The Russia vs Ukraine Thing – Part 1

26 March 2022

So while most of the world collectively “Stands With Ukraine” without understanding the slightest thing about what or who they might be supporting, it turns out there is some interesting stuff coming out now about some biological labs in Ukraine that are potentially connected to the Pentagon.

Please note, this article, it’s author and this entire website is not pro-Russia, is not pro-Ukraine, is not pro-USA/UK/EU and most certainly is not pro-war. Anti-establishment, and most definitely anti-war, and not picking one of the engineered sides. Observing history and current events is not the same as choosing a side.

There is an orchestrated and concerted effort to persuade by the mainstream media, using censorship, theatrics, propaganda and psychological programming at levels we haven’t seen since the world wars early in the 20th century, and maybe this eclipses even then.

An Indian news outlet called WION published an article on the 8th March 2022 titled “Found 30 biological labs in Ukraine, possibly for bioweapons, claim Russian forces”. In the article Igor Kirillov, the chief of the Russian Armed Forces’ radiation, chemical, and biological defence is quoted as saying:

The Russian Defense Ministry has repeatedly drawn attention to the military biological programs that are being implemented by the Pentagon in post-Soviet countries, including on the territory of Ukraine, where a network of more than 30 biological laboratories has been formed, which can be divided into research and sanitary-epidemiological ones. The Pentagon’s Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) is the project’s customer, and a corporation linked with the military department, notably Black and Veatch, is involved in project implementation.

https://www.wionews.com/world/found-30-biological-labs-in-ukraine-possibly-for-bioweapons-claim-russian-forces-460189

OK, so what? Russia will say anything to justify their actions, right? That’s the claim by almost all the media and I’m not disagreeing. All Governments everywhere have always done that and always will. We’ve just lived through two years of medical tyranny, which isn’t over despite the sudden pivot by all and sundry to the “Ukraine Crisis”, where almost all Governments justified medical tyranny with the flimsiest of excuses and many still are. Not only that but WION is owned by Zee Media Corporation, which is in turn owned by an Indian billionaire and has had it’s fair share of controversies. So this could be complete fabrication by Russian propagandists, or the media company. There is no reason to take this report at face value, unless there is some corroborating evidence. So let’s see what we can find…

Let’s start with Victoria Nuland. Private school and Ivy League research university educated, Vicky has a lot of connections and history with Ukraine and Russia. Her father was of Ukrainian/Jewish heritage, and she studied Russian literature, political science, and history at university. She has had an array of jobs in US politics, all of which have an international aspect to them, including:

• Chief of Staff to Deputy Secretary of State
• Deputy Director for former Soviet Union affairs
• Principal Deputy Foreign Policy Adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney
• U.S. Ambassador to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
• Special Envoy for Conventional Armed Forces in Europe
• State Department spokesperson
• Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs

She held influential roles during the Iraq war, and was tasked with “mobilizing European support for the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan” according to Wikipedia. Just think about what those words actually mean. Her job was to get support for the United States “occupation” of Afghanistan from Europe. We’re talking about whipping up support for the entirely unjustified (as demonstrated by the withdrawal in September 2021) decades long war and occupation of a sovereign State, a foreign country by the US. Remember that when you next hear some media talking-head or warmongering politician lambast Russia for it’s recent activities in Ukraine.

Back in 2014 it was reported on the Reuters website in an article titled “Leaked audio reveals embarrassing U.S. exchange on Ukraine, EU” regarding a conversation between Victoria Nuland and Geoffrey Pyatt who was at the time the US Ambassador to Ukraine.

So the people that were mentioned in that call were:

• Jeff Feltman: Head of the United Nations Department of Political Affairs
• Oleh Tyahnybok: Member of the Verkhovna Rada and the leader of nationalist Svoboda political party
• Robert Serry: Dutch diplomat serving as United Nations Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process
• Ban Ki-Moon: Secretary-General of the United Nations
• Jake Sullivan: National security advisor to Joe Biden
• Joe Biden: Vice President USA
• Viktor Yanukovych: President of Ukraine
• Vitali Klitschko: Leader of the Ukrainian Democratic Alliance for Reform and Member of the Ukrainian Parliament

Klitschko was referred to as “the complicated electron” and Nuland wanted him outside the Ukrainian Government. There was all kinds of other talk about the makeup of the Ukraine Government, meetings to set up to “reach out” to people and so on. There was also Nuland’s infamous “fuck the EU” statement that was largely glossed over. The Reuters article quotes Jen Psaki who is currently Joe Biden’s mouthpiece as criticising the publicising of the recording as “a new low in Russian tradecraft”. She denied the US was meddling or engineering a particular outcome in Kiev, and claimed:

Absolutely not. It should be no surprise that U.S. officials talk about issues around the world. Of course we do. That’s what diplomats do.

Jen Psaki in 2014 denying reality – https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-ukraine-tape-idUSBREA1601G20140207

If you listen to that recording, you’d have to be brain-dead to believe that conversation was just a “talk about issues around the world”. They (Nuland and Pyatt) were discussing specifically who should and shouldn’t be in the Ukrainian Government and how best to achieve that. It is undeniable and almost unfathomable that Psaki could even have the audacity to deny it, but that is what politicians do for a living, i.e. tell the most audacious lies in the face of mountains of evidence to the contrary. They rarely face any consequences for such bold-faced dishonesty as an entirely different set of rules applies to them compared to everyone else.

There are a number of ways the US interferes in the affairs of other countries, and of course they have this rule that it’s OK when they do it, because they dress this interference up in the sanctimonious garb of “spreading democracy”. If anyone else does it, it’s a “threat to democracy”. Remember this isn’t about picking a side, this is about identifying hypocrisy, and more importantly, establishing the fact that “democracy” is just a word. It’s a word used as a disguise for thoroughly anti-democratic covert foreign political meddling. It is used as a battering-ram for regime-change for Governments the US doesn’t like. It is also used as a defence too, to deflect criticism and to justify maligning other countries, and as we have seen outright nationality-based xenophobia. The same western Governments that lecture their populations relentlessly about tolerance, multiculturalism and so on are advocating for the firing of people from their jobs based on their country of birth.

The pseudo-noble goal of “spreading democracy” by the United States has been largely the task of the US military, based on their “Project for the New American Century” (PNAC) plan. This was briefly reported on by the BBC back in May 2003. The BBC article begins with…

The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) was founded in 1997 by the right wing thinkers William Kristol and Robert Kagan.

This group is arguably one of the most influential in Washington and is thought to have a significant influence on – or at least to reflect – much of George Bush’s view of the world.

The PNAC believes that America should use its power to shape the world and further American interests across the world – by military means if necessary.

It has some high profile sympathisers including US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld, his deputy Paul Wolfowitz, John Bolton, the under-secretary of state for Arms Control and International Security and Richard Perle.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/3032147.stm

Lots of interesting names there, but relating to this article one name in particular stands out… that of Robert Kagan. On the Wikipedia website entry on Kagan he is described as “an American neoconservative scholar, and critic of U.S. foreign policy and a leading advocate of liberal interventionism”. From that description you could be forgiven for thinking of Kagan as someone who opposes the US wading into other countries. Sadly not. The term “liberal interventionism” is simply a euphemism for warmongering with a smile. His criticism of U.S. foreign policy is that there isn’t enough “intervention”. He also happens to be married to Victoria Nuland. He dislikes Russia, she dislikes Russia. It’s a match made in hell.

The BBC article goes on to say:

The most important document produced by the group was published in September 2000, as Mr Bush was running for the presidency.

The report called “Rebuilding America’s Defences” said that America’s goal should be to “promote American global leadership”.

It called for increased defence spending coupled with a strong foreign policy which promotes American democracy across the globe – all hallmarks of the current US foreign policy.

Hmm, what Kagan calls for was and is “current US foreign policy”, that he is allegedly a critic of. The “Rebuilding America’s Defences” document published in September 2000 (PDF) is a mission plan to “shape a new century favourable to American principles and interests”, but not of the ordinary American citizen. Oh no. This is purely about the expansion across the world of US Government interests, largely defined by the demands of the military industrial complex, Wall Street, big business and modern US imperialism.

If you wanted any better example of how the Red/Blue fake choice is just that, note that these kinds of people do these jobs regardless of what face and emblem occupies the Whitehouse. Kagan also left the Republican party due to the nomination of Donald Trump in 2016 and endorsed the Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton. No party politics for these people, this is all about plans that go way beyond squabbles over elephants and donkeys.

In the introduction to “Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century”, the authors describe America as the world’s police, as facing “no global rival” and that they need to “preserve and extend this advantageous position as far into the future as possible”. It’s OK when Team America are running the world, because they are the good guys, right? It’s all been peaches and cream while the bombs rain down somewhere else for decade after decade, as long as they have little “stars and stripes” emblems on them and someone spouts something about “spreading democracy”, right?

Section five is titled “Creating Tomorrow’s Dominant Force” where the authors bemoan the Pentagon’s constrained and limited budgets that has “seen funding for experimentation and transformation crowded out in recent years. Spending on military research and development has been reduced dramatically over the past decade.”. The solution as they see it, is a “transformation” is needed to “preserve American military preeminence in the coming decades”, and thus we have the now infamous quote:

“Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”

Of course they (Kagan and the rest of the PNAC gang) got their “new Pearl Harbour” just 12 months later when a man on dialysis in an Afghan cave organised a bunch of randoms to hijack two planes, fly around over the most well defended airspace in the world for an hour, knock down 3 buildings and accidentally drop a passport out the window to then identify them. Yes that “catastrophic and catalyzing event” known as 9/11 that was followed a mere 13 days later with the USA PATRIOT Act, which was basically a shopping list for the PNAC. That part of this scheme was/is to destabilise the middle east, as outlined by retired four-star general Wesley Clark in an interview in 2007 with Amy Goodman. Here is a clip from that interview:

In that clip Clark mentions Paul Wolfowitz who is another PNAC member. The destruction of those countries listed, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran has been in progress since then. Obviously the idea of accomplishing that in 5 years was optimistic, but speaks to the arrogance of the likes of the PNAC team and the U.S. military industrial complex overall.

Obviously the recent U.S. assassination of Iranian Qasem Soleimani under Donald Trump’s presidency was an attempt to provoke a response from Iran in order to go wading in with more “Shock and Awe” tactics.

Another way the United States interferes with the political functioning of other countries is via the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). Even according to Wikipedia the NED’s specific role is as a…

non-governmental organization in the United States that was founded in 1983 for promoting democracy in other countries by promoting democratic institutions such as political groups, trade unions, free markets and business groups.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Endowment_for_Democracy

The NED takes U.S. taxpayers money and funds uprisings in foreign countries. As the Wikipedia entry notes…

The idea was strongly championed by the State Department, which argued that a non-governmental foundation would be able to support dissident groups and organizations in the Soviet Bloc, and also foster the emergence of democratic movements in US-allied dictatorships that were becoming unstable and in danger of experiencing leftist or radical revolutions, without provoking a diplomatic backlash against the US government.

Of course it was “strongly championed”. Any opportunity to stick it to the Soviets eh? Plus what better way to control foreign countries than install systems that mirror the “democracy” of the free world? The only reason Governments like the UK and the US don’t go down the boots on faces route is because that level of force to ensure total compliance and no revolutions is hard work. It is much easier to sell the idea of “democracy” where people vote in their own slave masters and pay them to be treated like cattle.

What is interesting about the NED is that it has on it’s website a search facility to look up projects it has funded. You can search their database by various parameters including country. Up until recently if you searched for Ukraine you’d find over 250 results totalling more than $17 million in grants from the NED to projects in Ukraine, as you can see from this archived link (screenshot) from 26th January 2022. If you go to that same link on the actual NED website today, using the exact same search parameters, you’ll get a “No results found” message. How strange. It’s almost like the U.S. is starting to want to distance itself from the political finagling it has been up to, even further than the shell NGO set up to do that very thing.

Returning to the topic of Ukraine, before Victoria “fuck the EU” Nuland had her chat on the phone about the personnel that should make up the Ukrainian Government in 2014, she gave a speech in December 2013 via the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation. Here is a video of that…

To summarise that 8+ minutes of talk explicitly describing overt U.S. interference in Ukraine and the EU, dear Vicky is so concerned about the Ukraine Government at that time allegedly clamping down on unhappy citizens that she has personally made it clear that it is “impermissible” and how the U.S. has invested $5 billion “to assist Ukraine” with it’s “aspirations” of becoming an EU member, and “other goals”.

Nuland outlines all the apparent issues Ukraine has that preclude it’s becoming a member of the EU, and one wonders if the goal of getting Ukraine into the EU was to help grease the skids for the other goal, that of Ukraine becoming a member of NATO. It is clear Victoria doesn’t have masses of respect for the EU, so it is a reasonable hypothesis that this long-term financial investment by the U.S. had more to it than just helping Ukraine join a rival hegemon like the EU.

This “strategic partnership” or alliance the U.S. has with Ukraine, usually referred to specifically as being with Kiev, i.e. the Government, on Russia’s doorstep has been a bone of contention for a very long time. It is always presented by the “western” Governments as “Russian aggression”, or “Russian statecraft” or some other slur to imply Russia is entirely at fault for not wanting U.S. military activity that close, or Russia is unreasonable for wanting the U.S. and NATO stick to agreements they made about NATO expansion. Again this is not to absolve Russian politicians including Putin of any/all wrongdoing, or suggest that they are “the good guys”. Just again this illustrates the incredible amounts of hypocrisy on show by the USA, UK and so on.

Joe Biden, the current President of the U.S.A. and vice president for the Obama administration has had a lot of involvement with Ukraine, as has his son Hunter Biden. ABC News did report on the distinct lack of transparency from Joe and Hunter Biden on their roles out there as you can see here:

Whilst the ABC reporting is hardly incisive, the irony should be plain to see. Hunter Biden appointed to the board of a Ukrainian gas company to help with cleaning up the “cancer of corruption” while profiting hugely and landing the gig because daddy Biden has a lot of clout, then both refusing to speak about it. A U.S. politician like Joe Biden sending his drug addict son to clean up a massively corrupt country with shady business deals is like trying to cure actual cancer with plutonium milkshakes.

To see just how much clout the U.S. and Biden had/has in Ukraine, you can see in this clip from a meeting of the Council on Foreign Relations where Joe Biden speaking for the U.S. wants someone fired, and blackmails them into it…

The original video this clip is from is on the C-Span website, and the clip is from around the 52 minute mark. Snopes have attempted to cover for this by “debunking” the claim that this bribery was about something specific to do with a Ukrainian prosecutor investigating Hunter Biden, and Joe getting him fired to halt the investigation. We are not making that highly specific claim here. It may be true, it may be false, but that’s not what we are discussing here. What this illustrates is the influence and interference by America in Ukraine, to the point of deciding who should be in their Government and who shouldn’t be, “investing” billions of dollars to support mechanisms of change, and then withholding some of that money as a means to ensure what America wants in Ukraine happens. Even if you wanted to believe that the influence was always 100% noble, had the best of intentions and outcomes, this is still blatant foreign interference and something that the U.S. will happily go to war over if anyone else does it. Snopes can call this “whataboutism” if they like, but anyone with a functioning brain-cell knows groups like Snopes are there to justify the interests of whoever their paymasters tell them to.

What the accusation of “whataboutism” often misses, is that while it can be used by one group as a method to deflect attention towards another to avoid attention on their own crimes/failures etc. but it doesn’t actually make the thing mentioned false. It can make you a hypocrite, or indeed a liar but in this case we are observing the “sides” from the outside. Pointing out hypocrisy from the outside is not “whataboutism”, it is an observation of the evidence that intentions and claims are not what they are said to be, and that is dishonest. It is not unreasonable to expect honesty although it is probably naïve to think anyone involved in politics will be, at least on things that matter.

Back in October 1962 the world was on the brink of nuclear war between the USA and the Soviet Union over where missiles by each side were being placed. The USA had deployments of missiles in Italy and Turkey which were matched by Soviet deployments of similar ballistic missiles in Cuba. This was clearly both sides provoking each other and pushing this warmongering nonsense to it’s limits, but having Soviet missiles just over 200km off the Florida coast in Cuba was enough for the United States to escalate things to such an extent that all-out nuclear war seemed a possibility. It should be obvious that after decades of “fighting talk” from mouthy U.S. politicians that the Russian Government would not tolerate the incursion of NATO eastwards forever, and the idea that Ukraine was imminently going to join the EU and/or NATO was the final straw.

An interesting article on the Spectator website titled “Whisper it, but Putin has a point in Ukraine” that was published on the 25th January 2022 explains some interesting and notably absent things from mainstream public discourse on the Russia/Ukraine situation. This was obviously from before the “invasion” happened, but some quotes from the article are…

From the high towers of the Kremlin, Ukraine looks like an increasingly hostile, American-backed Potemkin state. It was not always this way. In the decade following the collapse of the USSR, the newly created Russian Federation had sought western integration. And not only via the rapid adoption of free-market capitalism. Initially, Vladimir Putin sought a security alliance and even membership of Nato.

Russia’s post-USSR leaders sought to join a transformed collective West to turn it into what would, with Russia’s membership, have become a greater West. Instead, Moscow was faced with an expanding Atlantic power system, with Russia firmly on the outside. 

Since the era of German reunification, Moscow had been repeatedly assured that there would be no enlargement of Nato beyond a united Germany. Then in 1999, the alliance brought in the former Soviet countries of Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic. Five years later came the ‘big bang’ enlargement, encompassing another seven former communist countries (Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia). In February 2007, Putin condemned the dangers of establishing a ‘unipolar world’ and listed a range of strategic and security concerns, including the marginalisation of the UN, the installation of ballistic missile defences in Eastern Europe — and above all Nato enlargement. He stressed that Russia ‘with a thousand years of history’ did not need to be instructed on how to behave in international affairs. How did the West respond? With the accession of Albania and Croatia in 2009, Nato membership rose to 28. The addition of Montenegro and North Macedonian in the last five years has brought that number to 30.

Russia had apparently wanted to join NATO but was excluded, and was also assured that NATO would not expand after the reunification of Germany, but it has, and with the prospect of the U.S. puppet State of Ukraine joining which would put legitimate U.S. military presence in a bordering and already hostile country, a response from Russia should not be unexpected.

No military aggression is justified of course, but for those that accept the justification for the relentless aggression of the “west” that has blighted the middle east for decades, all based on lies, they should hardly be shocked that the Russian Federation responds in like manner. And of course, that’s not all there is to this. There is plenty more going on than the sudden flare-up in what has been an ongoing issue in Ukraine for years. What were doing here is dismantling the official narrative, piece by piece. Once the official story is thoroughly disproven, even if some aspects remain unknowable, we can stop being taken in by the relentless propaganda, the demand to pick a side, and think more clearly. And once we can think clearly, we can stop being distracted.

There are lots of efforts to distract, appeal to emotions and so on, all with the express intent of redirecting your attention and whipping up support for the next caper that furthers the main goal.

For example in the UK recently we saw what we were told was a “Ukrainian Journalist” confront current Prime Minister Boris Johnson. This woman was allowed to rant and rave at Johnson, who stood there with a grave expression on his face, occasionally appearing to write something down, perhaps some critiques of her acting skills. The Mirror reported on this on the 1st March 2022 in this article titled “Ukrainian journalist in tears confronts Boris Johnson saying ‘WW3 has already started'”.

Only she’s not just any old Ukrainian “journalist”. She not really a journalist at all. She’s a member of the World Economic Forum’s Young Global Leaders group as you can see here:

She also happened to feature in that ABC news segment above talking about Hunter Biden, saying the bad thing he did was “allowing his name to be used”. Isn’t it a small world.

There is much, much more to all this. Geo-politics and international chicanery is by it’s nature almost impossible to fully grasp. So many organisations playing at being spooks, so many overlapping interests in a domain that generally only attracts the very worst people, so that even though this is all part of a global plan, interdepartmental infighting is to be expected.

Bio-labs connected with the Pentagon were mentioned at the start of this article. Initially this was also dismissed as Russian propaganda by the media, as if they don’t exist. Except they do. This has now been admitted, albeit in a way still designed to make Team America’s eternal enemy Russia the only bad guys. Victoria Nuland who has been intricately involved in U.S. meddling in Ukraine for years was asked about this by Senator Marco Rubio.

To answer the basic question “does Ukraine have chemical or biological weapons?” Nuland responds very carefully, framing the labs as “biological research facilities”. Then there’s the “concern” that Russia “may be” trying to get their hands on them. Why? Why would Russia want them? We’re supposed to believe that Russia are the regular users of such things, they should not need to invade another country to get their hands on these “research materials”. You may recall the false-flag event in 2018 when we were told that Russian agents had used the deadly nerve agent Novichok against Sergei and Yulia Skripal. It was a huge deal at the time and was part of a larger scheme involving the United States once again. That of course is being wheeled out right now as “proof” that the Russians “have form” with this kind of thing. Marco Rubio then pitches a nice softball for Nuland to hit for a home run, with the question “If there’s a biological or chemical incident or attack inside the Ukraine is there any doubt in your mind that 100% it would be the Russians that would be behind it?” to which the objective and unbiased Victoria answers “There is no doubt in my mind Senator and it is classic Russian, er, technique to blame on the other guy what they’re planning to do themselves”.

In a way you have to admire the audaciousness of these people. Rubio and Nuland sit there and feed each other the right lines to end up with a statement that is so blatantly hypocritical and self-evidently what the U.S. does routinely they were in more danger of vanishing up their own rectums than from “Russian technique”.

On the 11th March 2022 the BBC posted these two articles consecutively on their live news feed, at 2:52 in the morning, while most people in the UK would not be watching…

So we have a child organisation of the United Nations, i.e. the WHO is instructing Ukraine to “destroy any dangerous pathogens being kept in research laboratories”, which they admit, only because they have to, that they have been funded by “the West”, and then report that Russia’s “claim” about US funded “development of biological weapons”, is being looked at by… the United Nations. The UN has instructed the thing they have essentially been asked and tasked with investigating be destroyed. Does that strike you as odd? If the UN wanted to ensure there were no “spills”, they could have gone in there themselves and secured it all. But no, just destroy it all please, while we investigate a claim about whether it exists or not.

Just like a large company with many departments that has office politics and rivalries, even people trying to get others fired, the countries of the world run by their respective Governments are just departments run by managers as far as globalists are concerned. They don’t care about countries, flags or borders. Those are the concerns of the department managers, who are often trying to outdo each other, or jostle for possible promotion. There is after all, not much room at the top of the pyramid.

By no means is this article suggesting Putin and the Russian Government are the good guys, or that this is all some 5D chess game with Putin fighting the globalists on behalf of humanity. But equally the flag waving, Ukraine good, Russia bad, Putin evil, Zelenskyy hero nonsense that is permeating literally everything is clearly unbelievable garbage, put out by the exact same Governments and media that just lied for 2 years straight about COVID-19, and still is.

An online dictionary is putting out war propaganda, and if you were to click that “statement about the Russian invasion of Ukraine” link, you get a clever Free Dictionary definition of the “Russian Invasion”, and then a big list of companies they would like the public to harass to stop doing business in Russia. Whatever you happen to think about this timely international conflict, one thing is for sure… sanctions hurt the average citizen way more that they hurt politicians. The Free Dictionary wants these companies to “do the right thing”, and advocate for more harm to innocent citizens because they happen to have been born and reside within one arbitrarily enclosed piece of land instead of another. Nice.

For all protestations of “the West” and their claims of not getting involved, millions upon millions of dollar-pounds worth of military gear, planes, tanks, missiles and actual money has left the western taxpayers coffers and been handed to Zelenskyy to do what he likes with. But “the West” is not involved, oh no. This apparently is not “active military support”, so it’s fine. Can you imagine a person who supplied someone who wanted to shoot up a school with scores of machine guns, armour and ammo claiming the resulting bloodbath was nothing to do with them as they were not “active” in their support of the shooter? This insane illogic wrapped up in the pretext of supporting “hero” Zelenskyy and everything emblazoned in the blue and yellow colour scheme that has been so incredible popular this last 2 years and just happens to match the flag of the only country currently at war among dozens that we know about, let alone all the covert crap the U.S. and it’s allies get up to with their spooks programmes, “spreading democracy” and the fairly recent innovation, “War By Other Means: Geo-economics and Statecraft”. There is of course a book on that last one, authored by Robert Blackwill who is Henry A. Kissinger Senior Fellow for U.S. Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations, and Jennifer Harris who is Senior Fellow also at the Council on Foreign Relations. Apparently disappointed at seeing the U.S. outmanoeuvred by the likes of China (that is the claim, but I would beg to differ) Bob and Jenny have, on behalf of the CFR, collated all the current thinking on how to reassert U.S. dominance via means other than just having the biggest and most guns.

Bob was a member of the George W. Bush administration (Republican) and Jenny was a member of of the Obama adminstration (Democrat) and she was “a lead architect of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s economic statecraft agenda” according to the CFR website. Again this should tell you that the two fake sides, the Red vs Blue, is just that. The people that actually push the buttons and pull the levers of power at the international level couldn’t care less about party politics. Whoever you foolishly vote for and whoever inhabits the White House or number 10 Downing Street or wherever, you have the likes of Bob and Jenny doing those jobs anyway.

This new method of war they advocate for, which is described as:

the United States must strategically integrate economic and financial instruments into its foreign policy—what they define as geoeconomics

https://www.cfr.org/book/war-other-means

…uses things like sanctions to pressure Governments into playing ball, by harming their populations and hoping they will demand their Governments do what they are told. There’s way more to it than that, I am not trying to oversimplify things. Geo-politics is unstable and unpredictable by it’s nature, and only the hubris of these self-appointed “global leaders” make them think they can just wargame the future of humanity as real people just trying to live their lives always pay the price. These arrogant elitists inhabit organisations like the Council on Foreign Relations, the World Economic Forum, the Atlantic Council and many others. They all pretend to operate as non-governmental organisations (NGO) and simply “advise” or “tackle global challenges”. The Atlantic Council for example has a lot of interest in “geoeconomics” and in 2020 launched their very own GeoEconomics Center. The reality is these NGOs are directing the policies of Governments and therefore futures for all of us in the directions that suit them the best.

There are more dots to connect with all these international shenanigans than a painting by Georges Seurat, and some of this will likely never come to light, not fully. But with some clear thinking and just looking at the evidence that does exist, the official story is revealed to be just that; a work of fiction.

There will be a “Part 2” to this coming soon that will connect aspects of what has been discussed here with the Great Reset stuff, as it really is all connected. Stay tuned, and don’t get sucked in to the fake arguments and fake sides thing.