Decoding 9/11 is the Key to Understanding Modern Geopolitics

Most observers of modern geopolitics face a heavy dose of confusion on a daily basis. The seemingly nonsensical nature of post-9/11 American foreign policy leaves too many questions unanswered, questions like “Why regime change at any cost in the Middle East?” or “Why do they hate Putin so much?” In order to answer them, one must first understand the geopolitical circumstances of the 20th century, the fall of the Soviet Union, and the lead up to 9/11.

As Halford Mackinder noted in his 1904 work The Geographical Pivot of History, the central, contiguous land mass consisting of Europe, Asia, and Africa is incontrovertibly the most populated and resource rich area in the world. Mackinder also recognized that Russia sits right in the middle of this land mass, in what he called the Heartland, meaning that any attempt at world domination and the establishment of a New World Order by the Globalist powers that be could never be successful without removing Russia as an obstacle. But as history has shown, military conquest of Russia is far easier said than done. Swedish and French campaigns chased Russian forces across vast but empty expanses before becoming bogged down and ultimately frozen and destroyed by Russia’s brutal winter. Arguably, the last successful, lasting military invasion of Russia occurred in 1240 when Batu Khan’s Golden Horde annexed Moscow and the Eurasian Steppe into the Mongol Empire.

To the Western oligarchs, the Russian obstacle was a undeniable impediment to their overall strategy. It also meant that the possibility of an alliance between resource rich Russia and industrialized Germany, the classic nightmare scenario of the West, would never go away. What’s more, any attempt to establish a Russian-led world hegemony would spring from the most geopolitically advantageous location on the globe.

With this in mind, a new plan was formulated by the elite- covert regime change. As revealed by Anthony C. Sutton’s seminal work Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, immensely powerful forces such as the Rockefellers, Morgan Bank (now JPMorgan Chase & Co.), National City Bank (now Citigroup) and other supposedly pro-Capitalist institutions and actors aided and funded Bolshevik revolutionaries like Leon Trotsky in toppling the Russian government and installing a one-party system under the Communists.

By 1917, the Marxist cultural infiltration was complete and Western elites had succeeded in capturing Russia without even firing a shot. The next step in establishing the New World Order was to merge the Soviet Union with the United States. We know this because the Reece Committee uncovered such a plan in their investigations of the Ford, Carnegie, and Rockefeller foundations in 1953.

“Rowan Gaither was, at that time, President of the Ford Foundation. Mr. Gaither had sent for me, when I found it convenient to be in New York. He asked me to call upon him at his office, which I did.”

“Upon arrival, after a few amenities, Mr. Gaither said, ‘Mr. Dodd, we have asked you to come up here today, because we thought that, possibly, off the record, you would tell us why the Congress is interested in the activities of foundations such as ourselves.’

“And, before I could think of how I would reply to that statement, Mr. Gaither then went on, and voluntarily stated, ‘Mr. Dodd, all of us who have a hand in the making of policies here, have had experience either with the OSS during the war, or with European economic administration after the war. We have had experience operating under directives. The directives emanate, and did emanate, from the White House. Now, we still operate under just such directives. Would you like to know what the substance of these directives is?’

“I said, ‘Yes, Mr. Gaither, I would like very much to know.’ Whereupon, he made this statement to me, ‘Mr. Dodd, we are here to operate in response to similar directives, the substance of which is that we shall use our grant-making power so to alter life in the United States, that it can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union.'”

-Norman Dodd, chief investigator for U.S. Congressman B. Carroll Reece’s 1953 Special Committee on Tax Exempt Foundations, as interviewed by Edward G. Griffin in 1982

With the combined might of the US and the Soviet Union, Germany and the rest of world would not stand a chance, and the Globalist one world government would then be installed.

The German factions witnessed all of this, and knew that they could never resist such a alliance, or establish a hegemony of their own, if they were still divided into East and West. While the Globalists in America and Europe spent nearly all of the 20th century pushing Socialism, the policies of Perestroika began to take hold in the Soviet Union during the late 80’s, and it would have appeared that the great merger was under way. In 1989, the Soviet Union began to crumble, the “Sovietologists” and the fake intelligentsia were stunned, and the German Globalists sprang into action with a plan for quick reunification.

During the 90’s, America enjoyed its position as the sole superpower of the world. The pro-West Atlanticist politicians like Yeltsin who pushed for Perestroika would take power, and new policies of privatization developed with “help” from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Harvard Institute for International Development would result in a truly colossal amount of wealth going to a small group of Russian oligarchs. Yeltsin’s decision to sell off state-owned assets and natural resources to foreign entities for pennies on the dollar proved utterly catastrophic for Russia, but was good business for its oligarchs and Western Globalists like George Soros. Yeltsin had been conned into selling out Russia and its people, and by the late 90’s, everybody knew it.

On the other hand, German reunification went smoothly and quickly, and the country returned to its pre-war position as the economic and industrial powerhouse of Europe. The EU was formally established in 1993 via the Maastricht Treaty and the Euro was officially introduced. Monetary policy and an exchange rate mechanism were established as Europe became economically integrated into one union. Due to Germany’s central location and heavily industrialized export economy, it quickly became the strongest economy in Europe, and other countries who had become insolvent due to corruption or instability would eventually rely heavily on German prosperity.

Everything was going according to plan for the Globalists. Russia was being siphoned dry and controlled by the Atlanticists and central bankers, German Globalists were incorporating Europe into the centralization paradigm, and all of the appropriate structures and mechanisms to maintain a one world government were being installed.

And then it all fell apart on September 11, 2001.

In his excellent book on the subject, Hidden Finance, Rogue Networks, and Secret Sorcery: The Fascist International, 9/11, and Penetrated Operations, Dr. Joseph P. Farrell lays out a thoroughly researched and meticulously detailed prima facie case that the destruction of the Twin Towers, Building 7, and the attack on the Pentagon was not just an inside job by the elites here in America, but consisted of two separate operations, one within the other. According to Farrell, the first was an operation to facilitate a “new Pearl Harbor” called for by the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), which consisted of merely damaging the target buildings in order to destroy evidence of a covert slush fund consisting of trillions of dollars of stolen money, and to kick off the final sprint towards global hegemony under the leadership of American Globalists starting with regime change in the Middle East. US military bases in Iraq and Afghanistan would carve out a chunk of the rapidly developing Asian continent and isolate Africa, splitting apart Mackinder’s “World-island.”

The second operation was kept a secret from the Bush administration and US Globalists, and it consisted of the actual leveling of the towers and building 7, the hijacking of the US nuclear arsenal and its command structure (the US had assumed a strategic nuclear posture that morning with nuclear armed bombers and submarines standing at full alert), and the isolation and control of key government officials such as Dick Cheney and leaders of Congress. Dr. Farrell posits that a partial coup had taken place capitalizing on the PNAC operation in order to commit nuclear blackmail against US Globalists in order to force them into (or perhaps, out of) a certain course of action or policy.

So who was responsible for blackmailing Bush and the US elites? Farrell unveils a tangled web connecting the 9/11 hijackers and Osama bin Laden to Deutsche Bank and a shadowy organization known as the Carl Duisberg Society. Duisberg was the CEO of German chemical giant Bayer during World War One, forcefully advocating for the development and use of chemical weapons derived from the toxic waste products of his chemical dye industries. Duisberg would also merge Bayer with BASF to form I.G. Farben, the infamous manufacturer of Zyklon B for the Nazi concentration camps.

This group is just one part of what Dr. Farrell calls the “Fascist International,” a mafia-like, extra-territorial covert organization consisting of Nazi holdovers from World War II, the German industrial magnates who followed them, and various levels of peons, cutouts, and shills from all over the world. One of those peons was, apparently, Mohamed Atta, mastermind of the 9/11 attack. Citing the late Michael C. Ruppert’s Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil, Atta was listed as a Carl Duisberg Society scholarship recipient and tutor from 1995 to 1997, had opened accounts with Deutsche Bank while planning the attacks in Frankfurt, and participated in a joint US and German student exchange program for four years in Hamburg. Atta even spoke fluent German.

If Dr. Farrell’s hypothesis is correct, and this Fascist International did indeed turn against the Western elites, 9/11 would have represented the beginning of a factional war within that Globalist power structure, an event that Farrell calls “the divorce.” All of which begs the question: “What could have caused this factional war?”

On January 1, 2000, Boris Yeltsin resigned his position as President of the Russian Federation and appointed his Prime Minister, Vladimir Putin, as his successor. Putin immediately set about reforming everything from tax codes to criminal law to economic policy in an effort to reverse the damage done in the 90’s. The same Russian oligarchs who were enriched by Yeltsin’s policies now found themselves locked in a power struggle with the new President over the direction of the country and its people. Although the Atlanticists still had a significant presence in Russian politics, it was clear that Putin had his own plans for Russia, and they did not involve playing along with a US-led New World Order.

With the largely successful prosecution of the Second Chechen War and having survived harsh criticism for his handling of the Kursk submarine incident, Putin had established himself as the manifestation of a new, nationalist direction for Russian politics. After the debacle of Yeltsin, the Russians had responded by picking the anti-Yeltsin, and therefore, the anti-Christ to the Globalists in the US. Putin’s ascension and solidification of power meant that the fleeting window of opportunity for one world government had come to a close. More than 80 years of preparation, decades of political maneuvering and clandestine activities, and untold amounts of blood and treasure spent would soon be all for nought. Mackinder’s Heartland was pulling itself out from under the Globalist thumb.

But with Putin reigning over Russia, Europe and Germany were spared from US global hegemony. In fact, one could make the argument that Putin was, geopolitically speaking, the best thing to happen to Germany since the reunification as the EU and its Euro are now facing the possibility of disintegration. The revivification of the Russian energy industry was an opportunity for the EU to receive cheaper fuel from a region of the world which was more stable than the Middle East, as well as a means to bypass the petrodollar cartel. Once again, we are face to face with the classic nightmare scenario for Western elites- a rapprochement and alliance between Russia and Germany. Whether or not such an alliance is probable or even possible is an excellent question, but what is far more obvious is the effect of Russia’s revival in driving a wedge between Globalist factions. A wedge which would, many years later, manifest itself in the form of President Donald Trump and the Deep State Junta.

I speculate that it is the effect of this new balance of power, or perhaps a disagreement over how to respond to it and its source in the Kremlin, which would have been one cause for the schism among the Globalists, and ultimately, the “divorce” of 9/11. I suspect another cause would have been a deep suspicion among US elites towards the Germans regarding any potential role they may have played in precipitating the collapse of the Soviet Union at a time which would have benefited Germany’s geopolitical position. As stated earlier, the German reunification was handled quickly and smoothly, Angela Merkel herself assisted in this effort by serving as a deputy spokesperson under the stewardship of Lothar de Maizière, who had run on a platform calling specifically for rapid reunification.

Although Merkel and Putin may have more than a few shared interests, I don’t believe that Putin is a pawn for German Globalists. I do believe, however, that Putin is more than willing to play a role in helping China in their attempt to usurp world dominance. While environmental catastrophists in the US and EU demand carbon taxes, stifling regulations, and an end to fossil fuels, emerging markets are more than happy to continue buying Siberian gas. Meanwhile, China has the jump on the US in developing renewable energy technologies, having spent hundreds of billions of dollars on the development of solar panels, thorium nuclear reactors, and even high-voltage undersea power cables to export energy to other countries. While the US was busy spending trillions overturning the Middle East to placate the Saudis, the rest of the world was taking care of their own interests.

Because Globalists pay no mind to silly, antiquated things like patriotism or love of country, they don’t have to suffer the consequences of their misguided, megalomaniacal quest for world domination and the foolhardy attitude they embrace. The window on a US-led hegemony has closed, and a new door has been opened for China to take on the wretched mantle of Globalism with its totalitarian, Hitlerian philosophy elevating the state over God, the collective over the individual, and the end justifying the means. But please do not resent the Chinese, pity them. They have made the ultimate Faustian bargain, one which will slowly but most surely destroy the beauty of their ancient culture and enslave their many people.

An Ocean Apart: The Great Schism Between the US and the EU

I was somewhat disappointed, but not really surprised, to witness the ouster of certain pro-Trump voices in the mainstream media. I was not shocked to learn that various social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube had begun to blatantly censor independent voices and nonconforming opinions using flimsy copyright violation claims, ambiguously drafted terms of service agreements and equally questionable personal conduct policies written by far-left political advocacy groups. The demonetization of YouTube sapped the will of many anti-Globalists on the platform, which is the primary reason why this blog is not monetized.

I also thought I could change the style of this blog to less frequent but lengthier, more detailed essays with more of an emphasis on the bigger picture, but with fake media reverting back to their old habits of Russian conspiracy theories, anonymous sources which may or may not exist, and some straight up fake news, I see there is still plenty of work to be done and fewer people to do it. The only good news is that the Globalists themselves are forever toiling away at their false narratives and distortions, and that every minute, every waking second of their day is devoted to maintaining the “big lie” that is pushed onto the American people. Those of us who are informed and willing must correct the record, so to speak.

But today, we will not be focusing on Globalist narratives as there are much bigger geopolitical realignments taking place that the fake media are not talking about at all. On his first foreign tour, President Trump had three goals: 1) be the peace through strength candidate, which he pulled off quite well 2) establish economic cooperation with US allies to fund his policy initiatives, which he did with the Saudis, and 3) secure funding for NATO.

The issue of NATO, and Angela Merkel’s refusal to pay Germany’s fair share, clearly defines the growing schism between the US and the EU. The Germans have been spearheading the push for an EU army which would free Europe from dependence on American military might, make NATO obsolete, and ultimately allow Germany and most of Europe to slip out from under the thumb of American global hegemony. It’s either fund NATO, or fend for yourselves, and the President’s insistence forced Merkel to publicly declare her position. Germany’s Chancellor chose not to play ball.

This was ultimately a poor choice, but Merkel and the EU Globalists are very much in dire straits, anyway. The European banking system is failing. Deutsche Bank has been locked into covert economic warfare with the US, and Italy’s oldest bank is on the verge of insolvency. The EU paradigm of debt-based finance, austerity programs, and the Euro have proven to be a failure. Apparently, the socialists in Europe have learned nothing from the Soviets and their inability to adapt to changes at the local level in a top-down style of governance.

And at a time when they needed help the most from their fellow Globalists across the pond, Donald Trump takes power. Had the French election gone to Nationalist and Euroskeptic Marine Le Pen rather than Rothschild banker Macron, the EU’s fate would have been sealed. But the French people have supposedly spoken, and the EU’s wretched existence will continue.

Eastern Europe, on the other hand, has decided to move on. China and Russia’s New Silk Road (AKA One Belt One Road, or OBOR) multi-trillion dollar infrastructure project has been completed. Rather than depending on sea lanes to conduct trade across Asia, goods can be transported via continent-spanning roads and railways, and Eastern European nations are eager to join in.

Notably, leaders of the EU countries most strongly objecting to Brussels policies in key areas of the economy and refugees, such as Hungary’s Viktor Orban, strongly embraced participation in China’s vast $22 trillion infrastructure project…

In remarks in Beijing summarizing his talks there, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban spoke bluntly of an emerging global tectonic fault line. Orban declared that the old globalisation model is obsolete, noting that “a large part of the world has had enough of a world where “a few developed countries have been continuously lecturing most of the world on human rights, democracy, development and the market economy,” a direct slap in the face to the US-led “democracy and human rights” NGOs of George Soros and the CIA-tied USAID which have ferociously tried to topple the very popular Orban.

Orban added that the world today has, “arrived at a cusp between historical eras: the old model for globalisation – built on the assumption that money, profit and technological know-how are in the West, flowing ‘from there to less developed, eastern countries.’ That model, Orban stressed, has “lost its impetus.” The Hungarian leader emphasized the crucial point that Washington and the stagnating governments of much of the EU are in denial. “Over the past ten years, the global economy’s engine room is no longer in the West, but in the East. More precisely, the East has caught up with the West.”

Eastern Europe Tilts to OBOR and Eurasia By F. William Engdahl

Facing US global hegemony from the west and Chinese/Russian economic encroachment from the east, the Nazis-turned-Globalists in Germany are, yet again, dealing with a two-front war.

Trump, the Deep State Junta, and the Mysterious Motives for Regime Change in the Middle East

With rising geopolitical tensions from North Korean missile tests, direct threats from a desperate EU President Juncker, endless Russian conspiracy theories, and open calls for sedition among Washington swamp rats, the all-out war between President Trump and Globalists foreign and domestic finally came to a head when the administration may have used, you guessed it, a false flag operation to justify a tomahawk missile strike against Assad’s forces.

The pure geopolitical expediencies of such a move are apparent. Yes, it’s a show of force and a demonstration of political brinkmanship responding to aggression from North Korea, the seemingly ambivalent Chinese, and the ravings of the hysterical Juncker. And yes, it also helps to cast doubt on the Russian collusion conspiracy theory that the left peddles, as Russia has been trying to break out of post-World War II containment, into the Middle East, and finally into resource-rich Africa. Syria and Iran have been client states of the Russians since the Soviet era expressly for this purpose.

But maybe more importantly, the Trump administration is reasserting the US’s intent to serve as the primary guarantor of security for the region, a role which was relinquished by the US during the Obama administration’s failure to enforce their own red line policy. That role is now entrusted to the Russians, who began drawing up lucrative energy development and European pipeline agreements with Middle Eastern nations who had rejected the destabilization of Hillary Clinton’s “Arab Spring” operations in places like Libya, Egypt and Syria.

But one question still remains: was striking Syria worth the political cost? and the unwavering support of Trump’s voter base? Is this really a course of action that the President would have himself formulated? And why would the Trump administration choose to respond to growing tensions with action in the Middle East? Why not stage a false flag in the Ukraine? or in the South China Sea to address the Globalists directly? What is this long-running, Globalist fixation with interventionism and regime change in the Middle East? And most importantly, why would the Globalists precipitate Trump’s brinkmanship, and praise him when he prevails over them?

Report: Soros-Linked Group Behind Chemical Attack in Syria

I believe Globalists, both for and against Trump, are working to steer his foreign policy into the Middle East region and Syria specifically, and they are using the classic tactic of problem-reaction-solution to do so. Trump finds himself between a rock and a hard place, Trumps authorizes his military to carry out an unpopular missile strike, and then Trump’s approval rating mysteriously shoots up to 50% and the fake media suddenly start praising him? This is classic Pavlovian stimulus-response conditioning, or pressure from above and pressure from below to use the proper Gnostic terminology. Neocon warhawks are already calling for full-scale invasions, and H.R. McMaster has already made plans to insert 150,000 soldiers into the country.

…the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, Wall Street Journal and New York Daily News—offered no opinion space to anyone opposed to Donald Trump’s Thursday night airstrikes. By contrast, the five papers ran a total of 18 op-eds, columns or “news analysis” articles (dressed-up opinion pieces) that either praised the strikes or criticized them for not being harsh enough…

Five Top Papers Run 18 Opinion Pieces Praising Syria Strikes–Zero Are Critical

But we still have the question of what do the Globalists want from the Middle East? To answer this question, we must go to Iraq, back to the aftermath of the Iraq War invasion and the beginning of the occupation. At the time, Operation Iraqi Freedom was viewed largely as a success, but there was one glaring failure that even the media could not overlook  – the looting of the National Museum of Iraq located in Baghdad.

Cuneiforms

Those who know of the history of Iraq know that between the Tigris and Euphrates lies the fertile crescent and Mesopotamia, where the world’s first civilizations sprung up from seemingly nothing. While humans across the globe were still hunter-gathering nomads, seemingly fully-developed cultures with knowledge of agriculture, cuneiform writing, basic math and astronomy, two story houses, and a serious emphasis on record keeping and issuing receipts just popped up in places like Sumer, Ur, Babylon, and Akkad.

Considering that most historians had thought cities like Babylon to be a myth until its discovery in 1811 by Claudius Rich, these apparently anachronistic aspects of Mesopotamian cultures have puzzled academics, and no satisfactory answer has been given to try to explain this second “great leap forward” in human history. But the speculation may not be necessary as the Sumerians themselves admit in their creation story, just like the ancient Egyptians and the Zulu tribes of Africa, that they are a legacy civilization spawned from the fall of an older, greater civilization. Of course, this mode of thinking is in direct conflict with the standard Western model of human history, which considers the present period of Globalist feudalism and Orwellian thought control as the height of human progress.

According to the Sumerian texts, the cause of this fall was a sort of family feud among the “Gods,” similar to the quarrels of the Greek pantheon, which turned into a massive war and the destruction and diaspora of that ancient high civilization not unlike Plato’s account of the sinking of Atlantis. The Egyptians and the Zulu have maintained their creation stories via the oral tradition of their own mystery schools, but the Sumerians, with their aptitude toward cuneiform record-keeping, have transcribed that information to protect it from distortion and embellishment.

And it is these cuneiform records, or perhaps what they reveal about early human history and the fall, are what the Globalists are after and have been after for centuries. All of which brings us back to the looting of the National Museum of Iraq. The footage of Iraqi nationals walking away from the smashed museum with whatever they could carry was deemed a travesty, and the US military was heavily criticized for their inability to secure the site. And that became the narrative- that the looting was an unfortunate byproduct of a lack of law and order. But as time passed, more details came to light.

The story of what really happened inside the Iraq Museum when thousands of valuable antiquities were stolen in the immediate aftermath of the 2003 US invasion has been revealed in a new book.

Written by the chief investigator, it says there were three separate thefts, at least one of which was an inside job, another the work of professionals, and a third where fleeing Iraq military had left open a door which let in the looters.

…

The above-ground storage rooms told a different story. Here was where looters had struck, getting in via a door left open by Iraqi soldiers who, even as they fled, discarded their uniforms in a trail of clothing.

Revealed: the real story behind the great Iraq Museum thefts

One of these thefts resulted in the loss of a collection of 80,000 cuneiform tablets, and unless you think the average Iraqi looking to make a quick buck would skip the fancy vases and ceremonial masks and go straight for the massive cuneiform collection, I suspect that this recorded knowledge was the true goal of these thefts. And I also suspect that these “Iraqi soldiers” who discarded their uniforms may not have been Iraqi soldiers at all.

So who all was involved? It seems that the Globalists in the Bush and Obama administrations were not the only ones interested in this ancient knowledge. The other world power that has consistently demonstrated an interest in Mesopotamia archaeology has been the Germans.

The Germans

In 1902, noted German Assyriologist and linguist Friedrich Delitzsch began sharing through his lectures a shocking discovery he had made during his research of cuneiform tablets. In fact, his work was so provocative, Delitzsch was ordered to present his research before Kaiser Wilhelm and his court. The lecture, titled Babel and Bible, revealed that the proper name of the Jewish god of the Old Testament, Yahweh, had appeared in cuneiform writing during the age of Hammurabi and 300 years before the Israelite’s Exodus from Egypt. Delitzsch also noticed striking similarities between Sumerian creation myths and the Old Testament’s Garden of Eden. He tied the great flood of the Epic of Gilgamesh to the story of Noah’s Ark. According to Delitzsch, the Hebrew Bible, and therefore the Old Testament, was clearly and significantly influenced by Sumerian mythology.

What Delitzsch was discovering was that the Jews had been heavily assimilated to Babylonian culture during their 70 year period of captivity. The practice of monotheism slowly replaced polytheism in Judaism around this time. The introduction of the Hebrew alphabet, along with a new emphasis of referencing the Torah for matters of every day life, appear to be inspired by the Sumerian fixation with record keeping and written language. The cuneiform records were, indeed, telling an interesting story.

It was at this time German foreign policy changed from a sole emphasis on facilitating trade and access to ports, to a policy that included subversion, bribery and propaganda to keep other world powers out of the Middle East. Only four years prior, Kaiser Wilhelm had toured the region, and was advised to back the Pan-Islamism of the slowly unraveling Ottoman Empire. According to the Kaiser’s policy makers, the Ottoman Empire was pushing the Muslim identity and their self-proclaimed status as an Islamic caliphate due to the rebellion of Southern European Christians. The Ottomans wanted to unite the remaining Muslim-majority populace to end the encroachment of Nationalism into their territory.

At first, the Kaiser’s advisors were not interested in saving the Ottomans, they were instead interested in using Pan-Islamism, and later Jihad, to subvert British colonies in India and Egypt as well as French colonies in Morocco and Algeria. But when the German-backed Young Turks came into power in 1908, the stage was set for World War I, and the consequences of the Ottoman alliance turned out to be disastrous for the Germans.

And thus came the Nazis, who would widen the search for ancient knowledge to the Peruvian Andes and Tibet, and also substantially expanded the Kaiser’s policies to include the fomenting of Jihad and terrorism against other Western powers. As soon as Adolf Hitler became Chancellor of Germany in 1933, he met with and formed an alliance with the Sunni Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Amin al-Husseini, who would later lead the Palestinian revolt against the British and actively encourage the extermination of Jews. The Nazis would also form allegiances with the Ba’ath Party, the Muslim Brotherhood, and the Young Egypt Movement.

But the Grand Mufti would ultimately fail to spark the Pan-Islamic revolution the Nazis wanted when his rebellion ended in 1939. Undeterred, the Germans continued to back other Pan-Islamists and Arab Nationalist strong men like the Shah of Iran, Said Barre in Somalia, and Ba’athists like Saddam Hussein. But the Pan-Islamic Jihad revolution never materialized, and many of these Pan-Arab regimes just so happened to be the same regimes mentioned in Wesley Clark’s infamous “7 nations in 5 years” remark in March of 2007. And if you’ll recall, the “7 nations” regime change plan was a direct response to the attacks of 9/11.

Covert War

And now we have come full circle, back to the Iraq war of 2003, and the baffling continuation of regime change policy today. Although President Trump claims he will not invade Syria or interfere further with the Middle East, I believe the Globalist splinter group backing Trump will continue that policy against their German Globalist rivals. Whether the fake media will cover their insatiable lust for hidden knowledge and lost secrets is extremely doubtful.

You may have noticed Neocon warhawks like H.R. McMaster and Dina Powell taking power in the National Security Council, but President Trump’s choice for Director of National Intelligence, Dan Coats, is particularly telling. According to Wikipedia:

From August 15, 2001, to February 28, 2005, Coats was the United States Ambassador to Germany.^[19][20] As ambassador during the lead-up to the Iraq war, he pressured the German government not to oppose the war, threatening worsened US relations with Germany.^[21] As Ambassador he also played a critical role in establishing robust relations with then opposition leader Angela Merkel and in the construction of a new United States Embassy in the heart of Berlin next to the Brandenburg Gate.^[22]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Coats

And note that the Berlin embassy Coats helped build was revealed by Edward Snowden in 2013 to be the same embassy that facilitated British and American spying on Angela Merkel’s personal phone.

So I am forced to speculate that there is indeed a covert war between German and American Globalists in the Middle East, but exactly what they are after remains murky. Could it be an ancient story of the origins of humanity? Or occulted knowledge providing insight into the mysterious structures of the universe? Could it be forbidden technology? Could it be all of these things?

Whatever it is, American Globalists have been using Arab Spring operations and ISIS cutouts to continue their pillaging of ancient sites and antiquities in other regime change nations like Egypt, Libya, and Syria.

Pictures: Looters Shatter Museum of Ancient Egyptian Treasures

Libya’s cultural heritage ‘being destroyed and plundered by Isis’

Inside the Palmyra museums looted by ISIS: Pictures show wanton destruction carried out by fanatics

And, when the Globalists have what they want, they simply order their ISIS agents to blow up and level whatever ancient site they are assigned to desecrate, thereby depriving anybody else from learning what they had just learned. Because things like culture, history, and art are irrelevant to the Globalists’ insatiable, sociopathic, psychotic desire for power. If President Trump allows these Rockefeller Republican, warhawk Neocons to bog the US down in another big Middle Eastern quagmire, the political consequences in 2020 may be insurmountable, and the era of Globalist tyranny will continue.

Leaks, Liars, and the New Political Weapon of Choice

It always amuses me when terms and concepts once relegated to the realm of conspiracy theory and crackpots suddenly start popping up in the mainstream lexicon, words like “deep state,” “shadow government,” and “globalism” are suddenly appearing in headlines and being tossed around by those empty, talking heads on TV. The exposure of the global hidden hierarchy and power structure, and the family feud between Globalist hardliners like the Clintons and detentists like Kissinger, has shown us that the deep state hierarchy isn’t just vertically striated, but horizontally divided as well. This is, and has always been, a conflict between factions.

Which should mean that the dubious effort to prove that there is a vast, monolithic conspiracy should be coming to an end, as well as the hopeless search for that grand unified theory that can explain every event, every actor, every relationship, and all of history in one neat little package (IE “It’s the Freemasons!” or “It’s the Jews!”). Hopefully, alternative research will become a bit more nuanced with this turn of events, and the public conscious can get beyond the “conspiracy theory” marginalization term.

Because of these changes, this blog will change too. If the media has decided to inch closer to what I know to be the truth, then I will move further in that direction as well. This blog has briefly touched upon some very deep geopolitical topics like tectonic weaponry, the bearer bonds scandals, and the pedophilia rings currently being rounded up by the Trump administration, but those are just the tip of the iceberg. It is time to shed light on the deepest secrets of the Globalists, secrets like the Black Eagle Trust, the events going on in Antarctica, and what Joseph Farrel calls the “archaeology wars” between the US and German Globalists. Examining these oddities will demystify many of the seemingly nonsensical, arbitrary decisions of the Globalists, such as the Middle Eastern mission of widespread regime change.

But the subject of this post will be the fake media, and the official death of their influence as a manipulative PR tool. Their collective failure to manufacture the consent needed for a Hillary Clinton presidency showed that the age of mass media collusion and perception management has come to an end. The election of 2016 was won and lost in cyberspace, in the world of intelligence agencies, hacking, and leaks, and the war between the Globalists and their factional enemies continue there.

Perhaps the most readily apparent example of this new paradigm is the Rachel Maddow fiasco. Maddow’s “expose” of the President’s 2005 tax returns was a spectacular failure, and the current theory is that Trump himself furnished the returns as they were fairly benign. If true, she fell for what intelligence operatives call “chumming the waters” using black propaganda. But the question weighing on my mind is how she could have fallen for such a ruse. Maddow is intelligent, she is a graduate of Stanford, an Oxford Rhodes Scholar, and a Globalist propagandist on par with Ivy Lee and Joseph Goebbels. I am inclined to believe she chose suicide by Trump rather than trying to maintain the untenable position of a Globalist shill.

Without a Globalist administration to support them, the fake media have lost nearly all of their inside sources and have been relegated to the role of the outsider, and relying on leaks. Even worse, President Trump’s ability to circumvent the fake media has severely crippled their ability to control the narrative, which has sent the press into a frenzy. The Globalists know this as well, so the media has been tasked with pushing the Russian hacking conspiracy theory in an effort to distract Democrat voters from the disaster of 2016, and the continued rule of corporatist cronies like Schumer, Pelosi, and Perez. With their credibility in tatters, and public trust levels in single digit numbers, their job is to peddle wishful thinking to their dwindling, disillusioned audience in an effort to reunite the shattered left.

EU Globalists like Merkel in Germany have quickly recognized this new paradigm of weaponized leaks, and a particularly damaging leak of emails targeting Turkish Minister of Energy and Natural Resources Berat Albayrak exposed efforts to manipulate the Turkish press and social media as well as ties to ISIS oil smuggling via a firm called Powertrans. Albayrak happens to be the son-in-law of Turkish President/Dictator Recep Erdogan, and the leak has worsened the totalitarian, authoritative image of Turkey’s government. When a journalist from the German newspaper Die Welt began to report on it, he was arrested for disseminating terrorist propaganda.

As the spat between Ankara and Berlin becomes increasingly angry, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan called Deniz Yucel, a Die Welt reporter with dual nationality, a “German agent” and a member of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK).

Erdogan says Yucel was a PKK plant with German support

Dictators have a habit of seeing spies around every corner, and the allegation may have just been a convenient excuse to silence dissent, but Erdogan would be right to anticipate a German/Globalist offensive in the theater of cyberspace. Relations between the two countries have finally hit rock bottom after the chain reaction of Brexit, and the rejection of unlimited, uncontrolled immigration meant that Syrian refugee flows would end in Turkey, placing an immense burden on the Turkish state. From there, relations between Turkey and the EU soured quickly.

Contrary to expectations, Turkey actually gained the upper hand by threatening to unleash migrants into a EU that no longer had the political will to accept them. And on more than one occasion, Erdogan threatened to unleash those migrants unless Turkey received some concession from Merkel and the Globalists. Ultimately, Turkey left the EU and the West altogether to join Russia and China in their BRICS system of finance and trade. The Chinese offered to build rail and highway infrastructure and promoted economic development. Pipeline deals between Russia and Turkey were finalized, and proposals were made to introduce Turkish agriculture to the rest of the Asian continent. In short, Russia and China had everything to offer Turkey while Merkel, the EU, and the Obama Administration had nothing.

And because Merkel has nothing to appeal to Erdogan, she has nothing to lose from attacking him, and burning down that already smoldering bridge. On the other hand, Merkel has everything to gain politically by distancing herself from a dictator who is very unpopular in Europe. Erdogan’s response was simply to arrest the journalist and accuse him of sedition, which is itself an interesting observation. Now we are presented with the question of what is to become of Globalist soft power strategy? Prior to President Trump, the fake media and NGO’s did most of the heavy lifting on behalf of the West, but now the press have discredited themselves and some very revealing leaks have some European leaders contemplating a ban of George Soros’ Open Societies NGO’s. As we have seen with Merkel and Erdogan, targeted leaking is only marginally successful in totalitarian states, so how will Globalists effect political change without starting a hot war?

And then there’s the Vault 7 leak, which was incredibly damaging to the CIA in that it revealed sources and methods. Add that to the damage that President Trump has already caused, and the Soft Power capabilities of the Globalists are almost nil.

So what do all of the talking heads have to say about this? Well, they are calling it a “new” type of warfare called Hybrid Warfare, which incorporates everything from economic inducement to full-blown military operations and the theater of cyberspace. In other words, its the old Soft Power Full Spectrum Dominance strategy but with more emphasis on cyberwarfare.

And if you are familiar with history, there is really nothing new about this multifaceted geopolitical strategy. The ancient Christian crusading orders of the Knights Templar and the Knights Hospitaller operated their own intelligence networks, ran their own independent financial systems, and were considered sovereign orders that worked for the Papacy and the Holy See to secure Palestine, but were not governed by them. The Knights Templar became so powerful, they were purged by Pope Clement V. Royally chartered mercantile companies such as the East India Company and in particular the Dutch East India Company also had their own intelligence networks and were essentially the technocrats of their day with an expertise in maritime navigation, ship building, and control over Asian trade. Thus began the strategies of large-scale economic inducement and cultural infiltration that continues to this day.

So perhaps it’s true what they say- there really is nothing new under the sun. Granted, cyberwarfare is relatively new, but the war of ideas stays the same no matter the technology or the medium. The invention of the printing press allowed the mass dissemination of ideas during the Protestant Reformation as well as the American Revolution, and it seems with the fall of the fake media and the rise of the internet, another new revolution has begun with the victory of President Trump. A global counterrevolution is taking place in Britain, France, Italy, and the Netherlands, and the Globalists are far, far behind the curve.

Vladi’s World: A Look Inside Putin’s Plans for Russia

In a previous piece about events in Eurasia I focused on Russia’s larger geopolitical goals and only briefly mentioned the New Silk Road Initiative and its economic implications. Now, we shall delve further into the latter. This article is from Mr. F. William Engdahl, whose research is admirably impeccable in its thoroughness.

Putin: Nyet to Neo-liberals, Da to National Development

The focus of the article is the Stolypin Club, an economic think tank inspired by the ideas of 19th century German-American economist Friedrich List. Compared to Putin’s other advisors, Alexei Kudrin the flustered Keynesian and the monetarist sect who recommend no action be taken, the Stolypin Club have developed a plan to reinvest in Russian education and healthcare to bolster their economy with skilled workers, the cessation of debt-based money, and the deliberate hording of gold (along with ally China) to use as a backing for the Ruble in opposition to the Dollar.

Friedrich List was the developer of “National Systems,” an old concept very much opposed by the Globalists in London, Berlin and Washington. List believed that the touting of international free trade (think TTIP, TPP, and NAFTA) was really a ruse to make the economies of less developed nations dependent on first world manufacturing or services. Instead, List suggested that an economic or customs union be developed for the region first, and when economic, technological, and cultural parity or near-parity is attained between the members of the union, the whole may be solidified under one government, treaty, or set of laws. Friedrich List’s ideas were rather well-received in his time, as Prussia used his principles to develop the massive Zollverein, a 164,000 square mile economic union controlling tariffs and economic policy between the German states in the 1800’s. By 1871, the region had solidified itself into the German Empire, the economic colossus that took the world four years to subdue in World War I. What’s more, List’s ideas would go on to inspire the European Economic Community, the predecessor of the EU.

Therefore, it wouldn’t be a surprise to see a penchant for economic and customs unions among the members of the Stolypin Club, and we find just that.

Both Titov and Glazyev, an adviser to Putin on Ukraine and other matters, are founding members of the Stolypin Club in Russia. In 2012 Glazyev was named by Putin, then Prime Minister, to coordinate the work of federal agencies in developing the Customs Union of Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Russia, today the Eurasian Economic Union.

Combine this outlook with Putin’s offer of partnership to Turkey along with the rest of Eurasia, it’s even more proof that Russia is attempting to free up and organize trade in Central Asia. Connecting Russia and China to this potential Zollverein would be the New Silk Road Initiative, an infrastructure project creating highways, rail lines, and communications systems throughout Asia and the Middle East. With the prospect of establishing a continent-wide trade system and a possible economic union in the South China Sea, China and Russia may have an economic basis to sustain their currencies outside of the Dollar system, which the Ruble had been pegged to for 24 years after the State Bank of Russia was privatized in 1990. The use of gold as a backing, however, has nearly no effect on the Dollar, but would be very useful in a time of war or in the aftermath of an economic collapse.

With the monetarists silent and the Keynesian policies being passed over, the Stolypin Club may have Putin’s ear, now. Given these clearly anti-Globalist policies and Nationalist tendencies, we can certainly expect the Globalists to gnash their teeth and shake their fists at Russia. If Putin decides to carry out these proposals, and attempt to break out with the Ruble, expect to see a sudden surge of counterfeiting of the Russian currency. Also expect to see sudden glitches and hacks in the BRICS global payment system, which competes with the West’s SWIFT system. Either way, it would be a good idea to keep an eye, or maybe both eyes, on the Stolypin Club.

Merkel’s Brexit Reprisals an Effort to Snuff Out a Contagion

As China is establishing their own economic union in the South China Sea, the economic union of Europe is still experiencing the aftershocks of the British referendum to leave. The EU’s response to the Brexit came from Angela Merkel:

Merkel throws down gauntlet to May: No free market access while curbing immigration

The immigration issue, particularly in relation to Middle Eastern refugees and migrants, was a major point of contention between the EU bureaucracy and British conservatives and possibly the royal family. The fact that Merkel continues to demand EU control over this policy is somewhat surprising considering that the Chancellor herself admitted that the immigration policies in contention undermined domestic security this past Monday. Other serious criticisms include loss of national sovereignty and rule by non-elected committees, but increasingly unpopular economic policies (and sanctions preventing trade with Russia in particular) are bringing the wealthier entrepreneurial classes into the dispute against the EU. The fact that many member nations are voicing identical grievances should be concerning as the Brexit could spur a contagion of new national referendums to leave. By withholding trade privileges from non-members, Merkel is attempting to establish additional consequences for leaving.

“We will make sure that negotiations will not be carried out as a cherry-picking exercise. There must be and there will be a palpable difference between those countries who want to be members of the European family and those who don’t,” [Merkel] said.

And those additional consequences may be necessary as Italy has rejected the renewal of the Russian sanctions that have affected the Italian economy as much as Russia. Italy’s pro-EU prime minister may be ousted in a fall referendum, and Italian ministers have stated that they will let the EU disintegrate further if there are no reforms.

‘The Unthinkable Is Happening’: Italy Demands EU Reform, Warns Over Full Collapse

Judging from Merkel’s reaction, the fall of the EU, albeit unlikely, is a very real possibility. If Italy leaves, you can expect other southern European nations to leave as well. Both Greece and Spain were subject to repressive austerity measures and both are major trade partners with Italy, and their departures could easily spell the end of the union. The Italians may have forced the EU into making a concession or two, but if we were to see it all come crashing down around the head of Merkel and the European bureaucrats, expect to see Germany picking up the pieces to start over again.