Somnolent Europe, Russia, and China — Paul
Craig Roberts
Somnolent Europe, Russia, and China
Can the world wake up?
Paul Craig Roberts
On September 19, 2000, going on 16 years ago,
Ambrose Evans-Pritchard of the London Telegraph reported:
“Declassified American government documents
show that the US intelligence community ran a campaign in the Fifties and
Sixties to build momentum for a united Europe. It funded and directed the
European federalist movement.
“The documents confirm suspicions voiced at the
time that America was working aggressively behind the scenes to push Britain
into a European state. One memorandum, dated July 26, 1950, gives instructions
for a campaign to promote a fully fledged European parliament. It is signed by
Gen. William J. Donovan, head of the American wartime Office of Strategic
Services, precursor of the CIA.”
As I have previously written, Washington
believes that it is easier to control one government,
the EU, than to control many separate European governments. As Washington has a
long term investment in orchestrating the European Union, Washington is totally
opposed to any country exiting the arrangement. That is why President Obama
recently went to London to tell his lapdog, the British Prime Minister, that
there could be no British exit.
Like other European nations, the British people
were never allowed to vote on whether they were in favor of their country
ceasing to exist and them becoming Europeans. British history would become the
history of a bygone people like the Romans and Babylonians.
The oppressive nature of unaccountable EU laws
and regulations and the EU requirement to accept massive numbers of third world
immigrants have created a popular demand for a British vote on whether to
remain a sovereign country or to dissolve and submit to Brussels and its
dictatorial edicts. The vote is scheduled for June 23.
Washington’s position is that the British
people must not be permitted to decide against the EU, because such a decision
is not in Washington’s interest.
The prime minister’s job is to scare the
British people with alleged dire consequences of “going it alone.” The claim is
that “little England” cannot stand alone. The British people are being told
that isolation will spell their end, and their country will become a backwater
bypassed by progress. Everything great will happen elsewhere, and they will be
left out.
If the fear campaign does not succeed and the
British vote to exit the EU, the open question is
whether Washington will permit the British government to accept the democratic
outcome.
Alternatively, the British government will
deceive the British people, as it routinely does, and declare that Britain has
negotiated concessions from Brussels that dispose of the problems that concern
the British people.
Washington’s position shows that Washington is
a firm believer that only Washington’s interests are important. If other
peoples wish to retain national sovereignty, they are simply being selfish.
Moreover, they are out of compliance with Washington, which means they can be
declared a “threat to American national security.” The British people are not
to be permitted to make decisions that do not comply with Washington’s
interest. My prediction is that the British people will either be deceived or
overridden.
When Washington, its generals and European
vassals declare Russia to be a threat, they mean that Russia has an independent
foreign policy and acts in her own interest rather than in Washington’s
interest. Russia is a threat, because Russia demonstrated the capability of
blocking Washington’s intended invasion of Syria and bombing of Iran. Russia
blunted one purpose of Washington’s coup in the Ukraine by peacefully and
democratically reuniting with Crimera, the site of Russia’s Black Sea naval base
and a Russian province for several centuries.
Perhaps you have wondered how it was possible
for small countries such as Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yeman, and Venezuela to be
threats to the US superpower. On its face Washington’s claim is absurd. Do US
presidents, Pentagon officials, national security advisors, and chairmen of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff really regard countries of so little capability as
military threats to the United States and NATO countries?
No, they do not. The countries were declared
threats, because they have, or had prior to their destruction, independent
foreign and economic policies. Their policy independence means that they do not
or did not accept US hegemony. They were attacked in order to bring them under
US hegemony.
In Washington’s view, any country with an
independent policy is outside Washington’s umbrella and, therefore, is a
threat.
Venezuela became, in the words of US President
Obama, an “unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and
foreign policy of the United States,” necessitating a “national emergency” to
contain the “Venezuelan threat” when the Venezuelan government put the
interests of the Venezuelan people above those of American corporations.
Russia became a threat when the Russian
government demonstrated the ability to block Washington’s intended military
attacks on Syria and Iran and when Washington’s coup in the Ukraine failed to
deliver to Washington the Russian Black Sea naval base.
Clearly Venezuela cannot possibly pose a
military threat to the US, so Venezuela cannot possibly pose an “unusual and
extraordinary threat to the national security of the US.” Venezuela is a
“threat” because the Venezuelan government does not comply with Washington’s
orders.
It is absolutely certain that Russia has made
no threats whatsoever against the Baltics, Poland, Romania, Europe, or the
United States. It is absolutely certain that Russia has not invaded the
Ukraine. How do we know? If Russia had invaded Ukraine, the Ukraine would no
longer be there. It would again be a Russian province where until about 20
years ago Ukraine resided for centuries, for longer than the US has existed.
Indeed, the Ukraine belongs in Russia more than Hawaii and the deracinated and
conquered southern states belong in the US.
Yet, these fantastic lies from the highest
ranks of the US government, from NATO, from Washington’s British lackeys, from
the bought-and-paid-for Western media, and from the bought-and-paid-for EU are
repeated endlessly as if they are God’s revealed truth.
Syria still exists because it is under Russian
protection. That is the only reason Syria still exists, and it is also another
reason that Washington wants Russia out of the way.
Do Russia and China realize their extreme
danger? I don’t think even Iran realizes its ongoing danger despite its close
call.
If Russia and China realize their danger, would
the Russian government permit one-fifth of its media to be foreign owned? Does
Russia understand that “foreign owned” means CIA owned? If not, why not? If so,
why does the Russian government permit its own destabilization at the hands of
Washington’s intelligence service acting through foreign owned media?
China is even more careless. There are 7,000
US-funded NGOs (non-governmental organizations) operating in China ( http://www.globalresearch.ca/china-preserving-sovereignty-or-sliding-into-western-sponsored-color-revolutions/5523019 ). Only last month did the
Chinese government finally move, very belatedly, to put some restrictions on
these foreign agents who are working to destabilize China. The members of these
treasonous organizations have not been arrested. They have merely been put under
police watch, an almost useless restriction as Washington can provide endless
money with which to bribe the Chinese police.
Why do Russia and China think that their police
are less susceptible to bribes than Mexico’s or American police? Despite the multi-decade
“war on drugs,” the drug flow from Mexico to the US is unimpeded. Indeed, the
police forces of both countries have a huge interest in the “war on drugs” as
the war brings them riches in the form of bribes. Indeed, as the crucified
reporter for the San Jose Mercury newspaper proved many years ago, the CIA
itself is in the drug-running business.
In the United States truth-tellers are
persecuted and imprisoned, or they are dismissed as “conspiracy theorists,”
“anti-semites,” and “domestic extremists.” The entire Western World consists of
a dystopia far worse than the one described by George Orwell in his famous
book, 1984.
That Russia and China permit Washington to
operate in their media, in their universities, in their financial systems, and
in “do-good” NGOs that infiltrate every aspect of their societies demonstrates
that both governments have no interest in their survival as independent states.
They are too scared of being called “authoritarian” by the Western presstitute
media to protect their own independence.
My prediction is that Russia and China will
soon be confronted with an unwelcome decision:
accept American hegemony or go to war.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.