We’re witnessing the complete dominance of the Cosmopolitan Bourgeois Dictatorship by the neocons in the USA and the fifth columnists in the European Union
This CIA created fascist beast has now paid dividends as Germany is defeated for third time in a century by the United States.
The US was incensed about the Nordstream 2 pipeline which was completed this year and needed a war in Ukraine to ensure no oil was sent down that pipeline. Ns2 was initiated by the Germans – it was not the Russians that proposed the project as is so oft repeated in the Mainstream Press and by lying stenographers for the MSM.
The Ukraine war therefore was directed squarely at Germany – the Ukrainians are but “collateral damage” in Natos domination of Europe, in destroying European (particularly German) industry and severing energy links to Europe.
Freeze In Your Homes To “Play Your Part”
The understanding that the European Union is a foreign entity for Anlo-American interest should come as no surprise therefore as to why the EU demands europeans impoverish themselves.
The EU has released a 9 point plan in how they can be more impoverished
The nine-point plan, entitled “Playing My Part”, urges citizens to drive less, by using public transport, or working from home three days a week.
It also calls on citizens to:
Heat their homes less in winter, and turn the air conditioning down in summer.
Drive more slowly on highways, with the car air conditioning turned down, which uses less fuel
Use the train instead of flying
Travel by public transport, walk, or cycle
Dressed up in a full little way does not show the sinister meaning behind the lack of Russian gas and oil in Europe. The EU cannot replace Russian gas and oil. People will freeze in their homes because of this. Even Britain is discussing managing rolling blackouts next winter.
Ultimately Europe desperately needs Russian energy. The Europeans will be forced into abandoning their anti-Russian stance when the public finally understands they cannot heat their homes with “I Stand With Ukraine” stickers.
The European Union Was the CIA Created Political Front To Give The Veneer Of Respectability: Operation Gladio Was The Nato Shadow War Against Their Own People To Ensure They Backed It
The European Union was created publicly by the CIA and lobbied by the American bourgeois to form itself into a coherent political structure to advance US interest inside Europe. This was the carrot.
The stick was Operation Gladio.
Operation Gladio was a Europe wide Nato operation to commit terror attacks against European citizens. The 1980 Bologna bombing was committed by Operation Gladio (ie. Cia/Mi6 and whatever degenerate rightists they could convince and arm to kill innocent people).
The Brabant Massacre of 1982-1985 were a series of murders committed by Operation Gladio.
The Italian Peteano bombing: a suicide bomb attack which lured 3 carabinieri to their deaths with a booby trapped car bomb. The cover up of this murder – and its later uncovering by Italian judge Felice Casson was a major event in the exposure of Operation Gladio.
The Piazzo Fontana bombing which mass murdered 17 people and injured some 88 more was another act of terrorism perpetrated by the Nato backed groups to try to prevent the electoral success of the Communist Party.
These attacks were to be blamed on the left wing: communists and socialists. By having innocent people being blown up by right wing radicals (but the public believing it was done by reds) created a “strategy of tension”. In which the public were pushed away from voting for or supporting communists into retreating into the arms of the State and conservative politics.
“Freedom” is as nebulous a term for them to use. Afterall they acted against the freedom and democratic interests of their own people. You may as well replace “Freedom” with “the paedophile elite of Anglo-American Finance capital”.
“There most certainly is evidence that quite a bit of child abuse takes place at the highest level of society and that people in this milieu for the most part care little about this problem. Also, there have been very demonstrable ties between the royal house of Orange, Klaas Bruinsma-Etienne Urka-John Engelsma-Charles Geerts Maffia and Intelligence & Operations. This last group was the Dutch brand of CIA Operation Gladio/”Stay Behind” network. These ties have to be investigated much deeper, because it appears that it’s from this milieu that a lot of manipulation of the Dutch state has taken place, seemingly including paedophile entrapment operations.Joël van der Reijden (October 2014)
The Epstein revelations that he “belonged to intelligence” therefore should be understood that the CIA and Mi6 have been running entrapment paedophile rings for decades. 4
The Ukrainian Crisis Was Deliberately Orchsestrated By The Anglo-Americans
PLA strategist Qiao Liang, notorious author of “Unrestricted Warfare”, outlined how the Americans use the dollar to export inflation all across the world.
The U.S. avoided high inflation by letting the dollar circulate globally. It also needs to restrain the printing of dollars to avoid a dollar devaluation. Then what should it do when it runs out of dollars?
The Americans came up with a solution: issuing debt to bring the dollar back to the U.S. The Americans started to play a game of printing money with one hand and borrowing money with the other hand. Printing money can make money. Borrowing money can also make money. This financial economy (using money to make money) is much easier than the real (industry-based) economy. Why will it bother with manufacturing industries that have only low value-adding capabilities?5
He then describes the process in which the US exports inflation via it’s dollars, then causes a crises to see a return of investment of dollars back into the USA.
In 1979, after flooding the world with U.S. dollars for nearly 10 years, the Americans decided to reverse the process. The U.S. dollar index started climbing in 1979. Dollars flew back to the U.S. and other regions received fewer dollars. Latin America’s economy boomed due to an ample supply of dollar investment, but this suddenly stopped as its investments dried up.
The Latin American countries tried to save themselves.
Argentina, which once had its per capita GDP among the ranks of the developed countries, was then the first to drop into a recession. Unfortunately, then Argentine President Galtieri, who came to power through a military coup, chose to use a war to solve the problem. He turned his eyes toward the Malvinas Islands (which the British called the Falkland Islands), which are 400 miles away from Argentina. These islands had been under British rule for over 100 years. Galtieri decided to take them back.
Of course, he couldn’t take on a war without the U.S.’s blessing. He sent an intermediary to inquire about the U.S.’s opinion. U.S. President Reagan answered it lightly: it was between you and the U.K.; the U.S. had no position and would stay neutral. Galtieri took it as acquiescence by the U.S. He started the war and took over the islands with ease. The Argentinians were crazy.
However, then U.K. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher claimed that they would absolutely not accept it and forced the U.S. to speak out. Reagan tore off his neutral mask, issuing a statement to blame Argentina for the invasion and to stand by the U.K. The British dispatched a task force with an aircraft carrier, travelling 8,000 miles, to take the Malvinas Islands back.
At the same time, the U.S. dollar appreciated and international capital flew back to the U.S. just as the U.S. wished. When the Malvinas Islands War started, investors around the world concluded that a regional crisis had started in Latin America and the Latin American investment environment would deteriorate. So investors withdrew their capital from there. The Federal Reserve, at the same time, announced an increase in interest rates, which further accelerated the withdrawal of capital from Latin America.
The Latin American economy dropped to the bottom. The capital leaving there went to the U.S.’s three big markets. It gave the U.S. the first bull market since the dollar had been unpegged from gold. The U.S. dollar index jumped from 60 to 120, a 100 percent increase.
The Americans didn’t stop after making big money from their bull market. Some took the money they just made and went back to Latin America to buy the good assets whose prices had just fallen to the ground. The U.S. harvested handsomely from Latin America’s economy.
If this had happened only once, it could be argued as a small probability event. As it has occurred repeatedly, it indicates an intended pattern.
In 1986, after the first “ten years of a weak U.S. dollar following six years of a strong dollar,” the U.S. dollar index started to decline again. Ten years later, in 1997, the dollar index started climbing. This time, the strong dollar also lasted for six years.
During the second ten-year weak U.S. dollar cycle, U.S. dollars went mainly to Asia. What was the hottest investment concept in 1980s? It was the “Asian Tigers.” Many people thought it was due to Asians’ hard work and how smart they were. Actually the big reason was the ample investment of U.S. dollars.
When the Asian economy started to prosper, the Americans felt it was time to harvest. Thus, in 1997, after ten years of a weak dollar, the Americans reduced the money supply to Asia and created a strong dollar. Many Asian companies and industries faced an insufficient money supply. The area showed signs of being on the verge of a recession and a financial crisis.
A last straw was needed to break the camel’s back. What was that straw? It was a regional crisis. Should there be a war like the Argentines had? Not necessarily. War is not the only way to create a regional crisis.
Thus we saw that a financial investor called “Soros” took his Quantum Fund, as well as over one hundred other hedge funds in the world, and started a wolf attack on Asia’s weakest economy, Thailand. They attacked Thailand’s currency Thai Baht for a week. This created the Baht crisis. Then it spread south to Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, and the Philippines. Then it moved north to Taiwan, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, and even Russia. Thus the East Asia financial crisis fully exploded.
The camel fell to the ground. The world’s investors concluded that the Asian investment environment had gone south and withdrew their money. The U.S. Federal Reserve promptly blew the horn and increased the dollar’s interest rate. The capital coming out of Asia flew to the U.S.’s three big markets, creating the second big bull market in the U.S.
When the Americans made ample money, they followed the same approach they did in Latin America: they took the money that they made from the Asian financial crisis back to Asia to buy Asia’s good assets which, by then, were at their bottom price. The Asian economy had no capacity to fight back.
The only lucky survivor in this crisis was China.
C. Now, It Is Time to Harvest China
It was as precise as the tide; the U.S. dollar was strong for six years. Then, in 2002, it started getting weak. Following the same pattern, it stayed weak for ten years. In 2012, the Americans started to prepare to make it strong. They used the same approach: create a regional crisis for other people.
Therefore, we saw that several events happened in relation to China: the Cheonan sinking event, the dispute over the Senkaku Islands (Diaoyu Islands in Chinese), and the dispute over Scarborough Shoal (the Huangyan Island in Chinese). All these happened during this period. The conflict between China and the Philippians over Huangyan Island and the conflict between China and Japan over the Diaoyu Islands, might not appear to have much to do with the U.S. dollar index, but was it really that case? Why did it happen exactly in the tenth year of the U.S. dollar being weak?
Unfortunately, the U.S. played with too much fire [in its own mortgage market] earlier and got itself into a financial crisis in 2008. This delayed the timing of the U.S. dollar’s hike a bit.
If we acknowledge that there is a U.S. dollar index cycle and the Americans use this cycle to harvest from other countries, then we can conclude that it was time for the Americans to harvest China. Why? Because China had obtained the largest amount of investment from the world. The size of China’s economy was no longer the size of a single county; it was even bigger than the whole of Latin America and about the same size as East Asia’s economy.
Since the Diaoyu Islands conflict and the Huangyan Island conflict, incidents have kept popping up around China, including the confrontation over China’s 981 oil rigs with Vietnam and Hong Kong’s “Occupy Central” event. Can they still be viewed as simply accidental?
I accompanied General Liu Yazhou, the Political Commissar of the National Defense University, to visit Hong Kong in May 2014. At that time, we heard that the “Occupy Central” movement was being planned and could take place by end of the month. However, it didn’t happen in May, June, July, or August.
What happened? What were they waiting for?
Let’s look at another time table: the U.S. Federal Reserve’s exit from the Quantitative Easing (QE) policy. The U.S. said it would stop QE at the beginning of 2014. But it stayed with the QE policy in April, May, June, July, and August. As long as it was in QE, it kept overprinting dollars and the dollar‘s price couldn’t go up. Thus, Hong Kong’s “Occupy Central” should not happen either.
At the end of September, the Federal Reserve announced the U.S. would exist from QE. The dollar started going up. Then Hong Kong’s “Occupy Central” broke out in early October.
Actually, the Diaoyu Islands, Huangyan Island, the 981 rigs, and Hong Kong’s “Occupy Central” movement were all bombs. The successful explosion of any one of them would lead to a regional crisis or a worsened investment environment around China. That would force the withdrawal of a large amount of investment from this region, which would then return to the U.S.
Unfortunately, this time the American’s opponent was China. China used “Tai chi” movements to cool down each crisis. As of today, the last straw to break the camel’s back has yet to occur and the Camel is still standing.
The camel didn’t break. Therefore, the Federal Reserve couldn’t blow its horn to increase the interest rate, either. The Americans realized that it was hard for them to harvest China, so they looked for an alternative.
Where else did they target? Ukraine, the connection between the EU and Russia. Of course there were some problems under Ukraine President Yanukovych’s administration, but the reason that the Americans picked it was not simply because of his problem. They had three goals: teach a lesson to Yanukovych who didn’t listen to the U.S., prevent the EU from getting too close to Russia, and create a bad investment environment in Europe.
Thus, a “color revolution,” took place, which the Ukrainians themselves appeared to have led. The U.S. achieved its goal unexpectedly: Russian President Putin took over Crimea. Though the Americans did not plan it, it gave the Americans better reasons to pressure the EU and Japan to join the U.S. in sanctioning Russia, adding more pressure to the EU’s economy.
Why did the Americans do this? People tend to analyze it from the geo-political angle, but rarely the capital angle. After the Ukraine crisis, statistics showed over US$1 trillion in capital left Europe. The U.S. got what it wanted: if it couldn’t get dollars out of China, it would get dollars out of Europe.
However, the next step didn’t occur as the Americans planned. The capital out of Europe didn’t go to the U.S. Instead, it went to Hong Kong.
Qiao Liang is correct in describing this process. However this time (Qiao was writing in 2015) has seen an outflux of capital back into the United States. The sanctions of “genocide against the Uyghurs”(fraudulent Western propaganda), the Chinese retaking of Hong Kong with the National Security act (effectively ending the fifth column in hong Kong) and the sanctions on Russia have ensured the capital can only flow to the USA.
In this sense the USA has sought a consolation prize if it cannot conquer Ukraine and install more military bases and biolabs on the border of Russia. It’ll settle for the consolation prize of removing European industry from the world market (plunging Europe into poverty and economic/political and cultural backwardness).
Whilst a small victory for the United States this action will end the Bretton Woods II system initiated under Nixon and the European Union may well still be around in a few years. But it’s relevance will be nil.
The United States is about to find out that it’s economy built on Finance, Accounting and real Estate is not real.
That is: creative Accounting, Money laundering and property speculation.
The US and Europe are going to find out you can’t print wheat, gas, oil or heavy metals like they can their currency.
A brief request
If you can donate to pay for hosting of this website and contribution to my writing you can do so at my bitcoin address here. bc1qk95pshylvqdxukd2m63534lqqmehme5vxpa93a
As this newspaper first reported when the treasure became available, one memorandum dated July 26, 1950, reveals a campaign to promote a full-fledged European parliament. It is signed by Gen William J Donovan, head of the American wartime Office of Strategic Services, precursor of the Central Inteligence Agency.
The key CIA front was the American Committee for a United Europe (ACUE), chaired by Donovan. Another document shows that it provided 53.5 per cent of the European movement’s funds in 1958. The board included Walter Bedell Smith and Allen Dulles, CIA directors in the Fifties, and a caste of ex-OSS officials who moved in and out of the CIA.
The Telegraph, The European Union always was a CIA project, as Brexiteers discover, Apr 2016
The emerging European Economic Community (EEC) and the growing Western intelligence community overlapped to a considerable degree. This is underlined by the creation of the Bilderberg Group, an informal and secretive transatlantic council of key decision-makers [representatives of the billionaires who controlled U.S. and U.S.-allied international corporations]. Bilderberg was founded by Joseph Retinger and Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands in 1952 in response to the rise of anti-Americanism in Europe. … Retinger secured support from Averell Harriman, David Rockefeller and Walter Bedell Smith. The formation of the American wing of Bilderberg was entrusted to Eisenhower’s psychological warfare chief, C.D. Jackson, and the funding for the first meeting, held at the Hotel de Bilderberg in Holland in 1954, was provided by the CIA.
Richard J aldrich, The Hidden Hand, p.366
- Eric Zuesse, How the Cia Created the EU , Nov 2020
In an article for The Daily Beast, investigative journalist Vicky Ward quotes a former senior White House official, in turn quoting Acosta’s response to questions about Epstein during his interview with President Donald Trump’s transition team:
“I was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and to leave it alone.”
CounterPunch, Did Jeffrey Epstein “Belong to Intelligence?”, July 2019
- Qiao Liang, PLA Strategist: The U.S. Uses Its Dollar to Dominate the World, Sept 2015