This post was published at WeAreChange
This post was published at WeAreChange
The abuse and the crimes are real; the media op is different…
If you had to pick three titans who were promoting Globalism and its new world order, you could scarcely do better than Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and George Soros.
During his reign at PBS, Charlie Rose interviewed them a total of 34 times.
Not only that, Charlie managed never to ask a direct question about the underlying aim of Globalism, and he never elicited a straight response on that subject.
Instead, Charlie’s furry, smarmy, self-congratulatory, oh-so-innocent breathless questions navigated ‘deep intellectual waters’ in the realm of The Abstruse, and you came away from the interviews with a rash and an itch. You were supposed to feel smarter from the experience, but you couldn’t recall what really happened. What was Charlie asking? What were the titans saying? It could have been a parody of high academic fluff. Countries had been mentioned. Crises had been alluded to. The word ‘solution’ occasionally bubbled up.
This was Charlie’s impenetrable style on important subjects.
He was a social hob-nob pro of the first order in New York. Anybody who was anybody wanted to sit down with him and slide into a long-form interview. And he met many of them at cocktail parties on the Upper East Side. He was a kinder gentler magnet for the rich, famous, and fatuous. If you weren’t fatuous before you appeared on his PBS show, you were by the time you were done. Because Charlie pretended everything coming out of his and your mouth was exceedingly Important. He kept pumping fake dead cartoon blood through those televised conversations.
This post was published at Jon Rappoport on December 18, 2017.
Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, a man who dares not travel in many parts of the globe due to fears of arrest, just made one of the most stunning admissions of his career to date.
In an article for CapX, a British online news website founded by the Centre for Policy Studies, Kissinger warned against defeating ISIS because doing so could lead to an ‘Iranian radical empire.’ He warned:
‘In these circumstances, the traditional adage that the enemy of your enemy can be regarded as your friend no longer applies. In the contemporary Middle East, the enemy of your enemy may also be your enemy. The Middle East affects the world by the volatility of its ideologies as much as by its specific actions.’
Unsurprisingly, Kissinger, a documented war criminal, displayed a complete disregard for international law while expressing his major concerns. Kissinger said:
‘The outside world’s war with Isis can serve as an illustration. Most non-Isis powers – including Shia Iran and the leading Sunni states – agree on the need to destroy it. But which entity is supposed to inherit its territory? A coalition of Sunnis? Or a sphere of influence dominated by Iran?’
This post was published at The Daily Sheeple on AUGUST 15, 2017.
The Hague-based intergovernmental Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) is mandated ‘to implement the provisions of the Chemical Weapons Convention… to achieve… a world… free of’ CWs.
Its mission includes ‘credible and transparent’ on-site inspections to verify use of or destruction of these weapons.
In 2013, it was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for its work – given nearly always to establishment individuals, groups or other entities – with rare exceptions.
Notorious laureates include Obama, Al Gore, Jimmy Carter, Kofi Annan, Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, Menachim Begin, the 14th Dalai Lama, Elie Wiesel, Mother Teresa, Henry Kissinger, the EU, and last October to narco-state terrorist Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos – among many other deplorable honorees.
On June 30, the OPCW issued a ‘fact-finding (sic)’ report on alleged use of CWs [chemical weapons] in Kahn Sheikhoun, Syria on April 4, 2017.
Its so-called ‘rigorous methodology’ was deeply flawed. Alleged evidence lacked credibility – obtained from anti-Syrian sources, including the al-Qaeda-connected White Helmets.
This post was published at 21st Century Wire on JULY 3, 2017.
A little more than a week ago it was announced that Whole Foods was bought by Amazon.com for just under $14 billion. One of the major problems with this is that Jeff Bezos, the head of Amazon has deep ties with the CIA and the Federal government. Wal-Mart being fully in the government’s pocket and now Whole Foods brought under thumb as well, how much longer before Kissinger’s ‘Food as a Weapon’ principle is brought to bear? A good article was just released by Jon Rappaport entitled Buy your food from the CIA: Amazon buys Whole Foods, that is worth reading.
As if that connection is not nefarious enough, there is more: it appears a new cloud technology is being produced for the CIA from…you guessed it…none other than the CIA, as is excerpted here:
This post was published at shtfplan on June 30th, 2017.
Brzezinski’s death at 89 years of age has generated a load of propaganda and disinformation, all of which serves one interest group or another or the myths that people find satisfying. I am not an expert on Brzezinski, and this is not an apology for him. He was a Cold Warrior, as essentially was everyone in Washington during the Soviet era.
For 12 years Brzezinski was my colleague at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, where I occupied the William E. Simon Chair in Political Economy. When I was elected to that chair, CSIS was a part of Georgetown University. However, the president of Georgetown University was one of those liberals who hated Henry Kissinger, who was also our colleague, and the university president also hated Ronald Reagan for his rhetoric, not for his deeds about which the Georgetown president was uninformed. So I also was unwelcome. Whatever I was worth to CSIS, Kissinger was worth more, and CSIS was not going to give up Henry Kissinger. Therefore the strategic research institute split from Georgetown university. Brzezinski stayed with CSIS.
This post was published at Paul Craig Roberts on June 2, 2017.
President Trump just took a trip to Saudi Arabia in an effort to obsequiously ‘shore up’ the ties. Expected. It is expected for any U. S. president to ‘recertify’ the Petrodollar and the commitments to protect the House of Saud that were initiated by Kissinger and Nixon almost five decades ago. Times change, and administrations change; however, the systems in place are very slow and resistant to modification. The BRIC nations are shoring up their interests as the U. S. continues to send more naval ‘support’ for South Korea in the form of another aircraft carrier.
In order to keep the MIC (Military Industrial Complex) happy, defense contracts have to be on the rise: A Republican administration is the foundation for this. The creation of a threat is ongoing. The creation of a threat (whether viable or not) is essential to justify the defense contracts and the ongoing deployments of U. S. troops that were initiated under Obama and are continuing under President Trump. The MIC is too deeply lodged within the framework of the government to extricate in one fell swoop. It is inexorably intertwined with the fragile (almost skeletal) domestic industrial base of the U. S. economy, as well as all of the foreign policy instituted at home and carried out abroad.
This post was published at shtfplan on May 25th, 2017.
The following video was published by X22Report on May 11, 2017
Corporate media is still reeling from the firing of the FBI director. They are so busy trying to figure out what’s going on they are not reporting on anything else. The acting FBI director is currently under investigation himself. Trump launches voter fraud panel. Trump meets with Lavrov and Kislyak and then brings in Kissinger. Trump is going to meet with Erdogan. Trump invites South Korean president to the White House. CIA sets up base outside North Korea. Merkel says they are staying out of Afghanistan. Moderate rebels capture the Tabqa dam in Syria. Intelligence agencies buildup forces in a base in Jordan near the border of Syria.
The tawdry Michael Flynn soap opera boils down to the CIA hemorrhaging leaks to the company town newspaper, leading to the desired endgame: a resounding victory for hardcore neocon/neoliberalcon U.S. Deep State factions in one particular battle. But the war is not over; in fact it’s just beginning.
Even before Flynn’s fall, Russian analysts had been avidly discussing whether President Trump is the new Viktor Yanukovych – who failed to stop a color revolution at his doorstep. The Made in USA color revolution by the axis of Deep State neocons, Democratic neoliberalcons and corporate media will be pursued, relentlessly, 24/7. But more than Yanukovych, Trump might actually be remixing Little Helmsman Deng Xiaoping: ‘crossing the river while feeling the stones’. Rather, crossing the swamp while feeling the crocs.
Flynn out may be interpreted as a Trump tactical retreat. After all Flynn may be back – in the shade, much as Roger Stone. If current deputy national security advisor K T McFarland gets the top job – which is what powerful Trump backers are aiming at – the shadowplay Kissinger balance of power, in its 21st century remix, is even strengthened; after all McFarland is a Kissinger asset.
Flynn worked with Special Forces; was head of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA); handled highly classified top secret information 24/7. He obviously knew all his conversations on an open, unsecure line were monitored. So he had to have morphed into a compound incarnation of the Three Stooges had he positioned himself to be blackmailed by Moscow.
What Flynn and Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak certainly discussed was cooperation in the fight against ISIS/ISIL/Daesh, and what Moscow might expect in return: the lifting of sanctions. U.S. corporate media didn’t even flinch when US intel admitted they have a transcript of the multiple phone calls between Flynn and Kislyak. So why not release them? Imagine the inter-galactic scandal if these calls were about Russian intel monitoring the U.S. ambassador in Moscow.
This post was published at Sputnik News
An article by Robert Berke in oilprice.com, which describes itself as ‘The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News,’ illustrates how interest groups control outcomes by how they shape policy choices.
Berke’s article reveals how the US intends to maintain and extend its hegemony by breaking up the alliance between Russia, Iran, and China, and by oil privatizations that result in countries losing control over their sovereignty to private oil companies that work closely with the US government. As Trump has neutered his presidency by gratuitously accepting Gen. Flynn’s resignation as National Security Advisor, this scheme is likely to be Trump’s approach to ‘better relations’ with Russia.
Berke reports that Henry Kissinger has sold President Trump on a scheme to use the removal of Russian sanctions to pry President Putin away from the Russian alliance with Iran and China. Should Putin fall for such a scheme, it would be a fatal strategic blunder from which Russia could not recover. Yet, Putin will be pressured to make this blunder.
One pressure on Putin comes from the Atlanticist Integrationists who have a material stake in their connections to the West and who want Russia to be integrated into the Western world. Another pressure comes from the affront that sanctions represent to Russians. Removing this insult has become important to Russians even though the sanctions do Russia no material harm.
We agree with President Putin that the sanctions are in fact a benefit to Russia as they have moved Russia in self-sufficient directions and toward developing relationships with China and Asia. Moreover, the West with its hegemonic impulses uses economic relationships for control purposes. Trade with China and Asia does not pose the same threat to Russian independence.
This post was published at Paul Craig Roberts on February 14, 2017.
Here we go again. General ‘Mad Dog’ Mattis, the U.S. Secretary of Defense, declares Iran ‘is the single biggest state sponsor of terrorism in the world.’ National Security Advisor General Michael Flynn puts Iran ‘on notice.’ President Trump says ‘they are not behaving,’ and, on his Superbowl interview, doubles down: ‘They are the No. 1 terrorist state. They’re sending money all over the place – and weapons. And… can’t do that.’ Iran is slapped with new sanctions. It’s as if Dick ‘Dark Side’ Cheney and Donald ‘known unknowns’ Rumsfeld never left.
Never allow facts to get in the way of a bombastic quote. ‘State sponsor of terrorism’ is a neocon meme for any nation/political system that resists U.S. Exceptionalism. The industrial-military-intelligence-security complex feeds on massive budgets to engage these manufactured ‘threats’ while real, on the ground terrorism – yielding from the Salafi-jihadi matrix – has absolutely nothing to do with Iran.
The birth of al-Qaeda was inbuilt in the official Dr. Zbig ‘Grand Chessboard’ Brzezinski doctrine of fighting the former USSR in Afghanistan in the 1980s via a Wahhabi-controlled Jihad Inc. Nothing to do with Iran. Even Trump’s own national security advisor admitted on the record there was a ‘willful decision’ by the Obama administration to let ISIS/ISIL/Daesh fester. Nothing to do with Iran.
As for the Iranian missile test, the U.N. resolution concerning the nuclear deal ‘called upon’ Iran not to test nuclear-capable missiles. This was a conventional missile test, as even the White House admitted.
So what is it all about? We must once again resort to the shadowplay/wayang of a Henry Kissinger-devised new balance-of-power U.S. foreign policy bent on preventing Eurasian integration by prying away Russia from China while antagonizing Iran.
This post was published at Asia Times
The Trump era starts now – with geopolitics and geoeconomics set for a series of imminent, unpredictable cliffhangers.
I have argued that Trump’s foreign policy guru Henry Kissinger’s strategy to deal with the formidable Eurasia integration trio – Russia, China and Iran – is a remixed Divide and Rule; seduce Russia away from its strategic partnership with China, while keep harassing the weakest link, Iran.
In fact that’s how it’s already playing out – as in the outbursts of selected members of Trump’s cabinet during their US Senate hearings. Factions of US Think Tankland, referring to Nixon’s China policy, which was designed by Kissinger, are also excited with the possibilities of containment regarding at least one of those powers ‘potentially arrayed against America’.
Kissinger and Dr. Zbig ‘Grand Chessboard’ Brzezinski are the two foremost, self-described Western dalangs – puppet masters – in the geopolitical arena. In opposition to Kissinger, Obama’s foreign policy mentor Brzezinski, true to his Russophobia, proposes a Divide and Rule centered on seducing China.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Jan 21, 2017.
When Henry Kissinger and David Rockefeller met with Zhou Enlai in China in 1973 – just after President Richard Nixon had visited China establishing official relations – an understanding was reached whereby the U. S. would supply industrial capital and know-how to China.
In return Kissinger-connected corporations would gain the monopolistic advantage of low-cost labor production which could outcompete all U. S. domestic industry.
The comparative advantage gained was being able to hire Chinese laborers who were ready to work hard at exceedingly low cost – with no drugs, no alcohol, a strong work ethic, no unions, no paid benefits and weak environmental standards. And with such a large labor pool, burned out workers could simply be replaced. This gave the Rockefeller/Kissinger corporations a major edge over their domestic U. S. competitors who had to pay relatively high wages, high regulation costs, deal with union strikes and collective bargaining etc.
Of course, the American consumer did not see greatly lowered prices commensurate with such greatly lowered labor costs. The $19.99 plastic action-figure toy marketed with a Hollywood movie still cost $19.99 even though it cost $12 to $15 to produce in the U. S. but less than $2.00 per copy to produce in China and transport to America’s West Coast container ports for distribution throughout America.
This post was published at 21st Century Wire on DECEMBER 31, 2016.
The English language Russian news agency, Sputnik, reports that former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger is advising US president-elect Donald Trump how to ‘bring the United States and Russia closer together to offset China’s military buildup.’If we take this report at face value, it tells us that Kissinger, an old cold warrior, is working to use Trump’s commitment to better relations with Russia in order to separate Russia from its strategic alliance with China.
China’s military buildup is a response to US provocations against China and US claims to the South China Sea as an area of US national interests. China does not intend to attack the US and certainly not Russia.
Kissinger, who was my colleague at the Center for Strategic and International studies for a dozen years, is aware of the pro-American elites inside Russia, and he is at work creating for them a ‘China threat’ that they can use in their effort to lead Russia into the arms of the West. If this effort is successful, Russia’s sovereignty will be eroded exactly as has the sovereignty of every other country allied with the US.
This post was published at Paul Craig Roberts on December 28, 2016.
In this world, it is often dangerous to be an enemy of the United States, said Henry Kissinger in 1968, but to be a friend is fatal.
The South Vietnamese would come to appreciate the insight.
So it is today with Aleppo, where savage reprisals against U. S.-backed rebels are taking place in that hellhole of human rights.
Yet, again, the wrong lessons are being drawn from the disaster.
According to The Washington Post, the bloodbath is a result of a U. S. failure to intervene more decisively in Syria’s civil war: ‘Aleppo represents a meltdown of the West’s moral and political will – and … a collapse of U. S. leadership.
‘By refusing to intervene against the Assad regime’s atrocities, or even to enforce the ‘red line’ he declared on the use of chemical weapons, President Obama created a vacuum that was filled by Vladimir Putin and Iran’s Revolutionary Guard.’
This post was published at Lew Rockwell on December 17, 2016.
In August 2015, I tweeted that if Donald Trump were to be elected President of the United States, we would have to ‘head for the bunkers.’
A Trump presidency was considered highly unlikely back then; but here we are. And while heading for the bunkers might not be the most appropriate response (yet), where we are is undoubtedly a more dangerous world.
Nearly two years ago, former US National Security Adviser and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger warned the Senate Armed Services Committee that, ‘as we look around the world, we encounter upheaval and conflict.’ As Kissinger observed at the time, ‘the United States has not faced a more diverse and complex array of crises since the end of the Second World War.’
And what seemed true from the perspective of Washington, DC, was doubly so from a European perspective. To put it plainly, Europe feels as though it were surrounded by a ring of fire, from the revisionist and revanchist Russia in the east, to the multiple meltdowns in the Middle East and North Africa in the south.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Dec 16, 2016.
A now-ancient Henry Kissinger is still the de facto manager of the Anglo-establishment wing of the new world order. And he still holds tremendous power and influence over world affairs.
And in true fashion, the realpolitik mastermind is prepared to embrace any president, just made remarks urging people not to prejudge Donald Trump – because his administration could create some useful policy.
It seems that President-elect Trump could become a good disciple after all.
Speaking on world peace, a topic for which he was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, Henry Kissinger gave a tacit endorsement to the next elected president, hinting at his acceptance among the upper echelons of the true power base in this country.
While the figures in the media and Washington are still sending mixed signals and attacking Trump on every front, behind the scenes, things may not be so rocky. Kissinger states:
Review of Greg Poulgrain’s book “The Incubus of Intervention: Conflicting Indonesian Strategies of John F. Kennedy and Allen Dulles”
Would Allen Dulles have resorted to assassinating the President of the United States to ensure the achievement of his ‘Indonesian strategy’?
This is the central question addressed by Greg Poulgrain in his extraordinarily important book, The Incubus of Intervention: Conflicting Indonesian Strategies of John F. Kennedy and Allen Dulles.
Two days before President John Kennedy’s assassination on November 22, 1963, he had accepted an invitation from Indonesian President Sukarno to visit that country the following spring. The aim of the visit was to end the conflict (Konfrontasi) between Indonesia and Malaysia and to continue Kennedy’s efforts to support post-colonial Indonesia with economic and developmental aid, not military. It was part of his larger strategy of ending conflict throughout Southeast Asia and assisting the growth of democracy in newly liberated post-colonial countries worldwide.
He had forecast his position in a dramatic speech in 1957 when, as a Massachusetts Senator, he told the Senate that he supported the Algerian liberation movement and opposed colonial imperialism worldwide. The speech caused an international uproar and Kennedy was harshly attacked by Eisenhower, Nixon, John Foster Dulles, and even liberals such as Adlai Stevenson. But he was praised throughout the third world.
Of course, JFK never went to Indonesia in 1964, and his peaceful strategy to bring Indonesia to America’s side and to ease tensions in the Cold War was never realized, thanks to Allen Dulles. And Kennedy’s proposed withdrawal from Vietnam, which was premised on success in Indonesia, was quickly reversed by Lyndon Johnson after JFK’s murder. Soon both countries would experience mass slaughter engineered by Kennedy’s opponents in the CIA and Pentagon. Millions would die. Subsequently, starting in December 1975, American installed Indonesian dictator, Suharto, would slaughter hundreds of thousands East-Timorese with American weapons after meeting with Henry Kissinger and President Ford and receiving their approval.
This post was published at Lew Rockwell on November 24, 2016.