Hoax busted: There is no US-Saudi relationship

Hoax busted: the American people have NO relations with the Saudis

 

by Don Hank

 

A Neocon article titled Analysis: Russian jets in Iran change Mideast game – Middle East criticizes the new “game changing” arrangement between Iran and Russia in which the latter uses Iran’s airport facilities as a home base for its anti-ISIS bombing missions. While the author calls his piece an analysis, it is in fact blatant propaganda, distorting the nature of the “game change” he describes.

 

QUOTE:

“…this type of change is definitely not in the interests of the US, America’s traditional Sunni-Arab allies in the region, nor Israel.”

 

In fact, the US-Saudi relationship touted by the author is not a relationship between the US people and the Saudis, although the sneaky author would like us to believe it is. We the People obviously have no interest whatsoever in a relationship that spawned the Taliban, al-Qaeda and ISIS, destroyed previously stable partner countries like Iraq, Libya and Syria and seriously threatened Egypt until el-Sisi stepped in, all of which has served only to erode US prestige and credibility in the world. The American people have, in fact, an existential interest in ending this ill-conceived US Establishment-Saudi relationship as soon as ever possible, while the financial elites, notably the Federal Reserve Board, know that the Saudis are the key to propping up a dollar that has practically no other support in our debt-based economy and government. It is known that, under the secretive petrodollar agreement between the US elites and the Saudis, the US government has promised to protect the Saudi royals and their oil fields in exchange for their charging only US dollars for their oil and buying US sovereign bonds as financial reserves, all of which have been, since the early 70s, keeping the value of the US dollar artificially high. But what is not known is how much further that agreement goes in reality, thanks to terms brokered in secret, either since the original deal or at the time Richard Nixon and King Faisal signed it. What is known, however, is that all US wars outside the New World, without exception (ie, even the Kosovo war), have clearly benefited violent and intolerant Saudi Wahhabism, but in no way benefited the US people, and this is all a sinister indication that the agreement goes much deeper than is known. Indeed, looking back over the last 50 odd years of warfare, initiated by the US on the flimsiest of grounds, Washington and Wall Street appear to have sold out US interests and even the interests of civilization itself in exchange for a strong dollar worth far beyond any economy-based intrinsic value, enabling them to “print” unbacked dollars in QEs 1 through 3 and possibly beyond without having to pay for the value thereby stolen from other economies throughout the world.

By contrast with secretive US-Sunni (Wahhabi) cooperation, the Russia-Shiite relationship brought about the first sincere attempt to stop ISIS, thereby thwarting the once unchallenged Saudi-US relationship.

The US then reluctantly followed Russia’s example by attacking ISIS in Iraq, politically unable to do otherwise but knowing that in so doing it was flirting with the possible rupture of the dollar-supporting agreement described above, and hence with financial disaster for the elites.

Further, the rearrangement of the Middle East chessboard has not only led to Russia’s establishment of an airbase in Shiite Iran but, prior to this, had led to a flourishing relationship between Netanyahu and Putin, which has benefited both countries. There can be no question that Israel-US relations are now much cooler and unproductive than Russia-Israel relations. (But remember that the US and Russia have swapped roles both domestically and in terms of foreign policy).

Thus the crucial difference between US foreign policy and Russian foreign policy is that the US has so far cultivated good relations only with one side – the Sunnis and their radical Wahhabi terrorists (posing at times as “moderates”) and also with the warlike Likud Party in Israel (instead of reconciling both the hawks and the Israeli factions that want peace) – a policy that necessarily leads to the untenable situation of perpetual conflict, while Russia has taken the broader view, trying to cultivate relations with both Sunnis and Shia, and just as importantly, with Israel, in an attempt to bring permanent peace between Sunni and Shia in the Middle East and end the Palestine-Israel conflict. (BTW, there is another unseen aspect to all of this in that many Western Christians believe – in large part under encouragement from sly Neocons – that any US attempt to bring about peace in the Middle East is unbiblical and that somehow, God wants them to support, or at least passively consent to, senseless wars in order to fulfill prophecies that carry unspecified time frames and schedules. Yet this lack of specific time settings makes these prophecies hard to pin down and makes a rigid interpretation inappropriate at best. Further, there is no biblical commandment or even suggestion that Christians are supposed to consent to or participate in wars at any time in history — the way so many of them did during the Iraq invasion, believing at first — thanks to sly propaganda efforts willingly perpetrated by fooish clergy — that this disastrous war that saw the banishment of most Iraqi Christians, was godly. Thus Christianity has been used as a tool of Satanists thanks to the lack of common sense and spiritual discernment of these pawns with little grasp of the scriptures. I showed previously how these Christians are disobeying an important commandment of Jesus).

So yes, this new Russia-Iran arrangement is not in the interests of the US if we define the US as the Neocon perpetual war Establishment (including Obama and Hillary), and it is not in the interest of the Saudi Wahhabists whose ultimate goal is the total annihilation of Shia and Christians as well as civilization as we know it. But the Saudis, with their intolerance toward people with different opinions and religions, certainly do not deserve to be given by the US, through stealth or otherwise, the green light to continue founding and funding terror groups throughout the world, whether or not their rampaging props up the greenback, because such is obviously immoral unless you are a Neocon or central banker. Thus, Washington’s oft-times schizophrenic foreign policy is precisely due to the fact that, while the elites have constantly supported the barbaric Saudi regime and its thinly veiled terror campaign (for the reasons enunciated above), the ordinary people whom they despise sense that this policy is insane and threatens civilization.

The Establishment has been playing the mischievous wizard behind the curtain. But thanks in large part to Donald Trump, and to alternative media, this curtain is now in tatters and ordinary people can easily discern the wizard and his evil machinations. Whether or not Trump wins the presidency, it is only a matter of time before the wizard’s workshop will be permanently closed down.

Making sense of the Turkish coup attempt

Making sense of the Turkish coup attempt

 

Incirlik, pron. In-jeer-lik in Turkish but generally mispronounced as In-ser-lik by US TV anchors.

 

It has been reported by various sources that US forces in Incirlik have been surrounded by Turkish troops, although some reports now say that the standoff has been resolved.

The reason for this is that apparently, the recent failed coup against Erdogan has been attributed to the US, although this is a source of speculation. Some think Erdogan (pron. Er-do-an) himself staged the coup to consolidate his power and make himself a full-fledged dictator.

But all of this is secondary to the nitty-gritty fact that the US, via the CIA, USAID, the State Department, Soros foundations linked to the government, etc, has a long and sordid history of interference in other countries in an attempt to manipulate or overthrow governments and replace them with leaders willing to kowtow to Washington and spread senseless revolutions (which essentially started with the “Enlightenment,” as discussed here). The latest example of such US meddling may be the recent Brazil “legal” coup but no one can be sure. The latest documented example is the Ukraine debacle, with Asst. Secretary of State Victoria Nuland proudly announcing that the US had spent $5 billion of your money to overthrow a stable duly elected government and replace it with fascist-friendly “leaders” loyal to the US and EU. The net effect was chaos, with Ukraine now enjoying a standard of living that has been compared to that of Haiti.

Libya was another example. Further, the war in Syria can be traced back to the Arab Spring, a project sponsored by Washington and the EU that aimed to replace the stable democratic government of Bashar al-Assad with “moderate” Islamists and wound up spawning ISIS. Though the uprising has been portrayed as homegrown, numerous foreign fighters are involved. The US-sponsored and armed Islamist “rebels” recently beheaded a young boy. That is the new “democracy” sponsored by the US. Not the best publicity for US foreign policy, although good publicity is hard to come by.

This history of disastrous US-led interference goes back at least as far as the CIA-induced coup in Iran in 1954 that unseated a very popular secularist president, had him killed and replaced with Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, a very unpopular man famous for torture and murder of his opposition. In 2013 the CIA admitted its involvement. Pahlavi was eventually overthrown by rebels loyal to the Khomeini, an Islamic fundamentalist and Iran has been a thorn in Washington’s side ever since. Without our interference, Iran could be under secular rule instead of being dominated by Islamic fanatics. Only the Wahhabist Saudi Rat Pack is happy about this situation, which makes Iran an outcast.

Other admissions by the CIA include its admission, in 2000, of involvement in the Chilean coup to overthrow President Salvador Allende in 1973. The barbaric Augusto Pinochet, who replaced him, was subsequently tried for human rights abuses.

Kosovo is another example of US meddling and has produced a Muslim state where historic churches have been razed or damaged and no Christian cemetery has been left unscathed. The story is completely covered up, perhaps because the truth would be too much of an embarrassment to the Clintons, who made the decision to invade this once-Christian country and carve out a caliphate. By a twist of fate, I seem to be the only Western blogger who has uncovered these uncomfortable facts, as reported here.

All of this horrible embarrassment owes to the geniuses in the US State Department, who think they can control the world but keep winding up with unintended consequences that badly damage US relations with other countries. They are godless manipulators who keep proving the existence of God, the only thing standing between them and success in their Satanic plans.

What is happening now in Incirlik, Turkey, is another unintended consequence of US policies, in this case, the policy of “isolating” Russia. In truth, we are isolating the US, slowly but surely, as one ally after the other turns away from Washington in horror and disgust (as when almost every US ally in the world joined the

Chinese investment bank AIIB against vociferous warnings from Washington—it was a soft coup that went virtually unnoticed in the msm).

Finally, since Russia seems to have at least some involvement in the counter-coup, it is highly relevant that the US, mostly via the CIA, was deeply involved in coups and subversion against Russia, because this meddling provides a motive for the Russians to help counter this Turkish coup. Thus, even if it turns out the US was not involved, the blatant, counterproductive interference in governments throughout the world for at least 60 years, much of it aimed at countering Russian influence, has made the world justifiably suspicious of US involvement in all coups and terror events everywhere.

The CIA has not yet admitted to its involvement in the troubles in Chechnya that led to war in that Russian region, but this story is well documented and has been reported in minute detail by Zero Hedge. There are few pertinent reports in the Establishment msm, but a few have appeared, for example, here, here and here, which support the Zero Hedge report (I say that because the rabid Neocons who run the lying US media keep pretending ZH is unreliable).

Again, there is no telling whether the US was involved in the coup against Erdogan, and that is not the point I want to make.

I think it is clear that the Russians warned Erdogan of the coup attempt. You will recall that a Turkish fighter plane had shot down a Russian jet over Syria and this had led to a catastrophic rift in Turkish-Russian relations. But there was too much at stake for both parties to allow this contention to continue. Russia had agreed to lay a gas pipeline across Turkey that would supply Europe. Turkey would have had a steady income from the profits of gas sales. That deal is back on the table now thanks to Putin’s willingness to forgive.

Almost miraculously, the Russo-Turkish relationship may have been saved by some stories, whether true or false, including the report that the pilot who shot down the Russian plane over Syria was not following Erdogan’s orders in so doing but had perhaps followed orders from the US. That pilot has meanwhile been arrested, suspected of complicity with the coup. The story that the pilot was working against Erdogan is possible if far-fetched. But truth is not what matters in this case to the parties involved, which are eager to mend fences.

Like so much of what has happened in world affairs, this renewed Russian-Turkish rapport can be classified as payback for US meddling. And it could change the geopolitical landscape in ways that Washington will regret. US ally and NATO member Germany is already feeling the bite, as reported here.

The lesson, again, is that attempts to manipulate geopolitical events will always fail.

But don’t expect the Neocon maniacs in Washington to learn it.

 

 

Why you should fear the Fourth Reich

Why you should fear the Fourth Reich

by Don Hank

Recently, in a mass email to friends, I referred to the Merkel regime as the Fourth Reich, and this raised eyebrows. One said “surely you can’t compare today’s Germany with the Third Reich?” My response was as follows:

My ancestors were all Germans. On at least my Dad’s side, they had been banished from their homeland by the Lutherans, who tortured, murdered and banished all persons openly professing Anabaptist beliefs.

 

I majored in German in college and studied the language in a Junior year abroad program in Marburg an der Lahn, West Germany, in 1963-4. Why does today’s German government remind me of the Nazis, based on my experiences and knowledge of the Germans?

A German playwright named Carl Zuckmeyer saw something in the German character that troubled him. He saw that most Germans were mesmerized by authority, eg, military uniforms. He wrote about this disturbing feature and in 1930, his tragicomic play, The Captain of Köpenick, was published.

Here is a short intro: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A912lD1xpy. This intro is followed by a movie version with English subtitles, which I suggest you take the time to view. I was assigned to read this play in the original German and found it fascinating because I had seen these very traits in people all around me during my year abroad.

Of course, if I were to say these things in public in today’s Germany, I would be at risk of arrest. And that feature of German government, largely accepted by the public, reinforces the description of their national character.

Hitler collaborated with the Muslims, like the Grand Mufti and Yugoslav Muslims, to kill Jews. Today’s Germany still collaborates with Muslims, inviting hordes of them to Europe, and they are destroying European culture and creating an existential crisis, including the killing of European Jews in France, eg, in a famous massacre at a Kosher grocery store in Paris last year but also in a famous massacre at a Jewish school.

The Third Reich had laws banning certain kinds of speech. In today’s Germany, there is a jail sentence provided for people who say the “wrong” things in public. For example, the well-known official story is that Hitler killed 6 million Jews. Anyone who says in public in Germany that he killed less than that number, can go to jail. Several authors, even non-Germans, have been jailed for writing books that counter the official view. I do not agree with these authors, but if you jail people for saying something instead of debating with them, then that suggests to the public that you do not have cogent arguments or are not intelligent enough to defend your views. It certainly reflects an authoritarian behavior and the fact that the Germans accept this reflects the sheeplike traits that Carl Zuckmeyer expressed in his play, as described below and in the linked film. In addition to Holocaust denial, you can go to jail or pay a fine for insulting someone or for inciting ethnic violence. In other words, if you don’t agree with Mohammed’s theology (and I do not), then you are not free to say so or explain why in Germany – a “free world” country.

It was Merkel’s government that condemned EU countries that refused — for reasons of public security — to take in countless “refugees” even though security officials have stated that there are almost certainly terrorist sleeper cells hidden among them. She tried to enact laws via the EU that would punish these countries for refusing to put their citizens at risk. The Germans generally went along with her idea but other nations balked. This was the beginning of what is now a growing rift in the EU. It will not heal until finally the whole rotten system collapses.

BTW, Merkel had sent millions of euros to support the Arab Spring that saw foreign fighters come illegally to Syria in an attempt to oust Assad. Now, instead of accepting the refugee flood that Merkel and her partners in Washington created, the proper thing to do would be to fight ISIS and other terror groups such as Al-Qaeda (currently called Al-Nusra, but it is the same group that knocked down the WTC on 911). Instead, she and her Atlanticist partners in crime (eg, John McCain) support Al-Nusra with arms and training and want to defeat the Russians, the only world power that sincerely fights ISIS and Al-Nusra terror and protects Christians and other minorities in Syria. If the West accepted responsibility for its evil actions and helped Russia clear ISIS out of Syria, it could invest, jointly with Russia and others, in Syrian infrastructure and resources and provide jobs and safety to the Syrian people, who would then have no reason to migrate to Europe.

And then, there is the matter of foreign policy. The “free” country of Germany has sided with the authoritarian Turkish president Erdogan against Russia and Syria. She, like the Washington government, has a visceral suspicion of all things Russian and, like our government, finds it intolerable that Russia refuses to kowtow to the West. Though no one admits it, this is racism pure and simple, a reflection of the previous Reich, though directed at a different group – although Hitler irrationally thought the Slavs – to whom, ironically, he lost his army – were inferior.

Before the illegal coup that destroyed Ukraine, German foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier travelled to the Maidan to encourage Kiev to illegally and violently overthrow a regime that was friendly to Russia. During that time, he, along with US activists like John McCain, posed for photo-ops with activists having fascist associations, as described by Rodney Atkinson:

“Steinmeier, who recently said that eurosceptics and those nations who sought democratic self government were “a danger to peace in Europe,” was pleased to meet the leader of an extreme nationalistic and fascist party Oleh Tiahnybok with whom “Germany’s man”, Klitschko has been pleased to collaborate.” [my bolding—Don]

Recently, Berlin announced joint military drills with the troops of Turkey’s aspiring Muslim dictator Erdogan, who is known to be supporting ISIS. Of course, now that the Turkish government has seen another massacre and has attributed it to ISIS, we are supposed to believe that suddenly, the Turks are on our side.

However, if you believe the msm and Erdogan, namely, that the attacks were perpetrated by ISIS, then you must read an earlier report of mine showing that ISIS invariably claims responsibility for its attacks within one day and often the same day as the attack, as shown here http://laiglesforum.com/isis-always-claim-responsibility-except-in-turkey/3734.htm. In this latest Turkish attack, ISIS did not claim responsibility. Possible suspects include Kurdish separatists and the Turkish secret service.

At any rate, it is highly unlilkely ISIS was responsible. After all, you should know by now that Erdogan routinely sends ISIS fighters across his border into Syria and his son has bought oil stolen by ISIS from the Syrian people (see: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-11-25/meet-man-who-funds-isis-bilal-erdogan-son-turkeys-president). After all, claiming responsibility is a form of advertising for ISIS. They are not about to let a good propaganda moment go to waste. Indeed, they often claim responsibility for attacks that they themselves did not plan, like the recent lone wolf attack in Orlando. So why wouldn’t they claim responsibility in Turkey? I think this is best explained by the hypothesis that Erdogan and the attackers are on the same side. Of course, CIA chief John Brennan, a Muslim, supports Turkey’s claim that it was ISIS, claiming that it has their earmarks – sure, John, the devious Turkish dictator would not be capable of imitating ISIS, would he? He also admits that ISIS rarely takes credit for attacks in Turkey. He doesn’t say why. There can be no rational explanation – unless you accept the proposition that Erdogan is lying and that ISIS did not perpetrate the attack.

It is clear to me that the reason Merkel has taken Erdogan’s side is that he has her blackmailed with the “refugees,” housed within his borders. He has on one occasion threatened to put refugees on busses and send them to Europe if she does not comply with a certain demand. If the West were in the hands of sane and rational people, Turkey would be ousted from NATO and sanctioned.

But the harsh fact of the matter is that Erdogan owns Merkel like the Saudis own the US government, as I showed here: http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/hank/150314.

And that is a very dangerous situation. We should never believe that once a war has been fought and won, the ingredients that went into brewing that war are now cleared away. Of course, no one is saying that the Germans are going to start throwing Jews into ovens. But siding with Muslim radicals and letting them wreak havoc all over Europe, and then aiding the higher powers that created and foster the terror groups responsible for the havoc (the Saudis and Turkey in this case), is a really bad sign. So is the strong German support for the dictatorial (and collapsing) EU, whose unelected EU Commission is the only agency that is allowed to propose legislation, and which overrides all national laws, reducing the individual states to mere vassals.

Nonetheless, I would be remiss to apply the term “Fourth Reich” only to the German nation. The term applies to the Atlanticist empire as a whole.

Declassified document shows Obama DID know he was creating ISIS

Declassified document proves Obama DID know he was creating ISIS

 

by Don Hank

A recent column appearing at zerohedge.com confirmed that a tweet by Donald Trump hinting that Obama knew he was creating a terror group when he sent arms to “rebels” in Syria was on the money.

 

QUOTE:

The tweet included a link to this story that appeared on Breitbart: an account of a 2012  intelligence report from the Defense Intelligence Agency predicting the rise of the Islamic State in Syria – and showing how US policy deliberately ignored and even succored it. Secured by Judicial Watch thanks to the Freedom of Information Act, the document says it’s very likely we’ll see the creation of “an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria.” And this won’t just be a grassroots effort, but the result of a centrally coordinated plan: it will happen because “Western countries, the Gulf states and Turkey are supporting these efforts” by Syrian “opposition forces” then engaged in a campaign to “control the eastern areas (Hasaka and Der Zor) adjacent to Western Iraqi provinces (Mosul and Anbar).”

 

The author reminds us that “Western countries” includes the US.

Whether Obama and Hillary are Muslims or not is hardly the issue here. They are an important part of the Saudi Rat Pack (SRP) and that is all we need to know. If there were any justice in our country, they would both hang for treason.

BTW, a lot of hullabaloo is made over the “evil Muslims,” and Christians are some of the most vociferous in condemning all Muslims for what the Saudi Rat Pack does. I agree that Islam is not the religion of peace and that Mo was basically a fraud.

However, I have interacted with Muslims lately and am getting a much more-nuanced impression of things.

Two anecdotal pieces of evidence:

I attended a local English-speaking church on Easter Sunday here in Panama, and after the service they offered free food in the church basement. We sat at a table with a guy who turned out to be Indonesian, a really nice, respectful guy who had taken part in the service. When he told us where he was from, I said aren’t you folks Muslims? He smiled and said they were. My family and I gathered that he was admitting that he was a Muslim, and for me that was no surprise. I had lived in Asia for over 3 years and had made friends and acquaintances there. I learned early that Southern Asians are open to various religions and can confess more than one religion. In fact, the Buddhists believe that there are 5 great religions and Christianity is one of them. They deeply respect Christianity. Sounds insane to most Westerners, but that is how they are.

So I told the young Indonesian Muslim church goer that I had understood that Indonesian Muslims are different from their Middle Eastern brothers. He was quick to let me know that his countrymen want nothing to do with the Saudi violence and intolerance. He was definitely sincerely incensed about this and about the fact that people might mistakenly think his countrymen might largely sympathize with radical Islam. He said there was only one small region in Indonesia where the Muslims were radical like the Saudis.

The next piece of evidence came in today. I was seated in a lounge area of a large department store waiting for my wife and daughter to finish spending their money and noticed a gent sitting beside me who was looking about as bored as me and we struck up a conversation. He turned out to be an Albanian, one of 2 diplomats opening an embassy in Panama, and he had lived in Kosovo. Many of you know that I have written a piece on Kosovo, mostly a translation about the horrors that Serbs face there. He did not deny that this had happened in the past but said that the Serbs had really abused the Albanians for years. He pointed out that over 100 years ago, Serbia had tried to illegally annex Albanian territory. I told him I didn’t think any of that justified mistreating Serbs in Kosovo, but I saw he was not to be persuaded, so I decided to change the subject a bit and told him I had heard that the Saudis had sent money to Kosovo after the war was over.

He said that Kosovars do not like Saudi interference and that he knew they were causing trouble in Kosovo.

I was shocked to hear that he and I could agree that the Saudis were behind much of the mischief in the Middle East. In fact, he was clearly disgusted by it. He insisted that no one wants terrorism (meaning Muslims) and he sounded sincere.

Clearly the Islamic world is not a monolith and we owe it to ourselves to learn from individuals like my Indonesian and Albanian friends.

I had noticed a while back that there are certain groups of people who want us to believe that Muslims are all cookie cutter copies of each other, and what I noticed about these folks is important, so please pay attention:

These folks who want us to hate ALL Muslims are by and large Neocons. Now why would the Neocons want Americans to simply hate all Muslims and not just terrorists and potential terrorists?

I cannot say for certain, but I suspect that this is because it is easier to convince Americans of the righteousness of a misguided military action by the Pentagon if the target audience of the war propaganda is a bunch of cattle who accept the notion that all Muslims are equally evil and represent an unnuanced homogeneous group. They could use this excuse to take out any leader, such as Ghadaffi, Mubarak, Saddam, and of course, Assad.

I strongly suspect this slyly implanted idea that all Muslims are evil is what is motivating many Americans to support US military engagements that, without the blanket hatred of all Muslims, would make no sense. Indeed, I have read opinions critical of Assad based on the fact that he is a Muslim and therefore is evil and not worthy of consideration. The people who expressed this opinion did not seem to care that if the US takes him out, he will be replaced by ISIS. To them there is no difference between ISIS and Assad. They are tragically wrong. Assad belongs to a subgroup of Shia Islam that is almost perfectly tolerant of other religions. Despite whatever sins he may be guilty of, he is the perfect choice for protection of minorities and has done an amazing job of creating a tolerant society in Syria. Only the made-in-USA terror groups like Al-Nusra and ISIS have changed this situation and turned groups against each other who once had learned to tolerate each other under the leadership of Assad.

I do not suspect that Trump will use hatred and suspicion of Muslims to such an untoward end. I think he was just shooting from the hip when he said we need to stop the immigration of Muslims until we can figure out what is going on.

But Hillary is another story.

Meanwhile my Albanian acquaintance was surprisingly open minded about Trump and said that Trump no doubt was not referring to all Muslims but only to people from terror-exporting countries. He said that if Trump became president Albanians would support him, but that likewise they would support Hillary if she won the presidency because her husband Bill had “helped” the Albanians in Kosovo. In other words, contrary to the doomsday warnings of both liberals and GOP higher-ups, Trump would not destroy the US’s rapport with all Muslim countries but may only sully the most radical ones, like Saudi Arabia, which is in fact the enemy of the American people and does not deserve to be coddled.

I also told him I thought Kosovo had become more unstable after the war and that NATO was just indiscriminately killing people.

Incredibly, while he disagreed on the first point, he seemed to agree that NATO was just having itself a rowdy shooting match in Kosovo!

Finally, he told me that Kosovo and Albania saved the lives of many Jews in those places. Here is that story confirmed by the Jewish Post http://www.jewishpost.com/news/Why-Albania-A-Nation-of-Muslims-Christians-Saved-Every-Jew.html.

The world is a big place and there are all sorts of nuances that we are best served to examine and try to understand. More-precise knowledge of groups of people can help both avoid unnecessary military intervention and/or make sure the groups targeted by the Pentagon and/or the State Department really are enemies and not in fact friends or potential friends of We the People. We really ought to have noticed by now that groups or nations that Washington declares to be enemies routinely turn out to be friends and vice-versa and that overly strident propaganda against anyone is generally an excuse for a needless war.

I am only just beginning to understand the Muslim world but God has allowed me to make just the kind of contacts that are helping me fill in the blanks.

 

Obama’s own Napoleonic Wars

Obama’s Napoleonic Wars

 

by Don Hank

In Europe, the elections are manipulated and Eurosceptical political parties are neutralized simply by being called “nationalist.” This is like the label “demagogue,” which is applied to non-Establishment candidates because they remind people of things that would make anyone but the lobotomized angry. Reminding people of the obvious abuse by the Eurobullies is slyly called “manipulation of emotions” or the like, when in fact it is the Establishment that causes the anger in the first place. But everyone is supposed to behave like mechanical dolls with no emotion and that is “democracy.” If you are angry at being treated like a slave, you are undemocratic and must be closely watched and supervised.

Throughout the West, and particularly in the EU, while nationalism is blamed for wars, it is far from the main culprit. It is SUPRANATIONALISM in the form of centralized governments (intended to lead up to a one-world government) that causes wars, especially when the central government (eg, the EU) works in tandem with – or rather as a puppet of – the Washington-NATO dictatorship.

Here’s how it works:

Napoleon Bonaparte was not a nationalist. In fact he was not even French. He was Corsican. It was his idea of uniting all nations, not under the French tricolor, but under the ideological banner of the Enlightenment, that caused the Napoleonic wars. Therefore, though few realize it, the so-called Enlightenment itself, not nationalism, was responsible for the Napoleonic wars. Nor do historians point out that there were different variations on the Enlightenment theme when that movement first appeared, and that only one of them, the most radical and anti-traditional one, prevailed. This radical ideology taught that tradition itself was behind all evil and must be abolished at all cost, including guillotining anyone who happened to disagree. Few realize that Lorenzo de Medici was actually an advocate of an Enlightenment that was both Christian and linked to the roots of Greek philosophers, particularly Aristotle. This tradition-respecting idea from Italy was far removed from the radical French “Enlightenment” ideals that led to the massacre of church clerics and thousands of innocents who failed to pass the political correctness tests of the day. The French Revolution, based on the Enlightenment, saw the first trials of non-commonsense, non-sane, anti-traditional ideas in action and was a laboratory for the subsequent implementation of the non-sane ideas of Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot and other 20th Century mass murderers.

And nota bene: The US-EU system is still implementing non-sane ideas of its own invention – such as the notion that gender is interchangeable, and is still fighting an extension of the Napoleonic wars throughout the world to protect non-sanity — such as the teaching that Christianity is violent while Islam is peaceful, or that boundaries don’t exist and must be abolished (no one seems to notice that it would be pretty hard to abolish something that doesn’t exist). While not openly atheistic, the Western elites are clearly anti-Christian, waging wars that ultimately promote radical Islam and promoting, domestically, virulently anti-traditional ideas (leading, eg, to lawsuits and exorbitant fines imposed on bakers who refuse to bake gay wedding cakes with inscriptions on them that shake their religious beliefs to the core) and causes that sully traditional people’s sensitivities and instincts. Already, it is socially impossible to say in public “marriage is a union between a man and a woman” without incurring the wrath of almost everyone in our zombie-like society. Even those institutions cheekily calling themselves “churches” will condemn you for saying something so “un-Christlike.”

The ideas of the radical Enlightenment (as opposed to its more moderate branches, which have long been virtually banned) have led to the destruction of most of the Middle East, Afghanistan and Kosovo, as well as the near-total destruction of Syria, and threaten to plunge us into another war with Russia. How do you suppose that will work out?

Let’s ask Napoleon and Hitler how it worked out for them and their splendid invading armies.

Will Putin hand Trump the presidency?

Will Putin hand the presidency to Trump?

by Don Hank

I was invited to participate in a conversation among a group of friends who are hoping that the Kremlin will turn over their cache of Hillary emails obtained via the Romanian hacker “Guccifer” just in time to smear her prior to the November election. Judge Napolitano has stated that the Kremlin is holding these emails and is not sure what to do with them. The group was hopeful that Putin would reveal the content of this cache just in time for Hillary to be indicted before elections. Here is my reply to the group:

Yes, this could be a big deal.

But remember that Putin has an iron-clad policy of never interfering in the internal affairs of what he calls “partner” countries.

Putin must stick to this policy to avoid hypocrisy because he has publicly opposed interference by the State Department in the color revolutions, the Arab Spring and the military interventions in Kosovo, Libya, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc, nations that have been utterly ruined by Washington’s intervention. Thus by failing so abjectly in every attempt at control, Washington has handed Russia a huge propaganda advantage and he will not fritter it away by imitating Washington’s interference in other countries’ politics … including US politics. It is his principle (part of what I have called the Putin Principle) to avoid such chicanery, thereby presenting a stark contrast with Washington “leaders” and in so doing – ie, by his studied refusal to interfere – letting the world beat a path to Moscow – as Netanyahu has done just this week, for example.

He must come across to existing and potential trade and military partners as squeaky clean in this regard and not be seen interfering in anyone’s business, except, for example, to be seen as protecting the lives of minorities in Syria, or of Russian speakers in E. Ukraine, who have, you will recall, been bombed from the air and subjected to murders and abuse by fascist thugs of the Right Sector who revere men like Stepan Bandera, a Nazi who aided Hitler in killing Ukrainian Poles back in the day (these openly fascist partisans march in parades with photos of these old “heroes”). Unfortunately, these lumpenproletariat are all seen as part of the US-backed Kiev government. We own them and that fact makes Putin look like a white knight by contrast. Dim-witted State Department and Pentagon officials, as well as professional Russophobes (whom I exposed recently for the phonies they are), whine that RT (Russia Today) is “Russian propaganda” and some have even suggested banning it or imposing a heavy tariff on its revenues in the US. But the reality is that US foreign policy has been Russia’s best propaganda.

You will recall that when asked what he thought of Trump, Putin’s answer was totally apolitical. He only made a vague reference to Trump’s intelligence, which was misinterpreted by Trump to mean Putin thought he was a “genius.” Not quite, but it was a nice gesture on Volodya’s part (the nickname is not “Vlad” in Russian BTW). He pointedly commented at the time “we do not interfere in anyone’s internal affairs,” a comment that went over most Western heads because most of us refuse to believe that no other governments could possibly abstain from Washington-type skullduggery. “They’re all doing it.”

Just remember: Putin’s argument is that it was interference on the part of USAID, “sandwich girl” Victoria Nuland, Geroge Soros (who admitted on national TV that he was involved in the Maidan coup — the subject of my report here: http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/hank/140530) and the top “leaders” of EU countries (like President Rutte of Holland, Germany’s foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, etc), who personally blundered into the Maidan deceitfully presenting the EU as a potential savior — just as the EU had done in Greece), that turned Ukraine into a showcase of grandiose failure with an economy about on the level of Haiti’s). Thus Russia, which has never bankrupted another country, is holding all the propaganda cards thanks to the endless trail of failed states left behind by the West. Putin intends to hold on to these cards. He said in his autobiography that even in his youth, he never gambled. He won’t start now.

Thus Putin must and will be very careful not to look like another meddler because he has billed Russia as the anti-meddler and he will tend this image like a gardener tending a prize rose bud. So don’t expect him to openly threaten Hillary with blowing her whistle. He can’t afford to even appear to do this, as much as he would certainly like to.

Sure, he has some sympathy with Trump, but after all, Trump has waffled on his stance toward Putin and on Syria. None of us — including Vladimir Putin, is too sure what he would do as president.

That is another reason Putin must hold his cards close to his vest — something he is very good at.

So as much as he might want to help, and as much as my email group may yearn for it, Donald J. Trump will have to find his own way to the White House.. But after all, he is a “genius,” isn’t he?

 

New details on US-Saudi deal suggest Washington supporting terrorist regime

New details of US-Saudi deal suggest Washington supports terror

 

by Don Hank

Bloomberg recently exposed the storykept under wraps for over 40 yearsof the US-Saudi petrodollar agreement under which the US agreed to use its military to protect the Saudi family in exchange for the Saudis’ demanding US dollars as payment for oil and buying US Treasuries. The US officials who disclosed this story said that King Faisal insisted the deal should be kept secret because anti-US sentiment in the Middle East was running high due to US support for the Yom Kippur War.

The fact that the Saudis insisted on secrecy in this petrodollar deal suggests that there may well still be secrets yet to be revealed.

Considering that all US involvement in wars and US support for government coups outside the Western Hemisphere since 1974 greatly benefitted the Saudis and harmed the US people (Saudi support for terror, trillions of dollars spent on wars all supporting Sunni Islamization), it is highly likely that part of this agreement – certainly an unwritten part – called for the US indirectly to help spread Wahhabism everywhere. Because this is exactly what the US government did in its foreign and military policy for over 40 years. Don’t tell me it was all a coincidence!

Recap:

GW Bush covered up Saudi complicity in the 2001 terror attacks on the Twin Towers, as reported here.

QUOTE:

Case agents I’ve interviewed at the Joint Terrorism Task Forces in Washington and San Diego, the forward operating base for some of the Saudi hijackers, as well as detectives at the Fairfax County (Va.) Police Department who also investigated several 9/11 leads, say virtually every road led back to the Saudi Embassy in Washington, as well as the Saudi Consulate in Los Angeles.

Yet time and time again, they were called off from pursuing leads. A common excuse was “diplomatic immunity.”

Bush’s Iraqi war ended up with the Assyrian Christians leaving the country in droves. They had survived 2000 years of persecution but finally succumbed to the US-Saudi-led war that installed their enemies in power. The Saudis aim to eliminate Christianity from all predominantly Muslim regions. Hence, it was a Saudi win, but, like all US military engagements outside the Western hemisphere, it was at the same time a devastating loss – in terms of money, morale and security – for the once-Christian US.

The US-led war in Kosovo converted this cradle of Serbian Christianity into an exclusively Muslim domain, where the last Christian residents, who had spent their lives there since infancy, were mercilessly persecuted and almost all Christian monuments, such as cemeteries and churches, were, and are still being, destroyed and desecrated (http://laiglesforum.com/look-whats-happening-in-the-european-region-that-nato-defended/3786.htm). Again, this debacle was a clear-cut loss for the US people but a resounding victory in terms of Saudi goals. Indeed, Saudi money was reported to have “flooded Kosovo” after the war.

US Support for the Egyptian spring was apparently motivated by a desire to establish the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood in that country in compliance with Saudi wishes. I say that because there is no way that US officials could have expected democracy to bloom in that hotbed of  Islamic fanaticism. It succeeded under Mursi until he was ousted by Al Sisi. During Mursi’s reign, Christians were persecuted. A Christian Egyptian lady I know told me her husband had traveled back to Egypt during the Mursi regime and when they asked him where he intended to visit, and he mentioned the name of a predominantly Christain town, he was unceremoniously put on the next flight back to the US. At the time of this telling, they had never learned the fate of his family. As stated above, the Saudis aim to eliminate Christianity from all predominantly Muslim regions. A major US loss, a resounding victory in terms of Saudi goals – until the Egyptian military stepped in.

Libya was run by a secular Muslim leader who established stability and relative peace among all factions including Christians. The Saudis also aim to eliminate all secular leaders, mostly because they promote tolerance of Christians and Shia. Within a year after the criminal murder of Ghadaffi, aided by US-NATO forces, Libya fell into the hands of warring factions, predominantly ISIS, which adheres to Saudi Wahhabism and is a US-Saudi brainchild. Another Saudi victory, another loss – and humiliation for We the People.

The US supports the ouster of Bashar Al-Assad, a non-Sunni (Saudi Wahhabism is a Sunni sect), who also protects the Christians in his country.  Assad is also an ally of Christian Russia, making him doubly a target of the Saudis. The US motivation is pure and simple: Keep the Saudis happy by trumping up mostly unproven charges against Assad and training terror groups to defeat him. The US slyly calls these groups “rebels” but all of them are Islamists who will introduce Shariah law and persecute Christians. Many are linked to Al-Qaeda and have also passed on US-donated arms to Al-Qaeda and ISIS.

The dogged Neocon press insists that Iran is the biggest supporter of terror, despite the fact that this largely Shiite country has never supported any of the terror groups that oppose the West, such as the Taliban, Al-Qaeda and ISIS, all US-Saudi protégées. Arch-Neocon John McCain joked that he would like to bomb Iran. The US legislature was close to supporting an Israeli bombing raid on Tehran. This would have been another black eye for the US but a resounding victory for the Saudis, who aim to eliminate the Shiite religion everywhere in the world.

US antagonism for Russia can also be seen as part of this pattern of behavior intended to keep the Saudis happy.

The above recap of US foreign and military policy is ample circumstantial evidence that the most important elements of the secretive 40 year old petrodollar agreement are not known and may never come to light.

Nonetheless, this commentary is intended to encourage research in this area to see what might still be found, for examples, in records of classified phone, mail or email exchanges between the Washington government and the Saudis, and in the memories of officials involved in past US-Saudi transactions.

After all, confirmation that the government of the largest nominally Christian country in the world has been engaged for over 40 years in aiding and abetting the most intolerant and violent anti-Christian sect in the world – ie, Wahhabism – in its quest to eliminate Christianity everywhere might be a story of some interest.

Next US president must understand the Putin Principle

The disarmingly simple Putin Principle in foreign policy

by Don Hank

One of the cardinal points raised by Sun-tzu in his “Art of War” is the proposition of knowing the enemy. I will take that a step further and say that sometimes knowing the enemy leads to the discovery that he is not the enemy after all. And one further step: to the discovery that one is one’s own enemy.

The US government is the classic example.

There seem to be an alarming number of people who actually believe that hoax email making its rounds claiming that Hillary’s emails have been hacked by Russia.

First off, the story originated with a well-known hoaxster with the pseudonym Sorcha Faal, who specializes in these Russian fairy tales.

Secondly, if Americans do not have the ability and resources to hack into Hillary’s server, how in heaven’s name would they be able to hack into the Kremlin server?

The Kremlin is not run like the Washington government. No official would dare to let down his guard enough for a Westerner to hack into Kremlin emails. The offender would not get a smack on the wrist, the way Hillary did. Russians are serious about their government. Sadly, Americans have degenerated to the extent that very few care any more or believe that any government could possibly be serious about protecting its people. Why would any government be more honest than ours?, they reason.

The whole idea behind this fake story is that the Kremlin wants to interfere in our elections.

Nothing could be further from the truth. You will recall that when Putin was asked his opinion of Donald Trump, he ventured to say that Trump was clever (Trump later expanded this compliment claiming Putin had called him a “genius”), but in his very next breath, Putin made it clear that Russia has a policy of non-interference in the affairs of other countries. He was thereby establishing an unmistakable contrast between Russia and the Washington government.

I will attempt in a few lines here to explain a somewhat complex cultural and political situation in Russia as well as the mind of President Vladimir Putin.

One of the most important things you need to know about Putin is that he is serious about government business. Unlike our demented officials, he does not play irresponsible games. I am just now reading his biography, and recently came across an anecdote about his early days in the KGB school in Leningrad, now Saint Petersburg (BTW, Putin was not a spy, but rather an intel analyst). A few of his class mates — senior classmen — were discussing a certain hypothetical order that they might receive in the field.

When it came his turn to add his opinion, Putin said “that order is illegal.” Their attitude was “so what? It is an order.”

He said, “it is still illegal.”

That brief anecdote speaks volumes about who Vladimir Putin is and why he is respected in his own country (his popularity is still in the 80% range) and. increasingly, abroad.

Now, taking this further, Putin saw many years ago that the Washington government lies and cheats. It makes its own laws as it goes and enforces laws that are not on the books. All illegal in the international sphere. (Example: James Baker promised Gorbachev that the US would never encroach on Russian borders. Once an agreement was reached with Russia regarding relations with the US, the US broke that promise, and it is still doing so, with NATO building up heavy forces along Russia’s western border). Americans have been brainwashed into believing that lawless behavior in Washington is a good thing because America is “exceptional.” But this slipshod attitude toward the serious matter of international law – which, after all, governs the circumstances that lead to either war or peace – has led to the near-total destruction of Kosovo (in case you missed these, see: http://laiglesforum.com/so-youre-fond-of-nato-eh-mr-cruz-check-out-these-videos-of-nato-in-kosovo/3690.htm and http://laiglesforum.com/look-whats-happening-in-the-european-region-that-nato-defended/3786.htm), Libya, Syria and Ukraine.

Putin discovered long ago that the US was on the wrong track and set about to develop a strategic policy for his country that would restore legality to geopolitics and so impress the rest of the world that they would eventually trust Russia more than any other country. I like to call this policy the Putin Principle. The Kremlin calls it soft power.

It is the iron-clad implementation of this simple principle that led to Russia’s policies in Ukraine (particularly in the former Ukrainian territory of Crimea) and Syria.

The Western press and political class has brainwashed an astounding number of Westerners into believing that Russia is promoting lawlessness in these regions when in fact, even in its military operations, it is respecting sovereignty of nations and ethnic groups and their territories.

The West claims in unison that the accession of Crimea to Russia was an “annexation,” whereby Russia simply snatched territory in a selfish expansionist move. And yet no serious party in this same Western world protested the referendum in Scotland or claimed it was illegal. The US and Europe were all prepared to accept whatever the outcome might be, including Scotland’s separation from the UK, based on the principle that Scotland had a right to sovereignty, even though it was technically part of the UK. And once that vote became official, the Crimean people were free to accede to Russia.

Yet what was perfectly legal in Scotland was “aggression” in Crimea, even though over 90% of Crimeans (the vast majority of whom are Russian speakers and consider themselves Russian) voted in this referendum to break away from Ukraine – and for the same reasons that many Scots (just short of a majority) wanted to break away from the UK, namely, cultural identity.

Thus, by our own Western logic as applied to Scotland, what the Crimeans did was legal and not in any way reprehensible.

Russia simply accepted the will of the Crimean people and honored their sovereignty. But of course, Russia is illegal by definition in the West.

Likewise, in Syria – in contradistinction to the US, which waded into an internal conflict without any invitation from the Syrian people – Russia entered the conflict only when the duly elected president of Syria invited it to do so. In fact, it made a similar offer to the Iraqi government but stayed out of that conflict when the Iraqis declined the offer, choosing instead to allow the US to pretend to fight ISIS there and create one of their  trademark messes.

The “exceptional” US government went into Syria illegally while Russia entered as an invited guest. The US was exceptionally lawless. Yet it accuses Russia of “expansionism,” just as England – the most expansionist country that ever existed, touting an empire on which the sun never set – had once accused Russia of expansionism during the conflict with Turkey in the 19th Century.

Thus the West has always written its own laws as it goes, based on nothing but bare-faced propaganda.

Note that Putin not only wants to apply this more-righteous and in fact, more common-sense international policy of strict adherence to international law to Russia but at the same time, to use this higher virtue as an arm of soft power by contrasting it with the West’s ad hoc law of the Wild West. He and his government, often via the mouthpiece of foreign minister Sergey Lavrov, use every opportunity (eg, UN speeches, speeches before the Valdai Club, press conferences, interviews, RT) to drive this concept home.

The American public will perhaps be the last to grasp this simple concept, not because they are stupid but because they have been brow-beaten into feeling that facing the truth about foreign affairs is somehow unpatriotic. But elsewhere, including in Europe, there are high ranking actors who seem to understand it. And they respect Russia for what must be called a superior approach to geopolitics. After all, ISIS would not be a threat if the Russian principle had been applied in the West.

Look what’s happening in the European region that NATO “defended”

Look what’s happening in the European region that NATO “defended”

by Don Hank

From the site: Pravoslavie.RU

From the fourteenth century to the present day, the land of Kosovo and Metohija has been, and will always remain, the spiritual heartland of the Serbian Orthodox nation. Sanctified by a multitude of monasteries and churches as well as by the blood of martyrs, the holy land of Kosovo occupies a place of honor and reverence within the souls of all believing Serbs.

The pretext behind Bill Clinton’s war in Kosovo was genocide against the Albanian Muslim Kosovars, supposedly perpetrated by the Christian Serbs.

Now Kosovo is a holy land to Orthodox Serbs. It holds sites of some of the first churches and sacred monuments ever built in their country – in fact, some of the first in Europe. Some are around1,000 years old.

A joint report was recently issued by In Defense of Christians (IDC) and Knights of Colombus (KC) for the purpose of inducing the US Congress to issue a statement that the persecution of Christians in the Middle East is genocide. While this IDC/KC report mentions how the Knights of Columbus had defended Christians persecuted in Mexico under President Plutarco Calle, in Italy under Mussolini and in communist bloc countries, it does not mention persecution of Serbian Orthodox in Kosovo and Greek Orthodox in Cyprus. It is hoped that eventually, the situation in Kosovo and other parts of the former Yugoslavia will be brought to light. However, time is of the essence.

Once submitted to Congress, their report produced the desired effect. Not only did Congress issue a statement declaring persecution of Christians in the Middle East to be genocide, but the Obama administration was forced to reluctantly follow suit, for fear of losing face. However, while the report presents a meticulously detailed account of the known murders and persecution of Christians in Iraq and Syria, it does not mention the genocide in Kosovo, which is ongoing and is a hideous blemish on US foreign and military policy. It should give pause to anyone who has advocated that NATO be “strengthened” (eg, Ted Cruz and followers) rather than dismantled (as suggested by Donald Trump). In effect, while IDC and KC are to be commended for their meticulous study and efforts to bring this report to the US Congress, by singling out only the Middle Eastern Christians, sadly, their report glosses over Bill Clinton’s biggest crime, the Kosovo War, which I described here. The ulterior motivation for this war, and all Middle East wars in which the US engaged, was described here.

This accusation of “genocide” by the Christian Serbs was far from supported by the facts on the ground, which, according to reports from Serbian bloggers and others, seemed to suggest the inverse, ie, genocide against Christians by these supposed victims, who may have made some missteps in defending themselves against criminal Albanians but unquestionably had the right to defend themselves. In fact, as reported, for example, by the BBC here, the UN declared after the war that – at variance with the US allegations – the situation in Kosovo did not rise to the level of genocide against the Albanian Muslims. But it was too late. You can’t wind back a war.

The Serbian Parliament issued a report here taken from a speech by Chief Delegate Aleksandar Cotric at the autumn session of the International Secretariat of the Interparliamentary Assembly of Orthodoxy, held in Nicosia, Cyprus, from November 22 to 25. The excerpts appearing in the following are my translations from the Serbian from this site. Cotric’s speech contained horrific details rarely reported outside of Serbia, and while the Serbian Parliament’s site did include these details in its Serbian-language site, its English language site omitted them. Here are my translations of the salient details (emphasis mine):

“Since 1999, Serbian clergy, monks and temples of the Serbian Orthodox Church in Kosovo and Metohija have been exposed to constant attacks, threats and provocations by Albanian terrorists and extremists.”

“Since then more than three hundred thousand Serbs have been expelled from their homes in Kosovo and Metohija, and about 150 churches, monasteries and other religious objects were destroyed, damaged and desecrated.

“More than ten thousand icons, ecclesiastical art and liturgical objects were also stolen or destroyed, and about six thousand tombstones at about 350 Serbian Orthodox cemeteries destroyed or damaged, while in more than 50 Serbian Orthodox cemeteries, there is no monument left intact…”

The sanitized version of this report in English, authorized by the National Assembly (Parliament) of the Republic of Serbia, mentions, like the IDC/KC report, only the persecution of Christians in the Middle East and completely ignores the situation in Kosovo, even though the Kosovar persecution follows the same signature MO as the ISIS persecution in the Middle East. The Serbs who wrote this report would have had every right, and obligation, to report at their English-language site, the above-described ongoing destruction of an entire Serbian region ever since the end of the war in 1999.

Another English-language page of this National Assembly site goes so far as to mention the “Kosovo-Metohija issue” but does not elaborate. Thanks to media self-censorship, no non-Serb would have any idea what this issue is or that it involves genocide against Christians by the Muslim Albanians that NATO purported to protect. How does one protect thugs? Did Ted Cruz know about this when he recommended that NATO be “strengthened”?

So why did the Serbian government not speak out on the dire situation of Christians in Kosovo at its English-language site?

That’s easy. Serbia has applied for accession to the EU and the negotiations are ongoing. The EU is a US puppet and may not mention that the US’s (and NATO’s) war in Kosovo has been wreaking havoc in that region for 17 years. We must all be good little puppets.

Likewise, the Facebook site of the Inter-Parliamentary Assembly of Orthodoxy, which appears in English, Russian and Greek, also omits the above details of Christian persecution in Kosovo – in each of those languages – obviously for the same reason. So if a European state wants to join the EU, it had better not tell the truth about the dire situation facing your Christian population. This situation perfectly fits the definition of tyranny.

I went to the Assembly’s Facebook page and posted, admonishing them to stop the self censorship and warning them that they would be better off outside the EU, which had acquiesced to the destruction of Kosovo in cowardly fashion.

There are a few honest and balanced reports on the Kosovo war and its causes, for example, at this site.

An excellent video at this site presents an honest picture of the situation in Kosovo before, during and after the war. Note the role of the Americans in assisting the Albanian Muslims to purge the Christians.

Very obviously, the Kosovo war was not about preventing genocide. It was part of a larger effort by the Western elites to eliminate Christianity.

 

Crack analyst confirms my assessment of Panama Papers reporting

Crack analyst agrees with my assessment of Panama “scandal”

 

by Don Hank

I suggested to you here that the Panama story that falsely linked Russian president Vladimir Putin to an offshore account (in a scheme that is not illegal anyway) was manufactured and reported at this point in time because Putin and Assad had just routed ISIS from Palmyra (and Al-Qaryataini, which I neglected to mention), two brilliant military moves that make Washington’s do-nothing government look almost as bad as it is.

It was a no-brainer for a long-time observer of Russia bashing vs the real Russia.

Here is another long-time observer of the same phenomena, Pepe Escobar, providing essentially the same analysis (minus the fact that the timing is designed to drown out the praise for Putin/Assad’s routing of ISIS) plus some additional details about others allegedly involved and the motives for the exposure of the scandal. For example, Escobar points out that some of the others smeared in the story are prominent in BRICS, an economic union that challenges the US-dominated World Bank and IMF (which I wrote about here, showing why these US led institutions can’t compete in the free market, which is why they are desperate to keep the market from being free – this Panama report is part of that effort).

Note that the leaked story, reported by Russia bashers of long standing, eg, the Guardian and a German paper loyal to NATO (which I discussed at length here), does not mention any of the presumably numerous US clients of the now-smeared Panamanian law firm Mossack and Fonseca. The reporters cherry picked the data to show only the depositors whom the Washington schemers seek to destroy. You may wonder why David Cameron was mentioned. I think it is possibly because Cameron has been promising the UK a referendum to leave the EU and he is linked – wrongly – with the Brexit – which he in fact is trying to derail but is caught between a rock and a hard place because the majority of Brits want out of the EU and he is obliged to pretend he is with them. The US-centric global elites consider him a traitor to their scheme of world domination, of which the EU is the European centerpiece.

This scandal  may well be a shot over his bow to keep him in line with Washington’s desires. But more than anything it was a dragnet intended for Putin, who must be denigrated at all costs by the Washington establishment – which only pretended to fight ISIS for years – so that the public will not admire him for saving Syria from ISIS and making the Washington vipers look like the nest of vipers they are.

Nothing happens that is not politically motivated. And if the msm tells you something, assume it is a lie until proven otherwise.