A president or prime minister (or whoever officially calls the shots in a country), may have excellent qualities, but the one quality such people invariably lack is – by necessity – honesty.
Politics is a mixture of hockey and poker: You break your opponents bones, and you screw your allies. Look at President Trump: He succeeded didn’t he, in getting to the top, and he still hasn’t been impeached. They say he confabulates and he is certainly less – how shall I put it? – “subtle” than most of his predecessors in the role. But they have all – without exception – lied incessantly and with great determination, through their teeth.
A would-be president or prime minister may even have admirable intentions. I do not doubt, for instance, that some, even in the US, have been motivated by a wish to improve life for their compatriots.. Once in office, however, they soon learn that “national interests” are equated, not with the welfare of ordinary men, women and children, but with corporate interests, military-industrial interests and the interests of the financial institutions. Why? Long story. I guess you could call it an “ideological story”. For the record, though, allow me to remind you that “national interests”, as defined by the European elites over the past five centuries, were not guided as much by “ignorance” (for instance a feigned inability to understand that people with dark skin and peasants were human) as by self-interest.
Corporate interests regularly require new resources – oil, minerals, cheap labour etc. – which in turn require colonialism by hook or by crook, e.g. by “regime change operations” or outright economic or military war. (Remember how President Trump at the start of his term bandied for “deals” in Ukraine?) Financial interests (e.g. banks) require collateral. The “military-industrial complex” requires wars. After all, somebody has to keep buying and using the junk the war people produce.
Since 1945, Europe has lost much of its stolen foreign assets, but it still makes up part of the political West, and enthusiastically applauds whatever adventures its younger big brother wishes to engage in – guided, as always, by elite self-interest. Voters have absolutely no say, as no president or prime minster can change the game without changing the system.
My first introduction to USA’s innumerable grabs for lebensraum was the tale of the Dulles brothers’ shares in and work for United Fruit in Guatemala and the coup against that country’s president Arbenz in 1954. By now, the truth of this matter is admitted even by mainstream sources.
Ten years later, however, Allen Dulles, was President Kennedy’s powerful nemesis (as CIA-chief). Kennedy was finally able to fire him. So why was Allen Dulles on the Warren Commission?!!! The Warren Commission’s investigation was my first introduction to a classical US “deep state” cover-up.
There can be no doubt that Kennedy had many enemies: J. Edgar Hoover, for one. The Cubans were probably the least of his problems: By 1963, the worst excesses of McCarthyism may have been curtailed, but to this day, demands for a national health service is maligned as “Communism”, and “Communism ” is the worst swear-word in the US language.
With his so-called Peace Speech on June 10, 1963, the Commencement Address, Kennedy may have signed his own death warrant. From the point of view of his detractors, his younger brother Bobby was definitely no better, so they wasted no time in finishing him off as well.
Last year, heavily redacted files were released about the JFK assassination. We now know that the CIA Counterintelligence Chief, James Angleton performed operations for Israel. What also came to light for the first time was that Angleton had been monitoring Lee Harvey Oswald closely since 1959. The CIA had previously denied having any knowledge of him prior to the assassination. The rest will only be revealed when the implicated parties, their associates and offspring are long gone, but as Jefferson Morley writes in an interesting piece about Angleton and Oswald, “What we see in the new [2025] J.F.K. files is a pattern of malfeasance.”
My second introduction to a monumental US cover-up was – yes – 9/11. From a foreign perspective it seemed completely ludicrous that four hijacked planes would be allowed to traverse, unmolested and uncontested, US territory. Few US citizens dare challenge the official narrative for fear of being labelled “conspiracy theorists”. (In the old days they would have been accused of heresy. No joke, that. In Spain, for instance, heretics were burnt at the stake.)
On 9/11 2026, Kit Klarenberg writes:
While British detectives apparently believed they possessed “more than sufficient evidence” to extradite Bayoumi to stand trial, Washington ordered him freed, and he returned to Saudi Arabia. US authorities’ resistance is understandable, given the overwhelming abundance of evidence pointing ineluctably to the CIA at the very least actively facilitating the 9/11 attacks, if not carrying them out, using the Saudis as scapegoats. [Pelshval highlighting]
I strongly recommend the article!
“9/11” became the “New Pearl Harbour” referred to by the neocon Project for the New American Century (PNAC), in the document Rebuilding America’s Defences, September 2000. In the first paragraph of that document’s Introduction, we read that PNAC’s, “goal is to promote American global leadership”.
Members included Robert Kagan, Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz.
These people and their associates and allies would subsequently be responsible for the “‘War on terror”.
Result: Roughly 4400 US deaths and 32,000 US injured and roughly one million non-US deaths in the Iraq war alone. There is growing suspicion that they should also be held accountable for the roughly 3000 9/11 deaths and the thousands of others who have suffered long-term health effects from noxious gases, etc.
Was it worth it? It must have been, because they have been conducting wars of aggression, left, right and centre to this day. Now we learn that Iraq’s oil revenues have been controlled by the US ever since that first illegal war in 2003 and that the US consequently has a choke-hold on Iraq,
So 9/11 was a “false flag attack”? In modern warfare, which depends on winning public support (“hearts and minds”), false flag attacks are essential elements of the arsenal. After the 9/11 attack, the US population accepted “war on terror” and serious curtailments of the Bill of Rights.
Another example of “false flag attacks” is probably the “Bucha massacre” in Ukraine. It shocked Europeans out of their usual determined non-committal lethargy. Since Bucha, outraged Europeans have accepted massive tax-payed military support to Ukraine. (The Bucha massacre was almost certainly staged.)
I will not now discuss the other US wars of aggression that followed in the wake of the convenient “New Pearl Harbour” on 9/11, wars that formed part of the “war on terror”. Nor will I discuss, here, the 9/11 of 1973, which also – at the behest of USA – lead to 3000 extra-judicial killings – quite apart from the 40,000 or so persons who were tortured and incarcerated in concentration camps during the following years.
Nor will I discuss European “national interests”, truly a convoluted theme, since nobody quite knows just what “Europe’’ means anymore. A few days ago, the popular Scottish TV presenter and writer, Neil Oliver, said on the Duran: “If you start out with a lie, all you can do is to keep lying and your lies become more and more Byzantine”. Hear Niel Oliver’s take on Europe’s journey in a parallel world.
The players that orchestrate wars on false grounds and false flag attacks come in all colours, from young aspiring professionals longing to make it to the top, members of the FIRE set (Finance, Insurance, Real Estate), oil barons, tech-sociopaths to mere hangers-on. And of course the war-people.
Some of the most ambitious characters are smart enough to shy away from the headlines. These days a shady character called Steven Miller is said to be controlling the President. What do I know? So much is hidden from us, but the stakes are gargantuan and the bets nuclear.
Players dribble their sinister programmes around gate poles and through goal posts, pausing at tactical moments to dole out tempting titbits of the programme they claim to be pursuing, “fight for democracy” … “justice for all” … more recently also “equality”… adding “so help me God” for good measure. Never mind that millions have died and keep dying, for instance under buildings razed to the ground by “our boys” or our Zionist friends. We sing lullabies to our children, whispering, “never mind, dear, this is all in defence of Democracy”.