Tuesday, December 31, 2013


In response to the terrorist attacks in Volgograd, Vladimir Putin has vowed to eliminate terrorists.
“We’ll lead a confident, tough and consistent battle against the terrorists until their full elimination,” the President promised.

[source : 'Fight terrorists until full elimination': Putin changes New Year address after Volgograd terror attacks, Russia Today, http://rt.com/news/putin-address-volgograd-terrorism-035/, 31st December 2013]

So, hands up if you support Putin and Assad as they crush/annihilate/eliminate/destroy the Islamic extremist terrorists.

My right hand is up.

I can't see yours William.

Or yours David.



Tut. Benjamin. Your hand is not raised too.

You all disappoint me...and I assume most of the rest of the world.


Kaiser Wilhelm's memoirs. Announcements in media before his assassination that Arch Duke Ferdinand had been condemned to death by Freemasonry, and was going to be assassinated by Freemasonry. Ferdinand was aware of this condemnation. At their trial the assassins admitted to knowing that Freemasonry had condemned Arch Duke Ferdinand to death, that they were Freemasons themselves, and had received weapons and assistance from Freemasons abroad.

Slam dunk or what?

Freemasonic conspiracy or what?

And some academic prat recently gave a speech at The Marsten House entitled The July 1914 Crisis which was repeated on the BBC Parliament channel.


One thing we learned in 2013 is that President Obama is not the Zionist gimp some took him to be.

Obama is not supposed to be in The White House. His Nobel Peace Prize is a burden to the warmongers who are seriously behind schedule in their plan for war on seven nations in five years. Romney would have bombed Syria and Iran by now.

Throughout 2013 Obama was placed under immense pressure to bomb Syria, from being implicated in a series of scandals, to personal visits from leading warmongers like Cameron and Erdogan, to being led to believe that Assad had crossed his red line on a number of occasions, particularly at Ghouta, to frequent editorials in The Bilderberg Washington Post. But each time Obama refused. Even after the international outrage after Ghouta.

No war on Syria.

No war on Iran.

And the result?

The Zios declared war on Obama through a video questioning his competence over Syria and Iran which cited the possibly sabotaged roll-out of Obamacare. The video was released by The Emergency Committee for Israel, which was founded and run by William Kristol, who founded and ran...The Project for a New American Century.

Since then there has also been a growing expose of Saudi Arabia's role in 9/11. Was this an attack on Bandar for trying to trick the USA into war on Syria at Ghouta? And Seymour Hersh's article asked the question why Obama did a 180 over Ghouta, implying that Obama realised he had been lied to.

Following the incident at Benghazi in 2012 there was a series of scandals, which resulted in the DCI David Petraeus resigning.

The winner of the much coveted Truth Serum Report of the Year 2012 was published by Press TV, and stated:
Some of the same high-level sources who point to Richard Clarke as the US boss of the Israeli-instigated 9/11 false flag operation also claim that President Obama, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Dempsey, and other powerful Americans are considering exposing the truth about 9/11 during a second Obama term. In other words, Obama's re-election could put Israel out of business, and get Netanyahu hanged from the nearest lamp-post.

[source : Israel seeks war on Iran to keep lid on 9/11, PressTV, http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/09/20/262683/israel-seeks-iran-war-to-keep-lid-on-911/, 21st September 2012]

I think in 2014 we will see something that will seriously question if not outright expose the whole 9/11 fairytale.

Fingers crossed...


2013 was The Year of the Hoax.

Hoaxes in Syria: There were many hoaxes in Syria, initially blamed on the Syrian Arab Army which were subsequently found to have been committed by Bandar's cutthroats, and any massacre committed by the Syrian Arab Army was of Bandar's cutthroats, for which we should all be truly thankful. It was alleged that the Syrian Arab Army had used chemical weapons at Khan al Assal and at Ghouta. But at Khan al Assal the rebels used the weapons, it was proved by Russia to the UN, so the cutthroats went back in and slaughtered every living thing so there was nobody left alive to testify to the UN. And at Ghouta the outrageous insult to logic was made that the Syrian Arab Army had used chemical weapons to kill approximately 1000 civilians. Why the SAA would commit this insanity was rarely asked. But only Bandar's cutthroats stood to gain from this horrific tragedy, in a desperate attempt to provoke a large scale military intervention to save their condemned necks. They faced total annihilation since the fall of al Qusair in June, which is why Bandar visited Putin personally and Bandar, bless his sweet Jihadi heart, issued his truly evil and disgusting threats to create hell on earth in Syria. The NATO media played their part in this global hoax by not once considering the cutthroats as culprits, despite an abundance of evidence that the cutthroats possessed chemical weapons, had been arrested with kilograms of chemical weapons, had videoed their experiments with chemical weapons on live animals, and had issued threats on video of using chemical weapons.

Hoax in London : Lee Rigby was hacked to death by two Islamic extremists in broad daylight in Woolwich. Some tried to claim that it was all a hoax, with cameras, ketchup and props, perhaps to distract from the fact that the prime butcher was a known Islamic extremist who was allowed to preach Jihad against Assad on the streets of Woolwich while under surveillance from, and being harassed to become an agent for, MI5.

Hoaxes in the media : almost immediately after al Qusair was recaptured by the Syrian Arab Army allegations began to surface of a massive spying operation against everybody, but primarily implicating President Obama personally reading all our emails and texts and personally listening into all our phone calls. But such a program was already known about for years and previous whistleblowers had been ignored. But within days of these allegations, Obama, who had been under massive international pressure and was reluctant to accuse Assad of crossing a red line of using chemical weapons, changed his mind and agreed that the red line had been crossed, despite the evidence being flimsy at best. But there is something not right about the whistleblowers: in the space of over 6 months they have only published 1% of what they have, but they, from their new found fame, are soon to start a new media venture with lots of money provided by a billionaire, and they have also teamed up with another 'journalist' who made a film called Dirty Wars but took it upon himself to launch his own personal but very public dirty war against a nun from Syria who provided evidence that the aforementioned tragedy at Ghouta was a false flag psyop using children who had been kidnapped previously from Lattakia. These are not the actions of genuine whistleblowers and journalists, particularly when the conduit of their allegations is a bona fide member of the NATO media which loves the man that Russia loves to hate, the convicted embezzler and Rothschild asset Mikhail Khordokovsky.

There are other hoaxes but I won't go into them here.


Over a period of less than 24 hours the Southern Russian city of Volgograd suffered two terrorist attacks. And just a few days previous there was another terrorist attack in a town much closer to Sochi. In total nearly 40 Russian civilians died. Yet the NATO media, in the UK at least, is more concerned about the fate of a very wealthy F1 racing driver who had a skiing accident.


During the summer Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the intelligence chief of that utopia of freedom, democracy and human rights, The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, threatened Vladimir Putin that if Russia didn't dump Assad then Bandar would unleash Islamic terrorists onto the Sochi Winter Olympics. Other threats were also issued which have occured.

Bandar ran the 9/11 hijackers.

And Bandar is running the cutthroats in Syria. The cutthroats are in Syria because by 2007 a plan for war on seven nations in five years, as revealed to General Wesley Clark shortly after the inside job 9/11, was moribund. The nations named to Clark were Iraq, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, and Libya, Sudan and Somalia. This plan was kicked off and agreed before 9/11. But by 2007 only two of these nations had been attacked; Iraq was invaded in 2003, and Israel attacked Hezbollah in 2006 but lost. So in 2007 an agreement between the USA, Israel and Saudi Arabia was reached that the latter would unleash the nastiest cutthroat Jihadis onto those nations that had not yet been attacked. The first to suffer these Jihadis was Libya. After Libya the Jihadis went to Syria. Former French foreign minister Roland Dumas was asked by Great Britain to help them smuggle the Jihadis into Syria.

But for decades Great Britain has been the HQ of Islamic terrorists. London has been known as Londonistan for decades. There was a Covenant of Security between the Islamic terrorists and MI5 in which the terrorists could operate out of London as long as they served British interests. This is why very little was done about places like Finsbury Park Mosque and their preachers of hate. When a MI5 agent Reda Hassaine infiltrated the terrorists he was betrayed by MI5! And Lee Rigby was butchered by an extremist Michael Adebalajo who was under surveillance and being hounded to become a MI5 agent but was allowed to preach on the streets of London that Muslims should go to Syria to join the Jihad against Assad.

This is the background to the current NATO media love fest for Michael Schumacher while nearly 40 Russians were blown up by Islamic terrorists.

The Russian Foreign Ministry is not happy.
“The position of some politicians and political strategists, who are still trying to divide terrorists as ‘good’ and ‘bad’ ones, depending on current geopolitical aims, is becoming evidently mischievous,” the ministry stressed. “Terrorism is always a crime and the punishment for it must be inevitable.”

Russia has urged the international community to show “united condemnation of terrorism and genuine international solidarity in opposition to it and the ideology of violence and extremism, on which it feeds.”

[source : Volgograd blasts follow same template as US, Syrian, Afghan attacks – Russia, Russia Today, http://rt.com/politics/volgograd-terror-foreign-ministry-993/, 30th December 2013]

And the people are not happy with the Prince of Jihad, Bandar bin Sultan One commenter wrote:
Bandar needs to make his will, as soon as Sochi is over Putin will send the saud/wahabi royalty back to the days of cleaning their backsides with desert sand. It must be remembered that these are not acts of small time footsoldiers (paid by saudi money with houses for their surviving relatives), there are strategic evil masterminds orchestrating all this.

At the time of writing Jihadi Hague has not expressed any condolences on his personal Twitter account, though he has posted a photograph of the sun on The London Eye. And there is nothing either on the FCO Twitter from Hague, but there is something from the FCO Minister for Europe David Lidington. The British Embassy to Russia simply carries the condemnation from Lidington.

Contrast that with these responses to the terrorist attacks from embassies and politicians.

So read into that what you will.

Monday, December 30, 2013


In the end there was no contest.

The winner of the much coveted Truth Serum Report of the Year 2013 is...

Bandar Planning New "Blair Up" in Syria and Lebanon, which was published by LPAC at http://larouchepac.com/node/27735 on 13th August.

Several news outlets reported the threat issued by Prince Bandar bin Sultan to Vladimir Putin to dump Assad or suffer terrorism in Sochi.

But this report went a bit further and deeper.

The information in that report which astounded me was:
...Citing a diplomatic source she said was from the "BRICS" nations, most likely Russia, she said Bandar told his interlocutors, as she put it, that "the decline of the Muslim Brotherhood throughout the region as a whole, from Tunisia to Egypt, via Qatar and even in Turkey, weighs in favor of Saudi Arabia which now has taken control of the principal cases."

...Because of the failure of his "diplomatic" offensive, the "BRICS" diplomat says that Bandar will now launch an offensive against Syria, aimed at finally removing Bashar al-Assad from power. Bandar apparently announced that results would be visible on the ground in the coming months and has decided to create a new balance of power in Syria in favor of the opposition that would compel Russia and its allies to give up Assad in the context of international negotiations. At the same time, Bandar intends to create great difficulty for Iraq and the Hezbollah, which are in the process of aiding Assad. In Lebanon, Bandar instructed thus his allies — Hariri, Jumblatt, Geagea — to block any possibility for the Hezbollah and Aoun's party, the March 8th Coalition, to come to power again, and for them to gain once again a blocking minority.

Sources in Lebanon close to General Aoun fully confirmed this black scenario, that Bandar will try a full onslaught to eliminate Bashar al-Assad, in the course of September and October. "Times ahead will be terrible," he said, "the West has opted for a strategy of chaos and destruction of the entire area." He also noted the hideous massacres which occurred in the last days in the Latakia governorate — Abu Makka and Obin — where gangs of jihadists executed whole families and in the case of Obin exterminated a whole village.

Saudi Arabia paid General al Sisi to oust Morsi, and now The Muslim Brotherhood has been banned as a terrorist organisation.

But the most important sections of this report relate to Lebanon and Syria.

Lebanon had been relatively stable, but within days of this report there was an attack on the HQ of Hezbollah in Beirut. Hezbollah has been fighting in Syria alongside the Syrian Arab Army against Bandar's cutthroats. Terrorism in Lebanon has risen significantly since then.

And on 21st August it was reported that Assad had used chemical weapons against his own people and killed approximately 1000 Syrian civilians in Ghouta.

But, cui bono?

I ask again, cui bono?

The only beneficiary from such madness would be Bandar's cutthroats, who since the Syrian Arab Army recaptured al Qusair, faced and were experiencing total annihilation. They needed large scale military action on Syria to avoid their imminent defeat. This loss of al Qusair prompted Jack In A Box Ed Snowden to shout that Obama was personally reading all our emails and texts, and personally listening into all our phone calls. The NATO media went into overdrive and accused Assad of being the only entity to have chemical weapons to kill on such a scale. But initial estimates of the number of dead were vastly inflated (well, we are talking about the lying NATO media), and reports of the rebels possessing, testing and threatening to use chemical weapons were completely ignored.

Putin has been credited with being Person of the Year, but Ed Miliband comes an extremely close second, if there is any air between them, because without Miliband rejecting Cameron's sociopathic rush to war Putin would not have had the opportunity to avert an attack on Syria and a highly probable WW3.

This LPAC report explains a lot. Upon reading this report I immediately wrote "WE CAN STOP THE COMING SLAUGHTER IN SYRIA" on this blog, recognising its superior importance, asking that we write to our MPs to warn them of what was coming to Syria courtesy of Prince Bandar bin Sultan.
We must write to our MPs referring them to this report on Bandar unleashing hell on earth in Syria because Putin rejected the bribe from Bandar of billions for a massive purchase of Russian weapons by Saudi Arabia. But we must also refer to everything that this blog has repeated time and time again regarding A Clean Break, Rebuilding America's Defenses, 9/11, General Wesley Clark, The Redirection and The Arab Spring as cover for the NATO proxy cutthroat Jihadi terrorist scum.

[source : WE CAN STOP THE COMING SLAUGHTER IN SYRIA, The Truth Serum, http://thetruthserumblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/we-can-stop-coming-slaughter-in-syria.html, 15th August 2013]

I tried.

But on 21st August Bandar created the hell on earth in Syria at Ghouta that he had promised Putin which was suggested in the report.

The Truth Serum Report of the Year 2013 explains:
1. the escalation of terrorism in Lebanon;
2. the false flag attack of Ghouta;
3. the very recent escalation of terrorism in Russia;
4. the demise of The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.


The BBC Six O' Clock news began with a 6 minute article on Michael Schumacher. It was followed by a 2 minute piece on Volgograd. As I write the BBC News is interviewing a brain surgeon about Schumacher. The interview lasted 3 minutes. They have also been showing an interview of one of the Greenpeace 30 who was released by Russia recently, the interview lasting longer than 2 minutes.

So 30 people die in Islamic terrorist attacks in Russia, but the BBC considers a wealthy Formula 1 racing driver and an environmental protestor far more important.

This is yet more evidence that our media is controlled by NATO intelligence assets.


The Russian Foreign Ministry have hinted at who it believes is behind the recent terrorist attacks in Volgograd:
Russia's Foreign Ministry likened the Volgograd bombing to “terrorist attacks” in the US, Syria or elsewhere, organized by groups with the “same motivator”, and vowed not to retreat.

[source : Consecutive Volgograd suicide bombing kills at least 14 (PHOTOS, GRAPHIC VIDEO), Russia Today, http://rt.com/news/russia-volgograd-trolley-blast-957/, 30th December 2013]

The general suspect is al Qaeda.

But al Qaeda is controlled by:
1. MI6
2. CIA
3. KSA

And if you wanted a name then Prince Bandar bin Sultan would suffice. He threatened Putin with this and other events, which over a period of 5 months have occured.


Earlier this year Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the intelligence chief of that utopia of freedom, democracy and human rights, The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, met with Vladimir Putin. Bandar issued a threat to Putin: if Putin would dump Assad then the KSA would sign a very large deal to buy Russian weapons and Russia would be allowed to operate in The Middle East; if not, then he, Bandar, would unleash Islamic terrorists onto the Sochi Winter Olympics, and he would also create hell on earth in Lebanon and Syria.

Putin declined this lovely offer.

Since that offer was rejected Bandar has delivered on his threat: Lebanon has seen an escalation in terrorism; Syria suffered a horrific false flag at Ghouta which was blamed on Assad; and we are now seeing the Islamic terrorists being unleashed onto the Sochi Winter Olympics.

Two terrorist attacks by Islamic suicide bombers have killed tens of Russian civilians in the South Russian city of Volgograd. An earlier car attack in a town close to Sochi killed three civilians.

The NATO media is already displaying its anti Russia position.

The editorial in The Guardian blames Putin for the terrorist attacks in Volgograd, not once mentioning Prince Bandar bin Sultan's threat:
That does not mean they will not soon try to close in on Sochi itself. Mr Putin's record in combating Muslim extremism is not a good one. The invasion of Chechnya that he ordered in 1999 exacerbated and spread opposition across the Caucasus. A high price has already been paid for his and his predecessor Boris Yeltsin's mistakes in the region. Let us hope it does not rise even higher at Sochi.

[source : Terrorism in Russia: the road to Sochi, The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/29/terrorism-russia-road-sochi-editorial, 29th December 2013]

The Independent's editorial blames Russia in general, again without mentioning Bandar's threat:
Whether Russia can ever restore lasting peace in the North Caucasus is doubtful. It lacks the manpower to keep all the republics in lockdown simultaneously. Nor is the policy of periodically replacing obdurate local leaders with pliant ones effective.

In a sense, Russia is paying a delayed price for those colonial 19th-century wars – in which Tolstoy took part and wrote about – which have saddled Russia with lands that it can neither absorb nor relinquish. Regrettably, violence looks set to continue, even if not in Sochi.

[source : The Islamist threat to the Winter Games in Sochi is real, The Independent, http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/editorials/the-islamist-threat-to-the-winter-games-in-sochi-is-real-9029468.html, 30th December 2013]

This anti-Russia editorial is backed up by a long piece written by a musician(!) which is sympathetic to the Islamic terrorists by describing their plight against the Russian Empire. But again, there is no mention of Prince Bandar bin Sultan's threat to unleash Islamic terrorists onto the Sochi Winter Olympics.


Sky News is dedicating much more time to Michael Schumacher following his skiing accident than to the second terrorist attack on consecutive days in Volgograd.


Sunday, December 29, 2013


A BBC report on Aleppo states that in the last 2 weeks in Aleppo 517 people have been killed by barrel bombs dropped by the Syrian military out of helicopters.
Barrels packed with explosives and dropped from Syrian aircraft have killed 517 people in the northern province of Aleppo since 15 December, activists say.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights says 151 were children and 46 women.

The city of Aleppo has been the focus of bitter fighting between President Bashar al-Assad's forces and rebels.

[source : Barrel bombs 'kill 517 in Aleppo since 15 December', BBC, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25541726, 29th December 2013]

Can you remember what you were doing 19 months ago, May 2012?

I was living in a city in North England, doing a lot of cycling, and celebrating being awarded my PhD.

But I was also, as always, reading behind the NATO media headlines.

In May 2012 there occured yet another massacre of civilians in Syria, this time at al Houla. Activists told The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights that Shabiha had entered the village and slaughtered innocent men, women and children. NATO media willingly repeated this lie, and NATO politicians jumped on the news, particularly William Hague, who I subsequently nicknamed Hasty Hague, and demanded immediate retribution in the form of large scale military action on Syria. I didn't believe the SOHR, and slowly began to uncover what really happened. I won't go into the details here but you can search on Houla on this blog. What happened in al Houla was that cutthroats entered the village and attacked checkpoints manned by the Syrian Arab Army. The cutthroats then proceeded to massacre two large extended families who were living in remote farmhouses. These families were massacred because, despite being Sunni (like the cutthroats), they supported Assad. Men, women and children were slaughtered. To hide the crime 'activists' said that Shabiha had entered the village and done it. They lied. Their story was easily torn apart, and it made no sense whatsoever.

The SOHR has no credibility. It simply repeats the lies of cutthroats.

One wonders why Jihadi Hague hasn't mentioned Aleppo on his Twitter account.

Perhaps even he doesn't believe the SOHR anymore.

And I have yet to see a photograph or film of these barrel bombs being dropped out of a helicopter over Aleppo. For at least 2 weeks this has allegedly been going on, yet not one photograph of a barrel bomb being dropped has been provided. Photographs of the alleged aftermath, yes, but not of a helicopter or a barrel bomb being dropped out of one. Which is very strange because a helicopter is one of the noisiest machines on the planet. You would think that upon hearing the very loud approach of a helicopter at least one of the cutthroats would have their camera primed to photograph one of these bombs being dropped. But no. This logic escapes the cutthroats. Perhaps that is why they have been cutting the throats of Syrian children (with the backing of Jihadi Hague) without realising that they are actually demonically possessed and committing their evil not for Allah but for Israel.

I cannot say for certain what is happening in Aleppo, other than the brave and competent Syrian Arab Army is about to liberate it from the demonically possessed cutthroats. But I think it is a very safe bet to say that events are not occuring as the totally unreliable and discredited SOHR suggest.

UPDATE : But just after I have posted this Jihadi Hague has tweeted that he has spoken to Bonesman Kerry about Aleppo. Hmm.


When Bandar bin Sultan met Putin this summer, he didn't promise Putin a rose garden. No. Bandar promised that if Putin didn't dump Assad that he, Bandar, would unleash Islamic terrorists onto the Sochi Winter Olympics, and create hell on earth in Lebanon and Syria.

Since those lovely promises were made:
1. Lebanon has seen an escalation in terrorism, from the attack on the HQ of Hezbollah immediately after Bandar made his promise to Putin, to most recently the assassination of Mohamamd Shatah;
2. Syria saw hell on earth in a false flag attack at Ghouta, when allegedly a thousand civilians died from the use of chemical weapons which was blamed on Assad by NATO media in a vain attempt to trick us into attacking Syria to save Bandar's cutthroats from total annihilation;
3. Southern Russia has also seen a rise in terrorism, such as today in Volgograd where, at the time of writing, the death toll from a female suicide bomber is 16. A few months ago a bus was blown up by another female suicide bomber in Volgograd. Volgograd is the largest main Russian city closest to Sochi, and is also close to the Caucasus where the anti-Russian Islamic terrorists hide out. And last week a car was blown up in Pyatigorsk, which is very close to the Russia-Georgia border and within easy reach of Sochi. In other words, these terrorist attacks in Russia are in the Sochi area (remember that Russia is the largest country in the world by area).

So I repeat my international call; arrest Prince Bandar bin Sultan, before he starts WW3!

Saturday, December 28, 2013


At the end of WW2 the Nazi propaganda and intelligence network was not destroyed but was brought to work in NATO and the USA. Part of that network became Operation Mockingbird in which intelligence agents were planted into media organisations to push particular ideas and themes. The original idea was to fight the growth of Communism (which was created and controlled by Wall Street in the first place). But after the fall of Communism that propaganda network survived and continues to push the ideas and themes of the establishment, such as relentless war against everyone for this or that bogus reason.

I recently destroyed the credibility of The Guardian through an analysis of its editorials which were anti-Assad, pro-cutthroat, pro-Israel and pro-R2P war. Not every journalist at The Guardian is part of this network, but some are. As there are at The Daily Mail, The Daily Telegraph, The Independent, etc. In other words, our media is infested with intelligence agents pushing propaganda.

US Investigative Journalist Michael Hastings told an incredible story when he returned from his 2010 trip, embedded with US general Stanley McChrystal in Afghanistan. The Pentagon, he revealed in his award winning book 'The Operators', spends $4.7bn of public money annually employing 27,000 psychological operations, marketing and public relations staff around the world. Their daily mission: to push the Pentagon line into the West's national newspapers and broadcast bulletins.

Military staff working on 'Information Operations', Hastings explained in his 2011 Rolling Stone article headlined 'Another Runaway General' , are organized into cells, given specific enemy individual, social media or group targets and precise mission objectives. Hastings documented that ‘Lt. Gen. William Caldwell, and his staff' ordered Lt. Colonel Michael Holmes' I-Ops cell in Kabul not to target the enemy, but visiting US Senators.

Holmes refused to accept that senators could be US psychological warfare targets, so he took Caldwell's written order to two Judge Advocate General's (JAG) lawyers who both agreed he had been given an illegal order. Rather than being vindicated by the command though, Holmes was targeted as a troublemaker by Caldwell. So this where we are: honest, senators and law abiding US army Colonels are now the Pentagon's enemy number one.

When Michael Hastings died in a suspicious fiery Mercedes C250 crash this summer, many believed he was assassinated by a cyber-attack on his car's onboard computer. Whether or not the German car maker can tell if the car was hacked or were even complicit in the killing, Mercedes are not saying.

[source : How economic warfare killed the People's Bank, Tony Gosling, Russia Today, http://rt.com/op-edge/war-terror-economy-bank-873/, 27th December 2013]


Not Ferret Ears.

There it is - Shalamar

There it is, there it is
What took us so long to find each other, baby?
There it is, there it is
This time I'm not wrong

That I knew the answer to why people fall in love
But then I found I knew nothing about it
Till I met you, girl, I thought that I had had enough
Now I'm sure I've always been without it

And it feels so good that you and I can go together
Ooh baby, we've both found what we've been looking for
And this time I know we're gonna make it better
Our heart is a key to pump it at the door
Don't have to search no more

There it is, there it is
What took us so long, ooh, to find each other, baby?
There it is, there it is
This time I'm not wrong

In the sea of love we set our sails when waters were up
Two in search of love with no direction
Fish were biting at the time when catching wasn't enough
We couldn't make a sport of our affection

And who could change that we would sail into each other
Ooh girl, I never felt the wave of love so strong
And this love I never felt in any other
I trust it like the lighthouse guides a ship to land
I found it when you touched my hand

Ooh! There it is
What took us so long for a love so strong?
There it is, there it is
This time I'm not wrong

And it's about time
For love to find its way back home
Girl, you're mine
Now that we've found love we've got to get it on

There it is, there it is
What took us so long to find each other, baby?
There it is, there it is
This time I'm not wrong

There it is, hey, what took us so long
To find the sweet, sweet love?
There it is
This time I'm not wrong
This time I'm not wrong
We got a love that's so strong


You've got to hand it to Glenn Greenwald; he's got balls!

Throughout the summer Ed Snowden via Greenwald revealed to us the not so surprising news that we were being spied upon by our very own government agencies. That such a mass spying program called Echelon had existed for decades, was known about within the alternative media, and previous whistleblowers on this program had been ignored was, for whatever reason, not discussed. Both the NATO and alternative media were outraged. shocked. SHOCKED! All the NATO and the vast majority of the alternative media accused Obama of personally reading all our emails and texts, and listening into all our phone calls.

But look at what is happening now since the 'revelations': nobody is being prosecuted, and the spying is being deemed legal. In other words we have been normalised to this total surveillance.

But I think the most important result of these revelations was that they put so much pressure on Obama, due to the vastly inflated and personal nature of the allegations, that he finally succumbed to the relentless pressure to say that Assad had crossed Obama's 'red line', thus bringing the prospect of war on Syria that bit closer.

For the naïve, here is some background history to the jack-in-a-box Glenn Greenwald.

Obama is not supposed to be in The White House. In 2012 Bilderberg, Wall Street and Israel (same thing really) all backed Mitt Romney and his pro-war, pro-fascism, pro-Israel policies. They gave Romney ten times as much money as they did to Obama. One of their own, DCI David Petraeus, arranged to Carterise Obama at Benghazi. At a time when Obama was made to look weak and incompetent, a powerful Presidential Romney was supposed to rise up and save the nation. But Romney blew it, and Obama won. There was a series of scandals in which Petraeus resigned, but he has since been given a cushy job at KKR, who are ever present at Bilderberg.

Obama was not supposed to win because of his Nobel Peace Prize. Obama may love it, but to the warmongers who planned and executed 9/11 it is bad news. 9/11 was an inside job. Saudi Arabia supplied the patsies, and on the day Zionist agents were in control of the US military, government and media apparatus to make the military go AWOL and the American people go to sleep. Shortly after 9/11 the former head of NATO in Europe General Wesley Clark was told of a plan for war on seven nations in five years. The seven nations named to Clark were Iraq, Iran, Syria and Lebanon, and Libya, Sudan and Somalia. The first four were named in a Zionist warmongering document written in 1996 called A Clean Break. Iraq and Iran were also named in Rebuilding America’s Defenses which was written by a Zionist cabal called The Project for a New American Century which interlocked with the authors of A Clean Break. On and after 9/11 members of this cabal were in very, very, very influential positions. Although President Bush was not a member of this cabal, he was surrounded by them and their advice/lies.

We invaded Afghanistan for opium, not for bin Laden, who died around Christmas 2001. He had been suffering from Marfan Syndrome. Our ruling establishment has been running the global drug industries for centuries. The Taliban were destroying the opium crops, but within years of NATO invading Afghanistan the opium harvests were up to record levels.

So after the opium was sorted out the Zionist warmongering plan was implemented. First up was Iraq. They said Iraq was involved in 9/11. They said Iraq had WMDs. It was all lies, lies, lies.

In 2006 Israel engineered a war against Hezbollah, but lost.

So by 2007, just over five years after 9/11, the plan for war on seven nations in five years as revealed to General Wesley Clark was moribund.

To get the plan rolling again a Faustian pact was agreed between the USA, Israel and Saudi Arabia that the latter would unleash the nastiest extremist Jihadis onto those nations named to Clark that had not yet been attacked. But so NATO could give these Jihadis some kind of assistance a cover was required. That cover was The Arab Spring, which is not Arab but pure US State Department and CIA.

The first to suffer these Jihadis was Libya. British Special Forces assisted the Jihadis on the ground while NATO bombed a clear and unobstructed path for them all the way into Tripoli, killing tens of thousands of Libyan civilians in the process.

After Libya, next up was Syria. Former French foreign minister Roland Dumas was asked in 2009 by Great Britain to help them smuggle the Jihadis into Syria. The Jihadis have been slaughtering their way through Syria for nearly 3 years, massacring whole villages, cutting the throats of children and blaming it on Assad, the Syrian Arab Army and the Shabiha, using chemical weapons and blaming it on Assad, and a gullible NATO media has been willingly repeating their accusations.

But by late 2012, Assad was still in power, and no overt large scale military campaign, such as against Libya, had occurred. There had been allegations of use of chemical weapons by Assad, and that the Shabiha had slaughtered a whole village at al Houla, but despite massive international pressure Obama, in his wisdom, had refused to take overt action and attack Syria, instead issuing a warning of crossing ‘a red line’. He was supported in this decision by CJCS Dempsey.

So come the US Presidential election in 2012 you can see why the warmongering Bilderberg/Wall Street/Israel crowd wanted Nobel Peace Prize winner Obama out and pro-war pro-Israel Romney in.

Upon Obama returning to The White House, he was immediately embroiled and personally implicated in a series of minor scandals. There were loud calls for his impeachment. At the same time as these scandals there were allegations that Assad had used chemical weapons. And guess who provided the dodgy proof? ISRAEL AND THE UK!

But Obama resisted.

There was some in-your-face diplomacy from leaders such as David Cameron, Recip Erdogan and Benjamin Netanyahu, all trying to persuade Obama to attack Syria.

But still Obama resisted.

And then in June the back of the Syrian rebellion was broken when the important hub of al Qusair was recaptured by the brave and competent Syrian Arab Army.

Within days of this crucial turning point Glenn Greenwald and Ed Snowden, like a jack-in-a-box, appeared on the scene, shouting that Obama was spying on us all, and personally reading all our emails and texts, and personally listening into all our phone calls.

The calls for the impeachment of Obama were raised to a deafening level. The pressure on Obama was too much and he finally relented and decided, months after the event, that Assad had used chemical weapons and had crossed Obama’s ‘red line’, despite the source of the samples and their chain of custody not reaching internationally agreed standards.

But still Obama resisted all out war. Instead Obama announced an increase in supplies of small weapons, which a few weeks later had still not materialised.

So by July the warmongers really were getting desperate. Prince Bandar bin Sultan, suspected handler of the 9/11 patsies, visited Putin in Russia and issued an ultimatum; dump Assad and Saudi Arabia would sign a massive contract to buy Russian weapons and would allow Russia to operate in the Middle East, or he, Bandar, would unleash the Jihadis onto the Sochi Winter Olympics and create hell on earth in Lebanon and Syria. Putin declined.

A few weeks after this meeting the HQ of Hezbollah in Beirut was attacked, because Hezbollah was fighting against Bandar’s Jihadis alongside the Syrian Arab Army.

And then in late August came the horrific allegation that approximately a thousand civilians had been killed by chemical weapons in Ghouta. The NATO media immediately went into overdrive and accused Assad, saying that only Assad had the arsenal large enough for such an attack.

One surprising voice to repeat these allegations was The Guardian, which projects an image of responsibility and professionalism and humanitarianism. I destroyed the credibility of The Guardian a few weeks ago when I provided an analysis of its editorials. It consistently accused Assad of the Ghouta attack, and was pro-war for R2P. It not once addressed the question why Assad would kill a thousand of his own people, or even consider the rebels as suspects despite reports and videos of the rebels possessing and using chemical weapons. It also avoided mentioning disarming Israel of its known chemical, biological and nuclear arsenal. The Guardian had previously pushed green fascism and mass genocide at Copenhagen in 2009, and overtly supported that man so despised by the vast majority of Russia, the jailbird and Rothschild asset Mikhail Khordokovsky.

Yet despite the lies from The Guardian and all the other NATO media, a motion to go to war on Syria was narrowly defeated, thanks to Ed Miliband. This gave Obama the opportunity to duck out of attacking Syria, which Obama wisely took. So the warmongers are pissed off with Obama; no war on Syria, and possible peace with the ultimate target of all their warmongering and lies, Iran.

In response to being denied their wars, the warmongers declared war on Obama by releasing a video attacking Obama as incompetent, citing the possibly sabotaged roll-out of Obamacare and linking that to Obama’s decision not to start war on Syria and Iran. This video was released by The Emergency Committee for Israel, which was founded and run by William Kristol.

Now, which organization did Kristol found that is seriously implicated in all this warmongering? The Project for a New American Century.

The wheels of history go round and round…

But back to Greenwald.

Why did Greenwald go to the obvious NATO media asset, The Guardian?

Have the Greenwald/Snowden/Guardian circus published all the information they have? No. Apparently they have only published 1% of what they have.

Why have they not published everything?

Have they saved ‘the best’? If so, why?

And Greenwald is now teaming up with Jeremy Scahill to form a new media venture funded by the founder of eBay. Scahill has beguiled the alternative media with his film Dirty Wars, yet he launched his own personal but very public dirty war against Mother Agnes Mariam who has provided evidence that what happened at Ghouta was a planned psyop false flag involving children kidnapped from Lattakia a few weeks earlier. Scahill forced Stop The War to dump Mother Agnes Mariam.

I ask : are these the actions of a genuine media and genuine whistleblowers?

I believe not.

So to summarise:
1. before Greenwald and Snowden appeared we had known for years about Echelon, and previous whistleblowers had been ignored.
2. Obama is not supposed to be in The White House. Obama is obstructing the progress of the failing plan for war on seven nations in five years. Massive pressure was put on Obama to attack Syria, but Obama wisely refused. It was only after Greenwald produced Snowden via NATO media asset The Guardian that Obama decided that Assad had crossed Obama’s ‘red line’. But still no war on Syria.
3 Obama’s refusal to attack Syria and Putin’s refusal to dump Assad provoked Prince Bandar bin Sultan to run a false flag at Ghouta in August which nearly provoked WW3. The Guardian played its part in this anti-Assad mad rush to war by immediately blaming Assad, not once considering the rebels as culprits, and dancing with joy at Assad relinquishing his chemical weapons while not addressing Israel’s much larger, more powerful and more horrendous arsenal of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.
4. The Guardian is an obvious NATO media asset; it supported green fascism (and still does) at Copenhagen in 2009, and supported the obvious Rothschild asset and jailbird Mikhail Khordokovsky, the man so despised by the vast majority of Russia.

Yet Greenwald ran to The Guardian!!

So when I read this I laughed at the comedian jack-in-a-box Glenn Greenwald.
Journalist Glenn Greenwald condemned the mainstream media during an address at a German computer conference on Friday and accused his colleagues of failing to challenge erroneous remarks routinely made by government officials around the globe.

[source : Greenwald: US, British media are servants of security apparatus, Russia Today, http://rt.com/news/greenwald-snowden-nsa-hackers-conference-889/, 27th December 2013]

As I said; the man’s got balls!

Friday, December 27, 2013


I still scratch my head, so much that it nearly bleeds, why Justin Raimondo, editor of Antiwar.com and self-proclaimed proud Libertarian and devotee of Murray Rothbard, on the 50th anniversary of JFK's assassination attacked JFK as a warmonger and not once mentioned the assassination, the assassins or the reason for his assassination, when JFK was pulling out of Vietnam but immediately after the assassination LBJ rescinded JFK's orders, wittingly or unwittingly fell for the Gulf of Tonkin lie, and dragged the USA into a very long and unnecessary war that lasted 10 years and killed millions.

Jeff Steinberg on the JFK Assassination

Interview with "Mr.X" Col. Prouty

JFK vs. Empire, Interview with Anton Chaitkin

Kennedy’s “Grand and Global Alliance”


Ding dong merrily a spy
is reading all your emails.
He doesn’t need to tell you why
he needs to know your life’s tales.
Gloria, Hosanna in excelsis!

Everything you do is stored
and data mined later.
And don’t think that your every thought
escapes the freedom hater.
Gloria, Hosanna in excelsis!

know what you got for Christmas.
Snowden says it’s up to you:
Cure this spying sickness!
Gloria, Hosanna in excelsis!

Thursday, December 26, 2013


The two main parties opposed to the Anglo-American bankers appear to be
1. the Libertarian/Austrian school party
2. Larouche PAC

Regarding 1., I have been reading a few writings of theirs and found some very curious anomalies:
1. Justin Raimondo, editor of Antiwar, on the 50th anniversary of JFKs assassination attacked JFK as a warmonger and not once referred to his assassins. This is curious because it is blatantly obvious that after JFKs assassination the Gulf of Tonkin (non) event occured which was required to drag the USA into a long drawn out war in Vietnam, because before his murder JFK was pulling out of Vietnam.
2. Antiwar proudly state that they are Libertarian and believe in the work of Murray Rothbard of The Ludwig Von Mises Institute. One contributor to the LVMI is Thomas di Lorenzo, who has written books attacking Alexander Hamilton and Abraham Lincoln, and has praised another Libertarian writer as having the logic of Ayn Rand. Di Lorenzo has also praised John D Rockefeller in The Truth About the "Robber Barons" on mises.org. It was the Rockefellers who sponsored Hitler and world government. But Hamilton was assassinated by the bona fide traitor Aaron Burr because Hamilton exposed Burr's treason. Burr fled New York to escape prosecution and stayed with hero of the Libertarians Andrew Jackson (who later delivered the USA on a plate to the Rothschilds) to plot yet more treason, but that plot was foiled and Burr eventually escaped to England to stay with Jeremy Bentham.

Regarding 2., one criticism that the Libertarians have is of the Bank of North America and the First and Second Bank of the United States, claiming that all that these banks did was create a British-style banking class but based in the USA. I believe there is possibly something in this. The President of the Bank of North America was the not-so-revolutionary Thomas Willing. Willing was also the first President of the Bank of the United States, who appointed Baring as bankers to the United States, having appointed Baring as his personal bankers just before the revolutionary war broke out. Willing was the son of a Shippen and two of Willing's granddaughters married leading members of the Baring banking family. The LPAC historian Anton Chaitkin in Treason in America attacks both the Shippen family and Barings, yet in A Very American Irony I looked at Willing and the Shippen family and their treason against America, and in other posts throughout last summer I looked at how Baring, which Chaitkin claims was at heart of the British Empire's war against the USA, could have sunk the USA financially several times but each time acted to save the USA, even going so far as to side with and financially assist Lincoln during the British-engineered US Civil War.


Wednesday, December 25, 2013


With just one week left in 2013, I think we can say that the most memorable and significant political event of 2013 was the humiliating defeat for Der Fuhrer David Cameron in late August after the horrific and highly suspicious events of 21st August in Ghouta, Damascus, Syria.

For the first time in centuries The Marsten House voted against a motion for war.

Can You Feel The Force? - The Real Thing

Whoo oo oo ooo Can you feel the force?
Whoo oo oo ooo Can you feel the force?

There's a mood spreading round the world today
Can you feel the force?
It's with you in your work or at your play
Can you feel the force?
They're cleaning up the streets throughout the world
Can you feel the force?
Ghetto folk have had the final furl
Can you feel the force?

You can feel the pressure lifting off your head
People who make war are making love instead
This could be the dawning of another time
Hatred is a stranger we can see the sign

Whoo oo oo ooo Can you feel the force?
Can you feel the force?
Whoo oo oo ooo Can you feel the force?
Can you feel the force?

All you people with your heads on the ground
Can you feel the force?
I can feel the hope spreading all around
Can you feel the force?
I can feel a new beginning in the air
Can you feel the force?
Peace and love forming everywhere
Can you feel the force?

You can see a change in people's attitudes
Looking to the future in much brighter moods
There's a message clearly written in the sky
Time to change and soon we'll all be flying high

Whoo oo oo ooo Can you feel the force?
Can you feel the force?
Whoo oo oo ooo Can you feel the force?
Can you feel the force?


I would strongly recommend watching the four episodes of Connecting The Dots currently available on The People's Voice channel on Youtube.

Episode 1

Episode 2

Episode 3

Episode 4

The latest Episode 4 focuses on the speech given in 1969 by Dr Richard Day, a high ranking employee in the Rockefeller empire, who decided one day to tell a private audience 'the plan'. And oh how prophetic he was!

One aspect of this speech is what Day said about education. According to Day:
1. students would stay in school for longer but not learn much;
2. schools would act as a focus of the community rather than a place of learning;
3. schools would also indoctrinate students in the benefits of world government.

Regarding 1. and 2., the current Secretary for Education Michael Gove recently proposed that schools should be open for longer, both during day time and for more weeks of the year. Standards in English and Mathematics in the UK have fallen significantly as recognised by several recent reports, including the House of Lords STEM Committee last year. Employers grumble that students leaving school have an inadequate education. I heard one employer on a BBC radio phone in say that a student with grade B at GCSE Mathematics couldn't calculate 25% of 50.

But for all you teachers out there, in the USA the Rockefellers financed the General Board of Education and the National Education Association (NEA). But the Rockefellers also sponsored Hitler's eugenics research, and also ignored advice from the US government and gave him technology to increase the capability of the Wehrmacht. The Rockefellers have also sponsored the two attempts at world government; The League of Nations, and The United Nations.

In the editorial of the January 1946 edition of the NEA Journal, editor J. Elmer Morgan wrote,
"In the struggle to establish an adequate world government, the teacher... can do much to prepare the hearts and minds of children.... At the very top of all the agencies which will assure the coming of world government must stand the school, the teacher, and the organized profession."

I have written here that I know of at least one school in which the time dedicated to mathematics was slashed in order to allow study of world and european government as part of a citizenship/life skills program. I have a copy of it, and although the curriculum for this program is supposed to be unbiased, there is a very definite pro-world government bias, and this was clear in the work of students that I looked at.

World war 1 was engineered to establish a world government. But it failed. So a second world war was engineered. That succeeded in that The United Nations has survived and grown in power and influence. As has the European Union. The EU is itself a child of Bilderberg, which was established and run by...the Rockefellers.

There is also a provable link between The Bavarian Illuminati and current education practices through Wilhelm Wundt, whose grandfather was a member of that evil and banned organisation, and who was influenced by other members via Johann Herbart. Wundt's theories were imported to Yale University via members of Skull and Bones which then led to the lovers of the Nazis and world government, the Rockefellers, sponsoring John Dewey at the School of Education at their University of Chicago. Dewey would later state that he wanted a system of mathematics that was useless. He would also become Honorary President of the aforementioned NEA. This is all clearly stated in America's Secret Establishment by Antony C Sutton, and The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America by Charlotte Iserbyt Thompson.

In short, the Rockefellers supported by the Carnegies have been controlling education for decades, financing this organisation and that researcher, all with the aim of finding the perfect system of education for total social control. And if the Rockefellers are involved then it is definitely very, very bad for humanity. This speech by Rockefeller employee Dr Richard Day says it all.


This is Bandar bin Sultan.

He is implicated in handling the 9/11 hijackers.

He is also implicated in providing the cutthroat Jihadis who are slaughtering their merry way through Syria.

He has also threatened Putin with unleashing Islamic terrorists onto the Sochi Winter Olympics.

He is also believed to have organised the attacks on the Hezbollah HQ in Beirut and then the horrific events at Ghouta.

There is currently an attempt in The New York Post to expose the role of Bandar bin Sultan and Saudi Arabia in 9/11. Or is it an attempt to deflect blame for 9/11 onto Bandar alone? The Saudis didn't write A Clean Break or Rebuilding America's Defenses.

Whatever. Bandar is no Bandar Claus. He is one of many grinches who have stolen Christmas from millions and replaced it with war, homelessness and cut throats. Other grinches include:
William Jihadi Hague;
David Cameron;
Benjamin Netanyahu;

Tuesday, December 24, 2013


She was the beautiful, curvaceous, saucy, wholesome wife who cooked great food and ... (LP scratch).

Hold it!

No she wasn't.

She was, according to her aides who were found not guilty of defrauding her, a fake.

Exactly like the media who used her.




Propagating a myth based on a lie.


Finally, at long last, there was some kind of resistance shown against the Ed Snowden lovefest last week when Sibel Edmonds asked Snowden in an open letter 8 incisive questions:
  • What was your foremost intention for making the decision to obtain thousands of documents that implicated the United States government?

  • What was your foremost intention for actually taking the action following your decision, and obtaining those documents?

  • At the time, when you were obtaining the documents, did you target particular categories of implicating documents, or did you just grab everything you could?
    1. If you vetted the documents, or the specific categories of documents, beforehand, and then went about obtaining them, then why would you ask journalists to vet and make personal judgments on which ones to release or which ones to withhold permanently?
    2. If you didn’t vet the documents prior to obtaining them, and if you asked particular journalists to vet them and decide what to release and what to withhold, did you make any demands to ensure that you were part of that vetting process and that they had to have your consent?
    3. If you didn’t vet the documents prior to obtaining them, and if you asked particular journalists to vet them and decide what to release and what to withhold, did you also asked them to have meetings with U.S. and U.K. government agencies, and have those who were actually implicated in your documents call the shots on what to withhold and what to release?

  • Did you provide Glenn Greenwald with your explicit consent and authorization to make decisions on what to release and what to withhold? If so, was this in writing? If so, why and how did you make that decision?
    1. For example: Mr. Greenwald entered in a contractual agreement with a mainstream corporate publisher to withhold certain documents only to include them exclusively in his coming book in return for millions of dollars. Did you sanction this decision? Do you find this action justified and reasonable?

  • Did you provide Mr. Greenwald with your explicit consent to strike a business venture with a corporation that is a known cooperative partner of the NSA in a $250 million deal? Did you authorize Mr. Greenwald to withhold 99% of the documents and transfer their ownership to the corporate news entity owned by PayPal’s Pierre Omidyar? If yes, when and how did you provide your consent and approval? What was your reasoning for sanctioning and or authorizing this transfer of document ownership, and to withhold the vast majority of these documents from the public and its right to know?

  • Do you believe it is reasonable, justified and acceptable that the person you gave the ownership of these documents to is commoditizing and profiting from these documents that are considered classified and stolen by the United States government, yet were considered by you as evidence to which the people have the right to know about?
    1. If yes, then, do you believe that it is acceptable and correct for entities who obtain classified and incriminating government documents to market these documents as commodities, and offer them to the highest bidders, whether the bidder is the government, or a corporation, or a book publisher?
    2. If your answer to above question (a) is yes, then, do you believe you are also entitled to benefit and profit from the sale and censorship of these documents?

  • Have you made any venture deals or entered into any contract with Mr. Greenwald where you will receive a cut from the millions of dollars that are being obtained by him in return for publication and withholding certain portions of the NSA documents?
    1. If yes, when, where and how?
    2. If yes, then, does your flexibility on the sale and commoditization of stolen and classified government documents also extend to foreign government entities?

  • This appears to be the first case labeled and categorized as a whistleblowing case where a leak is being commoditized at a value of hundreds of millions of dollars by corporations such as PayPal, Book publishers and Hollywood studios. Could you provide us with your general stand, principles and values with regard to leaking and disclosing for political and profit motives?

  • [source : Mr. Snowden, It’s Time to Come Out and Take a Stand Publicly as to Your Intentions, Boiling Frogs, http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2013/12/15/mr-snowden-its-time-to-come-out-and-take-a-stand-publicly-as-to-your-intentions/, 15th December 2013]

    Well, I've just had a good look at Edmonds' website Boiling Frogs, and I assume that Snowden has not answered her questions because there does not yet appear to be a reply to Edmonds' questions on her website.

    The reason why I looked at Edmonds' Boiling Frogs website is because Ed Snowden is to give the Channel 4 Christmas Day Message this year.
    Edward Snowden, the whistleblower who prompted a worldwide debate when he leaked a cache of top secret documents about US and UK spying, has recorded a Christmas Day television message in which he calls for an end to the mass surveillance revealed by his disclosures.

    The short film was recorded for Channel 4, which has 20-year history of providing unusual but relevant figures as an alternative to the Queen's Christmas message shown by other UK broadcasters. It will be Snowden's first television appearance since arriving in Moscow.

    [source : Edward Snowden to broadcast Channel 4's alternative Christmas Day message, The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/24/edward-snowden-channel-4-christmas-day-message, 24th December 2013]

    Readers will know that I was immediately highly sceptical of Ed Snowden. The conduit of his allegations was The Guardian. I demolished the credibility of The Guardian last week with an analysis of its editorials on Syria since the horrific events at Ghouta. The Guardian detests Assad more than it detests Putin. So when The Guardian began publishing the allegations of Snowden shortly after the Syrian rebels lost the strategically important al Qusair I smelled a big fat NATO rat. This scepticism was all but proved when it was casually announced that Glenn Greenwald would be teaming up with Jeremy Scahill, who had just launched his own personal but very public dirty war against arguably the bravest woman on the planet, Mother Agnes Mariam, when he torpedoed her appearance at the Stop The War conference a few weeks ago.

    So, why would Snowden appear on Channel 4 TV to give a Christmas Day Message, but not answer in writing the perfectly legitimate and intelligent questions of Sibel Edmonds?

    Answers on a postcard please to:
    NATO Mass Psyop Department
    Kiddie Fiddling Belgium
    The World
    The Solar System
    The Milky Way
    The Universe
    The Simulation

    Monday, December 23, 2013


    Just been reading a book entitled, "Lord Milner's Second War" by John Cafferky, who does a good job in accusing The Milner Group of starting World War 1, in particular Sir Edward Grey, by either (1) not telling Germany that Great Britain would join in any war, or (2) not telling France that Great Britain would not support them. But one particular chapter completely misses the point, and although Cafferky assumes some kind of British green light to the assassination of Arch Duke Ferdinand, he also implicates Russia, but only with assumptions. On the other hand there is ample evidence that it was British Freemasonry that engineered the whole bloody saga, from start to finish and The Milner Group was just a cog in their machinery.

    5 out of 10 but good effort.


    Apparently the Syrian Arab Army has been hovering over Aleppo dropping barrel bombs onto unsuspecting civilians.

    And apparently there has been a fierce battle over a hospital being used as a military base.

    But apparently the rebels do not appear to have been able to photograph these helicopters or the barrel bombs being pushed out of them. Such photographs would be a dynamite PR victory for the rebels. But for whatever reason the only photographs we get to see in the NATO media is the alleged aftermath of one of these barrel bombs.

    Now, if the rebels had any brains (and after nearly 3 years still not realising that they are actually fighting for Israel implies that they don't) you would think that at the first sound of an approaching helicopter they would have their cameras ready to either photograph or even better film barrel bombs being pushed out of helicopters. Alas, no such photographic evidence exists. Instead, all we have are allegations from intellectually challenged and unreliable rebels being passed onto a totally discredited one man band based in Coventry.

    On the other hand, as a sick example of just how cutthrroat the rebels are, they posted photographs of their slaughter of civilians at Adra. I do not wish to propagate those images because they are horrific and degrading to humanity. But they are, or were last week, available on the internet.

    So that is my point:
    1. despite over a week of allegations that the Syrian Arab Army is dropping barrel bombs out of helicopters over Aleppo, we have not been provided with any images of this, despite helicopters announcing their approach quite loudly, thus giving the rebels plenty of time to prepare to film these alleged attacks; and such images would provide a PR victory; but they always seem to have cameras to photograph the aftermath of these attacks;
    2. the cutthroats were very eager to display their slaughter of innocent civilians at Adra, with photographs of them holding the decapitated heads of their victims.
    3. the rebels and their mouthpieces such as the MI6 SOHR have already been sussed by blaming slaughter of civilians on the Syrian Arab Army at Houla and Khan al Assal, and more importantly at Ghouta.

    Saturday, December 21, 2013


    Behind every great fortune lies a great crime - Honore de Balzac
    Mikhail Khordokovsky has been in prison for 8 years convicted of tax evasion, fraud, embezzlement and money laundering. At the time of his arrest he was one of the richest men in Russia.

    But behind every great fortune lies a great crime.

    Khordokovsky gained his fortune from Yukos. Under alcoholic Boris Yeltsin, in 1995 Khordokovsky bought Russian state oil company Yukos at a bargain basement price, the previous year having been Deputy Chairman of The Council for Industrial Policy and Privatization. Khordokovsky assisted Yeltsin's campain in 1996 which led to Khordokovsky being given access to the corridors of power and state finance.

    Somewhere along the way Khordokovsky became an asset of the Rothschilds. In 2001 Khordokovsky founded The Open Russia Foundation, with Lord Jacob Rothschild and Henry Kissinger on its board of trustees, and its official launch in Somerset House, London, a building owned by the Rothschilds. The aim of the ORF was to open up Russia to bargain basement privatization, much like what happened here with the recent scandal from the cheap sale of Royal Mail. And upon Khordokovsky's arrest in 2003 Khordokovsky tried to give his shares in Yukos to Lord Jacob Rothschild.

    The Guardian loves Khordokovsky. It has championed Khordokovsky's case, even going so far as to write an editorial under Khordokovsky's name! A few days ago I provided an analysis of The Guardian's editorials regarding Syria; to put it mildly The Guardian detests Assad, possibly more than it detests Putin.

    So to add to that analysis we now have this:
    1. nearly everyone in Russia hates Mikhail Khordokovsky because behind his great fortune lies a great crime, or in Khordokovsky's case, crimes, crimes against the Russian people, crimes for which he has been in prison for over 8 years; but The Guardian loves Mikhail Khordokovsky!
    2. Khordokovsky appears to be an asset of the Rothschilds, which would explain why the NATO media and its human rights organisations have pushed Khordokovsky's case, and why there is great celebration that such a convicted criminal has been released early.

    The world now waits for what surprises Prince Bandar bin Sultan has for Putin at the Sochi Winter Olympics... 

    Friday, December 20, 2013


    There it is - Shalamar

    There it is, there it is
    What took us so long to find each other, baby?
    There it is, there it is
    This time I'm not wrong

    But I knew the answer to why people fall in love
    But then I found I knew nothing about it
    Till I met you, girl, I thought that I had had enough
    Now I'm sure I've always been without it

    And it feels so good that you and I can go together
    Ooh baby, we've both found what we've been looking for
    And this time I know we're gonna make it better
    Our heart is a key to pump it at the door
    Don't have to search no more

    There it is, there it is
    What took us so long, ooh, to find each other, baby?
    There it is, there it is
    This time I'm not wrong

    In the sea of love we set our sails when waters were up
    Two in search of love with no direction
    Fish were biting at the time when catching wasn't enough
    We couldn't make a sport of our affection

    And who could change that we would sail into each other
    Ooh girl, I never felt the wave of love so strong
    And this love I never felt in any other
    I trust it like the lighthouse guides a ship to land
    I found it when you touched my hand

    There it is
    What took us so long for a love so strong?
    There it is, there it is
    This time I'm not wrong

    And it's about time
    For love to find its way back home
    Girl, you're mine
    Now that we've found love we've got to get it on

    There it is, baby
    There it is, this time I'm not wrong
    Got a love that's so strong

    Like the lighthouse guides a ship to land
    I found it when you touched my hand

    There it is, there it is
    What took us so long to find each other, baby?
    There it is, there it is
    This time I'm not wrong

    There it is, hey, what took us so long
    To find the sweet, sweet love?
    There it is
    This time I'm not wrong
    This time I'm not wrong
    We got a love that's so strong


    This is what one source of Seymour Hersh said about the cutthroat Jihadis that have been unleashed onto Syria by Saudi Arabia with the full backing of Israel and the USA.
    Nasr went on, “The Saudis have considerable financial means, and have deep relations with the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafis”—Sunni extremists who view Shiites as apostates. “The last time Iran was a threat, the Saudis were able to mobilize the worst kinds of Islamic radicals. Once you get them out of the box, you can’t put them back.”

    [source : The Redirection, The New Yorker Magazine, http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/03/05/070305fa_fact_hersh?currentPage=all, 5th March 2007]
    This has now manifested in Syria.
    It’s been so long ago, it’s easy to forget that the Syrian Civil War began with peaceful protests. Now those organizers and human rights activists that initially called for the ouster of Assad are finding a rebellion that they recognize less and less, and that has less and less use for them.

    Fleeing Assad-held territory, such activists took refuge in the rebel-held north. But as secular rebel fighters lose what little influence they have left, the activists are fleeing Islamist-dominated territory.

    Reporters Without Borders and other groups have detailed scores of activists “detained” by al-Qaeda, and at least 150 were reported to have fled the country outright.

    [source : Targeted by Islamists, Secular Rebels Flee Syria, Antiwar, http://news.antiwar.com/2013/12/19/targeted-by-islamists-secular-rebels-flee-syria/, 19th December 2013]

    But I am not so surprised at Antiwar calling the violence in Syria "the Syrian Civil War" (note the use of capitals to make it sound official). As documented on this blog ad nauseum (which is free of charge and powered by long solitary hours of reading and analysis) there is no civil war in Syria. There is however an invasion of Syria by cutthroat Jihadis who are sponsored by Saudi Arabia. This was agreed with Israel and the USA because the plan for war on seven nations in five years, which was revealed to General Wesley Clark shortly after the inside job 9/11, was moribund.

    Why am I not so surprised at Antiwar getting "the Syrian Civil War" wrong? Because on the recent 50th anniversary of JFKs assassination Antiwar had a right go at JFK. Not only that, there is a strong pro-Ron Paul element to their writings. And on Ron Paul, I am again with Webster Tarpley; there is something not right with Paul's link to Bilderberg, which could explain his Austrian economics, or vice versa. Not that I am anti Antiwar. But as with Paul's dodgy finances, we also have to ask who are Antiwar's angels? And what have they asked for in return?

    Thursday, December 19, 2013


    At the time of Lee Rigby's murder there was a sick attempt to lead us to believe that his death was a hoax, that somehow the many residents in the area didn't see the lights and cameras and film crews being transported in to film the scenes in which Rigby is attacked with a rubber knife and bleeds ketchup, or the scene in which the murderers charge at the police like in the final scene of Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid starring Robert Redford and Paul Newman.

    If Lee Rigby did not die that day in the way we were told then he is playing the cruelest hoax not only on this nation but more importantly on his distraught grieving mother. But the hoaxers will say, "Ah, perhaps his mother is in on it too?"

    What a bunch of sickos!

    Here is Rigby's mother being interviewed by ITV.

    Are those real tears from a grieving mother?


    The unreported facts about this horrific case are that at the time of Rigby's murder:
    1. Adebalajo was under surveillance by MI5 suspected of being an Islamic extremist
    2. Adebalajo was openly preaching on the streets of Woolwich asking Muslims to go to Syria to join the Jihad against Assad.

    You see, in this fucked-up country, it's OK to encourage violence and slaughter of the innocents if it suits British foreign policy. And even better, as in this case, if it suits domestic policy too! For a few months now we have been told that we must cede our privacy and rights because of al Qaeda. And yes, that's the same al Qaeda that we created and was run by Osama bin Laden who had a mansion in Wembley and trained with MI6. We have been warned that British Jihadis who are currently fighting in Syria against the Syrian Arab Army will one day soon return to Great Britain and continue the Jihad on British streets. Hmm. I wonder how many of those Jihadis were inspired by Adebalajo or other extremist preachers on the 'watch' list of MI5, who allowed the preachers to preach Jihad in Syria because the Syrian Arab Army is wiping the floor with those Jihadis there now and more are needed to be the new gimps for Israel?

    This really is one fucked-up mugged-off country!


    Wednesday, December 18, 2013


    The Guardian has mocked believers in The Bavarian Illuminati.

    Why do this now is not clear to me.

    The piece mocks those who believe that The Illuminati exists and controls the world. According to The Guardian The Illuminati is,
    ...a shadowy conspiracy that has existed since the dawn of time, secretly pulling the strings of every major organisation in the world. It manipulates finances and dictates policy so as to usher in a terrifying new world order.

    [source : The Illuminati: the secret society pulling the strings of every major organisation in the world, The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/shortcuts/2013/dec/18/illuminati-secret-society-conspiracy-jay-z, 18th December 2013]

    The piece references as evidence for this shadowy conspiracy,
    Lindsay Lohan's tattoos. Or Lady Gaga's videos. Or that hand thing that Jay Z does. Or the way Barack Obama shakes hands with the pope...Especially the Guardian. What are all those articles about quinoa for, if not to deliberately make it too expensive for Bolivians and further the rise of McDonald's, which is also part of the Illuminati,

    The piece is immature. The Illuminati really did exist. Their documents were full of really evil stuff. They wanted to takeover the world with something similar to Communism. The Bavarian authorities banned them and warned every government in Europe of their activities.

    But their leader is alleged to have found sanctuary in the House of Saxe-Gotha. Readers will note that the British Royal Family began to be referred to as Windsor only during WW1. Before this they were Saxe-Gotha-Coburg.

    The piece references pop stars such as Jay Z and Lady Gaga. But it does not refer to Rihanna, who is the proclaimed Princess of The Illuminati.

    The piece mocks the idea that there is a group who "manipulates finances and dictates policy". But there exists such a group. They created and own The Federal Reserve. Before this they created and owned The Bank of England. Their banks create money out of thin air while we work our arses off just to put crumbs on the table. They run organisations like Bilderberg, The Council on Foreign Relations and The Trilateral Commission to vet politicians and leaders. They attend sick ceremonies at which mock human sacrifices occur in front of a huge stone owl called Moloch, an ancient deity to whom children were sacrificed.

    It is these families who created Hitler, financed his eugenics policies, gave Nazi Germany the military technology to build his Wehrmacht and collaborated with him in building Auschwitz. But they also created Soviet Russia. All this is in the excellent books of Professor Antony C Sutton and Webster Tarpley.

    But above all they financed the two attempts at world government; first The League of Nations, which failed, and then The United Nations, which has survived and is growing in strength and influence but is not yet a totalitarian world government. But a WW3, one that could occur over Syria and/or Iran, would provoke calls for all national sovereignty to be ceded to the UN.

    In short, they can create trillions out of thin air, to buy this corporation or influence that political body. They engineer world wars. They finance world governments.

    This is provable fact, and is not to be mocked.


    The Guardian is controlled left. It wholeheartedly supported the push for green genocide at Copenhagen in 2009, publishing little booklets before and during the conference. But it had to. There is only one newspaper that could have possibly supported green genocide that way. Each newspaper has its part to play in projecting an image of the world into our brains, and it is the role of The Guardian to play a caring, humanitarian role. That the leaders of the Africa and Asia rejected the original Copenhagen agreement because they believed it would have led to a drastic decline in living standards and their economies while enriching the west was barely reported.

    In the early hours of 21st August 2013 in Syria, it was reported that chemical weapons had been used in a suburb of Damascus called Ghouta. The immediate cry in the NATO media was that Assad did it. Why Assad did it was not addressed, because Assad had no reason to do it. Such an allegation was an insult to logic, because the Syrian Arab Army had turned the war against the invading foreign cutthroats in their favour a few months earlier at al Qusair, resulting in the SAA defeating the cutthroats in battle after battle after battle. The cutthroats were on the run, being chased out of their dens into a cloud of SAA bullets and a shallow grave, or back to where they came from (which is not Syria).

    Every single major British newspaper blamed Assad for Ghouta.

    Even The Guardian.

    There now follows an analysis of the editorials of The Guardian and its sister The Observer.

    The Guardian directly accused Assad in its first editorial after the event. They didn't wait for evidence. They know they are one of the most popular news outlets on the internet, and should therefore exercise caution and professionalism and responsibility. But they didn't.

    There is next to no doubt that chemical weapons were used in Ghouta in eastern Damascus, and that, unlike previous alleged attacks, they produced mass casualties. Whether the death toll is in the hundreds or over a thousand, as the rebels claim, this is one of the most significant chemical weapons attacks since Saddam Hussein's on the Kurds in Halabja 25 years ago, and an unmistakable challenge to the vow Barack Obama made a year ago that, if proved, the use of chemical or biological weapons would "change my calculus".

    Nor is there much doubt about who committed the atrocity. The Syrian government acknowledged it had launched a major offensive in the area and they are the only combatant with the capability to use chemical weapons on this scale.

    [source : Syria: chemical weapons with impunity, The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/22/syria-chemical-weapons, 22nd August 2013]

    A few days later and their accusations (at least in editorials) had calmed down a bit but were still present between the lines. But whereas just after the events in Ghouta The Guardian made accusations but did not call for war, on Sunday 24th August in an editorial in its sister The Observer, war was suggested, the reason was R2P, responsibility to protect. Read this and see what you think:
    The stark and compelling evidence of large-scale atrocities, including the strongly suspected use of chemical weapons outside Damascus last week, killing perhaps hundreds of people, comes amid a growing perception that a weak and divided international community is powerless and unwilling to act on crimes against humanity. A sense of impunity feeds boldness and escalation. In Damascus, Cairo and elsewhere, actors today are making dangerous decisions based on the calculation that they will not be called to account.

    In these circumstances, it is the easiest thing to say that, in the case of Syria in particular, there are only bad options. That may be true. But increasingly it may be that there is a worse option: doing nothing.

    This paper has resisted the calls for military intervention in Syria. It remains the case that such intervention seems a deeply perilous route, with no guarantee of success and pregnant with the risk of triggering a wider regional war. But we do appear to be coming ever closer to a tipping point, with difficult judgments ahead. The recent statements from William Hague and President Obama have raised the temperature and increased the likelihood of some form of action or sanction if it is conclusively proved that the Syrian regime is authoring chemical attacks on its citizens. Hague is right to say that "a chemical attack ... is not something that a humane and civilised world can ignore".

    [source : Choosing between bad options in Syria becomes ever more complex, The Observer, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/24/options-syria, 24th August 2013]

    There is the strong hint that Assad was to blame for Ghouta, as can be found in, "In Damascus, Cairo and elsewhere, actors today are making dangerous decisions based on the calculation that they will not be called to account."

    And then in, "This paper has resisted the calls for military intervention in Syria...But we do appear to be coming ever closer to a tipping point", we see the strong hint that bombing Syria under R2P would be acceptable.

    Readers should also note that in not one editorial of The Guardian or The Observer are the cutthroats ever accused or considered as culprits.

    Then came the debate in The Marsten House, and to be fair The Guardian appeared to be less antiwar, and did not make any blatant accusations, and appeared pleased at the outcome of that vote.

    But it made up for it the following weekend in another Observer editorial.
    How many died in the Assad regime's chemical attacks? The UK's mini-dossier put to MPs last Thursday said 330 or so, the fatter US intelligence file cited by Mr Obama said nearly 1,500. One round of claims and responsibilities was described as "highly likely", another as "compelling"

    [source : Syria: an air strike will have no practical benefit, The Observer, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/31/observer-editorial-syria-air-strike-no-benefit, 31st August 2013]

    You can't get more blatant than that, can you?

    The next day the accusations against Assad continued.
    The presumed use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime presented the whole international community with a dilemma which has not gone away since. Do nothing effective, and the world would be averting its gaze from a type of warfare which has always triggered a special repugnance from countries which regard themselves as upholding moral standards. Do something forceful, and the human and military impact in Syria and beyond might be hard either to control or to justify.

    [source : US and Syria: gambling with engagement, The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/01/us-syria-gambling-engagement-obama, 1st September 2013]

    In this editorial The Guardian tasks President Obama with "international responsibilities":
    Taking the congressional route may be smart domestically.

    ...It is right that democracies facing wars of choice should vote on whether to go ahead. But democracies have international responsibilities as well as domestic ones. The priorities in Syria are to find a diplomatic solution to the conflict and bring the rule of law to bear. If that happened, Syria's humanitarian crisis could be addressed. Western nervousness is not making any of these things easier to achieve. On the contrary, Russia and Iran are likely to feel emboldened, and Israel more threatened, creating fresh instability. The democracies have rightly opted for a considered approach. But the need for an engaged strategy is as urgent as ever, and is neglected at our collective peril.

    What do you think is meant by "engaged strategy"?

    The following week Syria agreed to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention. The Guardian was pleased:
    But for now, the problem and doubts over enforcement should not be allowed to obscure the ultimate goal – that if Syria signs the CWC, and it said it would, a procedure will be put in place that is more thorough and more targeted at Syria's chemical weapons stock than any military action, barring full scale invasion, could achieve.

    If the CWC route takes time, so be it. Renouncing the use of force – that Mr Obama's administration is deeply divided about and struggling to define –may be the price that has to be paid.

    [source : Syria: a path worth exploring, The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/10/syria-a-path-worth-exploring, 10th September 2013]

    And it is in this editorial that we really begin to see The True Guardian.

    Can you see why?

    Read the editorial again...and again...and again.

    Have you read it?

    There is not one mention of Israel's chemical weapons or its publicly stated desire to sign the CWC.

    Why is The Guardian so pleased at Syria relinquishing its chemical weapons while not mentioning Israel's huge stockpiles of all kinds of nasty stuff, chemical, biological and nuclear?

    And in response to the deal reached over Syria's chemical weapons, The Guardian was sceptical:
    A bleaker view is to be had on the ground in rebel-held Syria. The rebels see Mr Assad as strengthened by the deal. Giving up weapons which were anyway becoming a liability is a small sacrifice for the implied protection from an air strike which he will secure for at least one year. His chemical weapons stocks were never the crown jewels they were described as being. He has allegedly used them on 14 different occasions before, but always on a small scale – enough to terrify the civilian population, but in small enough quantities to escape verification. It is no exoneration of Mr Assad to say that the most likely explanation for the massacre in Ghouta in Damascus was that it may have been the work of an overzealous local commander. Taking these weapons off the battlefield will be little relief to civilians, who are coming under fire from all manner of conventional high explosive, and no help to the Free Syrian Army.

    ...Last week Russian diplomacy was at its opportunistic peak. But its arguments that Mr Assad had not used chemical weapons were specious.

    [source : Syria: the deal that only goes so far, The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/15/syria-deal-only-goes-so-far, 15th September 2013]

    But at least in this editorial Israel is mentioned, but its nuclear, biological or chemical weapons stockpiles are not.

    And note that nearly a month after Ghouta, the most accurate assessment that The Guardian has as to the culprit is, "It is no exoneration of Mr Assad to say that the most likely explanation for the massacre in Ghouta in Damascus was that it may have been the work of an overzealous local commander." In other words, not Prince Bandar bin Sultan and his merry band of cutthroats.

    AND THIS IS THE PAPER SELLING US GLENN GREENWALD AND ED SNOWDEN AFTER ALL THE PREVIOUS NSA WHISTLEBLOWERS WERE IGNORED!? And Greenwald is now cavorting with Jeremy Scahill following Scahill's dirty war against Mother Agnes Mariam.


    So to summarise:
    1. The Guardian immediately accused Assad of the horrific events of Ghouta;
    2. The Guardian and its sister The Observer pushed R2P as a reason to attack Syria (remember, the loyal readership of The Guardian is generally the antiwar left);
    3. The editorials of The Guardian and The Observer continued to accuse Assad of Ghouta after the humiliating defeat for Der Fuhrer in The Marsten House, and not once considered the rebels as the culprits;
    4. Following the proposals for Syria to relinquish its stockpile of chemical weapons, The Guardian not once mentioned Israel's stockpiles of WMDs in its editorials.

    So from this evidence is The Guardian working for, or at least protecting, somebody?


    Throughout last summer The Bilderberg Washington Post attacked Obama for not attacking Syria. As explained multiple times on this blog, Syria is just one of seven nations targeted for war shortly after the inside job 9/11, even though no evidence had been provided that those seven nations had anything to do with 9/11. Former Commander of NATO in Europe, General Wesley Clark, was told of this plan shortly after 9/11. The seven nations named to Clark were Iraq, Iran, Syria and Lebanon, and Libya, Sudan and Somalia. The first four were named in a Zionist warmongering document called A Clean Break, whose authors interlocked with a powerful network of Zionists in the USA who formed The Project for New American Century. PNAC members were essentially running the US government and military on 9/11. PNAC had also named Iraq and Iran as the biggest threats to the USA. The plan revealed to Clark was for war on these seven nations in five years. But by 2007 only 2 of these nations had been attacked: Iraq was invaded in 2003 and suffered sectarian violence for years resulting in the USA staying in Iraq for longer than planned and the American public becoming war-weary; in 2006 Israel engineered a war on Hezbollah, but somehow managed to lose, killing hundreds of Lebanese children in the process, so Bravo! Israel.

    So by 2007 this plan for war on seven nations in five years was moribund.

    To inject some life back into this warmongering, the USA, Israel and Saudi Arabia reached a Faustian pact that the latter would unleash cutthroat Jihadis onto some of those nations not yet attacked. But some kind of cover was required to mask their cutthroat nature. That cover was The Arab Spring, which is not Arab but CIA and financed by Washington. In Libya in 2011, British Special Forces assisted the Jihadis on the ground while NATO bombed a clear and unobstructed path for them all the way into Tripoli. Former French foreign minister Roland Dumas was asked in 2009 to help the British to get the Jihadis into Syria. Obama was not supposed to win the election last year. Bilderberg and Wall Street picked Romney and his pro-war, pro-Israel, pro-fascism policies. They, through their agent DCI David Petraeus, arranged Benghazi to Carterise Obama, but Romney blew it. Petraeus resigned in a scandal and now has a cushy job with KKR, who are ever-present at Bilderberg.

    In other words, to put it bluntly, the plan for war on seven nations in five years has become one big fuck-up, perhaps the biggest fuck-up in the sordid history of fuck-ups. All they have done is expose themselves as heartless, soulless warmongering scum who are prepared to unleash the nastiest medieval cutthroats onto children for slaughter. This scum deserve something much more gruesome than being hung, drawn and quartered.

    To pressure Obama into attacking Syria he was personally implicated in a series of scandals, culminating in the 'revelations' from Ed Snowden that Obama was personally reading all our emails and texts. These revelations came just days after the Syrian rebels lost the important hub of al Qusair. There were accusations that Assad had used chemical weapons at Khan al Assal. But Russia was allowed into Syria to collect samples under international regulations and standards and concluded that the rebels had used chemical weapons. Russia passed the evidence to the UN who reached an agreement with Syria to be allowed to enter Khan al Assal to investigate what really happened. Within hours of the news that Syria would allow in the UN the rebels went back into Khan al Assal and slaughtered every living thing, including soldiers from the Syrian Arab Army which proves that Russia was correct in accusing the rebels. This is just one example of the kind of dirty trick played against Syria that is barely reported in the NATO media. The latest and most horrific is that at Ghouta in August which could have led to WW3. In addition, Obama was spoken to personally by Erdogan of Turkey, Der Fuhrer David Cameron, Netanyahu of Israel. But still Obama resisted war.

    And so the fury of the warmongers manifested in a video attacking Obama's competence. This video was released by the Emergency Committee for Israel, which was formed by Bill Kristol, who had previously formed...The Project for a New American Century!

    Oh, how the wheels of history turn. It is always the same people, the same families, as if it is genetic.

    So onto the latest barage against Obama from The Washington Post. The angle of attack from the WP is "we told you so". The WP paints a picture of al Qaeda taking root in the Middle East and causing a huge refugee crisis, a crisis that could have been averted had Obama heeded advice and bombed Syria. But for some strange reason the WP does not mention anything that I state above. Nothing whatsoever. According to their sociopathic minds they are the innocents in all this medieval slaughter of Syrian children, while Obama is the bungling fool who started and propagated all the bloodshed and humanitarian crisis.

    Yet there is not one mention of either Saudi Arabia or Israel, not even to praise them. No. According to the WP all the world's problems are due to the bungling Obama who didn't heed the advice of the WP.

    It’s impossible to know what U.S. leadership could have achieved, but it’s hard to imagine a more frightful outcome. The one advantage of inaction seems to be the ability to disclaim responsibility: We didn’t break it, so we don’t own it. Even that benefit, however, may prove transient. Already the United States is the largest donor of refugee aid. As misery spreads and anti-American radicals plant roots, the Obama administration, or its successor, may find that the costs of non-involvement far exceed those that would have come with timely and measured intervention.

    [source : U.S. inaction in Syria could be far more costly than intervention, Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/us-inaction-in-syria-could-be-far-more-costly-than-intervention/2013/12/17/9417c604-6738-11e3-ae56-22de072140a2_story.html, 18th December 2013]