Archive | May 7th, 2016

Nazi-Zio-WahhabI-Egyptian agreement on the islands of Tiran and Sanafir


Since the 11th April 2016, date at which the islands of Tiran and Sanafir were given by Zionist puppet Sissi to Saudi Zio-Wahhabi regime, the two governments have been multiplying their declarations affirming that they had always been Saudi, in an attempt to soothe the anger of Egyptian nationalists [1].

The two governments and their supporters have published several internal documents aimed at proving their claims. However, in international law, only the London Convention of 1840 applies. After the «Eastern Question» which opposed Mehemet Ali to the Sultan, it was agreed that he would give up Syria, but would keep Egypt and Sudan, including the islands of Tiran and Sanafir. No other international treaty was signed which modified the sovereignty of the islands until the announcement made by President Al-Sissi.

From his side, the Nazi Minister of Defence, Moshe Yaalon, confirmed that Zionist puppet Sissi had consulted  the Nazi regimeTel-Aviv before the transfer. Indeed, during the Camp David Accords, Egypt had agreed to guarantee the free passage of the Nazi fleet in the Tiran Straits, and in exchange, in 1982, Nazi returned the islands that it was occupying. But we should note that Nazi regime gave the islands back to Egypt, and not to Saudi Zio-Wahhabi regime, from whom it had stolen them. Since the Zio-Wahhabi regime party had agreed to respect this part of the Camp David Accords, Nazi regime made no objection to the transfer.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, Egypt, Saudi ArabiaComments Off on Nazi-Zio-WahhabI-Egyptian agreement on the islands of Tiran and Sanafir

Who will pay the 3 billion Euros annually for the Turkish war against Syria ?


While we have been stating for several weeks that the 3 billion Euros annually promised by the European Union to Turkey are not destined to help the migrants, but to finance the war against Syria, European deputy for Holland Sophie in t’Veld (Liberal Democrats) caused a shockwave by unmasking the scandal – according to her, no Treaty has been signed between the Union and Turkey.

This is unique in European history – the decisions taken by the Council have been formulated exclusively by way of a Press communiqué.

It seems that it is now impossible to hide this manipulation any longer.

So who is going to pay the 3 billion Euros annually?
And from what budget?

Pete Kimberley

Posted in Syria, TurkeyComments Off on Who will pay the 3 billion Euros annually for the Turkish war against Syria ?

The puppeteers of the migration crisis


The biographies of the three main organisers of the migration crisis and the response offered by the European Union attest to their connections with the the United States administration and their existing determination to abolish frontiers. For these men, the current migrations are not a humanitarian problem, but a chance to put their theories into practice.

- Peter Sutherland, special representative of the General Secretary of the United Nations for international migrations.

JPEG - 26 kb
Peter Sutherland

An Irishman, ex-European Commissioner for Competition, then General Director of the World Trade Organisation (1993-95) ; ex-Director of BP (1997-2009), president of Goldman Sachs International (1995-2015) ; ex-administrator for the Bilderberg Group, president of the European section of the Trilateral Commission, and vice-president of the European Round Table of Industrialists.

While Mister Sutherland never misses an occasion to underline the moral duty to help refugees – a traditional Catholic, he is an advisor to the IESE Business School (Instituto de Estudios Superiores de la Empresa) of Opus Dei, and, since 2006, consultant for the Administration of the Patrimony of the Apostolic See – he is above all an eulogist of international migrations. Speaking to the Committee for Internal Affairs of the House of Lords, he declared that all people should enjoy the possibility of studying and working in the country of their choice – which is incompatible with all policies for the restriction of migrations – and that migrations create a crucial dynamic for economic development, whatever the citizens of the host country have to say about it. Consequently, he concluded, the European Union should undermine the homogeneity of its nations [1].

- Gerald Knaus, Director-founder of the European Security Initiative (ESI)

JPEG - 21.3 kb
Gerald Knaus

An Austrian sociologist, Knaus worked from 1993 to 2004 in Bulgaria, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo – at the end of Bernard Kouchner’s mandate – first for NGO’s, then for the European Union. He continued his research, from 2005 to 2011, at the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at Harvard University, after which he published Can Intervention Work ? He founded the ESI in 1999 in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The Institute received its first grant from the US Institute of Peace, the sister organisation of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which is a wing of the Pentagon. Then Knaus went to Washington where he was received by the NED, then by the Carnegie Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute. In addition, he was received by James O’Brien and James Dobbins at the State Department and by Leon Fuerth at the White House. The ESI was soon to be financed by the German Marshall Fund, the Mott Foundation, the Open Society Institute (run by George Soros), the Rockefeller Brothers Foundation, and by the governments of Holland, Ireland, Luxembourg, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland.

In 2004, he published a report declaring that the accusation that 200,000 Serbians had been expelled from Kosovo was a lie, and Russian propaganda. In 2005, he launched the theory that the Turkish AKP was a formation of «Islamic Calvinists» who were attempting to create a form of «Muslim Democracy.»

In his book Can Intervention Work ? – which he published with Rory Stewart, the ex-tutor of Princes William and Harry of the United Kingdom, whom he met in Kosovo and who became successively one of the assistants of Paul Bremmer at Meyssan during the occupation of Iraq, then the director of the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy – he praised the US wars and developed a new concept of colonisation. According to Knaus, «humanitarian interventionism» is legitimate, but can only succeed if it takes local realities into account. He praised Richard Holbrooke, whom he had also known in Kosovo. His book was promoted by Samantha Power, who is known for being an ex-collaborator of Holbrooke, and who had created and directs the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy, where he had been a researcher.

- Diederik Samsom, Dutch representative, president of the Workers’ Party

JPEG - 23 kb
Diederik Samsom

A nuclear physicist, ex-director of the Greenpeace campaign for Climate and Energy, elected representative (proportional elections) since 2003, he has become the President of his Parliamentary Group, then President of his party. However, he failed to win the Presidency of the Parliament and the function of Prime Minister. He then refused to join the coalition government which he supports, and remains the President of his group at the Assembly.

He has an IQ of 136, and has twice won a televised competition of intelligence tests. He claims to be a militant atheist, and is a strict non-smoker and vegetarian. In June 2014, he was invited with Prime Minister Mark Rutte to the Bilderberg Group, where they were able to talk with Peter Sutherland, but not with Rory Stewart, who had been invited only to the 2012 meeting.

According to Dutch political observers, he is the main victim of the referendum of support for the European Agreement with Ukraine. He had personally taken position on this theme and against Russia. His defeat, according to certain opinion polls, caused the decline by one half to three quarters of the influence of his party.

Posted in EuropeComments Off on The puppeteers of the migration crisis

How the European Union is manipulating the Syrian refugees


The migration crisis that marked the European Union during the second half of 2015 was created artificially. However, several groups have tried to use it, either to destroy national cultures, to recruit low-cost workers, or to justify the financing of the war against Syria. But in the end, once the wave has passed and the damage done, the problem remains, above all, African.

JPEG - 59.5 kb
Arrival in Greece of Afghan migrants from Turkey

Triggered by the coordinated publication of the photograph of a young Kurdish child, Aylan Kurdi, drowned on a Turkish beach on the 3rd September 2015, European public opinion mobilised and mounted various demonstrations in favour of the refugees. Immediately, French President François Hollande and the chancellor of the German Federation Angela Merkel pronounced themselves favourable to a «permanent and obligatory European system of accomodation», while an immense crowd of people of mysterious origin began its progression across the Balkans. Only the Hungarian Prime Minister, Viktor Orban, spoke out against this sudden and massive migration.

The ESI proposition

Until then, the question of migration had been an economic problem, mainly between Africa and Italy. This was added to a problem internal to the Union – the demand of German heavy industry, expressed by its President Ulrich Grillo, of recruiting to Germany 800,000 East European workers who did not belong to the Schengen Area. Overnight, the problem of the humanitarian refugees fleeing a war zone was added to these two economic factors.

The first concrete proposition for responding to the new situation was formulated on the 17th September 2015 by the ESI, a think tank created in Berlin, and then clarified on the 4th October. It concerned the drawing up of an agreement between the EU and Turkey designed to stem the tide of migrants, while organising the transfer of 500,000 Syrian refugees to the Union over the next twelve months. In addition, Turkey would agree to take back the other migrants who continued to enter the Union illegally, while in exchange, it would receive a visa dispensation for all its citizens.

«It is a recognition that the Syrian crisis is genuinely unique, creating a humanitarian crisis on a scale not seen in Europe since the Second World War», indicated the ESI, specifying that the initiative should come from Germany, in response to the Russian intervention in Syria.

And yet,
- the ESI takes it as read that the Syrian refugees are fleeing «repression by Bachar’s régime» supported by Russia.
- the ESI only takes into account the Syrian refugees, and not the Iraqi refugees, who are also persecuted by Daesh.

the ESI specifies that its plan also has the objective
- of warning against the development of the extreme right in Austria – the director of this think-tank is Austrian ;
- of preparing a similar operation for 1.1 million Syrian refugees currently based in Lebanon, and who will be sent on to North America and Australia. This concerns the application of Kelly Greenhill’s theories about the «strategic management of migrations as a weapon of war» [1], such as that observed by ESI researchers during the start of the war in Kosovo [2].

In addition, by proposing to send back the migrants to Turkey, the ESI seems to ignore that this country is not a stable state for refugees, and that it had refused to sign the Convention of 1951.

The Merkel Plan

On the 23rd September, the European Council published a communiqué which, in turn, assimilated the question of the migrants to that of the war in / against Syria [3].

The main points of the ESI plan were resumed on the 7th October by Chancellor Angela Merkel, during an interview with journalist Anne Will on the TV channel ARD.

In order to present its project, now named the «Merkel Plan», the ESI organised conferences in Berlin, Ankara, Istanbul, Stockholm, Brussels and La Haye.

On the 12th November, independent of the emergency provoked by the hordes of migrants gathering in the Balkans, the Union organised a summit in Valetta to try to answer the structural question of economic migrations from Africa. It was agreed to create a special fund of 1.8 billion Euros for long-term projects which could offer a local economic perspective to Africans and help them to create stability at home.

On the 29th November, the Union organised another summit of the European Council, this time with Turkey. The «Merkel Plan» was adopted by both parties. However, an envelope of aid to Turkey was added, to the sum of 3 billion Euros.

The Council justified this sudden generosity as aid for the accommodation of the Syrian refugees who, until then, had cost Turkey 8 billion dollars – but there was no plan to pay an equivalent sum to Lebanon and Jordan, who together have hosted more Syrian refugees than Turkey. Yet the Council pretends to ignore that Turkish spending has already been reimbursed by the UNO, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, and that Turkey has systematically looted the North of Syria –dismantling machine-tools and stealing antique treasures– for infinitely greater sums. And finally, the majority of the 2.7 million Syrian refugees in Turkey have been integrated into the local economy, to the extent that less than 240,000 have been placed under the protection of the World Food Programme.

In reality, Germany and France, who pushed for the creation of this donation, intend in this way to indirectly finance the continuation of the war against Syria, which will – according to them – put an end to the suffering of the refugees by overthrowing the Syrian Arab Republic.

On the 21st January 2016, the director of the ESI, Gerald Knaus [4], published an op-ed piece in the Süddeutsche Zeitung. He defended the principle of a closer and more direct cooperation between Germany and Turkey, but without involving the EU. He concluded that a failure of the «Merkel Plan» would lead to «reinforcing those who wish to abolish the right to asylum, who are against the refugees, against the Union, against Turkey, against Muslims, and who support Putin. » [5].

Gerald Knaus does not explain how the fact of dealing directly between Berlin and Ankara without involving Brussels would help the struggle against Euro-scepticism. Neither does he explain why Russia would want to see Syrian refugees drowning in the Aegean.

No-one reacted to these insanities, since the refugee question has not been treated rationally for a long time.

The Merkel-Samsom Plan

On the 28th January, when the six-month rotating presidency of the European Council fell to Holland, Dutch Prime Minister Mak Rutte and his ally, the President of the Workers’ Party, Diederik Samsom [6], announced to De Volkskrant that they had prepared concrete measures for the implementation of the «Merkel Plan» [7]. As a result, one now speaks of the «Merkel-Samsom Plan» when talking about the project presented by the ESI [8].

In passing, we learn that Diederik Samsom has been consulting with several European Socialist governments since November, and that he has already visited Turkey.

On the 18th March, the European Council, presided by Holland, confirmed the implementation of the 29th November agreement [9]. Except that, by some miracle, the 3 billion Euros which were to be paid to Turkey had now become 3 billion annually.

And yet in the time between the two European summits, the number of refugees who entered the Union illegally, through Turkey via Greece, is estimated at about 200,000.

Observations on a deviation

In six and one half months, we have gone from a crisis concerning migrants who were mostly African, and who drowned in the Mediterranean before reaching the coasts of Italy, to a windfall for German heavy industry, which was able to hire 800,000 workers at minimal cost, and then to an operation for financing the war against Syria and the displacement of its population.

Indeed, it is recognised that
- On the 1st July 2015, the special representative of the UN General Secretary charged with international migrations, Peter Sutherland [10], forced the World Food Programme to diminish aid for Syrian refugees, making survival difficult for approximately 240,000 of those living in Turkey. In this way, the Anglo-Saxon pressure group that he represents intended to provoke a crisis which would harm the identity of the European nations. This decision, followed by the declarations of hospitality by the French President and the German Chancellor on the day following the publication of the photo of the corpse of young Aylan, led certain Syrian refugees to try for survival in Europe. Consequently, Peter Sutherland opposed the «Merkel-Samsom Plan», because it stabilises the populations, and uses the crisis against Syria alone.
- The Imprimerie Nationale Française, which until 2011 supplied Syrian passports, created a large number which, at the start of the crisis, were distributed to non-Syrian economic migrants – mainly Lebanese – thus increasing the pressure of « refugees» in Europe.
- The migration networks were organised not to bring Syrian refugees from Turkey to Europe, but to go and take Syrians from their homes in Syria and bring them to Europe. Rumours were spread which spoke of luxurious living conditions for Syrian refugees in Europe – a special airline was opened from Beirut, and a maritime line from Tripoli, to transport Syrians who were not refugees to Izmir. In the space of a few weeks, we saw middle-class citizens from Damascus and Latakia – who have always supported the Syrian Arab Republic – sell their businesses and take the road to exile.

Finally, and contrary to certain official declarations :
- The link between the pressure of migrants in Europe and the war in / against Syria is artificial. It has been deliberately created in order to provoke both the acceptance of the migrations and the indirect funding of the war by the Union. Although several hundred thousand Syrians have already been forced to cross the Mediterranean, it is unlikely that millions of others will follow.
- The mixture of populations that were organised to form the hordes of migrants who crossed the Balkans is particularly explosive. It includes Syrians and Iraqis, Afghans, Albanians and Kosovars etc. The fact that most of these people are Muslims should not obscure the fact that they have cultures and religious interpretations which are widely different – sociological origins and motivations which have no connection with one another.
- Apart from the episode of the second half of 2015, the migratory pressure on Europe remains essentially African. However, over the next few years, it could become Turkish. Indeed, should Ankara deprive 6 million of its citizens of their nationality, as it has announced, these people will do anything to flee their country of origin, if possible, before they become stateless. A transfer which could be facilitated by the abrogation of the visas necessary to Turkish citizens wishing to enter the Schengen Area.

Keep in mind :
- Three different group have manipulated the migrant crisis of the second half of 2015 :
• the partisans of the destruction of national cultures, around ex-President of the World Trade Organisation, Peter Sutherland, who believes that this was a way of favouring global free-exchange ;
• German heavy industry, around its President Ulrich Grillo, who hoped he would benefit from 800,000 new workers at minimal cost ;
• France and Germany, represented by François Hollande and Angela Merkel, who saw a way of legitimising the indirect funding of their war against Syria.
- These three groups have in common the fact that they support NATO, see each other on a regular basis, especially during the meetings of the Bilderberg Group, and share the same cynicism about populations. But their interests remain divergent, meaning that in the end, the states have won out over the partisans of global free-exchange.
- As is often the case in this sort of crisis, the populations deliberately set into motion have not exceeded a few hundred thousand people. They were added to other currents, older and more constant. It is the false media interpretation of the facts that give the impression of an imminent transfer of millions of people.

Posted in EuropeComments Off on How the European Union is manipulating the Syrian refugees

Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) Protected by Saudi Zio-Wahhabi led Coalition?

War in Yemen: Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) Protected by Saudi-led Coalition?
Saudi Arabia's Military Involvement in the Yemen Conflict

The Saudi-led coalition continues a propaganda campaign, claiming to be in a major offensive against al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). However, AQAP continue to gain the ground despite the so-called “military pressure” of the coalition. AQAP actively criticizes the Kuwait peace talks between the Saudi coalition and al Houthi and former Yemeni president Ali Abdullah Saleh’s government as negotiations to empower the al Houthis along with Yemen’s political elite, including Saleh. This AQAP media campaign is aimed to strengthen the diplomatic position of Saudi Arabia.

The UN-led peace talks in Kuwait had been suspended, when the Hadi delegation withdrew from the peace talks citing the al Houthi-Saleh forces’ seizure of a military base in Amran on May 1. The Houthi alliance seized the Umaliqa base in Amran governorate.  The both sides, the Houthi alliance and the coalition had previously cited continued violations of the ceasefire by each other.  The talks resumed on May 4. Both sides submitted proposals for a political settlement and plans for the withdrawal of forces and release of prisoners. The current round of peace talks are unlikely to produce a political solution. However, the release of prisoners and improvement of the humanitarian situation in separate regions can be achieved.

The Saudi-backed forces are attempting to secure Aden and Lahij, but can’t overcome the resistance from Jihadists and southern secessionist groups.

Recently, a SVBIED targeted Aden’s police chief 2 times: on April 28 and on May 1. It shows that militant cells remain operational in Aden even after efforts to clear the militant-infiltrated neighborhoods.  The Aden-based security forces claim to clear the road from Aden to Taiz in Lahij governorate and secure the whole governorate. However, AQAP militants remain active in the governorate, however, as indicated by a recent attacks on checkpoints in the area.

Meanwhile, clashes are ongoing for Al Dhabab, which controls the southwestern entrance to the city of Taiz, despite the ceasefire. The Houthi alliance holds the road leading to the eastern and northeastern entrances to the city and the Mokha port. The coalition is attempting to advance in the areas.

Posted in Saudi Arabia, YemenComments Off on Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) Protected by Saudi Zio-Wahhabi led Coalition?

China: Preserving Sovereignty or Sliding into Western Sponsored ‘Color Revolutions’


Washington and its Vassals are Demonizing China for Keeping a Check on Foreign NGOs


On April 28, the New York Times was blasting “Clampdown in China Restricts 7,000 Foreign Organizations”. A perfect reason for demonizing China for infringing on the liberties of foreign NGOs – NGO’s that try to help and do good in China. The ‘doing good’ is a concerted effort by foreign agents, including international and national organizations and NGOs that receive foreign training and funding to influence public opinion and eventually to cause civil unrest. Imagine, foreign agents teaching and influencing students at Chinese universities with western interests of, for example, privatizing China’s public and social services; or directly interfering in sovereign state affairs, by for instance attempting to rig the Shanghai stock exchange.

Let’s put this Chinese ‘clampdown’ in perspective. What would Washington say and do, if thousands of Chinese and Russian ‘NGO’s were to infiltrate US territory under all sorts of philanthropic pretexts, but in reality to subvert the US population against their government? – Well, there is no need to speculate with the answer. It’s very clear, they would simply be banned. So, this is not even a game on equal footing. It’s as usual – Washington pretends making the rules.

When China announced in March 2015 a planned reduction in GDP growth from 12%-14% of the past years to 6%-7% for at least 2016 and possibly beyond, it was a well-calculated move by the Chinese Central Bank. The past more than 10% growth was not sustainable – not for Chinese internal equality and stability, nor for the stagnant western export markets.

The stock market plunge was made to look like a reaction to a ‘faltering’ Chinese economy. It peaked at a drop of about 30% in mid-July 2015. The decline had nothing to do with the ‘Chinese economy failing’, as western pundits wanted the general public to believe. Something even Forbes journalists argued, the “stock market crash does not indicate a blowout of the Chinese physical economy”, but it may indicate a “shift from a focus on manufacturing to service industries.” After all, a 6% to 7% growth rate is more than any western country can claim.

The Shanghai stock crash had much to do with foreign ‘agents’, in this case Wall Street banks, some of which have been accredited to the partially liberated Shanghai bourse. A bust in the Chinese stock market meant the Chinese economy is faltering – negative propaganda, so much needed these days by Washington and its minions, to boost their own empty glory. The western media were immediately lambasting the Chinese economic model as failure. In order for foreign banks to intervene so drastically, foreign trained and funded local counterparts are necessary. To exacerbate the propaganda message, such prominent financial institutions, as Morgan Stanley, Credit Suisse and Bank of America warned that China’s market was a “bubble”.

On 29 June 2015, the market regulator, China Security Regulatory Commission (CSRC) called out on their Sino Weibo site, “There have been people calling out the Chinese economy in an attempt to destabilize faith in the stock market and to disrupt the order of the market. The CSRC wishes investors to act independently of such rumors, not to fall for such claims, and not to follow them blindly.”

Western Interference

No wonder under these circumstances, and merely observing what is going on around the globe with western interference in national elections, organizing ‘regime change’ by all possible illegal means, ‘Color Revolutions’, parliamentary ‘coups’, proxy wars and conflicts, it is but common sense for President Xi Jinping, as reported by the New York Times, to take a major step on Thursday, imposing greater control and limit Western influences on Chinese society, as [the government] passed a new law restricting the work of foreign organizations and their local partners, mainly through police supervision.”

This affects some ‘good-hearted’ 7,000-plus NGOs working in the fields of environment, philanthropy, cultural exchanges, and maybe even in business promotion. What a shame. The authoritarian Chinese Government clamps down on those foreign agencies, which attempt to destabilize China by influencing people via the media, universities, industries and by associating with local civil society. Most of these foreign and dissident local ‘groups’ and individuals are trained and funded by the ‘National Endowment for Democracy’ – NED, a Washington based, fully State Department sponsored and funded agency, receiving hundreds of millions of dollars for precisely the purse of training and financing local dissidents and ‘NGOs’.  There are others in the US doing similar work. They are very strong and determined. They set an objective and won’t let go.

Again, ask yourself – what would Washington do, if similar Chinese and Russian trolls were to intrude the US of A with the same objective – mobilizing the American public against their government?

Fragmented and Twisted News

This piece of fragmented and twisted China news reported by the NYT was copied and blasted into the airwaves every hour on the hour by every European mainstream radio and TV station for every European to once more getting the message, China is an oppressive police state.

Most of these 7,000 NGOs, if not all, are foreign agents with one purpose – destabilizing ‘unaligned’, sovereign and autonomous China. Russia is facing the same phenomenon, especially now, shortly before parliamentary elections. Heeding the lessons from the various ‘NGO’ initiated coup attempts and demonstrations before the 2012 elections, and in foresight of this year’s elections, Mr. Putin has already put similar laws in place, especially the so-called ‘undesirable’ organization legislation which he introduced soon after his re-election in 2012. It requires those agencies or NGOs receiving foreign funding to register as ‘foreign agents’, who may be surveilled by police and whose finances are subject to government control.

In March 2015, Mr. Putin called NGOs a threat to national security. Western special services continue their attempts at using public, non-governmental and politicized organizations to pursue their own objectives, primarily to discredit the authorities and destabilize the internal situation in Russia. They are already planning their actions for the upcoming election campaigns of 2016-18.”

A similar law limits foreign ownership in Russian media to 20%. Of course, the western media in which neither Russia or China would be allowed to own a single percent, lambasted Russia for censuring freedom of press and freedom of expression. Vladimir Putin was personally accused of stifling dissent. As you know by now, this has nothing to do with censuring freedom of expression. It is just a means of limiting the public damage caused by propaganda-lies propagated by the western media throughout any territory they have access to and want to conquer. Curtailing foreign media influence is what all of sovereign South America should have done long ago, especially Argentina, Brazil and Venezuela. Now it’s (almost) too late. The Washington ‘backyard’ is nearly cooked, ready for usurping and atrocious consumption.

Foreign Funded and Trained NGOs

Foreign-funded and trained NGOs and other politicized ‘groups’ can be extremely dangerous, as many of them are so well camouflaged and integrated into society that they become almost invisible. They may be in a country for several years before they act, pulling the ‘trigger’ when the right time arrives to launch an act of unrest and destabilization, almost always with the goal of ‘regime change’. The new puppet chief of state is usually groomed by Washington, ready to take over at command.

The various ‘Arab Springs’, were the brainchild of the CIA, prepared during several years and executed by foreign groups and nationals, trained for subversion and funded abroad. The Arab Spring, launched in Tunisia in December 2010, also known as the Tunisian Revolution, spread subsequently and conveniently throughout the Arab League countries of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) – and is ongoing, always guided by foreign trained, funded and armed locals; and supported by the secret services of Washington and its allies. It was successful in creating sufficient chaos to justify foreign military intervention – US-CIA, NATO, Mossad, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other Gulf States, applying the old principle: divide to conquer – a doctrine still valid after hundreds of years – and counting.

This Washington sponsored, State Department funded around-the-globe destabilization program has been a success story in most cases. One of the most glaring examples in recent history was breaking the tenacity of the Soviet Union, where they, the Masters of the Universe, used heavier artillery than just NGOs – with the final financial blow coming from the Washington Consensus – FED, IMF, World Bank. The Washington Consensus moved in quickly after the Soviet Unions manufactured collapse, ‘restructuring’ the new Russia with billions of dollars in loans, as well as privatization of almost the entire state apparatus, leaving behind a country in shambles; a country that was not prepared with legislation to deal with the private ‘market place’ western-style. The ensuing chaos, corruption and mafia-type crimes have since become legendary. Only with President Putin after 2000 order and control with the appropriate legal framework was re-instated.

The destabilization effort continued almost seamlessly to the former Soviet Republics which became the CIS countries (Commonwealth of Independent States). Internal subversion by foreign sponsored groups early on in their new found identity as ‘free’ states was necessary for the west, lest these new republics may stay in the Russian orbit, and not allow expansion of NATO closer to Moscow. The German-US promise to never expand NATO eastwards was a farce.

Here is what the Spiegel-Online of 26 November 2009 says about the promise: On Feb. 10, 1990, between 4 and 6:30 p.m., Genscher spoke with Shevardnadze [Soviet Foreign Minister]. According to the German record of the conversation, which was only recently declassified, Genscher said: “We are aware that NATO membership for a unified Germany raises complicated questions. For us, however, one thing is certain: NATO will not expand to the east.” And because the conversion revolved mainly around East Germany, Genscher added explicitly: “As far as the non-expansion of NATO is concerned, this also applies in general.” Shevardnadze replied that he believed “everything the minister (Genscher) said.”

So much for trusting the West. NATO was expanded in 1999 to Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic, followed in 2004 by the Central and East-European countries Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. In 2009 Albania and Croatia joined. Under debate is now NATO membership of Sweden, Finland and Serbia. At its creation in 1949 NATO had 12 members. At present it has 28members; all in an expansion towards the east, encroaching Russia.

Al this goes to say that without the infamous ‘NGOs’ or foreign trained and funded political ‘inserts’ into the former Soviet Republics, countries the west needed to convince that NATO was good for their protection, NATO expansion may not have been possible. The ‘convincing’ was done with massive anti-Russia propaganda, the danger to be absorbed again by expansionist Russia, leading to the so-called ‘Color Revolutions’, a western invention, promoting western friendly parties in the country targeted for ‘regime change’, with massive displays of brightly colored flags.

Secretary of State, John Kerry’s sidekick, Victoria Nuland is famous for boasting in a recorded telephone call with US Ambassador Pyatt in Kiev with such infamous words, fuck the EU; we have spent 5 billion dollars for regime change [in Ukraine] and won’t let others interfere. She and US Ambassador Pyatt, with the help of CIA and NATO intelligence, instigated the bloody coup in Maidan Square in February 2014. Ukraine, for hundreds of years was part of old and new Russia; today it is a shambles, a bloodbath; corrupted to the bones by a US-NATO installed and maintained pro-western Nazi Government.

Color Revolutions in Latin America

A Latin formula of ‘Color Revolutions’ was also conceived to destabilize Washington’s backyard – Central and South America – also ongoing. Already under US control are Panama, Honduras, Guatemala, Peru, Colombia, Uruguay, and since December 2015 Argentina. Currently thousands of foreign (US) trained destabilizing local ‘politicos’ are working hard on a parliamentary coup in Brazil. After having turned the Venezuelan Parliament from the left to the extreme right last December, they – Washington’s Secret Services, be sure, always with the help of Mossad – using their local patsies, have now initiated a referendum with the objective to overthrow President Maduro.(left)

There is apparently no way of halting them. And there is no decisive move by affected governments in peril, aka Brazil and Venezuela, to use constitutional legislative forces to stop these illegal coups. Have the leaders of these countries and their families been threatened with their lives? – John Perkins’Economic Hit Man, the old and the new versions, tell plenty of such stories. This website, albeit incomplete may also give insight.

Concluding Remarks  

In this western instigated moves to subdue ‘non-obedient’ governments, NGOs and other foreign trained, funded and often also armed groups and individuals, merely prepare the ground. They make sure the time is right and are in constant communication with CIA and other secret services under the Empire of Chaos. Before Washington’s actual move to check-mate, they – Washington and its stooges – put the appropriately bought local puppets into key positions, using to the extent possible constitutional procedures – no matter whether the executioners are crooks, corrupt or even murderers. The empire has no scruples. Why should they? They get away with murder all the time.

China has first-hand experience with the student uprising in Hong Kong, the so-called Umbrella Revolution that lasted from 24 September to 15 December 2014, protesting against what they called the Beijing influenced Hong Kong Congress electoral process. After all, Hong Kong is part of China. Although it was clear to most observers that this show of force was foreign funded, instigated and supported throughout, nobody in the western media reported the truth. Every Anglo-Saxon MSM bashed China for using dictatorial means in imposing electoral rules in Hong Kong. The Umbrella Movement failed miserably.

Mind you, those swell-sounding NGOs like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Green Peace and more of the sort, they are all majority US-western funded and know very well who is their master. For example, you probably have never seen any Amnesty International Report accusing the United States of America of human rights abuses. Yet, by all accounts the US and its minions are arguably by far the most atrocious human rights abusers on this globe, being responsible for the death of at least ten to twelve million people over the past 60 years by wars and conflicts carried out directly by US-NATO forces, or indirectly by Washington instigated and paid proxy wars and conflicts. Obama boasts about being involved in 7 wars around the globe, let alone the thousands and thousands of drone killings carried out under his personal command.

No wonder President Xi and President Putin put measures in place to stop these Washington directed, paid and often armed aggressive and violent separatist groupings, camouflaged as NGOs. The lies, uncomplete and biased reporting have turned the New York Times and similar – once-upon-a-time – prominent and credible media outlets into a ridiculous farce.

Posted in ChinaComments Off on China: Preserving Sovereignty or Sliding into Western Sponsored ‘Color Revolutions’

Shoah’s pages