Making The World A More Dangerous Place

Without any doubt, the Middle East has been a very long-simmering region of violent religious and tribal enmity.

In that regard, perhaps today is no different than 1,000 years ago. But given the importance of the remaining oil in the Middle East to the next 20 years of global economic health, the violence and chaos seen there recently is hugely important to the entire world.

But it’s also equally without doubt that the US and NATO are inflaming the situation by provoking conflicts and supplying military weapons and training to various extremist groups -- therefore deserving much of the blame for the current tensions, despair and mayhem happening in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and Libya.

Forget anything you might read about “brutal dictators” that need to go or the importance of “democracy” to the region. That's dumbed-down pablum for the masses and has literally nothing to do with the motivations of the (clinically insane) external power brokers actually driving the events on the ground and crafting the narrative that is faithfully scribed and re-told by the media. In fact, disturbingly often, the scribed narrative is exactly opposite of the truth.

On The Path To War

If a wider war breaks out between the US/NATO and either Russia and/or China, then massive systemic shocks will result to the economy, oil prices, and the global financial system.

Some comfort themselves with the belief that such a war would not be in the interest of the true powers that now drive the politics of most countries. Others worry that chaotic systems and events sometimes have a life of their own, regardless of what 'the powers that be' may want. We have entered such a time.

While predicting the outbreak of war is not my intent here, I do want you to be appraised of the risks. We all should note that the elevated tensions across the globe are as good a reason as any to get our houses in order. As we reinforce often here at Peak Prosperity: when it comes to such preparations, we vastly prefer to be an entire year early than a single day late.

Good planning begins with good intelligence. But sadly, if you feel relatively well-informed because you read a lot of newspapers or watch a lot of news, you may be among the most misinformed of them all.

Certainly, the events in the Middle East over the past decade have been almost impossible to analyze or understand from a logical perspective.

But the pattern has been clear enough: a rough justification of the need for military force is raised by the US adminstration and, within weeks, money and war material are mobilized to do exactly that. Libya, Iraq, and Syria are recent examples of such.

However, none of this is any surprise to those paying attention. General Wesley Clark warned about the US’s military objectives in the Middle East back in 2007 in an interview with Democracy Now!. It's difficult to read this transcript without concluding that the US was going to manufacture whatever justifications it needed in order to carry out a larger strategy that, inexplicably to rational observers, seemed intent on inflaming and toppling governments across the Middle East -- a monstrous war crime by any historical standard:

About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, “Sir, you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second.” I said, “Well, you’re too busy.” He said, “No, no.” He says, “We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq.”

This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, “We’re going to war with Iraq? Why?” He said, “I don’t know.” He said, “I guess they don’t know what else to do.” So I said, “Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?” He said, “No, no.” He says, “There’s nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq.” He said, “I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do about terrorists, but we’ve got a good military and we can take down governments.” And he said, “I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail.”

So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, “I just got this down from upstairs” — meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office — “today.” And he said, “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” I said, “Is it classified?” He said, “Yes, sir.” I said, “Well, don’t show it to me.” And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, “You remember that?” He said, “Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’t show it to you!”


Seven countries in five years. 

Poking The Bear – Part IV

Actually, I don’t know how many times the US has poked the bear (Russia) over the past two years, so I thought I’d use “Part IV” to get the point across.  It might be a much higher number.

First there was Ukraine, where the US and other western parties conspired to overthrow the sitting elected government and putting in place the current crop of ultra-nationalist thugs and Nazi sympathizers that now infest the halls of power in Kiev. The situation there is an unfortunate mess, one the West fomented.

Naturally the West was none too pleased when Russia, quite predictably, responded and sought to protect the roughly 8 million Russian speaking citizens living in eastern Ukraine with military support. Money and military aid and the ubiquitous US “advisors” flooded in to help the Kiev militarily dominate eastern Ukraine – ironic, as a few of Ukraine's current leaders were caught on tape saying they’d prefer to nuke the region in an ethnic cleansing.

Then, when the people of Crimea voted to rejoin Russia (perhaps you would, too, if your "elected" leaders dreamed of nuking you), the US reacted as if this were some kind of foul play. That's a strange sort of needle to thread for a country that prides itself of on “spreading democracy” (even by force, if necessary). You’d think that people voting and exercising their free rights would top of the list of acceptable things to the US -- but unless the election outcome is exactly in alignment with US wishes, that’s just not the case.

Similarly, an almost comical (were it not so serious) attempt to malign Russia was made by the US State Department this week. In the aftermath of the US’s own bombing of the Afghan hospital in Kunduz, this charge was leveled against Russia:

U.S. believes Russian bombing in Syria hit hospital: State Department

Oct 29, 2015

The United States has "operational information" that leads U.S. officials to believe Russian military aircraft hit a hospital while carrying out bombing raids in Syria, the State Department said on Thursday.

Since the start of the Russian bombing campaign on Sept. 30, various reports from media and civilian groups have charged that Russian warplanes have hit hospitals with their air strikes.

Asked at a briefing whether the United States had evidence that Russian bombing had hit Syrian hospitals, State Department spokesman John Kirby said, "Yes, we've seen some information that would lead us to believe that Russian military aircraft did hit a hospital.

"We have seen some press reporting to that end, we have seen some Syrian civil society groups say that," Kirby said.

"I would tell you that we have other operational information that leads us to believe that Russian targeting has not only not been focused on ISIL (Islamic State) but has, in fact, caused collateral damage and some civilian casualties, to include some civil infrastructure."


Um.... “some press reporting” and “other operational information?” Good grief, that’s lame. Is that all the State Department has?  How about some pictures? Ballistics evidence? Satellite photos? Anything??

Watching this RTTV reporter trying to get something credible out of a State Department spokesperson on the matter is simply cringe-worthy:

The video is also notable for the arrogance on display. Assertions are useless without evidence, and in this age of satellites and drones, evidence of a destroyed hospital should be remarkably easy to come by. Yet not only did the State Department not share any such evidence, it went on to further claim that Russia had been targeting civilian infrastructure, which was another awkward charge for to lob given the news of the week prior:

Warplanes of US-led alliance attack power plant in Aleppo

Oct 18, 2015

A military source told SANA that warplanes of the Washington alliance violated Syrian airspace and attacked civilian infrastructure in Mare’a, Tal Sha’er, and al-Bab in Aleppo countryside on Sunday.

The source added that the warplanes attacked the biggest electric power plant that feeds Aleppo city, which resulted in cutting off power from most neighborhoods in Aleppo city.

This transgression comes only 8 days after two F-16 warplanes belonging to the alliance targeted two power plants in al-Radwaniye area east of Aleppo city, cutting off power from the area.


I’ve seen this information presented in various sources and nobody has denied it yet. But neither have I seen pictures, so perhaps this is disinformation too…though Putin is on record as saying "On Sunday, the American aviation bombed out an electrical power plant and a transformer in Aleppo. Why have they done this? Whom have they punished there? What’s the point? Nobody knows,"

Given that charge, you’d think at least a denial from the US was in order. But none has been made. If the allegation is true, though, then it fits a larger pattern of the US criticizing other countries for doing the very same things it does.

Even more seriously, back in June the US rattled its sabers by announcing this:

U.S. Is Poised to Put Heavy Weaponry in Eastern Europe

Jun 13, 2105

RIGA, Latvia — In a significant move to deter possible Russian aggression in Europe, the Pentagon is poised to store battle tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and other heavy weapons for as many as 5,000 American troops in several Baltic and Eastern European countries, American and allied officials say.

The proposal, if approved, would represent the first time since the end of the Cold War that the United States has stationed heavy military equipment in the newer NATO member nations in Eastern Europe that had once been part of the Soviet sphere of influence. Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the war in eastern Ukraine have caused alarm and prompted new military planning in NATO capitals.


These moves are indicative of worsening relations with Russia. They show an over-reliance on military options and a woeful lack of diplomatic outreach, at least any that are being reported in the news.  Of course, the risk of all this being interpreted by Russia as 'overtly hostile' is pretty much 100%.

“The Enemy Of My Enemy Is My Friend”

If you are having similarly hard time trying to understand the US’s policy in the Middle East, you're not alone. The shifting alliances in play there are really hard to keep track of.

Turkey has been aiding the so-called Syrian rebels (more on those rebels in a minute) but maintaining its long-standing hatred of the Kurdish people.  The US has been arming the Kurds and Syrian rebels while maintaining a mutual relationship with Turkey. 

Iraq has been struggling with ISIS and accepting help from Iran to deal with them. This puts the US and Iran on the same side of the battle, if you believe that the US is actually trying to stop ISIS rather than covertly helping it. Why would it possibly help ISIS? Because ISIS is battling Assad’s government in Syria.

Crazy, huh?

Now, let’s talk about those so-called “Syrian rebels.”   The term "rebels" implies that these are Syrians fighting their own government. That’s significantly untrue. Consider this:

20,000 Foreign Fighters Flock to Syria, Iraq to Join Terrorists

Feb 10, 2015

WASHINGTON -- Foreign fighters are streaming into Syria and Iraq in unprecedented numbers to join the Islamic State or Iraq and Syria (ISIS) or other extremist groups, including at least 3,400 from Western nations among 20,000 from around the world, U.S. intelligence officials say in an updated estimate of a top terrorism concern.

Nick Rasmussen, chief of the National Counterterrorism Center, said the rate of foreign fighter travel to Syria is without precedent, far exceeding the rate of foreigners who went to wage jihad in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Yemen or Somalia at any other point in the past 20 years.


There are dozens of reports indicating that the US, through the CIA and other outfits, has been responsible for a big part of both recruiting and training these foreign fighters, who draw from such nations as Pakistan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Chechnya and Qatar (among many others). 

In short, anyone and everyone who could be used to topple the government of Syria is being drafted.

I knew how ridiculous the claim of “Syrian rebels” was when I saw this picture showing the prominent ISIS leader Shishani, a well-known Chechen who was reportedly trained and backed by the US while in Chechnya.  


But sharp eyes will also easily pick out the fact that he’s surrounded by people clearly not of Syrian origin. In fact, it looks more like a UN diversity conference than a Syrian rebel group.

For the sake of appropriate context, imagine if China were funding “rebels” to attack and fight inside the US, and that these “rebels” were sourced from Mexico, Nicaragua, Argentina, and Peru. 

These images and reports clearly show the pattern in play: the US and Turkey have been funneling vast amounts of arms, money and training to so-called opposition groups that, in many cases, consist of mercenaries and jihadists from a very wide range of different countries. Therefore, the US has directly supported and incubated some of the most brutal terror organization on the face of the planet -- a list including ISIS and the Al Nusra front, both of which are well-documented for having committed horrible civilian atrocities.

That this happened was not exactly news to those inside the beltway. A secret 2012 Pentagon report, since uncovered, detailed exactly this dynamic and predicted the rise of ISIS:

Pentagon report predicted West’s support for Islamist rebels would create ISIS

May 22, 2105

A declassified secret US government document [a US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) document then classified as “secret,” dated 12th August 2012] obtained by the conservative public interest law firm, Judicial Watch, shows that Western governments deliberately allied with al-Qaeda and other Islamist extremist groups to topple Syrian dictator Bashir al-Assad.

The document reveals that in coordination with the Gulf states and Turkey, the West intentionally sponsored violent Islamist groups to destabilize Assad, and that these “supporting powers” desired the emergence of a “Salafist Principality” in Syria to “isolate the Syrian regime.”

According to the newly declassified US document, the Pentagon foresaw the likely rise of the ‘Islamic State’ as a direct consequence of this strategy, and warned that it could destabilize Iraq.

The 7-page DIA document states that al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), the precursor to the ‘Islamic State in Iraq,’ (ISI) which became the ‘Islamic State in Iraq and Syria,’ “supported the Syrian opposition from the beginning, both ideologically and through the media.”

The formerly secret Pentagon report notes that the “rise of the insurgency in Syria” has increasingly taken a “sectarian direction,” attracting diverse support from Sunni “religious and tribal powers” across the region.


Well, of course the Defense department knew that arming and funding violent jihadists was going to lead to some crazy sectarian unpleasantness.  How could they not? 14 years in Afghanistan and Iraq taught them plenty about the region and its sectarian dynamics.

But make no mistake: the US worked hard to attract regional jihadists to Syria to fight their war for them.  That was not an oddity to be curiously noted, but a feature of the program. Why? Because there was not enough legitimate internal Syrian opposition to Assad to get the job done. An angry mob had to be recruited.

Said another way: Syria’s bloody civil unrest is not entirely the result of a natural social uprising, but was fostered with a great deal of external meddling.

Why This Is Worth Our Full Attention

Tensions are as high as they’ve been in decades. Neo-con hotheads with a track record of shooting first and not caring to ask questions later are still driving US foreign policy. Russia is signaling that it has had enough of American intervention that destabilizes volatile parts of the world.  China is flexing its muscles as well.

This is all happening while global economic system is not nearly as robust as advertised. And history shows that nations always react more aggressively during leaner times.

With so many sensitive flash points that the West has its fingers in these days, the risk of one or more of them erupting into a full-scale war between the major world powers is not dismissible. And given the huge cost should that come to pass, it makes all the sense in the world to take precautionary measures in advance.

In Part 2: How Things May Well Get Ugly Quickly we zero in on the largest risks to monitor and the likely range of forms of retribution the US could face (from financial and cyber war to a full-blown shooting war) should the situation worsen.

We're not trying to drum up fears that war is imminent. But what we are saying is that the risk is substantial enough, and the potential cost high enough, that it's worth making some pre-cautionary preparations at this time. 

Click here to read Part 2 of this report (free executive summary, enrollment required for full access)

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at

Maybe I missed it, but with the "seven countries in five years", why attack in the first place? What is the US trying to accomplish by meddling with the Middle East's affairs?

PNAC- Project for a New American Century. Closely followed by the new Pearl Harbour.
The GOD complex. Guns oil and drugs keeps the criminals in power in power!

The USA is just the attack dog corporation doing the work of the global power elite who have no loyalty to any country, just themselves and the honor amongst thieves crowd!

Its world domination using violence coercion and lots of debt, mainly controlled by the unscrupulous banksters and their politician lackeys. 

A New World Order, and you better not get in their way!

Chp. 12  Sink the Lusitania.   Spells it all out.  Same thing, once again.  The USA has it all down pat!!
Wars DISTRACT and bring us out of depressions/recessions, and feed the "Military-Industrial Complex." Besides the planet has a population problem and this is a good way to reduce this problem. And OIL, Baby, OIL, is the indispensable key. 

Why not just take over the major oil countries?  But then there is the population problem.  So, we get two for the price of one!!  Besides, Germany/Europe NEEDS young cheap labor to take care of their expanding elders.

It all makes good sense, from the Elite Perspective, no?  Heck, even Bush Sr. berates his Jr son!!!  Still can't figure out why the Sr put out his book now–unless he wants to save Jeb from a really tough and dangerous job.

War is a Racket by Major General Smedley Bulter

I have seen this theme come by several times in recent weeks–that a world war is "normal,"  "expected,"  "inevitable," "only a mater of time" and "just how things are."  Since "we know it is going to happen" the only pertinent questions is what technologies should be use to wage this war to achieve victory in a nuclear exchange.
This assumption is insanity and needs to be rejected loudly and clearly.  We must break up this "general consensus" by clearly saying "Absolutely Not!"

Paul Craig Roberts puts up a guest post a few days ago:

The West Is So Lost In The Matrix That Only Socialists Can Raise The Real Issues

Washington prepares for World War III 5 November 2015

The US military-intelligence complex is engaged in systematic preparations for World War III. As far as the Pentagon is concerned, a military conflict with China and/or Russia is inevitable, and this prospect has become the driving force of its tactical and strategic planning.  Three congressional hearings Tuesday […focusing on] 1) cyberwarfare… 2) deployment of the fleet of aircraft carriers, and…  3) modernization of US nuclear weapons.

None of the hearings discussed the broader implications of the US preparations for war, or what a major war between nuclear-armed powers would mean for the survival of the human race, and even of life on our planet. On the contrary, the hearings were examples of what might be called the routinization of World War III. A US war with China and/or Russia was taken as given, and the testimony of witnesses and questions from senators and representatives, Democrats and Republicans alike, concerned the best methods for prevailing in such a conflict.

The Pentagon recently published a document on "The Laws of War."  The World Socialist Website writer, Tom Carter, summarizes his impression of the document.
The new US Department of Defense Law of War Manual is essentially a guidebook for violating international and domestic law and committing war crimes. The 1,165-page document, dated June 2015 and recently made available online, is not a statement of existing law as much as a compendium of what the Pentagon wishes the law to be.
According to the manual, the “law of war” (i.e., the law of war according to the Pentagon) supersedes international human rights treaties as well as the US Constitution.

The manual authorizes the killing of civilians during armed conflict and establishes a framework for mass military detentions.  Journalists, according to the manual, can be censored and punished as spies on the say-so of military officials. The manual freely discusses the use of nuclear weapons, and it does not prohibit napalm, depleted uranium munitions, cluster bombs or other indiscriminate weapons.

The manual might have more properly been titled A Manifesto for Total War and Military Dictatorship.

Last night in LA, air traffic was re-routed around LAX airport and a ballistic missile was fired from just off the CA coast from a nuclear submarine.  It was reported as visible throughout southern CA and even AZ and NV.

Psychopathology of Killing to Steal and Dominate

At the individual level, everyone knows that shooting someone to steal his wallet is deeply immoral.  In fact, murder committed in the process of armed robbery is an example used to illustrate sociopathic behavior.  This violates the morality of our Judeo-Christian society, domestic law and the universal understanding of what "decent human behavior" is.  

Yet this psychopathology is somehow "normal" in the course of the affairs of nations!   We are DEEP IN THE MATRIX with the acceptance of this belief!

Tom asked:  Where is the Anti-War Movement. 

It is us.  We must disrupt this process of building a "consensus for the acceptance of the upcoming nuclear war" so that people who do not critically think for themselves will not be lead into this. We must say clearly and publicly:

Hell No.

World War is not normal.

War is criminal.

We will NOT participate in a nuclear exchange.

We have the power to disrupt the "mind field" where beliefs come to be commonly accepted by the masses as "true."



Who has benefited the most through the turmoil wrought by the NATO countries in the ME over the past 20+ years?  Obviously the US Military Industries.  But really, WHO (State) has benefited the most…?..

Who is the head of the BIS as well as the FED?  What culture/race are they?

Do your own research.  Come to your own conclusions.  But remember, there are no coincidences in the world of the elite.



My only comment would be to be careful in delineating between the People of Israel and the State of Israel. I suspect that the People of Israel in general share a different "perspective" that a certain portion of Israeli leadership. If any of this is sounding familiar to you here in the US… 

A very sharp friend remarked that she suspects drone strike karma will come back to haunt her grand children.  Someday, the next global power will be shooting missiles into American weddings and school picnics.
The USA altered international law with the GWOT in several fundamental ways:

1.  Dropping bombs and shooting missiles into other sovereign nations is OK.

2.  No need to declare war before bombing another country as

  • the entire earth is now "the battlefield,"
  • there is no start or stop date for this war, and
  • every human being is an enemy suspect.
3.  There is no need to restrict warfare to defense only (the historical criteria for a "moral war.")  An offensive attack is a "preemptive defense."

4.  There is no intention of ever ending this war.  It is intended as a permanent, open ended approach to international relations.  The USA will never "defeat terrorism," declare victory and cease its war.  (In fact, there is no way to escape the impression that the MIC is actively working to create enemies by indiscriminate civilian massacres.)

A single executive can now conduct warfare without congress declaring war.

Once a person knows, absolutely without a doubt, that the seminal event of this global war on terror was deliberately created, we can only conclude that descending the world into permanent warfare was the intention. 

I believe that there is a powerful group that wants to take the world to war. I surmise that this group feels that it can "win" in a setting of global war in a way that it could not should the rules of civilization remain intact.

What on earth would possibly give you that idea?

Very fair.  

The Rothschild Zionists that are running the State of Israel as well as the Western Financial/Monetary Institutions are my target.

Although, the Israeli people's are as much at fault for allowing for the Zionists to control their state (Just as the American people's are at fault for the same).


Assuming that it's not a just another ruse. I'll agree that evidence (real world, circumstantial and anecdotal) is piling up in droves though. It would appear, at this time based up the information available, that the global monetary system has been captured by a relatively small cabal of (possibly satanic) banksters.
Honestly, from where I was when all of this started - I did not see that coming surprise.

You could not make this s**t up.

The good news here is that I think you will find pretty much universal agreement that "satanic banksters" with access to nuclear and biological weapons is a really bad thing (it would be hard to put a positive spin there, but who the hell knows anymore).

If I'm off base here I'd love to be wrong about this. Not trying to offend anyone - just looking for the truth.

Yes, obviously.

Yet no attention has been spent there, doing the hard homework that it would take to better understand the military-industrial complex's role in the deep state.

Ditto for the lack of effort by those concerned about these issues with respect to the nature of big finance in the United States. Pray tell, was J.P. Morgan Jewish? Were the Rockefellers or the Vanderbilts?

Ditto for the lack of attention paid to big ag.  Anyone know the history of Monsanto?

Are the Kochs Jewish?

It's true that that lobbyists from the State of Israel have too much influence in Washington.  This doesn't mean that either Israel or Jews are secretly running the world. There are a lot of other things happening in terms of any deep state, yet I haven't seen anyone raising concerns about Israel and/or Jewish people lift a finger towards any of that.

But, as Dan Ariely (a Jewish man and Israeli) reminds us, via Chris, threats are cognitively easier to deal with, and more compelling, if they have a face. On the other hand, maybe all three of the leading behavioral economists/psychologists in history (Kahneman, Tversky, and Ariely) are part of a Jewish/Israeli conspiracy of psychology professors!!! (yes…/sarc)

It may be comforting to try to blame Israel and an international conspiracy of Jewish bankers, in LogansRun's case, for everything, but that is more likely to whip up hate than shed any real light on the picture. I have seen CHS do way better work on the Deep State than anyone here so far, and as long as people here focus almost exclusively on the foreign policy of the State of Israel it will be a gross oversimplification, and to the extent that they are focusing on the Jewish people per se they will be spreading a bigoted and mendacious red herring.

No banker made me use a car, an airplane, or a computer. No one made me buy silver, thus adding to environmental destruction. That wasn't any conspiracy. Those were my choices and it's one of the reasons that the blame game is mostly unproductive, even if partially accurate.

A grownup view of the problems we face recognize that we ourselves have a role in many of them. None of us rich enough to own a computer and with enough leisure time to talk on PP are really victims, comparatively speaking.

How many of these companies are run by Jewish people?  (Answer: Not many.) Just because someone is Jewish and has a high placed job, do we then say that they're part of a conspiracy?  
Would the same hold true for anyone who is or was an executive at these companies? Is it really productive to paint such a broad brush? 

  1. Computer Sciences Corp 

  2. Oshkosh

  3. SAIC

  4. United Technologies

  5. L-3 Communications

  6. Raytheon

  7. General Dynamics

  8. Northrup Grumman

  9. Boeing

  10. Lockheed Martin

Source: Business insider

If a small group of individuals slowly gains control of the majority of the currencies and financial institutions worldwide, using nefarious, deceitful and frankly - horrific means to attain their goals…who cares what religion they are?  
Really bad people = really bad people.

What sucks is when really bad people assign themselves a label, e.g. "I'm a Klingon", do really bad st to others, and then when the inevitable backlash occurs, the ones doing the really bad st disappear into the woodwork while the rest of the Klingons get hammered.  

Guilt by association. Seems to be a lot of guilt going around.


You clearly care, as you've spent a lot of energy making the case that the conspiracy you perceive is led by the Israeli state. You're one of the people labeling it, and we're not talking about Klingon's here, as you and others have stated, you are talking about Jewish people and/or the Israeli state.

If you won't trust a bankster, would you trust an executive in a military contracting corp? Again, why the broad and oversimplified brush?

Also, does every thread have to be about Israel and/or the Jews now? 

"You clearly care, as you've spent a lot of energy making the case that the conspiracy theory (don't forget to add "theory") you perceive is led by the Israeli State. You're one of the people labeling it, and we're not talking about Klingon's here, as you and others have stated, you are talking about Jewish people and/or the Israeli State and her international banking interests.
If you won't trust a bankster (LOL), would you trust an executive in a military contracting corp? Again, why the broad and oversimplified brush?

Also, does every thread have to be about the State of Israel and her international banking interests and/or the Jews now? (Ah yes, guilt)"


One day you might be ready to develop a mature theory of the deep state, instead of repackaged, half-baked youtube remix of an old and hackneyed slander.

This is not about guilt; it's about asking you to quit spamming the threads with your obsession.

This conversation with you is definitely not productive, so I'll wave off. Have a nice day.