Washington Tries to Break BRICS —Rape of Brazil Begins

 

Brazil, August 2016: Another US-Coup d’état organized by its Washington rogue régime: It was about setting up the new US-vassal Brazilian President: Michel Temer (done) and “privatize” aka steal Brazil state’s owned assets (oil, water, electricity belonging to the Brazilian people) for the benefit of the Wall Street and London City bankster cabal: More of the same as the ongoing Washington coup-d’état campaign-spree goes on.

This article was written by F. William Engdahl exclusively for the online magazine  New Eastern Outlook under the title:  Washington tries to break BRICS —Rape of Brazil Begins

“Washington’s regime change machinery has for the time being succeeded in removing an important link in the alliance of large emerging nations by railroading through a Senate impeachment of the duly elected President [Washington’s new color revolution aka coup d’état],  Dilma Rousseff. On August 31 her Vice President Michel Temer was sworn in as President. In his first speech as president, the cynical Temer called for a government of ‘national salvation,’ asking for the trust of the Brazilian people. He indicated plans to reform, and has also signaled his intention to overhaul the pension system and labor laws, and cut public spending, all themes beloved of Wall Street banks, of the International Monetary Fund and their Washington Consensus. Now after less than three weeks at the job, Michel Temer has unveiled plans for wholesale privatization of Brazil’s crown jewels, starting with oil. The planned Wall Street rape of Brazil is about to begin (emphasis throughtout: Geopoliticalnews.)

It’s important to keep in mind that elected President Rousseff was not convicted or even formally charged with any concrete act of corruption, even though the pro-oligarchy mainstream Brazil media, led by O’Globo Group of the billionaire Roberto Irineu Marinho, ran a media defamation campaign creating the basis to railroad Dilma Rousseff into formal impeachment before the Senate. The shift took place after the opposition PMDB [Brazilian Democratic Movement Party] party of Temer on March 29 broke their coalition with Rousseff’s Workers’ Party, as accusations of Petrobras-linked corruption were made against Dilma Rousseff and former president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.

On August 31, 61 Senators voted to remove her while 20 voted against removal. The formal charge was ‘manipulation of the state budget’ before the 2014 elections to hide the size of the deficit. She vehemently denies the charge. Indeed, the Senate issued its own expert report that concluded there was ‘no indication of direct or indirect action by Dilma’ in any illegal budgetary maneuvers. According to the Associated Press, ‘Independent auditors hired by Brazil’s Senate said in a report released Monday that suspended President Dilma Rousseff didn’t engage in the creative accounting she was charged with at her impeachment trial.’ Under an honest system that would have ended the impeachment then and there. Not in Brazil.

In effect, she was impeached for the dramatic decline in the Brazilian economy, a decline deliberately pushed along as US credit rating agencies downgraded Brazilian debt, and international and mainstream Brazilian media kept the Petrobras corruption allegations in the spotlight. Importantly, the Senate did not ban her from office for 8 years as Washington had hoped, and she has promised an electoral return. The Washington —steered Michel Temer has until end of 2018 to deliver Brazil to Temer‘s foreign masters before his term legally ends.

Notably, Temer himself was accused of corruption in the Petrobras state oil company investigations. He reportedly asked the then-head of the transportation unit of Petróleo Brasileiro SA in 2012 to arrange illegal campaign contributions to Temer’s party which was running a Washington-backed campaign to oust Rousseff’s Workers’ Party. Then this June, only days into his serving as acting president, two of Temer’s own chosen ministers, including the Minister of Transparency, were forced to resign in response to allegations that they sought to subvert the probe into massive graft at Petrobras.

One of the two, Temer’s extremely close ally Romero Jucá, was caught on tape plotting Dilma’s impeachment as a way to shut down the ongoing Petrobras corruption investigation, as well as indicating that Brazil’s military, the media, and the courts were all participants in the impeachment plotting.

In brief, the removal of Dilma Rousseff and her Workers’ Party after 13 years in Brazil’s leadership was a new form of Color Revolution from Washington [same neocon procedure as ususal,] one we might call a judicial coup by corrupt judges and congressmen. Of the 594 members of the Congress, as the Toronto Globe and Mail reported, ‘318 are under investigation or face charges’ while their target, President Rousseff, ‘herself faces no allegation of financial impropriety.’

The day after the first Lower House impeachment vote in April, a leading member of Temer’s PSDP party, Senator Aloysio Nunes, went to Washington, in a mission organized by former Bill Clinton Secretary of State Madeline Albright’s lobbying firm, Albright Stonebridge Group. Nunes, as president of the Brazilian Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee, has repeatedly advocated that Brazil once again move closer to an alliance with the US and UK.

Madeline Albright, a Director of the leading US [neocon] think-tank, Council on Foreign Relations, is also chair of the prime US Government “Color Revolution” NGO, the National Democratic Institute (NDI). Nothing fishy here, or? Nunes reportedly went to Washington to rally backing for Temer and the unfolding judicial coup against Rousseff.

A key player from the side of Washington, Rousseff’s de facto political executioner, was, once again, Vice President Joe Biden, the ‘Dick Cheney’ dirty operator-in-chief in the Obama Administration.

Biden’s fateful Brazil trip

In May, 2013, US Vice President Joe Biden made a fateful visit to Brazil to meet with President Rousseff. In January 2011 Rousseff had succeeded her Workers’ Party mentor, Luis Inacio Lula da Silva, or Lula, who constitutionally was limited to two consecutive terms. Biden went to Brazil to discuss oil with the new President. Relations between Lula and Washington had chilled as Lula backed Iran against US sanctions and came economically closer to China.

In late 2007 Petrobras had discovered what was estimated to be a mammoth new basin of high-quality oil on the Brazilian Continental Shelf offshore in the Santos Basin. In total the Brazil Continental Shelf could contain over 100 billion barrels of oil, transforming the country into a major world oil and gas power, something Exxon and Chevron, the US oil giants wanted to control.”

In an article published in May this year,  U.S. corporations target Brazil’s oil industry, German Economy News (Deutsche Wirtschaftsnachrichten) reported: “Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff is nearing impeachment. Brazilian politicians have contacted influential US senators in Washington. They are hoping for an alliance. The U.S. corporations want to gain influence on the Brazilian oil sector.” Doesn’t this remind us of Iraq, Egypt, Libya, Ukraine and Yemen? A familiar six-step U.S.-takeover isn’t it? 

1. Activate U.S.-NGOs on the ground
2. Promote your “liberation” message via social media channels: Twitter and Facebook
3. Don’t forget your flash-mobs (think of Cologne 2015 Newyear’s eve)
4. Ad a touch of local “liberating” terrorism
5. Enhance, if not sufficient, with Academi hired mercenaries (Kiev Maidan vintage)

Bravo! You’ve just created your perfect color revolution and/or coup d’état. You now may replace the local leadership with your “democratically re-elected” pro-Washington neocon goons! Do not forget to round off your “democratization undertaking” with ongoing and sufficient main stream media propaganda (Geopoliticalnews.)

 

Engdhal goes on to write: “In 2009, according to leaked US diplomatic cables published by Wikileaks, the US Consulate in Rio wrote that Exxon and Chevron were trying in vain to alter a law advanced by Rousseff’s mentor and predecessor in her Brazilian Workers’ Party , President Luis Inacio Lula da Silva. That 2009 law made the state-owned Petrobras chief operator of all offshore oil blocs. Washington and the US oil giants were not at all pleased at losing control over potentially the largest new world oil discovery in decades.

Lula had not only pushed ExxonMobil and Chevron out of the controlling position in favor of the state-owned Petrobras, but he also opened Brazilian oil exploration to the Chinese, since 2009 a core member of the BRICS developing nations with Brazil, Russia, India and South Africa.

In December, 2010 in one of his last acts as President, Lula oversaw signing of a deal between the Brazilian-Spanish energy company Repsol and China’s state-owned Sinopec. Sinopec formed a joint venture, Repsol Sinopec Brasil, investing more than $7.1 billion towards Repsol Brazil. Already in 2005 Lula had approved formation of Sinopec International Petroleum Service of Brazil Ltd as part of a new strategic alliance between China and Brazil.

In 2012 in a joint exploration drilling, Repsol Sinopec Brasil, Norway’s Statoil and Petrobras made a major new discovery in Pão de Açúcar, the third in block BM-C-33, which includes the Seat and Gávea, the latter one of the world’s 10 largest discoveries in 2011. USA and British oil majors were nowhere to be seen.

Biden’s task was to sound out Lula’s successor, Rousseff, about reversing that exclusion of US major oil companies in favor of the Chinese. Biden also met with leading energy companies in Brazil including Petrobras.

While little was publicly said, Rousseff refused to reverse the 2009 oil law in a way that would be suitable to Biden, Washington and US oil majors. Days after Biden’s visit came the Snowden NSA revelations that the US had also spied on Rousseff and top officials of Petrobras. She was livid and denounced the Obama Administration that September before the UN General Assembly for violating international law. She cancelled a planned Washington visit in protest. After that, US-Brazil relations took a dive.

After his May 2013 talks with Rousseff, Biden clearly gave her the kiss of death.

Before Biden’s May 2013 visit Dilma Rousseff had 70% of popularity rating. Less than two weeks after Biden left Brazil, nationwide protests by a very well-organized group called Movimento Passe Livre, over a nominal 10 cent bus fare increase, brought the country virtually to a halt and turned very violent. The protests bore the hallmark of typical “Color Revolution” or Twitter social media destabilizations that seem to follow Biden wherever he makes a presence. Within weeks Rousseff’s popularity plummeted to 30%.

Washington had clearly sent a signal that Rousseff had to change course or face serious problems. The Washington regime change machine, including its entire array of financial warfare operations ranging from a leaked PwC audit of Petrobras to Wall Street credit rating agency Standard & Poors’ downgrade of Brazil public debt to junk in September 2015, went into full action to remove Rousseff, a key backer of the BRICS New Development Bank and of an independent national development strategy for Brazil.

Selling the Crown Jewels

The man who has now manipulated himself into the Presidency, the corrupt Michel Temer, worked as an informer for Washington the entire time. In documents released by Wikileaks, it was revealed that Temer was an informant to US intelligence since at least 2006, via telegrams to the US embassy in Brazil classified by the Embassy as “sensitive” and “for official use only.”

Washington’s man in Brazil, Temer, has lost no time appeasing his patrons in Wall Street. Even as acting President this May, Temer named Henrique Meirelles as Minister of Finance and Social Security. Meirelles, a Harvard-educated former President of the Brazilian central bank, was President of BankBoston in the USA until 1999, and was with that bank in 1985 when it was found guilty of failing to report $1.2 billion in illegal cash transfers with Swiss banks. Meirelles is now overseeing the planned selloff of Brazil’s “crown jewels” to international investors, a move that is intended to gravely undercut the power of the state in the economy. Another of Temer’s key economic advisers is Paulo Leme, former IMF economist and now Goldman Sachs Managing Director of Emerging Markets Research. Wall Street is in the middle of the Temer-led economic rape of Brazil (emphasis throughout Geopoliticalnews.)

On September 13, Temer’s government unveiled a massive privatization program with the cynically misleading comment, ‘It is clear the public sector cannot move forward alone on these projects. We are counting on the private sector.’ He omitted to say the private sector he meant were his patrons.

Temer unveiled plans that would complete the country’s largest privatization in decades. Conveniently, the process us to be completed by end of 2018, just before Temer’s term must end. The influential US-Brazil Business Council detailed the privatization list on its website. The US-Brazil Business Council was founded forty years ago by Citigroup, Monsanto, Coca-Cola, Dow Chemicals and other US multinationals.

Tenders for the first round of concessions will be issued before the end of this year. They will include privatization of four airports and two port terminals, all auctioned in the first quarter of 2017. Other concessions include five highways, one rail line, bidding on small oil blocks and a later round for large, mainly offshore, oil development blocks. As well the government will sell selected assets currently controlled by its Minerals Research Department plus six electric power distributors and three water treatment facilities.

The heart of his planned privatization are, not surprisingly, Joe Biden’s coveted state oil and gas companies along with chunks of the state Eletrobrás power company. Temer plans to get as much as $24 billion from the selloff. Fully $11 billion of the total are to come from sale of key oil and gas state holdings. Of course, when state assets such as huge oil and gas resources are sold off to foreign interests in what will clearly be a distress sale, it is a one-off deal. State oil and gas or electric power projects generate a continuing revenue stream many times any one-off privatization gains. Brazil’s economy is the ultimate loser in such privatization. Wall Street banks and multinationals are of course, as planned, the winner.

On September 19-21, according to the US-Brazil Business Council website, the Brazilian government’s key ministers for infrastructure including Minister Moreira Franco; Minister Fernando Bezerra Coelho Filho, Minister of Mines and Energy; and Minister Mauricio Quintella Lessa, Minister of Transport, Ports and Civil Aviation, will be in New York City to meet with Wall Street ‘infrastructure investors.’

This is Washington’s way, the way of the Wall Street Gods of Money, as I title one of my books. First, destroy any national leadership intent on genuine national development such as Dilma Rousseff. Replace them with a vassal regime willing to do anything for money, including selling the crown jewels of their own nation as people like Anatoli Chubais did in Russia in the 1990’s under Boris Yeltsin’s ‘shock therapy.’ As reward for his behavior, Chubais today sits on the advisory board of JP MorganChase. What will Temer and associates get for their efforts remains to be seen. Washington for now has broken one of the BRICS that ultimately threaten her global hegemony. It is not likely to bring any lasting success if recent history is any guide.”

F. William Engdahl

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”
http://journal-neo.org/2016/09/24/washington-tries-to-break-brics-rape-of-brazil-begins/

Additional Reading:

• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy (Part One)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy (Part Two)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | September 11th 2001 and the Rise of U.S. Neocons (Part Three)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Preemptive Strike & Neocons Mainstream Media Propaganda (Part Four)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Oligarchy and Neocons Destructive Agenda (Part Five)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Oligarchy and Neocons Destructive Agenda (Part Six: coming soon)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | U.S.-NATO Serbian Genocide (Part Seven: planned)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Iraq the War for Oil and Control of the Middle East (Part Eight: planned)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Iraq the War for OIL and Control of the Middle East (Part Nine: planned)

U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Oligarchs and Neocons’ Destructive Agenda (Part Five)

“Those who corrupt the public mind are just as evil as those who steal from the public purse.” —Adlai Stevenson | 1900 — 1965 | 23rd Vice President of the United States

In Part One, Part Two, Part Three and Part Four of this series, we saw how the U.S. has become a contested (by Russia and China) geopolitical Hegemon. We reviewed the illegal attacks and following wars on Serbian Kosovo and Iraq: Perfect examples of the neocons’ favorite military doctrine of preemptive strike. We analyzed the irrefutable evidence of U.S.-neocon mainstream media propaganda backed up by some pristine U.S. publications such as: The New York Times, The Washington Post, or even the U.S. Presidency.

John Pilger once wrote: “Journalism is the first casualty of war,” and mainstream Western news outlets have become as lethal and war-mongering as former Soviet Union (USSR) and German Democratic Republic (GDR) propaganda tools. Just like the USSR (Part Four) was defending its crumbling empire, the West has jumped on the propaganda bandwagon and rehypothicated the notion of a democratic state into a daunting Wagnerian Leitmotiv of “freedom, liberation and reform.” An alleged “democratization” Zeitgeist has followed as this neocon doctrine has literally been shoved down the throats of countries like Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt and Ukraine and this, regardless of local national opinions and interests.

In his wonderful work: America’s Deadliest Export: Democracy, The Truth About US Foreign Policy and Everything Else, William Blum blows off the neocon “democracy and freedom narrative” to expose the real geopolitical and geofinancial situation on the ground:  “. . . [B]ut freedom [in Iraq] indeed reign[s] — for the great multinationals to extract everything they can from Iraq’s resources and labor without the hindrance of [Iraqi] public interest laws, environmental regulations, or worker protections (emphasis Geopoliticalnews).”

Mulling over these last three quotes and comparing them with the first GDR one, helps put things into perspective. Thus, one may wonder how educated journalists like Thomas Friedman, Michael Gerson and David Brooks could churn out such literary neocon gobbledygook and gibberish. What could such book authors and columnist luminaries teach their kids about character, honesty and truth? Could these political point-scoring neocon stooges have become pathological liars suffering mythomania? One day, they too will have joined the shameful and despicable group of propagandists and will have added their names to a list of fascist “collaborateurs” (French euphemism for traitors) who, just like the Vichy deserters, will have contributed to the shame, disgrace and destruction of U.S. society and its citizens.

Julian Casablanca recently asked world expert Canadian American Dr. Henry Giroux “What entities are more powerful banks or nations?” Dr. Henry Giroux answered: “I think that now, nations are controlled by financial interests: Hedge funds and banks clearly control the U.S. Government. If you look at the number of lobbyists auditing any person in Congress, you know it is just overwhelming. Policies are basically written for corporations, I think the notion of State, of Governance being something that is being representative of [the] people, it is not just simply a lie, not just simply a myth, it is a distortion and complete misrepresentation and I will give you an example: Princeton did a study, a few years ago, and looked at policies over a 30 — 40 years period: 95% of those policies had nothing to do with the American People. Nothing! And Princeton concluded . . . that we no longer live in a democracy, we live in an oligarchy: Oligarchy meaning a government controlled by the rich (emphasis throughout Geopoliticalnews).”

Geopoliticalnews often uses three expressions to describe our 21^st Century neocon Nazi fascist power grab takeover:

• Plutocrat | Cambridge Dictionary: “Someone who becomes powerful because they are rich.” A heavy hitter, authoritarian, autocrat, autocratic, big beast, despot, dictator, dictatorial, establishment, figurehead, grey eminence, heavy, potentate, power broker, strongman, tyrant, voiceless.
• Oligarch | Dictionary.com: “A form of government in which all power is vested in a few persons” or “In a dominant class or clique; government by the few”; “A state or organization so ruled”; “The persons or class so ruling.”
• Kleptocrat | Merriam-Webster Dictionary: “Government by those who seek chiefly status and personal gain at the expense of the governed.”
  

Neocons promote:

• National socialism (born in pre-WWII Germany as National Sozialismus
• Financial feudalism led by oligarchs and plutocrats
• Pro-Corporate trade “partnership campaigns”such as TTIP, TPP, NAFTA, CETA and TISA
• Neo-Stalinism propaganda for wealthy oligarchs
  
• Lawless and permissive liberalism or destruction of traditional Judeo-Christian societal structures
• Removal of God and His laws, or any signs of His sovereignty as Creator and Ruler of the universe and mankind
• One world borderless plutocracy (New World Order)
• Global theft of countries’ assets  replaced by worthless fiat paper money issued by the private central bankster criminality of the worst kind: FED (the U.S. Federal Reserve), BOE (Bank of England), ECB (European Central Bank), BOJ (Bank of Japan), World Bank, IMF (International Monetary Fund), and last but not least the BIS: Bank of International Settlements | Basel, Switzerland | The Central Bank of all Central Banks.

Are our societies becoming dehumanized, totalitarian, crippled by environmental disasters and cataclysmic decline of traditional societal values? Is this 21^st century unfolding in front of our very eyes promoting the shapes of a cacotopian society as described in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four novel?

Welcome to 21^st century dystopian neo-Stalinist socialist capitalism

Bruno Gebarski

Additional Reading:

• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy (Part One)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy (Part Two)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | September 11th 2001 and the Rise of U.S. Neocons (Part Three)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Preemptive Strike & Neocons Mainstream Media Propaganda (Part Four)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Oligarchy and Neocons Destructive Agenda (Part Five)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Oligarchy and Neocons Destructive Agenda (Part Six: coming soon)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | U.S.-NATO Serbian Genocide (Part Seven: planned)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Iraq the War for Oil and Control of the Middle East (Part Eight: planned)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Iraq the War for OIL and Control of the Middle East (Part Nine: planned)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Preemptive Strike & Neocons Mainstream Media Propaganda (Part Four)

In Part One, Part Two and Part Three of this series, we saw how the U.S. has become the Unipolar geopolitical Hegemon of our 21^st Century although threatened by regional powers China and Russia. We compared conservatives and neoconservatives policies and observed how the military doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) has been replaced by the post 9/11 neocon belief of “preemptive strike.”

Growing up in France in the early 70’s, I often listened to La Voix de la Russie (The Voice of Russia) and its daily spew of communist propaganda that I found amusing. Why? Because my family comes from Poland: Mom and Dad (born in Grenoble and Paris) had both Polish Parents. I once recall a radio-guest being asked about “alleged” shootings and deaths of German Democratic Republic (GDR) citizens being caught trying to escape to the West. The GDR official replied: “This is Western Propaganda, the Berlin Wall is here to ‘protect’ GDR citizens from Westerners trying to ‘enter illegally’ into the German Democratic Republic (sic).”

What is actually atypical and preposterous is the fact that things have literally turned around one hundred per cent.  Similar to the former Soviet Union times, I am convinced that a new breed of propaganda has emerged: But this time, it comes from the West! Just like in the 70’s and 80’s the old Soviet Union was trying to “protect and defend” its crumbling empire, today’s Empire of Chaos (U.S., Britain and EU) is upholding its too-big-to-fail aka too-big-to-jail institutions via private Central Banks: FED, BOE, ECB and BOJ and a full array of financial policies, products and dicey skims:

• Quantitative Easing: QE
• Zero Interest Rate Policy: ZIRP
• Negative Interest Rest Policy: NIRP coming soon from the Federal Reserve?
• Global derivatives : 700 trillion USD in 2015
• Credit default swaps (CDS) and other exotic instruments: 1.5 quadrillion USD according BIS: Bank of International Settlement in Basel, Switzerland
• Drug trade money laundering (see also here and here)

Jacob Rothschild admits:

“The six months under review have seen [private central] bankers continuing what is surely the greatest experiment in monetary policy in the history of the whole world. We are therefore in uncharted waters and it is impossible to predict the unintended consequences of very low interest rates…” (see also here and here)

Witnessing how NATO has transformed itself, from a former Cold War defensive-asset into a war mongering neocon terror organization, one may just wonder at its horrific 78-day Serbian ethnic cleansing undertook in 1999 via the targeting of white Christian Serbs who did not pose any threat to Yugoslavia or NATO allies whatsoever.

During an interview by Andy Clark with Noam Chomsky, at the Amsterdam Forum on the 18^th of December 2005:”Terror and Iraq“, Chomsky replied: “. . . [A]lthough every sane person knows that [oil] was the reason, if Iraq had been producing pickles and lettuce, would they have been invaded? I mean, let’s be serious. Of course it’s oil.” It was a calling for U.S. President George Walker Bush and Britain’s Prime Minister Anthony Charles Lynton (Tony) Blair‘s “Messianic Mission” too, Chomsky went on to say: “Bring democracy to Iraq and immediately everyone had to leap on the democratization bandwagon and it began to be described as the most noble war in history and so on and so forth.“

And indeed, the mainstream media hogwash went on to spew even more neocon propaganda extraordinaire. I do apologize to my readers for this brief linguistic lesson but ordinär in German comes from the French ordinaire. “Extra-ordinär” then would mean “extra-vulgar” and/or “extra-offensive“, which would very well describe the inaccuracy, falsehood and deceit of the three following statements:

• This war [in Iraq] is the most important liberal, revolutionary U.S. democracy-building project since the Marshall Plan … It is one of the noblest things this country has ever attempted abroad.” —Thomas Friedman, New York Times foreign affairs analyst, November 2003
• “President Bush has placed human rights at the center of his foreign policy agenda in unprecedented way.” —Michael Gerson, columnist for the Washington Post, and former speech-writer for George W. Bush, 2007
• “[The war in Iraq] is one of the noblest endeavors the United States, or any great power, has ever undertaken.” —David Brooks, New York Times columnist (2007) as the nefarious neocon propaganda “bravo and sierra” went on unabated.
• And last but not least, the neocon propagandist in chief himself: Barack Hussein Obama adding his own version to it:

“This is an extraordinary achievement, (15:19) nearly nine years in the making. And today, we remember everything that you did to make it possible. … (32:35) Years from now, your legacy will endure. In the names of your fallen comrades etched on headstones at Arlington and the quiet memorials across our country. In the whispered words of admiration as you march in parades, and in the freedom of our children and grandchildren. And in the quiet of night, you will recall that your heart was once touched by fire. You will know that you answered when your country called; you served a cause greater than yourselves. You helped forge a just and lasting peace with Iraq, and among all nations. I could not be prouder of you, and America could not be prouder of you. God bless you all, God bless your families, and God bless the United States of America.” —U.S. President Barack Hussein Obama | December 14, 2011 | Fort Bragg, North Carolina, USA

*William Blum concludes: “”Does Mr. [Barack Hussein] Obama, the Peace Laureate, believe the words that come out of his mouth? Barack H. Obama believes only in being the president of the United States. It is the only strong belief the man holds. But freedom has indeed reigned — for the great multinationals to extract everything they can from Iraq’s resources and labor without the hindrance of [Iraqi] public interest laws, environmental regulations, or worker protections.” (emphasis Geopoliticalnews)

*Blum, William. “3.” America’s Deadliest Export Democracy: The Truth about US Foreign Policy and Everything Else. Cape Town: Best Red, 2013. p60. Print.

Let’s conclude briefly with the Iraq death toll and honor the Dads and Moms who are still mourning and grieving for the lost of their sons and daughters: Fathers and Mothers who have been given the U.S. Flag, as badge of honor, for having traded the lives of their kids: Potential children of God created in God’s Own Image: Genesis 1:26.

• As of November the 14th of 2014: 4.486 American Soldiers have died in Iraq
• According the Lancet Survey: 601.027 violent Iraqi deaths out of 654.965 excess deaths
• According the Opinion Research Business Survey: 1.033.000 deaths

Bruno Gebarski

 

Additional Reading:

• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy (Part One)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy (Part Two)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | September 11th 2001 and the Rise of U.S. Neocons (Part Three)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Preemptive Strike & Neocons Mainstream Media Propaganda (Part Four)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Preemptive Strike & Neocons Mainstream Media Propaganda (Part Five: in progress)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | U.S.-NATO Serbian Genocide (Part Six: planned)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Iraq the War for Oil and Control of the Middle East (Part Seven: planned)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Iraq the War for OIL and Control of the Middle East (Part Eight: planned)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | September 11th 2001 and the Rise of The U.S. Neocons (Part 3)

In Part One and Part Two of this series, we reviewed why the United States of America has become the geopolitical Hegemon of our 21^st Century. Rising powers China and Russia are threatening the geopolitical and geofinancial “command and control” neocon-led Empire of Chaos (as coined by Pepe Escobar) and forcing the U.S. to defend its US-Dollar Reserve Currency status with extraordinary and non-diplomatic means: Quantitative Easing or QE Zimbabwe style fiat paper money printing, color revolutions, coups d’états, war crimes, subversion, coercion and weapons of mass migration: Germany and Austria being the latest victims. However, China and the BRICS offer an array of geopolitical, financial and banking services providing the international community with a worthy alternative to both collapsing Petrodollar and US-Dollar:  

• BRICS: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa as an alternative to the Bretton Woods Western nations USD, GBP, EUR and ¥EN
• SCO: Shanghai Cooperation Organization as an alternative to NATO
• AIIB: Asian Infrastructure and Investment Bank as an alternative to the IMF
• CIPS: Chinese inter-banking payment system as an alternative to SWIFT
• Shanghai Gold Exchange: an alternative to the paper-fraud markets of London and New York
• CFFEX: China’s New, China Financial Future Exchange

It is also well worth noticing the entry of the Chinese Renminbi (CN¥ or Chinese Yuan) into the Special Drawing Right (SDR): the Elite currency club of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). As of October 1st of 2016, the Chinese Renminbi will have entered the privileged club of pristine world reserve currencies: US Dollar, Euro, British Pound and Japanese ¥en to become its fifth international reserve currency:

A few days back, we remembered September 11^th 2001 15h anniversary. We are still longing for the full disclosure of what really happened. Similar to President John F. Kennedy’s 1963 assassination in Dallas, we most likely will never find out. Nonetheless, we now have proof of 9/11’s Mainstream Media cover-up as well as strong evidence for a miniature nuclear implosion/detonation with the use of thermite.

9/11 remains the coup d’état par excellence : A terror attack applied upon the American Sheeple and the creation of a fictitious enemy the Establishment can adapt, relocate and rename at anytime: The perfect enactment of a self-made neocon catastrophe that rallied people internationally, emotionally and passionately behind a newly created brand of terror: Al Qaeda, ISIS, The Levant, IS, ISIL, The Islamist State, Daesh or Al Nusra. All should be considered the neocons’ “War on Terror trademark“; a mainstream propaganda tool easily sold to a Western crowd way too busy with ubiquitous Internet, smartphones or Britain’s Got Talent. After 9/11, Al Qaeda 2.0 or ISIS would follow. Trained mercenaries are backed up financially by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; they often follow the Wahhabi strain of Islam that produces so many ISIS militants: Thanks to Washington’s acquiescence.  An updated version of ISIS, The Islamic State, would follow in Syria after Russia and China refused a similar French-led NATO bombing on Libya.

The iniquitous 1999 US-NATO dismantling of Yugoslavia (that preceded 9/11) was followed by a 78-day NATO “humanitarian bombing” of Kosovo with the help of German co-conspirator. Kosovo did not pose any threat within Yugoslavia or to any members of the NATO alliance whatsoever: Thus a flagrant crime of aggression in violation of Article 2.4 of the UN Charter. As we shall see in the next installment (Part 5) Kosovo’s capture could have been on U.S. Pentagon’s drawing board for three main reasons:

• Control the Balkan pipeline energy-grid between Western Europe, Eurasia, and Russia
• Control the heroin Balkan route from Central Asia’s Golden Crescent (Afghanistan) to Europe and beyond
• Control South Eastern Europe with  1000 acres (3 km²) of U.S. military footprint: Camp Bondsteel

In a Global Research‘s article: Neocon 101: What do Neo-conservatives Believe? Global Research author asks the question: “What is the difference between a neoconservative and a conservative: Liberals first applied the ‘neo’ prefix to their comrades who broke ranks to become more conservative in the 1960s and 70s. The defectors remained more liberal on some domestic policy issues. But foreign policy stands have always defined neoconservatism. Where other conservatives favored détente and containment of the Soviet Union, neocons pushed direct confrontation, which became their raison d’être during the 1970s and 80’s.”

“Mutual Assured Destruction or mutually assured destruction (MAD) [was] a doctrine of military strategy and national security policy in which a full-scale use of nuclear weapons by two or more opposing sides would cause the complete annihilation of both the attacker and the defender … It was based on the theory of deterrence, which holds that the threat of using strong weapons was a military strategy” dear to President Regan during the Cold War era. Ronald Reagan mantra was “peace through strength“, “peace was the end; strength was the mean“: it was based on a policy of military détente and as much as possible entente cordiale. 

U.S. neocons have pushed aside the Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) doctrine to replace it with preemptive strike … Did you catch that? Preemptive strike…? The next installment (Part 4 of this series) will magnify the thought of “Preemptive Strike” and the nefariousness of these U.S. fascist neocons and their warmongering philosophy.

Beliefs: Conservatives	Beliefs: Neo Conservatives
MAD as Military deterrence	Preemptive military strike | war
Peace through strength	Use of U.S. unrivaled military power
Peace is the end, strength is the mean	Forcefully promote U.S. values around the world: color revolutions and coups d’états
Reservation about military intervention	Cultivation of a U.S. Empire (NGO propaganda)
Reservation about so called “nation building”	“Democratic” transformation of the Middle East (Iraq, Egypt, Libya and Syria)
Policy of détente and containment with Russia	Policy of aggression against Russia (NATO Anaconda-2016)
Multipolar world is supported	U.S. is the unchallenged superpower and “benevolent” global Hegemon
Potential U.S.-threats are appeased or contained	Potential U.S.-threats are confronted aggressively

In his blog-article “American Exceptionalism and the Election Made in Hell (Or Why I’d Vote for Trump Over Hillary)”, William Blum, author of America’s Deadliest Export: Democracy – The Truth About US Foreign Policy and Everything Else, writes:

“My main concern is foreign policy. American foreign policy is the greatest threat to world peace, prosperity, and the environment [emphasis Geopoliticalnews]. And when it comes to foreign policy, Hillary Clinton is a[n utter] disaster. From Iraq and Syria to Libya and Honduras the world is a much worse place because of her; so much so that I’d call her a war criminal who should be prosecuted. And not much better can be expected on domestic issues from this woman who was paid $675,000 by Goldman Sachs [fascist bankster cabal criminals] – one of the most reactionary, anti-social corporations in this sad world – for four speeches and even more than that in political donations in recent years. Add to that Hillary’s willingness to serve for six years on the board of Walmart while her husband was governor of Arkansas. Can we expect to change corporate behavior by taking their money?”

 Bruno Gebarski

Additional Reading:

• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy (Part One)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy (Part Two)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | September 11th 2001 and the Rise of U.S. Neocons (Part Three)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Preemptive Strike & Neocons Mainstream Media Propaganda (Part Four)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Oligarchy and Neocons Destructive Agenda (Part Five)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Oligarchy and Neocons Destructive Agenda (Part Six: coming soon)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | U.S.-NATO Serbian Genocide (Part Seven: planned)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Iraq the War for Oil and Control of the Middle East (Part Eight: planned)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Iraq the War for OIL and Control of the Middle East (Part Nine: planned)

 

 

Two Great Quotes from Caroll Quigley, a U.S. Neocon, Historian & Theorist

U.S. historian, theorist and neocon Caroll Quigley, who incidentally was President Bill Clinton’s mentor, provided us here with two brilliant quotes.

Quigley‘s first quote is on Financial Capitalism: Feudalism as financial system controlled by central banks’ oligarchs and plutocrats. Quote from his book: “Tragedy and Hope.”

Quigley‘s second quote is on America’s “Two Party System.” It is also a quote from his book: “Tragedy and Hope.”

 

Bruno Gebarski

Guest Article: “Trump’s Anti-Interventionism – Neocons Hate It As Anti-War Left Comes Around”

Original Link: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-22/trumps-anti-interventionism-neocons-hate-it-anti-war-left-comes-around

Submitted by John Walsh via LewRockwell.com,

Until recently the progressive mind has been resolutely closed and stubbornly frozen in place against all things Trump.

But cracks are appearing in the ice.  With increasing frequency over the last few months, some of the most thoughtful left and progressive figures have begun to speak favorably of aspects of Trump’s foreign policy.  Let us hear from these heretics, among them William Greider, Glen Ford, John Pilger, Jean Bricmont, Stephen F. Cohen and William Blum.  Their words are not to be construed as “endorsements,” but rather an acknowledgment of Trump’s anti-interventionist views, the impact those views are having and the alternative he poses to Hillary Clinton in the current electoral contest.

First, let’s consider the estimable William Greider, a regular contributor to The Nation and author of Secrets of the Temple.  He titled a recent article for the Nation, “Donald Trump Could be The Military Industrial Complex’s Worst Nightmare: The Republican Front Runner is Against Nation Building.  Imagine That.” 

Greider’s article is brief, and I recommend reading every precious word of it.  Here is but one quote: “Trump has, in his usual unvarnished manner, kicked open the door to an important and fundamental foreign-policy debate.”  And here is a passage from Trump’s interview with the Washington Post that Greider chooses to quote:

“‘I watched as we built schools in Iraq and they’d be blown up,’ Trump told the editors.  ‘And we’d build another one and it would get blown up. And we would rebuild it three times. And yet we can’t build a school in Brooklyn.… at what point do you say hey, we have to take care of ourselves. So, you know, I know the outer world exists and I’ll be very cognizant of that but at the same time, our country is disintegrating, large sections of it, especially in the inner cities.'”

Trump talks about building infrastructure for the inner cities, especially better schools for African American children, rather than bombing people of color halfway around the world!  That is hardly racism.  And it is not how the mainstream media wants us to think of The Donald.

Next, Glen Ford, the eloquent radical Left executive editor of Black Agenda Report, a superb and widely read outlet, penned an article in March 2016, with the following title: “Trump Way to the Left of Clinton on Foreign Policy – In Fact, He’s Damn Near Anti-Empire.” Ford’s piece is well worth reading in its entirety; here are just a few quotes :

“Trump has rejected the whole gamut of U.S. imperial war rationales, from FDR straight through to the present.”

 

“If Trump’s tens of millions of white, so-called ‘Middle American’ followers stick by him, it will utterly shatter the prevailing assumption that the American public favors maintenance of U.S. empire by military means.”

 

“Trump shows no interest in ‘spreading democracy,’ like George W. Bush, or assuming a responsibility to ‘protect’ other peoples from their own governments, like Barack Obama and his political twin, Hillary Clinton.”

 

“It is sad beyond measure that the near-extinction of independent Black politics has placed African Americans in the most untenable position imaginable at this critical moment: in the Hillary Clinton camp.”

Next, let’s turn to John Pilger, the Left wing Australian journalist and documentary film maker who has been writing about Western foreign policy with unimpeachable accuracy and wisdom since the Vietnam War era.   Here are some of his comments on Trump:

“..Donald Trump is being presented (by the mass media) as a lunatic, a fascist.  He is certainly odious; but he is also a media hate figure.  That alone should arouse our skepticism.”

 

“Trump’s views on migration are grotesque, but no more grotesque than those of David Cameron. It is not Trump who is the Great Deporter from the United States, but the Nobel Peace Prize winner, Barack Obama.”

 

“In 1947, a series of National Security Council directives described the paramount aim of American foreign policy as ‘a world substantially made over in [America’s] own image’.  The ideology was messianic Americanism. We were all Americans. Or else. …”

 

“Donald Trump is a symptom of this, but he is also a maverick. He says the invasion of Iraq was a crime; he doesn’t want to go to war with Russia and China. The danger to the rest of us is not Trump, but Hillary Clinton. She is no maverick. She embodies the resilience and violence of a system whose vaunted ‘exceptionalism’ is totalitarian with an occasional liberal face.”

The money quote is: “The danger to the rest of us is not Trump, but Hillary Clinton.”  When Pilger submitted his article to the “progressive” magazine Truthout, this sentence was deleted, censored as he reported, along with a few of the surrounding sentences.  Such censorship had not been imposed on Pilger by Truthout ever before.  Truthout’s commitment to free speech apparently has limits in the case of The Donald versus Hillary, rather severe ones.  So one must read even the progressive press with some skepticism when it comes to Trump.

Trump has also been noticed by the Left in Europe, notably by the sharp minded Jean Bricmont, physicist and author of Humanitarian Imperialism who writes here:

 

(Trump) “is the first major political figure to call for ‘America First’ meaning non-interventionism.  He not only denounces the trillions of dollars spent in wars, deplores the dead and wounded American soldiers, but also speaks of the Iraqi victims of a war launched by a Republican President. He does so to a Republican public and manages to win its support. He denounces the empire of US military bases, claiming to prefer to build schools here in the United States. He wants good relations with Russia. He observes that the militarist policies pursued for decades have caused the United States to be hated throughout the world. He calls Sarkozy a criminal who should be judged for his role in Libya. Another advantage of Trump: he is detested by the neoconservatives, who are the main architects of the present disaster.”

And then there is Stephen F. Cohen, contributing editor for The Nation and Professor Emeritus of Russian History at Princeton and NYU.  Cohen makes the point that Trump, alone among the presidential candidates, has raised five urgent and fundamental questions, which all other candidates in the major parties have either scorned or more frequently ignored. The five questions all call into question the interventionist warlike stance of the US for the past 20 plus years. Cohen enumerates the questions here, thus:

“Should the United States always be the world’s leader and policeman?

 

“What is NATO’s proper mission today, 25 years after the end of the Soviet Union and when international terrorism is the main threat to the West?

 

“Why does Washington repeatedly pursue a policy of regime change, in Iraq, Libya, possibly in Ukraine, and now in Damascus, even though it always ends in “disaster”?

 

“Why is the United States treating Putin’s Russia as an enemy and not as a security partner?

 

“And should US nuclear weapons doctrine include a no-first use pledge, which it does not?”

Cohen comments in detail on these questions here. Whatever one may think of the answers Trump has provided to the five questions, there is no doubt that he alone among the presidential candidates has raised them – and that in itself is an important contribution.

At this point, I mention my own piece, which appeared late last year.  Entitled “Who is the Arch Racist, Hillary or The Donald”?  Like Cohen’s pieces, it finds merit with the Trump foreign policy in the context of posing a question.

Finally, let us turn to Bill Blum, who wrote an article entitled, “American Exceptionalism and the Election Made in Hell (Or Why I’d Vote for Trump Over Hillary).”  Again there is little doubt about the stance of Blum, who is the author of Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II, a scholarly compendium, which Noam Chomsky calls “Far and away the best book on the topic.”

Blum begins his piece:

“If the American presidential election winds up with Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump, and my passport is confiscated, and I’m somehow FORCED to choose one or the other, or I’m PAID to do so, paid well … I would vote for Trump.”

 

“My main concern is foreign policy. American foreign policy is the greatest threat to world peace, prosperity, and the environment. And when it comes to foreign policy, Hillary Clinton is an unholy disaster. From Iraq and Syria to Libya and Honduras the world is a much worse place because of her; so much so that I’d call her a war criminal who should be prosecuted.”

And he concludes:

“He (Trump) calls Iraq ‘a complete disaster’, condemning not only George W. Bush but the neocons who surrounded him. ‘They lied. They said there were weapons of mass destruction and there were none. And they knew there were none. There were no weapons of mass destruction.’ He even questions the idea that ‘Bush kept us safe’, and adds that ‘Whether you like Saddam or not, he used to kill terrorists’.”

“Yes, he’s personally obnoxious. I’d have a very hard time being his friend. Who cares?”

I conclude with Blum’s words because they are most pertinent to our present situation.  The world is living through a perilous time when the likes of the neocons and Hillary Clinton could lead us into a nuclear Armageddon with their belligerence toward Russia and their militaristic confrontation with China.

The reality is that we are faced with a choice between Clinton and Trump, a choice which informs much of the above commentary.  Survival is at stake and we must consider survival first if our judgments are to be sane.

Original Link: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-22/trumps-anti-interventionism-neocons-hate-it-anti-war-left-comes-around

Submitted by John Walsh via LewRockwell.com

U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy (Part Two)

Polish-American political scientist and geostrategist Zbigniew Brzezinski and his monumental geopolitical work: “The Grand Chessboard”, is a must read if we want to better understand 21^st century U.S. Hegemon Unipolar World priorities. (Former) Imperialist Atlantic Europe (Portugal, Spain, France, Belgium, The Netherlands and Britain) did rule Europe and the world up to the 1870’s until Continental Europe: Italy (grandiose contributor to modern banking system and the Renaissance) and Germany  “showed up”most likely  feeling left out and wanting a piece of the geopolitical pie. In 1879, Germany and Austria-Hungary formed what is known as the Dual Alliance which became the Triple Alliance with the addition of Italy in 1882. In the late second half of the 19^th century and beginning of the 20th century (1880 — 1910), the German Empire was to become an economic powerhouse: Its economy rivaled and surpassed imperialistic Britain and France:

“The speed of Germany’s advance to industrial maturity after 1890 was breathtaking. The years from 1895 to 1907 witnessed a doubling of the number of workers engaged in machine building, from slightly more than one-half million to well over a million. An immediate consequence of expanding industrial employment was a sharp drop in emigration; from an average of 130,000 people per year in the 1880s, the outflow dropped to 20,000 per year in the mid-1890s. The surplus population continued to leave Prussia’s eastern provinces, but the destination was the growing and multiplying factories of Berlin and the Ruhr rather than the Americas. Earlier British fears of German competition were now fully justified. While Britain produced about twice as much steel as Germany during the early 1870s, Germany’s steel production exceeded Britain’s in 1893, and by 1914 Germany was producing more than twice as much steel as Britain. Moreover, only one-third of German exports in 1873 were finished goods; the portion rose to 63 percent by 1913. Germany came to dominate all the major Continental markets except France.”(Source: Encyclopedia Britannica)

Due to its unbalance of trade payments towards Germany, Britain got so worried about losing its gold (The British Pound was then backed up by gold) that in 1887, it issued the “Made in Germany” Merchandise Marks Act intended at degrading German products as shoddy compared to the renowned “British manufacturing standards” (sic). Obviously the unintended consequence is the fact that “Made in Germany” became, and remains to this very day, a worldwide seal of first class workmanship and quality. Where is the French, British or U.S. equivalent to Audi, Mercedes Benz, Porsche, Volkswagen, BMW (Bayerische Motor Werke) fine German automobiles? Was this one of the reasons why the Washington neocons have lassoed Volkswagen, for a while the first automobile manufacturer in the world, with a 15 billion USD fine and 3.000 of their cars were blown up in the Tianjin catastrophe?

At the turn of the 20^th Century, the German Empire (with Austria, Hungary and Italy) had already become a Post-Industrial Revolution threat to Britain and France unchallenged Imperialists powers. I would like to  suggest that this could have been one of the core reasons why France and Britain needed Germany’s destruction (WWI) “once and for all” as stated by the great Sir Winston Churchill:

“You must understand that this war is not against Hitler or National Socialism, but against the strength of the German people, which is to be smashed once and for all, regardless of whether it is in the hands of Hitler or a Jesuit priest.”

Shortly after the newly (1913) created Private Federal Reserve, thanks to corrupt U.S. President Woodrow Wilson’s acquiescence, much evidence shows that taking down “German strength” could have very well been on the allies’ agenda:

1. Germany’s industrial power and the talent of its people
2. Germany not borrowing money from the central banks of England (BoE) or Federal Reserve

What followed Germany’s 1918 defeat was the 11th of November 1919 humiliating Treaty of Versailles inflicted by Imperialists France and Britain (with the help of the U.S.) The combination of Germany’s WWI defeat and the Versailles dictate had just crushed a superb industrial nation by demanding an additional gold ransom (lost between 1871 and 1914 due to France and Britain’s trade unbalance) of 132 billion (gold) mark. 

“You see, the real value of a conflict, the true value is in the debt that it creates. You control the debt – you control everything. You find this upsetting, yes? But this is the very essence of the banking industry, to make us all – whether we [are] nations or individuals, slaves to debt.”

—Umberto Calvini, from the motion picture: The International (starring Clive Owen as Louis Sallinger and Naomi Watts as Eleanor Whitman.)

After re-entering the geopolitical chessboard in 1871, Germany’s post WWII-partition, into West-Germany or Western Federal Republic of Germany (FRG), and East Germany or German Democratic Republic (GDR), gave the birth to a bipolar world dominated by the United States of America (USA) and the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR | CCCP: Сою́з Сове́тских Социалисти́ческих Респу́блик). After the fall of the Soviet Union in December 1991, we returned to a Unipolar world dominated by the United States of America but increasingly challenged by the BRICS nations led by the Double Helix Russia and China.

How is the U.S. profiling and securing its geopolitical, financial and industrial hegemony? What are the main geopolitical “building sites” the United States of America is trying to control and secure right now? We shall begin addressing some of these topics:

• Controlling the Balkan via NATO-Kosovo territories (Camp Bondsteel)
• Ukraine:  a fascist coup d’état led by the U.S. and EU
• Syrian conflict and U.S. gas and crude oil control
• Qatar vs. Iran: The Sunni—Shiite gas dilemma
• Destabilization of the Eurasian Balkan

Bruno Gebarski

Additional Reading:

• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy (Part One)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy (Part Two)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | September 11th 2001 and the Rise of U.S. Neocons (Part Three)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Preemptive Strike & Neocons Mainstream Media Propaganda (Part Four)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Oligarchy and Neocons Destructive Agenda (Part Five)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Oligarchy and Neocons Destructive Agenda (Part Six: coming soon)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | U.S.-NATO Serbian Genocide (Part Seven: planned)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Iraq the War for Oil and Control of the Middle East (Part Eight: planned)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Iraq the War for OIL and Control of the Middle East (Part Nine: planned)

 

U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy (Part One)

“Supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy’s resistance without fighting.” —Sun Tzu, Chinese general, military strategist and philosopher | 544–496 BC

What has happened to U.S. Exceptionalism? Does it still exist? Is 21st Century USA still “The Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave?”

“In its classic forms, American Exceptionalism refers to the special character of the United States as a uniquely free nation based on democratic ideals and personal liberty. Sometimes this special character is inferred from the nature of American political institutions founded in the 1776-89 period–the declaration of independence (1776), revolution (1776-83), constitution (1787).” —Ian Tyrrell

Since the December 1991 fall of the Soviet Union (USSR), we have been leaving in a Unipolar World dominated by a resurging Anglo-American Neo-Conservative leadership: One of the many Khazarian Mafia’s extensions assisted by its own private banking center headquartered in the Financial District of the City of London. Looking into history, one could trace the roots of the most nefarious KM: Khazarian Mafia‘s aspiration all the way back to the Babylonian Empire and its pagan worship that has come down in all sorts of secret societies: Freemasonry, Skull and Bones, Illuminati, The Bohemian Grove’s “Cremation of Care ritual“, held every July in the Redwood Forest outside of San Francisco, California USA, in a 2.700-acre (10.92 km²) privately owned summer camp: Part 1 and Part 2.

One could equate September 11. 2001 to the termination of U.S. democracy as established by the Founding Fathers of the United States of America with its Fourth of July 1776 Declaration of Independence: Thanks to an egregious synthetic terrorist neocon coup d’état on its own American Citizenry.

Since 911, Washington’s worldwide neo conservative destabilization mission is ongoing. “Exceptionalistan” as shrewdly coined by international Brazilian geopolitical analyst Pepe Escobar or the “Empire of Chaos” to-do-list is endless: Kosovo, Afghanistan (FBI cocaine trafficking via Incirlik Turkey and Ramstein Germany NATO airbases), Iraq, Egypt, Iran, Libya, Syria, Ukraine, Macedonia, Georgia, Russia, Venezuela, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Kyrgyzstan part of the soon to be destabilized Eurasian Balkan. In the name of U.S. Unipolar World hegemony: “Color revolutions would never be enough; [US] Exceptionalistan is always on the lookout for major strategic upgrades capable of ensuring perpetual Empire of Chaos hegemony,” Pepe Escobar goes on to say.

However, this Anglo-American financial Unipolar World, as we’ve known it since post-WWII 1944 Bretton Woods Conference, is under threat.

BRICS, SCO, AIIB, China’s New Shanghai Gold Exchange, China Financial Future Exchange (CFFEX) and CIPS are all menacing the Anglo-American fiat money USD hegemony (including GBP, EUR and YEN) re-established in 1971, when President Richard Nixon, following General de Gaulle demanding French gold back from the Federal Reserve, unilaterally ended the convertibility of US Dollars to Gold.

Washington’s neocon headquarters have since transformed the United States of America into the world’s largest Terror State, a country which is using God’s blessings promised to Abraham to attack innocent nations (Libya, Afghanistan, Ukraine, Syria to name just a few) on behalf of its Khazarian Neocon Mafia with/via the deployment of synthetic terror, creating new enemies who then must be attacked by the “official” U.S. Pentagon army. All this is being done to allegedly “stop terrorism” and bring “freedom and democracy” to the Middle East and Africa: pure neocon “national socialist” propaganda that reminds us of Third Reich National Sozialismus’ (Nazi). In other words, Neo Conservatism (neocon) is a political euphemistic jargon synonym of Third Reich’s “National Sozialismus” or in English: National Socialism.

For the sake of maintaining its fiat financial USD Unipolar Leadership Status, “Exceptionalistan” is ready to implement whatever nefarious methodology is necessary: Even if terror has to be applied on its own citizenry and snuff out three thousands human lives like it did on September 11^th of 2001. A fictitious “terrorist” enemy had just been created out of nothing. After the birth of this new breed of synthetic terrorism, destabilization of whatever country that dared to threaten U.S. and Western geopolitical and geo-financial interests would follow:

• Iraq: as Sadam Hussein announced in 2000 that Iraqi oil would be traded in EUR instead of USD
• Libya: as Gaddafi planned to introduce a gold Dinar and thus had to be removed

Initiative such as the BRICS’ and Russia’s De-Dollarization of the world economy is dangerous and taken by the Anglo-American neocons very seriously. As Gerald Celente at Trendsresearch says: “Do you think we [The USA] would be in Iraq if its major export was broccoli?”

Among others, the neo-cons’ methodologies include:

• Deployment of synthetic terror: New York, September 11. 2001 | Madrid, March 11. 2004 | London July 7. 2005 | Paris November 13. 2015 | Nice 14. July 2016 | Munich July 23. 2016
• Manufactured wars (Iraq, Libya, Syria, Ukraine)
• US-Pentagon “official” army fighting CIA narcotic financed Langley mercenaries (ISIS, ISIL, IS, Al Qaeda, Daesh, Al Nusra, Al Nustra, The Islamic State)
• Color revolutions (Egypt 2008 “Arab Spring” thanks to newly 2006 created social media technology via Twitter propaganda
• NGOs such as Freedom House innocuously founded in 1941 by Eleanor Roosevelt
• Weapons of Mass Migration: Germany and Austria being hit the hardest since September 4^th 2015
• Dīvide et īmpera: “divide and conquer” strategy creating ongoing chaos

Western citizenry is to the most part oblivious to what is happening. Main Stream Mass Media Propaganda is crucial in upholding the Western ignorance of a compliant and acquiescent sheeple who has been taken captive by a neocon “liberalism” aimed at enslaving its citizens and destroying the God-ordained family structure, which remains the foundation of a functioning and healthy society.

• Mind-control (via Mass Media Propaganda, Smartphones, Virtual Reality (VR) and Augmented Reality (AR)
• Social Media Propaganda (Facebook and Twitter)
• Induced drug addiction slavery
• QE: Quantitative Easing “to infinity”
• Debt slavery:

• Destruction of water supply via fracking shale oil industry: Fueling half of U.S. oil output
• Destruction of natural God ordained living seeds via genetically modified organisms (Monsanto‘s GMO’s)
• Murdering of innocent unborn babies via abortion: 58,5 million children lives sacrificed to the 21^st century molech god of materialism
• “Planned Parenthood” murdering of babies and selling of “fresh” aborted baby eyes, hearts and “gonads”
• Heating of UK hospitals with aborted babies incineration
• Removing of God’s 10 commandments from our schools and public places

The Washington rogue régime has turned the table of good and evil upside down: We only have the Word of God left to properly qualify or summarize the level of nefariousness these fascist neocons are inflicting upon their victims. Christof Hörstel from newly created Deutsche Mitte (German Middle) qualifies it as “The Global Chaos Management of the U.S. Government.”

Let’s conclude the indictment of this present nefarious ruling “establishment” and take heed to the wise Words of Almighty God via His (Minor) Prophet Habakkuk:

• Hab 2:6  Shall not all these take up a parable against him, and a taunting proverb against him, and say, Woe to him that increaseth that which is not his! how long? and to him that ladeth himself with thick clay!
• Hab 2:7  Shall they not rise up suddenly that shall bite thee, and awake that shall vex thee, and thou shalt be for booties unto them?
• Hab 2:8  Because thou hast spoiled many nations, all the remnant of the people shall spoil thee; because of men’s blood, and for the violence of the land, of the city, and of all that dwell therein. (KJV: King James Version of the Bible)  

Bruno Gebarski

Additional Reading:

• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy (Part One)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy (Part Two)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | September 11th 2001 and the Rise of U.S. Neocons (Part Three)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Preemptive Strike & Neocons Mainstream Media Propaganda (Part Four)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Oligarchy and Neocons Destructive Agenda (Part Five)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Oligarchy and Neocons Destructive Agenda (Part Six: coming soon)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | U.S.-NATO Serbian Genocide (Part Seven: planned)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Iraq the War for Oil and Control of the Middle East (Part Eight: planned)
• U.S. Exceptionalism and U.S. Global Terror Management Strategy | Iraq the War for OIL and Control of the Middle East (Part Nine: planned)

Zbigniew Brzezinski on the 15th of July 2016 U.S. Neo Conservative Coup d’État in Turkey

Washington’s Neoconservatives / Neocons (euphemism for national socialists or fascists) will be destroyed by the fact that one of the key U.S. architects of Neo-Conservatism, Zbigniew Brzezinski, recently confirmed the involvement of the United States of America with the 15^th of July 2016 Turkish Coup d’état, one day after the bloody 14^th of July French Bastille Day in Nice.

Zbigniew Brzeziński: “Précis of my new article to be published in “the-american-interest.com. U.S. role in #Turkey_coup a bad mistake.”

“The U.S. backing of the attempted coup against the Turkish president Reccep Tayyip Erdogan was a grave mistake that could deliver a major blow to the U.S. reputation. Turkey was on the verge of reconsidering its foreign policy after failure in the Syria during the last five years and the US miscalculation in supporting the coup and hosting its leader was so serious that it is no longer possible to put the blame on once US ally Turkey if it turns its back on US and rethink its policies. A potential Russia-Turkey-Iran coalition would creat an opportunity to solve the Syrian crisis. IF Erdogan had the smallest bit of wisdom, he should have come to the understanding that he could not make an independent credibility with the help of the decayed Arab countries.”  —Zbigniew Brzeziński

This Turkish allegiance shift towards Russia and away from NATO and the United States of America makes actually sense when we think about it. Until recently Turkey has been a tenor terror ally to the Washington neocon regime with CIA-made subsidiaries Al-Qaeda, ISIS, IS, ISIL, Daesh, Al-Nustra or The Islamist State: Most terrorists entities are financed and armed by the United States of America and its allies under the CIA directing-baton. Wherever “terrorism” is needed, the Western World (USA, Britain, France, and Israel) will most likely provide support and financing via Saudi Arabia and/or Qatar: The two Sunnite States backing up many nefarious U.S. and Western terrorist “undertakings.”

It is crucial to bear in mind that turkey did not turn towards Russia because of an attempted coup d’état on the 15^th of July 2016 but rather to remember that the U.S.-led coup d’état attempt took place because Erdogan turned towards Russia after apologizing for the Russian fighter jet shot down near Turkey-Syria border.

For the U.S. and NATO this may well be a geopolitical “Berezina.” The U.S. has started transferring its 50 tactical nuclear weapons stationed in Turkey to the Deveselu air base in Romania, against the backdrop of worsening relations between Washington and Ankara. Needless to say the the US-Turkey relations have deteriorated so much following the coup that Washington no longer trusted Ankara to host the weapons thus the move to Deveselu near Caracal in Romania.

Romania used to be an ally of the Soviet Union during the Cold War, but it never hosted nuclear weapons during that period. Stationing tactical US nuclear weapons close to Russia’s borders is likely to provoke Russia and potentially feed an escalation. The stationing of Russian nuclear missiles in Cuba in 1962 was the closest the Cold War came to escalating into a full-scale nuclear war.

Strong denial by Romania

The Romanian foreign ministry strongly denied the information that the country has become home of US nukes. “In response to your request, Romanian MFA firmly dismisses the information you referred to,”  a spokesperson wrote.

After the failed putsch, relations between Washington and Ankara are at their worst since Turkey joined NATO in 1952. Ankara believes the U.S. government supported the Turkish US-exiled cleric Fethullah Gülen, whom it accuses of having masterminded the failed coup d’état. Turkey is demanding Gülen’s extradition, and the issue was expected to take center stage during US Vice President Joe Biden’s (one of many nefarious vertebrates to befoul the halls of American power) last visit to Turkey on August the 24^th.

There was no Turkish acquiescence for Islamist preacher Fetullah Gülen remaining in Pennsylvania. So what is going to happen next? Will Erdogan bow down to fascist Washington rogue régime? Here is the real dichotomy for President Obama and the Washington geopolitical fools: a choice between Fethullah Gülen’s extradition or stand by the CIA’s cover-up.

Bruno P. Gebarski

How the USA Created Al-Qaeda and the ISIS Terror Group

Incisive article originally published by GR in September 2014.  Terror attacks or mass shootings allegedly perpetrated by the ISIS [IS, ISIL, Al Qaeda, Al Nustra, Daesh, The Islamist State] the question that should be asked: who are the State sponsors of  Al Qaeda and ISIS?  (M.Ch. GR Editor).

“Much like Al Qaeda, the Islamic State (ISIS) is made-in-the-USA, an instrument of terror designed to divide and conquer the oil-rich Middle East and to counter Iran’s growing influence in the region.  The fact that the United States has a long and torrid history of backing terrorist groups will surprise only those who watch the news and ignore history.

The CIA first aligned itself with extremist Islam during the Cold War era. Back then, America saw the world in rather simple terms:

• On one side, the Soviet Union and Third World nationalism, which America regarded as a Soviet tool;
• On the other side, Western nations and militant political Islam, which America considered an ally in the struggle against the Soviet Union.

The director of the National Security Agency under Ronald Reagan, General William Odom recently remarked, ‘by any measure the U.S. has long used terrorism. In 1978-79 the Senate was trying to pass a law against international terrorism – in every version they produced, the lawyers said the U.S. would be in violation.'”

During the 1970′s the CIA used the Muslim Brotherhood [A Nazi Fascist group who already had very close ties to the German Third Reich] in Egypt as a barrier, both to thwart Soviet expansion and prevent the spread of Marxist ideology [the very reason why the Khazarian Mafia hired Adolf Hitler in the 1930’s to stop the spread of communism they themselves had exported to Russia via the Bolshevik Revolution] among the Arab masses. The United States also openly supported Sarekat Islam against Sukarno in Indonesia, and supported the Jamaat-e-Islami terror group against Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto in Pakistan. Last but certainly not least, there is Al Qaeda.

Al Qaeda a U.S. database of thousands of Islamist extremists

Lest we forget, the CIA gave birth to Osama Bin Laden and breastfed his organization during the 1980′s. Former British Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, told the House of Commons that Al Qaeda was unquestionably a product of Western intelligence agencies. Mr. Cook explained that Al Qaeda, which literally means an abbreviation of “the database” in Arabic, was originally the computer database of the thousands of Islamist extremists, who were trained by the CIA and funded by the Saudis, in order to defeat the Russians in Afghanistan.

America’s relationship with Al Qaeda has always been a love-hate affair. Depending on whether a particular Al Qaeda terrorist group in a given region furthers American interests or not, the U.S. State Department either funds or aggressively targets that terrorist group. Even as American foreign policy makers claim to oppose Muslim extremism, they knowingly foment it as a weapon of foreign policy. The Islamic State is its latest weapon that, much like Al Qaeda, is certainly backfiring. ISIS recently rose to international prominence after its thugs began beheading American journalists. Now the terrorist group controls an area the size of the United Kingdom.

In order to understand why the Islamic State has grown and flourished so quickly, one has to take a look at the organization’s American-backed roots. The 2003 American invasion and occupation of Iraq created the pre-conditions for radical Sunni groups, like ISIS, to take root. America, rather unwisely, destroyed Saddam Hussein’s secular state machinery and replaced it with a predominantly Shiite administration. The U.S. occupation caused vast unemployment in Sunni areas, by rejecting socialism and closing down factories in the naive hope that the magical hand of the free market would create jobs. Under the new U.S.-backed Shiite regime, working class Sunni’s lost hundreds of thousands of jobs. Unlike the white Afrikaners in South Africa, who were allowed to keep their wealth after regime change, upper class Sunni’s were systematically dispossessed of their assets and lost their political influence. Rather than promoting religious integration and unity,

American policy in Iraq exacerbated sectarian divisions and created a fertile breading ground for Sunni discontent, from which Al Qaeda in Iraq took root.

The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) used to have a different name: Al Qaeda in Iraq. After 2010 the group re-branded and refocused its efforts on Syria.

There are essentially three wars being waged in Syria:

• One between the government and the rebels
• Another between Iran and Saudi Arabia
• And yet another between America and Russia

It is this third, neo-Cold War battle that made U.S. foreign policy makers decide to take the risk of arming Islamist rebels in Syria, because Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad, is a key Russian ally. Rather embarrassingly, many of these Syrian rebels have now turned out to be ISIS thugs, who are openly brandishing American-made M16 Assault rifles.

America’s Middle East policy revolves around oil and Israel. The invasion of Iraq has partially satisfied Washington’s thirst for oil, but ongoing air strikes in Syria and economic sanctions on Iran have everything to do with Israel. The goal is to deprive Israel’s neighboring enemies, Lebanon’s Hezbollah and Palestine’s Hamas, of crucial Syrian and Iranian support.

ISIS is not merely an instrument of terror used by America to topple the Syrian government; it is also used to put pressure on Iran.

The last time Iran invaded another nation was in 1738. Since independence in 1776, the U.S. has been engaged in over 53 military invasions and expeditions. Despite what the Western media’s war cries would have you believe, Iran is clearly not the threat to regional security, Washington is. An Intelligence Report published in 2012, endorsed by all sixteen U.S. intelligence agencies, confirms that Iran ended its nuclear weapons program in 2003. Truth is, any Iranian nuclear ambition, real or imagined, is as a result of American hostility towards Iran, and not the other way around.

America is using ISIS in three ways:

• To attack its enemies in the Middle East,
• To serve as a pretext for U.S. military intervention abroad,
• And at home to foment a manufactured domestic threat, used to justify the unprecedented expansion of invasive domestic surveillance.

By rapidly increasing both government secrecy and surveillance, Mr. Obama’s government is increasing its power to watch its citizens, while diminishing its citizens’ power to watch their government. Terrorism is an excuse to justify mass surveillance, in preparation for mass revolt.  The so-called “War on Terror” should be seen for what it really is: a pretext for maintaining a dangerously oversized U.S. military. The two most powerful groups in the U.S. foreign policy establishment are:

• The Israel lobby, which directs U.S. Middle East policy
• The Military-Industrial-Complex, which profits from the former group’s actions

Since George W. Bush declared the “War on Terror” in October 2001, it has cost the American taxpayer approximately 6.6 trillion dollars and thousands of fallen sons and daughters; but, the wars have also raked in billions of dollars for Washington’s military elite. In fact, more than seventy American companies and individuals have won up to $27 billion in contracts for work in postwar Iraq and Afghanistan over the last three years, according to a recent study by the Center for Public Integrity. According to the study, nearly 75 per cent of these private companies had employees or board members, who either served in, or had close ties to, the executive branch of the Republican and Democratic administrations, members of Congress, or the highest levels of the military.

In 1997, a U.S. Department of Defense report stated, “the data show a strong correlation between U.S. involvement abroad and an increase in terrorist attacks against the U.S.” Truth is, the only way America can win the “War On Terror” is if it stops giving terrorists the motivation and the resources to attack America. Terrorism is the symptom; American imperialism in the Middle East is the cancer.

Put simply, the War on Terror is terrorism; only, it is conducted on a much larger scale by people with jets and missiles.

arikai Chengu is a research scholar at Harvard University. Contact him on garikai.chengu@gmail.com | Follow Garikai Chengu on Twitter at: https://twitter.com/ChenguGold

Opinions stated in Garikai Chengu’s article (except for GeopolticalNews’ comments in […] are not necessarily endorsed by this site or its guest-authors.