The Silk Road and Israel

by Thierry Meyssan

Beijing continues unceasingly to develop its “Silk Road” project. China’s vice-President, Wang Qishan, has undertaken a tour of the Near East which took him to Israël for four days. According to the agreements which have already been signed, within two years China will control the major part of Israël’s agro-food industry, its high technology and its international exchanges. A free trade agreement should follow, and the geopolitics of the whole region will be turned upside down.

JPEG - 41.6 kb

The visit of Chinese vice-president Wang Qishan to Israël, Palestine, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates is aimed at developing the “New Silk Road”.

In the autumn of 2013, China made public its project for the creation of maritime and especially terrestrial communication routes across the world. It unblocked colossal sums of money and began to realise its plan at a rapid rate. The main axes will cross either Asia or Russia towards Western Europe. But it is also planning routes across Africa and Latin America.

The obstacles to the New Silk Road

The project is going to meet two obstacles, one of them economic, the other strategic.

From the Chinese point of view, this project is aimed at exporting its products according to the model of the ancient “Silk Road” which, from the 2nd to the 15th century, linked China to Europe via the Ferghana Valley, Iran and Syria. At the time, this concerned transporting products from town to town, so that at each stage they were exchanged for other goods according to the needs of the local merchants. However, today, on the contrary, China hopes to sell directly to Europe and the world. But their products are no longer exotic wares (silks, spices, etc.) but identical to those of the Europeans, and often of superior quality. The commercial route has been transformed into a super-highway. While Marco Polo was dazzled by the silks from the Far East without their equivalent in Italy, Angela Merkel is terrified at the idea of seeing her automobile industry destroyed by her Chinese competitors. The developed countries are therefore going to have to do business with Beijing, and at the same time, protect their industries from economic shock.

By massively exporting its production, China will take over the commercial place that the United Kingdom – at first alone, then with the United States – has occupied since the industrial revolution. It was specifically to maintain this supremacy that Churchill and Roosevelt signed the Atlantic Charter and the United States engaged in the Second World War. It is therefore probable that the Anglo-Saxons will not hesitate to employ military force in order to hinder the Chinese project [1], just as they did in 1941 when faced with the German and Japanese projects.

Already in 2013, the Pentagon published the Wright plan, which programmed the creation of a new state straddling Iraq and Syria in order to cut the Silk Road between Baghdad and Damascus. This mission was carried out by Daesh – China therefore modified the layout of its route. Beijing finally decided to build the route through Egypt, and invested in the doubling of the Suez Canal and the creation of a vast industrial zone 120 kilometres from Cairo [2]. Similarly, the Pentagon organised a « colour revolution » in Ukraine in order to cut the European route, and stirred up trouble in Nicaragua in order to prevent the construction of a new canal linking the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans.

Despite the unprecedented importance of Chinese investment in the New Silk Road, we have to remember that in the 15th century, China launched a formidable navy in order to secure its markets. Admiral Zheng He, “the eunuch with three gems”, fought the pirates of Sri Lanka,built pagodas in Ethiopia and made the pilgrimage to Mecca. Notwithstanding, on his return, for reasons of interior politics, the Emperor abandoned the Silk Road and burned his ships. China then withdrew into itself. So we should not imagine that, from the Chinese point of view, the current project is a pre-ordained success.

In the recent past, China invested in the Middle East with the sole idea of ensuring its supply of oil. It built refineries in Iraq which were inconveniently destroyed either by Daesh or by the Western Forces who were pretending to combat the Islamists. Beijing also became the main buyer of Saudi Arabia’s “black gold”. It also constructed in the Kingdom the gigantic oil complex of Yasref-Yanbu for 10 billion dollars.

JPEG - 33.2 kbSignature of the concession for the port of Haïfa at the Shanghai International Port Group

Israël and the New Silk Road

The links between Israël and China date from the mandate of Israëli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, whose parents had fled the Nazis in order to settle in Shanghai. Benjamin Netanyahu’s predecessor had tried to establish strong relations with Beijing, but his efforts were nullified by his support for one of the Somali pirate groups tasked by Washington with disturbing Russian and Chinese maritime traffic at the exit of the Red Sea [3]. A scandal was avoided by inches. China was authorised to establish a naval base in Djibouti, and Ehud Olmert was excluded from political life.

China has been negotiating a free-trade treaty with Israël since 2016. In this context, the Shanghai International Port Group has bought the concession for the exploitation of the ports of Haïfa and Ashdod, so that by 2021,China will control 90 % of Israëli commercial exchanges. Bright Food has already acquired 56 % of the Tnuva kibbutzim cooperative, and could increase its participation, so that China would control most of the Israëli agricultural market. The founder of the on-line store “Ali Baba”, Jack Ma, who came to Tel-Aviv as part of the official Chinese delegation, did not hide his intention to buy up a number of Israëli start-ups in order to recuperate their high technology.

Armament is the only important sector of the Israëli economy still preserved from the Chinese appetite. In September, with the aid of the US Hudson Institute, professor Shaul Horev organised a conference at Haïfa university in order to alert the Pentagon’s general staff to the consequences of Chinese investment. In particular, the speakers emphasised that these contracts exposed the country to the risk of intensive spying, making it difficult to exploit the port for its nuclear missile-launching submarines, as well as its links with the US 6th Fleet.

The ex-director of Mossad, Ephraïm Halevy, known for his proximity to the United States, pointed out that the National Security Council had never deliberated on these investments, but that the decision had been made solely for reasons of commercial opportunity. This raises the question of whether or not Washington had authorised the rapprochement between Tel-Aviv and Beijing.

We should make no mistake about the reasons which allowed China to implant a military base in Djibouti, and it seems unlikely that Beijing concluded a secret agreement with Washington for the layout of this new Silk Road. Certainly, the United States will not be too worried about an economic collapse of the European Union. However, in the long term, China and Russia are obliged to maintain good relations in order to protect themselves from the Western powers. History has shown that the latter have done, and continue to do everything possible to dismantle these major powers. Consequently, if a China-US alliance would be in favour of Beijing in the short and medium term, it would lead thereafter to the successive elimination of Russia and China itself.

The Chinese-Israëli agreements suggest that, as Lenin said, “the capitalists will sell us the rope we shall use to hang them”.

Thierry Meyssan

Pete Kimberley

[1] “The Geopolitics of American Global Decline”, by Alfred McCoy, Tom Dispatch (USA) , Voltaire Network, 22 June 2015.

[2] “China deploys in the Near East”, by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Pete Kimberley, Voltaire Network, 25 January 2016.

[3] “21st century Pirates, Privateers and Filibusters”, by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Anoosha Boralessa, Оdnako (Russia) , Voltaire Network, 25 June 2010.

The Triumph of Evil

From Paul Craig Roberts Website

From Vladimir Putin's decision to sell the Saudis the S-400 is a blunder. {MID-320628}
Vladimir Putin’s decision to sell the Saudis the S-400 is a blunder.
(Image by Permission Details DMCA

The murder of Jamal Khashoggi inside the Saudi Arabian embassy in Turkey is unprecedented in its audacity. The response from Washington and the Canadian government is to sell more weapons to Saudi Arabia, weapons that are being used by the Saudis in their destruction of the Yemeni population. The Russian response, if the report I saw was not fake news, is to sell the Saudis the S-400 air defense system.

What we can conclude from this is that armament profits take precedence over murder and genocide.

Genocide is what is going on in Yemen. I heard a report today on NPR that Yemeni are dying from starvation and from a cholera epidemic that has resulted from the Saudi destruction of the infrastructure in Yemen. The aid worker giving the report was obviously sincere and upset, but had difficulty connecting the high death rate to the Washington-sponsored war, blaming instead a 20% devaluation of the Yemen currency that raised food prices out of the reach of most Yemeni. She said that the solution to the crisis was to stabilize the currency!

It is difficult to understand why in the Western media and among Western politicians there is so much demonization of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, North Korea, China, and Russia. It is not these demonized countries that are murdering people in their embassies, conducting wars of aggression (war crimes under the Nuremberg Standard), and embargoing food and medical supplies to the populations that are being bombed. These crimes are being done by Saudi Arabia, Israel, and the United States and its NATO vassals.

Obviously, the Yemeni, like the Palestinians, don’t count. Their slaughter doesn’t cause a moral ripple in the West.

Putin might be giving Washington tit for tat by horning in on Washington’s armaments customers, but the decision to is a strategic blunder. Saudi Arabia is a sponsor of the war against Syria, in whose defense Russian lives and treasure have been spent. Moreover, Saudi Arabia is an enemy of Iran. Iran is an ally of Russia in the defense of Syria, and a country whose stability is essential to Russia’s stability. Perhaps even more important, the minute the Saudis get their hands on the S-400 they will hand it over to Washington, and experts will figure out how to defeat it, thus negating Russia’s investment in the weapon and its advantage. The decision to sell the S-400 to the Saudis convinces Washington that Putin and his government are clueless, babes in the woods to be easily run over.

In my opinion, the worst aspect of the S-400 sale is that it erases the moral edge that Putin has gained for Russia over the murderous and ever-threatening West. Now we have Russia putting profits above the Russian government’s professed respect for the rule of law and moral behavior.

An even more immoral and irresponsible development is President Trump’s withdrawal from the INF Treaty. The only reason for Trump’s Zionist Neoconservative National Security Adviser to orchestrate this withdrawal is to threaten Russia. Intermediate range missiles cannot reach the US. Russian ones could reach Europe, and US ones placed in Europe on Russia’s border can comprise a first-strike nuclear attack on Russia that has no warning and is indefensible.

President Putin has complained for years, and warned of the consequences, of Washington establishing ABM missile sites in Poland and Romania under cover that their purpose is to protect Europe from Iranian missile attack. Putin has pointed out repeatedly that these missile sites can easily, without anyone knowing, be converted into a nuclear cruise missile attack posture against Russia. Yet, the crazed US National Security Adviser claims, illogically, that it is the Russians, who have nothing to gain from violating the treaty, who are cheating.

Europe has no capability whatsoever of being a military threat to Russia except as launching posts for Washington. If it were not for Washington’s aggression toward Russia, Europe would face no Russian threat.

The reason President Reagan negotiated the INF Treaty with Gorbachev was to reduce the Soviet perception of the US as a threat. Reagan wanted the end of the Cold War and nuclear disarmament. Reagan hated nuclear weapons. By Reagan’s time in office, no one with any intelligence any longer believed that the Red Army intended to overrun Europe. The problem was different. The problem was to get rid of nuclear weapons that are capable, if used, of winning no war but of destroying life on planet Earth. Reagan understood this completely.

Unfortunately, this understanding has been lost in Washington.

If the INF Treaty is abandoned, it is impossible for Russia to tolerate any missile bases near its borders as these bases could be first-strike nuclear weapons against which Russia has no defense. The European countries sufficiently stupid to host these bases will be on a hair-trigger with the Russian military. Just one false signal, and nuclear war begins.

Trump’s intention to normalize relations with Russia has been defeated by CIA Director John Brennan, FBI Director James Comey, Justice Department Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, the military/security complex, the Israel Lobby, the Democratic Party, the US liberal/progressive/left, and the presstitute media — CNN, MSNBC, New York Times, Fox News, BBC, Washington Post, etc.

We will all die, because the American Establishment lied through its teeth nonstop.

We can conclude from the acceptance of Saudi crimes and Western indifference to Washington’s withdrawal from the NFL Treaty that morality takes a back seat to material interest. We can also conclude that evil has achieved dominance over good, with the consequences that avarice and lawlessness will escalate their destruction of truth, peoples, and life on earth.

Losing the Trade War with China

China is spread across all of Asia, with Chinese plants in every locale. They are moving into South America, which the US has treated like garbage for years.
The US trades with 102 nations and has a trade deficit with all of them. Look at the numbers. China Trade is 4.2 Trillion and only 15% is US-Trade related. Do you comprehend this? China does more trade with Europe than the US. The US is small potatoes. The USA is the next France.

Then, while you were being the military bully of the world, China was expanding into all of Asia. If you include all of ASIA together, they dwarf the US GDP and its whole economy. And they are growing, most of them in double digits.

Further, are you even aware that Hong Kong, a province of China, is immune from US tariffs by Federal law and treaty?

In the last several months, China has stopped buying cars made in the USA. Before this Trump Tariff nonsense, they bought more US cars than Americans bought.

China has stopped buying US shale, which only they can refine. Europe won’t buy it. China replaced it all with Iranian oil. Then China cut off beef imports from the US and bought beef from Brazil. Brazil packers are now doubling production. China bought all its soy for the year. US soy production is now under water and won’t even come to harvest until Nov. The whole crop is a loss. Brazil has agree to double Its production next year.

As you were sleeping, China has methodically stopped buying US products to reduce its dependence on US supplies. Other countries are doing the same. This is Smoot Hawley all over again. Trump is a complete fool. China is smart and has the best traders in the world.

US problems are internal. What do you make, in the USA? Nothing that can’t be bought elsewhere, cheaper. Even Airbus is doing better, thanks to Trump. Boeing is taking a hit.

Look at handheld devices. The US chipmakers INTEL and Microsoft missed the entire handheld revolution. YOU are falling behind each and every day. Trump tells you he is the big bully but at 15% of China trade, you are little more than the tail of the dog.

The US is just a blowhard nation. China should ignore Trump and Pompeo and continue their enormously successful global trade efforts.

What Sanctions On Russia And China Really Mean

Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Asia Times,

The Pentagon may not be advocating total war against both Russia and China – as it has been interpreted in some quarters …

A crucial Pentagon report on the US defense industrial base and “supply chain resiliency” bluntly accuses China of “military expansion” and “a strategy of economic aggression,” mostly because Beijing is the only source for “a number of chemical products used in munitions and missiles.”

Russia is mentioned only once, but in a crucial paragraph: as a – what else – “threat,” alongside China, for the US defense industry.

The Pentagon, in this report, may not be advocating total war against both Russia and China – as it was interpreted in some quarters. What it does is configure the trade war against China as even more incandescent, while laying bare the true motivations behind the sanctioning of Russia.

The US Department of Commerce has imposed restrictions on 12 Russian corporations that are deemed to be “acting contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the US.” In practice, this means that American corporations cannot export dual-use products to any of the sanctioned Russian companies.

There are very clear reasons behind these sanctions – and they are not related to national security. It’s all about “free market” competition.

At the heart of the storm is the Irkut MC-21 narrow-body passenger jet – the first in the world with a capacity of more than 130 passengers to have composite-based wings.

AeroComposit is responsible for the development of these composite wings. The estimated share of composites in the overall design is 40%.

The MC-21’s PD-14 engine – which is unable to power combat jets – will be manufactured by Aviadvigatel. Until now MC-21s had Pratt & Whitney engines. The PD-14 is the first new engine 100% made in Russia since the break up of the USSR.

Aviation experts are sure that an MC-21 equipped with a PD-14 easily beats the competition; the Airbus A320 and the Boeing-737.

Then there’s the PD-35 engine – which Aviadvigatel is developing specifically to equip an already announced Russia-China wide-body twinjet airliner to be built by the joint venture China-Russia Commercial Aircraft International Corp Ltd (CRAIC), launched in May 2017 in Shanghai.

Aviation experts are convinced this is the only project anywhere in the world capable of challenging the decades-long monopoly of Boeing and Airbus.

Will these sanctions prevent Russia from perfecting the MC-21 and investing in the new airliner? Hardly. Top military analyst Andrei Martyanov convincingly makes the case that these sanctions are at best “laughable,” considering how “makers of avionics and aggregates” for the ultra-sophisticated Su-35 and Su-57 fighter jets would have no problem replacing Western parts on commercial jets.

Oh China, you’re so ‘malign’

Even before the Pentagon report, it was clear that the Trump administration’s number one goal in relation to China was to ultimately cut off extended US corporate supply chains and re-implant them – along with tens of thousands of jobs – back into the US.

This radical reorganization of global capitalism may not be exactly appealing for US multinationals because they would lose all the cost-benefit advantages that seduced them to delocalize to China in the first place. And the lost advantages won’t be offset by more corporate tax breaks.

It gets worse – from the point to view of global trade: for Trump administration hawks, the re-industrialization of the US presupposes Chinese industrial stagnation. That explains to a large extent the all-out demonization of the high-tech Made in China 2025 drive in all its aspects.

And this flows in parallel to demonizing Russia. Thus we have US Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke threatening no less than a blockade of Russian energy flows: “The United States has that ability, with our Navy, to make sure the sea lanes are open, and, if necessary, to blockade … to make sure that their energy does not go to market.”

The commercial and industrial demonization of China reached a paroxysm with Vice-President Mike Pence accusing China of “reckless harassment,” trying to “malign” Trump’s credibility and even being the top US election meddler, displacing Russia. That’s hardly attuned to a commercial strategy whose main goal should be to create US jobs.

President Xi Jinping and his advisers are not necessarily averse to making a few trade concessions. But that becomes impossible, from Beijing’s point of view, when China is sanctioned because it is buying Russian weapons systems.

Beijing also can read some extra writing on the trade wall, an inevitable consequence of Pence’s accusations; Magnitsky-style sanctioning of Russian individuals and businesses may soon be extended to the Chinese.

After all, Pence said Russia’s alleged interference in US affairs paled in comparison with China’s “malign” actions.

China’s ambassador to the US, Cui Tiankai, in his interview with Fox News, strove for his diplomatic best: “It would be hard to imagine that one-fifth of the global population could develop and prosper, not by relying mainly on their own efforts, but by stealing or forcing some transfer of technology from others … That’s impossible. The Chinese people are as hard-working and diligent as anybody on earth.”

That is something that will be validated once again in Brussels this week at the biennial ASEM – Asia Europe – summit, first held in 1996. The theme of this year’s summit is “Europe and Asia: global partners and global challenges.” At the top of the agenda is trade, investment and connectivity – at least between Europe and Asia.

Washington’s offensive on China should not be interpreted under the optics of “fair trade,” but rather as a strategy for containing China technologically, which touches upon the absolutely crucial theme: to prevent China from developing the connectivity supporting the extended supply chains which are at the heart of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

We don’t need no peer competitors

A glaring giveaway that these overlapping sanctions on Russia and China are all about the good old Brzezinski fear of Eurasia being dominated by the emergence of “peer competitors” was recently offered by Wess Mitchell, the US State Department Assistant Secretary at the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs – the same post previously held by Victoria “F*ck the EU” Nuland.

This is the original Mitchell testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. And this is the redacted, sanitized State Department version.

A crucial phrase in the middle of the second paragraph simply disappeared: “It continues to be among the foremost national security interests of the United States to prevent the domination of the Eurasian landmass by hostile powers.”

That’s all the geopolitics Beijing and Moscow need to know. Not that they didn’t know it already.

The Twilight of the War

The undermining of the right of peoples to self-determination by transnational financial elites will come to an end

by Thierry Meyssan*, Damascus (Syria)

If we consider the war in Syria not as a singular event, but as the culmination of a world war which has persisted for a quarter of a century, we have to ask ourselves about the con- sequences of the imminent end of hostilities. Its completion marks the defeat of an ideology, that is to say globalization and financial capitalism. The people who have not understood this, particularly in Western Europe, are defining their own exclusion from the rest of the world.
World wars do not only end with a winner and a loser. Their termination defines the contours of a new world.
The First World War ended with the defeat of the German, Russian, Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman Empires. The cessation of hostilities was marked by the elaboration of an international organisation, the League of Nations (LN), tasked with abolishing secret diplomacy and settling any conflicts between the member-states by arbitration.
The Second World War ended with the victory of the Soviet Union over the Nazi Reich and the Japanese Empire of hakk’ ichiu1,2, followed by a frantic chase between the Allies to occupy what was left of the vanquished Coalition. It gave birth to a new structure, the United Nations Organisation (UNO), tasked with preventing new wars by establishing international law around a double legitimacy – the General Assembly, where each state has a voice, irrespective of its size, and a directorate composed of the five main victors, the Security Council.
The Cold War was not the Third World War. It did not end with the defeat of the Soviet Union, but by its collapse in and onto itself. It was not followed by the creation of new structures, but by the integration of the states of the USSR into pre-existing organisations.

From Yugoslavia to Syria – the Third World War as a fight for …

The Third World War began in Yugoslavia, continued in Afghanistan, Iraq, Georgia, Libya and Yemen, and ended in Syria. Its battle-grounds were confined to the Balkans, the Caucasus and what we now call the „Greater Middle East“. It has cost the lives of countless Muslim and Orthodox Christian populations, without spilling over too much into the Western world. It is in the process of drawing to a close since the Putin-Trump Summit in Helsinki.

… A shift in power in favour of transnational “elites”

The profound changes which have transformed the world over the last 26 years transferred a part of the power of governments towards other entities, both administrative and private — and also vice versa. For example, we saw a private army, Daesh, proclaim itself a sovereign state. Or again, we watched General David Petraeus organise the most voluminous arms traffic in History when he directed the CIA, and then continue it after his resignation on behalf of a private company, the hedge fund KKR3.
This situation may be described as a confrontation between, on the one hand, a transnational ruling class and, on the other, the governments responsible to their people.

War propaganda obfuscates the real causes of war

Contrary to the imputations of propaganda, which attribute the causes of war to immediate circumstances, the true causes are to be found in rivalries and in deep- seated, ancient ambitions. States take years to challenge one another. Often, it is only with the passage of time that we are able to understand the conflicts which devour us.
For example, very few people understood what was happening during the Japanese invasion of Manchuria (1931) and waited until the invasion of Czechoslovakia by Germany (1938) to understand that it was racist ideologies which provoked the Second World War. Identically, rare are those who understood that by the war of Bosnia-Herzegovina (1992) the alliance between NATO and political Islam opened the way for the destruction of the Muslim world.4
And today, despite the work of journalists and historians, many people have still not understood the enormity of the manipulation of which we have all been victims. They refuse to admit that NATO coordinated its Saudi and Iranian auxiliaries on the European continent. And yet this is a fact which is impossible to contest.5
Similarly, they refuse to admit that Al- Qaïda, accused by the United States of having perpetrated the terrorist attacks of 9/11, fought under the orders of NATO in Libya and Syria. And yet this is another fact that is impossible to contradict.6
The initial plan, which was intended to set the Muslim world against the Orthodox world, became transformed as it unfolded. There was no “war of civilisations”. Shiite Iran turned against NATO, which it had served in Yugoslavia, and allied with Orthodox Russia in order to save multi-confessional Syria.
We must open our eyes to History and prepare ourselves for the dawn of a new world system in which certain of our friends of yesterday have become our enemies of today, and vice-versa.
In Helsinki, it was not the United States which drew up an agreement with the Federation of Russia. It was the White House alone. Because the common enemy is a transnational group which exercises authority in the United States. Since this group considers itself, and not the elected President, to be the representative of the USA, it did not hesitate to immediately accuse President Trump of treason.

Neoliberal distraction theories to erode state power

This transnational group has succeeded in making us believe that ideologies are dead and that History is finished. It presents globalization, in other words Anglo-Saxon domination by way of the extension of the US language and lifestyle, as the consequence of the technical development of transport and communication. It assures us that a single political system is the ideal for all humanity — democracy (in other words “government of the People, by the People, for the People”) — and that it is possible to impose this ideal by force on all humanity. Finally, it presents the freedom of circulation of people and capitals as the solution to all problems of labour and investment.
However, these assertions, which we all accept in the course of our daily lives, do not stand up to a minute of thought.
Behind these lies, the transnational group has systematically worn down the Power of states and amassed fortunes.
The right of peoples to self-determination resists transnational financial governance
The side which will be the victor of this long war defends, on the contrary, the idea that in order to chose their destiny, people must organise themselves into clearly- defined Nations, based either on a land or else on a common history or project. Consequently, it supports national economies rather than transnational finance.
We have just experienced the World Football Cup. If the ideology of globalisation had won the war, we should have supported not only our national team, but also the teams of other countries according to their membership of our common supra-national structures. For example, the Belgians and the French would have had to support one another mutually by waving the flag of the European Union. But this did not occur to a single supporter. This fact shows the chasm which separates the propaganda with which we are force-fed and which we repeat, and our spontaneous behaviour. Despite appearances, the superficial victory of globalism has not modified what we are.
It is obviously no coincidence if Syria, where the idea of a state was first imagined and developed several thousand years ago, is the land upon which this war will end. It is because they benefited from a true state which never stopped functioning that Syria, its people, its army and its President were able to resist against the most gigantic coalition in History, constituted by 114 member states of the United Nations.


1. Hakk’ ichiu (the eight corners of the world under one roof) is the ideology of the .Japanese Empire. It claims the superiority of the Japanese race and its right to dominate Asia.
2. The Soviet armies overran Manchuria on the assumption that Tokyo would then surrender to Moscow. But President Truman launched the second atomic bomb in Nagasaki, forcing the Japanese to surrender to General McArthur so that the Penta- gon could occupy the country.
3. “[Billions of dollars’ worth of arms against Syria]”, by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Pete Kimberley, Voltaire Network, 18 July 2017.
4. Les Dollars de la terreur : Les États-Unis et les is- lamistes, Richard Labévière, Grasset, 1999. Eng lish version : Dollars for Terror: The United States and Islam, Algora Publishing, 2000.
5. Wie der Dschihad nach Europa kam. Gotteskrieger und Geheimdienste auf dem Balkan, Jürgen Elsässer, Kai Homilius Verlag, 2006.
6. Sous nos yeux. Du 11-septembre à Donald Trump, Thierry Meyssan, Demi-Lune 2017.
(Translation: Pete Kimberley)
Source: Voltaire Network, 31 July 2018

A Google query for the subject ‘American inventors’

A Google query for the subject ‘American inventors’ provides for the first 10 places only two American inventors of European lineage. They are Thomas Edison (6th place), and Alexander Graham Bell (10th place).

Here are the first 35 names that appear when a person performs a Google search for ‘American inventors’:

1. George Washington Carver (1864-1943), African American

2. Lewis Howard Latimer (1848-1928), African American

3. Garrett Morgan (1877-1963), African American

4. Madam C.J. Walker (1867-1919), African American

5. Elijah McCoy (1844-1929), African American

6. Thomas Edison (1847-1931), European American

7. Lonnie Johnson (1949-), African American

8. Patricia Bath (1942-), African American

9. Granville Woods (1856-1910), African American

10. Alexander Graham Bell (1847-1922), European American

11. Jan Ernst Matzeliger (1852-1889), African American

12. James Edward Maceo West (1931-), African American

13. Frederick McKinley Jones (1893-1961), African American

14. Thomas L. Jennings (1791-1856), African American

15. Otis Boykin (1920-1982), African American

16. Benjamin Banneker (1731-1806), African American

17. Norbert Rillieux (1806-1894), African American

18. Marie Van Brittan Brown (1922-1999), African American

19. Sarah E. Goode (1855-1905), African American

20. Percy Lavon Julian (1899-1975), African American

21. Henry Blair (1807-1860), African American

22. George Robert Carruthers (1939-), African American

23. Henry Ford (1863-1947), European American

24. Eli Whitney (1765-1825), European American

25. Sarah Boone (1832-1904), African American

26. Janet Emerson Bashen (1957-), African American

27. Samuel Morse (1791-1872), European American

28. Ben Montgomery (1819-1877), African American

29. Valerie Thomas (1943-), African American

30. Andrew Jackson Beard (1849-1921), African American

31. David Crosthwait (1898-1976), African American

32. Nikola Tesla (1856-1943), European American

33. Albert Einstein (1879-1955), European American

34. Marjorie Joyner (1896-1994), African American

35. Alfred L. Cralle (1866-1920), African American

What Sears’ Bankruptcy Says About Amazon’s Future

by Joe Jarvis Via The Daily Bell

Sears was the Amazon of the 1900s.

Sears Roebuck started in 1892 as a mail-order watch catalog. They soon moved into selling almost any consumer goods you could think of in their catalogs.

Imagine being able to shop from the convenience of your own home!

You could order sewing machines, buggies, clothes, and even guns through the mail, and have them delivered to your door.

Of course, brick and mortar physical retail stores were not so happy. Some even went out of business. Sears was cheap, convenient, high quality, and even offered free delivery.

In 1925, Sears opened its first retail store and quickly expanded to physical locations throughout the country.

It soon grew to become the largest retailer in the world.

Does this story sound familiar?

Amazon started in 1994 as an internet book retailer. They soon moved into selling almost any consumer goods you could think of on their website.

They made it so easy to shop from home!

Of course, brick and mortar physical retail stores were not so happy. Some even went out of business. Amazon was cheap, convenient, and sometimes offered free delivery.

Amazon is now moving into physical retail by buying Whole Foods and introducing humanless convenience stores.

Now Sears is on the verge of bankruptcy after 126 years in business. The stock price is down to $0.34 per share, from $9 just over a year ago, from a 2007 peak of $133 per share.

On Monday, Sears has $134 million in loans coming due. The company is expected to file for bankruptcy according to the Wall Street Journal. The plan will likely include shuttering stores and selling off the remaining inventory.


Walmart came along in 1962 and challenged Sears’ retail supremacy. By 1989, Walmart surpassed Sears as the largest retailer in the country.

And then it was Amazon’s turn to challenge Walmart…

I’m not saying this means Walmart has only 56 years of life left, or that has Amazon will expire in 2120, following the 126-year life cycle of Sears.

I am just pointing out that it is easy to have a distorted view in the present.

Ask anyone in 1955 if they thought Sears would go bankrupt and they would have scoffed. How could such a dominant business ever collapse?

Right now Amazon is dominating. But that doesn’t mean Amazon will always dominate.

Just a few years ago Walmart was on top, and it was hard to imagine a strong competitor rising from nowhere to challenge their number one spot.

Walmart still has higher sales than Amazon. But the overall value of the Amazon company is much higher than Walmart.

The two retail giants are battling for control over online retail, as well as grocery delivery. Walmart is a major grocery retailer, and of course, Amazon just entered the space with its acquisition of Whole Foods.

Competition between the two companies has even led to drastic drops in pricing when the companies get into price slashing wars.

The important point is that Amazon and Walmart do have competition.

They are far from monopolies. And no company is safe in its dominant position forever.

This competition forces companies to become better in some way, or lose business. This can manifest itself in a better customer experience, cheaper products, better products, or even better working conditions for employees.

And there is no telling what other companies will come along to challenge these companies’ dominance.

But history shows there will be challengers to the likes of Sears, Walmart, Amazon, and even behemoths like Google, Facebook, and Apple.

None of them are guaranteed their top spots forever. In fact, history all but guarantees that their time will come too…

As long as the market stays relatively free, these companies cannot become or remain true monopolies.

There is one concern…

When the government gets involved, they screw up this natural, beneficial, free-market competition.

And that is the real threat. That the government will keep something alive despite its market failure.

Wall Street got bailed out after the 2008 financial crisis. The bankers responsible for risky investments and financial manipulation didn’t lose their jobs–they didn’t even lose their bonuses. The taxpayers took the bill, while we wallowed in the mess that Wall Street created.

General Motors was also considered too big to fail. The taxpayers were forced to bail out the failing automaker, losing over $10 billion. Meanwhile, GM still laid off over 20,000 employees.

The government protected the status quo and killed innovation. These industries were due for an upset, for a major competitor to shake them to the core, to clear out the dead wood so that new plants could grow.

Instead, they were propped up with the support of the government, making it harder for better alternatives to emerge.

Luckily, we don’t hear talk of bailing out Sears, even though they have far more employees than GM had–150,000 versus 90,000.

Unfortunately, Amazon already makes some money from the government. They have a CIA contract worth $600 million per year.

Some also say that the US Postal Service–and therefore the US taxpayer–subsidizes Amazon’s business by not charging a market rate for package deliveries. A 2006 law does, however, prohibit the Postal Service from charging below its actual costs to deliver packages.

Regardless, that is one more interesting similarity to note between Amazon and Sears.

The Rural Free Delivery Act of 1896 was a huge help to Sears’ mail-order business. The law expanded package delivery to more rural areas of the United States. Previously, these people had to travel quite some distance to pick up their packages at a Post Office.

So in the end, we shouldn’t worry about the market dominance of any particular company. We should really concern ourselves with being informed consumers.

And that might mean boycotting businesses when the government gives them an unfair advantage.

You don’t have to play by the rules of the corrupt politicians, manipulative media, and brainwashed peers.

The Big Lie

Frequently attributed to Joseph Goebbels, the oft-cited big lie theory appears instead to have been Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler‘s explanation for how people came to believe that Germany lost World War I in the field — a “big lie” that Hitler attributed to Jewish influence on the press.

Hitler writes in Mein Kampf (James Murphy translation, page 134):

“All this was inspired by the principle – which is quite true in itself – that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest purposes.”From time immemorial. however, the Jews have known better than any others how falsehood and calumny can be exploited. Is not their very existence founded on one great lie, namely, that they are a religious community, whereas in reality they are a race? And what a race! One of the greatest thinkers that mankind has produced has branded the Jews for all time with a statement which is profoundly and exactly true. Schopenhauer called the Jew “The Great Master of Lies.” Those who do not realize the truth of that statement, or do not wish to believe it, will never be able to lend a hand in helping Truth to prevail.”

Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s minister of propaganda, is alleged to have stated that if a lie is repeated enough times it would become widely accepted as truth. However, in a 1941 article titled “Churchill’s Lie Factory,” he wrote:

“One should not as a rule reveal one’s secrets, since one does not know if and when one may need them again. The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.”

Portions of this article were adapted from Wikipedia’s article.

The US Military-Industrial Complex’s Worst Nightmare: The S-300 May Destroy & Expose The F-35

Authored by Federico Pieraccini via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

The tragic episode that caused the death of 15 Russian air force personnel has had immediate repercussions on the situation in Syria and the Middle East. On September 24, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu informed allies and opponents that the delivery of the S-300 air-defense systems to the Syrian Arab Republic had been approved by President Vladimir Putin. The delivery had been delayed and then suspended as a result of Israeli pressure back in 2013.

In one sense, the delivery of S-300 batteries to Syria is cause for concern more for Washington than for Tel Aviv.Israel has several F-35 and has claimed to have used them in Syria to strike alleged Iranian weapons transfers to Hezbollah. With the S-300 systems deployed in an updated version and incorporated into the Russian command, control and communications (C3) system, there is a serious risk (for Washington) that Israel, now incapable of changing the course of events in Syria, could attempt a desperate maneuver.

It is no secret that Greece taking out the S-300s, having apparently discovered their weaknesses.

Tel Aviv’s warning that it will attack and destroy the S-300 battery should not be taken as an idle threat. It is enough to look at the recent downing of Russia’s Il-20 surveillance aircraft to understand how reckless a desperate Israel is prepared to be. Moreover, more than one IDF commander has over the years reiterated that a Syrian S-300 would be considered a legitimate target if threatening Israeli aircraft.

At this point, it is necessary to add some additional information and clarify some points. Greece’s S-300s are old, out of maintenance, and have not had their electronics updated. Such modern and complex systems as the S-300s and S-400s require maintenance, upgrades, and often replacement of parts to improve hardware. All this is missing from the Greek batteries. Secondly, it is the operator who uses the system (using radar, targeting, aiming, locking and so forth) that often makes the difference in terms of overall effectiveness. Furthermore, the system is fully integrated into the Russian C3 system, something that renders useless any previous experience gleaned from wargaming the Greek S-300s. No Western country knows the real capabilities and capacity of Syrian air defense when augmented and integrated with Russian systems. This is a secret that Damascus and Moscow will continue to keep well guarded. Yet two years ago, during the operations to free Aleppo, a senior Russian military officer warned (presumably alluding to fifth-generation stealth aircraft like the F-35 and F-22) that the range and effectiveness of the Russian systems may come as a surprise.

The following are the words of Russian defense minister Sergei Shoigu concerning the deployment of the S-300 to Syria and its integration with other Russian systems:

“Russia will jam satellite navigation, onboard radars and communication systems of combat aircraft, which attack targets in the Syrian territory, in the Mediterranean Sea bordering with Syria. We are convinced that the implementation of these measures will cool hotheads and prevent ill-considered actions threatening our servicemen. Otherwise, we will respond in line with the current situation. Syrian troops and military air defense units will be equipped with automatic control systems, which have been supplied to the Russian Armed Forces. This will ensure the centralized management of the Syrian air defense forces and facilities, monitoring the situation in the airspace and prompt target designation. Most importantly, it will be used to identify the Russian aircraft by the Syrian air defense forces.”

If the Israelis will follow through with their reckless attempts to eliminate the S-300 (if they can find them in the first place, given that they are mobile), they will risk their F-35s being brought down. The US military-industrial complex would suffer irreparable damage. This would also explain why Israel (and probably the US) has for more than five years put enormous pressure on Moscow not to deliver the S-300 to Syria and Iran. The US State Department’s reaction over the future purchase by Turkey and India of the S-400 confirms the anxiety that US senior officials as well as generals are experiencing over the prospect of allies opting for the Russian systems. This would allow for a comparison with weapons these allies purchased from the US, leading to the discovery of vulnerabilities and the realization of the US weapons’ relative inferiority.

Given Tel Aviv’s tendency to place its own interests above all others, it would not be surprising to find them using the possibility of attacking the S-300 with their F-35s as a weapon to blackmail Washington into getting more involved in the conflict. For the United States, there are two scenarios to avoid.

The first is a direct involvement in the conflict with Russia in Syria, which is now unthinkable and impractical.

The second – much more worrying for military planners – concerns the possibility of the F-35’s capabilities and secrets being compromised or even being shown not to be a match against air-defense systems nearly half a century old.

An illuminating example of how the United States operates its most advanced aircraft in the region was given in eastern Syria around Deir ez-Zor. In this part of Syria, there is no threat from any advanced air-defense systems, so the US is often free to employ its F-22 in certain circumstances. The Russian military has repeatedly shown radar evidence that unequivocally shows that when Russian Su-35s appear in the same skies as the F-22, the US Air Force simply avoids any confrontation and quickly withdraws such fifth-generation assets as the F-22. The F-35 is not even ready in its naval variant, and has yet to be deployed on a US aircraft carrier near the Middle Eastern theater or the Persian Gulf; nor is it present in any US military base in the region. The US simply does not even consider using the F-35 in Syria, nor would it risk its use against Russian air defenses. Israel is the only country that so far may have already used these aircraft in Syria; but this was before the S-300 came onto the scene.

The F-35 program has already cost hundreds of billions of dollars and will soon reach the exorbitant and surreal figure of over 1 trillion dollars. It has already been sold to dozens of countries bound by decades-long agreements. The F-35 has been developed as a multi-role fighter and is expected to be the future backbone of NATO and her allies. Its development began more than 10 years ago and, despite the countless problems that still exist, it is already airborne and combat-ready, as the Israelis insist. From the US point of view, its employment in operations is played down and otherwise concealed. The less data available to opponents, the better; though the real reason may lie in a strong fear of any revelation of potential weaknesses of the aircraft damaging future sales. At this time, the Pentagon’s marketing of the F-35 is based on the evaluations provided by Lockheed Martin, the manufacturer, and on the tests carried out by the military who commissioned it to Lockheed Martin.Obviously, both Lockheed Martin and the US Air Force have no interest in revealing any weaknesses or shortcomings, especially publicly. Corruption is a big thing in Washington, contrary to common assumptions.

The combination of Israel’s ego, its inability to change the course of events in Syria, coupled with the loss of its ability to fly throughout the Middle East with impunity due to Syria now being equipped with a superior air defense – all these factors could push Israel into acting desperately by using the F-35 to take out the S-300 battery. Washington finds itself in the unenviable position of probably having no leverage with Israel over the matter ever since losing any ability to steer events in Syria.

With the Russian air-defense systems potentially being spread out to the four corners of the world, including China, India, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and who knows how many other countries waiting in the queue, Russia continues to increase its export capacity and military prestige as it demonstrates its control of most of the Syria’s skies. With the introduction of the the S-500 pending, one can imagine the sleepless nights being spent by those in the Pentagon and Lockheed Martin’s headquarters worrying about the possibility of an F-35 being taken down by an S-300 system manufactured in 1969.