“Oh the gift that God could give us, to see ourselves as others see us.”
-Robert Burns

This famous quote by the great Scottish poet Robert Burns stands as one of the clearest reminders of a precondition for any matured identity.

Burns understood that without having learned to use our God-given ability to place ourselves in the shoes of another, then those powers needed to self-examine our false prejudices, exercise humility (upon which creative insight is premised) and correct our false motives, actions and beliefs would be completely lost.

It is thus disappointing, albeit no small surprise that those basic tools of self-criticism are entirely non-existent when one listens to the gossipy make-believe speeches of so many helmsmen manning today’s ship of fools, sometimes known as the Trans Atlantic “rules-based international order”.

A Clash of Paradigms

After seven years of civil war in East Ukraine, 14 thousand casualties, broken peace deals and countless appeals by those living in the Lugansk and Donetsk Republics for independence from the Nazi-infested militias embedded in the Kiev defense forces, Russia decided to finally recognize the East Ukrainian republics as sovereign nations. A few days later, Russia unleashed a program of de-militarization and de-Nazification of Ukraine featuring targetted military strikes that (as of this writing) have annihilated over 74 military bases, US biolabs and entrenched radical neo-nazi forces that have been entrenched in the Ukrainian military since 2014.

But despite this completely understandable humanitarian intervention which is provably NOT an annexation, we see endless instances of western sock puppet statesmen denouncing Russia’s imperial ambitions and antagonism to western democratic values.

From Canada, where Justin Trudeau and his handlers have used an Emergency Measures Act to justify the violent crushing of peaceful protestors in Ottawa (including the freezing of bank accounts of hundreds of citizens who donated money to a freedom convoy), we hear only buzzing threats of anti-Russian sanctions and pompous condemnation of “Russian aggression” with more comparisons of Adolph Hitler to Putin than one can count.

In response to Russia’s recognition of the East Donbass republics, Justin stated “Canada and our allies will defend democracy”. Referring to the wide array of sanctions and Canadian troop deployments to Latvia, Trudeau said “we are taking these actions to stand against totalitarianism.”

He then stated “the people of Ukraine, like all people must be free to determine their own future”. This last remark implies that the people in East Ukraine who have been demanding independence are not actually people.

These remarks are coming from a Canadian regime that had only days earlier arrested nearly 200 people for the terrible crime of “causing mischief” in Ottawa and freezing bank accounts using “secret information” which none of those representatives or Senators expected to vote for the act were allowed to see. Deputy Prime Minister Freeland herself (who has more than a few uncomfortable connections with outright pro-Nazi Ukrainian networks) has even publicly stated that many extraordinary powers created under ‘emergency conditions’ should be continued indefinitely after the emergencies act is revoked. [1]

Across the Trans-Atlantic Five Eyes cage, similar virtue signalling in defense of “democracy” has resounded with the USA, European Union and UK moving in lockstep to condemn Russian aggression, and impose similar sanctions on Russian parliamentarians, businessmen and banks, with the USA and UK joining Canada in sending troops to Russia’s border.

While an energy crisis has already made a hard life harder for millions of Europeans struggling with a self-induced economic crisis under pandemic conditions, the German government has been pressured to accelerate its own self-destruction by cancelling the desperately needed Nord Stream 2 in order to “punish” Russia.

Nazis and Operation Gladio

European Commission Vice President Frans Timmermans has demonstrated the typical level of over-exaggerated hypocrisy asserting that February 22 was “one of the darkest days in Europe’s history” apparently forgetting that WWI or WWII happened.

Timmermans is a character who has distinguished himself as a technocratic sock puppet by pushing anti-Russian sanctions for 8 years beginning with the highly flawed MH-17 bombing investigation in 2014, while covering up the true Kiev-connected hands behind that atrocity. Amidst his current crocodile tears over the “darkest days” Europe has ever faced, Timmermans appears oblivious to the mass atrocities committed by Nazi “stay behinds” used by western intelligence operations under Operation Gladio during the Cold War. This is especially strange since it was during Timmermans’ time as Deputy Chair on the Commission of Foreign Affairs in the Netherlands that an extensive 2005 report on Nazi stay-behinds was published by the Dutch Ministry of Defense.

After having been established by the CIA, NATO and MI6 in 1956, Operation Gladio saw hundreds of terrorist cells deployed by former leaders of Nazi intelligence embedded across Europe who were used to kill civilians and troublesome politicians while stoking the fires of anarchy along the way. These acts of terror were in turn used to justify the excessive “emergency management” by oligarchically captured trans Atlantic nations throughout the Cold War based upon the logic that “the war against communism justifies everything… including fascism”.

While some say that the Gladio Operations were cancelled when the Soviet Union disintegrated, evidence points to a very different picture.

One particularly loud case is found in the figure of Andriy Parubiy, founder of the neo-Nazi Social-National Party of Ukraine who was appointed to serve as Secretary of the National Security and National Defense Committee (RNBOU) in the post-regime change putsch managed by Victoria Nuland and overseen by Joe Biden.

It is noteworthy that Parubiy, who has close ties to Freeland (herself the proud granddaughter of Hitler collaborator Michael Chomiak) cozied up to Justin in 2016 while seeking weapons, training and other logistical support from Canada. Meetings between Canadian politicians and leading neo-Nazi groups from Ukraine like the Azov Battalion continued to be so frequent that the Ottawa Citizen reported on November 9, 2021 that:

“Canadian officials who met with members of a Ukrainian battalion linked to neo-Nazis didn’t denounce the unit, but were instead concerned the media would expose details of the get-together, according to newly released documents. The Canadians met with and were briefed by leaders from the Azov Battalion in June 2018. The officers and diplomats did not object to the meeting and instead allowed themselves to be photographed with battalion officials despite previous warnings that the unit saw itself as pro-Nazi. The Azov Battalion then used those photos for its online propaganda, pointing out the Canadian delegation expressed “hopes for further fruitful co-operation.”

Deputy Chairman of Ukraine’s Parliament, Andriy Parubiy, visited Ottawa in February 2016, meeting with the prime minister. At that meeting (from left) are Ukraine’s Ambassador to Canada Andriy Shevchenko, Verkhovna Rada Deputy Chairman Andriy Parubiy, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Member of Parliament Borys Wrzesnewskyj.

It is thus no small irony that among those “liberal democracies” of Canada, the USA, UK and EU, we have repeated evidence of actual neo-Nazi collaboration both past and present as well as fascist behavior deployed against the people living in and around those very liberal democracies. Among these self-professed bastions of freedom and democracy, we have numerous cases of torture (Guantanamo Bay), illegal arrests of dissidents who participated in January 6 Washington rallies or Ottawa anti-medical dictatorship mandates, unlawful freezing of bank services for those whose political views are deemed unacceptable to a governing elite, and the imprisonment of whistleblowers.

What is clear is that those managerial technocrats processed through World Economic Forum training camps are generally entirely incapable of self-criticism or recognizing their own hypocrisy. They are wired to move in echo chambers of self-congratulatory flattery without every confronting points of disagreement that need be dealt with through dialogue or reason. The typical unipolarist automaton is entirely incapable of basic fundamental human character traits that allows each of us to see and judge ourselves from the standpoint of people outside of our class, group, or even cultural matrix choosing instead to expect everyone and even the universe itself, to fit into those ivory tower models and values which are wired into the mind of any Davos creature.

At the end of the day, those statesmen who are unencumbered by such mechanical handicaps as those suffered by Davos creatures, have access to a much greater degree of insight, and creative flexibility to lawfully break the rules of rigged games in ways that those control freaks sitting in ivory can ever comprehend. It is precisely this incapacity to either comprehend creative human thinking or self-criticize their own false thinking that creates those systemic conceptual blind spots which will ultimately prove their own undoing.

The author can be reached at matthewehret.substack.com

[1] Thankfully, pushback from a few courageous Senators and Members of Parliament (as well as certain financial institutions petrified of an immanent bank run) have induced the Canadian government to pull back from the act on February 23 although, although an Orwellian “war on disinformation and hate” and a new level of integration between banks and intelligence agencies has now been put into motion.

THE HISTORY

Adolf Hitler is the best source for understanding his ideology. On 27 January 1932, he spoke before the Industry Club of Dusseldorf. Somehow (and it’s not fully understood how, even today) he managed to double his vote-percentage, from 18.3% in September 1930, to 37.3% in July 1932. The owner of Vereinigte Stahlwerke, the world’s largest steel and mining cartel, Fritz Thyssen, attended this speech, and, after the war, he wrote of it, “The speech made a deep impression on the assembled industrialists, and in consequence of this a number of large contributions flowed from the resources of heavy industry into the treasuries of the National Socialist party.” Other than that public statement, however, there is no surviving record that the Nazi Party received any immediate large infusion of cash as a result of the speech. The Nazi Party was broke at the time the speech was made. And yet, quite suddenly and mysteriously a year later, the Party received huge infusions of cash, and Hitler’s message to the tycoons had not changed, nor is there any indication that the deeply indebted Party was being bailed-out by its members.

Though there is no consensus regarding whom the main funders of the Nazi Party were, Hitler’s full address at that crucial presentation in Dusseldorf — to 700 principals and agents of the richest residents of Germany’s industrial center, Rhineland-Westphalia — was his most complete recorded statement about his economic philosophy, and it therefore is extremely important for understanding his ideology. The text of that lengthy speech can be seen here. The gist of it is that those men (they all were men) were the most superior of all Germans, and wouldn’t be the titans of German industry if they hadn’t been Germany’s best. Hitler explicitly condemned “democracy,” because it isn’t elitist. He said that “Political democracy … is equivalent to communism in the field of economics,” and that both violate nature. His message was ‘social Darwinism’ in the economic sphere (something that Darwin himself strongly did not believe in, but Hitler had no real scientific interests). “The greatest results are the great crowning achievement of individual geniuses endowed by God,” he told them. Consequently, he said that they should be the actual political leaders of the Volk, and not merely its economic leaders. The Nazi Party represented this view. He was praising the aristocracy as being successful on account of their genetically being “geniuses” — not merely heirs from Man’s laws, but instead a product of the laws of nature and of nature’s God — that it reflected the survival of the fittest, and should extend to the political sphere, and not merely to the economic one.

In every nation where an aristocracy exists, what really matters isn’t whether or not aristocrats possess official titles but whether they actually are the few individuals whom the government actually represents. If they are (and whomever they might happen to be), then the government is an aristocracy, no democracy (which is where there is rule by no few people, but actually by a government that authentically represents all of the nation’s residents). And those few individuals (the actual aristocracy, or “Deep State,” which rules that country) are typically the wealthiest in the land, who hire lobbyists and others to pay whomever needs to be paid in order to carry out their intention by means of the Government, via its legislature, chief executive, courts, police, and military. In other words: such a country is a dictatorship — and, by its very nature, is a corrupt one. Such dictatorship formerly used to be carried out as feudalism, during the Agrarian Age, but increasingly, in the Industrial Age, after 28 October 1922, it’s being carried out as fascism, which Benito Mussolini sometimes called “corporationism”. In either case, it’s rule by the richest.

Both of those systems — feudalism and fascism — are typically extended also internationally, by means of imperialism and conquest, and control over, and exploitation of, foreign countries, called colonies or vassal-nations. The difference between fascism and nazism is simply that nazism is racist fascism, but both of those ideologies impose rule over a nation by its aristocracy (the owners of the controlling blocs of stock in that nation’s major corporations) and therefore are dictatorships, not democracies. (Under feudalism, the aristocracy possessed control over land, instead of control over corporations. That’s the difference between feudalism and fascism.) The dictatorial government can never become a democracy unless conquered by their own public (in an authentic revolution, which can be either violent or non-violent) or else by a foreign democracy that seeks no empire. (If they’re defeated instead by yet another imperialistic regime, then the government will remain a dictatorship.)

During World War II, the United States and its allies were waging war against three imperialistic fascist regimes — Italy, Germany, and Japan — because those three fascist regimes were imperialistic: they were not only domestic dictatorships, but also international dictatorships, conquering other lands, distant from their own, and therefore posed severe threats against the national security of all other nations. America and its three main allies — Britain, USSR, and China (plus the nations that were allied with each one of those) — weren’t waging war against fascist Spain, because that fascist regime wasn’t trying to conquer any foreign country. Spain’s Government was a non-imperialist fascism, and therefore presented no threat to any of the Allies.

Consequently, the “isolationists” who, in the non-fascist countries, wished to avoid war against the three imperialistic fascist regimes, were supporting imperialism, not supporting peace, because the only way to support peace when there is an imperialistic regime is to prepare to defeat that imperialistic regime — to prepare for war against it, because that war will be coming, and the only real question is when it will come. (This is why lend-lease was done by Franklin Delano Roosevelt even before America overtly entered WWII.) Some of the pacifists in the 1930s were authentically naive, but others of them were pro-fascist.

WWII was not actually a war about fascism versus democracy (such as the propagandized myth says), but instead was a war about imperialism versus the sovereignty of each nation. This reality is misrepresented by many ‘historians’, who simply — and falsely — presume that WWII was about dictatorship versus democracy. The reason why this myth is propagandized is that wherever the military-industrial complex control the government and the ‘news’-media (such as after FDR died), this myth is the way to get the public to support invasions such as against Iraq in 2003, Libya in 2011, and Syria during 2013-2019 (all of them sovereign countries, which posed no actual threat to America). That’s imperialistic fascism. It’s what an imperialistic fascist nation does, and what that nation’s propaganda lies about (because those target-nations had actually posed no threat to the invading nations).

In this context, a clarification is important: to assert (as many people do) that support for the sovereignty of each nation necessarily means opposition to the formation of a world government, is wrong — it is simply false to assert that. A global federal government could develop in which all of the existing governments are democratically represented in a global republic as constituting its federal districts (which was FDR’s goal with the U.N.). Doing this would support the sovereignty of each nation within each nation’s territory, and would assign to the global government the exclusive control over nuclear and other strategic weapons, so that only by means of a majority-vote, in that global legislature, could strategic weapons be mobilized for war. However, a fascist world government — a global corporate dictatorship such as U.S. President Barack Obama was trying to advance — would eliminate the sovereignty of nations and replace it by the sovereignty of international corporations. What would be supremely inconsistent with a global democracy of sovereign nations, is a global dictatorship — any type of dictatorial world government. There is strong evidence that Adolf Hitler (like Obama) aspired to establish a dictatorial world government, and that he (unlike Obama) even expected to achieve such global dictatorship within his own lifetime.

Hitler’s Nazism was fascist like Mussolini’s Fascism, but with a more pronounced residual feudalistic element of land and of race (and this feudalistic element includes the Old Testament’s zionism, of Israel being the land that God gave to “God’s People”; so, zionism is based upon that ancient feudal concept, which is concerned more with land than with any corporations).

Hitler hated Jews as a race. He didn’t consider them a religion, because in his private notes in 1919 at the time when he entered politics, he cited (see pages 283-287 of Werner Maser’s 1974 Hitler’s Letters and Notes) his authority, “The Bible — Monumental History of Mankind,” and this included both the Old Testament and the New Testament. He paraphrased from both Testaments in his subsequent speeches and writings, and did it often; and he always interpreted Old Testament passages as viewed in light of the New Testament. He thus had a fundamentalist, or literal, interpretation of that “Monumental History of Mankind.” Until 1937, he believed unquestioningly in its complete and literal truthfulness. But even till the end of his life, he remained basically a Biblical literalist. For example, in his Secret Conversations (Table-Talk) on the night of 25-6 January 1942, when the “final solution” was already under way (and the Wannsee Conference had occurred just five days earlier, instructing his subordinates what their respective roles would be in the plan), Hitler asked, “Where do we acquire the right to believe that man has not always been as he is now? The study of nature teaches us that, in the animal kingdom just as much as in the vegetable kingdom, variations have occurred. They’ve occurred within the species, but none of these variations has an importance comparable with that which separates man from the monkey — assuming that this transformation really took place.” Even that late, it all went back to Adam and Eve and the snake, and to original sin.

As a supremacist Christian, he despised Slavs as a nation of slaves to Jews, via the racially Jewish Karl Marx’s communism reigning over Slavic lands, which Hitler was convinced should therefore become controlled by his pureblooded Christian God’s People, or “Aryans.” For Hitler, race was thus supreme above nation, and this racial supremacy was what he referred to by emphasizing the “Volk,” or people, as being represented by his Nazi Party. To him, their race was “Aryan,” and this meant that they were pure-blooded Christians, the direct descendants of Adam and Eve in Genesis 3, as that was being interpreted in light of the New Testament. In Hitler’s theology (roughly outlined in those 1919 notes, and subsequently developed in his speeches and Mein Kampf), the snake Satan from Genesis 3 had spawned the Jews, as Hitler interpreted Genesis 3 upon the basis of Matthew 23:33-38, John 8:44, and over a hundred other biblical passages that he paraphrased from in his notes, letters, speeches, and books. Thus, he said, “Jesus was not a Jew” — Jesus was descended from Adam and Eve, not from the snake. In his private notes during September 1919, at the time when his notes mentioned “The Bible — Monumental History of Mankind,” he was pondering the meaning of “original sin” and referred to the “blood poisoning” of “the Aryan” or “Children of God” by “the Jew” via “miscegenation,” violating “Racial purity the highest law” (as he interpreted the Old Testament) and so constituting “a terrible fact” that produces “misery forever.” He feared that he might be the illegitimate son of (“miscegenated” from) a Jew (though he actually was not, and he never got to know this). From September 1919 onwards, he was determined to atone for his “original sin” (the alleged Jewish bastardization) (and never to let the public know that this is what he was aiming to do). This was the basis of his racist fascism. Thus, in the May 2003 The Atlantic, Timothy Ryback headlined “Hitler’s Forgotten Library: You can tell a lot about a person from what he reads. The surviving — and largely ignored — remnants of Adolf Hitler’s personal library reveal a deep but erratic interest in religion and theology.” Ryback pointed out especially Hitler’s passionate markings in the books that Hitler was the most interested in. For example, Ryback wrote:

As I traced the penciled notations, I realized that Hitler was seeking a path to the divine that led to just one place. Fichte asked, “Where did Jesus derive the power that has held his followers for all eternity?” Hitler drew a dense line beneath the answer: “Through his absolute identification with God.” At another point Hitler highlighted a brief but revealing paragraph: “God and I are One. Expressed simply in two identical sentences — His life is mine; my life is his. My work is his work, and his work my work.”

As I had noted in my 2000 book about Hitler and the Holocaust, WHY the Holocaust Happened, Hitler on several occasions said in private, or only to devoted followers, things such as he did on 18 December 1926, “The teachings of Christ have laid the foundations for the battle against Jews as the enemy of Mankind; the work that Christ began, I shall finish.” In that book regarding Hitler’s “final solution,” I wrote that (p. 274):

as is shown by Revelation 20:1-6, this solution [his ‘final solution’] will actually last for only a thousand years: exterminating Satan’s people will eliminate the blood-poisoning from Satan, and restore Paradise for one thousand years, the Thousand-Year Reich, during which God’s People — the Aryans — will rule the Earth, carrying out God’s will in Paradise restored.

In order for Hitler to do this, he needed to rise to become Germany’s leader, and to ultimately become the world’s leader; and this required WWII. He even frustrated his generals in order to expedite the extermination of Jews. So: that was his intention when he entered politics. WWII was essential in order for him to become enabled to wipe out all Jews and establish “Paradise,” the Thousand-Year Reich. For him, success in the war could not be achieved unless and until all Jews would be eliminated.

But Jews were only his main target. He had actually two primary targets — two main war-aims — which were for Jews to become eliminated, and for Slavs to become Aryans’ slaves. Another way to phrase it is for Jews to be exterminated (not only in Germany but everywhere), and for the Soviet Union to be colonized by Aryans. As he saw it at that time, Slavs were being exploited by Jews, and he wanted Slavs to be exploited instead by Aryans. Hitler’s focus against the Soviet Union was secondary to his focus against Jews. But almost immediately when, on 12 April 1945, U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt died, Hitler’s secondary focus became adopted as the U.S. Government’s primary focus. Today’s U.S. is therefore a modified Nazism. Here’s how that happened:

Under the naive U.S. President Harry S. Truman (deceived by agents of America’s wealthiest citizens), America’s dominant foreign-policy theme became (beginning on 26 July 1945) — and it increasingly has become — Hitler’s anti-Slav theme: under the guise of “anti-communism”. It was to be conquest of all of the Slav republics, virtually all of which, except Russia itself, have, indeed, successfully been taken over by the U.S. regime — that is, by the U.S. aristocracy, its billionaires who control all of America’s international corporations and the U.S. Government. Hitler’s chief of anti-Russian intelligence actually became hired by U.S. President Truman’s Government, in order, first, to set up West Germany’s foreign-intelligence operation against the Soviet Union; and, then (once Truman became replaced by one of his own core former advisors, the cunning Republican Dwight David Eisenhower) to help the fascist, even Nazi, Allen Dulles’s own CIA, to defeat the communist Soviet Union. After the Cold War ended in 1991 on Russia’s side, it was secretly continued on the U.S. side, and U.S. President Barack Obama’s February 2014 coup in Ukraine (which he had started in 2011 to plan) was one of its culminating events, which brings us to today. Here’s some of the deeper background behind that outcome (and explaining the nazism of the Government that Obama imposed upon Ukraine):

Reinhard Gehlen had been the chief of Hitler’s “military intelligence service on the eastern front during World War II” and he had been chosen by Hitler for this assignment because of his intense devotion to conquering the Soviet Union so as to expand the Lebensraum (living-space) of Germany’s Aryans, or pureblooded Christians, and to impose the enslavement of the Slavs who lived there. Gehlen’s amply documented methods entailed mass-murder and individual torture, all on a vast scale. He would have been a cinch to hang at Nuremberg. But he was sufficiently cunning so as to have secretly turned against Hitler in 1943 as soon as he could see that Germany would lose the war, and actually he was already, by 1942, in contact with Allen Dulles in America’s nascent CIA, the OSS, offering Dulles assistance after the war would be over. Gehlen knew better than to reach out to any of Stalin’s people to offer help, and Truman turned out to be as naive as Gehlen possibly could have hoped for. Truman’s CIA set Gehlen up to run West Germany’s intelligence operation. Dulles did this, under the ignorant Truman, and largely behind Truman’s back. As John Loftus and Mark Aarons put it, in their masterful 1994 The Secret War Against the Jews (p. 151), “Allen Dulles had arranged for General Reinhard Gehlen, chief of Nazi intelligence on the Eastern front, to receive special treatment. Gehlen was flown to Washington in 1945, dressed as an American General.” Dulles was one of Gehlen’s secret friends. Truman didn’t like Dulles, but Eisenhower, who intermittently advised Truman, did.

Perhaps the greatest masterpiece of investigative historical writing about the post-WW-II era is Paul L. Williams’s 2018 book OPERATION GLADIO: The Unholy Alliance between The Vatican, the CIA, and the Mafia, which delivers stunning evidence against all three of those components of the Operation, and which historical account opens by discussing “the close of 1942, when the German infantry remained mired in the mud and snow of the Russian steppes.” Williams quotes Dulles there as saying “We’re fighting the wrong enemy.” Dulles was eager to move forward at that time with “word via Vatican messengers from Schutzstaffel (SS) chief Heinrich Himmler and Walter Schellenberg, head of the Sichterheitsdienst (the SS foreign intelligence service) that the Nazi government wished to establish a separate peace with the United States.” Williams notes that “Dulles not only endorsed the Nazi proposal, but also maintained that a strong Germany was necessary as a bulwark against Bolshevism.” Then, “Having established contact with Hitler’s High Command, Dulles conducted meetings in Bern with Nazi General Reinhard Gehlen.” Not only that, but Dulles’s then-boss, the head of FDR’s OSS, William Donovan, promptly worked with Dulles, and with Gehlen, behind FDR’s back, so that in February 1945 they did all that they could to sabotage what FDR was arranging at the Yalta Conference with Stalin. Both Donovan and Dulles were top Wall Street lawyers. Truman became President barely over a month later, on April 12th. And, by the time of 26 July 1945, General Eisenhower was able to persuade the gullible Truman, by his mere opinion, that the Soviet Union would take over the world, if the U.S. did not; and, so, the Cold War was on, started by those Deep State agents, including, by that time, the Nazi Gehlen. Perhaps Truman recognized that he was in over his head, and — finding himself forced by circumstances to choose whether to trust his advisors, who could speak his language, or else trust Stalin, who couldn’t — he chose to trust his advisors, and to assume that the man who had actually been FDR’s chief international ally was instead America’s (and Truman’s own) top international enemy. Truman didn’t know some of the key details of the discussions that had gone on between FDR and Stalin. At first, Truman trusted Dulles so much as to assign him to hire and organize the members of the CIA, which would soon replace FDR’s OSS. For American democracy, this turned out to be a fatal error.

Gehlen, though one of the top Nazi war criminals, was not hung at Nuremberg, because the influential Americans who shared his chief values — both anti-Semitism but also and especially anti-Russian — assigned Gehlen to establish West Germany’s CIA division, the Bundesnachrichtendienst, or national intelligence service, against the Soviet Union. General Gehlen already had thousands of secret “left behind” agents in the Soviet sphere, who had helped the Nazis while Hitler was still alive, and who remained committed to overthrowing communism there, even if not particularly supporting the post-WW-II, after-FDR, really very new and increasingly anti-democratic, U.S. government, which was rapidly becoming fundamentally different from what FDR had been hoping and trying to establish for post-WW-II America and for the world-at-large.

There exists overwhelming and irrefutable evidence that as soon as FDR died, the U.S. Government became protective of whatever Nazis would help it to conquer the Soviet Union. For example: As Charles Higham said in his classic 1985 American Swastika, (p. xxv), “Dulles made arrangements with SS General Karl Wolff in order to secure the surrender of Italy and the security of German armaments as a potential force against Russia. General [“Wild Bill”] Donovan (at that time Colonel) of the OSS cannot be absolved from his own arrangements, many of them conducted despite the express disapproval of the chief executive [FDR].” Furthermore: (p. xv) “The [Klaus] Barbie [“Butcher of Lyon”] operation was a mere part of a much larger operation, the Gehlen operation, which was incorporated and sanctioned [allowed] by the Pentagon.” The U.S. attorney who was “in charge of pursuing the matter of the Barbie connection with the U.S. Army” “stated in sum that it was quite in order to use a former Nazi if that personage would be of use against the Soviets.” Then, as Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair detailed in their classic 1998 Whiteout: The CIA, Drugs, and the Press, in their chapter “Klaus Barbie and the Cocaine Coup,” Barbie became employed by the CIA starting in the 1960s to funnel Latin American cocaine profits into the CIA’s hidden off-the-books accounts that largely fund the CIA; he was “a major player in the US-inspired Condor Program to suppress popular insurgencies and keep US-backed dictators in power throughout Latin America. He helped orchestrate the so-called ‘cocaine coup’ of 1980 when a junta of Bolivian generals seized power, slaughtering their leftist opponents and reaping billions in the cocaine boom.” So: whereas France, Israel, and others, were trying to nab and prosecute leading ‘ex’-Nazis, America was instead protecting them, despite FDR’s intentions. Then FDR died, and the U.S. Government promptly got taken over by fascists and outright nazis in leading governmental positions. As Whiteout reported, at least some American Presidents not only knew about such operations, but themselves personally oversaw them. For example (p. 9): “When Reagan secretly decreed to National Security Adviser McFarlane that whatever Congress might stipulate, the [Nicaraguan] Contras had to be kept together ‘body and soul,’ the drug operation run by Contra supporters Meneses and Blandon led a charmed life, without any disruption of its activities by law enforcement. Indeed, several law enforcement officers have complained bitterly that actions targeted against Meneses were blocked by NSC officers in the Reagan administration and by the CIA.” Under America’s fascist Presidents, this wasn’t merely acceptable; it was commanded. (Yet, most Americans have great respect for those Presidents.)

Without the laws illegalizing (instead of regulating) narcotics, ‘intelligence’ agencies such as the CIA couldn’t exist as they do. Perhaps that’s why such laws exist — to fund such agencies with no real democratic accountability: rogue operations, dark operations, off-the-books enforcement operations, in order for international corporations to get the type of foreign governments that will do their bidding (such as was described in John Perkins’s 2004 classic Confessions of an Economic Hit-Man).

The post-FDR U.S. has thus become, and increasingly it is, a two-Party, Republican and Democratic Party, imperialistic fascist regime, which is bent upon world-conquest not much different from what Hitler had propounded for Germany in his 1928 Second Book, except that, in the American instance, the global-empire goal was not specifically anti-Jewish but instead is anti-Russian — and, at first, it was not even that (at least not nominally) but instead was ideological, “anti-communist,” so as to provide a ‘moral’ cover for what was actually a rising American imperialism, serving the billionaires who control the military-industrial complex. Global control has been the focus of this American fascist regime. It benefits America’s international corporations. The main aim of America’s post-WW-II foreign policy has been to demonize Russians and anyone who opposed overthrowing the Soviet Union’s, and subsequently post-communist Russia’s, government (so that the United States would ultimately control Russia and finally the world).

At the end of WWII, the Soviet Union included not only Russia but also Ukraine, Georgia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Armenia, and Azerbaijan. Then, because of FDR’s agreement with Stalin that it needed buffer-states in order to protect itself — just as the U.S. had buffer states in Mexico, Canada and throughout the Western Hemisphere — Stalin was allowed by FDR to continue controlling the formerly Nazi-controlled Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Poland and eastern Germany, each of which nation therefore entered the post-War era with hundreds or thousands of left-behind agents who reported either directly to Gehlen’s organization or else to that of James Jesus Angleton, who worked under Allen Dulles. Angleton’s father, Hugh Angleton, had, while FDR was President and the CIA was called the OSS, collected the names and contacts of 3,000 Axis secret agents, which list he handed to his son when retiring from Government service at the end of WWII. Under FDR, the likely expectation was to target those 3,000 people after the war, to expose and disempower them, but under Truman the list was instead used so as to recruit them to be used against the Soviet Union. And the Angletons’ list, plus Gehlen’s personal list of his secret agents, thus became the basis of the new CIA’s Operation Gladio, which for the first time became fully and publicly exposed by a masterful BBC documentary in 1992, which was being telecast right after the Soviet Union disintegrated but before the management of the BBC yet knew that the war against Russia was secretly to continue even after Russia had already just ended the Cold War on their side.

Here is that extraordinary, and historically important, breakthrough documentary, which everyone who wants to understand the world today should see:

In other words: Virtually as soon as Truman came into office, J.J. Angleton was organizing the Gladio contingent, who were, at their very start, comprised of fascist and racist-fascist (or nazi) aristocrats who had previously been having the “partisans,” or anti-Fascist and anti-Nazi fighters against the fascists and nazis — the leading supporters of the Allies against the fascists — lynched. America now was secretly working against, instead of (as under FDR) working for, the heroic Europeans who had so courageously fought against Mussolini and Hitler during WWII. The leading fascists’ and nazis’ loyalty now was to be against the Soviet Union and to be organized and run by the U.S. Government (no longer by either Hitler or Mussolini), with the cooperation and under the immediate direction of the most-far-right aristocrats of Europe, so as, ultimately, to conquer, first, the Soviet Union, and, then (ultimately), Russia (and China to be dealt with later). The ignorant and manipulable Truman became followed immediately, as President, by the intelligent and cunning outright fascist General Dwight Eisenhower, who knew what he was doing — building up America’s military-industrial complex, for global conquest — and, then, three days before he left office, he warned Americans against it as being a danger to America, as if he hadn’t been building them up all along. (Like Obama’s vision, Ike’s vision was for a dictatorship of the world by the controlling stockholders in America’s international corporations. And also like Obama, Ike was a mild-mannered and extremely cunning charmer. So, too, of course, was Alan Dulles.)

Meanwhile, the German industrialists (such as this) who were likeliest to have been the individuals who had funded Hitler’s rise to power, were let off scot-free at the Nuremberg Tribunals after the war was over.

Behind the scenes, after FDR’s death, the U.S. Government was — and it still is — a totalitarian international regime, no democracy at all, but instead an imperialistic dictator over almost the whole world, a nation that’s bent upon making the entire world serve as its imperial colonies. In other words: imperialistic fascist. And this wasn’t to be fascism in one nation, like under Franco in Spain (who would have been happy to serve as one of Hitler’s mere vassals); it was to be the full-fledged thing: expansionist fascism, which is imperialistic fascism, like Mussolini, Hitler, and Hirohito. This is today’s America, though, under FDR, it had been America’s enemy.

The latest important example of it was America’s February 2014 conquest of Ukraine, which was “the most blatant coup in history.” On 15 June 2014, Russia’s RT posted to youtube an accurate succinct 14-minute documentary on the deep history of the U.S. regime, including Gladio, being behind that coup against Ukraine:

A sophisticated operation by today’s fascists and nazis has arisen after WWII (including even in Israel) to pretend that Hitler did not intend to take over the world but that Stalin (whose philosophy derived from the communist Marx who condemned all imperialism) did. And, beside that fact against such ‘historical’ lies, is this: Stalin, within the communist movement, stood opposed to Trotsky who opposed this anti-imperialist feature of Marxism. Stalin instead insisted upon “communism within one country,” which meant that beyond the Soviet Union and its buffer-states, there was to be no spread of communism until communism within the Soviet Union first would manage to lead the world economically and thus would stand as the global economic model, which success of “communism within one country” would then (he was expecting) cause workers around the world to rise up in local revolutions and overthrow and replace capitalism. But today’s fascists and nazis lie nonetheless to allege that both Hitler and Stalin together had caused WWII and were imperialistic, trying to conquer the whole world. The fact is: Hitler was imperialistic, but Stalin was — in this regard, like FDR himself — anti-imperialistic.

This post-WW-II fascist and nazi movement contends that Hitler actually was only responding to Stalin’s imperialism. Here is one recent argument along this line, and it’s based upon and extols the Oxfordian A.J.P. Taylor’s 1962 The Origins of the Second World War. A succinct good review of that book was written by Stephen Cooper at Amazon and headlined there “AN OUTRAGE”. One of the currently two negative reader-comments against that review of it was by an “Infidel” and took Taylor’s review to task because the only thing that Cooper presented against Taylor’s argument was “a completely different book,” which “Infidel” did not identify, but Cooper had especially cited Mein Kampf, as indicating that Hitler even in 1925 was promising to invade and conquer the Soviet Union. So, I responded there, to “Infidel,” as follows:

Responding to the comment here by “Infidel”: I presume that by your dismissive reference to “a completely different book,” you are referring to Hitler’s 1925 Mein Kampf, which book stated two primary goals in international policy: one being the elimination of Jews everywhere, and the other being the enslavement of Slavs in the Soviet Union so as to take their land for Lebensraum or living-space to become controlled by Aryan, or pureblooded Christian, Germans. However, Hitler’s 1928 Second Book stated in more detail his subsequent war-aims, and fleshed them out a bit on a country-by-country basis, while suppressing the emotional intensity of his more blatantly anti-Semitic expressions in Mein Kampf. And yet even in his Second Book, he emphasized that “Jewry,” meaning Jews everywhere, were responsible for Germany’s defeat in WW I. And even in his Second Book it is clear that the only way in which he could accept a foreign nation is if it has no Jews. He would not live in peace with a Britain that still had Jews. In fact, though his war-aim to enslave Slavs was one of his two main objectives in foreign policy, it was, for Hitler, secondary to his anti-Semitic goal of eliminating all Jews. Although the Second Book said that Italy would be an ally, and that England, and maybe Hungary and Spain would be, there was no question that the Soviet Union would not be. Furthermore, only a U.S.A. that eliminates its Jews would be. I have read all of Hitler’s published letters, private notes, and speeches, and much else, and do not find anything in them that is contrary to this. Consequently, I agree with Stephen Cooper’s calling this book by A.J.P. Taylor “AN OUTRAGE” but I go further and call it a hoax.

Unfortunately, as soon as I posted that comment, Amazon’s editors simply removed the one that I was contradicting.

At that same site where I said above here that had posted “one recent argument along this line” against Russia and especially against communism, the same writer had earlier extolled another rabid hater of both Russia and communism, David Irving, the famous Holocaust-denier and defender of Hitler. (Irving portrayed Hitler as having been a well-intentioned but weak dictator who had unfortunately become manipulated into anti-Semitism by his underlings and who had really been just an anti-communist himself, not originally an anti-Semite at all.) I responded there to that writer’s adulatory review of David Irving’s Hitler’s War, and headlined there “Against David Irving’s View of Hitler”. So, readers here can judge for themselves whether what I am saying is true, or whether what the nazis (or racist fascists) are saying is true. Since I was writing there at a site which favors nazism — except as it’s practiced by almost all Jews in Israel against non-Jews there — most of the 854 reader-comments to that article from me are supportive of the article (in favor of David Irving) that I was attacking, and opposed to the views that I expressed there against that (pro-David-Irving) article. The readers at that site seem generally to favor Hitler against Stalin, Christians against Jews, and Whites against Blacks, instead of to favor truth against lies. I should state here, for the record, that I favor no group against any other group, and that in terms of ideology, I favor democracy; and in terms of economics, I reject both Adam Smith and Karl Marx, and favor both Marriner Eccles and FDR. When writing about ideology (such as I am doing here), it is important for the writer (me) to state clearly his or her own personal ideological orientation. When discussing ideology, questions about the writer’s motives are not unscientific; they’re not merely, ad-hominem, but instead possess also an ad-rem (i.e., scientifically justifiable) component, and therefore should be addressed. So, I do.

More recently, the U.S.-regime-created EU’s European Parliament voted on September 19th for a resolution condemning both Hitler and Stalin for having started World War II, which is a lie — and an especially outrageous one, considering that the Soviet Union did more than any other country to defeat Hitler and to enable all of those countries to not now be controlled by a Nazi regime. (Shortly after I published that article, another, by Max Parry, independently came to the same conclusion: that the EU is fascist.)

The EU’s lie is especially blatant in regard to what Hitler stated in his Second Book to be the aims of the war-to-come.

He said in Chapter 5 of his Second Book, “I am a socialist. I see no class and no social estate before me, but that community of the Folk, made up of people who are linked by blood,” so that “its foreign policy is to be be determined by the necessity to secure the space necessary to the life of our Folk.” Also, “I am a German nationalist. This means that I proclaim my nationality.” That was his nazism: his National Socialism (or, as it was called in Ukraine, “Socialist Nationalism”). None of it was at all Marxist. He despised Marxism as “Jewish.” However, many post-War nazis lie to condemn nazism as “socialist” in the same sense that Marx’s communism is. They refuse to acknowledge that they’re nazis, and blame only communism. In Chapter 11 of his Second Book, Hitler said that it is impossible “to achieve an understanding with a State whose greatest interest is the destruction of this very national Germany. Obviously, should such an alliance finally come into being today, its result would be the complete rule of Jewry in Germany exactly as in Russia.” In other words: peace with Russia would be impossible unless the “Bolshevists” there became replaced by Nazis. Furthermore, common purpose could never be achieved between Germany and Russia, because “For then, Germany would no longer be allied with the Russia of a great, noteworthy, ethical, bold idea, but with the despoilers of the culture of mankind.” He then critically paraphrased proponents of a German-Soviet detente, and said: “This is a very great error. It rests on an extraordinary ignorance of the psyche of the Slavic Folk Soul.” Like in Mein Kampf, he was virtually declaring the Soviet Union to be Germany’s Jewish-controlled enemy. Slavs, in his view, were merely a slave-people, and their masters needed to be changed, from Jews to Aryans. This was part of his Lebensraum concept. His argument to this effect was unambiguously clear, and it was remarkably consistent throughout his entire political career. Stalin (who had figured this argument out from Mein Kampf, because the Second Book remained unpublished) achieved the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact only in order to delay Hitler’s invasion so as to help to prepare for it. Today’s nazis blame Stalin not only for the delaying-tactic but for his preparations against Germany’s invasion.

The cover-up of this is all part of America’s post-WW-II victory for fascism and nazism. However, it’s not yet an ultimate victory — an all-encompassing global dictatorship by the U.S. regime over the entire world. Some hope therefore still remains that the U.N. will become the global democracy that FDR had intended. (However, that’s very unlikely.)

It might also be noted here that another defense which the post-WW-II U.S. regime offers for its having protected and hired so many ‘ex’ Nazis is that the Soviets hired some also. For example, American historian Norman J.W. Goda produced a 30 December 2015 paper, “CIA Files Relating to Heinz Felfe, SS Officer and KGB Spy” which claimed that Felfe’s file is “of great historical significance” because it shows “in more detail than ever before how Soviet and Western intelligence alike used former Nazi SS officers during the Cold War years.” However, Goda admitted that Felfe had been a member of the Gehlen Organization, who was captured by the British in Netherlands and then hired by British intelligence but subsequently became a double-agent after the KGB threatened him that if he didn’t, his war-crimes (which weren’t nearly on the level of Gehlen’s own) would be publicly exposed. Any historian who even just suggests that ‘both sides did it’ is basically lying. Nazis and Bolshevists hated and despised each other. That’s no defense of either, but it is a fact about both. As an online review of a Cambridge University Press book co-authored by Goda fairly concluded at the end: “It is disappointing that the authors seem almost as uninterested as the OSS had been in following the trail of evidence before them to see where it might lead.” Cambridge University Press published that book, but I feel confident that they wouldn’t even consider publishing something like this. Prestigious publishers in the social ‘sciences’ use lots of filters, but uncompromising truth and honesty are almost never among them. In a field that’s not yet scientific, peer review is no way to find truth; it’s only the way to embellish the prevailing myth, which the aristocracy endorse. That, too, is just a fact, a well-established historical fact. Such a field is more like the ‘journalism’ and ‘history’ that’s described in the prophetic dystopian 1948 George Orwell novel 1984.

It’s because of these pro-imperialist, anti-Russian, fascist, and even outright nazi, filters that, for example, the nazi nature of the U.S. coup against Ukraine in February 2014, and subsequent ethnic cleansing there, all of which destroyed that country, remain hidden in the U.S. empire, even now, and the overthrow remains called, instead, a ‘democratic revolution’ — while Russia’s reactions, instead of America’s crimes there, get blamed for the coup’s results. That potently displays the victory America won for fascism and nazism after WWII. In fact, Obama, by no later than June 2013, was actually expecting that when his coup in Ukraine would succeed — which happened in February 2014 — the U.S. would take over Russia’s largest naval base, which (ever since 1783) was (and still remains) in Crimea. Though the U.S. regime and its vassals imposed sanctions against Russia for “seizing Crimea,” the U.S. regime actually seized Ukraine and expected that Russia’s main naval base would become part of America’s prize in Ukraine. And yet, no one is imposing sanctions against America. Why not? It’s the global empire. It’s a dictatorship that no nation wants to go up against. Hitler’s regime was like that, until WWII started.

Blackwater mercenary company founder Erik Prince and the self-appointed leader of Fascist International, Steve Bannon, have joined forces and dusted off the old discredited neo-conservative theory of “Clash of Civilizations,” to threaten global stability with religious and ethnic nationalism.

One of the more important revelations in former Justice Department Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report on the 2016 election is the close working relationship Bannon established with Prince. Sensing fertile political ground for their far-right beliefs, Bannon and Prince have established, under the aegis of their professed Catholicism, a movement that threatens both the current pope and the European Union.

The Clash of Civilizations was the main tenet of Harvard University’s Samuel P. Huntington. Huntington also defended the pro-fascist Mexican Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) of Mexico and the military dictatorship of Brazil. Huntington was also a champion of South Africa’s apartheid state and advocated its “reform” rather than its abolishment. Huntington’s approaches to Latin American immigration into the United States serves a basis for the draconian anti-immigration policies of Donald Trump and his “immigration czar,” Stephen Miller. Huntington saw Europe and Western Europe, including Croatia and Slovenia, along with Australia and New Zealand as a “core civilization” against the rest of the world. Huntington made it a point to exclude from the core civilization the Christian Orthodox nations of the Balkans, including Greece, as well as Belarus, Russia, Ukraine, and Armenia.

To advance political domination by far-right political parties and politicians, Bannon has been busy establishing a training academy for far-right wing Christian zealots at the Trisulti Charterhouse in Collepardo in central Italy. Bannon has admitted that he is following George Soros’s global playbook. Instead of a neo-liberal global network, like that of Soros, Bannon is creating a far-right political movement in Europe that will extend its tentacles around the world, primarily in Huntington’s “core civilization” countries plus Brazil, Chile, and Argentina. With his political group, called “The Movement” in operation in Brussels and targeting upcoming European Parliament elections, Bannon has taken advantage of a schism within the Roman Catholic Church to convincing those opposed to Pope Francis I to permit him to set up shop in the 13^th century monastery in Collepardo.

Bannon is clearly setting the stage for a revised “clash of civilizations” between Judeo-Christianity and the rest of the world. Fascism is seen as the preferred political system for the Western “core.”

Bannon’s colleague in the 2016 Trump campaign, Michael Ledeen, the notorious neo-conservative, wrote a book in 1972 that promotes the fascist political philosophy. Titled “Universal Fascism: The Theory and Practice of the Fascist International, 1928–1936,” Ledeen describes in glowing terms Mussolini’s efforts to create an international Fascist movement in the late 1920s and early 1930s. According to an interview Ledeen gave to the neo-con “National Review” in 2002, the Ledeen Doctrine boils down to the following credo: “Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business.” Mussolini’s template has largely been adopted by Bannon, who, still has, along with arch neo-con national security adviser John Bolton, still have Trump’s ear on foreign policy.

Bannon is attempting to purge the nexus of his Judeo-Christian core civilization of perceived enemies, who include Vatican loyalists of Pope Francis. Bannon – in cooperation with the extremely conservative Cardinal Raymond Burke and former Pope Benedict XVI – has been waging a political jihad against Pope Francis. Bannon believes the current pontiff to be a dangerous liberal and a “Cultural Marxist,” who supported many of President Barack Obama’s policies. Bannon and a right-wing Catholic group close to Burke, the Institute of Human Dignity, or Dignitatis Humana Institute, which runs Bannon’s new headquarters at the Trisulti Abbey, opposes Francis’s goal of avoiding a “clash of civilizations” between Christianity and Islam.

Bannon, in cooperation with Cardinal Raymond Burke and former Pope Benedict XVI, has been waging a war against Pope Francis I. Bannon sees Francis as a dangerous liberal and a “Cultural Marxist,” who supported President Barack Obama’s policies. Bannon and a right-wing Catholic group close to Burke, the Institute of Human Dignity, or “Dignitatis Humana Institute,’ which owns Bannon’s new headquarters at the Trisulti Abbey, opposes Francis’s goal of avoiding a “clash of civilizations,” particularly one between Christianity and Islam.

Bannon’s financial firm, Bannon & Company, is investing in Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, believed by many financial experts to be a giant scam. Cryptocurrencies are favored by neo-Nazis and fascists to fund their activities without the worry of financial surveillance from bank regulators and financial intelligence agencies. Bannon, as a former Goldman Sachs executive, understands how to avoid financial network roadblocks.

One of the mandatory studies at Bannon’s academy for neo-Nazis will most certainly be on the works and thoughts of Julius Evola (1898-1974), a far-right Italian philosopher, who provided the inspiration for several fascist terrorist attacks in Italy during the 1960s, 70s, and 80s, including the deadly Bologna central rail station bombing in 1980. Bannon is a promoter of Evola’s doctrine, which is known as Traditionalism. The followers of Evola are called the “Children of the Sun” and they include adherents of two leading neo-Nazi parties in Europe: Golden Dawn in Greece and Jobbik in Hungary. Other Traditionalist philosophers, all of whom dabbled in Indo-European Aryan occultism and, to varying degrees, embraced fascism in the interwar years, include Romanian Mircea Eliade (1907-1986), French/Egyptian René Guénon (1886-1951), and Ceylonese (Sri Lankan) Ananda Coomaraswamy (1887-1947).

US neo-Nazi leader and “alt-right” term creator, Richard Spencer, a college friend of Trump’s anti-immigration czar, Stephen Miller, is also a follower of Evola. Evola’s writings were an inspiration to Benito Mussolini Fascist movement and Heinrich Himmler’s Schutzstaffel (SS). Evola even visited SS headquarters in Germany to proselytize his philosophy of fascism to the SS rank and file.

Bannon’s and Prince’s intertwined political finances were exposed during the 2016 presidential campaign. Prince donated some $150,000 to the pro-Trump PAC “Make America Number 1 in 2016.” In turn, the PAC funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars to Cambridge Analytica and Glittering Steel, a video production company. Bannon co-founded both companies. Bannon was also buoyed by generous funding from hedge fund billionaire Robert Mercer. Currently, with a seemingly endless supply of funds, Bannon is waging a far-right insurgency in Europe involving neo-Nazi, fascist, and right-wing Catholic organizations close to Opus Dei.

Erik Prince abandoned the conservative Calvinism of his auto parts-manufacturing wealthy father to embrace Catholicism, Opus Dei, the Sovereign Military Order of Malta – based in Rome and a rival-laden headache for Pope Francis – and the Legionnaires of Christ. Opus Dei was founded by Spanish priest Josemaría Escrivá in 1928 as a pro-fascist and pro-Francisco Franco answer to the more liberal-minded Jesuits. It is noteworthy that Pope Francis, the first Jesuit pontiff, is currently experiencing a virtual civil war within the catholic Church and Vatican hierarchy, spurred on by the likes of Bannon, Prince, former Pope Benedict, and other right-wing members of the College of Cardinals.

Bannon, Prince, and other far-rightists are now attempting to impose on their followers and fellow-travelers the same sort of “groupthink” Nazi Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels applied to Germany. In his seminal work, Yale University professor Irving Janis summed up “groupthink,” particularly how groups can, conversely to bringing out the best in people, also bring out the worst. Janis’s 1982 book, “Groupthink,” describes the phenomenon by quoting 19^th century German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche: “Madness is the exception in individuals but the rule in groups.” Europe’s current fascination and widespread support for political parties that were largely banned and shunned after the Nazi defeat in 1945 have created an environment where Bannon, Prince, and their collaborators find ready audiences for their extremism. In such climates, a strategy of tension permits a clash of civilizations, which is nirvana for the neo-cons and extreme right.

The recent deadly Christchurch mosque attacks appear to have been the first act in a strategy of tensions conflict being waged by the far-right. The Easter Sunday bombings of churches in Negombo, Batticaloa, and Colombo, Sri Lanka, as well as three five-star hotels in Colombo – killing well over 300 people, were reportedly claimed by a hitherto unknown group called the National Thowheed Jamath or National Monotheism Organization. Sri Lanka’s government alleged the attacks were in retaliation for the Christchurch mosque bombings. Some things are known about the group claiming it carried out the attacks in Sri Lanka. It is not connected operationally to either the Islamic State or Al Qaeda, although the Islamic State made unverifiable claims of responsibility. New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said that New Zealand’s intelligence has no indication that the Sri Lanka attacks were in retaliation for the Sri Lanka attacks. It should be noted that New Zealand, as a member of the FIVE EYES signals intelligence alliance, has access to countless communications intercepts.

While flames leaped from Paris’s iconic Notre Dame Cathedral on April 15, a fire broke out at the Al Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem, Islam’s third-holiest shrine. In the weeks preceding the Notre Dame fire, vandals broke into Notre-Dame-des-enfants in Nîmes, France and smeared excrement on the crucifix and walls of the church. In March, a fire broke out at another famous Paris church, Saint-Sulpice. In February, a fire broke out in Lavaur Cathedral in Lavaur, France. That fire was preceded by vandalism of Saint Nicolas in Houilles and Saint Nicolas in Maisons-Laffitte in Yvelines.

Arson also destroyed three African-American churches in Opelousas, Louisiana. The son of a sheriff’s deputy was arrested for arson. Louisiana has recently been the scene of renewed activities by Ku Klux Klan and other white supremacist groups.

All of the incidents – in New Zealand, Sri Lanka, France, and Louisiana – those confirmed as terrorism and those for which the jury is still out, should be viewed through the lens of the strategy of tensions and a final showdown between Christianity and Islam advanced by Bannon, Prince, and their supporters in Brussels and the Trisulti monastery.

The world has seen this particular play before. From the late 1960s to the 1980s, over two thousand people died in terrorist attacks blamed mainly on left-wing terrorists, including the Italian Red Brigades and West German Red Army Faction. The victims included the former Christian Democratic Prime Minister of Italy, Aldo Moro. The deadliest attack was the bombing of the Bologna rail station in 1980. Originally, there was an attempt to blame all the attacks, mostly bombings, on the left-wing groups. In fact, most of the attacks were carried out by neo-fascist groups hoping to have the Communists blamed. Inquiry commissions later determined that the neo-fascists and far-left groups all had links to the Central Intelligence Agency – which once employed Erik Prince’s Blackwater as a contractor – and the intelligence services of NATO members. It was the late Turkish Prime Minister, Bulent Ecevit, who revealed the name of the sinister association of NATO spies and false flag terrorists: Gladio.

So, on 14 April 2014, I headlined “US Is an Oligarchy, Not a Democracy, Says Scientific Study”. Subsequently, my editor linked it to the published article at the Journal where the study was published, Perspectives on Politics, from the American Political Science Association, and the full study can be read there.

On 30 April 2014, was posted at youtube the video that remains, to this day, the best and clearest ordinary-language summary of what that badly-written academic study proved. See its explanation here:

That summary’s title is also better than the title of my article was; this excellent video headlines “Corruption is Legal in America”, which is another accurate conclusion from that study. Every American citizen should know what this 6-minute video says and shows from the academic study, because it explains how the super-rich, as a class, steal from everyone else (everyone who isn’t super-rich): They do it through corruption. 

Then, that same person who created the video did another presentation of it, but this time with text accompanying the video, and this article was titled "One graph shows how the rich control American politics”, and it indeed showed how. The super-rich carry out their control via corruption, which is legal in America and which can be done vastly more by rich people than by poor people — poor people simply can’t buy the Government, and any who would even attempt to do so would be using only the illegal means, which the US Supreme Court says constitutes the only illegal means, and that's blatant bribery, which is lower-class corruption, not the far more lucrative type of corruption that super-wealthy individuals have access to. Only the forms of corruption which are available only to the super-rich are legal in America. That’s the reason why the super-rich keep getting still-richer, while the rest of the population are lucky if they don’t become poorer.

On 28 July 2015, former US President Jimmy Carter was frank about this situation; as a caller at a progressive radio show, he said this about America’s soaring top-level corruption:

It violates the essence of what made America a great country in its political system. Now it's just an oligarchy with unlimited political bribery being the essence of getting the nominations for president or being elected president. And the same thing applies to governors, and US Senators and congress members. So, now we've just seen a subversion of our political system as a payoff to major contributors, who want and expect, and sometimes get, favors for themselves after the election is over. … At the present time the incumbents, Democrats and Republicans, look upon this unlimited money as a great benefit to themselves. Somebody that is already in Congress has a great deal more to sell."

Three days later, Huffington Post published my article about that statement, which was headlined “Jimmy Carter Is Correct That the US Is No Longer a Democracy,” and it had over 60,000 likes on Facebook (here the article is shown a bit earlier, when it had 56,000) but HuffPo reduced that number down to its currently shown number, 18,000; and this article turned out to have been the last submission of the 100+ that they accepted from me. They've rejected all of my submissions after it. No explanation was ever given, and I never heard anything from them again.

The scientific article about America’s Government had reviewed 1,779 pieces of proposed legislation during the period from 1981 to 2002, and it found that only what the super-rich wanted to become law did become law: “The preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy,” they said. That’s certainly not a democracy.

There has been speculation as to how far back historically America’s government-by-the-aristocracy (or, simply, America’s being an aristocracy — a rule over the public by the few super-rich, an “oligarchy”) has been in effect. Prior to Ronald Reagan’s Presidency, going back to the time when FDR died in office in 1945 as the President, the distribution of income and of wealth was much more equal in America than it started to become as soon as Reagan entered the White House and began the subsequent dominance of supply-side economics, which is based upon the supply-push belief that wealth trickles down from the few rich, instead of (as FDR believed) in a demand-pull way, that it percolates up from the many poor. FDR believed that what drives an economy is needs, not the products and services to fill needs. Reagan believed in the opposite, Say’s law, which says that whatever is produced will fill needs (or at least desires) — that production is what drives an economy, and that needs (and desires) just take care of themselves. So, FDR focused on “the common man” and especially the poor, but Reagan focused on “entrepreneurs” or the owners of businesses. (The middle class isn’t an issue here, but is simply the richer portion of the poor. Historically that has been the case. For example, America’s middle class has declined while the poor have mushroomed, but the top 5% are getting all of the gains; and most of that is going to the top 1% or even less. So: “poor” here includes the middle-class; and, to refer to “middle-class America” is now like referring to a dying breed — but it’s a breed of poor, not of rich.)

However, the extreme corruption at the top in this country is showing up more sharply than ever in recently declassified US Government documents about the JFK assassination — showing up as having begun much earlier than had generally been suspected, begun at least by the time when President Kennedy came into office on 20 January 1961. Kennedy found himself surrounded by the military-industrial complex that his predecessor, Eisenhower, had cultivated while he was in the White House and that “Ike” hypocritically warned the American public against, on his way out of office, only on 17 January 1961 — three days before Kennedy’s inauguration. Some of these corrupt people were ones whom Kennedy himself had brought in. Not all of them were Ike’s holdovers. But Kennedy was apparently shocked, nonetheless.

The beginnings of this profound corruption might be traced still farther back to moles in the Government (such as the Dulles brothers, Averell Harriman and Prescott Bush) who had built their careers after World War I by means of plying and mastering the revolving door between the Government’s foreign-policy Establishment and Wall Street. Starting at the very end of WW II, in 1945, agents of these moles ended FDR’s Office of Strategic Services and started Truman’s CIA. Right from the get-go, the CIA was deeply corrupt, as the following 2.5-hour BBC documentary from 1992 makes clear:

Operation Gladio – Full 1992 documentary BBC

It documents from testimony of former CIA operatives in Europe, that the CIA had been hiring European aristocrats and committed fascists and even ‘former’ Nazis, to set up terrorist incidents in Europe rigged so as to be blamed by the public against communists and against any entities that were favorable in any way toward the Soviet Union. Numberless Europeans were injured and killed in terrorist incidents that were set up by the CIA to be, basically, anti-communist propaganda. This CIA operation was called “Gladio,” and it continues to this day, even though communism itself is gone.

Subsequently, a video was done that’s far briefer, 50 minutes, and which starts with interviews of some of the survivors of these CIA-NATO operations, so that it’s far more from the victims’ perspective than was the BBC’s lengthier documentary:

NATO’s Secret Armies (2009)

When Kennedy became President, he found himself surrounded by advisors who were urging him such as, on 22 March 1962, John Kennedy’s own brother and US Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy did, when RFK held a meeting to discuss “the possibility of US manufacture or acquisition of Soviet aircraft” because:

“There is a possibility that such aircraft could be used in a deception operation designed to confuse enemy planes in the air, to launch a surprise attack against enemy installations or in a provocation operation in which Soviet aircraft would appear to attack US or friendly installations in order to provide an excuse for US intervention. If the planes were to be used in such covert operations, it would seem preferable to manufacture them in the United States.”

And, also like this (on 12 April 1962, from a Major General and CIA officer — see it on page 16):

“We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington. The terror campaign could be pointed at Cuban refugees seeking haven in the United States. We could sink a boatload of Cubans en route to Florida (real or simulated). We could foster attempts on lives of Cuban refugees in the United States even to the extent of wounding in instances to be widely publicized. Exploding a few plastic bombs in carefully chosen spots, the arrest of a Cuban agent and the release of prepared documents substantiating Cuban involvement also would be helpful in projecting the idea of an irresponsible government.”

Even JFK’s own brother RFK, and Secretary of ‘Defense’ Robert McNamara, and Secretary of State Dean Rusk — plus lots of holdovers from the Eisenhower Administration — thought that this sort of thing would be worth the President of the United States considering. Fortunately, JFK didn’t. 

Michael Ellison had gotten to see a bit of the 12 April 1962 document decades earlier and he reported it on 2 May 2001 in Britain’s Guardian under the headline “Memos disclose US cold-war plot to frame Castro”. Ellison wrote that “The idea was an element in a wider scheme that ‘may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the US government’, asserts James Bamford.” Since Bamford is perhaps the world’s leading journalist and historian who has written about the NSA (books such as his 1983 The Puzzle Palace), for even him to have expressed surprise in 2001 that the US Government, at its top level, was predominantly staffed by people who were racking their brains to figure out ways to fake Soviet terrorism and attacks so as for the US and NATO to have a pretext to invade the Soviet Union, indicates how much more cynical we all have become after George W. Bush’s lies about ‘Saddam’s WMD’ as pretexts for the US and its collaborators to invade and destroy Iraq in 2003. Not only was John Kennedy surprised to discover it in 1962, but James Bamford was surprised to discover it even as late as 2001. Bamford in 2001 might not have said what he said there if he had seen that 1992 BBC documentary, which showed that the top level of the CIA had been like this from the time when the CIA started in 1947. But with so much history behind us now and which had still been classified information, and thus non-public, until 2001 when Bamford said that the 12 April 1962 document described “may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the US Government,” we today are hardly surprised at all to discover it. The corruption at the top of the US Government has long since overflowed its banks, out into the public’s consciousness. Not all the king’s horses and all the king’s men can put the myth of US Government decency together again.

Another false flag in Würzburg, Bavaria, Germany. A young man attacks four passengers in a train and later a passerby in the street. The scenes repeat themselves now in rapid cadence. Paris, Brussels, Nice, Bangladesh… Same patterns, same motives – and same group of terrorists claiming credit.

The lies and propaganda are becoming more flagrant, and, We, the People, just swallow it. No questions asked. For how long? Until it is too late – when we are all militarized and can’t make a move without being watched – or killed for disobedience?

How much longer!

Tell me friends, world compatriots – how much longer are we just looking on and accepting what authorities want us to believe for the purposes of serving the elite that directs and pays them? A corporate and financial elite that needs a militarized society to drive the final nail into the coffin of democracy? Of sovereignty? Of individual freedom?

How much longer?

As reported by the Swiss and various German media, on 18 July, in a train near Wuerzburg, Bavaria, allegedly a young, 17-year old Afghan citizen, who arrived a year ago in Germany as a refugee, attacked a traveling Hong Kong family and a passerby with an axe and knife, injuring all five people of whom at least two seriously.

His alleged motive was revenge on infidels – those who do not believe in the Quran. The msm say that during the attack, according to witnesses – who are these witnesses? – he yelled repeatedly “Allahu akbar” (“God is Great”).

When the train came to a screeching emergency halt, the alleged perpetrator eventually jumped to escape. While running, he allegedly attacked a passerby.

A special police commando, coincidentally (term used by the msm) in the area pursued the young man and killed him in, what they call, ‘self-defense’! – Wonderful! – An armed to the teeth German police commando killed a 17-year old boy, armed merely with an axe and knife – in self-defense!

Voilà. Again dead men don’t talk.

And Würzburg’s Ober-Prosecutor can now freely invent whatever suits the purpose, i.e. that a few hours after the attack, ISIS claimed responsibility for the attack, and that there was an apparent video from the alleged terrorist in which he was announcing ‘revenge’, that in his rented room the police found a hand-painted IS-flag and a letter that looked like a good-by letter to his father.

The name of the young man — ehhh ‘terrorist’ was as of this writing not revealed.

This morning, the ISIS-Daesh propaganda website, called Amaq – does anybody ever check who is truly behind this internet site? – published a video showing a young ISIS soldier, proclaiming, ’I am a soldier of the Islamic State and am about to start a sacred operation in Germany’.

And the young man is wielding a knife which the German investigators are still trying to figure out whether it’s the same one the Würzburg ‘terrorist’ has used in his train assault.

I’m not kidding. This is what the German and European media are trying to have the public at large swallow. Getting more and more flagrant in their lies, is of no concern to the criminal authorities, the real perpetrators of the crimes committed, the murdered people left behind by these false flags, in Paris, San Bernardino, Orlando, Brussels, Nice, Bangladesh —- and the list goes on and is growing.

This is the new CIA-led ‘Gladio’, as well depicted by Paul Craig Roberts – destroying any free ideas, spreading fear, making citizens compliant. ‘Gladio’ was the code name for the operation designed and led by CIA after WWII to destroy the Communist parties in France and foremost in Italy.

With a series of false flags which were years later officially revealed by an investigating judge – too late for people to still relate to the events – the plan was successful; the left was divided, decimated people put under fear – supporting the fake Cold War against the ‘horrendous’ danger called Soviet Union. – Cui Bono?

Naturally the military industrial complex, the predators of humanity, the ever smaller elite behind Washington, NATO and the European vassal states – then, in the 1960’s / 1970’s – as well as today.

People out of fear will ask for more police and military protection. It will be a piece of cake for European puppet politicians to glide through their respective parliaments laws and even constitutional amendments allowing a permanent state of war, Martial Law, to be enshrined in the countries’ legislation.

France, after the false flag Nice Bastille Day massacre will most likely be the first one to enter a permanent state of emergency, effectively Martial Law.

Europe must be militarized to oppress any peoples’ protests that may arise with future barbarities the ‘establishment’ will impose upon its citizens, like the TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership), currently being ‘negotiated’ in secret and behind closed doors by a small unelected group of people in Brussels – the TTIP, which, if signed and ratified by the EU member countries, would super-impose corporate private courts over countries sovereign courts and legal systems, leaving behind a trail of misery, of outright slavehood for European citizens.

Militarization also means deviating people’s minds from the imminent NATO threat, allowing NATO to further advance and encroach Russia, further provoking Russia into a WWIII- to be played out in Europe, naturally, not in the sacred US of A. Of course not.

That would be the third time in a century that Europe would be destroyed by a Washington instigated war; most likely humanity would be wiped out.

Or, there may be just enough serfs left to slave for the elite which has been hiding in bunkers during their imposed world holocaust. When the dust settles, they may have what they always wanted – the remaining natural resources of planet earth all for themselves, not having to protect and share them with 7.3 billion co-inhabitants.

Let’s remind ourselves, the final objective of this evil group is Full Spectrum Dominance over the world’s energy, people and finances.

This plan is not new. It was coined in the seventies by Henry Kissinger, a backbone of the nefarious Bilderberg Society, when he said, ‘who controls energy controls whole continents, who controls food, controls people, and who controls money can control the entire world’.

We are soon there, but can still stop it. It’s not yet too late. One of the most direct ways is by dismantling the European Union, the Euro and eliminate NATO from Europe. BREXIS gives us hope. It is already inspiring other nations to exit this atrocious fiefdom in Brussels.

None of these three yokes – EU, Euro, NATO – oppressing Europeans was a European idea in the first place. They were the concepts for future dominance emerging during or shortly after WWII of the Machiavellian secretive and invisible elite behind the United States of America who carried out – and still carries out – their wishes. Stooges directing vassals to oppress people.

How man massacres will it take until we see the light?

4thmedia.org

It does seem odd that a lone person driving a large truck can gain access to blocked off areas where French people have assembled to watch the fireworks of Bastille Day. It also seems odd that the event is branded a terrorist one when the alleged perpetrator’s family says that he was not at all religious and had no religious motivation.

We will never know. Once again the alleged perpetrator is dead and conveniently left behind his ID.

It looks like a permanent state of martial law in France will be one consequence. This shutdown of society will also dispose of the protests against capitalist puppet Hollande’s repeal of France’s labor protections. Those protesting the take-back of their hard-earned rights will be closed down under the martial law.

Amazing how convenient the attack was for global capitalism, the primary beneficiary of Hollande’s new «labor reform».

Questions raised by Koenig and Lendman call to mind Operation Gladio. Gladio is the codename for a secret NATO operation set up by Washington after WWII as a result of fear that the Red Army would overrun Western Europe. Originally Gladio consisted of hidden arms caches and an organization to conduct guerrilla war against the Soviet occupying army.

Instead of a Soviet Invasion, the threat that emerged was the popularity of the Communist Party in France and especially Italy. Washington was fearful that communist parties would win enough votes to form a government and that Washington’s Western European Empire would be breached as these communist governments aligned with Moscow.

Consequently, Gladio was turned against the European communist parties. The Italian intelligence service together with the CIA began bombing public places in Italy, such as the Bologna train station in which 285 people were killed, maimed, and otherwise wounded.

Gladio operative Vincenzo Vinciguerra first revealed Gladio’s existence during his 1984 trial for the bombing of the Bologna train station in 1980. Questioned about the Bologna bombing, Vinciguerra said:

«There exists in Italy a secret force parallel to the armed forces, composed of civilians and military men, in an anti-Soviet capacity that is, to organize a resistance on Italian soil against a Russian army…A secret organization, a super-organization with a network of communications, arms and explosives, and men trained to use them…A super-organization which, lacking a Soviet military invasion which might not happen, took up the task, on NATO’s behalf, of preventing a slip to the left in the political balance of the country. This they did, with the assistance of the official secret services and the political and military forces».

It was not until 6 years later, 1990, that the prime minister of Italy, Giulio Andreotti, officially acknowledged the existence of Gladio.

Italian General Gerardo Serravalie commanded Italy’s Gladio’s participation in the first half of the 1970s. Wikipedia reports that he testified that those responsible for planning and coordination «were the officers responsible for the secret structures of Great Britain, France, Germany, Belgium, Luxemburg, the Netherlands and Italy. These representatives of the secret structures met every year in one of the capitals… At the stay-behind meetings representatives of the CIA were always present». 

There were many bombings with many civilian casualties from the 1960s through the mid-1980s. Vinciguerra said:

«You were supposed to attack civilians, women, children, innocent people outside the political arena, for one simple reason–to force the Italian public to turn to the state, turn to the regime and ask for greater security. … This is the political logic behind all the bombings. They remain unpunished because the State cannot condemn itself».

The bombings were blamed on communist terrorist groups, such as the Red Brigades and the Baader-Meinhof gang, groups that might have been real or invented intelligence covers to aid the discrediting of European communist parties.

In 1984 Judge Felice Casson reopened a 12-year-old case of a car bomb in Peteano, Italy. The judge found that the case had been falsified and blamed on the Red Brigades, but had actually been the work of the military secret service, Servizio Informazioni Difesa (SID) in conjunction with Ordine Nuovo, a right-wing organization created or co-opted by Gladio. The police official who falsified the investigation was sentenced to prison. Judge Casson’s investigation concluded that the Peteano bombing was part of a series of bombings carried out by Gladio including the Milano Piazza Fontane bombing, which killed 16 and injured 80, and the 1980 Bologna railway station bombing, which killed 85 and injured 200.

Based on the Italian revelations, Belgium and Swiss governments undertook investigations of Gladio operations in those countries. The United States government has denied any participation in the bombings. However, Judge Casson’s search of the archives of the Italian military secret service turned up proof of the existence of the Gladio network, and links to NATO and the United States.

Western peoples whose democracies have degenerated into plutocracies are inoculated against the belief that the government would kill its own citizens. Clearly they need to learn about operation Gladio.

Is Operation Gladio still alive and well? The terror events of today are blamed on Muslims instead of on communists. Is it possible that the terror attacks in France and Belgium are Gladio operations?

Addendum:

This large collection of photos from the UK Daily Mail of the Nice attack does not seem to show any blood in the streets where the carnage is reported to have happened or any blood associated with what are reported to be bodies. The white truck that is reported to be the murder weapon does not seem to show any blood or damage. A colleague once hit a deer, and his car was totaled. How can there be 186 people hit and no damage to the truck? Also, among the photos is a video of police standing exposed a few feet from the truck cab firing into the cab. For the police to expose themselves to a lunatic reported to be armed implies that he wasn’t armed or that the truck cab was empty. Why didn’t the police just open the door and capture him, or if he was armed wait until his pistol ran out of ammunition? In all of these attacks, the alleged perpetrator is always killed. Note also that already there are names and photos of the victims and a history of the perpetrator. How can so many photos of so many different people be so quickly collected and so much information collected about the perpetrator? The media never ask public authorities such questions or ever provide answers. It seems the story is prepared and ready to go when the event occurs, and that story is all we ever get.

And what do we make of this? Why would armed French troops on the scene capable of stopping the Bataclan carnage be told to stand down?

paulcraigroberts.org

The Brussels attack was linked to the November 13, 2015 attacks in Paris, which targeted the Bataclan concert hall and restaurants and cafés in the heart of the city, as well as the Stade de France football stadium.

In almost a replay of the Paris attacks, the news media began reporting that the Brussels attack was carried out by two brothers – Ibrahim and Khalid el-Bakraoui – who were linked to the November 13 attacks in Paris. The November 13 attacks were, in turn, linked to the January 7, 2015 ISIL attacks on the Paris offices of the satirical magazine «Charlie Hebdo» and a kosher supermarket in the Paris suburbs. The January 7 attacks also involved two brothers – Cherif and Said Kouachi. Since all the sibling attackers died in suicide attacks, the media is bound to believe what law enforcement reports to them about the Paris I, Paris II, and Brussels attacks. One of the suicide bombers at Brussels airport was reportedly ISIL’s chief bomb maker in Western Europe, Najim Laachraoui, who is said to have made the suicide bomb-laden vests used in the Paris II attacks.

Just prior to the Brussels bombings, Belgian police swooped in on the person they said was the mastermind of the Paris II attacks, Salah Abdeslam. Abdeslam was captured in the largely Muslim-populated neighborhood of Molenbeek in Brussels, an area believed to have spawned a number of ISIL terrorists and guerrillas who have fought in Syria and Iraq.

There was some media speculation that Abdeslam began passing to the police details of ISIL’s plans for future terrorist attacks. Nevertheless, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who, himself has suspicious connections to ISIL fighters in Syria, claimed that one of the Brussels terrorist brothers, Ibrahim el-Bakraoui, had been deported by Turkey to the Netherlands in July 2015, some four months before Abdeslam’s cell carried out the Paris attacks. Erdogan said that Turkey deported Ibrahim el-Bakraoui because he was a militant foreign fighter in Syria. Turkey has aided and abetted other militant foreign fighters, including terrorists, traveling to and from Syria, so why Erdogan singled out el-Bakraoui is a mystery. It also stands to reason that if Turkey was such a valued member of NATO, why did it deport a security threat to the Netherlands, also a NATO member?

And just as with previous terrorist attacks, the media reported that the Brussels attackers were previously known to European law enforcement and intelligence services. So, why were they able to carry out three successful major terrorist attacks in a year-and-a-half time period?

Pre-attack knowledge by the authorities of an alleged terrorist perpetrator was certainly the case in the Merah affair in March 2012. Mohammed Merah, a French national, was killed by French police after he was accused of killing three French paratroopers in Montauban and three students and a teacher at a Jewish school in Toulouse. It was later discovered that not only did the French Central Directorate of Internal Intelligence (DCRI) have a dossier on Merah but that it tried to recruit him as an agent. Merah traveled with ease to Afghanistan and Pakistan with the foreknowledge of French intelligence. The then-governing conservatives of President Nicolas Sarkozy and the opposition, now ruling, Socialist Party, conspired to cover up Merah's links to French intelligence.

The deadly 1980 attack on the Bologna train station in Italy began, in earnest, the modern era of using false flag attacks in waging asymmetric warfare. Although the Italian government and media originally blamed the bombing on leftist radical Italian guerrillas, it was, in fact, carried out by an underground fascist cell that obtained the bomb materials from hidden caches belonging to the secret NATO «stay behind» paramilitary network known generically as «Gladio».

By blaming leftist guerillas for various terrorist attacks in Europe, NATO was able to convince its members to host US offensive cruise missile systems and keep NATO tightly-bound as an agent for US foreign policy goals, including facing down the Soviet Union. Today, with Islamist terrorists replacing leftist guerrillas as NATO’s chief raison d’être, policymakers on both sides of the Atlantic have used the terrorist attacks in Brussels and Paris to call for an end to Belgium’s unruly federal system of two states – Flanders and Wallonia – within one. Belgium, the neoconservative-slanted policy wonks believe, would be better off with a strong central government and strong centralized intelligence and security forces. That NATO message is not merely for the attention of Flanders and Wallonia but also for separatists in Catalonia, Scotland, Corsica, Wales, Veneto, and other independence-minded regions within NATO borders.

NATO, on behalf of a personal data-hungry United States, also wants to see unfettered access by European and American intelligence and security services to databases on air travelers in Europe. European data protection officials have been reticent about sharing such personal data with the United States, particularly after the Edward Snowden revelations about how the US National Security Agency abuses such data.

The question must be asked: If Western European intelligence had advanced knowledge of Paris I, Paris II, and Brussels, why was preventive action not taken? If governments «let it happen on purpose» – or «LIHOP» – meaning, allow planned terrorist events to occur without disruption, those governments can rush their counter-terrorism «wish list» of massive surveillance and larger security and defense budgets into quickly-passed legislation amid the resulting climate of fear. No politician wants to be seen as weak on security, particularly after major terrorist attacks.

One such tell-tale sign of a false flag operation is the convenient discovery by police of evidence linking attacks to the perpetrators, be they unknowing double agents or patsies who believe in whatever cause has been dangled before them.

One sign of a false flag operation is that «evidence» linking the intended perpetrators to the crime scene is always conveniently discovered after the event. French police claim they were able to pin the Paris I attack on two Franco-Algerian brothers, Cherif and Said Kouachi, because Said, the eldest brother, left his French identification card in a black Citroen used as a getaway car. Police would not say whose identification card they found. Some French security experts warned that the ID card may have been purposely planted in the car to confuse the police. Police also conveniently found Molotov cocktails and Islamist jihadist flags inside the getaway car.

In the case of Brussels, a taxi driver who said he believed he picked up the Bakraoui brothers and Laachraoui in the Schaerbeek neighborhood of Brussels and drove them to Zaventem, contacted the police after the explosions. The cab driver recalled that it was suspicious that the three passengers did not want him to help them with their extremely heavy luggage. When the police raided the pick-up address, they found bomb-making chemicals, detonators, and a suitcase packed with nails and screws. Also discovered was the signature black and white ISIL flag. But there was another convenient clue found in a trash dumpster near the terrorist apartment: a computer with the last testament of Ibrahim el Bakraoui. The terrorist, who Erdogan insists was expelled from Turkey for his radical views, wrote that he was «is in a rush, not knowing what to do, being looked for everywhere, not feeling safe and if this goes on, he risks ending up in a cell».

If Brussels goes according to script, the European Union will soon implement a draconian surveillance regime throughout Europe. Europeans will find their freedom of movement throughout the European space to be restricted while Europe continues to take in more migrants from the Middle East and North Africa. And among these migrants will be jihadists looking at carrying out more Paris- and Brussels-like attacks. And the European population will find themselves powerless in the face of such a vicious cycle of terrorist events and more migrants.

«This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence – economic, political, even spiritual – is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together». – President Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Dwight D. Eisenhower was a five-star general in charge of the Normandy Invasion and a popular two-term President of the United States. Today he would be called a «conspiracy theorist».

Were Ike to be issuing his warning from the White House today, conservative Republicans like Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Marco Rubio (R-FL) would be screaming at Ike for impugning the motives of «the patriotic industry that protects our freedom».

Neoconservatives such as William Kristol would be demanding to know why President Eisenhower was issuing warnings about our own military-industrial complex instead of warning about the threat presented by the Soviet military.

The presstitute media would be implying that Ike was going a bit senile in his old age, a tactic the presstitutes used against President Reagan as he struggled to end stagflation and the Cold War.

By January 17, 1961, when Eisenhower issued his warning in his farewell address to the American People, it was already too late. Cold Warriors had had their hooks into the American taxpayer for 15 years after the end of WW II, and the military-industrial complex had replaced «mom and apple pie» as the most venerated and entrenched US interest. The Dulles brothers ran the State Department and CIA and overthrew governments at will. (Read The Brothers).

The Cold War was a profitable business that served many, and that is why it lasted so long.

There was never any threat of the Red Army invading Europe. Stalin declared «socialism in one country» and purged the Communist Party of the Trotskyist element that preached world revolution. An accommodation could have been reached, except that for the first time ever the military-industrial complex saw that it could keep the war business going for decades and perhaps forever.

George F. Kennan predicted that should the Soviet Union «sink tomorrow under the waters of the ocean», another adversary would have to be invented. «Anything else would be an unacceptable shock to the American economy».

When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the «Soviet threat» was replaced with the «Muslim threat» and the «War on Terror» took over from the Cold War. Despite a succession of false flag attacks and warnings of a «thirty years’ war», a few thousand lightly armed jihadists were an insufficient replacement for the Soviet Union and its thousands of nuclear ICBMs. It was an uncomfortable notion that the «world’s only superpower» could not dispose of a few terrorists.

So we are back to the Cold War with Russia. The propaganda is fast and furious. «Putin is the new Hitler.» «Russia invaded Ukraine.» «Russia is about to invade the Baltics and Poland.» «Putin is a corrupt multi-billionaire.» «Putin is scheming to recreate the Soviet Union.» These accusations become headlines despite US military spending being a dozen or more times higher than Russian military spending and the Russian government expressing no hegemonic aspirations.

Eisenhower’s successor, John F. Kennedy, realized that the military-security complex was a threat, but he underestimated the threat and paid for it with his life when he stood up to the military-security complex. In stating this fact, I have joined Eisenhower as a conspiracy theorist. (For a hair-raising account of the threat posed to President Kennedy by General Lyman Lemnitzer, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, read chapter three in Richard Cottrell’s book, Gladio, NATO’s Dagger at the Heart of Europe.)

Conspiracies are real. There are many more of them than people are aware. Many government conspiracies are heavily documented by governments themselves with the official records demonstrating the conspiracies openly available to the public. Just google, for example, Operation Gladio or the Northwoods Project. These conspiracies alone are sufficient to chastise those uninformed Western peoples who go around saying, «our government would never kill its own people».

Perhaps Russian studies provided my introduction to government conspiracies against their own people. I learned that the Tsar’s secret police set off bombs and killed people in order to blame and arrest labor agitators. I was skeptical of this account and wondered if it was a reflection of left-wing bias against Tsarist Russia. Some years later I asked my colleague, Robert Conquest, at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University if the account was true. He replied that the story is true as is known from the released secret police files that are part of the Hoover Institution’s archives.

False flag attacks are used by governments in order to pursue secret agendas that they cannot publicly acknowledge. If President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney had said: «We are going to attack Iraq and a half dozen other countries in order to exercise hegemony over the Middle East, steal their oil, and clear the path for Israel to steal the entirety of the West Bank of Palestine, diverting taxpayers’ resources from serving the American people into the pockets of the armaments industries and spilling the blood of your parents, spouses, children, and siblings», even the American sheeple would have resisted.

Instead, following the famous advice of Hitler’s chief propagandist, they said: «Our country has been attacked!»

Generally speaking, an observant person with a bit of education can recognize a false flag attack. However, few people pay attention beyond what the official media says, and the media no longer investigates and questions but simply repeats the official story. Therefore, only a few realize what has really happened, and when these few open their mouths they are discredited as «conspiracy theorists».

This method of control might be wearing thin. There have been so many false flag «terrorist attacks» in the 21^st century that there are now thousands of experts labeled as «conspiracy theorist». For example, the 9/11 Truth Movement consists of thousands of high rise architects, structural engineers, demolition experts, nano-chemists, physicists, firefighters and first responders, civilian and military pilots, and former high government officials. Collectively these experts represent far more knowledge and experience than the 9/11 Commission, which did nothing but write down whatever the government told them, NIST, a collection of people whose incomes and careers depend on the government, and the presstitutes who can barely manage arithmetic, much less the mathematics of controlled demolition.

The neoconservatives, who controlled the George W. Bush regime, called for a «New Pearl Harbor» so that they could begin their wars of conquest in the Middle East. A «New Pearl Harbor» is what 9/11 gave them. Was this a coincidence or a Gulf of Tonkin or a Reichstag fire or a Tzarist secret police or Operation Gladio bomb?

The charge, «conspiracy theory», is used to prevent investigation.

9/11 was not investigated. Indeed, as many experts have pointed out, there was a conscious effort to remove and destroy the evidence before it could be investigated.

The 9/11 families had to lobby and protest for a solid year before the Bush regime consented to the totally controlled 9/11 Commission.

The Boston Marathon Bombing was not investigated. A scripted story was issued and repeated by the media. The San Bernardino shootings were not investigated. Again, a pre-scripted story took the place of investigation.

The success of false flag attacks in the US led to their use in the UK and France. The Charlie Hebdo affair was not investigated and the official explanation makes no sense.

The story has been closed with all the loose ends dangling. For example, why did a French police official investigating the crime allegedly commit suicide in his police office in the early hours of the morning, and why was his family denied the autopsy report? What happened to this disappeared story? Why did the police finger a third participant in the attack as the «getaway driver» who had an iron clad alibi? If the police were so totally wrong about this member of the gang, how do we know they are right about the two men they shot to death. How come alleged perpetrators of «terrorist attacks» are always killed before they can talk? How come the only story we ever get is what the government says? How can people be so gullible after the Gulf of Tonkin, Operation Gladio, etc.?

Apparently the Charlie Hebdo attack was insufficient for the purpose, and now France has had what is called «the Paris attack», an even more unbelievable event, evidence for which is missing. This false flag attack was too much for Kevin Barrett who assembled a collection of skeptical essays from 26 people into a book, Another French False Flag: Bloody Tracks From Paris To San Bernardino.

Twenty-four of these contributors do not believe the official story. Does this make them «conspiracy theorists» or does this make them brave souls who are concerned that Reichstag fire type events are replacing Western civil liberty with fascist police states?

Ask yourself, why are those trying to preserve liberty denounced?

Dear Western Peoples, if you wish to be able to walk down the streets of your cities without being accosted by police, demanded to present identity papers, searched, detained indefinitely or assassinated without due process of law, if you wish to be able to express your opinion about «your» government and its use of your tax payments, if you wish to be able to discuss current affairs or your personal affairs without being recorded by the NSA or the equivalent in your own country or by both, if you wish to be able to act on your moral conscience and to protest the violence the West applies to Muslims and others unfavored by powerful Western interests, such as Palestinians, if you wish to live in the freedom that was achieved in the West after centuries of struggle, wake up, find time from less meaningful pursuits to become aware of what is being stolen from you. It is late in the game. If you do not stand up for truth, you will have no freedom as there is no freedom without truth.

The DHKP-C is claimed to have carried out a suicide bombing of the U.S. embassy in Ankara in 2013, an attack that killed a Turkish security guard. In that attack, a website called «The People's Cry», supposedly operated by DHKP-C, claimed that one of its members, Ecevit Sanli, carried out the suicide bombing at the embassy, which killed both Sanli and the Turkish guard. The problem with the overall claim of DHKP-C involvement was a video posted by «The People’s Cry» that was discovered by the Israeli Mossad-linked «Search for International Terrorist Entities» or «SITE», a Washington, DC-based group that has been known to distribute to the media dubious videos and communiqués purporting to be from «Al Qaeda», «the Islamic State», and other alleged Islamist terrorist groups.

The alleged resurgence of DHKP-C has provided the Turkish government with cover to pound Kurdish guerrillas in eastern Turkey and instill a siege mentality among Turkish voters as the country heads into another national election that pits the Islamist-oriented government of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan against the secular opposition.

Moroccan national Ayoub El Khazzani is accused of boarding a Paris-bound train in Brussels in order to launch a killing spree on passengers. Khazzani, who had in his possession an AK-47 and other weapons in a bag that he said he «found» in a Brussels park, was overpowered by three Americans and a British national. Two of the Americans who helped subdue Khazzani are members of the U.S. military, U.S. Air Force Airman Spencer Stone and Oregon National Guardsman Alek Skarlatos. The British national is Chris Norman, born in Uganda and a resident of southern France.

It is believed that Khazzani, a native of Tetouan, Morocco, like so many alleged Islamist attackers in France, had traveled abroad extensively prior to committing his terrorist attack. Khazzani was a resident of Algeciras and Madrid in Spain until 2014, whereupon he took a job with the French mobile phone company Lycamobile and moved to France. Khazzani reportedly was radicalized at a mosque in Algeciras, across from the British territory of Gibraltar, where British intelligence keeps a very close eye on surrounding Spanish territory, including Algeciras. In June of this year, Khazzani was reportedly fighting alongside Islamic State guerrillas in Syria, later traveled from Antakya, Turkey to Tirana, Albania.

Khazzani’s story is almost the same as the one proffered by Mehdi Nemmouche, the Franco-Algerian who is said to have attacked the Jewish Museum of Brussels. Before the Brussels attack, Nemmouche is said to have fought with the Islamic State’s forces in Syria and spent some time in Britain. After attacking the Brussels museum, Nemmouche caught an overnight bus to Marseille from Brussels. A customs check discovered Nemmouche’s bag with an AK-47, a revolver, and bullets.

Nemmouche claimed after his arrest by French police that he discovered the weapons in a parked car in Brussels and stole them in order to sell them on the black market in Marseille. Khazzani claims that he intended to use the weapons he found in a Brussels park, an AK-47, a Luger pistol, a box cutter, a half-liter of gasoline, and nine magazines of ammunition to rob passengers on the Thalys train in order to buy food because he was penniless and homeless. Both Kazzani and Nemmouche were well-known to French and other European law enforcement agencies as potential threats, yet no action was taken to conduct surveillance of their activities. Before the attack on the train, Khazzani was the subject of a French police «Fiche S» or «S notice that was transmitted to various European law enforcement agencies and requested Khazzani to be placed under police special surveillance. In addition, the Spanish police had Khazzani’s DNA on file. Moreover, not only Spanish, but German and Belgian, as well as French intelligence, had fairly complete files on Khazzani prior to the attack on the Thalys train.

Mohamed Merah, the Franco-Algerian who killed seven people in the Toulouse region, including three Jewish school children, in 2012, and Said and Cherif Kouachi, the Franco-Algerian brothers who attacked the offices of «Charlie Hebdo» magazine in January of this year, also had «Fiche S» and other intelligence files collected on them by French authorities.

The Franco-Senegalese-Malian gunman Amedy Coulibaly, who attacked the Hyper-Cacher Jewish supermarket in Paris at the same time the Charlie Hebdo offices were attacked, was also well-known to French police and intelligence. Danish police and intelligence files also turned up the name of the alleged deadly attacker of Copenhagen’s Central Synagogue and a Danish film festival, Omar Alhamid Alhussein, a Danish national of Palestinian descent and criminal with a violent record who was released from a Danish prison just two weeks prior to the attack on the synagogue. Danish police shot and killed Alhussein after his alleged twin attacks.

The Thalys train was traveling through the Oignies region in Haute Picardie, France when Khazzani was subdued by the passengers. French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve immediately suggested that Khazzani was a member of a radical Islamist group.Cazeneuve also wasted no time in flying to Copenhagen right after the synagogue and film festival attacks. It was Cazeneuve who was reportedly under investigation by 45-year old French Police Commissioner Helric Fredou, the second in command of the French Judicial Police in Limoges, for links with Jeanette Bougrab.

Bougrab was the so-called «girlfriend» of slain «Charlie Hebdo» editor Stephane Charbonnier or «Charb», as he was known to his colleagues. Bougrab claimed to have been Charb's girlfriend and even insinuated that he fathered her daughter. Fredou is said to have committed suicide at the height of his investigation of a link between Bougrab and Cazeneuve. Fredou is said to have shot himself in the head after becoming despondent after meeting the family of one of victims of the French attacks. However, Fredou's family and friends discounted reports that Fredou was depressed. Furthermore, they pointed out that he had cracked open a major lead in the terrorist attacks a move that placed him at loggerheads with Cazeneuve.

According to French news reports, Fredou had Cazeneuve under suspicion since the police commissioner's days as Cherbourg police «commissaire». Cazeneuve has been mayor of the town of Cherbourg-Octeville since 2001 and it was during his time as police commissioner that Fredou first became aware of Cazeneuve's links with Mossad and his relationship with Bougrab and her cabal of anti-Muslim provocateurs.

The re-introduction of Gladio on the European political scene is in response to growing hostility to the European Union and austerity dictates by European central bankers. The corporatists and fascists who have steered Europe into bankruptcy are now using their media assets to morph their favorite threat over the last two decades – Islamist terrorism – to a combined menace of Islamist terrorists teamed up with an international network of anarchists. In Greece, Italy, Turkey, and Spain there are signs that the paradigm shift from Islamist terrorism to leftist anarchism is already occurring, with highly-suspicious and likely false flag bombings taking place at embassies and other facilities. The media will step up planted stories designed to link «anarchists» to «Jihadists».

After the Thalys train incident in Brussels, Cazeneuve and his friend, the anti-Muslim and right-wing Socialist French Prime Minister Manuel Valls, are calling for airport-style security checks at European train stations. The end-game is for the European Union to exercise increased political and social control over the peoples of the continent.

It is noteworthy that the rise of previously unknown «anarchist» groups is occurring in the very same countries where Gladio’s operations were most extensive: Italy, Turkey, and Greece. Italy was the nexus for «Organazzizione Gladio», the Italian branch of the pan-European CIA-led terrorist operations. In Turkey, Gladio was known as «Ergenekon» and in Greece, the Gladio operations were known as «Operation Sheepskin».

As long as Gladio is back in operation in Europe, the people of the continent should be afraid, in fact, they should be very afraid.