I think you are spot on in your analysis of British fascism and empire. However I disagree that Communism/Socialism, Russia, China, Stalin etc. were somehow opposed to British Imperial fascism for this is to ignore the overwhelming evidence that it is simply another tentacle of the same beast.
Rothschild's name (and wallet) crops up repeatedly in the creation of the communist ideology from Adam Weishaupt's illuminism through Marx's work (Marx was a Rothschild cousin himself) to the Bolshevik revolution. And Theosophists crop up not only as the founders of the Nazi party, but they were clearly operating in Russia as well where, for example, Rasputin's key adviser, successor and posthumous son-in-law, Boris Soloviev was a Blavatsky acolyte.
And of course there were freemasons (and all the theosophists were freemasons) everywhere (including all of Churchill, FDR and Stalin), an organization which seems to have been controlled by Rothschild since at least the late seventeen hundreds when Weishaupt and his agents infiltrated all the lodges (and whose influence most certainly did not cease when the elector of Bavaria attempted to shut down the Illuminati in 1786 (date from memory so may have misremembered). And Mao, if not a freemason himself, was heavily influenced by several members of the Skull and Bones society and appears to have been financed by Rothschild through Israel Epstein who may well also have been the authro of Mao's Little Red Book (https://lipstick-and-war-crimes.org/mao-yale-man-rothschilds-create-peoples-republic-china/).
The entire world political stage appears to me to have been controlled on both sides throughout this period. Post WW2 was not British imperial fascism vs Russia/China/communism at all - it was the managed Hegelian dialectic writ large with the entire world dancing to the tune of the hidden hand.
Horace, assuming all that you say is true, for which I will quietly demur, one of the key differences between Western fascism-capitalism and communism-socialism is the latter is bottom-up popular democracy serving the interests of the vast majority of the population, whereas the prior is top-down aristocracy serving the 1%.
1. On what basis do you demur? There is strong evidence available for what I suggest. If you can point to the part you disagree with, I will happily point you in the direction of the evidence.
2. I disagree with your perspective on the difference between fascism-capitalism and communism-socialism. The problem with both of these systems is that they centralize control and power. In the case of British imperial fascism, the control mechanism is regulatory democracy - an endless web of laws which create huge barriers to entry for potential competitors to the large corporations and the men in who control them and wield political power over the regulatory process through bribery and blackmail. In the case of communism, the control is more direct, less subtle and actually more powerful. The result is in fact a greater degree of top down control and monopolies even more firmly protected from competition. The idea that the means of production are placed in the hands of the workers is a nonsense - an advertising gimmick with no basis in reality - the means of production are in fact under the control of even fewer people under such a system. Sure the people are politicians and bureaucrats instead of corporate executives. But in practice it is the *same* people who end up filling the controller roles. The only difference is that under communism there are even fewer limitations on their behavior.
In 1871 Mikhail Bakhunin noted this when he wrote (even though unaware of the family ties and direct financial relationship between Marx and Rothschild):
“Himself a Jew, Marx has around him, in London and France, but especially in Germany, a multitude of more or less clever, intriguing, mobile, speculating Jews, such as Jews are every where: commercial or banking agents, writers, politicians, correspondents for newspapers of all shades, with one foot in the bank, the other in the socialist movement, and with their behinds sitting on the German daily press — they have taken possession of all the newspapers — and you can imagine what kind of sickening literature they produce. Now, this entire Jewish world, which forms a single profiteering sect, a people of bloodsuckers, a single gluttonnous parasite, closely and intimately united not only across national borders but across all differences of political opinion — this Jewish world today stands for the most part at the disposal of Marx and at the same time at the disposal of Rothschild. I am certain that Rothschild for his part greatly values the merits of Marx, and that Marx for his part feels instinctive attraction and great respect for Rothschild.
This may seem strange. What can there be in common between Communism and the large banks? Oh! The Communism of Marx seeks enormous centralization in the state, and where such exists, there must inevitably be a central state bank, and where such a bank exists, the parasitic Jewish nation, which. speculates on the work of the people, will always find a way to prevail ....”
And it is of course true that Marx's communist manifesto indeed specified a state central bank which does indeed centralize power, and suck up all the wealth of a nation, in exactly the way Bakunin described.
In my view communism is not in any way different to fascism, it is in fact simply a more extreme version of the monopoly system. At one end of the spectrum you have free markets. In the middle you have regulatory democracy (aka British fascism) where the (corrupt) government's ability to create monopolies is partially limited by the necessity to pay at least lip service to the idea of free markets. And at the extreme end you have communism where the government simply outlaws any competition and a small group of people assume direct control of everything by fiat.
And I don't know if you have visited China or Russia. Their cities are most definitely not beautiful at all. Any beauty that remains post communism dates from the pre-communist era. Post communist takeover, the architecture is cheap, utilitarian and appallingly ugly.
Honestly, Mr. Brown...Top Down or Bottom Up; in the end Totalitarianism is Totalitarianism and it's slavery in all its nasty, ugly forms diverting slightly from place to place.
Every time China is mentioned as 'Free' and 'Democratic', it is nauseating since it's a fact of Democracy being possible or APPEARING possible in any number of Economic Systems.
Factually, the west isn't Democratic. It's based in Democracy; but since it's Representative in orientation to the promotion, support, creation and approval of legislation, most western Nations or the United States was/is a Republic. The British Commonwealth is NOT primarily a Republic; although the various regions of English-Speaking populations have variations of Imperialism always motivated by Empiricist tendencies as China is manifesting more and more today.
Have had many students from China in my classrooms and for Therapy...And, they are NOT in agreement with you, Matt, Cynthia. They claim China to be a very cruel place to live and antithetical to creative thought, political opinion and basic life choices. One student was permanently damaged when she was kidnapped and taken to have her 8 month duration pregnancy terminated with a live baby screaming when ripped from her. She was forced to watch it die in a bucket placed in a locked room having glass partitions for hours and could do nothing to end this abomination. She was continuing to suffer PTSD from this horror when I retired from practice. Have any number of such horrific examples from Counselling Sessions providing enlightenment towards understanding of what real life in China has been for average people in the recent half century.
Like all the scar literature about China, all the false flags and fake news vomited out of the West's Big Lie Propaganda Machine (10% of Uighurs are in concentration camps, machine gun nests in Tiananmen Square in 1989, Falungong's claims of organ harvesting, persecution of Tibetans, and on and on...), extraordinary claims require concrete proof.
I can agree with Cynthia on just about everything she has discussed with one exception. This was her remark that Stalin had no interest in conquering Western Europe. I have studied the inter-war period quite extensively by reading the diplomatic histories of this period by authors who are outside the mainstream publications on this era, since most of these people are merely parroting the party line that Washington wanted.
Stalin, in short, was a monster, and was more than eager to invade western Europe, which has been demonstrated by Viktor Surovov's books on this subject, and which has been corroborated by other historians. The most recent book on this subject is Sean McMeekin's latest study, "Stalin's War", which uses newly available primary source materials from Soviet archives.
There is nothing I have studied in the past 10 years or so that will dispute these observations and as fine as Cynthia's research is, both she and her husband appear to be very narrowly focused on Britain as the font of all such problems in the world.
This may be very well be true but both Cynthia and Matthew fail to allow for individual agency on those people who came later over the many years that Britain was a major force on the world stage.
And though there is no doubt that many people did follow the tenets of British imperialism and its offshoots inside the US and elsewhere, it is highly unlikely that such groups that have been formed as a result, would be so focused on tenets that were created decades prior to their existence.
For example, one of the the concepts that it is being touted is that the West financed the rise of Adolf Hitler's accession to power in Germany. And it is true that quite a few Wall Street personages gave monies to the National Socialists but not on the scale that German industry and the German people provided to the NSDAP.
I believe both Matthew and Cynthia have a lot to offer in such discussions, but such narrow focuses should be questioned as there are too many variables involved to simply support such a direction in such a complete perspective. In fact, a lot of these groups that are discussed are at odds with each other since they all have such differing agendas no matter how much they may align with the original tenets as contended...
Great support of your argument, Steve. Very thoughtfully expressed.
I personally think Stalin was more interested in building up his country's people and that it was and still is the Trotskyists who push for global revolution. I also think Cynthia's research supports that the City of London is at the root of what we call the deep state.
Thanks for commenting and watching the show.
You may want to check out Grover Furr's books. His research is outstanding.
I looked at some of Grover Furr's books as you suggested. I find it rather odd that one historian who also used primary source materials from the Soviet archives would come to the same conclusions regarding Stalin that most legitimate historians have come to, while Mr. Furr says the opposite. Both sets of conclusions cannot be correct...
As Grover says, you cannot get books published with larger companies in the West, unless you make Stalin into a bloodthirsty, genocidal monster. Given that reality, I believe Grover over all the others chasing money and fame,
I did some research on Grover Furr. One he is not a credentialed historian of any merit, and two, other people such as myself, who are non-credentialed historians, have done extensive research on this subject (including myself) and see Furr's analysis as very faulty and just downright incorrect.
Whatever Stalin's real crimes, all of the events that occurred during his time in office came under his watch, thus making him the final responsibility to all of them.
Let us take as one example, the Katyn Massacre. Furr states that this was in fact the fault of the German Army and that it was German propaganda from 1943 that blamed the Soviets for this event. Furr seems to believe that we believed this since the end of WWII. However, having grown up in the 1950s and 1960s, I happen to remember that it was the Germans who were always to blame. It wasn't until sometime in the 1980s or 1990s that certain Soviet Archives were finally open for research that it was then found to be the fault of the Soviets.
So what is going on here? Everything we supposedly know about Stalin is completely false? I find such a view incredibly distorted given the amount of research that has been done on this man. Nothing happened during WWII as we finally came to believe from years of research on this man?
No matter what you may believe about many historians, all of them cannot be simply singing from the same tune book. David Hoggan certainly didn't, Walendy didn't, and Rohof-Schultz certainly didn't.
As to the Katyn Massacre, I can agree that the German Army had more motive than the Soviets to commit this crime, given the violence that had been perpetrated by the Poles against the German minority in Poland. However, the Soviets also had motive in that Poland acted egregiously towards both Germany and the Soviet Union after the death Pilsudski in 1935.
I have read something like 9 texts on the inter-war period starting with Margaret McMillan's well received, "Paris 1919", while the others were from lessor known historians whose works have yet to be debunked, given that at least one mainstream British historian actually corroborated a bit of this work.
If Furr has no other corroborating works towards his own, I simply cannot except his viewpoint and to me, it is nonsensical...
Though it is nauseating to imagine being a Chinese person based upon reports originating from migrants from China, this book sounds fascinating and I will purchase it.
Couldn't listen to the whole discussion...But, what I could listen to was fascinating.
Cynthia Chung thank you. This is the the most important book our life, I felt it in the Middle East as a five years old child, continuously hearing adults anguish terrorized no hope, telling bad news, one after the other at great pace, it was the end of their World after WW1.
We lived absurdity became stupid like the Government, crying "We can't live like this!" to what Saint we pray for.
In 2011, France Sarkozy invited Lebanese Patriarch Al Rai and all of Middle East, to the Élisée Palace in Paris, "You must take your people for an Exodus to Europe Moslem Brotherhood will enter Syria in November", Al Rai and Bishops were furious Sarkozy was banging on the table.
Photographed at the sortie by the press, their eyes popping out..sorry..
Russia and China voted in extremis against the UN.
US and Israel sent Jihadist from 75 different countries to Syria.
Erdogan opened his borders with Syria to Cannibals.
Husband was 'On Ship' as Plane Mechanic when U.S. was in Vietnam...'USS Forrestal' when McCain's Plane Crashed and caused major catastrophe and was UTTERLY COVERED-UP and lied about for years to shield the GUILTY installed into the Senate for 31 years and the House of Representatives four years before that.
He is perpetually disgusted by the U.S. Political Climate and Regulatory Environment since Vietnam.
Common story among the Establishment Psycho/Sociopathic Parasites since 1899.
BTW, I posted your interview to all of my networks (FB, LI, msg, etc) with the following header;
We may have some differences in perspective, but a mutual love for Truth, Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. Please critically consider and review the attached interview by long-standing friends and colleagues on the roots of fascism. ❤️Wage Peace, ⭐️Keep the Faith, #DeNazthePlanet.
Thanks, Cynthia for sharing.
On with the good fight!
Are there any Alan Watt listeners here?
I only know a lot of the names Cynthia is mentioning from his talks over the years.
This is great information.
Substack seems to be the place to be.
Long may it last
Yes, Darz, Substack is still resisting deep state corruption. Fingers crossed.
Thank you honoured and grateful.
ELTV, I too am honored and grateful to work with Cynthia.
On with the good fight!
Yes absolute, the remarkable work Cynthia and Matthew are doing is amazing and invaluable thank you for the show and check for more mate cheers!
Interesting discussion.
I think you are spot on in your analysis of British fascism and empire. However I disagree that Communism/Socialism, Russia, China, Stalin etc. were somehow opposed to British Imperial fascism for this is to ignore the overwhelming evidence that it is simply another tentacle of the same beast.
Rothschild's name (and wallet) crops up repeatedly in the creation of the communist ideology from Adam Weishaupt's illuminism through Marx's work (Marx was a Rothschild cousin himself) to the Bolshevik revolution. And Theosophists crop up not only as the founders of the Nazi party, but they were clearly operating in Russia as well where, for example, Rasputin's key adviser, successor and posthumous son-in-law, Boris Soloviev was a Blavatsky acolyte.
And of course there were freemasons (and all the theosophists were freemasons) everywhere (including all of Churchill, FDR and Stalin), an organization which seems to have been controlled by Rothschild since at least the late seventeen hundreds when Weishaupt and his agents infiltrated all the lodges (and whose influence most certainly did not cease when the elector of Bavaria attempted to shut down the Illuminati in 1786 (date from memory so may have misremembered). And Mao, if not a freemason himself, was heavily influenced by several members of the Skull and Bones society and appears to have been financed by Rothschild through Israel Epstein who may well also have been the authro of Mao's Little Red Book (https://lipstick-and-war-crimes.org/mao-yale-man-rothschilds-create-peoples-republic-china/).
The entire world political stage appears to me to have been controlled on both sides throughout this period. Post WW2 was not British imperial fascism vs Russia/China/communism at all - it was the managed Hegelian dialectic writ large with the entire world dancing to the tune of the hidden hand.
Horace, assuming all that you say is true, for which I will quietly demur, one of the key differences between Western fascism-capitalism and communism-socialism is the latter is bottom-up popular democracy serving the interests of the vast majority of the population, whereas the prior is top-down aristocracy serving the 1%.
Two thoughts.
1. On what basis do you demur? There is strong evidence available for what I suggest. If you can point to the part you disagree with, I will happily point you in the direction of the evidence.
2. I disagree with your perspective on the difference between fascism-capitalism and communism-socialism. The problem with both of these systems is that they centralize control and power. In the case of British imperial fascism, the control mechanism is regulatory democracy - an endless web of laws which create huge barriers to entry for potential competitors to the large corporations and the men in who control them and wield political power over the regulatory process through bribery and blackmail. In the case of communism, the control is more direct, less subtle and actually more powerful. The result is in fact a greater degree of top down control and monopolies even more firmly protected from competition. The idea that the means of production are placed in the hands of the workers is a nonsense - an advertising gimmick with no basis in reality - the means of production are in fact under the control of even fewer people under such a system. Sure the people are politicians and bureaucrats instead of corporate executives. But in practice it is the *same* people who end up filling the controller roles. The only difference is that under communism there are even fewer limitations on their behavior.
In 1871 Mikhail Bakhunin noted this when he wrote (even though unaware of the family ties and direct financial relationship between Marx and Rothschild):
“Himself a Jew, Marx has around him, in London and France, but especially in Germany, a multitude of more or less clever, intriguing, mobile, speculating Jews, such as Jews are every where: commercial or banking agents, writers, politicians, correspondents for newspapers of all shades, with one foot in the bank, the other in the socialist movement, and with their behinds sitting on the German daily press — they have taken possession of all the newspapers — and you can imagine what kind of sickening literature they produce. Now, this entire Jewish world, which forms a single profiteering sect, a people of bloodsuckers, a single gluttonnous parasite, closely and intimately united not only across national borders but across all differences of political opinion — this Jewish world today stands for the most part at the disposal of Marx and at the same time at the disposal of Rothschild. I am certain that Rothschild for his part greatly values the merits of Marx, and that Marx for his part feels instinctive attraction and great respect for Rothschild.
This may seem strange. What can there be in common between Communism and the large banks? Oh! The Communism of Marx seeks enormous centralization in the state, and where such exists, there must inevitably be a central state bank, and where such a bank exists, the parasitic Jewish nation, which. speculates on the work of the people, will always find a way to prevail ....”
And it is of course true that Marx's communist manifesto indeed specified a state central bank which does indeed centralize power, and suck up all the wealth of a nation, in exactly the way Bakunin described.
In my view communism is not in any way different to fascism, it is in fact simply a more extreme version of the monopoly system. At one end of the spectrum you have free markets. In the middle you have regulatory democracy (aka British fascism) where the (corrupt) government's ability to create monopolies is partially limited by the necessity to pay at least lip service to the idea of free markets. And at the extreme end you have communism where the government simply outlaws any competition and a small group of people assume direct control of everything by fiat.
And I don't know if you have visited China or Russia. Their cities are most definitely not beautiful at all. Any beauty that remains post communism dates from the pre-communist era. Post communist takeover, the architecture is cheap, utilitarian and appallingly ugly.
Honestly, Mr. Brown...Top Down or Bottom Up; in the end Totalitarianism is Totalitarianism and it's slavery in all its nasty, ugly forms diverting slightly from place to place.
Every time China is mentioned as 'Free' and 'Democratic', it is nauseating since it's a fact of Democracy being possible or APPEARING possible in any number of Economic Systems.
Factually, the west isn't Democratic. It's based in Democracy; but since it's Representative in orientation to the promotion, support, creation and approval of legislation, most western Nations or the United States was/is a Republic. The British Commonwealth is NOT primarily a Republic; although the various regions of English-Speaking populations have variations of Imperialism always motivated by Empiricist tendencies as China is manifesting more and more today.
Have had many students from China in my classrooms and for Therapy...And, they are NOT in agreement with you, Matt, Cynthia. They claim China to be a very cruel place to live and antithetical to creative thought, political opinion and basic life choices. One student was permanently damaged when she was kidnapped and taken to have her 8 month duration pregnancy terminated with a live baby screaming when ripped from her. She was forced to watch it die in a bucket placed in a locked room having glass partitions for hours and could do nothing to end this abomination. She was continuing to suffer PTSD from this horror when I retired from practice. Have any number of such horrific examples from Counselling Sessions providing enlightenment towards understanding of what real life in China has been for average people in the recent half century.
Like all the scar literature about China, all the false flags and fake news vomited out of the West's Big Lie Propaganda Machine (10% of Uighurs are in concentration camps, machine gun nests in Tiananmen Square in 1989, Falungong's claims of organ harvesting, persecution of Tibetans, and on and on...), extraordinary claims require concrete proof.
❤️Wage Peace,
⭐️Keep the Faith,
#DeNazthePlanet!
Thanks, Warren. I like "DeNazthePlanet"!
I like Wage Peace :-)
Thank you, look forward to it. I always learn from you.
It's a great book, Kathleen. I learned so much.
I can agree with Cynthia on just about everything she has discussed with one exception. This was her remark that Stalin had no interest in conquering Western Europe. I have studied the inter-war period quite extensively by reading the diplomatic histories of this period by authors who are outside the mainstream publications on this era, since most of these people are merely parroting the party line that Washington wanted.
Stalin, in short, was a monster, and was more than eager to invade western Europe, which has been demonstrated by Viktor Surovov's books on this subject, and which has been corroborated by other historians. The most recent book on this subject is Sean McMeekin's latest study, "Stalin's War", which uses newly available primary source materials from Soviet archives.
There is nothing I have studied in the past 10 years or so that will dispute these observations and as fine as Cynthia's research is, both she and her husband appear to be very narrowly focused on Britain as the font of all such problems in the world.
This may be very well be true but both Cynthia and Matthew fail to allow for individual agency on those people who came later over the many years that Britain was a major force on the world stage.
And though there is no doubt that many people did follow the tenets of British imperialism and its offshoots inside the US and elsewhere, it is highly unlikely that such groups that have been formed as a result, would be so focused on tenets that were created decades prior to their existence.
For example, one of the the concepts that it is being touted is that the West financed the rise of Adolf Hitler's accession to power in Germany. And it is true that quite a few Wall Street personages gave monies to the National Socialists but not on the scale that German industry and the German people provided to the NSDAP.
I believe both Matthew and Cynthia have a lot to offer in such discussions, but such narrow focuses should be questioned as there are too many variables involved to simply support such a direction in such a complete perspective. In fact, a lot of these groups that are discussed are at odds with each other since they all have such differing agendas no matter how much they may align with the original tenets as contended...
Great support of your argument, Steve. Very thoughtfully expressed.
I personally think Stalin was more interested in building up his country's people and that it was and still is the Trotskyists who push for global revolution. I also think Cynthia's research supports that the City of London is at the root of what we call the deep state.
Thanks for commenting and watching the show.
You may want to check out Grover Furr's books. His research is outstanding.
¡VENCEREMOS!
Jeff
I looked at some of Grover Furr's books as you suggested. I find it rather odd that one historian who also used primary source materials from the Soviet archives would come to the same conclusions regarding Stalin that most legitimate historians have come to, while Mr. Furr says the opposite. Both sets of conclusions cannot be correct...
As Grover says, you cannot get books published with larger companies in the West, unless you make Stalin into a bloodthirsty, genocidal monster. Given that reality, I believe Grover over all the others chasing money and fame,
http://chinarising.puntopress.com/2018/08/18/everything-you-know-about-russia-and-the-ussr-is-a-lie-dr-grover-furr-interviews-on-china-rising-radio-sinoland-180818/
Jeff...
I did some research on Grover Furr. One he is not a credentialed historian of any merit, and two, other people such as myself, who are non-credentialed historians, have done extensive research on this subject (including myself) and see Furr's analysis as very faulty and just downright incorrect.
Whatever Stalin's real crimes, all of the events that occurred during his time in office came under his watch, thus making him the final responsibility to all of them.
Let us take as one example, the Katyn Massacre. Furr states that this was in fact the fault of the German Army and that it was German propaganda from 1943 that blamed the Soviets for this event. Furr seems to believe that we believed this since the end of WWII. However, having grown up in the 1950s and 1960s, I happen to remember that it was the Germans who were always to blame. It wasn't until sometime in the 1980s or 1990s that certain Soviet Archives were finally open for research that it was then found to be the fault of the Soviets.
So what is going on here? Everything we supposedly know about Stalin is completely false? I find such a view incredibly distorted given the amount of research that has been done on this man. Nothing happened during WWII as we finally came to believe from years of research on this man?
No matter what you may believe about many historians, all of them cannot be simply singing from the same tune book. David Hoggan certainly didn't, Walendy didn't, and Rohof-Schultz certainly didn't.
As to the Katyn Massacre, I can agree that the German Army had more motive than the Soviets to commit this crime, given the violence that had been perpetrated by the Poles against the German minority in Poland. However, the Soviets also had motive in that Poland acted egregiously towards both Germany and the Soviet Union after the death Pilsudski in 1935.
I have read something like 9 texts on the inter-war period starting with Margaret McMillan's well received, "Paris 1919", while the others were from lessor known historians whose works have yet to be debunked, given that at least one mainstream British historian actually corroborated a bit of this work.
If Furr has no other corroborating works towards his own, I simply cannot except his viewpoint and to me, it is nonsensical...
Bought one already and it was illuminating to read. Congrats.
Though it is nauseating to imagine being a Chinese person based upon reports originating from migrants from China, this book sounds fascinating and I will purchase it.
Couldn't listen to the whole discussion...But, what I could listen to was fascinating.
Cynthia's book is a great read. You will be glad you did.
Cynthia Chung thank you. This is the the most important book our life, I felt it in the Middle East as a five years old child, continuously hearing adults anguish terrorized no hope, telling bad news, one after the other at great pace, it was the end of their World after WW1.
I haven't been able to play this video, after it initially worked.
Is anybody else having problems playing this video?
Edit: It's playing now, though has on/off issues I think
Darz, I just checked my website and it's working fine.
Here is the direct link just in case,
https://www.brighteon.com/c9ea3096-b9cf-4f08-b638-20fce939d1d8
Okay, thank you for the reply
Much appreciated
We lived absurdity became stupid like the Government, crying "We can't live like this!" to what Saint we pray for.
In 2011, France Sarkozy invited Lebanese Patriarch Al Rai and all of Middle East, to the Élisée Palace in Paris, "You must take your people for an Exodus to Europe Moslem Brotherhood will enter Syria in November", Al Rai and Bishops were furious Sarkozy was banging on the table.
Photographed at the sortie by the press, their eyes popping out..sorry..
Russia and China voted in extremis against the UN.
US and Israel sent Jihadist from 75 different countries to Syria.
Erdogan opened his borders with Syria to Cannibals.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KeThckstKNE
Rose, for the last 3,000 years the West has almost always been ruled by psychopaths. Still true today.
On with the good fight!
Husband was 'On Ship' as Plane Mechanic when U.S. was in Vietnam...'USS Forrestal' when McCain's Plane Crashed and caused major catastrophe and was UTTERLY COVERED-UP and lied about for years to shield the GUILTY installed into the Senate for 31 years and the House of Representatives four years before that.
He is perpetually disgusted by the U.S. Political Climate and Regulatory Environment since Vietnam.
Common story among the Establishment Psycho/Sociopathic Parasites since 1899.
Great background, BlazeCloud3. Yes, for the last 3,000 years, the West has been ruled almost all the time by psychopaths.
Thx Jeff! I originated and works well combined:
❤️Wage Peace,
⭐️Keep the Faith,
#DeNazthePlanet!
BTW, I posted your interview to all of my networks (FB, LI, msg, etc) with the following header;
We may have some differences in perspective, but a mutual love for Truth, Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. Please critically consider and review the attached interview by long-standing friends and colleagues on the roots of fascism. ❤️Wage Peace, ⭐️Keep the Faith, #DeNazthePlanet.