Monday, October 19, 2015

TTIP : The Aristocracy Aren’t Satisfied - They Demand More

Classic over-reach will spell doom for the elitists and eugenecists bent on destroying the middle classes  

By Eric Zuesse

A new analysis of the Obama-proposed TTIP ‘trade’ treaty, which the U.S. would have with Europe, finds that it was initiated and shaped by large international corporations, which will, also according to the only independent economic analysis that has thus far been done of TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership), be the only beneficiaries of the proposed Treaty — all at the expense of the publics in each one of the participating countries.

This new study is titled “Public Services Under Attack,” but it’s about more than just the proposed treaty’s impacts upon replacing “Public Services” by private services.

Corporate Europe headlined about this study on October 12th, “Public services under attack through TTIP and CETA,” and listed 15 of what they consider to be the report’s highlights. The following will instead quote extensively from the study itself, so that this summary will come mainly from the report itself:

The study is “Published by Association Internationale de Techniciens, Experts et Chercheurs (AITEC), Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO), European Federation of Public Services Unions (EPSU), Instytut Globalnej OdpowiedzialnoĹ›ci (IGO), Transnational Institute (TNI), Vienna Chamber of Labour (AK Vienna), and War on Want.” So: it reflects a concern for workers, and for the poor, not mainly for corporate owners — the latter being the proposed Treaty’s sole sponsors and beneficiaries. 

This new study opens by defining (page 8) “Public Service”: “Public services are those provided by a government to its population, usually based around the social consensus that certain services should be available to all regardless of income.” Another way of stating this is that a “public service” is one provided to citizens as a right, available to all equally, instead of as a privilege, available only upon the basis of ability-to-pay. 

The “social consensus that certain services should be available to all regardless of income” is repudiated in treaties like this, because they reflect instead a “libertarian” (to use the U.S. term) or “liberal” (to use the European term) viewpoint, that a person’s wealth reflects that person’s contribution to society, so that no poor person possesses any rights at all. 

Supporting this viewpoint, Adam Smith, in his 1762 Glasgow Lectures on Jurisprudence, said: “Till there be property there can be no government, the very end of which is to secure wealth, and to defend the rich from the poor.” He wrote this in a society and age in which virtually all wealth – or else poverty – was inherited from one’s parents, not earned. He portrayed the poor as being the enemies. Their rights were no more than their wealth, in his view. He retained that aristocratic view throughout his life.) This viewpoint is also often referred to as being “conservatism,” because it conserves the existing power-structure, with the richest (the aristocracy) being the most powerful in the future, as they have been in the past. Consequently, in the West at least, the ideological polarity is between “liberalism” versus “conservatism,” both of which are fundamentally the same. Progressivism hardly even has a name, as of yet. (In other words: the ideological ‘debate’ is bogus, and is shaped on ‘both’ sides by the aristocracy.

Therefore, proponents of Obama’s proposed ‘trade’ treaties call themselves, variously, “liberals,” “libertarians,” and “conservatives”; but only the terminology varies, because the reality does not.

The same section of the study says: “With free trade treaties like CETA and TTIP, governments will lose policy space to organise public services according to societies’ preferences by locking in liberalisation and privatisation. This is raising great concerns about whether profit will distort the ability of these services to be run in the public interest. Moreover, government attempts to regulate them could be deemed ‘barriers to trade’ and overturned.” 

The report’s Table of Contents is also something of a summary of the report:

Executive summary…3

1. Introduction…6

2. Dangerous liaisons: business, services, and trade…9

2.1 A brief history of services lobbying: the birth of GATS and ESF…10

2.2 Brothers in arms: the EU negotiators soliciting corporate lobbying…10

2.3 Systemic collusion: DG Trade’s calls for support…12

3. Business wish-list for Europe‘s public services…14

3.1 Public services: everything must go!…15

3.2 Dismantling public health…16

3.3 Competitive tendering: bidding for health contracts…17

3.4 Financial industry: a major player in services liberalisation…19

3.5 Procurement: attack on public utilities…20

3.6 Public Private Partnerships: profiting from austerity…20

3.7 Post: eroding universal service…21

3.8 Hollywood: fighting the cultural exception…22

3.9 Future proofing TTIP: digital trade in public services…23

3.10 Locking in privatisation…24

3.11 Protecting investment – endangering welfare…24

4. Rolling out the red carpet: how the EU bows to corporate demands…26

4.1 An ESF win: privatising everything but the kitchen sink?…27

4.2 Pleasing BusinessEurope: negotiating PPPs…30

4.3 Standstill: no backtracking from postal services liberalisation…31

4.4 Water utilities unprotected…32

4.5 Energy services: blocking policy space…33

4.6 On the rise: privately funded services…33

4.7 TNCs and the commodification of education…34

4.8 NHS: the sell-off of public health…37

4.9 Audiovisual services: nixing an exemption…39

4.10 Cashing in: the financialisation of social services…40

4.11 ISDS: defending a corporate privilege…42

4.12 Private tribunals adjudicating on public services…43

5. Conclusion: democracy and social justice, not trade deals threatening public services…45

Here is the opening of:

3.1 Public services: everything must go

To ensure maximum coverage of services in TTIP, the powerhouse lobby groups on both sides of the Atlantic, ESF and CSI, recommended a particular negotiation strategy known as a ‘negative list’ which means that all public services are subject to liberalisation unless an explicit exception is made. 

This ‘list it or lose it’ approach dramatically expands the scope of a trade agreement as governments make commitments in areas they might not even be aware of, such as new services emerging in the future (see box 7 on page 28). It marks a departure from the positive lists used so far in EU trade agreements containing only those services which governments have agreed to liberalising. 

At the same time, transatlantic lobby groups are trying to prevent negotiators from exempting any public services from the trade agreement. Their alarm bells started to ring in February 2015 when the European Parliament’s Committee on International Trade (INTA) drafted a TTIP resolution asking for “an adequate carve-out of sensitive services such as public services and public utilities (including water, health, social security systems, and education) allowing national and local authorities enough room for manoeuvre to legislate in the public interest”.21 …

Then, there is:

3.2 Dismantling public health 

The public health sector is one of the main targets of business lobbyists advocating for TTIP, hoping to capitalize on increasing health expenditure driven by aging populations in both the EU and the US, while public health sectors continue to suffer from fiscal pressures and harsh austerity measures. For instance, the powerful Washington-based Alliance for Healthcare Competitiveness (AHC) assembles companies and associations representing service providers, hospital operators, insurers, producers of pharmaceuticals and medical devices, as well as IT and logistics companies (including Abbott, Johnson & Johnson, Medtronic, UPS, Intel, United Health Group, CSI, PhRMA, and USCIB). It prides itself on being “the only coalition advocating for the freer flow of health goods and services at the healthcare sector level”.26 

AHC complains that “today’s world of health care services is highly restricted and fragmented”, but an “open trading world for these services would create a large new flow of revenue into the United States [to executives and major stockholders of those companies]”. …

Then, there is:

3.10 Locking in privatisation 

Beyond prising open services markets, one of the central features of free trade agreements such as TTIP and CETA is their capacity to effectively lock in previous and future liberalisations and privatisations – regardless of any government that gets voted in or what its mandate or policies might be. 

Apart from ‘standstill’ clauses irreversibly binding existing policies, business groups further demand the inclusion of a so-called ‘ratchet’ provision which would effectively lock in future deregulations. … 

Then, there is:

3.11 Protecting investment – endangering welfare 

Business lobbyists are united in their call to have a broad investment protection chapter in TTIP, including the highly controversial Investor-State Dispute Settlement mechanism (ISDS), granting foreign investors the exclusive right to bypass international tribunals. One of the overarching corporate aims is to prevent governments from any regulatory changes limiting private profits. 

Then, there is:

4.1 An ESF win: privatising everything but the kitchen sink?

Heeding the demands of the business lobby, CETA and TTIP apply to virtually all public services … at best excluding some core sovereign functions such as law enforcement, the judiciary, or the services of a central bank.84 [In common parlance, as Grover Norquist has phrased the matter, “reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.”] 

Then, there are sections indicating that postal services and also the water utility are to be privatized so as to be available only only on a for-profit basis: excluding or else prohibitively charging regions where those services are unprofitable:

4.3 Standstill: no backtracking from postal services liberalisation

4.4 Water utilities unprotected 

Education gets treated similarly. Then, there is:

4.8 NHS: the sell-off of public health

TTIP and CETA will allow investors domiciled in North America to exploit liberalisations already undertaken in Europe’s public health sectors to force through further market openings and to lock in past privatisations. The UK’s National Health Service (NHS) is an important case in point. … 

Then, there are several sections devoted to such things as:

Regulatory changes, such as new laws or taxes diminishing private profits, may be seen as breaches of an investor’s “legitimate expectations” justifying multi-billion euro payouts in compensation [to companies that have been prohibited from activities by regulations, or even to the violating companies that have been fined] and,

Thus, “indirect expropriation” lends itself to an extremely broad range of interpretation. For example, tribunals have already denounced many public interest regulations as measures “tantamount” or “equivalent” to expropriation – and ordered states to pay multimillions of euros in compensation. 


A major failing of this study is that it ignores such things as: Locking in food, drug, automobile-safety, and other existing regulations, so that, for example, when new scientific studies or else newly developed technologies indicate that an updating of a regulation would save lives or otherwise help the public, the regulation under TTIP and similar treaties cannot be updated (except by subjecting the government to potentially crippling lawsuits), which crippling of government will produce ever-increasing numbers of diseases and deaths as government is frozen even while science and technology continue to advance.

This is feudal. Fascism is to the industrial age what feudalism was to the agrarian age; and this is fascism, but on an international or imperial scope, perhaps even an emerging fascist world government — the exact opposite of what the United Nations was founded in order to promote.

U.S. President Barack Obama was elected to office in 2008 with the promise and public expectation that he opposed anti-democratic, pro-aristocratic, initiatives such as this. The fact that he now goes even far beyond the extremists Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher in them, is virtual proof that the United States is no longer a democracy. (At least those candidates were honest about their conservatism.) Is the EU at all a democracy? Or will they accept Obama’s global-aristocratic monstrosity, and push for the aristocracy against the public, like the U.S. government does? The hypocrisy is mind-boggling.

Anyone who wants to know the mechanisms by which Obama’s mega ‘trade’ treaties — TTIP, TPP, and TISA — will operate, can find that machinery (the means to enslave the public to the aristocrats) described here.

And here is a description of the family that will benefit the most from these agreements.

This news bureau contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

WAYNE MADSEN : America’s Disastrous Proxy Wars - Syria Is The Latest

Obama's and his murdering CIA now set America firmly on course for WWIII    

By Wayne Madsen

Ever since the decisive military victory by the Allies over the Axis powers in World War II, the United States has fought an alternating series of all-out military campaigns and proxy wars. 

The Korean War resulted in a stalemate with North Korea, therefore the United States decided to engage in a series of low-level proxy wars in Cuba, the former Belgian Congo, Tibet, Laos, and Indonesia using client states and mercenary armies.

In the mid-1960s, not content with the low-level proxy war it was fighting in South Vietnam that relied on U.S. military "advisers" and local forces, the United States committed over a half million troops to "fight communism" in Southeast Asia. 

The decision came on the heels of an all-out U.S. invasion of the Dominican Republic in 1965, one of America’s largely-forgotten acts of military aggression. 

The Indochina War was a disaster for the United States, one that is remembered by scenes of U.S. helicopters evacuating in great haste its diplomatic and military personnel from the rooftop of the U.S. embassy in Saigon in 1975.

After the Vietnam debacle, America returned to the concept of fighting proxy wars against what it considered to be an expansionist Soviet Union. America propped up guerrilla forces in Afghanistan, Angola, and Nicaragua. America’s obsession with a invented non-existent threat resulted in the United States supporting, through a proxy war against Vietnam, Cambodia’s ruthless Pol Pot dictatorship, which, although communist and pro-China, was a sworn enemy of Hanoi. 

American support for Pol Pot resulted in the genocide of at least a million-and-a-half Cambodians. America’s proxy war against Sandinista-ruled Nicaragua using contra mercenaries included the illegal mining of Nicaraguan harbors and the targeted assassinations of Nicaraguan officials.

President Jimmy Carter supported the Khmer Rouge mass murderers

The CIA’s various proxy mercenary armies would have other consequences for the United States, a process known in the intelligence community as "blowback." The Cuban mercenaries were directly linked to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and the Watergate scandal. The Nicaraguan contra mercenaries were a key element in the Iran-contra scandal that nearly drove Ronald Reagan from office.

The CIA’s arming of and recruiting for Afghanistan’s Islamist Mujaheddin helped create the Taliban and Al Qaeda and transformed one Osama Bin Laden from a little-known son of a wealthy Saudi-Yemeni construction tycoon to the greatest terrorist figure the world had known since Carlos the Jackal. Before his untimely death in 2005, former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook, who had overall responsibility for and access to the most secret files of Britain’s MI-6 Secret Intelligence Service, wrote that "Al Qaeda" was nothing more than a CIA computer database of Arab jihadist recruits, trainees, mercenaries, financial backers, and weapons suppliers designed to keep replenishing the ranks of the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan.

CIA aids, arms, funds Islamic head-choppers in several proxy wars

After its proxy wars in Afghanistan and Central America, the United States returned to the concept of all-out military invasions. The successful U.S. invasion of tiny Grenada in the Caribbean in 1983 provided an impetus for Pentagon planners who advocated swift military action. This renewed policy culminated in the 1989 invasion of Panama and the 1991 invasion of Iraq, the latter resulting from Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait. The invasion of Panama resulted in the overthrow of Panamanian strongman Manuel Noriega, however, his incarceration in an American prison on CIA-linked drug smuggling charges helped increase anti-American feeling throughout Latin America. The United States permitted Saddam Hussein to remain in power in Baghdad and would use the 9/11 attacks of 2001, blamed on America’s one-time Afghanistan client Bin Laden, to justify the "shock and awe" invasion and occupation of Iraq.

After America failed to defeat the Taliban and its jihadist allies in Afghanistan and after Iraq fell under the control of a Shi’a-led government in Baghdad linked to Iran, the United States decided, once again, to return to the concept of a proxy war. In the case of "Arab Spring" rebellions against Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, this resurrected policy of the proxy war saw the United States ally with its old friends from Afghanistan in the 1980s, Al Qaeda and its offshoots, some of whose mercenary recruits declared the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) in Syria and Iraq and made no secret of their intention to extend their self-proclaimed caliphate from Indonesia through the Middle East, Central Asia, and Africa to Spain and the Balkans.

ISIL, in fact, has its roots in the American-led "Sunni Awakening," a neo-conservative contrivance designed in 2006 to provide arms and money to Sunni tribes in western Iraq that were opposed to the Shi’a-dominated U.S. puppet government in Baghdad. However, merely because these tribes were opposed to the Shi’as and Iran did not mean they were opposed to Saudi-funded Salafist/Wahhabist provocateurs in their midst. The only thing the Sunni Awakening managed to do was to awaken jihadism in Iraq, which created the nesting ground for ISIL. The Sunni Awakening and Al Qaeda in Iraq have only the neo-con darling, the sex scandal-disgraced General David Petraeus, the brainchild of the Sunni Awakening, to thank for helping launch ISIL.

Proclaiming it was providing training, equipment, and weapons to an army of "moderate" Syrian rebels, the United States was, in reality, funneling military assistance to the most radical Islamist guerrillas, the core of ISIL that consisted mostly of foreigners recruited from the ranks of Chechens, Afghans, Uighurs, Iraqis, Libyans, Yemenis, and Algerians, some battle-tested in wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, and Libya. There are informed estimates that as much as 80 percent of CIA weapons destined for the Syrian "moderate" rebels ended up in the hands of ISIL and its affiliates.

U.S. traitor, FSA/ISIS commander John McCain with Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi

As with U.S. support for the Afghan and "Arab Afghan" Mujaheddin ranks during the Soviet-Afghan war, the financial help for America’s jihadist army in Syria came from the oil-rich Wahhabist potentates of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Kuwait. These same oil-rich Wahhabist entities also provided troops, weapons, and mercenaries to combat Shi’a Houthi rebels in Yemen’s bloody civil war. In Syria and Yemen, the United States was happy to see the most radical jihadist armies take on Assad and the Houthis, since both were supported by Iran. In essence, throughout the Middle East, the United States was using Salafist, Wahhabi, and jihadist Sunnis to fight a proxy war against Iran and its surrogates.

Petraeus with squeeze Paula Broadwell
Top American neo-conservatives, the same ilk that helped propel the United States into devastating direct military intervention in Afghanistan and Iraq, argued for the U.S. to ally itself with jihadist proxies, including Al Qaeda. 

The U.S.-Al Qaeda alliance was promoted by former CIA director Petraeus. Former NATO commander General Wesley Clark urged the United States to support existing jihadist groups in northern Syria in establishing a "no fly zone" targeting Russian military aircraft in the region. 

U.S. Defense Secretary Ashton Carter appeared to have taken Clark’s advice when he announced the scrapping of the U.S. "train and equip" program for new Syrian rebel recruits and, instead, concentrate U.S. military support on existing Syrian rebel fronts, many of them jihadist in nature.

Syrian rebel groups, whose links to jihadist elements are well-established, have already received TOW anti-tank missiles and tons of airdropped weapons from the United States. American neocons have even called for the U.S. to supply the rebels with shoulder-launched anti-aircraft missiles.

U.S. military now close to mutiny over endless
deployments and the back-door draft
The United States may still find that its senseless proxy war in Syria might come at a tremendous cost. Syrians forced from their homes by the U.S. support for violent Islamist extremists fighting under the black and white jihadist flags of ISIL, Al Qaeda, Al Nusra Front, Muhajirin wa Ansar, Ahrar as-Sham, Jabhat Ansar al-Din, Yarmouk Martyrs Brigade, Jaysh al-Jihad, and the Khorasan Group.

There is perhaps one resolution to this latest American proxy war that could compensate the people of Syria who have lost the lives of their loved ones and their homes to the U.S.-backed jihadist rebels. 

In 1986, the International Court of Justice in The Hague dealt with America’s proxy war against Nicaragua that involved the illegal mining of Nicaraguan harbors and arming of the Nicaraguan rebel contras. The court found that the United States violated international law in its proxy war against the sovereign Republic of Nicaragua. 

Although the United States bellicosely rejected the court’s jurisdiction and judgement against it, even vetoing a UN Security Council resolution calling for Washington to accede to the court’s ruling, the court’s decision resulted in a landmark case against nations that engage in proxy wars. The government of the Syrian Arab Republic has the same legal case to make against the United States as did Nicaragua in 1986.

The future of America? 

If the United States continues to flout international law and ignores repeated decisions by the International Court of Justice, there are other remedies: sanctions against United States, visa bans on America’s top officials, freezing of foreign assets held by U.S. officials, and the seizure of U.S. aircraft, ships, and other assets on foreign soil until the United States recognizes its crimes against the people of Syria, and, by extension, others affected by the U.S. proxy wars. Other aggrieved parties include the people of Iraq, Libya, Yemen, eastern Ukraine, and other countries and regions targeted by America’s proxy warlords.

Wayne Madsen

Wayne Madsen
Investigative journalist, author and syndicated columnist, Madsen has over twenty years experience in security issues. 

As a U.S. Naval Officer, he managed one of the first computer security programs for the U.S. Navy. Madsen has been a frequent political and national security commentator on Fox News and has also appeared on ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, CNN, BBC and MS-NBC. He has been invited to testify as a witness before the US House of Representatives, the UN Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and an terrorism investigation panel of the French government. A member of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) and the National Press Club, Madsen is based and reports from Washington, D.C.

'They Don't Care Who Gets Killed ': Ex - Drone Pilot Turned Whistleblower

The Hague War Crimes Tribunal will one day be packed to the rafters with the Bush/Cheney/Obama mass-murderers; America will never regain it's standing in the international community until these war criminals are brought to justice along with the "mainstream media" frauds and hacks that covered up their crimes against humanity    


Guilt-ridden American drone pilots continue to quit in unprecedented numbers. One former secret mission operator, Brandon Bryant, who’s received a whistleblower award, spoke to RT of the horrors of indiscriminate killing from a safe distance.

“The people that are giving the order to kill – they don’t care who gets killed as long as their target gets attacked… they’ll take out however many people they can in order to get their results,” Bryant says.

The former pilot received the German Whistleblower Award for revealing details of operations taking place at the Ramstein base, specifically, its role in transferring information between the US and its CIA missions in North Africa, Afghanistan and the Middle East. He was among the first to bring into question the role the base was playing.

Earlier this year, Bryant spoke to RT and discussed the details of his former job. He explained that it is not about the idea of drones, but about who controls them, to what ends, and how transparent the operation is. 

Obama apologist Carney will be in the dock alongside
his master
He also mentioned about the physiological aspect of being in a virtual cockpit.

“We killed people who we really didn’t know who they were, and there was no oversight. And I just know that the inside of the entire program was diseased,” he said. 

“I actually talked to a lady whose husband and brother were killed in a drone strike. I talked to her face to face, and she asked me why her husband and brother had to die… they weren’t bad guys."

"And I just looked at her and said – ‘I don’t know’”, he confessed. “And that’s not really the best thing that I can tell someone who’s asking questions about why someone that they cared about was killed, and they need to know the answers."

“The really true, hard answer is to say that I’m sorry – a mistake happened, and I’m doing everything that I can to prevent further mistakes from happening,” he added.

Bryant’s revelations about Ramstein ended up highlighting the existing debate and criticism in Germany and elsewhere about the human collateral damage and legality of US drone warfare. 

There are also questions if it is legal under the German constitution to host drones at the air base in the south west of Germany, given Bryant’s revelations.

The Bush/Cheney murderers will all be in attendance

The prestigious Whistleblower Award is given out biannually. Former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, who is now hiding in Russia from prosecution by the US, was a recipient of the award. 

Another is Chelsea Manning, who was commended for leaking documents relating to the American campaign in Iraq – something that earned her a 35-year prison sentence.

Lying Bush prostitute, Fox "News" fraud Dana Perino will be seated in the dock with her drunken, retarded, mass-murdering master

Prosecutions of people brave enough to answer for such defiant acts have drastically increased during the Obama presidency. 

Obama serial liar, cover-up artist Josh Earnest
will be prosecuted for his crimes
The current US President has pardoned fewer prisoners than any other head of state since the 19th century.

As Bryant is set to receive the award, another unknown person has recently leaked information concerning the US drone program – the so-called ‘drone papers.’ The person who leaked the documents is now being hailed as ‘the new Snowden.’ Details are on The Intercept website.

One shocking fact to emerge was that a staggering 90 percent of all drone killings are not planned. 

Also if no evidence is found, the dead are labelled ‘enemy killed in action.’ 

The Former MI5 agent Annie Machon expressed her disbelief at the aggressive crackdown. 

The drone strikes, she says, “are killing thousands of people. It always takes a few brave souls to speak out and take a huge risk of years of imprisonment to actually confirm what has already been known for many years and has concerned certain people, but has not caused outrage across the West. This new whistleblower knows what the risks are and still thinks that to follow their conscience is much more important.”

This news bureau contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.



The real truth on 9/11 slowly continues to bleed out

Technical experts are mounting major challenges to official U.S. government accounts of how three World Trade Center skyscrapers collapsed in near-freefall after the 9/11 attacks 15 years ago.

Many researchers are focusing especially on the little-known collapse of



The Geopolitics Of The United States, Part 1: The Inevitable Empire

The Empire and the inevitable fall of the Obama criminal regime

STRATFOR Editor’s Note: This installment on the United States, presented in two parts, is the 16th in a series of STRATFOR monographs on the geopolitics of countries influential in world affairs.

Like nearly all of the peoples of North and South America, most Americans are not originally from the territory that became the United States.



Geopolitics Of The United States Part 2: American Identity And The Threats of Tomorrow

A look back at 2011 predictions for the future in order to put events of today into perspective

 photo capitalism_zpsah78uy5p.jpg
We have already discussed in the first part of this analysis how the American geography dooms whoever controls the territory to being a global power, but there are a number of other outcomes that shape what that power will be like. The first and most critical is the impact of that geography on the American mindset.



By Robert S. Finnegan

This e-mail outlines and confirms the acts of espionage against Indonesia and Indonesians by Akiko Makino and the others involved both in Kobe University and in AI Lab at University of Airlangga, Surabaya; Bahasa Indonesia original follows English translation...



UPDATED 01/07/2015 : New Analysis Challenges Tamiflu Efficacy; Hong Kong Corona Virus Outbreak


 photo TAMIFLU_small_zpssojx6okt.jpg

Obama criminals now resulting to biowarfare in quest to destroy Chinese and ASEAN economy; "novel virus substrain" points directly to a Kawaoka / Fouchier / Ernala-Ginting Kobe lab virus weaponized and genetically altered to specifically target and infect the Asian population: Ribavirin...



 photo WHO02_zpsplmhtlpr.jpg
The 5th Estate has just purchased a library on H5N1 "Novel" virus pandemics, there are dozens of PDF and Exel documents we feel will assist you in saving lives following intentional releases of the H5N1 and now MERS viruses; we will begin by printing those that appear to be extremely relevant here: H5N1 Kobe-Kawaoka-Ernala series continues soon with more "Smoking Gun" e-mails from Teridah Ernala to The 5th Estate . . .



By Robert S. Finnegan

On October 12, 2002 the Indonesian island of Bali experienced a terrorist attack that rocked the world. It was unquestionably well-coordinated and executed, the largest in the country's history.