Joerie, joerie, botter en brood,
as ek jou kry, slaat ek jou dood

Friday, February 24, 2012



Syria: Seeking a Convenient Casus Belli

Alleged death of two Western journalists in Syria used to dance around UNSC veto. 
commentary by Tony Cartalucci

February 22, 2012 - You are an embattled nation with the entire world watching. Your allies Russia and China just made a major decision at the UN Security Council in your favor with much of their reputation and future at stake. Western propagandists have been relentlessly making up news stories regarding your nation no matter what you do, for nearly a year, starting with "Gay Girl in Damascus" who Syrian activists insisted was still real even after doubts began to surface, and leading up to daily reports from "activists say" coming out of London, England.

Your choices: continue a campaign to restore order in Homs which is admittedly overrun by cross-border militants and foreign terrorists operating with NATO support and arms, fighting under the banner of the "Free Syrian Army." Or, spend your time instead purposefully killing women and children in front of British and French journalists before plotting over easily-intercepted radios their spectacular deaths in front of a watching world?

Image: Syria's rebels are armed. Were they running loose in New York City, a military operation mobilized to neutralize them would not be described as a "massacre" by the corporate media. 

Quite clearly there is something wrong with this narrative being given to us by the West, who have established themselves by a comfortable margin as serial liars. Iraq lost a million sons and daughters to these lies. Libya likewise was portrayed as a nation "massacring civilians" when it is now clear these "civilians" were US State Department-listed terrorists of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group who are now conducting nationwide murder sprees.

Reading any report out of the corporate-media, we find Syria's campaign against admittedly armed rebels paradoxically referred to as a "massacre," and an almost palpable fervor to justify circumventing the latest UNSC resolution veto. As news comes out of the death of two foreign journalists in Homs, Remi Ochlik and Marie Colvin who sneaked into Syria and were operating there illegally to begin with, Western leaders are unanimously calling this the "breaking point." France's Nicolas Sarkozy even stated, "that's enough now, this regime must go and there is no reason that Syrians don't have the right to live their lives and choose their destiny freely."

One wonders where Sarkozy's moral fortitude was when in January, while covering a pro-Assad rally in Homs, French journalist Gilles Jacquier was killed in a rebel attack. Unbelievably, not only does this contradict the news we've been told all along of Assad persecuting a brutal campaign against peaceful protesters, but while the attack was condemned by France, it was the Syrian government who was blamed for not protecting their journalists from armed thugs. Where were the calls for the rebels to lay down their arms? Where was the cessation of political support for the "Free Syrian Army?" Where was the decision by NATO to discontinue their support for rebels who had now murdered a Western journalist?

Clearly, reason is not driving Western foreign policy, rather a search for a convenient "casus belli" to serve where their "responsibility to protect" doctrine has failed. We will not know what really happened in Syria this week regarding the two journalists allegedly killed there, so long as "activists say" is attached to each claim made about the events.

What we do know is that the West has long ago predetermined that regime change will occur in Syria, and that they will do anything necessary, at any cost to achieve it.

Thursday, February 23, 2012


by craig on Feb 23rd in Uncategorized

The killings of Marie Colvin and Remi Ochlik are deeply sad, as are the killings of all those millions of innocents who have died in the conflicts of the last decade whose names do not get such global sympathy. That is not to decry the sympathy; the world needs more of it, not less.
The Assad rule of Syria is brutal and it would be good if it were to end. There is no doubt the indiscriminate nature of the bombardment of Homs is vicious and wrong. But the same was true of the NATO destruction of Sirte. The idea that the answer to such deaths is to intensify the killing to a more industrial scale is crazed. The deliberate escalation of civil war in order to back a new winning side to gain leverage over economic resources appears to be the new standard method of advancing the interests of ruling western elites.
The truth is that Gadaffi was awful, but the life of ordinary Libyans is no better for the war, death and destruction and there is no practical improvement in human rights – indeed an awful lot more arbitrary rule, rape, brutalisation and killing by armed militias.
Life in Iraq is materially still massively worse than under the awful Saddam Hussain. The doctrine of “liberal intervention” is a screen for resource grab. The fact its practical effects on the countries upon whose inhabitants the necessary death – or “creative destruction” in the words of imperialist propagandist Niall Fergusson – is rained, are the opposite of those claimed, is hidden by the media simply declaring “Mission accomplished” and moving on. The awfulness of everyday life today in Iraq and Libya is not shown.
I hope Syrians can save themselves from their own government, their own militias, and above all from the awesome death-dealing of NATO.

Tuesday, February 21, 2012


Aan die verhuisingsmanne

Dra saggies, vriende,
want sierpotte en erdewerk,
keurborde en fyn glas
sluit 'n hele lewe
met sy drome
en verlangens in;

Dra saggies, mededraers,
want die drag
van veerbed,
tafels, lessenaar
druk teen die bors
se dun skelet;

Dra saggies, regters,
want die oordeel
oor my klein bedryf
lê vasgevang
in prente, boeke
en 'n eie ou gemakstoel;

Dra saggies, gode,
want die hart se porselein
is broos en tot veel seer
en kwesbaarheid geneig:
die kratte van 'n lewe
kan so maklik breek.

[Ernst van Heerden]

Sunday, February 19, 2012


It's time we recognised the Blair government's criminality

16 February 2012

In the kabuki theatre of British parliamentary politics, great crimes do not happen and criminals go free. It is theatre after all; the pirouettes matter, not actions taken at remove in distance and culture from their consequences. It is a secure arrangement guarded by cast and critics alike. The farewell speech of one of the most artful, Tony Blair, had "a sense of moral conviction running through it", effused the television presenter Jon Snow, as if Blair's appeal to Kabuki devotees was mystical. That he was a war criminal was irrelevant.

The suppression of Blair's criminality and that of his administrations is described in Gareth Peirce's Dispatches from the Dark Side: on torture and the death of justice, published in paperback this month by Verso. Peirce is Britain's most distinguished human rights lawyer; her pursuit of infamous miscarriages of justice and justice for the victims of state crimes, such as torture and rendition, is unsurpassed. What is unusual about this accounting of what she calls the "moral and legal pandemonium" in the wake of 9/11 is that, in drawing on the memoirs of Blair and Alistair Campbell, Cabinet minutes and MI6 files, she applies the rule of law to them.

Advocates such as Peirce, Phil Shiner and Clive Stafford-Smith have ensured the indictment of dominant powers is no longer a taboo. Israel, America's hitman, is now widely recognised as the world's most lawless state.  The likes of Donald Rumsfeld now avoid countries where the law reaches beyond borders, as does George W. Bush and Blair.

Deploying sinecures of "peace-making" and "development" that allow him to replenish the fortune accumulated since leaving Downing Street, Blair's jackdaw travels are concentrated on the Gulf sheikhdoms, the US, Israel and safe havens like the small African nation of Rwanda.  Since 2007, Blair has made seven visits to Rwanda, where he has access to a private jet supplied by President Paul Kagame. Kagame's regime, whose opponents have been silenced brutally on trumped-up charges, is "innovative" and a "leader" in Africa, says Blair.

Peirce's book achieves the impossible on Blair: it shocks. In tracing the "unjustifiable theses, unrestrained belligerence, falsification and wilful illegality" that led to the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, she identifies Blair's assault on Muslims as both criminal and racist. "Human beings presumed to hold [Islamist] views were to be disabled by any means possible, and permanently... in Blair's language a 'virus' to be 'eliminated' and requiring 'a myriad of interventions [sic] deep into the affairs of other nations'."  Whole societies were reduced to "splashes of colour" on a canvas upon which Labour's Napoleon would "re-order the world".

The very concept of war was wrenched from its dictionary meaning and became "our values versus theirs". The actual perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks, mostly Saudis trained to fly in America, were all but forgotten. Instead, the "splashes of colour" were made blood-red - first in Afghanistan, land of the poorest of the poor. No Afghans were members of al-Qaeda; on the contrary, there was mutual resentment. No matter. Once the bombing began on 7 October 2001, tens of thousands of Afghans were punished with starvation as the World Food Programme withdrew aid on the cusp of winter. In one stricken village, Bibi Mahru, I witnessed the aftermath of a single Mk82 "precision" bomb's obliteration of two families, including eight children.  "TB," wrote Alistair Campbell, "said they had to know that we would hurt them if they don't yield up OBL."

The cartoon figure of Campbell was already at work on concocting another threat in Iraq. This "yielded up", according to the MIT Centre for International Studies, between 800,000 and 1.3 million deaths: figures that exceed the Fordham University estimate of deaths in the genocide in Rwanda.

And yet, wrote Peirce, "the threads of emails, internal government communiques reveal no dissent." Interrogation that included torture was on "the express instructions... of government ministers". On 10 January 2002, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw emailed his colleagues that sending British citizens to Guantanamo Bay was "the best way to meet our counter terrorism objective". He rejected "the only alternative of repatriation to the United Kingdom". (Later appointed "justice secretary", Straw suppressed incriminating Cabinet minutes in defiance of the Information Commissioner). On 6 February 2002, Home Secretary David Blunkett noted that he was in "no hurry to see any individuals returned to the UK [from Guantanamo]".  Three days later, Foreign Office minister Ben Bradshaw wrote, "We need to all that we can to avoid the detainees being repatriated to the UK." Not one of the people they refer to had been charged with anything; most had been sold as bounties to the Americans by Afghan warlords. Peirce describes how Foreign Office officials, prior to an inspection of Guantanamo Bay, "verified" that British prisoners were being "treated humanely" when the opposite was true.

Immersed in its misadventure and lies, listening only to their leader's crooned "sincerity", the Labour government consulted no one who spoke the truth. Peirce cites one of the most reliable sources, Conflicts Forum, run by the former British intelligence officer Alastair Crooke, who argued that to "isolate and demonise [Islamic] groups that have support on the ground, the perception is reinforced that the west only understands the language of military strength". In wilfully denying this truth, Blair, Campbell and their echoes planted the roots of the 7/7 attacks in London.

Today, another Afghanistan and Iraq beckons in Syria and Iran, perhaps even a world war.  Once again, voices such as Crooke's attempt to explain to a media salivating for "intervention" in Syria that the civil war in that country requires skilled, patient negotiation, not the provocations of the British SAS and the familiar, bought-and-paid-for exiles who ride in Anglo-America's Trojan Horse.

Friday, February 17, 2012


Washington’s Insouciance Has No Rival

Is Obama a hypocrite or merely insouciant? Or is he an idiot?
According to news reports Obama’s White House meeting on Valentine’s day with China’s Vice President, Xi Jinping, provided an opportunity for Obama to raise “a sensitive human rights issue with the Chinese leader-in-waiting.” The brave and forthright Obama didn’t let etiquette or decorum get in his way. Afterwards, Obama declared that Washington would “continue to emphasize what we believe is the importance of realizing the aspirations and rights of all people.”
Think about that for a minute. Washington is now in the second decade of murdering Muslim men, women, and children in six countries. Washington is so concerned with human rights that it drops bombs on schools, hospitals, weddings and funerals, all in order to uphold the human rights of Muslim people. You see, bombing liberates Muslim women from having to wear the burka and from male domination.
One hundred thousand, or one million, dead Iraqis, four million displaced Iraqis, a country with destroyed infrastructure, and entire cities, such as Fallujah, bombed and burnt with white phosphorus into cinders is the proper way to show concern for human rights.
Ditto for Afghanistan. And Libya.
In Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia Washington’s drones bring human rights to the people.
Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, and secret CIA prison sites are other places to which Washington brings human rights. Obama, who has the power to murder American citizens without due process of law, is too powerless to close Guantanamo Prison.
He is powerless to prevent himself from supplying Israel with weapons with which to murder Palestinians and Lebanese citizens to whom Obama brings human rights by vetoing every UN resolution passed against Israel for its crimes against humanity.
Instead of following Washington’s human rights lead, the evil Chinese invest in other countries, buy things from them, and sell them goods.
Has any foreign dignitary ever raised “a sensitive human rights issue” with Obama or his predecessor? How is the world so deranged that Washington can murder innocents for years on end and still profess to be the world’s defender of human rights?
How many people has China bombed, droned, and sanctioned into non-existence in the 21st century?
Will Syria and Iran be the next victims of Washington’s concern for human rights?
Nothing better illustrates the total unreality of life in the West than the fact that the entire Western world did not break out in riotous laughter over Obama’s expression of his human rights concern over China’s behavior.
Washington’s concern with human rights does not extend as far as airport security where little girls and grandmothers are sexually groped. Antiwar activists have their homes invaded, their personal possessions carried off, and a grand jury is summoned to frame them up on some terrorist charge. US soldier Bradley Manning is held for two years in violation of the US Constitution while the human rights government concocts fabricated charges to punish him for revealing a US war crime. WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange is harassed endlessly with the goal of bringing him into the human rights clutches of Washington. Critics of Washington’s inhumane policies are monitored and spied upon.
Washington is the worst violator of human rights in our era, and Washington has only begun.
Who will liberate Americans from Washington’s clutches?


Is Western Democracy Real or a Facade?

The United States government and its NATO puppets have been killing Muslim men, women and children for a decade in the name of bringing them democracy. But is the West itself a democracy?
Skeptics point out that President George W. Bush was put in office by the Supreme Court and that a number of other elections have been decided by electronic voting machines that leave no paper trail. Others note that elected officials represent the special interests that fund their campaigns and not the voters. The bailout of the banks arranged by Bush’s Treasury Secretary and former Goldman Sachs chairman, Henry Paulson, and Washington’s failure to indict any banksters for the fraud that contributed to the financial crisis, are evidence in support of the view that the US government represents money and not the voters.
Recent events in Greece and Italy have created more skepticism of the West’s claim to be democratic. Two elected European prime ministers, George Papandreou of Greece and Silvio Berlusconi of Italy, were forced to resign over the sovereign debt issue. Not even Berlusconi, a billionaire who continues to lead the largest Italian political party, could stand up to the pressure brought by private bankers and unelected European Union officials.
Papandreou lasted only 10 days after announcing on October 31, 2011, that he would let the Greek voters decide in a referendum whether or not to accept the austerity being imposed on the Greek people from the outside. Austerity is the price charged by the EU for lending the Greek government the money to pay to the banks. In other words, the question was austerity or default. However, the question was decided without the participation of the Greek people.
Consequently, Greeks have taken to the streets. The conditions accompanying the latest tranche of the bailout have again brought large numbers of Greeks into the streets of Athens and other cities. Citizens are protesting a 20% cut both in the minimum wage and in pensions larger than 12,000 euros ($15,800) annually and more cuts in public sector jobs. Greek taxes were raised 2.3 billion euros last year and are scheduled to rise another 3.4 billion euros in 2013. The austerity is being imposed despite Greece’s unemployment rate of 21% overall and 48% for those under the age of 25.
One interpretation is that the banks, which were careless in their loans to governments, are forcing the people to save the banks from the consequences of their bad decisions.
Another interpretation is that the European Union is using the sovereign debt crisis to extend its power and control over the individual member states of the EU.
Some say that the EU is using the banks for the EU’s agenda, and others say the banks are using the EU for the banks’ agenda.
Indeed, they may be using each other. Regardless, democracy is not part of the process.
Greece’s appointed–not elected–prime minister is Lucas Papademos. He is a former governor of the Bank of Greece, a member of Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission, and former vice president of the European Central Bank. In other words, he is a banker appointed to represent the banks.
On February 12 the appointed prime minister, whose job is to deliver Greece to the banks or to Brussels, failed to see the irony in his statement that “violence has no place in a democracy.” Neither did he see any irony in the fact that 40 elected representatives in the Greek parliament who rejected the bailout terms were expelled by the ruling coalition parties. Violence begets violence. Violence in the streets is a response to the economic violence being committed against the Greek people.
Italy has formed a second democratic government devoid of democracy. The appointed prime minister, Mario Monti, doesn’t have to face an election until April 2013. Moreover, according to news reports, his “technocratic cabinet” does not include a single elected politician. The banks are taking no chances: Monti is both prime minister and minister of economics and finance.
Monti’s background indicates that he represents both the EU and the banks. He is former European advisor to Goldman Sachs, European chairman of the Trilateral Commission, a member of the Bilderberg Group, a former EU Commissioner, and a founding member of the Spinelli Group, an organization launched in September 2010 to facilitate integration within the EU, that is, to advance central power over the member states.
There is little doubt that European governments, like Washington, have been financially improvident, living beyond their means and building up debt burdens on citizens. Something needed to be done. However, what is being done is extra-democratic. This is an indication that Western elites–the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations, Bilderberg Group, the EU, transnational corporations, oversized banks, and the mega-rich–no longer believe in democracy.
Perhaps future historians will conclude that democracy once served the interests of money in order to break free of the power of kings, aristocracy, and government predations, but as money established control over governments, democracy became a liability. Historians will speak of the transition from the divine right of kings to the divine right of money.

Sunday, February 12, 2012


by craig on Feb 6th in Uncategorized

An important rule of good blogging is not to comment on matters which you do not understand. An important rule of my own life is not to try to understand everything, as no one man can. I have never tried to master the intricacies of Syrian internal politics, (or Lebanese for that matter). Assad senior perpetrated atrocities on a grand scale without ever getting much attention from the West. Hopes that Assad junior would make things much better seemed to come to nothing. If the revolutionary tide swept away the Assad crew, I should be pleased.
I do not know in depth why Homs is a hotbed of opposition, and what the tribal divisions are. I do know that Saudi Arabia – the apostle state of repression – is funding and arming the Free Syrian Army, which is anything but a good sign. I am very interested that the BBC reports bombings in Damascus as false flag bombings by the Assad regime, when I found that to note false flag bombings by UK/US ally Karimov in Tashkent was treated as crazed conspiracy theory.
But what I understand most is the diplomacy. On Libya, NATO took a UN Security Council Resolution authorising a no fly zone, and twisted it as cover to wage all out aerial warfare on one side in a civil war. Long after pro-Gadaffi sources lost any serious offensive capability, NATO were carpet-bombing Sirte, killing many times more people than Assad has killed in Homs to date.
If given an inch you take 500 miles, you should not be surprised when in future nobody will give you half an inch. That is the context of Russian and Chinese veto of any UNSCR authorising action against Syria. The total disregard for the spirit and precise wording of the resolutions on Libya to which Russia and China agreed, has stymied the chances of future united security council action, perhaps for many years. I actually predicted this, blogging on 5 October 2011
“Having absolutely abused UNSCR 1973, plainly NATO was seriously damaging the ability of the Security Council to work together in future, and making quite certain that China and Russia would not for many years agree to any SC Resolutions which might be open to similar abuse.”
All the sham indignation about a consequence the US, UK and France so directly brought upon themselves, and which was so obviously predictable, is pathetic.
It is fascinating the way this has been presented in the media, with graphics on all the major news channels showing the national flags of the thirteen countries who voted for the resolution, compared to the two against. There is some interest here – Azerbaijan is certainly a surprise and will be causing real heartache in the Kremlin. But the language from Clinton on the irresponsible use of the veto and on need for action without the United Nations, is completely out of order.
The United States has stymied UN action against Israeli aggression on numerous occasions, very often vetoing alone. I do not recall the BBC ever showing a graphic of all the national flags on one side versus just the stars and stripes on the other. Funny that. The threat of a veto is usually enough to stop a motion being tabled, but I am fairly confident in saying that the USA has exercised its veto to protect Israel on over thirty occasions. That US prevention of international action includes over Operation Cast Lead, not so long ago, where again the Israelis were killing far more civilians than are dying in the current – still deplorable – assault on Homs.
The drive for another war in the Middle East, from the same old suspects who profit from such wars, is relentless and pretty well any war of opportunity will do. What is happening in Syria is sad in its violence, and also hopeful insofar as some of it is motivated by a genuine spark of freedom. Those who purport to believe that internal conflict anywhere is best resolved by us bombing the hell out of a country and/or invading it, are a combination of cranks and cynical profiteers.
What worries me most is not the turmoil in Syria; it is the vultures circling over it.

Saturday, February 11, 2012



ex post facto
is twee stoomlokomotiewe
piepend en stomend
van vuur en vlam bekomend

Thursday, February 9, 2012


sien hul naak
alledemate kaal
gestroop van kamoeflage
lowerydelheid versaak
staan hul daar
op die barre vlak
gekeerde rûe fluister
van ongenaakbaar wind
vertel verhale, overlewe
ring van oer tot kind
bind hul saam
tot één sterk stam
trotseer elk aanslag
en bly uitdagend
teen die hele wêreld vry:

Tuesday, February 7, 2012


FEBRUARY 3, 2012

Beware The Ides of March in 2012: The Double Blow of Economic Collapse And World War Is Coming

"Ruin from Man is most conceal'd when near
And sends the dreadful Tidings in the Blow." - Edward Young, Night Thoughts.
The world economy is on the brink of a crisis that will end modern civilization as we know it.

Nations, or I should say banking colonies, will collapse left and right. Global poverty and unemployment rates have risen to levels that are socially and economically unmanageable under the current global financial, political, and bureaucratic system which favours the few at the expense of the many.

It is fitting that the collapse of Western Civilization is beginning in its ancient cradle, Greece. This great nation has fallen to the banksters who are behind the despotic new world order.
In the article, "Art Cashin: Beware The Ides Of March--Or Maybe A Few Days Later," journalist Gus Lubin says that global investors are expecting a structured default to take place in Greece on March 20.

Some people believe a Greek default and a collapsing global economy is a good and beneficial development for the planet, especially anti-growth radicals in elite and new age circles who are committed to the view that the planet is under attack from economic development and modern industrialization.

They don't mind seeing nations like Greece go under. They justify their economic warfare and financial looting by saying the destruction of national economies is done for the sake of the environment. But the real reason for bankrupting nations such as Greece and America is to consolidate political power and create a global authoritarian police state.
Nations that are not in the Banksters' sphere of political and economic influence like Libya are overthrown and bombed, and nations that are like America are pillaged and burned to the point of collapse.

Engineering A "Clash of Civilizations" To Destroy The Global Economy, Save The Environment, Reduce The World Population, And Maintain The Global Status Quo
The anti-growth Western elites want a third world war to erupt in the Middle East, with Israel and the forces of the West on one side, and Iran and the forces of Islam on the other side. They believe that the world economy is a threat to the global environment and that creating a divine "Clash of Civilizations" is a solution to this mega problem because it will lead to a catastrophic world war and the destruction of the world economy.

This "Clash of Civilizations" has been set up between the West and Islam in such a way that both civilizations will be destroyed by the end of the epic struggle, and pave the way for a new, global, post-industrial civilization to emerge out of the shadows and out of the ruins.
But in order for there to be a mythical "Clash of Civilizations," the globalists in Washington must first create the Islamic Ummah, with Islamic fundamentalists in power throughout the Middle East, Central Asia, and North Africa, from Egypt to Iran, Libya to Afghanistan.

The process of Islamisation is not spontaneous, but generated by British and American intelligence agencies. Their aim is to put culturally backward and power-hungry theocratic thieves in charge in Muslim societies, rather than allow secular and nationalist democracies to develop and modernize the Islamic world.
Any prominent Muslim leader in the Middle East who is against the forces of Islamic fundamentalism, and who has the power to shift Western popular perceptions about the East, is pushed out of the picture by the globalist owned CIA and MI6. This is what happened to the legendary Afghan Mujahideen commander Ahmad Shah Massoud, who was planning a democratic future for his war-torn country but was murdered by CIA trained Al-Qaeda terrorists on September 9, 2001.

Massoud was a real warrior and heroic revolutionary, unlike the villainous snake and coward Khomeini, who was supported by the MI6 and CIA.

What occupies the minds of the elites in America, England, Israel, and Iran is creating a global dictatorship out of the fires of the coming great clash between the two worlds, not the survival of the countries that they rule over.

The belief that America's rulers won't let Iran close the Strait of Hormuz because that act would turn off the world economy implies that America's rulers actually care about the world economy. But they don't. They want America's economy and the world economy to collapse. Privately, they will welcome a closure of the Strait of Hormuz, but publicly they'll scream like crazy and pretend to defend the interests of the world economy.
Also, the belief that Iran won't use all its means to shut down the Strait of Hormuz because that would be an act of national suicide is grounded in the false understanding of the Islamic Republic of Iran's goals and methods.

The roots of the regime are in shadowy soil of Western intelligence agencies. The shadow CIA and shadow MI6 have cooperated with Islamist fanatics in Iran since 1953 when they were called on to agitate in the streets against the democratically elected government of Mohammad Mosaddegh.

When the Shah's time had come to an end in 1979, the CIA and MI6 manipulators brought in the same Islamic fundamentalists to rule Iran for them while posing on the wold stage as antagonistic and ideological rivals. Khomeini's rise to power as Iran's Supreme Leader assured the success of the Globalist agenda.

The elite magicians of the West have a long view of history. They knew the Soviet Union would fall one day so they made preparations for that event in the geopolitical and ideological terrain.

It was no accident that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Islamic fundamentalism as represented by Iran and international terrorism as represented by various Islamic groups came to replace the Soviet Union as "The Enemy."

Totalitarian States Are At War, Not Nations And Peoples 
On Friday, February 3, 2012, Washington's Blog wrote in a headline: "Less than One-Fifth of All Americans Favor Military or Covert Action Against Iran … Less than Half of Israelis Want to Attack Iran, and 65% Want the Entire Middle East – Including Israel – to be a Nuclear-Free Zone."

The people of America, Israel, and Iran are sick and tired of wars. Without false flag attacks like 9/11 and ritualistic chants like "Death to America," the fever of war would not exist.

In the current state of human affairs, the totalitarian doctors of the Total War State first spread the fever of war throughout society and then they sell the medicine. It is an evil, barbaric, and psychopathic practice.

Crooked elites want wars for obvious reasons. War gives them extra powers and extra profits, and keeps the people off their backs. War means chaos, and chaos leads to control. Chaos is the name of the age-old political game.

As the totalitarian guardians of Iran's destiny, the Mullahs have imbued Iran with a sense of historic mission and grand purpose. They have done this not for the good of Iran or for the good of Islam, but for the good of their masonic and globalist masters. The top Mullahs are not interested in preserving Iran's security and survival, but in fulfilling the wishes of the men who put them in power in the first place.

Iran, like Israel, has been chosen to be a nation of sacrifice with war on its national mind and hatred pierced in its heart like a spiritual tattoo. There is no authentic and free political culture in Iran and Israel in any real sense because their rulers are totalitarian myth-makers and sociopathic criminals who do not separate the boundaries between society and the state.

"Culture for the modern totalitarian state," wrote Historian Georg G. Iggers in his 1958 book The Cult of Authority, "is a matter of political control. Learning, the arts, and the sciences, have always been subsidized by governments in Western Civilization and authoritarian states have often proscribed heterodox political or religious ideas. But the conception of the arts and sciences as tools of the state, subject to close political guidance, is a product of our century." (Iggers, The Cult of Authority. Martinus Nijhoff: The Hague, Netherlands. 1958. pg. 158).

Iran and Israel are large mythical and totalitarian factories that are producing brainwashed martyrs and fighters for a cosmic and divine war. They are not countries with a future, but graveyards in the making.
In his speeches to Iranian Revolutionary Guards, Basij, and other soldiers/slaves of Iran's military, such as this one, Supreme Leader Khamenei always reinforces the spiritual nature of the coming clash between Iran and America/Israel. The Mullahs' hardcore spiritual strategy is manipulative in nature because they do not have in mind the best interests of the Iranian people and the Iranian martyrs.

But it is not only Iran that has been hijacked and betrayed by evil totalitarian myth-makers. America and Israel have been hijacked and betrayed as well.

The people and soldiers of America, Israel, Iran, and other nations that are set to participate in this staged world war are sacrificial lambs who are victims of mass mind control.

George Washington said it best: "If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter."

Thursday, February 2, 2012




by craig on Feb 1st in Uncategorized

“Afghan civilians frequently prefer Taliban governance over GIRoA [the Afghan government], usually as a result of government corruption, ethnic bias and lack of connection with local religious and tribal leaders”.
That is a direct quote from a NATO report. This blog has been telling you for six years that the Afghan government rigged its elections, is enormously corrupt, full of warlords and deeply implicated in the heroin trade. That the “Afghan army” is a tribal construct based on the Northern Alliance, and channels weapons to warlords. That no development is really happening. That the government of Afghanistan is comprised of individuals who make money from war and have no interest in peace.
All this has been at odds with the mainstream media narrative, which consists of embedded journalists and visiting ministers telling us that British troops are bringing civilisation to Afghanistan, roads are being built, markets opened and little girls going to school. The leaking of a candid NATO report on the genuine situation has brought us one day of reporting which jars with the general narrative flow.
Watch the propaganda machine go into top gear and more of the same old lies pouring forth in the next few days.

Honours Among Thieves

by craig on Feb 1st in Uncategorized

Personally I don’t care if he is called His Holy Magnificence Viceroy Goodwin of the Water of Leith. The Saxe-Coburg-Gotha-Battenberg familiy three times offered to honour me (LVO, OBE and CVO) and three times I politely refused. I did not think my worth as an individual would be enhanced by being covered in bling by Greco-German midgets.
Come to think of it, German Liz has been subsidising Greek Phil for sixty years. See how modern the Royal Family is – they even provided the model for the Euro.
Goodwin is a distraction from the fact that the resources of socirty are being channelled to the super-rich and unproductive as never before. Thousands of “bankers” in London are getting millions each in bonuses. These people are so regardless of the views of society and of the plight of others as to be truly sociopathic.
Let them keep their baubles, and wear them on their prison uniforms.