Monday, May 15, 2006

Americans Vanquished: The Impact of America’s Jewish Elite on America’s Foreign Policies.

In the past, american jews were able on occasions to influence america’s foreign policies towards the jos. These days they possess so much economic and political power they are virtually determining america’s policies not merely over the jos but over much of the middle east and beyond that the west asian continent. Over the last couple of decades or so the jewish colonization of the american political system has become comprehensive.

Americans forced to pretend the Jos has no Nuclear Weapons.
For the last five decades, america’s jewish elite and the jos have been powerful enough to prevent successive american presidents/politicians from formally acknowledging the existence of the jos’s nuclear weapons. As far as american politicians are concerned the jos has no nuclear weapons so it does not need to become a member of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. "The U.S. government has never acknowledged that Israel possesses nuclear weapons, even though the world knows otherwise, thanks to the whistleblower, Mordechai Vanunu. (London Sunday Times, Oct. 5, 1986) The continuing policy of denial can only hinder efforts to "rein in" Israel in the event of a nuclear crisis. One could hardly imagine a more explosive mix." (Mark Gaffney ‘Will Iran Be Next?’ http://informationclearinghouse.info/article3288.htm May 8th 2003); "The United States refuses to acknowledge formally that Israel has nuclear weapons, even though top officials will tell you privately that it has 200 of them." (Jonathan Power ‘Israel's nukes serve to justify Iran's’ http://www.iht.com/articles/539860.html September 22, 2004).

America has fought Zionist Proxy Wars against the interests of America’s Oil Companies and the advice of the American Military.
During the october 1973 war, the jos used its possession of nuclear weapons to blackmail the nixon administration into airlifting military supplies to the jos’s military despite the fact that it was against america’s global interests to do so. Since then the jos/jol have used their political power to push the american military into two wars that benefit only the jos.

The first gulf war was a proxy zionist war. One of the major political factors that pushed the bush senior administration into support for the war was yet another brazen fabrication concocted by a prominent neocon. "In 1991, in an effort to convince Congress and the world that Iraq needed to be forcibly removed from Kuwait, Lantos helped stage a hearing before his private Congressional Human Rights Caucus at which the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador, pretending she was a nurse who had been working in a Kuwaiti hospital at the time of Iraq's invasion, testified that she had witnessed Iraqi soldiers throwing babies out of scores of incubators on to the hospital floor in order to take the incubators back to Iraq. The story was a total fabrication, but the outrage it engendered was enough to get reluctant members of Congress to change their minds and vote for the war. Despite articles about the fraud in the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and Harper's, Lantos was never criticized on the House floor, let alone censured." (Jeffrey Blankfort ‘A tale of two Congress members and the Capitol Police’ http://www.sfbayview.com/041206/atale041206.shtml April 15th 2006).

In 2003, america’s ruling jewish elite pushed the country into a proxy zionist invasion of iraq even though america’s gigantic multinational oil corporations and many american military leaders opposed the war. "Moreover, an ever-expanding rift has opened between the civilian Wolfowitz clique and America's career soldiers, many of whom do not want to be cannon fodder in a crusade supported by American Zionists and Southern Baptists to establish an Israeli-American condominium over the middle east. Career military officers, in an attempt to subvert the Wolfowitz team, are leaking documents to the press on a scale not seen since the closing years of the Vietnam war. In private, our soldiers deride the bloodthirsty neo-conservative civilian policymakers and pundits, many of whom avoided service in the US military before the draft was abolished, as "chickenhawks."" (Michael Lind ‘Israel Lobby Part 3’ http://www.newamerica.net/index.cfm?pg=article&DocID=989 October 1, 2002); "In 2003, the war in Iraq was opposed by virtually the entire professional class at the State Department, the CIA and the U.S. military, yet Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld launched their illegal, unilateral war anyway." (Robert Dreyfuss ‘Iraq War, Round Two’ http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/04/17/iraq_
war_round_two.php April 17, 2006).


For the last decade or so, the jewish owned media, jewish academia/think tanks, the jol, the jewish dominated congress, the jews in the bush administration, and the jos, have been advocating an american attack or invasion of iran. They are the only sector of american society pushing for such an attack. Please see The Jews Stirring up War Against Iran. Once again, just like the invasion of iraq, this war is not in america’s interests and is opposed by america’s oil companies and a substantial chunk of the american military.

The jol is currently campaigning to replace rumsfeld with a fanatical jewish extremist, joe liebermann, in order to help push the bush administration even closer to a war against iran. "Rumsfeld, under tremendous pressure from practically all of the top professional military officials, fears that an Israeli war will further accelerate US military losses. The pro-Israel lobby would like to replace the ultra-militarist Rumsfeld with the ultra-militarist Senator Joseph Lieberman, an unconditional Israel First Zealot." (James Petras ‘Israel's War with Iran’ http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m19081&l=i&size=1&hd=0 December 28, 2005); "More recently, they have taken advantage of the growing calls for a comprehensive shakeup in the administration to renew their demands for Rumsfeld's resignation, demands that ironically echoed those in recent days of their realist foes in retired military ranks, including former Central Command chief, Gen. Anthony Zinni, and Gen. Paul Eaton, who served as senior commander in Iraq." (Jim Lobe ‘Bush's War Hawks Edged Out of the Nest’ http://www.antiwar.com/lobe/?articleid=8803 April 4, 2006).

The Jewish Transformation of America’s Defence Policies.
If aliens visited the Earth in the mid 1970s they would have noted that america’s defence stance was quite distinct from that of the jos. If these aliens returned thirty years later their most obvious observation would be that america’s defence stance is now almost identical to that of the jos. In other words, the jewish owned media, jewish academia/think tanks, the jewish owned congress, the jol, and the jews in successive presidential administrations, have imported the jos’s defence posture into america. The jewish elite have colonized america’s defence establishment with jewish strategies and policies.

The jos’s defence strategy is based on unilateralism (acting without the support of their military allies), pre-emption, (the willingness to take military actions that are illegal in international law), and regional supremacism. "In January, Jane’s Intelligence Review reported that some Israeli strategists are wondering whether Israel’s current strategic doctrine, which mandates that Tel Aviv maintain absolute superiority over any potential rival, is really worth the trouble it causes. According to Jane’s, some Israeli defense intellectuals are arguing that the requirement "can create enemies where previously they did not exist." The alternative is for Israel to adopt a strategy of deterrence, the same doctrine that saw the United States through the Cold War, the doctrine Robert Tucker prescribed for the Mideast 30 years ago." (Scott McConnell ‘Mission Improbable’ http://www.amconmag.com/2006/2006_03_27/feature.html March 27, 2006). Because the jos has never acknowledged the existence of its nuclear weapons it has not had to publish a defence strategy outlining the circumstances in which these weapons might be used. This is extremely convenient since this means it does not have to publicly acknowledge its willingness to use a nuclear first strike. .. "after all, Israel has never even acknowledged its nukes, let alone declared a policy of "no first strike."" (Justin Raimondo ‘Steppingstone to War’ http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=8914 April 28, 2006).

America has changed its defence strategy from deterrence and containment to unilateralism, pre-emption, and global supremacy. In 1992 the american secretary of defense for policy paul wolfowitz wrote a defense planning guidance "final draft" which was initially denounced but later became policy under the bush administration. "Wolfowitz declared then that, with the threat of a Soviet attack gone, the US was the unchallenged sole superpower and should pursue its global agenda, including preemptive war and unilateral foreign-policy actions. An internal leak of the draft to the New York Times then led Bush Sr to announce that it was "only a draft and not US policy". By 2002, it was officially US policy." (F William Engdahl ‘The US's geopolitical nightmare’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HE09Ad01.html May 9, 2006). This jewish strategy later became known as the wolfowitz doctrine. "President Bush and his top aides entered the White House in early 2001 with a clear strategic objective: to resurrect the permanent-dominance doctrine spelled out in the Defense Planning Guidance (DPG) for fiscal years 1994-99, the first formal statement of U.S. strategic goals in the post-Soviet era. According to the initial official draft of this document, as leaked to the press in early 1992, the primary aim of U.S. strategy would be to bar the rise of any future competitor that might challenge America's overwhelming military superiority." (Michael T. Klare ‘Containing China’ http://www.antiwar.com/engelhardt/?articleid=8873 April 19, 2006); "This is the US policy as elaborated in Bush's June 2002 speech at the United States Military Academy in West Point, New York. There the president outlined a radical departure in explicit US foreign policy in two vital areas: a policy of preventive war, should the US be threatened by terrorists or by rogue states engaged in the production of weapons of mass destruction; second, the right of self-defense authorized the US to launch preemptive attacks against potential aggressors, cutting them off before they were able to launch strikes against the US. The new US doctrine, the Bush Doctrine, also proclaimed "the duty of the US to pursue unilateral military action when acceptable multilateral solutions cannot be found". It went further and declared it US policy that the "United States has, and intends to keep, military strengths beyond challenge". The US would take whatever actions necessary to continue its status as the world's sole military superpower. This resembled British Empire policy before World War I, namely that the Royal Navy must be larger than the world's next two largest navies put together." (F William Engdahl ‘The US's geopolitical nightmare’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HE09Ad01.html May 9, 2006).

Just as the jos’s defence stance aims to achieve and maintain absolute military (and economic) supremacy in the middle east to prevent the rise of any rival in the region, so america’s defence strategy is now to prevent the emergence of any political/economic/military rival around the world. America has adopted the jos’s defence strategy rather than forcing the jos to adopt its defence strategy. This proves yet again that america has become a jewish colony rather than the jos being an american client.

The Jewish Transformation of America’s Foreign Policies.
It is not only america’s national defence strategy that has been adopted virtually wholesale from the jos – courtesy of the jewish owned media, jewish academia/think tanks, the jewish dominated congress, and the jews in successive american administrations. Something similar has also happened to america’s foreign policies. America’s foreign policies have also been imported from the jos and are virtually identical to those being pursued by the jos. In effect, the jos and its political agents in america have manipulated america into implementing the jos’s foreign policies. This is yet more proof that america has become a jewish colony rather than the jos being an american client.

In the past america’s foreign policies were designed to promote the interests of american multi-national corporations around the world. There were occasions, however, on which the jol was able to force the american government into ignoring such interests for the sake of supporting the jos e.g. nixon’s airlift of military supplies to the jos in 1973; the undermining of détente with russia in 1974; and support for the jos’s invasion of the lebanon in the early 1980s.

However, as a result of the pentagon and new york bombings, america’s jewish elite became so influential over the bush administration it was more or less able to manipulate the administration into adopting the jos’s foreign policies as its own. The jos’s enemies have now become America’s enemies even though they pose not the slightest threat to america. "With the assault on Iraq," wrote the distinguished historian, David Hirst, "the U.S. was not merely adopting Israel's long-established methods - of initiative, offense and pre-emption - ; it was also adopting Israel's adversaries as its own..." (quoted in Jeffrey Blankfort ‘A War for Israel’ http://www.leftcurve.org/LC28WebPages/WarForIsrael.html April 2004).

The jos has never been a member of the civilized international community. It was runt at birth. In 1948 jews never attempted to confine the newly established jos to the borders which had been so generously set for it by the united nations. It has continued to act like a rogue nation ever since. What is remarkable is that instead of america being able to use its vast political and military power to civilize the jos and bring it within the fold of the international community, the jos and its agents in america have dragged america out of the international community and transformed it into a rogue nation. The jos’s contempt for international institutions and international law has now become a critical part of America’s foreign policies. "Indeed, under UN Security Council Resolution 242, which is meant to be the foundation of any peace, the acquisition of land through war is stated to be illegal. The wall itself is illegal. The International Court also ruled it to be illegal. And Israel ignored this ruling. So, of course, did the US." (Robert Fisk ‘Another Brick in the Wall’ http://www.palestinechronicle.com/story.php?sid=0404
06231246 April 04, 2006). Just like the jos, the united states has started taking unilateral action in global affairs, it launches pre-emptive wars, it illegally detains, and often tortures, innocent people. It does not oppose but disdains the international criminal court, the human rights council, and the kyoto protocol.


President bush has committed america to defending the jos. He did this without any debate in congress over such a huge military and political commitment. He has also recently adopted the zionist terminology of fighting a third world war. "US President George W. Bush has said the September 11 revolt of passengers against their hijackers on board Flight 93 had struck the first blow of "World War III". Mr Bush said: "I believe that. I believe that it was the first counter-attack to World War III." In 2002, then-White House spokesman Ari Fleischer explicitly declined to call the hunt for Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda group and its followers "World War III"." (Bush calls terror fight WWIII’ http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/
0,5478,19043507%255E1702,00.html May 6, 2006).


In the seemingly lopsided battle between america, a hyperpower and leader of the civilized free world, and the rogue jos, the latter has colonized the former and transformed it into its own image. It seems now as if america is proud to have become a pariah nation alongside the racist jos rather than taking its place with the community of nations. The jewish elite has transformed america into the spitting image of the jos. America is becoming as jewish as the jos. "Most vividly of all in our book, a congressional aide, writing pseudonymously under the name George Sutherland, contributed a savagely funny essay called "Our Vichy Congress." "As year chases year," Sutherland wrote, "the lobby's power to influence Congress on any issue of importance to Israel grows inexorably stronger . Israel's strategy of using its influence on the American political system to turn the U.S. national security apparatus into its own personal attack dog - or Golem - has alienated the United States from much of the Third World, has worsened U.S. ties to Europe amid rancorous insinuations of anti-Semitism, and makes the United States a hated bully."" (Alexander Cockburn ‘The uproar over the Isreal lobby’ http://www.freepress.org/columns/display/2/2006/1368 May 5, 2006).

This amazing political transformation of america’s national defence strategy and foreign policies did not happen because a group of white, anglo-saxon, protestants (wasps) sat down, looked into a crystal ball to determine which policies would maximize their long term interests and found the best policies were those being implemented by the jos. In reality, these policies were introduced by jews living in america in order to put the interests of the jos first. They were then pushed through the american political system by the combined weight of the jol, the jewish dominated media, jewish academics/think tanks, and the increasing proportion of jews in successive american administrations.

The following sections explore the degree to which america’s foreign policies are now determined by america’s ruling jewish elite working in conjunction with the jos.

Increasing American Support for the Jos at the Expense of the Palestinians.
In the decades prior to the collapse of the soviet empire, successive american administrations had attempted to play the role of an arbiter between jews and palestinians in palestine. However, after the collapse of the soviet empire, american jews in successive american administrations, with the help of the jol, the jewish dominated media, and jewish think tanks, took increasing control of america’s policies towards the jos. They increasingly favoured the jos at the expense of the palestinians. Clinton’s cabinet was dominated by american jews and allowed them to arbitrate between the jos and the palestinians. The inevitable consequence was that the palestinians found themselves confronting two sets of jewish opponents. Not surprisingly this "peace process" got nowhere. "The extreme tilt toward Israel is a dramatic break with American tradition that took place in the Clinton administration and - to a greater degree - the Bush administration." (Michael Lind ‘Israel Lobby Part 3’ http://www.newamerica.net/index.cfm?pg=article&DocID=989 October 1, 2002).

After the pentagon and new york bombings, bush suffered a number of ignominious public defeats at the hands of ariel sharon. Thereafter, he allowed sharon to do whatever he wanted in palestine no matter how barbaric. "In the months since my essay "The Israel lobby" appeared (Prospect, April 2002), US foreign policy has been aligned with - if not subordinated to - that of Ariel Sharon's Israel to a degree that nobody could have imagined last spring. To the dismay of moderate Israelis and our European allies, President Bush has endorsed Sharon's policies of reoccupation, the repudiation of the Oslo negotiations, the dismantling of the Palestinian Authority, and the diplomatic isolation of Arafat, while announcing unrealistic conditions for Palestinian statehood that give Israel a licence for indefinite rule over almost 4m conquered subjects." (Michael Lind ‘Israel Lobby Part 3’ http://www.newamerica.net/index.cfm?pg=article&DocID=989 October 1, 2002). This would have been unthinkable a decade earlier. Bush’s grovelling towards sharon has already been covered in, ‘Jewish control over Bush’ in the chapter entitled, ‘Jewish Ownership of the American Presidency’.

Increasing American Support for Jewish Supremacism in the Middle East.
After the collapse of the soviet empire, increasing jewish control over america’s foreign policies resulted in changes not only towards palestine but the middle east. America’s foreign policies towards the jos and the middle east have been adopted almost wholesale from the jos. America’s jewish ruling class is using america to implement the foreign policies of the jos.

America’s ruling Jewish Elite determines the Country’s Policies towards Iraq.
America’s ruling jewish elite manipulated america into a proxy zionist war to expel the iraqi army from kuwait (the so-called gulf war). This was followed by over a decade of utterly merciless sanctions on iraq. In 2003, america launched a proxy zionist invasion of iraq.

America’s ruling Jewish Elite determines America’s Policies towards Iran.
The jewish elite which runs america has also had a critical impact on america’s stance towards iran. After the pentagon and new york bombings, america received a great deal of assistance from iran (and, as will be seen, also from syria and pakistan) in its so-called war against terrorism and the invasion of afghanistan. Iran offered to do a great deal more to assist america but, in 2002, the neocons within the bush administration forced bush to turn his back on iran and define it as part of the axis of evil in line with the stance taken by the jos. "After the Sept. 11 attacks, U.S. officials responsible for preparing for war in Afghanistan needed Iran's help to unseat the Taliban and establish a stable government in Kabul. Iran had organized resistance by the Northern Alliance and had provided arms and funding at a time when the United States had been unwilling to do so. It was thanks to the Northern Alliance Afghan troops, which were supported primarily by the Iranians, that the Taliban was driven out of Kabul in mid-November. Two weeks later, the Afghan opposition groups were convened in Bonn under United Nations auspices to agree on a successor regime. At that meeting, the Northern Alliance was demanding 60 percent of the portfolios in an interim government, which was blocking agreement by other opposition groups. According to U.S. special envoy to Afghanistan James Dobbins, Iran played a "decisive role" in persuading the Northern Alliance delegate to compromise. But the cooperation against al-Qaeda was not the priority for the anti-Iranian interests in the White House and the Pentagon." (Gareth Porter ‘How Neocons Sabotaged Iran's Help on al-Qaeda’ http://www.antiwar.com/orig/porter.php?articleid=8590 February 23, 2006).

America’s ruling Jewish Elite determines America’s Policies towards Syria.
The jewish elite which runs america also had a critical impact on the country’s foreign policies towards syria. In 1991 syria supported, both militarily and politically, the proxy zionist war to eject iraq from kuwait. After the pentagon and new york bombings, syria, just like iran, assisted america in its so-called war against terrorism and helped america in the aftermath of the invasion of iraq. "Turning to Syria, until the March 2003 invasion of Iraq Syria under President Bashar Al-Assad enjoyed reasonably good relations with the West. We should also remember that Syria fought alongside the US-led allies during the Gulf War. Syria also voted, albeit reluctantly, for the UN resolution that oiled the invasion, and was a strong partner in the so-called 'War on Terror'. Then, lo and behold, Syria could do no right. Suddenly, it was accused to all kinds of 'crimes' from hiding Iraq's mythical weapons of mass destruction, harbouring insurgents and terrorists, and allowing the free passage of fighters and arms into Iraq. Today the US is actively engaged in weakening the Al-Assad government and is supporting opposition parties. If it is successful, experts predict that Syria, like Iraq, will fall victim to sectarianism and internecine conflict." (Linda S. Heard ‘Is the US Waging Israel's Wars?’ http://www.counterpunch.org/heard04252006.html April 25, 2006); "Drezner closes by appearing to acknowledge that AIPAC is highly influential on congressional policy toward Syria, but dismisses the policy itself as mere saber-rattling. He ignores the opportunity cost of the US having lost Syria’s cooperation in the war on terror, and the impact on Syrian willingness to police its borders to intercept volunteers going to fight US troops in Iraq. Indeed, the AIPAC-authored "Syria Accountability Act" certainly has contributed to US battlefield deaths in Iraq. In what way was it in the interests of the United States to end Syria’s cooperation against al-Qaeda and to impose an economic boycott?" (Juan Cole ‘More on Autonomous Regions’ http://www.juancole.com/2006_05_01_juancole_archive.html May 02, 2006).

The neocons in the bush administration have been using american power to promote the jos’s foreign policies towards syria. "A more recent US-Israeli role commenced in mid-November, 2004. A demonstration was called by former Christian General Michel Aoun. (Aoun testified to the US Congress in 2003, and Congress favors him as a post-Assad Lebanese president). US diplomats coached a vanguard of unwitting Lebanese youth in CIA "Triple U" techniques (uncontrollable urban unrest). Opposition sources revealed that a downtown rally of 3000 mostly Christian student activists protesting "Syrians Out!" had been organized by the US Embassy in Beirut. The Associated Press reported on November 19, 2004, "One demonstrator appealed to the US president, holding a placard that read: 'Bush help us save Lebanon.' Another dressed up as Osama bin Laden but with the words "Syrian Terror" on his chest. He held a toy gun to the head of a protester who was wrapped in the Lebanese flag..." Lebanese riot police allowed this unprecedented pre-Cedar rehearsal without arrests because of a deal worked out beforehand with US Ambassador Jeffrey Feltman. Feltman, closely linked to Ariel Sharon and Karl Rove, is an associate of the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans that created the false evidence and "mushroom cloud" intelligence used to justify attacks on Iraq. This 2004 rehearsal demonstration was answered by a counter protest of 300,000 on November 30 against UN Resolution 1559." (Trish Schuh ‘Faking the Case Against Syria’ http://www.counterpunch.org/schuh11182005.html November 18, 2005).

America’s ruling Jewish Elite influences America’s Policies towards Kurdish Independence in Iraq.
The jos, and america’s ruling jewish elite, supports the creation of an independent kurdistan in iraq to undermine the power of the arab world. At present, the bush administration does not. It is not in america’s interests to support kurdish independence in iraq because it undermines iraqi sovereignty. It is also opposed by america’s allies turkey, saudi arabia, and other arab states. And yet america has been shifting in the direction of the jos’s policies towards the kurds.

Increasing American Support for Jewish Supremacism beyond the Middle East.
America’s jewish ruling elite has also had a critical impact on shaping america’s foreign policies towards countries surrounding the middle east e.g. kurdistan, turkey, india, pakistan, and even as will be seen, russia.

The Jewish Elite’s support for the creation of a Greater Kurdistan.
The jos supports not merely the creation of an independent kurdistan in iraq but the creation of a greater kurdistan covering territory annexed from iraq, iran, and syria, and possibly even turkey. "So, as the bombs fly over Iran, the Kurds would be likely to seize the day and fight for the recognition of a Kurdish state that deletes portions of present-day Turkey, Iran, Syria and Iraq (http://www.kncna.org/docs/map.asp) from the map. This is no idle dream. The American based KNC openly advocates a United Free Kurdistan. One day, there will be a Kurdish state. That could be done in a non-violent fashion rather than as a consequence of a misguided military adventure against Iran." (John Stanton ‘Strike Iran, Watch Pakistan and Turkey Fall’ http://www.counterpunch.org/stanton04242006.html April 24, 2006).

Although america does not support a greater kurdistan, it has been shifting in the jos’s direction over such a state. "Turkey blames the PKK for the deaths of more than 30,000 people since it launched its armed campaign for an ethnic homeland in 1984. Around 5,000 PKK rebels are believed to be operating out of camps in the mountains of northern Iraq. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the formation of a new Iraqi government would help boost coordination between the three countries and prevent border incursions by the PKK, seen by both Ankara and Washington as a terrorist group. "We obviously also are sharing information. The U.S. was active in helping in the past with the PKK and we will be active in the future," she said during a visit to Turkey." (Rice Pledges US Help to urkey against Kurd Rebels’ http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060425/pl_nm/
iraq_usa_turkey_dc April 25th 2006); "The Turkish government has frequently complained about the duplicity of the US government as it plays its Kurdish cards. The US has largely stayed away from Turkey's battle with its Kurds while actively supporting Kurdish groups in Iran and Syria with funds and arms. The creation of Kurdistan in Northern Iraq has infuriated Turkish leaders. When Condolezza Rice visits with Turkish officials in late April, these matters are sure to be topics of discussion." (John Stanton ‘Strike Iran, Watch Pakistan and Turkey Fall’ http://www.counterpunch.org/stanton04242006.html April 24, 2006); "According to a Reuters bulletin dated April 20th, Turkey has increased its troop presence in Kurdish dominated Southeastern Turkey by 40,000-bringing the total to 290,000. The Turkish government made that move because the American-backed Kurdish government in Northern Iraq/Kurdistan is likely to supply the Kurdistan Workers Party (PPK) with arms and intelligence on Turkish military movements in Hakkari, Van, Sirnak and other major cities in the country. It is likely that insurgents in Iraq have been training the PPK in the tactics that have been wildly successful against US forces in Iraq." (John Stanton ‘Strike Iran, Watch Pakistan and Turkey Fall’ http://www.counterpunch.org/stanton04242006.html April 24, 2006).


Turkey’s concern about the establishment of a greater kurdistan is not merely about the effect this will have on its own kurdish population but the impact the kurds will have on turks living in iraq. "Senator Biden and Leslie Gelb propose a Bosnia solution for Iraq. That is, a very loose federation of three big ethnic enclaves. They seem to just surrender Kirkuk province to Kurdistan and don't seem aware of the Turkoman population as a factor there. There are on the order of 750,000 Turkomans, and they have been adopted as protectees by Turkey, and they are not going to accede to Kurdistan. There could easily be a Kurdish-Turkey war if a settlement is not made with the Turkomans. The FT reports on Iran's firefights with the radical Marxist Pejak faction of the PKK, which has carried out sabotage and terror attacks in Iran. Iraqi Kurdistan seems to be giving both PKK and Pejek safe haven. There are said to be 5,000 PKK fighters in Iraq, who fled eastern Turkey. This problem of Iraqi Kurdish leaders allowing their territory to be used to attack tarkets in neighboring Turkey and Iran has produced both Turkish and Iranian shelling into Iraqi Kurdistan in recent days. Somehow the Turkish attacks are ignored or read as understandable, but the Iranian ones are unsupportable. A policy of Kurdistan encouraging autonomy for other regional Kurdistans inevitably leads to bloodshed." (Juan Cole ‘More on Autonomous Regions’ http://www.juancole.com/2006_05_01_juancole_archive.html May 02, 2006).

Not surprisingly, turkey has recently announced it will not allow the american military to launch attacks on iran from turkey. "Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul said Sunday that his country refused a request from the United States to attack Iran from its Air Force base in Incirlik, despite the U.S. offer of a nuclear reactor, according to a report in Al Biyan." (‘Turkey won’t let U.S. attack Iran from its land’ http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3245382,00.html May 1 2006).

It has to be suggested that if america attacks iran then it will have to rely heavily on the kurds for military support on the ground. The quid pro quo for this will inevitably lead the americans to condone the creation of a greater kurdistan. If america attacks iran, the only way it will be able to control the country will be by carving it up and allowing the kurds to annexe north west iran.

The Jewish Elite determines America’s Policies towards Turkey.
As regards turkey it has been stated, "It is this neocon-Jewish joint venture which has to a large extent shaped the US policy on Turkey for many years, with its strong arms in Congress, bureaucracy, trade and think tanks. The neocon-Jewish alliance has been the leading group who kept the positive interest in Ataturk’s Turkey alive in Washington so far, due to their US-Israel focused regional plans and because they are concerned about secularism in Islamic nations. As for the Pentagon, the chief expert on Turkish affairs there is Ambassador Eric Edelman, who has a blood feud with JDP and known to have close ties with the neocon-Jewish community." (Ali H. Aslan ‘The Wrath of Neocon-Jewish Alliance’ http://www.zaman.com/?bl=columnists&alt=&trh=
20060412&hn=31942 April 12, 2006). The ambassadors to turkey and syria are both jewish neocons.


The Jewish Elite determines America’s Policies towards India and Pakistan.
Since the mid 1990s, the jos has been developing a close political relationship with the indian government, "India became the latest partner of convenience. By the year 2000 Israel’s nuclear commerce with India reportedly reached $500 million per year. (Yossi Melman, "India's Visiting strongman Wants to Expand Nuclear Cooperation with Israel," Ha'aretz, June 16, 2000)." (Mark Gaffney ‘Will Iran Be Next?’ http://informationclearinghouse.info/article3288.htm May 8th 2003); "Current military contacts between Israel and India, another nuclear power, bring up questions of nuclear cooperation. Pakistani sources have already voiced concerns over a possible joint Israeli-Indian attack on Pakistan's nuclear facilities." (Warner D. Farr, LTC, U.S. Army 'The Third Temple's Holy of Holies - Israel's Nuclear Weapons' The Counterproliferation Papers Future Warfare Series No. 2 quoted in Lili 'Israel's 'Use' Of Its Nuclear Weapons Against US' RENSE.COM 26.2.2003). The indian government has also benefited from this relationship not merely in refining their nuclear weapons but in suppressing moslems in kashmir. "Images of an Israeli pilot and an Indian-born civilian engineer drifting weightlessly alongside the other crew members from the U.S. military (in the space shuttle colombia) were interpreted as a threat across much of South Asia and the Middle East. In Kashmir, torn by a Muslim insurgency against Indian rule since 1947, the three partner countries India, Israel and the U.S. are referred to as "The Nexus." The connection goes back to Israeli instructors who have been training Indian troops to suppress the Muslim majority population in Kashmir using the brutal methods tested in the West Bank and Gaza Strip." (Yoichi Clark ' The Wrong Stuff' Pacific News Service http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=15092 3.2.2003).

In contrast, throughout the 1990s, america remained neutral towards both india and pakistan given the dangers posed by their conflict over kashmir which threatened to result in a nuclear confrontation between the two countries. However, after the pentagon and new york bombings, the bush administration had to depend heavily on pakistani military assistance during its invasion of afghanistan. After the occupation of afghanistan, the pakistan government was vital in helping to round up suspected al quaeda supporters.

In late 2005, however, the americans suddenly turned their back on pakistan in favour of india. The jewish elite in america was determined to stop the construction of a massive oil pipeline from iran running through pakistan to india. "Condoleeza Rice however, has not minced her words about the US opposition the gas pipeline project. "We've voiced our concerns to the Indian Government about the gas pipeline with Iran." said Rice. Under a US law, the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996, George Bush can penalize any foreign firm that invests more than 20 million dollars in the energy sectors of either country. In other words, India was required to sacrifice the pipeline to the nuclear agreement." (Ingmar Lee ‘Bush's Destabilizing Nuke Deal with India’ http://www.counterpunch.org/lee05082006.html May 8, 2006).

The only bargaining chip the americans could use to undermine this deal was to support india’s nuclear power programme - despite the fact that india is not a member of the non-proliferation treaty. "Contrary to the assertions of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, it is widely believed that during the nuclear bargaining, he did make three major concessions to Bush. First, India supported Bush's recent machinations against Iran and the IAEA, and subsequently at the UN Security Council. Secondly, Singh conceded to terminate the $4 billion "Peace Pipeline" project, which was to have delivered natural gas from Iran, across Pakistan, to India which was slated to be operational by 2011. And Thirdly, Singh has demoted the main architect and proponent of the Peace Pipeline, his Union Petroleum Minister, Mani Shankar Aiyar to the post of Sports and Youth Affairs." (Ingmar Lee ‘Bush's Destabilizing Nuke Deal with India’ http://www.counterpunch.org/lee05082006.html May 8, 2006). See also, "With the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline in the doldrums because of US pressure ..." (M K Bhadrakumar ‘Cheney puts Moscow to the hardness test’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HE09Ag01.html May 9, 2006). (However, engdahl believes the ‘peace pipeline’ deal is still on, "Iran is also moving on plans to deliver natural gas via a pipeline to Pakistan and India. Energy ministers from the three countries met in Doha recently and plan to meet again this month in Pakistan." (F William Engdahl ‘The US's geopolitical nightmare’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HE09Ad01.html May 9, 2006)).

America’s nuclear deal with india made a mockery of its stance towards iran’s development of civil nuclear power. America was assisting india to do what it was insisting that iran should not be allowed to do.

Just as importantly, america’s nuclear deal with india also undermined the authority of president musharraf in pakistan which in turn jeopardized his support for the american occupation of afghanistan. "In a hard-hitting opinion piece published in the Washington Times on Friday, Michael F. Scheuer, a 22-year CIA veteran, describes Pakistan as an ally that did far more and took more lethal risks to accomplish America’s ‘dirty work’ than any other of its allies, including all of Nato, in the war against al Qaedaism. The CIA veteran says that since 9/11, Washington has often forced Pakistani leaders to take steps that run counter to Pakistan’s national interests. "Pakistan, for example, had no enemies in the Taliban or al Qaeda until (Pakistani leaders) made them such at our behest. Likewise, there could have been no better Afghan government for Pakistan than the Taliban regime, and yet (Pakistani leaders) helped America destroy it and replace it with the Karzai regime, a government that has allowed an enormous increase in the Indian presence in Afghanistan. To date, Pakistan has lost more soldiers killed and wounded than the US-led coalition in Afghanistan. More dangerously, the offensives … are stoking the fires of a potential civil war between Islamabad and the Pashtun tribes that dominate much of the Pakistan-Afghanistan border." This situation, he says, is heaven-sent for Pakistan’s enemies, "the Karzai regime and India, to fuel Pashtun irredentism." If successful, this people could lead to the creation of a country ungovernable without Western bayonets, reducing Islamabad’s domain to an indefensible sliver of territory, faced by angry warlike tribes to the west and a billion-plus, nuclear-armed Indians to the east. For New Delhi, this would be nirvana on earth." (Anwar Iqbal ‘Don’t push Islamabad too far, ex-CIA official tells govt’ http://www.dawn.com/2006/04/08/top12.htm April 8, 2006).

In effect, then, america’s foreign policy towards india has now been brought into line with that of the jos. "The Bush administration continues an escalating spiral toward conflict with Iran, using Iran's nuclear policy as its primary focus. At the same time, the administration is reducing restrictions on other emerging nuclear states that pose a far more serious and immediate threat to world peace. The United States also recently removed nuclear restrictions imposed upon India for their thinly disguised nuclear weapons program. Much of the impetus for this reportedly came from the head of the export licensing arm of the Commerce Department, who is lobbying for a job as ambassador to India and who has a very cozy relationship with the Defense Department's neoconservative leadership." (William O. Beeman, Donald A. Weadon ‘Iran as Bush's nuclear bogeyman’ http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.
cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/09/30/EDG
B790KB01.DTL September 30, 2004).


Not surprisingly, the jol in america is currently doing its best to ensure the passage of the necessary legislation for bush’s nuclear deal with india. "What has been missing from the discussion on the nuclear deal signed in India by Resident Bush is the behind the scenes role that the Israel Lobby is apparently playing to get it approved. Not only is Lantos pushing for it, so are the Democrats closest to the Lobby such as Joe Biden, long on its payroll and John Kerry. There will be those with "softer" ties such as Russ Feingold and Barbara Boxer who will oppose it, but the strong connections that have been made over the past two years between the Israel Lobby and the Indian-American community guarantee that it will pass. Just as the Lobby has protected Turkey in the US arena, it also does the same now for India as well as having close ties to the Anti-Cuban lobby which guarantee that there will be no change in America's Cuba policy no matter what party sits in the White House and controls congress after 2008. Until Americans begin to understand how much clout the Lobby actually has, quite apart from its current efforts to foment an attack on Iran, the country will continue down this dangerous road. Those who, whatever their motive, pretend that the Israel Lobby is not playing a decisive role in formulating US policy, become, therefore, its unwitting accomplices. This is not to say that without the presence of the Lobby, the country would suddenly transform itself and pursue more humane policies, but that the power and presence of the Lobby has produced global conflagration that otherwise would not have taken place, such as the present war in Iraq, a possible attack on Iran and, to be sure, unconditional US support for decades of repression and dispossession of the people of Palestine." (Jeff Blankfort ‘Lantos, Lobby Pushing for Indian Nuclear Deal’ jblankfort@earthlink.net April 8th 2006).

America’s Jewish Elite focuses America’s Foreign Policies on the Middle East.
Further evidence of the jewish elite’s control over america’s foreign policies is its success in focusing the bush administration’s attention almost exclusively on the jos and the middle east thereby ignoring american interests around the rest of the world - especially south america and the far east. Indeed, america’s jews-only foreign policy has drained american political and military resources to such an extent that it would be difficult to use them in other parts of the world to promote or defend america’s global interests. "Despite Bush's recent 'historic' trip to India and other top officials' hasty attempts to reassert America's global dominance, there should be no illusions that the US' chief foreign policy debacle starts and ends with the Middle East - especially its 'special' relationship with Israel. While the latter has served the role of the client state since its establishment on ethnically cleansed Palestinian territories, this relationship was significantly altered in recent years, with the pro-Israeli lobby taking centre stage, not simply by influencing US foreign policy toward Israel, but eventually by directing it altogether in the region." (Ramzy Baroud ‘Hubris and Neglect: The Imminent Decline of the American Empire?’ http://www.counterpunch.org/baroud04122006.html April 12, 2006).

South America escaping America’s Orbit.
Over the last five years, a number of south american countries have undergone a political transformation that poses an increasing threat to america’s control over its own so-called backyard, the interests of america’s multinational corporations on the continent, and america’s oil supplies. Leon hadar has pointed out, "in Latin America, the backlash against American-led "neo-liberalism" has manifested itself in the election of leftist governments in Brazil and Argentina, and the growing power of movements representing the indigenous populations in Bolivia and Peru." (Leon Hadar ‘Saying Good Bye to Dubai; Bidding Adieu to Globalization?’ http://www.antiwar.com/orig/hadar.php?articleid=8715 March 17, 2006). Noam chomsky has stated, "For the first time, they are beginning to integrate and in quite a few different ways. Venezuela and Cuba is one case. MERCOSUR, [the trading association now including many Latin American countries] which is still not functioning very much, is another case. Venezuela, of course, just joined MERCOSUR, which is a big step forward for it and it was greatly welcomed by the presidents of Argentina, Brazil." (Noam Chomsky ‘What's happening is something completely new in the history of the hemisphere." - March 7, 2006); "Meanwhile, in Latin America left-centre governments prevail from Venezuela to Argentina. The indigenous populations have become much more active and influential, particularly in Bolivia and Ecuador, where they either want oil and gas to be domestically controlled or, in some cases, oppose production altogether. Many indigenous people apparently do not see any reason why their lives, societies and cultures should be disrupted or destroyed so that New Yorkers can sit in their SUVs in traffic gridlock." (Noam Chomsky ‘The Crumbling Empire’ http://www.counterpunch.org/chomsky03152006.html March 15, 2006).

The most recent development underlining this escape from american manipulation is bolivia’s nationalization of its natural gas industry, "Bolivian President Evo Morales seized control of the country's natural gas industry Monday, sending soldiers to occupy fields that he contends private companies have plundered for years. Morales said that unless foreign energy firms agreed to give Bolivia's state oil company oversight of production and a majority of their revenue generated in Bolivia, the government would evict them from the fields. "The time has come, the awaited day, a historic day in which Bolivia retakes absolute control of our natural resources," Morales said during a televised speech from a gas field near the country's southern border. "The looting by foreign companies has ended." Morales's announcement was expected, but his deployment of troops to gas fields was a strong statement in a region where governments are moving to block outside influence, particularly from the United States, and exert more control over the energy industry. Venezuela recently voided drilling contracts with private companies at 32 oil fields, demanding new contracts that give the state oil company a 60 percent stake. Ecuador is finalizing a law that could limit excessive profits by foreign crude producers. Bolivia boasts South America's second-largest reserves of natural gas, behind Venezuela. The country does not play a major role in international energy markets, but its natural gas exports are important to some of its neighbors. About 25 international energy firms operate in Bolivia. Brazil's Petrobras and Spain's Repsol YPF have the largest operations in the country, and Exxon Mobil Corp. of the United States maintains a smaller presence. A longtime leader of Bolivia's coca growers union, Morales was elected in December after leading protests railing against foreign corporations and the management of the country's gas resources, which are mostly located in the Santa Cruz province in the southeastern corner of Bolivia. He spent the weekend in Cuba with ideological ally Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan leader who has helped lead a regional shift away from the privatization of South American industries and toward more state control." (Monte Reel and Steven Mufson ‘Bolivian President Seizes Gas Industry’ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/01
/AR2006050100583_pf.html May 2, 2006); "Vice President Alvaro Garcia said the military and officials from state energy company Yacimentos Petroliferos Bolivianos (YPFB) had begun occupying gas fields, pipelines and refineries as soon as Morales signed the document. Bolivia has some 48.8 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, which is being exploited by some 20 foreign firms, including Brazil's Petrobras, Britain's BG Group PLC, France's Total, and Spanish-Argentine Repsol-YPF." (Bolivia nationalizes natural gas deposits, sends army to fields’ http://english.people.com.cn/200605/02/eng20060502
_262579.html May 02, 2006); "With the nationalization of Bolivia's natural gas and petroleum resources President Evo Morales, the country's first Indian president, is dramatically reshaping his country's destiny. On May 1st he proclaimed "an historic day has arrived. Now the gas and oil that flows from our land will no longer belong to foreigners." This came just after his return from Havana, Cuba where he signed the People's Trade Agreement with Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez of Venezuela." (Roger Burbach ‘Bolivia's Radical Realignment’ http://www.counterpunch.org/burbach05042006.html May 4, 2006).


The bush administration virtually ignores the political, military, and economic, developments in south america because america’s jewish elite keeps the administration focussed on implementing the jos’s foreign policies in the middle east. "With the government's expropriation decree, fifteen corporations have been nationalized, with foreign capital from a wide variety of nations, including the United States, Spain, Great Britain, Brazil, France and the Netherlands. The trade agreement and the nationalization of Bolivia's natural resources mark a dramatic shift in hemispheric affairs. Morales is serving notice on Washington that he is becoming part of a radical bloc of nations in Latin America that are no longer subservient to the United States." (Roger Burbach ‘Bolivia's Radical Realignment’ http://www.counterpunch.org/burbach05042006.html May 4, 2006). Ironically, seemingly unaware of the theoretical implications of what he is saying, noam chomsky has pointed out, "Every day Latin America, too, is becoming more independent. Now Asia and the Americas are strengthening their ties while the reigning superpower, the odd man out, consumes itself in misadventures in the Middle East." (Noam Chomsky ‘The Crumbling Empire’ http://www.counterpunch.org/chomsky03152006.html March 15, 2006). Surely if american wasps were implementing foreign policies to promote the the interests of wasps’ multinational corporations - as chomsky believes - and not those determined by the jol/jos, then wouldn’t they be paying far more attention to south america than to the middle east?

Another major step away from american control over the south american continent is brazil’s development of nuclear energy which, it is suspected, may eventually result in the development of nuclear weapons. It is ironic then that brazil is doing exactly what iran has been accused of doing and yet whilst iran is being condemned and bullied despite its renunciation of nuclear weapons, brazil is virtually being ignored. "Brazil has inaugurated its first uranium enrichment facility to produce the type of fuel for nuclear power plants that Iran is running into trouble for attempting to produce. There are strong suspicions that the objective of the Iranian nuclear program is to eventually build a bomb, but Brazil has managed to assure the international community its intentions are industrial and commercial, not military. On Friday, Indústrias Nucleares do Brasil officially launched the first two centrifuges needed for uranium enrichment at a facility in Resende, in the state of Rio de Janeiro. The centrifuges, which are already operating, have the capacity to produce two percent of the uranium needed to run Brazil's two nuclear power plants." (Brazil Officially Starts First Uranium Enrichment Facility’ http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/may2006/2006-05-08-04.asp May 8, 2006).

Although america’s policy is to keep the south american continent ‘nuclear-free’ it is doing little to deter brazil from going down the path of developing nuclear weapons, "The Bush administration continues an escalating spiral toward conflict with Iran, using Iran's nuclear policy as its primary focus. At the same time, the administration is reducing restrictions on other emerging nuclear states that pose a far more serious and immediate threat to world peace. Brazil is now defying the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) regarding questions over its nuclear program, which is not benign. This would violate the long-standing U.S. determination to keep South America nuclear- free. And the U.S. response? No seismic rumbles of the kind directed toward Iran are apparent here. And forget South Korean enrichment efforts - clearly they were "just a mistake."" (William O. Beeman, Donald A. Weadon ‘Iran as Bush's nuclear bogeyman’ http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.
cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/09/30/EDG
B790KB01.DTL September 30, 2004).


South america is drifting out of america’s political control to such an extent it is even developing relations with iran! "The American Jewish Committee has issued a stern warning over expanding relations between Iran and a number of Latin American nations. "Latin American countries are playing with fire," said Dina Siegel Vann, director of AJC's Latin America and Latino Institute, and author of a new briefing paper, Iran's Presence in Latin America: Trade, Energy and Terror. "Not only do some Latin American nations weaken international resolve to curb Iran's nuclear program, but they also are allowing Tehran a foothold for terrorism in the western hemisphere." Siegel Vann assesses the growing economic and political relations between Iran and several countries in the region. To further these ties the president of the Iranian Parliament visited these countries in February. Those nations most open to deepening relations with Tehran, like Cuba and Venezuela, are headed by populist political leaders who view their ties to Iran as part of a political realignment that excludes the United States, writes Siegel Vann." (AJC Press Release ‘AJC Report Warns of Growing Iranian Presence in Latin America’ http://www.ajc.org/site/c.ijITI2PHKoG/b.851561/apps/

nl/content2.asp?content_id={A0E4B878-5D23-4D18-BED

B-E7BF6FFF1464}¬oc=1&tr=y&auid=1537256 March 28, 2006).

America has become so Judaeocentric it has allowed China to implement its Global Strategy.
The jewish elite’s decision to focus america’s foreign policies on boosting the jos’s supremacy in the middle east has had a second set of adverse consequences for america’s global interests. These adverse consequences are on a far greater scale of political, economic, and military, significance than those concerning south america. Since the pentagon and new york bombings, america’s jews-only foreign policy has also led it to virtually ignoring china. "But the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington on Sept. 11, 2001, resulted in the bumping of China to the diplomatic back-burner. On the one hand, obsessed with the 'war on terrorism,' the Americans shifted most of their attention to the Middle East while pressing the Chinese to work with them to combat the 'terrorist threat' (which they did)." (Leon Hadar ‘The War on Terror Is Over, and China Won’ http://www.antiwar.com/orig/hadar.php?articleid=8882 April 21, 2006). America’s jewish elite has not merely bogged down the american military in iraq for the last three years - it has also done the same to the bush administration. "For the next two years, when so much effort was devoted to rebuilding Iraq in America's image and crushing an unexpected and potent Iraqi insurgency, China was distinctly on the back-burner." (Michael T. Klare ‘Containing China’ http://www.antiwar.com/engelhardt/?articleid=8873 April 19, 2006).

Whilst america’s jewish elite has kept the bush administration’s attention on iraq and the middle east, the chinese have been busy establishing economic, political, and military, alliances around the world. "China's increased investment in modern military capabilities and its growing economic reach in Southeast Asia, Africa, and Latin America – much of it tied to the procurement of oil and other vital commodities …." (Michael T. Klare ‘Containing China’ http://www.antiwar.com/engelhardt/?articleid=8873 April 19, 2006). These developments are allowing china to emerge as a superpower and thus, eventually, as a rival to the united states. In other words, then, america’s jewish elite has forced the bush administration into ignoring its own defence strategy which is to prevent the emergence of any rival to america’s global dominance.

Whilst the americans, under their jewish yoke, have been politically and militarily bogged down in iraq and preoccupied with iran, the chinese have made huge political and economic gains in south east asia. "It was not China's military moves, however, that truly alarmed American policymakers – most professional analysts are well aware of the continuing inferiority of Chinese weaponry – but rather Beijing's success in using its enormous purchasing power and hunger for resources to establish friendly ties with such long-standing U.S. allies as Thailand, Indonesia, and Australia. Because the Bush administration had done little to contest this trend while focusing on the war in Iraq, China's rapid gains in Southeast Asia finally began to ring alarm bells in Washington." (Michael T. Klare ‘Containing China’ http://www.antiwar.com/engelhardt/?articleid=8873 April 19, 2006);

Whilst the americans, under their jewish yoke, have been politically and militarily bogged down in iraq and preoccupied with iran, the chinese have made huge political and economic gains in south america. "These countries are also diversifying their international relations including commercial relations. So there's a lot of export to China, and accepting of investment from China. That's particularly true of Venezuela, but also the other big exporters like Brazil and Chile. And China is eager to gain access to other resources of Latin America." (Noam Chomsky ‘What's happening is something completely new in the history of the hemisphere." - March 7, 2006). The fact that china is developing trade links with south american countries is by no means a minor political move on the global chessboard, "China and India, on the other hand, continue to achieve astounding economic growth with China's economic might and relevance to soon surpass that of the US. In fact, there is an intense diplomatic clash underway between the US and China, since the latter has dared to violate the understanding of the Monroe Doctrine of 1823, which gave the US alone the right to manage its Latin American domains. For the first time, says a BBC analysis, a foreign country has challenged American influence in the region, and successfully so. Indeed, China is upgrading its economic relations with Brazil -both increasingly formidable economic powers -in ways that will eventually help Brazil break away from a domineering US hold." (Ramzy Baroud ‘Hubris and Neglect: The Imminent Decline of the American Empire?’ http://www.counterpunch.org/baroud04122006.html April 12, 2006); "We Americans consider the Monroe Doctrine – no foreign power is to come into our hemisphere – to be holy writ." (Patrick J. Buchanan ‘Why Are We Baiting Putin?’ http://www.antiwar.com/pat/?articleid=8964 May 9, 2006).

Whilst the americans, under their jewish yoke, have been politically and militarily bogged down in iraq and preoccupied with iran, the chinese have made huge gains in pakistan. It was noted above that america’s ruling jewish elite coaxed the bush administration into a nuclear agreement with india which infuriated the pakistan government. This deal would shift the balance of power between india and pakistan increasingly in favour of the former. The pakistan government could not tolerate such a development. Musharraf immediately went to china to conclude important deals in the hope of averting an imbalance of power with india. "When Bush and Musharraf met in Islamabad, they didn't even have a clear-cut agenda to discuss, unlike Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who had met earlier and agreed on a number of important issues, including a civilian nuclear accord. Against this background (of musharraf refusing to allow the americans to interview kahn), the US will definitely not provide Pakistan with any cooperation in the field of civilian nuclear energy, as it did with India. Bush clearly drew a line during his press conference in Islamabad in response to a question on whether his country would deal equally with India and Pakistan. He said Pakistan and India had a different history of nuclear development and requirements. Between the lines, he clearly outlined the fact that India had developed its nuclear program indigenously and had never been involved in proliferation, while Pakistan had obtained its program clandestinely and then sold on secrets. Further, in calculated remarks ahead of Bush's visit, Afghanistan lashed out at Pakistan for failing to deal with Taliban bases and their activities on Pakistani territory. This prompted Musharraf to pay a fruitful strategic visit to China, during which he not only struck a deal for fighter aircraft with an advanced delivery system, but also for nuclear plants. This was a clear message to the United States that Pakistan had options. "They [US] should be ready for worse times coming ... we have substitutes and they know why I went there [China] before his [Bush's] visit," Musharraf said at a press conference in Islamabad, which was repeatedly broadcast on all private and state-run media." (Syed Saleem Shahzad ‘Musharraf caught in an arc of turmoil’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/HC08Df03.html Mar 8, 2006). "In another stellar example of incompetence, the USA-Indo nuclear deal struck by President Bush with Prime Minister Singh this past March was suppose to be a signal to Russia and China that the US is almighty. The USA seemingly gave no thought to what the deal with a country that refused to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty might create. Pakistan has vowed to increase its nuclear weapons capability. China has offered to build reactors for Pakistan and can tinker with America's prosperity via currency manipulation." (John Stanton ‘Strike Iran, Watch Pakistan and Turkey Fall’ http://www.counterpunch.org/stanton04242006.html April 24, 2006).

Paradoxically, whilst the americans believe they have now secured india’s support, many indians believe their country could benefit enormously from the rivalry between america and china/russia so they are unwilling to commit themselves fully to the american cause. The shanghai cooperation organization, an alliance between russia and china (more details below) has invited india to become a member. "At the same SCO meeting next month, India, which Bush is personally trying to woo as a geopolitical Asian "counterweight" to China, will also be invited to join the organization, as well as Mongolia and Pakistan. The SCO is gaining in geopolitical throw-weight quite substantially." (F William Engdahl ‘The US's geopolitical nightmare’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HE09Ad01.html May 9, 2006). Indeed, whilst bush may have been savouring his diplomatic success in getting a nuclear deal with india, the indian government was secretly reaching an agreement with the russians to provide it with nuclear fuel. Bush must have been appalled to hear of this deal behind his back. This is hardly the sort of behaviour america would have expected from a country which it seeks as an ally. "Instead, immediately after Bush's visit to India, Russia raced to the Nuclear Suppliers Group to notify them of their intention to supply fuel for two of the Tarapur nuclear reactors on "safety grounds," because they were running low on fuel. The Russian deal to supply the nuclear fuel was concluded last December, but because it was going to raise hackles, especially in the United States, it was kept under wraps until February. It was only then that Russia notified the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Nuclear Suppliers Group of the sale. India's Big Buddy Bush was not even informed that a fuel deal had already been negotiated with Russia in the lead up to his trip to India! The U.S., like other NSG members, only came to know of the proposed supply after Mr. Bush's return to Washington when Russia intimated its intent." (Ingmar Lee ‘Bush's Destabilizing Nuke Deal with India’ http://www.counterpunch.org/lee05082006.html May 8, 2006).

Whilst the americans, under their jewish yoke, have been politically and militarily bogged down in iraq and preoccupied with iran, the chinese have made huge gains in saudi arabia. "Hu .. immediately went to Saudi Arabia for a three-day state visit where he signed trade, defense and security agreements. This is no small slap in the face to Washington by the traditionally "loyal" Saudi royal house. Hu signed a deal for Saudi Basic Industries Corp (SABIC) of Saudi Arabia to build a $5.2 billion oil refinery and petrochemical project in northeastern China. At the beginning of this year, Saudi King Abdullah was in Beijing for a full state visit. Since the Franklin D Roosevelt-King Ibn Saud deal giving US Aramco and not the British exclusive concession to develop Saudi oil in 1943, Saudi Arabia has been regarded in Washington as a core strategic sphere of interest." (F William Engdahl ‘The US's geopolitical nightmare’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HE09Ad01.html May 9, 2006).

Whilst the americans, under their jewish yoke, have been politically and militarily bogged down in iraq and preoccupied with iran, the chinese have made huge gains in morocco, nigeria and kenya, "Hu then went on to Morocco, Nigeria and Kenya, all regarded as US spheres of interest. And only two months ago Rumsfeld was in Morocco to offer US arms. Hu is offering to finance energy exploration there." (F William Engdahl ‘The US's geopolitical nightmare’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HE09Ad01.html May 9, 2006).

Whilst the americans, under their jewish yoke, have been politically and militarily bogged down in iraq and preoccupied with iran, the chinese, in conjunction with russia, have also made huge gains amongst the central asian stans - kazakhstan, kyrgyzstan, tajikistan and uzbekistan. All of these countries, with russia and china, are founding members of the shanghai cooperation organization, (more details below). America tried to woo kazakhstan but was rebuffed. "Washington had based its strategy on Kazakhstan being its key partner in Central Asia. The US wants to expand its physical control over Kazakhstan's oil reserves and formalize Kazakh oil transportation via the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline, as well as creating the dominant US role in Caspian Sea security. But Kazakhstan isn't playing ball. President Nursultan Nazarbayev went to Moscow on April 3 to reaffirm his continued dependence on Russian oil pipelines. And China is making major energy and pipeline deals with Kazakhstan as well." (F William Engdahl ‘The US's geopolitical nightmare’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HE09Ad01.html May 9, 2006). America’s relations with uzbekistan have been described as "disastrous." (F William Engdahl ‘The US's geopolitical nightmare’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HE09Ad01.html May 9, 2006).

Whilst the americans, under their jewish yoke, have been politically and militarily bogged down in iraq and preoccupied with iran, the chinese have also made huge gains in iran. Iran’s biggest trading partner is europe. It would have loved to have concluded deals with european, and american, energy companies to exploit its fossil fuels that would have been mutually beneficial. However, in 1995 america’s jewish elite forced clinton to ban american oil companies from trading with iran and, in 2002, bush denounced iran as part of an imaginary axis of evil. The result was that iran turned to china for technological and economic assistance. "Already much of Iran's oil goes to China, and China is providing Iran with weapons that both states presumably regard as a deterrent to US designs." (Noam Chomsky ‘The Crumbling Empire’ http://www.counterpunch.org/chomsky03152006.html March 15, 2006). Last year, co-operation between the two countries resulted in a trade agreement worth in the region of $100 billion. One commentator has suggested this deal entails china’s protection of iran allowing it to defy america and develop nuclear power. "Iran can afford to face down the wrath of the West and be robust about becoming a nuclear power because it has the cast-iron support of China - secured by oil. In November 2004, Iran gave China the rights to exploit the giant Yadavaran field. Importantly, China plans to bring this oil into China, not across the Indian Ocean and through the Malacca Straits, but by pipeline across central Asia, free from the surveillance of the US fleet. China's attitude to Iran is foretold; it has refused to condemn Sudan over the killings in Darfur since Sudan allowed it to build a 500-mile pipeline to the coast. Ahmadinejad can therefore be 100 per cent certain that China will veto any attempt to win UN approval for military intervention in Iran." (Will Hutton ‘A battle for oil could set the world aflame’ http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1764542,00.html April 30, 2006).

China is hoping that a pipeline can be built across the central asian stans to enable iran to export fossil fuels to china. In addition, it is believed iran will soon become a member of the shanghai cooperation organization, "Iran is soon to become a member of that group." (John Stanton ‘Strike Iran, Watch Pakistan and Turkey Fall’ http://www.counterpunch.org/stanton04242006.html April 24, 2006).

America has become so Judaeocentric it has forced China into a Strategic Alliance with Russia.
Whilst the americans, under their jewish yoke, have been politically and militarily bogged down in iraq and preoccupied with iran, the chinese have made huge gains in russia. China and russia have developed a new global strategic alliance which is by far and away the most important geopolitical development of the new century. This alliance will not only help both countries increase their global power it will offer some protection against american efforts to reassert its global power.

Firstly, russia and china have entered into an economic, political, and military alliance, called the shanghai cooperation organization (sco). "The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) was created in Shanghai on June 15, 2001, by Russia and China along with four former Soviet Central Asian republics, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. Prior to September 11, 2001, and the US declaration of an "axis of evil" in January 2002, the SCO was merely background geopolitical chatter as far as Washington was concerned. Today the SCO, which has to date been blacked out almost entirely in US mainstream media, is defining a new political counterweight to US hegemony and its "unipolar" world. At the next SCO meeting on June 15, Iran will be invited to become a full SCO member." (F William Engdahl ‘The US's geopolitical nightmare’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HE09Ad01.html May 9, 2006).

Secondly, russia and china have concluded a major pipeline agreement in which russia will provide china with the oil it so desperately needs for its booming economy. The russians chose to support this deal in preference to one with japan.

Russia and china are integrating economically and industrially even before the construction of this new oil pipeline. "Russia is keen to secure a toehold in the lucrative Chinese market, so much so that that its oil-pipeline company Transneft is considering forthwith supplying 1.3 million tons oil from West Siberia through Kazakhstan (the Atasu-Alanshankou pipeline) to China pending the construction of Russia's own Pacific oil pipeline. Russia's No 1 oil company Rosneft is getting ready to enter the Chinese retail market." (M K Bhadrakumar ‘Cheney puts Moscow to the hardness test’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HE09Ag01.html May 9, 2006).

American Belligerence towards China.
The chinese leader recently visited america and was treated almost with insolence by the bush administration. "President Hu Jintao’s visit to Washington was a grand way not to build a positive, fruitful relationship. First, it was not even a state visit, the type usually afforded heads of state. The visit was downgraded to an economy-class event known as an "official visit." This was a huge insult and major loss of face for President Hu and 1.2 billion Chinese. I was surprised that Hu did not cancel the visit. But it got worse. The White House did not even give an official dinner for Hu and his entourage, but a luncheon. This may sound trivial, but in the world of diplomacy – or business, for that matter – such an act is a clear sign of the status of the visitor. To give a mere lunch for the leader of the world’s most populous nation that holds close to $200 billion in US debt was a diplomatic outrage and a slap in the face." (Eric Margolis ‘Bull in a China Shop’ http://www.lewrockwell.com/margolis/margolis28.html May 3, 2006); "In this context, the recent diplomatic insult from Bush to visiting Chinese President Hu Jintao is doubly disastrous for the US foreign position. Bush acted on a script written by the anti-China neo-conservatives, deliberately to insult and humiliate Hu at the White House. First was the incident of allowing a Taiwanese "journalist", a Falungong member, into the carefully screened White House press conference, to rant in a tirade against Chinese human rights for more than three minutes, with no attempt at removal, at a filmed White House press conference. Then came the playing of the Chinese national anthem for Hu, which was introduced as the anthem for the Republic of China - Taiwan. It was no slip-up by the professional White House protocol people. It was a deliberate effort to humiliate the Chinese leader." (F William Engdahl ‘The US's geopolitical nightmare’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HE09Ad01.html May 9, 2006).

Russia’s Re-emergence as a Global Superpower.
America’s Jewish Elite determines the Country’s attitude towards Russia.
In america, the jewish dominated media, jewish academics/think tanks, the jewish neocons, and the jol, have virtually dictated the country’s foreign policies towards russia since the early 1970s when they succeeded in sabotaging nixon’s policy of détente with russia. Détente could have resulted in a vast, mutually beneficial, economic boom for both countries. The neocons, however, opposed this policy firstly, because they wanted to force russia to allow the emigration of russian jews to the jos and, secondly, because they regarded russia’s nuclear weapons as a threat to the survival of the jos. "Aside from being known as "the senator from Boeing," in recognition of the many lucrative contracts he funneled Boeing’s way while chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Jackson’s main legacy is as co-author of the Jackson-Vanik amendment which made the success of US-USSR Cold War negotiations dependent on the Soviet Union opening its doors to Jewish emigration. Understandably, that made him the darling of the pro-Israel lobby and American Jews, in general, who provided $523,778 or 24.9% of his campaign contributions over a five-year period. An opponent of détente and a Cold War hawk, he was "virtually the last Democrat in the Senate to support... [the Vietnam] war." Most recently, he has been remembered as the Congressional patron saint of the neo-cons, having given Richard Perle his start on the path to evil." (Jeffrey Blankfort ‘Damage Control: Noam Chomsky and the Israel-Palestine Conflict – April 2005). Once again, jewish interests predominated over american interests.

After the collapse of the soviet empire, russia was virtually taken over by jewish oligarchs who would have sold russia’s vast resources to american energy companies. America and russia would then in effect be ruled by a global jewish elite. Putin, however, managed to undermine the power of russia’s jewish oligarchs and restore state control over his country’s resources. "Thus, from the US perspective, its calculations of gaining control over Russia's energy reserves are proving to be a pipe dream. Washington puts the "blame" for this squarely on Putin. The slide began with Putin's crackdown on Yukos and the "oligarchs" - at a moment when US oil majors were hardly inches away from capturing the heights in Russia's energy industry." (M K Bhadrakumar ‘Cheney puts Moscow to the hardness test’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HE09Ag01.html May 9, 2006).

The increasing jewish grip over america’s foreign policies has resulted in an increasingly belligerent attitude towards putin. "The neo-con stranglehold on the Pentagon continues to permit this cabal of provocateurs and dual loyalists to pump out false charges in an attempt to damage relations with Russia and President Vladimir Putin as Russia continues to push for negotiations with Iran and lay the possible groundwork for Russian casualties at Iranian nuclear facilities in the event of war with Iran. Neo-cons would argue that such casualties were legitimate considering previous Russian support for Saddam against the United States." (Wayne Madsen ‘Putin and Russian government: Latest targets of the neo-cons and likely forged documents’ http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/ March 25, 2006).

Russia’s Economic Recovery.
Since putin’s rise to power russia has been rebuilding its shattered economy. As the price of fossil fuels has risen so has russian wealth. It has been estimated that russia will become a superpower again within the next couple of decades. "According to the estimates of the Goldman Sachs Investment Bank, in the next 20 years Russia is sure to emerge as the economically most powerful country in Europe, with a gross national product of $3 trillion." (M K Bhadrakumar ‘Cheney puts Moscow to the hardness test’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HE09Ag01.html May 9, 2006). A state owned russian company is about to take a step onto the global market. "$20 billion initial public offering of Rosneft, Russia's state-owned oil company, through the London Stock Exchange. The deal could turn out to be the biggest IPO in history." M K Bhadrakumar ‘Cheney puts Moscow to the hardness test’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HE09Ag01.html May 9, 2006). Another state run company with shares on the global market is estimated to be the third biggest company in the world. "This comes on the heels of the emergence of Gazprom as one of the three largest companies in the world - even ahead of Microsoft." (M K Bhadrakumar ‘Cheney puts Moscow to the hardness test’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HE09Ag01.html May 9, 2006).

The Global Implications of Russia’s Strategic Alliance with China.
It is quite true that even if putin had done absolutely nothing politically except renationalize russia’s fossil fuel resources then russia would have become increasingly wealthy. However, it is putin’s global political strategy that is likely to reap the greatest economic dividends in the future.

America’s Jewish Elite is causing America to suffer a Foreign Policy Disaster of Catastrophic Proportions.
America’s Jews-Only Foreign Policies.
The public debate about jewish influence on america’s foreign policies has so far been confined almost exclusively to an analysis of who was responsible for pushing america into the invasion of iraq and a possible invasion of iran. An increasing number of commentators have come to conclude that it was america’s jewish elite, in conjunction with the jos. Others have argued it was america’s multi-national oil corporations demanding control over iraq’s oil. This essay has suggested it is the former but accepts that the arguments of the latter can seriously blur the issue. When confronted by the blatantly logical, but superficial, proposition, ‘Iraq has oil so america must have invaded the country for its oil’ it is invariably more difficult to make more complex arguments seem convincing. What makes it even more difficult to persuade the public that american jews pushed america into a proxy zionist invasion of iraq is that the jewish dominated left always blame multinational oil companies and utterly refuses to blame the jewish lobby. Just as it covered up the racism of the jos when protesting about the racism of the apartheid south african regime, so the jewish dominated left seek to cover up the guilt of the jewish lobby by placing all blame on america’s multi-national oil companies. In conclusion, it is only when the perspective is widened to explore the issue from a global standpoint that the role of america’s jewish elite over the bush administration becomes much more pronounced.

This section highlights the political and strategic calamities that have resulted from the domination of america’s ruling jewish elite on the country’s foreign policies. America’s jewish elite is pushing america towards a catastrophe solely for the sake of boosting the supremacy of the jos in the middle east.

Global Revulsion of American support for the Racist Jos.
America’s ruling jewish elite has such control over america’s foreign policies it is allowing the jos to carry out whatever policies it wants in palestine. The consequence is that america is now reviled around the world for its one-sided support for the racist jos. "It is becoming clear to prominent thinkers across the political spectrum - from erstwhile neo-conservative interventionists like Francis Fukuyama to hard-nosed realists like Mearsheimer - that in recent years the United States has suffered a catastrophic loss of international political influence and an unprecedented degradation of its moral image." (Tony Judt ‘The country that wouldn't grow up’ http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/711997.html May 2nd 2006).

Bogged down in the Middle East.
America is implementing the jos’s foreign policies towards iraq, iran, and syria and, to a lesser extent, the kurds. As a consequence, for the sake of the jos, america has become bogged down in afghanistan and iraq. If america’s ruling jewish elite has its way, america would be dragged further into the morass by an attack on iran.

America’s Increasing Vulnerability to Political developments in South America.
America imports a substantial amount of its oil from south america and virtually none from iraq. And yet even though america’s oil supply is becoming much more vulnerable because of the rise of democratic forces in south america, america’s jewish elite forces the bush administration to pay far more attention to iraq than it does to south america. Even worse is that america supports the idea of a nuclear free continent but even though this looks under threat as brazil develops civil nuclear energy, the bush administration ignores what is happening. Worse still is that america’s hegemony on the continent is also under threat from china.

America Alienating Turkey.
America’s ruling jewish elite supports an independent kurdish state in iraq and the creation of a greater kurdistan which is increasingly alienating turkey.

America Alienating Pakistan and India.
Over the last few years america’s jewish foreign policies have increasingly alienated pakistan. One of america’s few diplomatic successes in recent times has been its nuclear agreement with india but india is far from being willing to side exclusively with america. Indeed, it is currently being wooed by china and russia to join the shanghai cooperation organization.

America had an enormous opportunity to bring about peace and stability between pakistan and india by supporting the construction of a massive oil pipeline from iran through pakistan to india. This would have required their long term co-operation which could have had a highly beneficial impact on reducing the dangers of a nuclear confrontation between the latter two countries. But the americans sacrificed this opportunity for peace solely in order to support the jos’s paranoid fantasies about iran. "Condoleeza Rice however, has not minced her words about the US opposition the gas pipeline project. It's difficult to envision a more stabilizing, neighbourly Peace project for the whole region. To construct such a pipeline would require an inordinate degree of cooperation and goodwill, to stitch together and stabilize this volatile region of the world. Mr. Aiyar's energetic and passionate pusuit of the Peace Pipeline, in my opinion, makes him one of India's most outstanding and unusual peace activists and a candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize. (He was india’s former Union Petroleum Minister). On the other hand, it's impossible to imagine a more idiotic and disastrous catastrophe than that which has been inflicted on South Asia by George W. Bush." (Ingmar Lee ‘Bush's Destabilizing Nuke Deal with India’ http://www.counterpunch.org/lee05082006.html May 8, 2006).

America Alienating the Central Asian Stans.
After the collapse of the soviet empire, america made efforts to acquire political and military influence over the four central asian stans - kazakhstan, kyrgyzstan, tajikistan and uzbekistan. After some initial successes, america’s diplomatic effort collapsed in 2001 when all four countries joined the shanghai cooperation organization. These countries support the sco because they will benefit financially from the construction of oil pipelines emanating from iran and russia to china. They will also benefit from transit fees. Such pipelines will also guarantee their own energy supplies.

The Failure to Combat the Rise of China.
America’s jews-only foreign policy distracted attention from china’s meteoric rise onto the world stage, "It can also be argued that the US adventurism in Iraq has provided the coveted opportunity to other countries to further their national and regional interests without the constant fear of US reprisals." (Ramzy Baroud ‘Hubris and Neglect: The Imminent Decline of the American Empire?’ http://www.counterpunch.org/baroud04122006.html April 12, 2006). The chinese have benefited enormously from the jewish colonization of america because america’s jews-only foreign policies has allowed it almost a free reign to conclude political, military, economic, and trade deals with many countries thereby boosting its emergence as a world power. As has been noted above, the americans have been losing out to the chinese in south east asia, south america, pakistan, saudi arabia, morocco, nigeria kenya, kazakhstan, kyrgyzstan, tajikistan, uzbekistan, and last, but not least, iran.

The bush administration believed it didn’t need to bother about what china was doing around the world because it could control china’s access to fossil fuels. China has been dependent upon fossil fuels from the middle east which have to be transported by sea through the straits of malacca. The bush administration believed its naval forces would be able control this flow of resources. "The heart of the matter is that so long as China remains critically dependent on energy supplies from the Persian Gulf region, it will remain vulnerable to US pressures. Washington calculates that the long supply routes through the Strait of Malacca can be easily throttled, thus bringing China's economy to its heels if it chooses to do so at any given point." (M K Bhadrakumar ‘Cheney puts Moscow to the hardness test’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HE09Ag01.html May 9, 2006).

However, the chinese have acted to counter this dangerous choke point. Firstly, through the construction of an oil pipeline from russia to china over which america would have no control. Secondly, through the construction of a pipeline from iran through the central asian stans to china which, once again, will be beyond america’s control. Thirdly, china is further diversifying its energy supplies by trying to obtain oil from south america and nigeria. The bush administration has made a huge mistake to believe there was no need to bother about china because it could control the china’s energy supplies. American jews have undoubtedly used the argument about china’s supposed vulnerability to the american navy, to insist that america’s foreign policies need not bother about china only the middle east.

America’s focus on the jos and the middle east is undermining its own national defence strategy to combat the rise of any future rival. America’s ruling jewish elite are deceiving america into focussing on the middle east whilst the country is losing global dominance to china. Juan cole laughs at the absurdity of it all, "At what point would Iran be a greater military threat to the United States than Communist China? It certainly is not now. It is just a poor, small, ramshackle, mulla-ridden society with no unconventional weapons at all." (Juan Cole ‘More on Autonomous Regions’ http://www.juancole.com/2006_05_01_juancole_archive.html May 02, 2006).

The Failure to Combat the Alliance between Russia and China.
By far and away the most devastating political disaster caused by america’s ruling jewish elite is its failure to prevent russia and china from developing a political, military, and economic, alliance. One explanation for this is that the bush administration believed russia and china would always be greater enemies against each other than they would with america. This meant there was no need for america to try and woo one side or the other to guarantee that at least one of them would remain on america’s side. "In retrospect, Washington grossly miscalculated by subscribing to its own propaganda about the inherent contradictions in a Sino-Russian rapprochement." (M K Bhadrakumar ‘Cheney puts Moscow to the hardness test’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HE09Ag01.html May 9, 2006). The bush administration believed it could be as belligerent as it wanted towards both russia and china without driving them into a self defensive co-operation. But this is exactly what happened. From an american perspective this is a geostrategic disaster. Another explanation is that the bush administration believed it was such a formidable hyper-power that it didn’t matter what russia or china did because america could bully either or both of them at the same time whenever necessary.

In terms of what could be called an idealistic foreign policy strategy, america should have tried to develop harmonious relationships with both russia and the emerging chinese super-power so that all would benefit. After all, a war would prevent any of them from benefiting from the resources they have already let alone amicably sharing the resources that remain around the world. However, from the perspective of a realistic foreign policy analysis, america should have ensured that russia and china remained divided to prevent them from mutually benefitting through a political, military, and economic, alliance. But it failed to do even this.

The only explanation why america allowed russia and china to form an alliance is because it is dominated by jewish supremacists promoting foreign policies for the sake of the jos. America’s foreign policies have been so belligerent towards russia and, to a lesser degree, china it has virtually forced them into a mutually beneficial alliance that will be increasingly disadvantageous to america over the coming decades. It has been concluded, "In the space of 12 months, Russia and China have managed to move the pieces on the geopolitical chess board of Eurasia away from what had been an overwhelming US strategic advantage, to the opposite, where the US is increasingly isolated. It's potentially the greatest strategic defeat for the US power projection of the post-World War II period. This is also the strategic background to the re-emergence of the so-called realist faction in US policy." (F William Engdahl ‘The US's geopolitical nightmare’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HE09Ad01.html May 9, 2006). The russia-china alliance threatens to bring about the end of american global dominance. If this alliance is not disrupted it will become a geopolitical disaster for america.

The Alliance between Russia, China and Iran.
If the bush administration has made a serious mistake in allowing china and russia to form a strategic alliance, it has compunded this mistake by driving iran reluctantly into the arms of this alliance.

At the moment, iran’s biggest trading partner is europe. It would have loved to have concluded multi- billion dollar deals with european energy companies to exploit its fossil fuels that would have been beneficial economically to both countries. Iran also wanted to trade fully and openly with america. However, in 1995 american jews made this impossible when they forced the clinton administration to ban american energy companies from doing business with iran. The americans have been so belligerent towards iran, and have ignored all iranian requests for improved relationships, that there is now a strong possibility that iran will join the shanghai cooperation organization.

Given iran’s vast fossil fuel reserves, an alliance between russia, china, and iran threatens to create a serious rival to american global hegemony. In the past russia and iran have been energy rivals. Once they start to co-operate they increase their supply power within the global market place. Given china’s voracious appetite for fossil fuels it is unlikely they will have any trouble in selling their energy resources. "A senior financier told the FT that Iran, which is competing with Gazprom to provide gas to the Caucasus, was considering a switch in policy by selling its gas to Russia through Central Asia because the US was blocking its access to Europe and India."" (M K Bhadrakumar ‘Cheney puts Moscow to the hardness test’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HE09Ag01.html May 9, 2006). If iran does start selling its fossil fuels to russia it will then become possible for these fuels to be piped to china, "Now, that's just a step away from Iran linking up with the Chinese market via Central Asia. With the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline in the doldrums because of US pressure, Iran is at liberty to focus on China as its principal Asian market for natural gas." (M K Bhadrakumar ‘Cheney puts Moscow to the hardness test’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HE09Ag01.html May 9, 2006). Should this alliance between russia, china, and iran, begin to flourish, it will inflict a calamitous political disaster for america. America will suffer this political disaster solely because of the policies being pursued by the country’s ruling jewish elite.

The Alliance between Russia and China is developing into a Continental Alliance.
This is not, however, the end of the threat posed by the alliance between russia, china, and iran. It is possible that it could eventually end up becoming a continental alliance. The founding members of the shanghai cooperation organization were china, russia, kazakhstan, kyrgyzstan, tajikistan, and uzbekistan. Iran has been asked to join, "At the next SCO meeting on June 15, Iran will be invited to become a full SCO member." (F William Engdahl ‘The US's geopolitical nightmare’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HE09Ad01.html May 9, 2006).

The sco has also issued invitations to india, mongolia, and pakistan. "At the same SCO meeting next month, India, which Bush is personally trying to woo as a geopolitical Asian "counterweight" to China, will also be invited to join the organization, as well as Mongolia and Pakistan. The SCO is gaining in geopolitical throw-weight quite substantially." (F William Engdahl ‘The US's geopolitical nightmare’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HE09Ad01.html May 9, 2006). America is facing the prospect of losing its influence on the world’s biggest continent.

Russia using China to pressure Europe to Ditch America.
The russians chose to support a massive oil pipeline deal with china in preference to one with japan. The political implications of this deal, however, go far beyond these two countries. The deal provides russia with considerable leverage over europe as regards negotiations for russia’s supply of oil and gas to europe. Russia sells oil and gas to europe but it also wants its energy companies to have the right to conduct business in european markets. The americans and the europeans want russia’s fossil fuels but they don’t want russian energy companies in their markets. The americans had been working with the europeans on a common energy policy in which they refuse to allow russian companies to enter europe’s and america’s domestic markets. For a long while they had the power to do this because they have been the biggest market for russia’s resources. Russia has had little alternative but to sell its fossil fuels to europe/america and accept their demands. "Washington has been striving to get the European governments to orient toward its trans-Atlantic leadership on a platform riveted on the issue of energy security - meaning in plain terms that Europe's "excessive" dependence on Russia for energy will make them vulnerable to Moscow's political blackmail. The campaign is intrinsic to Washington's strategy of building up an architecture of "selective cooperation" with Moscow aimed at delimiting the latter's re-emergence any time soon as a major player on the world stage." (M K Bhadrakumar ‘Germany, Russia redraw Europe's frontiers’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HE03Ad01.html May 3, 2006).

Russia ended europe’s monopoly over purchases of russian fossil fuels by announcing it was going to construct a pipeline to china. Once the europeans realized that china was going to get access to russia’s fossil fuels, they had little alternative but to agree to russia’s demands or else they would lose these invaluable resources to china. "It could not have been a coincidence that Putin chose the backdrop of the Tomsk summit to announce the long-awaited decision on the route of Russia's longest oil pipeline from Eastern Siberia to the Pacific Ocean, bypassing ecologically sensitive Lake Baikal. Accordingly, the construction work was launched near the town of Taishet in the Irkutsk region on Friday. The pipeline will run along a 4,000km route to give Russia access to countries of Asia, especially China. Putin drove home to anyone who was listening that Russia indeed was determined to develop the option to turn to Asian markets if the West remained obdurate and illogical on issues of energy." (M K Bhadrakumar ‘Germany, Russia redraw Europe's frontiers’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HE03Ad01.html May 3, 2006).

The americans had been worried that russia’s supply of fossil fuels to europe would give it too much political power over europe. But now the situation is even more dire since the europeans have been forced to accept russia’s demands for its companies to do business in european markets which will give russia even more political leverage over europe. The first country to break the american-european security pact was germany. "The US strategy involved rallying European countries under its leadership in a common stance vis-a-vis Russia. Merkel has now driven a huge hole into this strategy by breaking loose and proceeding to firm up some massive new energy deals for German companies with Russia, while in turn conceding to Russia's Gazprom new opportunities to make acquisitions in the European energy-distribution network. Conceivably, other European countries will follow Germany's footsteps. (Apparently, French President Jacques Chirac is heading for Russia.) The Netherlands is already emulating Germany's example of allowing Gazprom into its domestic retail market. Where does that leave the short-lived US dream of a new trans-Atlantic leadership role over energy issues?" (M K Bhadrakumar ‘Germany, Russia redraw Europe's frontiers’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HE03Ad01.html May 3, 2006). Bush’s policy of america and europe combatting russia’s political influence orginating from its supply of fossil fuels is slowly collapsing. Even worse, is that russia is now in a position to start exerting its political muscle to drive a wedge between america and europe.

If america had spent more time building up a harmonious relationship with russia it would have been much less likely that russia would have turned to china to form a strategic alliance. But far from making any sensible, pragmatic decision to cultivate russian interests, america’s jewish elite which has been highly belligerent towards russia since the mid 1970s, bush the bush administration into a policy of alienating the russians until it was left with no other alternative than to seek an alignment with china. American jews are primarily responsible for bringing about the russia-china alliance with all the threats that this entails for america’s position as the world’s sole hyper-power.

America Trampling over Europe’s Strategic Interests.
It is in europe’s strategic interests to trade with iran. Europe should be trading with iran: importing fossil fuels from iran whilst exporting consumer commodities. Such trade would have been advantageous to europe not only economically but politically since it would not then have had to rely so heavily upon russia for supplies of fossil fuels with the consequent concerns about its political influence. And yet america has scuppered deals between europe and iran so that both europe and iran have lost out. Europe continues to support america’s jews-only policies threatening a war against iran despite the fact that such a war would be against its strategic and material interests. Europe’s continued support for america’s foreign policy towards iran is one of the bush administration’s few diplomatic successes given that so many other countries around the world are turning their backs on america. Why europe supports america even though this runs counter to its interests is primarily because of jewish power in europe.

America as a Jewish Puppet.
America has become a laughing stock as the whole world watches the world’s hyper-power following the orders of its masters in the jos and its collaborators in america. Outside the western world, most people can see clearly that the jewish empire rules america and europe. It is only those living in the jewish bubble covering america and europe who cannot see this political reality or who refuse to talk about it.

Conclusions.
The influence of the jewish owned media, jewish academia/think tanks, the jewish owned congress, and the jol can be appreciated in america’s one sided support for the jos, the adoption of jos policies towards the middle east and the west asian continent, the almost exclusive focus on the middle east, continual criticisms of russia, and america’s indifference to the increasing political and economic power of china.

The policies that america’s ruling jewish elite wish the country to implement are blatantly different from those america would pursue in its own national interests. The jewish elite ruling america is so brazen about its control over the bush administration it has even explicitly outlined the foreign policies it wishes its american muppets to implement – all of which happen to be policies supported by the jos. Not surprisingly, these foreign policies are almost totally centred upon the middle east. "One is reminded of the most extravagant expression of neoconservative triumphalism, uttered by one Laurent Murawiec in those halcyon days when war advocates were confidently predicting the road to Baghdad would be strewn with rose petals. Murawiec, a former LaRouche cultist who somehow talked his way into the Rand Corporation, told members of the president's Foreign Policy Advisory Board that we ought to prepare an invasion of Saudi Arabia, adding with a flourish: "Iraq is the tactical pivot, Saudi Arabia the strategic pivot, Egypt the prize."" (Justin Raimondo ‘'Diplomatic' Terrorism’ http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=8881 April 21, 2006). The only thing wrong with this wildly extravagant jewish strategy for america is that murawiec forgot to include iran but, then again, when this neocon outlined such a strategy it was assumed the american military would march almost immediately from baghdad to tehran! This foreign policy is not merely focussed overwhelmingly on the middle east, it would keep america preoccupied with the region for decades. The jewish neocons call this foreign policy which it wants america to adopt by the cute name of world war three. Rather ominously, the dunce george bush has recently been talking about the start of just such a war. It is a statement of the obvious that world war three will be a disaster of catastrophic proportions – one from which humans might never recover.

After the pentagon and new york bombings and the jewish take-over of america’s foreign policies, the bush administration seemed determined to use its vast military superiority to force the rest of the world to accede to its demands. The successful invasion of afghanistan simply boosted its megalomania encouraging it to become increasingly belligerent to any country around the world which did not follow its orders. The most notable characteristic of america’s foreign policies towards virtually all other nations around the world has been hysterical, paranoid, belligerence. This characteristic is shared with only one other nation, the jos. This should not surprising given that american jews imported this attitude from the jos into america america. The belligerence of america’s ruling jewish elite has obviously alienated the palestinians. It has obviously alienated iraq. It has alienated russia and china to such an extent it has driven them into a strategic alliance. It has also alienated iran and, even pakistan, which might drive both of them into joining this new alliance. It has alienated syria, turkey, and the four central asian stans. Despite america’s lavish nuclear deal with india, primarily because of the jos’s good relationship with the country, there is the possibility that india might also defect to the russian-chinese alliance.

If america was pursuing its own geostrategic policies it would support the palestinians not the jews in palestine; it would support the arab world not the jos; it would be confronting developments in south america; and would be madly courting russia as a counterweight to the increasing power of china. This vast discrepancy between what is in america’s best interests and america’s current policies can be explained only by the fact that america is controlled by a jewish elite whose sole interest is the regional supremacy of the jos. America has become a jewish colony. It is an outpost of the global jewish empire. This jewish influence on america is turning out to be a catastrophic disaster for america.

It could be argued that bush has the choice: either pursue america’s geopolitical interests which are to control oil around the world which necessitates him avoiding becoming bogged down in any particular part of the world. Or, he can implement the policies of america’s ruling jewish elite, whose goal is the regional supremacy of the jos, which invariably entails america becoming bogged down not merely in iraq but in the middle east. "The chance was to deliver on the US strategic goal of control of petroleum resources globally, to ensure the US role as first among equals over the next decade and beyond. Not only have they failed to "deliver" that goal of US strategic dominance, they have also threatened the very basis of continued US hegemony, or as the Rumsfeld Pentagon likes to term it, "Full Spectrum Dominance". The move by Bolivian President Evo Morales, after meetings with Venezuela's Hugo Chavez and Cuba's Fidel Castro, to assert national control over oil and gas resources is only the latest demonstration of the decline in US power projection." (F William Engdahl ‘The US's geopolitical nightmare’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HE09Ad01.html May 9, 2006).

America’s ruling jewish elite want bush to pursue what jewish commentators call world war three – a war which they believe will last for decades. However, this will be a war in which they will never fight. It will be a war they will try to prevent their beloved jos from fighting in. But it is a war in which they are willing to condone the deaths of untold numbers of americans. It seems transparent that bush’s neocon inspired foreign policies have been a disaster. If the neocons push the bush administration into a war against iran it could be an even greater catastrophe.

America’s foreign policies are in meltdown because of its domination by a jewish elite. It is bogged down in afghanistan and iraq. The americans have been losing out to the chinese in south east asia, south america, pakistan, saudi arabia, morocco, nigeria, kenya, kazakhstan, kyrgyzstan, tajikistan, uzbekistan, and iran. It has lost control over russia which is becoming increasingly powerful over europe and the central asian stans. It has also been losing support from turkey. It has lost its grip over germany after its energy deal with russia. It faces the prospect of losing other european countries to russian influence as well. Its only diplomatic successes have been in winning the support of the european community over iran and the palestinians, contrary to their real interests, but even here the solidarity can be deceiving and could crumble. It has had some success with india but for how long is another matter. The jos is forcing america into becoming as much of a rogue and a pariah as the jos itself.

America could have had enormously beneficial relations with iran that would also have been of considerable benefit to europe and which, in addition, would have kept iran away from russia and china. And yet now because american jews have forced america to try and isolate iran, america has lost out, europe has lost out, and iran is increasing integrating with russia and china. America should be on good terms politically and militarily with the russians, the chinese, and the iranians so that all may benefit. But, pushed by american jews whose sole concern is the jos, the bush administration has chosen the path of continual belligerence and warmongering which is going to lead to a catastrophic war from which no-one will benefit.

The adverse consequences of america’s jews-only foreign policy are already verging on the catastrophic even before an attack on iran. The frightening possibility is that america’s ruling jewish elite might conclude that such is the scale of this political catastrophe, the only way they can reverse this trend is to go to war against iran.

America’s Foreign Policies are still on Course.
It could be argued, irrespective of jewish influence on the country, america is correctly focussing on the middle east because it contains vast quantities of oil. This is absurd for three reasons.

Firstly, it is quite true that america would love to own and control middle eastern oil but the belief that it can do so is a sheer illusion – its just oil fever. It is not possible for america to militarily occupy a country in order to exploit its oil because nationalists will do their best to thwart such blatant theft e.g. the flow of oil from iraq has almost dried up since the american occupation. In the vernacular, it is not possible for a Bull to run a china shop.

Secondly, america gets little of its oil from the middle east. It gets a significant proportion of its oil from south america which the bush administration has virtually ignored for the last five years. In terms of resources, it is therefore irrational for american foreign policy and military power to be focussed almost solely on the jos and middle east, from where america gets little oil, when countries on its own doorstep which provide it with substantial amounts of oil are being allowed to drift out of american control.

Thirdly, the same also applies to american policies towards russia. Russia possesses as many fossil fuels as the middle east. However, it also provides vast quantities of a range of other raw materials which do not exist in the middle east. Geostrategically, america should be developing harmonious relationships with russia to exploit these resources which would make the middle east much less relevant. On the contrary, because of the critical influence of american jews on the bush administration, america goes out of its way to alienate russia which is why it is increasingly allocating its resources to china.

America’s Interest in Iran has more to do with China.
It could be argued that america’s focus on iran has nothing to do with the influence of the jol/jos on america’s foreign policies but is due to america’s global strategy to combat china’s increasing global influence. It is because of this global strategy that america has recently concluded a deal with india. "A strong message of the Bush tour is that the US now regards India as a key partner in its regional security interests, not least because India is seen as a powerful counterforce to the growth of Chinese influence. The current US administration is aware that cultivating good relations with India may cause internal problems for President Pervez Musharraf, but it considers that having a country of India's size and importance "on side" outweighs any negative impact that might have in Pakistan." (Paul Rogers ‘The Pakistan risk’ Open Democracy March 9th 2006). It is not true, however, that the focus on iran has more to do with china than with the jos.

Firstly, bush’s explicitly stated motive for a war against iran is to protect the jos not undermine china.

Secondly, if the bush administration was really serious about confronting china rather than doing the jos’s dirty business in the middle east then it would be combating china’s increasing links with south america.

Thirdly, the bush administration should have courted either russia or china to prevent a china-russia alliance.

Fourthly, whilst jewish neocons in america have hysterically denounced russia (because it is a threat to the jos not america), they have never been anything like as hysterically paranoid about the rise of china. Indeed, richard perle has had business dealings with chinese companies which would have been unthinkable with the russians. The jewish neocons’ attitude towards china is far more ambivalent than to any other country so this is why they haven’t bothered to focus america’s foreign policies on china. China is far more of a threat to america than it is to the jos, so jewish neocons are much less bothered about it than should be the case. H

It should be noted, however, that eric margolis takes a different stance. He believes the neocons are just as antagonistic towards the chinese as the russians, "Why was the Bush Administration so grossly disrespectful (to the chinese president during his recent visit)? First, to please its Christian fundamentalist core supporters .. Second, because US East Asia policy is still being made by the same extremist neoconservatives who fabricated the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, and are waging an anti-Muslim jihad from the White House, Pentagon and US media." (Eric Margolis ‘Bull in a China Shop’ http://www.lewrockwell.com/margolis/margolis28.html May 3, 2006).

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home