April 28, 2014

Agenda 21 EXPLAINED, full version

In Defense of Diana West

Commentary for 27 April 2014

There is great confusion in our political discourse today. “Former” Communists in Russia are sounding more and more like conservatives. The same might be said of “former” Communists in the United States. Everyone talks a good anti-Communist line. After all, Communism is dead, and only exists (we are told) as an artifact of college life. Most people are focused on Global Warming, multiculturalism or homosexual rights. Nobody seems to notice that Global Warming, multiculturalism and homosexual rights are artifacts of the supposedly “dead” religion (whose acolytes have, for the sake of deception, become “conservatives”). Well, there are a few of us – a small minority – who see what is happening. As a member of this minority I feel as if a cold wilderness has swallowed me up. I do not feel represented by the big foundations, or the conservative “smart set.” And so, when Diana West’s American Betrayal was published, and received favorable attention, I was excited and hopeful. But then, predictably, the celebrity pundits of the alternative Left (i.e., the Republican Right) began to attack Wests book, starting with David Horowitz and Ronald Radosh. There had to be, in the greater scheme of things, an attempt to kill the book. It was getting too much attention, and God knows what would have happened if somebody had not intervened.

April 24, 2014

German Military in the Soviet Union 1918-1933

Feldgrau.com - research on the German armed forces 1918-1945
German Military in the Soviet Union 1918-1933 by Arvo Vercamer and Jason Pipes

For 11 years (1922 to 1933), the whole world was almost entirely shielded from Germany's clandestine military build-up and military development efforts in the Soviet Union. A political flap did occur in 1926 when the Social-Democrats of Germany publicly announced some aspects of the German-Soviet military co-operation efforts (the Manchester Guardian in England also helped by publishing a number of articles on the subject), but it went on largely undetected. After the victory of the Nationalist Socialists in 1933, one-by-one, the veils or remilitarization were lifted until 1935 when the formation of the Wehrmacht was offically announced and the various measures designed to cover up their reformation were dropped.

To more optimally understand how it is that the Germans and Soviets were drawn to each other in the post World War One era, one must first look at both nations as they stood in 1918-1919.

Germany was humiliated in by the Treaty of Versailles. Germany was forced to reduce her military capabilities to a token force of limited troops, to have no capital ships, no submarines, to give up all colonial possessions, was proscribed from manufacturing a wide range of military goods, was forced to pay war reparations realistically outside of its means to do so, was forced to give up German territory, and more. Internationally, Germany had few friends or allies to draw on for support.

Similarly, the Soviet Union also found itself in a poor post-World War situation. The Russian Civil War was still going on. The military campaign against Poland had failed. The Baltic States of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania all declared their independence; the Soviet Union now only controlled the port of Leningrad in the Baltic Sea. The Allied intervention forces were in Archangel and Vladivostok. The military limitations of the new Soviet Union were often the laughing stock of the world. Internationally, the Soviet Union was essentially isolated.

April 22, 2014

Let's start a real Ukrainian debate


Introduction: The difficult heritage of the past
The state of Ukraine today is a sad outcome of Stalin's attempts to mix up nations and boundaries, disrupt natural historical ties and create a new Soviet man by turning original nations into mere ethnic residua and historical leftovers. Taking it into consideration is the starting point of our thinking, something that is sadly missing in the political debates today.
The cacophony of commentaries and statements to recent Ukrainian developments misses the point that the first and foremost contribution to the current dramatic situation there is the obvious political, economic and social failure of Ukraine as an independent state. This failure, in our view, has been caused by the following factors:
1. Ukraine as we know it today, has no historical tradition of statehood, and in over twenty years of its existence the country failed to create a state that would be accepted by the bulk of its population. The state was not born out of its people's efforts to gain self-determination and sovereignty, it came into being through the dissolution of the Soviet Union by its political leadership, and emancipation of the artificial Soviet republics, created by Moscow in their then valid borders.
2. The largely passive population's anti-Moscow sentiment was exacerbated by Gorbachev's perestroika and its catastrophic results. The local Soviet party nomenklatura also feared Yeltsin's policies aimed to crush the old system.

Divide and Conquer

Commentary for 21 April 2014
I recently asked a Polish journalist friend his ideas regarding the ongoing crisis in Ukraine. He gave me a five point answer: (1) The Ukrainians are fighting against Russia’s corrupt version of so-called capitalism; (2) Russia is trying to portray Ukraine as a non-state; (3) Putin is rebuilding the former Soviet Union’s empire, extending Moscow’s influence over specific economic sectors; (4) Moscow’s ultimate goal is to completely push the United States out of Europe, using a new anti-American ideology; (5) Meanwhile, Moscow relies heavily on the West’s readiness to compromise on everything and anything to preserve their access to Russian markets.
There is truth in what my Polish friend says. The key point, above all, is the intention to push the United States out of Europe. This was a Soviet goal prior to 1991, and it remains unchanged to this day. In part, the threat of war in Ukraine is being used to produce a split in Europe. Talk of economic sanctions also has the same effect. While some politicians may wish to support Ukrainian sovereignty, as the United States and Britain are obligated to do in accordance with the Budapest Memorandum, other politicians think it ridiculous to sacrifice their own constituents’ economic interests for a country that has been under Russia’s thumb for centuries. Furthermore, a case is being made that Washington is responsible for stirring up trouble in Ukraine, and that Europe’s interests are more closely aligned with Russia’s. Arguably, this is the immediate objective of Moscow’s push into Crimea: To split Europe, split NATO, isolate America from Europe; and to demonstrate Europe’s need for what Russian officials call – “a new security architecture.”

April 17, 2014

Farage: There's No Consent for a 'United States of Europe'




• European Parliament, Strasbourg,  15 April 2014

• Speaker:  Nigel Farage MEP, Leader of the UK Independence Party (UKIP), Co-President of the 'Europe of Freedom and Democracy' (EFD) Group in the European Parliament.

• Debate: 100 years on from the First World War: lessons to learn and future of Europe


Council and Commission statements
[2014/2670(RSP)]

Transcript:

 

April 15, 2014

J’accuse l’oligarchie


« J’accuse l’oligarchie occidentale de comploter tous les jours contre la paix, contre l’identité et contre le droit des peuples à disposer d’eux-mêmes. »


♦ J’accuse l’oligarchie de provoquer des crises pour mettre en tutelle les peuples, d’encourager tout ce qui favorise l’implosion des sociétés, de programmer la destruction des cultures et des savoirs, de détruire la démocratie, de conduire à la guerre. Un texte fort de Michel Geoffroy. Les oligarques de l’hyperclasse mondiale, voilà l’ennemi ! Polémia


1)  J’accuse l’oligarchie occidentale de provoquer les crises pour mieux mettre en tutelle les peuples afin d’ouvrir la voie à un gouvernement mondial.


L’oligarchie n’échoue pas à trouver des solutions aux différentes « crises », qu’il s’agisse du chômage, de l’immigration, de la natalité ou de l’insécurité. Ces « échecs » constituent en réalité pour elle autant de succès car le choc et le chaos font partie intégrante de sa stratégie.

J’accuse l’oligarchie d’avoir systématisé la pratique du choc théorisée par les néo-libéraux de l’Ecole de Chicago dans les années 1970, comme moyen d’imposer des réformes économiques et sociales contre la volonté des peuples.

April 14, 2014

Betrayal by Leaders



Commentary for 14 April 2014
In his 2008 book, The Failure Factory, Bill Gertz detailed the nuclear apostasy of Air Force general George Lee Butler, former chief of the U.S. Strategic Command. Incredibly, Gen. Butler subverted U.S. deterrence policy vis-à-vis Russia and bragged about it later. When Gen. Butler retired in 1994 he confessed to being a nuclear pacifist. Rather than seeking to uphold America’s nuclear deterrent, Gen. Butler hated the “self-serving profit interests of the military-industrial complex.” As he put it, the United States had been “in a messianic pursuit of a demonized enemy.” He was not alone in this opinion. Many politicians and pundits, especially from the Left, have expressed a similar view. However, Butler was in a special position. He could weaken U.S. nuclear capabilities and – in his own words – “end the madness” of nuclear deterrence. This carries with it a belief that Russia’s leaders were not seeking global dominion, even though high-level defectors from the East Bloc said that Russia’s leaders were seeking exactly this. Gen. Butler, believing in the benevolent intentions of Russia’s leaders, confessed to the following actions: “…I did what I could to cancel all of the strategic nuclear modernization programs in my jurisdiction, which totaled $40 billion. I canceled every single one of them.” As it turns out, America’s nuclear lion was a blind kitten. “If I’d had my way and I’d been there a while longer,” said Butler, “I would have worked to reduce [our nuclear arsenal] to zero.” (Read in full Butler’s Speech and joint statement with Gen. Goodpaster.) Forget the stereotype of the cigar-chomping Strategic Air Command warmonger from the sixties who wants to nuke Moscow. The stereotype is a lie. There are no such American generals. There never were. According to Gertz, “Butler is typical of a U.S. officer corps that has remained disdainful of the concepts of patriotism, love of country, and the idea that liberty and freedom and the American way of life are worth fighting for and ultimately worth dying for.” [p. 160]
Is Gertz insulting our valiant officer corps? Or is his assessment realistic?

April 7, 2014

When Conservatives Go Wrong


Commentary for 7 April 2014

Blaise Pascal wrote that man was full of error. “This error is natural,” he explained, “without grace, ineffaceable. Nothing shows him the truth; everything deceives him.” Along similar lines, Frederick the Great said, “Man is made for error; it enters his mind naturally, and he discovers a few truths only with the greatest effort.” Conservatives are especially guilty in this regard when it comes to the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics, Russia, and Communism. To understand the complex underlying realities, one must first discover the deceptive quality of the thing itself. A Communist is a human being with the power of a person. Like other political humans, he does not change his beliefs at the drop of a hat. He does not give up and become a capitalist. On the other hand, it is entirely natural for a Communist to become a pretend capitalist. Lenin did so in the 1920s, while Stalin joined with capitalism in the early 1940s. There was “peaceful coexistence” in the 1950s under Khrushchev, Détente under Brezhnev, and perestroika under Gorbachev. And today, in Moscow, Vladimir Putin pretends to be a Christian. Who is simple enough to believe in this latest deception? Of all people, Patrick J. Buchanan, who has written a column titled, IS GOD NOW ON RUSSIA’S SIDE?
 

April 5, 2014

Russia Is Dominated By Global Banks, Too


Numerous cultures have had holidays dedicated to the celebration of pulling the wool over the eyes of others, from the ancient Romans, to early Muslims, to medieval Christians, to Americans and Europeans today. As April begins, we once again turn a mischievous eye to the concept of the fool and, as always, each person seeks to be the prankster and never the victim.

Unfortunately, even the most vigilant of Americans can sometimes be led astray by a clever ruse, and I believe this is taking place today in the Liberty Movement’s perception of the rising “tensions” between Russia and the West.

In my article Ukraine Crisis: Just Another Globalist-Engineered Powder Keg, I outlined the history of false paradigms and engineered conflicts between numerous nations, including how these conflicts are exploited by global money interests to consolidate and centralize social and political power. The birth of communist Russia, in particular, was directly funded by Western banks and supported with arms and military aid from the U.S. government itself. These sorts of startling facts are not taught in schools and universities exactly because the continued dominance of the money elite relies on continued misrepresentations of legitimate history.


April 1, 2014

Further War Preparations?

Commentary for 1 April 2014
On 26 March the Daily Mail reported the following headline: “Kim Jong-Un has told his military chiefs to prepare for war with South Korea in 2015, claims Seoul media.” Of course, the North Korean dictator is always threatening war. This is the first report, however, which alleges a definite timetable (in terms of a specified year for attack). What is noteworthy about this date is how it agrees with Chinese authorities. In an August 2005 speech by former Chinese Defense Minister Chi Haotian, titled The War Is Approaching Us, we read, “…only with the power that is capable of totally extinguishing Japan and crippling the United States can we win peace; otherwise the Taiwan problem cannot be prolonged for more than 10 years, and there will be war within 10 years!” Gen. Chi delivered an even more terrifying speech before elite Party cadres titled, War Is Not Far from US and Is the Midwife of the Chinese Century. Chi concluded this particular speech with the following note: “The central committee [of the Chinese Communist Party] believes, as long as we resolve the United States problem at one blow, our domestic problems will all be readily solved. Therefore, our military battle preparations appear to aim at Taiwan, but in fact [are] aimed at the United States, and the preparation is far beyond the scope of attacking aircraft carriers or satellites.”