Afghanistan......permanent American military presence in the country

.
.
.
.
Afghanistan is to India what Inner Mongolia and Korea strategically means to China from a historical perspective.

The long -term hostile occupation of the country by the USA, which additionally HARVESTS heroin so that the profits can be laundered by the big banks in New York and London, amongst other things is obviously not good for the region.....with massive quantities of Afghan heroin going into Russia, Ukraine, Iran, Pakistan ....and India lately.

One would have thought given the social and human cost these countries endure, they would have united and made a stronger effort in ousting the USA from Afghanistan, rather than meekly watch from the distance......for example creating NEW RESISTANCE GROUPS TO THE OCCUPATION WHICH ARE NOT IDEOLOGICALLY/emotionally LINKED TO THE much dreaded medieval Taliban(created by the USA).

Its a simple enough task surely.........then supply them with heavy equipment. The ISI which is funded by the Americans will never give the Taliban heavy equipment....especially Lt SAMs.

If the USA knowingly DUMPS massive quantities of Afghan heroin into such countries, why can't they fight back? Or must they endure politely this state of affairs?

________________________________

Neutral Afghanistan serves regional stability

M.K. Bhadrakumar originally posted at therearenosunglasses.com

The U.S. and NATO now acknowledge that a complete withdrawal from the South and Central Asian region by 2014 is not on the cards. Regional powers face a challenge.

The Anglo-American project to craft an Afghan endgame that ensures long-term western military presence in the South and Central Asian region has entered a critical phase. The United States and North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) now acknowledge that a complete withdrawal from the region by 2014 is not on the cards. Several stages of diplomatic and political deception concealed this “hidden agenda.” Regional powers — Pakistan and India, in particular — are sadder and wiser today.

Looking back, the military stalemate in Afghanistan provided a persuasive argument for the West to justify the opening of a political track. The U.S. and Britain literally shoved down the throat of regional countries at the London conference in January last year their idea of reconciliation with the Taliban. India was assured that what was being contemplated was mere “reintegration” — and not “reconciliation” — and was given a bit of tutoring in the subtle uses of the English language. Pakistan was in a triumphalist mood, having been assured privately that it would be the kingmaker in any peace process. Equally, Russia was basking in the sunshine of the newly-invented process of “reset” in relations with the U.S. Iran, which was consistently wise to the western game plan, boycotted the London conference. China, of course, kept its head below the parapet.

Following the London conference, which must stand out as a first-rate drama of diplomatic deception, the U.S. and Britain rightly proceeded to claim an “international mandate” for talking to the Taliban. With the help of Saudi Arabia, a series of secret meetings with the representatives of various insurgent groups commenced. NATO aircraft provided transportation for Taliban participants in these meetings and according to Der Spiegel, Berlin got U.S. intelligence operatives and Taliban representatives to meet face-to-face on German soil more than once. All the while, the Anglo-American deception continued and a thick layer of fog surrounded the entire process. Mark Sedwill, U.K.’s special representative on Af-Pak, during last week’s visit to New Delhi, said with a delightfully airy vagueness that will be the envy of any diplomat: “There are channels of communication being explored… This outreach to the senior leaders is still in the very early stages. And we don’t know how serious they are… It is Afghan-led but that doesn’t mean that others are not involved. Others are involved. All initiatives are with Afghan consent and on their behalf.”

Meanwhile, former Afghanistan President and head of the Afghan High Council for Peace, Burhanuddin Rabbani, revealed that his members have held preliminary talks with the main Taliban group led by Mullah Mohammad Omar and the so-called Quetta Shura and that the “multiple channels” are indeed “getting momentum.” According to the Guardian, representatives of the Haqqani network visited Kabul “very recently.” Simultaneously, the U.S. is spearheading a move in New York for the removal of the Taliban from the United Nations’ list of terrorists so that they can travel and openly take part in talks. The idea has been floated that the Taliban be permitted to open “representative office” in a third country.

The U.S. is piloting a proposal to remove 20 Taliban figures from the U.N. list. Alongside, it is pushing for a range of changes to the U.N.’s so-called “1275 list,” which comprises around 450 terrorists belonging to al-Qaeda and the Taliban. The U.S. wants to “separate” the Taliban from al-Qaeda and the justification being given is that the al-Qaeda and the Taliban belong to two “different fields of action” as unlike the al-Qaeda which is a global organization, the Taliban is “Afghanistan-centric.” The plain truth, however, is that the U.S. wants to hold out the tantalizing prospect of lifting sanctions against select Taliban figures as a bargaining chip to get them to talk and cut deals directly with American negotiators. Unsurprisingly, having been caught unawares at the London conference, Russia, China and India are today on guard and view the U.S. moves at the U.N. Security Council with reserve.

The western propaganda has drummed up a grim scenario in Afghanistan, which provides the raison d’etre of long-term western military bases. The visiting French Foreign Minister, Alain Juppe, told journalists in Washington last week that the U.S. is engaged in tripartite talks with the Taliban and Pakistan, that it wants the Taliban to be part of the solution but has had difficulty so far finding credible interlocutors on the Taliban side who are willing to talk peace and that talks are under way “as we speak.” He said that despite the U.S.’ surge a year ago, and notwithstanding claims of progress by U.S. and NATO generals commanding the troops, actual progress against the Taliban is inadequate. “The strategy doesn’t succeed as well as we expected on the ground,” he said. He went on to doubt the feasibility of the “transition” through 2014 that is being planned in July, since the Afghan army and police are ill-prepared to assume responsibility for security.

Regional opposition

The sum and substance of what Mr. Juppe said is that despite the efforts to engage the Taliban and notwithstanding the “transition” that is being planned, the insurgency will not end in the near future. What he left unsaid was that continued western troop presence beyond 2014, therefore, is a must. To be sure, Washington is secretly negotiating a ‘strategic partnership agreement’ with the Kabul government that provides for military bases on a long-term basis. Again, the U.S. is in denial but its doublespeak is increasingly getting exposed. The regional powers oppose a long-term U.S.-NATO military presence but Washington counts on the Kabul government to deliver. The Kabul government is on the horns of a dilemma insofar as the American dollar holds its own attractions in the Hindu Kush but then, one has to be alive first to enjoy the good life and the bottom line is that Afghan people may not like the prospect of foreign military occupation and the regional powers are opposing it. In a fit of disgust, Pakistan reportedly advised the Kabul government to swap the American dollar for the Chinese yuan. The Afghan bazaar is agonizing. Whereas the U.S. remains confident about the Afghan bazaari culture and estimates that the Afghan protagonists after some pretentious hard bargaining will ultimately settle for a deal that won’t burn a hole in America’s pocket.

Core issue

It is a sad state of affairs that a once-proud nation is being traded in the bazaar. The core issue for the U.S. is that the Taliban should mellow on its uncompromising opposition to the long-term western troop presence as quid pro quo for what passes for “reconciliation.” To this end, Washington needs to deal with the Taliban directly, on a one-to-one basis without Pakistani or Afghani intermediaries — despite the U.S.’ proforma acknowledgement all through of Pakistan’s key role as ‘facilitator’ and despite paying lip-service that reconciliation with the Taliban ought to be “Afghan-led.” This tussle lies at the core of the U.S.-Pakistan tensions, as Islamabad is credited with influence over the Quetta Shura. Pakistan’s military leadership resents that contrary to earlier pledges, when the crunch time approached, the U.S. bypassed the Inter-Services Intelligence and the Central Intelligence Agency operatives began networking directly with various militant organisations. Through two months of sustained grilling of the U.S.’s ace intelligence operative Raymond Davis in a Lahore jail by the ISI, Pakistani military leadership got to know a lot about the reach of the CIA’s penetration of Pakistan’s body polity.

A huge challenge faces Indian policymakers also. Quite obviously, New Delhi views these developments with concern. The good part is that it has measured the “big picture” while being what Washington fondly calls the U.S.’ “indispensable partner in the 21st century.” Thus, New Delhi persists with its far-sighted dialogue approach toward Pakistan although it is deeply disappointed by Pakistan’s lack or response on 26/11 investigations and on dismantling the terrorist infrastructure. New Delhi also takes care not to identify with the U.S.’s ‘containment’ strategy toward China.

Not much ingenuity is required to anticipate that India’s interests will be severely damaged if this region becomes the arena of a “new cold war” stemming out the long-term NATO military presence in South and Central Asia. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh took the initiative to strengthen New Delhi’s ties with Kabul while judiciously leaving it to the latter to set the parameters in deference to Pakistani sensitivities.

The Indian move to seek membership of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) promises to provide a much-needed forum for New Delhi to partake in regional processes where India gets to work with Russia, China and Pakistan. India’s policymakers are doing extraordinarily well in navigating the country’s passage through a rather dangerous situation.

The Anglo-American enterprise capitalised on the absence of a regional initiative. The U.S.’ diplomacy brilliantly succeeded in creating disruptions in Russia’s and India’s traditional ties with Iran to isolate Tehran, which is an influential player in Afghanistan, apart from tapping into the contradictions in India’s relations with China and Pakistan. The U.S. selectively engaged Russia under the rubric of “reset.” On the whole, however, the regional powers are today a wiser lot about the criticality of a neutral Afghanistan.

( The writer is a former diplomat.)

A balanced simple neutral foreign policy

.
.
.
.

India needs a balanced simple neutral foreign policy......devoid of wanna be super power hyperbole, and the importance of looking after India's back yard through diplomacy, foreign aid, with investments. In that sense the $5 billion aid to Africa was unnecessary and extravagant given India's position in her own back yard.

__________________________

US-India ties in primary colors

By M K Bhadrakumar originally posted at therearenosunglasses.com

An imminent decision by the Nuclear Supply Group [NSG] at its forthcoming plenary at The Hague next week to approve new guidelines barring transfer of enrichment and reprocessing technology and equipment [EPR] to India has forced the government in Delhi to take the nation into confidence that the United States has committed a grave breach of trust with the country. The dark cloud looming on the horizon presaging squalls at some indeterminate future date in the India-US relationship, which was obvious to careful observers for some time already, has indeed turned out to be real and unavoidable. For the uninitiated, the ‘breaking news’ comes as an absolute stunner as it exposes the India-US strategic partnership to be in actuality an empty drum. For the pro-American lobby in Delhi circles, this poses an acute dilemma as they won’t know what to say – whether to laugh it away or sit down on the floor and cry.

(Sadly the USA has never been greatly enthusiastic about technology transfers of significance to India. Whilst massive quantities of sensitive technology transfers do take place to China, openly or inadvertently (missile technology, stealth technology, F-15 engines, nuclear technology.....and so on)....with India basic civilian nuclear technology which is India's right has to go through major hurdles before they are cleared, both by the USA and by international bodies.

The USA has transferred sensitive strategic technology to Bolshevik Soviet Union in the 1920's, and there after, and ditto Nazi Germany. Point being when the USA really wants to it can transfer whatever it wants where it wants for business.

With India ALL the laws of the world seems to come into play when transferring technology to the country.

The USA is keen on fostering a pro-America stance in Delhi; the USA is keen on fostering a neo-liberal economic model in India; the USA is keen on closer security ties with India; the USA is keen on taking the best of India to the USA........but the USA is not too keen to give the ever less fashionable nuke civilian technology to India. We will need a Ph.D to understand this problem on the part of the USA.............but given this OBVIOUS double standard reality India should never be a poodle to America geo-strategy in Asia, especially in her own back yard)

The US’ perfidy is so obvious. Having entered into a civil nuclear cooperation agreement with India in 2008, which provides for a ‘clean waiver’ for EPR transfer to India, US immediately began undercutting the provision by prompting the NSG to introduce new guidelines that will effectively reinstate the previous embargo. The sordid story and the diplomatic exchanges thereof speaks volumes about the contrived nature of Barack Obama’s claim that he regarded India as the US’s “indispensable partner in the 21st centruy”. In sum, what the US wants is to tap into the vast Indian market for lucrative business and to cajole India to be a collaborator in its containment strategy toward China, which is, after all, what the strategic partnership is all about.

India could well be paying the price for its dogged refusal to become part of the US’ containment strategy toward China. To ‘insiders’ and perceptive outside observers alike in Delhi, many recent developments were unmistakably suggesting for a while already that contrary to the soap operas of the US state department singing songs of glory about the US’ partnership with India, things were not exactly going well – and were getting to be more and more problematic. Delhi was getting to be wiser and wiser about the US strategies toward India but indeed wouldn’t feel the urge to contradict the US’ public diplomacy, which, therefore, misled the public perceptions. Indian diplomacy works in strange ways – and has quietly done an extraordinary amount of ‘new thinking’ as to how to steer the country ahead in a complicated regional and international milieu.

But to begin with, let us draw the balance sheet:

One, India has refused to join a new avatar of the US’ 6-year old fanciful idea of an alliance of Asian democracies against China (which South Block mandarins almost signed up for in 2005).

Two, in the past couple of years, India began steadily distancing itself from the US and started working on the normalization of relations with China on a bilateral track (against stiff opposition bordering on sabotage by sections within the Indian establishment – often hand in glove with the media – which are hopelessly, crudely wedded to the past and simply lack the intellectual capacity or the sophistication to comprehend the spirit of our times.)

Three, in the more recent past, India point blank refused to play ball with the US to pile pressure on Pakistan (Pakistan is a problem child and a relative of India that requires economic aid to INDUCE it to India's way of thinking).

Four, Indian policymakers instead opened the track of dialogue with Pakistan with primacy, again, placed on bilateralism.

Five, Indian rhetoric against Pakistan (and China) has become ‘nil. (Refer to the proceedings of the recent Shangri-La conference in Singapore.)

Six, India finally took a measured step toward seeking membership of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation whose main agenda is to check the expansion and consolidation of US/Nato military presence int the region.

Seven, India reworked its Afghan policies and has all but delinked from the US strategies.

Eight, India bluntly refused to be drawn into the propagandist exercises of the Rana trial at Chicago despite US urgings, directly or indirectly, to have an old-fashioned bash at the Pakistani security establishment. (Sections of our media fell into the trap.)

Nine, India has distanced itself from the US game plan to corner the regime of Mahinda Rajapaksa in Sri Lanka.

Ten, Indian policy in Nepal is shifting gear with greater accent on regional stability rather than the ‘new great game’.

Eleven, India overlooked the bids by Boeing and Lockheed in the MMRCA tender.

Twelve, India has kept an independent stance in the UN Security Council on the issues of Libya and Syria.

Thirteen, India abstained at the IAEA vote on Syria.

Fourteen, India turned down the US proposal to have a new format of strategic dialogue known as ‘two-plus-two’ (involving defence ministers in addition to foreign ministers).

Fifteen, India finds it difficult to accede the request of the US companies exporting nuclear reactors to amend its Nuclear Liability law to suit exactly their business needs.

So, is this the end of the road for US-India ties? Far from it. There is a broad consensus in favor of expanding and deepening ties with the US, as our country moves into a higher trajectory of growth and it has needs of high technology for the modernization of its economy, its society and human resources and its military. Didn’t India recently place one of its biggest orders for procurement of weapons from US – handing over a highly lucrative 4.1 billion dollar order to Boeing which is estimated to generate around 25000 jobs in the US and would allow a profit margin of around 2 billion dollars?

Trade is flourishing. Only yesterday, Robert Blake, US assistant secretary of state, who came all the way to Kolkatta to mark America’s high expectations from CM Mamata Bannerjee and Finance Minister Amit Mitra said at a speech, “A quick look at the data reveals a trade relationship that is accelerating, mutually beneficial and relatively balanced.” Washington cannot complain. At a time when World Bank forecasts a meager 2.6 percent growth for US economy through 2013, Indian market is becoming a veritable milch cow it can’t do without.

In sum, what is happening is a certain removal of the blinkers on the US-India relationship. From the Indian side, the policymaker almost completely sequestered himself from the needless excitement of the “pro-American” lobby and sundry other fat-cats who stand to gain out of the US-India tango, as well as the US’ own propaganda machinery, which incessantly churns out the spin about the relationship being a rare thing in contemporary global politics. From the US propaganda, it may appear the Indian policymaker is being passively led by the skillful American master who knows the ways of the poodles.

But in reality, both Delhi and Washington know – as WikiLeaks cables reveal – that it is just not in India’s DNA (to borrow a memorable phrase from the People’s Daily) to be a poodle. The rupture that threatens to break out next week could well throw the entire US-India nuclear deal into a spin, but it has also brought out into the open the real alchemy of the US-India relationship as a hard-nosed, selective partnership based on mutual advantage. It stands out in primary colors.

Sans misleading euphoria,

sans false pretensions,

sans unrealistic expectations.

No coups within the military please.......keep the discipline.

.
.
.
.
General Kiyani should have done the honorable thing and retired his post with good grace when his time for retirement came up......as it was his position was extended by another 3 years, by the Zardari government on the direction of the American embassy taking into account his Coolie Kuta credentials for the JEWSA.

As it is Kiyani since his extension of service has dined, smiled and mingled with the Americans covertly in Oman and overtly..... several times as the JEWSA continued with the murderous drone strikes which kill innocent honest Pakistani civilians, and covert action within Pakistan against civilians and Pakistani military posts (Mehran naval base)

Kiyani and Suja Pasha are Mir Jafar's and Mir Sadiq, helping the JEWSA empire extend its reach.

On the other hand the Pakistan security structure has to maintain its cohesion, ready for the BIG STRUGGLE AGAINST THE JEWSA..........AND not descend into a internal struggle and civil war.

An internal struggle where the command structure is compromised in the Pakistan military will weaken the military, AND allow the JEWSA to claim that Pakistan is a destabilized failed state which CAN'T be trusted to look after its nuke assets.

Under no circumstances can there be a covert or overt military coup for many good reasons. Kiyani and his sidekick Shuja Pasha can however be made to see the error of their ways............and they can be persuaded to change their open JEWSA policies. That is OK.

What is required though and OK is a COUP within the political establishment which removes the PPP from power, and replaces in their place a more patriotic civilian government.

A civilian government which articulates the peoples sentiments more clearly, overtly and honestly........and not as now with Rehman Malik overtly criticizing sometimes lamely, but secretly cooperating with the JEWSA.

_______________________________

CIA TO TOPPLE KAYANI? by aangirfan.

Panetta (from Calabria)

On 10 June 2011, CIA boss Leon Panetta met Pakistan army boss General Kayani and Pakistan spy boss General Shuja Pasha.

On 11 June, Panetta left Pakistan without achieving a deal on improving the relationship between the US and Pakistan spy agencies.

CIA chief Panetta leaves without deal

On 17 June 2011, a US official reported that Pakistan "is blocking food and water" from reaching a base used by America for its drone attacks.

Pakistan 'blocks supplies to American drone base'

According to the New York Times, General Kayani is facing opposition from top people within the Pakistan army and may be toppled from power.

Pakistan's Chief of Army Fights to Keep His Job

The New York Times story leads one to believe that it is the CIA which is instigating mutiny in the Pakistani army, according to the blog at Indian Punchline

"There is a US attempt to exploit the growing indiscipline within the Pak army and, if possible, to trigger a mutiny, which will bog down the army leadership in a serious 'domestic' crisis that leaves no time for them for the foreseeable future to play any forceful role in Afghanistan.

"In turn, it leaves the Americans a free hand to pursue their own agenda.

"Time is of the essence of the matter and the US desperately wants direct access to the Taliban leadership so as to strike a deal with them without the ISI or Hamid Karzai coming in between.

"The prime US objective is that Taliban should somehow come to a compromise with them on the single most crucial issue of permanent US military bases in Afghanistan."

Everything Rehman Malik says think and do the opposite.

.
.
.
.
One of the simple ways the JEWSA runs a Third World country is to buy its ministers, top military people, the local media and other senior bureaucrats.(USAID)

Most of the PPP ministers are paid for by the USA with Swiss bank accounts, which explains the obvious to the simple Pakistani man, why state policies which the government carries out are fundamentally ANTI-PAKISTANI (no rocket science/drone science here)........that is why Pakistan is a failed state now, since Musharaf left and billionaire crook Zardari took over in 2008.

The top echelon of the military and political system work for the USA in Pakistan.

Rehman Malik is one such guy.

He is the point man for the USA when "special events" takes place courtesy of the USA in Pakistan.........the Abbottabad fake non-raid in 2nd May by the USA, and the Mehran naval base raid by the USA (Gora guys with "Star Wars" equipment raiding a sensitive military installation in the later case.........which ATTEMPTED to create the image that Pakistan is an unstable country which can't even protect its sensitive military installations...ie read "Nuclear installations".........no post event pictures of the 4 dead gora with tattoo's terrorists or a meaningful discussion of where such UNIQUE types of men came from).

There is growing justified pressure in Capitol Hill for cessation of such decade long WARS, which is destroying the USA. Sections of the American security obviously to counter such plans back home will always be looking to incite new wars for Israel as long as they are based in Af/Pak.....100,000 troops officially and 150,000 mercenaries.

Rehman Malik played a critical role in both these episodes covering up and establishing the Washington narrative for the media. Chidambaram plays a similar role in India for the USA(26/11)...........again gora guys with blond hair shooting up Central Mumbai whilst the police stood motionless, centered around a Jewish controlled hostel as the HQ...........an attempt to incite India to war with Pakistan.

Pakistan the failed state thus has this fundamental problem, where too much security centered around false state sponsored terrorism increase year by year the instability of the country.......as the country fights alongside the USA in its particular geo-strategic struggle and design in the region. Rehman Malik, Zardari bhen and Kiyani ALL call for greater efforts to fight terrorism.......AND YET, as they do so the terrorism in Pakistan increases year by year inexplicably..........ALL terrorism in Pakistan comes from the state, directly and indirectly. All Jihadis are controlled by the Pakistani military, therefore if a Jihadi carries out terrorism in Pakistan = its the Pakistan military doing it, or the USA.

The JEWSA requires Pakistan to be destabilized (Somalia) before they can directly attack and secure the nuclear assets of the country for Israel.

The Pakistan military top brass, and the PPP government is doing their best to help the JEWSA.

They are ENEMIES and TRAITORS to their country.

__________________________________

Media should not criticize intelligence agencies: Malik

By the NEWS.com

Interior Minister Rehman Malik said Saturday that security forces were playing a major role in protecting the country from terrorism and crime especially in maintaining law and order in Karachi, Geo News reported.

(The Pakistan military and its British created ISI is the MAIN destabilizing force in Pakistan since they assassinated Liakat Ali Khan in 1951........I have already listed these failures in MANY posts previously as a chonological list (the failures are pretty big and fundamental to Pakistan).....in the Orwellian world of Failed State Pakistan those that are charged by the tax payer to protect the nation constitute its biggest threat. The security forces of Pakistan have coopted and obey the Washington security narrative, which is OBVIOUSLY not good for Pakistan. What is good for the JEWSA as defined by Likud Israel is not necessarily good for Pakistan)

Briefing the media outside Parliament house, the Interior Minister said Sindh Rangers and their former DG had played a vital role in controlling target killing in Karachi and the country’s forces were doing a good job.

(Thats why Pakistan is called terrorist hub number 1)

A few isolated incidents have taken place and security forces have to work within the limits of the law, Malik said and added that the media should not criticize intelligence agencies.

(They don't, and never have worked within the law.............4000 people have disappeared, extra-judicial killings...35,000 dead since 2001, 300 terrorist incidents...and millions of people homeless, AND ENDLESS WARS for the JEWSA)

According to Malik, criminal elements had killed 48 policemen in 5 months, adding that if the ISI and other intelligence agencies did not exist, than there would even more acts of terrorism.

__________________________

• My final year law degree dissertation was titled, "The relationship between the state, the security services and the law." taking a critical look at the situation in the UK post the Peter Wright affair and a new legislation enacted to bring the intelligence services under the purview of parliament, rather than "the Queen"......using entirely secondary material from the library one could see how even in First world UK, with its cricket, polite manners and the mother of all parliaments...its intelligence agencies by their very nature:

1) Had to work and therefore train to work outside of the law....bypass the law.

2) They operated as a tool of the powerful elite; political/business elite...read Jewish.

3)They created "false business" in order to generate, expand and justify the importance of their own work.

The IRA/real IRA were run by British intelligence; of the 3500 deaths from the Northern Ireland conflict between 1970--2000, 90% was the result of actions by British military intelligence activity. 7/7 was undertaken by MI-5 for Israel.

• There are many nations with with regimes with first class intelligence services, but due to poor governance the regimes eventually collapse due to too much security: One thinks of Stasi East Germany, where 1 in 4 of the population worked for the intelligence Services; KGB Soviet Union; Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy. On the other HAND, there are many nations on earth with minimal intelligence and security, and yet they do rather well and are happy as societies.......Japan, though belatedly in the process of establishing a foreign intelligence service, and Sweden, Norway........and so on.

• In failed state Pakistan given the nature of the Pakistan security establishment and their record for the last 63 years, the ordinary people must keep an wary eye on the Pakistani security system critically....for their own good.

______________________________________

PAKISTAN'S SPOOKY REHMAN MALIK by aangirfan.

Malik with the shidi hairdo

On 17 January 2009, Pakistan acknowledged that India's 26/11 Mumbai dossier has "proof" of the involvement of Pakistani elements.

The first-ever admission that India had proof came from Pakistan's interior ministry chief Rehman Malik.

Pak concedes India has got proof against Pak nationals

Malik

The most powerful man in Pakistan appears to be a friend of Mossad and the American government.

Rehman Malik is the effective Interior Minister of Pakistan.

ISI is the Pakistan spy agency.

Pakistan Daily writes of 'the bizarre, abortive handover of the ISI to Rehman Malik'. (You Can’t Be On The Wrong Side Of Pakistan Mr Asif Ali Zardari)

Benazir Bhutto appointed Rehman Malik as chief of Pakistan's Federal Investigation Agency (FIA)

According to the article on Rehman Malik at Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia :

1. The Pakistani military was dismayed by reports of FIA contacts with the Israeli secret service, the Mossad, which had been cooperating with Indian secret service RAW.

2. One of the first acts of President Farooq Leghari after dismissing Benazir Bhutto on 5 November 1996 was to imprison Rehman Malik, the Additional Director General FIA.

3. Rehman Malik was the person responsible for security of Benazir Bhutto. After the assassination of Benazir Bhutto there were many accusation against Rehman Malik for lax security. (A Fishy Character - Rehman Malik Pakistan Politics / Rehman “Double Agent” Malik–>Emergency mailing list ... )

According to the Pakistani Spectator, 11 May 2008, (Rehman Malik Runs Zardari and PPP The Pakistani Spectator):

"Rehman Malik ... helped Zardari a lot to launder ... looted money and invest and secure it at different places in the world... He does what he is told to do by the masters in Washington."

Cointelpro since .

.
.
.
.

As per the blog intro statement "about me" the same has happened to me from British Intelligence, and namely MI-5.....since 1985 where MI-5 have networked with intelligence organizations of other countries such as Germany, South Korea and others....when I could no longer bare to live in the UK given the level of harassment, and I moved out in 2002. In the process of selling the rational for extensive surveillance of me over such a long period including by foreign intelligence agencies, MI-5 have come up over the years (1985--2011) with some pretty variegated EVER CHANGING DEPENDING ON THE SEASON cock and bull excuses to do so illegally.

Professor Juan Cole I'm sad to say has had it quite easy in comparison to what I have been through at the hands of the British state, and I am quite certain what has been done to me was done with the full knowledge of both the Labor leadership and the Tory leadership, and significant sections of the British state...The Foreign Office, the Home Office especially.

MI-5 works as an arm of the multi-layered British elite. Given that I have never been given an explanation for this harassment from 1985, I am unable to rationalize or communicate my side of the situation with anybody especially from the British state, save for the meaningless advice from various parties to just get on with ones life, because "it will eventually fizzle out."

I'm sure I can't be the only one, since during the 1980's insiders of MI-5 revealed that some 2 million people had files on them, of which 300,000 may have been active files. COINTELPRO also takes place in the UK, but without the incites and exposure of a Church Commission, it is thus very pro-active and hidden. I myself have never joined or attempted to join any political organization in my life, or participated in any demonstrations, and the extensive writing on politics is a very recent affair. The harassment by MI-5 thus began at a time when I had no conceivable political connections or activity. Britain is also a Police state......surpassing the USA in some respects.

___________________

The Persecution of Juan Cole

Bush White House targeted Michigan professor

by Justin Raimondo, at antiwar.com

The revelation by Glenn Carle, a former CIA official, that the Bush White House sought information on Prof. Juan Cole, an academic and critic of the Iraq war, in order to discredit him is hardly shocking, at least to anyone of my generation. After all, I reached political consciousness during the administration of Richard M. Nixon, whose hijinks – the Watergate break-in, the infamous COINTELPRO operation – are well known. Less well-known is the long history of police state tactics by previous administrations, running all the way back to FDR and Woodrow Wilson, two wartime presidents who set the pace for their successors.

Sure, now we have laws supposedly forbidding a repeat of history, and yet, existing right alongside these prohibitions, we have legislation like the PATRIOT Act, which empowers the feds to read our emails, monitor our political activities, and pretty much do what it pleases in the name of fighting our endless “war on terrorism.” Congress has renewed the Act, year after year, with clocklike regularity, and the nation’s liberals, as well as the supposedly “limited government” conservatives, aren’t making much of a fuss about it. As the first in a series of articles by Dana Priest and William M. Arkin in the Washington Post, “Top Secret America,” pointed out,

“The top-secret world the government created in response to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, has become so large, so unwieldy and so secretive that no one knows how much money it costs, how many people it employs, how many programs exist within it or exactly how many agencies do the same work.”

It’s the only growth industry we have left, apparently:

“Some 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies work on programs related to counterterrorism, homeland security and intelligence in about 10,000 locations across the United States. An estimated 854,000 people, nearly 1.5 times as many people as live in Washington, D.C., hold top-secret security clearances. In Washington and the surrounding area, 33 building complexes for top-secret intelligence work are under construction or have been built since September 2001. Together they occupy the equivalent of almost three Pentagons or 22 U.S. Capitol buildings – about 17 million square feet of space.”

Granted near absolute power to operate with impunity – to collect information on us, through fair means or foul – this vast army of spies, stool pigeons, and “analysts” is bound to do precisely what they were doing to Professor Cole because that’s their job. The idea that the information-gathering function of our national security bureaucracy can be separated out from any malign intent – and that it was this intent, rather than the act of collecting information, that was the real transgression — is reflected in the New York Times’ account:

“The experts said it might not be unlawful for the C.I.A. to provide the White House with open source material — from public databases or published material, for example — about an American citizen. But if the intent was to discredit a political critic, that would be improper, they said.”

For what purpose would the CIA or any similar government agency be collecting information on American citizens other than to discover facts that might bring discredit on them? The idea that such intelligence gathering is basically benign, and can only be considered illegal and/or impermissible on account of intent, is how they manage to get away with it.

As the Washington Post series showed, the sheer number of resources being absorbed by Top Secret America’s parallel universe of intelligence operatives is so immense it can’t even be accurately calculated. Even under the strictest legal constraints, some portion of this intelligence trove is more than likely to be leaked – especially if there’s some political advantage to it. In Washington, unsurprisingly, this happens all the time.

A couple of years ago, Prof. Cole, who teaches at the University of Michigan, was being considered for a teaching post at Yale: the matter became a cause célèbre in the blogosphere, and in the neoconservative media, where an organized campaign to deny him the position was launched. Yale eventually caved in to the pressure: Cole continues to teach in Michigan.

In retrospect, I think there can be little doubt that the campaign to deny Cole the Yale tenure-track position was directed from the White House. As the Times reported, the effort to dig up dirt on Cole started in 2005: the next year, when the Yale position was up for consideration, he was accused of being “pro-terrorist,” anti-Israel, and called every name in the book. When David B. Low, Carle’s boss, called Carle into his office, he said of Cole: “The White House wants to get him.”

Well, it looks to me like they got him.

Prof. Cole has reportedly called for an investigation, and good luck to him in that. Each and every member of the faculty committee at Yale that voted on Cole’s proposed appointment should be asked – and probably will be asked – to reveal their contacts with outsiders regarding the matter. I have no doubt that the trail of defamation will lead straight to Washington, D.C.

The larger lesson to be learned from all this is that none of us is safe. If you stick your head up above the tall grass, and are critical of whatever gang is in charge at the moment in Washington, you are taking a very big chance. Your career, your private life, your financial and professional existence – all are put at risk. And the idea that, under the Obama administration, we are going to catch a break is laughable: the FBI has been given more leeway in pursuing domestic intelligence targets, and that’s for a very good reason – because they intend to use it.

You can bet Prof. Cole wasn’t the only one on the Bush White House’s “enemies list” who suffered damage to his professional reputation inflicted by US government operatives. We’ll probably never know the identities of the targets, or the methods used to smear, slander, and marginalize them.

What I want to know is: who’s on Obama’s enemies list? Because, as sure as Washington real estate prices will continue to rise while plummeting in the rest of the country, these very same activities are continuing under the present administration. The heat is off Prof. Cole, at least for the moment – having endorsed Obama’s latest war, in Libya, the prominent lefty blogger probably has nothing to worry about. However, this administration has so far faithfully emulated its predecessors in so many other important ways that one has to assume the heat is still on the rest of us: indeed, given the Obama administration’s record on national and domestic security, one must assume domestic spying efforts and other covert actions have escalated.

In short, the persecution of Prof. Cole is just one example of America’s emerging police state – emerging into the daylight, that is, because it’s been thriving in the dark for quite some time.

Jewish run Germany.

.
.
.
.

Germany: Still Under Control of Foreign Powers

By Dr. Ingrid Rimland Zundel at Veterans Today and Rebel News. Translation by Stephan Goodson.

I remember clearly the first time I learned that the Third Reich, at least on paper that is scrupulously kept from eyes beneath raised eyebrows, still exists. You didn’t know that – did you? I didn’t – until fairly recently.

Frumpy granny Frau Angie Dorothea Krasner with toy-boy, "Whatever You Say Darling"

The legendary German attorney, Horst Mahler, now serving a lifetime sentence for having rushed in bravely where angels fear to tread, called me one merry morning right after my husband was kidnapped by agents of my government to please the Noisy Lobby, and gave me the low-down on this.

In Horst’s own words, since tauntingly repeated to much judicial and editorial squirming in several recent thought-crime trials in Germany, including the ghastly show trial that cost Ernst Zundel five years:

“The German Reich, including its people, never surrendered! Only the Wehrmacht did.”

At the time, I shrugged this off as obscure legalese that had no relevance to what I was desperately trying to do – to explain to the authorities that my husband had been swept up under the guise of a fig leaf of a “visa overstay” so as to silence him for his politically incorrect sins. Since then, I have learned differently.

Now it makes sense to me that what is happening in Europe, especially in Germany, where in the last ten years more than 100,000 upright citizens have found themselves in conflict with the law for having misspoken themselves to the displeasure of the Ruling Mandarins.

(100,000 is the number of non-Jewish Berliners who died fighting the EVIL JEWISH instituted Nazi regime in Germany between 1933-45)

This could only have happened thanks to a Shadow Government – an Occupation Government since 1945! – that passes itself off as legit!

(I have news for you frau Zundel which is that Jewish shadow governments exist in the UK {Rothschilds run} France, Holland, USA and ofcourse Russia....in fact in ALL Western Occidental societies without exception, and to a great extent in Central and South America.

Because of the sheer incredibility of this fact, it sounds paranoid and conspiratorial.........in non-Western countries where there obviously cannot be any shadow Jewish governments, the international Jew uses the power of the JEWSA, UK, France and so forth......as the Jew eggs them on their multiple foreign misadventures as a means of increasing Jewish power in the global plain, which serve Jewish interests.....Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and so forth, and through globalist organizations such as the United Nations, IMF, WB, WTO mainly based in the JEWSA, and supra-national organizations such as the EU, NAFTA)

More shall be said about the shameful record of the so-called “Bundesrepublik” of Germany that jails its dissidents in the tried-and-true Stalinist Mode – without allowing the slightest defense. Not only that – even defense attorneys are now being jailed who dare to speak Truth to Power!

The letter below was sent to me by a South African friend who happens to be – get this! – a banker whose email is abolishusury@telkomsa.net You see why I am always optimistic that patriots can still be found in weird and wonderful places? His name is Stephen Goodson – and I am sure he doesn’t mind my giving away his moniker because he is running for office. His letter below features a man who calls a spade a spade. It gives me great please to pass it on to you for your elucidation:

Stephen Goodson Letter

It is not often that one has an opportunity to confront one’s adversaries and ask penetrating questions without fear of arrest or retribution, as may well have been the case if the following encounter had taken place in the allegedly “freest” Germany of all time.

On the evening of Monday, 24 January 2011, I attended a symposium entitled “21 and 15 years on: To what Extent Can Germans and South Africans Enjoy their Respective ‘Living’ Constitutions?”, sponsored by the German Consulate General in Cape Town.

The South African panelists were advertised as Pius Langa, former president of the South African Constitutional Court, and Roelf Meyer, former Minister of Constitutional Affairs, who was chief negotiator at Kempton park, Johannesburg (1992-1996) and who played a leading role in selling South Africa out to the international banking cartel behind the smokescreen of majority rule. After his election, President Thabo Mbeki personally thanked David Rockefeller for his invaluable support in this regard.

The German panelists were represented by emeritus Professor Hans-Peter Schneider, a former member of a number of provincial (Laender) Constitutional Courts, and Professor Herta Daeubler-Gmelin, a former
Minister of Justice (1998-2002) and member of the Bundestag.

During her term of office Frau Gmelin was responsible for introducing same sex “marriages” or civil unions, and for fining and jailing hundreds of “thought criminals”. But she was fired from her post in 2002 after comparing the methodology of President George W Bush in Iraq to that of Adolf Hitler. Her leader, SPD chief Gerhard Schroeder, who apologized profusely to Bush, said at the time that he could not sit at the same Cabinet table with someone who had connected Bush to a “criminal”.

In the event, of the four invited panelists, only Professor Schneider was present. The South Africans were indisposed and Frau Gmelin’s flight was delayed.

Three Points

In the spirit of clarification, I directed the following three points to Professor Schneider:

(i) Two days prior to the enactment of the German constitution on 23 May 1949, a Secret Treaty (Geheimer Staatsvertrag) was signed, which gave complete Allied control over electronic and print media, film, culture and education until the year 2099.

As a result thereof, there are still 100,000 occupation troops in Germany; after 66 years there still has been no peace treaty concluded between Germany and the Victorious Allied Powers; and all of Germany’s gold reserves are held in the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank of New York, in which the Rothschilds have a 57% shareholding.

This treaty has been confirmed by Major-General Gerd-Helmut Komossa, former head of German Military Intelligence in his book “Die Deutsche Karte” (The German Card).

(ii) There appear to be two constitutions. According to a resolution of the Constitutional Court (Verfassungsgericht) of 17 August 1956, “It is upheld that the German Reich has outlasted the collapse of 1945 and has never gone under or fallen, either through capitulation or through the exertion of foreign state authority in Germany by the Allies, or in the later course of time; it is still an entity with legal capacity, even though it is not fully operable as a government due to a lack of organization. The Federal Republic of Germany is NOT the successor of the German Reich”.

It needs to be noted that the Constitution of the Third Reich dates back to the North German Constitution of 1866. The principal reason why it still exists is because only the German High Command surrendered on 8-9 May 1945, and not the German Government.

Furthermore, the 1949 Constitution is termed the Basic Law, because it is a provisional constitution, pending unification of the lost territories. So far, only central Germany has been reunified – 3 October 1990. The eastern territories, as defined by the 1937 borders, still remain under Polish and Russian control.

(iii) Freedom of expression is guaranteed by Section 5 of the Basic Law (Grundgesetz), but it is clearly contradicted by Section 130 of the Criminal Code (Strafsgesetzbuch) under the heading ‘Agitation of the People’. Any alternative view of the Establishment’s version of history is punishable by up to 5 years in prison (12 years in the case of Horst Mahler), and thousands of innocent people have been jailed or fined.

Germar Rudolf - Thought Criminal ?

I will give two brief examples. Dr Wilhelm Staeglich from Hamburg was forced to resign as a judge and lost 20% of his pension for five years for publishing a book about World War II, “Der Auschwitz Mythos”. In a letter to me dated 21 October 1990, he wrote:.”…In Germany the book has been banned forever.”

My second example concerns Germar Rudolf, who graduated in Chemistry at Bonn University and was a researcher at the Max Planck Institute. In 1992 he wrote a scientific report about the so-called concentration camps in the east, which was peer-reviewed by over 300 professors of Inorganic Chemistry. Not one of them could find a single mistake. He was sentenced to 2 1/2 years in prison for writing this Report.

Finally, I wish to quote a sentence from Professor Dr Ernst Nolte, who was a witness at the recent Kevin Kaether trial in Berlin: “Such questioning must be allowed, or else scientific truth in this area of
history is ruled out – this is simply not a possibility.”

The Result

Halfway through the third question, the moderator of the symposium requested a “termination”, in other words, he wished to stop the questioning. Professor Schneider only replied to this, the third question, saying flatly that freedom of speech is protected by the Constitution and that the Criminal Code is there to protect it from “hate” speech.

After the symposium ended for the public, I expanded on the rest of my question to him as well as mentioning that the famous German historian, Professor Helmut Diwald, had had his book, “Geschichte der Deutsche” pulped in the late 1970’s, after he had written (p.165) that whatever happened to the Jews who were evacuated to the east after 1940 is “still unexplained with regard to the central questions, in spite of all that has been written.” Professor Schneider seemed to agree that such questions needed to be treated more seriously.

Regarding the secret Treaty discussed in point (i) above, Schneider said that he was unable to say whether it was true or false. There has been much debate about its authenticity, but the fact is that the provisions contained in it have all been applied.

Concerning the constitution of the Third Reich never having been abrogated, as discussed in point (ii) above, he admitted that it still exists, but apparently only so that those who worked during that period could still receive their pensions!

The Crux

Human Rights Council

The crux of any constitution is the unfettered right to freedom of expression. This has recently (3 June 2010) been formulated by the Human Rights Council, a subsidiary of UNESCO, as follows:

“The exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression is one of the essential foundations of a democratic society, and is instrumental to the development and strengthening of effective democratic systems.” Until this righthas been restored in Europe, injustice and repression will persist, notwithstanding Germany’s false claim of being a Constitutional state (“Rechtsstaat”).

During the discussions, it was revealed that there had been a steady decline in the participation of the German people in the party political system. Furthermore, large-scale violent riots had erupted because of the dumping of nuclear waste in Lower Saxony and the construction of a new underground railway station in Stuttgart, indicative of general dissatisfaction and possibly a new direction.

Another indication was the finding by a recent opinion poll that 89% of Germans do not believe the official version of 9/11, a hopeful development, no doubt spurred on by the Internet.

The response to my questions and points from the audience of about 60 people was muted, and was epitomized by the glum look on the face of the Consul General. However, afterwards a former Jewish student of political philosophy and a black film maker both said that they found it an intriguing revelation that Germany was still under the control of foreign powers.

Hopefully, the Germans will one day have the opportunity to write their own constitution, free of foreign interference, and one which would fully reflect their own culture and traditions.

(Stephen Goodson, the writer of this article, graduated in Roman-Dutch Law at the University of Stellenbosch.)

Jewish revolutionary movements and WWII.

.
.
.
.

I've already covered this area in previous posts, but as a warm up to the next post very relevant in seeing the bigger conspiracy and patterns, and therefore intentions.

_____________________________

SECRET BACKERS by aangirfan

Revolutions and wars can bring about a transfer of wealth and power from one 'clan' to another.

The takeover of Russia by Lenin and Trotsky led to a transfer of wealth and power to certain 'Jewish' folks within Russia.

But, Stalin, who was reportedly 'Jewish', saw certain 'Jews', such as Trotsky, as his enemies.
(Jewish mobsters do fight each other even in the USA)

Hitler, who may have been partly 'Jewish', was clearly anti-semitic (propaganda image???? of an otherwise very evil puppet of Jewish bankers), but was reportedly backed by certain 'Jews'.

The booklet Hitler's Secret Backers, by "Sidney Warburg" claims that certain 'Jewish' bankers helped put Hitler into power. ("Sidney Warburg")

"Warburg, a joint owner of the New York bank Kuhn Loeb and Cie described in the book three conversations he held with Hitler at the request of American financiers, the Bank of England and oil firms to facilitate payments to the Nazi party." (Hitler's Secret Backers, by Sidney Warburg, at American Buddha ...)

Christian Rakovsky, interrogated by Stalin's agents in 1938, reportedly stated that Jewish bankers, having established communism, had found it stolen from them by Stalin

So, reportedly, certain 'Jewish' bankers hoped to use Hitler against Stalin.

And eventually use Stalin against Hitler.



Freemason Hjalmar Schacht, who worked for Hitler.

In 1934, the American Ambassador in Berlin William Dodd wrote (Hitler's Secret Backers. /mhp: "Sidney Warburg"):

"Schacht is the real master here, and government officials don't dare order him to do anything...

"One evening my wife visited Baron Eberhard von Oppenheim, who lives splendidly and quietly near us. Many German Nazis were present. It is said that Oppenheim gave the Nazi party 200,000 marks...

"Lazaron (an American rabbi) is here to gain information about possibilities for the Warburgs...

"I visited Eric Phipps and repeated confidentially a report that Armstrong Vickers, the huge British armaments concern, had negotiated the sale of war materials here last week ... (1934)

"I understood representatives of Curtiss-Wright, from the U.S. were here to negotiate similar sales...

"Poor Lazaron was very upset because so many rich Jews have capitulated to the Nazi leadership and are influential financial aides to Dr. Schaft, who finds their support in the present situation very important."


Rakovsky with Trotsky.

nobody drew our attention to the Rothschilds and the "Red Symphony"

In 1938 the Soviet secret police interrogated Christian Rakovsky, born Chaim Rakeover, a communist accused of plotting to overthrow Stalin.

The 50-page transcript of his interrogation is called "The Red Symphony."

A Spanish Fascist volunteer later found the manuscript of "The Red Symphony" on a dead body in a hut on the Petrograd front during World War Two.

Could it be fascist propaganda?

Reportedly it confirms the plan by certain bankers:

1. To use Communism to establish a world dictatorship of the super rich.

2. To use Hitler to destroy Stalin, who was not following the banker's plans.

Rakovsky supported Trotsky, Stalin's rival.

Allegedly, the Trotskyites worked for the Rothschilds.


Nathan Rothschild (1840--1915)

According to Rakovsky's 'confession':

Russian communism pretended to be about helping humanity.

But this communism was really about giving total world power to 'the bankers' - the Masonic secret society of the Illuminati.

This communism would be used to overturn Western civilization including the Christian religion.

Nathaniel Rothschild (1840-1915) needed to overthrow the Christian Romanoff Dynasty.

Through his agents Jacob Schiff and the Warburg brothers, he financed the Japanese side in the Russo Japanese War.

Then he helped start the First World War (Trotsky was behind the murder of Archduke Ferdinand).

He financed the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution.

Rakovsky says he was personally involved in the transfer of funds in Stockholm.

The Jewish labour movement infiltrated all the socialist parties in Russia and provided the leadership for the Russian Revolution. Alexander Kerensky was a secret member.


Trotsky

Leon Trotsky was supposed to become the leader of the USSR.

Trotsky, a Jew, married the daughter of one of Rothschild's closest associates, banker Abram Zhivotovsky and became part of the "clan."

Lenin overruled Trotsky and made peace with Germany (Treaty of Brest Litovsk, 1918.) This was not the Rothschild's plan.

Russia was supposed to overrun Germany in 1918 and assist local "revolutionaries" in establishing a "peoples' republic."


The three Jews, Winston Churchill, Harry Soloman Truman and Joseph Djugasvili (Stalin)....at Potsdam at the end of the Jew instigated WWII.

The 1929 Crash and Great Depression was an "American revolution" designed to break the "classical American" and to take political power.

Rakowsky sees Stalin as a "Bonapartist," a nationalist as opposed to an International Communist like Trotsky.

(Some nationalist!!!.... given that Stalin was responsible for the death of a huge number of the 60 million Soviets who perished under Bolshevik rule between 1924---1953, which led to his denunciation by his own party later.....to the last up to 1953 Stalin was working for the Jewish International bankers in London and NY. His destruction of the Soviet high military command in 1937 is critically telling, as was his inexplicable reason for refusing to believe Hitler would attack the Soviet Union in 1941, when all indications stated otherwise from all his considerable intelligence sources both domestic and foreign based in Jew London........AND thus his lack of preparations for war.....which consequently led to many deaths in the "Great patriotic war" of possibly 30 million Soviets....some victory!)

In order to control Stalin, international finance was forced to build up Hitler and the Nazi party.

Rakowsky confirms that Jewish financiers backed the Nazis although Hitler was not aware of this.

"The ambassador Warburg presented himself under a false name and Hitler did not even guess his race... he also lied regarding whose representative he was... Our aim was to provoke a war and Hitler was war...[the Nazis] received...millions of dollars sent to it from Wall Street, and millions of marks from German financiers through Schacht; [providing] the upkeep of the S.A and the S.S. and also the financing of the elections..."

Unfortunately for the bankers, Hitler started to print his own money.

"He took over for himself the privilege of manufacturing money and not only physical moneys, but also financial ones; he took over the untouched machinery of falsification and put it to work for the benefit of the state... Are you capable of imagining what would have come ...if it had infected a number of other states and brought about the creation of a period of autarchy [absolute rule, replacing that of the bankers]. If you can, then imagine its counterrevolutionary functions..."

Hitler now became the enemy of the bankers.

Rakovsky and his backers persuaded Stalin to make his 1939 pact with Hitler.

The Ribbentrop-Molotov pact seems to have been a temporary accord between Stalin and the Illuminati.

Rakovsky proposed that Stalin stop executing Trotskyites.

The Illuminati plan was for the 1939 pact to be temporary.

Hitler and Stalin were to be turned against each other.

Rakovsky outlined the Illuminati plan to blend Communism and Capitalism, with the Illuminati ending up controlling all wealth and power.

"In Moscow there is Communism: in New York capitalism. It is all the same as thesis and antithesis. Analyze both. Moscow is subjective Communism but [objectively] State capitalism. New York: Capitalism subjective, but Communism objective. A personal synthesis, truth: the Financial International, the Capitalist Communist one."