The EU is trying to make North, Central and West Africa part of the Schengen zone

Marrakesh Political Declaration

WE, Ministers of Foreign Affairs, of the Interior, of Integration, in charge of Migration and high representatives of the following countries:, AUSTRIA, BELGIUM, BENIN, BULGARIA, BURKINA FASO, CABO VERDE, CAMEROON, CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC, CHAD, CONGO, CÔTE D’IVOIRE, CROATIA, CYPRUS, CZECH REPUBLIC, DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO, DENMARK, EQUATORIAL GUINEA, ESTONIA, FINLAND, FRANCE, GABON, GAMBIA, GERMANY, GHANA, GREECE, GUINEA, GUINEA-BISSAU, IRELAND, ITALY, LATVIA, LIBERIA, LITHUANIA, LUXEMBOURG, MALI, MALTA, MAURITANIA, MOROCCO, NETHERLANDS, NIGER, NIGERIA, NORWAY, POLAND, PORTUGAL, ROMANIA, SÃO TOMÉ AND PRÍNCIPE, SENEGAL, SIERRA LEONE, SLOVAKIA, SLOVENIA, SPAIN, SWEDEN, SWITZERLAND, TOGO, TUNISIA and UNITED KINGDOM; High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and European Commissioner for Migration, Home Affairs and Citizenship; and high representatives of the Economic Community of West African States Commission ; and Algeria and Libya as observer countries;

MEETING the 2nd May 2018 in Marrakesh, at the invitation of the Kingdom of Morocco;

ACKNOWLEDGING the growing relevance of migration issues at the global level in general, and in Euro-African and Intra-African relations in particular, as well as the need to identify adapted and coordinated responses for the management of migration flows in all their aspects;

RECALLING the commitments made by the Rabat Process partners in the framework of the 2006 Joint Africa-EU Declaration on Migration and Development, the 2014 Africa-EU Declaration on Migration and Mobility, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development adopted by the United Nations in 2015 in which States pledged to “leave no-one behind”, the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants adopted the 19th September 2016 by the United Nations, the United Nations Declaration of the High-level Dialogue on International Migration of 2013, and the Political Declaration of the 5th African Union – European Union Summit of 2017 ;

REAFFIRMING the commitments made by the Rabat Process partners at the Valletta Summit on Migration in November 2015 and the Senior Officials’ Meeting of Valletta in February 2017, as well as their adherence to the principles of solidarity, partnership and shared responsibility in the joint management of migration issues in full respect of human rights;

REITERATING the commitment of the Rabat Process partners to the effective implementation of the Valletta Joint Action Plan (JVAP);

TAKING INTO ACCOUNT the mandate given to the Rabat and Khartoum Processes to monitor the JVAP, as well as the mapping exercise already conducted, to ensure its follow-up, and COMMENDING the efforts made to implement the technical instrument for the long-term monitoring of the JVAP;

RECALLING the commitments made by the Rabat Process partners at the Ministerial Conferences in 2006, 2008, 2011 and 2014, and the principles contained in the 2011 Dakar Declaration (an operational and coherent dialogue, a flexible and balanced approach, committed partners and shared responsibility);

RECOGNIZING the progress achieved within the framework of the different plans and strategies of the Rabat Process and taking into account the lessons learnt from the analyses carried out at the end of the Rome Programme 2014-2017;

Page 1 of 8

NOTING the value of the technical expertise and experience of external observers such as international organisations working in the field of migration and asylum, civil society actors, members of the diaspora and academic representatives, in enriching and operationalising the dialogue; CALLING for the strengthening of cooperation with the latter through increased consultations;

CONSCIOUS of the driving force of the Rabat Process in identifying common political priorities for migration and asylum issues between Africa and Europe, and its contribution to the formulation and implementation of migration strategies;

ENDEAVOURING to ensure coherence with the implementation instruments which have emerged since 2014 and which redefine the partnership framework, AVOIDING duplication of actions being undertaken in this respect and ENSURING complementarity of interventions;

ADOPT the Marrakesh Programme for 2018-2020, which comprises the present Political Declaration as well as the targeted, operational Action Plan, and which is based on a regional approach whilst also respecting state sovereignty;

AGREE to align the said Programme with the five domains of the JVAP in order to maintain coherence and complementarity with it:

Domain 1: Development benefits of migration and addressing root causes of irregular migration and forced displacement;

Domain 2: Legal migration and mobility;

Domain 3: Protection and asylum;

Domain 4: Prevention of and fight against irregular migration, migrant smuggling and trafficking in human beings;

Domain 5: Return, readmission and reintegration;

AGREE equally to effectively implement, in a balanced way, the Action Plan which is thus adopted by incorporating the following cross-cutting priorities:

1. A human rights-based approach: the implemented actions will contribute to fully respecting the human rights and dignity of refugees and migrants, irrespective of their migration status;

2. Particular attention will be paid to the issues of gender and the protection of migrants in vulnerable situations including, in particular, women and children;

3. Increased attention to the fight against xenophobia, racism and discrimination: the partners will undertake efforts to combat these phenomena, and to promote a balanced narrative on migration and diasporas, based on facts and highlighting their positive contribution to the development of societies in countries of origin, transit and destination;

4. A regional approach: the identification, formulation and execution of actions will take into account local and regional specificities.

5. An inclusive and multi-stakeholder approach: in their interventions, the partners will seek to involve all the actors under the coordination of the national authorities (regional organisations, local authorities, traditional and customary authorities, representatives of civil society and migrant and refugee communities, social partners, the private sector, the media and academia) as well as relevant International Organisations, to ensure coordinated and orderly management of all dimensions of the migratory phenomenon.

6. Particular attention to the collection, analysis and sharing of disaggregated data: among the activities envisaged, the partners will endeavour to identify existing initiatives and studies, to share migration data and will undertake, if necessary, specific studies for operational purposes at national or regional levels. The data and information obtained will feed into and contribute to migration policy-making processes;

DECIDE to target concrete actions which reflect the specific added value of the Rabat Process. This resides, notably, in its ability to build networks of technical and political actors, to formulate actions which take regional specificities into account, and to centralise information gathered as a result of their implementation, whilst at the same time respecting geographical balance at all levels;

AGREE to specify the modalities for the implementation of the targeted actions and to use the relevant mechanisms and tools to monitor and evaluate the implementation of the Marrakesh Programme for 2018-2020 on a periodic basis in order to improve its scope and impact.

Page 3 of 8

Domain 1: Development benefits of migration and addressing root causes of irregular migration and the phenomenon of displaced persons

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development aims, in its Goal 10.7, to “Facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through the implementation of planned and well-managed migration policies”.

Since its inception, the Rabat Process has consistently promoted the positive potential of regular migration and the key role of the diaspora for countries of origin, transit and destination. The strengthening of synergies between migration and development constitutes a priority domain and a specific feature of the Rabat Process. The dialogue partners agree to pursue this path and will focus most of their actions on maximising the benefits of regular migration for development, including, as a priority, members of the diaspora in this process.

The Rabat Process partners recognise the multiple root causes of irregular migration and forced displacement. These root causes, most of which are interconnected, need to be increasingly addressed through a wide range of appropriate responses both at policy and operational levels. Taking into account the mixed nature of migration flows, the partners reiterate the commitments made in the Valletta framework to invest in development and the eradication of poverty, to fight the root causes of irregular migration, to support humanitarian aid and development assistance in the countries most affected by the phenomenon of displaced persons, and to address environmental and climate change issues in the most affected regions.

Objective 1: Maximising the positive impact of regular migration for development

Action 1: Identify and share good practices that enable countries to gain better knowledge of the profiles of their diasporas and to adopt or to optimise strategies that promote their economic, social and cultural potential for development, whilst also analysing the potential obstacles to the adoption and optimisation of these good practices.

Action 2: Contribute to reducing the costs of remittances and to facilitating remittances sent by migrants to their countries of origin, in particular by supporting innovative or existing initiatives using the potential offered by digitalisation. The partners might refer, for example, to the work carried out by the African Institute for Remittances and its network of focal points.

Action 3: Promote initiatives that support entrepreneurship and productive investment among young people from the African Diaspora (such as the flagship MEETAfrica programme, developed within the framework of the Rabat Process), and encourage these young people to use their skills for the benefit of their countries of origin.

Objective 2: Achieve a common understanding of the root causes of irregular migration and forced displacement in the Rabat Process region

Action 4: Analyse the root causes and make practical recommendations (particularly through the organisation of thematic meetings on this subject) with a view to improving the incorporation of these issues into policy development.

Page 4 of 8

Action 5: Promote a more systematic inclusion of issues related to the root causes of irregular migration and forced displacement into socio-economic development strategies and programmes at national level, and into development cooperation programmes, whilst also promoting ownership of existing regional normative frameworks.

Domain 2: Legal migration and mobility

Taking note of the above-mentioned Goal 10.7 of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Rabat Process partners recognise the need to encourage and to strengthen the pathways to regular migration, based on efficient civil registration systems, and to promote the mobility of certain categories of travellers (in particular, businessmen and businesswomen, young professionals or researchers) between European and North, West and Central African countries.

Objective 3: Promote regular migration and mobility, especially of young people and women, between Europe and North, West and Central Africa, and within these regions

Action 6: Encourage the establishment of exchange networks between vocational training institutes and employment agencies in Europe and Africa, in order to draw full benefit from the skills of young migrants and to adapt technical training to the needs of the labour market. Particular attention will be paid to activities targeting women and youth.

Action 7: In accordance with the national legislative frameworks, promote projects which aim to strengthen the portability of the rights and social protection of regular migrants and their families, for example, through the conclusion and the implementation of appropriate bilateral, regional or international conventions.

Action 8: Identify good practices and success factors which can guide relevant policy development and support inter- and intra-regional mobility, in particular through the analysis of existing studies on circular migration, particularly at regional level.

Objective 4: Encourage facilitation of visa issuing procedures

Action 9: In a spirit of partnership, pursue an open dialogue regarding visa facilitation, in particular through meetings and technical training sessions.

Action 10: Support actions designed to improve the accessibility, efficiency and transparency of the various national systems for visa issuance, including support for the creation of local information structures or the establishment of online information portals.

Domain 3: Protection and asylum

Rabat Process partners reiterate their international commitments in the field of protection and asylum, including those contained in the Valletta Political Declaration, and in particular those aimed at providing protection “to all those entitled to it in accordance with international and regional instruments”. They reaffirm their respect for the dignity of refugees and other forcibly displaced persons, and for the protection of their human rights, irrespective of status. The partners encourage countries in their efforts to sign up to and implement existing international conventions on protection, including the 1951 Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967

Page 5 of 8

Protocol. They also encourage capacity building of national institutions with regards to asylum systems.

Objective 5: Promote measures aiming to strengthen the protection of refugees and other forcibly displaced persons

Action 11: Identify existing cross-border and regional protection initiatives in one of the sub-regions of the dialogue, and propose actions to stakeholders aimed at improving the protection of refugees and forcibly displaced persons. Particular attention will be paid to take into account the most vulnerable people, the best interests of children and the needs of unaccompanied minors.

Action 12: Promote the adoption of local, national and regional action plans aimed at defining procedures for an effective response, especially in the event of massive displacements of people.

Objective 6: Promote the integration of refugees and forcibly displaced persons into host communities

Action 13: Promote the integration of refugees and forcibly displaced persons through the establishment of awareness-raising campaigns aimed, on the one hand, at local communities and on the other hand, at refugees and asylum seekers, covering their rights and obligations in host countries.

Action 14: Share experiences and good practices which promote access to work and which allow people benefitting from international protection to become more self-reliant.

Domain 4: Prevention of and fight against irregular migration, migrant smuggling and trafficking in human beings

The Rabat Process partners reiterate their commitment to international obligations relating to the prevention and fight against migrant smuggling and trafficking in human beings, which are two serious forms of organised crime under international law (the 2000 United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and the additional United Nations protocols against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Air and Sea, and aimed to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children).

In accordance with the Valletta Political Declaration, the partners encourage the stepping-up of efforts to prevent and combat these phenomena, both in Europe and Africa, through various instruments. Within this framework, the search for alternatives to the informal economy stemming from the illicit smuggling of migrants and the trafficking of human beings, as well as awareness-raising measures, are particularly encouraged.

The partners recognise the contribution of regional and international organisations and civil society organisations in this domain. The added value of the Rabat Process lies, inter alia, in its ability to connect the actors concerned by these two phenomena, in order to promote mutual learning and to improve cooperation.

Objective 7: Build the capacities of public institutions with competency in the areas of integrated border management, and the prevention and fight against migrant smuggling and trafficking in human beings

Page 6 of 8

Action 15: Improve the detection capabilities of national authorities with regard to smuggling of migrants and persons in need of international protection, trafficking in human beings, as well as in the area of integrated border management and control.

Action 16: Strengthen judicial and police cooperation at bilateral, inter- and intra-regional and international levels regarding the exchange of information, paying particular attention to financial investigations.

Action 17: Continue and accompany efforts designed to develop and to implement appropriate legislative and institutional frameworks at both national and regional levels, in accordance with the 2000 United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and the relevant additional Protocols against the smuggling of migrants and trafficking in human beings.

Objective 8: Improve the protection of migrants and persons in need of international protection who have been smuggled, and victims of trafficking in human beings

Action 18: Facilitate the sharing of good practices in relation to awareness-raising and information on the risks of irregular migration and trafficking in human beings, targeting, in particular, children and women, and involving all stakeholders (the State, the diaspora, the media, social networks, civil society, international organisations and the private sector).

Action 19: Formulate concrete responses regarding the protection and assistance of people affected by smuggling and victims of trafficking in human beings, particular women and girls (reception structures, legal advice, social, psychosocial and health services, interpretation, reintegration, etc.) and promote their inclusion into national, regional and sub regional initiatives and policies.

Domain 5: Return, readmission and reintegration

The Rabat Process partners reiterate their adherence to obligations under international law in the area of return and readmission and recall the importance of sustainable reintegration. They reiterate their support for the principle of non-refoulement and agree to give preference to voluntary return. They recall that policies in the area of return and readmission are the shared responsibility of States, and that they should be efficient, transparent and carried with full respect for the human rights, security and dignity of migrants.

The partners of the Rabat Process applaud the joint progress achieved through the political dialogues which have been initiated in this domain. It is important that these efforts are pursued and that this dialogue is translated into action, leading to strengthened cooperation and more efficient return and readmission.

Objective 9: Strengthen the capacities of the competent authorities in order to improve and ensure the identification processes and the issuing of travel documents.

Action 20: Exchange best practices related to return, readmission and reintegration at national, regional and cross-border levels (in particular through regional consultations).

Action 21: Promote the use of innovative identification techniques. The thematic meeting on return, readmission and reintegration organised in Brussels in 2016 proposed, among other things, the use of videoconferencing for identification or pre-identification, more systematic use of fingerprints, or recourse to joint actions for complex cases. Depending on the needs, provide support (technical assistance, peer support or training) to a specific group of countries in order to help them put these techniques in place.

Page 7 of 8

Objective 10: Encourage programmes that ensure the safe return and sustainable reintegration of migrants, in full respect of their rights and dignity

Action 22: Organise peer-to-peer meetings between European and African cities, and with other competent authorities, to enable mutual learning in migration management, including sustainable return, building on existing networks (such as the City-to-City initiative) and capitalising upon their achievements.

Action 23: Strengthen assisted return programmes and promote actions aimed at accompanying and including all returned migrants in development policies and programmes at local level.

Click to access 20180503_declaration-and-action-plan-marrakesh_en.pdf

Has The West The Will To Survive?

Authored by Patrick Buchanan via Buchanan.org,

“If you’re … pathetically weak, the country is going to be overrun with millions of people, and if you’re strong, then you don’t have any heart; that’s a tough dilemma. … I’d rather be strong.”

So said President Donald Trump, on issuing his order halting the separation of children from parents caught breaking into the country. Trump’s enemies are celebrating a victory. Yet the issue remains.

Under U.S. law, teenagers and tots cannot be detained for more than 20 days and must be held in the least-restrictive facilities. But if the children cannot be separated from the parents as they await trial, both will have to be released to keep families together.

We are back to “catch and release.”

When that welcome news hits Central America, the migrant stream moving north will become a river that never ceases to flow.

The questions America and the West face might thus be framed:

Is there a liberal, progressive, Christian way to seal a 2,000-mile border, halt millions of migrants from crossing it illegally, and send intruders back whence they came?

Or does the preservation of Western nations and peoples require measures from which liberal societies today reflexively recoil?

Does the survival of the West as a civilization require a ruthlessness the West no longer possess?

Consider what our fathers did to build this country.

The English settlers brought in 600,000 slaves, ethnically cleansed the Indians, joined their cousins in a war to expel the French, then revolted and threw out those cousins to claim all the land to the Mississippi for ourselves.

Jefferson grabbed the vast Louisiana Territory for $15 million from Napoleon, who had no right to sell it. Andrew Jackson drove the Spanish out of Florida, sent the Cherokee packing on the Trail of Tears, and told a dissenting Chief Justice John Marshall where he could go.

Sam Houston tore Texas away from Mexico. “Jimmy” Polk took the Southwest and California in a war Ulysses Grant called “the most unjust ever fought.” When the South declared independence, Lincoln sent a million-man army to march them back in a war that cost 600,000 lives.

William McKinley sent armies and warships to seize Puerto Rico, Hawaii, Guam and the Philippines. The indigenous peoples were not consulted. “God told me to take the Philippines,” said McKinley.

The conquest and colonization of the New World and the creation of the United States and its rise to world power required acts of aggression and war of which many among our elites are ashamed. They exhibit their guilt by tearing down the statues of the men who perpetrated the “crimes” that created America. But of these elites, it may be fairly said: they could never have built a nation like ours.

Which brings us again to the larger questions.

While our forefathers would have not hesitated to do what was needed to secure our borders and expel intruders, it is not a settled matter as to whether this generation has the will to preserve the West.

Progressives may parade their moral superiority as they cheer the defeat of the “zero tolerance” policy. But they have no solution to the crisis. Indeed, many do not even see it as a crisis because they do not see themselves as belonging to a separate tribe, nation or people threatened by an epochal invasion from the Third World.

They see themselves as belonging to an ideological nation, a nation of ideas, whose mission is to go forth and preach and teach all peoples the gospel of democracy, diversity and equality.

And this is why the establishment was repudiated in 2016. It was perceived as too elite, too liberal, too weak to secure the borders and repel the invaders.

“If you’re really, really pathetically weak, the country is going to be overrun with millions of people,” said Trump on Wednesday. Is he wrong?

Since the Cold War ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union, it has grown apparent that the existential threat to the West comes not from Czar Vladimir’s Russian divisions returning to the Elbe.

The existential threat comes from the south.

Half a century ago, Houari Boumedienne, the leader of a poor but militant Algeria, allegedly proclaimed at the United Nations:

“One day, millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere to go to the Northern Hemisphere. And they will not go there as friends. Because they will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory.”

This is the existential crisis of the West.

Thus, Trump seeks to build a wall, turn back the intruders, and bring Vladimir Putin back into the Western camp, where Russia belongs. Thus the new populist regime in Rome blocks boats of refugees from landing in Italy. Thus Angela Merkel looks like yesterday.

Nikola Tesla about Albert Einstein

By Rand Clifford for Veterans Today

When Albert Einstein was asked how it felt to be the “smartest person alive”, Einstein replied: “I don’t know, you’ll have to ask Nikola Tesla.”

Certain scholars question the validity of this exchange, largely because Tesla…well, in 1934, on his 79th birthday, Tesla called Einstein’s Relativity Theory “…a beggar wrapped in purple whom ignorant people take for a king.”

Other Tesla quotes amid his public disagreement with Einstein, regarding Relativity Theory:

— “…a mass of error and deceptive ideas violently opposed to the teachings of great men of science of the past and even to common sense…the theory wraps all these errors and fallacies and clothes them in magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. Its exponents are very brilliant men, but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists.”

— “Not a single one of the relativity propositions has been proved.” (NYT, 7/11/1935, p. 23).

Reverence of Einstein, historically and publicly seems rather full-scope. His eminence has been welded into the public mind by those who control the public mind, the Power Status Quo (PSQ).

Germany and Syria

JPEG - 39.3 kbIn Berlin, in January 2015, a march for tolerance united political and Muslim leaders in reaction to the attack on Charlie Hebdo in Paris. Madame Merkel marched arm in arm with Aiman Mazyek, general secretary of the Central Council of Muslims in Germany. Although he pretends to have broken with the Muslim Brotherhood, and maintains an open dialogue, Mr. Mazyek offers protection within his organisation to the Milli Gorus (the supremacist organisation of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan) and the Muslim Brotherhood (the matrix of jihadist organisations, under the international presidency of Mahmoud Ezzat, ex-right hand of Sayyid Qutb).by Thierry Meyssan

Relations between Germany and Syria, which used to be excellent under Emperor Wilhelm II, are today abysmal. This is because since the Cold War, Berlin has become the ground-base for the Muslim Brotherhood where they organized their attempt to overthrow the Syrian Arab Republic. Since 2012, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the federal think-tank SWP have been working directly on behalf of the US deep state for the destruction of the country.

Historically, beginning of the 20th century, Germany maintained excellent relations with the Ottoman Empire. Kaiser Wilhelm II, who was fascinated by Islam, pursued archeological excavations, notably in Baalbeck, and participated in the construction of the first railways, including the Damascus-Medina line. The Reich and the Sublime Porte stood together against the British when they organized the “Great Arab Revolt” of 1915. Then they lost the First World War, and as a result, were excluded from the region (Sykes-Picot-Sazovov agreements).

JPEG - 29.6 kbIn 1953, President Eisenhower received a delegation of the Muslim Brotherhood led by Saïd Ramadan. From then on, the United States supported political Islam overseas.

During the Cold War, the CIA recuperated some of the best Nazi officers in order to continue its struggle against the USSR. Among them were Gerhard von Mende, who had recruited Soviet Muslims against Moscow [1]. In 1953, this senior civil servant installed the chief of the Muslim Brotherhood outside of Egypt, Saïd Ramadan, in Munich [2].

JPEG - 19.1 kbAlois Brunner, considered to be responsible for the deportation of 130,000 Jews, was installed by the CIA in Damascus in 1954, in order to prevent the régime of President Choukri al-Kouatli from concluding an alliance with the Soviets.

In the same period, the CIA secretly sent Nazi officers all over the world to fight the pro-Soviets. For example, Otto Skorzeny went to Egypt, Fazlollah Zahedi went to Iran, and Alois Brunner [3] to Syria. They all organised the local secret services on the model of the Gestapo. Brunner was only to be ousted much later, in 2000, by President Bachar el-Assad.

In the period between the Khomeinist revolution of 1979 and the attacks of 9/11, West Germany remained prudent in their dealings with the Muslim Brotherhood. However, at the demand of the CIA, and while Syria recognised East Germany, it accepted to offer political asylum to the putschists who attempted the coup d’etat of 1982 against President Hafez el-Assad, including the ex-Supreme Guide Issam al-Attar (brother of Syrian Vice-President Najah el-Attar). In the 1990’s, the Brotherhood reorganised itself in Germany with the assistance of two businessmen, the Syrian Ali Ghaleb Himmat and the Egyptian Youssef Nada, who was later to be accused by Washington of financing Osama Bin Laden.

JPEG - 26.5 kbFor many years, German academic Volker Perthes participated alongside the CIA in the preparation of the war against Syria. He directed the most powerful European think-tank, the Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik (SWP), and took part, in the name of the UNO, in the Geneva negotiations .

When the United States began the “never-ending war” in the “Greater Middle East”, the CIA encouraged reunified Germany to launch a “Dialogue with the Muslim world”. In Berlin, the Minister for Foreign Affairs based his work for that purpose mostly on the new local chief of the Brotherhood, Ibrahim el-Zayat, and on an expert, Volker Perthes, who would become the director of the main federal think-tank, the Foundation for Science and Politics (SWP).

JPEG - 23 kbIn the name of the UNO, Detlev Mehlis accused the Lebanese and Syrian Presidents, Emile Lahoud and Bachar el-Assad, of having assassinated Rafic Hariri. His work was based on false witness reports which, when revealed, forced him to resign.

In 2005, Germany participated in the assassination of Rafic Hariri by supplying the weapon which was used to kill him – (it was obviously not a classic explosive, contrary to the propaganda of the special “Tribunal”) [4]. Thereafter, Germany supplied the head of the UN inquiry, the ex-prosecutor Detlev Mehlis [5], and his assistant, the ex-police commissioner Gerhard Lehmann, who was implicated in the affair of secret CIA prisons.

In 2008, while the CIA was preparing the Syrian “civil war”, Volker Perthes was invited by NATO to the annual reunion of the Bilderberg Group. He worked with a Syrian civil servant of the CIA, Bassma Kodmani. Together, they explained to all participants the profit that could be made by the West by overthrowing the Syrian Arab Republic and placing the Muslim Brotherhood in power. Having adopted the double language of the Brotherhood, in 2001 he wrote an op-ed in the New York Times mocking President Assad who believed he had unearthed a “conspiracy” against his country [6]. In October of the same year, he participated in a meeting of Turkish business leaders organised by the private US intelligence agency, Stratfor. He told his listeners of the oil and gas resources that they could steal from Syria [7].

JPEG - 30.1 kbClemens von Goetze (director of the 3rd department of the German Ministry for Foreign Affairs ) and Anwar Mohammad Gargash (Emirati Minister for Foreign Affairs), during the meeting in Abou Dhabi of the work group on the carving up of the Syrian economy.

Expanding this work, Germany organised in Abou Dhabi a meeting of the Friends of Syria under the presidency of one of its diplomats, Clemens von Goetze, who shared among those present the future concessions for exploitation which would be awarded to the winners once NATO overthrew the Syrian Arab Republic [8].

In mid-2012, Volker Perthes was tasked by the US Department of Defense with preparing “The Day After” (in other words the government which would be imposed on Syria). He organised meetings at the Ministry for Foreign Affairs with the participation of 45 Syrian personalities, including his friend Bassma Kodmani and Muslim Brother Radwan Ziadeh, who had come especially from Washington [9]. Finally, Perthes became one of Jeffrey Feltman’s assistants at the UN. With that title, he participated in all the Geneva negotiations.

The positions of the German Ministry for Foreign Affairs were adopted word for word by the European External Action Service (EEAS) of Federica Mogherini. This administration, directed by a French senior civil servant, drew up confidential notes on Syria for the heads of state and government of the Union.

In 2015, Chancellor Angela Merkel and Turkish President, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who had become the world protector of the Muslim Brotherhood, organised the transfer of more than a million people to Germany [10], thus conforming to the demand by German industrial business leaders. A number of these migrants are Syrians, including those the AKP no longer wants, and which Germany does not want to return home.

Chancellor Angela Merkel will be in Beirut and Amman this week to talk about Syria.

Thierry Meyssan

Translation
Pete Kimberley

[1] The CIA under Alan Dulles placed Nazi ex-leaders as supervisors of almost all the secret services of the allied states on all five continents. This system was dismantled in the 1970’s, after the revelations of the Church and Pike Congressional committees. All the Nazi leaders were chased out by President Carter and Admiral Stanfield Turner at the end of the 1970’s. The Europeans wrongly believed that the CIA used the Nazis exclusively in Latin America (for example, Klaus Barbie in Bolivia). But the system was in fact generalised, including in Europe (operation Gladio). In all probability, the placing of these Nazi « experts » was coordinated from Germany by Reinhard Gehlen, whom the CIA nominated as the first head of the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND).

[2] A Mosque in Munich, Ian Johnson, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2011.

[3] Alois Brunner is believed to be responsible for the deportation and assassination of 130,000 people, in Austria, Greece, France, Germany and Slovakia. In 2001, he was sentenced in absentia to life imprisonment in France for his responsibility in the death of the children of Izieu.

[4] “Revelations on Rafik Hariri’s assassination”, by Thierry Meyssan, Оdnako (Russia) , Voltaire Network, 29 November 2010.

[5] “The disgrace of the Mehlis Commission”, by Talaat Ramih, Voltaire Network, 12 January 2006.

[6] “Is Assad Capable of Reform ?”, Volker Perthes, The New York Times, March 30, 2011.

[7] « Küresel Enerji Stratejileri Simülasyonu : Türkiye’nin Gelecek 10 Yılı », Tusaid, 6 Ekim 2011.

[8] “The “Friends of Syria” divvy up Syrian economy before conquest”, by German Foreign Policy, Voltaire Network, 30 June 2012.

[9] The Day After Project, August 2012. The Day After. Supporting a Democratic Transition in Syria, United States Institute of Peace & Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, August 2012.

[10] Turkey took over from Saudi Arabia after it had dropped the Brotherhood, following the speech by Donald Trump in Riyadh, 21 May 2017.

U.S.-China Trade War Will Only Hurt the US

Trump is now in the Twilight Zone. Intellectual property? The US leads the world in corporate theft of intellectual property. Facebook stole its software from Leader Technologies. Sovaldi, the blockbuster hepatitis C drug, is an illegal patent of British Protide research. Most major American research starts off being funded by the federal government. If the research is successful, the resulting technology gets transferred illegally to a private corporation. Otherwise, the patent rights would belong to the US taxpayer who funded the research.

When one counts the trade that US companies BASED in China sell to China, which isn’t counted as exports, one finds out that the actual “trade” is about even. Just because they don’t put it in containers and ship it across the Pacific doesn’t mean it isn’t “trade”.

All the fools that are proclaiming the USSA is China’s biggest market are deluding themselves and basing it on the artificial worth of the dollar. One example is Shale, which is a scam at today’s oil prices.

Trump is basically trying to get the Chinese to buy more American products. We sell them food and energy; they sell us manufactured goods. He’s also trying to further open up China to American corporations. Those corporations can then do business in China without worrying about the Chinese stealing intellectual property. How does this help American workers? The jobs will still be in China.

If the US had tied corporate tax cuts to bringing jobs back, it would have made sense. If not, it’s just US corporations trying to get more from the Chinese government.

The Chinese government could also drop tariffs on American products and have their people boycott American-made products. Or devalue their currency.

Propaganda works both ways.

From here on in for the USSA, it is about managing the post-colonial demise, shrinking purchasing power and post super-power status.

Mattis: Putin Is Trying To “Undermine America’s Moral Authority”

Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via CaitlinJohnstone.com,

At a graduation ceremony for the US Naval War College (barf), US Secretary of Defense James Mattis asserted that Russian President Vladimir Putin “aims to diminish the appeal of the western democratic model and attempts to undermine America’s moral authority,” and that “his actions are designed not to challenge our arms at this point but to undercut and compromise our belief in our ideals.”

This would be the same James Mattis who’s been overseeing the war crimes committed by America’s armed forces during their illegal occupation of Syria. This would be the same United States of America that was born of the genocide of indigenous tribes and the labor of African slaves, which slaughtered millions in Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Iraq, Libya and Syria for no legitimate reason, which is partnered with Ukrainian Nazis, jihadist factions in Syria and Iranian terror cultists, which supports 73 percent of the world’s dictators, which interferes constantly in the electoral processes of other countries as a matter of policy, which stages coups around the world, which has encircled the globe with military bases, whose FBI still targets black civil rights activists for persecution to this very day, which routinely enters into undeclared wars of aggression against noncompliant governments to advance plutocratic interests, which remains the only country ever to use nuclear weapons on human beings after doing so completely needlessly in Japan, and which is functionally a corporatist oligarchy with no meaningful “democratic model” in place at all.

.

A casual glance at facts and history makes it instantly clear that the United States has no “moral authority” of any kind whatsoever, and is arguably the hub of the most pernicious and dangerous force ever assembled in human history. But the establishment Russia narrative really is that cartoonishly ridiculous: you really do have to believe that the US government is 100 percent pure good and the Russian government is 100 percent pure evil to prevent the whole narrative from falling to pieces. If you accept the idea that the exchange is anything close to 50/50, with Russia giving back more or less what it’s getting and simply protecting its own interests from the interests of geopolitical rivals, it no longer makes any sense to view Putin as a leader who poses a unique threat to the world. If you accept the idea that the west is actually being far more aggressive and antagonistic toward Russia than Russia is being toward the west, it gets even more laughable.

In order to believe that the US has anything resembling “moral authority” you have to shove your head so far into the sand you get lava burns, but that really is what is needed to keep western anti-Russia hysteria going. None of the things the Russian government has been accused of doing (let alone the very legitimate questions about whether or not they even did all of them) merit anything but an indifferent shrug when compared with the unforgivable evils that America’s unelected power establishment has been inflicting upon the world, so they need to weave a narrative about “moral authority” in order to give those accusations meaning and relevance. And, since the notion of America having moral authority is contradicted by all facts in evidence, that narrative is necessarily woven of threads of fantasy and denial.

Establishment anti-Russia hysteria is all narrative, no substance. It’s sustained by the talking heads of plutocrat-owned western media making the same unanimous assertions over and over again in authoritative, confident-sounding tones of voice without presenting any evidence or engaging with the reality of what Russia or its rivals are actually doing. The only reason American liberals believe that Putin is a dangerous boogieman who has taken over their government, but don’t believe for example that America is ruled by a baby-eating pedophile cabal, is because the Jake Tappers and Rachel Maddows have told them to believe one conspiracy theory and not the other. They could have employed the exact same strategy with any other wholly unsubstantiated conspiracy narrative and had just as much success.

In reality, Russia is nothing other than a rival power structure that the US-centralized empire wants to either collapse or absorb, but they can’t just come right out and tell the public that they’re dangerously escalating tensions with a nuclear superpower because westerners live in an invisible empire ruled by insatiably greedy plutocrats, so they make up nonsense about Putin being some kind of omnipotent supervillain who has infiltrated the highest levels of US government and is trying to take over the world.

I think it’s time we give Vladimir Putin his due. He is clearly the greatest intelligence agent —ever . He has engineered the unraveling of the western alliance, fidelity to democracy in the United States and the severing of the UK from the EU. It’s a remarkable achievement

— Steve Schmidt (@SteveSchmidtSES) June 10, 2018

Of equal interest to the Defense Secretary’s “moral authority” gibberish is his claim that Putin’s actions “are designed not to challenge our arms at this point but to undercut and compromise our belief in our ideals.”

I mean, like… what? So Russia isn’t challenging America militarily and isn’t taking any actions to attempt to, but it’s trying to, what, hurt America’s feelings? All this new cold war hysteria and nuclear brinkmanship has basically been America acting like a bitchy high school drama queen because Russia is saying mean things about it behind its back? How does a guy named “Mad Dog” get to be such a thin-skinned little snowflake?

I’m just playing. Actually, when Mattis says that the Russian government is trying to “undercut and compromise our belief in our ideals,” he is saying that Moscow is interrupting the lies that Americans are being told about their government by the plutocrat-owned media. As we’ve been discussing a lot recently, control of the narrative is absolutely essential for rulers to maintain their rule. When you hear establishment policy makers babbling about “Russian propaganda” and Putin’s attempts to “undercut and compromise our belief in our ideals,” all that they are saying is that the plutocrats who rule America need to be able to control the way Americans think and vote, and that the Russian government is making it a bit harder for them to do that.

More and more, the threads of the establishment narrative are ceasing to be unconsciously absorbed and are being increasingly consciously examined instead. This development has ultimately nothing to do with Russia and everything to do with our species moving out of its old relationship with mental narrative as it approaches evolve-or-die time in our challenging new world. I am greatly encouraged by what I am seeing.

Auschwitz in mid December 1944

Floda says:

My Mother spent a few days and nights in Auschwitz in mid December 1944. She was a Ukrainian schoolteacher employed by the Wehrmacht as an interpreter. She worked with a small unit of older German ‘soldiers’ whose real task was to asses agricultural opportunities in Eastern Ukraine. In 1942 she married one of these men, a Lieutenant and my father. After an incident involving a young German killed by partisans while taking a Ukrainian girl for a moonlight ride on a motorbike, the CO of the unit, a Captain, shot himself as he was not able to take the obligatory retribution out on the Ten local men and boys in a community in which they had formed many friendships.

This left my father as CO, the soldiers had been agitating to retreat ever since the losses at Stalingrad. They left and all mechanized equipment was abandoned, including a Fieseler Storch aircraft but they took a herd of perhaps 100 Horses. It took them over a year to cross Ukraine and reach Germany’s most Easterly Upper Silesia. At this point my parents decided to split up and meet again after the war at my Uncle’s home in Halle an der Salle ,near Berlin.

This left my mother, a stranger in a strange land and losing a terrible war with the whole World.
She was 24 years of age and six months pregnant with yours truly. She joined up with other women Germans, all fleeing West as the Red army was now unstoppable. In late December 1944 on a freezing afternoon the group of about 25 women including about half a dozen Nuns came across an enormous ‘Factory Complex’ in a medium sized Township. It was clearly a Military facility as its Barbed wire and armed Guards in watch towers indicated. The Women were looking for a place to spend the night, it was snowing lightly and getting dark. Two of the Nuns approached a Guard who escorted them into one of the buildings leaving the others waiting outside

This was Auschwitz: Moments later a Nun beckoned the group to come inside. They were able only to stay for several days to give the elderly Nuns time to rest. In 1996 my family asked me to write ‘granny’s story’ so I ‘interviewed’ her in Moss Vale, about an hour south of Sydney, New South Wales. She was 76 and sharp as a tack:

I asked her what she remembered, what was the mood of people, where she slept, what they ate etc.

Her recall was of a boring place which everybody wanted to leave. She described the SS Guards as old men, some stooped with arthritis but very courteous and delighted to have the Nuns (in particular) in their company so close to Christmas. She remembered having evening meals of Pea and ham soup at a large rectangular table. She also said she had swapped a fine pair of leather boots with a woman there for a Vienna loaf of bread. She was not able to describe the woman. I asked her if she remembered seeing Jewish people there. She said she cannot recall seeing any Jews but that’s not to say there we none there.

I asked her if any talk of Germany’s imminent defeat was permitted, she gave an odd (but understandable) reply: ‘All the SS men firmly believed the war would end like the first World war, with a laying down of arms on both sides’. That surprised me, poor guys may all have been shot just weeks later. Her overriding memory of it was simply everyone there wanted to go home.

Of course I asked her the most obvious question: She said ‘Look we were about 25 women, some highly educated, one was a doctor, women talk. We were in no way restricted as to our movement or to whom we could speak, we spent several days and nights there but the SS men insisted we could not stay longer. Not one of us saw or heard anything which would have made us suspect there was something sinister about the place. It was an ordinary work place, they made things.

Before leaving the Auschwitz KZ Lager the SS Guards solemnly warned the Women to avoid taking shelter in Barns or Stables as epidemics of ‘Fleck Fieber,’ aka Spotted Typhus were common in Winter and had caused the deaths many hundreds of person in the Camp/Factory including members of the SS Families.

I was born three months later in March 1945 in a Town named ‘Konigshutte’ not more than 15 or so Kilometers North west of Auschwitz. The name means the ‘King’s small house’. A week after my arrival the Hospital I was born in was destroyed by Russian Bombers. My mother was rooming with an elderly German couple who were ordered by Polish authorities to vacate their house forthwith. They owned a small sedan and offered my mother a ride to my Uncle’s place near Berlin. She declined and commenced an epic journey, again on foot but with me in a pram and towing a cart with some belongings which are with me to this day.

I’ve heard this story all my life. My mother passed at age 94, she was a tough and resourceful person I am completely convinced the entire gas-chamber part of the holocaust legend is a monstrous fabrication to justify the existence of Israel. Jews suffered in WW2, just like everyone else.

The Real Results Of The Trump-Kim Summit – Freeze For Freeze

via Moon of Alabama

The aftermath of the Trump-Kim summit in Singapore confirms my early take on the talks. What both sides committed to is the “freeze for freeze” agreement North Korea had offered since at least 2015. The U.S. stops its threatening maneuvers while North Korea stops missile and nuke testing. Both sides further committed to future talks about a peace treaty in exchange for some nuclear disarmament

Under pressure from hawks the Trump administration tries to spin additional Korean concessions into the summit declaration. It claims that North Korea committed to “verifiable and irreversible” steps. It is a bad move as that is not the case. Only the written words count. “[T]he DPRK commits to work towards the complete denuclearisation of the Korean peninsula” is the binding wording.

In 1970 the U.S. committed itself to its own complete nuclear disarmament in the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT):

Article VI – Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.

Both statements are aspirational. “To work towards” and to “undertake to pursue negotiations” are both intentionally vague and of equal determination.

The real point of the Singapore summit was the “freeze for freeze” the U.S. and North Korea both committed to it.

After North Korea successfully tested a thermonuclear device and an intercontinental range missile the U.S. was no longer able to go to war against it without risking the destruction of a major U.S. city. It had to negotiate towards some new truce with North Korea that would reduce the risk of a nuclear conflict. Freeze for freeze is the first step towards that.

North Korea had economic reasons for seeking nuclear weapons. The cost of constant military preparedness against a potential U.S. attack was killing its economy:

Each time the U.S. and South Korea launch their very large maneuvers, the North Korean conscription army (1.2 million strong) has to go into a high state of defense readiness. Large maneuvers are a classic starting point for military attacks. The U.S.-South Korean maneuvers are (intentionally) held during the planting (April/May) or harvesting (August) season for rice when North Korea needs each and every hand in its few arable areas.
…
Its nuclear deterrent allows North Korea to reduce its conventional military readiness especially during the all important agricultural seasons. Labor withheld from the fields and from elsewhere out of military necessity can go back to work. This is now the official North Korean policy known as ‘byungjin’.A guaranteed end of the yearly U.S. maneuvers would allow North Korea to lower its conventional defenses without relying on nukes. The link between the U.S. maneuvers and the nuclear deterrent North Korea is making in its repeated offer is a direct and logical connection.

Following this economic logic North Korea offered to freeze its nuclear development if the U.S. and South Korea freeze their large scale maneuvers. The Obama administration rejected the first offer in February 2015 and another one in April 2016. After that the Chinese government pushed the “freeze for freeze” concept. In early 2017 China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi explained:

To defuse the looming crisis on the peninsula, China proposes that, as a first step, the DPRK suspend its missile and nuclear activities in exchange for a halt of the large-scale US-ROK exercises. This suspension-for-suspension can help us break out of the security dilemma and bring the parties back to the negotiating table. Then we can follow the dual-track approach of denuclearizing the peninsula on the one hand and establishing a peace mechanism on the other. Only by addressing the parties’ concerns in a synchronized and reciprocal manner, can we find a fundamental solution to lasting peace and stability on the peninsula.

When the Chinese President visited Trump in April 2017 he explained the whole concept. Trump understood and spoke of “tremendous progress”. He had found a way to defuse the strategic problem of the North Korean bombs and missiles.

Secret negotiations were held with China and North Korea. In April Kim Jong-un froze all further testing. After some huffing and puffing the summit happened and the common declaration was signed. In his long press conference Trump explained the “freeze for freeze” parameters:

[T]he war games are very expensive, we pay for a big majority of them, we fly in bombers from Guam, …
I know a lot about airplanes, it’s very expensive. And I didn’t like it. And what I — what I did say is — and I think it’s very provocative, I have to tell you, Jennifer, it’s a very provocative situation. When I see that, and you have a country right next door, so under the circumstances that we are negotiating a very comprehensive, complete deal, I think it’s inappropriate to be having war games.
…
So we’re getting the remains back, secured the halt of all missile and nuclear tests for — how long has it been? Seven months? So you haven’t had a missile go up. For seven months, you haven’t had a nuclear test, you haven’t had a nuclear explosion.
…
.. they secured a halt of all missiles and of all nuclear tests, they secured the closure of their single primary nuclear test flight — test site …

There is the ‘freeze for freeze’ North Korea had offered and China promoted. The U.S. stops the large “strategic” maneuvers involving nuclear capable bombers flying from Guam, aircraft carriers and the like, while North Korea stops testing nukes and missiles. North Korea achieved its first aim. It can now lower its miliary posture and develop its economy.

The situation is still somewhat unstable as both freeze steps are reversible.

The ‘freeze for freeze’ is, as the Chinese Foreign Minister envisioned, a starting point for a long series of talks which may finally lead to a peace agreement and some nuclear disarmament. Now comes the “dual-track approach” of a peace agreement in exchange for some disarmament “in a synchronized and reciprocal manner”. This will be a “step-by-step” process which will take years or even decades.

North Korea will stay under U.S. sanctions for now but the teeth of the “maximum pressure” sanctions have been broken. Other countries will be free to deal with North Korea. In his press conference Trump talked about that too:

In the meantime, the sanctions will remain in effect.
…
The sanctions will come off when we are sure that the nukes are no longer a factor.
…
President Xi of China, who has really closed up that border maybe a little less so over the last couple of months, but that’s okay.
…
… And I think over the last two months, the border is more open than it was when we first started, but that is what it is, …

Trump will keep the U.S. sanctions up but he is fine with China ignoring at least some of them. Trump no longer insists on “maximum pressure”. Russia will also ease on sanctions as will South Korea.

The summit was successful in that it created the basis for further talks. Trump was smarter than Obama. Obama’s rejection of the offered freeze allowed North Korea to complete its nuclear program. Obama could have prevented that. Trump agreed to the North Korean concept of “freeze for freeze”. There was no other sensible way out of the security dilemma. Many further talks will follow and, if things go well, peace will finally come to Korea and the nuclear weapons will “no longer be a factor”.

The summit was a good start. The Trump administration is doing itself no favor now in overselling it as the all encompassing deal.

South Korea’s President Moon is also very happy with the results. It helped him to crush the hawkish opposition in yesterday’s local and by-elections.

Jews and the Armenian Holocaust

By Brother Nathanael Kapner, Copyright 2007-2010

BUSINESS AS USUAL is a powerful motivating force especially when Jews like the Rothschilds are running an oil business.

Banking is the forte of the Jewish House of Rothschild. But raw materials–especially oil–are money in the bank.

The Young Turk movement, AKA Committee of Union and Progress, arose out of the Rothschilds’ oil interests in the Black Sea area of the Ottoman Empire in the late 1800s. ‘Creating stability’ in an incendiary realm was necessary for the Rothschilds’ new oil enterprise Baku Oil. The instability of the Armenian Christians’ financial and intellectual prominence in the area was not “good for business.”

Thus hand-picked Jews of Salonika, (Jews made up the majority of the city’s population), and foreign agitators such as the Russian Zionist, Vladimir Jabotinksy, the editor of The Young Turk newspaper, were just what the Rothschilds needed for ridding the source of that instability, the Armenian Christians.

Now, the Zionist Young Turks who sought for the break up of the Ottoman Empire in order to obtain Palestine–and the House of Rothschild, who needed a Jewish-controlled Turkey and hegemony over the entire Middle East, could work together. This meant funding for the Jewish Young Turks and revolutionary subversives for the Rothschilds.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE JEWISH YOUNG TURKS

1680: Sabbatai Zvi, a Turkish Jew, proclaims himself to be the Jewish Messiah in Salonica. After amassing a following of thousands of Jews – he led them on a Zionist exodus to Palestine. On the way he decided to become a Muslim. Many of his followers saw this as God’s plan and also became Muslims.

1716: A group called the “Donmeh” forms in Salonica of Sabbatai Zvi’s followers headed by Sabbatai Zvi’s successor, Baruchya Russo. By the early 1900’s, the Donmeh numbers in the hundreds of thousands. They were known as “Crypto Jews” because though outwardly appearing to be Muslims, they were still Jews following the customs of the Jewish occult Kabbala which Sabbatai Zvi taught. They continue in their fervent, (yet secret), Zionist vision.

1860: Jewish Hungarian Zionist named Arminius Vambery becomes an advisor to the Sultan Abdül Mecit while secretly working as an agent for Lord Palmerston of the British Foreign Office. Vambery tries to broker a deal between the Zionist leader Theodore Herzl and Sultan Abdul Mecit over the creation of Israel but fails.

1891: Out of the Donmeh a Zionist political group forms called The Committee of Union and Progress, later called The Young Turks. The group is headed by a Freemason Jew by the name of Emmanuel Carraso who organizes the secret Committee of Union and Progress in Geneva with the help of the Rothschilds.

1895-1896: Sephardic Jews of Salonika together with the Turks massacre Armenian Christians in Istanbul.

1902 & 1907: Two Congresses of The Young Turks meet in Paris to plan, prepare, and effect the penetration the Sultan’s army leading to the military coup of 1908.

1908: The Jewish Young Turks revolt and force the Sultan Abdul Hamid II into submission.

1909: The Jewish Young Turks rape, torture, and slaughter over 100,000 Armenians in the city of Adana, also known as Cilicia.

1914: The Jews of The Young Turks create unrest, turmoil, and bolster the paid Serbian assassin, Gavrilo Princip, which leads to World War I.

1915: The Armenian Holocaust engineered by the ruling Jews of The Young Turks, leaves 1.5 million Armenian Christians starved, tortured, and murdered.

1918: Jew Mustafa Kemal ‘Ataturk’ ascends into leadership.

1920: Russian Jewish Bolsheviks supply Ataturk iwth 10 million gold roubles, 45,000 rifles, and 300 machine guns with ammunition.

1921: Ataturk occupies the Port of Baku in conjunction with the Russian Jewish Bolsheviks ceding it to the Bolsheviks five days later. The Rothschilds are delighted.

1922: Jewish Kemalists orchestrate the burning of Smyrna resulting in the ‘ethnic cleansing’ of over 100,000 Armenian and Greek Christians left tortured, starved, raped, and dead.

THE BRITISH AMBASSADOR TO THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE SIR GERALD LOWTHER’S LETTER TO SIR CHARLES HARDING, May 29, 1910

— “Shortly after the revolution in July 1908, it soon became known that many of the Young Turks’ leading members were Freemasons. It was noticed that Jews of all colours, native and foreign, were enthusiastic supporters of the new dispensation, till, as many Turks expressed it, every Hebrew became a potential spy of the Young Turks. Turks began to remark that the movement was rather a Jewish than a Turkish Revolution.” —

JEWISH MURDERERS KNOWN AS THE YOUNG TURKS

1. Emmanuel Carraso: B’nai B’rith Official of Italian origin. Grand Master of the Macedonia Resurrected Masonic Lodge in Salonika; Established the ’secret’ Committee of Union & Progress in Salonika in 1890.

2. Tallaat Pasha (1874-1921): Thought to be a Turk but in reality a “Donmeh Jew.” Interior Minister of Turkey during World War I; Member of Carasso’s Masonic lodge and Grand Master of the Scottish Rite Masons in Turkey; Chief architect of the Armenian Holocaust and Director of Deportations. He wrote, “By continuing the deportation of the Armenians to their destinations during the intense cold we are ensuring their eternal rest.”

3. Djavid Bey: “Donmeh Jew.” Talaat’s Finance Minister; Arranged the finances of revolution in Turkey with the Rothschilds; Later assassinated by Ataturk as a perceived rival.

4. Messim Russo: Assistant to Djavid Bey.

5. Refik Bey, AKA Refik Saydam Bey: Editor of Young Turk newspaper Revolutionary Press; Became Prime Minister of Turkey in 1939.

6. Emanuel Qrasow: Jewish propagandist for The Young Turks. Headed the delegation to inform Sultan Abdul Hamid II that “the nation has removed you from your office.”

7. Vladimir Jabotinsky: Russian Zionist who moved to Turkey in 1908. Supported by B’nai Brith of London and Dutch Zionist millionaire, Jacob Kann; Editor of Young Turk newspaper. Later started the terrorist Irgun political party in Israel.

8. Alexander Helphand, AKA Parvus: Financier/liaison of the Rothschilds of the Young Turk revolution; Editor of The Turkish Homeland.

9. Mustafa Kemal ‘Ataturk’ (1881-1938): A Jew of Sephardic (Spanish) origin. Ataturk attended the Jewish elementary school known as Semsi Effendi School run by the Jew Simon Zvi. Over 12,000 Jews welcomed to Turkey by Ataturk in 1933 when Hitler came to power.

Sources:
Jack Manuelian, The Founding Fathers of Modern Turkey
Times of London, The Armenian Massacres
Joseph Brewda, Young Turks To Control Middle East
Christopher Jon Bjerknes, Jewish Racism
Documents, Photos, History of Armenian Massacre By The Young Turks

Jacob M Landau, The Zionist Jews who founded the idea of Turkish Nationalism; National Geographic Magazine, September 1916 issue, Saloniki; Yair Auron, The Banality Of Indifference: Zionism & the Armenian Genocide

Richard Davey, The Sultan and his Subjects; Arnold S. Leese, The Real Jew-A Lesson From Turkey; Grant Richards, The Cause of The World’s Unrest; Dr. H. Stuermer, Two War Years in Constantinople; Andrew Mango, Ataturk; Clifford Shack, The Armenian & Jewish Genocide Project that Eliminated the Ethnic Conflict; Joseph Hantman,The Turkish-Israeli Connection and Its Jewish Roots; Hillel Halkin, Ataturk’s Turkey Overturned; Carroll Quigley, Tragedy & Hope

Is G3 possible?

There is a lot of posturing going on. Russia’s annual trade with China totals around $85 billion with exports and imports. However, that is nothing compared to China’s dependence on trade with the US.

China’s annual trade with the US is around $600 billion and the US trade deficit with China, its main trading partner, is about $350 billion, give or take about $25 billion. The US trade deficit with the EU is around $147 billion, out of some close to $700 billion trade, which is another significant amount. The US trade deficit with Canada, its third largest trading partner, depending on the source of the information, is no more than about $12 billion and is likely much lower. China is counting on a more independent economic future but is not likely to rock the boat too much with the US at this time, even for Russia, despite the fact that Russia is a key nation for resources and a reliable land link to Europe.

With his tariffs, sanctions and his warmongering cabinet, Trump has lost the US business cool. He has succeeded in making his nation look desperate to end foreign trade deficits and to end other nations abandoning the use of US petrodollars.

The US is in fact still the richest and most powerful nation. It has the military high ground and is dominant, but it is economically wounded and some time ago it lost the moral high ground and a great deal of international trust. Unless it starts another war at this time, which it cannot afford, it is most likely that the EU, Russia, China and most other nations will just wait around enduring the tariffs and sanctions and let the US just bleed itself out. This is a pretty bleak forecast and I sincerely hope I am wrong and that there are more positive options for everyone.