Neocon projection to Siege Russia and the implementation of the Global Americanism

Neocon are lying about the Russia 'globalist' project to start a war against Russia.

The establishment of USA, the same Republicans and Democrats, lied about the motives for an invasion in Iraq in 2003 are doing it again to invade teh Russia. The excuse of Syria, Ukraine and the proxies with the pretext of defending the decmocracy is the excuse to promote a small warfare proxy in Russian domains.

The are virtually using the image of siege the Russian Federation and surrounding the contry in Europe and trying to promote a siege in Middle East, focusing the heartlands, through Syria. The annexation of Ukraine is the last trick and the spread of propaganda by some of the globalist NGO's promoting the democracy, by placing missiles in Ukraine in Russian's boders. The promotion is like, what if Russia places missiles in borders of Canada, pointing the USA? Or even Mexico? It was a trouble when happened in Cuba, while the Missile Crisis.

The US establishment accuses Russia of being 'aggressive' after the War-Games of Vostok-2018, and USA is preparing a USA-NATO invasion, increasing the fear of a new agressive measures not because of Russia propaganda or politics, but because of the US Government actions.

Last promotion of Psyops is the use of fake news to promote fear and tendencies in the society ways of thinking, as Russia is planing a war to invade whole Europe and other parts, like with political aliances of Argentina to South America.

The fake news and the media promotion by NGOs and philantropy to promote peacekeeping but with investments on social advancements, and also promote hostility with national government and society. The Russian government still wants to promote hegemony in Eurasia and it's just, for sure the globalist position of Russia exists, but there is no interest on promotion of a globalism with Russia military present as it was in the 90's with USA.

Now the Trump administration with the Neocon personal are promoting the proxies in Ukraine and Syria, and now Russia is going to Libya, and the USA is trying to siege the position with the NATO in Africa and Middle East. 

The use of Ukraine as the new operative scenario promotes the capability of USA to maintain the private armies in a front and the use of rebels in Syria with the international NATO army in two small fronts, as the diplomatic position going to Koreas and Hong Kong, promoting the geopolitical position in Chinese territory to tie the Russian relations with the West.

The basic strategy is to promote the mediatic propaganda and fake news, spreading fear through a global civil society and promote this siege by diplomatic ways, and use of small wars and irregular forces, not to legitimate a conflict after the disastrous Iraq War in 2003, that promoted the raise of ISIS and a democratic leftist government financing the global terrorism, because the direct clash with regular forces can be disastrous to NATO and USA.

The numbers of Russia and the hidden technology of the military capability of Russia is still occult and USA keeps promoting the proxies to see if Russia shows the full power, but the last time it happened was a friendly maneouver with China and Mongolia, and the world got very aprehensive with the new scenario of Russian possible military hegemony.

So the tactics are promotion of local conflicts and psywar. Psywar to promote the non acceptance of the new scenario. George Soros open funds and NGOs that controls the media promotes many of the lies about this new scenario.

The neorrealistic advance of theoretics, promotes the social security and the non globalist countries are being considered the not alied by the west, as the USA keeps the promotion of NATO operations, turn itself still to the geopolitical theoretics of the heartlands, and keeps the coordination of the operations by the seas.

Russia, promotes the classic geopolitik in the Haushofer way, of the divide the influence zones and promote the hegemony in the region delimitated, not as the promotion of a global government as the proto-marxist Neocon ideological formation.

While propaganda weakens the acceptance of Russia, NATO and Neocon personal are trying to destablize the politics of Russia to promote the direct combat with them, but the new proxies are still the small wars, it's not decisive to the promotion of the regular warfare or a long range conflict, but keeps the game of small conquests and politico-social influence by the paramilitary operations and media.

Why Neocons Hate Russia Even More Than They Hate Any Other Nation

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/07/27/why-neocons-hate-russia-even-more-than-they-hate-any-other-nation.html

Neoconservatism started in 1953 with Henry “Scoop” Jackson, the Democratic Party US Senator from the state of Washington (1953-1983), who became known as a ‘defense’ hawk, and as “the Senator from Boeing,” because Boeing practically owned him. The UK’s Henry Jackson Society was founded in 2005 in order to carry forward Senator Jackson’s unwavering and passionate endorsement of growing the American empire so that the US-UK alliance will control the entire world (and US weapons-makers will dominate in every market).

Later, during the 1990s, neoconservatism became taken over by the Mossad and the lobbyists for Israel and came to be publicly identified as a ‘Jewish’ ideology, despite its having — and having long had — many champions who were ‘anti-communist’ or ‘pro-democracy’ or simply even anti-Russian, but who were neither Jewish nor even focused at all on the Middle East. Republicans Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, and John McCain; and the Democrat, CIA Director James Woolsey — the latter of whom was one of the patrons of Britain’s Henry Jackson Society — were especially prominent neoconservatives, who came to prominence even before neocons became called “neoconservatives.” What all neocons have always shared in common has been a visceral hatred of Russians. That comes above anything else — and even above NATO (the main neocon organization).

During recent decades, neocons have been hating Iranians and more generally Shiites — such as in Syria and in Lebanon, and now also in Yemen — and not only hating Russians.

When the Israel lobby during the 1990s and after, pumped massive resources into getting the US Government to invade first Iraq and then Iran, neoconservatism got its name, but the ideology itself did not change. However, there are a few neoconservatives today who are too ignorant to know, in any coherent way, what their own underlying beliefs are, or why, and so who are anti-Russians (that’s basic for any neocon) who either don’t know or else don’t particularly care that Iran and Shia Muslims generally, are allied with Russia. Neoconservatives such as this, are simply confused neocons, people whose underlying ideology is self-contradictory, because they’ve not carefully thought things through.

An example is Vox’s Alex Ward, who built his career as an anti-Russia propagandist, and whose recent ten-point tirade against Russia I then exposed as being false on each one of its ten points, each of those points having been based upon mere allegations by US neocons against Russia without any solid evidence whatsoever. Indictments, and other forms of accusations, are not evidence for anything. But a stupid ‘journalist’ accepts them as if they were evidence, if those accusations come from ‘the right side’ — but not if they come from ‘the wrong side’. They don’t understand even such a simple distinction as that between an indictment, and a conviction. A conviction is at least a verdict (though maybe based on false ‘evidence’ and thus false itself), but all that an accusation is an accusation — and all accusations (in the American legal system) are supposed to be disbelieved, unless and until there is at least a verdict that gives the accusation legal force. (This is called “innocent unless proven guilty.”)

Earlier, Mr. Ward had headlined as if he were an anti-neocon, when he posted his “America is fueling the war in Yemen. Congress is finally pushing back.” What can account for that seemingly incongruous article?

Mr. Ward is a Democrat — an heir to Senator Jackson’s allegedly anti-communist though actually anti-Russian ideology — but, since Ward isn’t as intelligent as the ideology’s founder was, Ward becomes anti-neocon when a Republican-led Administration is doing things (such as Ward there criticizes) that are even more-neocon than today’s Democratic Party itself is. In other words: ‘journalists’ (actually, propagandists) such as he, are more partisan in favor of support of Democratic Party billionaires against Republican Party billionaires, than in support of conquering Russia as opposed to cooperating with Russia (and with all other countries). They’re unaware that all American billionaires support expansion of the US empire — including over Yemen (to bring Yemen in, too — which invasion Ward incongruously opposes). But politicians (unlike their financial backers) need to pretend not to be so bloodthirsty or so beholden to the military-industrial complex. Thus, an American doesn’t need to be intelligent in order to build his or her career in ‘journalism’, on the basis of having previously served as a propagandist writing for non-profits that are mere fronts for NATO and for Israel, and which are fronts actually for America’s weapons-manufacturing firms, who need those wars in order to grow their profits. Such PR for front-organizations for US firms such as Lockheed Martin, is excellent preparation for a successful career in American ‘journalism’. If a person is stupid, then it’s still necessary to be stupid in the right way, in order to succeed; and Ward is, and does.

This, for example, is how it makes sense that Ward had previously been employed at the War on the Rocks website that organized the Republican neoconservative campaign against Donald Trump during the 2016 Republican primaries: the mega-donors to both US Parties are united in favor of America conquering Russia. And that’s why War on the Rocks had organized Republican neocons to oppose Trump: it was done in order to increase the chances for Trump’s rabidly anti-Russia and pro-Israel competitors such as Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio to win that nomination instead, which would then have produced the billionaires’ dream contest, between Hillary Clinton versus an equally neoconservative Republican nominee. A bipartisan neoconservatism controls both of the American political Parties. A ‘journalist’ who displays that sort of bipartisanship can’t fail in America, no matter how incompetent at real journalism he or she might be. (However, they do have to be literate. Stupid, maybe; but literate, definitely.)

The core of America’s form of capitalism has come to be the US aristocracy’s bipartisan, liberal and conservative, Democratic and Republican, form of capitalism, which isn’t merely fascist (which includes privatizing everything that can be privatized) but which is also imperialist (which means favoring the country’s perpetration of invasions and coups in order to expand that nation’s empire). The United States is now a globe-spanning empire, controlling not merely the aristocracies in a few banana republics such as Guatemala and Honduras, but also the aristocracies in richer countries such as France, Germany and UK, so as to extract from virtually the entire world — by means mainly of deception but also sometimes public threats and clearly coercive — unfair advantages for corporations that are within its borders, and against corporations that are headquartered in foreign countries. America’s billionaires — both the Democratic ones and the Republican ones — are 100% in favor of America’s conquering the world: this ideology is entirely bipartisan, in the United States. Though the billionaires succeeded, during the first Cold War — the one that was nominally against communism — at fooling the public to think they were aiming ultimately to conquer communism, George Herbert Walker Bush made clear, on the night of 24 February 1990, privately to the leaders of the US aristocracy’s foreign allies, that the actual goal was world-conquest, and so the Cold War would now secretly continue on the US side, even after ending on the USS.R. side. When GHW Bush did that, the heritage of US Senator Jackson became no longer the formerly claimed one, of ‘anti-communism’, but was, clearly now and henceforth, anti-Russian. And that’s what it is today — not only in the Democratic Party, and not only in the Republican Party, and not only in the United States, but throughout the entire US alliance.

And this is what we are seeing today, in all of the US-and-allied propaganda-media. America is always ‘the injured party’ against ‘the aggressors’; and, so, one after another, such as in Iraq, and in Libya, and in Syria, and in Iran, and in Yemen, and in China, all allies (or even merely friends) of Russia are ‘the aggressors’ and are ‘dictatorships’ and are ‘threats to America’, and only the US side represents ‘democracy’. It’s actually an aristocracy, which has deeply deceived its public, to think it’s a democracy. Just as every aristocracy is based on lies and on coercion, this one is, too — it is no exception; it’s only that this particular empire is on a historically unprecedentedly large scale, dominating all continents. Support that, and you’re welcomed into the major (i.e., billionaire-backed) ‘news’ media in America, and in its allied countries. This is America’s ‘democracy’. (Of course, an article such as this one is not ‘journalism’ in America and its allied countries; it’s merely “blogging.” So, it won’t be found there though it’s being submitted everywhere. It will be accepted and published at only the honest news-sites. A reader may Web-search the headline here in order to find out which ones those are. Not many ‘news’media report the institutionalized corruptness of the ‘news’media; they just criticize one-another, in the way that the politicians do, which is bipartisan — the bipartisan dictatorship. But the rot that’s actually throughout the ‘news’media, is prohibited to be reported about and published, in and by any of them. It is totally suppressed reality. Only the few honest news-sites will publish this information and its documentation, the links here.)

However, actually, the first time that the term either “neoconservatism” or “neo-conservatism” is known to have been used, was in the British magazine, The Contemporary Review, January 1883, by Henry Dunkley, in his “The Conservative Dilemma” where “neo-conservative” appeared 8 times, and was contrasted to traditional “conservatism” because, whereas the traditional type “Toryism” was pro-aristocratic, anti-democratic, and overtly elitist; the new type was pro-democratic, anti-aristocratic, and overtly populist (which no form of conservatism honestly is — they’re all elitist): “What is this new creed of yours? … That there must be no class influence in politics? That any half-dozen hinds on my estate are as good as so many dukes? That the will of the people is the supreme political tribunal? That if a majority at the polls bid us abolish the Church and toss the Crown into the gutter we are forthwith to be their most obedient servants?” “No: from whatever point of view we consider the question, it is plain that the attempt to reconstruct the Tory party on a Democratic basis cannot succeed.” “The Tories have always been adepts at conservation, but the things they have been most willing to conserve were not our liberties but the restrictions put upon our liberties.” “The practical policy of Conservatism would not alter, and could not be altered much, but its pretensions would have to be pitched in a lower key.” “Here we seem to get within the smell of soup, the bustle of evening receptions, and the smiles of dowagers. The cares which weigh upon this couple of patriot souls cannot be described as august. It is hardly among such petty anxieties that the upholders of the Empire and the pilots of the State are bred.” “The solemn abjuration which is now proposed in the name of Neo-conservatism resembles a charge of dynamite.” He viewed neo-conservatives as being let’s-pretend populists, whose pretense at being democrats will jeopardize the Empire, not strengthen it. Empire, and its rightness, were so deeply rooted in the rulers’ psyche, it went unchallenged. In fact, at that very time, in the 1880s, Sir Cecil Rhodes was busy creating the foundation for the UK-US empire that now controls most of the world.

The modern pro-Israel neoconservatism arose in the 1960s when formerly Marxist Jewish intellectuals in New York City and Washington DC, who were even more anti-communist than anti-nazi, became impassioned with the US empire being extended to the entire world by spreading ‘democracy’ (and protection of Israel) as if this Israel-protecting empire were a holy crusade not only against the Soviet Union, which was demonized by them, but against Islam, which also was demonized by them (since they were ethnocentric Jews and the people whose land the ‘Israelis’ had stolen were overwhelmingly Muslims — and now were very second-class citizens in their own long-ancestral and also birth-land). This was how they distinguished themselves from “paleoconservatism” which wasn’t nearly so Messianic, but which was more overtly ethnocentric, though ethnic Christian, instead of ethnic Jewish. The “paleoconservatives” were isolationists, not imperialists. They originated from the opponents of America’s entry into WW II against the imperialists of that time, who were the fascists. Those American “isolationists” would have given us a world controlled by Hitler and his Axis allies. All conservatism is absurd, but there are many forms of it, none of which makes intelligent sense.

The roots of neoconservatism are 100% imperialistic, colonialist, supremacist, and blatantly evil. They hate Russia because they still crave to conquer it, and don’t know how, short of nuclear annihilation, which would be extremely dangerous, even for themselves. So, they endanger everyone.

How the US Establishment Lies Through Its Teeth, for War Against Russia

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/03/03/how-us-establishment-lies-through-its-teeth-for-war-against-russia.html

The same people, Republicans and Democrats, who lied through their teeth for an invasion of Iraq in 2003, are doing it again for an invasion of Russia, sometime soon, so as to ‘defend’ ‘democracy’. The US has by now swallowed up virtually all lands surrounding Russia, at least in Europe, the latest being Ukraine, and is placing its missiles now on and near Russia’s borders, which is to Russians like would be to Americans if Russia had swallowed up Canada and were placing its missiles there. But the lying holier-than-thou US Establishment accuses Russia of being ‘aggressive’ when Russia holds war-games on and near its borders in order to prepare for a US-NATO invasion, which actually looks increasingly likely to them every day — and not because of ‘Russian propaganda’, but because of the US Government’s actions.

Hillary Clinton clearly hated Russians and wanted to start a war against Russia by establishing a no-fly zone in Russia’s ally Syria (which Russia defends while the US invades and occupies Syria) so as to shoot down Russia's planes there, and then, when Russia shoots down US planes in retaliation, America would have its pretext for invading Russia itself ‘so as to defend democracy against Russian aggression’ — but instead, Donald Trump became elected, and he has now turned out to be almost as much of a neoconservative as she was. This displays how extreme the grip is that the neocons, the Establishment and its many minions who dominate both of the two Parties and the press, now have.

An example of the Establishment’s holier-than-thou lies, is an article that appeared on February 22nd at the magazine, The National Interest, whose article-title is itself a marvelous deception, “Averting the US-Russia Warpath” (while the subliminal message there is: reasons why we’ll probably have to invade Russia), and whose authors are three ‘defense’ hawks, including James Northey Miller, of Harvard. He had been an Under Secretary of Defense during the Administration of the merely moderately neoconservative President Barack Obama — the President who in 2014 grabbed Ukraine, and who used Al Qaeda in Syria to lead ’the rebels’ there in order to try to grab Syria. (Ukraine had been friendly toward Russia and is now rabid against Russia; and Syria was and is allied with Russia; so, both of these two lands were American grabs, and the neocon Trump continues both.) Anyone who trusts the US Government to represent in international affairs the interests of America’s public, instead of the interests of America's billionaires, has been deceived by the Establishment’s (the billionaires' and their agents') virtually all-pervasive propaganda in America, and therefore needs a lot of re-learning about US history before understanding anything about US foreign policies. There is very good and sound reason why around the world the United States is considered, by far, to be “the biggest threat to peace” — because it is. (The Peter Kuznick book and Oliver Stone documentary Untold History of the United States, are the best cleaner-away of ‘historical’ lies about US history from 1912 to 2012 that I know of — and the seeing or reading of that, will expose to anyone the mockery of historical truth which is represented in articles such as “Averting the US-Russia Warpath.”)

This ordinary, and profoundly deceptive, article starts:

FOR NEARLY twenty years following the end of the Cold War, military confrontation between the United States and the Russian Federation seemed implausible. Even during periods of tension, as during the Kosovo crisis in the late 1990s, few believed that disagreement between Washington and Moscow could lead to a serious crisis, no less war. Before the first decade of the new century had passed, however, Russian officials were accusing the United States of working to isolate Russia. Such apprehensions have mounted steadily in Russia in the years since. At the same time, Russian behavior, including interventions in Ukraine and Syria, military posturing and harassment in Europe, and interference in Western elections, has led many in the United States to conclude that, while a US-Russian conflict is by no means inevitable, the risk of such a confrontation is growing.

The “Russian officials were accusing the United States,” while there was supposedly actual “Russian behavior, including interventions in Ukraine and Syria, military posturing and harassment in Europe, and interference in Western elections,” which pretexts the Establishment is now debating with itself whether that will be sufficient to ‘justify’ an American and NATO invasion, as response. This holier-than-thou and upside-down presumption, of Russian-government guilt and American-government innocence, is reeking throughout that pompous article; but what’s even worse is that the reality is exactly the opposite of the story-line that’s portrayed in it. The actual reality is: Ever since 24 February 1990, the US and its NATO allies have been pursuing secretly a continuation of the Cold War after the termination in 1991 of the Soviet Union, and of its communism, and of its counter-NATO military alliance, the Warsaw Pact; and the US plan has been to swallow up, first the former Warsaw Pact nations, and then the former nations (such as Ukraine itself) that were inside the Soviet Union itself, and then, any other foreign allies that Russia might still have (such as Syria); and, then, finally, to invade and conquer Russia itself. And, instead of helping those countries, the US Government has been destroying them.

Neoconservative, holier-than-thou, lying is so widespread in America’s ‘news’media, there’s practically nothing else than such deceptions about Russia, that’s “Fit to Print” (or broadcast) in today’s United States, and this is true in the media of both Parties, not merely the Republican media, or the Democratic media. This neoconservative consensus — the bipartisan ceaseless warmongering — is driven by the military-industrial complex (MIC) profiteers, whose companies’ main market is the American and allied governments (so that in order to increase their sales, more and costlier weapons must be purchased by those governments). It’s the MIC-sick current style of capitalism: capitalism that’s of, by, and for, the billionaires: a fascism that’s merely called ‘democracy’. (By contrast, one area of commerce that Russia refused to privatize was its weapons-manufacturers — there aren’t any stockholders who pay politicians to increase the ‘defense’ budget: instead, the Government itself is in control over that.)

America’s billionaires, and their many agents, are giving hypocrisy a bad name.

TRUMP: RECOGNITION AS "PRINCEPS HUIUS MUNDI"

https://www.geopolitica.ru/en/article/trump-recognition-princeps-huius-mundi

Trump: recognition as "prince of this world"

Trump: recognition as "prince of this world". Trump has already given us many surprises. And he brings more and more new ones. Initially, he was rejected by the American establishment, but he decided then to challenge it, and has built his electoral campaign  on anti-globalism. The surprise was that he ventured to do such a step, but even more - a crushing surprise this time - that he became finally President of the United States - POTUS. Almost nobody expected this. Surprise.

Arriving at the White House, he began to seem weak and hesitant - surrendering one after another his supporters under the storm of criticism from Dems and corporate media. His opponents, feeling the slack, began to prepare the situation for his impeachment.The main accent was made on a purely imaginary "Russian trace". Trump seemed to be confused and on defensive.

Under attack of typically fake news campaign about the alleged "chemical attack" of Assad Trump ordered a Tomohawk strike at the base of the Syrian government aircraft. And it was a surprise as well, because sucj a step was absolutely inconsistent with his entire election campaign. Now it seemed that he is hijacked by the Swamp and he is ready to become a puppet in the hands of CFR and neocons, like Obama or Bush Jr. (and earlier Bill Clinton).

But here ahain came a surprise (once more): Trump fired the FBI director Comey. Being under full control of the Swamp he would never do this. Then Trump speaks with Russian foreign MinisterSergey Lavrov for two hours and let President of Turkey Erdoğan go after 15 minutes of talks. What was that? One unpredictable step? May be return for his elaction campaign realist non-interventionist agenda? The fact that Trump didn't drop finally Steve Bannon was another good sign in this semantic direction.

But that was not the end of surprises - rather begining.

Now Trump is making his first foreign tour. And again a surprise. The first foreign visit is this time not to Mexico and the countries of Latin America, which is the custom of American presidents, and not to Russia, for example, but to Saudi Arabia, the country that is the main sponsor of ISIS (banned in Russia) and Islamic terrorism. What logic we are dealing with here? Neither  Trump number 1, nor Trump number 2. Who are You Mr. Trump?

But this is not the end of surprises: 50 countries of the Islamic world in Riyadh are inclined to the feet of Trump and bring him a vassal oath of allegiance. Then Trump signs a contract for 100 billion dollars for the military needs of Saudi Arabia (that is, for the needs of ISIS) and another 200 billion for later. For this, the Saudis could allow the wife and daughter of Trump not only not to wear a handkerchief, but also to come to the royal reception in a bikini.

After that, Trump dances Wahhabi dance with sabers - the dance of the Salafi jihad and delivers a speech in which the pro-American Islam is glorified. Leaders of Islamic states at the feet of Washington.

And the next day, a visit to Israel. Some rabbis calculated in 45 US President the kabalistic name "Adam", and proclaimed Trump Moshiach. Islam at the feet of Trump. And then Israel falls at the same feet.

And then NATO and the Big Seven will fall at his feet as welle. Yes, also the Pope, he also is going to bow next - to the feet of 45 POTUS - Donald Trump the First.

He left for the first visit as an unpredictable eccentric novice and an outsider in American politics with skaking position under the menace of impeachment. On his return to the White House he has every chance of being recognized as the "prince of this world" - "princeps hujus mundi".

And this time it is a real surprise. Now if Trump's personal enemies will be recognized as "Russian spies" and sent for jail no one will be astonished. Moreover, the Russian oligarchs who made the bet on Hilary, for sure, have left the traces in her political and financial support. Crooked Hilary. Indeed. This time Russian trace is much more real.

The fact that Marin Le Pen in France showed a rather weak result, and in Iran was chosen by the president of the Westernizer, the situation may very well become really tough in the very near future.

Of course, since we have already seen so many surprises, others can follow, but so far the things are getting more and more scary.