Afghanistan: Cui Bono?

*This article is the featured piece in my August 29, 2021 Red Alert newsletter. If you wish to subscribe, click the link and gain access to weekly analysis on world communism and current events for $35/year. Thank you for your support on Red Alert and here on The American Citadel. Thank you to those who also support me by purchasing my books and t-shirts. God Bless and Long Live Liberty!*

In this brief newsletter, I want to talk about the fall of Afghanistan. I will highlight the predictable Russian and Chinese incursion into that beleaguered nation. And then I’ll discuss the age-old question – Cui bono? Who benefited? 

Let’s begin with some facts. Even before the United States abandoned Afghanistan, the Taliban began conquering town after town after town. In fact, right now it’s the peak Taliban campaign season. Despite the Taliban’s surge, we did nothing. 

As soon as we hastily fled Bagram Airforce base, the emboldened Taliban seized even more territory and rushed to Kabul which they are in the process of capturing. As we were leaving, the Biden regime shipped loads of military equipment to Afghanistan to augment the billions of dollars’ worth of gear already there. This conveniently found its way into the Taliban’s hands. This is being called a “conspiracy theory” and “false” by the all-knowing fact-checkers, yet it’s irrefutably true. 

Time, which is obviously not a right-wing conspiracy rag, published an article on August 17 titled “How $83 Billion Spent on the Afghan Army Ended Up Benefiting the Taliban.” It noted: 

“Built and trained at a two-decade cost of $83 billion, Afghan security forces collapsed so quickly and completely — in some cases without a shot fired — that the ultimate beneficiary of the American investment turned out to be the Taliban. They grabbed not only political power but also U.S.-supplied firepower — guns, ammunition, helicopters and more. 

“The Taliban captured an array of modern military equipment when they overran Afghan forces who failed to defend district centers. Bigger gains followed, including combat aircraft, when the Taliban rolled up provincial capitals and military bases with stunning speed, topped by capturing the biggest prize, Kabul, over the weekend. 

“A U.S. defense official on Monday confirmed the Taliban’s sudden accumulation of U.S.-supplied Afghan equipment is enormous. . . . 

“Of the approximately $145 billion the U.S. government spent trying to rebuild Afghanistan, about $83 billion went to developing and sustaining its army and police forces, according to the Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, a congressionally created watchdog that has tracked the war since 2008. The $145 billion is in addition to $837 billion the United States spent fighting the war, which began with an invasion in October 2001. 

“The $83 billion invested in Afghan forces over 20 years is nearly double last year’s budget for the entire U.S. Marine Corps and is slightly more than what Washington budgeted last year for food stamp assistance for about 40 million Americans.” 

Cui bono? Not America. Not the American People. Not the U.S. military. Not our Western allies. Not the people of Afghanistan. Not Central Asia. 

Forbes article goes further in breaking down what it calls the “staggering” numbers of U.S. hardware gifted to the Taliban. A small part of the article records: 

“This month, the Taliban seized Black Hawk helicopters and A-29 Super Tucano attack aircraft. As late as last month, Afghanistan’s Ministry of Defense posted photos on social media of seven newly arrived helicopters from the U.S., Reuters reported. 

“Black Hawk helicopters can cost up to $21 million. In 2013, the U.S. placed an order for 20 A-29 Super Tucano attack aircraft for $427 million – that’s $21.3 million for each plane. Other specialized helicopters can cost up to $37 million each. 

“The Afghan air force contracted for C-208 light attack airplanes in March 2018: seven planes for $84.6 million, or $12.1 million each. The airplanes are very sophisticated and carry HELLFIRE missiles, anti-tank missiles and other weaponry. 

“The PC-12 intelligence, reconnaissance and surveillance airplanes use the latest in technology. Having these planes fall into Taliban control is disconcerting. Civilian models sell new for approximately $5 million each and the military planes could sell for many times that price. 

“Basic fixed-wing airplanes range in price from $3.1 million to $22 million in the DLA database. 

“Of course, helicopter prices also range widely depending on the technology, purpose, and equipment. For example, according to the DLA, general purpose helicopters range in price from $92,000 to $922,000. Observation helicopters can cost $92,000 and utility helicopters up to $922,000. 

“Even if the Taliban can’t fly our planes, the parts are very valuable. For example, just the control stick for certain military planes has an acquisition value of $17,808 and a fuel tank sells for up to $35,000.” 

Cui bono? Not the United States. Not Freedom. Not our allies. 

Perhaps more to the point, Tyler Durden wrote

“The Taliban’s latest offensives have been nothing short of impressive, acquiring 600,000 weapons, 75,000 vehicles, and 200 aircraft, transforming the terrorist group into a rogue military power overnight. One military device Taliban forces have sized is the U.S. military’s biometrics database that has sounded alarm bells with U.S. officials. 

“Called the Handheld Interagency Identity Detection Equipment (HIIDE), it was seized last week during the Taliban’s offensive, according to The Intercept, who spoke with current and former military officials. The sensitive data, now in Taliban hands, contains a biological database on the Afghan population. Some sensitive data include thousands of Afghan civilians who worked alongside U.S. Army Special Forces as interpreters.” 

Fun, huh? The Taliban now has the most modern of military equipment at its disposal – and in large quantities. But even handier, the Taliban can now use its newly-acquired Black Hawks in conjunction with the biometric database we compiled to hunt down U.S. sympathizers. Need we even ask “cui bono?” What’s more, Biden not only handed the Taliban terrorists “a biological database on the Afghan population,” which includes “thousands of Afghan civilians who worked alongside U.S. Army Special Forces,” but the regime literally handed a kill list to the Taliban

“[D]uring this surreal press conference late on Thursday, Biden did not deny the report of U.S. handing over names of Americans to Taliban, saying ‘There may have been.’ 

““There have been occasions where our military has contacted their military counterparts in the Taliban and said this bus is coming through…made up of the following group…let it through,” the president said. “Yes, there have been occasions like that.” 

“Biden added that to his knowledge, the “bulk of that group” has been let through but can’t say with “certitude” that there was a list of names passed to the Taliban. In short, yes, the Biden admin handed “kill lists” to the Taliban. 

“A day that will live in infamy for the reeling Biden administration just got even worse, after Politico reported that Biden administration officials in Kabul gave the Taliban a list of names of American citizens, green card holders and Afghan allies to grant entry into the militant-controlled outer perimeter of the city’s airport, a choice which according to the media outlet which was just purchased by Germany’s Axel Springer, “prompted outrage behind the scenes from lawmakers and military officials.” 

““Basically, they just put all those Afghans on a kill list,” said one defense official, who like others spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive topic. “It’s just appalling and shocking and makes you feel unclean.”” 

Cui bono? Did America benefit? Are the hundreds of Americans stranded in Afghanistan benefiting? Did our Afghan allies benefit? Has the U.S. Constitution benefited from our military adventurism lo these many years? 

The Taliban, despite promises that they’ll be nice this time around, are already publicly burning and decapitating women to create a chilling effect among resisters. As this happens and the United States abandons its former “allies,” the Taliban proceeds to capture strategic parts of the country. They just seized the militarized portion of the Kabul Airport – using American weapons. They also took control of the largest lithium deposit on planet earth. Potentially $1-3 Trillion in value, the deposit – which includes gold, iron, and other important minerals – sits in the Wakhan Corridor which borders Red China. 

China is now preparing to swoop in to secure the crucial region. They’ll likely do it in the name of fighting terrorism. As you read the following insight from a recent article, ask yourself “cui bono?”: 

“China shares a small border with Afghanistan called the Wakhan Corridor that is just 210km long and between 20 km and 60 km wide. While the length of the border may appear insignificant, its location is what makes Wakhan crucial in geopolitics. 

“The Wakhan Corridor links China’s restive Xinjiang province with Afghanistan’s Badakshan province, with Tajikistan to the north and Pakistan’s Khyber Pakthunkhwa and Kashmir to the south. The mountainous terrain in the region had made the Wakhan Corridor a difficult place for building road networks. 

“However, its location is crucial for the security and viability of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a key part of China’s larger Belt Road Initiative (BRI). An article by Australia’s Lowy Institute explained the significance of Wakhan as “The port of Gwadar in Pakistan marks the beginning of this corridor (CPEC), and the tip of the Wakhan marks entry point for CPEC into China.” 

“The Wakhan Corridor has been a route used by Uighur militants who are opposed to Chinese rule in Xinjiang. China has previously expressed fears the Taliban-controlled territory could be used by Uighur groups such as the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM). In fact during his meeting with Baradar, Wang had said, “We hope the Afghan Taliban will make a clean break with all terrorist organisations including ETIM (East Turkestan Islamic Movement) and resolutely and effectively combat them to remove obstacles, play a positive role and create enabling conditions for security, stability, development and cooperation in the region.” 

“Securing the Wakhan Corridor would help China control the activity of Uighur militants, while also ensuring the security of CPEC. Multiple projects linked to CPEC have been attacked in Pakistan in recent years. The CPEC, which is a network of road and rail links, is being built at an estimated cost of $62 billion. CPEC is intended to give China land access to the Arabian Sea, boosting trade prospects to the Middle East, Africa and Europe by cutting travel time. . . . 

“Afghanistan is believed to have large deposits of gold, iron, copper, zinc, lithium and other rare earth metals, valued at over $1 trillion. “Afghanistan may hold 60 million metric tons of copper, 2.2 billion tons of iron ore, 1.4 million tons of rare earth elements (REEs) such as lanthanum, cerium, neodymium, and veins of aluminium, gold, silver, zinc, mercury…” an analysis in The Diplomat in 2020 said. 

“Various rare earth elements are used for making key components of phones, cameras, computer disks, TVs and other equipment. They also have applications in clean energy and defence industries. . . . 

“China potentially getting control of untapped deposits of lithium and rare earths in Afghanistan would prove a major advantage for Beijing in its evolving competition with the US and Europe for resources. In 2019, the US imported 80 per cent of its rare earth minerals from China, while the EU states got 98 per cent of these materials from China.” 

So, cui bono? Did we benefit? Or did our enemies? You can answer for yourself. 

On a similar note, one of the enduring myths that burns me up is that the United States invaded Iraq “for the oil.” Bunkum. China actually received most of oil that left Iraq, not the United States. In fact, Iraq’s first oil contract after the ousting of Saddam was with China. It’s the same with Afghanistan. We didn’t go in for material gain, oil, or rare earth minerals. China appears like it will be the recipient yet again. So, I ask, cui bono? 

Let’s now shift to Russia. Are you sick of me talking about Russia? Well, buckle up. Last week, in Red Alert No. 29, I shared Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergei Lavrov’s statement on the Taliban. He said: “They are sane people.” To an insane person, perhaps! And there are few as insane as Russia’s leadership. This statement alone should make you wonder about Russia’s true intentions. 

On July 18, in Red Alert issue No. 26, I dove more into the problem of Russian intervention in Afghanistan: 

“Last week, I reported on the fact that Russia has been intruding in Afghanistan in a major way. I noted that they’re trying to fill the power vacuum left by the United States – as they’ve done in Syria and elsewhere. Now, this week, Russia held military drills in neighboring Tajikistan ostensibly aimed at potential operations against the Taliban. This is a farce. It’s a cruel joke on humanity. Russia is arming both sides – Kabul’s security forces as well as the Taliban. They’ve been openly hosting talks with Taliban leaders in Moscow for several years. Now, suddenly, they’re so concerned about the Taliban and are seemingly gearing up their military for an entrance into Afghanistan? . . . . 

“To add to the farce that Russian is legitimately “concerned” about Afghanistan – a nation they invaded and ravished not too many years ago – is the fact that Russia has now demanded that the Kabul government cooperate and deal with the Taliban! You can’t make this up. While being so supposedly concerned about the Taliban that it has to hold military drills on Afghanistan’s border, Moscow is simultaneously shilling for the Taliban and urging others to acquiesce and treat them as legitimate partners instead of the terrorists they are. . . . 

“Lenin famously said that the best way to handle opposition was to control it. This is just another example of this tactic in action. They cause chaos, play both sides, provoke one side to fight against the other, blame others (particularly the United States) for the problems, and then jump in to mediate and “save the day.” As repulsive as it is, Putin plays the game well and has set Russia up as the dominate power in Central Asia. 

“Don’t be surprised if you see Russia launch military actions in Afghanistan like they did in Syria. Of course, these actions will be taken in the name of “fighting terrorism” or of “liberating” the poor people of the area. In the communist mind, they never launch a war of aggression. All wars are defensive. All wars are wars of “liberation.” And, as a final psy-op, they’ll convince everyone that it’s all America’s fault and we’ll receive the black eye while they take the glory. This is how communists operate.” 

One week before I wrote that piece of prophetic penmanship, I observed in Red Alert No. 25: 

“The New World Order uses the United States like a battering ram. The U.S. military is used to bust up a place and, then, when our boys withdraw and create a vacuum, overtly hostile entities or nations are brought in to reshape it in the Marxist image. Such a power vacuum has been left in Afghanistan and the 21st-Century communist bloc has decided to step in and fill the void. 

“The five nations in particular that will hold sway in Afghanistan, alongside their Taliban puppets, are Russia, China, Iran, Turkey, and Pakistan. Turkey – a formal ally of Russia and Iran – has said it will keep its troops in Afghanistan even after NATO withdraws. China is openly talking about developing and using Afghanistan for economic purposes. And Russia, as always, seems to be in the background pulling strings. Meetings and conferences between Taliban leaders and Russian authorities have become increasingly frequent over the past several years with Moscow usually hosting or initiating them. 

“Russia has been the string-puller throughout the Middle East for a very long time. The War on Terror – which was emphatically supported and urged on by Vladimir Putin, the first head of state to call George W. and pledge support – has been a massive windfall for Russia. Russia has benefited, picking up the pieces of the nations smashed by the U.S. military, while America has achieved nothing whatsoever except a bad rep, a Mt. Everest of war debt, and internal division. . . . 

“There’s nothing “natural” about Russia’s intervention in the Middle East and Central Asia. Russia is very successfully following the same “roadmap” drawn up by the Soviet Union. As the United States withdraws, Russia is rushing in to fill the power vacuum while posing as the white knight of salvation. With it, Russia is bringing China, Iran, and Turkey. Hostile forces such as Assad in Syria, the PLO in Palestine, and the Taliban in Afghanistan, are being propped up and bolstered by Putin. Judging by the company it keeps and the strategic moves it’s making, it’s almost as if Russia is deliberately trying to fulfill Biblical end times prophecy.” 

I don’t mean to occupy your time reading what you may have already read before, but I do so because what I predicted is already being fulfilled – and faster than I expected. Russia is unquestionably moving into Afghanistan. Russian military aircraft have been at the Kabul airport evacuating people. Putin vetoed Biden’s request to place U.S. forces in Central Asian nations. That’s an intriguing tidbit since it was Putin who practically begged Skull and Bonesman George W. Bush to use those same nations to launch a war in Afghanistan. It seems that now the United States has wasted billions of dollars, lost thousands of lives, and made fools of themselves in the eyes of the world, it’s “mission accomplished” and they can now leave and make room for Russia to exert its power. 

Along with telling the United States to leave the region, Russia is not only mobilizing its military forces there, but pushing for stronger ties among Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) states. These states are Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Armenia. Afghanistan and Serbia are Observer States. Even though it recently held military drills in nearby Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, just 12 miles from the Afghan border in fact, Russia plans to hold additional war drills in Kyrgyzstan soon. And all of it is being done in the context of the “threat of terrorism” that Russia itself is supporting. 

I now quote from the Institute on the Study of War. They wrote of Russia’s angle on Afghanistan:  

“Kremlin messaging on Afghanistan since August 15 has praised the Taliban’s claimed “peaceful” takeover of Kabul, while Russian forces in Central Asia have responded with military exercises. Zamir Kabulov, the Kremlin’s special representative on Afghanistan, stated on August 16 that the Kremlin “prepared the ground ahead of time” to work with “the new government of Afghanistan” and claimed the Taliban seized Kabul “peacefully.” The Kremlin is officially predicating official recognition of the Taliban on the Taliban’s ability to prevent jihadist attacks in Central Asia and meet unstated good governance requirements. The Kremlin has previously called on the Taliban to “prevent the spread of tensions” beyond Afghanistan’s borders during meetings in Moscow in early July. Kabulov stated that Russia does not see “a single direct threat to our allies in Central Asia” from the Taliban itself, but noted that regime change can create “a niche for other international terrorist organizations” on August 16. Russian and partner forces are additionally increasing the frequency of joint military exercises and are preparing for a Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) exercise in the coming months. Approximately 1,000 troops at Russia’s 201st Military Base in Tajikistan began snap exercises on August 17 that are ongoing as of publication.[4] The Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) announced on August 16 that it will hold an exercise designated “Cobalt-2021” in Tajikistan “in the coming months” but did not specify a date or participants.  

“The Kremlin will likely officially recognize the Taliban and will expand Russian basing and military operations in Central Asia to combat potential jihadist forces. The Taliban is unlikely to completely control Afghanistan’s borders to meet Russia’s demand, and jihadist groups and criminal networks are highly likely to proliferate in Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and other Central Asian states. The Kremlin will likely accept a level of insecurity in the region above what the United States and its allies would accept and recognize the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan. The Kremlin may additionally seek to secure economic concessions such as access to mineral resources from the Taliban in exchange for recognition. The Kremlin will additionally prioritize preventing potentially destabilizing refugee flows from Afghanistan. The Russian military has prepared for several years for the potential of a renewed jihadist threat to Central Asia following a US withdrawal from Afghanistan. Russian military deployments in Central Asia are in large part responses to this legitimate threat. However, additional Russian basing and further military cooperation with Central Asian states will support the Kremlin’s campaign to integrate the militaries of the former Soviet Union under Russian structures and improve Russian force projection capabilities in the region.” 

In other words, despite the fact that the Taliban is outlawed in Russia, Russia has been working with the Taliban. Yet, it knows that the Taliban won’t be able to sufficiently keep control of Afghanistan and welcomes the “threat” because it provides a pretext for boosting its presence and military involvement in the area. 

Russia is currently refusing Afghan refugees because, as KGB dictator Vladimir Putin said, Russia doesn’t “want militants appearing again under the guise of refugees.” He then noted: “We don’t want to repeat, even in part, something what we had in the 90s and in the mid-2000s, when there were hostilities in the North Caucasus.” If you recall from history, “Islamic militants” committed a host of terrorist attacks in Russia during the 90s and early 2000s. Or did they? 

Putin is keen on concealing the fact that his own intelligence services orchestrated a host of false-flag bombings in Russia that killed hundreds of Russians and then blamed it on Islamic and Chechen “terrorists.” Mike Eckel, writing for Radio Free Europe Radio Libertyexplained how these bombings – much like our own 9/11 false flag – gave Russia a pretext to launch their own “War on Terror” that continues to this day: 

“The predawn blast on September 9, 1999, reduced the building to a smoking pile of rubble, killing more than 100. A second building, less than 6 kilometers away, was rocked by an explosion on September 13, killing 119. 

“Days earlier, a car bomb exploded in a small town bordering the war-ravaged region of Chechnya, where reignited fighting was already spilling into neighboring regions. That blast, outside the apartment building in the town of Buynaksk, killed dozens. 

“It was followed seven days later by a truck bomb that destroyed a nine-story building in another southern city, Volgodonsk, killing 17. 

“On September 23, Putin asserted terrorists in Chechnya were to blame and ordered a massive air campaign within the North Caucasus region. When asked a day later about the campaign targeting what he called terrorists, Putin responded with the phrase that inaugurated his rise to preeminence. 

““We will pursue them everywhere,” he said, using a crude slang expression. “Excuse me for saying so: We’ll catch them in the toilet. We’ll wipe them out in the outhouse.” 

“The statement became a Putin catchphrase, and set the tone for the 20 years of rule that followed.” 

September seems to be the month of false-flag attacks by “Islamic terrorists.” You’ll notice the sarcastic quotation marks around the words “Islamic terrorists.” Do we all have collective amnesia? Have we all forgotten what was common knowledge during the Cold War; namely, that the international communist cabal was behind most terrorism in the world? This was and is established fact. Soviet Russia even trained some of the leaders that are today leading terror groups and terrorist states, from Mahmoud Abbas of the KGB-created Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) to Ayatollah Khomeini, the supreme Maitreya-worshipping fanatic in charge of Iran. In fact, when you examine the worldwide terror network, you find that all roads lead to Moscow (to be honest, some lead to Tel Aviv, Washington, Tehran, and Beijing, too). 

The Soviet Union mastered false-flag attacks. In fact, Russia has been faking things dating back to at least the Potemkin villages under Tsaritsina Catherine II. The liars that they are, the communists knew how to manufacture crises to justify violence, revolution, or military action. In fact, Soviet intelligence had an entire unit devoted to producing forgeries that they distributed throughout the world to poison public opinion against the United States and her allies and to sow division and mistrust everywhere. 

Putin, a career KGB agent, is well-versed in the art of deception. As the newly-appointed head of Russia in September 1999, Putin was in the perfect position to benefit from a “terrorist” attack in Russia. But before I briefly talk about the 1999 bombings, let’s talk about the 1994 bombings. You probably aren’t aware of those false-flags in Russia, but they were used to justify a renewed cycle of military oppression against the Chechens the same as in 1999. 

In his landmark book Blowing Up Russia, which was the “crime” that got him censored in Russia and most likely led to his gruesome assassination via poison, former Russian intelligence operative Alexander Litvinenko wrote: 

“Knowing that Russian troops and the forces of the anti-Dudaev opposition might begin their storm of Grozny at any moment, on November 18, 1994, the FSK made its first recorded attempt to stir up anti-Chechen feeling by committing an act of terrorism and laying the blame on Chechen separatists: if the chauvinist sentiments of Muscovites could be inflamed, it would be easy to continue the repression of the independence movement in Chechnya. 

“It should be noted that on November 1 8 and in later instances, the supposed “Chechen terrorists” set off their explosions at the most inopportune times, and then never actually claimed responsibility (rendering the terrorist attack itself meaningless). In any case, in November 1994, public opinion in Russia and around the world was on the side of the Chechen people, so why would the Chechens have committed an act of terrorism in Moscow? It would have made far more sense to attempt to sabotage the stationing of Russian troops on Chechen territory. Russian supporters of war with Chechnya were, however, only too willing to see the hand of Chechnya in any terrorist attack, and their response on every occasion was to strike a rapid and quite disproportionately massive blow against Chechen sovereignty. The impression was naturally created that the Russian military and law enforcement agencies, while quite unprepared for the terrorist attacks, were incredibly well prepared to launch counter-measures. 

“The explosion of November 18, 1994, took place on a railroad track crossing the river Yauza in Moscow. According to experts, it was caused by two powerful charges of approximately 1 .5 kilograms of TNT. About twenty meters of the railroad bed were ripped up, and the bridge almost collapsed. It was quite clear, however, that the explosion had occurred prematurely, before the next train was due to cross the bridge. The shattered fragments of the bomber’s body were discovered about one hundred meters from the site of the explosion. He was Captain Andrei Schelenkov, an employee of the oil company Lanako. His own bomb had blown him up as he was planting it on the bridge. 

“It was only thanks to this blunder by the operative carrying out the bombing that the immediate organizers of the terrorist attack became known. Lanako’s boss, who had given his firm a name beginning with the first two letters of his own last name, was thirty-five-year-old Maxim Lazovsky, a highly valued agent of the Moscow and Moscow Region Department of the FSB, who was known in criminal circles by the nicknames of “Max” and “Cripple.” At the risk of anticipating events, we can also point out the significant fact that every single one of Lanako’s employees was a full-time or free-lance agent of the Russian counterespionage agencies. 

“On the day of the explosion on the river Yauza, November 18, 1994, an anonymous phone call to the police claimed that a truck full of explosives was standing outside the Lanako offices. As a result, the FSB department actually discovered a truck close to the firm’s offices containing three MON-50 mines, fifty charges for grenade launchers, fourteen RGD-5 grenades, ten F-I grenades, and four packs of plastic explosives, with a total weight of six kilograms. The FSB claimed, however, that it had been unable to determine who owned the truck, even though a Lanako identity card was found on Schelenkov’s remains, and the explosives used in the Yauza bombing were of the same kind as that on the truck” (Alexander Litvinenko and Yuri Felshtinsky, Blowing Up Russia: The Secret Plot to Bring Back KGB Terror, 4-6). 

Imagine that, Muslims being blamed for “terror attacks” which justify war. It’s almost as if the world Elites use the same script to push their agenda. . . . 

In 1999, a similar pattern to the 1994 false-flag attacks was used. In my article “How Russia Benefited from 9/11,” I summarized the situation thus: 

“At the beginning of September, 1999, a series of apartment bombs rocked Russia, killing several hundred. These were naturally blamed on Islamic Chechen terrorists. Alexander Litvinenko, and other researchers, however, have pinned the blame directly on the Moscow FSB which had so recently been headed by Vladimir Putin. In Ryazan, on September 22, light was shed on who was perpetrating the bombings. 

“On that day, a man spotted suspicious individuals carrying what appeared to be sacks of sugar or flour into the basement of a building. He called the police who arrived and found these sacks rigged with timed explosives and set near the main support columns of the building. The sacks contained hexogen, a military-grade explosive substance. Had the men not been spotted and the police not called, the bomb would have later gone off and demolished the old building. Like the other bombings, this would have been blamed on “Islamic terrorists” as part of the pretext for launching the Second Chechen War. 

 “In the immediate aftermath of the foiled bombing, Putin congratulated the public for its vigilance and the FSB feigned no knowledge of the event. Yet, two days later, after several “terrorists” had been apprehended in Ryazan by the local authorities, the Moscow FSB claimed the entire thing has been a training exercise and ordered the suspects released. Litvinenko raised obvious questions about this odd version of events. He wrote: 

““Could we possibly expect the FSB to say nothing all day long on September 23, while the whole world was buzzing with news of a failed terrorist attack? It’s impossible to imagine. Is it possible to imagine that the Prime Minister of Russia [Putin] and former director of the FSB, who, moreover, has personal links with Patrushev [then head of the FSB], was not informed about the “exercises?” . . . The fact that at seven o’clock in the evening, on September 23, 1999, Putin did not make any statement about training exercises taking place in Ryazan was the weightiest possible argument in favor of interpreting events as a failed attempt by the FSB to blow up an apartment building in Ryazan” (Alexander Litvinenko and Yuri Felshtinsky, Blowing Up Russia: The Secret Plot to Bring Back KGB Terror, 63).” 

I’m sure it was just an “exercise,” much the same way NORAD was holding “exercises” simulating an attack on the nation on 9/11 and just as London was undergoing bombing “exercises” when the London subway was bombed on 7/7. You have to be a firm believer in coincidence and cosmic irony to believe these flimsy narratives. 

I quote again from Mike Eckel’s previously-cited article: 

“On September 4, with fighting escalating in Daghestan and along the border with Chechnya, the first of four explosions targeting apartment buildings went off: a car bomb outside a five-story building housing relatives of Russian military personnel in Buynaksk, Daghestan. Sixty-two people died. . . . 

“Five days later, just after midnight, an explosion rocked a nine-story building located along a leafy bend in the Moscow River just a 30-minute drive from the Kremlin. More than 100 apartments were destroyed. In all, 106 people were killed. 

“Russians were stunned. Yeltsin ordered a search of thousands of apartments buildings in the city for other possible explosive devices. 

“Putin declared September 13 a day of national mourning. At around 5 a.m. that same day, another explosion went off in the basement of a brick, eight-story apartment building on Moscow’s Kashirskoye Highway, about 6 kilometers south of the previous blast. A total of 119 people were killed. 

“Three days later, a fourth apartment building was flattened when a truck bomb exploded before dawn in the southern city of Volodonsk. Seventeen people died. 

“Together, the bombings panicked the country, and added to further doubts about Yeltsin’s leadership. A growing number of Russian security officials publicly accused Chechen terrorists. 

“On September 23, during a trip to the Kazakh capital of Astana, Putin vowed to take an unflinching line against what he called “bandits” — even when they were in the toilet. 

“The day before Putin’s “outhouse” comment, on September 22, another incident occurred at an apartment building in the western city of Ryazan.  

“Putin that evening praised the work of investigators for thwarting what appeared to be another bombing attempt. 

“Two men driving a car with Moscow license plates were spotted carrying sacks into the basement of the building. Police and bomb-disposal experts swarmed the area, discovering they contained a military-grade explosive, and had a detonator and a timer set for 5:30 a.m. 

“The next day, three FSB officers were arrested by police in Ryazan and held on suspicion of planting the sacks. But Putin’s successor at the FSB, Nikolai Patrushev, declared that the Ryazan incident had, in fact, been a training exercise, and he apologized for scaring an already edgy populace. 

““It was not an explosion somebody foiled; it was a security training exercise. The sacks contained only sugar. There were no explosives inside,” Patrushev said. 

“A week later, Putin announced plans for a land invasion of Chechnya using Russian Army units.” 

As you can guess, it wasn’t really “sugar” in the bags. Patrushev and Putin were lying. Communists can’t help but lie; it’s what they do. Litvinenko shined light on the “sugar” narrative in his book: 

“The information about the explosives discovered after the terrorist attacks and the quantity discovered was not consistent. In Moscow, they found thirteen tons of explosives. There were three or four tons in the house on Borisovskie Prudy Street, even more at a cache in the district of Liublino, and four tons in a car shelter in Kapotnya. Some time later, it was discovered that six tons of heptyl (a rocket fuel of which hexogen is one of the components) had been taken from the Nevinnomyssk Chemical Combine in the Stavropol Region. Six tons of heptyl could have been used to produce ten tons of explosives. But there’s no way to process six tons of heptyl into ten tons of explosives in a kitchen, a garage or an underground laboratory. The heptyl was evidently processed at an army depot. Then the sacks had to be loaded into a vehicle and driven out under the eyes of the guards, with some kind of documents being presented. So transporting the material required drivers and trucks. Overall, an entire group of people must have been involved in the operation, and if that’s the case, information must have been received through the FSB’s secret agents and the agents of military counterintelligence. 

“The explosives were packed in sugar sacks bearing the words “Cherkessk Sugar Plant,” but no such plant exists. If “sugar” had been carried throughout the whole of Russia in sacks like that, especially with counterfeit documentation, the chances of discovery would have been too great. It would have been simpler to draw up documentation for the “sugar” from a plant that actually exists. Several conclusions can immediately be drawn from this fact, for instance, that the terrorists wanted to point the investigation in the direction of the Republic of Karachaevo-Cherkessia, since it was obvious that sooner or later, at least one sack from the “Cherkessk Sugar Plant” would fall into the hands of the investigators; also that the terrorists were not afraid of transporting sacks with a false name and documents into Moscow, since they were clearly quite certain, both they themselves and their goods were safe. Finally, it is reasonable to assume that the explosives were packed in the sacks in Moscow. 

“It would have been hard to finance the terrorist attacks without leaving any tracks. The intelligence services must have heard something, at least about a large sale of heptyl or hexogen from the depots, since no one would have given terrorists explosives for free. Only the agencies of state security or military officers could have gotten hexogen from a factory or a store without paying for it. 

“Such were precisely the conclusions reached by many reporters and specialists, trying to figure out the clever plan by which the hexogen could have been delivered to Moscow. The plan turned out to be exceedingly simple, since it had been worked out by the FSB itself.” 

He went on to explain that the Roskonversvzryvtsenr research institute opened up in Moscow 1991 to ostensibly use explosives in agricultural pursuits. In reality, it was a “front” used to sell explosives, including hexogen. Litvinenko summed up how the hexogen “sugar” got to its intended residential target: 

“Through the institute hexogen was purchased from the army and delivered to the terrorists for the bombing of buildings in Moscow and other Russian cities. These deliveries were possible only because Schukin’s scientific research institute “Roskonversvzryvtsenr” had been created by the secret services, and the terrorists who received the “TNT charges” were agents of the FSB” (Litvinenko, Blowing Up Russia, 125-126). 

It’s easy for “terrorists” to “beat the system” when those terrorists work for the system and do its bidding! These and other damning facts point to deliberate conspiracy – false-flag attacks carried out against the Russian people by the KGB-in-disguise headed by Vladimir Putin in order to help Putin consolidate power and put Russia on a permanent war footing. 

It’s my personal view that September 1994, September 1999, and September 2001 are linked. I’ve come to believe that the international cabal that runs world events carried out the 9/11 attacks, not merely dark forces within the U.S. intelligence community. Certainly, the so-called “Deep State” was involved. That’s beyond dispute. They were the ones who issued stand-down orders to our military and allowed the attacks to continue. They were the ones who cordoned off the WTC crater and hauled away, contrary to law, tons of evidence. They were the ones who “pulled” WTC 7. They were the ones, with their controlled media, who painted anyone asking questions as “unpatriotic” or “conspiracy wackos.” They were the ones who stripped Americans of many of their Liberties with the pre-written Patriot Act, introduced the TSA and Department of Homeland Security, and sent our boys to an Afghanistan war that was approved, “coincidentally,” one day before the 9/11 attacks. 

Yet, there were also dancing Israelis (i.e. Mossad agents) and other Israeli organizations who were clearly in on the plan. There’s no question that Mossad had foreknowledge. But who does Mossad serve? They don’t serve Israel, but the international conspiracy. They do their dirty work – assassinations, blackmail, terrorist attacks – everywhere. The Mossad, and Israel in general, has also been heavily infiltrated by Russian/communist operatives. This is one of the reasons I believe that there were Russian elements involved. They were perhaps the very “Mossad” agents just mentioned who were arrested on 9/11 or among the sixty “Israelis” rounded up as part of a massive spy ring operating in the United States at the time. If these Israelis weren’t involved in blowing up the actual WTC, they absolutely did know of the plot ahead of time through their espionage efforts and did nothing. 

All of this is just too convenient and too according to script. It’s a script used in Russia time and time again, including numerous times in the decade leading up to 9/11. It’s a script for chaos drawn up by Soviet special forces. Mossad has also used it. The CIA has used it, too. Truthfully, the CIA has been infiltrated from OSS times with communist agents, has been headed by communist sympathizers who have acknowledged they voted for Communist Party USA political candidates, and has ultimately served the purposes of the world conspiracy around the world – assassinations, drug-running, human trafficking, regime change, etc. The Mossad has done all of these things as well. 

Using our hindsight of twenty years, which of these groups has truly benefited from 9/11, the War on Terror, and, now, the United States’ slapdash Afghanistan withdrawal? In my view, Russia and Israel have both benefited from the past twenty years, but Russia has benefited more – especially as concerns Afghanistan. Yes, Zionists in the United States dreamed of a terror attack – a new Pearl Harbor – that would bring America into a war that would serve Israel’s interests – specifically the Oded Yinon Plan, or Greater Israel project. We can’t deny that. 

But America’s bull-in-a-China-shop approach serves equally Russia’s-China’s interests. It’s poisoned world opinion against the United States while Russia, swooping in to “save the day,” is now viewed by many as white knights. Israel’s already negative image has also been reduced greatly – again, while Russia’s has been boosted. Syria, instead of falling into Israeli or U.S. hands, is now more entrenched than ever in Russia’s camp and Russia has constructed permanent military bases mere miles from Israel. Russia has also concluded strategic pacts with Turkey and Iran. 

A quick aside about ISIS. While some ISIS factions are definitely Western-backed as Brandon Martinez shows in The ISIS Conspiracy, most ISIS fighters speak Russian, come from Russia-dominated Central Asia, and were heavily influenced by Soviet-trained leaders like the Iraqi Republican Guard. Setting that information aside, ISIS has conveniently handed Russia the excuse it needed to move into the Middle East in a major way and, now, is handing it the excuse it needs to move into Afghanistan. I like Cliff Kincaid’s analysis of the origin of ISIS: 

“Writer and researcher Christian Gomez traced the roots of ISIS to the Islamic Revival Party, created by the KGB during the final days of the old Soviet Union. 

“More recently, a defector from the KGB’s successor, the FSB, confirmed Russia’s role in creating ISIS by recruiting former members of Saddam Hussein’s security services. The former FSB officer told Ukrainian journalist Andriy Tsaplienko that “the Russian special services believed that if a terrorist organization was set up as an alternative to Al-Qaeda and it created problems for the United States as Donbas does for Ukraine now, it would be quite good.”. . . . 

“The FSB defector said that in order to create ISIS, the Russians selected former officers of the Iraqi army and members of the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party. All of them had graduated from Moscow-based “educational institutions”. . . . 

“. . . ISIS is a Marxist-style organization that uses religious cover” (Cliff Kincaid, Red Jihad: Moscow’s Final Solution for America and Israel, 28-29). 

Go ahead and let that sink in. I’ll wait. . . . 

Furthermore, Putin was the first world leader to call Bush and encourage him in his “War on Terror.” That’s significant. Why was he so eager to get America into a war in his backyard? It was from Russian-allied Central Eurasian states that the U.S. launched the Afghanistan invasion. And now it’s Russia which is benefiting, yet again, from America’s strategic defeat in that God-forsaken land of desolation. In fact, Afghanistan’s intelligence service, the National Directorate of Security (NDS) is now staffed with KGB holdovers. A 2020 article reports: 

“The Afghan intelligence community has undergone several phases of political transition as KhAD and NDS both fought complex wars with regional and international dimensions with two cultures of intelligence and gained significant experience. With the beginning of the global war on terrorism led by the US and its NATO allies in Afghanistan, the NDS was still learning operational tactics and intelligence collection mechanisms. A decade later, it had gained solid experience in intelligence collection, process, and countering terrorism on Afghan soil. However, it is inarguable that the intelligence agencies in Afghanistan consistently failed to obtain and gather information of significant worth that could otherwise prove to be in the best interest of its national security. The NDS’s lack of effectiveness and its poor information gathering is due to undertrained intelligence personnel with limited access to advanced technology, which led to incorrect and ill-informed conclusions by policy makers and military commanders. The NDS still lacks experienced officers, and the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is unable to train sufficient personnel to correct this deficiency. This lack of untrained and inexperienced officers forced NDS to rely on old KGB-trained personnel.” 

This brings us back to this week. On August 26, twin suicide bombings struck the Kabul airport. 13 U.S. soldiers and dozens of others were killed. The death toll is now approaching 200. This is the greatest single-day death tally of U.S. soldiers in a decade and one of the worst terrorist attacks in years. The Taliban also said that 28 of their own people were killed in the explosions. They blamed the United States, saying it was a controlled demolition of U.S. “belongings.” There was in fact a controlled demolition of a CIA outpost at the airport, Eagle Base, two days ago. The Islamic State, the Islamic State-Khorasan Province (ISKP) specifically, has apparently claimed responsibility for the attacks. Interestingly, the Taliban has actually fought the Afghanistan-Pakistan-based ISKP since its inception. 

Perhaps you can see why I spent so much time today talking about Russian false flags. My first thought about the Kabul bombings was how, as in 1994 and 1999, this gives Russia the excuse to charge in as the savior as the Americans flee in defeat. I immediately thought of Russia’s recent military exercises along the Afghanistan border. I also considered Russia’s courting of the Taliban in recent years, their heavy influence in the nation, and their proclivity to respond to anything terror-related in heavy-handed ways that ultimately benefit themselves. 

We might ask, what do these Kabul bombings benefit the United States? Some of the darker forces in the CIA and other organizations revel in these types of events and would perhaps benefit from seeing U.S. forces go back into Afghanistan, though that seems unlikely to happen at this point barring some additional event of mammoth proportions. If U.S.-backed forces did carry out the attack, they didn’t do it to benefit the United States, but, rather, to benefit international forces. 

To be clear, Russia’s TASS has been playing up the angle of U.S.-backed ISIS fighters in Afghanistan. On July 20, TASS released an article titled “Russia has evidence of foreign contingent’s cooperation with IS in Afghanistan — diplomat.” It noted: 

“Russia has received information about cooperation between the US-led foreign contingent and the Islamic State (IS) terror group (outlawed in Russia) in Afghanistan, Russian Special Presidential Envoy for Afghanistan and Director of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s Second Asian Department Zamir Kabulov said. . . . 

““I am sure that there was such interaction, we started talking about it for good reason. We began to receive very specific information about such facts of cooperation,” he said. “We received it from local Afghans, including leaders at the local level, who did not understand why helicopters were supplying weapons and ammunition to the areas captured by IS units.” 

“According to Kabulov, this is not the only occurrence. He recalled a case when the Taliban group (outlawed in Russia) had blocked a large IS unit in northern Afghanistan. “Those IS fighters were transported by helicopters in an unknown direction, as it looked initially, but then to the area of Bagram Airbase, and then they disappeared somewhere. One can recall a lot of such incidents, and when you do that, the conclusion is unambiguous,” the diplomat added.” 

There’s no doubt that the West backs some ISIS units, just as there’s no doubt that others have Russian backing. But I would ask, cui bono? Does the United States benefit from supporting the Islamic State in Afghanistan? Traitors in our military and intelligence services absolutely do use U.S. resources for nefarious purposes. This may be another such instance. But who benefits? Not the United States. Russia benefits. Pakistan benefits. Local radicals benefit. 

The fact that some of the IS terrorists are backed by U.S. assets is subservient to the fact that these assets are not actually working for the United States, but instead are working as part of a worldwide network of deceit, terror, and death that involves not only the United States, but Israel, Russia, Iran, Pakistan, China, etc. This is the I’ve written about for years. And though it doesn’t work for the exclusive benefit of the United States or any one nation, its efforts are calculated to undermine the U.S. position while bolstering the communist world. 

An Indian news piece gave some enlightening details about ISKP that are relevant: 

“ISKP cadres have been carrying out attacks in Kabul with the Haqqani Network. Both outfits are closely linked with Pakistan’s notorious agency ISI. According to experts the ISI has been using the ISKP and the Haqqani network to keep a close watch on the activities of the Taliban leadership. 

“Aslam Farooqui was arrested by the Afghan security forces in April last year but when the Taliban took over Kabul on August 15, they released all the militants from Bagram prison including him. 

“While in the custody of Afghan security forces, Aslam Farooqi had confessed his ties with the ISI and that is why Pakistan was desperate for his extradition which was refused by the then Afghan government. 

“Now it is believed, the mastermind of the Kabul airport attack was Aslam Farooqi, the chief of ISKP. The Taliban claims that ISKP is its sworn enemy but interestingly the Taliban freed him from the Bagram prison.” 

The Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, is Pakistan’s intelligence network. According to this article, ISKP is working with Pakistan’s ISI. And the Taliban is assisting its operatives while also fighting them. The CIA has worked closely with the ISI in the past. So has China. So has Russia. Do you see the international nature of this terror network? 

Since its creation, Pakistan has been a target of Soviet infiltration with communists from India setting up shop there in 1948. Soviet Russia backed India in the 1971 India-Pakistan war and has accused Pakistan of fomenting Islamic terror in Chechnya! The irony is that the Soviet Union was actively committing terrorist acts in Pakistan, as reported in an old Washington Post piece: 

“Last July 14, a remote-control device triggered three car-bomb explosions in Karachi, killing 72 Pakistanis and injuring 260. Then, on September 19, a bomb exploded at a bus stop in Rawalpindi, killing five and injuring 19. 

“These brutal bombings provide just two examples of Moscow’s secret war of terror against Pakistan. The Soviet-directed campaign began in the early 1980s, in an effort to pressure Pakistan to stop providing a base of operations for the mujaheddin in Afghanistan, and it has escalated sharply during the last two years. It is a dirty war — waged mostly against innocent civilians — that has passed almost unnoticed outside Pakistan. Yet Pakistan accounted for an astonishing 45 percent of all those killed or wounded in terrorist bombing incidents last year, according to State Department statistics. 

“Why are the Soviets trying subvert Pakistan? “The Russians consider Pakistan responsible for their present predicament in Afghanistan,” explains one Pakistani intelligence official. Another official notes: “This terrorist onslaught is to agitate people that being friendly to the West is the danger.” . . . . 

“Moscow hid its role in the terror war by using Afghan cut-outs. The Pakistani report explains that the bombing campaign was “primarily planned and directed by the KGB and implemented through its subservient organizations in Afghanistan, WAD, the Afghan version of the KGB, and the Afghan Ministry of Tribes and Nationalities.” 

“The Afghan intelligence service WAD selected the individual agents for the unsavory task of planting bombs to kill Pakistani civilians, the report says. WAD (formerly known as KHAD) has about 27,000 employees and a budget of $160 million, according to the report. It also has about 1,500 Soviet advisors, according to Pakistani estimates, and it doesn’t launch any significant operations without Soviet permission. 

“High-level KGB/WAD teams “monitor, control and conduct the terrorist campaign against selected targets in Pakistan,” according to the Pakistani intelligence report. Twenty such teams went into Pakistan between March 1986 and February 1987, the report says. WAD’s agents tended to be Pakistanis, rather than Afghans. These Pakistanis receive their terrorism training either in Afghanistan or the Soviet Union. WAD assigns the targets and provides the explosives. 

“With over three million refugees in Pakistan, it is easy for the KGB or WAD to smuggle in agents and hard for the Pakistanis to detect them. “Trained agents are regularly infiltrated into the Afghan refugee camps to carry out subversive activities,” says the report. . . . 

“The Soviets have also used political subversion as part of their invisible war. Pakistan is a nation of tribes and the Soviets concentrated on two ethnic groups, the Pashtoons of the Northwest Frontier Province and the Baluchis, who inhabit an area called Baluchistan. The Soviets have attempted to revive the latent separatist feeling among these two groups. . . . 

“Meanwhile, as Gorbachev talks of peace in Afghanistan, pictures of mangled bodies from random bomb blasts in Karachi and Rawalpindi are a reminder of Moscow’s efforts to force Pakistan into submission. For any Pakistanis who didn’t understand Soviet intentions, the KGB served notice on Dec. 26, 1987 — the anniversary date of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan — when a bomb exploded in the heart of Islamabad. One senior Pakistani intelligence official explains the message: “If we don’t behave, this is what’s going to happen.”” 

This is why history is so important. It teaches us patterns of conduct that we can use to analyze current events. The same tactics and events we see playing out today in Afghanistan have happened before. The Soviet script was being used then and, I believe, it’s being used now by Russia and her allies – only with a different target. 

Russia and Pakistan are much closer today than in the 1980s. But it was only partially because of Soviet-inspired bombings. Perhaps through China’s instrumentality, Pakistan has been finally swayed into the communist camp. I haven’t focused much on China today, but communist China should always be in your mind. China has an important naval base in Pakistan and has invested billions in the country. Young Pakistanis are learning Mandarin. Pakistan is a key player in China’s Belt and Road Initiative. An Atlantic article reports: 

“As part of an infrastructure development plan inked with Pakistan in 2013, China has pledged $60 billion to build what’s known as the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC)—a network of roads, pipelines, power plants, industrial parks, and a port along the Arabian sea. Intended to increase regional connectivity and trade between the two countries, CPEC is part of Beijing’s trillion-dollar Belt & Road Initiative (BRI). BRI aims to create land and maritime trade routes integrating 70-odd countries in Asia, Africa, and Europe, including politically turbulent states like Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Iraq. . . . 

“In Pakistan, CPEC has been built upon historically high levels of partnership between the two nations. Both Pakistani and Chinese officials have characterized Sino-Pakistan ties as an “all-weather friendship” that’s “higher than the Himalayas, deeper than the ocean, and sweeter than honey.” In 2014, a Pew Research Center survey found that nearly 80 percent of Pakistani respondents had a favorable view of China—the highest public opinion rating of China in the world. While cultural and linguistic exchange have not traditionally been a centerpiece of the relationship, many young Pakistanis are now increasingly looking toward China for education and employment, necessitating learning Mandarin.” 

Pakistan receives weapons, money, and infrastructure from China. China is solving the major unemployment problem in the country. Pakistan is riding China’s coattails to prominence. Of course Pakistan is in love with China! Birds of a feather, after all. And, let’s be honest, does it really matter which communist regime pulls Pakistan into its orbit? No. The point is that Pakistan is not on the U.S. team and Pakistan is a major supporter of both the Taliban and Islamist jihadis in Afghanistan, such as ISKP which just committed acts of terror in Kabul. It’s amazing how interconnected these third-world terror groups really are – and how they all have ties to communist nations. 

It’s massively convenient that a supposedly avowed enemy of the “peaceful” and “sane” Taliban committed a horrific terrorist attack when the United States was days away from departure. Russia is ramping up its war drills in the region, is warning of “Islamic extremism,” has a military presence in Kabul that is now conducting “humanitarian” work, and is shielding the Taliban from Western criticism. We will see what happens as more information rolls in, but from where I sit, I suspect the Kabul bombings were not organic ISIS bombings, but part of the larger proxy war in Central Asia that likely has Russian or Russian allies’ fingerprints all over it. 

As I finish writing this on Sunday morning, August 29, more attacks are rocking Kabul. Do you recognize in these attacks a similar pattern to the 1994 and 1999 attacks in Russia? I do. It’s just too convenient and coincidental. At any rate, Russia will be there to “mediate” with the Taliban and make sure things go the way it wants them to and the United States will retreat home with its tail between its legs. And if Russia’s power isn’t strong enough, for whatever reason, to reach its strategic objectives, it has communist China and Pakistan to back up its efforts. As we acknowledge that Afghanistan is formally a lost cause for the West, we’re forced to ask ourselves: Cui bono?

Zack Strong
August 30, 2021

The Coming Assassination False Flag

Imagine this scenario: Faced with a Joe Biden whose brain is obviously melting and who is losing even the sympathy of those who now regret voting for him, and running up against rising opposition to their tyrannical schemes, the world Elite decide to assassinate the U.S. president, turning him into a martyr and a providing a pretext for greater power grabs, war, or conquest expeditions designed to further their New World Order.

Around the time of the installation of the fraudulent puppet-in-chief Joe Biden following the election swindle operation committed by numerous hostile foreign powers, including Red China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and others, Alex Jones of Infowars fame said that we’ve entered “the era of the false flag.” He might as well have been stating that the sky is blue. It’s obvious to students of history that false-flag attacks, assassinations, bombings, poisonings, etc., have always been used by conspiring entities to start wars, knock out political opposition, and consolidate power.

The world Elite were forced to show their hand in 2020. They saw that the American People were waking up to their schemes. They saw that Americans, led by their extraordinarily popular president, were beginning to openly identify socialism as the great enemy of mankind. They saw America becoming more energy independent, lifting itself slowly out of economic ruin, and becoming more nationalistic.

As a result, they launched their “Great Reset” of humanity designed to halt America’s advance, dethrone their most popular national leader in decades and install a compliant puppet in his place, induce fear and confusion in the world population, and usher in a Marxist one-world order. The trigger was COVID-19. From the very beginning, I called this false-flag virus attack “one of the largest psyops in recent years” and “media-induced mass hysteria.” Because of the Coronahoax and the resulting election swindle carried on under cover of unnecessary lockdowns, the Elite indeed dethroned America’s real president, Donald Trump, and brought forward the weakest, most doddering, most intellectually defective individual ever to hold high office in America.

The Elite successfully put their puppet in the White House on January 20th, yet they had to go to such great lengths, commit such extensive fraud, tell so many blatantly obvious lies, and trample on so many rights to do it, that they’ve woken up a huge segment of the population. People who one year ago were comfortably asleep are now wide awake and watching. People who before would’ve never owned a gun now own numerous. People who felt they could remain in socialist-controlled zones in the United States and exist without problems have now relocated to saner parts of the nation like Idaho, Montana, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Texas, where the spirit of patriotism still lives. People who were content to allow their children to go to public school are now homeschooling and training their children in moral principles and real Americanism. People who loved the censorship-loving platforms like Facebook and Twitter are now joining or creating alternatives like Gab, MeWe, and USA.life. People who before would’ve called me a “conspiracy theorist” are now repeating the same messages, are convinced elections are rigged, understand that the media lies, know that science now serves a political agenda, and are standing staunchly against the experimental gene-editing Coronavirus vaccine.

Furthermore, states and local communities have begun exercising their right to reject and deny federal overreach. Florida famously outlawed vaccine passports. Several states such as Montana and Oklahoma have passed abortion laws heavily restricting abortion. Towns such as Gooding, Idaho have declared themselves gun safe zones. People are furious and many won’t tolerate being pushed around any longer. Thus, the Elite find themselves in a bit of a conundrum. They’ve seized power again, but the peasants are gathering with their pitchforks. Historically, when kings and rulers have felt threatened by their peoples, they’ve lashed out and have attempted to quell them by force and intimidation. I see them using the same tactic this time.

Instead of allowing Biden’s defective brain to continue malfunctioning on the world stage for all to see, or allowing him to die an ignominious death of natural causes after the media went to such great lengths to convince everyone he was as healthy as a horse, the powers-that-be might find it more useful to off him in a way that would allow them to seize even more power and to silence dissenters.

Think about it, the string-pullers have murdered people with two separate bioweapons – Coronavirus and the even worse vaccine that has claimed many thousands of lives and inflicted tens of thousands of horrific casualties including paralysis, miscarriages, and birth defects; have induced thousands to commit suicide due to forced isolation; have caused millions to be laid off or lose their businesses; have squeezed the global economy while prices have skyrocketed due to inflation and insane spending; and they’ve stolen Freedom from entire nations in such a recklessly obvious manner. Do you really think they care whether they have to take out a man who has become such a laughingstock and a liability and who’s now serving as a catalyst to unite dissenters?

It’s becoming glaringly obvious to all that Joe Biden is cognitively impaired. From recently stating he’s been president for 15 months to threatening to run over a man with his vehicle to forgetting his defense secretary’s name to saying on a hot mic that he’s not even sure what he’s signing in all those Oval Office photo ops, everyone can see that he’s clueless, unhinged, and unfit for office. I warned last August:

“Joe Biden is unfit for the presidency. That is not up for debate. Biden has no honor, class, or civility. More importantly, he has no coherence and is in obvious mental and physical decline. He must not be permitted to weasel his way into office. He must not be allowed to steal four years from the American People. He must not be allowed to become a “placeholder” for an even more radical individual waiting in the wings. Biden admitted that he is a “transition candidate to bring the Mayor Petes of the world into this administration.””

Now, with the whole world snickering about Biden’s free fall into dementia, the election swindle unraveling quickly, and states rebelling against federal overreach, the Elite know they’ll need to act soon to mitigate the damages. How will they do it? There are several plausible scenarios I want to briefly mention.

Perhaps the world Elite will decide to give the puppet-in-chief a fatal dose of Coronavirus and then make him the patron saint of vaccination voodoo. Imagine that – the media would use Biden’s memory as a truncheon to bludgeon dissenters and anti-vaxxers into submission. They’d forever use Biden’s demise to discredit those of us who call the “pandemic” a hoax, as if feelings trump facts.

Or perhaps the ruthless Elite will decide that the Coronahoax is out of the bag and that something more drastic is in order to halt opposition, distract those peasants with their pitchforks forming outside the gate, and create a pretext for truly consolidating world power. The thing that could bring this about is an assassination of the president. Please note that I’m not calling for this. I think, for the reasons I’m about to outline, that an assassination would plunge us into greater chaos and speed up the destruction of our Republic.

In the wake of the 9/11 false-flag attack, the United States, in her “righteous” anger, with the full support of Vladimir Putin, declared a “War on Terror.” Who would oppose such a war? After all, 3,000 of our people were slaughtered in a horrific way on live TV by Arab “terrorists.” So, with so-called patriotism numbing people’s consciences, we invaded Afghanistan. Then we invaded Iraq. Then we went after other nations – Libya, Syria, etc.

Now imagine if a “terrorist’s” bomb brought down Air Force One or took out the president during his State of the Union address. Imagine if, whether true or not, the bombing was blamed on Iran – a nation which has vowed eventual revenge for the assassination of General Soleimani. If our nation’s indignation after 9/11 was high, what couldn’t we do if our leader was eliminated on live TV?! Our military-industrial complex would immediately gear up for war. Our media would beat the war drums. Our politicians would clamor for vengeance. Israel would relish and cry for a U.S.-led attack on Iran. And so a regional war could begin in the Middle East dwarfing that in Iraq.

Alternatively, if a bomb or bullet ended Biden’s career, think of the response if it was determined, or alleged, that the perpetrator was a “right-wing extremist” group or some embittered Trump supporters. If the January 6 false-flag Capitol “siege” was considered an attempted coup, an assassination would be considered outright rebellion. The military could be mobilized against “extremist” groups like Oath Keepers or against “seditious” individuals like Chuck Baldwin in Montana or Alex Jones in Texas. Congress could likely be prevailed upon, in a time of turmoil like this, to ram sweeping gun control “laws” down our throats, just like Congress foisted the dastardly Patriot Act upon us after 9/11. Would anything lead to a civil war faster than gun confiscation after the chaos of an assassination?

Furthermore, consider what might happen if Kamala Harris was also eliminated in a mass attack. If our leadership was decapitated in one fell swoop, who would take over? Something in me doubts whether the powers-that-be would ever permit Kamala Harris, let alone crazy Nancy Pelosi, from assuming office. I doubt, in the wake of a terrible tragedy like an assassination in such a time as we now live, that the normal presidential line of succession would be followed. As I wrote last August, I think someone even more radical is being prepared to take over and use the machinery of state to clamp down on dissenters and snuff our our Freedom.

All of this is hypothetical, but take it seriously. I don’t see Joe Biden surviving much longer. He could potentially drop dead before the end of the year. He’s that sick. But let’s say he survives until 2022. That’s an election year. What better way to either cancel or create a pretext to swindle these important elections than a sudden change in the presidency? We’re certainly in the “era of the false flag.”

Please, pray for the good remnant left in this nation. That remnant is in the tens of millions. America is still the greatest nation on earth. Period. If you don’t believe it, try living abroad sometime as I have. Never take your blessings as an America for granted. We’re facing civil war and total oppression. I outlined what I see coming for our special land in a previous article. It’s not pretty. And I sincerely believe that the world communist Elite, who hate American and consider us the “main enemy” of their one-world schemes, will attempt – likely through some sort of false-flag attack – to overthrow the Biden administration and place a stronger radical on the throne. Watch carefully, prepare your family, and brace for the coming impact.

June 9, 2021

Zack Strong

A Deception that Will Live in Infamy

The deadly attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941 was a quintessential false-flag event known about ahead of time and permitted to unfold by the evil Establishment that rules in Washington, D.C. Despite the lies of court historians and biased talking heads on the radio, FDR absolutely did have foreknowledge of the Japanese attack on our military men in Hawaii and allowed it to happen to fulfill his sick desire to thrust our nation into a war that our People did not want to be involved in. This is conspiracy fact, not conspiracy theory. This article will not dive too deeply into the mass of material proving foreknowledge, though I will reference the basics and refer you to some excellent sources. I will, rather, focus on two of the reasons the Japanese felt they needed to fight back against U.S. aggression in order to safeguard their nation.

The late Robert B. Stinnett wrote in his foundational book Day of Deceit: The Truth about FDR and Pearl Harbor that not only did President Franklin D. Roosevelt have foreknowledge of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, but he was part of a small group who initiated an 8-point plan to provoke war with Japan. Stinnett outlined the plan in great detail, including this overview:

“Lieutenant Commander McCollum’s five-page memorandum of October 1940 (hereafter referred to as the eight-action memo) pull forward a startling plan—a plan intended to engineer a situation that would mobilize a reluctant America into joining Britain’s struggle against the German armed forces then overrunning Europe. Its eight actions called for virtually inciting a Japanese attack on American ground, air, and naval forces in Hawaii, as well as on British and Dutch colonial outposts in the Pacific region.

“Opinion polls in the summer of 1940 indicated that a majority of Americans did not want the country involved in Europe’s wars. Yet FDR’s military and Stale Department leaders agreed that a victorious Nazi Germany would threaten the national security of the United States. They fell that Americans needed a call to action.

“McCollum would be an essential part of this plan. His code name was F-2. He oversaw the routing of communications intelligence to FDR from early 1940 to December 7, 1941, and provided the President with intelligence reports on Japanese military and diplomatic strategy. Every intercepted and decoded Japanese military and diplomatic report destined for the White House went through the Far East Asia section of ONI, which he oversaw. The section served as a clearinghouse for all categories of intelligence reports, not only on Japan but on all the other nations of eastern Asia.

“Each report prepared by McCollum for the President was based on radio intercepts gathered and decoded by a worldwide network of American military cryptographers and radio intercept operators. McCollum’s office was an element of Station US. a secret American cryptographic center located at the main naval headquarters at 18th Street and Constitution Avenue N.W. about four blocks from the White House.

“Few people in America’s government or military knew as much about Japan’s activities and intentions as Lieutenant Commander Arthur H. McCollum. He felt that war with Japan was inevitable and that the United States should provoke it at a time which suited US interests. In his October 1940 memorandum McCollum advocated eight actions that he predicted would lead to a Japanese attack on the United States:

“A. Make an arrangement with Britain for the use of British bases in the Pacific, particularly Singapore.

B. Make an arrangement with Holland for the use of base facilities and acquisition of supplies in the Dutch East Indies [now Indonesia].

C. Give all possible aid to the Chinese government of Chiang Kai-shek.

D. Send a division of long-range heavy cruisers to the Orient, Philippines, or Singapore.

E. Send two divisions of submarines to the Orient.

F. Keep the main strength of the US Fleet, now in the Pacific, in the vicinity of the Hawaiian Islands.

G. Insist that the Dutch refuse to grant Japanese demands for undue economic concessions, particularly oil.

H. Completely embargo all trade with Japan, in collaboration with a similar embargo imposed by the British Empire” (Robert B. Stinnett, Day of Deceit: The Truth about FDR and Pearl Harbor, 7-8).

Look carefully at these recommendations and think of the audacity – the pure evil – of concocting such a plan; a plan that would deliberately drag tens of millions of people to the hell of war. Each move was calculated to hem in the Japanese in the Pacific, hurt the Japanese economy, isolate Japan from her allies and resources, aid Japan’s enemies at a time of war (which itself is a violation of international law and an act of war), and place American servicemen directly in harm’s way as a sort of bait or sacrifice.

Of point four of FDR’s perverse plan, Stinnett wrote:

“Roosevelt’s “fingerprints” can be found on each of McCollum’s proposals. One of the most shocking was Action D, the deliberate deployment of American warships within or adjacent to the territorial waters of Japan.11 During secret White House meetings, Roosevelt personally took charge of Action D. He called the provocations “pop-up” cruises. “I just want them to keep popping up here and there and keep the Japs guessing. I don’t mind losing one or two cruisers, but do not take a chance on losing five or six.” Admiral Husband Kimmel, the Pacific Fleet commander, objected to the pop-up cruises, saying: “It is ill-advised and will result in war if we make this move.” . . . .

“From March through July 1941, White House records show that FDR ignored international law and dispatched naval task groups into Japanese waters on three such pop-up cruises. . . .

“Action D was very risky and could have resulted in a loss of American lives approaching that of Pearl Harbor. In the end, however, no shots were fired during the cruises. It would take not just one, but all eight of McCollum’s proposals to accomplish that” (Stinnett, Day of Deceit, 9-10).

To read all about FDR’s duplicity in deliberately and willfully provoking Japan in such a way as to bring an attack on American military men, read Day of Deceit by Robert Stinnett. Additionally, read Operation Snow: How a Soviet Mole in FDR’s White House Triggered Pearl Harbor by John Koster. Also, read James Perloff’s superb research in his “Pearl Harbor: Roosevelt’s 9/11.” Finally, see these links for additional information to explore: Link 1, Link 2, Link 3, Link 4, Link 5, Link 6.

I now cover two of the reasons the Japanese themselves gave for opposing, and ultimately attacking, the United States: 1) U.S. economic warfare against Japan; and 2) the imminent threat of communism.

U.S. Economic Warfare Against Japan

In his book Bankrupting the Enemy: The U.S. Financial Siege of Japan Before Pearl Harbor, author Edward S. Miller presented evidence leading the careful reader to a straightforward thesis: The United States compelled Japan to war through economic strangulation. Miller began his book by contextualizing Japan’s decision to go to war:

“The judgment of history is that Japan attacked Pearl Harbor and launched the Pacific War to thwart American resistance to its designs of imperial conquest in East Asia. U.S. opposition included diplomatic pressure, military preparations, and, above all, economic sanctions. Historians have emphasized the de facto embargo of oil as the most deadly sanction because Japan’s navy and army depended on U.S. exports of fuel, a situation the military leaders effectively in control of Japanese policy perceived as an intolerable weakness. But the U.S. action of 26 July 1941 was not just a trade embargo. It was an emasculation of Japan’s laboriously accumulated international money reserves, imposed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt by invoking an obscure 1917 law, the Trading with the Enemy Act.

“I propose that the most devastating American action against Japan was the financial freeze. Money mattered. In 1941 war had congealed the financial systems of other great powers, rendering their currencies inconvertible. Abroad, the yen itself was illiquid, that is, not acceptable for payments outside the Japanese Empire. The United States stood in the extraordinary position of controlling nearly all the world’s negotiable money resources. It applied its extraordinary power to “bankrupt” Japan.

“Bankruptcy is a condition imposed by a court of law to compel settlement of debts. A bankrupt person of company that is judged insolvent lacks sufficient assets to pay. A sovereign nation, however, is not subject to a court’s jurisdiction, and in any case, on 25 July 1941, Japan held ample liquid assets – dollars in U.S. banks and gold bars in Tokyo vaults – to purchase vital imports and service its relatively small international debts. Japan was not insolvent, then or later. Only 26 July, however, a stroke of the pen rendered it illiquid. The freeze isolated Japan economically from the outside world, voiding its monetary assets, both sums on hand or obtainable in the future. Consent to buy strategic good in the United States, or in any country that exported for dollars, was withheld by the United States in conjunction with parallel freezes by the British and Dutch empires. Japan’s commercial sphere shriveled to the “yen bloc” of its colonies and conquered regions in East Asia. . . .

““Bankrupt” and “impoverished” are terms often used interchangeably. Japan’s international illiquidity would, beyond doubt, have impoverished the nation within a couple of years. The U.S. freeze presented Japan with three choices: suffer economic impoverishment, accede to American demands to yield its territorial conquests, or go to war against the United States and its allies” (Miller, Bankrupting the Enemy, 1-2).

personal.psu.edu.

This information is not new. Every historian admits these basic facts. We know that FDR intentionally crippled Japan’s economy. We know FDR slapped Japan with costly sanctions. We know FDR cut off Japan from its money supply and from international trade. We know that FDR applied pressure on Asian nations to not do business with Japan. What court historians taken for granted, however, is the reason FDR took these provocative steps. They couch it as a last-ditch effort to stop Japan’s murderous aggression. In reality, these policies purposefully provoked war between nations whose peoples had no bone to pick with each other in order to meet sinister ends that will be noted later.

Japanese writers at the time pointed to the intolerable political and economic pressure applied on Japan by the United States and Britain as prominent reasons why the war eventually happened. Along with relentless economic warfare, the United States leveled endless propaganda against the Empire of the Rising Sun – propaganda which is mindlessly repeated by politicians, school teachers, the media, Hollywood, and Establishment historians even today.

In the early 20th Century, Japan was far and away the most technologically, economically, and militarily advanced Asian nation. They projected a vision of an independent Asia that looked beyond traditional racial and ethnic hostilities and promoted the greater good of the entire region. They created the aptly-named Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere to promote their vision of an Asia free from Western intervention and free from economic strangulation. In short, they desired a unified Asian brotherhood of economically and politically independent nations.

This course of action naturally led Japan into the arms of Hitler’s Germany which promoted a similar, albeit European version, of the same goal. The two nations shared a very similar ideological outlook. They believed in nationalism, self-determination, and the end of the internationalist Establishment’s chokehold on world affairs and the global economy. They also believed that their position of power in their regions – each being the most advanced nation in their individual spheres – gave them the responsibility to led out in overthrowing those forces which oppressed them and in establishing regional peace and stability.

To strengthen their respective efforts, Germany, Japan, and Italy concluded the Tripartite Pact on September 27, 1940. This followed their signing of the Anti-Comintern Pact, which will be discussed in the next section. The Japanese writer Nobumasa Suyetsugu explained the goal of the Tripartite Pact and why the West’s objections to it were totally unfounded. In November 1940, he wrote:

“[T]he Japanese-German-Italian pact is not directed against any other particular Power, nor is it to be construed in any way as having been concluded for the purpose of waging war against any one particular Power. . . .

“Then what has brought about this agreement? It is the outcome of mutual ideological antagonism between those Powers which seeks to maintain the old political, economic and other structures and those which are dissatisfied with the injustice of the old order and are determined to bring about a fundamental reform in the existing international and national structures. Recent intensification of this antagonism has been so great that it finally lead to the conclusion of the treaty in question as nothing but a natural outcome. The Powers upholding the old order virtually formed a league of their own, and, in order to preserve what they have, they kept opposing the rightful claims of the nations hitherto treated unfairly in international affairs. Consistent efforts were made to bring political and economic pressure to bear upon the latter countries. Finding their positions intolerable under the series of pressures, the reformist Powers felt that the only way of survival and future growth for them was in a firm combination on the basis of their ideological similarities. What actually has developed into the three Power pact, therefore, is the result of forced circumstances and was a historical necessity. . . .

“As has been mentioned, the special feature of the treaty is its ideological aspect . . . Heretofore, alliances and treaties have been based chiefly on the interests of the participants. When those interests faded the agreements were conveniently forgotten or openly discarded. Present treaty, of course, embodies the interests of the three signatories, but its fundamental spirit lies in the unity of thought and ideology. Therefore, it may be applied in complete disregard of the material interests of the participating parties as the occasion demands. Its overwhelming power and influence lie in the very fact that it was not signed for temporary gains or effects, but was conceived rather with a definite conception of human life and of the world and how men and nations should live therein . . . It is a concrete expression of the irrepressible demands inherent in the peoples of the three countries. . . .

“If the Japanese-German-Italian combination harboured any intention to bring the entire world under its control after the fashion of the Anglo-American Powers, which established and now are trying to maintain financial hegemony over the world, the mutual antagonism between the two groups inevitably would become stronger, regardless of the peaceful attitude of the former. That would mean merely replacing one kind of world hegemony for another. Happily, however, the objective of the tripartite pact, with its ideological origin, is not so aggressive as to attempt to bring the world within its grasp. It opposes emulating the Faults of the old order. The Pact has as its chief objective the establishment of the most natural geographic, economic and racial spheres and the liberation of the peoples of these respective regions from the shackles of controlling influences which heretofore have preyed on them from the outside. One cannot but be struck by the similarity between the present treaty and the position of the United States, which is doing its utmost to create solidarity among the nations of the American continents on the basis of Pan-Americanism and the Monroe Doctrine, although there is an admitted difference in the fundamental ideas. No one openly attacks the Monroe Doctrine as such, and it follows logically that there is no reason why the aims of the tripartite agreement should be made the butt of adverse criticism. As the pact envisions the establishment of a sphere of common prosperity in Greater East Asia, as well as the establishment of a new order in Europe under Germany and Italy, it would be well for its critics to postpone their unwarranted attacks until after they have exhausted their verbal ammunition against the Monroe Doctrine, lest their arguments sound hollow with inconsistency.

“It is regrettable that the world at present is wholly lacking in stability. War is the general order of things and peace is merely an ideal. Even in time of peace, there is hardly any sense of security among mankind and most nations prepare feverishly for the next war. Such conditions are suicidal for humanity. It would be good and well if peace and well-being could be secured for mankind. This can never be, however, until the old order of politics, entrenched as it is in financial control of the world and directed solely toward the continuation of such control, has been eradicated, because it constitutes the fundamental cause of world unrest. To do away with this old structure and restore world peace on a new and lasting foundation is the ultimate purpose of the three Power pact.

“Let us now consider the situation in Greater East Asia, whose people comprise more than half of the total world population. The Western plutocracies have forced their influence upon them and have caused them to suffer through the exercise of financial control. Under such conditions there never can be stability in East Asia. Without stability in East Asia, there can be no security for Asia at large and, consequently, the world in general cannot become tranquil . . . Properly speaking, territorial sovereignty should belong to the people who have inhabited the land for a long time. Seeds of trouble are sown when this sovereignty is usurped by outsiders . . . Unless these causes of trouble are removed, the chaotic condition of the world can never be remedied. . . .

“The Greater East Asia sphere of common prosperity, whose establishment we earnestly espouse, means nothing more than the restoration of the lands, peoples and sovereignties inherent to East Asia to their original and therefore natural status . . . Unfortunately, until recently its fulfilment has been prevented by various political, economic and diplomatic factors. But with the world turning toward an epochal change, the long pent-up demand has taken a practical turn. It is the role of the Japanese-German-Italian Treaty to mould and give definite shape to the aspirations of these peoples of East Asia for their satisfaction” (Nobamasu Suyetsugu, “The Three Power Pact,” in Joshua Blakeney, ed., Japan Bites Back: Documents Contextualizing Pearl Harbor, 216-223).

Please note that the Japanese viewed – mostly correctly, I might add – that the West’s economic interventionism in Asia had shackled the native nations. This was particularly true in China where Britain and the United States had launched unnecessary and highly immoral wars to force the Chinese regime to capitulate to their economic demands. Other nations had similarly caved to Western pressure and existed as mere vassal states at the start of the Second World War.

Additionally, Japan blasted the blatant distortions and lies about the purposes of their treaties with Germany. Japan, like Germany, sought to promote regional independence from internationalist forces – bankers, corporations, the Soviets, etc. They wanted Asia for Asians without outside interference, just as Germany wanted Europe for Europeans without foreign interference. Had the West – and the United States in particular – not foisted itself upon Asia and tried to check Japan’s Pan-Asianist efforts, it may have never felt the necessity of joining forces with Germany for survival.

As it turns out, FDR wanted Japan and Germany linked so that by initiating war against Japan, an excuse might be found to join the war against Germany which had scrupulously avoided and tolerated FDR’s provocations in order to avoid such a devastating conflict. This is called the “back door to war” strategy and has been copiously documented, despite Establishment cries of “false!” One of those to document FDR’s brazen path to world war was historian Charles C. Tansill who wrote Back Door to War: The Roosevelt Foreign Policy, 1933-1941. I leave you to do your own research and continue with the Japanese perspective on these tragic events.

In a lengthy article titled “Genesis of the Pacific War,” a Japanese writer confirmed the nature and aim of the Tripartite Pact with Germany and Italy:

“[B]y the terms of Article III of which the three Powers undertook to “assist one another with all political, economic and military means, if one of the High Contracting Parties should be attacked by a Power not at present involved in the European war or in the Sino-Japanese conflict.” From this stipulation, one can clearly see that the three Powers did not wish to have any third Power intervene either in the European war or in the China affair. The then Foreign Minister Yosuke Matsuoka referring to the Tripartite Axis Pact said that “Japan does not challenge any country.” The Foreign Office spokesman affirmed: “It is a pact to end wars, not to start them.” Regarding the allegation of the United States that the Tripartite Pact was solely directed against it, Yosuke Matsuoka in his statement of October 10, 1940, made clear its implications, so far as Japan was concerned, in the following words:

““Japan wishes earnestly to bring about an all-around peace in China at the earliest possible date. No other people have been more eager than the Japanese to see peace restored between Japan and China. As a matter of fact Japan has been and is actually bending every effort to that end. The conclusion of this pact with Germany and Italy is in a way another attempt to achieve the same end . . . I might add that the Tripartite Pact has not been entered into with the intention of directing it “against” the United States, but it is, I should say, directed, if at all, “for” the United States. To state frankly, the parties to the pact wish earnestly that such a powerful nation as the United States in particular and all other nations at present remaining neutral will not be involved in the European war, or come by any chance into conflict with Japan because of the China affair or otherwise. Such an eventuality, with all the possibility of bringing an awful catastrophe upon humanity, is enough to make one shudder if one stops to imagine the consequences. In short, the pact is a pact of peace.”

“President Roosevelt, however, in his fireside chat on December 29, 1940, assailed the Tripartite Pact in scathing terms. He persisted that “the three totalitarian Powers have, by the pact of September 27, 1940, joined together in the threat that if the United States interfered with or blocked their expansion programme, a programme aimed at world control, they will united in military action against the United States”” (“Genesis of the Pacific War,” in Joshua Blakeney, ed., Japan Bites Back, 310-312).

Truly, the Tripartite Pact would have proved a benefit to the United States had we remained neutral. The Axis powers would have obliterated the Soviet Union, prevented China from turning communist, and secured both Europe and Asia as safe zones outside the control of international bankers and fraudsters. As it turns out, our leaders were part of the internationalist cabal and chose a radically different course. The author listed just a few of FDR’s provocations and efforts to undermine genuine stability and peace in Asia:

“On November 30, 1940, Wang Ching-wei and General Nobuyuki Abe, Japanese special envoy to Nanking, signed a treaty of basic relations between China and Japan. Four documents initialled, giving Japan the right to station troops in North China and Inner Mongolia “for defence against Communist activities” and naval units in China, besides making it obligatory on Japan to co-operate with China in the development of China’s resources, especially minerals “required for national defence.” In a joint declaration issued by Nanking, Tokyo, and Hsinking, Wang Ching-wei recognized the independence of Manchoukuo; Japan agreed to surrender its extra-territorial rights, as well as its concessions in China in consideration of China opening its territory to the domicile and business of Japanese subjects; China undertook to pay compensation for “damages to the rights and interests” of Japanese subjects caused by the hostilities; and Japan undertook to withdraw all its troops from China, except those in North China and Inner Mongolia, within two years from the date when general peace was restored and a state of war had ceased to exist. President Roosevelt, in order to advertize that this Sino-Japanese Basic Treaty could not prove a deterrent to the intervention of the United States in the affairs of East Asia, granted a new loan of $100,000,000 to Chiang Kai-shek. . . .

“The United States Government, in addition to intensifying its assistance to Chiang Kai-shek against Japan and embargoing the export of raw materials to Japan, started the building of a “two-ocean” Navy. . . .

“Evidently President Roosevelt believed that if the supply of oil to Japan were cut off the war was inevitable. And two days afterwards, on July 26, 1941, he issued an order “freezing” all Japanese assets in the United States, thus stopping all trade relations with Japan, including the sale of oil. The Army Department announced on the same day that all troops under the Hawaiian Command had been ordered to be placed “on a training and precautionary alert status” at once. It was also announced that the President had created a new Army Command known as the U.S. Army Forces in the Far East. It would include 75,000 American troops and about 180,000 Filipino armed forces. Obviously President Roosevelt decided in favour of a war with Japan at the time when he issued the freezing order . . . Concurrently with the freezing of Japanese assets in America, the British Empire and the Dutch administration in Batavia took similar actions against Japan in their respective zones. Thus eighty per cent. of the export and import trade of this country was brought to a standstill at a moment’s notice . . . It needs no amplification to assert that this excessive Anglo-American move virtually amounts to the strangulation of the whole Japanese nation” (Blakeney, ed., Japan Bites Back, 312-314, 322-323).

Largely because of these provocations and acts of economic sabotage, Japan lashed out against America, turning FDR’s political-economic war into a shooting war. Pursuant to the Tripartite Pact, Hitler declared war against the United States on December 11. In his remarkable speech, Hitler stated:

“I cannot be insulted by Roosevelt for I consider him mad just as Wilson was. I don’t need to mention what this man has done for years in the same way against Japan. First he incites war then falsifies the causes, then odiously wraps himself in a cloak of Christian hypocrisy and slowly but surely leads mankind to war, not without calling God to witness the honesty of his attack – in the approved manner of an old Freemason. I think you have all found it a relief that now, at last, one State has been the first to take the step of protest against his historically unique and shame less ill-treatment of truth, and of right – which protest this man has desired and about which he cannot complain. The fact that the Japanese Government, which has been negotiating for years with this man, has at last become tired of being mocked by him in such an unworthy way, fills us all, the German people, and think, all other decent people in the world, with deep satisfaction. . . .

“As a consequence of the further extension of President Roosevelt’s policy, which is aimed at unrestricted world domination and dictatorship the U.S.A. together with England have not hesitated from using any means to dispute the rights of the German, Italian and Japanese nations to the basis of their natural existence. The Governments of the U.S.A. and of England have therefore resisted, not only now but also for all time, every just understanding meant to bring about a better New Order in the world. Since the beginning of the war the American President, Roosevelt, has been guilty of a series of the worst crimes against international law; illegal seizure of ships and other property of German and Italian nationals were coupled with the threat to, and looting of, those who were deprived of their liberty by being interned. Roosevelt’s ever increasing attacks finally went so far that he ordered the American Navy to attack everywhere ships under the German and Italian flags, and to sink them – this in gross violation of international law. American ministers boasted of having destroyed German submarines in this criminal way. German and Italian merchantships were attacked by American cruisers, captured and their crews imprisoned. With no attempt at an official denial there has now been revealed in America President Roosevelt’s plan by which, at the latest in 1943, Germany and Italy were to be attacked in Europe by military means. In this way the sincere efforts of Germany and Italy to prevent an extension of the war and to maintain relations with the U.S.A. in spite of the unbearable provocations which have been carried on for years by President Roosevelt, have been frustrated. Germany and Italy have been finally compelled, in view of this, and in loyalty to the Tri-Partite act, to carry on the struggle against the U.S.A. and England jointly and side by side with Japan for the defense and thus for the maintenance of the liberty and independence of their nations and empires.”

To recap, one of the two major reasons why the Japanese felt compelled to strike the United States at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, was to end the U.S. stranglehold on Japan’s economy and resources. FDR deliberately undercut Japan’s resources – most importantly, steel and oil – and cut off Japan from her international monetary assets. These acts of economic warfare compelled Japan to either submit to internationalist political demands, allow their nation to be bankrupted and economically impoverished, or fight for a chance of survival. They chose, as any respectable nation would, to fight rather than slavishly submit to a hostile foreign power.

The Threat of Communism

I’ve covered the communist origins of World War II in my various writings and podcasts for years, such as in chapter eleven of my book A Century of Red, in my article “Victory Day – For Whom?” and in my Liberty Wolf podcast episode titled “Who Really Started World War II?” The Reds and their Western allies on Wall Street, in banking, and in government from London to Washington, prodded and provoked and manipulated events in Europe, Asia, and America until they sparked a global conflagration that furthered their agenda of world revolution. After overthrowing the Russian government, this international cabal used the Soviet Union – and the resources that poured into it from Western sympathizers and co-conspirators in the “capitalist” world – as a base of operations. From this base, they launched coups, wars, and uprisings in Spain, Hungary, Germany, Mexico, China, and beyond. It is the Soviet thrust into China that particularly concerns us today.

In his September 1938 article “Japan’s Continental Policy,” Katsuji Inahara explained that Japan was deeply worried about the encroachments of communism into China and the Asian mainland. It was, he said, their #1 foreign policy concern. Peace and stability on the mainland – especially with China and Russia – was paramount to the Japanese leaders and strategists. He thus reasoned:

“Many factors determine a nation’s foreign policy, of which the most fundamental is probably its geographical position. . . .

“. . . it should be easy to understand from Japan’s proximity to the mainland of Asia why she is so vitally interested in what takes place there. Willingly or not, she is bound to see to it that no strong foreign Power should dominate the mainland in order to ensure her own peace, or even her very existence. Therefore Japan cannot remain indifferent to the conditions prevailing in Russia and China and to the activities of these two countries . . . The governing factor in the relations between Japan and the mainland of Asia has always been the problem of security, and must always be so. . . .

“It was for no other reason than to ensure her national safety that Japan fought China in 1894-5 and Russia in 1904-5. Indeed, it is impossible to find any outstanding event in Japan’s foreign policy that has not been affected by this fundamental attitude of hers towards the mainland. Far back under the Czars the ideal of Russia’s empire builders was the control of Eastern Asia; and although no newly instituted form of government ever went to such lengths in the overthrowing of the established order as the Soviet regime, the present government of Russia has not abandoned for one moment its interest in the Far East, despite declarations to the contrary made in the early stages of its accession to power. True, with replacement of Czarist diplomats by Soviet commissars, the methods may have changed, but the aim and substance of Russian diplomacy still remain the same. Not only that, but it would seem that Russian ideals have gathered a much greater momentum than under the Czars, so that the present dream of the Soviet in East Asia appears to be much more ambitious than that of Czarist Russia. For it is that of a Communist China, with its huge population of 400,000,000, accepting the direction of Moscow in carrying out its policies in the Far east.

“In the final analysis the present Sino-Japanese conflict springs from the twin root of Chinese Nationalism and Russian Communism. In the early stages of the Soviet rule, Moscow adopted what is known as the “Asia detour” policy, the purpose of which was to strike at Western Imperialism out in Asia. The first object of the Red machinations was Great Britain, as witness the virulent anti-British campaign in China in 1925-27. The extent to which Moscow was behind the Kuomintang in its anti-British agitation is shown by the fact that the party’s slogan was the denunciation of the exploitation of China by Western capitalism raised to a higher and more violent form than had ever been known before. It was by Moscow’s aid that Chiang Kai-shek and the Nationalist army were able, in 1926, to advance as far as the Yangtze Valley . . . The retreat of the British brought particular joy to the Chinese, for it was certainly an epoch-making event in the annals of China’s foreign relations, and so quite easily they succumbed to the dangerous illusion that, since such a powerful country as Great Britain had submitted to their threats of coercion, they could easily extort what they wanted from less powerful countries by similar methods.

“And so Japan became the next object of attack. . . .

“It is true that there was a rift in the Soviet-Nationalist combination in April, 1928, when Chiang Kai-shek staged a coup against the Left wing of the Kuomintang, the effect of which was to send Borodin and this comrades scurrying back to Moscow. Nevertheless, the Soviet ferment had already had enough time to permeate no small section of the Chinese people, so much indeed that it had taken practical shape in the formation of Chinese Communist armies. These Red forces Chiang Kai-shek had to tackle, but only with little success. For the Communist armies, under native leaders but assisted by Russian advisers, moved northward and established contact with the Soviet forces in Outer Mongolia, which, in fact, if not in name, is Soviet territory.

“Despite the temporary setback following on Chiang’s coup, Moscow, never wavered in its faith in Communist China. It knew how to bide its time, until the coveted opportunity arrived at last in December, 1936, in the shape of the Sian episode . . . as a result of the episode, the Soviet-Nationalist entente was reestablished. The common front on which this reunion was achieved was expressed by the slogan “Fight Japan!” . . . Prior to the Russo-Japanese war Russia had been able to hoodwink the world by means of a secret treaty of alliance signed with China on the strength of which she flooded Manchuria with Russian troops. Now the same thing had come to pass again, though on a much larger scale . . . Moreover, just as her apprehensions regarding Czarist Russia drove Japan to enter into an alliance with Great Britain in 1902, so the danger of Soviet aggression drove her to see an anti-Comintern pact with Germany in November, 1937.

“The present Sino-Japanese conflict started on July 7, 1937, when Chinese forces, at Marco Polo Bridge near Peking, made an attack on the Japanese troops stationed there in accordance with the Boxer protocol. . . .

“The war aim of Japan in the current conflict is the establishment of peace on the mainland and security in East Asia. . . .

“The peace and safety – security in one word – of a nation signifies something more than the mere preservation of its homeland or even of its territories beyond the seas from external attack. This is only the beginning of security. Real security must also include the maintenance of its economic interests so that it may be able to feed its people. . . .

“Geographical and political necessity as well as historical association impels Japan to take due note of whatever happens on the continent of Asia. She has always to be on the watch against anything inimical to her existence that might arise there. Thus, in the final analysis, she has either to help shape events on the mainland or else herself become the passive victim of those events. . . .

“When the Japanese talk of national safety in relation to the continent of Asia, they more usually have Russia in mind than China as a possible menace. “While the Communist creed and Communist propaganda,” observes a writer, “served to imbue Japan with deep distrust of Soviet Russia, it was not until 1929 that Russia once more loomed up as a serious military menace and to arouse Japanese anxiety on the score of national defence.” When Manchoukuo came into existence, the Japanese people thought that an effective dam against Russian inroads into this part of Asia had been set up. In thinking so, however, they were mistaken, for the march of events was such that the tableland of Mongolia, theoretically Chinese territory, was turned into a Russian province by means of Red activities. . . .

“. . . to all intents and purposes, Outer Mongolia is now Soviet territory, if not in name. And since a Power that controls Sinkiang and Mongolia also controls China, the Soviet domination of Mongolia constitutes a serious menace to the security of the Japanese position not only in Manchuria, but in Eastern Asia in general. Russia who was obliged to retreat beyond the Amur in Manchuria is now again casting a covetous eye upon it and Japan’s position there from across the Mongolian deserts. . . .

“What would happen if the stabilizing influence of Japan were to be withdrawn from Eastern Asia? In that event, Russia would be left the sole dominant Power in this part of the world. There would be nothing to check the Sovietization of China and finally of the whole of Asia, supposing that Russia does not forego her present policy of Red penetration. It would be difficult to see what benefit Britain or any other capitalist country would derive, if such a thing should come to pass. Japan, brought to her knees, would no longer be in a position to exert her influence as the one Power ready to check the extension of the Soviet system to East Asia. The present conflict in China is not solely between Japan and that country. It is in many respects a conflict between Capitalism and Communism. Could it be seriously maintained that the cause of real democracy is advanced by aiding and abetting Communism? Again, it should be borne in mind that any war between major capitalist Powers would only serve to benefit Communist Russia. . . .

“Germany and Japan have long been recognized as bulwarks against the advance of Communism in Europe and Asia. The pact signed between the two Powers in November, 1937, is directed against the machinations of the Comintern. . . .

“The issue of maintaining peace and prosperity in Eastern Asia is a vital one for this country, since its security largely and directly depends upon it. It is necessary, therefore, that Japan should fight for it when such becomes unavoidable” (Katsuji Inahara, “Japan’s Continental Policy,” in Blakeney, ed., Japan Bite Back, 85-92, 95, 162-164, 174-177).

What has been called the “revenge of geography” is a pressing reality for Japan. If you glance at a map, you find that the Korean Peninsula sticks out from the Asian mainland like an arm reaching towards Japan. In fact, the distance between Korean and Japanese territory is only about 31 miles at the narrowest point of the Korean Strait. The distance between Russia’s and Japan’s closest disputed islands today is so meager that you can stand on Japanese soil and view the Russian-held islands across the water. And, depending on which disputed point you judge by, Japan is a mere 400 miles from Chinese-claimed territory. In the 1930s and 40s, the distances were indeed longer, but still sufficiently close for Japan to keep their eyes riveted on the continent.

Think about it in context. If the Soviet Union and hostile China sat mere miles from the American mainland, would we go about our merry lives ignoring the threat, or would we be hypervigilant? Perhaps modern Americans would ignore the threat, as they’ve done with Cuba, but rational people would not – especially when their families and civilization are targeted for destruction. Rather, they would move to secure their borders, project strength outward, and reach out to stabilize their surroundings when necessary.

As pointed out earlier by one of the Japanese writers cited, the Japanese viewed their role in East Asia in a similar manner as Americans have traditionally viewed the Americas. Just as we issued the Monroe Doctrine for the legitimate protection of our own interests and to make this hemisphere one of Freedom and peace, so, too, did Japan declare a Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere and seek to thwart the advance of communism, liberate Asian nations from Western domination, and stabilize the region in order to protect the interests of all involved.

Japan has always been embroiled in controversy in Asia because of its proximity to the mainland. However, the rise of communism endowed the conflict with a greater sense of urgency and danger. Communism is the most murderous and treacherous system in world history. Nothing has ever equaled it in brutality and destructiveness. More people have been raped, pillaged, enslaved, dehumanized, and slaughtered by the Reds than by any other group or combination of groups in all of human history. Thus, when Japan saw communist banners being raised practically along its borders, it had to act decisively.

The Bolsheviks were smart and went after China first, knowing that the successful conquest of that great people would be sufficient to turn the rest of Asia Red. China had been beaten down, humiliated, and impoverished by the West. The Bolsheviks therefore agitated and stirred up hatred for the West among the Chinese populace. They promised the peasants a paradise if they would support the revolution. Ironically, it was only with the help of the hated West that China ultimately went communist, as I outlined in my article “The Great Betrayal – How China Turned Red.”

Before China descended into the hell of Maoist Marxism, however, Japan recognized the danger and attempted to thwart the plot. As Japan moved into China to safeguard the region against the communists, the international press – controlled by socialists and communists – excoriated Japan and claimed they were acting in unwarranted aggression. They also fabricated “atrocities,” just like they did against Germany. As always, communists flip the narrative and project their own guilt on their enemies and opponents.

The Soviets waged a war of subversion, deception, and insurrection in China for decades before it finally succumbed, with crucial U.S. intervention and support, in 1949. During the struggle, communists controlled large swaths of China. One Japanese writer, writing in 1937, noted the massive communist infiltration into the Chinese government:

“Who governs China today? This may seem a strange question, but, none the less, it is an important one, since the answer to it will explain, as nothing else will, the genesis and true meaning of the present conflict. The answer that most people would make to the question is that General Chiang Kai-shek governs China, for to all appearances he reigns supreme at Nanking. But, as is so often the case, appearances are deceptive. As a matter of fact, it is not he, but the extremist elements of the Kuomintang Party allied to the Communists that actually hold the reins of power both at Nanking and all over the country.

“To give a brief historical summary, it was some twenty-five years ago that Sun Yat-sen administered the final push to the tottering structure of the Chinese Empire. Thus the National Party entered into power, but it experienced grave difficulties in coping with powerful warlords. In its emergency, the Kremlin came to its assistance. This was in 1927.

“Evidently Russia saw here a supreme opportunity of bolshevizing China, or, at the least, of throwing out of gear the international machinery working there. . . .

“With the aid of Russian men and money the National Party was able to overcome its opponents, but when Chiang Kai-shek felt that he and his party were well entrenched in power he broke away from his Communist associates, including Borodin and Galen (Bluecher), who had been serving him as supreme political and military adviser respectively. Thus, for the time being the bond between Nanking and Moscow was severed.

“It was very soon destined to be renewed, however. The Seventh World Congress of the Comintern held at Moscow in 1935 decided upon a reorganization of its methods. Propaganda in favor of direct revolution was abandoned and in its place the more indirect method of rallying the radicals and socialists in various countries into a People’s Front, which would seize control of their respective governments and thus eventually consummate the revolution. Moreover, Poland and Japan were singled out as the two countries against which special efforts should be made. The Chinese Communists carried out thoroughly the instructions received, and began to win the people of China to their side by means of the slogan, “Fight Japan!” . . . .

“Since the mainspring of this combination is complete anti-Japanism, it is not difficult to realize how it is that the little incident in Lukouchiao has been so quickly magnified into the conflict of the present scale” (“The Sino-Japanese Conflict: A Short Survey,” in Joshua Blakeney, ed., Japan Bites Back, 43-45).

Almost inevitably when you research deeply into modern conflicts, you find communists lurking somewhere near. Their Red fingers have been in everything from world wars to national uprisings to local strikes to assassinations to drug pushing. Their subversive movement is of course aimed at all nations. However, in the 20th Century, three nations gave them a particular headache and nearly derailed their conspiracy altogether. I speak of Germany, Japan, and Italy.

Isn’t it curious that these three nations – the three which openly entered into an anti-communist pact and swore to fight the spread of communism – are the three which are most heatedly attacked, smeared, and held up as the epitome of evil in the controlled press, Hollywood, and centers of indoctrination we call schools and universities? On November 25, 1936, Germany and Japan, followed later by Italy, concluded the Anti-Comintern Pact. The Comintern was the international wing of the communist conspiracy. On orders from Moscow, it directed the revolutionary activities in individual countries throughout the world using homegrown communists advised and aided by Soviets.

Understanding this subversive machinery and the dire threat it posed, Germany and Japan signed the Anti-Comintern Pact which read in part:

“The Imperial Government of Japan and the Government of Germany,

“In cognizance of the fact that the object of the Communistic International (the so-called Komintern) is the disintegration of, and the commission of violence against, existing States by the exercise of all means at its command,

“Believing that the toleration of interference by the Communistic International in the internal affairs of nations not only endangers their internal peace and social welfare, but threatens the general peace of the world,

“Desiring to co-operate for defense against communistic disintegration, have agreed as follows.”

Among the things Germany and Japan agreed to were to “keep each other informed” of the Comintern’s activities, carry out defensive measures “in close co-operation,” and to “jointly” help other states “whose internal peace is menaced by the disintegrating work of the Communistic International.” It boggles the mind why a nation like the United States would not approve of such a treaty and give their blessing to Germany, Japan, and, later, Italy. Is it not in our best interest for the communist conspiracy to forever go out of existence? Do we not claim to be the chief rivals of the communists?

Sadly, in the run-up to World War II, a Marxist named Franklin Delano Roosevelt ruled in the White House instead of a true patriot who actually gave a damn about his country. FDR – Wall Street’s man – loved mass-murderer Joseph Stalin, affectionately calling him “Uncle Joe.” FDR’s administration made the United States the first major nation to recognize the barbaric Soviet regime of robbers and revolutionaries as a “legitimate” government, thus giving a massive boost to the Soviet economy and prestige. FDR surrounded himself by known Soviet moles, such as his closest adviser Harry Hopkins, Alger Hiss, and Harry Dexter White who helped trigger Pearl Harbor, as well as rabid Zionist agitators like Henry Morgenthau, Jr. and Bernard Baruch. FDR was the biggest traitor to ever sit in the White House and the world suffered greatly because of his influence.

Adolf Hitler was likely the most virulently anti-communist head of state in history. His National Socialist movement won favor with the German people precisely because of their anti-communist platform. Hitler banished communists, Freemasons, international bankers, occultists, and other such criminals from his country when he came to power in 1933. After six years of constant anti-Germany agitation, internationalist forces – led by Zionists and Soviet communists in Britain, France, Russia, Poland, and, yes, the United States – again plunged Germany into a war that she did not wish to fight.

As Germany defended herself against the Western powers, the Soviet Union gleefully prepared an invasion of its own, scheduled for 1941. Stalin planned to crush Germany and become sole hegemon of the continent. Knowing of the scheme, Hitler preempted him by launching Operation Barbarossa. Stalin knew that Hitler would attack when threatened, but he believed he would be the first on the trigger. Fortunately for the world, Hitler struck first – catching the Soviet Union off guard and routing them all the way back to the suburbs of Moscow.

Why am I talking about the German-Soviet war in an article about Pearl Harbor? Simple: FDR pushed his provocations against Japan into overdrive after Germany struck the USSR. FDR wanted to spark a war with Japan to have an excuse to fight Japan’s ally, Germany, and save his beloved Soviet comrades from the jaws of defeat. You will recall that it was in the summer of 1941, just after the Germans hit the Soviets and were well on their way to victory, that FDR froze Japan’s economic assets, bankrupted their nation, and made war inevitable.

Soviet spies and agitators in America, including in FDR’s administration, harangued the president to quickly get in the war and save America’s Soviet “ally.” Incomprehensibly, FDR sent billions of dollars worth of equipment to Soviet Russia via the Lend-Lease program. When I lived in Russia, I personally spoke with a Red Army tanker who fought in the war who shared his conviction that without American tanks and materiel, the USSR would have crumbled. I believe he is right. To our eternal shame, the United States saved the Soviet Union – we saved Joseph Stalin and his murderous gangsters from justice!

In order to save the communist mass murderers, FDR sacrificed over two-thousand American lives at Pearl Harbor. He waged economic warfare against Japan and backed communist operations in Asia until Japan, feeling the hurt of bankruptcy and the looming threat of communism on their frontier, felt it had no other option but to retaliate with force. This is the real story of why the Japanese struck Pearl Harbor that fateful day 79 years ago.

I believe the evidence forces us to acknowledge the truthfulness of Emperor Hirohito’s December 8, 1941 declaration of war. He affirmed:

“To insure the solidity of these ages and contribute to world peace is the far-sighted policy which was formulated by our great, illustrious, imperial grandsire and our great imperial sire’s experience, and which we lay constantly to heart; to cultivate friendship among nations and to enjoy prosperity in common with all nations – has always been the guiding principle of our empire’s foreign policy.

“It has been unavoidable and far from our wishes that our empire has been brought to cross swords with America and Britain.

“More than four years have passed since China, failing to comprehend the true intentions of our empire, and recklessly causing trouble, disturbed the peace of East Asia and compelled our empire to take up arms.

“Although there has been re-established the National government of China, with which Japan has effected neighborly intercourse and co-operation, the regime which has survived at Chungking, relying upon American and British protection still continues its opposition.

“Eager for the realization of their inordinate ambitions to dominate the Orient, both America and Britain, supporting the Chungking regime, have aggravated disturbances in East Asia. Moreover, these two powers, inducing other countries to follow suit, increased military preparations on all sides of our empire to challenge us. They have obstructed by every means our peaceful commerce and finally resorted to direct severance of economic relations, menacing gravely the existence of our empire.

“Patiently have we waited and long have we endured in the hope that our government might retrieve the situation in peace.

“But our adversaries, showing not the least spirit of conciliation, have unduly delayed a settlement, and in the meantime they have intensified the economic and political pressure to compel thereby our empire to submission.

“This turn of affairs would, if left unchecked, not only nullify our empire’s efforts of many years for the sake of the stabilization of East Asia, but also endanger the very existence of our nation.

“The situation being such as it is our empire, for its existence and self-defense, has no other recourse but to appeal to arms and to crush every obstacle in its path.”

While I’m truly saddened at the loss of so many fine American men at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, and honor them for their willingness to sacrifice for their country, I cannot condemn and blame Japan – a nation which we had harassed and waged economic war against for years. Those men did not need to die at Pearl Harbor. FDR sacrificed them on the altar of the global communist conspiracy. All of the pain and loss and tragedy must be laid at FDR’s feet and at the feet of those in America who voted for FDR and turned a blind eye to his treasonous treachery.

Remember Pearl Harbor and honor the men we lost. But also remember who was responsible. Remember that FDR and his fellow communists at home and abroad coordinated their plans to pressure Japan into attacking us so that we could fight Germany and save the Soviet butchers from defeat. The court historians have tried to conceal this damning information for eight decades, but now you know the truth. Make it count.

Zack Strong,

December 7, 2020

“Rise with Fury”

In the aftermath of the horrific shooting in Las Vegas last night, despots, shills, and ignorant people of all stripes came out of the woodwork – as they always do – to blame guns, gun laws, “rednecks,” and conservatives. According to script, these talking heads made a hue and a cry for stricter gun laws, gun bans, tighter security, more intrusive surveillance, etc. Before the victims’ bodies were even cold, the controlled media immediately paraded so-called “experts” in front of the public – “experts” citing false statistics, making demonstrably false allegations about past shootings, expressing anti-Constitution viewpoints about our God-given right to self-defense, and gushing pure emotion in opposition to all those “evil” inanimate guns.

Senator Richard Blumenthal was one such ignorant shill who publicly called for stricter gun laws. Sen. Blumenthal told CBS News that he expects Americans to “rise with fury” in opposition to our current gun laws. “Rise with fury” – strong words from a spineless man who wants to destroy our God-given rights so clearly enshrined in the Constitution. My article today is devoted to explaining just what Americans would be “rising with fury” against if they let their emotions trick them into supporting the Establishment’s anti-gun script.

Since the incredibly suspicious Sandy Hook shooting five years ago, the socialist Senator Blumenthal from Connecticut has been pushing gun control legislation in Congress. Thank God his efforts have hitherto failed. Yes, thank God! Why do I thank the Lord that his rabid efforts to restrict my right to defend my family have failed? Let me explain.

The real issue here isn’t guns. Let me repeat that: The real issue in this debate is not guns. Guns are an irrelevant detail. A gun is an instrument, a tool, a device to be manipulated by its user. Guns should be classified in the same category as swords, knives, spears, hammers, wrenches, shovels, and ice picks. Each one of these instruments can inflict death, and each can serve useful purposes. Each one has been used by a deranged person to commit crimes in the past, and each has been used harmlessly by countless others. Each one of them is, simply, an instrument. How an instrument behaves depends on how a person uses his free will.

If guns are not the issue at hand, what is? The issue, my friends, is self-defense. Do you and I have a right to self-defense, or not? That, and that alone, is the question. If we have a right to self-defense, then the means are wholly irrelevant. If we have a natural right to defend ourselves, then no government, agency, or voting bloc can justly or lawfully limit or restrict that right. Period. Logic and reason permit no other line of thinking.

Arguments about the “common good” or “national defense” are also irrelevant. Individual rights do not bow to the collective will. America is not a democracy in which the majority’s will reigns supreme and rides roughshod over individual rights. Democracy is little more than mobocracy. No one’s individual rights are secure in such a system, and there can never be any stability so long as 51% of the population can dictate to the other 49%

Likewise, America is not a collectivist or communist state where the government controls and dictates everything and everyone. Perhaps I ought to say that we should not be a communist state. In fact, that is exactly what we are – a communistic monstrosity controlled by a Luciferian clique that has a death grip on the financial, media, entertainment, educational, political, and religious sectors of our national life. This cabal, along with its “useful idiots” and fellow travelers, has become the dominant force in our culture.

In opposition to these despotic systems, our honorable Founding Fathers established a confederated Republic bound together by common principles enshrined in a national Constitution. This system guaranteed to the individual the free and full exercise of his God-given rights, while heavily restricting the power and scope of government. The Bill of Rights was, in all reality, a list of “thou shalt nots” directed at the federal government. The individual was to be exalted, while the collective will was kept in check by the Constitution, which, despite being ignored and twisted by scheming groups and an ignorant public, remains to this day the “supreme law of land.”

It is crucial to recognize that personal rights cannot, and must not, be sacrificed for any reason – let alone for so-called “national defense.” All sides must agree on this point if there is to ever be legitimate Freedom in America.

Furthermore, I want to highlight the fact that there is zero difference between the right to life and the right to defend that life. Indeed, if we admit that we have a right to life, then we must logically admit that we also inherently have the right to defend that life. And who can realistically stand in judgment of which means you need to defend your life and the lives of your precious family?

Additionally, if we have a right to private property, as I attest we do, then it logically follows that we have a right to defend that property. The means of defense – whether by machine gun, handgun, sword, machete, landmine, or Sherman Tank – are irrelevant. Without the right to own and use private property, there is no Liberty. And without the right to defend our property, our lives, or our Liberty, none is secure.

Again, I repeat: The question at hand is whether we have a right to defend ourselves, or whether we are defenseless. I declare that we do have that right, that it is an inherent, natural, and God-given right, and that we must never allow any government to restrict, erode, or regulate it.

Whether the fantastical mainstream narrative that a “lone gun” 64-year-old retiree with no formal arms training managed to sneak 19 guns into the Mandalay Bay Hotel and, from two separate 32nd-floor windows, shoot nearly 600 people in a matter of a few minutes, is true or not, makes little difference to the central question we must deal with. The wicked acts of one person can never be justification for destroying the God-given rights of millions. And false flag attacks perpetrated by our government, or shadowy factions of the elite cabal, are even less justification.

At the end of the day, we must stand with Freedom. We must defend the Constitution. We must safeguard our individual rights and the constitutionalist philosophy bequeathed to us by our Founding Fathers.

We must never forget that scheming and ignorant people want you to have a knee-jerk response to last night’s tragedy, and “rise with fury” against your own natural rights. Will you follow their script? Will you be pawns in their game? Will you bow to their proposed tyranny? Will you conform to the popular opinion (or, at least, the opinion the media makes appear popular)?

I ask you to take a deep breath, step back from watching the controlled news media, and remember who you are. You are an individual with inherent rights, inherent worth, and constitutional guarantees – including the right to self-defense, the right to own private property, and the right to live unmolested by the government. Do not let politicians, elitists, conspirators, and their media gatekeepers, rob you of your birthright of Liberty. Do not “rise with fury” against our rights because of the acts of a “lone gunman,” or of any group or segment of society. Do not succumb to the machinations and intrigue of those who lord over you and pretend they are your superiors. Rise up, but against those who have so maliciously targeted and threatened your rights and your ability to defend your family.

Zack Strong

October 2, 2017.