Gimme Some Truth

BE SURE TO PASS THESE ARTICLES TO FRIENDS AND KIN. A LOT DEPENDS ON THIS. DO YOUR PART.

We can only wonder what Lennon would have made of today's utterly cynical and hypocritical world. Would he be just one more comfortable liberal mouthing the Deep State propaganda themes and screaming about human rights?

 

  1. Gimme Some Truth

John Lennon, The Plastic Ono Band

I'm sick and tired of hearing things from
Uptight short sided narrow minded hypocritics
All I want is the truth, just give me some truth
I've had enough of reading things
By neurotic psychotic pigheaded politicians
All I want is the truth, just give me some truth

No short-haired, yellow-bellied
Son of tricky dicky's
Gonna mother hubbard soft soap me
With just a pocket full of hopes
Money for dope, money for rope

[dropcap]J[/dropcap]ohn Lennon wrote that song in 1971, and its value as message resonates even better today. His lyrics refer to some as ' uptight , short sided ( he meant ' sighted '? ) narrow minded hypo critics ( he may have even meant those in the media who ' critique ' the news) '. How sad that almost 50 years have passed and our A) Mainstream Media B) Politicians  and C) The Corporate Consumer machine are still at it. They are equal opportunity bullshit artists, undertaking the task of distorting the truth about what is affecting our society. Of course, behind the OZ curtain stand the wizards who control how we working stiffs should think, vote and shop. There was a cogent scene from Robert DeNiro's  2006 film The Good Sheperd. In the film Matt Damon plays a CIA official who visits a Mafia leader ( played by Joe Pesci), asking for some covert help. At the end of their visit, Pesci says ( I am paraphrasing) ' Let me ask you a question. Every group has something that they are known for. You know, the Niggers have their music, we Italians have the family... what do your people have?' Damon looks at him and answers ' We have America, and you're all just visitors.'

The brainwashing has been going on for so long that it's tough for minds to be deprogrammed through basic human discourse. Case in point: This writer has written consistently about my idea for a 50% Flat Surtax on any income over and above $ 1,000,000 a year. The first one million would be taxed at the regular rate of around 37% ( before deductions ) and would have no bearing on the surtax. When I discuss the plan with many working stiffs out there, the overwhelming majority of them  tell me ' Oh that's too much! Why not start at $ 5 million?' There you have it. The American Dream is alive and well in the psyche of our fellows. A good analogy to remember regarding the mainstream news outlets, electronic and print, is this:  You will know when you hear of a good , viable idea when the mainstream news rarely or hardly ever covers it. Ditto for our sacred elected officials. As far as our great Military Industrial Empire, stop believing the lies that are filtered out by both the Pentagon and of course the corporate world. Commercials as to our brave military that keeps us ' FREE' , or commercials about how the ' for profit ' health care industry cares about your wellbeing.... mute that boob tube! Folks, there is no ' truth in advertising' !

March 19th will be the 16th anniversary of one of the most heinous acts by our government... right up there, most assuredly, with 9/11. In both cases, elements within the inner circles of the Bush/Cheney Cabal must have skewed all that they could to arrive at what transpired. The sacrifice of tens of thousands ( in NYC and environs, what with the after effects of the towers being destroyed) and perhaps millions of Iraqi civilians, along with the destruction of one of the most modern countries in the Middle East, should give any decent person the desire, NO the drive, for truth. Those two actions by covert actors is why there is such a refugee crisis in Europe. It is also why there even is an ISIL or whatever our government calls those religious fanatics we actually "weaponised" as a global tool of imperial chaos. If not for US imperialist ( a word not used enough nowadays ) actions in the Middle East, there would be maybe just a few thousand fanatics in all those nations.

John Lennon was spot on in 1971. Without the mass of working stiffs demanding just that, TRUTH, our nation will continue to go down that rabbit hole.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Philip A Farruggio is a son and grandson of Brooklyn, New York, longshoremen. He has been a freelance columnist since 2001, with more than 300 of his essays posted, besides The Greanville Post, on sites like Consortium News, Information Clearing House,  Global Research, Nation of Change, World News Trust, Op-Ed News, Dissident Voice, Counterpunch, Activist Post, Sleuth Journal, Truthout and many others. His blog can be read in full on World News Trust., where he writes a great deal about the need to cut military spending drastically and send the savings back to save our cities. Philip has an internet interview show, "It's the Empire... Stupid" with producer Chuck Gregory, and can be reached at paf1222@bellsouth.net

The Russian Peace Threat examines Russophobia, American Exceptionalism and other urgent topics

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

PLEASE COMMENT ON OUR FACEBOOK GROUP OR IN THE OPINION WINDOW BELOW.
All image captions, pull quotes, appendices, etc. by the editors not the authors. 

black-horizontal




Who Rules the Anglosphere?

HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. SURVIVAL DEPENDS ON IT.


By Moti Nissani  • (First iteration on  
Invisible Government by Garveate. Courtesy: Rowan Wolf

“[The Controllers of the Invisible Government] would continue to grow in strength, until they had the whole silly world, the whole credulous world, the whole ingenuous world, in their hands. Anyone who would challenge them, attempt to expose them, show them unconcealed and naked, would be murdered, laughed at, called mad, ignored, or denounced as a fantasy-weaver.” — Taylor Caldwell, Captains and the Kings, 1972

The Controllers

This article argues that the five major countries of the Anglosphere — Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK, and the US — are governed behind the scenes by a coterie. This coterie shapes historical events, accounts for the near-uniformity of these five countries’ political developments, and enjoys partial or full control of most nations of the world. As far as we can guess, this coterie is comprised of a few banking families and their allies and subordinates in the information, corporate, military, intelligence, secret society, and “religious” worlds.

This coterie and its members go by such names as the deep state, One Bank, bankers, oligarchs, Directors, Men in the Shadows, Owners, or Princes of Power. In this series, I shall refer to the entity itself as the Invisible Government and, following Aldous Huxley, to its head honchos as the Controllers.

What is it that the Controllers are after? Why aren’t they content with what they already have? The best guess is that they are just as sick as the fictional Eddorians:

While not essentially bloodthirsty—that is, not loving bloodshed for its own sweet sake—they were no more averse to blood-letting than they were in favor of it. Any amount of killing which would or which might advance an Eddorian toward his goal was commendable; useless slaughter was frowned upon, not because it was slaughter, but because it was useless—and hence inefficient. And, instead of the multiplicity of goals sought by the various entities of any race of Civilization, each and every Eddorian had only one. The same one: power. Power! P-O-W-E-R!! (Doc Smith, Triplanetary, 1948)

Likewise, the head of the Invisible Government in This Perfect Day reveals his real motives:

“CHIP, LISTEN TO ME,” HE SAID, LEANING FORWARD, “THERE’S JOY IN HAVING IT, IN CONTROLLING, IN BEING THE ONLY ONE.”

_________

Why Prove the Reality of the Invisible Government?

I’m not aware of any near-conclusive proof for the existence of the Invisible Government. This article attempts to close that gap.

Also, most people are not even dimly aware of the Invisible Government. And even the few who are awake can still be mesmerized by the charade of elections, still subscribe to the fiction that the president of the USA is elected by the people (in reality, he is selected and disposed of by the Controllers), still look upon said president as an independent actor, still talk about him as “the most powerful man in the world.” They fail to see a simple truth: It doesn’t matter who the president of the USA is, who sits in Congress or on the Supreme Court, who performs for the mainstream media or organized religion. It doesn’t matter who writes for the New York Times, who recites at National Public Radio, who avers whatever in any of the major think tanks. All these people are jumping jacks. Hopefully, proving the reality of the Invisible Government will help some people extricate themselves from the Controllers’ pervasive propaganda.

But, you may wonder: Is it conceivable that so many people mistake puppets for puppeteers? Hollywood provides a trivial illustration. Most movie watchers know the actors, but few know the controllers behind the camera: producers, scriptwriters, and directors.

I shall explore elsewhere the profound strategic implications of shifting our focus from the puppets to the puppeteers. If mercenaries are invading your republic, your most logical target is their financial sponsor. Once you effectively shine the light on, impoverish, arrest, intimidate, or assassinate this sponsor, the looting of your country will cease. Likewise, reformers and revolutionaries must shift their attention from the likes of Monsanto, British Petroleum, President of the United States, Senior Senator from Arizona, Governor of Wisconsin, or Chancellor of Germany, to the handful of their financial sponsors.

_________

Who are the Controllers?

I want to know who the men in the shadows are.Jackson Browne

Jeff Nielson offers the following brilliant deduction:

At first glance; the question appears elementary. The One Bank is a financial crime syndicate which controls 40% of the global economy – a global economy with annual GDP of roughly $70 trillion. Clearly the owners of the One Bank would have to be “the world’s richest people” (richest men?).

Here the Corporate media is only too happy to be of service to us. Once a year; we are presented with a “world’s richest list”, which is then parroted by all of the other outlets of the Big Media oligopoly, ad nauseam. Thus, we simply peruse this list for the names at the top, and we have our “owners” of the One Bank. Et voila!

More than 90% of the actual wealth in the world today (real and paper) is hidden from us.

Instead, the only rational answer is that there is another, entire tier of the “world’s richest”, an echelon above all the B-List Billionaires on the official lists. The real “world’s richest” are, in fact, not billionaires at all, but rather trillionaires: the Oligarch Trillionaires who own (among other things) the One Bank.

How wealthy are these Oligarchs? Not only are these Oligarchs wealthy enough to be able to hide their names (and fortunes) from all public scrutiny, these trillionaires wield enough power to even prevent the word “trillionaire” from being recognized as an official word in our dictionaries.

Nielson then identifies the Controllers’ with the Rothschild clan.

For my part, I have been trying to fathom the Controllers’ identities for a long time. I’ve read many competing speculations but never encountered a definitive answer. So I have some vague notions about their identity and suspect that somehow the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers (Rs&Rs) are involved.

Apart from that, I can only offer a few queries.

To avoid assassination, the Controllers typically rely on proxies, shadows, and surveillance mirrors. As we shall soon see, besides the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers sit atop an immense web of regimentation. So, are the Rs&Rs collaborating as equals? Are they competitors? Or are the Rockefellers merely the American agents of the Rothschilds? (not farfetched—the “mighty” J.P. Morgan was a Rothschild agent).

Above the ordinary billionaires, way up in the stratosphere, Nielson says, are the trillionaires. That could be another way of identifying the men in the shadows: Do the Rothschild and Rockefeller clans control trillions? Does the Catholic Church? Do British or Dutch royalties? Do some secret societies?

The intelligence agencies, the police, the armed forces of the USA, UK, Israel, and allied countries, have a license to kill, and they could perhaps do away with the bankers and become the top dogs. Why don’t they? How do the Controllers keep these Praetorian Guards in line?

It’s important to note, however, that our limited information about the Controllers’ identity in no way invalidates our forthcoming conclusion that the Controllers, conniving in the background, are the real power brokers. Humans have always known that water exists, even though they were often ignorant of its constituent parts. The same goes for the Invisible Government: Truth-seekers have excellent reasons to believe it exists, although information about its internal structure and the identity of its members remains as elusive as they are.

_________

Evidence Supporting the Existence of the Invisible Government

Insider Quotes: Many Insiders Tried to Alert us:

BANKING ESTABLISHMENTS ARE MORE DANGEROUS THAN STANDING ARMIES. — THOMAS JEFFERSON, 1816A POWER HAS RISEN UP IN THE GOVERNMENT GREATER THAN THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES, CONSISTING OF MANY AND VARIOUS POWERFUL INTERESTS, COMBINED IN ONE MASS, AND HELD TOGETHER BY THE COHESIVE POWER OF THE VAST SURPLUS IN BANKS.– JOHN C. CALHOUN, 1836

AS A RESULT OF THE WAR, CORPORATIONS HAVE BEEN ENTHRONED AND AN ERA OF CORRUPTION IN HIGH PLACES WILL FOLLOW, AND THE MONEY POWER OF THE COUNTRY WILL ENDEAVOUR TO PROLONG ITS REIGN BY WORKING UPON THE PREJUDICES OF THE PEOPLE UNTIL ALL WEALTH IS AGGREGATED IN A FEW HANDS AND THE REPUBLIC IS DESTROYED.–ABRAHAM LINCOLN

BEHIND THE OSTENSIBLE GOVERNMENT SITS ENTHRONED AN INVISIBLE GOVERNMENT OWING NO ALLEGIANCE AND ACKNOWLEDGING NO RESPONSIBILITY TO THE PEOPLE. TO DESTROY THIS INVISIBLE GOVERNMENT, TO BEFOUL THE UNHOLY ALLIANCE BETWEEN CORRUPT BUSINESS AND CORRUPT POLITICS IS THE FIRST TASK OF THE STATESMANSHIP OF THE DAY.—FROM THE PLATFORM OF PRESIDENT THEODORE ROOSEVELT’S PROGRESSIVE (“BULL MOOSE”) PARTY

[W]E HAVE COME TO BE ONE OF THE WORST RULED, ONE OF THE MOST COMPLETELY CONTROLLED AND DOMINATED, GOVERNMENTS IN THE CIVILIZED WORLDNO LONGER A GOVERNMENT BY FREE OPINION, NO LONGER A GOVERNMENT BY CONVICTION AND THE VOTE OF THE MAJORITY, BUT A GOVERNMENT BY THE OPINION AND THE DURESS OF SMALL GROUPS OF DOMINANT MEN. – WOODROW WILSON, 1913


“The real menace of our Republic is the invisible government, which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy legs over our cities, states and nation. To depart from mere generalizations, let me say that at the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as the international bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both parties, write political platforms, make catspaws of party leaders, use the leading men of private organizations, and resort to every device to place in nomination for high public office only such candidates as will be amenable to the dictates of corrupt big business. These international bankers and Rockefeller–Standard Oil interests control the majority of the newspapers and magazines in this country. They use the columns of these papers to club into submission or drive out of office public officials who refuse to do the bidding of the powerful corrupt cliques which compose the invisible government. It operates under cover of a self-created screen [and] seizes our executive officers, legislative bodies, schools, courts, newspapers and every agency created for the public protection.” — John Hylan, 1922

“I find that the Morgan [=Rothschild] and Rockefeller groups alone held, together, 341 directorships in 112 banks, railroad, insurance, and other corporations, and one of this group made an after-dinner speech in which he said that a newspaper report had asserted that 12 men in the United States controlled the business of the Nation, and in the same speech to this group he said, ‘And I am one of the 12 and you the balance, and this statement is correct.’ . . . Unless we provide for the redistribution of wealth in this country, the country is doomed; there is going to be no country left here very long.” — Huey Long, 1932

WHEN THE FEDERAL RESERVE ACT WAS PASSED, THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES DID NOT PERCEIVE . . . THAT THIS COUNTRY WAS TO SUPPLY FINANCIAL POWER TO AN INTERNATIONAL SUPERSTATE — A SUPERSTATE CONTROLLED BY INTERNATIONAL BANKERS AND INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIALISTS ACTING TOGETHER TO ENSLAVE THE WORLD FOR THEIR OWN PLEASURE.”– CONGRESSMAN LOUIS T. MCFADDEN, 1932

THE REAL TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, AS YOU AND I KNOW, THAT A FINANCIAL ELEMENT IN THE LARGE CENTERS HAS OWNED THE GOVERNMENT EVER SINCE THE DAYS OF ANDREW JACKSON.— FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT, 1933

WallaceAmericanFascists

The Rockefellers and their allies have, for at least fifty years, been carefully following a plan to use their economic power to gain political control of first America, and then the rest of the world. Do I mean conspiracy? Yes, I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent. — Congressman Larry P. McDonald, 1975

_________

Views of Other Knowledgeable Observers[dropcap]T[/dropcap]he first quote is from an outraged journalist (in those bygone days when some mainstream journalists defended truth and people). The next two are from high-level captive intellectuals.

The treason of the Senate! Treason is a strong word, but not too strong, rather too weak, to characterize the situation in which the Senate is the eager, resourceful, indefatigable agent of interests [the Rockefellers] as hostile to the American people as any invading army could be, and vastly more dangerous; interests that manipulate the prosperity produced by all, so that it heaps up riches for the few; interests whose growth and power can only mean the degradation of the people, of the educated into sycophants, of the masses toward serfdom. — David Graham Phillips, Treason of the Senate, 1906

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the BernaysPropagandamasses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our countryWe are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. — Edward Bernays, 1928

There grew up in the twentieth century a power structure between London and New York which penetrated deeply into university life, the press, and the practice of foreign policy. . . . In addition to their power over government based on government financing and personal influence, bankers could steer governments in ways they wished them to go by other pressures. the advice given to governments by bankers . . . was consistently good for bankers, but was often disastrous for governments, businessmen, and the people generally. — Carroll Quigley

_________

Invisibility Slips

An article in one of the Invisible Government’s chief propaganda organsclearly underscores who is really in charge of the UK:

Governed either by or on behalf of the people who fleece us, we cannot be surprised to discover that all public services are being re-engineered for the benefit of private capital. . . . The financial sector exploits an astonishing political privilege: the City of London [London’s financial district] is the only jurisdiction in the UK not fully subject to the authority of parliament. In fact, the relationship seems to work the other way. Behind the Speaker’s chair in the House of Commons sits theRemembrancer, whose job is to ensure that the interests of the City of London are recognised by the elected members.

In the U.S., the Rockefellers played a key role for some 140 years. David Rockefeller in particular, in rare exhibitionist moments, likes to brag:

We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time magazine, and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promise of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The super-national sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.

_________

David-Rockefeller3[dropcap]S[/dropcap]o, we have it straight from the Psychopath’s mouth: It’s Rockefeller and his lackeys—and not the nominal governments—who are conspiratorially developing their “plan for the world” and who possess enough power to do so. If they get their way, we shall become the slaves to conscience-less bankers like David Rockefeller and to such “intellectual” flunkeys of theirs as Kissinger, Brzezinski, Friedman, Greenspan, and Sachs.

In another overweening moment, David Rockefeller allowed these lines to be inserted into his own encyclopedia:

Rockefeller has met with and advised every American President since Eisenhower… President Jimmy Carter offered him the positions of United States Secretary of the Treasury and Federal Reserve Chairman but he declined both instead preferring a private role… Rockefeller has been able to act as bridge to various interests around the world, including Saddam Hussein and Communist leaders such as Fidel Castro, Nikita Khrushchev, and Mikhail Gorbachev… Rockefeller also reportedly has connections to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). David was extensively briefed on covert intelligence… Additionally, he serves as the only member of the Advisory Board for the Bilderberg Group… In 1992, he was selected as a leading member of the Russian-American Bankers Forum, an advisory group set up by the head of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to advise Russia on the modernization of its banking system, with the full endorsement of President Boris Yeltsin… Rockefeller began a lifelong association with the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) when he joined as a director in 1949, the youngest member appointed to that position yet. He would later become head of the nominating committee for future membership and after that the chairman of this foreign policy think-tank. In 1965, Rockefeller and other businessmen formed the Council of the Americas to stimulate and support economic integration in the Americas. In 1992, at a Council sponsored forum, Rockefeller proposed a “Western Hemisphere free trade area”, which subsequently became the Free Trade Area of the Americas in a Miami summit in 1994… Rockefeller helped found the Trilateral Commission in July 1973.

Given this web of subjection, given the Rockefellers’ 140-year-long dominance of American politics, it seems reasonable to suppose that the Rockefeller clans belongs to the exclusive club of world puppeteers.

_________

UniformityNear-identical policies suggest that the same entity(s) is pulling strings everywhere.

At times, the Controllers are careless, treating us to such bizarre spectacle as the “heads” of Canada and Australia reciting the same speech. Is it conspiratorial to suppose that they were reading a speech handed to them by someone possessing more power than they could ever dream of having?

Here is another trivial, and yet suggestive, example of convergence:

What do New York City and London have in common? Both are eliminating their public libraries against the will of the public and replacing them with luxury housing, using secretive, deceptive tactics. . . . It is almost as if the authors of the London and NYC articles copied each other and substituted different libraries, one from London, the other from NYC.

That grotesque uniformity applies to all key policies of the Anglosphere and its colonies. They all fight “terror” and are subjected to “terror,” they all deliberately and needlessly impoverish and poison their people, they all pay lip service to environmental stewardship—while steadily undermining the physical and biological foundations of life itself.

Or take the curious case of Crimea. Any decent person who knows what really happened in the Ukraine since the 2014 CIA regime-change operation would agree that the people of Crimea—mostly anti-fascist Russians—had a right to secede from Ukraine and join their historical Russian home. Instead, the official policies of all Western countries is that this act of Russian “aggression” calls for nuclear brinkmanship that could cost—deliberately or accidentally—the lives of billions. Only a central authority controlling all these countries could bring about such suicidal compliance.

How far would the Controllers go to achieve their stated goal of “full spectrum dominance,” using the USA as their primary tool? 1. Neither the USA nor any of its allies is under the remotest threat of being invaded or encroached on by anyone. 2. The Controllers plan to enrich and empower themselves by investing $10,000 dollars of each American’s household money on weapons of mass destruction (like the one shown nearby). Couldn’t the average American put that money to better use elsewhere? 3. The Controllers probably have underground cities to wait out the aftermath of multiple explosions. Do you have a similar hiding place? 4. Does their striving for power justify the killing of billions and the possible extinction—accidental or deliberate—of humanity? 5. Why, in heaven’s name, do ordinary people take such irresponsible brinkmanship lying down?
How far would the Controllers go to achieve their stated goal of “full spectrum dominance,” using the USA as their primary tool? 1. Neither the USA nor any of its allies is under the remotest threat of being invaded or encroached on by anyone. 2. The Controllers plan to enrich and empower themselves by investing $10,000 dollars of each American’s household money on weapons of mass destruction (like the one shown nearby). Couldn’t the average American put that money to better use elsewhere? 3. The Controllers probably have underground cities to wait out the aftermath of multiple explosions. Do you have a similar hiding place? 4. Does their striving for power justify the killing of billions and the possible extinction—accidental or deliberate—of humanity? 5. Why, in heaven’s name, do ordinary people take such irresponsible brinkmanship lying down?

 _________

Aaron Russo’s Testimony

Shortly before dying of cancer, renowned filmmaker Aaron Russo said:

SO I HAD A FRIEND, NICK ROCKEFELLER, WHO WAS ONE OF THE ROCKEFELLER FAMILY. . . . AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE USED TO TALK ABOUT . . . THE GOALS OF THE BANKING INDUSTRY — NOT JUST THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM BUT THE PRIVATE BANKS IN GERMANY, AND ENGLAND, ALL OVER ITALY, ALL OVER THE WORLD — THEY ALL WORK TOGETHER, THEY’RE ALL CENTRAL BANKS. . . . AND SO, THE ULTIMATE GOAL THAT THESE PEOPLE HAVE IN MIND IS THE GOAL TO CREATE A ONE-WORLD GOVERNMENT, RUN BY THE BANKING INDUSTRY. . . THERE’LL BE NO MORE CASH. . . . AND I USED TO SAY TO HIM THAT I NEVER REALLY DID THAT BECAUSE THAT WASN’T WHERE I WAS COMING FROM. AS MUCH AS I LIKE YOU, NICK, YOUR WAY ISN’T MY WAY, WE’RE ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE FENCE. I DON’T BELIEVE IN ENSLAVING PEOPLE.

[Rockefeller said something like]:

WHAT DO YOU CARE ABOUT THEM? WHAT DO YOU CARE ABOUT THOSE PEOPLE? WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE TO YOU? TAKE CARE OF YOUR OWN LIFE. DO THE BEST YOU CAN FOR YOU AND YOUR FAMILY. WHAT DO THE REST OF THE PEOPLE MEAN TO YOU? THEY DON’T MEAN ANYTHING TO YOU. THEY’RE JUST SERFS, THEY’RE JUST PEOPLE.”

It was just a lack of caring. And that’s just not who I was. It was just sort of cold.

_________

Massive Concentration of Wealth

“You’re looking at the most expensive Congress money can buy.” Bill Moyers, 2013

Jeff Nielson reminds us:

Roughly 2½ years ago, readers were introduced to a paradigm of crime, corruption, and control which they now know as “the One Bank.” First they were presented with a definition and description of this crime syndicate.

That definition came via a massive computer model constructed by a trio of Swiss academics, and cited with favor by Forbes magazine. The computer model was based upon data involving more than 10 million “economic actors,” both individuals and corporations, and the conclusions which that model produced were nothing less than shocking.

The One Bank is “a super-entity” comprised of 144 corporate fronts, with approximately ¾ of these corporate fronts being financial intermediaries (i.e. “banks”). According to the Swiss computer model; via these 144 corporate tentacles, the One Bank controls approximately 40% of the global economy. The only thing more appalling than the massive size of this crime syndicate is its massive illegality.

Attentive readers will notice that there is nothing new under the sun: This computer model echoes what Huey Long said 84 years ago.

The golden rule of politics states: He who has the gold, rules. Wouldn’t the owners of ill-gotten almost everything use their wealth to rule the world?

_________

The Controllers are above the Law

Here is Jeff Nielson again:

On a near weekly basis; the Big Banks of the West are caught-and-convicted (but never punished), perpetrating criminal conspiracies literally thousands of times larger than any other financial crimes in human history. The U.S. government has now publicly proclaimed that its Big Banks have a license to steal.

Another example is provided by a U.S. Congressional report, entitled “Too Big to Jail: Inside the Obama Justice Department’s Decision Not to Hold Wall Street Accountable.” This report proved that—“despite criminal wrongdoing as insidious as supporting major drug cartels and catering to states considered enemies of the United States”—certain Big Banks are above the law.

That is precisely what you would expect from a Department of Justice that is ruled by the very individuals it is obligated to put behind bars.

_________

Challenging the Controllers is a Life- or Career-Threatening Business

[dropcap]I[/dropcap]f the Invisible Government exists, then its control of government and information sources confers upon it a license to sideline, smear, incarcerate, or kill, its influential challengers.

This subject has been covered extensively elsewhere; for the moment we only need to mention that 4 of the 12 people cited in this posting for hostile criticisms of the Invisible Government were probably assassinated: Presidential candidate Huey Long, muckraking journalist David Graham Phillips, Congressman Louis McFadden (“heart attack,” having survived two earlier assassination attempts), and Congressman Larry McDonald (airplane “accident”).

Four others in this list died or were incapacitated comparatively young: Ex-President Theodore Roosevelt died at age 60, President Wilson was incapacitated in office, age 62, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt died in office (years after surviving a coup attempt) age 63, and Aaron Russo died of cancer, age 64.

On the other hand, activist Upton Sinclair died at age 90. Henry A. Wallace died at 77, Oscar Callaway at 74, and NYC ex-mayor John Hylan died at 67. All four were viciously smeared by the Rockefeller media. Thanks to those media and the Controllers’ power, the last three were unceremoniously evicted from the political world.

These data are certainly more consistent with the existence of an all-powerful Invisible Government than with its absence.

_________

The Acknowledged Power of Billionaires

The Rockefellers and Rothschilds (Rs&Rs) hand-pick a few shrewd yet acquiescent individuals to positions of political power (e.g., Rockefeller stooges Kissinger or Brzezinski) or, in all likelihood, help some people become billionaires (e.g., Bill Gates, Mikhail Khodorkovsky). In return, the politicians promise obedience and the billionaires undertake to toe the line and never, ever, share their excessive wealth with the people. Some of these handpicked billionaires—unlike their cautious masters—are kept in the limelight while promoting their masters’ agenda (so that, if push comes to shove, they, and not their benefactors, will be pitchforked).

Here are a few examples:

Russia’s Criminal Oligarchs

In Russia, the Rs&Rs created, out of thin air, a few plundering oligarchs. One, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, was powerful enough at one point to challenge a popular, democratically-elected, government.

According to Andrei Raevsky, a titanic struggle is being waged between Russian patriots and the Controllers’ oligarchs who are still running Russian finance and banking, key economic ministries, and the Central Bank. These oligarchs “are, by far, the single biggest threat . . . to the Russian people as a whole.”

George Soros

David Galland and Stephen McBride write:

During the 1980s and 1990s, Soros used his extraordinary wealth to bankroll and fund revolutions in dozens of European nations, including Czechoslovakia, Croatia, and Yugoslavia. He achieved this by funneling money to political opposition parties, publishing houses, and independent media in these nations.

There’s no doubt about Soros’s great influence on US foreign policy. In an October 1995 PBS interview with Charlie Rose, he said, “I do now have access [to US Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott]. There is no question. We actually work together [on Eastern European policy].

If you wonder why Soros meddled in these nations’ affairs, part of the answer may lie in the fact that during and after the chaos, he invested heavily in assets in each of the respective countries.

He then used Columbia University economist Jeffrey Sachs to advise the fledgling governments to privatize all public assets immediately, thus allowing Soros to sell the assets he had acquired during the turmoil into newly formed open markets.

Having succeeded in advancing his agenda in Europe through regime change—and profiting in the process—he soon turned his attention to the big stage, the United States.”

Why is Soros spending a fortune establishing a variety of organizations, mimicking his “successes” in Europe? For one simple reason: to buy political power.

More recently, Soros has given more than $33 million to the Black Lives Matter group, which has been involved in outbreaks of social unrest in Ferguson, Missouri, and Baltimore, Maryland, in 2015. Both of these incidents contributed to a worsening of race relations across America.

He is intent on destroying national borders and creating a global governance structure with unlimited powers. From his comments directed toward Viktor Orbán, we can see he clearly views national leaders as his juniors, expecting them to become puppets that sell his narrative to the ignorant masses. . . .

By all appearances, Soros is conspiring against humanity and is hell-bent on the destruction of Western democracies.

Soros alone, it would appear, wields more power than America’s Congress, President, and Supreme Court. Moreover, is it just a coincidence that Soros carries out David Rockefeller’s stated agenda?

Sheldon Adelson

Eric Margolis writes about Netanyahu:

[IN 2015] CAME THE TRIUMPHANT VISIT TO CONGRESS BY ISRAEL’S RIGHTWING PRIME MINISTER . . . CONGRESS PUT ON A TRULY REVOLTING DISPLAY OF SYCOPHANCY, SERVILITY AND BROWNNOSING . . . THAT INCLUDED 23 RAPTUROUS STANDING OVATIONS.

If you have an exceptionally strong stomach, you might want to watch this video:

This is neither the first time, nor the worst: In 2011, in a disgraceful, shocking, display of subservience, the thoroughly corrupt Netanyahu received 29 standing ovations.

Why are these politicians openly betraying humanity and the American people? The intrigues of one minor billionaire, working probably with the explicit or tacit consent of the Invisible Government, provide a partial answer.

“[Sheldon Adelson] has already threatened to invest unlimited sums of money to prevent the reelection of any Senator or Representative who is absent from Netanyahu’s speech.”

"Political parties in the United States? What political parties?"

Gambling godfather Sheldon Adelson invested $92 million in the 2012 presidential election cycle

_________

Historical Episodes Illustrating the Invisible Government’s Enormous Power

American “Medicine:” Follow the Rockefellers

No other peaceful population, probably since the 1839 Opium Wars, has been so devastated by a drug epidemic encouraged by a government.—James Petras and Robin Eastman-Abaya (Genocide by Prescription)

Cutthroat oilmen, moneychangers, and despoilers of everything: John D. Rockefeller Sr. and Jr.

Cutthroat oilmen, moneychangers, and despoilers of everything: John D. Rockefeller Sr. and Jr.

Isn’t it curious that the life expectancy at birth of people born in Spain or Switzerland is 83 years, while in the USA it is 79 (38th place in the world)—even though per capita spending on health in the USA is roughly 3.5 times greater than in Spain (in 2013, $9,146 vs. $2581)? Have you ever asked yourself why a Cuban born today is likely to live as long as her American counterpart, even though the per capita spending on health in the USA is 15 times larger than in Cuba?

James Corbett:

As Americans . . . wonder how the country became enslaved to the highest healthcare costs in the world, we turn back the pages to look at how the modern medical paradigm came together in the early 20th century, courtesy of the Rockefeller Foundation and their cronies.

[The healthcare industry came into being] “as a result of a concerted and carefully plotted plan that was laid out generations ago by people with malice of forethought. . . . By taking over the medical industry in 1910 through studies which he made through the Carnegie foundation, John D. Rockefeller emerged as the kingpin of the medical monopoly in the United States. And he now presided over an allopathic system of medicine, controlled through every legislature by accreditation of hospitals, control of physicians, control of medications and which is essentially what we have today. . . . Interestingly enough, the Rockefellers control every major drug company in the world, and when I say control, I mean directly. . . . I think we understand that profit isn’t in and of itself a motivating driving factor for the David Rockefellers and others of the world. . . . America became the most expensive healthcare system in the world . . . through methodical planning over the course of generations by people with almost unthinkable amounts of wealth.

You might want to click on the nearby link, before your next chemotherapy session, bi-annual dental X-rays, or visit to a conventional physician, dentist, or pharmacist:

[youtube watch?v=X6J_7PvWoMw]

Prohibition: Follow the Rockefellers

Using alcohol as an alternative to oil would actually drive down food prices, help enrich the soil, and have a lot of other benefits. . . . So if alcohol can provide a cheaper and better fuel than gasoline, why doesn’t anyone talk about it today?

Well, John D. Rockefeller, under the ruse of Christian temperance, gave 4 million dollars to a group of old ladies and told them to fight for Prohibition (they successfully used the money to buy off Congress). Why? Rockefeller owned Standard Oil, the main company pushing gas as an alternative fuel to alcohol. By getting Congress to pass Prohibition laws, Rockefeller eliminated his competition.

Global Brainwashing Operations: Follow the Rockefellers

William Hearst remarked: “The newspapers control the nation.” The Controllers understood that, and wisely decided to subvert most information sources. After all, why should criminals who can print as much money as they wish, steal national gold hordes, manipulate governments, and possess a license to sideline, steal, defame, and kill, have to put up with inconvenient truths? Why should they have to tolerate the likes of David Graham Phillips writing in a main circulation magazine about their crime syndicate?

The wily Rockefellers rose to the occasion, with the sad result that most people—intellectuals included—remain clueless because they read newspapers, listen to radio, watch television, go to school, and study “history” books.

We may note in passing that only one in a thousand sees the obvious: As in the case of cyanide poisoning, the only way to prevent brain poisoning is to avoid exposure.

In 1917, Congressman Oscar Callaway explained how the Controllers colonized our minds:

In March, 1915, the J.P. Morgan interests, the steel, shipbuilding, and powder interest, and their subsidiary organizations, got together 12 men high up in the newspaper world and employed them to select the most influential newspapers in the United States and sufficient number of them to control, generally, the policy of the daily press. . . . They found it was only necessary to purchase the control of 25 of the greatest papers. An agreement was reached; the policy of the papers was bought, to be paid for by the month; an editor was furnished for each paper to properly supervise and edit information regarding the questions of preparedness, militarism, financial policies, and other things of national and international nature considered vital to the interests of the purchasers.

To be sure, truth served money and power long before 1915. Thomas Jefferson famously said in 1807:

I REALLY LOOK WITH COMMISERATION OVER THE GREAT BODY OF MY FELLOW CITIZENS, WHO, READING NEWSPAPERS, LIVE AND DIE IN THE BELIEF THAT THEY HAVE KNOWN SOMETHING OF WHAT HAS BEEN PASSING IN THE WORLD IN THEIR TIME.

The 1915 and subsequent campaigns merely refined the conversion of mainstream journalists into presstitutes. Here, for instance, is Upton Sinclair, writing in 1919:

I was determined to get something done about the atrocious conditions under which men, women and children were working the Chicago stockyards. In my efforts to get something done, I was like an animal in a cage. The bars of this cage were newspapers, which stood between me and the public; and inside the cage I roamed up and down, testing one bar after another, and finding them impossible to break.

Every seeker of compassion and rationality since then would recognize Sinclair’s cage as her own.

_______________

EDITORIAL DISCLOSURE
All content herein is owned by author exclusively.  Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, TGP, authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians or Veterans Today Network (VT).  Some content may be satirical in nature. All images within are full responsibility of author.


ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Moti Nissaniis the compiler of “Revolutionary’s Toolkit.” This article first appeared in The Greanville PostMany thanks to Dr. Rowan Wolf for helping to improve an earlier draft.

Creative Commons License
THIS WORK IS LICENSED UNDER A Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS



In Venezuela crisis, American media and accomplices provide hybrid war support to Washington

Actually there is no need to imagine. It's happening already.

Patrice Greanville


Media Fraudulence Victimises Venezuela

BACKDROP TO INFAMY
[dropcap]W[/dropcap]hile the US-instigated and supported coup continues to unfold in Venezuela, the capitalist media is literally doubling down on its longstanding campaign of defamation. We say longstanding because there has never been anything approaching fair coverage of the historical processes in Venezuela, or Latin America, for that matter, ever since Hugo Chavez launched his unexpected Bolivarian Revolution.

We noted yesterday, and documented (see this post, for example, and the sidebar below) that even the European Union—which is now also officially joining Trump in his wanton assault on Venezuela—has long used hybrid war tricks to slander and deligitimate Venezuelan leaders in an effort to open the road to more drastic assaults.


SIDEBAR: EU'S ZAKHAROV PRIZE HONORS VENEZUELAN TRAITORS

In late 2017, the European eunuchs (via the European Parliament) insulted the government and people of Venezuela by bestowing the "Zakharov Prize" on Venezuela's opposition. Now, anyone of decent and impartial character who knows anything about the history of Venezuela, and Latin America, not to mention the bag of dirty tricks used by the empire, will know immediately that such a price is not just misplaced, like giving war criminal Obama a Nobel peace award, but a sordid and calculated maneuver to weaken the Caracas revolutionary project. Two things betray the mendacious origin of this dubious distinction.

(1) Being contrary to elementary truth and justice, the Zakharov Prize is very likely a propaganda concoction dreamed up in Washington, or promulgated at its behest, in one of the European capitals now leading the pack in terms of servility to the empire. Since there are so many suspects, let us say that our prime suspects include Britain, France, Denmark, Norway (the Scandinavians have gone full tilt to the dark side), rabidly anticommunist Poland, and even Spain. We doubt that Italy had any hand in this, although, being members of the EU parliament they could have made a stink, and didn't. The label "Zakharov Prize" and its sponsor, the "European Parliament" put the latter firmly in the category of hybrid war tools, a mere NGO, doing the imperial dirty business behind the transparently manufactured human rights obsession so dear to Western liberals. Andrei Zakharov, readers will recall, was a distinguished Soviet physicist (father of the USSR' Hydrogen bomb), who later, in the 1970s, like much of his privileged social layer, and enthralled with tales of the West's putative moral superiority, "went liberal", becoming a crusader for civil rights in his country. This promptly made him a convenient saintly dissident in the West, whose media paraded him everywhere with the sole object of embarrassing Moscow. In recent years, the prize has been given to other "Russian dissidents" also supposedly standing up against "oppression" in the land of Putin, Lenin and other supposed moral reprobates.

(2) As per its own official pamhlets, the Sakharov Prize, is awarded annually by the European Parliament "for people and organizations dedicated to human rights and freedoms."  It takes some historical creativity, some audacious balls, I should say, to fit the Venezuelan opposition into this description. For nowhere on earth has an entrenched and mean-spirited oligarchy ever been seen by right-thinking people as anything but a pestilential tyranny to be eliminated as soon as possible. Apparently the European Parliament does not meet such elementary standards of vision. Thus, for their sake, although I don't believe for a minute that willful blindness is curable, let us recall who these supposedly honorable gents are: they are vendepatrias.

The Spanish tongue created this wonderful portmanteau using two excellent and vivid words: vende, which means to sell, and patria, the motherland.

Even the gringo-edited Urban dictionary sports this entry, which (surprisingly) says it all:

TOP DEFINITION
vendepatria

Spanish word for traitor or Bennedict Arnold, someone who sells out their country (patria) to a perceived foreign enemy, usually for selfish material gain.

political leaders who are seen as corrupt and subservient to outside foreign interests are the ones most often branded this way, but it can also apply to wide sectors of society like the right-wing Cuban exile community in Miami that identifies strongly with the Republican Party and lobbies for a more restrictive U.S. policy towards Cuba.

Pablo called them vendepatrias because he saw them as tools of Western imperialism.

by a_las_barricadas August 17, 2008

So, yea, quite frankly, this prize is not worth a plugged nickel, especially since in this "Venezuelan opposition" we find first and foremost the United States, known worldwide for its hegemonist lawlessness, and which last time we checked was not Venezuelan at all, and did not care one iota for the well-being of Venezuelans, as demonstrated by its very long history of imperialist meddling and domination of that country, followed by a coterie of treacherous regimes all over Latin America, an abject and cowardly assembly which now routinely includes Canada, to its eternal and damnable shame.

QED?
—PG


UNLEASHING A COLOR REVOLUTION ON VENEZUELA
"Just following regime-change orders, Sir!"

THE BOLIVARIAN PROJECT HAS BEEN THE TARGET OF A US -SPONSORED COLOR REVOLUTION FOR A LONG TIME, PRACTICALLY FROM INCEPTION, as soon as the empire's antennae determined that Comandante Chavez was for real and not just one more corrupt demagog or strongman the US elites could do business with. That means this sordid process has been in motion for at least 20 years (c. 1998). In that tumultuous period Venezuela has seen peaks and valleys in the degree of counter-revolutionary virulence created by the vendepatrias.

How do we know Venezuela has been the target of a color revolution? Because the symptoms of her social malaise—invariably imputed to some inherent "socialist inefficiency" by the presstitutes—are classical signs of intentional disruption. Let's examine this global plague in some detail.

[dropcap]T[/dropcap]he first rule of the hypocritical regime change book perfected by the United States is to pave the road for more drastic measures by performing a complete and extensive character assassination of the leaders, ideologies, and governments marked as "enemies" by the US ruling cliques, on account of various criteria, including but not restricted to the following (in some cases, several types of criteria overlap):


• risk of bad example: socialism works  (Russia, China, Cuba, Iran, Vietnam, North Korea, Yugoslavia, Indonesia (under Sukarno))
• assertion of national sovereignty (Syria, Iran, Venezuela, Russia, China, Libya, Chile at one point, etc.)
• enormous national wealth (Iran, and just about the whole world, for one reason or another, as the imperialists covet everything)
• strategic value (Ukraine, Yugoslavia)
• global influence competition (Russia, China)

Indeed as soon as the word comes down from the elites that so-and-so is "an enemy", the huge machinery of aggression via demonisation developed by this country is put into motion, with the mainstream media in the forefront.  As we know quite well by now, the US, besides its huge whorish media apparatus, also commands tremendous power in world-known institutions such the UN, the World Bank, the IMF, and an alphabet soup of alliances ringing the world, with NATO leading the charge, plus literally scores if not hundreds of ad hoc subversive NGOs (i.e., the notorious National Endowment for Democracy-NED). These are all tools that can be readily turned into instruments to effect destabilisation on a targeted nation. In this regard, only recently have Beijing and Moscow awakened to the danger posed by such networks and began to neutralise this new-fangled "soft power" architecture with outright internal controls and global information assets of their own, countering mendacious Western narratives with narratives almost always based on truth, a reason for which they have rapidly gained ascendancy among Western publics. This development, as well as the existence of alternate information websites, have triggered a panic among the Western elites, for whom narrative control is essential to maintain their increasingly tarnished legitimacy. This, as readers already know, has triggered a vast counter-attack whose sole purpose is to destroy free speech and impose censorship in all major platforms of

THE DEMONISING OPTION
[dropcap]A[/dropcap]s previously discussed, in Western political and journalisitic practice, demonising a particular nation or leader has nothing to do with facts. Truth does not enter the equation at all. America, confident of its own power, is supremely, boorishly arrogant. As Dick Cheney and other neocons have boasted, "the US makes its own reality."  Thus whenever a Big Lie is floated, it's all a matter of cynical expediency based on sheer brute force—the force of a mammoth machine of disinformation speaking out of thousands of channels—largely in private hands— willing and able to march in lockstep at any given moment, and while controlling the masses consciousness, enjoying total impunity for committing crimes in the service of the empire. Such reality only encourages its replication indefinitely into the future.

Ghastly as it is, this uniformity of "fact and opinion" on a given political subject is never the product of some specific "hidden" internal memoranda concocted by media barons and filthy politicians in some out of the way place like the mafia's notorious Apalachin meeting in New York state. This fact is frequently used by so-called sophisticated journalism critics (in actuality apologists) to poo poo the notion that America's media operate as a totalitarian system.

In America, conformity with the media owners' political predilections—invariably favoring the plutocratic outlook at home and abroad— is subtly or overtly enforced by the top producers and editors.  Needless to say, for the careerist sort this is a quickly acquired instinct that goes beyond self-preservation. Reinforcing this tendency is the fact that journalists, despite their conceit of "independent thinking",  are also shaped early by the all-enveloping culture, and often share its biases and pro-capitalist assumptions. Contrary to what many Americans might think, America is a highly ideological and ideologised society, albeit one in which the fantasy of social unanimity about the mode of economic organisation, and the absence of real social conflict, are both kept well outside any possibility of national debate. Herbert Schiller, a pioneer in the study of modern political propaganda, sketched out the situation well in his keystone essay, The Packaged Consciousness:

The fundamental similarity of the informational material and cultural messages that each of the mass media independently transmits makes it necessary to view the communications systern as a totality. The media are mutually and continuously reinforcing. Since they operate according to commercial rules, rely on advertising, and are tied tightly to the corporate economy and its worldview, both in their own structure and in their relationships with sponsors, the media constitute an industry, not an aggregation of independent, freewheeling informational entrepreneurs, each offering a highly individualistic product. By need and by design, therefore, the images and messages they purvey, are, with few exceptions, constructed to achieve similar objectives, which are, simply put, profitability and the affirmation and maintenance of the private ownership consumerist society...

It is generally agreed that television is the most powerful medium; certainly its influence as a purveyor of the system’s values cannot be overstated. All the same, television, no matter how powerful, itself depends on the absence of dissonant stimuli in other media. Each of the informational channels makes its unique contribution, but the result is the same–the consolidation of the status quo. (1)

 

Demonisation is also a warning system

[dropcap]S[/dropcap]ince wholesale slander and defamation of leaders or entire nations in the imperial crosshairs is standard operating procedure, an evil that never fails to materialise, by now, anyone or any group intending to make serious changes anywhere on this planet without the consent of the Global Godfather in Washington, should brace themselves for a veritable cascade of lies and vitriol soon to come crashing on their heads, a campaign that will prove unrelenting. In fact, as we have seen in almost all cases, once started, this barrage of demonisation will not stop, to the point of becoming tedious. And America and her abject vassal states have the personnel and means to deliver this polluted informational storm. For if there is something the Anglo-American civilisation excels at is the production of am ungodly number of vile mass communicators, media whores willing and ready to do the bidding of the powerful for the sake of their squalid careers. Blood money, at its most repugnant, since these presstitutes facilitate the devastation and murder not of merely one or a handful of individuals, heinous enough, but often of millions.

A cursory review of the media landscape today suggests that Fox leads the pack, as usual mentally-deforming and insidious to the hilt, but all the US and much of the Western mainstream media is in on this filthy job, the character assassination of a nation and its leaders who simply wish to chart their own course without meddling by US imperialism. (Fox's particular perversity is that by catering to the working class, and the extreme right, it fills their minds with chauvinist/exceptionalist crap.)  Note that all of these voices speak of "widespread corruption" and "socialism" in the same breadth, to imply they are inseparable, which is blatantly false, and bloviating self-righteously about their targets' putative evils, as if the US, the world's most powerful capitalist entity, were not also a glaring example of runaway incurable corruption and off-the-charts global criminality.

Naturally, the double standard can only exist when you eliminate or simply do not even know or care to know the historical context, in this case the erasure of ANY explanation for the economic chaos in Venezuela, a situation jointly created by US illegal sanctions and the collaboration of the Venezuelan oligarchy, bent on disrupting the economy to cause disaffection with the government. This criminal and cynical tactic has been used on scores of nations, including Russia, Chile, Iran, Nicaragua, China, North Korea, and similar countries determined to remain sovereign in their international and external affairs. That the Western presstitutes have only indifference or contempt for that undeniable right is evidence of their own moral bankrutpcy.  For all their pretensions and high-falutin titles, they are enemies of humanity, and should be regarded as such.

Below, a sampler of this filth.

—PG

That US meddling and economic sanctions have caused much of the turmoil in Venezuela is never mentioned, leaving the public to infer that all the chaos is directly caused only by "Maduro's dictatorial socialist regime." In case after case, all the media voices affirm the same script.  The nauseating arrogance of imperialist goons like Pompeo needs no further comment.

1. FOX NETWORK

Published on Jan 24, 2019

FBN’s Kennedy on the economic problems in Venezuela, the protests against Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and why the U.S. shouldn’t send its military to Venezuela.

2. CBS NETWORK

3. CBS NETWORK

4. FOX NETWORK
This one, by a guy named Gutfeld, an out and out big lying apologist for capitalism, is as vile as it gets. Brace yourselves.

Published on Jan 24, 2019

For an apathetic press and socialism's celebrity apologists, Venezuela's 12-year death spiral has been easy to ignore. #TheFive #FoxNews
5. CNN NETWORK

Cavalierly, as if the whole world agreed, NBC, one of the largest US "news" networks, calls Maduro's election victory "a sham", precisely the State Department's putschist line.

8. FINANCIAL TIMES  NETWORK
When it comes to telling the truth about Venezuela, their vaunted economic literacy suddenly vanishes.

9. CBS NETWORK
Just in case you thought that Americans alone have cornered vileness in reporting on Venezuela, watch this clip by CBC, one of Canada's leading networks. It shows that the Canadian media is now as filthy as their servile neoliberal government.


About the Author
Patrice Greanville is founder and editor in chief of The Greanville Post.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

black-horizontal




Matt Taibbi & the Unbearable Lightness of Liberals (Reposted/Revised)


This is a repost
First published on January 4, 2017


VLADIMIR PUTIN, TARGET OF UNRELENTING DEMONIZATION. Yea, he’s a problem alright, but for whom? Not for the ordinary citizen, only for the supremacist Western plutocracy with global headquarters in Washington.

few days back I bumped into a column by Matt Taibbi that sounded promising:

Something About This Russia Story Stinks

Hmm, to have a well-known, hard-nosed reporter like Taibbi file a piece on this topic did sound like a good thing. Unfortunately the expectation that I would find some ironclad, devastating indictment, a lucid pushback against the current manufactured and hypocritical anti-Russian hysteria soon dissolved into something approaching incredulity when my hopes struck a reef on the very first paras:

“In an extraordinary development Thursday, the Obama administration announced a series of sanctions against Russia. Thirty-five Russian nationals will be expelled from the country. President Obama issued a terse statement seeming (sic) to blame Russia for the hack of the Democratic National Committee emails.

‘These data theft and disclosure activities could only have been directed by the highest levels of the Russian government,’ he wrote.

Russia at first pledged, darkly, to retaliate, then backed off. The Russian press today is even reporting that Vladimir Putin is inviting ‘the children of American diplomats’ to ‘visit the Christmas tree in the Kremlin,’ as characteristically loathsome/menacing/sarcastic a Putin response as you’ll find…”

“Seeming” to blame the Russians? Seeming?!  C’mon Matt. Read your own quotes. There’s nothing tentative about Obama’s accusations. But that is a minor peccadillo compared to what quickly follows, a big dollop of gratuitous shade thrown at Putin right at the outset, a kick in the groin that sets the tone for the rest, a curious mix of petulant jeremiad using Journalism 101 platitudes with repeated instances of oblique approval for the idea that, yes folks, Putin and the Russians could have done it.

For those who understand what’s really going on, how the liberal mainstream establishment has rolled out one of the most outrageous campaigns of defamation and putschist disinformation in modern history against both Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, indeed a case without parallel in the entire history of US media, this particular Taibbi piece does not make for enjoyable reading. It is disingenuous, at best.


Above the fray

[dropcap]C[/dropcap]ompounding Taibbi’s failure to call a spade a spade is his effort to keep his pristine skirts above the fray, a maneuver accomplished by that old liberaloid standby, the “curse on both your houses”.  The problem and inherent dishonesty with such curses is that they often do not lacerate with equanimity. One side —usually the weaker and more innocent side—is bound to emerge far more bloodied than the other, and this is precisely what happens in this case. For while castigating his fellows in the Western press for their lax standards, a lot of bla bla bla that professional disinformers will barely notice, Taibbi also manages to lend quite a bit of credibility to the lying side of the equation, which naturally can only add fuel to the Russian hacking story, already a raging, all consuming and dangerous fire. (BTW, it was an inside leak, not a hack.) Further, and for bad measure, judging by his venom against the Russian president, he has also cheerfully joined the Putin lynching mob.

This from the Great Taibbi, the often implacable Dragon Slayer of rightwing excess and chicanery. The man who wrote brilliantly mordant stuff like this:

To hear GOP insiders tell it, Doomsday is here. If Donald Trump scores huge on tonight and seizes control of the nomination in the Super Tuesday primaries, it will mark the beginning of the end of the Republican Party, and perhaps the presidency…But Trump isn’t the beginning of the end. George W. Bush was. The amazing anti-miracle of the Bush presidency is what makes today’s nightmare possible. 

People forget what an extraordinary thing it was that Bush was president. Dubya wasn’t merely ignorant when compared with other politicians or other famous people. No, he would have stood out as dumb in just about any setting.

If you could somehow run simulations where Bush was repeatedly shipwrecked on a desert island with 20 other adults chosen at random, he would be the last person listened to by the group every single time. He knew absolutely nothing about anything. He wouldn’t have been able to make fire, find water, build shelter or raise morale. It would have taken him days to get over the shock of no room service.

Bush went to the best schools but was totally ignorant of history, philosophy, science, geography, languages and the arts. Asked by a child in South Carolina in 1999 what his favorite book had been growing up, Bush replied, “I can’t remember any specific books.”  (Rolling Stone: Revenge of the Simple: How George W. Bush Gave Rise to Trump, March 1, 2016)


So how de we explain this? Is it age? Is it that particular liberaloid affliction so well exemplified by Rachel Maddow of seeing only evil in the Republicans and remaining stone-cold blind and indifferent to the numerous crimes and treacheries committed by the Democrats? Is it a great compensation package? Some juicy prospects with a book publisher or television channel? A do o die instruction from on high, in this case from Rolling Stone owner and Hillary sycophant tycoon Jann Wenner? After all, RS did endorse war goddess Hillary Clinton via an embarrassing piece of puffery (“Idealism and honesty are crucial qualities for me, but I also want someone with experience who knows how to fight hard”) penned by the RS publisher himself, who also happens to be Taibbi’s boss. (Hillary Clinton for President, March 23, 2016).

Not easy to explain. Indeed, for a bright guy who lived in Russia for years, it is inexcusable he should not have acquired at least a rudiment of Marxian analysis. If he had, he would have been able to easily sail through the fog enveloping the liberal mind. But it seems that Taibbi reads, listens to and watches only liberaloid material, to the calculated exclusion of anything that might rattle his self-imposed mental cage. Thus, at least in this lucubration, this supposed giant of political perception and commentary comes across as a conformist mouse, a myopic dwarf mouthing off the approved script when compared to anything written by the editors of Black Agenda Report, for example, who tell it like is, and tell it in depth, using irrefutable fact and logic. Granted, Black Agenda Report, and many of the sites (including this one) listed as purveyors of “Fake News” by the shady psyop asset propornot.com, a filthy slander operation given credence thanks to the criminal complicity of Jeff Bezos’ Washington Post, are not exactly huge engines of mass communications. Such sites, ironically carrying the best and most honest journalism around, are part of a long “ghettoized” sector of public opinion, their visibility to the ordinary citizen tenuous at best. But Taibbi is no ordinary citizen and I assume he knows how to dig. What then?

Leave for a moment the idea of Taibbi being exposed to radical thought by tapping the “information ghetto.” Let’s assume he never heard of Black Agenda Report’s Glen Ford or Margaret Kimberley; or of Luciana Bohne, Andre Vltchek, John Pilger, Jeff Brown, Diana Johnstone, or Pepe Escobar, all masterful analysts—which is already stretching it a bit. Does he not value the output of true, sophisticated, totally above ground and celebrated great journalists, folks like Glenn Greenwald? Is it possible that Taibbi has not even noticed or paid attention to what Greenwald and his brave colleagues have been saying on The Intercept? What kind of homework is that?

Frankly, I’m at a loss to explain Taibbi’s posture. I guess it goes to show you that bourgeois backgrounds and American cultural and ideological poisons run deep in most people—even those who appear to have escaped the American Bubble— and that such self-injected straightjackets are seldom shed, especially when you occupy a visible, rewarding and prominent spot in the media/cultural universe of the country under examination.  In any case, read the rest of this fatuous nonsense here.  Note that at no time does Taibbi stop to consider with any seriousness the alternative interpretation, that it was not a Russian “hack” at all, but an internal leak, as pointed out by reliable sources, a leak from someone within the US intel or DNC structures.

But let’s get to some specifics. The excerpts below clearly illustrate the issues that concern me. (I have used red bold to mark off my inline comments and the more questionable passages):

Did the Russians do it? Very possibly, in which case it should be reported to the max. But the press right now is flying blind. Plowing ahead with credulous accounts is problematic because so many different feasible scenarios are in play. 

On one end of the spectrum, America could have just been the victim of a virtual coup d’etat engineered by a combination of Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, which would be among the most serious things to ever happen to our democracy. (sic) [Taibbi’s lurid imagination is conveniently oblivious that the only credible coup underway has been organized by the Clintonites and not the Trump side.]

But this could also just be a cynical ass-covering campaign, by a Democratic Party that has seemed keen to deflect attention from its own electoral failures.

The outgoing Democrats could just be using an over-interpreted intelligence “assessment” to delegitimize the incoming Trump administration and force Trump into an embarrassing political situation: Does he ease up on Russia and look like a patsy, or escalate even further with a nuclear-armed power? (He’s on more solid ground here)

It could also be something in between. Perhaps the FSB didn’t commission the hack, but merely enabled it somehow. Or maybe the Russians did hack the DNC, but the WikiLeaks material actually came from someone else? There is even a published report to that effect, with a former British ambassador as a source, not that it’s any more believable than anything else here. (Cavalier dismissal of a reliable witness. If this source is so easily dismissed, why even pretend to have any factual or logical reason to trust anything or anyone and engage in this pretentious “analysis” to begin with? )

We just don’t know, which is the problem. 

We ought to have learned from the Judith Miller episode. Not only do governments lie, they won’t hesitate to burn news agencies. In a desperate moment, they’ll use any sucker they can find to get a point across.

swine enough during the campaign to publicly hope the Russians would disclose Hillary Clinton’s emails. So a lot of this is very believable.  (Taibbi’s insulting “grasp” of who Putin is in the current historical scheme of things is on a par with that of a multitude of US presstittes bent on demonizing the Russian leader.  Enough to discard Taibbi as a respectable or insightful observer, let alone a sophisticated reporter of Russian politics, except at the most impressionistic and superficial level.)

But we’ve been burned before in stories like this, to disastrous effect. Which makes it surprising we’re not trying harder to avoid getting fooled again.  (Yes we have, but such “incidents” are not aberrations; they are the norm).


Burned before? How about most of the time in anything of real interest to the public, and most particularly foreign policy? Facts is, the American media are simply propaganda vectors for the status quo, these days the global Neoliberal project, and just about the only thing you can put your faith on is trivia like football scores, celebrity gossip, ever more ludicrous and self-serving escapist fare, and the weather reports. The rest is 100% toxic.

As BAR’s editor in chief, Glen Ford, has put it with characteristic precision:

From the moment Obama became the protector-in-chief of jihadists in Libya and Syria, virtually all the “news” about the wars in the region has been fake, false, lies. The now indisputable fact that the U.S. has, variously, armed, financed, shielded, transported, trained, directed and otherwise nurtured Islamic jihadists, including al-Qaida, is the truth that cannot be spoken on corporate media. If widely understood and internalized by the public, such a truth would shatter U.S. ruling structures. Therefore, it must be suppressed at all costs.  (Locating Fascism on the Home Map, Jan, 4, 2016)


Hard to believe then that a self-professed cynic like Taibbi would apparently still want us to believe there is such a thing as an honest, hardworking mainstream press in the West, a press that supports democracy.  If Taibbi is for real on this, then I submit he is clinging to a beatific notion of the American media that carries no substance whatsoever and is in point of fact delusional. As they say in Yorkshire, the proof is in the pudding. How does Taibbi and his ilk explain the scores of international crimes carried out by the US empire, with total impunity (just counting since the end of WW2) in the presence of a solid and incorruptible press? The idea that the US press was all along reporting on little Nuremberg-class crimes like Korea or Vietnam or the toppling of Chile’s duly elected president, the overthrow of Iran’s premier Mossadegh, or the carnage in Central America, the murderous coup in Indonesia (yea the list is tediously long), not to mention the more recent examples of the press’ abject failure, nay, let’s call it by its real name, full complicity in the crimes of empire committed in the Middle East and Ukraine—how can any of this be reconciled with a strong independent press which most of the time reports the truth? Do note I say “most of the time” as I do not expect any absolutes, and in any case, “most of the time” straight reporting would make a huge difference. To borrow from Taibbi himself, something here stinks. For if the press was telling the truth all along and the US government still carried out these crimes we must face some pretty unpleasant conclusions:

(1) The US media reported truthfully on all these events and the US public could not be bothered.
(2) The US media reported truthfully on all these matters, the American people rose in opposition, but the US government dismissed the popular outcry and did what it was bent on doing anyhow.

If we choose (1), the American people stink.
If we choose (2), we don’t have a democracy in America.

Take your pick. Of course, we know the truth, because history has shown us what it is, and it corresponds much more to the second proposition, albeit not for the reason formulated above, because in both cases, the premise—that the US media has reported truthfully most of the time—is false, nonexistent. Both propositions are therefore untestable.

Taibbi’s sorry performance in this sordid affair mounted by the Democrat wing of the native plutocracy shows us, I sincerely regret to admit, that he is a lightweight, carrying all the devious limitations of mainstream liberalism. His failure reminds us again how much temperament and not intelligence conditions a man’s views of the world, and that while a liberal and a rightwinger are only separated by a weak stream, the distance between a liberal and a radical is an ocean.


ARE YOU A LIBERAL?


[dropcap]I[/dropcap]f you’re still buying this ludicrous and insidious Russia hacking story, and the notion that Pres. Putin is a “thug”, you are probably in the grip of liberal media and their treacherous propaganda. First of all realize that NOT being a liberal does NOT make you a know-nothing rightwinger, or a crude reactionary. But being a liberal, following the policies and choices sold to you by the Democratic party and their numerous shills in the media, NGOs, fronts such as MoveOn, Avaaz, etc., makes you unwittingly complicit with the Right’s agenda because in all issues that really matter, issues that go to the true nature of our “American democracy” and the distribution of power in American society, the liberals’ equivocal posture ends up fortifying the country’s drift to the right.

If you understand by “liberal” being a nice and progressive person, then by shopping Democrat you’re shopping at the wrong store. What you need to be is a RADICAL, a person who is not afraid to look at the root of a problem. A “radical” is NOT an extremist, as the word has been stigmatized in US political discourse. And even “extremist” is a term that remains subjective. An “extremist” like that fabled “freedom fighter” is a dangerous fellow to one and a brave and reasonable person to another. All good doctors are “radicals” in their practice, since they look for the actual, root causes of a disease in their search for a cure. Those who only treat superficial symptoms are quacks. Liberals are political quacks. By hijacking the “left” label, Liberals (especially in the US) suck up the oxygen, the political space that rightly belongs to the left. Their myriad failures and hypocrisies—guaranteed considering they rarely mean to effect real changes in society—are therefore understood by the public at large as failures of the “Left”.

Investigative independent journalist John Pilger, who has been fighting the liberal imposture for most of his life, and is worth more in vital truth terms than an entire American network, or the New York Times, for that matter, duly decries the liberals’ role in history:


“Liberals…appropriate the world that ought to represent the best of us: our fearless resistance to self-serving bombast and bullshit and of course great crime. They fix the boundaries of political culture, art, dissent, even idle discussion. Decent, educated people echo the bullshit, without thought and apparently a care. This brainwashing is the true power of our age, just as liberalism itself is by far the most violent ideology; the fusion with Americanism makes it deadly. What brightens my day is that (a) millions understand this and (b) the current panic of the rulers and their managers, which tells us the wind can change without notice. In the Sixties, that happened…”



Self-Diagnosis: How to Tell if You Are a Liberal

(This questionnaire obviously applies chiefly to Americans)

1. You remain a mainstream Democrat.
2. You supported and still support Hillary Clinton.
3, You voted for and admire Barack Obama thinking he’s the best thing that happened since sliced bread.
4. You listen to pundits and “news” on CBS, NBC, ABC, NPR, PBS or read The New York Times, Washington Post, Newsweek, TIME, and other mainstream media, nodding in assent and regarding them as generally trustworthy. You are alarmed by websites peddling “Fake News” and want them suppressed.
5. You watch Bill Maher, Stephen Colbert and John Oliver and think they’re clever, well informed and spot on. You also think they’re terribly funny.
6. You still think Rachel Maddow and Amy Goodman are reliable journalists and not compromised imperial shills, the former outrageously so.
7. You believe that Obamacare is a great piece of legislation and that it should not be touched.
8. You read and participate on Daily Kos, but you NEVER heard of or read Black Agenda Report, Consortium News, Global Research, Fort Russ, The Saker, 21st Century Wire, OpedNews or The Greanville Post. (This is just a sampler of reliable information sources.) As well you don’t have a clue who these people are:  John Pilger, Glen Ford, Margaret Kimberley, Jeff Brown, Jean Bricmont, Gilbert Mercier, Andre Vltchek, Pepe Escobar, Vanessa Beeley, Eva Bartlett, Paul Craig Roberts, Dady Chery, Stephen Lendman, Finian Cunningham, John Wight, Luciana Bohne, Steven Gowans, or Diana Johnstone. (There are others of comparable worth but I don’t want to overwhelm you.)
9. You believe Donald Trump is the most dangerous and heinous human being that ever existed, and that he is a unique phenomenon with no political antecedents or paternity in existing parties.
10. You think Mother Theresa and the Dalai Lama are saintly figures, and that George Soros’ White Helmets should receive a Nobel Prize.
11. You think Putin is a thug and Russia the most aggressive and devious nation on earth. They should be contained!  You also believe Pres. Assad is a brutal dictator who deserves to be overthrown for the sake of human rights.
12. You think Charlie Rose is a great journalist.
13. You believe The New York Times and the Washington Post, whatever peccasilloes they may have committed, remain bastions of exemplary journalism.

That should help with your self-diagnosis. Pleading “AYE” to any of these questions should tell you are contaminated with a worldview that is at best grotesquely inadequate and self-serving, and at worst maliciously biased and a threat to real social justice and world peace. Run for the exits! Start re-examining your beliefs. Google the people and orgs we mention above.



NOTE: ALL IMAGE CAPTIONS, PULL QUOTES AND COMMENTARY BY THE EDITORS, NOT THE AUTHORS • PLEASE COMMENT AND DEBATE DIRECTLY ON OUR FACEBOOK GROUP CLICK HERE

Media critic and former economist Patrice Greanville is The Greanville Post's founding editor. 


 




OpEds: Is Trump A Fascist? Like Obama & Clinton Before Him – YES

HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. SURVIVAL DEPENDS ON IT.


OpEds

”Self-indulgence has its limits. There are times when reality cannot be blustered through.”

A rejoinder to Norman Ball’s “Trump Vs. NPC’s: The Prattle-Whinge Of The Republic

[dropcap]I [/dropcap]can only laugh at anyone who still supports Trump or fails to understand that he is a distraction and a tool of the same evil masters who control Bush, Clinton and Obama, as well as most of the Western governments and institutions in the world today.

Do I despair at the juvenile stupidity of the vast majority of clueless pseudo-“progressives” who call Trump a fascist? Of course I do, but that in no way contradicts the fact that trump is a fascist. Whether by Mussolini’s definition, “corporatist”, or by the 14 Characteristics of Fascism, Trump qualifies as a genuine fascist on every single one. As did Obama before him. As does Clinton. Same shit, different pile.


Some Trumpsters try to excuse Trump’s fascist character and actions by saying he is trapped in a totally corrupt political cage that is designed to prevent any real political progress. Of course they too are also right, (about the cage) but like the pseudo-Left, they are right while still being fundamentally wrong. Because they are using a truth to try to prove a falsehood. They miss the point completely. Trump was a puppet and a clown, an idiot and an asshole, a tool of oligarchy, long before he became President.

Some Trumpsters try to excuse Trump’s fascist character and actions by saying he is trapped in a totally corrupt political cage that is designed to prevent any real political progress. Of course they too are also right, (about the cage) but like the pseudo-Left, they are right while still being fundamentally wrong. Because they are using a truth to try to prove a falsehood. They miss the point completely. Trump was a puppet and a clown, an idiot and an asshole, a tool of oligarchy, long before he became President. The point is that he wouldn’t do shit, even if he could. He can’t. He hasn’t, and he won’t. And he wouldn’t if he could. Only suckers, chumps and idiots still think he will.

The “inconvenient truth”, that the Trump regime “is possibly the most transparent, and potentially the most accountable, in US history”… “who fundamentally changed the framework of accountability and transparency in government” is laughable. That “No President in modern history has put that much accountability into the position of each cabinet member” is impossible to read with a straight face. What kind of idiot could write such drivel? What kind of idiot could believe it? One need only look at those cabinet members and know who they are, to understand this is just another pile of the same old shit. Pence? Bolton? Sessions? Nikki Haley? Pompeo? Mnuchin? Mattis? Betsy DeVos? Kirsten Nielsen? Rick Perry? You gotta be fucking kidding me. These are the fascist minions of oligarchy, as is Trump himself. This is a regime. Just like the one they have in Ukraine.To pretend otherwise is to be as divorced from reality as 47 different gender types.

Does Hitler “warrant more dastardly comparables”? Maybe. Trumpsters should ask the victims of Trump’s wars in Ukraine or Syria, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq or Yemen about that. But if the idiot bastard Trump succeeds in starting World War Three, as he certainly seems intent upon doing, Hitler will pale in comparison. Hitler only started World War Two, he only killed millions. World War Three will kill billions. Think about it. The end of life on Earth, at least for most of us, certainly including you and me. And Trump is playing with it like a monkey with a hand grenade. And no one on Earth today is closer to pulling the pin than the simian fascist Donald Trump.

The “prattle-whinge” of the Trumpsters is as dangerously stupid, as erroneous, and as worthless and contemptible, as that of the so-called “Left” who decry Trump’s genuine fascism while supporting Clinton’s genuine fascism. A mirror image of the same idiocy, the same Pavlovian knee-jerk reaction of noticing the speck in the other’s eye while missing the log in your own. There is a word for people who criticize in others what they themselves do as well. That word is “hypocrite”. There is a word for people who support Clinton, or still support Trump after two years of his pompous and highly dangerous misrule. That word is “idiot”.

The false dichotomy between “Right” and “Left” is what has neutered the political will and the political power of the American People. As long as you fight each other, you are utterly impotent, and your masters, your real enemies, will continue to fuck you, your family, your nation, your future and the world, to death, using tools like Donald Trump. Their impudence is the measure of your impotence. And just look at how impudent they are!

{And speaking of impudence, Ball’s criticism of Chris Hedges and Ralph Nader, while he extols the fake “populism” of Trump, really goes beyond the pale. Hedges and Nader are the titans of US political science in the 21st Century, modern versions of Thomas Paine and Ben Franklin, respectively. They have not years, but decades, of real populist activism behind them and remain at the forefront of US political thought. Trump”s “populism” extends to bullshit promises that will never be fulfilled..}

Trump is not anyone’s savior, and those who delude themselves into thinking that there is any difference between him and the scum who came before him are not only wrong by every empirical measure, but they are childish and cowardly as well – they pretend that Trump will do what only they themselves can do, and they abdicate their own responsibility for their lives and futures by pretending he will fix things. He hasn’t, he can’t, and he wouldn’t if he could. HE WON’T. To pretend otherwise not only invites ridicule, it is dangerous to the point of being suicidal.


Before reading further, read the below and follow the link to pick up a copy of Texas’ war diary – The Donbass Cowboy


There is no “peaceful” political process, no political figure, who can save the people of the West, and especially the USA, from what is clearly coming, and which they will certainly deserve if they let it. Elections and politicians are worse than useless, a distraction, a continuation of the status quo, or worse. They are a huge waste of resources – human, economic, intellectual, chronological. Think hard about that last one – chronological. “So let us not talk falsely now. The hour’s getting late.” Indeed it is.

If you want to know what’s in store for the USA, look at Ukraine. A failed state. Undrinkable water. No heat for millions. Ecological and economic rape six ways from Sunday. Utterly corrupt oligarchs and politicians who loot the nation and the people of every possible resource, who ruin the country and its future, then skedaddle with their billions as Yatsenyuk did, as Poroshenko will, as Tymoshenko will. (As Trump and Clinton will.) And do you really think there will be any difference when ukrops vote between Poroshenko and Tymoshenko? Just as much difference as between Trump and those who came before or whoever comes after.

But I will say what any intelligent person will always say, or at least always consider – “I could be wrong.” And if I am, I will be glad to admit it. So, get back to me, Trumpsters, the day Trump puts Clinton or Obama or Bush or any billionaire in prison, the day Trump orders the withdrawal of all US troops from Syria, the day he cuts off 100% of US support to ISIS terrorists or the nazis in Kiev, the day Trump outlaws paperless voting machines, the day Trump starts a real investigation into 9/11 or the Pentagon’s missing trillions, or cuts one single dollar from the US military budget. Till then, thanks for the laughs, idiots, and STFU.

Everyone has a right to their own opinion, so they say, even idiots. A Kalahari Bushman may have an opinion about rocket science, an eight year old kid may have an opinion about neurosurgery. It’s their right, but they’re always gonna be wrong. Because they may have a right to their opinion, but it doesn’t mean they’re qualified to have it, it doesn’t mean it is anything other than sheer idiocy to utter it, it doesn’t mean that it is not extremely dangerous and stupid for anyone to give it any credence.

Trump is a piece of shit. Clinton is a piece of shit. Anyone who can still support either of them is literally as stupid, as disgusting, as dangerously insane as any other coprophage. And it is better for coprophages to keep their mouths shut.


Trump supporters: following this crude mean-spirited demagog for a load of profoundly misguided reasons. But let us recall that the Democrats—the liberals and their endless treacheries—made Trump inevitable.

 



ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Russell "Texas" Bentley is an Information Warrior in Donetsk, DNR. He has been in Donbass since December 2014, as a soldier in the Novorussian Army, serving with the Essence of Time combat unit, and with Vostok and XAH Battalions. Now, as a member of the Essence of Time Information Center, he provides factual news and counter-propaganda about the situation in Ukraine and the war against Donbass. Using cameras and computers, as well as guns, guitars and grenades, he is still fighting against the US installed and backed fascist regime in Kiev.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

black-horizontal
[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]

Words from an Irish patriot—