From Pol Pot to ISIS: The Blood Never Dried   ...
"genocide"     ..it's  what

America

 ...pro~duce 's  ... NOW !   ...we USED 2 build shit folks ,  INVENT shit that helped the World , Plant  fucking  REAL crop's , feed people!  fuck~in SPREAD ...Hope ! fucking LIFT People the fuck UP !!  There was a fucking ...Time !  when NOBODY was 2 far down ,2 far gone ... when fucking somebody wouldn't  reach / stretch their hand the fuck  out &  say 'we' gotcha ,don't worry  :)  & the World believed U.S.     ... how long folks ,how fucking longggg  ..before the rest ( World & Off World) ... geet ,say   2   U.S.  ...  fuck off ???   huh   ,  how long  ??? 

By John Pilger

Global Research, November 17, 2015

JohnPilger.com 16 November 2015

Region: Asia, Middle East & North Africa

In transmitting President Richard Nixon’s orders for a “massive” bombing of Cambodia in 1969, Henry Kissinger said, “Anything that flies on everything that moves”. As Barack Obama wages his seventh war against the Muslim world since he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, and Francois Hollande promises a “merciless” attack on that ruined country, the orchestrated hysteria and lies make one almost nostalgic for Kissinger’s murderous honesty.
As a witness to the human consequences of aerial savagery – including the beheading of victims, their parts festooning trees and fields – I am not surprised by the disregard of memory and history, yet again. A telling example is the rise to power of Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge, who had much in common with today’s Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). They, too, were ruthless medievalists who began as a small sect. They, too, were the product of an American-made apocalypse, this time in Asia.
According to Pol Pot, his movement had consisted of “fewer than 5,000 poorly armed guerrillas uncertain about their strategy, tactics, loyalty and leaders”. Once Nixon’s and Kissinger’s B-52 bombers had gone to work as part of “Operation Menu”, the west’s ultimate demon could not believe his luck. The Americans dropped the equivalent of five Hiroshimas on rural Cambodia during 1969-73. They leveled village after village, returning to bomb the rubble and corpses. The craters left giant necklaces of carnage, still visible from the air. The terror was unimaginable. A former Khmer Rouge official described how the survivors “froze up and they would wander around mute for three or four days.
Terrified and half-crazy, the people were ready to believe what they were told… That was what made it so easy for the Khmer Rouge to win the people over.” A Finnish Government Commission of Inquiry estimated that 600,000 Cambodians died in the ensuing civil war and described the bombing as the “first stage in a decade of genocide”. What Nixon and Kissinger began, Pol Pot, their beneficiary, completed. Under their bombs, the Khmer Rouge grew to a formidable army of 200,000.
ISIS has a similar past and present. By most scholarly measure, Bush and Blair’s invasion of Iraq in 2003 led to the deaths of at least 700,000 people – in a country that had no history of jihadism. The Kurds had done territorial and political deals; Sunni and Shia had class and sectarian differences, but they were at peace; intermarriage was common. Three years before the invasion, I drove the length of Iraq without fear. On the way I met people proud, above all, to be Iraqis, the heirs of a civilization that seemed, for them, a presence.
Bush and Blair blew all this to bits. Iraq is now a nest of jihadism. Al-Qaeda – like Pol Pot’s “jihadists” – seized the opportunity provided by the onslaught of ‘Shock and Awe’ and the civil war that followed. “Rebel” Syria offered even greater rewards, with CIA and Gulf state ratlines of weapons, logistics and money running through Turkey. The arrival of foreign recruits was inevitable. A former British ambassador, Oliver Miles, wrote, “The [Cameron] government seems to be following the example of Tony Blair, who ignored consistent advice from the Foreign Office, MI5 and MI6 that our Middle East policy – and in particular our Middle East wars – had been a principal driver in the recruitment of Muslims in Britain for terrorism here.”
ISIS is the progeny of those in Washington, London and Paris who, in conspiring to destroy Iraq, Syria and Libya, committed an epic crime against humanity. Like Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, ISIS are the mutations of a western state terror dispensed by a venal imperial elite undeterred by the consequences of actions taken at great remove in distance and culture. Their culpability is unmentionable in “our” societies, making accomplices of those who suppress this critical truth.
It is 23 years since a holocaust enveloped Iraq, immediately after the first Gulf War, when the US and Britain hijacked the United Nations Security Council and imposed punitive “sanctions” on the Iraqi population – ironically, reinforcing the domestic authority of Saddam Hussein. It was like a medieval siege. Almost everything that sustained a modern state was, in the jargon, “blocked” – from chlorine for making the water supply safe to school pencils, parts for X-ray machines, common painkillers and drugs to combat previously unknown cancers carried in the dust from the southern battlefields contaminated with Depleted Uranium. Just before Christmas 1999, the Department of Trade and Industry in London restricted the export of vaccines meant to protect Iraqi children against diphtheria and yellow fever. Kim Howells, parliamentary Under-Secretary of State in the Blair government, explained why. “The children’s vaccines”, he said, “were capable of being used in weapons of mass destruction”. The British Government could get away with such an outrage because media reporting of Iraq – much of it manipulated by the Foreign Office – blamed Saddam Hussein for everything.
Under a bogus “humanitarian” Oil for Food Programme, $100 was allotted for each Iraqi to live on for a year. This figure had to pay for the entire society’s infrastructure and essential services, such as power and water. “Imagine,” the UN Assistant Secretary General, Hans Von Sponeck, told me, “setting that pittance against the lack of clean water, and the fact that the majority of sick people cannot afford treatment, and the sheer trauma of getting from day to day, and you have a glimpse of the nightmare. And make no mistake, this is deliberate. I have not in the past wanted to use the word genocide, but now it is unavoidable.” Disgusted, Von Sponeck resigned as UN Humanitarian Co-ordinator in Iraq. His predecessor, Denis Halliday, an equally distinguished senior UN official, had also resigned. “I was instructed,” Halliday said, “to implement a policy that satisfies the definition of genocide: a deliberate policy that has effectively killed well over a million individuals, children and adults.”
A study by the United Nations Children’s Fund, Unicef, found that between 1991 and 1998, the height of the blockade, there were 500,000 “excess” deaths of Iraqi infants under the age of five. An American TV reporter put this to Madeleine Albright, US Ambassador to the United Nations, asking her, “Is the price worth it?” Albright replied, “We think the price is worth it.”
In 2007, the senior British official responsible for the sanctions, Carne Ross, known as “Mr. Iraq”, told a parliamentary selection committee, “[The US and UK governments] effectively denied the entire population a means to live.” When I interviewed Carne Ross three years later, he was consumed by regret and contrition. “I feel ashamed,” he said. He is today a rare truth-teller of how governments deceive and how a compliant media plays a critical role in disseminating and maintaining the deception. “We would feed [journalists] factoids of sanitised intelligence,” he said, “or we’d freeze them out.” Last year, a not untypical headline in the Guardian read: “Faced with the horror of Isis we must act.” The “we must act” is a ghost risen, a warning of the suppression of informed memory, facts, lessons learned and regrets or shame. The author of the article was Peter Hain, the former Foreign Office minister responsible for Iraq under Blair. In 1998, when Denis Halliday revealed the extent of the suffering in Iraq for which the Blair Government shared primary responsibility, Hain abused him on the BBC’s Newsnight as an “apologist for Saddam”. In 2003, Hain backed Blair’s invasion of stricken Iraq on the basis of transparent lies. At a subsequent Labour Party conference, he dismissed the invasion as a “fringe issue”.
Here was Hain demanding “air strikes, drones, military equipment and other support” for those “facing genocide” in Iraq and Syria. This will further “the imperative of a political solution”. The day Hain’s article appeared, Denis Halliday and Hans Von Sponeck happened to be in London and came to visit me. They were not shocked by the lethal hypocrisy of a politician, but lamented the enduring, almost inexplicable absence of intelligent diplomacy in negotiating a semblance of truce. Across the world, from Northern Ireland to Nepal, those regarding each other as terrorists and heretics have faced each other across a table. Why not now in Iraq and Syria? Instead, there is a vapid, almost sociopathic verboseness from Cameron, Hollande, Obama and their “coalition of the willing” as they prescribe more violence delivered from 30,000 feet on places where the blood of previous adventures never dried. They seem to relish their own violence and stupidityso much they want it to overthrow their one potentially valuable ally, the government in Syria.
This is nothing new, as the following leaked UK-US intelligence file illustrates:
“In order to facilitate the action of liberative [sic] forces… a special effort should be made to eliminate certain key individuals [and] to proceed with internal disturbances in Syria. CIA is prepared, and SIS (MI6) will attempt to mount minor sabotage and coup de main [sic] incidents within Syria, working through contacts with individuals… a necessary degree of fear… frontier and [staged] border clashes [will] provide a pretext for intervention… the CIA and SIS should use… capabilities in both psychological and action fields to augment tension.”
That was written in 1957, although it could have been written yesterday. In the imperial world, nothing essentially changes. In 2013, the former French Foreign Minister Roland Dumas revealed that “two years before the Arab spring”, he was told in London that a war on Syria was planned. “I am going to tell you something,” he said in an interview with the French TV channel LPC, “I was in England two years before the violence in Syria on other business. I met top British officials, who confessed to me that they were preparing something in Syria… Britain was organising an invasion of rebels into Syria. They even asked me, although I was no longer Minister for Foreign Affairs, if I would like to participate… This operation goes way back. It was prepared, preconceived and planned.”
The only effective opponents of ISIS are accredited demons of the west – Syria, Iran, Hezbollah and now Russia. The obstacle is Turkey, an “ally” and a member of Nato, which has conspired with the CIA, MI6 and the Gulf medievalists to channel support to the Syrian “rebels”, including those now calling themselves ISIS. Supporting Turkey in its long-held ambition for regional dominance by overthrowing the Assad government beckons a major conventional war and the horrific dismemberment of the most ethnically diverse state in the Middle East.
A truce – however difficult to negotiate and achieve – is the only way out of this maze; otherwise, the atrocities in Paris and Beirut will be repeated. Together with a truce, the leading perpetrators and overseers of violence in the Middle East – the Americans and Europeans – must themselves “de-radicalise” and demonstrate a good faith to alienated Muslim communities everywhere, including those at home. There should be an immediate cessation of all shipments of war materials to Israel and recognition of the State of Palestine. The issue of Palestine is the region’s most festering open wound, and the oft-stated justification for the rise of Islamic extremism. Osama bin Laden made that clear. Palestine also offers hope. Give justice to the Palestinians and you begin to change the world around them.
More than 40 years ago, the Nixon-Kissinger bombing of Cambodia unleashed a torrent of suffering from which that country has never recovered. The same is true of the Blair-Bush crime in Iraq, and the Nato and “coalition” crimes in Libya and Syria.
With impeccable timing, Henry Kissinger’s latest self-serving tome has been released with its satirical title, “World Order”. In one fawning review, Kissinger is described as a “key shaper of a world order that remained stable for a quarter of a century”. Tell that to the people of Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, Chile, East Timor and all the other victims of his “statecraft”. Only when “we” recognise the war criminals in our midst and stop denying ourselves the truth will the blood begin to dry.

The original source of this article is JohnPilger.com

Copyright © John Pilger, JohnPilger.com, 2015

SPECTRE (2015): Tentacles of the All-Seeing Surveillance Octopus

jay008 / http://jaysanalysis.com/2015/11/17/spectre-2015-tentacles-of-the-all-seeing-surveillance-octopus/

SPECTRE film poster. “Hail the Pale King, Death.”

By: Jay Dyer
Appearing to conclude the Daniel Craig 007 reboots, SPECTRE has not just premiered to a no. 1 global status, but as could be expected, also gave quite a few insights into the nature of real geopolitics and espionage that only the Bond films can do.  Here at JaysAnalysis, I had a suspicion a year ago this is what we would see with SPECTRE, particularly given the so-called “leak” of the plot as part of the Sony hacking scandal that was more accurately described as a Rand-corporation designed marketing scheme, connected with the staged drama of Seth Rogan and James Franco’s release of The Interview.  In fact, The Interview was not an offense to the rogue nation-state of North Korea, quite the contrary: I have long argued North Korea is a fake state – a complete CIA puppet villain, with no ICBM “space program,” and certainly no real nuclear threat.
Concerning the SPECTRE/Interview Psy Op, analyst Patrick Henningsen commented:

“At last, an international cause that Hollywood can finally rally around – together in solidarity! It’s what we all have secretly wished for –  that Team America’s plot line has finally gone operational.  If this latest crisis demonstrates anything at all, it shows how Hollywood and North Korea have more in common than they realize – both are really big on theatrics, but not very big on substance.

What George Clooney might not know, and what history shows, is that North Korea’s bark is much worse than its bite. So in terms of a national security threat to the US, it’s somewhere between nil and nonexistent.

SMERSH: If Washington is to be believed, then this must be evidence of North Korea’s notorious ‘Unit 121’ hacker layer.

Most US media outlets managed to spin the Sony hack into a piece of national security propaganda – stoking fears of a “mysterious” North Korean hacking group, ‘Unit 121′. No surprise then that the charge originates from the US government itself, whose own General Bureau of Reconnaissance “suspects” the North Koreans were behind the attack on Sony. If you believe FOX’s Shepard Smith, you’d think that this was something along the lines of SPECTRE or SMERSH, but it’s more likely just another exercise in creativity from CIA’s propaganda desk in Seoul, alongside other imaginary figments, dreamed-up by the State Department like the ‘feared’ Khorosan Group. If this were a creative writing class, they’d all get an A+, but sadly it’s not.”

Indeed, even The Guardian has commented on the similarities of the SPECTRE plot with the supposed leaks of Edward Snowden regarding the NSA spying apparatus, yet keep in mind that I have questioned the Snowden heroics, as well as the fact that GCHQ was surveilling the population and spying long before there was any NSA in the US.   Furthermore, the real NSA is not some government building, but in fact the largest tech corporations, like Google and Apple.  The notion that the NSA is a government-run entity which has gotten out of hand from public oversight is preposterous, as the private globocorps have been doing the real dirty data collecting for decades (and continue to do so, apart from Snowden’s so-called “leaks”).   All of this will be relevant, as we will see, in reference to the plot of Sam Mendes’ latest installment of 007’s adventures, SPECTRE.

007 stalks Sciarra, babe in hand, as he learns of the terror plots of the “Pale King,” the Lord of the Dead.

With SPECTRE, we open with a long, single shot of Bond disguised in skeleton costume amidst the celebratory festivities of Dia de Los Muertos in Mexico City, smoothly striding through the streets with babe on arm, stalking the movements of a certain Sciarra.  The scenery elicits numerous demonic elements, including devil masks, effigies, corpses, and Santa Muerte.  Santa Muerte is the cartel-connected syncretistic cult often associated with MS-13 that analysts have noted operate both human trafficking and drug corridors.  Some have even argued the U.S. intelligence establishment is in bed with certain select cartels, with intent of controlling the black markets, while only “busting” operations of rival cartels not in bed with the Atlanticists.  We even saw elements of this in the Fast and Furious arms scandal, as well as in the recent film Sicario, where FBI agents discover their attache role in a border operation is cover for a deeper CIA black op of taking out a rival cartel.
In Mexico City, 007 gets hints of Sciarra’s involvement with the cartel underworld as the plan to bomb a professional soccer match is planned.  007 determines to take out the conspirators, ending up in an impressive helicopter battle with an escaping Sciarra.  Eliminating Sciarra at the behest of a secret, posthumous message from M (Dame Judi Dench), the only information Bond recovers is knowledge of a planned soccer match attack, and Sciarra’s curious Octopus ring.  Also worth noting is the room 007 uses to work his mojo on the Mexican beauty before this operation just happens to be Room 237, which echoes the speculative documentary about the secret messages in Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining.  While this is admittedly speculative, there is a connection between the real meaning of the “secret space program” I recently lectured on, Room 237 and Jay Weidner’s work, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and the present film, SPECTRE.

Tentacles of the octopus.

“The dead are alive,” the opening text of the film displays, and as the narrative progresses, we discover the meaning of this clue to be the same theme of the recent Mission Impossible installment, Rogue Nation, that the members of the (variously titled in most spy franchises), Syndicate, Cabal, SMERSH, MAD, SPECTRE, etc., tend to be ghosts.  In the spy world, a ghost is a spook, and spooks are specters, who appear to be dead.  As I have covered in many reviews and interviews, a great way to become a ghost is to fake your death and the CIA has a long history of doing this, as well as Soviet intelligence.

NRO patch with Octopus.

The iconic opening montage for SPECTRE hearkens to the prior 3 Craig Bonds, with all the villains of Bond’s past appearing in shattered glass fragmentation, emblematic of the psyche and the assassin’s traumatic past.  From Vesper Lynd to Mr. White, 007’s rabbit hole leads to the enigmatic cartel organization SPECTRE, symbolized by the octopus whose tentacles seemingly reach everywhere, even into Bond himself, as the source of all his ills.
Encircling the montage babes in a strange tentacle-porn imagery, the octopus morphs into an All-Seeing Eye that here will represent the panopticon surveillance state at the heart of the film’s narrative.  Furthering transforming, the eye becomes a massive octopus with nine eyes, later explained in the film to be the “9 Eyes” of a rough equivalent of the G8 nations (here G-9) that offer their sovereignty up to the promise of security from CNS, the new UK version of the NSA intent on integrating mass surveillance from the most powerful nations.  (Recall that the G6, G8 and G20 are creations of the Atlanticists and the Royal Society.)

Bond babe below the border.

Promising to prevent all future terror attacks and shut down all dated, dinosaur humint programs, the “00” licensed to kill program is also axed, resulting in the predictably rogue 007.   Injected with SmartBlood (yes, nanotech SmartBlood), the outdated tech wizardy of the implantable chip Bond received in Casino Royale is replaced with its newer transhumanist equivalent.  Tracked and traced globally, 007 is in debt to Q to keep his location secret as 007 seeks the answer to Sciarra’s backers in Rome.   After seducing and romancing Sciarra’s widow (a youthful looking Monica Bellucci), Bond sneaks his way into the elite SPECTRE board meeting that recalls Bill Harford’s (Tom Cruise) out-of-place attendance at the Eyes Wide Shut ritual.

007 sneaks into an “Illuminati” meeting.

Known immediately by the mysterious head of SPECTRE, Bond is called out as if he were intentionally led to the meeting (like Bill Harford) and subsequently chased from the premises.  The location of SPECTRE in Rome is curious, as if this were some underground fascist cabal of unknown mobsters and enigmatic Third World and Far Eastern villainy gathered in the heart of global Catholicism.  Could this reference P-2 and the infamous associations with Operation Gladio and the terror cells of the Cold War stay-behind units that I argue are the model for the recent waves of Euro-terror (including the Paris attacks)?   Interestingly the most striking example of predictive programming in the film’s plot is the revelation that global terror is being orchestrated by a single shadow cabal.    This cabal is also intent on bombing nation states behind a façade of radicalism that do not go along with the joint intelligence apparatus being erected by the private “space program” of our film’s super villain, Ernst Stavro Blofeld.   As SPECTRE manages to appoint its Number 2 (“C,” played by Andrew Scott) as head of the new CNS surveillance initiative, the screenplay subtly refers to the plan as the culmination of the “new world order.”

Blofeld’s private space program in You Only Live Twice.

In fact, while many perceptive film-goers probably caught the numerous references to the Connery and Moore-era installments, the most interesting aspect of Blofeld’s secret base in the desert of Morocco is its observatory and aerospace features.  Once again, as with Diamonds and Forever and Moonraker, the private space program has an ulterior motive than noble advancement of scientific  knowledge.  Here, as with old school Blofeld plots, we learn his aims are not even a Star Wars Defense Initiative, but the backdoor PROMIS Octopus technology that even Wired magazine has covered as relating to the NSA’s ability to hack into most tech.   And this is precisely what Blofeld is after – a total panopticon surveillance apparatus that is erected as a result of the engineering of global terror attacks, run by a private, unknown command center.   This is real, and not only that, it is the ultimate plan of the new world order, as I have argued in numerous articles the last 5 years.  Researcher and author Daniel Estulin has even highlighted this notion in his appropriately titled book, The Octopus Deception.

Bond baebe Madeleine Swann (Lea Seydoux) in a train scene reminiscent of From Russia with Love.

Curiously, while eavesdropping on the SPECTRE meeting, 007 finds that the planning group recalls something along Bilderberg lines, where decisions are made concerning human trafficking, the management of various vices like prostitution (using a large number of refugee/migrant women), the counterfeiting of pharmaceuticals (as if BigPharma itself isn’t a tentacle of the real SPECTRE) and the planning of a bombing in South Africa to terrorize the populace into signing onto the global privatized surveillance plan.   Throughout, the presentation of MI6 is as the guardian of western liberty and “democracy,” while the more eastern and fascist elements of SPECTRE are portrayed as enemies of the people.  Never tiring of playing out this propaganda, the Cold War subterfuge of the West still banks on its mythology of being a bastion of “freedom” and “liberty,” as if these were nonexistent elsewhere.

Blofeld’s base, an aerospace observatory that is also the real NSA.

This Anglo-centric model is by no means exposed in the film, inasmuch as it is western banking and corporate elites who are the real SPECTRE.   Never tiring of generic sloganeering, western propaganda and marketing hasn’t altered one iota since Bernays.  Moreover, the western narrative of libertarian Enlightenment freedoms ring ever more hollow in our days as it becomes increasingly evident how absurd this phraseology is, where the supposed “free” West becomes a mutant version of Brave New Disney World, all under the designs of the very establishment that professes empty mantras of “freedom.”  Freedom means the freedom to choose Coke or Pepsi, sterilization through GMOs or cancer through euthanasia – all choice delicacies of the decadent Atlanticist elites.

Blofed’s base echoes Pine Gap, Australia’s Joint Defense “Space” Research Facility.

Seeking the supposed dead Franz Oberhauser, Bond finds his own foster-brother to be the source of his ills, as the darkest secret of 007 is his own background – he was raised as an orphan by Blofeld’s father.  Blofeld , full of ressentiment, decides to work out his daddy issues through (as you can imagine) torturing Bond by strapping him down and drilling his skull for a full-scale MKULTRA style mind-wipe.   While SmartBlood may or may not be a reality, the targeting of certain areas of the brain to erase memories and motor functions is very real.  DARPA has openly discussed such projects many times under the guise of “treating addictions” or “traumas” and PTSD.   DARPA wants to help you, just like Pine Gap exists to “research space” and not mass surveillance, just like SETI exists to send space emails to aliens with X dollar satellites, not mass surveillance (my own particular speculation).

SPECTRE, er, ISIS, er, Al Qaeda, uh actors, or just terrists…on the loose! so who are the terrists, exactly? Who funds them?  Who stages their laughable videos?

Facing Blofeld, Bond learns the secret base is the site of a meteor crater where the oldest meteor is Ernst’s private property.  Likening himself to the obsidian Kaaba-like stone, Blofeld explains the meteor is an allegory for his own secret space surveillance system that will utilize the information from all surveillance satellites, CCTVs and tech gadgets globally.  This is SPECTRE’s big secret, erecting the global surveillance panopticon around staged terror events, erecting a total information grid that will allow for the blackmail of all.  Does this sound familiar?  Is it possible that in the real-world globo-terror is also orchestrated precisely for this purpose?   That is the thesis of JaysAnalysis, and hopefully it is becoming increasingly evident this is so, as more and more films begin to tell us this very story.

Most strikingly, as I argued in my Casino Royale analysis, the 007 reboots seem to continually hearken to clues about 9/11, such as the pre-9/11 airline stock put options.  From there, we move to Quantum of Solace exposing the Green Agenda and the left-right dialectic, to Skyfall showing us the fact that so-called cyber-terrorists are the system itself (as per the similarities of the plot of Skyfall with the Sony “hacking” scandal), and in SPECTRE yet another false flag references to 9/11 is hinted at in the “inside job” bombing of MI6 through a massive controlled demolition.  Now, whatever means you think took down the twin towers (and building 7), whether controlled explosive charges or exotic weaponry, it certainly was not jet fuel.

The “inside job” bombing of MI6 headquarters in Skyfall, followed by the complete controlled demolition, in SPECTRE.

It certainly was some form of controlled demolition, as the towers were demolished, and this was controlled by some artifice other than “Al Qaeda.”  Curiously, this is exactly what Blofeld does when he gains access to MI6 through placing his mole at the head of the CNS.   Isn’t it interesting that the first thing Blofeld does is lure 007 into the MI6 tower, intending on demolishing him and the old world with?   007 escapes, of course, but I would venture to say the film is not telling us about the demolition of MI6 headquarters, but the destruction of some other tower by SPECTRE.
ESOTERIC HOLLYWOOD WITH JAY DYER: SPECTRE AND THE PARIS ATTACKS

Esoteric Hollywood: SPECTRE and the Paris Attacks           https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TB3bZX0i7o

Esoteric Hollywood is Jay Dyer’s (from JaysAnalysis.com) deconstruction of the deeper messages, symbols, and predictive programming subtexts that underlie modern film, including interviews with artists and experts in numerous media fields. Based on years of research into film analysis, comparative religion, propaganda,psychological warfare, secret societies and mind control, Esoteric Hollywood decodes the biggest movies in an unparalleled way, from the classics of the silver screen to today’s blockbusters. Learn to watch film with completely new eyes, as philosophy and conspiracy combine to enlighten the arts and awaken the masses. Support my show by purchasing your organic products and supplements from Natural News and Talknetwork’s store featuring over 500 lab-tested products.
ESOTERIC HOLLWOOD AIRS EVERY TUES-FRI NIGHT AT 10 PM PACIFIC ON TALKNETWORK.COM
Show Archives are here.

TAIWANESE AND MAINLAND CHINESE LEADERS IN HISTORIC ...   &   THE
weakness of the American leadership class  hehe hey "every~body"  C's  it   ...but the Amerikan sheep~ie's

Posted on November 17, 2015 by Joseph P. Farrell •http://gizadeathstar.com/2015/11/taiwanese-and-mainland-chinese-leaders-in-historic-talks/

Last week there was a development whose significance will unfold over the next few years, if not decades, as the leaders of Communist Mainland China, and Taiwan, met for the first time since Chairman Mao's Communists drove Chiang Kai-Shek's Khoumintang forces from the mainland to Taiwan over 60 years ago, in this article shared by Mr. S.:
The leaders of China and Taiwan in a historic meeting
What's interesting to note here is the approach both countries are taking toward the nearly insoluble political and economic dilemmas that each "China" poses toward the other:

But while bilateral trade, investment and tourism have blossomed – particularly since Ma and his KMT took power in 2008 – there is deep suspicion on both sides and no progress has been made on any sort of political settlement.
Beijing still officially considers Taiwan a renegade province that should be reunified with the mainland. But many Taiwanese see it as independent and are concerned at China’s growing influence.
...
In order not to offend each other the officials will address to each other as Mr. Xi and Mr. Ma, rather than Mr. President, one Chinese government official has said. According to Mr. Ma this meeting will be promoting peace and probable ways to reduce hostility such as removing Chinese missiles targeted at Taiwan.

The backdrop to these talks is interesting to ponder, for they come at a time when America's position and leadership is being challenged on a multitude of fronts and in a variety of ways. One need only think of the Russian intervention in Syria, and two of its "technological messages," with the Russian blackout of communicationns over the entire country, exposing a key NATO-American technological weakness, and the Russian cruise missile attacks. The latter cannot be pondered too long or hard, for not only were the strikes flawlessely executed, but Russia's message was clear and simple: it can interdict any American-Western move in central Asia. Nor is the hidden message here to be forgotten: imagine the vulnerability of American aircraft carriers, the basis of America's ability to protect the sea lanes and project American power internationally, to such long-range cruise missile strikes by Russian(and Chinese) "carrier killers". In other words, there has been not only a collapse of "unipolarism" in recent months and years, but also a demonstration of the weakness of the American leadership class and its ability to protect its assets and allies...
... like Taiwan.
For that island nation, the pressures, when viewed in this context, to mend fences with Beijing are immense, as are the risks, which are almost equal to the risks of not doing so. And for Beijing, the risks of letting the opportunity slide are also immense, for the only other way to mend the fence is literally to storm it, and while the outcome of any one-on-one confrontation is a foregone conclusion, the mainland Chinese know that it would nonetheless be a bloody and costly affair. A forcibly reintegrated province would be a long-term source of internal instability which Beijing can ill-afford.
A clue to the seriousness of both sides is afforded by the fact that both have been willing to forego political protocols and niceties, and this is a powerful symbolic indicator of what the "two Chinas" may be up to over the long haul: a willingness to table immediate political difficulties for the moment, while intricacies of trade, law, and access to each others markets(of all kinds), may be on the table. It is this willingness of both sides to table the political question that is therefore a significant development.
So where's the high octane speculation here? How will Taipei and Beijing resolve over half a century of recriminations and animosity?  I suspect that both will do so in a typically Chinese way, one in which both sides can win if they play their cards carefully and are not in too much of a hurry to resolve the outstanding political issues, and one of the easiest ways for each to do this will be to make common cause, including the occasional joint communique or position statement, on a variety of geopolitical issues on which both sides can make common cause and show intentional agreement. Think of it, perhaps, as a kind of "honorary" membership for Taiwan in the Shanghai accords-BRICSA bloc. Expect, too, certain "joint projects" to be proposed and embarked upon, including joint military exercises for responding to "regional emergencies," and a major Taiwanese voice in Beijing's "new silk road" project and its efforts to build a parallel financial clearing structure; Taipei's financial prowess and expertise would greatly enhance Beijing's prospects for success, and thus in this one area alone Beijing and Taipei already have an issue ready to hand on which they could make common cause to the mutual benefit of both, provided the will is there to do so.
One thing, however, is certain. The recent talks are not a one-off. They will become more and more frequent, at all levels of Taiwanese-Mainland interaction. And that means, this is one to watch carefully.