Radical Islamic Terrorists: The Best Bad Guys Money Can Buy

Source: Radical Islamic Terrorists: The Best Bad Guys Money Can Buy | The Freedom Articles

freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com

Makia Freeman

Sept 20, 2017

Radical Islamic Terrorists are everywhere, it seems. They’re all over Syria and Iraq. They’re in Libya and Nigeria too. They attacked the former Soviet Union from Afghanistan and modern day Russia from Chechnya. We’ve seen them in the Philippines. They attacked an Australian cafe in Sydney, so we were told. Recently they’ve been in Myanmar (Burma). They’ve infiltrated Europe and are behind various attacks in London, Paris, Berlin and Barcelona, so we were told. They’re even in China (Uyghur/Xinjiang). And of course, they paid a grand visit to the US on 9/11 in 2001, right? Radical Islamic terrorists have scary beards, chant strange incantations and strike on every populated continent, so aren’t they the real bad guys in the world? Well … you may think that, but there is far more than meets the eye here.

ISIS in the Philippines, radical Islamic terrorists in Myanmar … just a coincidence?

Radical Islamic Terrorists – Cause or Symptom of the World’s Evils?

While I understand people’s desire for border control and limited immigration policies, some who gravitate towards the right of the political spectrum are quick to demonize all immigrants, find fault with Islam as a religion and blame all Muslims for the world’s evils. They point to radical Islamic terrorists as proof that anything Islamic has to be feared and hated. Aside from the obvious problems with this position – gross generalization, guilt by association, assigning collective guilt to individuals, judging that which you don’t know or understand, etc. – it’s only looking at the situation from a very superficial perspective. The game is being played at much, much deeper levels. We need to expand perception if we’re going to see it.

The real issue is this: are radical Islamic terrorists the cause of all the world’s ills – or are they just the symptom? What’s behind radical Islamic terrorism? Who created it? Who keeps creating it? Who trains these radical Islamic terrorists? Who funds them? Who arms them? Who controls them? Answers to these questions will help shed light on the whole situation.

Saudi Arabia: First Layer Source of Radical Islamic Terrorists

You don’t have to dig very deep to discover that Saudi Arabia is the veritable marble fountainhead of radical Islamic terrorism. Saudi Arabia is such a wellspring and source of radical Islamic terrorism that the terms Saudi Arabia and radical Islamic terrorism may as well be synonymous. Events really descended into the pit of absurdity when Saudi Arabia a few months ago had the gall to accuse Qatar of funding terrorism, claiming that was their reason for cutting ties with Qatar! No less absurd are Donald Trump’s claims that he is fighting radical Islamic terrorists while sucking up to and cutting deals with the Saudis. Last time I checked, funding something and selling it your weapons is not a very effective way of fighting it. Iran, one of the few Middle Eastern nations that is genuinely committed to fighting terrorism, is constantly accused of being the biggest state sponsor of terrorism in the world, but it’s all a game of distraction, smoke and mirrors. The US levels accusations like that at Iran only because the US is being led along by Israel and Saudi Arabia, both of whom hate Iran with a vengeance.

Get ’em while they’re young: young boys being trained to become the next generation of radical Islamic terrorists. Image credit: WorldAffairs.blog.

Saudi Arabia has entire networks of madrasses or schools that train jihadi terrorists and teach a militant form of Islam known as Wahhabism which espouses violence. Other terms used to describe radical Islamic terrorists are Salafists (fundamentalist and strict Muslims who claims to follow the exact teachings of Mohammad and support Sharia law) and Takfiris (literally an apostate or an unbeliever [i.e. worthy of being killed]).  The depth and breadth of Saudi funding of radical Islamic terrorists is truly staggering, as this article explains:

“How does Saudi Arabia go about spreading extremism? The extremist agenda is not always clearly government-sanctioned, but in monarchies where the government money is spread around to various princes, there is little accountability for what the royal family does with their government funds. Much of the funding is via charitable organizations and is not military-related.

The money goes to constructing and operating mosques and madrassas that preach radical Wahhabism. The money also goes to training imams; media outreach and publishing; distribution of Wahhabi textbooks, and endowments to universities and cultural centers … Although the Wahhabi curriculum was modified after the 9/11 attacks, it remains backward and intolerant. Freedom House published a report on the revised curriculum, concluding that it “continues to propagate an ideology of hate toward the ‘unbeliever,’ which include Christians, Jews, Shiites, Sufis, Sunni Muslims who do not follow Wahhabi doctrine, Hindus, atheists and others.” This is taught not only domestically but also enthusiastically exported abroad.”

WikiLeaks has exposed cables where Hillary Clinton admitted the Saudi-radical Islamic terrorism connection, as well as cables discussing Saudi front companies:

“For instance, a Wikileaks cable clearly quotes then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saying “donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide.” She continues: “More needs to be done since Saudi Arabia remains a critical financial support base for al-Qaeda, the Taliban, LeT and other terrorist groups.” … Other cables released by Wikileaks outline how Saudi front companies are also used to fund terrorism abroad.”

This article states:

“… out of the 61 groups that are designated as terrorist organizations by the U.S. State Department, the overwhelming majority are Wahhabi-inspired and Saudi-funded groups, with a focus on the West and Iran as their primary enemy. Only two are Shi’a—Hezbollah and Kataib Hezbollah, and only four have ever claimed to receive support from Iran. Nearly all of the Sunni militant groups listed receive significant support from either the Saudi government or Saudi citizens.”

It is important to understand that mainstream Sunni Islam rejects all types of militant Islam, as can be seen in the declarations and discussions of leading Islamic imams and scholars at this international Islamic Conference in 2016.

So there is a mountain of evidence that Saudi Arabia funds radical Islamic terrorists and exports its brand of militant Islam to Pakistan, Afghanistan and many other parts of the world. However, the story is much deeper than this, so let’s peel back another layer of the onion.

Radical Islamic terrorists or radical CIAslamic terrorists?

The CIA and Mossad: Deeper Layer Source of Radical Islamic Terrorists

The psychopathic mindset of the NWO controllers views people and groups outside of itself as things to be used, dumped and/or expended as necessary. Islamic terrorism is one of its favorite tools. Let’s face it: from the Anglo-American-Zionist New World Order point of view, radical Islamic terrorists are cheap, expendable, easy to arm and easy to fool (e.g. by using religion to trick them as Zbigniew Brzezinski did in this video). Yes, sometimes there is blowback, when you train an asset like Saddam Hussein or Osama bin Laden and then lose control of him, but as long as you still retain control, the results can be fantastic. It works like a charm.

CIA-Afghani textbooks used for indoctrination. Image credit: WorldAffairs.blog

Take a look at Afghanistan in the 1980s. The US, expanding the Empire on behalf of the NWO, was working on containment of Russia. They recruited Afghanis and turned them against the then Soviet Union by using religion as a weapon – where the narrative was holy righteous Islam against the godless communist USSR. These fighters became the Mujahideen – a proxy US army – and the whole Afghani-Russia war served as a template for how the US could use radical Islamic terrorists to achieve its geopolitical goals. The deployment of Islamic terrorism continued on into the 1990s, 2000s and beyond, as Chris Kanthan explains:

“When the Afghan war was about to be won, it dawned on us that the Mujahideen project was a brilliant playbook that could be replicated in other parts of the world. That’s when Al Qaeda was formed … Without the knowledge of the American public, the Mujahideen were very active all throughout the 1990’s in Bosnia, Kosovo, Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, Dagestan, Chechnya etc. These fighters were used for three major purposes:

• throw out pro-Russia dictators
• install pro-West leaders who would help us build oil/gas pipelines and agree to host US military bases, and
• disrupt Russian pipelines and other interests

Azerbaijan was an easy one and we got our man in 1993. Georgia took a long time, but George Soros and his color revolution finally installed our guy in 2005. Within a year, we had a 1000-mile pipeline that linked Azerbaijan (Caspian Sea), Georgia and Turkey! Chechnya was a partial success. They were struggling for independence from Russia and thus gladly welcomed the Mujahideen who also had plenty of Saudi money and US weapons. Within a short time, the non-violent and mystical Sufism of Chechnya was taken over by Saudi Wahhabism.”

The US through its agencies like the CIA has continued to use radical Islamic terrorists to do its dirty work throughout the world, especially in places like Libya and Syria. Al-Qaeda (Al-CIA-da) has been great, but ISIS (I-CIA-SIS) even better. We know that the CIA spent $2.2 billion on getting arms to radical Islamic terrorists in Syria (the so-called moderate rebels) – though this is just the tip of the iceberg.

US/Western funding is not the whole story. The other main force behind all the radical Islamic terrorists is Zionist Israel. In 1982, the Oded Yinon plan was released. It is a strategic plan for Israel with the explicit goal of capturing more territory to form Greater Israel – land all the way from the Nile (in Egypt) to the Euphrates (in Syria/Iraq). It therefore necessarily advocates the theft of land from various nations to achieve this goal, including Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Egypt and Saudi Arabia.

For the Israeli thinkers behind the Yinon plan, the only way that Israel can become a regional power is by gaining more land and by fracturing the nations around it, so that these nations will be weakened and offer less resistance to Zionist ambitions. Israel wants to balkanize the Middle East, just as the US did to Yugoslavia in the 1990s, to fracture Arab states by splitting them along sectarian and ethnic lines. This gameplan is being played out as you read this with the movement by the Kurds to hold a referendum to create their own nation of Kurdistan – thus taking land and population from Syria and Iraq (and potentially Turkey and Iran too, since they also have Kurdish people). Look how enthusiastically Israel has spoken out in favor of it!

The Oded Yinon plan for Greater Israel.

Make no mistake about it: Israel loves radical Islamic terrorists just as much as the West. The connections between Israel and ISIS, Nusra, FSA, Syrian rebels and other radical Islamic terrorists continue to mount by the day. Israel has a long history of framing Arab and Muslim patsies for Mossad-orchestrated crimes, the grandest of which to date is the 9/11 false flag op. The Mossad routinely uses fake passports and other tricks to implicate Arabs in their false flag terror operations. There are many examples, but a revealing one is Operation Trojan in 1986. Israel deliberately created false evidence of Arab terrorism in order to trick the US into going to war against an innocent nation (Libya). Ex-Mossad agent Victor Ostrovsky admitted the plot in his book The Other Side of Deception, an excerpt of which is here:

“A Trojan was a special communication device that could be planted by naval commandos deep inside enemy territory. The device would act as a relay station for misleading transmissions made by the disinformation unit in the Mossad, called LAP, and intended to be received by American and British listening stations. Originating from an IDF navy ship out at sea, the prerecorded digital transmissions could be picked up only by the Trojan. The device would then rebroadcast the transmission on another frequency, one used for official business in the enemy country, at which point the transmission would finally be picked up by American ears in Britain. The listeners would have no doubt they had intercepted a genuine communication, hence the name Trojan, reminiscent of the mythical Trojan horse.

…

By the end of March, the Americans were already intercepting messages broadcast by the Trojan, which was only activated during heavy communication traffic hours. Using the Trojan, the Mossad tried to make it appear that a long series of terrorist orders were being transmitted to various Libyan embassies around the world (or, as they were called by the Libyans, Peoples’ Bureaus). As the Mossad had hoped, the transmissions were deciphered by the Americans and construed as ample proof that the Libyans were active sponsors of terrorism. What’s more, the Americans pointed out, Mossad reports confirmed it.”

The Trojan transmitter planed in Tripoli Libya fooled the West into thinking that Libya was responsible for the killing of 2 Americans in the bombing of the La Belle discothèque in Germany. It was later proven that Libya had nothing to do with the bombing. Israel induced the American bombing of Libya by using radical Islamic terrorists as the pretext. More Zio-Islamic terrorism which killed innocent civilians …

Final Thoughts

Don’t expect the West to counter radical Islamic terrorists anytime soon. They are too much of great weapon in the destabilization toolbox of the CIA and the Mossad. Britain is loving its weapons sales to the House of Saud – pity about all those innocent Yemenis who are getting slaughtered with them. The US, especially under Trump, is joined at the hip with the Saudis and Israelis, so it’s business as usual. The Saudis and the US continue to sign devilish pacts with each other (oil, petrodollars, arms and expendable radical Islamic terrorists for geopolitical goals), becoming more and more bound to each other’s destiny, so the US doesn’t have as much bargaining power over the Saudis as it used to. Now, with the NWO wanting to conquer Eurasia, don’t be surprised if radical Islamic terrorists are used against Iran (ISIS), Russia (Chechnya Wahhabis) and China (Uyghur Salafis) in the years to come.

After all, with their scary beards, weird hats and blood-curdling utterances, radical Islamic terrorists are the best bad guys that money can buy.

*****

Makia Freeman is the editor of alternative media / independent news site The Freedom Articles and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com, writing on many aspects of truth and freedom, from exposing aspects of the worldwide conspiracy to suggesting solutions for how humanity can create a new system of peace and abundance.

Sources:

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/israel-and-saudi-arabia-best-friends/

*http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-yousaf-butt-/saudi-wahhabism-islam-terrorism_b_6501916.html

*https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/09STATE131801_a.html

*https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/09STATE83026_a.html

*http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-real-largest-state-sponsor-of-terrorism_us_58cafc26e4b00705db4da8aa

*https://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/other/des/123085.htm

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/sunnis-denounce-salafist-takfiri-terror/

*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9RCFZnWGE0

*https://worldaffairs.blog/2017/05/28/embracing-islamic-terrorism/

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/top-10-proofs-isis-us-israeli-creation/

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/israeli-islamic-terrorism-11-clues/

*http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/deception.html

Advertisements

America’s PC Plague Is a Catastrophe

Source: America’s PC Plague Is a Catastrophe – LewRockwell

http://www.lewrockwell.com

Ladies and Gentlemen, say hello to Dmitry Kiselyov, Russia’s #1 news anchor, and simultaneously, the head of one of the biggest government media conglomerates, Rossiya Segodnya, which owns, among other things, RT.

He has been roundly demonized by the western media, and put on the sanctions list, a strong hint that he probably talks a lot of good sense and is worth listening to.

Kiselyov is an excellent wordsmith, and his carefully crafted video essays pack a punch. This time he’s found an excellent translator to convey a hint at his style. Some choice chops:

I can’t say that we are always happy with our turbulent history, but at least unlike America, Poland or Ukraine, we don’t destroy monuments and don’t ban films.

Otherwise, we would have to stop showing, for example, “And Quiet Flows the Don” or “Battleship Potemkin,” to ban the “The White Guard” or “Lenin in October.” Then, we would begin to destroy the monuments.

And then, we would get indignant because Chekhov romanticizes the old landlord life in the play “Three Sisters.” And then we would ask if we needed Chekhov at all?

And did you know? Pushkin was a landowner himself. He received 200 servants as a wedding gift from his father. Is it possible to give living people as a gift? And hundreds of them at that?

And what should we do with Pushkin now?

For starters, the intellectual fare served to the broad masses in Russia is substantially higher than in the US.

Well worth listening to his take on the PC plague gripping America: (video and full text follows below)

Last week, stunning news came out of America even though to the unobservant eye, what happened could seem trifling at first glance.

At the Orpheum Theater in Memphis, Tennessee, it was officially announced that from now on the movie “Gone with the Wind” would be banned. Although until now, the same Orpheum Theater in Memphis has traditionally shown “Gone with the Wind” in August during the Film Classics days…for 34 years in a row. There won’t be a 35th season.

What happened, in my opinion, is a national catastrophe for America.

I’ll try to explain why. To assess the scale of the disaster, it’s worth recalling something that everyone knows. The great movie of the great director Fleming, “Gone with the Wind,” which premiered in 1939, is the most popular film in the US in the history of American cinema. It’s the absolute champion in tickets sales. Taking into account inflation, nearly $3.5 billion was collected. Modern-day Hollywood blockbusters can’t even get close to that kind of runaway success.

Vivien Leigh was cast in the lead role, an English actress, she was selected out of 1,500 candidates. “Gone with the Wind” immediately brought her world fame. Vivien Leigh is also remembered as an all-time symbol of British cinema. However, she received her first Oscar for the American movie “Gone with the Wind.”

Them damned Yankee, SPLC lovin’, boney-ass globalists up to their monkeyshines again darlin’

In total, this film has received 10 Oscar awards. One of them was given to a black actor for the first time in history. The highest award of the American Film Academy for the Best Supporting Actress was given to Hattie McDaniel, who played the maid, Mammy, in “Gone with the Wind. Now, the film is accused of racism, an insult to the black population of America, and the romanticization of the South during the slavery period.

The love story of this film is told against the background of the Civil War between the South and the North in the 19th century. And, they say, the movie is painful for a portion of America’s modern day population.

The representative for the distribution company states the following: “As an organization whose stated mission is to entertain, educate and enlighten the communities it serves, the Orpheum cannot show a film that is insensitive to a large segment of the local population.”

In order to understand the context, I should add that the Negroes – this word is fine in Russian – are about two-thirds of the population of Memphis. It’s them who are offended by the classics of American cinema. However, banning one film in only one city is only a part of a general process, which was kicked into high gear during the Obama presidency.

Racial tensions are at an all-time high in the United States. It was during Obama’s presidency that the first monument in a larger campaign to remove monuments to White heroes was taken down, the statue of the hero of the South, General Lee, in New Orleans. The decision was finally executed last May during Trump’s administration. But this was only done by labeling the General Lee monument a symbol of the superiority of the White race or, to translate it into PC-speak, a symbol to “White Supremacy.”

However, it is impossible to speak today in the United States about the atrocities of the northerners, in particular, about the “scorched earth” tactics of General Sherman during the American Civil War. Meanwhile, in New Orleans, the monument to the president of the Southern Confederation, Jefferson Davis, has already fallen, followed by a monument to the fighters for the freedom of the South.

Another general for the South, Pierre de Beauregard, was taken down as well. Later, the monument to General Lee was slated for demolishing in Charlottesville. This is similar to the mass toppling of Lenin statues, only done in the American way and it quickly spread to Baltimore. There, they brought down the monuments to four generals of the Confederation and other figures of the South of the Civil War period. A monument to the soldiers of the South was removed in North Carolina.

The fervor is so contagious that desecration operations are now planned for monuments all over the US. Moreover, not only memorials and monuments to the Southerners will be removed, of which there are more than 1,500 in the country, but their names will also be erased from the names of streets, schools, and public institutions.

With a red-hot iron against history.

The cinema’s turn has now come. Now, the brilliant movie “Gone with the Wind” runs the risk of disappearing from all American screens. The Memphis precedent will work. And they will certainly never ever show one of the first US full-length films, “The Birth of a Nation,” directed by David Griffith, who, by the way, is considered the father of American cinema.

It was he who laid the foundations for sensible editing and even special effects. “Birth of a Nation.” 1915. Three hours. The historical period the movie was set in was the Civil War in the US and the events immediately after.

The film had unprecedented battle scenes for cinema of that time. The drama lay in a gripping account of a fratricidal war and the drama of the defeated where “the White South was crushed by the Black heel of the North.” Without regard to rules of war and decency. The North unleashed Black brutality on the Southern Whites in the name of revenge for the past.

How can this film be shown now, especially since the birth of the awful Ku Klux Klan is also realistically depicted in the movie as well? It emerged as a necessary organization for the self-defense of Whites. And, the cavalry charges while “Ride of the Valkyries” by Wagner is playing as the score. All of this is unacceptable now, so this picture will be permanently banned from American cinemas. All of this even though the US President, Woodrow Wilson, who was a Nobel Peace Prize recipient, but who was also considered an authoritative historian, called the film “Birth of a Nation” a “terrible truth.”

President Wilson made this statement right after he organized a review of Griffith’s new movie in the White House, where he invited both his ministers and foreign ambassadors.

Surprisingly, it turns out that a hundred years ago America coped with its past and was ready to comprehend it and accept it as it is. Now, this ability has been lost, and a war has been declared on the past. And so far it proceeds in a very primitive fashion, through the destruction of monuments and censorship. And no one knows where it will stop.

Why not then take a new look at the American Westerns? Are they next on the chopping block? There are many films where the Indians are depicted as stupid and bloodthirsty, and they are killed by the White man in great numbers.

It seems that the fight against the Westerns hasn’t started just yet. But monuments to Christopher Columbus, the discoverer of America, are already being defiled all over the US. They say that he is to blame for initiating the genocide of the indigenous population of the country. Last Wednesday, in the State of New York, a statue of Columbus was knocked down from the pedestal, and then smashed to pieces.

There are new heroes in America now. American cinema does its best to create a new cast of heroes, infused with modern sensibility. The last Oscar for Best Picture is characteristic of a larger trend. The film “Moonlight”, has the main character be the son of a drug-addicted mother, a gay Black man, a brutal gangster with gold teeth. But look at his wounded soul, and his difficult childhood. It’s now beyond “Gone with the Wind.”

This is also an example of how America can’t cope with the real history of its own country. The conflicts of the past, the wounds of which they never managed to heal, have reopened. History seems to be coming to life and creating serious tension.

We lived through something similar in our Soviet experience, when all of society was ideologically balkanized and forced to take up the position of one of the parties in the conflicts of the past. We all supported the red and not the bourgeoisie. We were for the rebels of Pugachev and StepanRazin. We were against the landlords. We were for the insurgent officers, the Decembrists, and not for the Tsar. We were for the Narodnik terrorists and not for the tsarist police.

And we were all as one against those enemies as if they were still alive today.

The same thing is happening in the US now. The Confederates of a century and a half ago are turned into the living enemies of today. And, the relationship between the Negroes and the Whites in those days can’t be shown as it really was back then.

Political correctness is the instrument of American censorship. Under its banner, they forbid films and demolish monuments. Under its banner, you can destroy White history to your heart’s content.

In Russia, we are already so fed up with all that nonsense and thank God, we can now quietly write, publish, read, film and show our history. We can allow ourselves to look at events from different sides. I can’t say that we are always happy with our turbulent history, but at least unlike America, Poland or Ukraine, we don’t destroy monuments and don’t ban films. Otherwise, we would have to stop showing, for example, “And Quiet Flows the Don” or “Battleship Potemkin,” to ban the “The White Guard” or “Lenin in October.” Then, we would begin to destroy the monuments.

And then, we would get indignant because Chekhov romanticizes the old landlord life in the play “Three Sisters.” And then we would ask if we needed Chekhov at all? And did you know? Pushkin was a landowner himself. He received 200 servants as a wedding gift from his father. Is it possible to give living people as a gift? And hundreds of them at that? And what should we do with Pushkin now?

But this would mean applying today’s norms to the past. We have already spilt so much blood over the past, that we don’t want to reopen those wounds again. We want to heal our past divisions, to learn and accept everything as it was, and to learn from the experience. We don’t want new civil conflicts.

Meanwhile, America still has the energy to reopen old wounds and stoke the flames of resentment. Political Correctness only worked as a band-aid it seems, it masked the old tensions under a superficial layer of civility, meanwhile the old racial hostility and enmity smoldered in the deep like a simmering, submerged peat fire.

Now, the tongues of flame are already peeping out of the ground, licking the turf on top. And the scale of the fire when it finally breaks out is difficult to predict.

When a society is split, when politics are saturated with hatred, and the rule of law no longer exists, what will hold keep the whole thing from collapsing?

Reprinted from Russia Insider.

Copyright © 2017 Russia Insider

Jim Rogers: ‘A US trade war with China will end US monopoly on global financial system’

If the Trump administration puts sanctions on China, this would hurt America more because it just forces China and Russia and other countries to cooperate, says investor and financial commentator Jim Rogers.

Source: ‘A US trade war with China will end US monopoly on global financial system’ – Jim Rogers — RT Op-Edge

RT Op-Edge

16 Sep, 2017

© Reuters

 

If the Trump administration puts sanctions on China, this would hurt America more because it just forces China and Russia and other countries to cooperate, says investor and financial commentator Jim Rogers.

US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin warned on Tuesday that the US could impose economic sanctions on China if it does not implement the new sanctions regime against North Korea, saying that the restrictions could involve cutting off Beijing’s access to the US financial system.

“If China doesn’t follow these sanctions, we will put additional sanctions on them and prevent them from accessing the US and international dollar system, and that’s quite meaningful,” Mnuchin said at the Delivering Alpha Conference in New York City.

The UN Security Council unanimously approved a resolution banning North Korea’s textile exports and capping its oil imports following Pyongyang’s sixth nuclear test conducted last week.

RT spoke to famous investor, author, and financial commentator Jim Rogers to discuss global perspectives in the case of the US imposing sanctions on China.

RT: What is the likelihood that the US will go through with and actually impose economic sanctions on China if it does not implement the new sanctions regime against North Korea?

Read more

US threatens to ‘cut China off’ from dollar if it does not uphold sanctions against N. Korea

Jim Rogers: Sanctions are sanctions. They could do sanctions which are not very important or don’t do much damage. And then they will have good public relations which says they have sanctions, but it is meaningless. I would suspect if anything, that is what they will start with. If they put sanctions on China in a big way, it brings the whole world economy down. And in the end, it hurts America more than it hurts China because it just forces China and Russia and other countries closer together. Russia and China and other countries are already trying to come up with a new financial system. If America puts sanctions on them, they would have to do it that much faster and in the end America will lose its monopoly on the financial system, which will hurt America more than anybody.

RT: What do you think, is it an empty rhetoric and saber-rattling from Donald Trump because he said “those [UN] sanctions are nothing compared to what ultimately will have to happen” without specifying what he meant by that. Do you think this is just mere bluff on the part of the US, or would it really use the ‘nuclear option’?

JR: If it uses a nuclear option for sanctions, it will hurt America much more than will hurt North Korea, it will hurt America much more than it will hurt China, Russia and everybody else. It will force the rest of the world to find an alternative to the US financial system. If he does that, it is going to cause a lot of turmoil in the world financial economy and in the end it is going to hurt America more than it is going to hurt anybody else.

I would give you an example, if you look at Russian agriculture right now – America put sanctions on Russian agriculture trying to hurt Russia, but it has helped Russian agriculture. Russian agriculture is booming now. In the end, America has hurt itself more than it has hurt anybody else. 

RT: If that happens, what would the consequences be for the global economy? Could this end up becoming a global economic crisis?

JR: We are probably going to have a global economic problem, maybe even crisis, in the next couple of years. This may be one of the things that start it. There is always something which starts a crisis. If America does something like this, this could be the thing that did it. In 1929, it started when America started a huge trade war with the rest of the world and the economists said, “please, this is a mistake,” but America did that anyway. And then we had a great collapse and The Great Depression of the 1930s.

Read more

Petrodollar end looming as China & allies dump it in oil trading – Jim Rogers

RT: Washington runs a $350 billion annual trade deficit with Beijing. China also holds more than $1 trillion in US debt. How could the US actually threaten China in such circumstances?

JR: Mr. Trump has been saying for over a year, two years, that he was going to start a trade war with China. He was going to put very high tariffs on Chinese goods. In his mind, he wants to do it, he is ready to do it. Some of his advisors are very much in favor of a trade war. It may very well happen. If it happens, it is going to be very bad for the world and it is going to be worse for America than for other people.

RT: How significant is Chinese trade with North Korea?

JR: For North Korea, it is extremely important – that is really the only trade partner. They don’t trade with many people except China. But it is not very important for China. China has got gigantic trade all over the world and North Korea is a very small economy.

RT: What impact will this have on North Korea itself? From an economic perspective, would they be able to keep up their military development under harsh sanctions regime?

JR: If China actually cuts off their oil or something, no, then North Korea cannot do much of anything. North Korea would have troubles surviving if they do something like that. It depends on the sanctions, so far China has not done anything which would destroy North Korea. But they could destroy North Korea if they cut off all trade.

Tatiana Klimova, for RT

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

Behold a Pale Horse, and its Rider is Death

“It is becoming biblical. Washington the anti-Christ is subverting all good on earth.”

Benjamin West – Death on a Pale Horse (1796)

Source: Behold a Pale Horse, and its Rider is Death – PaulCraigRoberts.org

With permission from

PaulCraigRoberts.org

Paul Craig Roberts

Sept 12, 2017

Behold a Pale Horse, and its Rider is Death

 

Two of America’s most populous states, Texas and Florida, are in hurricane ruins, and Washington is fomenting more wars.

The US national debt is now over $20 trillion, and Washington is fomenting more wars.

The entire world is helping Washington foment wars—including two targeted countries themselves—Russia and China—both of which are helping Washington foment more wars. Believe it or not, both Russia and China voted with Washington on the UN Security Council to impose more and harsher sanctions on North Korea, a country guilty of nothing but a desire to have the means to protect itself from the US and not become yet another Washington victim like Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Yemen, Syria, Serbia, and Ukraine overthrown in a US coup and now poverty-stricken.

I once thought that Russia and China were checks on Washington’s unilateralism, but apparently not. Both governments have been knuckled under by Washington and both voted to punish North Korea for striving to be sufficiently armed to protect its sovereignty from Washington.

Why are Russia and China repeating their same mistake that they made when they supported Washington’s no-fly UN resolution for Libya, a resolution that Washington and NATO stood on its head when they launched air attacks that helped the CIA organized “jihadists” overthrow Libya’s progressive government and murder Gaddafi?

Russia knows that it is surrounded by US nuclear and military bases. So does China. The question is: have Russia and China capitulated out of fear? Or is their cooperation with Washington a ruse while they prepare their own strike on Washington, or are the two misguided governments trying to cooperate with Washington a la sanctions so as to avoid having to confront a US military attack on North Korea?

It requires much competence to confront evil, and there is probably more evil in Washington than there is competence in Russia and China, two countries interested in being rich to an extent that it might cost them their sovereignty and existence.

When you see such potentially powerful countries as Russia and China collapse under Washington’s pressure in the UN Security Council, it makes you wonder if the various analyses of Washington’s many weaknesses are real, and if they are real, if Russia and China are aware of them.

How does one go about explaining why two countries, whose sovereignty is in the way of Washington’s world hegemony, help their known enemy bully yet another small country, especially one in their orbit of influence? How can Russia complain of sanctions against Russia based on nothing but Washington’s propaganda when Russia supports sanctions against North Korea based on Washington’s propaganda?

Russia and China have nothing to fear from North Korean nuclear weapons. Indeed, no one does except a country that attacks North Korea. What is the explanation for Russia and China lining up with Washington’s foreign policy against North Korea when Russia and China know that Washington’s foreign policy is hostile to Russia and China?

Just the other day Washington announced that it was increasing its navy warships in the South China Sea to make sure China doesn’t think the South China Sea is Chinese, instead of American, territorial waters. Just the other day more election interfering charges were leveled against Russia. This time Facebook was the mechanism by which Russia stole the US presidential election.

These positions taken by Washington are absurd. Yet, they are becoming the reality. The frightening development is that the entire world, the entirely of the UN and Security Council are now captured by Washington in The Matrix. It seems that not even Russia and China can any longer see their own national interest.

Russia and China are working hand-in-hand with Washington toward their own demise.

It is becoming biblical. Washington the anti-Christ is subverting all good on earth.

Behold, a Pale Horse, and its Rider is Washington.

An Economic Lesson for China and Russia

Source: An Economic Lesson for China and Russia – PaulCraigRoberts.org

With permission from

PaulCraigRoberts.org

Paul CraigRoberts

Sept 13, 2017

An Economic Lesson for China and Russia

Is there anyone in Trump’s government who is not an imbecile?

After years of endless military threats against Russia—remember CIA deputy director Mike Morell saying on TV (Charlie Rose show) that the US should start killing Russians to give them a message, and Army Chief of Staff Mark Milley threatening “We’ll beat you harder than you have ever been beaten before”—now the US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin threatens China. If China doesn’t abide by Washington’s new sanctions on North Korea, Mnuchin said the US “will put additional sanctions on them [China] and prevent them from accessing the US and international dollar system.”
https://www.rt.com/usa/403118-usa-china-sanctions-north-korea/

Here is the broke US government $20 trillion in public debt, having to print money with which to buy its own bonds, threatening the second largest economy in the world, an economy on purchasing power parity terms that is larger than the US economy.

Take a moment to think about Mnuchin’s threat to China. How many US firms are located in China? It is not only Apple and Nike. Would sanctions on China mean that the US firms could not sell their Chinese made products in the US or anywhere outside China? Do you think the global US corporations would stand for this?

What if China responded by nationalizing all US factories and all Western owned banks in China and Hong Kong?

Mnuchin is like the imbecile Nikki Haley. He doesn’t know who he is threatening.

Consider Mnuchin’s threat to exclude China from the international dollar system. Nothing could do more harm to the US and more good to China. A huge amount of economic transactions would simply exit the dollar system, reducing its scope and importance. Most importantly, it would finally dawn on the Chinese and Russian governments that being a part of the dollar system is a massive liability with no benefits. Russia and China should years ago have created their own system. Being part of Washington’s system simply lets Washington make threats and impose sanctions.

The reason Russia and China are blind to this is that they foolishly sent students to the US to study economics. These students returned completely brainwashed with neoliberal economics, “junk economics” in Michael Hudson’s term. This American economics makes Russian and Chinese economists de facto American stooges. They support policies that serve Washington instead of their own countries.

If China and Russia want to be sovereign countries, they must pray that the imbecile Mnuchin does cut them off from the dollar system that exploits them. Then Russia and China will have to put in place their own system and learn real economics instead of propaganda posing as economics that serves Washington’s interest.

At least 5 Canadian diplomats and families hit by mysterious ‘sound attacks’ in Cuba, source says

Of course, when in doubt blame the Russians.

At least five Canadian diplomatic families were affected by strange “sound attacks” or “health attacks” on their homes in Havana, more victims than previously believed, suggesting the attacks deliberately targeted Canadians.

Source: At least 5 Canadian diplomats and families hit by mysterious ‘sound attacks’ in Cuba, source says – Politics – CBC News

CBC News

By Evan Dyer

Posted: Sep 15, 2017

Origin of attacks targeting Canadian and U.S. diplomats and their families remains unknown

The Canadian Embassy is seen in Havana. Canadian diplomats and their families were targeted in their homes by apparent ‘sonic attacks’ in the Cuban capital. (Franklin Reyes/Associated Press)

At least five Canadian diplomatic families were affected by mysterious “sonic attacks” in Cuba that left them with symptoms including hearing loss, headaches and dizziness.

That is a larger number of people than previously reported and suggests the Canadian diplomats were targeted intentionally and were not merely victims of mistaken identity in a wave of attacks that affected a larger number of U.S. diplomats.

But a Canadian source with knowledge of the affair told CBC News that unlike some of those U.S. diplomats, all affected Canadians have recovered from their initial symptoms, which in some cases required hospital treatment.

The source, speaking on condition of anonymity, said more than five — but fewer than 10 — Canadian families were affected by the attacks.

• Canadians in Cuba were also treated for hearing loss, Ottawa says amid U.S. probe of possible attack

• U.S. says its diplomats in Cuba were attacked with advanced sonic weapon

Staff at the U.S. and Canadian embassies in Havana gradually became aware that something strange was occurring toward the end of last year, when a number of diplomats reported feeling unnatural sensations inside their homes.

In some cases, they heard loud grinding or ringing noises, or felt vibrations in their bodies. Some were in bed when the sensations began. Some reported the sounds and sensations could only be felt in certain parts of the house, and that they could walk in and out of the affected area, feeling the effects shut off as they moved away from it, and resume as they moved back in.

The U.S. State Department has disclosed that some of the 21 U.S. diplomats and family members affected have since been diagnosed with mild traumatic brain injuries affecting speech and memory. Others have suffered permanent hearing loss.

FBI and RCMP investigators have travelled to Cuba, but the investigation has thus far failed to find a culprit, government sources told CBC News.

The Associated Press spoke with current and former U.S. officials who said they are baffled as to what technology could be involved.

“None of this has a reasonable explanation,” said Fulton Armstrong, a former CIA official who served in Havana. “It’s just mystery after mystery after mystery.”

Cubans co-operating

Canadian officials are not ruling out any suspects, but say the Cuban government has been adamant it has no knowledge of the attacks. The Cubans have also been unfailingly co-operative with the investigation, they say.

A senior Canadian diplomat who served in the embassy in Havana said the Cubans have an active and sometimes ruthless intelligence apparatus, and certainly engage in espionage of foreign diplomatic missions. But he said they have no record of targeting diplomats for attacks and generally respect diplomatic conventions.

Canada maintains friendly relations with Cuba. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau met with Cuban President Raul Castro at Revolution Palace in Havana during a visit last November. Cuba has co-operated with the investigation into the attacks and is not thought to be responsible. (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)

Many Cuba analysts have said the United States also appears to believe the Cubans are innocent of involvement, or at least that the operation may not have been sanctioned at the highest levels.

Although Washington did expel two Cuban diplomats for failing to protect its diplomatic staff as required by the Vienna Convention, experts say the response would have been far harsher if the U.S. believed the Cuban government had targeted and injured U.S. diplomats.

The fact that both U.S. and Canadian diplomats were targeted is suggestive, since Cuba’s relationship with the two countries is very different. Moreover, the attacks occurred under the Obama administration during a period in which U.S. relations with the island nation were improving.

Another suspect

Another nation that has often been mentioned in connection with this case is Russia, which has a large diplomatic presence in Cuba, poor relations with both the U.S. and Canada, and an alleged track record of dirty tricks and harassment of foreign diplomats.

The U.S. State Department has accused the Russians of targeting staff at its Moscow Embassy with home break-ins designed to intimidate them, and even the killing of pets.

The recent U.S.-Russian diplomatic relationship has been marked by a pattern of tit-for-tat expulsions and property seizures. In June 2016, a Russian police officer with the Federal Security Service beat a U.S. diplomat trying to enter the U.S. Embassy at night, breaking his shoulder.

The fact the Havana attacks seem to use an unknown (and therefore presumably advanced) technology also lends support to the Russian hypothesis.

But so far, sources told CBC News, investigators remain unable to point the finger of blame at any particular culprit.

With files from The Associated Press

Losing in Syria, the US will target Russia more than ever

The spectacular victory this week for Syrian state forces and allies liberating Deir ez-Zor portends an end to the war. But celebrations should be tempered by the realization that the enemies of Syria will shift their agenda for conflict elsewhere.

Source: Losing in Syria, the US will target Russia more than ever — RT Op-Edge

RT Op-Edge

Finian Cunningham

Sept 10, 2017

Finian Cunningham (born 1963) has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages. Originally from Belfast, Ireland, he is a Master’s graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in newspaper journalism. For over 20 years he worked as an editor and writer in major news media organizations, including The Mirror, Irish Times and Independent. Now a freelance journalist based in East Africa, his columns appear on RT, Sputnik, Strategic Culture Foundation and Press TV.

FILE PHOTO © SANA / Reuters

The spectacular victory this week for Syrian state forces and allies liberating Deir ez-Zor portends an end to the war. But celebrations should be tempered by the realization that the enemies of Syria will shift their agenda for conflict elsewhere.

If we segregate the many protagonists in Syria’s conflict, the two main rivals to emerge from the melee are the United States and Russia. Russia may have gained the upper hand in Syria. But, ironically, winning the peace in Syria may unleash wars elsewhere.

Reports that US military forces have been airlifting insurgents out of harm’s way in Syria suggest that Washington is saving its terrorist assets to fight another day, perhaps in some other unfortunate country targeted for regime change.

The six-year war in Syria was never really about Syria alone. It was but a battlefield in a global war for dominance by the US and its allies. Syria was only one of many countries where the US has sought to establish its suzerainty through war for regime change.

When Russia stepped in to defend its Syrian ally at the end of 2015, that was the game-changer. Up till that point, the government of President Bashar Assad looked decidedly precarious, as mercenary proxies backed by the US and its allies homed in on the goal of regime change.

The liberation of Aleppo last December and this week of the eastern city of Deir ez-Zor by the Syrian Army backed by Russian air power have heralded the final defeat of the foreign-sponsored war against Syria. However, that is not the end of the affair.

For months now, the US and its NATO and regional partners have realized that the game was up in Syria. Syrian President Assad recently disclosed that foreign funding for the anti-government militants had dried up. A key marker was the closing down two months ago of CIA support operations for militants in Syria by President Trump.

With the fall of the US-led war for regime change in Syria, the various foreign co-conspirators are scrambling to realign their interests.

Russia is emerging as the kingpin in the Syrian situation. Turkey is reportedly giving full support to the Russian-brokered peace talks to resume in Kazakhstan’s capital, Astana.

French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian was in Moscow this week, where he announced in a press conference with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov that Paris was no longer demanding President Assad to stand down. Quite a change from predecessor Laurent Fabius’ view, expressed repeatedly, that “there was no place on Earth for Assad.”

France, like Turkey, realizes that their best bet now is to dive into peace talks in the hope they can influence the final settlement with some dividend.

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia is supplicating Moscow to exercise its newfound authority in Syria in such a way as to curb Iran’s influence. Iran, along with Lebanon’s Hezbollah, was also key to Syria’s military success against the foreign-backed jihadist proxies. The Saudi rulers know the writing is on the wall for the US-led war against Assad. Last month, the Saudis reportedly told the various terrorist groups in Syria that the bankrolling was over.

What the Saudis are focused on now is the bigger picture of confronting Iran, which they see as their nemesis in the region.

Israel, too, backed the wrong horse in Syria, and like the other sponsors of the regime-change agenda, it is keen to shore up its losses. The surprise visit by Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu to Moscow at the end of last month was motivated by his alarm over Iran’s robust position gained in neighboring Syria.

The Israeli air strike this week in Syria (allegedly from Lebanese airspace to avoid Russian S-400 missiles) can be best understood as a knee-jerk act of revenge for the Syrian Army’s breakthrough victory at Deir ez-Zor.

Syrian political commentator Afraa Dagher wrote that the US, Israel, and the other regime-change conspirators had hoped to split the central authority of Assad by making Deir ez-Zor “a Berlin” – a symbolic splintering of the country.

Although the Syrian government is substantially regaining control over all its territory – with reports over the weekend of the army pushing on to liberate more territory – one cannot discount that the foreign enemies have given up their nefarious agenda entirely.

The intensified US aerial bombing of the northeast city of Raqqa and its support for Kurdish militia harks to the same objective of carving up Syria’s territorial integrity, with a view to undermining the authority of the Assad government in Damascus.

While the foreign enemies of Syria do seem to have resigned to accepting defeat in their objective to overthrow Assad, the country will still be subject to troublesome external interference. The Turks and French will no doubt try to stick their oars into the political process to sway the outcome. The Saudis and Israelis will shift their animosity toward Iran in some other way which will likely involve further violation of Syrian sovereignty.

As for the United States, and its trusty British bulldog, the agenda in Syria was always about the macro picture of exerting global dominance with regard to perceived rivals of Russia, China, and Iran. The US has incurred a serious setback in Syria. No doubt about it. Russia can be said to have won, and for a while is the kingpin, as the war-torn Arab country begins to reconstruct.

But we can expect new battlefields to emerge in the US struggle for hegemonic control.

The flared-up crisis over North Korea’s nuclear weapons program seems more than a coincidence with the stifling of American ambitions in Syria. Washington’s gung-ho approach to North Korea has served to destabilize the region and given the US a perfect cover for expanding its strategic forces on the far-east borders of China and Russia.

In Ukraine, the US is recklessly destabilizing that conflict further by moving to supply the Kiev regime with lethal weapons. Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned of escalating violence and the scuppering of any hope for a peaceful settlement if the US proceeds with its plans to arm the Kiev regime.

Winning the six-year war in Syria is a seminal strategic victory for the Syrian people and their allies, primarily Russia, thanks to Putin’s courageous decision to intervene nearly two years ago.

The US and its partners-in-crime against Syria are licking their wounds.

Nevertheless, the US agenda of global hegemony and “full spectrum dominance” will not stop there. We have to understand the Syrian war as being just one front in a range of global fronts for the US to violently assert its power ambitions. That incorrigible dynamic stems from the inherent nature of US capitalism and its imperialist form.

Russia is helping to win the peace in Syria despite a six-year criminal onslaught led by the US, Britain, France, Turkey, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and others.

But this is perhaps the precise time when war will erupt somewhere else. All the more so because Russia has spectacularly defied the American global bully in Syria.

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