Aug 18, 2014
By Steven MacMillan | New Eastern Outlook
The Middle East has been engulfed in a state of chaos for decades now, with the region becoming increasingly unstable in recent years largely due to western sponsored proxy wars. The current map of the Middle East was created in 1916 through the surreptitious Sykes-Picot agreement, a deal which divided the Ottoman-ruled territories of Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine, into areas controlled by either Britain or France. Today the chaos we see in the Middle East is the creation of Anglo-American-Israeli power, which is attempting to redraw the map to meet their present strategic and imperial objectives.
Islamic State: A Creation of US Intelligence
The Islamic State (IS) has hit the headlines in recent months due to their latest terror campaign in Iraq, which has led to US airstrikes in the North of the country. What has been omitted from mainstream circles though is the intimate relationship between US intelligence agencies and IS, as they have trained, armed and funded the group for years. Back in 2012, World Net Daily received leaks by Jordanian officials who reported that the US military was training ISIL (as it was then known) in Jordan, before being deployed into Syria to fight against Bashar al-Assad. Francis Boyle, a Law professor at the University of Illinois, has described IS as a “covert US intelligence operation” whose objective is to “destroy Iraq as a state”.
The strategy in the Middle East is the creation of a perpetual condition of instability and a policy of “constructive chaos”, where nation states are to be destroyed so that the map of the Middle East can be redrawn. IS provided the pretext to intervene in Iraq once again, with the intervention ensuring the oil fields in Erbil are safely in the hands of multi-national corporations – as oppose to chaotic and dysfunctional mercenaries. As well as providing the justification for the US, Britain and France to “bolster” the Kurds in the North of the country, which furthers the agenda of destroying “Iraq as a state”. As the President of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and Former Director of Policy Planning at the State Department, Richard Hass, wrote in an Op Ed for Project Syndicate last month:
“It is time to recognize the inevitability of Iraq’s break-up (the country is now more a vehicle for Iran’s influence than a bulwark against it) and bolster an independent Kurdistan within Iraq’s former borders.”
As I reported in June, the policy in Iraq is to split the country into 3 separate religious and ethnic mini-states: a Sunni Iraq to the West, an Arab Shia State in the East and a Free Kurdistan in the North. The objective of dividing Iraq into 3 has been discussed in neo-imperial policy circles since as far back as 1982, when Israeli journalist – who also had close connections to the Foreign Ministry in Israel – Oded Yinon, wrote an article which was published in a journal of the World Zionist Organisation, titled: “A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties”. Yinon discusses the plan for a Greater Israel and pinpoints Iraq in particular as the major obstacle in the Middle East which threatens Israel’s expansion:
“Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand and internally torn on the other, is guaranteed as a candidate for Israel’s targets. Its dissolution is even more important for us than that of Syria. Iraq is stronger than Syria. In the short run it is Iraqi power which constitutes the greatest threat to Israel (p.12)……….The dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unique areas such as in Lebanon, is Israel’s primary target on the Eastern front in the long run, while the dissolution of the military power of those states serves as the primary short term target.” (p.11.)
“In Iraq, a division into provinces along ethnic/religious lines as in Syria during Ottoman times is possible. So, three (or more) states will exist around the three major cities: Basra, Baghdad and Mosul, and Shi’ite areas in the south will separate from the Sunni and Kurdish north.”(p.12)
Israel is merely an extension of Anglo-American power and has been since its creation in 1948, so any expansion of Israeli territory is synonymous with an increase in Anglo-American hegemony in the region. Arthur James Balfour, the British Foreign Secretary from 1916 to 1919 and author of the 1917 Balfour Declaration – which declared British support for the creation of a Jewish state (Israel) in Palestine – was also a member of the Milner Group, according to CFR historian Carroll Quigley in his book the Anglo-American Establishment (p.311). The Milner Group was the precursor to the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA) or Chatham House; the British arm of the CFR, with both organisations sharing the collective objective of creating an Anglo-American global empire.
The Plan for a “Middle Eastern Union”
After funding and being directly responsible for much of the chaos and instability that has been unleashed in the Middle East, western think tank strategists are proposing a centralised, sovereignty-usurping union as the solution to the problem they have created, in a classic deployment of the order out of chaos doctrine. As The New American reported last month, Ed Husain, an Adjunct Senior Fellow for Middle Eastern Studies at the CFR, compared today’s Middle East to Europe before the EU was created, and he asserted that the only solution to the ongoing violence is the creation of a “Middle Eastern Union”. This sentiment was echoed by Hass, who compared the Middle East of today to 17th century Europe, in his article “The New Thirty Years War”. Hass proclaims that the future will likely be as turbulent unless a “new local order” emerges:
“For now and for the foreseeable future – until a new local order emerges or exhaustion sets in – the Middle East will be less a problem to be solved than a condition to be managed.”
The idea of an EU-style governing body over the Middle East is not a new concept. In 2008, the Iraqi government called for an EU-style trading bloc in the Middle East that would stretch from Turkey to Iran, in an address to the US think tank the Institute of Peace. Chatham House has also set up an initiative in Turkey called the Chatham House Istanbul Roundtable, designed to discuss issues relating to Turkey’s role within the region. The President of Turkey, Abdullah Gül, was in attendance at the second meeting in 2011 along with Egemen Bağış, the ‘Minister for EU Affairs and Chief Negotiator’ at the time, who gave a speech where he described the EU as the model for the Middle East:
“We all know that the EU emerged as the most successful peace and development project of the history after a bloody war. Today, we have the very same expectations for the Middle East.’”
Whether a “Middle Eastern Union” will be created is difficult to determine at this point in history, but there is no question that the process of redrawing the map of the Middle East is well under way.
This article originally appeared on | New Eastern Outlook
Brave The World
Aug 13, 2014
WE DECLARE BITCOIN’S INDEPENDENCE
When we say Bitcoin, we mean the idea: the birth of cryptocurrency. We know it’s not perfect. But we’re not after perfection, we’re after progression. We’re after a way out. And we will not stop.
We have been brought to a point where it has become necessary to dissolve the bond between currency and institution. We are not required to declare the causes which impel us to push for the separation, but we will oblige.
We hold these truths to be self-evident. We have been cyclically betrayed, lied to, stolen from, extorted from, taxed, monopolized, spied on, inspected, assessed, authorized, registered, deceived, and reformed. We have been economically disarmed, disabled, held hostage, impoverished, enervated, exhausted, and enslaved. And then there was bitcoin.
But we are in an age of appropriation, and nothing is immune. Today bitcoin is not only volatile in its value, but in its very essence. Bitcoin is in the crucial stages of development. Its code can evolve in several directions. It’s under threat from those who don’t understand it; it’s under threat from those who do understand it, but fear it.The crusade to absorb bitcoin into the seams of the State has begun. There is a conscious effort to co-opt. The goal is to swallow bitcoin, process it, integrate it, devolve it, and keep it stagnant in the gears of a failed operating system. Bitcoin’s potential is being hijacked. They have their own idea of what they want bitcoin to be. They have their own plan for its potential, and they have an investment in that plan. But our consent is withdrawn and the power of our ideas is too strong.
Do not underestimate DNA; nothing is born completely neutral. Follow the protocol: it has anarchistic implications. Bitcoin is inherently anti-establishment, anti-system, and anti-state. Bitcoin undermines governments and disrupts institutions because bitcoin is fundamentally humanitarian. There’s an elimination of 3rd party intrusion. It’s purely peer-to-peer. The blockchain is free speech. It’s decentralized, voluntary, and non-aggressive. Bitcoin is not supposed to work within our current mechanisms. Bitcoin needs not entities of authority to acknowledge it, incorporate it, regulate it, and tax it. Bitcoin does not pander to power structures, it undermines them.
Bitcoin is an animal of anonymity. Bitcoin basks in shadow. Satoshi’s facelessness is symbolic of this. Privacy is the point. Bitcoin is meant to function outside of regulatory systems. It is not a cog.
Bitcoin means to channel economic power directly through the individual. This is reflected by Satoshi’s symbolic birthday, which falls on the same day that Roosevelt signed the 6102 Executive Order, which forbade the hoarding of gold. We repeat. Bitcoin is not intended to be integrated; it’s intended to be a ghost outside the machine.
The voices of the people who are working to preserve the purity of bitcoin’s ethos are being drowned out. But actions speak louder than words. Bitcoin is utility. The cypherpunks are building anonymous systems. The crypto-anarchists are making institutions arbitrary. The internet is anarchy. And cryptocurrencies are the printless fingers of the internet.
Bitcoin is not just a currency, a commodity, or a convenience. Just like the internet gave information back to the people, Bitcoin will give financial freedom back to the people. But that’s only the first step. There will be a shift in the structure of enterprise, in the way we interact, in the way we voice our opinions, and in the way we fuel our action. Bitcoin will allow us to shape the world without having to ask for permission. We declare bitcoin’s independence. Bitcoin is sovereignty. Bitcoin is renaissance. Bitcoin is ours. Bitcoin is.
Julia Tourianski (Declaration of Bitcoin’s Independence, Brave The World)
Roger Ver (Bitcoin Evangelist, also known as the “Bitcoin Jesus”)
Paul Joseph Watson (InfoWars)
Jeff Berwick (The Dollar Vigilante, Anarchast)
Jeffrey Tucker (CLO, Liberty.me)
Charlie Shrem (BitInstant)
Kristov Atlas (Anonymous Bitcoin Book, Dark News)
Bruce Fenton (Bitcoin Association, Atlantic Financial)
Victoria van Eyk (The Ethical Empire, Bitcoin Strategy Group)
Gavin Wood (Ethereum)
Stephanie Murphy ( Let’s Talk Bitcoin, Free Talk Live)
Dmitry Murashchik (Mycelium)
Will Pangman (Bitcoin Maven, Tapeke.com)
Stephan Tual (Ethereum)
Enric Duran (Spain’s Robin Hood)
Richard Stott (Ethereum)
Joerg Platzer (Room 77)
Blake Anderson (uBITquity, Neo-arbitrage)
Peter Todd (Bitcoin Core, Dark Wallet, Zerocash)
Pamela Morgan (Smart Law)
M.K Lords (Bitcoin Not Bombs)
Patrick M. Byrne (Overstock.com, “Bitcoin Messiah”)
Amir Taaki (Libbitcoin, Dark Wallet, Dark Market)
Chris Ellis (World Crypto Network)
Ruben Alexander (Editor at Bitcoin Magazine)
Stacy Herbert (Keiser Report, STARTcoin)
Juraj Bednar (Hacker, Serial entrepreneur, DIGMIA, Citadelo)
Mathias Grønnebæk (Ethereum)
Chris Pacia (Bitcoin Authenticator, Escape Velocity Blog)
Paige Peterson (Developer at MaidSafe, SF Bitcoin Meetup Organizer)
Ryan Taylor (Bitcoin magazine)
Courtney Warner (Bitcoin advocate, actress)
Zach Ramsey (Coin Culture)
1. I thank both the good and the bad players in the Bitcoin space, because you equally inspired the need to create this.
2. There was a chain of events that lead to the actualization of this project. In the order of occurrence, the following individuals were the links in the chain:
Victoria Van Eyk
3. A huge thank you to Amir Taaki for reviewing the original “Declaration of Bitcoin’s Independence,” inspiring several lines, and giving me a much deeper understanding of this innovation.
4. Thank you to Peter Todd for inspiring “The block chain is free speech” line.
5. I am in debt to Blake Anderson, Amir Taaki, Paul Joseph Watson, and Jeffrey Tucker for helping me with contacts.
Support the evolution of the internet. All donations will fuel projects intended to actualize Bitcoin’s potential.
“Ghost Outside the Machine” T-Shirts
The Declaration of Bitcoin Bloopers
Donate if you were entertained!
Aug 4, 2014
By Shepard Ambellas
Obama Admin sought to create Cuban rebellion
(INTELLIHUB) — According to a new bombshell report by the AP, young Latin operatives were actually deployed into Cuba under direction from the Obama Administration to recruit anti-government protestors and rally a rebellion. Shockingly, the covert operation was funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development, USAID, which was also instrumental in the development of a Cuban Twitter style social media network.
The AP reported:
According to internal documents obtained by the AP and interviews in six countries, USAID’s young operatives posed as tourists, visited college campuses and used a ruse that could undermine USAID’s credibility in critical health work around the world: An HIV-prevention workshop one called the “perfect excuse” to recruit political activists, according to a report by Murillo’s group. For all the risks, some travelers were paid as little as $5.41 an hour.
The travelers program was launched during a time when newly inaugurated President Barack Obama spoke about a “new beginning” with Cuba after decades of mistrust, raising questions about whether the White House had a coherent policy toward the island nation.
There’s no evidence that the program advanced the mission to create a pro-democracy movement against the government of Raul Castro. Creative Associates declined to comment, referring questions to USAID.
USAID would not say how much the Costa Rica-based program cost. In response to questions from the AP, the agency issued a statement that said, “USAID and the Obama administration are committed to supporting the Cuban people’s desire to freely determine their own future. USAID works with independent youth groups in Cuba on community service projects, public health, the arts and other opportunities to engage publicly, consistent with democracy programs worldwide.”
In a statement late Sunday, USAID said the HIV workshop had a dual purpose: It “enabled support for Cuban civil society while providing a secondary benefit of addressing the desire Cubans expressed for information and training about HIV prevention.”
The entire goal of the operation was to essentially stir up rebellion in Cuba from within, a goal all so common to the United States.
About the author:
Shepard Ambellas is the founder and editor-in-chief of Intellihub News and the maker of SHADE the Motion Picture. You can also find him on Twitter and Facebook. Shepard also appears on the Travel Channel series America Declassified.
Xinhua News Agency
August 5, 2014
Number of displaced surges due to Ukraine conflict: UNHCR
GENEVA: The deteriorating situation in eastern Ukraine has led to surging numbers of internally-displaced people (IDPs), the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) said Tuesday.
Addressing a press conference upon his return from Ukraine, UNHCR’s Europe Bureau director Vincent Cochetel said the number of IDPs in the country reached an estimated 117,000 and was increasing by 1,200 people per day in recent weeks.
Among the total displaced population, up to 87 percent were from eastern Ukraine, mainly from Luhansk and Donetsk regions. UNHCR data showed IDPs from the two regions had risen sharply from 2,600 in early June to 102,600 in early August.
The UN refugee agency called on the Ukrainian government to establish a central registration system of IDPs.
Cochetel emphasized the current lack of a uniform system hampered relief efforts, adding that it was important for Ukrainian authorities to prepare for winter since most of the current shelters were not suitable for the colder months.
UNHCR estimates as additional 730,000 Ukrainians have crossed the border into Russia since the beginning of the conflict.
Xinhua News Agency
August 5, 2014
UN says 285,000 displaced in Ukraine crisis
KIEV: Almost 285,000 people have fled Ukraine’s restive areas as of early August, up 55,000 from the number of mid-July, according to a UN report obtained here on Tuesday.
Among the affected population are people who have been displaced from southern Crimean peninsula, Lugansk and Donetsk regions in the eastern part of the country, according to the document released by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).
Every day, around 1,000 people are leaving the conflict areas and 117,000 refugees have found shelters in calm Ukrainian regions since the turmoil in the eastern European country began in February, it said.
Meanwhile, about 168,000 asylum seekers had crossed the border into Russia and requested to obtain refugee status there, the report said.
According to another UN report, at least 1,129 people have been killed and 3,442 others wounded in the Ukraine crisis as of July 26.
On Sunday Aug 8th 2004, the Canadian Association of Veterans obtained funding to put up and display three statues in Memorial Park in Winnipeg, Manitoba. The statues are located near the corner of Osborne St. N and Memorial Blvd, north of Memorial Park. It is located north of the Masonic Legislative building as well.
It is dedicated to Peacekeepers who have lost their lives in the service of the country of Canada since the signing of the United Nations Charter on Oct 24th 1945.
The statue is called Peacekeepers Cairn. Cairn is defined as a heap of stones set up as a landmark, monument, tombstone, etc.
The three pillars are said to represent the Army, Navy, Air Force (and supposedly also the RCMP).
The pillar on the left is 10 feet tall, has a 45 degree beveled top to show a symbol from the front of a Peacekeeping medal depicting three soldiers. One soldier is an unarmed United Nations Military Observer, holding a pair of binoculars. A second soldier, a woman, shoulders a radio, while the third stands guard with a rifle. Above them flies a dove, the international symbol of peace. This side of the medal also bears the inscriptions PEACEKEEPING and SERVICE DE LA PAIX (translated to service out of peace), together with two maple leafs. The word“PAST” is engraved vertically into the front.
The center pillar is 12 feet tall with a 45 degree beveled top to show the United Nations symbol engraved into the stone. The symbol of the words UN on the top of a map of the world with what I construe as, it consits of longitude and latitude lines. The logo has a border of leaves, 7 on the left and 6 on the right. The word “PRESENT” is engraved into the pillar vertically.
The pillar to the right of center statue is 8 feet tall with the same bevel as the others and showing the Peacekeeping medal, reversed side. The medal’s reverse shows the cipher of Her Majesty the Queen on a maple leaf surrounded by two sprigs of laurel and the word CANADA. The word “FUTURE” engraved vertically into the front of the pillar.
Click HERE for the source (description of symbolism of peace medal).
So in essence the cairn depicts the Canadian Army’s past, present and future is aligned with UN peacekeeping missions and that the Canadian Armed Forces is essentially an army for the British Monarchy. After all that should come as no surprise to civilians who know section 2 of the Criminal Code of Canada which defines the “Canadian Forces” as the armed forces of Her Majesty
Are UN peacekeeping missions really about peacekeeping?
Canada has been in over 30 major peacekeeping missions since 1956 but are the peacekeeping missions all about perpetuating peace? It’s hard to tell unless one gets information first hand from a Canadian soldier or a veteran that’s been on a UN peacekeeping mission. The Canadian Awareness Network had a private interview with a veteran who was deployed to Cyprus and Bosnia under a UN peacekeeping mission. Here’s a quote of what he has to say about UN peacekeeping missions,he would like to remain anonymous:
“I have done a couple peacekeeping missions,I did Cyprus in the middle east. That was more of a peacekeeping mission there for sure. But then we go to Bosnia thinking it’s the same type of deal like Cyprus but it wasn’t.” He was there to give food to civilians.
He then told me in Cyprus there was very little combat saying, “in the middle east… it was one killing in the whole 7 or 8 months that you were there where in Bosnia there were peacekeepers getting shot at everyday… United Nations said it was peacekeeping but you know in the eyes of the soldiers it was definitely far from that. From what they’re trying tell the media and what it actually was to me were two different things.” He describes it to be missions that involve combat of defense He said many soldiers killed their selves from the trauma’s they endure.
An article from OpenCanada.org goes into detail how UN peacekeeping mission can be full out war below:
Steve Saideman | June 13, 2012 OpenCanada.org
“…Peacekeeping missions have always risked violence, and we will continue to see violence in the future, even if less than before. The key factor that needs to be considered, which is frequently ignored, is this: When it comes to peacekeeping efforts, the enemy forces have a say in how things play out – and theirs is the deciding vote.
What does this mean? In any conflict that peacekeepers might enter, there are multiple sides and usually more than one set of actors hostile to the accord. (After all, if an agreement produced consensus, there would be little need for outsiders to intervene.) These “spoilers,” as they are known, may or may not resort to violence, but the threat that they may do so means that the outside interveners must be prepared to be violent themselves. This is basic deterrence logic: You need to be able to threaten to impose costs to deter a potential aggressor, AND you need to use force if deterrence breaks down.
The dramatic failure of the UN mission in Rwanda as the genocide started was partly due to the weakness of the UN peacekeeping effort. The genocidaires chose to be violent, voting for war against the rest of Rwanda. They started it off by killing a number of peacekeepers. As the UN mission was poorly equipped, it did not defend itself, nor did it protect anyone else. Indeed, the lesson drawn by potential spoilers from Mogadishu and Rwanda is this: Start by killing the peacekeepers, who may then flee.
Those nostalgic of past peacekeeping forget the violence the Canadians not only faced in such circumstances, but also deployed. In Croatia, the Canadians battled with the Croatian army, which was engaged in war crimes against the Serb populace. This was the biggest battle Canada fought between the wars in Korea and Afghanistan. History suggests, then, that peacekeeping has always been a violent enterprise, and it is probably more so these days, as spoilers learn from Somalia and Rwanda. “
Do Canadian soldiers like being involved in UN peacekeeping missions?
An article from the Globe and Mail answers the question below:
Globe & Mail
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Despite high-minded policy statements and public perception, Canada’s global role, Michael Valpy reports
It’s so hard to square mythology with reality. While 70 per cent of Canadians consider military peacekeeping a defining characteristic of their country, Canada has turned down so many United Nations’ requests to join peacekeeping missions during the past decade that the UN has stopped asking.
In 1991, Canada contributed more than 10 per cent of all peacekeeping troops to the UN. Sixteen years later, its contribution is less than 0.1 per cent.
On this month’s fifth anniversary of Canadian troops being sent to Afghanistan and one year after assuming responsibility for the counterinsurgency campaign — a war by any other name — in Kandahar province, one of the country’s biggest unanswered questions is: What is Canadian military policy? It’s certainly not to be the global leader in peacekeeping the country once was.
Little more than a year ago, Colonel Michael Hanrahan, the Canadian Armed Forces’ top expert on peacekeeping, was offered the job as chief of staff of the UN’s Department of Peacekeeping Operations. His Ottawa superiors nixed the idea. There is, in fact, not a single Canadian officer in the UN’s peacekeeping headquarters.
“In view of the multiple security challenges we now confront, we should be extremely skeptical about arguments that the days of peacekeeping are over and our armed forces are now only in the business of fighting insurgents and targeting terrorists.”[quote from Fen Hampson, director of the Norman Paterson School]
Yet several academics who study Canadian military and foreign policy see patterns of anti-UN bias among senior army officers and a preference for operating beside the United States. The anti-UN bias comes from their experience in UN peacekeeping missions of the past, and their U.S. preference is based on top-grade logistics and tactical support that the U.S. military can offer their own troops.
One Canadian academic, who asked to speak anonymously because he works for the military, said he had been told confidently by a senior army officer that Canadian troops would never take part in another UN-led operation. But Prof. Roland Paris, a specialist in international security at the University of Ottawa, is less convinced that Canada is deliberately turning away from the UN. He cites previous cycles of troughs in Canada’s peacekeeping involvement.
In any event, the patterns seen by Mr. Heinbecker, now director of the Centre for Global Relations, Governance and Policy at Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo, Ont., suggest traditional UN peacekeeping operations are a thing of the past, that they have become more akin to the mission in Afghanistan.
“They are almost all complex missions now. They involve combat. Very often the UN is expected to get involved before the fighting is over….”
As the above article mentioned, Canadian armed forces have slowly declined in participating in UN peacekeeping missions. But does that mean they are not under UN control? The article above also made mention that Canadian army prefers to work along side of the US army. Ultimately the US army is under full control of the UN. U.S Defense Secretary Leon Panetta testified and stated that the UN and NATO have supreme authority over the actions of the U.S military, reported by Infowars in 2012.
So does the UN peacekeeping cairn in Winnipeg hold a little bit of truth of Canada still participating with the UN?
In one way or another, yes.
Is the UN all about peacekeeping? No!
Islam Karimov, the Uzbek dictator who likes to boil people alive was given a “Cultural Diversity” awarded by the UN. The UN has declared Fidel Castro, the longtime Communist dictator of Cuba, the “World Hero of Solidarity”. Castro killed thousands and thousands of people during his rule, torturing some to death . Even way earlier in history 26.3 million Chinese died between 1949-1965 under the regime of Moa Zedong’s red China. In 1971 the United Nations General Assembly voted to allow Mao Zedong’s red China into the UN.
The UN was established in 1942 after the second world war by international bankers and political world leaders. The UN is the forefront to establish a “new world order” one world government under UN control, under the guise of protecting human rights and doing peacekeeping. The term “new world order” was first politically used and publicly introduced by former U.S President George H. W. Bush at the United Nations General Assembly in 1991.
Red Ice Radio
Jul 25, 2014
Considered one of the classics of conspiracy research, David Icke has spent the last quarter of a century unraveling the secrets of the universe, reality and the forces that manipulate our world. After writing more than 20 books, David Icke has driven on with his unrelentless investigation into subject areas that others don’t dare touch. Icke shares his analysis of US occupation in the Middle East. He’ll also talk about ISIS, with an alleged extremist Islamic agenda, yet silence from Israel. We’ll talk about the genocide of Palestinians and the redrawing of the Middle East with Israel as the new dictator. David discusses the origins of Israel, which is based on a hoax. He’ll discuss events leading up to the creation of the State of Israel. Then, we’ll talk about where the elite want to take the world and the techniques they’re using to get there. Their techniques include the destruction of nationhood and forced multiculturalism. Icke comments on Europeans who are re-acting to preserve their nationhood, challenging the European Union and fighting back. We’ll talk about how the elite are working hard to establish a one world culture, a mono everything, through killing true diversity. Later, he’ll speak on the inner core of Zionism that functions like a secret society. We also talk about how young Jews are being programmed from birth and being used for a bigger strategy. At the end we discuss how people are frightened into silence, sticking their heads in the sand but this will not make the problems go away. Diversity of everything, including power is needed.
Books & DVDs
Jul 31, 2014
“The End of Oppression” is a six-part series of videos which show what it will take for humanity to finally outgrow and escape its long history of violence and oppression.
Part Two (“The Game”) shows how tyrants use the game called “politics” to legitimize violent domination and to deceive decent people into advocating their own subjugation and enslavement.
(If you like this video, check out http://www.josietheoutlaw.com
follow Josie on Twitter at @JosietheOutlaw1
on Instagram at @josiewalesoutlaw
and share with anyone and everyone YOU feel needs to hear this message.)
Jul 21, 2014
Someone recently asked me, “If my neighbor next door shoots my neighbor across the street, does that give my neighbor across the street the right to come shoot me?”
If someone’s corrupt government does something horrible, are all of its citizens, right down to the infants, to be held responsible? Votes seem to matter very little in the modern world. How would you feel if another country invaded and tried to kill you and everyone you know — all because of what your horrible government does?
You aren’t in charge of those rockets. You aren’t in charge of those decisions.
Back when Occupy protesters rallied, they chanted, “The whole world is watching. The whole world is watching.”
When Palestinians rally, they chant “Where is the world?”
This question is seemingly rhetorical.
The mainstream media knows the answer.
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
Media Blackout: Major Military Operation in East Ukraine. 496 Civilians, 1600 Soldiers Reported Killed
by Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Jul 20, 2014
The killing of innocent civilians in Eastern Ukraine resulting from the conduct of major bombing and shelling operations by US supported Kiev regime is not newsworthy. According to official sources, Four hundred and seventy-eight civilians, including seven children were killed and 1392 were wounded in Eastern Ukraine since the outset of the Kiev government’s military crackdown. (See RT, July 1o, 2014)
The casualty figures were released on the 10th of July 2014 by Ukraine’s Ministry of Health.
“The amount on civilian casualties is, unfortunately, greater than the military ones,” Vasily Lazoryshynets, deputy health minister, …
“In the area of the operation in eastern Ukraine, 478 civilians have died, including 30 women and seven children,”he said.
According to Lazoryshynets , a further 1,392 people were injured in the fighting, with 104 women and 14 children among them.
“Two hundred and seventy-nine currently remain in hospital,” he added. (Ibid)
There has been virtually no Western media coverage concerning this human tragedy. The deaths of innocent children resulting from Kiev’s “counter-terrorism operation” have been casually categorized as “collateral damage”.
In early June, according to figures of Ukraine’s National Security Council “200 soldiers and law enforcement officers had been killed and over 600 injured during the so-called “anti-terrorist operation.” (Ibid). The Ministry of Defense reported the same figure of 200 deaths pertaining to soldiers on July 11.
Is the official count of civilian casualties reliable? On June 11, following the release of the figures on casualties by the Ministry of Health, Ukraine’s General Prosecutor Vitali Yarema confirmed that the government was to establish a data bank of persons killed and insured:
“Every death, every physical injury, every body of an unidentified individual found will be entered into the unified register of pre-trial investigations, and each case will be investigated as much as possible,” (quoted by AP, July 11, 2014)
The above figures on civilian casualties are consistent with a ‘leaked” Ministry of Internal Affairs report (July 15, 2014): 496 civilians killed and 762 wounded (updated with data of casualties collected in the period extending from 9-15 July). (see below)
According to this “leaked” MIA document, the death toll of soldiers in the Ukraine Armed Forces would have increased from 200 in early July (reported on July 10th by the Ministry of Health) to 1600 in mid-July (MIA, leaked report, see table below, dated July 15). These rounded up figures suggest that the Kiev government’s figures on soldiers “killed in action” are rough estimates.
The table below which includes the figures of civilian and military casualties included those wounded reported by the Ministry of Internal Affairs (sent to Global Research by a source in Ukraine) are as follows:
- Killed in Action: 1600
- Wounded in Action: 4723
The Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA) and its Anti-Terrorism Organization (ATO) oversees the military operation in Lugansk and Donetsk in liaison with the Ukrainian Armed Forces.
The information was officially released on July 15, 2014 bearing the signature of the Arsen Avakov (Minister of Internal Affairs) and V. Gritsak (Head of ATO [Anti-Terrorism Organization]
The authenticity, reliability and source of this leaked report remains to be fully assessed. These figures have not been made public and they are not the object of media commentary. They are, however, compatible with a report published by the Central News Agency Novorossia, Novorus.info (Russian) based on figures of the rebel Donbass forces which point to major military losses by the Kiev regime.
The MIA figures pertain to soldiers “Killed in Action”. They do not address the number of soldiers taken prisoner and/or the number of soldiers who have deserted the Ukrainian Armed Forces.
In contrast, the Novorossia figures do not provide a breakdown of “killed, wounded, prisoners”. According to Central News Agency Novorossia, Novorus.info (Russian):
Total losses in Donbass inflicted to Kiev “punitive operatives” [in Russian каратели] 2 May – 11 July 2014 is 4994 soldiers [ in Russian persons, человек] [killed, wounded, prisoners]
What the MIA leaked report as well as the Novorossia figures convey is the conduct of a large scale military operation by Ukrainian Forces resulting in significant casualties incurred by Kiev government forces. None of this has been reported by the corporate media.
The leaked MIA report suggests heavy losses of military equipment by Kiev forces including a large number of tanks and armored vehicles which have either been captured or destroyed.
The rebels (according to MIA figures) have downed seven aircraft. This information was “leaked” 2 days before the MH17 crash. The reliability of these figures emanating from government sources remained to be determined.
The data from rebel sources cited Novorus.info also indicate sizable losses of military hardware including tanks and armored cars.
TOTAL UKRAINIAN LOSSES [MIA leaked document]
- Killed in Action: 1600
- Wounded in Action: 4723
- Tanks: 35
- Armoured Battle Vehicles: 96
- Artillery: 38
- Aircraft: 7
- Helicopters: 2
- Automobiles: 104
While the reliability of these figures emanating from the government remains to be determined, they nonetheless point to the failure of the Kiev led anti-terrorism operation confirming earlier reports to the effect that government forces have been repealed in Donetsk and Lugansk.
July 18, 2014 – Official Ukrainian Military Accounting of Losses for July 9-15, 2014
((1) Ukrainian Version; (2) Translation)
TOTAL UKRAINIAN LOSSES
- Killed in Action: 1600
- Wounded in Action: 4723
- Tanks: 35
- Armoured Battle Vehicles: 96
- Artillery: 38
- Aircraft: 7
- Helicopters: 2
- Automobiles: 104
TOTAL MILITIA LOSSES
- Killed in Action: 48
- Wounded in Action: 64
- Tanks: 2
- Armoured Battle Vehicles: 0
- Artillery: 5
- Automobiles: 8
TOTAL CIVILIAN LOSSES
- Killed: 496
- Wounded: 762
SIGNED & SUBMITTED BY: Arsen Avakov (Minister of Internal Affairs) and V. Gritsak (Head of ATO)
Table and translation provided by:
The Corbett Report
Jul 9, 2014
Hosts: Guillermo Jimenez, James Corbett, and special guest Dan Dicks
Welcome to The Beard World Order: In this episode of the BWO, we shine a light on the murky world of secret societies and clandestine gatherings of the world’s elite. We focus our discussion on the Bilderberg Group: what it is, who attends, how it’s structured, how it’s evolved, and why it’s significant.
Having been forced out of the shadows in the last decade, has the Bilderberg Group waned in influence? Has technology rendered it unnecessary? Why all the secrecy, and what can we the people do to resist these institutions? What would secret societies look like in a free (stateless) society?
Lastly, why aren’t we as creeped out as we once were (and rightfully should be) by hooded politicians in the dark woods performing mock human sacrifices? Does Conan O’Brien really worship Molech, or is the Bohemian Grove just a harmless sleepaway camp for elitist scumbags?
Your answers to these questions, letters, feedback, and much more on this BWO.
Why We Must Oppose Bilderberg
For a High Quality audio download of this episode, click here (right-click, and save-as).
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/ZER403A.html
Thanks to the Mossad, Israel’s “Institute for Intelligence and Special Tasks”, the Hamas was allowed to reinforce its presence in the occupied territories. Meanwhile, Arafat’s Fatah Movement for National Liberation as well as the Palestinian Left were subjected to the most brutal form of repression and intimidation
Let us not forget that it was Israel, which in fact created Hamas. According to Zeev Sternell, historian at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, “Israel thought that it was a smart ploy to push the Islamists against the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO)”.
Ahmed Yassin, the spiritual leader of the Islamist movement in Palestine, returning from Cairo in the seventies, established an Islamic charity association. Prime Minister Golda Meir, saw this as a an opportunity to counterbalance the rise of Arafat’s Fatah movement. .According to the Israeli weekly Koteret Rashit (October 1987), “The Islamic associations as well as the university had been supported and encouraged by the Israeli military authority” in charge of the (civilian) administration of the West Bank and Gaza. “They [the Islamic associations and the university] were authorized to receive money payments from abroad.”
The Islamists set up orphanages and health clinics, as well as a network of schools, workshops which created employment for women as well as system of financial aid to the poor. And in 1978, they created an “Islamic University” in Gaza. “The military authority was convinced that these activities would weaken both the PLO and the leftist organizations in Gaza.” At the end of 1992, there were six hundred mosques in Gaza. Thanks to Israel’s intelligence agency Mossad (Israel’s Institute for Intelligence and Special Tasks) , the Islamists were allowed to reinforce their presence in the occupied territories. Meanwhile, the members of Fatah (Movement for the National Liberation of Palestine) and the Palestinian Left were subjected to the most brutal form of repression.
In 1984, Ahmed Yassin was arrested and condemned to twelve years in prison, after the discovery of a hidden arms cache. But one year later, he was set free and resumed his activities. And when the Intifada (‘uprising’) began, in October 1987, which took the Islamists by surprise, Sheik Yassin responded by creating the Hamas (The Islamic Resistance Movement): “God is our beginning, the prophet our model, the Koran our constitution”, proclaims article 7 of the charter of the organization.
Ahmed Yassin was in prison when, the Oslo accords (Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government) were signed in September 1993. The Hamas had rejected Oslo outright. But at that time, 70% of Palestinians had condemned the attacks on Israeli civilians. Yassin did everything in his power to undermine the Oslo accords. Even prior to Prime Minister Rabin’s death, he had the support of the Israeli government. The latter was very reluctant to implement the peace agreement.
The Hamas then launched a carefully timed campaign of attacks against civilians, one day before the meeting between Palestinian and Israeli negotiators, regarding the formal recognition of Israel by the National Palestinian Council. These events were largely instrumental in the formation of a Right wing Israeli government following the May 1996 elections.
Quite unexpectedly, Prime Minister Netanyahu ordered Sheik Ahmed Yassin to be released from prison (“on humanitarian grounds”) where he was serving a life sentence. Meanwhile, Netanyahu, together with President Bill Clinton, was putting pressure on Arafat to control the Hamas. In fact, Netanyahu knew that he could rely, once more, on the Islamists to sabotage the Oslo accords. Worse still: after having expelled Yassin to Jordan, Prime Minister Netanyahu allowed him to return to Gaza, where he was welcomed triumphantly as a hero in October 1997.
Arafat was helpless in the face of these events. Moreover, because he had supported Saddam Hussein during the1991 Gulf war, (while the Hamas had cautiously abstained from taking sides), the Gulf states decided to cut off their financing of the Palestinian Authority. Meanwhile, between February and April 1998, Sheik Ahmad Yassin was able to raise several hundred million dollars, from those same countries. The the budget of The Hamas was said to be greater than that of the Palestinian Authority. These new sources of funding enabled the Islamists to effectively pursue their various charitable activities. It is estimated that one Palestinian out of three is the recipient of financial aid from the Hamas. And in this regard, Israel has done nothing to curb the inflow of money into the occupied territories.
The Hamas had built its strength through its various acts of sabotage of the peace process, in a way which was compatible with the interests of the Israeli government. In turn, the latter sought in a number of ways, to prevent the application of the Oslo accords. In other words, Hamas was fulfilling the functions for which it was originally created: to prevent the creation of a Palestinian State. And in this regard, Hamas and Ariel Sharon, see eye to eye; they are exactly on the same wave length.
[related: (Jan 27, 2006) Israel's Hamas]