrdom?
I very much relate to his situation and try to walk in his path as I try to stand up for truth and justice in the face of difficult if not overwhelming odds. As my 9/11 truth movement colleagues and I try to convince the American people to recognize 9/11 as a coup d’etat by Zionists and imperialists, we find ourselves in a position not unlike that of the followers of Imam Hussein: Standing for truth and justice against a vastly more powerful army commanded by tyrants and oppressors.
Since the day Imam Hussein (AS) was martyred, how has his martyrdom shaped Shia Muslims’ thoughts and actions through different generation?
The martyrdom of Imam Hussein has made Shia Muslims a kind of permanent opposition party within the larger Muslim community. Sometimes this opposition to worldliness and injustice takes the form of political activism, while other times it expresses itself as mystical quietism. At its best it embraces both, as in the case of Imam Khomeini, who was both a mystic and a political activist of the highest order.
How do the events of Ashura relate to our time? Who are the Yazids of our time and who are seeking justice as Imam Hussein and his companions did at that time?
The Yazids of our time are easy to identify. The ones who stand out are those who are the most arrogant and oppressive, notably the Zionists. Personalities like Ariel Sharon and Benjamin Netanyahu, who glory in the oppression of the Palestinians, are obvious Yazids. Likewise with the billionaire oil sheiks of the Gulf, most obviously Bin Salman, who is creating another Karbala in Yemen. But most of the powerful establishment figures in the world are Yazids of one kind or another. The US military, with its insane nuclear war doctrines, seems to be aiming to turn the whole planet into Karbala.
Despite the fact that the majority of Shia Muslims mourn Imam Hussein’s martyrdom in non-violent ways, Western corporate media outlets try to show Shia Muslims as violent people. What’s your take on how the Shia Muslims are portrayed in the media?
The Western media wants to divide and conquer Muslims. The Western leadership is afraid that Muslims from all schools of thought might unite for truth and justice. So the media reports on Shia Muslims in a way that is designed to marginalize them and prevent their message from being heard by other Muslims and oppressed people in general. Shia Muslims should counter this by downplaying sectarianism, making alliances with Sunni Muslims and other non-Shia groups, and making “promoting truth and justice” rather than “promoting Shia Islam” their main priority.
This article is posted for TruthJihad.com subscribers only. Please do not distribute. Thank you!
Was the Sutherland Springs church shooting “atheist terrorism”?
By Kevin Barrett, for American Free Press
When a crazy Muslim truck driver ran people down in New York, the New York Times headline screamed out: “8 Killed in ‘Act of Terror’ in Manhattan.” One week later, when a crazy atheist Air Force veteran massacred people in Sutherland Springs, Texas, the Times headline read: “Gunman Kills at Least 26 in Attack on Rural Texas Church.”
Why is one killer a “terrorist” while the other is only a “gunman”? The answer is obvious: The truck driver, Sayfullo Habibullaevic Saipov, is nominally Muslim, while the church shooter, Devin Patrick Kelley, was an atheist. Clearly the New York Times and the rest of the mainstream media are working hard to demonize Muslims as “terrorists.”
Atheists, however, are a protected category—like gays, Jews, and to some extent other minorities. So when someone from a category of people that harbors an animosity to Christianity (for example, atheists) commits a crime targeting Christians in a Christian house of worship, their atheism is barely mentioned! Nobody even asks whether Kelley’s “radicalization” that led him to target a church might have something to do with his atheist worldview. Nor does anyone wonder whether atheism, which denies that life has any inherent moral values or meaning, wonder whether such a philosophy might sometimes lead unstable people to do immoral things.
Those aware of the history of the MK Ultra mind control program and the Operation Gladio false flag terror campaign may wonder whether the real issue is not Saipov’s and Kelley’s religious or anti-religious worldview, but rather their possible manipulation by experts in fabricating Deep State violence. This is a legitimate avenue of inquiry. But since I have not yet seen strong evidence supporting the false flag hypothesis for either event, I will simply analyze the way the mainstream media propaganda apparatus is reporting each story, and explore what that reveals about the propagandists’ agenda.
The MSM’s reporting of the Saipov story strongly emphasized the “radical Islam” connection. The media focused on Saipov supposedly yelling “Allahu akbar” and demanding an ISIS flag for his hospital room. It suggested that Saipov was “radicalized” by ISIS propaganda videos he encountered on the internet.
But the reporting on the church massacre barely noted in passing that Kelley “liked” various atheist organizations on his FaceBook page. It did not suggest that he was an “atheist terrorist” who had been “radicalized.” Instead, the MSM simply took it for granted that he was crazy.
There is nothing whatsoever in Islam that makes Muslims harbor animosity toward pedestrians or bicyclists. From an Islamic perspective, Saipov’s actions are utterly nonsensical. Islam demands that even in times of all-out war, civilians must be protected.
But from an atheist perspective, Christians (and other religious people) are the enemy…or at least dangerously deluded believers in an enemy ideology. If a murderously angry atheist were going to “act out” ideologically, the first place he would shoot up would be a church. But nobody interprets the Sutherland Springs shooting this way. Why not?
The mainstream elite and intelligentsia in Western countries is overwhelmingly made up of actual and de facto atheists. They, and the institutions they control, commit mass murder every day. Today’s Godless elite are behind most of the fabricated “Islamic terrorism” in the headlines, which they deploy to justify their murderous looting all over the world. (About 32 million Muslims have been murdered in the 9/11 wars according to one expert, Dr. Gideon Polya, while more than 55 million civilians have been murdered in CIA and US military operations since World War II according to Noam Chomsky and Andre Vltchek.)
As Tony Cartalucci writes in “The Truth About Radical Islam”:
“The source of terrorism is not the Qu'ran — a book that few critics of Islam have even picked up let alone genuinely read — but rather a very easily traced money trail that leads to Washington and London. It is indeed the Western World that has created, branded, and marketed ‘radical Islam,’ which is — for all intents and purposes — a strictly political tool designed to provoke direct Western military interventions where possible, and fight conflicts by proxy whenever direct military intervention is not possible.”
The people who run the Western world are atheists, even though their ancestors were Jewish or Christian. And they are by far the biggest terrorists on planet Earth. They are working overtime to conquer the world and establish a “New World Order” —the atheist equivalent of an all-embracing global caliphate.
Yet just as a fish is not aware of the presence of water, few of us are conscious that we are swimming in a sea of blood shed by atheist terrorists. Indeed, the very concept of atheist terrorism — a commonplace 100 years ago — is now unthinkable.
This article is posted here for TruthJihad.com subscribers only. Please do not share. Best, Kevin
New Las Vegas shooting timeline makes even less sense
By Kevin Barrett, for American Free Press
Rarely do America’s mainstream newspapers evince skepticism towards official pronouncements about suspected false flag events. But the problems with the police timeline of the October 1 Las Vegas massacre are so egregious that even the Los Angeles Times couldn’t help but notice.
An October 9 Times article is headlined “Las Vegas gunman shot security guard a full six minutes before opening fire on concertgoers, police reveal.” The article, authored by three Times journalists, begins: “Police have dramatically changed their account of how the Las Vegas massacre began on Oct. 1, revealing Monday that the gunman shot a hotel security guard six minutes before opening fire on a country music concert — raising new questions about why police weren’t able to pinpoint the gunman’s location sooner.”
The previous official story held that the lone gunman, Stephen Paddock, fired from his 32nd floor hotel room on the crowd below from 10:05 to 10:15 p.m. Then at 10:15, using his surveillance cameras, he saw hotel security guard Jesus Campos in the hallway and unleashed a barrage of gunfire through the door, wounding Campos. Campos notified the authorities, who arrived shortly thereafter. But the police were apparently in no hurry to breach Paddock’s room and ensure the safety of the people below. They didn’t bother to break into Paddock’s room until 11:20, an hour later! When they finally did so, they discovered that Paddock was dead, supposedly from a self-inflicted gunshot.
The original timeline made no sense. Why would police linger for an hour outside the door of a mass shooter who had just killed more than 50 people and wounded hundreds—and who might still have guns and ammunition available with which to kill and wound hundreds more? Aren’t SWAT teams trained to take heroic action, risking their lives if necessary, to kick in doors and stop mass shootings?
It isn’t surprising that the Las Vegas Sheriff’s Department has seen fit to radically revise its original timeline. What is surprising, even shocking, is that the new timeline is even more absurd than the old one.
According to the new timeline, Paddock shot through his door, wounding Campos, at 9:59 p.m., six minutes before the mass shooting started. Campos must have immediately notified authorities. So by around 10 p.m., five minutes before the slaughter began, hotel security must have called 9-1-1 to report that someone had fired a burst of automatic gunfire on the 32nd floor. When reports of a massacre began rolling in shortly after 10:05, police should have already known which floor and which room the suspect was shooting from. Yet they didn’t bother to breach Paddock’s door till 11:20 p.m.!
Were the cops ordered to stand down—perhaps to allow the real perps to escape? Might the conveniently “suicided” Paddock have been a patsy?
The problematic Las Vegas timeline resembles the even more absurd official 9/11 timeline, which, as David Ray Griffin and others have shown, is riddled with inconsistencies and absurdities. On 9/11, we are told, the FAA and the military knew by around 8:15 a.m. that “hijackings” were underway. Yet there was no response from America’s air defenses even as planes hit the Twin Towers at 8:46 and 9:03, crashed into the Pentagon at 9:37, and plunged into the ground in Shanksville, Pennsylvania at 10:03.
My late friend Col. Robert Bowman, who flew more than 100 missions in Vietnam and headed the Star Wars Missile Defense Program under Presidents Ford and Carter, said he knew by the afternoon of September 11th that it was an inside job. The stand-down of our air defenses was the giveaway. Col. Bowman knew that every year over 100 commercial planes stray off course, and always find a fighter jet beside them within about ten minutes. The official 9/11 timeline, which claims that “hijacked” planes flew around the most heavily guarded airspace in the world for almost two hours without any air defense response, is an insult to the intelligence of every American.
The Las Vegas massacre timeline likewise insults our intelligence. Along with eyewitness and forensic evidence of multiple shooters, it suggests that we are not being told the truth about this event.
According to In Homeland Security, a voice of the security-industrial complex: “The October 1 massacre in Las Vegas will define a new normal for America. That much is certain. Americans had no choice but to accept post 9/11 heightened security measures at airports and longer travel times... Now, thanks to Stephen Paddock’s lone wolf shootings in Las Vegas, Americans certainly will need to accept heightened security measures when checking in to any hotel in the United States.”
Have we been hit by yet another Gladio B operation designed to terrorize us into giving up what is left of our freedom?
By Kevin Barrett, for American Free Press (reproduced here for Truth Jihad members only - please do not distribute)
In late August of 2016, an offensive, illegal image was planted — by a person or persons unknown — on Professor Anthony Hall’s Facebook page. The image portrayed a “white” man assaulting a “Jewish” man, alongside text reading: “There never was a ‘Holocaust,’ but there should have been, and, rest assured, there WILL be…” (The rest of the text is too vile to print here.)
The unsuspecting Professor Hall, traveling at the time, never saw the post. But B’nai B’rith did. (They were monitoring Dr. Hall’s Facebook page far more closely than Dr. Hall himself was.) The Israeli front group issued a flurry of statements vilifying Professor Hall and implying that he was responsible for the planted image. Canadian mainstream media outlets echoed B’nai B’rith’s libelous charges.
B’nai B’rith’s allies then unleashed a torrent of defamation against Professor Hall. On September 1, 2016 the President of the Canadian Jewish Civil Rights Association wrote to the University of Lethbridge falsely asserting that the horrendous words from the planted “kill all Jews” Facebook image came directly “from the lips” of Professor Tony Hall. Another letter to the Office of the University of Lethbridge President, copied to the Premier of Alberta and the Alberta Justice Minister, called Dr. Hall an “advocate for the murder of Jews.”
University of Lethbridge President Mike Mahon then suspended Professor Hall without pay and prohibited him from setting foot on campus. There were no hearings, no due process, no investigation…just a unilateral assertion by Mahon, unsupported by any evidence, that Hall might have violated the Alberta Human Rights Act.
Mahon himself, purporting to speak for the University, later filed a Human Rights Complaint against Professor Hall. Mahon argued that Hall might be guilty of a human rights violation because “Hall’s Facebook page had been used for virulent anti-Semitic comments.” (Mahon failed to mention that the virulent comments had been planted, unbeknownst to Hall, by Hall’s enemies.)
Mahan also charged Hall with “Inferring that Israelis, and hence Jewish individuals, were responsible for the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.” But why is that any more bigoted than inferring that Saudis, and hence Muslim individuals, were responsible for the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, as the mainstream media does?
In fact, 34 million Muslims have been murdered, according to Dr. Gideon Polya, due to the 9/11-fueled Islamophobia that drives the 9/11 wars. Yet the Human Rights Complaint against Professor Hall asserts that anyone who rejects this genocidal Islamophobia, and the 9/11 official conspiracy theory behind it, is a bigot! The complaint insists that “acts of terrorism between 2001 to the present… were in fact committed and financed by Islamic terrorists.” By questioning that dubious proposition, the complainants assert, Dr. Hall somehow violated the Alberta Human Rights Act.
In fact, the individuals who called for the murder of all Jews were those who manufactured and planted the offending image on Professor Hall’s Facebook page. According to an investigation by Ben Garrison, a Jewish-Zionist false flag terrorist named Joshua Goldberg created the image. Unknown internet hackers then planted it to frame Professor Hall.
Goldberg and the hackers should be charged with incitement to murder and incitement to genocide. The hackers should also be charged with (conspiracy to commit) defamation of character; obstruction of justice; and providing of false evidence. Likewise, B’nai B’rith and the Canadian Jewish Civil Rights Association should be charged with defamation of character. All of these individuals and groups should wind up paying Professor Hall tens of millions of dollars in civil damages, on top of their prison sentences.
Unfortunately, it is far from certain that justice will prevail. Certain groups seem to have a license to commit frame-ups with impunity. After all, virtually every major “radical Muslim terror attack” since the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993 has featured one or more blatant frame-ups. In almost all cases, passports or ID cards have been planted at the scene of the crime to inculpate the designated (Muslim) patsies.
On 9/11, the only thing left of the planes that supposedly crashed in New York and Shanksville were “hijackers’ passports” that miraculously turned up to identify the supposed perpetrators. Subsequent “Islamic terror attacks” including Charlie Hebdo, the follow-up 11/13/15 Paris attacks, and various vehicular homicides in London, Manchester, and elsewhere have all featured throw-down ID documents allowing police to instantly blame the designated scapegoats.
The Tsarnaev brothers were framed for the Boston bombings, despite ironclad photo evidence proving their innocence. A Pakistani couple was framed for the San Bernardino shooting, despite witness reports that three large white paramilitaries did it.
Are the same forces that frame “Muslim terrorists” also behind the frame-up of Professor Hall?
Here is my new article for publication in this coming week's American Free Press. It is published here for subscribers only, do not distribute.
Civil War Statues and “Public Myths”
By Kevin Barrett
For American Free Press
America is suffering from an epidemic of moral hysteria. All across the nation, angry mobs are targeting Civil War statues. The monument to Confederate General Robert E. Lee in Charlottesville—the flashpoint for the orchestrated violence I wrote about in my previous AFP column—is just one of the countless Confederate memorials slated for oblivion.
Here in Madison, Wisconsin, our cranky Jewish aging-ex-hippie mayor, Paul Soglin, recently announced that two Confederate memorials would be removed from Forest Hill Cemetery. "There should be no place in our country for bigotry, hatred or violence against those who seek to unite our communities and our country," Soglin solemnly intoned.
My late uncle, Tim Barrett, must be rolling over in his grave. A lifelong Madisonian, Uncle Tim was a fanatical Civil War buff. (Our ancestors include Union soldiers.) Tim would drive all over the country, sleeping in his car, to visit battlefields and monuments. Tim took took part in many re-enactments of Civil War battles. He undoubtedly visited the Confederate monuments in Forest Hill Cemetery, as well as the Union monuments at Camp Randall.
Tim was a partisan of Lincoln and the Union. He knew that many Northern soldiers believed they were fighting to end slavery, and Tim honored that belief. But he knew the reality was more complex.
Tim also honored the Confederate soldiers, who believed (with some justification) that they were fighting for freedom, not slavery. Unlike many Americans today, my late Uncle Tim could see that both sides had good reasons as well as bad reasons for doing what they did. Tim achieved a certain level of detachment from his pro-Union anti-slavery sympathies. He was able to view the war as a complex and nuanced tragedy. So Tim considered both Robert E. Lee and Abraham Lincoln as flawed heroes. He would have been equally appalled by anyone trying to tear down statues of either one.
That kind of nuance and complexity is conspicuously absent from our dumbed-down America of 2017. Self-righteous ignoramuses insist on seeing everything as a black-vs.-white, good-vs.-evil struggle. If you have any sympathy at all for the losers, you are an evil, no-good, very bad person who likely deserves to be clobbered with such weaponized epithets as “racist” and “Nazi,” and let’s throw in “anti-Semite” and “conspiracy theorist” for good measure. Yet the people hurling those terms usually know very little about the Civil War, World War II, the history of Jewish communities’ interactions with non-Jews, the JFK assassination, 9/11, or whatever topic set them off.
The people who hurl such weaponized words have been brainwashed by the likes of Philip Zelikow, a self-professed expert on “the creation and maintenance of public myths.” Zelikow, who personally authored the entire 9/11 Commission Report in chapter outline before the Commission had even convened, defines “public myths” (a.k.a. “public presumptions”) as “beliefs (1) thought to be true (although not necessarily known to be true with certainty), and (2) shared in common within the relevant political community.” He is especially interested in “particularly ‘searing’ or ‘molding’ events” that “take on ‘transcendent’ importance and, therefore, retain their power even as the experiencing generation passes from the scene.”
Zelikow argues that “for the generation who fought World War II, ‘Munich’ is an example of such a public presumption.” What he means is that the word Munich conjures up the whole good-guys-vs.-bad-guys cartoon version of World War II, by demonizing the “appeaser” Neville Chamberlain, and implicitly comparing anyone who opposes any American/Israeli war of aggression as such an appeaser. In other words, Munich is a weaponized epithet of the war party that draws its power from the depths of public myth.
Another such weaponizable public myth, for Zelikow, is “beliefs about slavery and the Civil War.” Like the cartoon version of World War II, the myth that the Civil War was about slavery legitimizes federal power and federal wars of aggression, by forging a ludicrous good-guys-vs.-bad-guys fairy tale and inviting us to identify with the good guys and revile the bad guys (and, by extension, our nation’s enemy du jour.)
Paul Craig Roberts recently published an excellent article entitled “How We Know the So-Called ‘Civil War’ Was Not Over Slavery.” Anyone interested in thinking about history, rather than drooling like Pavlov’s dog at the commands of the likes of Philip Zelikow, should read it.
The myths that the Civil War was fought to free the slaves, that World War II was “the good war,” and that the endless “War on Terror” is a legitimate response to 9/11, are all very similar. That is not an accident. People like Zelikow scripted 9/11 based on their studies of the public myths of the two earlier wars.
(Zelikow quotes are from “Thinking About Political History,” Miller Center Report, Winter 1999.)
Jim Fetzer asked me for a contribution to a book he is editing on Charlottesville. I sent him the article below. It is posted here for TruthJihad.com members only. Do not post or distribute.
Gladio Meets Cointelpro in Charlottesville: A New “Strategy of Tension” Against Economic Populism?
By Kevin Barrett
(Portions of this article were first published by American Free Press.)
America’s liberal mainstream media, along with the left-leaning foundation-funded pseudo-alternative media, are blaming violence in Charlottesville on the so-called alt-right. According to the dominant narrative, crazed neo-Nazi hooligans descended on a quiet college town and started beating people up and running people over. So let us all engage in an Orwellian two minutes of hate. Death to the alt-right and everything it stands for! And death to Trump for not joining the Orwellian hatefest!
When a violent, galvanizing, hyper-mediated event occurs, and the mainstream immediately tells us who to blame, I immediately think of 9/11 and the subsequent series of false flag outrages. As I wrote in the immediate aftermath of the Charlottesville clashes: “The recent ultraviolence in Charlottesville bears some of the hallmarks of a contrived event: It was shocking, spectacular, hyped by mainstream media, and seemingly designed to cast blame on a demonized ‘other’ (the alt-right white nationalist movement). Additionally, it could be seen as furthering a ‘strategy of tension’ pitting left against right, multiculturalism against racial nationalism, Bernie Sanders extremists against Donald Trump extremists, and so on.”
Hyper-mediated violent events like the Charlottesville spectacle are increasingly being scrutinized and subjected to a hermeneutic of suspicion. In my recent False Flag Trilogy (www.FalseFlagTrilogy.blogspot.com) I brought together 55 leading public intellectuals to analyze several alleged radical Islamic terror attacks committed in 2015 and 2016. The majority agreed that these events—among them the Paris attacks of January and November 2015, the Copenhagen Valentine’s Day attack and Brussels Airport attack of the same year, the San Bernardino shooting, the Orlando shooting of June 2016, the Nice Truck attack and Munich shopping mall shootings of July 2016—left a trail of evidence suggesting that the Gladio program is still alive and well.
Operation Gladio, a Pentagon program run through NATO, pursued a “strategy of tension” in Cold War era Europe. Infiltrating and manipulating both right-wing and left-wing groups, Deep State operators orchestrated terrorism and violence in an effort to discredit opposition to NATO-bankster rule and frighten voters into supporting the Establishment. Swiss professor Daniele Ganser and other researchers have shown that virtually all of the “left wing terrorism” in Europe during the 1960s, 1970s, and early 1980s was actually perpetrated by Operation Gladio. Likewise, most of the “right wing violence” of that era was also a Gladio product.
Deep State “strategies of tension” operate on several levels. First and most obviously, they incite fear, thereby nudging the public towards conformity and submission to authoritarian rule. They also manipulate public opinion by casting the Establishment’s opponents, whether on the left or the right, as violent, dangerous extremists. (The Charlottesville spectacle seemed designed to portray Trump supporters as racist Nazis, while simultaneously convincing conservatives that the Bernie Sanders left is not just insufferably arrogant and intolerant, but also vicious and violent.)
Charlottesville polarized the population into two opposing camps. It reoriented the entire political discussion—or, rather, the shouting match—around race and identity politics. Charlottesville offered an image of Trump supporters and Sanders supporters screaming at each other and beating each other up, followed by an even more disturbing image of a Trump supporter committing a vehicular attack on Sanders supporters. Lost in all of this was the obvious message of the 2016 election: Angry working-class people are flocking to the messages of people like Trump and Sanders NOT because of race or identity politics, but because they are angry at billionaires and other elites, and want a better economic deal if not an outright revolution. But Charlottesville intervened, and now the whole nation is talking about ID politics rather than economic justice.
George Lakoff has aptly observed that the secret of political power lies more in controlling what people are talking about than what they are saying. Just as the command “don’t think of an elephant” elicits thoughts of an elephant, a media blitz of spectacular, gripping, violent imagery focusing on hatred and anger around race and identity will get people thinking (and more importantly, emoting) about race and identity. And the supposed anti-hate side may very well end up hating as much their supposed pro-hate enemies. “Down with hate! We must hate hatred with every fiber in our being!” intones the Orwellian announcer during the MSM’s officially-sanctioned two minutes of hate.
The opposite of hate—love—would entail caring about people as individual human beings, beyond considerations of ethnicity or ideology. This would lead us to want to take better care of those who are being left by the wayside (just as we would want to take care of our own loved ones if they were in such miserable circumstances). The only way to do that would be to restructure society for the benefit of the bottom 50% rather than the top .0001 percent. This is precisely what the billionaire ruling elite does not want. To prevent love from breaking out, they stir up mass hatred in a divide-and-conquer strategy calculated to distract and deceive.
So Charlottesville appears to be a monumental diversion, a misdirection ploy worthy of an Orwellian stage magician. The riveting spectacle sucked in all eyeballs, while sucking all the oxygen out of the room. Trump and Sanders voters—rather than joining together to drain the swamp, confiscate the fortunes of the billionaires, institute honest and publicly-financed elections, nationalize the banking system, make internet monopolies transparently-operated public utilities, revitalize unions while stopping immigration’s downward pressure on wages, reduce the massive waste and fraud endemic to military spending, revitalize America’s decaying infrastructure, and generally pump money from Wall Street to Main Street—have now been cast as violent lunatics bent on beating each other up and running each other down in the streets.
It is all too convenient. The 2016 presidential elections delivered a slap to the face of America’s Deep State elite. Left wing populist Bernie Sanders trounced Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries, and could only be kept out of the White House through election fraud, as copiously documented by Richard Charnin. Right wing populist Donald Trump won an overwhelming fraud-proof victory in the Republican primaries, then defied polls and pundits by winning the general election.
Populism is surging. Elites are panicking. The mainstream media’s stranglehold over public opinion is eroding. Could Cointelpro, a domestic US equivalent of Operation Gladio, be infiltrating both white nationalist groups and their antifa opposition? Undoubtedly. Could Deep State operators be fomenting violence in an effort to discredit populism? Quite possibly.
America’s self-appointed Platonic Guardians are scrambling to adjust to the new reality. They appear to be resorting to ever-more-extreme measures in a desperate effort to shore up their dominance.
One of their primary targets is free speech on the internet. The Trump-Sanders phenomenon was the result of 15 years of alternative media chipping away at consensus reality in general and the official story of 9/11 in particular. A deep sentiment of mistrust now pervades the populace. More and more people are beginning to suspect that the entire political dog-and-pony show is a ruse whose main purpose is to allow the super-rich to keep right on picking our pockets.
As subversive truth spreads, the Platonic Guardians and the Deep State they rule are desperately seeking ways to muzzle internet-based alternative media. During the past several months, their pet CIA search engine, Google, has been systematically tweaked in an effort to hide alternative news websites from the general public. This has resulted in a 60% decline in readership for such truth-telling websites as GlobalResearch.ca. The Deep State is also trying to cut truth-tellers’ financial lifelines by such means as removing American Free Press’s credit card processing, nuking my GoFundMe platform, orchestrating the suspension of truth-seeking academicians like Anthony Hall and Joy Karega from universities, banning books from Amazon, removing alternative media from YouTube advertising programs, and otherwise trying to starve truth-seekers into submission.
But these attacks on alternative media can only be effective to the extent that public opinion acquiesces. To overcome America’s traditional affinity for free speech, as enshrined in the Bill of Rights, the Deep State needs to convince the public that the internet is populated by dangerous, violent extremists who must be muzzled in the name of public safety and so-called homeland security.
And that is where events like Charlottesville come in. Observers have noted that heavily militarized police and National Guard units initially showed up in force — then conveniently disappeared just before the violence was incited. And why were demonstrators allowed to carry weapons? Normally police prevent marchers from carrying objects that could be used as fighting implements. Yet Charlottesville demonstrators carried pepper spray, clubs, weaponizable torches, and other tools of mayhem.
Another suspicious aspect of the event was its “Nazi” aura. The mainstream and foundation-funded alternative media were especially outraged by the Judeophobic chants of some of the pro-Robert E. Lee statue demonstrators. (The media’s most-cited offensive chant was “Jew will not replace us!”)
The demonstrators’ anti-Jewish chants guaranteed wall-to-wall negative media coverage—because the media is heavily populated, if not actually dominated, by Jewish people who are highly sensitive to what they (incorrectly and offensively) call “anti-Semitism.” Could this element of the demonstrations have been orchestrated for precisely that purpose? Clearly there is a lot of synthetic Judeophobia out there. As The New York Times reported on March 23, 2017, “A monthslong wave of bomb threats against Jewish institutions in the United States that prompted evacuations, heightened security and fears of rising anti-Semitism (sic) gave way to an unexpected twist on Thursday. The person responsible for many of the threats, law enforcement officials said, was half a world away, in Israel, a Jewish teenager.” The Times failed to report that along with prompting evacuations and fears, the false flag threats also prompted the banning from Amazon of hundreds of history books. Mainstream media also failed to report that the phony Judeophobia scare fueled the 2017 campaign to censor the internet, which included Google tweaking its algorithms to hide alternative news sources, Youtube de-monetizing alternative videos, and Facebook sabotaging its own advertisers whose content it deems politically incorrect.
The Israeli-American false flag terror culprit and bane of Jewish Community Centers, a certain Michael Ron David Kadar, was reported to be the nephew of Mordechai Kedar, “a leading trainer of Shabak agents” who “teaches Arabic at Bar Ilan University and is one of the most vicious, Arabophobic academics in Israel.” Shabak, better known as Shin Bet, is the notorious Israeli internal security service implicated in thousands of cases of torture. It has recently been aggressively recruiting “cyber ninjas.” Was Kadar a false flag cyber-ninja tasked with spearheading a terror campaign against Jewish institutions in the US in order to smear Israel’s enemies as dangerous “anti-Semites”? His ability to evade detection for months while committing hundreds or thousands of cyber-crimes suggests a professional operation. And Kadar’s too-convenient excuse—“a brain tumor made me do it”—does not pass the smell test. More likely his Uncle Mordechai, alongside Shin Bet colleagues, unleashed the wave of false flag terrorism, with young Michael set up as the “patsy with a ready-made excuse.”
The Zionist creation of fake Nazi enemies plays into a broader Hegelian strategy pursued by the Euro-American Deep State. By creating a synthetic wave of Nazi/Confederate white nationalism on the right, and a counter-wave of antifa extremism on the left, the Deep State is pursuing a form of political Hegelianism aptly described by Anthony Sutton as “Right and Left: A Control Device.” Sutton explains: “For Hegelians, the State is almighty, and seen as ‘the march of God on earth.’ Indeed, a State religion. Progress in the Hegelian State is through contrived conflict: the clash of opposites makes for progress. If you can control the opposites, you dominate the nature of the outcome.” Sutton argues that both communism and fascism were created by Deep State forces funded by British and American oligarchs, and that the ensuing left-versus-right clash was orchestrated to concentrate more and more power in the hands of those oligarchs. The same strategy may be at work in 2017 America, with Charlottesville serving as the PR launch for a new era of left-vs.-right theatrics whose main purpose is to nip populism in the bud and cement oligarchical rule.
Could the people who benefit the most from “populist” violence—the anti-populist elite—be up to their usual tricks? Other contributors to this book have uncovered evidence supporting that hypothesis. Now it is up to us to spread the truth and nullify the psy-op, by redirecting the conversation away from race and identity politics, and back towards brotherly- and sisterly-love and economic justice…in other words, away from hate, and back towards love.