Accusations Emerge That the U.S. Is Aiding ISIS – The Latest “Conspiracy Theory” Circulating in Iraq
by Mike Krieger
My belief is, we will, in fact be greeted as liberators.
– Dick Cheney on NBC’s Meet the Press, March 16, 2003
But that enmity for the United States circulates beyond the militias that once fought U.S. soldiers, surfacing also in parliamentary debates and Iraqi media reports and even at the highest ranks of the national armed forces that the United States is aiding.
“Everybody knows that the Americans are dropping supplies to Daesh,” said Brig. Gen. Abed al-Maliki, a senior Iraqi army commander based in the city of Samarra, about 80 miles north of Baghdad, using another term for the Islamic State.
What’s more, he said, during some of the fiercest fighting around Samarra last year, U.S. Special Operations forces dropped behind enemy lines to assist Islamic State militants.
“They came in with parachutes, and they were helping to bomb the city,” he said.
U.S. airstrikes against the Islamic State, he contended, are probably just a cover for efforts to support the group.
“It’s just a show,” he said, sitting in the city’s army command headquarters. “If the Americans want to finish something, they will finish it. If they wanted to liberate Iraq, they could.”
– From the Washington Post article, In Fight for Tikrit, U.S. Finds Enemies on Both Sides of the Battle Lines, March 27, 2015
How do you know your foreign policy is a complete and total destructive nightmare? When the country you supposedly “liberated” not only turns into a horrific war zone, but all sides fighting accuse you of helping the enemy. This seems to be precisely what is happening in Iraq at the moment.
Just last week, I was shocked to read in the Wall Street Journal that the U.S. military was preparing to coordinate action against ISIS in Tikrit, alongside Iranian backed militias. I highlighted this in the post, Can’t Make This Up – U.S. Providing Aid in Fight Against ISIS in Iraq Alongside Iranian Troops. Here’s the key excerpt:
The U.S. has started providing Iraq with aerial intelligence in the stalled battle to oust Islamic State from Tikrit, drawing the American military into closer coordination with Iranian-backed militias spearheading the offensive.
Military officials said they aren’t working directly with Iran. But the intelligence will be used to help some 20,000 Iranian-backed Shiite militia fighters who make up the bulk of the force that has been struggling for weeks to retake the strategic city.
Incredibly, only a few days later, we learn from the Washington Post that one of the most popular “conspiracy theories” circulating in Iraq at the moment is that the U.S. is directly supplying and aiding ISIS in Iraq. Significantly, these accusations aren’t just emerging from random corners of the internet, but from senior military figures within the Iraqi army. Can’t make this up indeed.
From the Washington Post:
BAGHDAD — As American forces open another front of battle in Iraq, they find themselves on the same side as an array of armed groups that not only consider the United States an enemy but also accuse it of actively supporting Islamic State militants.
Since the U.S.-led coalition planes launched their first airstrikes in the Islamic State-held city of Tikrit on Wednesday night, threats and accusations from Shiite militias who were leading the battle there have grown. Several of the Iranian-backed groups accused coalition aircraft of bombing a headquarters for pro-government fighters in the city on Friday, promising retribution.
The claim was the latest in a long string of accusations leveled at the United States since its first airstrikes against the Islamic State in August. Rumors of coalition planes dropping weapons supplies to Islamic State militants and attacking pro-government fighters are now widely held beliefs in a country where conspiracy theories are rife.
But that enmity for the United States circulates beyond the militias that once fought U.S. soldiers, surfacing also in parliamentary debates and Iraqi media reports and even at the highest ranks of the national armed forces that the United States is aiding.
“Everybody knows that the Americans are dropping supplies to Daesh,” said Brig. Gen. Abed al-Maliki, a senior Iraqi army commander based in the city of Samarra, about 80 miles north of Baghdad, using another term for the Islamic State.
What’s more, he said, during some of the fiercest fighting around Samarra last year, U.S. Special Operations forces dropped behind enemy lines to assist Islamic State militants.
“They came in with parachutes, and they were helping to bomb the city,” he said.
U.S. airstrikes against the Islamic State, he contended, are probably just a cover for efforts to support the group.
“It’s just a show,” he said, sitting in the city’s army command headquarters. “If the Americans want to finish something, they will finish it. If they wanted to liberate Iraq, they could.”
When such accusations appear in the Iraqi media, they are normally accompanied by an image from an Islamic State video from Kobane in Syria last year, showing the militants displaying a load of weapons accidently dropped from a U.S. plane — an incident the United States acknowledged.
Whoops, sorry, our mistake! At this point, who doesn’t have access to hundreds of millions of U.S. weaponry?
Visiting U.S. officials are left to fend off questions about whether they support the group. The topic was the first to be broached in questions when Gen. John Allen, special envoy for the coalition to counter the Islamic State, met with Iraqi journalists in January.
The theories are stoked by U.S. involvement in the wider region, where Sunni states such as Saudi Arabia are battling for influence against Shiite Iran. While the United States has backed the same side as Saudi Arabia in conflicts in Syria and Yemen, in Iraq it finds itself on the other side of the battle.
A wildly popular trailer for an Iraqi TV program launched last year that mocked the Islamic State played off that speculation. It showed Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi hatching out of an egg after a marriage between characters representing Israel and America.
If this is how Iraqis greet their liberators, I don’t want to be invited to the party they throw for enemies.
Seriously though, it doesn’t even matter if these accusations are true or not. What matter is that Iraq is a total disaster zone, and everyone suffering from the chaos knows full well the U.S. government is responsible. Over the past decade, the clowns running American foreign policy have gone from promising the world that the Iraqis would greet U.S. soldiers as liberators, to all sides accusing the USA of aiding the enemy; whether that enemy be the Iraqi army, Iranian backed militias, or ISIS.
This is not a recipe for success. Unless of course, success is determined by the ability to create as much chaos and death overseas as possible via a divide and conquer strategy in which all combatants attempt to slay each other using weapons purchased from American defense companies. In that case, the Iraq war can be defined as a resounding success.
The Economic Collapse
by Michael Snyder
When an economic crisis is coming, there are usually certain indicators that appear in advance. For example, commodity prices usually start to plunge before a recession begins. And as you can see from the Bloomberg Commodity Index which you can find right here, this has already been happening. In addition, I have previously written about how the U.S. dollar went on a great run just before the financial collapse of 2008. This is something that has also been happening over the past few months. Some people would have you believe that nobody can anticipate the next great economic downturn and that to try to do so is just an exercise in “guesswork”. But that is not the case at all. We can look back over history and see patterns that keep repeating. And a lot of the exact same patterns that happened just before previous stock market crashes are happening again right now.
For example, let’s talk about the price of oil. There are only two times in history when the price of oil has fallen by more than 50 dollars in a six month time period. One was just before the financial crisis in 2008, and the other has just happened…
As a result of crashing oil prices, we are witnessing oil rigs shut down in the United States at a blistering pace. In fact, almost half of all oil rigs in the U.S. have already shut down. The following commentary and chart come from Wolf Richter…
In the latest week, drillers idled another 41 oil rigs, according to Baker Hughes. Only 825 rigs were still active, down 48.7% from October. In the 23 weeks since, drillers have idled 784 oil rigs, the steepest, deepest cliff-dive in the history of the data:
We are looking at a full-blown fracking bust, and this bust is already having a dramatic impact on the economies of states that are heavily dependent on the energy industry.
For example, just check out the disturbing number that just came out of Texas…
The crash in oil prices is hammering the Texas economy.
The latest manufacturing outlook index from the Dallas Fed plunged again in March, to -17.4 from -11.2 in February, indicating deteriorating business conditions in the state.
But this pain is going to be felt far beyond Texas. In recent years, Wall Street banks have made a massive amount of money packaging up energy industry loans, bonds, etc. and selling them off to investors.
If that sounds similar to the kind of behavior that preceded the subprime mortgage meltdown, that is because it is.
Now those loans, bonds, etc. are going bad as the fracking bust intensifies, and whoever is left holding all of this worthless paper at the end of the day is going to lose an extraordinary amount of money. Here is more from Wolf Richter…
It suited Wall Street just fine: according to Dealogic, banks extracted $31 billion in fees from the US oil and gas industry and its investors over the past five years by handling IPOs, spin-offs, “leveraged-loan” transactions, the sale of bonds and junk bonds, and M&A.
That’s $6 billion in fees per year! Over the last four years, these banks made over $4 billion in fees on just “leveraged loans.” These loans to over-indebted, junk-rated companies soared from about $40 billion in 2009 to $210 billion in 2014 before it came to a screeching halt.
For Wall Street it doesn’t matter what happens to these junk bonds and leveraged loans after they’ve been moved on to mutual funds where they can decompose sight-unseen. And it doesn’t matter to Wall Street what happens to leverage loans after they’ve been repackaged into highly rated Collateralized Loan Obligations that are then sold to others.
At the same time, we are also witnessing a slowdown in global trade. This usually happens when economic conditions are about to turn sour, and that is why it is so alarming that the total volume of global trade in January was down 1.4 percent from December. According to Tyler Durden of Zero Hedge, that was the largest drop since 2011…
Presenting the latest data from the CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis, according to which in January world trade by volume dropped by a whopping 1.4% from December: the biggest drop since 2011!
We are seeing some troubling signs in the U.S. as well.
I shared the following chart in a previous article, but it bears repeating. It comes from Charles Hugh Smith, and it shows that new orders for consumer goods are falling at a rate not seen since the last recession…
Well, what about the stock market? It was up more than 200 points on Monday. Isn’t that good news?
Yes, but the euphoria on Wall Street will not last for long.
When corporate earnings per share either start flattening out or start to decline, that is a huge red flag. We saw this just prior to the stock market crash of 2008, and it is happening again right now. The following commentary and chart come from Phoenix Capital Research…
Take a look at the below chart showing current stock levels and changes in forward Earnings Per Share (EPS). Note, in particular how divergences between EPS and stocks tend to play out (hint look at 2007-2008).
We all know what came next.
And guess what?
According to CNBC, a lot of the “smart money” is pulling their money out of the stock market right now while the getting is good…
Recent market volatility has sent stock market investors rushing for the exits and into cash.
Outflows from equity-based funds in 2015 have reached their highest level since 2009, thanks to a seesaw market that has come under pressure from weak economic data, a stronger dollar and the the prospect of monetary tightening.
Funds that invest in stocks have seen $44 billion in outflows, or redemptions, year to date, according to Bank of America Merrill Lynch. Equity funds have seen outflows in five of the last six weeks, including $6.1 billion in just the last week.
It doesn’t matter if you are a millionaire “on paper” today.
What matters is if the money is going to be there when you really need it.
At the moment, a whole lot of people have been lulled into a false sense of complacency by the soaring stock market and by the bubble of false economic stability that we have been enjoying.
But under the surface, there is a whole lot of turmoil going on.
Those that are looking for the signs are going to see the next crisis approaching well in advance.
Those that are not are going to get absolutely blindsided by what is coming.
Don’t let that happen to you.
New Eastern Outlook
by Viktor Mikhin
Every day life constantly confirms the relevance of popular proverbs that have not lost their actuality over the centuries but continue to teach wisdom and put stupidity to shame. For example the proverb: “Everything flows and nothing stands still”. The entire world has known for a long time that the United States was the founding father of the terrorist organisation Al-Qaeda with the help of their agent Osama bin Laden who united the rabble of terrorists, bandits and scum to fight against the Soviet troops in Afghanistan. At that time a contingency of Soviet forces was already in the country fighting against the genesis of terrorism as an international phenomenon, preventing it from spreading to neighbouring countries. This is when Washington started supplying their terrorist allies with “Stingers” to fight against the USSR, and the CIA paid a fixed going rate to the bandits for the heads of dead Soviet soldiers and officers. You will think that this happened in the Middle Ages but no, it was really in the 80s. The “free” American press effusively told stories of the “exploits” of the bandits and American politicians were photographed with members of Al-Qaeda with dead Soviet soldiers in the background.
There is yet another well-known proverb that says: “Do not dig a hole for somebody else; you yourself will fall into it”. Then came that tragic day on September 11, 2001 when the paid CIA agent Osama bin Laden and his organisation Al-Qaeda staged a terrorist attack in the heart of New York City in the way they were taught by the CIA. The then-President George Bush did not rush to start investigations into this disgraceful intelligence fail but promptly organised for numerous relatives of Osama bin Laden residing in the USA to get on a plane filled with cash.
Then followed the thrilling take down called “Catch Osama” that lasted for about 10 years. Finally, the former CIA agent and the head of Al-Qaeda, quietly living in a villa in the town of Abbottabad 50 km from the Pakistani capital of Islamabad, was killed by members of a US Navy Seal team. Admittedly, one of the American helicopters transporting a large number of Navy Seals participating in the assassination of the former CIA agent was shot down for some reason. A notorious tactic of the Chicago Mafia in the 30s of the last century to “kill the murderer of murderers”
Some time has passed and the proverb “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” has become popular in political circles in the United States. There are serious talks in Washington about restoring old ties with the terrorist organisation Al-Qaeda within the context of success of another terrorist organisation the Islamic State. The current American administration has decided that ISIS is now the main American rival in the fight for influence in the Middle East. Within the framework of bitter experiences in Afghanistan, Iraq and other Arab states where Washington wants to impose its “democratic order”, the Pentagon is not running the risk of sending back its ground troops. For example, a message just arrived that more than a hundred Special Forces soldiers are withdrawn urgently, or rather escape, from Yemen. According the the US media, the decision to withdraw the Special Forces from Yemen was made “in connection with the sharp deterioration of the security situation in the country”. The decision followed right after the terrorist attack in the capital Sana’a killing 137 people and wounding another 357. “It is highly likely to have been the work of Al-Qaeda as it is their style. The explosion happened on Friday in a crowded mosque in Sana’a where Houthis supporters habitually come,” said Yemeni journalist and social activist Fuad Musaad. According to one of the leaders of the National Salvation Alliance coalition in Yemen, Abdullah al-Matari, members of Al-Qaeda had threatened the Houthis group not long before that.
The question arises of who will fight against ISIS and its militants? And thus the idea is born: pit ISIS against Al-Qaeda, as the latter is still full of CIA agents. This is where the “free and democratic” American press comes to the forefront that at once becomes the performers of the social order of Washington for good money. “It is paradoxical of course but right at this moment when the USA is closer than ever to defeating Al-Qaeda it is in their interest to rather keep this terrorist organisation afloat and allow its leader Ayman al-Zawahiri to stay alive”, writes Barak Mendelsohn in the leading publication “Foreign Affairs”. It is very well said and a hundred percent right. Not long ago, Washington called the whole world to arms against them and now they are restoring old ties with these terrorists. America’s very own Nobel Peace Prize laureate is is making a familiar political somersault. Apparently in the near future Ayman al-Zawahiri will be met with fanfare in Washington as an active fighter against the Islamic State.
It might not be a bad idea to remind the politicians in the administration in Washington, who still confuse Iraq with Iran and cannot tell the terrorist organisations proliferating in the Middle East from one another, of one truth. The truth is that ISIS is the direct brainchild of many militants and terrorists who were disappointed with the passivity of their leaders of Al-Qaeda. The history of the Islamic State starts in 2006 in Iraq occupied by American troops at the time, when 11 radical Sunni groups united, headed by a division of al-Qaeda in Iraq (“Al-Qaeda Jihad in Iraq”). Since 2013 the group has been called the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI) and, interestingly enough, collaborated on several occasions with the American occupation regime. ISI’s goal was to occupy the Sunni part of Iraq and turn it into a paramilitary Islamic Sunni state once the international coalition forces led by the USA withdraw from Iraq.
“ISIS is a direct outgrowth of Al Qaeda in Iraq that grew out of our invasion, which is an example of unintended consequences, which is why we should generally aim before we shoot.” This admission comes from none other than American President Barack Obama. That being said this admission comes because as a result of American aggression 500,000 Iraqis were wounded and killed, the country’s entire infrastructure has been destroyed and the integrity of Iraq as a sovereign state has been called into question.
After the withdrawal of US troops in December 2011, ISI, then under the leadership of Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, started to actively carry out their activities. The new leader renamed the group this time the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL also known as Islamic State of Iraq and Syria or ISIS). This was a signal that the militants had big plans: to take control of the historical Mediterranean region, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Jordan, Egypt, Turkey and Cyprus. Having gained considerable territory in Syria and Iraq, the terrorists then renamed their organisation the Islamic State and announced the creation of a caliphate, where medieval laws and regulations were introduced. Based on this Middle East experts believe that the financing of this terrorist organisation comes from close US allies, the Gulf States (especially Saudi Arabia and Qatar) to support the fight against the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria. “I believe, the former head of the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Bob Graham bitterly stated, that the failure of American special services to shed light on the actions of the Saudis, in particular, their involvement in the September 11 attacks has allowed them to to engage in harmful activities to the USA, for example, supporting ISIS.”
Feeling as if they have become irrelevant to their old masters, Al-Qaeda has recently stepped up its activities, of which there are numerous examples. For example, Al-Qaeda claimed responsibility for the organisation of the terrorist acts against the editorial staff of Charlie Hebdo in Paris in January 2015 and the attack on a kosher shop. The American publication, The Wall Street Journal, cited the EU Counter-terrorism Coordinator Gilles de Kerchove who said that Al-Qaeda might stage a big attack in Europe in order to prove to the Islamic State and its former masters that it has not lost “its leadership in the global jihad.” He noted that the two terrorist groups Al-Qaeda and ISIS are now able to fiercely compete with each other for leadership as well as the generous funding of their sponsors.
President Barack Obama demonstrated the same political somersault in regards to the Syrian president Bashar al-Assad. It seems that only yesterday the Syrian leader was called a bloody dictator by the USA and now Washington is ready to negotiate and to recognise the current regime in Damascus in the name of combating ISIS. First the CIA director John Brennan said that the fall of the Assad regime will only exacerbate the problem and clear the way for radical groups such as ISIS to Damascus. Then followed the Secretary of State John Kerry on a similar note saying that he was ready to personally negotiate with Bash al-Assad to end the civil war. Yes, the very same John Kerry who harped on for ages that Assad must be removed from power, even at the cost of military operations.
The changed attitude toward the terrorist organisation Al-Qaeda and al-Assad, quite naturally, is an undeniable proof of the complete failure of American policy in Syria and throughout the Middle East. According to many political scientists, recent events have shown the utter disarray of the American president and his team, who literally rush from one stance to another, trying their best to save the US’ reputation of policemen of the world, and showing their increasingly dwindling allies that Washington supposedly has the situation under control. However, as the proverb says “everything flows and nothing stays still” and the international community is gradually bidding farewell to the unipolar American rule.
Viktor Mikhin, member correspondent of RANS, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
The New American
by Alex Newman
After largely failing to prod state governments into developing a national identification system known as “REAL ID,” Republican lawmakers in Congress are once again pushing an Obama-backed scheme that would force every American to have a national ID card containing sensitive biometric data. The controversial plan, embedded in an immigration-enforcement bill, has been in the works for years, but has consistently been met with stiff opposition from liberty-minded grassroots organizations and activists. While the plan has failed in previous Congresses thanks to a groundswell of opposition, critics of the measure say that without prompt action, the unconstitutional scheme could soon become a reality.
The legislation, officially dubbed the “Legal Workforce Act” (H.R. 1147), is ostensibly aimed at preventing illegal immigrants from obtaining jobs in the United States. Among the most troubling elements highlighted by critics, though, is that the bill would purport to mandate a national ID card for every American as a condition of working. It would also force every employer in America to purchase and use so-called “E-Verify technology” to check with Washington, D.C., as to whether potential employees have government permission to work. Finally, it would create a massive federal database containing sensitive data on virtually every person in the country — a database that could easily be expanded to include even more information.
While establishment lawmakers on both sides of the aisle seem fond of the measure, critics are sounding the alarm about the bill and its implications for liberty. In an e-mail to supporters urging them to help crush the unconstitutional legislation, for example, former Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas), in his capacity as chairman of Campaign for Liberty, warned that the national ID scheme would be a nightmare. Among other concerns, the two-time GOP presidential contender noted that it would allow federal bureaucrats to include biometric information — potentially including fingerprints, retinal scans, and more — that could and likely would be eventually used as a tracking device. It would also make it illegal for anyone to work in the United States without obtaining the national ID.
“Every time any citizen applies for a job, the government would know — and you can bet its only a matter of time until ‘ID scans’ will be required to make even routine purchases, as well,” Dr. Paul warned, adding that “statists in both parties have been fighting to ram their radical national ID-database scheme into law” for years. “In fact, this scheme was a key portion of the infamous so-called ‘Comprehensive Immigration Reform’ bills both parties have tried to ram through.” Now, Paul said, the statists believe they have found a way to impose their national ID: Drop the amnesty provisions and focus on immigration “security.”
According to Dr. Paul, a constitutionalist who served in Congress for more than 20 years, the term “security” is being used as “nothing more than a buzzword meant to trick Americans from all over the country into thinking that Congress is finally going to seal our southern border.” In reality, though, it means something much different. “The ‘security’ members of both parties in the U.S. House want doesn’t target any U.S. border,” Paul added. “Instead, it’s meant to create an all-out police state within them.”
Paul also warned that the national database required for the ID regime could easily expand to include information on gun ownership, medical records, political affiliation, and “virtually anything else at the stroke of a President’s pen.” In fact, the stakes are so high, he said, that this type of battle is often decisive in “whether a country remains free or continues sliding toward tyranny.” Existing abuses such as lawless NSA spying, IRS harassment, and more offer further evidence that the feds cannot be trusted with such Orwellian tools to track, monitor, and ultimately control Americans.
Despite the dangers, the legislation has already been passed out of the House Judiciary Committee, getting a vote just three days after it was introduced — and the markup took place before the text of the bill was even available online. “The speed with which this bill was rushed through Committee means the House leadership is very serious about passing this bill into law as soon as possible,” warned Paul, urging Americans to fight back immediately to prevent the bill from passing. He also warned about potential “bipartisan compromises” that could be even worse than the original.
The legislation was introduced by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), who has a dismal 54 percent in the Freedom Index, a tool provided by this magazine that scores lawmakers’ votes based on adherence to the U.S. Constitution they all swore to uphold. The controversial bill already has dozens of co-sponsors in the House, too. It is being publicly touted by Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), who claimed it would bring the “nation’s employment eligibility system into the 21st century,” as well as chief sponsor Smith.
“The Legal Workforce Act turns off the jobs magnet that attracts so many illegal immigrants to the United States,” Rep. Smith said in a statement promoting the measure, ignoring the fact that amnesty and the porous borders have been crucial in encouraging illegal immigration. “The bill expands the E-Verify system and applies it to all U.S. employers. Equally important, the American people support E-Verify,” Smith argued, citing polls showing that Americans overwhelmingly support stronger laws to stop businesses from hiring illegal immigrants. “This bill is a common-sense approach that will reduce illegal immigration and save jobs for legal workers. It deserves the support of everyone who wants to put the interests of American workers first.”
The bill also has the support of several major lobbying powerhouses — including some, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, that are infamous for their support of granting amnesty to illegal immigrants. Other organizations backing the bill include immigration enforcement-focused Numbers USA, the National Restaurant Association, the National Association of Homebuilders, and several others. However, in the past, similar national-ID schemes have met with major opposition from groups including Downsize DC, the Rutherford Institute, the American Policy Center, the Taxpayers Protection Alliance, the Republican Liberty Caucus, the U.S. Bill of Rights Foundation, Conservative Republican Women, and many more.
In a letter to lawmakers about the same legislation in the 112th Congress (2011-2012), that broad coalition of organizations blasted the bill as an affront to freedom and the Constitution. Among other concerns, they said it “violates individual civil liberties such as the right to work and free speech; mandates a costly job-killing regulatory burden that cripples small business; requires employers to become enforcement agents of the federal government; and encourages identify theft of law-abiding citizens.” The bill should never have even left committee, according to opponents.
“It is anathema to limited government, the right to privacy, free enterprise and prosperity,” the coalition said in the letter to members of Congress. “It violates the philosophy of the Constitution and intent of the Framers by subordinating the liberty of citizens to the administrative convenience of government. And the Founding Fathers would have rebelled against such a staggering Federal intrusion into every workplace in the nation and our personal civil liberties.”
As The New American reported as far back as 2010, the same plot to impose a national ID on America has been pushed before by some of the leading Big Government-mongers in Congress. The “bipartisan” amnesty-national ID legislation pushed by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and backed by Obama in 2010 eventually failed due to a massive uprising against legalizing illegal immigrants. Back then, though, promoters of the biometric national ID scheme were boasting about their machinations.
“Our plan has four pillars: requiring biometric Social Security cards to ensure that illegal workers cannot get jobs; fulfilling and strengthening our commitments on border security and interior enforcement; creating a process for admitting temporary workers; and implementing a tough but fair path to legalization for those already here,” wrote Graham and Schumer in a joint op-ed promoting their legislation. “We would require all U.S. citizens and legal immigrants who want jobs to obtain a high-tech, fraud-proof Social Security card.” At the time, Obama called the proposal “a promising, bipartisan framework which can and should be the basis for moving forward.”
With the amnesty provision now out of the more recent bill — Obama is using executive decrees funded by the GOP Congress in a bid to provide amnesty anyway — analysts say the national ID plot stands a much greater chance of coming to fruition. In addition to being unconstitutional by virtue of the fact that the Constitution grants no power over identification systems to the federal government, history shows that national ID schemes are dangerous and very often abused by authorities. Considering the U.S. government’s track record, Americans can be sure that, if the plot becomes law, the ID regime will be eventually be abused as well.
If solving the illegal immigration crisis is truly the goal, there is a much simpler solution. Rather than foisting an unconstitutional national ID scheme on Americans and building a massive database, Congress could stop funding Obama’s amnesty decrees and ensure that the borders are secure. For that to happen, though, Americans who value liberty and the Constitution must get involved.
The Common Sense Show
by Dave Hodges
Is this roundup taking place in China, Iran or Russia? As many already know, this recently took place in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida in which “pretend” dissidents are rounded up as part of the Jade Helm 15 drill. Please note the straight line and the hands on the shoulders of those in front of them, as they were swept away to waiting white vans. We are witnessing the implementation of the Fourth Reich.
I think it is logical to assume that Jade Helm 15 will go live and it is a martial law extraction of dissidents exercise to be followed by full scale martial law. I have received many inquiries about when I believe martial law will be declared. Despite all the documentation and anecdotal evidence, on my own, I am not able to precisely determine the time of the implementation of martial law on the streets of America.
Even though it is not possible to know the date, without the information leaking from the inside, I do believe that there are “the chest pains before the heart attack”, which will provide the clues necessary to determine when martial law will be imposed.
Your Pastor Will Know the Date of Martial Law Implementation
Many people in the independent media have reported that an estimated 28,000 pastors were recruited by FEMA/DHS, as part of the Clergy Response Team, and that their initial and primary training was to tell their flock to obey the DHS version of Romans 13. Romans 13, in the King James version of the Bible, begins:
“Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.” Romans 13:1
Many of us have been quick to point out that this bastardization of the Romans 13 is designed to force compliance to government edicts who might not otherwise comply. Certainly all governments are not established by God. Were the governments of Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, all ordained by God? What about George the III?
All of Pastor Mansfield’s revelations stem from legislation known as, The National Emergency Centers Act or HR 645 which mandates the establishment of “national emergency centers” to be located on military installations for the purpose of to providing “temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster,” according to the bill.
The legislation also states that the camps will be used to “provide centralized locations to improve the coordination of preparedness, response, and recovery efforts of government, private, and not-for-profit entities and faith-based organizations”. Hence, the birth of NOVAD and the Clergy Response Teams.
The bill also provides that the camps can be used to “meet other appropriate needs”, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security. This a carte blanche mandate that many fear could mean the forced detention of American citizens in the event of widespread rioting following a national emergency or a total economic collapse.
Pastor Mansfield’s Clergy Response Team Training Is Very Telling
Pastor Mansfield attended several briefings and he could barely believe his ears. He learned of the government’s plan to enact martial law as well as to implement forced population relocations. Mansfield emphasized that when martial law is enacted, the enforcement would be immediate. In other words, family members will be separated from each other and part of the training that the clergy received was how to comfort separated family members. It doesn’t take much imagination to conclude that this is what we are seeing from the horrifying images from Ft. Lauderdale and the Death Domes throughout Texas.
Pastor Mansfield told me that the pastors were trained by FEMA to go to homes were people refused to be relocated by the authorities and their immediate job was to convince the reluctant to willingly go to the relocation camps. Ostensibly, this was to be done in lieu of sending in the SWAT teams.
I asked Mansfield if FEMA camps were real and he stated that much of the clergy training focused around this scenario of pastors operating within the forced relocation centers. The main goal of a pastor assigned was to bring order and encourage compliance with DHS requests, hence, the emphasis on Romans 13.
Disturbingly, Pastor Mansfield reiterated several times that the number one job of these pastors is to calm down the detainees and encourage their compliance within the people’s new surroundings.
Pastor Mansfield also stated that pastors will be utilized as informants. This violates the legal privilege of confidentiality between pastor and church-goer, that is currently recognized by law. All church-goers can no longer trust the sanctity of personal confessions and revelations made to pastors and priests. This one illegal act by DHS completely undermines the Christian Church in America!
DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE CLERGY RESPONSE TEAM WILL BE UTILIZED IN THE EXTRACTION PROCESS OF AMERICANS, TO FORCED INTERNMENT/RESETTLEMENT CAMPS, THESE “TEAM” MEMBERS REPRESENT THE BEST CLUE WE HAVE AS TO WHEN MARTIAL LAW WILL BE CARRIED OUT.
I strongly suspect that the Clergy Response Teams are a part of Jade Helm 15 and simply listed as DHS personnel. With a minimum of 28,000 pastors being a part of this dastardly plan, we need to all put our pastors under our watchful eye. Is your Pastor disappearing for unexplained periods of time? Network with people you know from other churches. Are your respective Pastors disappearing at the same time? Can you account for your Pastor’s travels? This past weekend, at Baylor University, Christians from all over the Southwest came together at Baylor’s football stadium for fellowship at an event referred to as the “Gathering“. Given the political climate in Texas, I am a little more than suspicious that this event did not bring together several Clergy Response Team members for additional training under NOVAD. Again, we need to putting our Pastors under scrutiny because we have 28,000 Judas’ in our midst.
Clergy Response Team Members Are Intimidated and Threatened by DHS
Mansfield told me that the pastors in America are being coerced to participate because when an emergency is declared, no pastor, who does not have the “FEMA-trained government badge” will be allowed to be in a declared “emergency” SAFE area.
Pastor Mansfield also felt very strongly this was the government’s way of removing Jesus from America’s landscape and set the stage for the ushering in of a new-age religion. In fact, Mansfield shared with me documentation which demonstrated DHS’ attempt to remove Jesus from the entire internment/resettlement process.
The pastors were told not to quote Scripture. The DHS document which was prepared for the pastors clearly stated that Scripture had been used to “oppress” people in the past and the presenters strongly discouraged the its use. Please see the following excerpt from one of the DHS training manuals:
Healing Scripture and Prayer In the Pastoral Crisis Intervention
“During a time of crisis people do go through a “crisis of faith.”
Sometime quick mention of God and scripture may not be helpful. As we all know the Scripture has been used to oppress, dominate and at the same time used for healing and reconciliation- renewing of relationship with God and people. If the pastor senses it is appropriate to use the scripture and prayer, it must carefully be done for healing of victims not to uphold pastoral authority.” (Page 14)
In other words, all legitimate pastoral authority was abrogated by the pastors who participated in the roundup of American citizens.
Also on page 14 of the same training document, pastors were admonished to avoid“Unhealthy God talk….” Specifically pastors are ordered to avoid using references to God when helping people cope with the loss of a loved one:
“4. God must have needed him/her more than you.”
“5. God never gives more than we can handle.“
Doesn’t this strike you as odd? DHS recruits Pastors but will not let them preach the Word of God? Can we think of anyone or anything else that might support this goal? Please allow me to provide another hint:
The artwork of Jade Helm 15 is bizarre and troubling. Please note the broken arrows. In military parlance, broken arrow means that a military unit’s perimeter has been overrun and defeat imminent. The meaning here is easy to extrapolate.
Originally, I was stumped by the phrase that accompanied the symbol for Jade Helm 15, “Master the Human Domain”. This is not a phrase that is in our American colloquialisms. On the surface, it appears to mean that this drill is about the enslavement of humanity? Certainly, the Obama administration would not be so bold, even if this was their intent, to so brazenly put this phrase as moniker for a major operation. Wouldn’t that alert the public that something evil was afoot? Or, has this plot gone so far that they do not care?
Upon closer examination, the fact that the term”Human Domain” is used, it makes me wonder what would the “Un-Human Domain” consist of? And certainly the word “Master” does strongly imply slavery. And who is unhuman enough to be interested in enslaving humanity? The only possible answer is the Prince of Darkness. There is no other way to interpret this moniker for Jade Helm 15.
Now we know who the real enemy is. We also know that this rapture in reverse (i.e. “disappearing Pastors”) are a warning sign of impending martial law, the question remains, what are we going to do about it?
The upcoming Jade Helm exercise, conducted by the US military across seven states has been attacked as a preparation for martial law, but could in fact be part of a much more sinister project.
In the past several days, leaked plans for seven-state a US Special Operations Command (SOCOM) exercise in which states role-play as countries have made rounds across both news sites and conspiracy theorist circuits, with the latter ringing alarm, calling the drills a preparation for martial law. However, considering layout of the states used in the exercise, as well as their climate and terrain, the intent could be a preparation for an invasion of Iran and a Middle East-wide war.
According to the leaked proposal for the operation, service members will practice:
– Operating outside the normal support mechanisms
– Adapting to unfamiliar terrain, social and economic conditions
– Operating in and around communities where anything out the ordinary will be spotted and reported (Locals are the first to notice something out of place)
– The opportunity to work with civilians to gain their trust and an understanding of the issues
The main focus of the exercise appears to be Texas, including inhabited areas of Texas. The operation will include Army Special Forces (Green Berets), Navy SEALS, US Marine Corps Expeditionary Unites, US Army 82nd Airborne Division, as well as USAF and USMC SOCOM and “Interagency partners,” which together sounds more like a team that would invade a country, rather than a hostage-rescue operation or a plan to build homes for hurricane-devastated children.
A possible layout of the countries that US states that are part of Jade Helm exercises are role-playing as. © SPUTNIK
Texas — Islamic Republic of Iran
Texas, colored red for “hostile,” is likely a simulation of an invasion of Iran. Although it does not have the optimal terrain to simulate Iran, the proposal for the exercise appears to have chosen Texas for its Realistic Military Training because local authorities and the population are most receptive
The simulated invasion appears to be planned with a Central Joint Special Operations Task Force (CJSOTF), the headquarters, as well as the Home Station, where the service members involved in the exercise would likely begin, at the Elgin Air Force Base, across the Gulf of Mexico, in Florida. This could mean that the simulated invasion of Iran is executed from a very remote place, such as in the simulated United States, or across the Persian Gulf.
Meanwhile, the local Special Operations Task Force (SOTF) would be based at the nearer Camp Shelby, in Missisippi, possibly a simulated Saudi Arabia, and the island (flight deck) of the USS John C. Stennis, a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier, likely stationed near the coast of the simulated Iran.
Within the simulated Iran, there would be a Joint Operations Access Exercise (JOAX), a US Army Airborne landing, conducted together with other units, deployed inland, likely to plant a force behind enemy lines. In addition, a Contingency Response Force (CRF) would land on the coast and practice the ground invasion.
The operations in Texas will involve eight Operational Detachment Alpha (ODA) US Army Special Forces groups, four unidentified Operational Detachment Groups (ODG), a US Marines Special Operations Team (MSOT) and the Naval Special Warfare Training Unit (NSWUT), among others.
New Mexico — Iraq
New Mexico, viewed from Amtrak’s Southwest Chief. © FLICKR/ MATT’ JOHNSON
New Mexico is a state that has vast swathes of desert, like Iraq. Iraq has close ties with Iran, which could be a reason for why it is colored brown for “uncertain, leaning hostile,” which Iraq would likely be if Iran was to be invaded.
However, Iraq does have some US military installations, which could be simulated with the northern and southern Advanced Operational Bases (AOB).
Utah — Syria
Bonneville Salt Flats 361. © FLICKR/ MICHAEL KAPPEL
Like Syria, which would be considered hostile in case of an Iran invasion, Utah is colored red. In addition, like parts of Syria, Utah has both mountains and flatlands.
Utah will be home to a Large Scale Exercise (LSE), in USMC terms means fighting the army of a simulated country. The exercise is set in an uninhabited area, suggesting an actual simulated battle against a Syrian Army opposing force. In addition, two unidentified Operational Detachment Groups (ODG) would be dispatched to the capital, which could mean a simulated covert operation in Damascus.
Colorado — Turkey
In this April 20, 2006, file photo, Hildale, Utah, sits at the base of Red Rock Cliff mountains with its sister city, Colorado City, Ariz., in the foreground. © AP PHOTO/ DOUGLAS C. PIZAC, FILE
Colorado is a largely mountainous state, like Turkey, and it is colored blue for “permissive,” which means that aircraft and troops would be able to move through the state. Turkey as a NATO member would similarly be expected to fulfill such obligations.
Nevada and Arizona — Lebanon and Jordan
Several C-17 Globemaster IIIs, C-130 Hercules and a B-1 Lancer park on the flightline May 31, 2013, at Nellis Air Force Base, Nev. © FLICKR/ US AIR FORCE
Phoenix, Arizona will be the site of the Special Forces’ Operational Detachment Headquarters (ODH) and a Marine Corps (MC) site, likely simulating Jordan’s capital Amman, which has been the site of Marine Corps deployments in recent years. However, although Phoenix is in a largely desert environment, it is also next to a mountain range, unlike Amman.
In addition, Arizona is colored light blue, making it neutral but leaning friendly, which could be the status of Lebanon when it comes to an operation against Syria, while Nevada is blue, permissive, which could be the status of Jordan. Such an arrangement suggest that the geographic and diplomatic statuses could have been switched to preserve political realism in the situation.
California — Israel and Palestine
A U.S. Border Patrol vehicle, right, drives along a road running alongside the border structures that separate Tijuana, Mexico, left, from San Diego Thursday, June 13, 2013, in San Diego. © AP PHOTO/ GREGORY BULL
California generally has a soft Mediterranean climate, like Israel, and would be permissive to US military movements, as Israel would be. There are no deployments planned to California, as the simulated invasion of Iran would likely not have much of an impact on the situation there. The “insurgent pocket” likely represents both the inland West Bank and the coastal Gaza Strip, which would be hostile to the operation and would not allow the US military to operate in the area. However, it is also possible that California is a simulation of Lebanon, and the “insurgent pocket” is a Hezbollah-controlled area that would be opposed to a US invasion of Iran.
by BEN DENBY
Since 1971, the value of the US dollar, and with it the corporeal integrity of the US economy, has been tied to what we know today as the petrodollar system. This arrangement is the result of Nixon’s abolition of the gold standard in 1971, the basis of valuing the US dollar since the end of WW2, coupled with a deal struck with Saudi Arabia and other OPEC nations for US military hardware and protection in return for oil sales exclusively in US dollars. Despite rendering the US dollar a fiat currency, in the short term at least this arrangement bolstered the dollar’s flagging value by creating demand for it outside the country — thereby rendering what would have otherwise become inflation into a useful export. The concept of a ‘petrodollar’ arose as the volume of these fiat greenbacks outside US borders rose proportionally to those within, as a way of distinguishing between the two.
At the time the ‘Nixon Shock’ as it came to be known may well have seemed like a useful workaround for various problems associated with the disintegration of the postwar Bretton Woods system, which had set monetary policy on exchange rates and the like amongst industrialized states during the intervening period, not least of which being high rates of unemployment and inflation internal to the United States itself. At the same time as saving the dollar from what might be regarded as the inherent shortcomings of market ideology in the short term, however, it also appears to have been a fatal error to the extent that it tied the value of the dollar to what was and remains a finite resource — a fact that would ultimately lead to the collapse of the petrodollar, and with it the US economy.
While none of Nixon’s courtiers may have been willing to acknowledge that the king has no clothes, in retrospect it seems clear that Nixon was beset by myopia; in lieu of alternative means to maintain the value of the currency, then, the collapse of the dollar, with it the US economy, and with it the empire, was and remain a foregone conclusion. Even if though various wars of aggression the US military could establish control all the remaining oil reserves on the planet, under the pretext of protecting democracy from terrorist attacks etc., the finite nature of the oil supply meant were only so much to be controlled; that being the case, all that remained was to determine when collapse would in fact occur. It was only a matter of time. This was to become all the more pressing as other factors such as the peak oil phenomenon signaled the onset of the permanent decline in supply.
One might very well marvel at the hubris and hypocrisy informing this process. On the one hand, we can see the calculated and very conscious use of state power to prop up what was otherwise a purportedly free market not only capable of being supported through its own mechanisms, but whose acolytes scream bloody murder whenever anyone proposes regulation or taxation for the purposes of compensating for its antisocial and monopolistic tendencies. On the other, we have the pretense that one can depart even from ideological tenets that have little foundation in objective fact and are embraced because they function to rationalize institutional privilege and power, and still achieve successful or even simply functional outcomes in the long term.
By the same token, and in fact in this latter sense in particular, the real significance of these facts arguably derives from two points: (1) the fact that, barring the successful implementation of strategies to separate the maintenance of the value of the US dollar from the petrodollar system, they appear to define the parameters for the endgame of US military power; and (2) the broader lesson that may be drawn about the nature of power. We can best understand the first point by examining it in the context of the second.
If one of the reasons to marvel at the conditions surrounding the Nixon Shock and the creation of the petrodollar on their own terms was the pretense of being able to depart from professed ideological principles, even where these lacked basis in fact, and still achieve ultimately successful outcomes, this was also indicative of a failure to maintain a basic harmony between means and outcomes of a type that has a far broader and more notorious history in numerous contexts far removed from the United States of the early 1970s. One might even go so far as to describe it as one of the quintessential follies of state power — especially when governments begin to dismantle freedoms in the name of defending them in the name of protecting democracy from terrorism, as per some of the more draconian and infamous legislative products of the current and ongoing Terror Scare, or as they have done in the past, perhaps by conducting wars of aggression to conquer and kill in the name of ‘love thy enemy’ as in the Crusades, or using the Dictatorship of the Proletariat to exercise a dictatorship over the proletariat as in the ultimately catastrophic experiment with state communism in the USSR.
Where the health of any society at least claiming to be free is concerned, the destructive effects of ‘ends justify the means’ type morality is hardly news. It remains a truism of freedom and of free societies that means determine outcomes, and that just as libertarian means will beget libertarian outcomes, so too will authoritarian means beget correspondingly authoritarian outcomes (libertarian in the technical sense of an advocate of individual freedoms). In this respect, the essential failing of the Nixon Shock — besides the lack of evidence to support the foundational myths of laissez faire ideology and the mountain of evidence against it notwithstanding — was that it would function ultimately to preserve economic and social order, root out crisis and chaos, and in so doing uphold the values of freedom and justice upon which the United States was purportedly founded. In other words, Nixon’s pretense that he could fix what was in actual fact a systemic problem and preserve order and freedom through means apparently justified by the goal of defending the economy from disruption contained the seeds of its own demise.
It is this fact in particular that gives us a reasonable basis to expect that this endgame or slow-motion downfall of US economic and military power will unfold in ways manifesting this exact same lack of respect for the imperative to maintain a basic harmony between means and outcomes — to the extent that freedom and justice even remain values for those in high places at a rhetorical level. It gives us a reasonable basis to likewise expect that the ‘ends justifies the means’ morality characteristic of the exercise of US military and economic power will not only continue, but become more acute, especially where the refusal of those in power to reflect on the events that have created it in the first place is concerned.
We find all the more reason to believe this to be so in considering that a manifest lack of interest in the democratic imperative to maintain a basic harmony between means and outcomes appears to go much further back than 1971. While trying to predict the course the process of the degeneration of the petrodollar into collapse will take with any measure of accuracy would be a generally pointless exercise, we might anticipate the logic the response to it from the US government it will follow thanks to the following offering from George Kennan, Director of Policy Planning in the US State Department, in 1948:
We have about 50% of the world’s wealth, but only 6.3% of its population. This disparity is particularly great as between ourselves and the peoples of Asia. In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security. To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and daydreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives. We should cease to talk about vague and unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of living standards, and democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better.”
Nothing in the period since then has done anything to suggest that anyone in the State Department or anywhere else in the US establishment has changed their mind on this count, the Nixon Shock not least of all. The evidence tends strongly in fact towards the opposite conclusion, namely that ‘concentrating everywhere on our immediate national objectives’ and ‘ceasing to talk about human rights, democratization and the raising of living standards, objectives’ that are in any event ‘vague and unreal’ has become the sole determiner of foreign policy — or better yet, that any desire to maintain any pretense to the contrary has all but disappeared.
It seems reasonable to assume then that the US establishment will continue to do all in its power to protect the petrodollar, and with it the corporeal integrity of its own economy, and that it will continue to do so even where this comes into conflict with human rights, democratization and the raising of living standards — much less to say international law, or anything approaching a coherent moral principle like the idea that everyone has the right and duty to control the conditions of their own lives as long as they respect the equal rights of others. The euphemistic language Kennan employs to sneer with such haughty distain at cornerstones of civilization such as respect and regard for human rights and the freedoms of the individual are a clear marker in this respect; his moral disengagement from the rights and freedoms of his victims in the process of ‘maintaining the position of disparity’ upon which his economic and social privileges, and those of his establishment counterparts, depend, certainly sets the tenor for the rest of the century, if not for the next one as well.
One can anticipate then a general refusal to engage in any of kind of policy or institutional change that might potentially avert the social and human catastrophes that are a sure consequence of economic collapse, or at least offer some hope to those who would be obliged to bear the brunt of them (no prizes for guessing who that might be). This appears to be all the more true to the extent that the arrogant refusal to acknowledge the means by which this state of affairs has come to pass has established a pattern of blame-shifting and scapegoating that, rather than slowing down as the end of the petrodollar beckons, can only increase with the desperation of those responsible for maintaining it.
One need only look at the reaction of the US establishment to the 9/11 attacks and all that has transpired since to appreciate the extent to which this is true. The willingness to engage in the politics of scapegoating and blame-shifting in order to maintain positions of economic privilege within an increasingly overt imperial global order has become completely ingrained and normalized in political discourse to the point where the norms of free societies are not only history but so completely neglected in popular discourse as to be almost beyond recollection. In their place is not only a series of propaganda norms that set the meaning of freedom on its head, but also function to facilitate the kind dynamics necessary to maintain the ideological pretexts that what is now really an imperial establishment needs to operate without being revealed as such.
Therefore, as far as propaganda directed against the mass of humanity for the purposes of deception, we have seen, do see and will continue to see in the first instance a fundamental confusion — apparently a willing one — about the meaning of what freedom entails. Every tyrant and oppressor throughout history has believed in their own freedom and their own right to do as they pleased, the difference between themselves and those they oppressed being any limits to that freedom. This essentially defines the difference between the idea of freedom as a meaningful concept and the use of freedom as a propaganda tool with which to beat one’s enemies and smear or demonize those considered to be a threat to one’s social or economic privileges. Freedom defined as a meaningful concept that one actually cares about and wants to implement in practice entails rights that are limited, rather than absolute, on the grounds that rights for each are possible only to the extent that rights for one end where those for another begin, and vice versa, to infinity.
On the other hand, freedom as a propaganda tool is defined as an absolute, in absolutist terms of black and white, such that any attempt to articulate the notion of rights of freedom in a multilateral or multifaceted sense is treated as a hostile manoeuver. This nowhere more the case than when attempting to hold those who admit no limits on their own freedom, as in the manner typical of tyrants and sociopaths, to their contempt for the rights and freedoms of others. In this instance, rather than being something to stand in front of and defend for others, it becomes something to hide behind, and in the course of doing so those who claim absolute rights typically accuse those trying to reign in their abuses or hold them accountable for their actions in perpetrating abuses of trying to deprive them of their freedom — of themselves being oppressors who have no respect or regard for individual rights and no concept of the meaning of freedom.
In this manner of projecting one’s own unconscious shame onto a scapegoat we see the most important mechanisms of moral disengagement: playing the victim, blaming the victim, abjuring oneself of responsibility for the consequences of one’s actions, ignoring the consequences of one’s actions, and articulating a defense on the ground of the ‘those who aren’t for us are against us’ fallacy — one that traces back at least as far back as the Bible (eg. Matthew 12:30; Mark 9:40).
Therefore to doubt, question, challenge, not venerate the ideological orthodoxies to which the nation demands obedience with the requisite level of awe, which seems increasingly the case where the basic operating assumptions of neoliberal ideology is concerned, or even simply think for oneself is to give oneself over to the antagonists who threaten the mythical social consensus on which rests the order, freedom, security and sense of identity of the nation (as if any nation was ever best served by everyone bending over backwards to imitate hand puppets for the 1%ers who constitute the imperial establishment), or of western civilization writ large. In essence, if you think for yourself and question authority, the terrorists win. Or the communists, or whichever bogeyman happens to be handy at that moment in time.
In the second place, we can continue to expect to see the habit on the part of this neo-feudal global corporate aristocracy of constructing a series of self-justifications based on the self-serving assumption that the interests of the imperial establishment are the same as those as the interests of the nation as a whole, more or less irrespective of which one you happen to be a member of, or even more broadly of civilization writ large. On the basis of this assumption, the imperial establishment and those who serve them have create a self-serving interpretation of the causes of and remedies needed to fix political, social and economic trouble internationally in a way that has shifted, does shift and will continue to shifts blame away from themselves as controllers of the levers of power onto scapegoats. This they again have done, do do and will continue to do according to the process sociologists refer to as the production of deviance, as well as the subjective emotional mechanisms social psychologists refer to as moral disengagement.
The production of deviance is based on the fact that deviance itself is a completely subjective concept, and as such is a matter entirely of how those with the power to enforce their own interpretation of the word on common usage choose to define it. It typically has very little or nothing whatsoever to do with the appearance, thinking or behavior of those so labeled. The process of producing deviance is notable for the fact that the interpretations of deviance that are chosen and imposed on common usage are generally self-serving for those creating them; in effect, they create a problem or threat for which the creator becomes both cause and cure. For this reason, the production of deviance is as much a matter of reasserting the authority of the definer of the term in the face of crisis and shifting the blame for the crisis away from them onto a physically or numerically weaker scapegoat who can then be silenced through whatever means are considered appropriate. The value of this process to a power structure facing ever more acute threats to its own existence by virtue of the finite nature of the substance upon which its existence depends is obvious.
Similarly too then we can see the importance for a power structure in crisis of the aforementioned mechanisms of moral disengagement that make the blame-shifting process possible — playing the victim, blaming the victims, a militant ignorance in the face of the moral imperative to acknowledge the consequences of one’s actions for others and an ideological self-justification that purposefully confuses being criticized, contradicted, questioned or not worshipped with sufficient reverence and awe with being attacked via the ‘with us or against us’ fallacy.
All of the above were a necessary devices to justify either draconian state policy or military adventurism and aggression or both following or during such events as the blowing up of the USS Maine in 1898, the sinking of the Lusitania in 1915, the Red Scare of 1919-1920, the War Scare of 1948, the Red Scare of 1947-54, the Cold War of 1947-1991, the CIA-sponsored coup d’etat that installed the Shah as leader of Iran in 1953, the CIA-sponsored overthrow of the Arbenz government of Guatemala in 1954, sponsorship of numerous proto-fascist client states throughout the world during the Cold War, the planned campaign of disruption and terror against Cuba contained in the Operation Northwoods document of 1962, the Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964, the CIA-sponsored overthrow of the Allende government in Chile on September 11, 1973 and the continuing Terror Scare that constitutes the reaction of the imperial establishment to the September 11 terrorist attacks.
To illustrate several of these examples, the sinking of the Lusitania by Germany was used by the United States to justify entry into WW1 on the grounds of the necessity of stopping the barbarous Hun who had no respect for human life, though the German embassy in London put out an advertisement warning that the Lusitania was a potential target for u-boats and the ship itself later turned out to be carrying military supplies, and was therefore a legitimate target under international conventions on war crimes. The first US propaganda from the war invoked parallels with the Crusaders of the Middle Ages; we are somewhat unsurprised to find none other than Adolf Hitler praising the propaganda effort of the Committee for Public Information during WW1 and citing it as one of the primary reasons for the German defeat. None of this would have been possible either without the ability of the US war-mongers to maintain the pretense of being victims or to engage in the production of deviance via the motto of ‘He who is not for America is against America’ emblazoned on tens of thousands of ‘America First Society’ membership cards during the same period.
The mythology of the ‘domino theory’ as expressed in documents such as NSC-68 similarly utilized the same kind of dynamics and mechanisms we can expect to continue to see as the petrodollar becomes under great and more dire threat of extinction. As George Kennan noted above, the actual reasons for the Cold War were the maintenance of the ‘position of disparity’ upon which the economic wellbeing and growth of the US economy depended in the postwar period; as Frank Kofsky in particular demonstrated, the mythology of communist expansion which served as pretext for the military aggression upon which this policy depended was forestalled on the one hand by the doctrine of ‘Socialism in One Country’ Joseph Stalin had long adopted as a contentious response to the failure of communist revolutions in Germany and Western Europe. On the other, Russia was in the postwar years far too weak as a result of the hammering it had taken during the Second World War to even contemplate military expansion.
In this example in particular, the two Red Scares, domestic panics over the perceived menace of communist expansion within the United States itself, had served to thwart rather acutely the capacity of dissidents, critical thinkers and doubters of the magnificence of states as a general concept to get a fair hearing — the latter in particular. The stated policy of George Kennan did not apparently represent a dire threat to democracy around the globe, particularly in Asia where attempts to seek redress of the great (and expanding) gap between the global north and south in the name of promoting ‘human rights, the raising of living standards, and democratization’ were dismissed with sneering contempt as ‘vague and unreal objectives.’
Rather, according to the theory of the domino effect, it was attempts to see ‘human rights, the raising of living standards, and democratization’ through movements for independent nationalism that made a victim out of what after 1989 would be the sole remaining superpower. In addition to the ‘if you think for yourself the communists’ win logic of McCarthyism, brilliantly parodied by Arthur Miller during the period in his stage play The Crucible, one might also point to the blaming of the million of victims around the world for rejecting the logic of Kennan’s 1948 callous prescription for the maintenance of US power as well as the mythology of the domino effect as further evidence of moral disengagement, this time in the form of victim blaming. Is there any reason to imagine that the imperial establishment should be willing to reflect on this history or that any prospect exists of history not repeating itself further in this manner? Hardly.
Further doubt again is cast over the likelihood that the imperial establishment is likely to change mentality or policy in the face of the decline of the petrodollar when we consider that their response to the 9/11 attacks was to usher in a Terror Scare, or a moral panic over terrorism. History tends to forget these day that they did this by rehashing the ‘War on Terrorism’ rhetoric of George Shultz and other Reaganites during the 1980s, who apparently attempted to link movements for independent nationalism on the one hand, and the blowback from sending hundreds of millions of dollars of aid to often fanatical Muslim proxy combatants fighting the Soviet Union during the Afghanistan War on the other, to an overarching Communist conspiracy to bring down western civilization on the grounds of a logic so comprehensively and exhaustively binary in scope it could have hardly landed elsewhere than the ‘for or against’ fallacy.
This seems all the more significant when we remember that the ‘War on Terrorism’ mythology of today, the mythology that underwrites the Terror Scare just as the ‘Domino Theory’ mythology underwrote the Cold War, is based on half truths. In the former case, the fact that movements for independent nationalism have often been based on aspirations articulated in terms of ‘human rights, the raising of living standards, and democratization’ commonly associated with left wing politics has been used to associate them with the USSR, in the manner typical of one playing the victim treating the opposition or perceived enemy as a big, demonic, terrifying monolith. The same is true of the ragged renegades that Chalmers Johnson and many others have identified as blowback from the aforementioned CIA backing of the Mujahedeen during the 1980s, non-state actors who according to the mythology of the ‘War on Terror’ constitute the sum total of the phenomenon of terrorism writ large, when we know in fact — and as many of the examples above well illustrate — the main drivers of terrorism historically and in the present are states.
Naturally the imperial establishment is as silent on the subject of its own historical role in supporting and encouraging radical Islamic fundamentalists in the grounds that the enemy of my enemy is my friend, as it is on that of its continuing alliances with states such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar, many of whom continue to provide substantial aid to ISIS, and as it is for that matter on the policy articulated by George Kennan in 1948 that appears to have informed its attitude to the rest of the world ever since. Chomsky and others have well documented its militant ignorance in this respect, as well as its singular contempt for the aspirations of billions around the world for ‘human rights, the raising of living standards, and democratization,’ much less to say the autonomy of sovereign governments particularly throughout the course of the second half of the 20th century — all carried out in the name of preserving precisely the things they set out to destroy while engaging in the production of deviance and invoking various mechanisms of moral disengagement in order to avoid ever having to engage in concerted, comprehensive, principled, and above all critical refection on self.
The authoritarian and even totalitarian strains of this line of thinking are not hard to decipher; they indicate the extent to which the democratic norms many still take for granted have been colonized by an imperialism that dare not speak its own name, but that defines the parameters of the conditions that beget the foregone conclusion that a empire built on a finite resource will eventually fall. Where one might argue that to bring about a free society you must use freedom as a means, on account of the fact that outcomes are generally determined by means, rather than the other way around, variations on the theme of moral panicking and scapegoating using the various mechanisms demonstrated above will continue to be rolled out to try to mask the actual assumptions about the world that inform the operations of power, such as those informing Kennan’s appraisal of international affairs in 1948.
Just as they represent a dominant theme in history and inform current practice, so too will these themes of scare mongering, othering and scapegoating define the parameters of the endgame of US power. As the crisis of the petrodollar becomes more acute, as it only must as the remaining supplies are slowly used up in the process of expediting military adventures and extravagant consumer lifestyles, the hunt for the ways and means of the production of deviance and thus pretexts to invoke the mechanisms of moral disengagement will only become more acute, the shrieking about perceived threats from Russia or Iran or China only ever more shrill. As Ronald Wright once observed, “Each time history repeats itself, the price goes up.” This time around, with history repeating itself every which way, and apparently via the logic of ‘with or against’ as an excuse for a policy of ‘the ends justify the means,’ the ability to maintain a basic harmony between means and ends in contradistinction to this tendency may well prove to be the wellspring of the political ascendency for anyone still able. Those who are not, on the other hand, may well choke on it.
Ben Debney is a PhD candidate in the School of Politics and International Relations at Deakin University, Melbourne. He is researching moral panics and the political economy of scapegoating.
by Zen Gardner
Ultimately those who awaken invariably come up against a very big question; why would the so-called “elite” self-appointed rulers of this planet bring the house down around their own ears? Don’t they get irradiated, chemtrailed and ultimately modified like the rest of us? Aren’t their children in peril just like ours?
Underground bunkers or not, the rapid deterioration of our environment is leading toward a dead planet if their machinations aren’t halted some time very soon.
What these manipulators are up to is not life giving, it is death dealing. For humanity and all of nature. Why would anyone/anything do such a thing? To answer that, people first need to realize that that’s what they’re doing.
Deliberately trashing our planet.
The Utter Insanity
It’s beyond our fully grasping how these entities think and operate because of the difference in vibrational understanding. They’re insane psychopaths in our minds, we’re dumb sheep in theirs. Someone said the reptilians told them to trash the environment but don’t worry, their greys will restore everything. Neat little package but it always makes me wonder since they’re doing exactly that, wantonly trashing the place.
The oceans are being deliberately killed off. The Macondo oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico never ended. It’s still gushing oil and other toxic elements which work their way around the gulf and then take the Atlantic current up the US coast and over to Europe, screwing that whole system up. What did they expect would happen when you drill miles down into a known volcanic undersea region? And oil leaks and spills continue worldwide with hardly a mention anymore.
To then spray the banned dispersant Corexit over the area so it wouldn’t look so bad, further killing off sea life and dangerously toxifying the entire region is even further insanity.
Sewage and waste, much of which won’t decompose for centuries, is flooded into the seas and tributaries in gargantuan amounts. On top of that the US Navy is “experimenting” with huge algae blooms that starve sea life of oxygen and disturb the natural life-cycles of the sea, while they’re also playing with sonic warfare equipment that also results in mass fish and other sea life die-offs.
Add chemtrails to the mix now, and weather manipulation and earthquake induction. How about genetic modification of just about anything that’s alive. The current assault on the northeast US with these manipulated arctic cold incursions extend right out over that same Gulf stream that drives not only drives the weather system but could bring on a massive killing off of the Atlantic much like is happening to the Pacific ocean via radiation.
The irradiation of our planet is massive–all from decades of hundreds of atom bomb tests, reactor meltdowns, the use of depleted uranium in weaponry and even medical and so-called security usage. Remember, Fukushima, like the Macondo well, is still spewing, and our atmosphere and oceans are getting massive amounts of radiation with cataclysmic animal and plant die offs being recorded. With hundreds of reactors reaching deterioration point and a mad world on the verge of a nuclear holocaust, the outlook is, what you my might say, a little tenuous.
That’s the state of our home. The planet on which we live.
Feeding Off Accelerated Entropy
At the very least these manipulative forces imposing their paradigm upon the earth and her inhabitants is a purely anti-creative force, a form of relative darkness that feeds off of the entropic breakdown they engineer and exacerbate. Instead of the magnificent creative growing complex force of life, entropy is the breakdown of organized structures into lower, simpler forms which in turn releases energy.
In nature this happens as living forms decay, giving off heat and and water vapor and replenishing the soil with nutrients for the next cycle of growth of living, wonderfully complex organisms. All natural.
Engineering entropy is another thing. While harnessing a river’s energy via electric generators may seem innocent enough, the by-product of man’s actions are cumulative. Damming up the world’s rivers has changed the natural flow and distribution of water. Drilling for oil to burn and mining massive amounts of other natural resources is changing the make up of the earth’s interior and the balance of nature as well. Asphalting and paving the surface of the earth is literally turning the world inside out. That cannot bode well.
This entropic reduction for power can be dramatically seen in an atomic explosion, which only results in death, destruction and the lingering of deadly radiation for many hundreds of years. Other forms of massive energy releases such as the vast array of weapons of war are using entropy for power and control. Fluoridating our water, chemtrailing our skies and altering our food are other forms of this. Besides organic and even inorganic structures breaking down unnaturally, these and other toxins and drugs are making humanity stupid and dazed – chemically lobotomized and unable to function properly.
In addition, our geoengineered skies are also precipitating increased methane releases and other entropic breakdowns that seriously threaten our planet’s very existence. EMFs from cell masts, Wifi, smart meters and appliances, GWEN towers and other new technologies, and massive antenna arrays such as HAARP further break down the natural magnetic resonance of the planet, ourselves and everything on it.
The entire biodiversity of the planet is shrinking drastically as plant and animal species are disappearing at an exponential rate. All of this is a designed breakdown to harvest energy and bring the planet to a lower vibrational state while also lessening the sustainable size of the human population, a documented program long in the works.
This is where it becomes apparent who is engineering all of this. Whatever you want to call it – evil, satanic, rogue ETs and transdimensionals or archonic entities as the Gnostics taught, it appears we’re dealing with a force not natural to our environment, something we call other worldly that exists in another dimension and seeks to transform and take over the world we inhabit. It is not only from another plane of existence, it is parasitic in nature and seeks the complete subjugation of our planet and our species.
Entropic Psycho-Spiritual Vampirism
Similar to the chemical and biological programs, breaking down the human spirit for psychic energy harvesting is another exercise in entropy. This is the big one, their drug of choice. We know the entities that guide and motivate the dark rulers of this world feed off of fear, violence, pain, suffering and even death. For them the more heightened the intensity, the better, which is why drugs, perverted sex, human sacrifice and energy sucking Satanic rituals are so madly pursued by these dark energy vampires.
The breakdown in society’s complexity and the cultural variety of the planet has always been important to them. Our natural tendency as conscious beings is to love and care for each other, unite in cause and purpose for the betterment of all. This tremendously creative force generates incredible spiritual awareness and empowerment and re-creation, like crystals spontaneously growing beautiful fractal structures as consciousness taps into infinite potential.
That forces have always fought against this for the empowerment of some titular energy/control freaks at the top at the expense of the many has apparently been our planet’s plight for untold millennia, but with these advances in technology we’re witnessing an exponential increase that is approaching critical mass.
Our connection to infinite, conscious creative awareness is diametrically opposed to the world they come from. While we revel in empathy, compassion and love they have no such affinity. It is not just foreign to them, but anathema. Their cold, calculated realm runs purely on self gratification, which extends from sexual lust to the dark ecstasy of having control over the lives of others. It is two dimensional. They wish they had what we have but wouldn’t know what to do with it anyway. That’s why they fear us, manifested in the intense hate and violence they breed. They know the only control they can have over a superior consciousness is fear, which shuts off our connection to Source.
Where the Hell Are We?
Is this planet a playing field to see who wakes up and who doesn’t? Are the asleep destined to constant recycling into this strange arena called Earth until they get the point, wake up and make an effort to help get this planet on its true track of conscious awareness and a society based on love and cooperation?
You can sure see why the religions have a field day with this. People want to know, they want this question answered. Even if it’s only a belief, they want to lay it to rest. Unfortunately they play right into the controllers’ hands when they do so.
“Back to sleep, now. Don’t want you to ask too many questions. It’s God’s will, that’s all you need to know. Just feel guilty for your sins, be obedient, and send money.”
Even the dualism we see being played out is part of the game. While there is a struggle between what we call light and dark forces, these dualities we see being played out at different levels are illusions, distractions from the core principle of life which is conscious awareness and our innate inter-connectivity with the creative Source.
There are a lot of very interesting theories as to what’s really going on here. Knowing there are infinite parallel worlds at play makes it all the more exciting. Our particular 3-D theater is quite macabre at the moment and about to get a lot worse if and when these entities keep this up and perhaps unleash even bigger insanities.
That there’s an ongoing ascension of the awakened could be true at some level, but last I checked I’m still here. However things are shifting vibrationally and continue to shift so it should be a thrill wherever we’re headed.
If there is a cavalry to be sent in it sure seems it should have happened a long time ago. Don’t hold your breath if that’s what you’re counting on. This is up to us. That’s how they got away with it, by continually berating and intimidating humanity via lies and deception and giving us religious promises of some future savior. The enforcement trip is mainly a ruse, as there’s no way they could stop all of humanity if we all rose up to throw them out. The problem is centuries of dumbing down, physical weakening and spirit breaking.
That we’re being terraformed for habitation by an alien life form in some way isn’t that far fetched to me. Those who’ve yielded to and carried out the programs of these parasitic entities are clearly no longer human by the natural, spiritual definition, so they are carving out their own hell to say the least, no matter the expense to the races that populate the planet.
One thing for sure, knowing the realities outlined above will help find a more true answer to our current predicament. Much more profound than that, discovering and awakening to the infinite true nature of who we really are is the ongoing solution to it all.
From there everything makes sense. We may not have every answer to every individual question, but we know what’s important.
And that’s important.
Stay awake and aware, conscious and acting accordingly.
We do our parts first and foremost. Universe will lead us one step at a time.
Enjoy the ride!
by Nil NIKANDROV
The US-unleashed propaganda war against China has reached unprecedented level in Latin America. Americans use all means at their disposal for that purpose, including hundreds of TV channels, thousands of radio stations and films telling about “Chinese threat”. Puppet journalists are regularly used now to make skillfully prepared fakes go around. Ballyhoo is raised by “ecologists” concerned over the China’s plans to build the Nicaraguan Canal or the joint China-Venezuela gold mining project in the Venezuelan national park. Even a furtive look is enough to pinpoint the source of this stories circulating around the Western Hemisphere from Mexico to Chile.
The Nicaraguan Canal is a good example of success reached as Beijing implements its Latin American strategy. The new waterway is really important for transporting Venezuelan oil and mineral resources from Central and South America. The United States has launched a campaign to obstruct the project. Wang Jing, the Chinese businessman behind the Nicaragua’s Interoceanic Grand Canal, is painted as an incompetent upstart. They spread rumors saying the Canal is doomed to failure as it lacks economic feasibility. No matter that, the construction started last December. The US replied by launching an operation to sabotage the project. Experts believe that the activities to undermine the construction of the waterway will be intensified in 2016 – an election year in Nicaragua. Washington strongly opposes Daniel Ortega and Sandinistas. One can be one hundred percent sure the will be another attempt to stage a color revolution in Latina America.
Washington perceives the China’s growing presence in the region as a serious geopolitical challenge, a threat to national security. President Obama constantly talks about US exceptionalism, but all the attempts of the United States to reshape the world map have ended up in bloodshed, devastated cities and the destruction of states with centuries-old cultures. Latin America perceives the United States as an empire, a hostile, egoistic and amoral force which could be countered only by strengthening consolidation, providing a new impetus to the process of regional integration and boosting military capability. That’s why Latin America fosters the relationship with other centers of power in the world. Beijing has correctly assessed the situation. Latin America is distancing itself away from the United States.
The contemporary Chinese politicians are pragmatic; they know well the continent and the special characteristics of the Latin American situation. Washington can hardly offer anything to counterbalance the promising prospects for cooperation with China. In 2000-2013 the trade turnover between Latin America and China grew by 22 times. It made China the continent’s leading business partner. China is already the largest trade partner of Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela and Peru. In 2014 its two-way trade with each of these countries exceeded the bilateral trade with the United States. Chinese banks increased their investments in the region by 70% against the background of US capital outflow. It’s not an occasion that many Latin American states call China a privileged partner. China adheres to the principles of equality and mutual benefit to facilitate the economic development of Latin American states.
The first ministerial meeting of the Forum of China and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) took place in Beijing on January 9, 2015. The majority of Latin American countries took part in the event. The theme of the Meeting was “New Platform, New Starting Point, New Opportunity－Joint Efforts to Promote China-Latin America and the Caribbean Partnership of Comprehensive Cooperation.” China’s President Xi Jinping attended the opening ceremony and delivered an important speech entitled “Jointly Writing a New Chapter of the China-CELAC Comprehensive Cooperative Partnership.” Xi Jinping stressed that China is willing to work with Latin American and Caribbean countries to jointly build the new platform of China-CELAC overall cooperation from a long-term and strategic perspective, and to firmly grasp new opportunities in China-CELAC overall cooperation to jointly compose a new chapter of the China-CELAC comprehensive cooperative partnership. The Chinese government will invest $250 billion in Latin American and Caribbean countries over the next 10 years, in particular in mining operations and infrastructure projects, like the construction of railways, ports, highways and airports. The Chinese President said volumes of bilateral trade between China and the region’s countries could reach $500 billion by 2025. Dozens of bilateral agreements on cooperation in electronics, telecommunications, and biotechnology and space research were signed as part of the CELAC leaders’ time in China. Beijing is going to share its experience in developing cutting edge technology and achieving progress in scientific studies. The Beijing forum put into writing a five-year cooperation plan. Its final declaration was signed by 33 foreign ministers of CELAC member states. The next meeting will be held in Chile in 2018 to sum up the results of cooperation between the leading Asian state and the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean.
China has been cooperating with Latin America in the field of space research for many years. Chinese state-owned company China Great Wall Industry Corporation and the Venezuelan government have signed an agreement to build and deliver into orbit Venezuela’s third satellite. It’ll be used for intelligence gathering. This year the Center for Space Research and Development in Puerto Cabello will open, where satellites will be designed, assembled, integrated, and verified for use in low orbits. The weight of a satellite will not exceed one ton.
Space is an important sphere of cooperation between China and Argentina. Argentina’s space program is one of the most advanced in Latin America. China plans to build an antenna for deep space observation in Argentina’s southern Patagonia region in Neuquen province. It also takes part in the Latin American effort to boost its defense capability. Chinese experts help Venezuela to produce drones for monitoring the Amazonian region. Chinese littoral ships and training aircraft are in high demand. Argentine President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner has recently visited China to sign agreements on co-operation in building a new ice-breaker, naval tugboats, mobile hospitals, and new warships for the Argentine Navy. Reports from mid-2014 indicate the Argentine Army evaluated the Norinco VN1 8×8 amphibious APC. Argentina and China are to form a working group to look at the possible transfer of a range of military equipment to Buenos Aries. Chief among this equipment is either the Chengdu Aircraft Corporation (CAC) FC-1/JF-17 or the CAC J-10 fighter aircraft. The cooperation in the field of space research and up-to-date weapons production facilitate the increase of China’s presence and influence in the region.
BY DUSTIN VOLZ
Next time you travel, be careful not to complain about airport security.
A Transportation Security Administration officer watches computer monitors that display luggage as it is tracked through various security screening measures, Thursday, Oct. 30, 2014 at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York. MARK LENNIHAN/AP
Next time you go through airport security, do your best to avoid yawning, whistling, or complaining too much: Any of those behaviors could make you look like a terrorist in the eyes of a Transportation Security Administration screening agent, according to newly disclosed government documents.
A secret 92-point checklist, obtained and published Friday by The Intercept, reveals for the first time what kind of passenger behavior can merit a red flag for TSA agents responsible for pulling possible terrorists and criminals out of airport security lines.
The checklist reveals a step-by-step process for assessing whether passengers deserve additional scrutiny. Those deemed suspicious under “observation and behavior analysis” are pulled aside and searched for “unusual items” such as almanacs and prepaid calling cards. During the inspection, TSA agents are also instructed to look for “signs of deception,” which can include a fast rate of eye-blinking.
Other suspicious signs listed include exaggerated yawning, gazing down, a pale face due to a recent beard shaving, widely open staring eyes, wearing of “improper attire,” and arriving late for a flight.
The program, known as Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques, or SPOT, has been in use nationwide since 2007 and has cost taxpayers upwards of $1 billion dollars.
SPOT has been dogged with accusations that it is based on pseudoscience and promotes racial and ethnic profiling among the some 3,000 TSA agents tasked with observing unusual behavior. Two years ago, a review by the Government Accountability Office found no clear evidence that the protocol used by SPOT-trained agents to detect terrorists was any better than random selection. The GAO report recommended that Congress halt funding for the program.
Despite the scathing conclusions, however, the SPOT program has continued, and its screening checklist has been kept largely secret until now. Its backers say the program is an essential layer of TSA’s multipronged airport security approach and expressly forbids any kind of discriminatory profiling.
In a statement, a TSA spokesman said the agency would not comment on or confirm the checklist published by The Intercept.
“Behavior-analysis techniques that have been successfully employed by law enforcement and security personnel both in the U.S. and internationally,” the spokesman said. “No single behavior alone will cause a traveler to be referred to additional screening or will result in a call to a law enforcement officer.”
Last week, the American Civil Liberties Union sued TSA for access to records related to the SPOT program’s efficacy, which the agency has so far refused to hand over.
“What we know about SPOT suggests it wastes taxpayer money, leads to racial profiling, and should be scrapped,” said Hugh Handeyside, staff lawyer with the ACLU. “The TSA has insisted on keeping documents about SPOT secret, but the agency can’t hide the fact that there’s no evidence the program works. The discriminatory racial profiling that SPOT has apparently led to only reinforces that the public needs to know more about how this program is used and with what consequences for Americans’ rights.”
The SPOT program has also in recent years attracted the scrutiny of lawmakers in both parties skeptical of its efficacy and concerned about the high price tag. In 2013, Rep. Mark Sanford, a South Carolina Republican, extensively questioned former Transportation Security Administration chief John Pistole at a Homeland Security Subcommittee hearing about whether the SPOT program held any merit or was necessary given the other layers of airport security.
“You go through a screening system which essentially undresses somebody, you send their equipment through radar detection and other devices,” Sanford said. “The question is, from a civil-liberties standpoint, given those other tests, do you in addition have to go through a screening process based on somebody’s interpretation of what might be in your brain?”
Pistole was resolute in his defense of the program, but conceded, “There’s no perfect science, there’s no perfect art of this.” He told Sanford that the value in the SPOT program was difficult to measure, as it had only led to only a handful of arrests—none on terrorism charges—but that it aided in deterrence.
The New American
by Alex Newman
A massive U.S. military drill dubbed “Jade Helm 15” lists Texas, Utah, and part of California as “hostile” or “insurgent pocket” territory. The unclassified information about this drill is causing widespread alarm nationwide, with more than a few analysts suggesting it may be some sort of exercise practicing to impose martial law on Americans fed up with an out-of-control federal government. During the exercises, which will take place over the summer, Special Forces from various branches of the military will work with local law-enforcement in scenarios that, to critics at least, sound suspiciously like they are aimed at subduing rebellious American civilians and states amid a civil war or large-scale unrest. The federal government issued a response dismissing the concerns and saying that the training is to help U.S. forces prepare for overseas missions, but not everyone is convinced.
The most alarming components of the drills highlighted by concerned citizens and media commentators surround an unclassified presentation about Jade Helm 15’s “realistic military training” that was apparently leaked. In a graphic showing the territory across which the training will take place — essentially the American Southwest — different states are colored based on the fictional status of their loyalty to Washington. Colorado, Nevada, and most of California, for example, are dark blue, indicating that they are “permissive.” Utah and Texas are both shaded red, indicating that they are “hostile.” Southern California is also red, with a note reading “insurgent pocket.” Arizona is light blue, which in the legend is listed as “uncertain (leaning friendly),” while New Mexico is brown, or “uncertain (leaning hostile).” Two more states, Florida and Louisiana, have reportedly been added to the exercise.
According to the presentation, the eight-week training program involves Navy SEALs, Army Special Forces Command (Green Berets), Air Force Special Operations Command, Marine Special Operations Command, Marine Expeditionary Units, the 82nd Airborne Division, and unspecified “interagency partners.” Underneath the logo for the Jade Helm drills, a sword with two arrows crossing it, it reads: “Master the Human Domain.” What exactly that means was not clear, but at least some critics of the exercise have suggested it may be a euphemism for subjugating the population of the United States. Indeed, as other analysts have noted, citing available information, the drill almost certainly has nothing to do with defending the Southern border from invasion. The few details that have been provided, though, are causing concern among analysts.
On a slide explaining “what to expect” during the two-month training program for “unconventional warfare,” the document warns of “increased aircraft in the area at night,” possible noise complaints, personnel carrying weapons with blank ammo, and more. Especially alarming to critics of the program is that “some individuals may conduct suspicious activities designed to prepare them for complex environments overseas,” and that “some participants will be wearing civilian attire and driving civilian vehicles.” Separately, a slide describing what “realistic military training” means has also raised alarm. The document mentions that it will be conducted “outside of federally owned property” and that it is designed to “ensure proper coordination between DOD representatives and local and regional authorities.” News reports citing military officials said the DEA, FBI, and the “Joint Personnel Recovery Agency” (JPRA) would also be participating.
Citing other recently leaked U.S. military documents such as “FM 3-39.40 Internment and Resettlement Operations” about interning American civilians in camps, using “psyops” (psychological operations) on those detainees to affect their views, and more, David Hodges with the Common Sense Show said the drill is “undoubtedly the most frightening thing to occur on American soil since the Civil War.” In a widely re-published article about the training program, he said it could be “conclusively stated” that the drill was really about “preparing for a Red, White and Blue invasion.” “This is a massive rehearsal for martial law implementation as well as implementing the proverbial and much rumored Red and Blue List and the ‘snatch and grab’ extractions of key resistance figures from the Independent Media as well as uncooperative political figures,” Hodges added. “The various provisions of Jade Helm make it clear just how dangerous this drill truly is.”
Responding to widely expressed concerns that the scheme is “preparation for imposing martial law or subduing right-leaning groups and individuals,” as the military publication Stars and Stripes put it, U.S. Army Special Operations Command denied the accusation. “That notion was proposed by a few individuals who are unfamiliar with how and why USASOC conducts training exercises,” USASOC spokesman Army Lt. Col. Mark Lastoria was quoted as saying. “This exercise is routine training to maintain a high level of readiness for Army Special Operations Forces because they must be ready to support potential missions anywhere in the world on a moment’s notice.” He re-iterated those comments in other interviews as well. Despite being referred to as “routine,” it was not clear whether any similar drill identifying U.S. states as “hostile” had ever taken place — except perhaps amid the Civil War.
In comments quoted by the Houston Chronicle, which made its bias obvious in the first sentence by claiming that the drills had “stirred some ultra-right-wing fears of a government takeover in the Lone Star State,” local law enforcement officials also shed some light on what to expect. “They’re going to set up cells of people and test how well they’re able to move around without getting too noticed in the community,” Chief Deputy Roy Boyd with the Victoria County Sheriff’s Office was quoted as saying by the paper. “They’re testing their abilities to basically blend in with the local environment and not stand out and blow their cover.” A former Army Intelligence officer was also quoted downplaying fears about the drill and suggesting that it was largely routine training.
Separately, the Chronicle attempted to belittle concerns expressed by critics about the program. National radio host Alex Jones, for example — whose audience dwarfs the readership and listenership of many “mainstream” outlets, including the Chronicle — was introduced as part of the “far-right fringe” movement. Jones’ radio show and online portal Infowars played a key role in raising awareness about the drills under the headline “Feds Preparing to Invade Texas, List State as Hostile.” The supposed “journalist” at the Chronicle, apparently unable to contain himself or conceal his extreme bias, went on to describe the website Freedom Outpost, which also raised concerns about the drill and suggested it was practice for domestic martial law, as “ultra-libertarian.”
While local authorities quoted in news reports were aware of the programs and vowed to work with the community to prevent panic or paranoia, it would not be the first time that the Pentagon has alarmed U.S. civilians with its drills. In 2013, a series of “urban warfare” military exercises in major cities including Miami and Houston involving gun fire and black helicopters terrified locals who were unaware of what was going on. As The New American has also reported in recent years, under the Obama administration, military authorities have taken the unprecedented step of bringing troops from Communist China and Russia to do “training drills” with American forces. Other foreign militaries, primarily European, have for decades been practicing citizen disarmament and other drills on U.S. soil, as documented on video by Alex Jones.
Considering the fact that two-thirds of the American people in polls say the federal government is “out of control” and a “threat” to liberty, it is hardly surprising that many citizens do not trust the Obama administration when it performs military drills with law enforcement that it has been militarizing and attempting to nationalize — especially while identifying conservative states as “hostile” enemies. Obama’s invitation of foreign troops loyal to hostile regimes for military training drills in the United States certainly did not help matters. Nor does the fact that the current commander in chief began his political career in the living room of communist terrorist leader Bill Ayers — a man whose terror spree was backed by the Soviet puppet regime of Fidel Castro when it bombed the Pentagon and murdered police officers. Ayers’ terror group, the Weather Underground, planned to exterminate 25 million Americans in camps across the Southwest after taking over, according to FBI agent Larry Grathwohl who infiltrated the organization. “They were dead serious,” Grathwohl said in an video-taped interview.
Of course, the federal government’s recent behavior — ranging from Homeland Security stockpiling massive amounts of hollow-point ammunition to the multiple agencies producing propaganda demonizing U.S. military veterans, Christians, and Americans with mainstream political views as potential terrorists — is also unlikely to inspire trust. In fact, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia warned just last year that “you are kidding yourself” if you do not think mass internment of U.S. citizens, as happened with Japanese-Americans during World War II, would eventually return to this country.
Jade Helm drill may well just be nothing more than training U.S. forces for “overseas missions,” as officials claim. However, considering the known details of the exercise and the accelerating anti-constitutional lawlessness of the federal government, it is hardly unreasonable to express concerns. In fact, anybody who is not concerned by the current state of U.S. affairs is simply not paying attention.
This is Why You Need Your Money Out of the Bank: Freeze Outs, Glitches and Holds Increasingly Locking Customers Out of Funds
by Mac Slavo
The above image was captured from a real ATM machine not long ago, and could be seen anytime for any reason by anyone operating on the digital grid.
If ever you needed a better motivation to get your funds out of the bank, this is a clear sign that a digital clampdown is coming.
There are increasing examples of technology failures and stricter bank policies that are keep people from getting their money.
And they are happening all across the globe.
Ulster Bank in Ireland just made news after customers were locked out of their accounts by a glitch that disabled access to wage money:
Following a number of complaints from those expecting their weekly and monthly salaries to post, the bank apologised on Twitter for the glitch.
“We’re aware that a number of customers are experiencing delays in receiving credits this morning, our tech team are working on this at the moment,” the bank’s customer care account, @UlsterBank_Help tweeted.
Supposedly the problem is minor, short term and only happening at the one local branch. The bank has apologized for difficulties.
Unfortunately, the larger picture makes clear that this will happen again somewhere, and it could happen to many more people.
Even routine maintenance and website updates can be enough to block customers out of their accounts, often without even giving advanced notice; many credit unions, while offering a better choice, likely hold most of the same policies.
Consumer Affairs.com reported on many customers who’ve been shut out of their funds due to Suspicious Activities Reporting including cases where small business owners were considered potentially money launderers for conducting ordinary business by sending out checks to pay bills and employee salaries:
“I am a sole proprietor with a small business and have my income direct deposited into my checking account at 5/3. 3 days ago I went into the bank to get money orders and they treated me like I was robbing the bank. After about 40 minutes, they gave me the money orders and unknown to me had placed two half-a-million-dollar holds on my accounts with them. I was told it looked like money laundering and was treated like I had done something wrong,” she said. “They won’t give me my money and I can’t pay my employees nor my bills. They basically stole my money and I have to fight to get it back.”
South Africa just set new rules requiring banks to freeze the accounts of anyone who has the wrong address listed on their account.
If your bank statements are still being posted to an address that is no longer your residence, your bank account could be frozen, according to the South African Banking Risk Information Centre (SABRIC), which has urged South Africans to update their personal details with their bank.
In terms of the Financial Intelligence Centre Act (FICA), banks must have the correct customer information to ensure FICA compliance. ‘Know Your Customer’ (KYC) documents include, among others, identity documents and proof of address.
Similar policies in the United States, many of them established under terrorism laws, already require banks to automate monitoring and reporting of any suspicious transactions, including any transfers above $3,000 dollars, large cash withdrawals, all currency exchange activities and dozens of other details about individual accounts.
The laws even give banks legal immunity from any harm or false imprisonment that may come from false reporting “suspicious” activities.
As SHTF reported a few days ago, banks have even been ordered to seize cash from customers and alert police over large cash activities:
The Justice Department has ordered bank tellers across America to contact law enforcement if they suspect your cash withdrawal may have something to do with illicit activity. There doesn’t need to be proof, or any sort of red flag indicator – merely suspicion by the bank teller processing your transaction is now enough to have you investigated by authorities.
Via The Sovereign Man Simon Black
What a lot of people don’t realize is that banks are already unpaid government spies.
Federal regulations in the Land of the Free REQUIRE banks to file ‘suspicious activity reports’ or SARs on their customers. And it’s not optional.
Banks have minimum quotas of SARs they need to fill out and submit to the federal government.
A new wave of tech disruptions may even occur, as American consumers step inside of an era of cybersecurity full of hacks, denials of service, account restrictions, password fails, lockouts and the integration of biometrics for authentication that ultimately connects billions of people through millions of nodes on a global Internet dominated by corporations and ultimately regulated by the highly political FCC.
What happens when individuals are locked out of their lives or unable to monitor their accounts due to changing rules and standards for things like verifications, password retrieval, insufficient funds and suspicious (or misunderstood) transactions that draw red flags.
Establishing the status quo of strict surveillance and control has played out under a narrative of white and black hackers battling it out under the new rules of the game for cybersecurity.
“The banks are not only doing this for compliance purposes, but also to minimise customers’ exposure to bank crimes such as fraud, identity theft and cybercrime,” Pillay insisted. (source)
Quite simply, banks are required to comply with any and all requests for information, and increasingly, you will be required to comply with the banks on these policies, including verified up-to-date information on all manner of personal information and transaction details.
How far will it go?
The Halifax bank in the UK is already running trials to wirelessly verify biometric readings of your heartbeat signature in order to authorize ATM and bank transactions:
Halifax is believed to be the first British bank to trial technology which will allow customers to prove their identity through the analysis of their heartbeat.
Bank customers of the future could wear slender bracelets which measure the intricate “cardiac rhythms” unique to every person.
As with today’s existing contactless card technology, the bracelet, called a “Nymi”, will communicate with a checkout till or cash machine to allow the customer to pay for goods or draw money.
Keeping your money in banks under these circumstances will make banking convenient only for the most compliant members of society.
On the other hand, pulling all your money out can already draw suspicions. You are most certainly being watched.
Hence, many people have already opted out of the banking system. As Daisy Luther reported, an estimated 43% of Americans don’t rely on their deposits any more:
This means that 43% of the people who are saving money are not putting it in the bank. This is good news for those of us who wish people would wake up and see the net being cast around them, but bad news for the banks that depend on deposit accounts to be able to give out loans and earn interest.
In an recent interview, alternative asset manager Eric Sprott explains why stashing fiat currency in a bank is a bad idea:
In my mind the biggest reason to own precious metals is because of the risks in the banking system… you get nothing for putting your money in the bank… and yet when you have your money in the bank you take on all the risks of a leveraged bank… and I’ve always thought it’s the risks in the banking system that would cause people to go to gold… (Source: SHTFplan)
Long term, there may be value and necessity in reorienting your efforts in the barter system, and not only being able to buy and trade goods and services in gold and silver, but in being able to sustain yourself by providing a useful skill or service.
Transitioning into that could be challenging, but is a worthwhile pursuit in your prepping readiness lifestyle, and a big part of being self-sufficient, as Tess Pennington’s Prepper’s Blueprint explains in chapter 53 on the importance of bartering and community for survival.
Don’t say it couldn’t happen, lest, we should wait for another MF Global to happen, and customers to take a loss on their stolen funds.
by Wayne MADSEN
Beginning in 1982 with the «Yinon Plan», a proposed Israeli future for a Middle East based on a series of failed Arab states divided into warring smaller fiefdoms, and maturing in the 1990s with Binyamin Netanyahu’s commissioned policy paper called «A Clean Break,» which foresaw scrapping the entire peace process with the Palestinians, Netanyahu enters his fourth term as prime minister in command of an Israel that has scrapped a Palestinian state and which has provided assistance to the Salafist/Saudi axis in support of the Islamic State, Al Qaeda, and other radical jihadist groups. Today, as a result of Israeli right-wing/Saudi/Gulf Wahhabist collusion, Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Yemen are failed states and the Middle East is becoming increasingly «balkanized».
In December 2014, a Shin Bet intelligence report revealed that during the first few months of 2015 the disintegration of Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and Libya into warring factions would accelerate. That prediction has materialized. The Israeli report also saw Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey becoming more autocratic states. That, also, has come about, especially in Saudi Arabia where the new king, Salman, has started to reverse some of the minor reforms instituted by his late predecessor, Abdullah.
The Israelis predicted that Syrian president Bashar al-Assad would rule over what the Israelis called “Little Syria,” withy effective control of only 20 to 30 percent of the country. The Israelis saw the remainder of Syria in the hands of jihadist groups like the Islamic State and Jabhat al-Nusra, with smaller cantons in the hands of Syrian Kurds and non-jihadist Sunni tribes, all of which would be fighting each other, as well as against the Assad government. The report supported Israel enhancing its position in the Golan Heights. In fact, Israel has done much more than that. The Jewish state has actively supported logistically and with weapons and intelligence Syrian and foreign jihadists, including Jabhat al-Nusra and the Islamic State forces that have militarily engaged Assad’s forces and Lebanese Hezbollah near the Golan Heights, which remains in Israeli hands without any threat to Israel’s interests in the region from the Islamic State.
The Islamic State/Jabhat al-Nusra unholy alliance with Israel comes as a bitter pill for the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza who have never been able to count on the support of the duplicitous Saudis and Gulf Arabs when it comes to the overall strategic and sectarian interests of the Saudis and Persian Gulf sheikhdoms. Riyadh, Doha, and Abu Dhabi place greater value on their unsigned pact with Israel against Shi’a Iran, Alawite Syria, and Hezbollah-controlled southern Lebanon than in any commitment to the Palestinian cause of self-determination. This abandonment of the Palestinians by the Wahhabist Muslims was always a foregone conclusion since the pampered Saudis and their Gulf friends have historically harbored a deep-seated jealousy of the better-educated and more resourceful people of Palestine.
The Shin Bet report also saw Libya being divided into three states – Cyrenaica in the east, Tripolitania in the west, and Fezzan in the Saharan south. Cyrenaica is dominated by local jihadists who have pledged their loyalty to the Islamic State and showed their commitment to the Islamic State’s self-declared caliph, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, by beheading 21 Egyptian Coptic oil workers who were taken prisoner.
Yemen and Iraq are the scenes of bloody civil wars between proxy forces loyal to the Saudis and the Iranians. In Iraq, the Islamic State swept into control of large portions of the north and west of the country, committing genocide against Kurds, Yazidis, Shi’as, resistant Sunnis, Christian Assyrians and Chaldeans, and Turkmen while destroying their religious and historical shrines. The United States has, under Central Intelligence Agency pro-Saudi director John O. Brennan, never displayed a more inconsistent policy in the Middle East. Washington’s role is duplicitous in Iraq and Syria, where it, like Israel, supports groups allied with the Islamic State with weapons while, very much in opposition to Israeli and Saudi goals, militarily supports Iranian counter-offensives near Tikrit and Syrian operations against the jihadists in eastern Syria.
It is also noteworthy that the Islamic State, which is now active near Jordan’s Ma’an region and in the Sinai Peninsula, where the Ansar Bait al-Maqdis group, a group allied with the Islamic State, has targeted Egyptian security personnel, has not made any moves against Israel, which has a significant presence in both Jordan and Sinai.
Israel is more interested in supporting any group, including Sunni jihadists who have beheaded Americans, Britons, Japanese, and others, against Shi’a Iran, Syria, Lebanese Hezbollah, and the Houthis in Yemen. Hamas in Gaza, like the Fatah government of the Palestininian Authority in Ramallah in the West Bank, feels betrayed by the Saudis, Qataris, and other Wahhabist nations. For that reason, Iran began providing covert military aid to Hamas in the West Bank. It is clear that the Islamic State would take the beheading swords to both Hamas and Fatah Palestinians if they were ever to take over in Gaza or Palestinian sectors of the West Bank. Covertly, the Israelis relish in such a prospect.
The Saudis claim nine other nations, including Egypt, Morocco, Pakistan, the Gulf states, and Sudan, have joined its military campaign in Yemen against the Shi’a Houthis. The Saudis have called their assault in Yemen Operation DECISIVE STORM, which sounds much like America’s Operation DESERT STORM against Saddam Hussein in 1991. The Houthis, backed by Iran and Lebanese Hezbollah, succeeded in driving out the pro-Saudi and pro-U.S. Yemeni government from Sana’a, Taiz, and Aden. Behind Saudi Arabia’s DECISIVE STORM is the hidden hand of Israel, which has made no secret of its military and intelligence alliance with the Saudis against Iranian influence in the Middle East. One country that has rejected any role in Saudi aggression in the region is Oman, which has served as a diplomatic bridge between the West and Iran and between Sunnis and Shi’as. Oman also has an interest in countering Saudi jihadist expansion in the former independent nation of South Yemen, which has always adhered to a secular profile against Saudi-financed radicalization in the Hadhramaut, the South Yemeni region that borders Oman.
Houthi leaders said their interest in driving into South Yemen was to root out Islamic State and Al Qaeda elements and that they had no desire to remain in control. Indeed, there is some indication that the Houthis agreed to allow South Yemen to have its independence restored. But that was not in the interest of the Saudis, who worked behind the scenes with Zionists in the U.S. State Department to create a six-region federation of Yemen, one that saw the rights of the Houthis diminished. It was this Feierstein Plan, named after Gerald Feierstein, the former Jewish-American ambassador to Yemen, which triggered the Houthi rebellion in the first place. Feierstein wanted to diminish the role of the Houthis and the Southern Yemeni independence Hirak movement in his plan for a federal Yemen because he saw both groups as proxies for Iran. Yemen’s disintegration is a direct result of the actions of a dupe for Israel who also happened to control the U.S. embassy in Sana’a. The Omanis know this is the case and so do the Iranians. In fact, Houthi leaders have correctly ascertained that the Islamic State and Al Qaeda were formed as the result of a conspiracy hatched by Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Brennan’s CIA.
Brennan recently told Fox News that the Islamic State was on the run in Syria and Iraq. Not only is Brennan’s contention patently false – and Brennan knows it is because he tacitly supports Saudi, Israeli, and Qatari assistance to Sunni jihadists in both countries – but the Islamic State has expanded its operations into Tunisia from Libya, as witnessed by the recent attack on tourists in Tunis, and Nigeria, as shown by the fealty sworn to the Islamic State by the Boko Haram jihadists. Boko Haram’s operations have also spread into Niger, Chad, and Cameroon. Brennan has every reason to soft peddle the Saudi/Israeli/Gulf Arab alliance that supports the most radical elements of Sunni Wahhabist Islam. Brennan’s support for the Yinon Plan, Clean Break, and Saudi Arabia’s DECISIVE STORM stems from his taking his marching orders from Jerusalem, Riyadh, and Doha.
New Eastern Outlook
by Tony Cartalucci
Overcoming the US-Saudi backed regime in Yemen, and a coalition of sectarian extremists including Al Qaeda and its rebrand, the “Islamic State,” pro-Iranian Yemeni Houthi militias have turned the tide against American “soft power” and has necessitated a more direct military intervention. While US military forces themselves are not involved allegedly, Saudi warplanes and a possible ground force are.
Though Saudi Arabia claims “10 countries” have joined its coalition to intervene in Yemen, like the US invasion and occupation of Iraq hid behind a “coalition,” it is overwhelmingly a Saudi operation with “coalition partners” added in a vain attempt to generate diplomatic legitimacy.
The New York Times, even in the title of its report, “Saudi Arabia Begins Air Assault in Yemen,” seems not to notice these “10” other countries. It reports:
Saudi Arabia announced on Wednesday night that it had launched a military campaign in Yemen, the beginning of what a Saudi official said was an offensive to restore a Yemeni government that had collapsed after rebel forces took control of large swaths of the country.
The air campaign began as the internal conflict in Yemen showed signs of degenerating into a proxy war between regional powers. The Saudi announcement came during a rare news conference in Washington by Adel al-Jubeir, the kingdom’s ambassador to the United States.
Proxy War Against Iran
Indeed, the conflict in Yemen is a proxy war. Not between Iran and Saudi Arabia per say, but between Iran and the United States, with the United States electing Saudi Arabia as its unfortunate stand-in.
Iran’s interest in Yemen serves as a direct result of the US-engineered “Arab Spring” and attempts to overturn the political order of North Africa and the Middle East to create a unified sectarian front against Iran for the purpose of a direct conflict with Tehran. The war raging in Syria is one part of this greater geopolitical conspiracy, aimed at overturning one of Iran’s most important regional allies, cutting the bridge between it and another important ally, Hezbollah in Lebanon.
And while Iran’s interest in Yemen is currently portrayed as yet another example of Iranian aggression, indicative of its inability to live in peace with its neighbors, US policymakers themselves have long ago already noted that Iran’s influence throughout the region, including backing armed groups, serves a solely defensive purpose, acknowledging the West and its regional allies’ attempts to encircle, subvert, and overturn Iran’s current political order.
The US-based RAND Corporation, which describes itself as “a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decision making through research and analysis,” produced a report in 2009 for the US Air Force titled, “Dangerous But Not Omnipotent : Exploring the Reach and Limitations of Iranian Power in the Middle East,” examining the structure and posture of Iran’s military, including its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and weapons both present, and possible future, it seeks to secure its borders and interests with against external aggression.
The report admits that:
Iran’s strategy is largely defensive, but with some offensive elements. Iran’s strategy of protecting the regime against internal threats, deterring aggression, safeguarding the homeland if aggression occurs, and extending influence is in large part a defensive one that also serves some aggressive tendencies when coupled with expressions of Iranian regional aspirations. It is in part a response to U.S. policy pronouncements and posture in the region, especially since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The Iranian leadership takes very seriously the threat of invasion given the open discussion in the United States of regime change, speeches defining Iran as part of the “axis of evil,” and efforts by U.S. forces to secure base access in states surrounding Iran.
Whatever imperative Saudi Arabia is attempting to cite in justifying its military aggression against Yemen, and whatever support the US is trying to give the Saudi regime rhetorically, diplomatically, or militarily, the legitimacy of this military operation crumbles before the words of the West’s own policymakers who admit Iran and its allies are simply reacting to a concerted campaign of encirclement, economic sanctions, covert military aggression, political subversion, and even terrorism aimed at establishing Western hegemony across the region at the expense of Iranian sovereignty.
Saudi Arabia’s Imperative Lacks Legitimacy
The unelected hereditary regime ruling over Saudi Arabia, a nation notorious for egregious human rights abuses, and a land utterly devoid of even a semblance of what is referred to as “human rights,” is now posing as arbiter of which government in neighboring Yemen is “legitimate” and which is not, to the extent of which it is prepared to use military force to restore the former over the latter.
The United States providing support for the Saudi regime is designed to lend legitimacy to what would otherwise be a difficult narrative to sell. However, the United States itself has suffered from an increasing deficit in its own legitimacy and moral authority.
Most ironic of all, US and Saudi-backed sectarian extremists, including Al Qaeda in Yemen, had served as proxy forces meant to keep Houthi militias in check by proxy so the need for a direct military intervention such as the one now unfolding would not be necessary. This means that Saudi Arabia and the US are intervening in Yemen only after the terrorists they were supporting were overwhelmed and the regime they were propping up collapsed.
In reality, Saudi Arabia’s and the United States’ rhetoric aside, a brutal regional regime meddled in Yemen and lost, and now the aspiring global hemegon sponsoring it from abroad has ordered it to intervene directly and clean up its mess.
Saudi Arabia’s Dangerous Gamble
The aerial assault on Yemen is meant to impress upon onlookers Saudi military might. A ground contingent might also attempt to quickly sweep in and panic Houthi fighters into folding. Barring a quick victory built on psychologically overwhelming Houthi fighters, Saudi Arabia risks enveloping itself in a conflict that could easily escape out from under the military machine the US has built for it.
It is too early to tell how the military operation will play out and how far the Saudis and their US sponsors will go to reassert themselves over Yemen. However, that the Houthis have outmatched combined US-Saudi proxy forces right on Riyadh’s doorstep indicates an operational capacity that may not only survive the current Saudi assault, but be strengthened by it.
Reports that Houthi fighters have employed captured Yemeni warplanes further bolsters this notion – revealing tactical, operational, and strategic sophistication that may well know how to weather whatever the Saudis have to throw at it, and come back stronger.
What may result is a conflict that spills over Yemen’s borders and into Saudi Arabia proper. Whatever dark secrets the Western media’s decades of self-censorship regarding the true sociopolitical nature of Saudi Arabia will become apparent when the people of the Arabian peninsula must choose to risk their lives fighting for a Western client regime, or take a piece of the peninsula for themselves.
Additionally, a transfer of resources and fighters arrayed under the flag of the so-called “Islamic State” and Al Qaeda from Syria to the Arabian Peninsula will further indicate that the US and its regional allies have been behind the chaos and atrocities carried out in the Levant for the past 4 years. Such revelations will only further undermine the moral imperative of the West and its regional allies, which in turn will further sabotage their efforts to rally support for an increasingly desperate battle they themselves conspired to start.
America’s Shrinking Legitimacy
It was just earlier this month when the United States reminded the world of Russia’s “invasion” of Crimea. Despite having destabilized Ukraine with a violent, armed insurrection in Kiev, for the purpose of expanding NATO deeper into Eastern Europe and further encircling Russia, the West insisted that Russia had and still has no mandate to intervene in any way in neighboring Ukraine. Ukraine’s affairs, the United States insists, are the Ukrainians’ to determine. Clearly, the US meant this only in as far as Ukrainians determined things in ways that suited US interests.
This is ever more evident now in Yemen, where the Yemeni people are not being allowed to determine their own affairs. Everything up to and including military invasion has been reserved specifically to ensure that the people of Yemen do not determine things for themselves, clearly, because it does not suit US interests.
Such naked hypocrisy will be duly noted by the global public and across diplomatic circles. The West’s inability to maintain a cohesive narrative is a growing sign of weakness. Shareholders in the global enterprise the West is engaged in may see such weakness as a cause to divest – or at the very least – a cause to diversify toward other enterprises. Such enterprises may include Russia and China’s mulipolar world. The vanishing of Western global hegemony will be done in destructive conflict waged in desperation and spite.
Today, that desperation and spite befalls Yemen.
New Eastern Outlook
by Salman Rafi Sheikh
Any probable nuclear deal between the United States of America and Iran is likely to result in giving a new trajectory to their bi-lateral relations; however, it is not the US-Iran relations alone that would enter a new phase of political history. As a matter of fact, this deal is most likely to send political jolts across the entire Middle Eastern political landscape, with Saudi Arabia and Israel standing as the most sensitive areas to bear its shocks; and as such, are most likely to clutch their hands into an alliance against Iran, and by default, against the US ambitions as well.
It is not, however, to suggest that Saudia and Israel would essentially adopt an anti-US strategic posture. What is becoming evident is that these three states will be re-negotiating the terms of their mutual relations to meet changing geo-political realities in a more ‘composite’ manner. This strategic negotiation is not, however, to be manned by the US itself, nor would it be playing the role of a crucial “balancer” between regional players. The US, in the contrary, would itself be a party to this process, and as such, would be more concerned about maintaining its own relations with Israel, Iran and Saudi Arabia than about merely assuring Israel and Saudia about the ‘harmless’ nature of the nuclear deal with Iran.
The process of re-negotiations has already started, and the fact that the US will be re-negotiating its own relations with her key regional allies is quite evident from the agenda John Kerry forwarded during his recent visit to Saudi Arabia. The main reason(s) for Kerry to visit Saudia was not that the US needed Saudi ‘support’ for finalizing this deal; it was necessary because the US wanted to make sure Saudi support in other matters of regional importance. Convincing Saudi Arabia to accept any agreed nuclear deal is important to President Barack Obama because he needs Riyadh to work closely with Washington on a host of regional policies and to maintain its role as a ‘moderating’ influence in oil markets. While the main critics of the US push for a nuclear deal with Iran are Israel and Congressional Republicans, Sunni Muslim powerhouse Saudi Arabia is also concerned that an accord would allow Iran to devote more cash and energy to Shi’ite proxies in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen, and in Saudia itself, which might lead to a serious escalation in regional conflict(s) of religious and non-religious nature.
On the other hand, Saudi concerns with regard to this deal are not based upon the possibility of Iran enjoying better relations with the US; Saudi concerns are largely related to her own position in the region following this deal; for, Iran does have enough politico-military and economic potential to counter-balance Saudi led “Sunni” states in the Middle East and beyond. It is precisely for this very reason that Saudi Arabia’s anxiety about an agreement has fueled a flurry of intense diplomacy in recent days to bolster unity among “Sunni” states in the Middle East in the face of “shared threats”, especially those emanating from Iran.
In other words, the central issue between Saudia and USA on the one hand, and the US and Israel on the other hand, is not the deal itself; it is the place Iran would have in the future Middle East. And, the very fact that the US officials are unwilling to outline what strategies might curb Iran’s regional influence, and the US record in Iraq, Syria and Yemen – where armed Iranian allies have since flourished and been resisting Saudi backed proxy factions – has caused Saudi Arabia and Israel great anxiety. To this anxiety has added the ‘fear’ of the US playing a double role in paving for itself a way entry into Middle Eastern politics. As a matter of fact, Saudia’s trust in Washington during the Iran talks is still recovering from the sudden move in late 2013 towards a nuclear deal, when Saudi officials, as also Israel itself, were blindsided by the revelation of months of secret talks between the US and Iran. At that time, for Saudia, the main issue was surely preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Now that the deal between the US and Iran is preventing the latter from developing Nuclear weapons, Saudia too has made a re-assessment of the possible threats and challenges Iran can and is causing in the region. Saudia, as such, now sees Iran’s involvement in Arab countries, particularly its backing of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, its support for Iraqi Shi’ite militias and its ties to the Houthi group that has seized control in northern Yemen, as a more urgent problem, resolution of which requires a “grand alliance.”
It is against this background that the Saudi King Salman is working to forge a “united front” among “Sunni” states against what Riyadh sees as grand threat from Iran. Over the last few weeks, Salman has met the leaders of all Saudi Arabia’s Gulf Arab neighbors, the king of Jordan and the presidents of Egypt and Turkey, the two most populous and militarily powerful Sunni states in the region. “The understanding is that we will face a more aggressive Iran if they sign an agreement. All the restrictions on it will be lifted and it will be much stronger. This is an issue that needs some sort of unity,” said Mustafa Alani, an Iraqi security analyst with ties to the Saudi Interior Ministry.
However, notwithstanding the significance of forging anti-Iran (and anti-Shia) alliance for Saudia and its allies, Saudi is not hesitating in forging much closer relationship with Israel than it has been having for last many decades. In February 2015, Saudi Arabia reportedly agreed to let Israel use its airspace to attack Iran if necessary, in exchange for “some kind of progress” on the Palestinian issue. The move will reportedly allow Israel to bomb targets in Iran by offering a shortcut, which will save fuel and time. The Saudi position was confirmed during multiple diplomatic talks, according to the report of an Israeli TV channel. “The Saudi authorities are completely coordinated with Israel on all matters related to Iran,” the European official from Brussels was also quoted as saying in that report.
Although there are no diplomatic ties between the two states, there have been various reports in the past showing that Riyadh and Jerusalem have been (deeply) cooperating when it came to Iran and its uranium enrichment program. For example, in November, Israel’s Mossad and Saudi officials were said to be working on contingency plans that could have included an attack on Iran if its nuclear program was not curbed enough, according to a report. It was also revealed that the Saudis were willing to assist an Israeli attack by cooperating with the use of drones, rescue helicopters, and tanker planes. On the other hand, Israeli behaviour also confirms some “abnormal” policy changes taking place. In February 2015, the White House and the US State Department stated that Israel had inaccurately provided information and twisted the official US position in nuclear talks with Iran. They also accused Jerusalem of “selectively” leaking details of sensitive talks, thereby casting Israel in the role of a “villain”, unwilling to accept Iran in a ‘new’ role.
The ‘unholy’ alliance taking shape between Saudia and Israel can decisively alter the Middle East’s geo-political landscape because of its potential to serve as the platform for many a state to practice what is otherwise known as “enemy of enemy is my friend.” Not only would it create a seriously hostile situation in the Middle East, but may also create a strong justification for Iran to contemplate going back to nukes. There are many probable scenarios that can take place in the future, given the number of regional and global actors involved in the ME. Therefore, we need not indulge in too much of speculation. However, what appears most certain and what is already on the wall is a grand anti-Iran alliance wherein the US would have minimum role to play; for, as the US takes one step towards Iran, its erstwhile allies seem taking two step backwards, and thereby, creating space for re-negotiating terms of their alliance.
Salman Rafi Sheikh, research-analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”
An interesting looking leaflet was dropped by the Pentagon over Syria.
As reported by Kristina Wong, from The Hill:
The Pentagon has dropped 60,000 leaflets warning people in the Syrian town of Ar-Raqqa not to join the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
The leaflets depict a grisly image: An ISIS recruiting office with new recruits lining up to join, but then being put through a meat-grinder.
“The message of this leaflet is, if you allow yourself to be recruited by Daesh, you will find yourself in a meat-grinder that is not beneficial to your health,” said Pentagon spokesman Army Col. Steve Warren, using a derogatory Arabic nickname for the group that means, “to trample underfoot.”
The Pentagon said the leaflets were dropped over the town by a U.S. Air Force F-15E fighter jet on March 16, to dissuade new recruits living in the ISIS stronghold from joining. They were dispensed using a canister.
The leaflets were developed by the personnel from the Pentagon’s information warfare arm, known as Military Information Support Operations, formerly known as “Psyops.”
In the leaflet, a sign with an arrow points to “Da’ish Recruiting Office,” and ultimately to a meat grinder labelled “Da’ish.” A television screen in the corner says, “Now serving 6001,” and a scared young man in the front of the line has a ticket with that number on it.
Defense experts say the leaflets were aimed at trying to take advantage of reports of internal divisions in the group, such as disputes over Western recruits being treated better than locals.
“It’s trying to set the stage for an internal uprising against ISIS,” the Center for a New American Security’s Nicholas Heras told USA Today.
The U.S. and coalition partners have conducted airstrikes near Ar-Raqqa, but this is the first time they have dropped the leaflets.
I wonder if this type of “psyops” would work on the American People.
By Joachim Hagopian
Ever since the Monroe Doctrine of 1823 the United States has claimed territorial rights to the Western Hemisphere, essentially warning the rest of the world to back off from USA’s backyard. The American way of proclaiming itself the big cheese of the New World manifested by quickly ousting colonial competitor Spain from Florida and the Southwest and two decades later declaring war on Mexico, stealing a third of its sovereign territory to ensure that Texas, New Mexico and Arizona became part of the bountiful chosen nation fast expanding from sea to shining sea. Next came more than a century of constant military interventions from the 1850’s in Nicaragua and Panama that brought forced labor and slavery to the indigenous population.
Long before the US became the global bully, it was the Western Hemisphere’s neighborhood thug. The 1898 Spanish American War born of the false flag sinking of the USS Maine facilitated colonial expansion and occupation of Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam and the Philippines. Genocide-war casualty expert RJ Rummel estimates up to near half a million Filipinos died in the bloodbath when the US military invaded, conquered and re-colonized the freshly independent nation of the Philippines during the Spanish American War.
As the US ascended to global power throughout the course of the following century, it became increasingly intolerant toward other nations’ autonomy or any and all regional claims of a “Monroe Doctrine” of their own. Having fought its own colonial wars far beyond its own hemisphere, the United States increasingly engaged in tampering with other countries’ internal affairs, regularly resorting to assassination of foreign leaders and inciting coups as it so chose around the world. And true to its New World Doctrine, the US maintained tightest control over the hapless nations of Central America and the Caribbean.
As examples of various “Monroe interventions,” a brief history follows. In 1903 for global trading purposes the US wanted a canal, so it invaded Panama, snatching up its land to construct and hold the Panama Canal from its 1914 opening up until 1999. Over this last century countless US Marine invasions took place in Central American nations like Panama and Nicaragua. Cuba and Haiti in the Caribbean were also constantly victimized with military aggression and regime changes, in Haiti right up to the present. US backed coups of democratically elected leaders during the last half century alone occurred in 1964 Brazil, 1965 Dominican Republic, 1973 Chile (ushering in brutal dictator Pinochet), 1973 Uruguay, 1980 El Salvador (that brought Reagan’s death squads also to Nicaragua), a CIA linked plane crash in 1981killing Panama’s leader, and more coups and invasions in 1982 and again 1983 in Guatemala and 1989 Panama. And then there are the incessant economic sanctions and embargos used against smaller nations like Cuba and Nicaragua that resist US oppression. Over the years thousands of Latin Americans died in the name of America’s “manifest destiny.”
By the end of the twentieth century when the US anointed itself as the only global superpower on the planet, American Empire powerbrokers began their ambitious campaign of world domination against its defeated cold war enemies still deemed its strongest potential threats. Thus the plan was launched to systematically isolate Russia and China from the rest of the world by implanting hostile puppet governments in every nation that borders them, with the ultimate aim of placing missiles aimed at Russia, completely usurping all other nations’ regional rights by expanding the Monroe Doctrine well beyond America’s own hemisphere but to the entire globe.
Once the Soviet Empire was broken up in the early 1990’s, at this point no other country could dare make similar claim of exercising any regional power over its neighbors anywhere in the world except the mighty US Empire that self-justified its longtime double standard hypocrisy always with its grandiose sense of empowered exceptionalism. This notion of exclusive impunity that the US is simply immune from compliance with any and all international laws and treaties including all Geneva Convention or United Nations Charter rules just because it happens to be the most powerful nation on earth meant that as the global village bully it can at will threaten, impose, dictate, control and even destroy all other nations through unchallenged global hegemony.
And so goes the US foreign policy enraptured by its own regime change madness to makeover any nation it so chooses using the worn out lie of spreading democracy when it really spread its own selfish agenda of destabilizing, plundering and enslaving in insurmountable debt every nation and people possessing precious dwindling resources or geopolitical chessboard significance to the US Empire as the self-serving master of the world. Without as much as declaring war, the United States in recent years has constantly violated international laws and committed countless war crimes invading, occupying for decades at a time, raping and destroying nations like Afghanistan, Iraq (several times over), Libya, and Syria (of course with a little proxy help from its secretly created and funded “terrorist” mercenary monster allies al Qaeda/ISIS), never failing to leave demolished failed states in its wake.
Then just over a year ago the neocon megalomaniacs assaulted another autonomous nation, investing $5 billion to subversively overthrow another democratically elected president in Ukraine. Then when a vast majority of ethnic Russians living in Crimea that for centuries were always part of Russia voted overwhelmingly to once again become annexed, and President Putin moved to protect both the citizens of Crimea as well as defend his strategically located Russian naval base in Sebastopol, Crimea, suddenly the world bully American Empire began its next propaganda war in futile attempts to demonize Putin with nonstop lies and false flags behind a thinly veiled design to manipulate the Russian leader into reacting, thus serving as provocation for the US-NATO forces as the clear aggressor to invade and occupy yet another country in yet another war.
But this time what could easily turn into World War III would be against a nuclear powered enemy and would risk the end of all life on planet earth. Yet these suicidal gestures of an evil Empire in freefall decline both morally and economically are being puppeteered by Western oligarchs in the midst of losing power and control to the emerging power of the East. For many centuries the central banking cabal has used war to drive both its power and profit.
On April 7, by the overwhelming House vote of 348-48, Congress moved forward with the Obama plan to provide heavy armaments to the corrupt de facto Ukrainian government despite Putin’s warnings and Europe’s ongoing efforts to resolve the conflict through peaceful negotiations. The vast majority of treasonous American leaders controlling the US crime syndicate government possess absolutely no regard for humanity, truth or justice and apparently are determined to plunge the planet headlong into catastrophic world war. A year ago researchers concluded the US government no longer represents the interests of American citizens but instead those of the Western oligarchs, the 1% of the world’s richest population of ruling elitists that as of next year will own more wealth than the rest of us 99% of the 7.2 billion earth inhabitants combined. Something’s demonically wrong and obscene with that NWO equation.
Yet with all this doom and gloom so rapidly unfolding and accelerating during these first few months of 2015, there remains but one populated continent on this earth that appears relatively free of US military domination and control. That laudable distinction belongs exclusively to nations in the US Empire’s own south facing backyard within the Western Hemisphere – South America. Suffering centuries of abuse and exploitation as Empire’s so called banana republics, despite their economic challenges that remain to this day, Latin American nations are emerging as a formidable political force endowed with natural resources and an empowering, growing independence and defiance toward the global giant to the north.
Emboldened by the largest oil reserves on the planet, this century has witnessed the charismatic leadership of the late Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez (until his death a couple years ago) leading the continental rebellion against the United States, calling Bush the “devil” before the UN, while calling upon South America to develop its own self-protective line of defense – a walled off independence, unity and solidarity away from the aggressive, controlling and destructive US Empire’s global dominance.
Hugo Chavez led the way for fourteen years shunning Washington’s claws bent on tapping into his nation’s vast oil reserves. But Chavez used his nationalized oil company to provide important revenue to uplift Venezuelans’ standard of living with improved educational opportunity, increased hospitals, affordable housing and transportation infrastructure. Any time a smaller nation in the world rejects US Empire and its predatory system of exploitation of the nation’s people and its land resources through privatized, greed-driven transnational corporations, through lies and propaganda that nation is invariably declared a US enemy. In other words, if a leader does what is best for his or her nation’s residents producing economic growth and prosperity for its own population, that nation is automatically targeted for “regime change” attack economically, politically and often even militarily by the US Empire. Viewed as a revolutionary champion of the people from humble roots much like his own constituents, and willing to boldly challenge and successfully outmaneuver blatant failed US attempts to overthrow him from power and temporarily did in 2002 and failed in more attempts later, Hugo Chavez overcame the Empire wrath and regional conflict with bordering Colombia and ultimately embraced continental Latin unity as an emerging defense against US imperialism.
The pivotal turning point came in August 2010 when enough pressure was brought to bear on Colombia by Chavez and other neighboring countries after Colombia’s president Alvaro Uribe signed an agreement the year before to allow eight more US military bases. The nixed plan was ostensibly to fight the same cocaine smuggling trade the US government makes billions in profits from as well as defeat the leftist insurgent rebels operating inside Colombia. Ultimately the Colombian courts wisely decided the bases were “unconstitutional” because they were never approved of by the nation’s legislators. It was simply a deal that the corrupt outgoing Colombian president had acquiesced to after American Empire pressured for a stronger military foothold on the continent. Though no new bases or additional US soldiers and contractors would be coming to Colombia, 1400 US personnel that were already part of a previously ratified agreement stationed at existing bases were allowed to stay. As a result of the Colombian court decision, the US was successfully banished from making any further inroads of a US military presence inside South America.
This Colombian decision came just a year after Ecuador gave the boot to the US Air Force occupying an air base sharing the runway of Manta’s city airport. The US base designed to be the primary South American “drug interdiction” watchtower from the sky was formally closed in 2009 after the United States had invested $71 million in airport renovation and over the last decade in operation had brought an annual revenue to the city of $6.5 million.
But the city of Manta moved onto bigger and better investments than the US Empire could offer with its thinly disguised imperialistic hegemony. Instead Ecuador went ahead with joint business ventures in partnership with both neighboring Venezuela and Hong Kong. Chavez made a sweet deal with Ecuadoran president Rafael Correa to construct a $6 billion oil refinery on the outskirts of Manta. Meanwhile, a Hong Kong firm secured a deal to finance and construct over a half billion dollar deepest water port on the Pacific coast of South America that geographically lies closest to Asia. Instead of giving the same half bill over to the fake enemy terrorists ISIS in Yemen like stupid Empire does resulting in a far more dangerously destructive world, China smartly invested the same amount of money into our same hemisphere’s nations but in renewable and sustainable infrastructure that offers win-win outcomes to both Asia and South America. In contrast, the US foreign policy for too long has always self-servingly invested in militarization and privatization that only benefits a small ruling elite rather than nations and whole populations. What goes around, comes around.
Ecuador’s security minister Gustavo Larrea framed it a little more diplomatically:
The U.S. stopped being the benchmark of what is good for Latin America. Because Latin America did everything that the US asked it to do and wasn’t able to get out of poverty, the North American myth lost political weight.
Latin American countries have long realized that the drug cartels work hand in hand with US government agencies to export their illegal drugs into North America. The US government’s criminal enterprise is partnered by the central banking cabal for safe money laundering. Just this week American Drug Enforcement Agency personnel got busted partying with drug cartel money.
The corrupt political system profiting from the international drug trade has not been more apparent than in Central American nations where local criminal cartels’ and Washington’s criminal interests appear one and the same. Honduras readily comes to mind as the worst Central American victim of another covert US-induced coup in June 2009when another democratically elected leader closely associated with Chavez, President Manuel Zelaya, was ousted because as a rancher he attempted to improve the lives of his indigenous agrarian poor class.
Honduras was targeted for regime change as Obama and his Secretary of State Hilary Clinton’s strategy to roll back democratic gains made in various countries during the Bush years. After training virtually the entire Honduran officer corps, the US planted a murderous military junta into power that’s been brutalizing Hondurans as the murder capital of the world ever since while partnering with the local drug cartels, their criminal gangs and agents of the US government moving drugs from South America into Mexico and North America. The 50,000 children largely from Honduras and El Salvador who showed up at the US border last year was but one among many tragic outcomes of the morally reprehensible US policy.
When Chavez died two years ago, the US realized that his successor Nicolas Maduro was far more vulnerable as the US has repeatedly attempted to undermine his power and position with its fanatical regime change agenda. While Ukraine was deposed of its president a year ago last February, CIA and State Department NGO’s were hard at work in Venezuela drumming up Maduro opposition culminating in violent street protests not unlike those in Kiev. Like clockwork a year later, Washington attempted yet another coup but once again failed on Valentine’s Day this year. Obama recently hypocritically declared Venezuela a threat to US national security, with more outright lies as he reacts with sour grapes to his recent botched coup effort and his jailed coup co-conspirators, attempting to scare weak links in both the Venezuelan government as well as all the Latin American governments assessing if he can lure any defectors away from their unified continental anti-Empire stance.
Leaders from Brazil, Bolivia, Argentina and Ecuador immediately responded to Obama’s verbal attack on Venezuela, verbalizing strong condemnation against his overt threats. If anything, the US president’s harsh words that have no real consequence (other than certain Venezuelan families cannot enter the United States) are in effect motivating South American nations to rally around Maduro and strengthening their alliances and mutual support against their common threat (not unlike Russia and China has been forced to do in response to the US Empire renewing its cold war enemies).
Meanwhile, the designated military structure for US presence in Latin America and the Caribbean – the US South Command – is hollow and more in name only as it hardly has anything to command these days because almost no US military outposts are located in the Western Hemisphere south of the United States. Very nearly to a country, every government has either kicked out the US military or has consistently refused to let the Empire wolf back in. One too many invasions from the past have come to haunt the rejected US Empire today. In fact, these days more often a visible Russian military presence is occasionally observed on Latin soil or sailing in southern waters or docked in South American ports than any US military deployments.
Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov last April visited Chile, Cuba, Nicaragua and Peru. Additionally, Russian defense minister Sergei Shoigu even went further, stressing the importance that Russian military forces should be assigned to foreign military bases, without naming exactly where. It was likely more a public relations ploy to excite the US national security neocons since clearly the Empire forces are being shunned while Latin America courts favor with the Russians. South American nations are unlikely to invite another foreign power to any permanent military bases since they collectively are emerging as an autonomous and independent political force unto themselves, and injecting Russia or the United States military into that mix would be both disruptive and counterproductive.
In Central America only Honduras has US military personnel stationed at Soto Cano Air Base listed to provide medical support to Hondurans as well as disaster relief. Another base located in El Salvador is Comalapa Naval Base opened in 2000 after the 1999 US departure from Panama. Comalapa employs just 25 US military and 40 civilian personnel (according to its website). Its mission is primarily narco-surveillance. Two more small anti-drug monitoring stations are located in the Caribbean Dutch territories on the islands of Curacao and Aruba. An air station on the island of Antigua is in the process of relocating to Western Australia. The radar station is moving to the Pacific to mainly monitor China’s growing military satellite activity in that part of the globe. Finally a secret black ops station in the Bahamas called “Area 51 of the Caribbean” is said to develop new naval military technology.
But outside these small scale outposts according to the Pentagon, no other active military bases are occupied by US armed forces. South Command commander General John F Kelly maintains that there is little current need for deployment of US troops in southern nations of the Western Hemisphere. His commander-in-chief notwithstanding, the general believes that no major security issues or serious threats in Latin America warrant a greater US military presence since numerous global hotspots that do require American military forces obviously take priority. Additionally, recent fiscal budget cuts factored in are also given to explain the near complete lack of US military presence in Central and South America. But then these “official reasons” sound more like a face-saving rationale rather than admitting the truth that the dominant mindset of Latin Americans who at one time chanted in protest “Yankee go home!” are now in unison and solidarity chanting even louder “Yankee stay home!”
What does unfortunately remain open as the Caribbean blight on the US Empire is an old US naval base operating since 1903 – Cuba’s Guantanamo Bay. It’s the Western Hemispheric mecca for housing illegal, unaccounted for US torture, false, unjustified imprisonment and grossest inhumanity still going on daily today since 2002. Though Obama has continued for seven years feebly promising and vowing to close it, the puppet president has yet to keep his word. Last week a teenager asked the president what he would like to change from the first day he was elected and Obama answered, “I think I would have closed Guantanamo on the first day.” That lame response failed to bolster his nonexistent credibility. After all, he also promised to be the “most open and transparent president in US history.” The man ad nauseam throughout his regime has only proven he cannot be trusted. But then neither can 99% of the United States leaders in government or the military.
It’s a bit of irony that the global superpower killing machine occupies over 1000 military posts throughout every corner of the globe except one, the one sitting in its south-side backdoor no less – Latin America. All those past military interventions, coups and tyrannical violence and injustice toward Latin America have soured relations now. The up and coming nations south of our border were brutally beaten down for more than a century by the US and now that they are rising in power with friendlier ties to cold war enemies Russia and China, once again karma’s come home to roost, biting the big evil Empire squarely in its imperial ass.
Joachim Hagopian is a West Point graduate and former US Army officer. He has written a manuscript based on his unique military experience entitled “Don’t Let The Bastards Getcha Down.” It examines and focuses on US international relations, leadership and national security issues. After the military, Joachim earned a master’s degree in Clinical Psychology and worked as a licensed therapist in the mental health field for more than a quarter century. He now concentrates on his writing and has a blog site at http://empireexposed. blogspot. com/.
Mint Press News
By Thalif Deen
Twenty-five years after the Soviet collapse, the world is entering a new nuclear age.
Part of Operation Upshot-Knothole, was a 15-kiloton test fired from a 280-mm cannon on May 25, 1953 at the Nevada Proving Grounds. Every nuclear power is spending millions to upgrade their arsenals, experts say. (Photo: Public Domain/CC)
As a new cold war between the United States and Russia picks up steam, the nuclear threat is in danger of escalating – perhaps far beyond political rhetoric.
Randy Riddel, a former senior political affairs officer with the U.N. Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA) told IPS he pities the general public.
“They’re being fed two competing narratives about nukes,” he said, in a realistic assessment of the current state of play.
“Oracle 1 says everybody’s rushing to acquire them or to perfect them.”
Oracle 2 forecasts a big advance for nuclear disarmament, as the bandwagon for humanitarian disarmament continues to gain momentum, said Riddel, a former senior counselor and report director of the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) Commission.
“The irony is that if Oracle 2 is wrong, Oracle 1 will likely win this debate – and we’ll all lose,” he grimly predicted about the nuclear scenario.
In a recent cover story, the London Economist is unequivocally pessimistic: “A quarter of a century after the end of the cold war, the world faces a growing threat of nuclear conflict.”
Twenty-five years after the Soviet collapse, it said, the world is entering a new nuclear age.
“Nuclear strategy has become a cockpit of rogue regimes and regional foes jostling with the five original nuclear weapons powers (the U.S., Britain, France, China and Russia), whose own dealings are infected by suspicion and rivalry.”
Shannon Kile, senior researcher and head of the Nuclear Weapons Project at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) told IPS he agrees with the recent piece in The Economist that the world may be entering a “new nuclear age”.
“However, I would not narrowly define this in terms of new spending on nuclear weapons by states possessing them. Rather, I think it must be defined more broadly in terms of the emergence of a multi-polar nuclear world that has replaced the bipolar order of the cold war,” he added.
Kile also pointed out that nuclear weapons have become core elements in the defense and national security policies of countries in East Asia, South Asia and the Middle East, where they complicate calculations of regional stability and deterrence in unpredictable ways.
This in turn raises risks that regional rivalries could lead to nuclear proliferation and even confrontation that did not exist when the nuclear club was smaller.
Meanwhile, the signs are ominous: the negotiations to prevent Iran going nuclear are still deadlocked.
Saudi Arabia has signed a new nuclear cooperation agreement, presumably for “peaceful purposes”, with South Korea; and North Korea has begun to flex its nuclear muscle.
Last week Hyun Hak Bong, North Korea’s ambassador to the UK, was quoted by Sky News as saying his country would use its nuclear weapons in response to a nuclear attack by the U.S.
“It is not the United States that has a monopoly on nuclear weapons strikes,” Hyun said.
“If the United States strike us, we should strike back. We are ready for conventional war with conventional war; we are ready for nuclear war with nuclear war. We do not want war but we are not afraid of war,” Hyun said.
The Economist also pointed out that every nuclear power is spending “lavishly to upgrade its atomic arsenal.”
Russia’s defence budget has increased by over 50 percent since 2007, a third of it earmarked for nuclear weapons: twice the share of France.
China is investing in submarines and mobile missile batteries while the United States is seeking Congressional approval for 350 billion dollars for the modernization of its nuclear arsenal.
Kile told IPS a subsidiary aspect of the “new nuclear age” is more technical in nature and has to do with the steady erosion of the operational boundary between nuclear and conventional forces.
Specifically, he said, the development of new types of advanced long-range, precision guided missile systems, combined with the increasing capabilities of satellite-based reconnaissance and surveillance systems, means that conventional weapons are now being given roles and missions that were previously assigned to nuclear weapons.
“This trend has been especially strong in the United States but we also see it in [the] South Asian context, where India is adopting conventional strike systems to target Pakistani nuclear forces as part of its emerging limited war doctrine.”
Kile also said many observers have pointed out that this technology trend is driving doctrinal changes that could lead to increased instability in times of crisis and raise the risk of the use of nuclear weapons.
“What these developments suggest to me is that while the overall number of nuclear warheads in the world has significantly decreased since the end of the cold war (with the fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989), the spectrum of risks and perils arising from nuclear weapons has actually expanded.”
Given that nuclear weapons remain uniquely dangerous because they are uniquely destructive, “I don’t think anyone will dispute that we must redouble our collective efforts aimed at reaching a world in which nuclear arsenals are marginalized and can be eventually prohibited,” he declared.
by Jim Lee
This article will prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the chemtrails we see over our heads every day is an on-going geoengineering project, who is involved, and why they claim they are screwing with our sky! Every quote has references, every fact has been triple checked, and the case is closed: Chemtrails are the New Manhattan Project, the world’s biggest in-your-face experiment. Please check the facts in this article, verify the material, and add to our ever-growing list of evidence. Let us begin.
If you read my last article The CIA, Weather Warfare, and Climate Terrorism or watched the video on YouTube then you know that even the CIA is freaking out about “who is controlling our weather?” The fact is nobody really knows and there is no way to tell! Scientists barely understand how aerosols form clouds, cannot predict the outcome of cloud seeding experiments after 60 years of performing them, and their atmospheric sensors cannot tell the difference between natural weather and man-made weather.
This is quite obvious Prof. Spy agencies and state criminals have long used unconventional arms to harm other people or countries, whether in time of war or peace. As a genuine scientist, your worries are also quite genuine.I am quite sure that some of your fellow researchers are receiving such funds to develop climate intervention technologies that will be used for other purposes than fixing the global warming issue. I therefore urge you to keep up raising awareness on these issues.
I fully agree that the military will be the real winner if geoengineering SRM becomes legal, nonetheless scientists press on with their research swearing the military has nothing to do with their work:
As for the U.S. Department of Defense — forget about it. To this group, such involvement prompts nightmares of a new military-industrial-geoengineering complex. One novel solution: demand that all technology used for sunlight reduction technologies remain in the public domain. “The issue is not private investment,” argued Keith. “It’s is open intellectual property.” Open-source climate engineering, anyone?
Lesson five: Trust is everything. The media loves to play up the angle of hubristic geoengineers hell-bent on messing with a system they don’t understand, but there was very little bold or reckless talk at Asilomar. The entire mood of the meeting was somber and hyper-alert to the dangers that lay ahead. “The whole game,” David Victor pointed out, “is about establishing credibility.” In other words, if the public comes to see geoengineering as, as one attendee put it, “a crazy idea cooked up by rich Anglo Saxons to dominate the climate,” then they will all be rightfully tarred and feathered.
Geoengineering scientists claim their work is just a bunch of computer models and theories but we know that is not true, they are already experimenting in our skies with Geoengineering Solar Radiation Management and we can prove it.
Official List of Geoengineering SRM Field Experiments
Here is the official list of geoengineering field projects posted on the Geoengineering Our Climate blog:
#1 – Field Experiment on Studying Solar Radiation Passing through Aerosol Layers, Izrael et al 2009
Yuri Izrael’s solar radiation experiment carried out in Russia with an uncertain degree of scientific credibility and an unclear assessment process;
Results of a field experiment on studying solar radiation passing in the visible wavelength range are described with the model aerosol media created in the surface atmosphere. High-efficiency thermocondensation generators were used for creating model aerosol media. The index of refraction and an average size of the aerosol particles formed are close to those characteristic of the natural stratospheric aerosol. The composition and technical characteristics of the equipment complex used in the experiments to control aerosol optical and microphysical parameters and meteorological conditions of the experiment are considered. The Gaussian model of impurity dispersion in the boundary layer is used for the analysis and interpretation of measurement results. It is found that with a number concentration of aerosol particles of ∼102–103 cm−3 (which corresponds to the aerosol density in the deposited layer of about 1–10 mg/m2 with the layer thickness along the ray path of about 100 m) the solar radiation attenuation with artificial aerosol layers accounts for 1 to 10%. Model estimates are in satisfactory agreement with the measurement results.
Original Russian Text © Yu.A. Izrael, V.M. Zakharov, N.N. Petrov, A.G. Ryaboshapko, V.N. Ivanov, A.V. Savchenko, Yu.V. Andreev, Yu.A. Puzov, B.G. Danelyan, V.P. Kulyapin, 2009, published in Meteorologiya i Gidrologiya, 2009, No. 5, pp. 5–15.
This experiment consisted of consisted of two vehicles making smoke plumes and some science dudes standing under the plumes while measuring how much sun got blocked (as seen in the figure above).
- Russian Mi-24 Hind helicopter with aerosol generators burning “metal-chloride pyrotechnic compounds”
- Car with a smoke generator burning oils and gas: “as a result of condensation of overheated vapor-gas mixture of individual fractions of petroleum products released at a high rate.”
#2 E-PEACE Eastern Pacific Emitted Aerosol Cloud Experiment, July-August 2011
E-PEACE, an experiment which while not identifying as SRM resulted in clear implications for marine cloud brightening (MCB) technology post hoc;
E-PEACE combined a targeted aircraft campaign off the coast of Monterey in July and August 2011 with embedded ship and satellite observations (Fig. 2) and modeling studies. Atmospheric conditions in the northeastern Pacific during July are ideal for the formation of homogeneous layers of persistent stratocumulus clouds. The layers observed have consistent diurnal characteristics, cloud thicknesses of 100–300 m, and cloud-top heights typically below 500 m. The susceptibility of cloud albedo to particle perturbations is well documented for the eastern Pacific near 36°N (Coakley et al. 1987, 2000; Platnick et al. 2000).
We employed the research vessel (R/V) Point Sur to measure the aerosol below cloud and as a platform for well-characterized smoke emissions to produce a uniquely identifiable cloud signature. The Center for Interdisciplinary Remotely-Piloted Aircraft Studies (CIRPAS) Twin Otter aircraft was used with a full payload of instruments (Table 3) to measure particle and cloud droplet number, mass, and composition. E-PEACE combined 1) controlled release of smoke from the deck of the Point Sur, salt aerosol from the Twin Otter, and exhaust from container ships transiting across the study region; 2) flight plans designed to investigate results from large-eddy simulations (LES) and to provide constraints for aerosol–cloud parcel (ACP) modeling studies, to test our ability to quantitatively predict the cloud dynamical response to increases in particle concentrations in the natural atmosphere; and 3) satellite analyses of marine stratocumulus to constrain the radiative properties of the natural, perturbed, and regional cloud systems.
With 12 days of ship time on the R/V Point Sur and 30 flights (each ~4.5 h long) on the CIRPAS Twin Otter (Tables 4 and 5), we could take full advantage of the persistence of stratocumulus clouds to probe the effect of particle sources on marine stratocumulus properties. Since the particles would be emitted in high concentrations over small areas in crosswind directions, their effects on clouds could be separated from those of meteorology. And in terms of number concentration and duration, the impacts of these particle emissions would be large enough to be distinguished from natural cloud variability.
As noted above, three types of particles were involved in E-PEACE:
1) combustion exhaust particles from cargo ships of opportunity, which are the emissions responsible for ship tracks;
2) shipboard smoke-generated particles; and
3) aircraft-based milled salt particles (Fig. 3).
Type 1 is the exhaust that consists of 50–100-nm dry-diameter particlesemitted at rates of 1016–1018 s–1 from the engines of large (2,000 ton) cargo ships, in this instance on trans-Pacific, Los Angeles to San Francisco, or other commercial routes. Such emissions were responsible for the first observed ship tracks (Conover 1969). At a fuel cost of about $100,000 (U.S. dollars) per day, operations of such vessels dedicated solely to research are not feasible. However, real-time tracking of commercial vessels (www.marinetraffic.com) was used to identify fast-moving (>30 km h–1) cargo or container ships in the region within the aircraft operating area (as illustrated in Fig. 4).
Type 2 involves smoke particles produced at an estimated rate of 1011–1013 s–1 on the stern deck of the R/V Point Sur (described in “Tailor-made particles with a battlefield smoke generator”), with dry diameters that ranged from 50 nm up to 1 μm and very low hygroscopicity.
Type 3 particles were dispersed from the Twin Otter aircraft in cloud. An adjustable auger fed a fluidized bed that dispensed NaCl particles, which had been milled to diameters of 3–5μm and mixed with SiO2 to prevent particles from sticking together (Drofa et al. 2010).
#3 The SPICE (Stratospheric Particle Injection for Climate Engineering) Project, 2012 [CANCELLED]
A field trial for a novel UK geoengineering experiment has been cancelled amid questions about a pre-existing patent application for some of the technology involved.
The Stratospheric Particle Injection for Climate Engineering (SPICE) project is a collaboration among several UK universities and Cambridge-based Marshall Aerospace to investigate the possibility of spraying particles into the stratosphere to mitigate global warming. Such particles could mimic the cooling produced by large volcanic eruptions, by reflecting sunlight before it reaches Earth’s surface.
But the field-trial arm of SPICE — which would have seen around 150 litres of water pumped into the atmosphere through a 1-kilometre hosepipe attached to a balloon — has now been abandoned.
“It is with some regret that today the SPICE team has announced we’ve decided to call off the outdoor ‘1km testbed’ experiment that was scheduled for later this year,” said Matthew Watson, the principal investigator of SPICE and an Earth scientist at the University of Bristol, UK, in an e-mail statement to Nature.
Was it patent or protest that killed SPICE?
The project had attracted a forceful protest campaign from NGOs such as Friends of the Earth and ETC group. A petition signed by more than 50 organisations was handed in the same day as the decision to pause the project was announced by the EPSRC. They objected to the project in part because they feared that a “plan B” approach of engineering the climate will offer politicians an excuse for not taking tough decisions on reducing greenhouse gas emissions from burning fossil fuels such as oil, coal and gas. | Link
- How will geoengineers address the statements of the AMS, WMO, and NRC on Weather Modification? | Link
- The SPICE project: a geoengineering feasibility study | Link
- Scientists to create artificial volcano for climate change experiment | Link
- Political backlash to geoengineering begins | Link
- Scientists criticise handling of pilot project to ‘geoengineer’ climate | Link
- Demonstrating the SPICE project | Video Link
- Cooling the Planet – Naked Engineering | Video Link
Could the patent contraversy have anything to do with Bill Gates’ “Hose to the Sky” The Stratoshield from 2009?
Using much larger particles than standard cloud-seeding, these salt particles made clouds, fast.
While hygroscopic seeding is not new, most experiments to date have used finely ground salt particles, usually larger than about 10 mm. The disadvantages of this approach are the weight that has to be carried for any practical applications and the difficulty in handling and dispensing the highly hygroscopic and corrosive salt particles. Also, the growth rates of the salt embryos to raindrops must be matched well to the updraft profile, or their growth will be inefficient (Klazura and Todd 1978). While some positive effects have been attributed to such seeding (Biswas and Dennis 1971), the logistics of handling the hygroscopic salts have made this method less attractive than ice nuclei seeding.
The approach reported here uses easily handled pyrotechnic flares that produce small salt particles, average size around 0.5 mm, that broaden the cloud base droplet spectra thus accelerating coalescence. Our hypothesis is that this increases the efficiency of the rain formation process in treated storms. The operational advantages of this method are the amount of salt required is much less, the salt particles are readily produced by flares, the target area for seeding is an easily identified region at cloud base where the initial droplet spectrum is determined, dispersion of the material is much easier, and long-term storage of the flares presents no problems.
source: Results of the South African Cloud-Seeding Experiments Using Hygroscopic Flares
Dr. Stephen Salter says:
Jack Doughty could also have mentioned the film made by Discovery Channel of the amazing result from cloud seeding flares off Liaaplek in South Africa. They had been told that conditions there meant that it always had perfect strato-cumulus cloud. When we arrived with a 40-person film crew, an aircraft, helicopter, ship and support vessels there was hardly a cloud in the sky. John Latham and I kept telling the producer that we were trying to make existing clouds a tiny bit whiter and that it could not possibly work with no cloud. Filming ‘experts’ making fools of themselves is great television so they went ahead anyway and lit up the flares. My very rough engineering estimate was that it was about two minutes of the output of a spray vessel.
The result was stunning. It created a very white cloud from nothing, about 5 km by 1.5 km. At that time of day the cloud top would be reflecting about 800 watts per square metre over an area of about 7.5 million square metres which I make to be 6 GW, more than the peak electrical demand of Scotland. It spread out slowly but was still visible about two hours later.
The air mass must have been extremely clean. Perhaps it had been over Antarctica for months. A picture should be below.
The heavens did not fall and nobody went to jail.
source: Dr. Stephen Salter
But wait, there’s more…
Wait, that can’t be the full list of solar radiation management field experiments?
Pay attention policy makers, the contrail con-game is over:
Geoengineering SRM Experiments using Contrails
Scientists claim that contrail cirrus has nothing to do with Geoengineering SRM experiments when in fact “chemtrails” are the longest-running SRM field experiment.
Those who do not remember the past are doomed to repeat it.
At the end of Sheila’s video (above) we see video testimonial from the victims of U.S. human testing back in the 50’s and 60’s. The U.S. military does not care about the law when “national security” is concerned. The Council on Foreign Relations’ “Climate Change and National Security, An Agenda for Action” from 2007 pretty much sums it up. In the name of “continuity of government” our three letter agencies and military branches are already geoengineering our skies with chemtrails. My belief is that through the alteration of fuel sulfur content and additives to increase carbon black soot production U.S. “agencies” are increasing cloudiness worldwide, testing the results, and revising their “strategies” daily in this grand “New Manhattan Project.”
For those who doubt the US military’s intention to control climate chaos, the following two 1994 FOIA documents obtained by The Sunshine Project show both the US Air Force and US Navy are engaged in weather modification techniques.
- US Air Force proposal to develop a theater-scale weather modification system using carbon black.Phillips Laboratory (AFMC) Geophysics DirectorateReleased under 1994 FOIA from the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate.
- US Navy proposal to develop new weather modification weapons.Code C2741 (Warhead Development Branch) NAWCWPNS, China Lake, California.This proposal is from April, 1994 and was submitted to the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate.
The Navy paper above proposes studying weather control under the name “non-lethal warfare” and the paper below shows a timeline of the US Air Force Phillips Lab’s use of carbon black aerosols.
After the 1994 proposals mentioned in the FOIA documents, weather warfare techniques were researched in detail with Air Force 2025.
In December 1994, the Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force (CSAF) tasked Air University to conduct a study to identify the concepts, capabilities and technologies the United States would require to remain the dominant air and space force beyond the first quarter of the 21st century. The study was called Air Force 2025, or 2025for short. USAF 2025 Fact Sheet
As a part of AF 2025, the United States Air Force discussed the future of weather warfare in its 1995-1996 brainstorming session “Weather as a Force Multiplier; Owning the Weather in 2025: Weather as a Force Multiplier.” Of particular interest is the following chart which shows the use of “Carbon Black Dust (CBD)” by 2005 with a star indicating “Technologies to be developed by the Department of Defense.”
Also worthy of mention is the intent to create a global weather control system, see the following images (WXMOD is military jargon for “weather modification”):
The intention to dominate the climate for weather warfare is clear.
Owning the Weather Meets Reality
Weather warfare, as laid out in the “Owning the Weather in 2025″ paper, was presented the following year at a joint US Air Force and US Army conference titled “Test Technology Symposium ’97 Weather Modification.” The presenter, Dr. Arnold Barnes from the Phillips Lab/GPO at Hanscom Air Force Base, reiterated the use of Carbon Black Dust for weather modification and showed a slide with “Current Capabilities” as of 1997.
- MAJOR IMPROVEMENTS IN SHORT TERM FORECASTS BY 2010
- 14 DAY FORECASTS BY 2040
- CURRENT CAPABILITIES (1997)
1. TARGETED FOG DISPERSAL
2. LOCAL CHANGES IN PRECIPITATION 3. CLOUD MODIFICATION
- HOLE BORING
- CREATE/SUPPRESS CIRRUS/CONTRAILS
- ENERGY REQUIREMENTS TOO LARGE FOR MAJOR STORMS
- TREATY RESTRICTIONS
- NEW WEAPON SYSTEMS PUSH THE ENVELOPETHE ENVIRONMENT MUST BE CONSIDERED FROM THE START OF THE CONCEPT/DESIGN FOR ALL NEW WEAPON SYSTEMS
Notes: Improvements in forecasts will follow from better and faster computers, improved communications and more detailed atmospheric observations from satellites, UAVs, microchips and ground based remote sensing. Current techniques for small area, short term atmospheric modifications will become easier to implement and will have improved accuracy as to the predicted results. Modifications of storms of thunderstorm size and larger are unlikely because of the energy required, the unknown side effects, and possible treaty violations. Due to political environmental concerns, it is doubtful that the treaty will be weakened. It is more likely to be made more restrictive with the growth of population and water demands. As weapons and other systems become more sophisticated, the atmospheric environment will continue to be a major factor in the usefulness and operational effectiveness of these systems. For this reason it is imperative that atmospheric scientists be brought in at the beginning on any and all new proposed systems so as to avoid the costs of altering or abandoning the system at a later date.
According to these documents, the US Air Force has had the ability to create or remove cirrus clouds and contrails since 1997 and intends to control the weather using Carbon Black dust by 2005, the year of the Katrina Hurricane disaster.
Masked under the guise of “climate change” studies, scientists are testing these man-made clouds and the aerosols that made them.
Carbon black dust is an “aerosol” and is also considered a “Cloud Condensation Nuclei” or CCN. Droplets of water will attach to these tiny CCN particles and form larger and larger drops of water which will eventually freeze and turn into ice or fall in the form of rain. This theory is the basis of all cloud-seeding projects today:
The exhaust plumes of jet engines predominately contain:
- Water vapor
- Sulfuric Acid – cools the planet, like Mount Pinatubo
- Carbon Black dust (soot) – heats the planet, traps heat like a black paint job on a car.
- all the other trace elements
Despite years of research on carbon black dust and weather modification, scientists still claim ignorance of the processes of Cloud Condensation Nuclei.
Climate change and geoengineering computer models do not properly account for aerosols making them the biggest unknown in atmospheric science, allegedly:
Aerosol-cloud interactions are one of the main uncertainties in climate research. Up to now a lot of research has been conducted on aerosol-cloud interactions in warm clouds. The impact of aerosols on ice or mixed-phase clouds is much less understood. Cirrus clouds in an unpolluted environment are assumed to form mainly via homogeneous freezing. The presence of heterogeneous ice nuclei can lead to earlier ice crystal formation and change the microphysical properties of cirrus clouds. Recent box model studies even suggest that heterogeneous freezing can suppress homogeneous freezing, if several conditions are fulfilled. Most likely this would lead to cirrus clouds containing fewer and larger ice crystals. If homogeneous and heterogeneous freezing compete either freezing mechanism may dominate depending mainly on vertical velocity and number density of ice nuclei. Thus, it is not clear yet how number and size of ice crystals are affected.
source: Dust ice nuclei effects on cirrus clouds in ECHAM5-HAM, 2013
The main reason there is so much uncertainty surrounding aerosols is atmospheric sensors are not accurate enough. Detection, modeling, and prediction of atmospheric aerosols behavior is an essential part of any Geoengineering SRM scheme, as verification is important but currently impossible. The following slide is from a NASA presentation at the Keck Institute for Space Studies (KISS) project: Monitoring of Geoengineering Effects and their Natural and Anthropogenic Analogues shows space-based instruments capable of detecting aerosols past, present, and future.
These insufficient instruments feed data into incomplete models, which are turned into reports to the IPCC et al.
Did you know that Geoengineering SRM advocates advised the IPCC on contrails and aerosols?
Coordinating Lead Authors:
Olivier Boucher (France), David Randall (USA)
Paulo Artaxo (Brazil), Christopher Bretherton (USA), Graham Feingold (USA), Piers Forster (UK), Veli-Matti Kerminen (Finland), Yutaka Kondo (Japan), Hong Liao (China), Ulrike Lohmann (Switzerland), Philip Rasch (USA), S.K. Satheesh (India), Steven Sherwood (Australia), Bjorn Stevens (Germany), Xiao-Ye Zhang (China)
Govindasamy Bala (India), Nicolas Bellouin (UK), Angela Benedetti (UK), Sandrine Bony (France), Ken Caldeira (USA), Anthony Del Genio (USA), Maria Cristina Facchini (Italy), Mark Flanner (USA), Steven Ghan (USA), Claire Granier (France), Corinna Hoose (Germany), Andy Jones (UK), Makoto Koike (Japan), Ben Kravitz (USA), Benjamin Laken (Spain), Matthew Lebsock (USA), Natalie Mahowald (USA), Gunnar Myhre (Norway), Colin O’Dowd (Ireland), Alan Robock (USA), Bjørn Samset (Norway), Hauke Schmidt (Germany), Michael Schulz (Norway), Graeme Stephens (USA), Philip Stier (UK), Trude Storelvmo (USA), Dave Winker (USA), Matthew Wyant (USA)
[names in bold are Geoengineering SRM advocates]
According to these fine scientists and geoengineering dudes, we really have no clue how much sun is currently being blocked or reflected by contrails, let alone how they are formed, allegedly.
We further assess the 90% uncertainty range to be +0.02 to +0.15 W m–2 to take into account the large uncertainties associated with spreading rate, optical depth, ice particle shape and radiative transfer. A low confidence is attached to this estimate.
The Bottom Line
The only difference between these contrail RF studies and the list of “official” geoengineering SRM field experiments is the scientists in the experiment didn’t have to pay for the planes.
- One experiment used a helicopter and car to make clouds
- another used planes and boats to make clouds
- one wanted to use boats and blimps to make clouds
- the last used salt flares to make clouds
The only thing left for an experiment to be considered a geoengineering SRM experiment, according to Jack Doughty’s definition, is to stand under some man-made clouds and measure how much sunlight was blocked.
Every single contrail RF study fits the definition, is a geoengineering SRM field project, and is “the project that shall not be mentioned.”
The ICAO has presenters discussing taking advantage of contrails to cool the planet, therefore, THIS IS GEOENGINEERING!
The reason I can confidently say that is if it were not an experiment, then why despite all the public outrage over chemtrails does every FAA caller get the same response: “those are contrails, just water, and normal” instead of “we are trying to get rid of them?”
Here is the kicker: Contrails are actually trapping heat! It turns out that all those contrail cirrus clouds are cooling during the day and trapping heat at night, and the list of unknowns grows precipitously:
“Contrails formed by aircraft can evolve into cirrus clouds indistinguishable from those formed naturally. These ‘spreading contrails’ may be causing more climate warming today than all the carbon dioxide emitted by aircraft since the start of aviation.”
So which is it, are they trying to cool the planet or trying to heat it up?
Is this intentional or unintentional?
To Sulfur or not To Sulfur, that is the question
Camp 1: Add sulfur to jet fuel and Geoengineer the Skies
“Another technique examined was the use of commercial passenger aircraft flying at high altitudes to inject sulphate aerosols, emitted by aviation fuel, into the stratosphere.” Reference link and Presentation
The Academy of Finland if far from alone in discussing how to geoengineer our planet using flight pollution.
- “Use commuter aircraft fuels doped with aerosol generators” [ref]
- “dissolved or suspended in their jet fuel and later burned with the fuel to create seeding aerosol, or (2) injected into the hot engine exhaust, which should vaporize the seeding material, allowing it to condense as aerosol in the jet contrail” [ref]
- “Options for dispersing gases from planes include the addition of sulfur to the fuel, which would release the aerosol through the exhaust system of the plane, or the attachment of a nozzle to release the sulfur from its own tank within the plane, which would be the better option.” [ref]
- “The particles may be seeded by dispersal from seeding aircraft; one exemplary technique may be via the jet fuel as suggested by prior work regarding the metallic particles. Once the tiny particles have been dispersed into the atmosphere, the particles may remain in suspension for up to one year.” [ref]
Turns out, atmospheric sulfuric acid levels are higher today than what David Keith called for in 2020, according to Oscar Escobar:
According to Keith’s calculations, if operations were begun in 2020, it would take 25,000 metric tons of sulfuric acid to cut global warming in half after one year. Once under way, the injection of sulfuric acid would proceed continuously. By 2040, 11 or so jets delivering roughly 250,000 metric tons of it each year, at an annual cost of $700 million, would be required to compensate for the increased warming caused by rising levels of carbon dioxide. By 2070, he estimates, the program would need to be injecting a bit more than a million tons per year using a fleet of a hundred aircraft.”
Given that by 1990 global aviation’s “annual contribution to the atmospheric sulfur budget by aircraft of 2.E7 kg H2SO4.” , and that by 2010 Aviation emissions could had been up 110% compared to 1990 levels  it is safe to assume that by the year 2013, H2SO4 by aircraft emissions is already at the level that would be required by 2020 for a geoengineering regime. In other words: geoengineering is way ahead of schedule!
Also giving all the warnings about the side effects of geoengineering by SRM on the hydrological cycle i.e. drought and flooding; and the ecosystems in land and the ocean, such as this one by Edward Teller:
“Consider what might happen if we start by using a stratospheric aerosol to ameliorate global heating; even if it succeeds, it would not be long before we face the additional problem of ocean acidification”. 
It is not at all shocking that we are already there … in all counts… today!
So, to the byline:
“Intentionally engineering Earth’s atmosphere to offset rising temperatures could be far more doable than you imagine, says David Keith. But is it a good idea?”
I would think the answer is clearly… NO! It is not a good idea. Specially in the case of SRM.
Then, it could also be said that one of the most relevant questions about geoengineering by SRM is… how do we stop?
“So perhaps those in the GE community who are genuinely opposed to geoengineering should revise their premises and call for research into GE with the purpose of ending this ‘unintended’, but failed and still ongoing experiment.”
Camp 2: Contrail Control
Jet Biofuel Enlisted For Contrail Control March 5, 2013
Contrails might be a punch line in the culture these days, thanks to the imaginative folks who have rechristened them “chemtrails” and embroidered them with elaborate theories involving government and corporate misdeed.
But contrails are pretty serious business for a less conspiratorial reason: scientists believe these ice clouds generated by water exhaust gases from aircraft engines could have a real impact on the climate, perhaps by cooling temperatures during the day and warming them at night.
That’s where a new phase in an ongoing NASA study comes into play:
The space agency recently began doing flights over the Southern California desert in which a DC-8 “flying laboratory” is testing the contrail consequences of using standard JP-8 jet fuel versus a 50-50 blend of JP-8 and a biofuel made from camelina plants.
- Aviation Climate Change Research Initiative (ACCRI)
- Alternative Fuel Effects on Contrails and Cruise Emissions II (ACCESS II)
- Civil Aircraft for the Regular Investigation of the atmosphere Based on an Instrument Container (CARIBIC)
- Project REACT4C “Reducing Emissions from Aviation by Changing Trajectories for the benefit of Climate”
REACT4C on CORDIS
- Centre for Aviation Transport and the Environment (Omega)
- Ice-Supersaturated Regions (ISSR)
- Formation flying civilian airliners? Flying planes like birds to save on the gas bill, no joke.
- Climate compatible Air Transport System (CATS)
- Climate Optimized Routing of Flights
- Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen)
And the experiments continue:
Experiments on Contrails:
- International Cirrus Experiment, 1987-1993
Participants: France, Germany, United Kingdom
- SUbsonic aircraft: Contrail & Clouds Effects Special Study (SUCCESS) 1996
“We plan to better determine the radiative properties of cirrus clouds and of contrails so that satellite observations can better determine their impact on Earth’s radiation budget. We hope to determine how cirrus clouds form, whether the exhaust from subsonic aircraft presently affects the formation of cirrus clouds, and if the exhaust does affect the clouds whether the changes induced are of climatological significance. We seek to pave the way for future studies by developing and testing several new instruments. We also plan to better determine the characteristics of gaseous and particulate exhaust products from subsonic aircraft and their evolution in the region near the aircraft.“
- In Situ Observations of Particles in Jet Aircraft Exhausts and Contrails for Different Sulfur-containing Fuels, 1996
- Global Warming and Ice Ages – Prospects for Physics-Based Modulation of Global Change, Edward Teller, Lowell Wood, Roderick Hyde. 1997
“We expect that introduction of scattering-optimized alumina particles into the stratosphere may well be overall competitive with use of sulfur oxides; alumina particles offer a distinctly different environmental impact profile.”
- First Direct Sulfuric Acid Detection in the Exhaust Plume of a Jet Aircraft in Flight, 1998
- Dilution of Aircraft Exhaust Plumes at Cruise Altitudes, 1998
- Long-Range Weather Prediction And Prevention of Climate Catastrophes – A Status Report. Edward Teller, Lowell Wood, Roderick Hyde. 1999
- Ultrafine Particle Size Distributions Measured in Aircraft Exhaust Plumes, 2000
- In Vitro Toxicity of Aluminum Nanoparticles in Rat Alveolar Macrophages, 2001
- Regional Variations in U.S. Diurnal Temperature Range for the 11–14 September 2001 Aircraft Groundings: Evidence of Jet Contrail Influence on Climate, 2004
- Active Climate Stabilization – Practical Physics-Based Approaches to Prevention of Climate Change. Edward Teller, Lowell Wood, Roderick Hyde.
- Particles and Cirrus Clouds (PAZI-2) Final Report, 2004
- ATM Contrail Mitigation Options Environmental Study 2005
And the list goes on:
Unless We Learn Our History, We’re Doomed to Repeat It
Preface: I am a patriotic American who loves my country. I was born here, and lived here my entire life.
So why do I frequently point out America’s warts? Because – as the Founding Fathers and Supreme Court judges have explained – we can only make America better if we honestly examine her shortcomings. After all:
“Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.”
Only when Americans can honestly look at our weaknesses can we become stronger. If we fail to do so, history will repeat …
While Americans rightly condemn the Nazis as monstrous people, we don’t know that America played both sides … both fighting and supporting the Nazis.
Americans also aren’t aware that the Nazis were – in part – inspired by anti-semites in America.
Large American banks – and George W. Bush’s grandfather – financed the Nazis.
American manufacturing companies were big supporters of the Nazis. here are 6 historical examples …
(1) IBM. CNET reports:
IBM has responded to questions about its relationship with the Nazis largely by characterizing the information as old news.
“The fact that Hollerith equipment manufactured by (IBM’s German unit) Dehomag was used by the Nazi administration has long been known and is not new information,” IBM representative Carol Makovich wrote in an e-mail interview. “This information was published in 1997 in the IEEE Annals of the History of Computing and in 1998 in Washington Jewish Week.”
IBM also defended Chairman Thomas Watson for his dealings with Hitler and his regime.
On September 13, 1939, The New York Times reports on Page 1 that 3 million Jews are going to be “immediately removed” from Poland, and they appear to be candidates for “physical extermination.” On September 9, the German managers of IBM Berlin send a letter to Thomas Watson with copy to staff in Geneva via phone that, due to the “situation,” they need high-speed alphabetizing equipment. IBM wanted no paper trail, so an oral agreement was made, passed from New York to Geneva to Berlin, and those alphabetizers were approved by Watson, personally, before the end of the month.
That month he also approved the opening of a new Europe-wide school for Hollerith technicians in Berlin. And at the same time he authorized a new German-based subsidiary in occupied Poland, with a printing plant across the street from the Warsaw Ghetto at 6 Rymarska Street. It produced some 15 million punch cards at that location, the major client of which was the railroad.
We have a similar example involving Romania in 1941, and The Sunday Times has actually placed the IBM documents up on their Web site…. When Nazi Germany went into France, IBM built two new factories to supply the Nazi war machine. This is the 1941-’42 era, in Vichy, France, which was technically neutral. When Germany invaded Holland in May 1940, IBM rushed a brand-new subsidiary into occupied Holland. And it even sent 132 million punch cards in 1941, mainly from New York, to support the Nazi activity there. Holland had the highest rate of Jewish extermination in all of Europe; 72 percent of Jews were killed in Holland, compared to 24 percent in France, where the machines did not operate successfully.
When Hitler came to power in 1933, his desire to destroy European Jewry was so ambitious an enterprise, it required the resources of a computer. But in 1933 no computer existed. What did exist was the Hollerith punch-card system. It was invented by a German-American in Buffalo, New York, for the Census Bureau. This punch-card system could store all the information about individuals, places, products, inventories, schedules, in the holes that were punched or not punched in columns and rows.
The Hollerith system reduced everything to number code. Over time, the IBM alphabetizers could convert this code to alphabetical information. IBM made constant improvements for their Nazi clients.
Our entry was of course precipitated by the bombing of Pearl Harbor on December 7. Shortly before that, with sudden new trading-with-the-enemy regulations in force–this is October 1941–Watson issued a cable to all IBM’s European subsidiaries, saying in effect: “Don’t tell us what you’re doing and don’t ask us any questions.” He didn’t say, “Don’t send machines into concentration camps.” He didn’t say, “Stop organizing the military forces of Nazi Germany.” He didn’t say, “Don’t undertake anything to harm innocent civilians.”
He then bifurcated the management of IBM Europe–one manager in Geneva, named Werner Lier, and the other one in New York, in his office, named J.L. Schotte. So all communications went from Switzerland to New York. Ultimately there was a Hollerith Department called Hollerith Abteilung–German for department–in almost every concentration camp. Remember, the original Auschwitz tattoo was an IBM number.
IBM put the blitz in blitzkrieg. The whole war effort was organized on Hollerith machines from 1933 to 1945. This is when information technology comes to warfare. At the same time, IBM was supporting the entire German war machine directly from New York until the fall of 1941 ….
IBM did more than just sell equipment. Watson and IBM controlled the unique technical magic of Hollerith machines. They controlled the monopoly on the cards and the technology. And they were the ones that had to custom-design even the paper forms and punch cards–they were custom-designed for each specific purpose. That included everything form counting Jews to confiscating bank accounts, to coordinating trains going into death camps, to the extermination by labor campaign.
That’s why even the paper forms in the prisoner camps had Hollerith notations and numbered fields checked. They were all punched in. For example, IBM had to agree with their Nazi counterparts that Code 6 in the concentration camps was extermination. Code 1 was released, Code 2 was transferred, Code 3 was natural death, Code 4 was formal execution, Code 5 was suicide. Code 7 was escape. Code 6 was extermination.
All of the money and all the machines from all these operations was claimed by IBM as legitimate business after the war. The company used its connections with the State Department and the Pentagon to recover all the machines and all the bank accounts. They never said, “We do not want this blood money.” They wanted it all.
(2) Standard Oil. The Nazi air force – the Luftwaffe – needed tetraethyl lead gas in order to get their planes off the ground. Standard Oil sold tetraethyl to the Nazis.
After WWII began, the English became angry about U.S. shipments of strategic materials to Nazi Germany. So Standard changed the registration of their entire fleet to Panamanian to avoid British search or seizure. These ships continued to carry oil to the Nazis.
(3) Ford. Ford made cars for the Nazis. Wikipedia notes:
Ford continued to do business with Nazi Germany, including the manufacture of war materiel. Beginning in 1940, with the requisitioning of between 100 and 200 French POWs to work as slave laborers, Ford-Werke contravened Article 31 of the 1929 Geneva Convention. At that time, which was before the U.S. entered the War and still had full diplomatic relations with Nazi Germany, Ford-Werke was under the control of the Ford Motor Company. The number of slave laborers grew as the war expanded ….
(And see discussion under GM, below.)
Wikipedia also points out that Henry Ford was one of the world’s biggest anti-semites … inspiring Hitler, Himmler and other high-level Nazis:
In Germany, Ford’s anti-Semitic articles from The Dearborn Independent were issued in four volumes, cumulatively titled The International Jew, the World’s Foremost Problem published by Theodor Fritsch, founder of several anti-Semitic parties and a member of the Reichstag. In a letter written in 1924, Heinrich Himmler described Ford as “one of our most valuable, important, and witty fighters.” Ford is the only American mentioned in Mein Kampf. Adolf Hitler wrote, “only a single great man, Ford, [who], to [the Jews’] fury, still maintains full independence…[from] the controlling masters of the producers in a nation of one hundred and twenty millions.” Speaking in 1931 to a Detroit News reporter, Hitler said he regarded Ford as his “inspiration,” explaining his reason for keeping Ford’s life-size portrait next to his desk. Steven Watts wrote that Hitler “revered” Ford, proclaiming that “I shall do my best to put his theories into practice in Germany,” and modeling the Volkswagen, the people’s car, on the Model T.
Grand Cross of the German Eagle, an award bestowed on Ford by Nazi Germany
James D. Mooney, vice-president of overseas operations for General Motors, received a similar medal, the Merit Cross of the German Eagle, First Class.
Testifying at Nuremberg, convicted Hitler Youth leader Baldur von Schirach who, in his role as military governor of Vienna deported 65,000 Jews to camps in Poland, stated,
The decisive anti-Semitic book I was reading and the book that influenced my comrades was … that book by Henry Ford, “The International Jew.” I read it and became anti-Semitic. The book made a great influence on myself and my friends because we saw in Henry Ford the representative of success and also the representative of a progressive social policy.
(4) GM. The Washington Post reports:
“General Motors was far more important to the Nazi war machine than Switzerland,” said Bradford Snell, who has spent two decades researching a history of the world’s largest automaker. “Switzerland was just a repository of looted funds. GM was an integral part of the German war effort. The Nazis could have invaded Poland and Russia without Switzerland. They could not have done so without GM.”
Both General Motors and Ford insist that they bear little or no responsibility for the operations of their German subsidiaries, which controlled 70 percent of the German car market at the outbreak of war in 1939 and rapidly retooled themselves to become suppliers of war materiel to the German army.
But documents discovered in German and American archives show a much more complicated picture. In certain instances, American managers of both GM and Ford went along with the conversion of their German plants to military production at a time when U.S. government documents show they were still resisting calls by the Roosevelt administration to step up military production in their plants at home.
When American GIs invaded Europe in June 1944, they did so in jeeps, trucks and tanks manufactured by the Big Three motor companies in one of the largest crash militarization programs ever undertaken. It came as an unpleasant surprise to discover that the enemy was also driving trucks manufactured by Ford and Opel — a 100 percent GM-owned subsidiary — and flying Opel-built warplanes ….
The relationship of Ford and GM to the Nazi regime goes back to the 1920s and 1930s, when the American car companies competed against each other for access to the lucrative German market.
In 1935, GM agreed to build a new plant near Berlin to produce the aptly named “Blitz” truck, which would later be used by the German army for its blitzkreig attacks on Poland, France and the Soviet Union. German Ford was the second-largest producer of trucks for the German army after GM/Opel, according to U.S. Army reports.
The importance of the American automakers went beyond making trucks for the German army. The Schneider report, now available to researchers at the National Archives, states that American Ford agreed to a complicated barter deal that gave the Reich increased access to large quantities of strategic raw materials, notably rubber. Author Snell says that Nazi armaments chief Albert Speer told him in 1977 that Hitler “would never have considered invading Poland” without synthetic fuel technology provided by General Motors.
As war approached, it became increasingly difficult for U.S. corporations like GM and Ford to operate in Germany without cooperating closely with the Nazi rearmament effort. Under intense pressure from Berlin, both companies took pains to make their subsidiaries appear as “German” as possible. In April 1939, for example, German Ford made a personal present to Hitler of 35,000 Reichsmarks in honor of his 50th birthday, according to a captured Nazi document.
Documents show that the parent companies followed a conscious strategy of continuing to do business with the Nazi regime, rather than divest themselves of their German assets. Less than three weeks after the Nazi occupation of Czechoslovakia in March 1939, GM Chairman Alfred P. Sloan defended this strategy as sound business practice, given the fact that the company’s German operations were “highly profitable.”
After the outbreak of war in September 1939, General Motors and Ford became crucial to the German military, according to contemporaneous German documents and postwar investigations by the U.S. Army. James Mooney, the GM director in charge of overseas operations, had discussions with Hitler in Berlin two weeks after the German invasion of Poland.
Typewritten notes by Mooney show that he was involved in the partial conversion of the principal GM automobile plant at Russelsheim to production of engines and other parts for the Junker “Wunderbomber,” a key weapon in the German air force, under a government-brokered contract between Opel and the Junker airplane company. Mooney’s notes show that he returned to Germany the following February for further discussions with Luftwaffe commander Hermann Goering and a personal inspection of the Russelsheim plant.
Mooney’s involvement in the conversion of the Russelsheim plant undermines claims by General Motors that the American branch of the company had nothing to do with the Nazi rearmament effort.
At GM and Ford plants in Germany, reliance on forced labor [from concentration camp inmates] increased.
In a court submission, American Ford acknowledges that Iwanowa and others were “forced to endure a sad and terrible experience” at its Cologne plant ….
Ford has backed away from its initial claim that it did not profit in any way from forced labor at its Cologne plant.
Mel Weiss, an American attorney for Iwanowa, argues that American Ford received “indirect” profits from forced labor at its Cologne plant because of the overall increase in the value of German operations during the war. He notes that Ford was eager to demand compensation from the U.S. government after the war for “losses” due to bomb damage to its German plants and therefore should also be responsible for any benefits derived from forced labor.
Similar arguments apply to General Motors, which was paid $32 million by the U.S. government for damages sustained to its German plants.
(5) Kodak. During World War Two, Kodak’s German branch also used slave laborers from concentration camps. Several of their other European branches did heavy business with the Nazi government.
And Wilhelm Keppler – one of Hitler’s top economic advisers – had deep ties in Kodak. When Nazism began, Keppler advised Kodak and several other U.S. companies that they’d benefit by firing all of their Jewish employees.
(6) Coca Cola. Coke made soda for the Nazis. Fanta was specifically invented for Nazi-era Germans.
Leading American financiers Rockefeller, Carnegie and Harriman also funded Nazi eugenics programs.
And the U.S. government actively backed the Nazis in Ukraine 70 years ago.
Inspired By America
As noted above, Hitler and his top henchmen were inspired by Henry Ford’s writings.
According to the San Francisco Chronicle, the idea of killing Jews, communists and gypsies in gas chambers originated in the U.S. … not Germany.
And Nazis were also apparently inspired by America’s treatment of Native Americans. Specifically, retired Major in the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General Corps, Todd E. Pierce – who researched and reviewed the complete records of military commissions held during the Civil War and stored at the National Archives in Washington, D.C. as part of his assignment in the Office of Chief Defense Counsel, Office of Military Commissions – notes:
Stories of the American conquest of Native Americans with its solution of placing them on reservations were particularly popular in Germany early in the Twentieth Century including with Adolf Hitler.
Finally, the Nazis copied American propaganda techniques.