It is being reported today that the U.S. bombed Syrian troops inside Syria, killing 62 troops. This is a dangerous and overt escalation of the war that has been boiling beneath the surface for the last six years. Additionally, Russia has made it clear that they will blame the U.S. should the fragile truce that exists within Syria collapse.

 US forces are waging a proxy war against Russia on behalf of Saudi Arabia, which provided the context for not just historical moments such as Benghazi, but can explain and define the entire Obama “presidency.”

Now with just a few months remaining for Obama to complete his objectives and under the threat of a complete reversal of foreign policy should Hillary Clinton become sidelined, it appears that a deliberate escalation inside Syria is in progress.

In response to the U.S. led air strikes inside Syria, Maria Zakharova, speaking for the Russian Defense Ministry on the Rossiya-24 TV station, said that the air strikes jeopardized a Russian-US agreement on Syria. What was also stated confirmed, at least in part, the information of my 2012 report:
“We are reaching a really terrifying conclusion for the whole world: That the White House is defending ISIS. Now there can be no doubts about that,” the RIA Novosti news agency cited Zakharova as telling.

Putin has directly and indirectly warned Obama not to meddle in Syria or risk direct conflict with Russia. Despite such warnings, Obama has continued his foreign policy of using al Qaeda backed rebels, supported by the Muslim Brotherhood, to install leaders affiliated with the Saudi-backed Muslim Brotherhood in Syria. Why would Obama place billions of people in jeopardy in a world war by his attempts to reshape the Middle East? What is pushing this agenda?

Unlike the more palatable and readily acceptable goals of the government backed operations a half-century ago (i.e. fighting the expansion of communism), the goals of this administration reveal something entirely different. It is through this prism of understanding that all of the most recent historically significant events begin to make sense. Could answers to such basic questions concerning the background and meteoric rise of Obama, his relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood, his deep bow to the Saudi King be found in Benghazi? Might this covert agenda, if exposed, reveal that we are actually engaged in a proxy war with Russia on behalf of Saudi Arabia?








Articles: Russia as the New Power Broker in the Mideast



Weighing options of how to move the peace process forward, without having to submit to American or European expectations, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently agreed, in principle, to meet with Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas in Moscow. If it actually happens, it will be the first direct meeting between the two leaders in six years.

Netanyahu has spent the past year developing a relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, mainly because of his military intervention in Syria, but also because of Russia’s overall increased presence and influence in the Middle East. Russia has filled a void resulting from America’s diminished authority in the region. Many observers have already noticed that Putin has sought to replace America’s superpower status, taking up the position of the new Middle East powerbroker. He seems more interested in that role than the results of future peace negotiations.


According to Dan Diker, a Project Director and Fellow at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, Netanyahu would prefer to have Putin as a mediating host because the vital issues for Israel may be easier to secure with the Russians.

Putin may not insist that Israel provide refuge to thousands, perhaps millions, of Palestinians that want to live in Israel as part of their “right of return”. He may not expect Israel to withdraw to the pre-1967 line as the Palestinians have demanded. And, he may not try and pressure Israel into dividing its capital city, Jerusalem. It seems that Putin’s greater interest is in playing a strong and active role in Syria, as well as along the Lebanese border.

Furthermore, Diker sees Israel’s diplomatic ties with Moscow as a way of countering whatever plans may emanate from the White House.


Diker explains that Obama has indicated by his statements and actions on the Palestinian-Israeli issue over the past eight years that he believes he can establish a viable Palestinian state. “And, he has in that context, favored Palestinian sovereignty, even at a time when the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian leadership are in complete chaos and disarray.”
All this points to a strategic decision by Israel to accept a new principle, the idea of talking to Abbas under Russian stewardship and mediation. “We already had the America mediation two years ago with Kerry, and it fell flat on its face,” says Diker.

Netanyahu had to find another way forward.  

There are still conditions being placed on the Israelis, apparently coming from the Palestinian side, about a settlement freeze, as well as demands for releasing Palestinian prisoners from Israeli jails. But, Netanyahu has only agreed to meet Abbas if there are no preconditions.

Meanwhile, the process of inviting Russia in, as a possible new Middle East powerbroker to replace the role of the U.S., is significant. This advancement comes on the heels of a meeting between Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi and Putin. Egypt and Russia have been forging closer ties, while Israel is also improving ties with Egypt.


When the Egyptian military helped overthrow Morsi, the U.S. government held up military assistance to Egypt. So, in a time of uncertainty, Egypt looked to Russia to fill in the gap.
Putin is making other significant advances in the Middle East, militarily and diplomatically. America’s failure to go through with a no-fly zone in Syria hurt its credibility, especially with neighboring Arab states. Today, America’s freedom of action in Syria is constrained, and its influence over the Assad government minimal. Instead, U.S. forces have to pay attention to Russia’s advanced weapons capabilities in Syria, and avoid confrontation.


Due to a major military intervention in Syria on President Assad’s behalf, Russia secured a military footprint in the country. This advantageous move by Putin has forced America to reckon with his demand that Assad stay in power in a transitional government under a future peace agreement between Assad and Syrian opposition groups. While America’s influence wanes in the region, Egypt, Israel, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia are looking to Russia as a new formidable regional power.


Netanyahu recognizes the shift, and it is in Israel’s current strategic interest to maintain a relationship with Putin, even though Russia has the capability of striking military targets in Israel at some future time. For now, however, Netanyahu has been looking for a new peace path.

A main interest for Israel is keeping the Iranians and their Shiite proxy forces away from Israel’s northern border, and Russia has influence there.
“This is an Israeli attempt to reshuffle the cards; and, to continue maintaining a much closer relationship with Russia, because of its interest in the north. Remember Russia will affect, in a very serious way, what happens with Hezbollah, and what happens on the Israel-Syrian border, all of which is connected to Iran.”


In the meantime, all eyes are on Russia in the region, as Putin looks to assert himself as a major Middle East power player and negotiator. He will continue to find opportunities to advance Russia’s interests, while reaching out his hand to Israel and Arab states. At the same time, he will not hesitate to use Russian military and political power on terrorist organizations or state entities that get in the way of his strategic plans.








Europeans are sick and tired of Muslims. They are sick and tired of Islam. No matter what they have done, no matter how much food and kind treatment these Muslims have received, all the Europeans have gotten in return was rape, robbery, and violence. With the police refusing to help them and their own governments against them, the people are taking matters into their own hands and giving the Muslims the only thing they have left- street justice.
In Germany, a gang of 80 angry Germans swarmed upon and attacked a group of Muslims that had been harassing the locals while screaming “We are the people!”:
Notice also another fundamental question- with the exception of Eastern Europe (Poland, Slovakia, Russia, etc.), where are the Christians? Where is the Church? With certain notable exceptions, these movements are dominated by extreme nationalist movements who define themselves in terms of racial and ethnic solidary and, while eschewing Christianity and even sometimes holding an unspoken disdain for it, all seem to readily embrace different forms of pagan ideas and teachings.

If this pattern sounds familiar, it is because it has happened before. This is what happened to Europe in the Second World War, where Germany, having become secular and abandoned its Christian past, was weak and through the occult societies, such as the Thule Society, developed neo-pagan religious ideas which formed the basis for National Socialism. In Germany apostate turned occultist Heinrich Himmler was involved deeply in the philosophical and as this pro-National Socialist article points out, religious formation of the movement.

As much as it is good that Europeans stand up to the Muslims. However, all of these battles are more than against mere men. This is a struggle for the soul of Europe, the Europeans, and ultimately the Muslims too, for as much as the Muslims are doing the devil’s work in the devil’s religion, all Christians have as much an obligation to fight against the Muslims as we do to pray for them and work for their salvation. For all the good that these nationalist groups do, their end is the same as all the other pagans of old, and that is another massacre just like what happened in World War II.
I am reminded of Bl. Marco Aviano, a Catholic monk who directly helped to organize the fighting at the Battle of Vienna on September 11th, 1683. Bl. Marco not only fought in battle, but after the battle he ordered and saw to it that no Muslims captured were to be tortured or abused, but that the captured were to be fed and safely returned to Ottoman territory.
Just like in Biblical times, this battle is the Lord’s, and His way is the only way to victory.







Chancellor Angela Merkel's conservatives suffered their second electoral blow in two weeks on Sunday, with support for her Christian Democrats (CDU) plunging to a post-reunification low in a Berlin state vote due to unease with her migrant policy.
The anti-immigrant Alternative for Germany (AfD) polled 11.5 percent, gaining from a popular backlash over Merkel's decision a year ago to keep borders open for refugees, an exit poll by public broadcaster ARD showed. The result means the AfD will enter a 10th state assembly, out of 16 in total.
Merkel's CDU polled 18 percent, down from 23.3 percent at the last election in 2011, with the centre-left Social Democrats (SPD) remaining the largest party on 23 percent. The SPD may now ditch the CDU from their coalition in the German capital.
The blow to the CDU came two weeks after they suffered heavy losses in the eastern state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. The setbacks have raised questions about whether Merkel will stand for a fourth term next year, but her party has few good alternatives so she still looks like the most likely candidate.








The US Central Intelligence Agency and its media outlets started the conspiracy – so let’s turn the tables on them. Could the CIA be setting Hillary Clinton up in a false flag hit for the purpose of blaming it on Russia?

For several months now, the 68-year-old former senator’s health has been the subject of intense public speculation, not least fanned by her Republican rival Donald Trump.
Apparent facial seizures while addressing public platforms and coughing spasms in front of media reporters culminated last Sunday at a New York event commemorating the 9/11 terror attacks, when Clinton was videoed collapsing on a sidewalk as aides bundled her limp body into the back of a van.

However, after weeks of dismissing claims about Clinton’s ill-health as wild conjecture, the Washington Post then gives vent to the even wilder notion that the Democrat candidate has been poisoned by Russian agents.


The Post, on one hand, half-acknowledges that the “theory” is far-fetched. Yet, the newspaper – one of America’s top publications – also sneakily adds credence by going on in the same article to reiterate baseless British claims that Russia’s Putin ordered the poisoning of Kremlin critic Alexander Livitnenko while he was living in exile in London in 2006.



Livitnenko’s death from Polonium poisoning was more likely caused by shady rivals in the criminal underworld. There is no evidence that Russian state agents were involved in his demise. But the claims have provided Western media with plenty of material to continue demonizing Moscow and Vladimir Putin in particular, as the Washington Post article demonstrates.


The latest claim that Clinton has been poisoned by Kremlin agents plays into a litany of false narratives portraying Russia as an evil foreign enemy. From the alleged “annexation” of Crimea, to alleged destabilizing of Ukraine, to the alleged shooting down of a Malaysian civilian airliner in 2014, to alleged “state-sponsored doping” of Olympic athletes.

With this mass media campaign of vilification against Russia and inculcation of pejorative public perception, it is in many ways a logical next step that American spooks in the CIA and closely aligned news outlets like the Washington Post would attempt to implicate Russia in incapacitating Clinton as presidential candidate.

After all, US media in concert with their favored Clinton presidential campaign have been pushing claims that Russian state-sponsored cyber hackers are interfering in the US elections by leaking damaging private information against Clinton. The identity of these hackers may well be American citizens opposed to Clinton.

Alleging that Hillary Clinton has been poisoned by Russia fits neatly in with a full-on US and Western media offensive portraying Russia under Putin as a global threat. The deep forces behind this campaign – the CIA and Pentagon – are the main beneficiaries from conflict with Russia. Clinton is favored by these forces because, of the two presidential candidates, she is the one who is belligerent towards Moscow. In short, she is the US Deep State’s candidate.

And the Deep State’s operatives in the mass media consequently row in behind her campaign, working to downplay her trail of corruption, while at the same time maximizing negative coverage of Trump.

But what if the political-media orchestration fails to get Clinton elected in November? Recent polls show that Clinton’s lead over Trump is waning to the point where it is neck and neck.
Given the high stakes to get their candidate into the White House, the Deep State is faced with a quandary of a tight race that could go either way.
So, there is a need to up the dirty tricks. Touting old Cold War tropes about Russian interference in US politics and Trump being a “Kremlin stooge”, the latest desperate bid to escalate fear is the theory that “Putin has poisoned the Democrat candidate”.

But hold it a moment. What if Clinton’s health impact needed a little bit of “evidentiary proof” that Russian agents were somehow involved?

This is analogous to how US intelligence agents could set up alleged Russian cyber hackers by leaving seeming telltale digital forensics implicating the Russians.