Winter Patriot Community Blog

A few days ago, Pepe Escobar published a scathing piece at RT on Obama's $1b splash over Europe. I'll quote from it extensively-

. . . . “Stupid s**t though, doesn’t even begin to describe Obama’s first act after announcing the doctrine last week at West Point. For those who don’t get the message, one picture is enough to tell the whole story; Obama and the Polish president in front of an F-16 exhibition at a military airport near Warsaw. (Straighten up and fly right, grunts) Ed. Stupid s**t also irretrievably takes a backseat to serious s**t during Obama’s current European tour. We just need to examine what’s in store at the selected pit stops. First is Warsaw – whose nervous poodle, US vassal government is absolutely hysterical over an imminent Russian “threat.” Then it’s the G7 in Brussels – the “ex-G8,” from which Russia was expelled by the self-proclaimed “great powers.” One of the items in the agenda is the possibility of slapping even more sanctions over Moscow’s “threat” to the Ukraine. And then there are the ceremonies over the 70th anniversary of the Normandy landings. It was the Soviet Union that essentially defeated Nazi Germany; the “West” only finished the job. Stalin’s generals should have easily entered Berlin; they didn’t because Stalin was afraid of ruffling Allied feathers at Yalta (and then the whole post-war scenario would have been a completely different story). Check it out: the whole, fascinating process becomes quite visible by mixing Vojtech Mastny’s “Russia’s Road to the Cold War. Diplomacy, Warfare and the Politics of Communism, 1941-1945,” with Vladislav Zubok’s and Constantine Pleshakov’s “Inside the Kremlin’s Cold War.” Now a serious World War II event like the Normandy landings has been marred by – what else – stupid s**t. Because Barack the First simply cannot be in the same room with Vladimir Putin – as he would have no teleprompter to guide him – French President Francois Hollande must host two dinners in a row on Thursday. This was essentially leaked to American media by one of Obama’s foreign policy advisers, the astounding mediocrity Ben Rhodes. And the most startling absurdity is that all this is taking place with the background of a Kiev-conducted, Washington-enabled “anti-terrorist operation” – for instance in Lugansk – where civilian “collateral damage” is being framed as the culprit. Neo-Nazis are positively gloating – in their graves or in their contemporary balaclavas. “

Crazy stuff, no?

Pepe references Saker's article that describes Obama's $1b splurge as a “hammer”. Here's Saker elaborating on that “hammer”-

By that logic of Levi's, we could say that being anti-EU is being anti-Zionist. And I think that is a fair description of how the jewish bankers and their paid-for Neocons like Victoria Nuland, John Kerry etc are seeing it.

Psychopaths may be crazy and use screwy logic but they do have their reasons. So what's going on?

Here's the iconoclastic but ever accurate Brother Nathanial's take on it-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6t9LMcjQJg&feature=youtu.be

Brother Nathanial makes it clear that the Jews, in his terminology, bankers, in other words, are running the US and the EU and fomenting the mayhem in Ukraine. Notice, also, he talks about Marine Le Pen and her rise in popularity. Le Pen is threatening to take France out of NATO and the EU. Her party is also against imposing sanctions on Russia.

Political parties need money and their popularity tends to rise with the injection of funds (and vice versa). So who else is against sanctions on Russia in France (and elsewhere in Europe for that matter)? Big business, the industrialists are. The European domestic economy is slowing and has been for some years. What is keeping it afloat is European industry's involvement in Russia's expanding economy. Russia's car market is the biggest now in Europe and growing. French car makers have suffered greatly from sanctions on Iran and now they are being threatened with more on Russia.

There is a big division in the Big End of town between the bankers and the industrialists. The Industrialists need Ukraine in the EU like a hole in the head. The Ukrainians are poor and getting poorer. They can't buy European cars or anything else. The industrialists do not want their govts borrowing money from the bankers to prop up the dying Ukrainian economy because all that borrowing has to be paid for (with interest) by European taxpayers including the said industrialists. The tax burden makes the European population poorer and less able to buy manufactured goods. Some level of unemployment over the years has suited the manufacturers just fine but mass unemployment imposed by the bankers is a threat. It's bad all round as far as the industrialists are concerned.

Presently, the big European manufacturers are staying afloat through selling to the prospering economies of Russia and China. They do not need to be responsible for another Greece.

The industrialists and the bankers are very different fish though up till recently they have swum in the same pond. They both are financially powerful but the industrialists have to earn their money through producing and selling things. The bankers don't 'earn' any money, they just 'make' it and lend it. They create their wealth at next to no cost through a bookkeeping system. They are not businessmen and couldn't run a corner shop let alone an auto manufacturing plant and make a consistent profit.

Could it be that the industrialists are behind the growing 'right' political parties that are pushing for continued investment and trade with Russia and winding back the powers of the EU (i.e. winding back the influence of the bankers)? I think so. Their interests are very much aligned. The industrialists and the people prosper with a prosperous economy. Only the bankers prosper in a shrinking economy.

Obama's $1b war chest and pictures of him posing in front of F16 fighter jets are aimed at these industrialists amongst others. It is a threat. It is all about the bankers' security not Europe's. The bankers want to separate Europe from Russia economically to consolidate their power. Because Russia and China don't have privately owned central banks, they don't have to endure the cost of bankers annually skimming their economies. They also don't have to put up with private central bankers sending their economies into recession periodically to plunder them.

The result – thriving and continually growing economies made possible through having money available for investment rather than being frittered away through speculation and corruption of truly epic proportions. If the west contiues to be economically engaged with Russia (and China) , the disparity between their economies will become increasingly obvious and western European peoples will begin to look for the foundational reason for this and begin to ask simple questions like, “Why can't we manage out economies like Russia and China do?”

This would be a disastrous outcome for the bankers. The bankers' opponents would need do nothing more than point to the Russian and Chinese economies and also to the developing economies that will thrive under Russia's and China's economic sponsorship and military protection.

The bankers lost power over Russia with Putin's accession and they never really had any power over China. Well, not since the good ole' opium days of Gunboat diplomacy, anyway. Russia and China (with the other BRICS countries to follow) are gone. The challenge now for the bankers is to stop Europe following them and the best way to do that is to rebuild the Iron Curtain but this time from the Western side to keep western Europe isolated from bilateral trade and the information that is exchanged with it. The sanctions are being sold now as isolating Russia but they are really about isolating Europe. We are now in the 'Hall of Mirrors' where the media is telling us that left is right and right is wrong.

If the industrialists can continue to trade with Russia, the East, the other BRICS nations and the developing countries that are destined to join them, they will continue to do well and prosper. If they are caught inside an isolated Europe, then the industrialists will face austerity and shrinking markets and probably serious economic depression and possibly bankruptcy. The stakes are high. The bankers and the industrialists have mutually exclusive interests and the struggle is on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pr_D0v_bUc4&feature=youtube_gdata_player