China Appears Set to Surpass US as Most Powerful Country in the World

Source: China Appears Set to Surpass US as Most Powerful Country in the World

theantimedia.org

Written by James Holbrooks

July 18, 2017

(ANTIMEDIA)  — Last week, headlines were made around the world when it was reported that China had dispatched troops to the Horn of Africa in advance of establishing its first overseas military base. Reuters opened its article on the subject by noting that this latest move falls in line with others as “China’s rapidly modernizing military extends its global reach.”

China broke ground on the base in Djibouti, a tiny country on the northwestern edge of the Indian Ocean, last year. It’s a high-value patch of land, as the nation is located at the southern entrance to the Red Sea on the route to the Suez Canal. The strategic importance of the location is evidenced by the fact that the U.S., France, and Japan all have bases there.

 In a brief post on Tuesday, China’s state-run Xinhua News Agency reported the news of the troop deployment. Citing comments made by Foreign Ministry spokesperson Geng Shuang, Xinhua wrote that the move is “conducive to China’s performance of international obligations” and will “assist China’s contribution to peace and stability both in Africa and worldwide.”

An editorial in the state-run Global Times, however, was far more assertive in stating the significance of China’s presence in Djibouti. The paper highlighted the fact that world leaders everywhere are taking note of China’s power projection, and said, basically, that they absolutely should:

“Certainly this is the People’s Liberation Army’s first overseas base and we will base troops there. It’s not a commercial resupply point. It makes sense there is attention on this from foreign public opinion.”

 Still, the Global Times notes that China’s military development is about protecting its own security and “not about seeking to control the world.”

But the very fact that China felt, once again, the need to state it’s not out to rule the planet speaks volumes to the perception that China is on a path to surpass the United States as the dominant geopolitical power on Earth.

All this came hours after China made headlines for an entirely different reason in an entirely different field.

 Last year, a team of Chinese scientists launched a satellite, the Micius, into a Sun-synchronous orbit so it would pass over the same spot on Earth at the same time each day. The Micius is a highly sensitive photon receiver that can detect the quantum states of single photons fired from the ground.

On Monday, the team behind the Micius — named after an ancient Chinese philosopher — announced the results of their first experiments. From the MIT Technology Review:

“The team created the first satellite-to-ground quantum network, in the process smashing the record for the longest distance over which entanglement has been measured. And they’ve used this quantum network to teleport the first object from the ground to orbit.”

The object teleported was a photon, and if you want the science behind how it all went down, MIT Technology Review — which spoke with the Chinese team about their findings — broke it all down very nicely. But anyone, regardless of technical background, can fathom the significance of something on Earth being beamed into outer space.

The folks at MIT Technology Review did something else in their coverage. In closing their report, they brought the whole thing back to the geopolitical level:

“It also shows China’s obvious dominance and lead in a field that, until recently, was led by Europe and the U.S. — Micius would surely have been impressed. But an important question now is how the West will respond.”

On that note, let’s turn to U.S. news.

On July 10, it was reported that a campaign committee had been officially filed with the Federal Election Commission making Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson eligible for the 2020 presidential election. In an interview with GQ back in May, Johnson said he’d consider the idea of running, and he joked about it on camera a couple of times since then.

The man who created the committee, called “Run the Rock 2020,” is 26-year-old political consultant and freelance writer Kenton Tilford. Speaking to CNN, Tilford said the goal is “to build a grassroots community of Americans to show to Mr. Johnson that his incredible popularity as an actor and public figure can translate into politics seamlessly.”

A few days later, Robert James Ritchie, better known as Kid Rock, appeared to announce his intention to run for the U.S. Senate in his home state of Michigan. The 47-year-old self-described “American badass” has been injecting himself into politics in recent years, but many still wonder if it’s all some sort of marketing ploy.

Others, however, such as The New Yorker’s Amanda Petrusich, went further, asking readers to look at the broader societal implications on display:

“Yet that we are paying attention at all — that a belligerent, proudly debauched rock star suddenly seems as if he might be a viable candidate for public service — is a terrifying new normal.”

On Saturday, political analyst Julian Zelizer weighed in on the matter for CNN. His commentary, titled “Kid Rock, The Rock and our rocky future,” opened:

“It looks like these days everyone with a Wikipedia entry or a star on the Walk of Fame is thinking of running for public office.

“With the former star of ‘The Apprentice’ inhabiting the White House, the doors are wide open.”

After joking about one day seeing The Rock using his signature wrestling move, The People’s Elbow, on legislatures who don’t vote his way, Zelizer asked his audience if all the American political madness is finally coming to a head:

“Are we now entering an era of celebrity politics? Has all of the distrust in government and frustration with perpetual gridlock generated a moment when Americans would rather have telegenic entertainment stars making decisions about war and peace, rather than those who have spent their lives in politics learning about public policy, negotiation, deal-making and diplomacy?”

As Petrusich astutely pointed out in The New Yorker, the fact that all this is being taken largely at face value suggests the answer to Zelizer’s questions is yes.

So as China continues to strengthen and extend its geopolitical might while simultaneously pushing science to its absolute limits, the United States remains obsessed with the notion of elections — indeed, of the election cycle itself.

No one really seems to like what’s happening in America, and everyone has their own reasons why. The one thing people do seem to agree on, however, is that it can all be fixed if the right guy — their guy — is in charge.

And if that guy happens to be a former wrestler-turned movie star, a greasy rap-rocker prone to vulgarities, or a millionaire mogul and reality TV celebrity, the current prevailing attitude among the American populace seems to be…Sure. Why not? Anything is worth a try.

Because something within the American engine is broken. This much is all but irrefutable. And equally so is the fact that China’s engine, meanwhile, seems to be humming along just fine.

Illuminati Pop Stars – the In-Your-Face Conspiracy that Won’t Go Away

“The goal is to take a young person, celebritize them and put them on stage to share the Illuminati values of over-sexualization, debauchery, slavery, spiritual degradation, consumerism, and worship of money and authority.”

Buck Rogers: Be outrageous. Be a puppet. Destroy yourself. 

Source: Illuminati Pop Stars – the In-Your-Face Conspiracy that Won’t Go Away – Waking Times

Waking Times

Sigmund Fraud, Staff Writer
July 4, 2017

 

A continuous assault on the public psyche by the entertainment industrial complex aims to disorganize and derail the individual. It’s a world governed by terror, and to find relief from such continual fear and stress we’re invited to seek shelter in meaningless, self-destructive habits and pursuits. The celebrity role models in our culture lead the way, setting the example for how to abandon ourselves to the mainstream orgy of debauchery and stupidity.

Via the 24/7 news cycle format, the media keeps the shock and awe flowing, and corporate pop-culture is the escape. Pop stars are selected for their helplessness against the MK Ultra/Monarch-type mind control. This kind of programming is necessary to turn people into celebrity puppets whose behavior is to be emulated by the public. The stars that do this best become icons of Illuminati symbolism, using their careers and souls to pimp occult messages and ideas to the masses.

Take the one-eye covered celebrity photo meme. They all do it. Is it just a creative coincidence, or are these stars required to strike this pose? If it’s in their contract to do this, what does it mean?

It’s mind control.

Handlers employed by the multi-trillion dollar entertainment industry craft these celebrities from children, subjecting them to various abusive forms of psychological torture. They are programmed play the role of fame and success, but are ultimately wired to self-destruct before the entire world. Miley Cyrus, Ariana Grande, Katy Perry and Amanda Bynes are a few of our contemporaries.

Roseanne Barr spoke about MK Ultra programming in Hollywood in an interview with Abbey Martin.

Many other celebrities have also spoken out. Corey Feldman went public with claims that Hollywood culture is rife with pedophilia, which is a powerful means of psychologically destroying a child. Bill Clinton even admitted that the government has been engaged in MK Ultra type programs where experiments were carried out on unwitting persons.

This the Illuminati mind-controlled celebrity conspiracy is ubiquitous and the symbolism of the occult, of pedophilia, and of the Illuminati is everywhere.

Covering one eye is a salute to the All Seeing Eye of the Illuminati.

 

Being subjected to Monarch programming and MK Ultra conditioning develops a form of schizophrenia in the victim, causing them to take on two distinct personalities. One personality is able to perform whatever degrading, self-deprecating behavior is necessary to pull off such ritualistic, ridiculous public performances. The other personality, the true and private self is subdued, eventually begging for help.

This recently happened with Katy Perry who publicly broke down, went on a psychotic fit on stage, then ended up making bizarre public statements about wanting to be herself again. She shaved her head, as many of these stars do as a first step in re-crafting an identity out of a shattered psyche. Brittany Spears went through a nearly identical breakdown at the end of her career.

This sets an example for those in the audience. Be outrageous. Be a puppet. Destroy yourself.

What is the Purpose?

“…as I looked more closely at the way that power is asserted over us, it became more obvious how much mainstream pop culture (and in particularly, music videos) syndicates a puppet-mentality, where bodies are seemingly controlled and manipulated by outside forces. Yet despite the dark, occult imagery that we’re used to seeing in videos by the likes of Rihanna, Lady Gaga, Justin Bieber, Beyonce and Britney Spears, their music maintains a saccharine quality which creates a disturbing discord. Is there a hidden agenda behind the creation of these pop icons and are young people being conditioned to accept hyper-sexualization, militarization, and mental and physical torture with this sugar-coated, Disneyfied pop culture?” ~Dance Choreographer, Rosie Kay

The goal is to take a young person, celebritize them and put them on stage to share the Illuminati values of over-sexualization, debauchery, slavery, spiritual degradation, consumerism, and worship of money and authority.

This an ongoing psychological experiment which has done more than perhaps any other existing program in marketing the culture of death to each new generation. Self-destruction has been presented as the highest form of personal achievement. In this culture, nothing is shocking. Not permanent war, nor surveillance, police brutality, corruption, environmental destruction, nothing.

Final Thoughts

The pervasive Illuminati symbols in our culture subvert our natural, independent and humanistic values with a pernicious onslaught of stupidity, absurdity, sexualized garbage and escape through intoxication. In no other cultural arena is the social engineering and moral manipulation more prevalent than in the world of pop-entertainment.

“The elite agenda is rooted in fear, panic, and terror. Such emotion is a golden currency, an invaluable asset that can be used to shape and mold society with little to no resistance.” ~Vigilant Citizen

Read more articles by Sigmund Fraud.

About the Author

Sigmund Fraud is a survivor of modern psychiatry and a dedicated mental activist. He is a staff writer for WakingTimes.com where he indulges in the possibility of a massive shift towards a more psychologically aware future for humankind. Follow Sigmund on Facebook here.

Kurt Russell was the civil pilot witness to the Phoenix lights UFO (4 min)

Until Now, we did not know the identity of that witness.
Here is his testimony he gave on BBC on april 2017.

Stone’s ‘Putin Interviews’ offend a US establishment drunk on its own exceptionalism

I never understood why this Colbert dude is considered funny. I take it that the Americans are so stupefied that they actually believe this so-called funny man is one of their prime intellectuals? Listen to the morons in the audience reacting on cue instead of thinking for themselves. Eejits.

Source: Stone’s ‘Putin Interviews’ offend a US establishment drunk on its own exceptionalism — RT Op-Edge

RT Op-Edge

John Wight

16 Jun, 2017

© SHOWTIME / YouTube

Oliver Stone’s documentary series on Vladimir Putin, you would think, is required viewing for Western audiences looking to see beyond the crude caricature of Russia’s president in order to gain an insight into his worldview.

Indeed, surely such an insight is absolutely necessary, what with Russia being the biggest country in Europe, a major nuclear power, and with the deepening tensions arising from Russia’s geostrategic differences and rivalry with Washington in recent years.

Yet for the Western liberal commentariat, condemnation rather than understanding is the order of the day, evidenced in the barrage of criticism with which Stone’s documentary series on the Russian leader has been received in the Western mainstream.

The interview the filmmaker did with liberal US talk show host Stephen Colbert on his project is a prime example.

Colbert’s line of questioning amounted to a regurgitation of the very caricature that Stone had set out to move beyond in over 20 hours of interviews on an abundance of topics with Putin – his upbringing, family history, career, thoughts on leadership, the challenges Russia faced during the dark days of the 1990s, his relations with various US presidents, NATO, and so on.

Yet for the likes of Mr. Colbert it’s much easier to go with the official narrative, contained in his first question of the interview: “What do you say to people who say that yours [Oliver Stone’s] is a fawning interview of a brutal dictator?” Not only the question, but also the casual and insouciant way in which it was delivered, confirmed the dumbing-down of news information, analysis and commentary that has been underway in the United States over decades.

The result is a culture so intellectually shallow it is frightening to behold, one in which ignorance is celebrated rather than scorned, in which national exceptionalism and arrogance is exalted rather than rejected. And woe betide anyone, such as Oliver Stone, who dares try to penetrate this fog of ignorance and sense of exceptionalism that has so corroded US cultural values.

Listening to Colbert’s studio audience laugh at Stone in response to his statement that Putin had been unfairly treated and abused by the US media, I was minded of the treatment meted out to the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates. Such a comparison is not as outlandish as some may think on first impressions.

Think about it: for daring to question the prevailing orthodoxy, received truths, and dominant ideas the philosopher was lampooned, ridiculed and ultimately condemned to death by the powers that be in Athens, considered at the time to be the home of democracy and liberty, just as Washington is – or to be more accurate claims that it is – in our time.

Interestingly, the clamor to condemn Socrates took place when tensions between Athens and its Greek city-state rival and adversary, Sparta, were still high just a few years after the end of the Peloponnesian War (431-404 BC).

As everybody knows, in times of war – whether cold or hot – a nation’s tolerance for dissent, for daring to swim against the cultural tide, evaporates, even though it is precisely at such times when dissent is most necessary. After all, in the case of the rising tensions that we have witnessed between Russia and the US recently, it is not people like Stephen Colbert who will be sent into combat should those tensions spill over into direct military conflict.

With this in mind, perhaps it would have been more to the talk show host’s benefit to have listened carefully to a man, in Oliver Stone, who has experienced combat, and who does have first-hand experience of a devastating war unleashed in the cause of the very national exceptionalism previously described.

As a filmmaker, Oliver Stone’s body of work, reaching all the way back to the 1980s, is a testament to his integrity both as an artist and as a human being. From ‘Salvador’ in 1986, an unflinching expose of covert US support for right-wing death squads in El Salvador, all the way up to his latest movie ‘Snowden’ in 2016, which tells the story of US intelligence whistleblower Edward Snowden, this is a filmmaker with a fierce passion for truth. As such, it is a fair bet that in generations to come his works will still command respect and serious analysis. Could we say the same about Stephen Colbert’s body of work?

To ask the question is to answer it.

‘Carthago delenda est’ – Carthage must be destroyed. These words of Cato the Elder, which the Roman statesman and orator is said to have repeated at the conclusion of every one of his speeches, is the sentiment behind the campaign of demonization against Vladimir Putin that is a feature of Western cultural life.

It has become so pervasive and obsessive you would think that it was the Russian leader who had the destruction of entire countries on his record and conscience – i.e. Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Iraq and Libya – and that it was his foreign policy that had killed more people and sown more chaos than at any time since World War II.

Oliver Stone is to be commended for trying to wake America up to the damage it does and has done around the world over many decades. Those who would attack and laugh at him for doing so merely confirm the degeneration of a culture built on foundations not of wisdom, but of crass ignorance.

John Wight has written for newspapers and websites across the world, including the Independent, Morning Star, Huffington Post, Counterpunch, London Progressive Journal, and Foreign Policy Journal. He is also a regular commentator on RT and BBC Radio. John is currently working on a book exploring the role of the West in the Arab Spring. You can follow him on Twitter @JohnWight1

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

5 reasons Oscar ratings have gone way, way down

I am three months late with this post. What can I say? I have never watched this ceremony. If I would ever want to see a bunch of dunces congratulating themselves for absolutely nothing I would definitely tune in to this sickening spectacle of human debauchery and pseudo artsy fartsy culture. Give those statues to the cleaning staff, as they deserve it more than these smelly narcissists. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Oscar ratings aren’t just down because of Trump bashing, but because what society considers entertainment has changed

Source: 5 reasons Oscar ratings have gone way, way down

theduran.com

Adam Garrie

March 2, 2017

 

Hint: It’s not all because of Trump bashing

1. Entertainment is Totally Decentralised 

Before the advent of television, people would see big Hollywood films in cinemas and at the end of every Oscar year, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences would award the ones they thought were the best…or the ones their friends made, or the ones whose makers bribed them, or the ones whose stars ate and drank in the same restaurants and bars as Academy voters.

In the 1950s, the popularity of television panicked the film industry, but new technology like wide-screen films and surround sound saved the industry.

Today, the pictures aren’t getting bigger but smaller and more mobile. When one can watch films both legally and otherwise on mobile phones and other portable devices, the mystique is gone. Entertainment has gone from gourmet to cheap fast food. There is no going back. People have other priorities. Watching a long boring ceremony where celebrities gush over films people view in bits and pieces as they ride the bus, is no longer essential viewing.

2. The Democratisation of Celebrity 

Whether it be Paul Joseph Watson ranting about his hatred of liberals, PewDiePie talking about video games, football experts debating the last game or a cat being frightened of a cucumber, the DIY model of celebrity is becoming ever more pervasive.

What’s more is that anyone can now make their own on-line video and some of them command the kind of numbers via subscription that Hollywood filmmakers could only dream of.

Whether watching your uncle get drunk at wedding or watching independently funded commentators on everything from sport to politics, video games to music, the idea of celebrity is less about how many kids you can adopt in your Beverly Hills home and more about your number of views on YouTube.

3. Preaching Is For Church–Entertainment Is For Hollywood

Many seem to not have received this particular memo. Whether cowboys and Indians, mafia gangsters, space aliens or clowns, Hollywood used to be primarily about escapism. Now, from the films Hollywood promotes to the Oscar ceremony itself, Tinseltown has become like CNN with slightly better plastic surgery.

If people wanted hours of anti-Trump rhetoric they could indeed turn on CNN or read the New York Times. If inversely they wanted pro-Trump rhetoric they could turn on InfoWars or Michael Savage.

The Oscars isn’t supposed to be a political grandstand. Indeed, when Marlon Brando tried to make it so in 1973 by having a Native American women accept his Oscar and giving a speech condemning the treatment of Native Americans, he was roundly criticised.

In 2017, the entire thing was like being at a Hillary Clinton rally. Frank Zappa said that ‘politics is show business for ugly people’. By the standards of this years Oscars, it is now the other way round.

 4. America’s Declining Living Standards 

At a time when many working class people had stable jobs that could lead to easy home ownership and a decent quantity of modern material goods, one looked to wealthy celebrities with a combination of awe and intrigue, but rarely outright jealousy.

Now though, the of collapse of  well paying industrial jobs that both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders talked about endlessly during their campaigns, is making overpaid celebrities appear as though they live in a parallel universe vis-a-vis ordinary people. When entire towns in America’s so-called ‘rust belt’ are destitute, these people won’t want to spend their time gazing at people whose shoes cost more than three months of their former wages.

5. Truth Is More Entertaining Than Fiction 

Many people deride Donald Trump for being the former star of a reality TV show, The Apprentice. But The Donald has a knack for keeping people entertained. Growing up, many people I knew thought that ‘politics was boring’. In many ways it was, in hindsight.

But it is hardly  boring anymore. With President Trump Tweeting away and his enemies attacking him left and right, it would be hard for even the best screenwriter to come up with something as fast paced.

So yes, I suppose the Hollywood elite do have some cause to be angry with Donald Trump. He’s outdone them in the light entertainment division.

If none of those explanations are satisfactory just remember that the actual Oscar ratings were very high. The low numbers are the result of Putin personally hacking the numbers. John McCain is all ready on the case.

UNCENSORED: These YouTube comments show most Americans are NOT buying into the anti-Russia agenda

Can someone explain to me why this Colbert dude is funny? I just don’t get it.

Ordinary Americans are not buying the anti-Russian conspiracy.

Source: UNCENSORED: These YouTube comments show most Americans are NOT buying into the anti-Russia agenda

theduran.com

Adam Garrie

June 15, 2017

Stephen Colbert’s recent interview with film-maker Oliver Stone  is a surprisingly good encapsulation of everything wrong with the Russophobia that has gripped America since the middle-years of the Obama administration, a phenomenon which has vastly accelerated since Hillary Clinton labelled the winning candidate, now POTUS Trump as a man compromised by ‘Russian links’ which are totally non-existent by any objective standard.

There is much to objectively praise and criticise about Trump, but the idea that he is ‘in it for Russia’ is not only a sign of the childishness and pettiness which has run rife in US politics thanks to the Democratic party of Hillary Clinton along with their neo-con fellow travellers, but it is also symptomatic of America needing a foreign enemy to avoid tackling its burning internal issues.

It is not in Russia where a crazed opposition supporter has been radicalised by a violent mainstream media and ends up shooting a prominent Congressman. No, this terrorist atrocity happened in the United States.

It is not Russia where the opposition are trying to undermine the legitimacy of a democratically elected President, that is happening in the United States.

As Donald Trump rightly said during his campaign, it is foreign wars, particularly in the Middle East that is bankrupting America while bridges collapse, airports decay and infrastructure is reduced to third world standards.

But for the mainstream media, rather than take action about these domestic problems, it remains important to lambaste Russia not based on any objective criticism but based on vague, false and cartoonish notions that Vladimir Putin is somehow evil, though no one in the American mainstream mediad is able to articulate just why they believe that.

Stephen Colbert mocked Oliver Stone throughout a deeply sardonic interview. What was the mockery for? Because Oliver Stone interviewed Putin without an agenda. Stone said very clearly to Colbert that he set out to find out what Putin has to say and to do so with the respect the leader of a great super-power deserves. Colbert wanted Oliver Stone to be Steven Colbert. Stone had the audacity to be himself and to allow the Russian President to speak openly and honestly rather than cut him off every few seconds with boring MSM talking points.

Colbert’s interview may have scored him points with members of the DNC and I’m sure it was popular in the McCain household. But for ordinary Americans, comments on Colbert’s Youtube interview show that people are not buying into the MSM anti-Russian agenda.

Here are just some examples of ordinary American television viewers expressing their support for both Oliver Stone and President Putin.

But the real tragedy is that America’s foreign policy is being dictated by those who agree not with Stone or the overwhelmingly supportive comments of Stone’s attempt to speak respectfully with Putin, but with Colbert, the snide man who thinks that international relations should be about frivolous point scoring and arrogant cynicism.

Now content with just losing the 2016 US Presidential election, the supporters of Hilary Clinton and her anti-Russian elite friends want to hammer home a dead message, something that really amounts to little more than beating a dead horse.

This is one of the reasons Hillary Clinton lost the election. Hillary Clinton ran against the President of Russia, Donald Trump ran to be President of the United States. The choice was obvious and the better man won.

Oliver Stone Tells Colbert Israel Had More Influence than Russia on 2016 Election

The big question is, why do people think Colbert is funny?

Source: Oliver Stone Tells Colbert Israel Had More Influence than Russia on 2016 Election

http://www.blacklistednews.com

Source: jewish press

June 14, 2017 

Film Director Oliver Stone on Monday night started a fight about Israel with host Stephen Colbert, on the CBS “Late Show” that never made it to air, the NY Post Page Six reported. A source in the audience said the political brawl was “painful to watch.”

The Oscar-winning Stone appeared on the show to promote his latest documentary, “The Putin Interviews.” Stone was granted unprecedented access to both Putin’s professional and personal worlds, and interviewed the Russian leader more than a dozen times over the course of two years, most recently in February following the U.S. presidential elections.

After showing a clip in which Stone clearly accepted without a hint of criticism Putin’s statement that Russia, unlike the US, never interferes in other countries’ elections, Colbert harangued Stone on his pussyfooting around the tyrant from Moscow.

REad More…