THE LEAD

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        

Its the British Empire, Stupid!

November 23, 2015

With Brussels in a second day of lockdown, in anticipation of another major Islamic State terrorist attack on the scale of the Nov. 13 massacres in Paris, attention is increasingly turning to the fact that the hub of jihadist terrorism is actually located in the heart of Europe.  Brussels, the capital of both NATO and the European Union, is now being referred to as Brusselstan, just as London has long been referred to as Londonistan, because of the fact that virtually every jihadist, narcoterrorist, and separatist terrorist organization has been housed, protected, and financed by the British Monarchy.  Recently, the British government dropped all charges against an alleged jihadist weapons smuggler, because his defense attorneys pointed out that the same groups he was accused of arming were being overtly backed by British intelligence's MI6.

This is an old story.  London has been at the center of world terrorism for decades.  Executive Intelligence Review provided a dossier to the U.S. Department of State in 2000, calling for Great Britain to be put on the list of state sponsors of terrorism.  The dossier was based exclusively on evidence provided by governments around the world, including Russia, Egypt, India, Pakistan, Colombia, and Peru, showing conclusively that the British Crown was harboring the world's worst terrorists as part of the system of Empire.  The biggest British banks, starting with HSBC (formerly the Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, of Opium Wars infamy), are the world's most notorious drug money laundering institutions, as recently documented by the United States Senate.

It is the British Crown, as well, that has deployed Knight Commander John Schellnhuber to capture the Pope and the Vatican to the idea of radical population reduction, based on the scientific swindle of man-induced global warming.

Every atrocity committed by President Barack Obama—from his drone-kill mass assassinations in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia, to his overthrow and cold-blooded murder of Qaddafi in Libya, creating a zone of chaos, terrorism, and failed states across much of North Africa and the Middle East, to the decimation of the conditions of life for the vast majority of Americans—can be laid at the doorstep of the British Crown. Obama is nothing but a British agent, who was selected by the British to be installed as President of the United States, on behalf of the Crown and the City of London.

After the Paris atrocities, it is becoming transparently obvious to a growing number of thinking people that the Islamic State is a creation of Obama and the British.  Al Qaeda was created and nurtured by the British, the United States, and Saudi Arabia during the 1980s, who collectively assemble a gang of terrorists from jails throughout the Arab and Islamic world, to drive the Soviets out of Afghanistan.  In 1985, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, a virtual member of the Bush Family, joined with British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher to launch the Al Yamamah barter arrangement, under which a $100 billion offshore slush fund was established to covertly arm Al Qaeda and other terrorist outfits. In 2001, Bandar deployed some of those Al Yamamah funds to bankroll the 9/11 hijackers to take down the World Trade Towers and strike the Pentagon.

If you want to understand why British agent Barack Obama has refused to declassify the 28 pages from the original Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11, you must start from the top down, with this account of how the British and Obama created Al Qaeda and, more recently, the Islamic State.  Former Defense Intelligence Agency head Gen. Michael Flynn has openly reported that President Obama armed the Syrian rebels out of Benghazi, and continued to do so because it was the Administration's policy. DIA documents from the summer and autumn of 2012 detailed the joint British-American operations from Benghazi to smuggling ports in rebel-held areas of Syria.

Lyndon LaRouche bluntly told colleagues on Sunday, Nov. 22, that you have to eradicate the British Monarchy or there is no solution to the Syria war or any other global hot-spot.  Unless the British Empire is brought down, we are facing global war against Russia and China, leading to the extermination of much of mankind.  Barack Obama is a British agent, selected by the British to be President of the United States. We must sink the British Empire and all it represents or we will face accelerated horror shows around the globe.

I'm interested, tell me more

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        

SUPPORTING MATERIAL


Former Drone Operator: Children Killed by Drones Were Called 'Fun-Sized Terrorists'

In an interview with Democracy Now! on Friday night, Nov. 20, former drone operator Michael Haas, one of the signers of the powerful letter opposing the drone killings, detailed the hideous policy and behavior toward killing civilians by remote control.  Haas told interviewer Amy Goodman, “the term 'fun-sized terrorists' was used to just sort of denote children that we'd see on screen.”  Haas then elaborated, “Other terms we'd use would be 'cutting the grass before it grows too long,' just doing whatever you can to try to make it easier to kill whatever's on screen.  And the culture is, that mentality is very much nurtured within the drone community, because these,— every Hellfire shot is sort of lauded and applauded, and we don't really examine who exactly was killed, but just that it was an effective shot and the missile hit its target.”

Haas is one of the drone operator whistleblowers who appears in the documentary, “Drone,” which opened at the AMC theater in Manhattan on Nov. 20 and will be playing this week in New York City and Toronto, Canada.

The movie team is running a high profile campaign to build support for stopping the drone murders.  On Friday night, Jeremy Scahill, one of the founders of The Intercept that published the “Drone Papers” secret documents, appeared with the film's director, Tonje Hessen Schei, and former drone operator Brandon Bryant following the 7 PM screening.  On Saturday afternoon and evening, Bryant appeared again, first with the attorney for the whistleblowers, Jesselyn Radack, and then with the film's producers for a question and answer session.

On the film's website, dronethedocumentary.com, an advertisement quotes Lawrence Wilkerson, Colonel U.S. Army (retired): “Our potential collective future. Watch it and weep for us. Or watch it and determine to change that future.” Wilkerson is the former aide to Colin Powell in the Bush/Cheney administration, who is an outspoken and frequent opponent of the perpetual war policy of both Bush and Obama, and who gave a lengthy interview to EIR in 2011.

Two other films exposing the drone program are also circulating. A 2013 documentary called, “Unmanned: The Drone Wars,” features interviews with victims of the drone attacks, including the brother of the innocent 16-year old Pakistani boy, Tariq Aziz. “Good Kill” (2014), a Hollywood movie starring Ethan Hawke, is a fictionalized account of the psychological breakdown of a drone operator who questions his role. 


Belgian MP Calls into Question Relations with Saudi Arabia

In several press interviews, Belgian MP Dirk Van der Maelen (Socialist, opposition) who currently heads the Foreign Affairs Commission of the Belgian House of Representatives and is otherwise known for having sent letters to members of the U.S. Congress to reenact the Glass-Steagall Act, has called on the Belgian government to thoroughly review its diplomatic relations with Saudi Arabia.

"After the bombings in Paris, questions are increasingly raised about the financing of terrorism by Gulf States such as Saudi Arabia," writes the Flemish daily De Standaard. The paper then quotes Van der Maelen saying:

"The fact that Belgium maintains friendly relations with countries which follow and finance the worldwide spread of Wahhabism, a current of radical Islam, is irresponsible.... You can't have a credible policy of de-radicalization [of youth] while at the same time signing economic treaties with governments backing extreme groups. Furthermore, we have long known that Saudi Arabia violates labor and human rights. Therefore, time has come to review these economic relations."

It should be noted that in the center of Brussels, not far from the EU Commission, Saudi Arabia has been financing since 1967 the Belgian Islamic Center (Centre Islamique de Belgique), a huge center for propagating Wahhabism.

According to diplomatic cables disclosed by WikiLeaks, the Saudi Ambassador in Brussels reported that in 2012, the Belgian Foreign Ministry and Belgian State Security asked him to repatriate Khalid Alabri, radical Imam of the Great Mosque of Brussels, the country's largest mosque, because of his extremist and potentially dangerous speeches. Under Belgian pressure, Alibri finally was sent back to Riyadh on April 14, 2012.

"Behind this," says Felice Dassetto, a sociologist at the University of Louvain, "the Muslim World League has a strategic objective developed by the Saudis since the 1960s which is to become the hegemonic pole of the Islamic world."

Another key factor is that close to half of firearms and munitions exported to the Middle East are produced in Belgium, reported the Flemish weekly Knack on Oct. 13. Belgian firearms exported to Saudi Arabia show up repeatedly in Libya and Syria; some of the weapons used by the terror squad that hit the Charlie Hebdo journalists in Paris on Jan. 7, 2015, were produced by the notorious Belgian firm Fabrique Nationale. 


Retired U.S. General Urges U.S.-Russia Military Dialogue

Gen. Peter B. Zwack, who served as U.S. military attaché in Moscow during part of the Obama presidency, has published a strong call for an immediate resumption of U.S.-Russia bilateral military dialogue, to both advance the war against the Islamic State and re-establish institutional contacts to avoid war.  Gen. Zwack wrote in Defense One that he was present in Jan. 2014 at the very last high-level discussion between American and Russian military commanders. 

“It's way past time for senior U.S. and Russian defense leaders and staffs to start meeting again,” he wrote, adding “it is increasingly dangerous in this cyber-fast world for both our nuclear-tipped nations to have such a dearth of contact.”

  He urged that such lines of regular communication would be

“hardnosed practical business: adding some human familiarity at key command-and-control nodes that might keep a sudden accident or incident from flashing into catastrophe. In a fast-breaking crisis, you want leaders who already know one another.  And over time, these linkages might help us move beyond these sour political times, and rebuild the kind of relationships that will allow our countries to work on global challenges where we have areas of common interest.”

Gen. Zwack called for Obama to give the green light for Defense Secretary Ashton Carter and JCS Chairman Gen. Joseph Dunford to meet with their Russian counterparts, Sergey Shoigu and Gen. Valery Gerasimov.

Gen. Zwack cited the Paris attacks, the Sinai bombing, and other recent events as obvious reasons for re-establishing the military-to-military institutional dialogue, warning

“without a dialogue of any consequence our strategic defense relationship will be even more dangerous and prone to hair-trigger miscalculation or misunderstanding ... Without contact, we both continue to demonize each other while hardening our populations. It's better agreeing to disagree than having no discussion at all.  Without direct dialogue between our senior defense leaders we cannot even begin to consider a more mutually cooperative and secure future.” 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        

Related