Thierry Meyssan On The Revolution Against Political Islam

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
June 17, 2017

Regular readers here know two things about my  attitude toward Islam: (1) I am definitely not friendly to its doctrine, and (2) I definitely do not believe every last Muslim of the world’s billion-plus Muslims are out to “get” everyone else. From my viewpoint, the history of that ideology, especially in the twentieth century, has been one long frustration – usually by the imperial powers of the West, and particularly by Great Britain and Imperial (and later, Nazi) Germany – of the indigenous attempts of those within Islam to reform the religion and the culture. Indeed, for the German contribution to this sad story, one can read my The Third Way.

Which makes the following article by Thierry Meyssan, notwithstanding its glaring inaccuracies concerning early Christian history, all the more important, for as I mentioned in the previous week’s News and Views, Meyssan’s hypothesis is that Mr. Trump’s recent visit and arms deal with Saudi Arabia is about more than just continuing the same old pattern of support of a royal-clerical state. The deal, Meyssan contends, could not have been made without commitments from the Middle Eastern nations involved, and particularly Saudi Arabia, to move away from “political Islam” and support of radical groups like the Brotherhood:

A wind of secularism blows over the Muslim world

Behind the hypothesis, however, Meyssan is also implying that there is a fundamental break between London – which in his view continues to support “political Islam” – and the Trump Administration, which he contends is trying to lead an initiative to break from prior policy of tacit support and funding of such groups and the states that support them:

We know today that the « Arab Springs » were a British initiative aimed at putting the Muslim Brotherhood in power and thus reinforcing Anglo-Saxon domination over the « Greater Middle East ».

For 16 years, the Western powers have been rightfully accusing the Muslims of not cleaning up their own house, and of tolerating terrorists. However, it is clear today that these terrorists are supported by the same Western powers in order to enslave Muslims by means of « political Islam ». London, Washington and Paris have no problems with terrorism until it spills over from the « Greater Middle East », and they never criticise « political Islam », at least as far as the Sunnis are concerned.

By giving his speech in Riyadhh, on 21 May 2017, President Trump intended to put an end to the terrorism which is consuming the region, and is now spreading to the West. The words he spoke did indeed act as an electroshock. His speech was interpreted as an authorisation to finish with the system.

What resulted, according to Meyssan, was something akin to uncorking a bottle that had been living under pressure for centuries, and now, with the bottle uncorked, the result cannot be undone:

What had seemed unthinkable over the last few centuries suddenly took shape. Saudi Arabia agreed to cut off all contact with the Muslim Brotherhood, and raged against those who continue to pursue their collaboration with the British, and particularly against Qatar. Riyadh gave the signal for a cleansing which will sweep much frustration along with it. In a spirit of Bedouin vengeance, diplomatic relations have been interrupted, and an economic blockade was organised against the Qatari population – while in the Emirates, a sentence of 15 years of imprisonment was established by law for any individual who showed as much as a little compassion for the inhabitants of accursed Qatar.

A gigantic displacement of forces and alliances has begun. If this movement is to continue, the region will organise itself around a new fissure. The question of the struggle against imperialism will wither and give way to the struggle against clericalism.

And this has led to a corrresponding “outburst” of editorials:

In two weeks, the Arab Press, which until now had viewed the Muslim Brotherhood in a favourable light, as a powerful secret organisation, and jihadism as a legitimate engagement, has suddenly made an about-turn. Everywhere, everyone is publishing denunciations of the pretension of the Muslim Brotherhood who want to regulate people’s lives, and the cruel folly of jihadism.

This flood of commentaries, the centuries of frustration that they express, coupled with their violence, makes any back-pedalling impossible – which does not, however, mean that the alliance Iran-Qatar-Turkey-Hamas will go all the way. This revolutionary tsunami is happening in the middle of the month of Ramadan. Meetings between friends and families, which should be consensual celebrations, sometimes turn into arguments about what until now had been perceived as the basic truths of Islam.

As Meyssan goes on to observe, even Iran’s Revolutionary Guard harbors simmering resentments against the ayatollahs governing the country.

We then get a bit of complete nonsense regarding Christian history, which Meyssan assumes – like so many – was completely “clergy-less” in its early years:

Like original Christianity, which had no ministers (these only arrived in the 3rd century), original Islam and current Sunnism have none. Only Chiism has been structured like Catholicism and Orthodoxy. As a result, political Islam today is incarnated by the Muslim Brotherhood and the government of Sheikh Rohani (the title of Shiekh indicates that President Rohani is a member of the Chiite clergy).

If so, Christianity would be almost unique among world religions, especially from that part of the world, in not having any clergy; after all, it was an offspring of Judaism, and Judaism certainly had a clergy, and the rabbinate could be taken to be a kind of ministry in lieu of the ancient Hebrew priesthood. In any case, the Epistles of St. Ignatius of Antioch would certainly stand as a pre-third century witness to the fact that early Christianity was not the  clergy-less paradise that so many think it was; it was, on the contrary, very hierarchical and very sacramental.  Additionally, Meyssan makes more of Pope Paul VI’s dropping the use of the papal tiara – symbol of papal claims and authority – than should be: for while the symbol was dropped, the claims were not. Indeed, when one reads the documents of the Second Vatican Council, amid all the modern-sounding verbiage, those sections dealing with the papacy itself read very much like the “old fashioned” language of Innocent III, of Pius IX and Vatican One: there was no diminution of claims whatsoever. In short: the tiara could return tomorrow, because what it symbolizes – the claims themselves – are still there.

But enough of that, for beyond this, Meyssan’s view is worth pondering, for it carries some implications, some of which, Meyssan contends, are already happening:

Meanwhile, the whole region is buzzing – in Libya, the Muslim Brotherhood have left Tripoli, leaving a militia to liberate Saif el-Islam Kadhafi, and General Haftar to expand his influence. In Egypt, the General-President al-Sissi has asked his opposite numbers in the Gulf to draw up a list of terrorists. In Palestine, the political directors of Hamas have fled to Iran. In Syria, the jihadists have stopped fighting against the Republic and are awaiting orders. In Iraq, the army has redoubled its efforts against the Muslim Brotherhood and the Order of the Naqshbandis. In Saudi Arabia, the Muslim World League has excluded from its administrative council the Brotherhood’s star preacher, Sheikh Qaradawi. And Turkey and Pakistan have begun the transfer of tens of thousands of soldiers towards Qatar -which can now only feed itself with the help of Iran.

A new dawn seems to be rising over the region.

But assuming he is correct in his diagnosis, there are also some implications for the west, not the least is the cleavage between Washington and London, and this is where it could get interesting, for one implication of his analysis is that the Trump Administration has broken with prior British and American policy in a major way, and in so breaking, has broken with those factions within the American deep state that have been cooperating and to a certain extent leading and orchestrating the prior policy, including the tacit and very covert financial support of the same radical groups. We call them “neo-cons” or “neo-libs”, and they have been running American foreign policy since at least the Clinton Administration, with roots in that of the G.H.W. Bush administration. On this view, Mr. Trump has set the fox loose in the henhouse, and if it portends major changes in the Middle East, and a renewed commitment to American allies there such as Saudi Arabia, it also portends a major shuffling in the “deep state”. Time will tell if this effort will bear fruit.

And that means a long term effort will have to be sustained, for the nature of the change Mr. Meyssan is suggesting will be long term in nature, with bumps and fits along the way. What to look for? I suggest that if Mr. Meyssan’s analysis is correct, then the response of such nations like Indonesia, a predominantly secular Muslim state, will be crucial to watch, for that nation is undergoing its own internal struggles against “political Islam”. How such nations respond to this, how the Saudis respond to this, will be crucial in order for Mr. Trump’s initiative to work.

See you on the flip side…
Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Dr. 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 Syria Strikes: A Conspiracy Theory

[Editor’s Note]

For those seeking additional information that show holes in the official narrative large enough to ferry the Titanic through, please read Jon Rappoport’s piece below [NoMoreFakeNews.com & JonRappoport.wordpress.com]:

Top Ten Reasons To Doubt Official Story On Assad Poison Gas Attack

Source: TheCorbettReport
April 14, 2017

The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about the Syria Strikes from the truth-telling truth-tellers in the truthful government and true mainstream news!…in under 5 minutes!!

Syria Attack: Is Trump Listening To His Followers Anymore?

breakaway3
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com | JonRappoport.wordpress.com
Jon Rappoport
April 9, 2017

Trump was going to be the president of peace and non-interference. No foreign wars. No reason for the US to be policeman for the world.

This was not a minor message. Many Americans who had blown through the prison gates of the US political system when Ron Paul ran for president backed Trump, hoping for sanity.

Now what?

On top of the Syria missile attack itself, there are several reasons to believe the sarin nerve gas incident, which provoked the missile strike, was a false flag or an accident, and Syrian President Assad was blameless. But Trump said GO NOW.

It appeared President Assad, with the help of Russia and the US, was moving closer to victory against the various terrorist groups in Syria. That outcome is now in doubt.

Is it possible Trump and Putin are secretly working toward the installation of an actual democracy in Syria? If true, the missile attack was a Trump strategy to gain political support from US lawmakers, neocons, and other assorted US military-industrial complex goblins. But I’m not betting on some secret US-Russia plan.

The demotion of Trump’s special counselor Steve Bannon in recent days could have been a move to get him out of the way, before the discussion about launching the missile strike took place—because Bannon might have voiced deep opposition.

Another “benefit” from the attack on Syria: with Democrats, war-hawk Republicans, media pundits, and other assorted Beltway adrenaline junkies suddenly piling praise on Trump, the passage of an inflated federal budget for the military is quite likely. That’s a plus for defense contractors.

Arch Rockefeller Globalists, including Bilderberg, Council on Foreign Relations, and Trilateral Commission players are now breathing a tentative sigh of relief. Trump seems to have come into their fold. He’s operating “on their turf, doing the right thing.”

All of which leaves millions of Trump supporters—the people who elected him—out in the cold. They didn’t sign on for this. The missile attack was just the sort of move Hillary Clinton would have made.

Trump surely understands this. He’s made the calculation that it doesn’t matter. Apparently, he believes he can win his supporters back.

He also understands that the US intelligence assessment of the sarin attack in Syria could have been cooked, fixed, dreamed up, based on an intentionally staged event. But he’s chosen to ignore that.

And unless he and Putin are playing a secret game in concert, having decided to install a new and improved anti-jihad secular government in Syria, Trump has pushed Putin away from any reasonable negotiating table. Here too Trump gains support from his opponents in the US, who have been shouting about Demon Russia and insisting that Putin and Trump together fixed the 2016 US election. Finally, Trump “sees the light” about Russia. Finally, he sees that Russia is backing the wrong horse in Syria. He sees that Russia is the eternal enemy of America. It’s all nonsense, of course, but Trump felt he had to get the screaming press and the majority of Congress off his back.

If so, he has miscalculated. His domestic enemies will never let up. They aim to take him down. They are dedicated to pushing him out of the White House, or at the very least, neutralizing every one of his policies during the next four years.

And again, Trump’s strength—his supporters who voted for him, who were hoping against hope that his administration would turn America in a new direction—Nationalism, not Globalism—his ultimate strength has taken a blow.

He has distanced himself from the power of those who put him in office.

A populist leader who does that is playing with fire.

He may temporarily win praise from the media echo chamber, but those echoes fade fast, and then he’ll realize he is isolated—which is exactly the position in which his opponents want him. On a mountain top, alone, his only option to embrace those he was campaigning against.

Is Trump smarter than that? Does he have hole cards no one has yet seen?

Or did he just make a fatal move, a mere 75 days after taking office?

I could spend another 5000 words detailing the people Trump has surrounded himself with, but the point is, most of them want to block him from thinking about, and talking to, the people who elected him. They want to keep him pinned to the “Washington conversation,” which is always and forever elitist. In their view, “presidential” means deaf, dumb, and blind to the wishes of the people. It’s the way politics works. That’s what sells. It sells to the media. It sells to the intelligence establishment. It sells to the briefers who tell Trump what the “inside game” is every day. It sells to people of every political persuasion, except those who want basic Nationalism.

We KNOW Trump is blind and dumb when it comes to certain aspects of life in the US. In his desire to make business the overwhelming business of America, he is willing, for example, to ignore ACTUAL environmental destruction in exactly the way George W Bush was willing. (Trump’s new EPA chief has already taken a ban of highly poisonous pesticides, Lorsban and Dursban, off the table.) We KNOW Trump is clueless when it comes to the FDA approving highly toxic medical drugs that kill huge numbers of citizens (106,000 a year, at a conservative estimate). He wants to enable FASTER FDA drug approval. That is a catastrophe in the making.

But, putting that aside, the defeat of Globalism, bringing back jobs to America, securing the borders against criminals, opposing that treacherous collection of self-entitled Globalist scum on the East Side of Manhattan called the United Nations—these are issues millions of Americans have come to understand, and they expect Trump to take decisive action.

They also expected him to refrain from launching attacks against foreign nations. They expected him to bring US troops home. They expected him to stop policing the world. They expected him to drain neocons from his inner circle.

But now, for the moment, the distance between Trump and the people who put him in office is increasing; and if a point is reached where those people no longer have faith that Trump can hear them, he is done.

He’ll be living the life of a president, like other presidents.

A shadow, remote.

Does he understand that?

Many months ago, I laid out and repeated my reasons, my ONLY reasons for favoring Trump: he was keeping Hillary Clinton out of the White House; he was mercilessly attacking mainstream news, which is the source of information mind control in America, the main obstructing force against people waking up to realities that are being hidden from them; he was gathering millions of citizens who want freedom and prosperity and an end to Globalism-Fascism-Collectivism-Socialism-Corporatism-political correctness.

I said: everything else is up for grabs.

It still is. But Trump has to understand what he is doing to his supporters—who exist as a movement independent of him.

Those supporters can check out of the Trump Hotel.

Like unhappy tourists, they can leave with a bad taste in their mouths.

They can move on.

Worst of all, they can wait for the next hopeful candidate and do nothing in the meantime.

Trump was going to be the president of peace and non-interference. No foreign wars. No reason for the US to be policeman for the world.

This was not a minor message. Many Americans who had blown through the prison gates of the US political system when Ron Paul ran for president backed Trump, hoping for sanity.

Now what?

On top of the Syria missile attack itself, there are several reasons to believe the sarin nerve gas incident, which provoked the missile strike, was a false flag or an accident, and Syrian President Assad was blameless. But Trump said GO NOW.

It appeared President Assad, with the help of Russia and the US, was moving closer to victory against the various terrorist groups in Syria. That outcome is now in doubt.

Is it possible Trump and Putin are secretly working toward the installation of an actual democracy in Syria? If true, the missile attack was a Trump strategy to gain political support from US lawmakers, neocons, and other assorted US military-industrial complex goblins. But I’m not betting on some secret US-Russia plan.

The demotion of Trump’s special counselor Steve Bannon in recent days could have been a move to get him out of the way, before the discussion about launching the missile strike took place—because Bannon might have voiced deep opposition.

Another “benefit” from the attack on Syria: with Democrats, war-hawk Republicans, media pundits, and other assorted Beltway adrenaline junkies suddenly piling praise on Trump, the passage of an inflated federal budget for the military is quite likely. That’s a plus for defense contractors.

Arch Rockefeller Globalists, including Bilderberg, Council on Foreign Relations, and Trilateral Commission players are now breathing a tentative sigh of relief. Trump seems to have come into their fold. He’s operating “on their turf, doing the right thing.”

All of which leaves millions of Trump supporters—the people who elected him—out in the cold. They didn’t sign on for this. The missile attack was just the sort of move Hillary Clinton would have made.

Trump surely understands this. He’s made the calculation that it doesn’t matter. Apparently, he believes he can win his supporters back.

He also understands that the US intelligence assessment of the sarin attack in Syria could have been cooked, fixed, dreamed up, based on an intentionally staged event. But he’s chosen to ignore that.

And unless he and Putin are playing a secret game in concert, having decided to install a new and improved anti-jihad secular government in Syria, Trump has pushed Putin away from any reasonable negotiating table. Here too Trump gains support from his opponents in the US, who have been shouting about Demon Russia and insisting that Putin and Trump together fixed the 2016 US election. Finally, Trump “sees the light” about Russia. Finally, he sees that Russia is backing the wrong horse in Syria. He sees that Russia is the eternal enemy of America. It’s all nonsense, of course, but Trump felt he had to get the screaming press and the majority of Congress off his back.

If so, he has miscalculated. His domestic enemies will never let up. They aim to take him down. They are dedicated to pushing him out of the White House, or at the very least, neutralizing every one of his policies during the next four years.

And again, Trump’s strength—his supporters who voted for him, who were hoping against hope that his administration would turn America in a new direction—Nationalism, not Globalism—his ultimate strength has taken a blow.

He has distanced himself from the power of those who put him in office.

A populist leader who does that is playing with fire.

He may temporarily win praise from the media echo chamber, but those echoes fade fast, and then he’ll realize he is isolated—which is exactly the position in which his opponents want him. On a mountain top, alone, his only option to embrace those he was campaigning against.

Is Trump smarter than that? Does he have hole cards no one has yet seen?

Or did he just make a fatal move, a mere 75 days after taking office?

I could spend another 5000 words detailing the people Trump has surrounded himself with, but the point is, most of them want to block him from thinking about, and talking to, the people who elected him. They want to keep him pinned to the “Washington conversation,” which is always and forever elitist. In their view, “presidential” means deaf, dumb, and blind to the wishes of the people. It’s the way politics works. That’s what sells. It sells to the media. It sells to the intelligence establishment. It sells to the briefers who tell Trump what the “inside game” is every day. It sells to people of every political persuasion, except those who want basic Nationalism.

We KNOW Trump is blind and dumb when it comes to certain aspects of life in the US. In his desire to make business the overwhelming business of America, he is willing, for example, to ignore ACTUAL environmental destruction in exactly the way George W Bush was willing. (Trump’s new EPA chief has already taken a ban of highly poisonous pesticides, Lorsban and Dursban, off the table.) We KNOW Trump is clueless when it comes to the FDA approving highly toxic medical drugs that kill huge numbers of citizens (106,000 a year, at a conservative estimate). He wants to enable FASTER FDA drug approval. That is a catastrophe in the making.

But, putting that aside, the defeat of Globalism, bringing back jobs to America, securing the borders against criminals, opposing that treacherous collection of self-entitled Globalist scum on the East Side of Manhattan called the United Nations—these are issues millions of Americans have come to understand, and they expect Trump to take decisive action.

They also expected him to refrain from launching attacks against foreign nations. They expected him to bring US troops home. They expected him to stop policing the world. They expected him to drain neocons from his inner circle.

But now, for the moment, the distance between Trump and the people who put him in office is increasing; and if a point is reached where those people no longer have faith that Trump can hear them, he is done.

He’ll be living the life of a president, like other presidents.

A shadow, remote.

Does he understand that?

Many months ago, I laid out and repeated my reasons, my ONLY reasons for favoring Trump: he was keeping Hillary Clinton out of the White House; he was mercilessly attacking mainstream news, which is the source of information mind control in America, the main obstructing force against people waking up to realities that are being hidden from them; he was gathering millions of citizens who want freedom and prosperity and an end to Globalism-Fascism-Collectivism-Socialism-Corporatism-political correctness.

I said: everything else is up for grabs.

It still is. But Trump has to understand what he is doing to his supporters—who exist as a movement independent of him.

Those supporters can check out of the Trump Hotel.

Like unhappy tourists, they can leave with a bad taste in their mouths.

They can move on.

Worst of all, they can wait for the next hopeful candidate and do nothing in the meantime.

Read More At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________________________

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Trump, Syria: A Rant

alternative news

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
April 10, 2017

It’s difficult for me to write this blog, not because I came late, and reluctantly, to support the Trump candidacy, but rather because in the cloud of bitterness, sadness, and outrage over the missile attacks on Syria, it’s difficult for me to articulate the full spectrum of my reasons, let alone my anger and sense of complete betrayal. In a nutshell, it appears to me that Mr. Trump is within a few decimal points of full-scale, Hillary Clinton type megalomania and insanity, and has succumbed to the same evil spirit that seems to infest all of Washington and America’s national political class. Those are strong words, and I mean every one of them in full measure (and particularly that part about the evil spirit infesting and investing Washington). And I’m just getting started.

Consider, for a moment, the chemical weapons allegations from the Assad regime’s point of view. Its military campaign, thanks to Russian intervention, was going well. Syria was winning. It thus makes no sense whatsoever for the Assad regime to risk the entire campaign by the use of chemical weapons, exposing his regime to the renewal of American and Western aggression in that country by opening it to reprisals.  He had no viable nor plausible military, nor political, nor geopolitical reason to do so, even if he re-equipped himself, or bought, chemical weapons from elsewhere. I’m not alone in this view. Former Texas Congressman Ron Paul has articulated much the same view, as have countless American talk show hosts and commentators, and even the former British ambassador to that blighted nation has weighed in, doubting the whole narrative.

Ex-UK Ambassador To Syria Questions Chemical Attack; “It Doesn’t Make Sense, Assad Is Not Mad

And not just a British ambassador or former Congressman Ron Paul:

US Congressman Surprises CNN by Backing Moscow’s Position on Idlib Attack

In this, Mr. Trump appears to have drunk the Hillary Clinton brand of Koolaid, and gallons of it at that. I cannot help but notice, as have many others, that this action was taken on April 6th, fully a century to the day that another political outsider, and unquestionably one of America’s worst presidents, the disaster named Woodrow Wilson, took this country into World War One. I’m not here to debate the merits or demerits of Mr. Wilson’s decision for war, only to point out how he, too campaigned on the slogan “He kept us out of war,” a nice way of saying “Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo.” Wilson, too, seemed to have a predilection for gallons of Koolaid brewed up in Colonel House’s kitchen. Lest we forget, Mr. Trump in 2013 had some very strong words about plans for American intervention in Syria:

Trumplash: Rapidly Evolving Syria ‘Policy’ Leaves Pundits And Supporters Puzzled

The Trump Administration Goes Neocon-Crazy

This Isn’t the Foreign Policy Trump Campaigned On

http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2017/04/06/trump-versus-trumpism-syria-in-the-crosshairs/  (Copy and paste into your browser)

Oh, and let us not forget the plan that was exposed in 2013 in the British press about using a chemical weapons attack and blaming it on the Assad regime…

U.S. ‘backed plan to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria and blame it on Assad’s regime’

… and that Mr. Putin headed off that attempt by talking Syria into giving up its chemical weapons and that the UN confirmed that it had (but who trusts them?)…

Some Missing Facts about the Chemical Attack in Syria

…and that Mr. Obama’s Administration apparently accepted that conclusion and that the original chemical weapons attacks back then were subsequently shown to have evidence that they, too, had been planned and conducted by the West and its sponsored “Rebel forces”…

Pentagon Trained Syria’s Al Qaeda “Rebels” in the Use of Chemical Weapons

Evidence Calls Western Narrative About Syrian Chemical Attack Into Question

… and that there is evidence that chemical weapons were supplied to the “rebels”(i.e., radical jihadists) by the West, even implicating the aforementioned insane Hillary Clinton and our “ally”, the Ottomaniac Erdogan…

Seymour Hersh Says Hillary Approved Sending Libya’s Sarin to Syrian Rebels

Well, you get the idea.

Naturally, the whole thing is already calling forth a variety of “theories”, one of the most popular being that this was really a message to the visiting leader of China, Mr. Xi Jinping to “do something about North Korea”.  In support of this fanciful notion, we’re told that many of the Tomahawk cruise missiles didn’t even reach their target, that some are unaccounted for, and that there was heavy damage (the West’s story), or minimal damage (Russia’s story), or that there were no casualties (the West’s early story), or that four children died in the attack (Syria’s story). On top of all that, we’re also told that the Russians were warned of the attack, and that they in turn probably warned the Syrians, who both naturally moved their forces away from the operational target (and hence the minimal damage done, according to the Russians), which is a very strange way of “being tough” on “aggression” (What aggression? Syria did not attack America). Stop and ponder that one: “Hey, we’re going to attack you at such and such a time and place with this number of missiles.” Here’s one purveyor of that Chinese theory, on, of course, Alex Jones’ Infowars:

This all occurred, of course, within the context of massive staff reshuffling within the Trump Administration, with an increase of neocon influence within it, and the corresponding loss of sanity, and more importantly, the complete about-face, within a matter of mere days (by some estimates, two days) from not ousting Assad to missile strikes and the “regime change agenda” being “on” again.

In response, Russia of course has (1) lifted its rules of engagement procedures and protocols that were put into place to avoid accidental conflicts between Russian and American forces, (2) stated, through “pro-Atlanticist” Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev, that this action has “ruined” (Mr. Medvedev’s word, not mine) Russo-American relations, and (3) ordered a Russian missile cruiser to the eastern Mediterranean. (Oh, and let us not forget that all this comes within days of a terrorist attack in St. Petersburg, at a time when Mr. Putin was actually visiting that city. But I digress.) Here’s the links for those points.

America’s Syria strike ‘on verge of military clash’ with Russia – PM Medvedev

Russia suspends flight safety memorandum over Syria after US missile strike – Foreign Ministry

Russian warship heads toward US destroyers after strike on Syria

After the Obamacare “repeal and replace” fiasco (I seem to recall that “replace” was not part of the equation for most Trump supporters although Mr. Trump mentioned “replace” during the campaign), and the signing of the bill to allow corporations to sell private individuals’ browsing history (so much for putting the people first), a disastrous federal budget (disastrous because the question of all the missing money didn’t even enter the picture!), we have this.

So… am I feeling bitter? saddened? outraged? betrayed? You bet I am. For years I didn’t vote at all, because I could not stand nor stomach the fetid reek coming from the serpentine tar pit of the Bush-Clinton-Obama nexus. It took much for me to think that possibly, just possibly, there was a chance to reverse course. But once again the Republithugs have proven they are a fake opposition party, incapable of doing anything to roll back the federal colossus or rein in the welfare-warfare state that Wilson, Roosevelt, Johnson et al. ( and yes, Nixon) bequeathed to us, not even when they control all three branches of government. My opposition to Darth Hillary was in large part because of the ruin and wreck of her foreign policy of confrontation with Russia(while, incidentally, selling it lots of uranium), of her support for “regime change” in Muslim nations like “we-came-we-saw-he-died”-(insert-cackle-here)-and-“what-difference-does-it-make” Libya, and Syria, and the whole covert agenda of funding and equipping the most radicalized, barbaric, and inhuman monsters on the planet and calling them “rebels” and even, on a few occasions, “freedom fighters”, and in general the cackling stench of death that followed her everywhere she went on her slither from Little Rock to Washington.

For the very same reasons, my patience, and support, of the Trump administration is at an absolute, and utter, end…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

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”.

Moscow invites Trump to Syria peace talks, breaking Obama trend

Source: RTAmerica
January 18, 2017

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said he believes US and UN representatives should be invited to the scheduled Syria peace talks in Astana, Kazakhstan – an invitation that was not extended to the Obama administration with the most recent talks. RT’s Daniel Hawkins reports.

Americans have no idea they’re at war with these 5 countries

Source: RT
October 27, 2016

Iraq, Syria, Somalia, Yemen, and Libya. These are 5 countries where America is actively waging war, and Americans have no idea. Why? By design. Wars used to be a rallying cry for freedom, but now our leaders know our wars are not so valiant. The Resident breaks it down.

The Space Weather Executive Order – Speculations

orbit
Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
October 27, 2016

So many people sent me articles about President Obama’s recent Executive Order regarding space weather that to neglect the story would have been almost a dereliction. As readers here are now aware, over the past week I’ve been blogging about space and UFO related matters. The reason why is simply that in addition to so many people emailing me versions of the Executive Order story, is that it occurred in the context of other such stories that I began to wonder if there was a connection between them and the order. We’ll get to that in today’s high octane speculation in a moment. But I want to recall two other things that I blogged about prior to this past week, and those are the strange statements coming out of Russia, and Iraq. Recall in that regard that a Russian spokeswoman warned of “tectonic consequences” if the USSA continued on course of its current chaos-inducing policies in the Middle East. As I argued then, that statement could be seen as a statement implying “tectonic shifts” in the geopolitical balance of forces. Or it could also be interpreted as a warning about the use of tectonic, earthquake weapons, or indeed both.

Similarly, the Iraqi transportation minister came out with a strange statement about Iraq being the home to ancient space ports, and he references the works of famous and now-deceased alternative researcher Zechariah Sitchin. Two days later, you’ll recall, the Russian general in charge of Russian forces in Syria, Igor Konshenkov, told the world that the Russian air defense systems in Syria were now operational, and that their range would be a “surprise” to “all unidentified flying objects,” a phrase that again could be taken in two senses: (1) unidentified aircraft in Syrian airspace, or (2) UFOs. Either way, the Russian general is not naive and chose his words carefully. And given the strange spate of Wikileaks emails we’ve examined this week about former Apollo astronaut Edgar Mitchell warning John Podesta about “space wars,” the Russian general’s comment take on yet another context suggesting that the second sense of his remarks cannot be excluded from the interpretive possibilities.

Which brings us to Mr. Obama’s Executive Order:

Executive Order — Coordinating Efforts to Prepare the Nation for Space Weather Events

One could produce volumes of high octane speculation concerning this order, but I wish to focus on the following paragraphs:

It is the policy of the United States to prepare for space weather events to minimize the extent of economic loss and human hardship. The Federal Government must have (1) the capability to predict and detect a space weather event, (2) the plans and programs necessary to alert the public and private sectors to enable mitigating actions for an impending space weather event, (3) the protection and mitigation plans, protocols, and standards required to reduce risks to critical infrastructure prior to and during a credible threat, and (4) the ability to respond to and recover from the effects of space weather. Executive departments and agencies (agencies) must coordinate their efforts to prepare for the effects of space weather events.

Sec. 3. Coordination. (a) The Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), in consultation with the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), shall coordinate the development and implementation of Federal Government activities to prepare the Nation for space weather events, including the activities established in section 5 of this order and the recommendations of the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC), established by Executive Order 12881 of November 23, 1993 (Establishment of the National Science and Technology Council).

(a) The Secretary of Defense shall ensure the timely provision of operational space weather observations, analyses, forecasts, and other products to support the mission of the Department of Defense and coalition partners, including the provision of alerts and warnings for space weather phenomena that may affect weapons systems, military operations, or the defense of the United States.

(b) The Secretary of the Interior shall support the research, development, deployment, and operation of capabilities that enhance the understanding of variations of the Earth’s magnetic field associated with solar-terrestrial interactions.

(b) “Space weather” means variations in the space environment between the Sun and Earth (and throughout the solar system) that can affect technologies in space and on Earth. The primary types of space weather events are solar flares, solar energetic particles, and geomagnetic disturbances.

When one considers the entirety of the order in the context of these excerpted paragraphs,  some disturbing high octane speculative potentials and implications emerge.

(1) The reference to the involvement of the Department of Defense raises the possibility that the Order cloaks an ultimately military purpose and agenda, as does the reference to the Department of Homeland Security’s counterrorism mission. Years ago, it will be recalled, Defense Secretary William Cohen during the Clinton Administration warned about terrorist groups having access to unconventional weapons of mass destruction, i.e., WMD’s that were not nuclear, biological, or chemical in nature. Mr. Obama’s Executive Order seems to be in line with this train of thinking.

(2) As such, the order raises the possibility that “space weather” may be the cloak behind which to disguise a weaponization of solar events, or the weaponized use by others of such events.

(3) In either case, one would be dealing with a “Farrell Corollary” to the Kardashev classification system, and hence with a “space war”. To refresh people’s memories, in my book Covert Wars and Breakaway Civilizations, I argued that if one were faced with a potential threat emanating from a Type I or II civilization in the Kardashev scheme, the way to respond to such a threat would be to leverage or engineer systems of planetary or stellar scale and to weaponize them in a kind of Mutually Assured Destruction doctrine. In the Kardashev scheme, class I and II civilizations are civilizations requiring the energy output of an entire planet, or star, respectively. Thus, leveraging or engineering such systems would give the appearance to any potential threat of being in a class I or II category.

(4) The reference to “understanding … variations of the Earth’s magnetic field associated with solar-terrestrial interactions” is precisely the kind of study I hypothesized might exist in connection with the operations of CERN’s large hadron collider, and with the growing evidence of its potential impact on the planetary magnetosphere, which could induce resonance-coupling effects in the Sun (see my The Third Way). I thus speculate and hypothesize that the Executive Order has now made that possibility public in a kind of backhanded way.

(5) The definition of space weather as anything in the “space environment” that “can affect technologies in space and on Earth” is a confirmation of the ultimately implicit military purpose of the order.

Of course, all of this is, indeed, very high octane speculation going far beyond the plain language of the text. But within the context of all that has been surveyed in the past days, and in the context of the strange remarks coming from Iraq’s transportation minister and – much more importantly – from Russian Major General Konshenkov, this reading I do not think in the final analysis can be definitively excluded.

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
_________________________________________________________________

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”.

News & Views From The Nefarium – July 14, 2016 – Geopolitics

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
July 14, 2016

Just what the heck is going on? Sultan Erdogan now appears to be disillusioned with Ottomania and is singing Kumbaya with Mr. Putin:
https://www.rt.com/news/348562-putin-…
http://russia-insider.com/en/end-regi…
http://sputniknews.com/politics/20160…

Saudis Have Lost The Oil War – F. William Engdahl

34534534545
Source: Journal-Neo.com
F. William Engdahl
June 1, 2016

Poor Saudi Arabia. They don’t realize it yet but they have lost their oil war. The war in its current phase began in September, 2014, when the dying King Abdullah and his Minister of Petroleum, Ali Al-Naimi, told US Secretary of State John Kerry they would gladly join Washington in plunging world oil prices. It became clear the main Saudi motive was to eliminate the new growing challenge to their control of world oil markets by forcing prices so low that the US shale oil industry would soon go bankrupt. For Kerry and Washington the focus, of course, was to economically cripple Russia in the wake of new US sanctions by damaging their revenues from export of oil. Neither achieved their aim.

Now, however, it’s clear that Saudi Arabia, which along with Russia is the world’s largest oil producer, is going down a dark road to ruin. Washington seems more than happy to cheer them on.

The long-term Washington strategy since at least 1992, well before September 11, 2001 and the Washington’s declaration of its War on Terror, has been by hook or by crook, by color revolution or outright invasion, to directly, with US “boots-on-the-ground,” militarily control the vast oil reserves and output of the major Arab OPEC oil countries. This is a long-standing institutional consensus, regardless who is President.

Cheney: ‘Where the Prize Ultimately Lies’

To appreciate the long-term strategic planning behind today’s chaotic wars in the Middle East there is no better person to look at than Dick Cheney and his statements as CEO of the then-world largest oilfield services company. In 1998, four years after becoming head of Halliburton, Cheney gave a speech to a group of Texas oilmen. Cheney told the annual meeting of the Panhandle Producers and Royalty Owners Association in reference to finding oil abroad, “You’ve got to go where the oil is. I don’t think about it [political volatility] very much.”

During his first five years as CEO of Halliburton, Cheney took the company from annual revenues of $5.7 billion to $14.9 billion by 1999. Halliburton foreign oilfield operations went from 51% to almost 70% of revenues in that time. Dick Cheney clearly looked at the global oil picture back then more than most.

In September 1999 Cheney delivered a speech to the annual meeting of an elite group of international oilmen in London. One section is worth quoting at length:

“By some estimates there will be an average of two per cent annual growth in global oil demand over the years ahead along with conservatively a three per cent natural decline in production from existing reserves. That means by 2010 we will need on the order of an additional fifty million barrels a day. So where is the oil going to come from?

Governments and the national oil companies are obviously controlling about ninety per cent of the assets. Oil remains fundamentally a government business. While many regions of the world offer great oil opportunities, the Middle East with two thirds of the world’s oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies, even though companies are anxious for greater access there, progress continues to be slow.”

The PNAC Warplan

Now let’s follow that bouncing ball sometimes called Dick Cheney a bit further. In September 2000 Cheney signed his name before his selection as George W. Bush’s vice presidential running-mate, to an unusual think-tank report that became the de facto blueprint of US military and foreign policy to the present. Another signer of that report was Don Rumsfeld, who would become Defense Secretary under the Cheney-Bush presidency (the order reflects the reality–w.e.)

The think-tank, Project for a New American Century (PNAC), was financed by the US military-industrial complex, supported by a gaggle of other Washington neo-conservative think tanks such as RAND. The PNAC board also included neo-conservative Paul Wolfowitz, later to be Rumsfeld’s Deputy Secretary of Defense; ‘Scooter Libby,’ later Vice President Cheney’s Chief of Staff. It included Victoria Nuland’s husband, Robert Kagan. (Notably Victoria Nuland herself went on in 2001 to become Cheney’s principal deputy foreign policy adviser). It included Cheney-Bush ambassador to US-occupied Afghanistan and Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, and hapless presidential candidate Jeb Bush.

Cheney’s PNAC report explicitly called on the future US President to remove Iraq’s Saddam Hussein and militarily take control of the Middle East a full year before 911 gave the Cheney-Bush Administration the excuse Cheney needed to invade Iraq.

The PNAC report stated that its recommendations were based on the report in 1992 of then-Secretary of Defense, Dick Cheney: “In broad terms, we saw the project as building upon the defense strategy outlined by the Cheney Defense Department in the waning days of the Bush Administration. The Defense Policy Guidance (DPG) drafted in the early months of 1992 provided a blueprint for maintaining U.S. pre-eminence, precluding the rise of a great power rival, and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests.”

At a time when Iran as a putative nuclear “threat” was not even on the map, PNAC advocated Ballistic Missile Defense: “DEVELOP AND DEPLOY GLOBAL MISSILE DEFENSES to defend the American homeland and American allies, and to provide a secure basis for US power projection around the world. (emphasis added)

In the report Cheney’s cronies further noted that, “The military’s job during the Cold War was to deter Soviet expansionism. Today its task is to secure and expand the “zones of democratic peace; (sic)” to deter the rise of a new great-power competitor; defend key regions of Europe, East Asia and the Middle East; and to preserve American preeminence…”

The Cheney PNAC document of 2000 went on: “The United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.

The quote is worth reading at least twice.

A year after the PNAC report was issued, then-General Wesley Clark, no peacenik to be sure, in a March 2007 speech before the Commonwealth Club of California in San Francisco, told of a Pentagon discussion he had had shortly after the strikes of September 11, 2001 at the World Trade Center and Pentagon with someone he knew in Defense Secretary Rumsfeld’s office.

Ten days after the 911 attacks, Clark was told by the former Pentagon associate, a general, that the Pentagon planned to invade Iraq. This was when Osama bin Laden, a bitter foe of the secular Baathist Socialist, Saddam, was being blamed for the terror attacks, and there was no 911 link to Iraq’s government. Clark related his conversation that day with the general:

“We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq.” This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, “We’re going to war with Iraq? Why?” He said, “I don’t know.” He said, “I guess they don’t know what else to do.” So I said, “Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?” He said, “No, no.” He says, “There’s nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq.”

“I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, “I just got this down from upstairs” — meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office — “today.” And he said, “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.”

Continue Reading At: Journal-Neo.com
__________________________________________________________________

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”

Incisive Analysis Into Media Propaganda Regarding The Panama Papers

Source: TheCorbetReport
James Corbett
April 5, 2016

The Panama Papers are out and the Panama Papers propaganda is out right along with it. So why does this new mega-leak seemingly only expose those in the State Department crosshairs or expendable others and not a single prominent American politician or businessman? And what does this have to do with the OECD’s plan for a global taxation grid? Find out more in today’s Thought For The Day with James Corbett.