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.

Anti-Russianism is every bit as dangerous as anti-Semitism

Anti-Russian is as bad as anti-Jewish. Both are dangerous

by Don Hank

After I published yesterday’s article, titled “RT condemned as anti-Jewish for copying a Jewish newspaper’s headline verbatim,” I received another email from the Russia-hating friend who had alerted me to the article condemning RT for its headline. She said that Ha’aretz is a leftist site, implying that it is not representative of the Israeli people. Let me ask then – suspending disbelief and assuming it does not represent Israel – why did CAMERA not criticize Ha’aretz in addition to RT? Further, after receiving that email, I found another Israeli site that also ran that same offending headline. So you have two Israeli sites running a headline and no one bats an eyelash, but when RT publishes verbatim the news feed from one of them, they are condemned as being “dramatically absurd.”  I don’t know how absurd can be dramatic (the language is suspiciously reminiscent of Accuracy in Media), but if there is such a concept, then should it not apply to all offending sites alike, whether Israeli or Russian or whatever? It is clear from the content of the RT article that no offense was intended. I cannot say the same about the statements by CAMERA. And you know what? PM Netanyahu just returned from a meeting with Putin and the web site of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs today ran a very respectful report on that meeting, in which Netanyahu thanks Putin for his cooperation, and says he expects another 25 years of Israeli-Russian cooperation.

The friend further writes: “Bibi is playing KGB Putin like a fine fiddle!  Americans are NOT taken in by your KGB comrade.”

Now that raises questions. The Russophobes all seem to agree that Putin is deceitful and wants to pull a dirty trick on the West (speculation ranges upwards to a nuclear attack). However, this person, who obviously admires Netanyahu, is saying in her above-cited email, that Netanyahu intends to betray Putin. Now if that were true (and she gives no evidence to back this up), then why condemn Putin for being sneaky and treacherous when she believes the man she admires is also sneaky and treacherous? This just goes to show the irrational and racist double standard applied to Russia.

But beyond that, I do not believe for a minute that either of these gentlemen dislike or mistrust each other. Quite to the contrary, they have cooperated in Syria, where Putin has helped save the lives of Israeli pilots near or in the Golan Heights. Plus, as Putin reminds him at each meeting, both nations have suffered  immensely at the hands of the fascists. I believe that Netanyahu senses a close brotherly bond with Putin and the Russians that results from that historic experience. Further, they are both brave warriors, each in his own way, and each one loves his own country. Moreover, each has reason to fear the other’s military prowess, and this fear has grown into mutual respect. Netanyahu must also know that Putin’s cooperation with Israel has put a strain on Iran-Russia relations and that Putin is willing to accept this strain because  he values his relationship with the PM and with the Israeli people.

Everyone needs to remember the lesson of the Holocaust, namely, that humanity must be constantly wary of any signs of racism and root it out wherever it rears its head. Anti-Jewish speech and actions are routinely referred to as racist (even though Jews do not, strictly speaking, constitute a race). The exact same yardstick must be applied to the Russians, who lost several times more lives in WW II than any other nation. Who therefore know more about war and peace than any other nation. Who are doing the job we should be doing by eliminating ISIS in the Middle East. And who are therefore our natural and logical friends and allies.

We are now closer to a nuclear conflagration than ever before in history, precisely because of the irrational Russia baiting I highlighted in yesterday’s, and now this, article. It is exactly the wrong time to be antagonizing or baiting another nuclear power, even if you don’t like its internal politics or foreign policies.

Pray for peace, friends. Let’s none of us be hatin’ on anyone else.

Matthew 5:46.

Again, all people of good will need to be able to say: God bless Israel! God bless Russia! God bless America!

Will Russia be first to unite the Middle East?

Will Russia be the first to bring Shiites and Sunnis together?

 

by Don Hank

 

Today’s situation in the Middle East is very confusing to the uninitiated because US policy is secretly based on a decivilizing and disordering strategy that, to survive, must masquerade as being beneficial to all and designed to bring peace and justice. A major challenge for deceitful policy makers. For example, Obama originally had decided not to send arms and troops to the Syrian “rebels,” but when he saw the Russians bombing rebel bases, he decided to send more troops and arms (perhaps to appease the Neocons or perhaps because he has become one), as reported here.

BTW, note that Israel has apparently done the same, as reported here.

A few months ago Ted Cruz addressed a group of Syrian Christians living in the US. Like many naive Americans, he assumed that the Middle East Jews and Christians share the same plight and therefore sympathize with each other. However, the Christian-killing terrorists in Syria have the moral support of many Israelis and the Israeli government because these terrorists are, for now, also opposed to Hezbollah and Iran, which the Israelis see as enemies. This complexity is overwhelming for most Westerners because the pertinent dots are never connected in our media.

The ingenuous Cruz was surprised at these Christians’ hostile response when before this crowd of Syrian Christians, he repeated the shibboleth “I stand with Israel,” indicating that, like nearly all US politicians, he hasn’t a clue as to Syrian sentiments and the reality there. (Ben Carson, unlike Trump, also wants to ratchet up the cold war).

To state this reality as simply as possible, the Shiites (the Iranian people and the Syrian government–supported by Russia) are perceived as enemies of Israel while the Sunnis (essentially the Saudis, Gulf states and Turkey), who hate the Shia, are perceived as allies.

This unintentionally pits US supporters of Syrian Christians against Israel in the sense that to support these Christians, one naturally supports Russia’s efforts to defeat ISIS and the rebels, but Israel perceives Russia as a threat because she is defeating their Sunni “allies” in ISIS. Thus, when Israelis hear Americans sympathizing with the Syrian Christians, many of them tend to get nervous. On the other hand, US Christians and others who mouth the slogan “I stand for Israel” make Syrians nervous because this suggests that the person who says this is seen as a threat to the Syrian Christians and other minorities.

Thus far, geopolitically illiterate Western politicians (the vast majority) and by far the majority of US analysts, seem to think that not only are Sunnis and Shia irreconcilable, but that in the outside chance they could be brought together, their newfound unity could threaten US interests.

Yet they also perceive perpetual war to be in the US interest, a proposition that is counterintuitive and morally untenable. I have tried to explain here how this absurd and dangerous idea came about and why it has been perpetuated for a half-century with almost no opposition in politics and media.

So how can both sides be brought together?

Putin is an unrivaled statesman who obviously wants to do unite these enemies of long standing. He recognizes that the US-aggravated rivalry between the Sunnis and Israel on the one hand and the Shia and Russia on the other is untenable in the long run and will lead to war. He is clearly trying to defuse the tension nurtured by the US. While attacking the Syrian terrorists who have the tacit support of Israel, he has shown Israel his support by meeting with and speaking with Netanyahu and by agreeing with the latter to involve Russia in the extraction of the Leviathan gas deposit, part of which is claimed by Israel. This tacitly implies several important things:

1—Russia accepts Israel’s existence as a nation

2—Russia agrees with Israel’s claim to its share of Leviathan even though Israel has stretched international law by extending its waters from 12 miles to 200 miles to include the relevant part of the deposit.

3—Russia will not allow encroachment on this deposit during its extraction and will protect any portions of the pipeline that cross Israeli territory.

It is a virtual military protection agreement for Israel. Further, none of this will come as a surprise for Russia watchers of the non-Neocon variety because Putin had visited Israel years ago and gave a press conference relating to this trip in which his respect for the Jews and the people of all faiths is reflected. This video of the conference best illustrates the fact that Putin is by his very disposition a true uniter of peoples and a man of good will.

It was only a matter of time before Israel’s tenuous support of the Sunni terrorists would be discovered and would therefore backfire mightily.

The US and Israel were playing with fire by cultivating Sunni Saudis and, by extension, the Saudis’ pets in ISIS,as their main allies (with the US all the while pretending to fight ISIS for cosmetic purposes). They had set a trap for themselves that has now been sprung by Russia.

Russia is now the only country in the world that intends to bring the Sunni world – and  its allies Israel and the US – and the Shia world – ie, the Iranian people and Syrian government – together as clearly suggested by this report showing that in September, Putin either spoke by phone or met with not only the Shia leaders of Iran and Syria but also their supposed arch enemies the leaders of the Sunni countries Palestine, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Jordan, and most amazingly, Israel. This convergence of the Middle East in Moscow represented nothing short of an epoch making plate shift but went almost completely unreported in the West, a benighted region which still seeks answers solely in policies that divide the Middle East and make it more barbaric, supposedly to benefit US interests but in fact to no one’s benefit.

After years and years of relentless brainwashing, the idea of a relatively peaceful Middle East is now alien to Americans, most of whom would scoff at the idea.

Putin, however, understands the commonality of these seemingly divergent peoples (if only based on economic expediency) and his effort to unite all of their leaders is by far the most ingenious, monumental and momentous peace effort ever attempted in the Middle East. Yet no one, not even the brightest and best of geopolitical analysts, seems to have noticed. They are too busy taking sides in an effort to prop up a falling empire.

Some will say that my analysis is weighted in favor of our one-time enemy Russia. Yet what I have shown suggests a happier ending for the US than most would admit to.

Putin continues to refer to the US as a partner, and if only for economic reasons, he is deadly serious about this.

Putin knows that an economically failed US does not favor Russia or its Eurasian partners, all of whom are seeking the greatest prosperity for all, if for no other reason than to benefit from trade with us. After all, what is the percentage in trading with poor countries?

This came in since I wrote the above and it substantiates my commentary:

http://journal-neo.org/2015/11/12/saudi-russo-rapprochement-back-on-track/

 

The elites are doing an about face

 

by Don Hank   August 25, 2015

 

George Friedman, CEO of Stratfor, seems to be following the lead of other prominent Neocon elites. Recently, Kissinger and Soros both warned against taunting the Russian bear or escalating the Ukraine conflict. This was remarkable for them, because they had always generally supported, at least by their actions and words, the Wolfowitz doctrine of encircling Russia, and indeed, Soros even admitted that one of his foundations had aided in the Maidan coup, as I pointed out here.

Now comes George Friedman and joins them in backtracking, reluctantly admitting here that maybe attacking the Russian ally Iran was never such a brilliant idea. He says the problem with this idea is that the plan might fail and thereby strengthen the Iranian position while weakening Israel’s position. No kidding.

I wrote to George via his Stratfor site and asked why no one ever mentions Daniel Greenfield’s famous speech on the MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) principle, which that author skillfully demonstrates would effectively prevent a nuclear power (he doesn’t explicitly mention Iran) from attacking another. Israel is known to possess a nuclear arsenal.

I had mentioned Greenfield’s comments on MAD here in the context of the rush to war against Iran – which, nota bene, even the Israeli military leaders knew to be an unnecessarily risky idea.

So when you say “I stand with Israel,” are you saying you stand with these wise military leaders who oppose war with Iran or with the minority who want to take that needless risk?

See the problem with that slogan?

Below is my response to George:

 

Thank you for this report.

I find it intriguing that no commentator ever mentions, in the context of Israel vs Iran, Daniel Greenfield’s speech on the MAD principle, which prevents nuclear powers from attacking each other. The Israeli government is aware of Greenfield’s writings and certainly, many have read this speech and know this theory makes common sense. Since it is known that Israel and the US are nuclear powers and that neither would sit back and let Iran attack Israel, Iran, in the real world, would never nuke Israel. Further, any nuclear explosion in Israel would kill and harm millions of Palestinians and other Arab neighbors. The whole world would turn against Iran and that would end Iran’s ability to ever trade with any country again. It would, in a word, be suicide. In other words, the war hawks in Israel are directing an inordinate and unjustified amount of time and energy at preventing an impossibility.

It is obvious to me that the only reason Israeli war hawks keep beating the drums in Iran’s direction is that they want to stay on the good side of the Saudis, who they perceive as having the power to crush them via their protégés like ISIS.

Why not address this side of the story some time? It would not hurt your credibility and would almost certainly boost your readership.

END OF LETTER

 

When you see the elites distancing themselves from their past strongly held positions, it’s not because they had a change of heart or “saw the light.” It’s because an external force or forces have made it impossible to sustain those positions and they woke up to this reality.

Despite all the setbacks that Eurasia (mostly Russia and China) have suffered (such as the recent collapse of the Chinese stock market), this region has so far avoided, for the most part, the extravagance of Western Keynesianism – unbridled money printing, borrowing more than they can ever pay down or back to pay for reckless spending – and despite the “socialist” tag, neither of them spends, as a percentage of GDP, even a fraction of what Western “developed” countries spend on welfare or social programs. The Neocons haven’t a leg to stand on, and now the upper echelons aren’t in fact standing.

Further, Eurasia has managed to demonstrate the vast potential of its economic power and prestige, for example, via the new investment bank, the AIIB, to most of our “allies,” over 50 of which became founding members, as I pointed out here.

On top of that, Russia and China have been doing impressive joint military exercises lately, demonstrating not only that they possess the hardware to back down any opponent, but that they are a team. I am amused at analysts who discuss Russian military capability in great detail without ever mentioning that there is in fact no such thing as the “Russian” military. In today’s world, there is only a joint Russian-Chinese military that we must contend with – and get along with, like it or not. And while there are still US “allies,” most are only reluctant and leaning away from the constant wars made in USA.

I say all that to remind you of why the elites, like Soros, Kissinger and Friedman, are changing their tune. They simply have no choice. Reality is facing them like a brick wall, foiling their schemes of world dominance. I say this cautiously, but it would seem that Neoconservatism is dead for all practical purposes.

The elites, who had everything to lose, were the first to notice the tectonic plate shift in geopolitics.

The rest of America needs to pay attention.

 

The far-left connection to the Near-East rebellion

The far-left connection to the near-east rebellion

by Don Hank

It is now well known that Obama pals and Marxists Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn and Jody Evans were instrumental in instigating the rebellion in Egypt:

Without this far-left intervention and the blessings of the White House there may well have been no rebellion in Egypt, and a stable (though imperfect) regime would still be in place, friendly to the US and tolerant of Israel.

Since then the rebellion has spread to Libya, and this too is arguably part of the Egyptian-Islamic / Western leftist-inspired revolution. Indeed there are reportedly at least 100 Egyptian operatives there, as well as US and British commandos.

A reader objected to my latest column critical of the Coalition’s Operation Odyssey Dawn, and this is my response to his objections.

You are free to support with heart, mind, propaganda and even finances whomever you please, but excuse me if I decline to be part of a rebellion instigated by the far left and strongly supported by friends of Islamic terror who deny Israel’s right to exist. Excuse me if I see gross hypocrisy in supporting an all-out attack on a Middle East dictator who has long been cooperative with the West, while turning a blind eye to more egregious dictatorships like China (where a Noble prize winner is now in jail for speaking his mind) and North Korea (where dissidents and their families are routinely jailed and it is a crime to own a radio with unlimited tuning).  You say I want to soft-pedal on Ghadaffi. Yet you are perfectly content to soft pedal on the undemocratic rogue regimes of China and North Korea that also kill their own people at times (eg, Tiananmen Square).

Where were the noble contenders for democracy when China was holding Liu Xiaobao? Oh, that’s right, democracy champion Barack Obama was fêting him at the White House. Further, China is one of the permanent members of the UN Security Council, which decided to attack Ghadaffi because he was behaving like a Chinese dictator. As for North Korea, we have sent them free food for years, and China, our “ally,” runs interference for that country. Apparently, the Koreans don’t need democracy.

But isn’t Iran also a dictatorship that suppresses democracy? Should we be soft pedaling on Iran? Well, judging by the silent consent of Western leaders, Iran is perfectly democratic. There was an uprising there during the one in Egypt, but Obama didn’t think it would be appropriate to demand that Ahmadinejad step down. After all, that dictator, who has reportedly been executing people at the rate of one every 9 hours, is anti-Israel.  No need to get rid of him.  He’s on “our” side.  A few years back, the US Energy Department even subsidized 2 Russian institutes that helped build parts of reactors for Iran.

So if the true motives of the Fabian leaders for the attack on Libya are not the noble ones they enunciate, what is the motivation? The Left never starts anything that will not likely further their cause of world domination or that will have the outcome expected and intended by the public. That explains Obama’s role in opposing a regime that in recent years has been forthcoming toward Western interests, while ignoring regimes antagonistic to our interests. Sarkozy has an additional motive: he is up for re-election soon and needs a good war at his back.

It is more than obvious that replacing regimes that support the US and Israel with our enemies (like the street mobs of Egypt — dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood; and of Libya — strongly allied with terror) will help the Left, as led by Obama and socialist Europe, to undermine Western culture and values.

The Fabian Socialists (of which Tony Blair is a member) were founded in the 1880s for the express purpose of spreading socialism and eliminating Christianity by stealth.

They believed that they could get away with anything as long as they pretended to be supporting worthy-sounding causes, and it is going swimmingly (Tony even has a religious foundation aimed at uniting all religions — that goes nicely with the Christian teaching: I [Jesus] am the way). They have managed to pretty much take over the West. You see, it wasn’t only Tony Blair. The entire power structure, top to bottom, is infested with globalist New World Order operatives, and “conservative” parties are in no way exempt. David Cameron used stealth to get elected, in keeping with the West’s trademark Fabian tactics. As head of the Conservative Party, he promised that, if elected, he would allow a referendum as to whether the UK should stay in the EU. Even though everyone now knows that was a lie, many see Dave acting like a “conservative” now, helping with a war effort in the tradition of “conservative” GW Bush (reminder: Blair’s staunchest ally). Yet starting wars whose predicted outcome is to undermine Christianity and our relations with the Middle East and endanger Israel is not necessarily a conservative thing to do, though it can certainly be deemed within the scope of Fabian stealth activities. It is hard to believe that any true conservative could support this cheap and transparent stealth tactic of starting wars for the apparent purpose of strengthening our enemies and weakening our friends. In fact, judging by the popularity of my last column on this topic (which has been reposted at several sites) and also the next-to-last (which shocked even me with the boldness of its conclusions), I seriously doubt any true conservatives do fall for this.

There is no excuse for Europeans to believe in the sincerity of the Western coalition. The Western powers that now support the attack on Ghadaffi, replete as it is with abundant collateral civilian casualties, are essentially the same leaders who insist on importing millions of hostile Muslims to Europe who refuse to assimilate and who not infrequently kill Westerners (like the people who bombed Madrid and London, like the killer of Theo van Gogh, and like so many other Islamic terrorists and violent criminals who had enjoyed Western hospitality or claimed the West as their home) or deliberately configure the Southern US border as a welcome mat for terrorists (eg, some of the 911 attackers) or promote rabidly anti-US soldiers to high ranks (eg, the Fort Hood shooter).

Democracy sounds like a worthy cause and the vast hordes of politically unsophisticated (whose study of history – or even current events — is next to non-existent) and the spiritually blind are liable to fall for this ruse.

However, the rest of us generally realize that if democracy were really a cause worth the shedding of blood, then Iran, for example, would be a nation marked by justice and protection of the weak — now that Carter has gotten rid of the cruel dictatorial Shah and paved the way for democracy there.

But the dirty open secret of democracy (as distinct from the republican form of government our founders founded) is that it neither protects the weak nor promotes justice. Invariably, it eventually winds up protecting the majority or a very powerful group of oligarchs, just as it did in the Soviet Union, China, Cuba, Cambodia, N Korea, and just as it is now doing increasingly in the Americas and Europe.

And as for Christianity, by supporting the Coalition, we are contributing mightily – knowingly or unwittingly — to the demise of Judeo-Christianity in the world.

By supporting the Iraq war, we indirectly eliminated the Assyrian Christians in Iraq by toppling a dictatorship that protected them, and are now witnessing the genocide of  the Egyptian Copts, who were at least allowed to exist under Mubarak. Within a week after Mubarak stepped down, at Obama’s behest, the democratic activist military that replaced him attacked a monastery and shot a monk and six church workers, and they’re just getting warmed up.

Behold democracy, a foul fruit with a noble-sounding name.

Remember these fruits of past Western adventures in the Middle East when the conflagration starts in earnest in North Africa and the torrent of crocodile tears from the instigators and participants from our own democracy movement starts to drown the West.

In the end, we all believe what we choose to – whether out of dangerously naïve or false altruism or because we are sympathetic to the far-left Fabian New World Order.

In either case, we reap the consequences.

Obama is already reaping some of his, both at home and abroad.

The terrorists fighting Qadaffi (he’s too moderate for them):

http://emperors-clothes.com/libya.htm

Further reading by a readers and friends:

http://www.ravenhill.org/prophet.htm