Patriotism Is A Two-Edged Sword by Paul Craig Roberts

Patriotism Is A Two-Edged Sword

September 28, 2017 

Your website needs your support

Patriotism Is A Two-Edged Sword

Paul Craig Roberts

I sometimes wonder if America’s greatest threat is the population’s hyper-patriotism. The bulk of the population is now at work shutting down the NFL players’ First Amendment rights, and none of the incensed censors are capable of understanding that it is they, and not the NFL players, who are attacking the U.S. Constitution. We have been through all this flag business before, and federal courts have ruled for the protesters who burnt flags, wore them on their clothes, whatever. Yet, here we go again.

Hardwick Clothes CEO pulls the company’s advertising from NFL games. Insofar as advertising helps Hardwick’s shareholders, CEO Allan Jones is hurting his own shareholders in order to protest the NFL players’ protests, a thought that probably never occurred to him. http://ijr.com/the-declaration/2017/09/984704-first-ceo-hits-nfl-right-wallet-unpatriotic-national-anthem-protests/

According to this report — http://www.dcclothesline.com/2017/09/26/americans-nationwide-burn-nfl-tickets-shirts-in-solidarity-with-trump/ — white people across the country are burning their NFL shirts and their expensive tickets for which they paid hundreds of dollars.  

A Louisiana state representative has introduced legislation to ban state subsidies for the New Orleans Saints because of their “disgraceful protests.” It is OK with Rep. Kenny Havard for Louisiana taxpayers to give hundreds of millions of dollars in subsidies to the NFL team as long as the players stand for the anthem, but not if they don’t. It apparently never occurred to Havard to question whether relatively poor Louisiana taxpayers should be giving hundreds of millions of dollars to a billionaire team owner. There is no doubt that the average salary of the Saints exceeds the average salary of Louisiana taxpayers. http://ijr.com/the-declaration/2017/09/984526-louisiana-state-rep-pushes-make-nfl-team-pay-national-anthem-protests-literally/

Former NFL quarterback John Elway declares: “I believe that this is the greatest country in the world,” and his personal belief takes care of the numerous protesters who clearly have a different view. http://ijr.com/the-declaration/2017/09/984449-john-elway-responds-anthem-protests-nfl-players-pay-attention-words/

Bill O’Reilly makes a guest appearance on Fox News berating the NFL protesters for ignoring the effect on US soldiers in Afghanistan who “are putting their life on the line.” Apparently, after all these years it still has not occurred to O’Reilly that the soldiers’ lives — and those of Afghans — are being put on the line by the military/security complex’s drive for profits and the neoconservative drive for US and Israeli hegemony. http://ijr.com/the-declaration/2017/09/984598-oreilly-makes-return-fox-news-remind-nfl-players-soldiers-fighting-3000-miles-away/

Trump sends out emails: “Do you stand with President Trump, our flag, and this great country” against the NFL protesters?

The childishness of it all is an American embarrassment.

The patriotic response is not only an attack on the First Amendment but also plays into the hands of Identity Politics, which has its own take on the matter. Julio Rosas writes in the HuffPost that standing for the national anthem is standing for white supremacy. http://ijr.com/the-declaration/2017/09/984655-huffpost-op-ed-white-athletes-stand-national-anthem-stand-white-supremacy/

Before a few dimwits send me emails demanding explanation why I stand for anti-American minorities against “the greatest country in the world,” let us all first consider where this is going. The answer is: nowhere good. The hyper-patriotism that is being whipped up is so irrational that it is against the self-interests of the counter-protesters, who are hurting the visibility of their merchandising brand and costing the shareholders profits, burning their clothing and expensive football tickets, and denying themselves their favorite entertainment. 

The military/security complex, the hegemonic neoconservatives, and the Israel Lobby are sitting there, licking their chops. They know what to do with this display of ignorant patriotism. They will turn it against Iran, North Korea, China, and Russia. Their profits will flow even higher, neocon ambitions will be realized, and Israel will have the US eliminate another country — Iran — in the way of its expansion. Or so they think.

Russia cannot afford a vassal of Washington in Iran or the type of chaos in Iran that now engulfs Iraq and Libya. It is a short distance from Iran through Azerbaijan or Turkmenistan into Muslim areas of Russia and former Muslim provinces of the Soviet Union. If Iran falls, Russia is the next to be destabilized. Additionally, Iran in Washington’s hands extends to the East Washington’s surrounding of Russia. The Russian government would be confronted with US missile bases on its borders ranging from the Baltics through eastern and southern Europe, Ukraine, Georgia and Iran. Moreover, US missiles in Iran could reach China in a few minutes as can the US missile bases being constructed on China’s Pacific border under the guise of countering “the North Korean threat.”

China depends on Iran for 20 percent of its oil supply. China was forced out of its Libyan oil supply by Washington’s overthrow of Gaddafi. Losing Iran would be a blow. At some point these two powerful countries will have to realize that their national existence is at stake. China has been too busy making money to pay attention, and Russia has been in thrall to its centuries-old desire to be part of the West.

The Russian government’s policy of replying to Washington’s aggression with diplomacy has failed totally. This policy has been extremely expensive to Russia and today is a direct threat to Russia’s national survival. Whether Russia is too controlled by Washington and Israeli-installed billionaires to attend to its national interests remains to be seen.

China’s lust for riches is a non-substitute for national survival.

Washington is counting on these singular weaknesses of the only two countries capable of serving as a check on Washington’s unilateralism.

However, there are countervailing powers in Russia and China. The Operation Command of the Russian High Command has publicly given its opinion that Washington is preparing a surprise nuclear attack on Russia. It would be derelict beyond comprehension for President Putin to ignore this conclusion. Inside China, historic pride is a rival influence to the lust for riches. The Chinese are determined never again to be a mere playground for foreign powers.

Sooner or later even the hubris-overstuffed Zionist Lobby will realize that the American war against Iran that Israel is demanding is a fuse for a Third World War and that the Jews will be destroyed along with everyone else. From the “Nile to the Euphrates” will be a wasteland.

On this website on September 27, 2017, I addressed what can be done from the Western side to reduce the tensions that are leading to nuclear armageddon. On the Russian and Chinese side what can be done is a tri-party mutual defense pact between Russia, Iran, and China that is made public. This would tell the psychopaths in Washington and Israel that an attack on Iran means World War III.

If this is not a deterrent, then Washington and Israel are lost to evil, and life on earth is ended.

More from Articles & Columns ↓

The US Economy Is Failing by Paul Craig Roberts

The US Economy Is Failing — Paul Craig Roberts

September 29, 2017 

This is your website. Support it.

The US Economy Is Failing

Paul Craig Roberts

Do the Wall Street Journal’s editorial page editors read their own newspaper?

The frontpage headline story for the Labor Day weekend was “Low Wage Growth Challenges Fed.” Despite an alleged 4.4% unemployment rate, which is full employment, there is no real growth in wages. The front page story pointed out correctly that an economy alleged to be expanding at full employment, but absent any wage growth or inflation, is “a puzzle that complicates Federal Reserve policy decisions.”

On the editorial page itself, under “letters to the editor,” Professor Tony Lima of California State University points out what I have stressed for years: “The labor-force participation rate remains at historic lows. Much of the decrease is in the 18-34 age group, while participation rates have increased for those 55 and older.” Professor Lima points out that more evidence that the American worker is not in good shape comes from the rising number of Americans who can only find part-time work, which leaves them with truncated incomes and no fringe benefits, such as healh care.

Positioned right next to this factual letter is the lead editorial written by someone who read neither the front page story or the professor’s letter. The lead editorial declares: “The biggest labor story this Labor Day is the trouble that employers are having finding workers across the country.” The Journal’s editorial page editors believe the solution to the alleged labor shortage is Senator Ron Johnson’s (R.Wis.) bill to permit the states to give 500,000 work visas to foreigners.

In my day as a Wall Street Journal editor and columnist, questions would have been asked that would have nixed the editorial. For example, how is there a labor shortage when there is no upward pressure on wages? In tight labor markets wages are bid up as employers compete for workers. For example, how is the labor market tight when the labor force participation rate is at historical lows. When jobs are available, the participation rate rises as people enter the work force to take the jobs.

I have reported on a number of occasions that according to Federal Reserve studies, more Americans in the 24-34 age group live at home with parents than independently, and that it is those 55 and older who are taking the part time jobs. Why is this? The answer is that part time jobs do not pay enough to support an independent existence, and the Federal Reserve’s decade long zero interest rate policy forces retirees to enter the work force as their retirement savings produce no income. It is not only the manufacturing jobs of the middle class blue collar workers that have been given to foreigners in order to cut labor costs and thus maximize payouts to executives and shareholders, but also tradable professional skill jobs such as software engineering, design, accounting, and IT—jobs that Americans expected to get in order to pay off their student loans.

The Wall Street Journal editorial asserts that the young are not in the work force because they are on drugs, or on disability, or because of their poor education. However, all over the country there are college graduates with good educations who cannot find jobs because the jobs have been offshored. To worsen the crisis, a Republican Senator from Wisconsin wants to bring in more foreigners on work permits to drive US wages down lower so that no American can survive on the wage, and the Wall Street Journal editorial page editors endorse this travesty!

The foreigners on work visas are paid one-third less than the going US wage. They live together in groups in cramped quarters. They have no employee rights. They are exploited in order to raise executive bonuses and shareholder capital gains. I have exposed this scheme at length in my book, The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism (Clarity Press, 2013).

When Trump said he was going to bring the jobs home, he resonated, but, of course, he will not be permitted to bring them home, any more than he has been permitted to normalize relations with Russia.

In America Government is not in the hands of its people. Government is in the hands of a ruling oligarchy. Oligarchic rule prevails regardless of electoral outcomes. The American people are entering a world of slavery more severe than anything that previously existed. Without jobs, dependent on their masters for trickle-down benefits that are always subject to being cut, and without voice or representation, Americans, except for the One Percent, are becoming the most enslaved people in history.

Americans carry on by accumulating debt and becoming debt slaves. Many can only make the minimum payment on their credit card and thus accumulate debt. The Federal Reserve’s policy has exploded the prices of financial assets. The result is that the bulk of the population lacks discretionary income, and those with financial assets are wealthy until values adjust to reality.

As an economist I cannot identify in history any economy whose affairs have been so badly managed and prospects so severely damaged as the economy of the United States of America. In the short/intermediate run policies that damage the prospects for the American work force benefit what is called the One Percent as jobs offshoring reduces corporate costs and financialization transfers remaining discretionary income in interest and fees to the financial sector. But as consumer discretionary incomes disappear and debt burdens rise, aggregate demand falters, and there is nothing left to drive the economy.

What we are witnessing in the United States is the first country to reverse the development process and to go backward by giving up industry, manufacturing, and tradable professional skill jobs. The labor force is becoming Third World with lowly paid domestic service jobs taking the place of high-productivity, high-value added jobs.

The initial response was to put wives and mothers into the work force, but now even many two-earner families experience stagnant or falling material living standards. New university graduates are faced with substantial debts without jobs capable of producing sufficient income to pay off the debts.

Now the US is on a course of travelling backward at a faster rate. Robots are to take over more and more jobs, displacing more people. Robots don’t buy houses, furniture, appliances, cars, clothes, food, entertainment, medical services, etc. Unless Robots pay payroll taxes, the financing for Social Security and Medicare will collapse. And it goes on down from there. Consumer spending simply dries up, so who purcheses the goods and services supplied by robots?

To find such important considerations absent in public debate suggests that the United States will continue on the country’s de-industrialization, de-manufacturing trajectory.

More from Articles & Columns ↓

America’s Jews Are Driving U.S. Wars — Philip Giraldi

America’s Jews Are Driving U.S. Wars — Philip Giraldi

September 27, 2017 

America’s Jews Are Driving U.S. Wars — Philip Giraldi

Former CIA officer Philip Giraldi explains that for the last 16 years the United States has been manipulated into fighting wars for Israel. Giraldi explains the tremendous power that Zionists have over Washington’s foreign policy and American public opinion.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47843.htm

 America's Jews Are Driving U.S. Wars 

Shouldn't they recuse themselves when dealing with the Middle East?

By Philip Giraldi

UPDATE: September 25, 2017 - On the morning of September 21st Phil Giraldi was fired over the phone by The American Conservative, where he had been a regular contributor for fourteen years. He was told that “America’s Jews Are Driving America’s Wars” was unacceptable. The TAC management and board appear to have forgotten that the magazine was launched with an article by founder Pat Buchanan entitled “Whose War?” which largely made the same claims that Giraldi made about the Jewish push for another war, in that case with Iraq. Buchanan was vilified and denounced as an anti-Semite by many of the same people who are now similarly attacking Giraldi.

September 19, 2017 "Information Clearing House" -  I spoke recently at a conference on America’s war party where afterwards an elderly gentleman came up to me and asked, “Why doesn’t anyone ever speak honestly about the six-hundred-pound gorilla in the room? Nobody has mentioned Israel in this conference and we all know it’s American Jews with all their money and power who are supporting every war in the Middle East for Netanyahu? Shouldn’t we start calling them out and not letting them get away with it?”

It was a question combined with a comment that I have heard many times before and my answer is always the same: any organization that aspires to be heard on foreign policy knows that to touch the live wire of Israel and American Jews guarantees a quick trip to obscurity. Jewish groups and deep pocket individual donors not only control the politicians, they own and run the media and entertainment industries, meaning that no one will hear about or from the offending party ever again. They are particularly sensitive on the issue of so-called “dual loyalty,” particularly as the expression itself is a bit of a sham since it is pretty clear that some of them only have real loyalty to Israel.

Most recently, some pundits, including myself, have been warning of an impending war with Iran. To be sure, the urging to strike Iran comes from many quarters, to include generals in the Administration who always think first in terms of settling problems through force, from a Saudi government obsessed with fear over Iranian hegemony, and, of course, from Israel itself. But what makes the war engine run is provided by American Jews who have taken upon themselves the onerous task of starting a war with a country that does not conceivably threaten the United States. They have been very successful at faking the Iranian threat, so much so that nearly all Republican and most Democratic congressmen as well as much of the media seem to be convinced that Iran needs to be dealt with firmly, most definitely by using the U.S. military, and the sooner the better.

And while they are doing it, the issue that nearly all the Iran haters are Jewish has somehow fallen out of sight, as if it does not matter. But it should matter. A recent article in the New Yorker on stopping the impending war with Iran strangely suggests that the current generation “Iran hawks” might be a force of moderation regarding policy options given the lessons learned from Iraq. The article cites as hardliners on Iran David Frum, Max Boot, Bill Kristol and Bret Stephens.

Daniel Larison over at The American Conservative has a good review of the New Yorker piece entitled “Yes, Iran Hawks Want Conflict with Iran,” which identifies the four above cited hawks by name before describing them as “…a Who’s Who of consistently lousy foreign policy thinking. If they have been right about any major foreign policy issue in the last twenty years, it would be news to the entire world. Every single one of them hates the nuclear deal with Iran with a passion, and they have argued in favor of military action against Iran at one point or another. There is zero evidence that any of them would oppose attacking Iran.”

And I would add a few more names, Mark Dubowitz, Michael Ledeen and Reuel Marc Gerecht of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies; Daniel Pipes of the Middle East Forum; John Podhoretz of Commentary magazine; Elliot Abrams of the Council on Foreign Relations; Meyrav Wurmser of the Middle East Media Research Institute; Kimberly Kagan of the Institute for the Study of War; and Frederick Kagan, Danielle Pletka and David Wurmser of the American Enterprise Institute. And you can also throw into the hopper entire organizations like The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) and the Hudson Institute. And yep, they’re all Jewish, plus most of them would self-describe as neo-conservatives. And I might add that only one of the named individuals has ever served in any branch of the American military – David Wurmser was once in the Navy reserve. These individuals largely constitute a cabal of sanctimonious chairborne warriors who prefer to do the heavy thinking while they let others do the fighting and dying.

So it is safe to say that much of the agitation to do something about Iran comes from Israel and from American Jews. Indeed, I would opine that most of the fury from Congress re Iran comes from the same source, with AIPAC showering our Solons on the Potomac with “fact sheets” explaining how Iran is worthy of annihilation because it has pledged to “destroy Israel,” which is both a lie and an impossibility as Tehran does not have the resources to carry out such a task. The AIPAC lies are then picked up and replayed by an obliging media, where nearly every “expert” who speaks about the Middle East on television and radio or who is interviewed for newspaper stories is Jewish.

One might also add that neocons as a group were founded by Jews and are largely Jewish, hence their universal attachment to the state of Israel. They first rose into prominence when they obtained a number of national security positions during the Reagan Administration and their ascendancy was completed when they staffed senior positions in the Pentagon and White House under George W. Bush. Recall for a moment Paul Wolfowitz, Doug Feith, and Scooter Libby. Yes, all Jewish and all conduits for the false information that led to a war that has spread and effectively destroyed much of the Middle East. Except for Israel, of course. Philip Zelikow, also Jewish, in a moment of candor, admitted that the Iraq War, in his opinion, was fought for Israel.

Add to the folly a Jewish U.S. Ambassador to Israel who identifies with the most right-wing Israeli settler elements, a White House appointed chief negotiator who is Jewish and a Jewish son-in-law who is also involved in formulating Middle East policy. Is anyone providing an alternative viewpoint to eternal and uncritical support for Benjamin Netanyahu and his kleptocratic regime of racist thugs? I think not.

There are a couple of simple fixes for the dominant involvement of American Jews in foreign policy issues where they have a personal interest due to their ethnicity or family ties. First of all, don’t put them into national security positions involving the Middle East, where they will potentially be conflicted. Let them worry instead about North Korea, which does not have a Jewish minority and which was not involved in the holocaust. This type of solution was, in fact, somewhat of a policy regarding the U.S. Ambassador position in Israel. No Jew was appointed to avoid any conflict of interest prior to 1995, an understanding that was violated by Bill Clinton (wouldn’t you know it!) who named Martin Indyk to the post. Indyk was not even an American citizen at the time and had to be naturalized quickly prior to being approved by congress.

Those American Jews who are strongly attached to Israel and somehow find themselves in senior policy making positions involving the Middle East and who actually possess any integrity on the issue should recuse themselves, just as any judge would do if he were presiding over a case in which he had a personal interest. Any American should be free to exercise first amendment rights to debate possible options regarding policy, up to and including embracing positions that damage the United States and benefit a foreign nation. But if he or she is in a position to actually create those policies, he or she should butt out and leave the policy generation to those who have no personal baggage.

For those American Jews who lack any shred of integrity, the media should be required to label them at the bottom of the television screen whenever they pop up, e.g. Bill Kristol is “Jewish and an outspoken supporter of the state of Israel.” That would be kind-of-like a warning label on a bottle of rat poison – translating roughly as “ingest even the tiniest little dosage of the nonsense spewed by Bill Kristol at your own peril.”

As none of the above is likely to happen, the only alternative is for American citizens who are tired of having their country’s national security interests hijacked by a group that is in thrall to a foreign government to become more assertive about what is happening. Shine a little light into the darkness and recognize who is being diddled and by whom. Call it like it is. And if someone’s feelings are hurt, too bad. We don’t need a war with Iran because Israel wants one and some rich and powerful American Jews are happy to deliver. Seriously, we don’t need it.

Phil Giraldi is a former CIA Case Officer and Army Intelligence Officer who spent twenty years overseas in Europe and the Middle East working terrorism cases. He holds a BA with honors from the University of Chicago and an MA and PhD in Modern History from the University of London.

More from Guest Contributions ↓

What Can Be Done? By Paul Craig Roberts

What Can Be Done?

September 27, 2017 

Dear Readers: This is your website. It needs your support.

What Can Be Done?

Paul Craig Roberts

Despite clear evidence that Washington has chosen the path to conflict with Russia and China, European governments have not objected. Poland, Ukraine, and the Baltics even seem to demand more conflict or a quicker path to conflict. The European peoples themselves have not elected leadership that is willing to repudiate vassalage to Washington and conduct a rational foreign policy toward Russia.

Last Sunday’s German election was an opportunity for the German electorate to repudiate Washington vassal Angela Merkel and the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), and to some extent they did. But you would never know it from the news reporting.

The headlines were Merkel wins fourth term. In the US Hillary’s folks emphasize that Trump lost the popular vote, but Merkel lost it by 70%. Only 3 Germans out of 10 voted for her. Her party’s vote fell from 41.6% in the previous election to just under 33%.

Merkel’s coalition partner, the Social Democratic Party (SDU) also suffered a vote decline that resulted in the SDU refusing to enter into another coalition government with Merkel. This means that Merkel has to go to the Free Democratic party (FDP) which got 10.7 percent of the vote and to the Greens which got 8.9 percent of the vote. That coalition produces 52.6 percent from which a government can be formed. Merkel’s “win” was such a defeat that she is perhaps on the way out.

Where did the votes lost by Merkel’s party and coalition partner (SDU) go?
They went to a new party that stands for Germany, and not for Washington, not for the refugees from Washington’s wars, and not for conflict with Russia. This party is Alternative for Germany (AfD). It is now Germany’s third largest political party with 12.6% of the vote and 94 seats in the German legislature.

As the party is against the massive Muslim immigration supported by Merkel and against Washington’s policy toward Russia, the AfD was promptly branded “far-right,” a term that is saddled with Nazi connotations.

In other words, if you stick up for Germany and the German people, you are a Nazi.

The German people have been so brainwashed by Washington since World War II that Germans have no positive conception of themselves, only guilt and fear of anything said to be “far right.” Yet, the third largest vote went to the “far right” party.

Jewish organizations have gone berserk over the AfD vote. Hitler is being resurrected, and so on. It is difficult to believe that Jews are really this paranoid. One sometimes wonders if Jewish watchdog organizations have some other agenda.

Clearly, in Germany a political party, which does not want to be in conflict with Russia or to be the dumping ground for the human residue of Washington’s wars in the Middle East and Africa, is defined by presstitutes in the US, Europe, Canada, UK, Australia, and even in English language Russian news services such as Sputnik, as “far right.”

Although it is encouraging to see 12.6% of the German people wake up, the vote seems to be based less on avoiding the looming conflict with Russia and more on not being the dumping ground for the human debris of Washington’s wars. How does one judge these two threats to Germany?

Germany does not exist, nor does Europe, if Washington brings nuclear conflict to the world. Germany does not exist if the country is overrun by other peoples fleeing from Washington’s atrocities in the Middle East and Africa.

In the first case, there is nothing left of Germany. In the second case, there is a country that is no longer German.

As far as we have evidence, Western Europe is captive by Washington and will go to its destruction rather than dissociate from Washington’s foreign policy. But there are signs of hope in parts of Eastern Europe.

Unlike Germany, some of the Eastern European countries have refused to accept their quota of refugees from Washington’s wars. The EU Commission itself accepts its vassalage function as a dumping ground for Washington’s “collateral damage,” the euphemism Washington applies to the casualties of its wars for profits and hegemony, and is suing the EU members who refuse their quotas of refugees. The former president of the Czech Republic, Vaclav Klaus, responded to the EU’s determination to impose immigrant quotas on the Czech nation by declaring: “The time has come to start preparing the exit of our country from the European Union.” http://gatesofvienna.net/2017/06/vaclav-klaus-the-time-has-come-to-start-preparing-the-exit-of-our-country-from-the-european-union/

The dictatorial character of the EU is a good reason for every member to leave it. Countries already subjected to looting by American global corporations and financial entities have no spare money with which to support the victims of Washington’s illegal wars. For the EU to try to force Washington’s external war costs upon its members proves how much of a tool of Washington the EU is.

The more important reason for Eastern Europe, or that part of it that still has the capability of independent thought, is to avoid nuclear armageddon. Washington’s quest for world hegemony is driving the world to the third, and final, World War. Eastern European governments could prevent this looming war by breaking from their vassalage to Washington and forming a neutral buffer between NATO and Russia.

Such realistic behavior on the part of Eastern Europe could possibly even wake up Germany, France, and Great Britain to the extreme danger that they face as Washington’s vassals.

It is extraordinary, as I reported (http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/09/25/washington-initiated-military-conflict-russia/), that Washington has twice directed attacks against Russian military forces in Syria. This insanity can come to no good end. Americans are so out to lunch that they have no idea of the terrible war that Washington’s madness is brewing. Apparently, neither do the Europeans or the British.

Dear Europeans, yes, non-European immigration is a threat. So is conflict with Russia. Currently, due to your lack of leadership and any significant awareness on your own part, you are incapable of doing anything to save yourselves and the rest of us.

Exhausted, indoctrinated, brainwashed, can Europe do anything except submit to its and the world’s demise?

More from Articles & Columns ↓

CASTELLANO -- HE AQUÍ UN CABALLO PÁLIDO, Y SU JINETE ES LA MUERTE por Paul Craig Roberts,

HE AQUÍ UN CABALLO PÁLIDO, Y SU JINETE ES LA MUERTE

por Paul Craig Roberts, 

en Instituto de Economía Política y Comunidad Saker Latinoamérica. 

Traducción de Leonardo Del Grosso

Dos de los estados más poblados de Estados Unidos, Texas y Florida, están en ruinas por huracanes, y Washington está fomentando más guerras.

La deuda nacional de Estados Unidos es ahora de más de 20 billones de dólares, y Washington está fomentando más guerras.

El mundo entero está ayudando a Washington a fomentar guerras -incluyendo dos países que son su objetivo- Rusia y China-, los cuales están ayudando a Washington a fomentar más guerras. Lo creas o no, tanto Rusia como China votaron con Washington en el Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU para imponer más y más duras sanciones a Corea del Norte, un país culpable de nada más que un deseo de tener los medios para protegerse de los Estados Unidos y no convertirse en otra víctima de Washington como Afganistán, Irak, Libia, Somalia, Yemen, Siria, Serbia y Ucrania derribada en un golpe de Estado norteamericano y ahora condenada en la pobreza.

Bandera pirata en submarino estadounidense Jimmy Carter

Una vez pensé que Rusia y China eran controles sobre el unilateralismo de Washington, pero aparentemente no. Ambos gobiernos han sido castigados por Washington y ambos votaron para castigar a Corea del Norte por esforzarse por estar suficientemente armada para proteger su soberanía de la agresividad de Washington.

¿Por qué Rusia y China repiten el mismo error que cometieron cuando apoyaron la resolución de la ONU sobre Libia, una resolución que Washington y la OTAN pusieron sobre sus cabezas cuando lanzaron ataques aéreos que ayudaron a los “jihadistas” organizados por la CIA a derrocar al gobierno progresista de Libia y assesinar a Gaddafi?

Rusia sabe que está rodeada de bases nucleares y militares estadounidenses. Lo mismo ocurre con China. La pregunta es: ¿Rusia y China han capitulado por miedo? ¿O es su cooperación con Washington un ardid mientras preparan sus propios ataques sobre Washington, o están los dos gobiernos equivocados, tratando de cooperar con Washington en las sanciones para así evitar tener que enfrentar un ataque militar estadounidense contra Corea del Norte?

Se requiere de mucha competencia para enfrentar al diablo, y probablemente hay más maldad en Washington que la competencia que hay en Rusia y China, dos países interesados en ser ricos en una medida tal que les podría costar su soberanía y existencia.

Cuando uno ve que países tan poderosos como Rusia y China se desmoronan bajo la presión de Washington en el Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU, se pregunta si los análisis de las muchas debilidades de Washington son reales y, si son reales, si Rusia y China son conscientes de ellos.

¿Cómo se puede explicar el por qué sobre dos países cuya soberanía está en el camino de la hegemonía mundial de Washington, que ayudan a su conocido enemigo a intimidar a otro país pequeño, especialmente uno en la órbita de influencia de China y Rusia? ¿Cómo puede Rusia quejarse de sanciones contra Rusia basadas en nada más que propaganda de Washington, cuando Rusia apoya sanciones contra Corea del Norte sobre la base de la propaganda de Washington?

Rusia y China no tienen nada que temer de las armas nucleares de Corea del Norte. De hecho, nadie excepto un país que ataca a Corea del Norte. ¿Cuál es la explicación de que Rusia y China se alineen con la política exterior de Washington contra Corea del Norte cuando Rusia y China saben que la política exterior de Washington es hostil a Rusia y China?

El otro día, Washington anunció que estaba aumentando sus buques de guerra en el Mar de China Meridional para asegurarse de que China no suponga que el Mar de China Meridional es chino, en lugar de aguas territoriales de Estados Unidos. Justo el otro día, más acusaciones de interferencia electoral fueron puestas contra Rusia. Esta vez fue Facebook el mecanismo a través del cual Rusia robó las elecciones presidenciales de Estados Unidos.

Estas posiciones tomadas por Washington son absurdas. Sin embargo, se están convirtiendo en la realidad. El aterrador desarrollo es que el mundo entero, la totalidad de la ONU y el Consejo de Seguridad, están ahora capturados por Washington en The Matrix. Parece que ni siquiera Rusia y China pueden ver su propio interés nacional.
Rusia y China están trabajando mano a mano con Washington hacia su propia desaparición.

Esto se está volviendo bíblico. Washington, el anti-Cristo, está subvirtiendo todo bien en la tierra. 

Fuente: http://leonardodelgrosso.blogspot.pt/2017/09/he-aqui-un-caballo-palido-y-su-jinete.html

Washington Has Initiated Military Conflict With Russia by Paul Craig Roberts

Washington Has Initiated Military Conflict With Russia

September 25, 2017

Washington Has Initiated Military Conflict With Russia

Paul Craig Roberts

Russia has provided evidence that Washington is collaborating with ISIS in attacks on Russian forces. http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/breaking-russia-presents-satellite-proof-us-troops-collaborating-isis-syria/ri21030

In one Washington-directed attack, ISIS tried to capture 29 Russian military policemen. However, Russian special forces entered the fray, and the result was spectular losses for ISIS. http://russia-insider.com/en/military/us-secret-services-tried-nab-29-russian-troops-syria-and-got-their-butts-kicked-russian

In another attack Washington-directed attack, Russian General Valery Asapov and two Russian colonels were killed in an attack that violated agreements. http://www.moonofalabama.org/2017/09/syria-us-centcom-declares-war-on-russia.html#more

Sooner or later it will dawn on the Russian government that Washington is not a rational government with which diplomacy can be practiced, peace pursued, and agreements reached. Sooner or later it will dawn on the Russian government that far from being rational, Washington is a criminally insane collection of psychopaths in thrall to the military/security complex which, in turn, is in thrawl to its massive profits.

In other words, for the powerful interest groups that control the US government, war is a profit center. No amount of Russian diplomacy can do anything about this fact.

It is unfortunate that the Russian government did not realize what it was dealing with. If the Russian government had not projected its own rationality on Washington, the war in Syria would have been over a couple of years ago. Instead, hoping for a settlement, the Russians were stop-go/stop-go, which gave Washington time to recover from the shock of Russian intervention and put in place plans to partition Syria in order to keep the conflict alive forever. Having dallied in hopes of a settlement, the danger of which The Saker warns us is real. http://thesaker.is/very-dangerous-escalation-in-syria/

The protests by black pro-football players by refusing to stand for the national anthem has come at an unfortunate time. It is playing into the hands of the military/security complex which is using President Trump’s loud voice challenging the “anti-americanism” to whip up patriotic fervor. It is amazing how people fall for it every time. The military/security complex and their presstitutes are creating public anger at those “attacking our country.” This anger will be turned from black football players to Russia.

With the public in its pocket, the military/security complex will increase its reckless provocations of Russia until we are all dead.

More from Articles & Columns ↓

John Pilger Tells Us About Ourselves. It is not a pretty picture.

John Pilger Tells Us About Ourselves. It is not a pretty picture.

September 22, 2017

John Pilger Tells Us About Ourselves. It is not a pretty picture.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47871.htm

More from Guest Contributions ↓