Conflicting Messages From NATO & EU
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
November 30, 2016

As readers here can tell, over this past week I’ve been largely concentrating on geopolitical stories, particularly those that seem to have been due to blowback and implications from the American presidential election/referendum. In this respect, there are three articles that caught my attention this week, because they are sending out mixed messages. They were shared, respectively, by Mr. E.O., Mr. T.M., and Ms. C:

‘Russia is not our enemy’ – NATO Navy Commander

The EU is pursuing defense policies that rely less on the US after Trump’s win

European Union Confirm EU Army Will Launch In 2017

Let’s start with the last article first. Notably, the expressed reason for creating a “pan-European” military is the BREXIT vote, which, as we’ll see, is probably nonsense, but a convenient way for the EU globaloney crowd to continue pouting and to strengthen their hand in the difficult negotiations ahead. The real reasons are expressed in the second article, namely, the election of Donald Trump. To be sure, this constitutes another convenient excuse, for the idea of a common European military has been the goal all along. Mr. Trump simple affords an excuse to “speed the process up”, as a common military gives a bureaucratic reason and glue to keep the otherwise faltering EU together.

From a strategic point of view, the creation of a European army is necessary, at least, if the EU’s pretensions to being the “third way” or “third superpower” between the US and Russia (or, depending on one’s lights, China), are to have any weight. With the loss of Great Britain to the project, Europe’s sole remaining acknowledged thermonuclear power is France, although most regular readers here are aware that I personally think Germany is also a thermonuclear power, a thing kept relatively quiet by the corporate globalist media, perhaps in the name of political “expediency.” More importantly, the European powers individually have neither the strategic depth of a Russia, China, USA or even Brazil, nor do any of them individually have a population base of more than 100 million. If Europe is to project deterrent power of a conventional military nature to any of the powers that do have these things, it simply will require a military on a large population base, and that is only possible with an integrated European military.

The effectiveness of such a military integration, however, is in doubt. It will require integrated armaments industries (a step towards which was taken with recent mergers of French and German armaments concerns in a kind of modern version of a Schneider Creusot-Krupp monster, if one can imagine such a thing; the Airbus consortium of companies already being a framework for potential collaboration in aerospace military matters, and of course there’s the “Eurofigher”), but more importantly, a way to manage efficiently the units of so many different nationalities and languages. Think of it as a kind of Imperial and Royal Austro-Hungarian army, on steroids, probably similarly based on two “official languages”, in this case, not German and Hungarian, but rather German and French. And of course, all this will mean further erosions of national sovereignty in Europe, and in the current political climate, that could become very problematic. Does the average Frenchman want decisions for war or peace being made by Brussels bureaucrats, given their track record of…

Continue Reading At:

Profile photo of Joseph P. Farrell

About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.


Europe, Trump & Election Implications

Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
November 16, 2016

Watching the geopolitical fallout from the American referendum has been almost impossible, for in these past few days I’ve received a veritable tsunami of emails containing articles that people have noticed and passed long, and I’m still sorting through them! But this one caught my eye for it clearly indicates that some of that fallout will be strongest in Europe. I’ve been of the opinion that President-elect Trump’s victory will have geopolitical consequences, first and foremost in Europe. On the one hand, I’ve been of the opinion that his victory will give support and strengthen the anti-globalist movement in Europe, particularly in nations such as Austria, the Netherlands, France, Germany, Italy, and Spain, that have been crushed by a flood of refugees from the Islamic world. There’s no reason to rehearse what the effects of this has been, for we have seen the stories. In Great Britain, of course, we had the BREXIT referendum, and the ongoing attempts in that country of the globaloneyists and corporatists to undo it by stonewalling and attempting to dilute it.

But to sum all this up, in general, this now world-wide movement appears to have a major though underlying theme or conceptual core, and that is “anti-centralism.” The larger and more centralized the “governmental and bureaucratic solution” is, the more inept, clumsy, and removed from local-on-the-ground reality it becomes. Indeed, Mr. Globaloney has been engaged on an experiment for the past few decades – really the past century or more, but certainly ramped up since the administration of US President G.H.W. Bush in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and proceeding apace under Clinton, Bush II, and Obama – an experiment precisely in such massive centralization. The reason is simple: the more such political and bureaucratic power is consolidated and centralized, the less say “ordinary people” have. In other words, if you think your big federal governments in Berlin or Paris or Rome or Madrid or Washington (i.e., fill in your favorite globaloneyist-occupied capital here) are tyrannical and unresponsive, just wait until you see the same thing on a truly planetary basis! It’s merely a way for the corrupt global corporate mafias to secure their own power.

The trouble is, this experiment has no precedent in human history: in other words, there’s not a shred of evidence that such a scheme can actually work, unless of course one wants to go back to some ancient texts, and there the outcome is always the same: the attempt didn’t work, usually because “someone else” stepped in and put a stop to it. In my secret space program talks and in my book Covert Wars and Breakaway Civilizations, I’ve called this the “Tower of Babel Moment,” that uneasy period of transition to a genuinely global society, during which the powers that be must play their card game very carefully so as to avoid any such “repeat.” Notably, in those ancient stories, the goal was centralization, and that could be taken to be at least in part the cause and motivation for the “intervention.”

The bottom line here in Europe’s case is that President-elect Trump’s victory can, and I think will, fuel that anti-centralizing impulse we see emerging on the political scene in Europe.

But it can also fuel the centralizing impulse of the Euro-technocrats themselves, as this important article, shared by Mr. J.C., also points out:

Europe needs own army, can’t rely on US forever – EU Commission President

As noted, the European commission president Mr. Juncker – and don’t you just love the fact that the president of the European Commission’s surname recalls those Prussian Junckers of yesteryear? (And where’s your Pickelhaube, Herr Juncker? You seem oddly out of uniform, and I’ll be you have one!) – anyway, to get back to the main point here. The European Commission President Mr. Juncker is now calling for a trans-European army:

Europe should build its own army and not rely on security guarantees from Washington, the European Commission president said following the election of Donald Trump. At the same time, Jean-Claude Juncker called for the preservation of the transatlantic partnership.

Speaking in Berlin about the future of Europe sometime around 2050, Juncker had to ad lib, admitting that his speech had been written with the assumption that Hillary Clinton would be the victor of the US presidential race. But reflecting on the unexpected outcome of Trump’s presidency, Juncker said that “regardless” of who is the US president, the EU and the US must work together. (Emphasis added)

Notably, Mr. Juncker composed his speech thinking Mrs. Clinton would emerge victorious. And that’s a strong indicator that the European army project was all business-as-usual for Mr. Globaloney, and part and parcel of the policies that Darth Hillary would have been on board with.

But I submit that Mr. Trump’s own campaign rhetoric gives even more oxygen to this centralizing fire, for his insistence on US allies doing more for their own self-defense, and for his willingness to re-examine NATO. So on the one hand, his victory aids and strengthens the anti-centralizing tendency at the popular level, and on the other…

Continue Reading at

Profile photo of Joseph P. Farrell

About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.


Trump and Brexit: Directed History Proceeds Apace?

November 9, 2016

The American voters have Brexited, leaving behind their global dominance    America has Brexited. It’s an imperfect comparison. The United States can’t leave itself. But on Wednesday, with the election of Donald Trump, it withdrew from a number of agreements it long ago entered, some more enduring than others.  The American people have voted to leave behind the late 20th century consensus on free trade and open immigration. -SMH

The populism versus globalism meme is in full effect today and given the thousands of references to it currently, it’s an honor to have been the first publication to have identified this particular element of propaganda as you can see here.

We also predicted several times throughout the recent months that Donald Trump might win the election and then, as a so-called populist, face a good deal of elite retribution.

Infowars has an article today dealing with this, and we wrote about it again yesterday as you can see here.

The difference between our interpretations and some others is that we have a very difficult time believing that all of this is spontaneous.

Of course, Trump’s victory has unfolded in a logical way, providing justifications for those who believe that any inference that we are watching a scripted event is just so much “conspiracy theory.”

On the other hand, his victory immediately provides critics with opportunities to assert the benefits and superior moral value of … “globalism.”


The 1992 candidacy of Pat Buchanan was a bellwether for Trump, a call for “America First” paired with a move toward economic protectionism and closed borders.

Buchanan lost his bid for the Republican nomination, and his ideas were muted, ignored. Not by everyone – not by the populists who carried his banner, who marched sometimes with the Republicans and sometimes with the Democrats and sometimes with third-party candidates like Ross Perot.

But the GOP ignored them, and to a lesser extent, the Democrats as well. The parties agreed, more or less, and until tonight, they were comfortable in their agreement.

The American people have likewise voted to leave behind the nation’s global dominance and its global partnerships.

We can see in this excerpt the predictable references to populism and the characterization of the US’s current situation as one in which it is in the midst of repudiating its “global dominance and global partnerships.”

This doesn’t seem right to us, but we are fairly convinced that the next four years will feature this rhetoric both in the US and in Britain – throughout the West, in fact. Again, we have a hard time believing it’s a coincidence. The idea from our point of view is that this rhetorical stance is the gateway to further elite, globalist consolidation.

It may seem strange to make a statement that the elite forces of this world intend to “win” by losing. But everything we understand about their employment of the Hegelian dialectic gives us a sense that this is just what’s going on.

Top banking elites functioning out of the City of London have never reigned overtly deom what we can tell. They have always set up two opposing sides and then gradually steered the world in the direction they want it to go.

That direction is surely toward a globalist empire. It is seemingly incontrovertible. The two world wars of the 20th century were evidently manufactured – the internet shows us that – and after both wars gigantic leaps towards globalism occurred.

After World War II, the UN was created along  with the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. The control of the Bank for International Settlements that runs central banking was updated.

Now in Britain, Brexit is in force. And in the US Donald Trump has won. The “populists” are in power and we are given to understand this is a “peasant revolt” of the first magnitude.

But history seems to show us in the past few hundred years that important societal processes are strictly controlled. At a lower level, perhaps, you can be “free.” But events at the highest level are not exercises in liberty.

We simply cannot imagine that Trump made up`his mind to run for president and did so successfully as an independent candidate and without the silent acquiescence of those who remain in power behind the scenes.

Maybe we’re wrong, but let us state for the record, as we often do, that we believe the world’s power base is located among trillionaires in London who invented and control the world’s central banks.

This group has been leading the way, worldwide, not for hundreds but probably for thousands of years, first in Sumer, then Babylon, then Egypt, then Rome, then Venice and finally in England where members intermarried with Royals.

Since the Civil War, anyway, or even much earlier, this group has been tightening its grip on a every sector of the US from education to the military to politics and industry. It has control in Europe too – and we would make the argument that at the very top, elites in Russia and China work together as well.

(This is one reason we continue to make arguments against the standard history of nuclear weapons, here. We think it is in many ways a kind of shared lie around the world that will eventually prove clearly that the global narrative is a manufactured one on many levels.)

To believe that this history – if you do believe it – has been turned upside down by a single election in the 21st century is, for us, a bridge too far. But as we predicted more than a decade ago, the Internet, like the Gutenberg Press before it, has made the elite’s secretive control impossible to sustain. They need another way of influencing events.

The easiest way is to provoke a public argument over the merits of populism (versus globalism) and then to use directed history to ensure people get the message loud and clear that “populism” (read freedom and self-determination) doesn’t work.

For this reason we continue to expect a variety of catastrophes to continue and deepen – mostly from an economic and military standpoint.

We will also be surprised if Trump’s larger vision for the revitalization of the US is going to be especially successful. It will have to be discredited along with Brexit.

It could be that Trump – and Hillary – are unaware of these trends. Not everything has to be a gigantic conspiracy at all levels. But one way or another, first Brexit and now Trump seem to be creating a kind of “directed history.”

Conclusion: Add the sudden appearance of the populism vs. globalism meme and you have rhetoric married, sooner or later, to action. One or two of these elements would be coincidental. But all three? These events seem arranged.

Read More At:

Foreign Affairs Confronts Trump’s ‘Populism’

October 26, 2016

The Globalization of Rage  Why Today’s Extremism Looks Familiar … Militant secessions from a civilization premised on gradual progress under liberal democratic trustees—the kind of civilization that D’Annunzio and his peers denounced as feeble and corrupt—are once again brewing within the West and far beyond it: and as before, they are fueled by a broad, deep, and volatile desire for destruction.    –Foreign Affairs                             

This is the single most important article we’ve read in Foreign Affairs in years. It grows out of the “populism versus globalism” meme we’ve been tracking regularly.

We believed from the beginning that this meme would prove extremely important. The idea was that populism would be contrasted unfavorably to globalism and that this would be developed via directed history.

We tend to think Brexit is an example of this. It still doesn’t make sense that Brexit passed when British electoral facilities are controlled by globalist elites. In other words, Brexit’s passage may have been purposeful.

The idea, for instance, would be to ensure that Brexit has a broad array of negative consequences for the British. Paint Brexit as “populist” and  then paint its negative consequences as occurring because the wise precepts of globalism were not adhered to.

This is how elite propaganda works. Create a dialogue and then enforce it with the economic, legislative and military consequences – all of which are controlled by the dialogue-makers.

Global warming doesn’t exist, or not in fashion represented in the popular media. But global warming has been acted upon economically and legislatively throughout the world.

Likewise, “populism versus globalism” is a meme – a rhetorical construct – not a reality.

But there can be little doubt now that those behind the meme intend to make real. We can see the rhetoric heightening.

The consequences of a “populist” Brexit are going to be determinedly negative. If the “populist” Trump is elected in the US, the consequences will likely be similarly disastrous – and blamed on his populism.

Foreign Affairs is the magazine of the Council on Foreign Relations, which is the elite sister of the elite-controlled British Roundtable. Foreign Affairs magazine enunciates elite banking policies.

In this case, we would do well to pay heed to an emergent meme that will define the next decades.

It is not enough to suggest globalist remedies. An entire argument must be constructed around globalism if it is to be fully implemented.

And since the preferred device is Hegelian – thesis and antithesis giving way to synthesis – one needs to establish two sides. Globalism is the thesis here. Populism the antithesis. The synthesis will be a more fully emergent globalism.

In the highly charged rhetoric of this Foreign Affairs article, we can see just how vehemently this emergent meme is being pursued.

In reality, today’s malignancies are rooted in distinctly modern reactions to the profound social and economic shifts of recent decades, which have been obscured by the optimistic visions of globalization that took hold in the aftermath of the Cold War.

Notice the language. Globalism is optimistic. Its alternative (populism) is “malignant.

Then there is this:

Behind all these developments lies the fact that globalization—characterized by the mobility of people, capital, and ideas and accelerated by the rapid development of communications and information technology—has weakened traditional forms of authority everywhere, from Europe’s social democracies to the despotic states of the Arab world.

It has also produced an array of unpredictable new international actors that have seized on the sense of alienation and dashed expectations that defines the political mood in many places.

The extremists of ISIS have exploited these changes with devious skill, partly by turning the Internet into a devastatingly effective propaganda tool for global jihad.

You see? It is not enough to characterize populism as malignant. It must be conflated directly with ISIS. Trump, for instance, is not merely misguided. He is part of a larger terrorism.

And populism is to be conflated with “conspiracy theory” as well … actually a CIA-developed meme. In fact, populism – so the article informs us – is responsible for “lynch mobs and mass shooters.”

Populist and extremist attacks on reasoned debate and evidence-based analysis have made it easier for conspiracy theories and downright lies to spread and gain broad credence. Lynch mobs and mass shooters thrive in a climate where many people think of others only in terms of friends and foes and where sectarian loyalty or nativist hatred override civic bonds.

The article goes on to blame some of today’s disturbing violence and aimlessness on major media.

Of course, the article doesn’t tell us that most major media is controlled by a handful of individuals who run them to benefit the goals of the globalist elite.

Here’s the duplicitous characterization:

The world seems beset by pervasive panic, which doesn’t quite resemble the centralized fear that emanates from despotic power. Rather, people everywhere find themselves in thrall to the sentiment—generated by the news media and amplified by social media—that anything can happen, anywhere, to anybody, at any time.

The pervasive panic the article discerns is further complicated by the continued failure of globalism, which is disordering people “spiritually.”

In places where globalized capitalism has not fulfilled its promise of opportunity and prosperity, culturally and spiritually disorientated people have become increasingly susceptible to demagoguery and extremism.

The consequences of globalism, should it continue to fail, will include the disenfranchising of the world’s youth.

The inheritance of modern youth will include “racist nationalism” that will remove or reduce “freedom and prosperity.”

The sudden and rapid success of racist nationalists and cultural supremacists ought to make liberals wonder whether the millions of young people awakening around the world to their inheritance—which for even the richest among them includes global warming—will be able to realize the modern promise of freedom and prosperity, or if they are doomed to hurtle, like many Europeans in the past, between a sense of inadequacy and fantasies of revenge.

Generally speaking, populism is to be feared as the worst of all results, should it grip the world more pervasively in its icy clutches.

Militant secessions from a civilization premised on gradual progress under liberal democratic trustees … are once again brewing within the West and far beyond it: and as before, they are fueled by a broad, deep, and volatile desire for destruction.

This is a broad and ringing affirmation of globalism, which as we recently pointed out, is at root a religion.

It is an evil religion however, proposing the gathering together of the world’s population under a single ruler (or group or rulers) who will have near-absolute control over the world’s billions.

All the negatives attributed to populism in this article are actually properties of globalism. But the rhetoric justifies the ascension of globalism and the removal of populism.

Conclusion: Populism is painted as malignant, exploitative, racist and violent. These are not opinions either. This article is proposing a broad gamut of properties that the wise solons of globalism will have to act against and eventually remove. You may wish to consult the Georgia Guidestones for the human costs involved.

Read More At:

Another Earthquake: Canada To Join China’s Asia Infrastructure

Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
September 6, 2016

There’s been another huge earthquake in the financial geopolitics of the globe according to this article shared by Mr. S.D.: Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau has announced that Canada will join China’s Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank:

Canada to join China-led infrastructure bank

As Mr. S.D. pointed out to me in his email, the bulk of Canada’s trade is with its neighbor to the south, which places these statements in the article into a very illuminating context:

On Tuesday, Trudeau hinted that Canada’s application had been in the works.

“My government believes very, very much in the importance of investing in infrastructure,” Trudeau said during a roundtable discussion with business leaders.

“That’s one of the reasons why we’re looking very favourably at the possibility of joining the AIIB.”

Prior to Wednesday’s announcement, former Canadian diplomat Charles Burton said joining the bank would signal Canada was prepared to see China take a seat at the table in terms of having input on the global economic landscape.

“By supporting this institution that’s primarily initiated by China indicates that we’re trying to build trust that China will use this institution for the greater good in a liberal, internationalist way and not simply as a device to expand its geopolitical reach,” said Burton, a political scientist at Brock University.

But there is still some wariness in official Ottawa about supporting China’s global influence, particularly with its recent actions the South China Sea, said Paul Evans of the University of British Columbia’s Institute for Asian Research.

But Evans said most officials feel Canada made a mistake by not joining the bank last year.

The four projects approved earlier this year addressed many of the concerns western countries had about the new bank, he said, including that China would use it to advance its own strategic and commercial interests.

Evans said Ottawa’s decision to sign on would be symbolically important in terms of Canada-China relations.

While the cost — which he estimated will be as much as $1 billion — could be high, he agreed that Canadian firms would indirectly benefit from the billions of dollars in projects the bank will finance.

So what is my high octane speculation here? Well, firstly, I suspect that behind closed doors in Ottawa, there are those in Canada who have the same misgivings about the direction of US foreign and domestic policy in the post-9/11 world, the world that has issued in unipolarism, and in a slew of foreign interventions that have proven to be such disasters that even former Carter Administration National Security Advisor and vowel-impaired Zbgnw Brzznsk has had to rethink this whole approach, an approach he himself advocated in his 1990s book The Grand Chessboard. This approach has issued in frayed alliances, growing discontent with American policy at a grassroots level both in Europe and North America, and more recently, to reappraisals of globalism and the American political class itself. Recall only that op-ed piece from the July 2015 issue of The Economist pointing out the calcification of the American deep state, with specific reference to Jeb Bush and (you guessed it), Darthillary. Of course, the Trudeaus have a “family history” of not being entirely pro-USA, but perhaps that crazy Bilderberger scheme from a few years back to detach the entire province of Quebec from Canada and annex it to the USA might have something to do with Canadian caution about its “neighbor” to the south.

But I suspect there are other things going on in the background here besides…

Continue Reading At:

Profile photo of Joseph P. Farrell
Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

The 3-D Printing Scrapbook, Or Mr. Global’s Scrapbook: NASA


Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
August 3, 2016

Mr. T.M. shared this story, and I have to admit, when I saw his header in my email inbox – “NASA and scientist want to 3d Print Dwellings on the Moon” or something to that effect – I wasn’t too enthused about the article. “So what?” I thought, “just another article about the wonders of 3d printing and how we can use it to speed up the human colonization of other planets.” Granted, you and I both know that 3d printing will revolutionize the manufacturing and assembly process, not only on Earth, but in space and potentially on other planets as well.

Imagine, for a moment, a printer able to take surface materials found on a planet, and literally mine, process, and use those materials to construct dwellings and other structures without having to haul the materials from the surface of the Earth. That, at least, is the current thinking about the possibilities and applications of the new additive manufacturing technologies. We’re a long way off, of course, but closer than we were half a decade ago. Houses are already being built on earth using the process, and  tools have been constructed on the International Space station using the process.

So with all this in mind, lest I miss why Mr. T.M. had sent me this article, I read it, lest I miss some new detail or revelation.

And then it hit me, in the very last paragraph:

A professor is working with NASA to 3D print houses on the moon — here’s his plan

Here’s that last paragraph:

“How can we ever end such conflict of territorial problems between nations? When can we get rid of countries, the notion of nations, and have one world for the whole of humanity under one government?” Khoshnevis said. “That’s why I’m so dedicated to the vision of space. I know it won’t happen in my lifetime, it’s just the right thing to do for the future of humanity.”

This was not, and is not, I suspect, merely a bit of the usual glassy-eyed utopian “hope” that gets expressed in certain quarters. As I put it a few weeks ago in an interview with former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Catherine Austin Fitts, and as I also put it in a recent blog, it appears that Mr. Global has either changed the “plan” or is investing more into one of its “alternative backup” strategies, which I think is more likely. What’s that strategy?

In the wake of the BREXIT vote, and a growing worldwide revolt against “internationalism, unipolarism” and “globalism”, as more and more people from every area increasingly perceive it as a threat to their indigenous culture, and their individual sovereignty and freedom, I hypothesized that we might be looking at the end of the “bottom up” attempt to impose global government on Earth, via increased “trade” agreements, the emplacement of regulatory bureaucracies on whole regions, the adjudication of disputes not by law but by regulatory bodies, the creation of artificial “unions” based solely upon geography rather than on real appreciation of the cultures one is attempting to “unify” (think only of the EU and its refugee crisis in this respect, or, in the more recent example of this goofy dystopian vision, the beginning attempts to create an “African Union” out of the whole continent, in spite of deep tribal, religious, and economic divisions).

Continue Reading At:

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Brexit Is A Blow to the Oligarchs: Michel Chossudovsky Unmasks the EU Empire

Source: CorbettReport
James Corbett
July 21, 2016


In order to understand Brexit in its full historical context, we must know about the origins and motivations for the formation of the European Union and the forces that have shaped the EU bureaucracy into an arm of the IMF/World Bank-led Wall Street hegemon. Today Professor Michel Chossudovsky joins us to expose the EU as the imperial project that it always was, and the growing movement against EU domination as an anti-imperial movement of world historical importance.

What Everybody’s Missing About Brexit

Source: Corbett Report Extras
James Corbett
July 14, 2016

“Brexit is good!” cheer the nationalists. “No, it’s a travesty!” cry the globalists. “No, it’s a trap!” cry the conspiracists. So who’s right? All of them. Or none of them. As James explains on his recent appearance on WGDR radio with Jim Hogue, Brexit is a destabilizing move that can be used by the globalists to create order out of chaos or used by us to effect the only revolution that really matters: the revolution of the mind. Don’t miss this wide ranging conversation on the multiple origins of the EU, the 3D moves of the Gladio globalists, and how the real power lies with the people (if only they’d realize it).


Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
July 7, 2016

Now, unless you’re Jean-Claude Juncker and have been commiserating with extra-terrestrials over the BREXIT vote in a Luxembourg pub over shared martinis, you’ll have noticed something else is taking place in Europe, and that is Germany’s apparent attempt to “pick up the pieces” is already under way. And this is a big piece, and it bodes … well, it bodes “you tell me”:


One can, I suspect, argue, as does the article, that there is nothing more here than another result of the BREXIT, and that, when Britain leaves, a move of the EU banking regulator from London (yet another “logical” choice because of London’s position as a leading global financial center) to Frankfurt, the leading EU global financial center, is all entirely logical and above board.

But in today’s high octane speculation I strongly suspect there is much more going on here than meets the eye. THis, I would contend, is exactly what I argued would happen, especially since the Brexit stands to shatter the EU in its current form. In that instance, I have been arguing all along – based in part of the 1990s CDU Kohl-Lammers memorandum – that in the wake of the failure of a “large EU cartel space”, Germany would “pick up the pieces,” and one of those pieces would obviously be to retain a measure of control and influence over whatever international financial regulatory and bureucratic instruments of power that it can. Hence, the bid to move the EU regulator to Frankfurt, convenient home, you’ll note, to the EU central bank, which is, note also, not therefore located in Brussels or Paris.

But there’s also a bigger looming problem, and that’s the European banking system itself. Already we’ve seen bailout packages being offered to Italy’s banks. The ostensible reason, we are told, is to maintain their liquidity. The hidden reason, I suspect, is that it’s a simple bribe to Italy to remain in the EU. But this hidden reason reveals yet another looming crisis for the EU, and it could be the one that shatters the euro once and for all(article shared by Ms. C.V.):

“Deutsche Bank Poses The Greatest Risk To The Global Financial System”: IMF

In other words, all those bad paper derivatives from the 2008 financial crisis are still sloshing around in the system, and Deutsche Bank has managed with German efficiency to end up with the lion’s share of them, which is interesting, since apparently Mr. (or Ms.) Extra-terrestrial was not too concerned about them during his martini-luncheon with M. Juncker.

It doesn’t take much dot connecting here to see a relationship between the two stories, especially if Germany is sitting atop the epicenter of a financial earthquake.

But there is a deeper issue here, and it has one that has always bothered me, and continues to bother me; it brings us chin to chin with my (very) high octane speculation of the day. The bothersome nature of this issue can been considered best by posing a question: why would one create such an enormous pile of derivatives in the first place, a pile of derivatives that, in its quadrillions of dollars, or euros or reminbi or yen or whatever other currency one can think of, far exceeds not only the gross domestic product of the planet itself, but does so by several times. Or to put it somewhat differently, why create such an enormous pile of derivatives  that it would take the entire planet several years, decades, to pay off?

Continue Reading At:

Profile photo of Joseph P. Farrell
Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

NEWS AND VIEWS FROM THE NEFARIUM JULY 7 2016 – Brexit, Italy, Ruling Elite & More

Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
July 8, 2016

In the past Joseph has said: “Watch Italy…”  Well, in the wake of the BREXIT vote there has been movement in Italy, and it has huge long term repercussions:

Italian senate refuses to back automatic renewal of anti-Russian sanctions

Italy Demands EU reform, warns of full collapse