Is The (Out)House Of Saud On A March To A Civil War?


Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
July 3, 2017

Mr. J.K. found this very important article from our friends at Zero Hedge and passed it along, and it’s worth some very careful consideration. The desert kingdom has certainly been busy lately, ever since President Trump’s “triumphal” visit, holding hands on a glowing globe of the world, with misplaced continents, a squeemish looking Saudi king, a big arms deal, and so on. Within mere days of the visit, we saw the sudden severing of diplomatic relations with Qatar over its support of terrorism, which is a bit like the terrorist calling the terrorist a terrorist (or in plainer English, the pot calling the kettle black).

Here’s the article:

Saudi Arabia’s March Towards Civil War

Besides noting that Turkey has sent troops to Qatar to offset Saudi pressure, the article zeros in on something in the opening paragraphs that are a geopolitical game-changer:

Has Saudi Arabia’s brinkmanship and heavy-handed policies of intervention in the Middle East come back to haunt the desert kingdom?

After decades of playing the role of middle man between foreign states and establishing itself as a regional power, Saudi Arabia’s policies of meddling in the affairs of neighbor states and support for terror appear to have finally exacerbated issues in the country which could threaten to plunge it into chaos. Growing anger over attempted austerity cutbacks, economic issues due to the fluctuating price of oil and tell tale signs of royal disagreement over the successor to King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud mean that Saudi adventures abroad are preparing a perfect storm for civil conflict which could lead to further instability in the Middle East. The disruption comes as other states such as Iran and Turkey are positioning themselves as potential competitors to the de facto leader of the Arab world.

I. Saudi Arabia Is Experiencing Increasing Signs Of Instability

Saudi Arabia has experienced a number of issues which contribute to internal destabilization. In April 2017, Bloomberg reported that King Salman was forced to restore bonuses and allowances for state employees, reversing attempts to reform Saudi Arabia’s generous austerity programs. The Saudi government insisted that the move was due to “higher than expected revenue” despite the fact that observers were noting in March that Saudi Arabia’s foreign reserves were plunging as one third of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) of United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Qatar and Kuwait have seen their credit ratings slashed and have increasingly disagreed on common foreign policy towards Iran.

The kingdom’s increasing financial problems are due in part to the falling price of oil. In January 2016, The Independent noted that the dropping value of oil would put Saudi Arabia’s man spending programs in jeopardy and that a third of 15 to 24-year-olds in the country are out of work. The Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering estimates that Saudi Arabia will experience a peak in its oil production by 2028, but this may be an incredible underestimation. The Middle East Eye has noted that experts in the United States who state that Saudi Arabia’s net oil exports began to decrease in 2006, continuing to drop annually by 1.4% each year from 2005 to 2015. Citigroup has estimated that the Kingdom may run out of oil to export entirely by 2030. The end of the Kingdom’s cash cow is likely to cause problems in a nation that The Atlantic has accused of running itself like a “sophisticated criminal enterprise.”

There have been a number of “interpretive positions” about the falling oil prices in the past few months. One interpretation has it that the Saudis, in cahoots with “The Powers That Be,” deliberately flooded the market with an oil glut to dismantle the then-booming American fracking industry. Indeed, a few years ago I blogged about the fact that this industry in effect had made the USA energy independent – at least as conventional fuels are concerned – and that the prior “vulnerability” needed to be restored. Then there was the “Russia was the target” version, which had the glut also targeting the always-to-be-mistrusted-they’re-behind-everything-Russians, to deprive the Russian energy-based economy of needed revenues. Of course, both are possible at the same time.

For the moment, and not taking into account those persisting rumors of alternative energy sources we hear about from time to time, or this or that breakthrough in the progress toward fusion, I point out something about those stories: none of them ever seem to come from the (out)House of Saud. Its one, and only, valuable contribution to the world is oil, and that, according to the above paragraphs, is declining, along with the revenues from falling prices, while the social commitments and programs do not diminish. (Perhaps this is why they were so quick to agree to that arms deal with Trump, part of which apparently includes the transfer of manufacturing capability… better learn how to make something, and fast.)

Over the long term, this is bad for Riyadh, and good for Bismarck, North Dakota, for Moscow, Tehran, and even for Tokyo and Beijing, because three of the capitals mentioned in this list, have the energy supplies, and the rest have the money to buy it. And this, plus Saudi bluster, is driving a sweeping geopolitical change in the region, and once again, it appears that Washington (and London), are backing the wrong horse.

There’s a player here to watch, if my hunch is true: in the long term, Saudi Arabia desperately needs to build things that people need, not just its people, but people everywhere. Chances are, most people don’t need to buy an American fighter jet or a German Leopard tank. Trading oil for American aircraft and German tanks is not a long term, stabilizing, economic strategy. For this reason, I suspect, we need to pay attention to how China reacts to the growing instability in the region, for they could approach the Saudis and say “you need to build your own cars and toys, and we can show you.” The oil’s running out, and with it, the Saudi share in the petro-dollar.

Watch the reminbi in the Middle East… it won’t happen over night; it will occur in incremental, slow, patiently Chinese steps, but I suspect it will occur, and the Saudis, probably, will wake up and realize it.

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”.

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”.

What’s Up With Qatar?


Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
June 14, 2017

Last week one of the most significant stories was the sudden break, or rather, apparently sudden break, of diplomatic relations between Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain, on the one hand, and Qatar on the other. In fact, Mr. J.D. and H.B. began what became a trend of people sharing the following articles with me:

Saudi Arabia, Egypt, UAE, & Bahrain Cut Diplomatic Ties, Shut All Borders With Qatar

Gulf plunged into diplomatic crisis as countries cut ties with Qatar

If one looks at the Guardian article for a moment, it would appear that at one level, Saudi Arabia is in fact trying to take steps to minimize and distance itself from its hitherto traditional support for Islamic terrorist groups, in this case, the usual cast of characters, the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Qaida, the Islamic state:

The small but very wealthy nation, the richest in the world per capita, was also expelled from a Saudi-led coalition fighting in Yemen.

The coordinated move dramatically escalates a dispute over Qatar’s support of Islamist movements, including the Muslim Brotherhood, and its perceived tolerance of Saudi Arabia’s arch-rival, Iran. The dispute is the worst to hit the Gulf since the formation of the Gulf Co-operation Council in 1981.

Qatar’s foreign affairs ministry said the measures were unjustified and based on false claims and assumptions. As the Qatari stock market tumbled and oil prices rose, it accused its fellow Gulf states of violating its sovereignty.

“The state of Qatar has been subjected to a campaign of lies that have reached the point of complete fabrication,” a statement said. “It reveals a hidden plan to undermine the state of Qatar.”

Saudi Arabia said it took the decision to cut diplomatic ties owing to Qatar’s “embrace of various terrorist and sectarian groups aimed at destabilising the region”, including the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Qaida, Islamic State and groups supported by Iran in Saudi Arabia’s restive eastern province of Qatif.

Of course, behind this, there is the usual and to-be-expected reference to Iran and Iranian state-supported terrorism and groups. Qatar, though a Suni state, has been more “tolerant” of Shia Iran than Saudi Arabia would like.

If one were to stop there, one would have the impression that this is the usual Suni-Shia split manifesting itself once again, which of course, in a way, it is. But there are deeper players and stories lurking behind the scenes, and many people, when this story broke, were kind enough to to go digging and share their results. For example, Ms. K.M. found this story in Russia’s Sputnik, and its implications, if one reads between the lines a bit, are stunning:

The Dead Sea to Strengthen China’s Geopolitical Presence in the Middle East

Note the following statement; the implications will immediately be apparent:

China is a footstep away from winning the tender for Phase 1 of the Middle Eastern ‘Red-Dead’ water project, launched by Israel, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority. Israeli and Chinese experts have commented to Sputnik on how it could help Beijing to strengthen its presence in the region.

China National Technical Import and Export Corp. has been shortlisted for Phase 1 of the “Red-Dead” water project launched by Jordan, Israel and the Palestinian Authority. The other four finalists are Hong Kong’s Hutchison Water International Holdings, South Korean Korea Water Resources Corp., Japan-based Mitsubishi Corp. and France’s Suez International SAS. The results of the tender are to be announced by the end of June. (Emphasis in the original)

Some time ago I blogged about the fact that Middle Eastern stability was a necessary component for China’s various Silk Road Projects to work. Of course, China is not so stupid as to place all of its chips in the perpetually risky Middle East. It is pursuing other silk road projects through central Asia and, of course, through its ally, Russia, much further to the north.

What’s notable here is that China is dealing directly with two of the more stable nations in the region, Israel, and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, as well as the Palestinian Authority, for developing water resources. I am not, frankly, surprised that Jordan would court the Chinese. I am much more intrigued by Israel also apparently putting a Chinese firm on its short list for development, for a very simple reason: in the wake of the Paris summit, and last year’s Brexit vote, German Chancellor Angela Merkel voiced what may be the quiet whispers in other corridors of power: the USA and UK have become “unrealiable” allies, and hence, Germany and Europe must assume a much more independent course. Now it appears that Tel Aviv is voicing similar concerns, though not so much in words as in deeds.

So how does this relate to the recent diplomatic developments with Qatar?

For one thing, I have no doubts the initiative originated in Riyadh. The real question is why?

Answer: it seems that, beyond Qatar’s more open attitude toward Iran, there is something else in play, according to this article spooted by Mr. B:

Note, Mr. G. informed me in the accompanying email, the following:

Russia says 386 agreements for around 2 trillion rubles ($35.32 billion) were signed at a recent economic forum.

Representatives of business, international organizations and experts from more than 143 countries attended the gathering, Presidential adviser Anton Kobyakov said at a press conference on the results of the SPIEF-2017.

SPIEF is an annual Kremlin-run, high-profile gathering of business and political figures.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi attended the event this year with India being the “guest country” of SPIEF-2017. Qatar announced its intention to be the guest country next year.
(Emphasis added)

In other words, Qatar was making moves to become associated with the BRICSA bloc, and therefore, a participant at some stage in the Silk Road Project, and this, of course, would have expanded Iran’s influence in the region.

What might come of this? The Saudis, again, may have stepped into a bear trap from which they cannot disentangle themselves, for all it will take, at this juncture, to compound their difficulties, is for China and/or Russia to extend humanitarian aide to that tiny country, and perhaps some “military advisors”, in return for a seat at the table.  That, of course, would be a risky venture, but seemingly no less risky than the new Riyadh unipolarism that seems to be emerging. And in this light, one has to wonder whether or not the whole Qatar venture was even floated – much less green-lighted – in Washington or London. There are of course many reasons to assume and argue that it was, for the action gives a context for the recent Trump-Saudi arms deal. Time will tell, of course, whether that supposition is true. But I cannot help but entertain the notion or hypothesis that it might not have been. London’s and Washington’s foreknowledge of such a break is not the same thing as green-lighting or even discussing it. And if indeed the Saudis initiated the action on their own, then they might have just been sucker-punched.  I cannot, even while entertaining that high octane speculation, imagine that either London or Washington view the alternative – growing Chinese and Iranian influence in the region – with anything but a jaundiced eye.

But note, for the record, that the really odd man out in all these goings on, is Tel Aviv, and they, not Riyadh, will ultimately set the tone.

And notably, they’re talking to, rather than confronting, the Chinese.

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”.

Did Canada Sell Its Gold to Prepare for the North American Union?

union1

Source: TheDailyBell.com
August 17, 2016

Loonie closes at highest level in more than a month; stock markets pull back  … The Canadian dollar continued to ride higher with oil prices Tuesday, as both the currency and a barrel of crude climbed in value for a fourth straight day.  The loonie added 0.38 of a cent to 77.80 cents U.S., closing at its highest level in more than a month amid a weakening U.S. dollar.

It’s never been clear why Canada sold ALL its gold, HERE, but perhaps it has to do with the potential, upcoming North American Union.

Just the other day, we wrote that Hillary’s plans are obviously to support the creation of the NAU. You can see the article HERE, entitled, “Hillary Plans Steps Toward North American Union If Elected.”

We’ve been writing about the resurgence of the NAU for years – and then more recently for months as regards this campaign. Gradually,  the alternative media is becoming more aware of how high the stakes really are. Some of our articles are HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE.

It is not too strong to say that the future of the United States as a sovereign entity may be decided by this election. The NAU is threnody – the deep dirge – harmonizing many of the arguments over “immigration.” One big explosion came when George Bush suggested turning immigrants, legal or not, into eventual citizens, HERE.

Bush, who further wrecked America in many ways, disingenuously claimed that his stance was motivated by his “compassionate conservatism.” But it was not. Bush secretly advanced the legislative agenda of the NAU through a series of hush-hush meetings with his counterparts in Mexico and Canada.

Obama has not perhaps been so overt as Bush, though recently, he did  see his counterparts in Canada in a meeting that was obviously intended to raise the concept of an NAU once more.

Meanwhile, the lack of gold-backing for the loonie, seems to create the circumstances that benefit the idea of an NAU as well. Its emphatic removal of gold (and recent sales of gold merely expanded a long-term trend) has surely increased its volatility and overall weakness, HERE.

Canada once had 1,000 tons of gold, but selling started in the 20th century and continued throughout the 2000s. It finished with a flourish in early 2016, when Canada had nothing left.

However, there is no reason why Canada couldn’t back the loonie with substantial gold if it wished to. Canada is a huge country with significant gold and silver resources. But instead, the loonie’s fate increasingly seems tied to oil, which doesn’t make much sense on a variety of levels.

The loonie lately has been around or below 78 cents US and only received reinforcement from a September crude contract that pushed a barrel of oil to US$46.58. The hope now is that Russia will help Saudi Arabia stabilize oil. However this doesn’t acknowledge that the US itself is trying to destabilize Saudi Arabia in order to debase the dollar further, HERE.

The Chinese yuan is scheduled to join the IMF’s SDR basket in October. Additionally, the World Bank is starting to issue yuan (RMB) bonds. The results, eventually, will hit the dollar hard.

The dollar has likely been targeted in order to strengthen potential global governance – just as the BRICs have risen up to challenge the West.

The world needs to be “evened out” to make globalism work, you see. And currencies need to be destabilized in order to create the justification to combine them. No doubt, the NAU’s backers are considering a single currency, much like the disastrous euro.

If Canadian, Mexican and US currencies are seen as weakened and even chaotic, especially due to a lack of even a residue of gold, creating some sort of mutual currency doubtless becomes easier to implement – even if it is simply a more comprehensive dollar.

Of course, the dollar is merely the “strongest” currently of a variety of weak currencies. Mexico’s peso, too, is not strong.

Not so long ago, Mexican officials actually admitted, HERE, that some 96 percent of Mexican gold resided mostly in London’s City (no surprise there) – where it no doubt has been lent out a thousand times.

Will Mexico ever see that gold again? For now, the peso, like the loonie, seems to lack gold backing.

Of course, as the Fed and the US government do not want any full-scale audit of Fort Knox, it is not clear what kind of gold-backing the dollar possesses. Probably less than more.

All-in-all, these gold-deprived currencies probably support the creation of what we call “directed history.” This elite approach manipulates events until they resolve themselves into a requisite, logical pattern.

For instance, Canada, Mexico and the US all have varying degrees of public – “universal” – health care. Though people will disagree, it seems obvious that Obamacare mess is intended to justify an even more fully public system.

Meanwhile, Mexico converted to universal health care beginning in 2004 and ending in 2012, HERE, with astonishingly little fanfare.  Very strange.

On a variety of fronts, the sociopolitical and economic policies of the US, Canada and Mexico are being harmonized.

If Hillary gets into office, this extensive harmonization will allow swift action to realize a potential union. Probably numerous quasi-secret treaties and executive orders will help facilitate it.

One of Hillary’s main goals is to open up a new government agency that will support the citizenship of illegal aliens.

But that is probably only the first step.

News With Views posted a far more a comprehensive report on where her regime might head.

The article HERE is entitled “Get Ready for FEMA Regions For the North American Union” and contends that the ultimate plan is to “do with away with the 50 states and create FEMA regions.”

The report quotes Parag Khanna, a contributor for the NYTimes, who believes the US would “thrive more if the government did away with the states and created regions.” You can see his article HERE.

Conclusion: While many people are terribly concerned about a Hillary presidency, the true ramifications may be even deeper and longer lasting than regularly discussed. The fate of America itself may hang in the balance.

Read More At: TheDailyBell.com

Meanwhile, On Earth, Mr. Global Salivates Over The Prospects Of The…

 MEANWHILE, ON EARTH, MR. GLOBAL SALIVATES OVER THE PROSPECTS OF THE ...
Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
August 4, 2016

Now it’s Africa’s turn to  go the way of Europe to be amalgamated into one huge bloc, and we’ll get to my “predictions” and high octane speculations in a moment. This article was spotted and shared by Ms. S.H.:

http://www.activistpost.com/2016/07/step-towards-united-states-africa-au-launches-africa-passport-create-borderless-continent.html/embed?wmode=transparent#?secret=inmPBX7u0R

Now you’ll notice here that the same old globalist methodology and rationalizations are in play(welcome back, colonialism!): a common passport is being issued to allow the “free flow of goods, services, and peoples” in the African Union:

However, as this confusion is rocking Europe, the continent of Africa is pursuing vision to achieve what Europe seems to be abolishing. Africa’s continental body, the African Union (AU) has announced that it has launched for the first time, a single passport for all citizens on the continent. The AU consists of 54 countries. The only country in Africa, which is not part of the Union, is Morocco. Morocco opted out of the Union after the AU recognized Western Sahara as a sovereign nation, as Morocco claimed Western Sahara is part of its territory.

The Union said in a statement that “This flagship project has the specific aim of facilitating free movement of persons, goods and services around the continent – in order to foster intra-Africa trade, integration and socio-economic development.”

According to the Union, the all-African passport represents a key plank of the Agenda 2063 action plan, which emphasizes the need for greater continental integration, based on the vision of the parent organization of the AU called the Organization of African Unity (OAU).

In other words, what’s good for the European goose is good for the African gander.

So what’s my high octane speculation and prediction here?

Well, for one thing, expect what is going on in Europe with the expansion of Islam and the resulting culture crisis and backlash in Europe to occur in Africa, on steroids. Some nations in Africa have attempted to stem the tide, but one wonders how this free flow of persons across borders will work when this rising tide confronts the various tribal cultures in Africa.

In the background there is hovering another development, and one that portends even more great power conflict, for the USA is quickly trying to expand its Africom command, and China, of course, has been actively involved on the continent, trying to secure markets and attempting the opposite approach of the US: building roads, schools, and so on. More recently, China has projected military force into the region by basing troops on the African side of the southern end of the Red Sea.

So how do these two players interact with the growing AU project? Expect the same patterns evident in Europe…

Continue Reading At: GizaDeathStar.com
_________________________________________________________________

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”.

Joint Russo-American Space Projects Are Becoming More Detailed

JOINT RUSSO-AMERICAN SPACE PROJECTS ARE BECOMING MORE DETAILED
Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
August 3, 2016

Recall that yesterday I blogged about an article that was sent to me by Mr. T.M., and about my hypothesis that with nationalist trends on the rise globally, that Mr. Global might be signaling shifts in the strategy, from a bottom-up Earth-based approach, to a top-down space-based approach. Well, with that in mind, consider this article, also shared by Mr. T.M.:

Russian and US engineers plan manned moon mission

In the light of my hypothesis, consider the following statements :

Both American and Russian organizations are considering ways to return to space together, as long as the political relationship between the two nations doesn’t deteriorate. The countries had been preparing to part ways after the ISS ceases operation in 2024.

NASA is developing its Orion spacecraft and the Space Launch System (SLS), a super-heavy rocket to be used for manned missions into space, possibly as far as Mars. NASA is also giving funds to companies like SpaceX to make excursions into orbit with reusable rockets.

A few years ago, the European Space Agency, (ESA) joined with NASA in a maintenance agreement to service the Orion propulsion module. But Russia, the second largest contributor to ISS, hasn’t made any commitments beyond the time when its current obligations to the station are complete.

Russia’s recent economic issues are said to have somewhat stymied the nation’s space ventures, but the largest obstacle to space cooperation may be Moscow and Washington’s current contentious relationship. Engineers at Roskomos (the Russian space agency) and NASA are working together, while traversing the problematic political terrain of their respective governments.

Russian space contractors, such as RKK Energia and GKNPTs Khrunichev, along with American companies like Lockheed Martin and Boeing, are developing several tentative missions in which both nations cohabitate in cislunar space near the Moon. Such missions may lay the groundwork for mining missions to asteroids.

Russian technologists are known to be deft at operating and developing space modules designed to sustain propulsion, as well as creating house crews, exactly the expertise the US needs. That sort of module would increase the Orion crew’s living capacity beyond the small one-room compartments currently in use.

When consulting with their American counterparts, the Russians showcased hardware that will soon be available for building deep-space living quarters. For instance, ISS’s small docking compartment, built by RKK Energia, could be adapted as a 10-ton addition to the habitat, and would include cargo space, sleeping quarters and a discrete life-support system. (Emphasis added)

But now I want you to perform a thought experiment: take that line in the first paragraph that I have italicized, and change it to this: “Both American and Russian organizations are considering ways to return to space together, because the political relationship between the two nations continues to deteriorate.” With that change in mind, read the remainder of the quotation above, and you get the idea: major global corporations like Lockheed Martin and Boeing are teaming up with their Russian counterparts Energia to design a permanent space station in orbit between the Earth and  the moon as a large-scale permanent human presence and as a steppingstone  to permanent human colonies on that planet.

Continue Reading At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________________________

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”.

SPACE COMMERCIALIZATION AND WEAPONIZATION: THAT “LITTLE” …

 SPACE COMMERCIALIZATION AND WEAPONIZATION: THAT “LITTLE” ...
Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
July 21, 2016

The past three days I’ve been watching and blogging about space stories and especially about that strange Russian “transmutation” annoncement and its possible relationship to recent space agreements between Russia and China over the details of controlling “sensitive space technologies,”  and about it’s possible relationships to the sudden geopolitical about-faces we’ve seen emerge in the past month. As I noted yesterday, the Chinese-Russian annoucement for cooperation on Moon and Mars-related space missions comes in the same approximate time-frame as that Russian announcement about transmutation, which itself was couched by the Russians themselves in at least partially space-related terms.

These is, however, something else to consider in this brewing cauldron, and that is the legal loophole of current space treaties, as outlined in this article shared by Ms. M.W., Mr. P.J., and others:

Eternal light, up for grabs Astrophysicist warns of treaty loophole

At issue are the “Eternal Peaks of Light” the ridges and peaks around the Moon’s polar regions that are bathed in endless sunlight, and which would therefore constitute viable places for the first permanent human outposts on the Moon, bases which could function to establish that presence, and then, from there, to build the infrastructure needed on the rest of the Lunar surface – the power plants and so on – needed to sustain a permanent human presence elsewhere. As Marvcin Elvis, Harvard astrophysicist, notes in the article, these peaks are thus the most precious current Lunar real estate that there is. As Elvis points out, the current treaty was hastily composed and agreed upon during the space race between the Soviet Union and the United States to land humans on the Moon and return them to Earth, and a “compromise” was reached that was neither “socialist” nor “capitalist”:

ELVIS: It was agreed upon in 1967, during the Russian-U.S. rivalry over getting to the moon. It was concluded very quickly and it was a fight between socialist principles of the Russians — keeping space common property — and the U.S. capitalist approach saying we should be able to exploit space for its resources. And they sort of sit uncomfortably together in the treaty.

So you can’t own any celestial body as it’s defined, including the moon, but you can make use of its resources. That leads to a sort of tension, but it has never mattered because it’s never actually come up as a practical issue.

So what’s the legal loophole?

Nothing prevents anyone from claiming a permanent base for “research”:

That’s a perfectly valid experiment for solar physics. You would study the low-frequency part of the radio spectrum that cannot be studied from Earth because those waves don’t get through our atmosphere. It would be permanently exposed to the sun and you can claim — because you want to do clever Fourier analysis techniques — that you need continuous coverage [by sunlight]. That’s crucial, because then you say, “This is wonderful. I’ve just set up a research station, as anyone is allowed to under the Outer Space Treaty. And I’m happy for you to come and inspect it, as is required under the Outer Space Treaty. Except you mustn’t interrupt my operations, as is required under the Outer Space Treaty, and I’ve got a bare copper wire here, so don’t bring a radio, don’t bring any electrical equipment whatsoever, because it will pick up on my wire and ruin my solar physics experiments.”

And that means you can’t visit because there is no way to get around on the moon without any electrical equipment at all. So I basically, totally legally, have effectively taken possession. In effect, I own it, because how are you going to get me out of there if you want to put up photovoltaic cells? You’re going to have to make it worth my while to roll up my copper wire. You could complain, but who are you going to complain to? There is nobody to oversee these disputes. And that’s what we’re really pointing out, that it’s time to realize that because of the highly non-uniform distribution of resources on the moon and the imminent arrival of several players, we’d better start thinking about what those mechanisms should be.

Note that what Elvis is implying is that, under the guise of doing “research” on the Moon, one might in fact be establishing de facto ownership over it, and thence be able to conduct permanent commercial enterprises.

But there’s also, to my mind, another loophole here, for one might also be able to conduct “defense research” at these sites, and thus effectively be able to establish a military presence on the Moon. Again, where commerce occurs and has to be protected, militarization and weaponization are not far behind.

However, all this said, there is something else implied here, and in my high octane speculation, I think it may be taken as the “new methodology” that appears to be emerging for that faction of the globalists who view centralization as the be-all and end-all of their goals. It’s this:

Continue Reading At: GizaDeathStar.com
___________________________________________________________________

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”.