Showing posts with label WW3. Show all posts
Showing posts with label WW3. Show all posts

Friday, September 4, 2026

Refilling America's Strategic Petroleum Reserve | The Orange Ape

 
» THE BIGGEST OIL DEAL IN WORLD HISTORY! «
Bombing. Killing. Hijacking. Looting. Intimidation.
Triumphs of the Orange Ape.

September 4, 2026: The Orange Ape dismisses his six-month war
against Iran as "small potatoes," saying, "It’s not a big thing:
We got Venezuela."
» Trump's dementia is growing, fueled by his excessive narcissism and megalomania. He won't listen to anyone anymore. And the two people who are running the United States government right now are the deputy chief of staff for policy, Stephen Miller, and the director of the Office of Management and Budget, Russell Vought. That's about as dangerous a situation as you can imagine. The budget director doesn't believe in the Constitution, and the other fellow—it's hard for me to come up with the words adequately to describe his understanding of government. The people who ran Germany in the 1930s come to mind. « — Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, September 4, 2026.
  

Tuesday, September 1, 2026

Captain Obvious of the Euro-Titanic | Laura Ru

On August 27, at a business forum in Paris, Führerin Ursula von der Leyen stated the obvious: the former advantages of the European economy have all disappeared. The European economic model, she explained, had rested on several pillars: cheap imported energy from Russia, open global trade, growing access to the Chinese market, US strategic protection, and Western technological leadership.

What von der Leyen chose not to mention was that these advantages did not disappear by accident. They were systematically destroyed by the very institution she leads, through sanctions that severed energy and economic ties with Russia, a trade war against China, and regulatory overreach that suffocated European industry.

Russian officials have watched Europe's self-inflicted wounds with a mixture of bewilderment and dark amusement. Maria Zakharova, the official spokesperson for Russia's Foreign Ministry, responded to von der Leyen's confession with a single, devastating epithet: "Captain Obvious of the Euro-Titanic." From Beijing, the critique is no less damning. Chinese analysts have watched Europe's protectionist turn with growing frustration, arguing that the EU is destroying the very thing it claims to protect: its own industrial competitiveness.
The EU's share of global GDP has plummeted from 30% in 2008 to just 17% in 2025—a decline three times faster than that of China's Qing Dynasty during its collapse. And as one Chinese commentator put it, while the Qing fell to foreign invasion, Europe's decline is "self-inflicted, purely something Europe has brought upon itself."
It is, in the words of one Chinese analyst, "locking protectionism directly into its economic and trade policy system." European decision-makers, Chinese commentators argue, have lost touch with basic economic reality. They are absolutely right. This is a systemic crisis that permeates Europe's decision-making circles. Both Moscow and Beijing see the same tragic irony. Europe has spent years lecturing the world about rules and order, about strategic autonomy and economic resilience. Yet in its rush to punish Russia and contain China, it has torn down the very foundations of its own prosperity.
In Paris, the Führerin zeroed in on Europe's €10 trillion in household bank deposits, branding them "lazy" (paresseuse) capital that must be forced "to the service of European companies" through her Savings and Investment Union. Explicit plan: securitize them, supervise them. Coming for your savings, Europe.
Europe's energy prices are now two to three times higher than in the US and China. Its industrial base, once the envy of the world, is bleeding jobs and capacity. Its share of global markets continues to shrink. And its leaders, having created the crisis with their own hands, can only stand by and admit that the old model is gone. They are clearly batting for another team, one that demands Europe throw itself off the cliff.
 
Laura Ru (pen name of Laura Ruggeri) is a Milan-born Italian independent researcher, writer, and geopolitical analyst based in Hong Kong since 1997. A former academic in media and cultural studies, she focuses on multipolarity, international relations, US foreign policy, China–EU relations, and European political economy. She publishes long-form essays and commentary on  Substack, Medium, and Telegram.

Friday, August 28, 2026

CIA, MI6, and Mossad Own Europe's Political Class | Col. Lawrence Wilkerson

I take a grim satisfaction from knowing exactly what we did. I know how painstakingly the CIA, MI6 (SIS), and to a certain extent Mossad worked to shape today's Europe. Though Mossad was not initially a willing partner, they eventually joined in once they saw the money involved. To borrow a phrase from certain Asian scholars, we "taught the dogs to bark." 
 
» We bought entire countries' political apparatuses. «
 
We bought newspaper editors, labor union heads, and parliamentarians. We purchased two NATO Secretary-Generals—Jens Stoltenberg and Mark Rutte. We bought entire countries' political apparatuses, starting in earnest around 2002, when billions of CIA dollars began flowing. USAID was the instrument; we weaponized liberal democracy.
 
2022: Biden, with Reich Governor Scholz at his side, promised to
terminate Nord Stream 2. And the perfect lackey just kowtowed.

In that respect, I supported what Trump and Rubio did to the extent that they purged the lower-level operatives who executed these policies—though I did not support their removal of top bureaucrats. But we created the Europe that exists today, on purpose. And now we are paying the piper. It will take another six to eighteen months to root out many of these figures, and God knows how long to cleanse the parliaments. We painstakingly crafted Europe in our own image.

From Anti‑War to Neo‑Con
I recall the anti-war fervor of 2003, when the US invasion of Iraq was seen as outrageous, aggressive, and counterproductive across Europe. The hawks—figures like Colin Powell and Dick Cheney—were despised and ridiculed. Those days are gone. Today's European leaders are indistinguishable from the US neoconservatives of that era. The reaction to George W. Bush back then was a call to battle for that administration, and they set all this in motion.

1965: Humberto Delgado, Portuguese Air Force General, prominent opposition leader against the Estado
Novo dictatorship of António de Oliveira Salazar; assassinated by NATO/CIA/MI6 stay-behind operatives.
 
 
1978: Aldo Moro, leader of the Christian Democracy party, Prime Minister of Italy, and chief architect
of the "Historic Compromise", a coalition government that would bring the  Communist Party (PCI)
into the ruling cabinet; assassinated by NATO/CIA/MI6 stay-behind operatives.
 
1986: Olof Palme, Swedish Prime Minister, leader of the Social Democratic Party, staunch promoter
of the welfare state and Third World liberation movements, condemned the US war in Vietnam and
the apartheid regime in South Africa; assassinated by NATO/CIA/MI6/Mossad stay-behind operatives.

1989: Alfred Herrhausen, Chairman of Deutsche Bank, visionary leader, active promoter of
German-Russian economic relations, and highly influential advisor to Chancellor Helmut Kohl; 
assassinated by NATO/CIA/MI6/Mossad stay-behind operatives. 
  
1991: Detlev Karsten Rohwedder, president of the Treuhandanstalt, the German government agency
tasked with privatizing East German state-owned enterprises, was considered insufficiently flexible
toward certain foreign demands; assassinated by NATO/CIA/MI6/Mossad stay-behind operatives.
 
2003: Jürgen Möllemann, prominent German politician from the Free Democratic Party,
 president of the German-Arab Society, outspoken critic of Israel and promoter of the
Palestinian cause; assassinated by NATO/CIA/MI6/Mossad stay-behind operatives. 
 
2008: Jörg Haider, Austrian right-wing populist politician, governor of Carinthia and
harsh anti-Zionist; assassinated by NATO/CIA/MI6/Mossad stay-behind operatives.
 
Et cetera et cetera et cetera:
 murder, slaughter, genocide: children, women, heads of state; terrorism; intimidation; weapon, drug, organ, 
child trafficking; well poisoning; pedophilia; hijacking; torturing; counterfeiting; looting; piracy; bribery...
 
Forging the CIA
The CIA had never before operated on such a scale. Harry Truman greatly objected to the agency's formation, initially, but he was eventually sold out by William "Wild Bill" Donovan and J. Edgar Hoover—despite Hoover's hatred for Donovan. It is a strange history, but the agency bought this new mission lock, stock, and barrel because it knew billions would pour its way. And indeed they did. They set about changing the European attitude. When the largest anti-war rally in British—and possibly European—history erupted in London in 2003, we did not like that at all. We set out to reverse it.
» NATO's purpose is: Keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down. «
Lord General Hastings Lionel Ismay, 1st Baron Ismay, NATO's first Secretary General, 1952.


1952: Stalin proposed reunifying Germany as a demilitarized, neutral state. Chancellor Adenauer rejected it as "Soviet ruse," prioritizing West Germany's US/British/French occupation regime
over national sovereignty and unity; remained in power and lived to 91. 
Cultivating Stoltenberg
How close was I to this? I was up close and personal in getting Jens Stoltenberg to his position. We saw what he did within his own government, recognized how malleable and susceptible he was to our messaging, and used him as a center pole from which to extend our influence into other governments. He was willing because he knew we had promised him the NATO Secretary-General post. I did not see the infection of the EU up close, but I am sure it followed chapter and verse alongside our manipulation of NATO leadership.
 
 
NATO's Top‑Heavy Bloat
That effort was not difficult. You must understand the history of NATO's top-heavy flag structure. Every time we built a headquarters and placed a three- or four-star general there, the Europeans felt compelled to match us. We built this incredible overhead of flag officers—Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps—across Europe, and they were so influenceable that all you had to do was whisper in their ear. Suddenly, you had this pliant NATO military leadership doing your bidding. The CIA merely had to whisper about Russia, building up the threat as needed.


Russophobia as Propaganda
This Russophobia began early—with Boris Yeltsin's disappearance and Vladimir Putin's arrival on the scene. That is when we started using fear of Russia as a propaganda instrument. In the Dutch media, it was exposed that Mark Rutte, while Prime Minister, would excuse Israeli actions and adopt extra-hawkish positions on Russia and Yemen, all to look good on his job application for NATO. They knew exactly what the Americans would reward.

Since 1871, the US/Anglo prime geopolitical doctrine for Europe:
"Keep Germany and Russia separate and in conflict."
[Or, as Victoria Nuland put it in 2014: "Fuck the EU!"]
 
20
26: Pete Blaber, former US Delta Force Commander, on the 
truth
about the NATO/CIA/MI6/Mossad war against Russia in Ukraine.
  
Weaponizing Historical Guilt
We were also acutely aware—particularly in Germany, but elsewhere too—of how deeply the Holocaust lingered over European consciousness. With Mossad's assistance, we exploited that guilt to the maximum. This is why Germany has the laws and regulations it does regarding anti-Semitism today; we helped build them.
 
Reference: 
 
»
They lose their jobs if there is peace. «  
Lawrence B. Wilkerson (b. 1945) is a retired US Army colonel and former senior government official. A 31-year Army and Vietnam veteran, he became closely associated with Colin Powell in 1989, serving as his assistant as Powell completed his tenure as President Reagan’s National Security Advisor. Wilkerson remained with Powell through his tenure as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, into civilian life, and, when Powell became Secretary of State under George W. Bush, as his Chief of Staff from 2002 to 2005. He later became a prominent critic of the Iraq War, expressing particular regret over his role in preparing Powell's infamous 2003 UN Security Council presentation on Iraq's alleged weaponized anthrax. Since retiring in 2005, Wilkerson has held academic posts at the US Naval War College and College of William and Mary. He is a fellow of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft and a member of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, and regularly comments on US foreign policy, the Middle East, and national security.

Wednesday, August 26, 2026

US Treasury Secretary Bessent: "Sanctions Could Disrupt Global Finance!"

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent outlined "Operation Economic Outcast," a phased sanctions campaign targeting Iran’s cryptocurrency, technology, gold, aviation, and shipping sectors, while warning third countries to cut ties with Tehran or risk losing access to the US dollar. 
  
 Currency Collapse Indicator Model: US 2026 worse than Venezuela 2017. Ready for shock therapy?
» Scott Bessent looks to be intentionally crashing the $. I studied currency collapses and found that there were  7 indicators that preceded every major currency collapse in modern history. I then measured the US dollar against those 7. And as of right now, based on what Scott Bessent did last week, we have hit all 7 indicators. No country in modern history has met all 7 and avoided a currency collapse. None. And this doesn't look to be happening to us, it looks to be being done to us, by the people who swore an oath to prevent it. And they are getting rich while they do it. «

He warned that "sanctions could disrupt global finance," arguing that a gradual approach gives nations time to end their dealings with Tehran and avoid broader financial disruption. His remarks drew mixed reactions, ranging from claims that they amounted to an "empire-level economic terrorist" admission to interpretations that they were simply a rhetorical push for compliance, fueling memes and debate over the global impact of sanctions.

» Why would I want to blow up the global financial system? «

Bessent's recent doubling of bond buybacks and sanctions have been cited as potential warning signs, alongside indicators such as high debt-to-GDP, declining reserves, and political interference, with charts comparing the US to historical cases. 
 
 "Let them eat white bread!"
The Reign of the Orange Ape—certainly one for the history books.
 
The US Dollar System.
 
Reactions split between alarm over a potential dollar squeeze—fueled by China's reduced Treasury holdings and increased gold purchases—and pushback emphasizing the dollar’s unique reserve-currency status and the subjectivity of such models. Markets have reflected the debate, with a weaker dollar coinciding with gains in gold and Bitcoin as concerns persist over the official $40 trillion national debt.
 
You don't grow your way out of debt when 
debt is outrunning growth every single year. 
 
Jerome Powell in February 2024, in a 60 Minutes interview
—and still not arrested... 'cause it's the land of the free.
 
Warsh will inflate the US debt away. It was clear
in February 2026... and it should be clearer now.  
 
Well, that official US national-debt number—$40 trillion—is a straight-up lie. The US government uses accounting rules that would get every CEO and entrepreneur arrested. Unfunded Social Security and Medicare promises over the next 75 years: more than $400 trillion. None of it is on the government's headline balance sheet. A public company would be required to recognize future obligations. Washington simply doesn't. And when promises can't be paid honestly, there's always another way to settle the bill: Create the money. Inflate the currency. Make everyone else pay. The $40 trillion isn't the whole bill. It's the number this giga-corrupt criminal regime in Washington chooses to put on the books—and Americans and the rest of the world are expected to pretend the other $400+ trillion of this Ponzi scheme doesn't exist. Inflation is a tax. Seigniorage is fraud. Americans, make these criminals economic outcasts. 
 
See also:
 

Friday, August 21, 2026

Why Time Is on Iran, Russia and China's Side | Michael Hudson

Time is on the side of Iran, Russia, and China and increasingly works against the US and its allies. The longer the confrontation persists, the greater the pressure on highly indebted Western economies. As in Russia's past wars against Napoleon and Germany, the decisive advantage need not come from military strength alone, but from an external force that steadily erodes the enemy's capacity to sustain the conflict. Today, that force is the global financial and economic system.

Tsar Nicholas I famously boasted that Russia possessed two unbeatable generals—"General January and General February." However, while the severe winter of 1854–1855 did inflict catastrophic casualties on British and French forces during the Siege of Sevastopol, "General Winter" failed to save Russia from defeat in the Crimean War (1853–1856). World War I illustration of 'General Winter' on the Eastern Front, featured on the front page of the French periodical Le Petit Journal (1916).
"General Winter"—Russia's eternal ally against her enemies.

The US has contained the oil price shock by releasing oil from its strategic petroleum reserves and encouraging other countries to do the same, despite the major disruption to Persian Gulf exports. But this buys time, and only by depleting reserves and leaving less room for further intervention. The stakes are high because higher energy prices quickly feed into diesel, aviation fuel, fertilizer, transportation, and food costs. With the US midterm elections approaching, Washington is therefore racing the clock to contain prices as its economic buffers diminish.

Weaponizing Survival: Energy, Food, and Sovereign Debt Pressure
Iran's strategic advantage is to avoid escalation while letting economic pressure accumulate. A similar dynamic is developing around Russia and Ukraine, where disruptions to grain exports risk compounding the energy shock. About 27% of global grain trade moves through the Black Sea; Ukraine's harvest is coming in while warehouses are full, and Russian attacks on shipping and ports threaten both incoming supplies and outgoing grain. Much of Ukraine's grain normally goes to Europe, leaving Europe vulnerable to simultaneous fertilizer, food, and energy-price shocks.
 
Asymmetric warfare against Western full-spectrum aggression:
wrecking the enemy through food, energy, and debt.

The crisis need not involve major military escalation because the US and Europe are already too financially stretched to absorb a sustained increase in energy costs without wider economic damage. Higher fuel prices raise transportation, food distribution, and production costs; industries operating on thin margins can become unprofitable; and higher inflation puts upward pressure on interest rates. The resulting pressure spreads to agriculture, trucking, and the movement of crops, with particularly severe effects in the West, among US allies, and across developing economies in Asia and the Global South.

 
Higher inflation and interest rates also raise the cost of servicing already-heavy debt burdens. Rising bond yields compound the problem in the US, Japan, and other highly indebted economies, while vulnerabilities associated with Japan's currency and carry trade expose the limits of available policy responses. The fundamental vulnerability is therefore debt: governments must increasingly choose between supporting households and industry and servicing accumulated debt.

Sanctions Threaten America's Financial Power 
This pressure also threatens the financial system that has enabled the US to exercise global power for decades. Washington has relied not only on military force, but also on its control of the dollar, international payments, global banking, and the oil trade. By weaponizing sanctions against Iran and threatening Chinese, Asian, and other banks involved in Iranian oil transactions, the US is encouraging those same countries and institutions to reduce their dependence on the dollar. Financial coercion could therefore undermine one of America's principal instruments of power.

murder, slaughter, genocide: children, women, heads of state; weapon, drug, organ, child
trafficking; well poisoning; pedophilia; hijacking; torturing; counterfeiting; looting; piracy; bribery...
 
The oil trade is particularly important because Persian Gulf and OPEC oil have long been key channels of US financial influence. Oil revenues recycled through US banks, dollar assets, and the American financial system have reinforced the dollar's central position. Driving oil producers, buyers, and financial institutions away from that system therefore risks undermining the very mechanism Washington has used as a global economic choke point.  
 
Tru
mp offered billions to Iran's military

Iran: "Leave before it's too late!"

Iran's strategy exploits this contradiction. If its own oil exports are blocked by sanctions and trade restrictions, the implicit threat is that broader oil exports may also be disrupted, forcing other countries to choose between accepting higher energy costs and resisting the sanctions regime. Iran cannot defeat the US militarily, even though it can attack US bases in the Middle East; its leverage instead lies in imposing costs on the wider system and forcing other countries to decide how they will respond.

China and the Emerging Alternative
China is relatively well-positioned to withstand such pressure because of its large oil reserves, coal resources, and extensive investment in solar power and other energy alternatives. The broader question is how China, Russia, Iran, Asia, and the Global South will respond if continued US sanctions keep driving up energy and commodity prices. Their incentive will be to develop mechanisms that insulate their trade from unilateral US financial coercion. 

Zhou Xiaochuan, Governor of the People's Bank of China, presenting his
landmark 2009 proposal, "Reform the International Monetary System," 
to the Bank for International Settlements (BIS).

Gold provides one possible reserve asset outside the dollar system. Countries have increasingly added to their gold reserves while maintaining relatively stable dollar holdings; the European Union now holds more reserves in gold than in dollars. China and Russia have also developed alternatives to Western payment infrastructure. China's and Russia's independent clearing systems reduce their reliance on SWIFT, while Iran has experimented with cryptocurrency payments despite the US seizure of Iranian cryptocurrency assets.  
 
The issue therefore goes beyond creating a BRICS currency. What is required is an alternative international architecture for payments, reserves, and lending, capable of financing trade without depending on the dollar, SWIFT, the IMF, or other Western institutions. China, because of its enormous financial reserves, is uniquely positioned to provide the financial capacity that such a system would require. Russia and Iran could contribute oil, with Russia also contributing grain.

The Cost of Dedollarization
Such a system could fundamentally reshape the post-1945 financial order. Countries facing rising energy, food, fertilizer, and chemical costs would increasingly face a choice between supporting domestic industry and households and servicing dollar-denominated debt. As balance-of-payments pressures intensify, governments would have to decide whether scarce resources should go toward subsidizing industry, protecting families from higher heating and food costs, or continuing to pay foreign creditors. The incentive to prioritize domestic stability would accelerate dedollarization and weaken the financial mechanisms through which Washington has historically exercised global influence.

More sanctions, guns, butter, servicing debt, or collapse?
 
China, Russia, and Iran could therefore form the foundation of an alternative monetary system: Iran contributing oil, Russia oil and grain, and China financial reserves. Such a system could remove or weaken several of the instruments of influence established after World War II to structure global trade and finance in America's interest, including control over the dollar, oil, food, and seaborne trade. 

Keynes's Alternative to the Dollar System
The alternative need not be another dominant national currency at all. The argument instead returns to John Maynard Keynes's 1944 proposal for an international clearing institution based on a supranational unit of account called the bancor. Keynes proposed a system designed to manage persistent international surpluses and deficits rather than forcing debtor countries into destructive austerity. The institution would manage intergovernmental debts, allowing countries with temporary imbalances to obtain temporary liquidity while preserving their capacity to become economically self-sufficient.
 
Keynes maybe wasn't all wrong.

The critical difference is that surplus countries would also share responsibility for global imbalances. Keynes argued that the persistent accumulation of surpluses and claims by creditor countries necessarily creates corresponding deficits elsewhere. If debts become so large that repayment requires destroying a debtor’s economy, those debts should be written down—and the corresponding creditor claims written down as well. The US rejected this approach in 1944 because it was then the dominant creditor and had little incentive to accept a system that could reduce its accumulated claims.
 
Keynes's proposal was shaped by the German reparations and transfer debates of the 1920s. His central argument was that a debtor cannot repay indefinitely by suppressing wages, transferring resources abroad, and selling its assets without destroying its own productive economy. A loan made without regard to the borrower’s ability to repay ultimately becomes a bad loan. The same logic, he argued, applies internationally: forcing debtors into permanent austerity can produce depression rather than repayment.
 
The proposed international institution would create an accounting unit based on a combination of gold and member currencies rather than a conventional national currency. It would manage international surpluses and deficits and provide liquidity for temporary imbalances. When accumulated claims became impossible to service without undermining a country’s productive capacity, the system would permit debt reduction rather than compel economic destruction.

China's Potential Role
China could potentially build such an international payments system around productive investment rather than creditor extraction. Its investments in ports, railways, infrastructure, and the Belt and Road Initiative could increase borrowers' productive capacity and ability to earn foreign exchange, enabling them to repay principal and interest rather than forcing them into austerity and privatization. The argument is that, unlike Western financial systems, China has the capacity to structure such financing primarily on geopolitical and developmental grounds rather than purely for financial returns or capital gains.
 
The central question is whether China itself could avoid becoming another creditor power with the capacity to weaponize its currency. The historical lesson, however, is that other countries did not necessarily expect the US to weaponize the dollar in the 1950s and 1960s, yet it eventually did. The same concern could apply to the yuan. The proposed solution, however, is not simply to substitute one national currency for another, but to create an international clearing mechanism that limits any single country's ability to accumulate unlimited financial power.

The End of the Post-1945 Order
The broader conclusion is that the post-1945 financial order may be approaching a structural break. The present conflict is no longer simply a military conflict; it is increasingly a contest between competing economic systems: a creditor-driven and highly financialized model and an industrial, state-directed model represented by China and parts of Asia. The existing system may not contain mechanisms capable of managing this transition. Instead, the world could fracture into parallel financial and economic systems, with the struggle over the future economic order ultimately displacing the narrower conception of a military or civilizational conflict.

Reference: