Showing posts with label 100 Year War Cycle. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 100 Year War Cycle. Show all posts

Sunday, January 7, 2024

Scholz Will Go So Everything Remains The Same │ The Duran

Alex Christoforou & Alexander Mercouris:
Is Olaf Scholz, Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany 
- the governor of the most important US-vassal state in Europe - on his way out? 
 
This is what Springer's Bild, Europe’s biggest daily paper and a major CIA media in Germany, is suddenly peddling with. Bild creates a narrative around Scholz 'retiring' soon. He would be replaced by Boris Pistorius, the current Federal Minister of Defence, another seasoned senior Atlanticist, Anti-German, Warmonger, Russophobe and Zionist apparatchik of the US-occupation regime. Pistorius 'may' ban the AfD, Germany's most popular opposition party, Bild informs. To 'save democracy'. No worries. No elections. Steinmeier, Habeck, Baerbock, Faeser will remain. No regime change. Germany remains course. End of announcement.

"Majority wants Pistorius instead of Scholz" claims Bild,
while farmers block roads and fuel deliveries in largest nationwide protests ever.
Weimar 2.0.
 
Reference:

Friday, January 5, 2024

The Rest against the West │ Samuel P. Huntington

The central axis of world events will be conflict between Western and non-Western civilizations, conflict between the West and the Rest. The Rest has now three options:
 
The Rest against the West.
  • Surrender and submission
  • Isolation and protection of sovereignty and values. The costs are very high. Only few pursue this option.
  • Protection and defense of values and sovereign institutions through constant development of economic-military power and through cooperation and alliance with the West's other enemies.
Reference:
 
 Projection from Bharat.

Benjamin Netanyahu, 1990.
 
The man who ruined all the US’s illegitimate plots in West Asia:
Qasem Soleimani, Major General, Commander of 41st Tharallah Division of Kerman Quds Force (1957-2020).

»
The world is witnessing an asymmetrical confrontation between two opposing sides, which has displayed the peak of brutality as well as desperation on one side and innocence along with heroic resistance on the other side. With a broader look at the years of confrontation and conflict between Global Arrogance and its vassals in West Asia on the one hand, and the Resistance Front and popular forces on the other hand, there remains no doubt that the astonishing work by Hamas and the residents of Gaza in Palestine are the domino effect of successive defeats of the hegemons and global colonialism in the region. «

See
also:

Friday, September 8, 2023

Cycles Write World History | Donald A. Bradley

Research embracing many fields of scientific pursuit and all available historical records proves that the climate of the earth as a whole goes through long cycles. World-climate shifts from cold to warm periods and from wet to dry periods with amazing regularity. Dry periods accompanied by colder weather take place about every 170 years, every third such “cold drought” being severe in its effects.

"The turning points between old and new civilizations occur when 
cold-dry times reach their maximum severity."

Professor Raymond H. Wheeler, eminent psychologist of the University of Kansas, heads this study project which finds an important correlation between world climate and political history. Dr. Wheeler's analysis of an immense accumulation of data shows that great international changes occur on these shifts from warm to cold and vice versa. Nations deteriorate on the shift from warm to cold, the study reveals. What is probably most fascinating among the findings is that totalitarianism is representative of world-wide political sentiment during warm periods. Democracy is vivified and sought after by men during cold periods. Intervals of cold droughts usually coincide with eras of civil wars. International wars are fought, for the most part, during warmer times. The Wheeler project has identified basic mass-psychological patterns with every climatic condition found in the global weather cycle. Public attitudes and popular ideas are directly colored by the general nature of the world-climate prevailing at any time.
 
Raymond H. Wheeler and his 'big book'.
 
Astrology offers a logical explanation for this 170-year rhythm in world activities. It is hardly a coincidence that every cold-drought is synchronized with one of the solar system's major planetary configurations. Called a great mutation in astrological parlance, a conjunction of the planets Uranus and Neptune occurs every 171 years, on the average. These conjunctions are within effective orb for 15 years before and after their central date of coming-together in the sky. This Uranus-Neptune cycle leaves a continuous impression on the unwinding scroll of world history in inciting those conditions in human and natural affairs described.

Central conjunctions of Uranus and Neptune took place in the A.D. years of 
110, 281, 453, 624, 796, 967, 1139, 1310, 1481, 1653 and 1824 [1906-10, 1993, 2078-81, 2165]

[The years cited mark the general centers of the 30-year influence at work. They are computed for the conjunctions in mean heliocentric longitude, and not for the apparent (geocentric) times of occurrence. The time-margin allowed for this difference is nearly a whole decade.]

Each of these epochs is at or near the dead center of a period of serious cold drought recorded in the annals of history and science. It is no surprise to the astrologer that lowered mean temperature, lack of much rainfall, political stress and civil war itself should be typical of our earth’s response to these vibrations. Uranian influences alone have long been recognized as revolutionary in action. Neptune is peculiarly associated with meteorological matters, and also with canons of idealistic thought. Astrologers are generally agreed that Neptune is the planet of “isms” and ideologies which provoke national and international changes of attitude. Uranus is disruptive in action and progressive in the long run. Neptune, on the other hand, is said to determine world sentiments which have an emotional base. Conjunctions of these divergent forces bring about the years of famine and civil strife which make and break the great economic and political structures we call nations.

The primary precipitation-and-temperature cycle is obviously connected with a particular interplanetary periodicity. There are dozens if not hundreds of other cycles in man’s social and natural environment which can be traced to similar causes. Relations of two or more planets to each other as viewed from the earth are called aspects. The positions of any moving heavenly body across the great star-sprangled backdrop of the sky are called transits. In astrology, we make use of the term transit to mean the location of a planet by the sign of the zodiac it occupies. Aspects and sign-transits of the various planets are the fundamental causes of cycles on earth. Although not actually zodiacal factors, the declinations of certain planets and changes in the elements of planetary orbits are found to be strong components in the astrological theory of world cycles.

Above and beyond true physical phenomena is the strange tendency of world affairs toward cycles which reflect the general connotations of successive zodiacal signs. This is apparent if one reconsiders the famous historical analyses of Oswald Spengler in the light of astrology. Spengler’s anthropomorphic outlines of spiritual, cultural and political “contemporary epochs” seem to follow a fascinating zodiac of characteristics, commencing each broad swing in mankind’s affairs with typical Aries qualities, and culminating it, after ten more eras, with Piscean attributes. The reason for this inclination is inexplicable, at the present, as no astronomical connection has been discovered.

Mention of such interesting matters lays the groundwork for our immediate subject — that of applying astrology as a calculable gauge of contemporary economic conditions.

Monday, September 26, 2022

The Bankster's Paradise Conspiracy Theory | Antony C. Sutton

There is an extensive literature in English, French, and German reflecting the argument that the Bolshevik Revolution was the result of a "Jewish conspiracy"; more specifically, a conspiracy by Jewish world bankers. Generally, world control is seen as the ultimate objective; the Bolshevik Revolution was but one phase of a wider program that supposedly reflects an age old religious struggle between Christianity and the "forces of darkness."
 

The argument and its variants can be found in the most surprising places and from quite surprising persons. In February 1920 Winston Churchill wrote an article — rarely cited today — for the London Illustrated Sunday Herald entitled "Zionism Versus Bolshevism." In this article Churchill concluded that it was "particularly important ... that the National Jews in every country who are loyal to the land of their adoption should come forward on every occasion ... and take a prominent part in every measure for combatting the Bolshevik conspiracy." Churchill draws a line between "national Jews" and what he calls "international Jews." He argues that the "international and for the most atheistical Jews" certainly had a "very great" role in the creation of Bolshevism and bringing about the Russian Revolution. He asserts (contrary to fact) that with the exception of Lenin, "the majority" of the leading figures in the revolution were Jewish, and adds (also contrary to fact) that in many cases Jewish interests and Jewish places of worship were excepted by the Bolsheviks from their policies of seizure. Churchill calls the international Jews a "sinister confederacy" emergent from the persecuted populations of countries where Jews have been persecuted on account of their race. Winston Churchill traces this movement back to Spartacus-Weishaupt, throws his literary net around Trotsky, Bela Kun, Rosa Luxemburg, and Emma Goldman, and charges: "This world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing."
 

[...] The persistence with which the Jewish-conspiracy myth has been pushed suggests that it may well be a deliberate device to divert attention from the real issues and the real causes. The evidence provided in this book suggests that the New York bankers who were also Jewish had relatively minor roles in supporting the Bolsheviks, while the New York bankers who were also Gentiles (Morgan, Rockefeller, Thompson) had major roles.

What better way to divert attention from the real operators than by the medieval bogeyman of anti-Semitism?

 

Wall Street's Revolutionary Socialism for Mexico | Anthony C. Sutton

Anthony C. Sutton (1974) - Another case of revolution supported by New York financial institutions concerned that of Mexico in 1915-16. Von Rintelen, a German espionage agent in the United States, was accused during his May 1917 trial in New York City of attempting to "embroil" the U.S. with Mexico and Japan in order to divert ammunition then flowing to the Allies in Europe. 
 
Iconic image of revolutionary Pancho Villa in Ojinaga, a publicity still taken
by Mutual Film Corporation photographer John Davidson Wheelan, January 1914
 
Payment for the ammunition that was shipped from the United States to the Mexican revolutionary Pancho Villa, was made through Guaranty Trust Company. Von Rintelen's adviser, Sommerfeld, paid $380,000 via Guaranty Trust and Mississippi Valley Trust Company to the Western Cartridge Company of Alton, Illinois, for ammunition shipped to El Paso, for forwarding to Villa. This was in mid-1915. On January 10, 1916, Villa murdered seventeen American miners at Santa Isabel and on March 9, 1916, Villa raided Columbus, New Mexico, and killed eighteen more Americans. 
 
Columbus, New Mexico, after being raided by Pancho Villa
 
Wall Street involvement in these Mexican border raids was the subject of a letter (October 6, 1916) from Lincoln Steffens, an American Communist, to Colonel House [Edward Mandell House], an aide' to Woodrow Wilson: My dear Colonel House: Just before I left New York last Monday, I was told convincingly that "Wall Street" had completed arrangements for one more raid of Mexican bandits into the United States: to be so timed and so atrocious that it would settle the election [...]
 
Venustiano Carranza, 44th President of Mexico,
First Chief of the Constitutionalist Army, 1920
 
Once in power in Mexico, the Carranza government purchased additional arms in the United States. The American Gun Company contracted to ship 5,000 Mausers and a shipment license was issued by the War Trade Board for 15,000 guns and 15,000,000 rounds of ammunition. The American ambassador to Mexico, Fletcher, "flatly refused to recommend or sanction the shipment of any munitions, rifles, etc., to Carranza." However, intervention by Secretary of State Robert Lansing reduced the barrier to one of a temporary delay, and "in a short while [the American Gun Company] would be permitted to make the shipment and deliver."

The raids upon the U.S. by the Villa and the Carranza forces were reported in the New York Times as the "Texas Revolution" (a kind of dry run for the Bolshevik Revolution) and were undertaken jointly by Germans and Bolsheviks. The testimony of John A. Walls, district attorney of Brownsville, Texas, before the 1919 Fall Committee yielded documentary evidence of the link between Bolshevik interests in the United States, German activity, and the Carranza forces in Mexico.

Consequently, the Carranza government, the first in the world with a Soviet-type constitution (which was written by Trotskyites), was a government with support on Wall Street. The Carranza revolution probably could not have succeeded without American munitions and Carranza would not have remained in power as long as he did without American help.
 
[...] We also identified documentary evidence concerning a Wall Street syndicate's financing of the 1912 Sun Yat-sen revolution in China, a revolution that is today hailed by the Chinese Communists as the precursor of Mao's revolution in China. Charles B. Hill, New York attorney negotiating with Sun Yat-sen in behalf of this syndicate, was a director of three Westinghouse subsidiaries, and we have found that Charles R. Crane of Westinghouse in Russia was involved in the Russian Revolution.

Sunday, September 25, 2022

Lenin. Money. Revolution. | Serhii Hrabovsky

Serhii Hrabovsky (2010) - The themes linked to Lenin, money, and revolution, present an inexhaustible source for historians, psychologists, and satirists. Just imagine: we have a man who urged to make, after the complete victory of communism, toilet bowls in public restrooms of solid gold; who never had to earn a living through hard work; who was quite comfortably off even in prison and exile, and barely knew what money is, yet at the same time made a considerable contribution to the theory of commodity-money relations.

How exactly did he manage to do that? Not via brochures and articles, of course, but through his revolutionary activities. It was Lenin who introduced, in 1919-21, non-monetary “natural” barter between towns and in the countryside. This resulted in the total collapse of the economy, a complete standstill in agriculture, mass famines, and, consequently, mass uprisings against the regime of the Russian Communist Party. Only then, soon before his death, did Lenin perceive the true meaning of money and introduced the NEP, the New Economic Policy, a kind of “manageable capitalism” under the supervision of the communist party.
 
 
 
However, our purpose here is something other than the exploration of these fascinating subjects. Instead, we will take a look at where Vladimir Lenin got the fantastic sums necessary to fund party activity before the revolution. Over recent decades some very interesting materials have been published, but still, much remains obscure. For example, at the beginning of the 20th century, the underground newspaper Iskra was sponsored by a mysterious benefactor (individual or collective), disguised in the party documents as the “Californian gold mines.” Some researchers believe that this was an instance of radical Russian revolutionaries being sponsored by American Jewish bankers, mostly Russian expatriates and their descendants, who hated Tsarism for its official anti-semitic policies.

During the revolution of 1905-07, Bolsheviks were sponsored by American oil corporations with the view to pushing their rivals out of the world markets (namely, Nobel’s oil cartel in Baku). At that very time, the American banker Jacob Schiff also provided Bolsheviks with money, as he himself confessed. The list of donors also included Yermasov, a manufacturer from Syzran, and Morozov, a merchant and industrialist based near Moscow. Later, the Bolshevik party acquired another financial donor in the person of Schmidt, owner of a furniture factory in Moscow. It is curious that Savva Morozov and Nikolai Schmidt both eventually committed a suicide, as a result of which the Bolsheviks got a considerable proportion of their fortunes. And of course, big money came from the so-called ex’es [the truncated form of “expropriation”] or, in simpler terms, banal robberies of banks, post offices, and railway ticket-offices. These actions were masterminded by two characters with criminal monickers Kamo and Koba, i.e., Ter-Petrosian and Dzhugashvili.

Nevertheless, hundreds of thousands and even millions of roubles invested in revolutionary activities might at best only shake the Russian empire. Despite all its shortcomings, its institutions were pretty solid – but only in peacetime. With the outbreak of the First World War, new financial and political opportunities opened up before the Bolsheviks, and they didn’t fail to take advantage of them. On Jan. 15, 1915 the German ambassador in Istanbul sent a report to Berlin, relating about his meeting with a Russian subject Aleksander Gelfand (aka Parvus), an active participant of the revolution of 1905-07 and owner of a large trade company. Parvus acquainted the German ambassador with the plan of the Russian revolution. He was immediately invited to Berlin, where he met with some influential cabinet members and advisors to Chancellor Bethmann-Hollweg. Parvus suggested that the Germans give him a large sum of money to help promote, firstly, the national movements in Finland and Ukraine and secondly, to support the Bolsheviks, who propagated the idea of the defeat of the Russian empire in the unjust war for the sake of overthrowing the “regime of landlords and capitalists.” Parvus’ suggestions were accepted; on Kaiser Wilhelm’s personal order, he was given two million German marks as the first contribution to “the cause of the Russian revolution.” Later, other installments followed, some of them for greater sums. Thus, according to a receipt made by Parvus, on Jan. 29, 1915 he received 15 million in Russian bills for the development of the revolutionary movement in Russia. The money was allotted with the typical German efficiency.

In Finland and Ukraine Parvus’ (and the German general staff’s) agents turned out to be of second or third-rate importance. Therefore, their influence on the process of gaining independence in these countries was insignificant in comparison with the objective processes of nation-building in the Russian empire. Yet in regards to Lenin, Parvus-Gelfand hit the bull’s-eye. Parvus claimed that he told Lenin that, at that moment, revolution was only possible in Russia, and only as a result of Germany winning the war. In response, Lenin sent his proxy Fuerstenberg (aka Ganetsky) for close cooperation with Parvus, which lasted till 1918. Another installment from Germany, although not as large, came to the Bolsheviks via the Swiss parliamentary Karl Moor – but it only amounted to 35,000 dollars. More investments came from the Nia Bank in Stockholm. On the order of the German Imperial Bank at No. 2754, Nia, personal accounts for Lenin, Trotsky, Zinoviev, and other Bolshevik leaders, were opened. Order No. 7433 of March 2, 1917, provided payments for the “services” of Lenin, Zinoviev, Kollontai, and others, in the sphere of public peace propaganda in Russia, where the Tsarist regime had just been overthrown.

The colossal sums were wisely administered. The Bolsheviks published their own newspapers which were distributed free of charge in every town and village. The entire territory of Russia was covered with a network of their professional propagandists. “Red guard” units were formed quite openly. Of course, it was done not just with the German gold. Although the “poor” political emigrant Trotsky had 10 thousand dollars confiscated by Canadian customs in Halifax in 1917, whilst being on his way from America to Russia, it is absolutely clear that he still managed to smuggle huge sums from the banker Schiff to his supporters.
 
Yet even greater funds were raised in the course of “the expropriation of the expropriators” (in more common terms, the robbing of wealthy individuals and organizations), initiated in the spring of 1917. Has it ever occurred to anyone to question the Bolsheviks occupation of the palace of the ballerina Kshesinskaya and the Smolny Institute?

Generally speaking, the Russian democratic revolution broke out in the early spring of the 1917 quite unexpectedly for all its political subjects both inside the empire and outside its boundaries. It was a spontaneous, truly grass-roots movement both in Petrograd and on the outskirts of the empire. Suffice it to say that a month before the start of the revolution Lenin, who then was in emigration in Switzerland, publicly voiced his doubts about the chances for the politicians of his generation (i.e., 40 and 50-year-olds) to live to see a revolution in Russia. However, it was the radical Russian politicians who were the fastest to change their ways and ready to ride the revolution (as we have already said, with the use of the German assistance).

All in all, the Russian revolution was not accidental. It is even strange that it should not have broken out, say, one year earlier: all the social, political, and national problems in the Romanov empire had reached their limits, while from the formal, economic perspective, the industry was developing dynamically, and the stock of weapons and ammunition had considerably increased. Yet the utter inefficiency of the central power and the corruption of the elite, unavoidable under any autocracy, took their toll. Following that, the deliberate corruption of the army, the undermining of the rear, the sabotage of any attempts at constructive solutions of the urgent problems, together with the incurable chauvinistic centralism typical of virtually all Great Russian political forces, aggravated the crisis. During the campaign of 1917, the Entente troops were supposed to start a simultaneous general offensive on all European fronts, but the Russian army proved to be unprepared. Consequently, in April the attacks of the Anglo-French forces at Rheims failed, the casualties exceeding 100,000 in dead and wounded. In July, the Russian troops attempted an offensive in the direction of Lviv, but eventually had to retreat from Galicia and Bukovyna, and yield Riga in the north, almost without resistance. Finally, the battle at Caporetto in October resulted in a disastrous defeat of the Italian army. 130,000 Italian men were dead, another 300,000 were taken captive. Only the English and French divisions, urgently shipped from France, were able to stabilize the front and prevent Italy from withdrawing from the war. And finally, after the November uprising in Petrograd, when the Bolsheviks and left social revolutionaries came to power, an armistice was declared on the East front – first de facto and then de jure, and not only with Russia and Ukraine, but Romania as well.

Such changes on the Eastern front were to a large degree possible due to the funds which were allotted by Germany for the demoralization of the Russian army from the rear. The military operations on the Eastern front, prepared on a large scale and executed with great success, were considerably facilitated by the undermining activities from within Russia, conducted by the Ministry of foreign affairs. “Our chief goal in this activity was to further strengthen the nationalist and separatist sentiments, and support the revolutionary elements. We are continuing this activity even at present, and completing an agreement with the political division of the General Staff in Berlin” (Captain von Huelsen).

Our joint efforts have yielded considerable results. Without our constant support, the Bolshevist movement could have never reached the scale and influence it now has. Everything testifies to the further growth of this movement.” These were the words of German secretary of state, Richard von Kuehlmann, written on Sept. 29, 1917. It was a month and a half before the Bolshevik revolt in Petrograd. Von Kuehlmann knew what he was writing about. He was an active participant in all those events; a little later he was to conduct peace negotiations with Bolshevik Russia and the Ukrainian People’s Republic in Brest in the early 1918. He controlled the huge financial current, going into the tens of thousands of German marks, and also had contacts with a number of key characters in this historic drama. “I have the honor of asking Your Excellence to allot a sum of 15 million marks at the disposal of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for political propaganda in Russia, referring this sum to paragraph 6, section II of the extraordinary budget. Depending on the development of events, I would like to stipulate in advance a possibility of addressing Your Excellence again in the nearest future with the view to allotting additional monies,” wrote von Kuehlmann on Nov. 9, 1917.

As we can see, no sooner had news of the Petrograd revolt (to be labeled the Great October Revolution) arrived than Kaiser Germany allotted new funds for propaganda in Russia. This money went first and foremost to support the Bolsheviks, who first demoralized the army, and then withdrew the Russian Republic from the war, thus freeing millions of German soldiers for operations in the West.

Yet managed to preserve the image of unselfish revolutionaries, romantic Marxists, until this very day. Even now, not only “official” adepts of the Marxist-Leninist creeds, but also a certain proportion of the non-party left intellectuals, are convinced that Lenin and his adherents were sincere internationalists and noble champions of the popular cause.

On the whole, we can observe a curious situation. In 1958, Oxford University published the secret documents of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Kaiser Germany (this is where von Kuehlmann’s telegrams come from, and where one can find scores of no less significant texts dating back to the First World War), which proved the massive financial and organizational assistance rendered by the German authorities to the Bolsheviks.

Germany’s goals were obvious. The radical revolutionaries were to undermine the military potential of one of the principal rivals of the central powers, to which Germany also belonged, i.e., the Russian empire. Thousands of books on the subject have been published, providing other convincing evidence. Yet even today not only communist historians, but also a great number of liberally-minded researchers, will deny self-evident historical facts. Here is some more evidence provided by the German secretary of state von Kuehlmann: “Only when the Bolsheviks began to receive constant investments from us via various channels and under various labels, were they able to firmly establish their major printed organ, Pravda, to develop active propaganda, and to considerably enlarge their party base, which was rather narrow at the beginning” (Berlin, Dec. 3, 1917). Indeed, party membership grew 100 times only within a year after overthrowing Tsarism! As far as Lenin’s personal stand goes, this is how Colonel Walter Nicolai, head of German military intelligence service in the times of the First World war, described him in his memoirs: “Like anyone else, at that time I knew nothing about Bolshevism; as for Lenin, I only knew that he was living in Switzerland as a political emigrant, under the cryptonym ‘Ulianov’ he provided my service with valuable information on the situation in Tsarist Russia against which he was fighting.

In other words, without constant assistance from the Germans, the Bolsheviks would hardly have become one of the leading Russian parties in 1917. This would mean a completely different development of events, probably much more anarchical, which would have hardly resulted in the establishment of a dictatorship, let alone a totalitarian regime. The most likely scenario is a different version of the disintegration of the Russian empire, as WWI was primarily about the ruin of empires. Thus, the independence of Finland and Poland was de facto a fait accompli some time around 1916.

The Russian empire, or even the Russian republic, would hardly have become an exception from this process of collapse triggered by the First World War. Suffice it to remember that Britain was forced to grant independence to Ireland, India rushed for its independence just after WWI, and so on, and so forth. And this revolution itself was to a point marked by the national-liberation struggle, as it was the Life Guards Volhynia Regiment that was the first to rebel against autocracy in the early 1917. As to the Bolsheviks, at that time they were a minute party, hardly known to anyone else (four thousand members, mostly in exile and emigration). They had no say in overthrowing Tsarism.

Assistance did not stop after Lenin’s government came to power. “You are free to operate large sums, as we are extremely interested in the stability of the Bolsheviks. You have Riesler’s funds at your disposal. If necessary, wire us how much more you need.” (Berlin, May 18, 1918). As usual, von Kuehlmann calls a spade a spade as he addressed the German embassy in Moscow. The Bolsheviks stood fast, and in the fall of 1918 they threw huge sums from the Russian imperial treasury, which they had seized, into revolutionary propaganda in Germany, with the hope to inciting the world revolution.

The situation in Germany was a mirror image of the one in Russia. In early November, 1918, the revolution did break out there. Money, weapons, and qualified professional revolutionaries shipped in from Moscow and played their role. Yet the local communists failed to lead this revolution. Subjective and (more importantly) objective factors worked against them. A totalitarian regime was established in Germany only 15 years later, but this is a different topic. Meanwhile, in 1921, in the democratic Weimar Republic the renowned social democrat Eduard Bernstein published in his party’s central organ Vorwaerts an article headed “A Shady Story.” In it, he related that as far back as December 1917, he received an affirmative answer from "a certain comp
etent person” to the question of whether Germany had given money to Lenin. According to his data, the Bolsheviks alone were paid more than 50 million German marks in gold. Later, this sum was officially mentioned during the session of the Reichstags committee on foreign policy. Responding to the accusations of libel from the communist press, Bernstein suggested that they sue him, after which the campaign instantly stopped. As Germany was in a bad need of friendly relations with Soviet Russia, the discussion of this topic in the press ended abruptly.

Aleksander Kerensky, one of the Bolshevik’s chief political opponents, deduced from his own investigation of the case, that the sums received by the Bolsheviks before and after coming to power totaled 80 million German marks in gold. As a matter of fact, Ulianov-Lenin never even tried to conceal this from his party colleagues. Thus, in November, 1918, at the meeting of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee (a Bolshevist quasi-parliament), the Bolshevik leader said: “I am often accused of having carried out our revolution with German money; I do not deny it, but instead, with the Russian money, I’m going to carry out the same revolution in Germany.” And he tried to do so, throwing away tens of millions of roubles. However, he failed: the German social democrats, unlike their Russian counterparts, saw which way the wind was blowing and managed to arrange for a timely assassination of Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg. This was followed by the disarmament of the “red guards” and physical extermination of their leaders.

They had no other way out of the situation. Maybe, if Kerensky had mustered his courage and ordered to shoot Smolny together with all of its “red” inhabitants, even the Kaiser’s millions wouldn’t have helped them. We might as well round off here, should it be not for a piece of information in The New York Times of April, 1921, stating that in 1920 alone, 75 million Swiss franks were sent to Lenin’s account in one of the Swiss banks. According to the newspaper, Trotsky had 11 million dollars and 90 million franks on his accounts, Zinoviev – 80 million franks; the “knight of the revolution,” Dzerzhynsky, had 80 million, while Ganetsky-Fuerstenberg had 60 million franks and 10 million dollars. Lenin, in his secret note to the Cheka leaders Unschlicht and Bokiy of April 24, 1921, demanded that they find the source of the information leak. However, it was never established.

Was this money also meant for the world revolution? Or is it a kind of kickback from the politicians and financiers of those countries where Lenin and Trotsky’s “red horses” were not ordered to go? One can only hypothesize. Even now a considerable proportion of Lenin’s papers is kept top secret [...].

Quoted from: 

See also:

Saturday, February 25, 2017

Energy War over Syria │ The Geopolitics of Oil and Gas Pipelines

Major Planned Pipelines - Enlarge
The war on Syria is only unclear at first sight. On closer inspection, it becomes clear that fighting between mercenaries and government forces takes place only where important pipelines are running or planned. 

Russia, the Western powers and the Gulf States are fighting for the best starting position for gas and oil supplies for the European market. France, the United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia and the United States, in particular, are interfering in the distribution struggle without any reference to international law, while Russia's support to the legal Syrian government is fully in line with international law.  

Two of the most important oil markets are located in the Syrian cities of Manbij and al-Bab, both of which are located in the Aleppo province. These two cities are also the most important pipeline, the oil from Iraq - from Mosul and al-Qaim - transported to Syria as far as the province of Idlib

Territorial Control - Enlarge
The same Pipeline runs through the city of Aleppo to the oil market in Idlib. Whoever controls Manbid, has a great influence on the oil transport in Syria. The same applies to Aleppo, Idlib and al-Bab in the west of the country. In the east of the country the same oil transport line runs through Raqqa and Deir Ezzor. The oil that flows through this transport line comes from Mosul, via Sinjar to Deir Ezzor and a second strand from al-Qaim to Deir Ezzor. So far, Turkey has had no influence on the oil transport lines in the Syrian conflict. Through the capture of Manbidz, Turkey could assert its influence on the transport system in Syria. The current battle for Aleppo is called only from a basic decision-making battle: Aleppo is the last big city through which flows the country's most important transport line. Anyone who controls Aleppo controls the "key" of the pipeline. It is striking that the conflicts between the conflict parties take place, in particular, on the most important points of the transport lines: Raqqa, Deir Ezzor, Aleppo, Idlib, Manbidsch, Hasaka, al-Bukamal, Ain Issa and al-Bab. In Homs and Hama also violent battles take place. Previously, Palmyra was fiercely fought. These, in turn, are the areas through which the Qatar-Turkey pipeline is planned. The Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline supported and planned by the Russians should also be run by Homs. That is why Homs from the Russian point of view cannot be controlled by the Islamic mercenaries. 

The fog of war and the realm of uncertainty:
Russian
and US Airstrikes -
Enlarge
From the map of the air strikes, it is clear that the US airspace mainly focuses on the East and the Russian air strikes, especially on the west of Syria. While the control of West Syria is important to the Russians to prevent pro-Western pipelines, it is important from the US point of view that the prospect of pro-Russian pipelines - like the Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline - to prevent.

Another planned pipeline was originally to go from the Israeli Golan Heights via Damascus to Turkey. This pipeline would allow Israel to emerge as a gas supplier, provided the government is overthrown in Damascus. But Russia does not want any competitors in the gas market.

In connection with the pipeline routes, the planned "Kurdish corridor" is also critical. The Caucasus Strategic Research Center (KAFKASSAM) in Ankara reports: "The real objective of this corridor is to transport the Kurdish oil and gas from the Northern Iraq over Northern Syria to the Mediterranean by pipeline there. In addition, the US had planned to build another pipeline from the Persian Gulf to the Northern Iraq and from there via Northern Syria. Thus, both Iraq and Turkey should be brought to the West and especially to Europe on the energy market through both Turkey and Northern Syria. But the plan to found a Kurdish corridor fell into the water because the Russians intervened in Syria. Russia is opposed to this corridor because Europe is to be maintained as a customer of Russian energy carriers. Russia will under no circumstances give up its position on the European market." See also HERE + HERE + HERE + HERE


War as the continuation of politics and economic interest by other means.

Friday, June 10, 2016

Weapon of Mass Migration | The US War on Europe

Open Gates: Coerced collective
suicide of European nations (
Here)
Artificial mass migration as imperial policy has a long history, and the current mass migration into Europe is the brain child of US military grand strategist Thomas P.M. Barnett. He was a strategic advisor to former US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and currently works with the Israeli military consultancy firm Wikistrat, a close collaborator of the US Africa Command (AFRICOM) in Stuttgart, Germany. Barnett’s books 'The Pentagon’s New Map' and 'Blueprint for Action' (2004, 2005) have had a major influence on US and Israeli global military geostrategies. Today Wikistrat is heavily involved in the development of ‘crowd sourcing’ and ‘crowd leveraging’ technologies, and most of the Twitter entries encouraging migrants in the Middle East and Africa to travel to Austria, Germany and Sweden come from the UK, US and Australia (Ayn Rand Institute, The Escape Institute, etc.). Barnett came up with the theory of the ‘Five Flows of Globalisation’ — five flows which must come about if US imperialism wants to prevail in the world of the 21st century. These involve the free flow of money, security, food, energy and people. The ‘Five Flows’ theory means breaking down nation-state structures and freeing up resources for pillage by US multinational corporations and hyenas of high finance. The inundation of Europe with migrants is a key feature of Barnett’s geostrategic thinking: 1.5 million immigrants from third world countries to Europe every year. The result will be a mixed new population with an average IQ of 90 - too dumb to grasp anything, but intelligent enough to work.

Not welcome anymore (HERE)
In her book Weapons of Mass Migration: Forced Displacement, Coercion and Foreign Policy (2011), Kelly M. Greenhill argues that one of the reasons for Europe’s rapprochement with Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi was the latter’s offer to stem the tide of African emigration to Europe. It would be erroneous, therefore, to suggest that the chaos wrought by the Arab Spring, the devastation of Libya and the killing of Gaddafi were unintentional. EU borders have long been deconstructed by EU utopianism of a borderless world. This fits perfectly with Greenhill’s “hypocrisy cost” of wealthy liberal nations which can be coerced by specifically such open border vulnerabilities. Hundreds of thousands of migrants are equipped with welcome booklets published by a George Soros foundation. Written in Arabic, and packed with maps and useful information on where to go, what to do, whom to refer to, and which sob story to tell to the European authorities, these rough-guides are distributed by an ominous NGO called w2eu.info, which stands for Welcome to the EU. One is reminded of the non-violent revolution hand book by Gene Sharp which was used to train activists in the US-Israeli fomented counter-revolutions in North Africa in 2011 (HERE). Since the very inception of the ensuing 'refugee crisis' the multi-billion dollar business of human trafficking into Europe and the booming asylum-industry is controlled by the EU Commission, globalist fifth columns inside EU member states, by the Erdoğan regime, ISIS, the Italian Mafia, certain oligarchs, and the CIA. 

Reporting on services rendered.
In 2015 the Merkel regime certainly had foreknowledge of what would happen when the chancellor repeatedly issued her infamous “Welcome” calls to not only Syrian war refugees and their families but to any asylum-seeker in the world. Merkel had been warned personally by her domestic intelligence and the Joint Centre for Illegal Migration Analysis and Policy that Europe's borders would be stormed and Germany and her neighbors seriously and permanently damaged and destabilized (HERE). But Merkel is clearly cooperating with a script originating from western intelligence agencies that follows the Greenhill recipes. In May 2016, facing a new mega-wave of migrants out of Libya into Italy, Merkel steadfastly refuses to close borders. By mid 2016 1.8 million refugees had invaded Germany. More than 1.5 million of them are young men aged 20 to 35, outnumbering the German army by the factor of 20 already. While thousands of them are ISIS and Al Nusra fighters, thousands of these invaders are actually housed on active military bases. The total cost to entertain 2 million refugees for the next three years was estimated to be 900 billion Euros - more than twice the federal government's annual budget of 2014. Quoting Shakespeare: Though this be madness, yet there is method in't.

Jihad - Muslim Invasion (HERE)
What we are dealing with here is a well-planned strategy of chaos. Washington is the driving force of this strategy that destroys entire states and nations, causing a chaotic chain reaction of division and conflict to be used according to the old method of "divide and rule." We are witnessing a genocidal covert war being waged by the Anglo-Zionist power elite on the nation states and peoples of Europe. Migrants are weaponized to create social chaos and fiscal constraints in order to prevent Berlin’s inevitable rapprochement with Moscow. The migrants cannot possibly integrate into society if the German economy does not integrate into Eurasia, as Germany will have insufficient access to resources and energy, and no viable markets for its exports. Let Europe whither on the vine. Keeping Russia and Germany separate and in conflict has been the primordial geopolitical objective of the US in Europe since 1871. Barnett predicts that both western Europe and Russia would disintegrate in the 21st Century, leaving only India and China to rival the United States. US strategists believe that coercive engineered mass migration into Europe, coupled with the American occupation of Eastern Europe and the Balkans, with terrorism and the destabilization of the Ukraine, with currency wars, trade wars, and hot wars, would altogether prevent Eurasian integration, whilst securing control over Europe and establishing the conquest of Africa would ultimately safeguard future US global supremacy. 

This is the plan and its implementation is underway. However, this will not solve any of the US' major problems: Losing the dominating position in world production, finance, trade, transport, and communication. The center is drifting towards China and other Asian countries. The US financial hegemony is endangered by the collapse of the dollar pyramid of state obligations, and the dollar's position as the world currency is undermined by the processes of regional economic integration, namely by China and Russia. As the US financial and economic system cannot be kept in balance without powerful and growing outside support, it feels objectively forced to escalate military and political tensions and eventually start a world war, that it cannot win. Von Clausewitz would have immediately realized. But Barnett is a brute, a gambler, a mercenary strategist.

HERE
On a larger time-scale, we are currently living through the repetition of the 100 Year War Cycle and the conclusion of Arnold Toynbee's 500 Year Cycle of Civilizations. We are living in a period that Antonio Gramsci termed an interregnum, morbid times, times of chaos, in which the old is dying, and the new is not born yet. The first decades of this millennium are similar to the early 16th century in Europe, times of technological innovations, population growth, migrations, capitalist expansion, but also religious secession, fanaticism and war. The process was finally directed to outer European conquest, and the ascent of the imperial West (HERE). Today the fate of the US empire largely depends on whether Russia will be sufficiently destabilized and subjected to the globalist oligarchy. Russia is the Heartland and has everything necessary to become the cornerstone for the next world system. Whether the new emerging multipolar system of civilizations and big spaces will be able to establish and to defend itself, is currently decided in Russia, by Russia, and through Russia. 

The spin-doctors and architects of this epic mass migration and population replacement unleashed a monster: French, Italians, Germans, Anglo-Saxons, Irishmen, Swedes, Poles, and almost every other European ethnic group are marked for replacement, i.e. demographic extinction. The utopia of multiculturalism failed and is rejected. Instead Europe is headed for ethnic clashes and breakdowns of economic, social, political and international regimes. However, the globalist's Great Replacement project itself may never reach its ultimate end. Naturally it is unacceptable to passively surrender, and to be dominated and replaced by invaders, by barbarians in the literal sense of the word. Pan-European Nationalism is on the rise across Europe. Radicals and fanatics are ready to defend their lands and cultures at all costs. They are prepared to topple and destroy abusive regimes, to wage civil war and pogroms. What nobody seems to be prepared for is how to recover and what should be build instead. Once the US hegemony diminishes, the leftovers of a shattered Europe may finally become absorbed in some Sino-Russian dominated Eurasian empire (HERE).