Quite often you see a powerful man (or woman, let us give credit afore my wife does something to me) looking like a fool and what is worse, stubbornly carry on with whatever wrong track he chose. From the outside, it makes no sense unless you understand how it is done.
Presidents don’t deal with best case scenarios but always the worst case and the devil you do or the devil you don’t. Whatever decision he makes has to do with re-election, future history, and his re-election above all. They also tend to be highly prejudiced, highly overconfident regarding their own smartness and exposed as human beings. They are easy to play and mostly held in contempt.
Long before a candidate becomes President he is studied by the intelligence agencies. Whatever his worst traits are would be thoroughly abused by them. Should he have a weakness for something, supply it abundantly to curry favor. I.e. an abnormal admiration for Military Generals? Well, give him the Generals that will say what you want them to say. I assure you that they are all open to this type of thing. In fact, most senior officers are the greatest arse lickers you have ever seen and were so since they joined up. In my experience, the best officers seldom go beyond colonel rank.
As an example of how the system works, Ronald Reagan was known to like visual presentations. Therefore, he would be briefed by videos put together by the CIA and whoever else briefed him. And that is where the shenanigans start. The briefer knows exactly what the President wants to hear and what will make him agree to whatever he wants him to do without, of course, him waking up to the strings tied to his feet, hands, tongue, and head. What you do, is to tell the truth to cover your own ass, yes, but you leave out what is not in your interests to tell him. That you dismiss as not confirmed / speculation / etc. Therefore, the President breaks the first rule of justice, the Audi Alteram Partem Rule of hearing both sides. Yep, he gets one side no matter what it might look like from a cursory glance. He hears what you decide he must hear.
Still, he must be nudged. So you always give him options to choose from. And you make sure that he will take the middle one which is the most measured and what you want him to do. But sometimes the fellow takes the way-out option and all hell breaks loose as did with Mr Trump’s decision to murder Iranian General Soleimani with the rest that died on 3 January 2020. (It is said that many senior officials were surprised that he chose that one.) Yet, that can be changed if you should wish to do so. If a bad decision is made, that is against your ideas, say to withdraw your forces and bring them home as promised during the election, you simply delay executing the order, throwing red tape until he forgets. If not, well, execute the order and let him be blamed. What you do is to pressurise him all the way to get a quick response. Yes, the same as a loathsome salesman will do. This goes something like “Mr President, we are locked and loaded, you simply need to say yes... Mr President, the strike is already on their way and almost in radar detection range... Mr President, our soldiers need an answer... Mr President, this is a unique opportunity...” And so it goes on. Chances are good that he will relent to what he should know is stupid if he had time to think things over. Especially when grim looking bemedaled Generals are wisely nodding in the background.
Ah, and then you make sure that he continues with his bad eating habits as much as possible. Cheeseburgers, meat, chocolate, and alcohol will lower his resistance even more. I wrote an entire chapter in VOICES – War Crimes USA, on what the effect is on the human brain when given food that is not good for your discernment capabilities. No less than 1 out of every 4 US servicemen (and women) are classified as obese. It helps too when the fellow is under constant negative attacks from outside through a hostile media. Leaks will assure this state of mind. After all, he is human, and it will affect him. Yes, he will then form a lager and have only those that he sees as friends close to him. You will now be able to control that little bubble where only yes-men are allowed. The bubble is only pricked when someone from the outside appears. Example, yes, when Donald J Trump called off a strike on Iran in June 2019 after a US drone was shot down. An outsider, a Fox News anchor, happened to be close by to tell him to wake up to what he is being fed. Without that around, and you can control this through security measures and a workload that will kill other men, the bubble will continue.
You also tell the President that what he is doing (what you want) is “the right thing to do, is Presidential, is the American way, etc.” This is called the “Moral Card.” Then the History Card – “Mr President, in history, President Whoever did this and that (which just so happens to be what you want) ...” This makes it legal, it was done before. The Legacy Card – “Mr President, we should consider your legacy if you let Whoever get away with whatever... Mr President, our country cannot afford to be shown to be weak...” And you become his best buddy, best friend, the one that has his back, by flattering – “Mr President, you have a job that no other man can do... Mr President, you are chosen by God Himself to be this... Mr President, the American people will love you... Mr President, it is such a privilege to serve you...”
There is no way that a President can resist for years unless he is wise to what is happening. That is why he looks stupid, bubble living will do that to you. He hears nothing else and thus does stupid things. A good leader will never fall for such crap.
I suppose if you wish to annoy an American, tell him he lives in a bubble of exceptionalism and that there is a wide world outside the States that sees things differently. Then you say in dozens of books that US Special Forces are sub-standard, have low standards, and so would be the entire US Military. The QME is lost and so is the much-acclaimed technical superiority. My desire though was not to insult but to warn. I gave many reasons for my conclusions based on facts but they rattled many. I further said that the word “hero” is way overused and merely serving is not a qualifying factor to be a hero. At the same time, there are way too many medals being thrown around, lowering their value to those of Idi Amin. But, it seems that you simply should not say such things in polite society. So I am glad to see that the official records are now confirming what I was warning about.
The US Special Operations Command Comprehensive Review, 23 January 2020, is a bombshell report that confirmed all my opinions on US Special Forces. The review, 69 pages, says in effect that “America’s special operations forces have developed a problematic culture that overemphasizes combat to the detriment of leadership, discipline and accountability. Time on the battlefield is seen as the ultimate expression of competence, and those with combat experience are held as almost an infallible standard bearer for the rest of the organization to emulate - seemingly regardless if it is a positive or negative standard. Missions by special forces in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere, often boil down to little more than raids - assaulting targets and killing enemy fighters - which some operators bluntly refer to as kicking in doors and shooting people in the face. The frequent deployments have also bred problems in the training and career pipeline, from raw recruits up through the leadership ranks: an overemphasis on physical fitness and workouts for trainees, and an overemphasis on weapons and tactics among field leaders, often to the detriment of training in leadership and ethical standards. Trainees who enter the elite forces directly from civilian life, rather than transferring in, are most at risk for developing an unhealthy sense of entitlement that could lead to problems later on. Instructors chosen for their combat prowess may lack the appropriate balance of character and competence needed for the job.”
And so it goes on and on. The above report was entirely predictable and due in no small part to the close to useless high command strategies that simply do not understand counterinsurgency nor counterterrorism. It is pathetic. I warned time and time again. Now you really have a problem because these are the men that do almost all the fighting. They are overused, burned out and now exposed. The only good news here is that they might up their standards and wake up to reality. Yet it deeply saddens me that it went this far. And I doubt if serious changes will take place.
So, what about leadership? Failures at every possible level: West Point Professor Tim Bakken’s book, The Cost of Loyalty: Dishonesty, Hubris, and Failure in the US Military, should be read on West Point standards. He describes how the “system” pays to get potential athletes and accepts students nominated by congressmen commensurate with donations made to fund re-election campaigns. He says straight that the US Military academies offer “a community college-level education only with more hazing, violence, and tamping down of curiosity. West Point takes soldiers and declares them to be professors, which works roughly as well as declaring them to be relief workers or nation builders or peace keepers. The school parks ambulances nearby in preparation for violent rituals. Boxing is a required subject. Women are five times more likely to be sexually assaulted at the three military academies than at other US universities.” About the rape of US female military officers by their male comrades, yes, I wrote about that in VOICES – War Crimes USA. That was the reason why I wrote that book, I was that shocked. It is also so that the entire West Point is a bubble with relatively few outsiders allowed to bring new ideas. That is the sure way to stay firmly on the road of mediocrity.
Okay, so how is the above dealt with?
Lowering standards even more... a Defense Department report shows that those that are classified as Category IV (too stupid to even handle a rifle) are standing at 4.1 percent of new recruits. Let me explain in practical terms – a tank gunner classified as Category IV will hit his target 34% less than those more fortunate above his classification. As any study of Israeli Armour warfare will tell you, the first shot must be on target or your tank is shot out in return. Low standards WILL kill you and your mates. What about technical matters? A RAND report shows that they took “three-man teams from the Army’s active-duty signal battalions and told them to make a communications system operational. Teams consisting of Category IIIA personnel had a 67% chance of succeeding. Teams with Category IIIB soldiers had a 47% chance. Those with Category IVs had only a 29% chance.”
Do you know what is the standard in the South African Army? 100% every single time or God will not have mercy on you. Do you know what is the standard in the Russian, Chinese, Indian, French, British etc. armies? 100%. My word, anything less is simply not good enough! How hard is this to understand? Lowering standards to fill the ranks were proven a disaster with the Vietnam Era McNamara Morons. Secretary of Defence, Robert Strange (yes, that is his middle name, my word) McNamara, the original numbers guy, decided to get men into the US military that could not read, write, navigate or even pass basic training on the first attempt. They could not pass PT tests or understand how an M14 or M16 works never mind artillery or something technical. Most company commanders tried to get them out of the field where they were dangerous to themselves and all around them. Nevertheless, 354,000 arrived in South Vietnam. Half ended in combat units where they suffered 3 times higher a kill ratio than the rest - 5,478 died, close to 10% of the total. One officer described them as “sending a five-year-old into combat.” This was recklessly irresponsible behaviour and a warning from history. Yet, it is repeating.
How scandalous and how more so that no mainstream outlet will say anything about this. Why must I do so? GMJ.
During the night of September 27, 1940, a Luftwaffe Ju 88 was damaged severely enough to make a crash landing on Graveney Marsh, Kent, England. The crew armed themselves with the aircraft’s machine guns as well as a sub-machine gun that they brought along. They made no effort to run away or to escape. They were going to fight.
When the London Irish Rifles arrived to take them into custody and to a POW (Prisoner of War) camp a gunfight broke out. That became known as the “Battle of Graveney Marsh.” To date that was the last time that a ground engagement with any foreign military and British troops took place on mainland Great Britain. Admittedly, it was not much of a fight. The Germans surrendered after one was wounded in the foot.
The London Irish Rifles suffered no casualties in the unanticipated skirmish. More importantly, the airframe was still intact with all its secrets and technology that could then be examined. The German crew did not expect that. They thought it would explode and self-destruct. However, British army Captain John Cantopher disarmed the demolition charges that were placed and activated by the aircrew before the gunfight. For that he was awarded the George Medal and rightly so.
The Ju 88 bombsight that was found proved beyond doubt that the Germans had stolen the USAAF Norden Bombsight and adapted it for their own use. This was suspected at the time but not proven. There is a largely forgotten spy story regarding this…
The Duquesne spy ring ran by a South African, Frederick “Fritz” Joubert Duquesne, obtained the bombsight in 1938 by compromising German born workers at the US Norden plant. Duquesne was described by Frederick Russell Burnham, DSO, the, Chief of Scouts, British Army, years before this, as “one of the craftiest men I ever met. He had something of a genius of the Apache for avoiding combat except in his own terms; yet he would be the last man I should choose to meet in a dark room for a finish fight armed only with knives. Next to Theron I believe Duquesne the greatest scout the Boers produced.” That says it all as Danie Theron was the greatest scout of the Second Boer War and is still revered. Theron, by the way, died young, 28 years old, during the war on 5 September 1900. He encountered seven members of Marshall's Horse whilst on a mission and tried to shoot his way out, succeeding in killing three and wounding the remaining four. But, he was known to be trapped somewhere on a small kopje (hill). The Brits shelled the area until he died. His great-great-niece, Charlize Theron became a famous Hollywood actress. Danie Theron also used the name “James Bond” whilst working behind enemy lines... the first use of that particular name in espionage as far as is known.
The FBI arrested the lot, including Duquesne. They were lucky they weren’t executed as it was demanded. However, they spent the entire war up to the 1950s in jail.
Despite the hype, the Norden bomb sight was never much good in actual service. It proved unable to fulfil any of its many claims of pinpoint accurate bombing. The manufacturer blamed mysterious high-altitude winds and the cloudy European weather for the failures, but tests showed that even under perfect conditions the average bomber crew could not hit what it aimed for. Expert crews did better but they were specially trained and in another class all together.
Mass saturation carpet bombing was thus the only viable option left for the heavy bombers even in daylight. To overcome the gross inaccuracy many hundreds of bombers were needed. This led to little empires created for the “Bomber Barons” like Carl Andrew Spaatz (born Spatz), Ira Clarence Eaker, and Arthur Harris of the RAF.
These officers became obsessed with the foolish idea that air power can win wars although this has actually been disproved in history in every conflict to date. You need infantry and armour to win a war. Air power alone will never win a war but you can certainly lose one if without air protection.
Another of the “Bomber Barons” that became notorious was Curtis Emerson LeMay with his “Bomb them back to the stone age” comment regarding North Vietnam. He later denied the statement but the USAF did drop more bombs on North Vietnam than what was used by all air forces in World War Two. Overall, they achieved nothing. SOE agents working behind enemy lines destroyed more trains and locomotives than what the tactical air forces could achieve with thousands of sorties. Another inconvenient fact.
To counter the bombers, general blackouts were introduced across Europe except in neutral countries like Spain, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland. As a navigational obstruction method, blackouts proved to be ineffectual in the extreme. It was a nuisance more than a practical war measure designed to make the population feel that their government was looking out for them. Aircraft did not need, even at the time, visible light to fly safely at night. As long as the pilot was trained in instrument flying he would get where he wanted to go by navigating with the stars above him, visual sights like a river and major roads, even railway lines, and dead reckoning based on speed and direction taking in account time travelled and wind direction. Radio beams to assist with navigation and later, radar, helped too.
Oddly, the German Luftwaffe, in their drive for as many pilots as possible, had relatively few instrument rated ones able to fly safely at night. This would prove detrimental in September 1940 when the London Blitz started after the RAF, on Churchill’s direct instructions, bombed Berlin three times in a row, to relieve pressure on RAF airfields during the Battle of Britain. Churchill desperately wanted Hitler to order the Luftwaffe to bomb London. Knowing this would gain sympathy with the Americans who were still neutral and remove all prospects of peace as well as unite the civilian population. As far as Winston S Churchill was concerned, the bombing of London would ensure victory. But the Luftwaffe was not taking the bait. To say that he became frustrated with this is putting it mildly. The entire 1930s he predicted mass bombing attacks on London and other cities. But it was not happening. And it was not happening because the Luftwaffe was ordered not to attack British civilians, Hermann Göring, head of Luftwaffe, June 30, 1940, “The war against England is to be restricted to destructive attacks against industry and air force targets which have weak defensive forces. The most thorough study of the target concerned, that is vital points of the target, is a pre-requisite for success. It is also stressed that every effort should be made to avoid unnecessary loss of life amongst the civilian population.”
Churchill knew this from the Bletchley Park codebreaking effort. He knew that Hitler prohibited terror air attacks on Britain. He also knew the Luftwaffe targets in advance and thus could ensure that he was not around. And so Hitler’s hand had to be forced. The best way was to bomb Berlin and cause German civilian casualties. It was a calculated risk that succeeded and saved Fighter Command, and almost certainly the war. He said to US Ambassador Joseph Kennedy in June or July 1940: “You watch, when Adolf Hitler begins bombing London and bombing towns in Britain like Boston and Lincoln, towns with their counterparts in the United States, you Americans will have to come in, won’t you, you can’t just stand aside and watch our suffering.” Well, they did not come in until after Pearl Harbour.
When a few German bombs strayed onto London dockside during the Battle of Britain, the British justification used to this day is “that they bombed us first” despite the ban on the Tu Quoque defense. It was not a deliberate attack and against orders. But Churchill had his excuse to be abused thoroughly. He ordered the RAF to attack Berlin, and so they did, as we know, three times in a row.
Hitler replied to Churchill’s shenanigan’s during a speech regarding the RAF air raids on Berlin, “The other night the English had bombed Berlin. So be it. But this is a game at which two can play. When the British Air Force drops 2,000 or 3,000 or 4,000 kg of bombs, then we will drop 150,000, 180,000, 230,000, 300,000, 400,000 kg on a single night. When they declare they will attack our cities in great measure, we will eradicate their cities. The hour will come when one of us will break – and it will not be National Socialist Germany!”
Terror bombing now became the norm. As we know, it was Nazi Germany which was bombed to pieces by the Allied bomber barons culminating in the 1945 Dresden bombing, unnecessarily, at the end of the war. Between 35,000 and 135,000 civilians were killed by the Allied bombings of Dresden. The firestorms created there and in Hamburg earlier is still talked about today. But the first Air Force to bomb an open city/civilian targets on purpose was neither the Germans nor British Forces, it was the Soviets during the Finland/Winter War in 1939 that holds that “honour.” History shows us that terror bombing came directly from Winston S Churchill. He did not even inform his Cabinet of his decision. We know why not, they would have objected as they did when he starved Bengal, wanted to use poison gas and arrived drunk for meetings. Another blog, another conversation, soon, I hope, perhaps an entire book. I like exposing the 33-degree Freemason and Druid for what he really was.
Some time ago, and in most of my books, I wrote a blog about the “Double Tap” method of shooting. I recall one of my instructors at the old Police Counter-Insurgency Training Base at Maleoskop saying to us trainees forming a circle around him: “Double tap first or die.” Since then I became a great believer in double tap shooting. So it was odd to me to find out that not one US Special Forces member, nor any US civilian, nor any US SWAT member, knows what the “double tap” method is. I found the lack of knowledge astonishing. It certainly explains the tens of thousands of shots fired at every raid and the numerous civilian casualties that they just cannot seem to avoid. During Vietnam, at one stage, it took US troops 100,000 rounds to obtain one kill. The same in World War Two. Later statistics said 250,000, then 500,000 bullets (Vietnam). Today, with the modern optical aiming devices being used in Afghanistan and Iraq, 300,000 according to some reports. Why more bullets when you have better optics? Low standards, what else. But also, the M4 rifle has a pathetic first-kill ratio, worse than the M16 because of barrel length.
Historically, the double tap was first used by the British Special Air Service, SAS, in the 1970s when they became interested in counterterrorism, hostage rescues, after the Munich Massacre. They realised that the standard full metal jacket 9mm Parabellum round is crap. It does not kill fast enough and thus they adjusted by adding Special Forces ammunition, hollow points, and shooting two rounds so fast it sounds like one shot. We did the same, even on our assault rifles and to me, it is the mark of a professional. Fully automatic fire is the mark of ill-discipline and of run of the mill soldiers not worthy of Special Forces (or anywhere else) where you often carry the ammunition to and from the target without guaranteed resupply. There are also those that say that the British wartime saboteur agency, Special Operations Executive, SOE, came up with the double tap technique first. Be that so, it is a fine old tradition. Except for covering fire and the first few crazy seconds of an ambush, fully automatic fire was a luxury we could not afford and looked down upon. Nothing has changed.
About snipers. The moment that I suspect that a sniper will not shoot when told to do so, it is his end and he is back to where he came from. And he is expected to kill as quickly and efficiently as possible. That is to shoot the target in the head at any distance that the rifle is capable of shooting. I want instantaneous death to safeguard the hostages. I wrote a sniper book, Code Name Butterfly, how to use counter snipers to protect a president. In fact, personally, I don’t believe that the turd (he floats in what he speaks) is worth protecting... because he will be replaced within seconds of being killed. If you wish to hurt a country, then kill the spymasters, the real ones, not the political appointees. But I wrote the book and it is a good story. I went into great detail about the history and use of snipers. An interesting read for those interested in the subject.
Today I was asked if killing takes place in anger, or, do you need to hate to kill? In my view and experience, absolutely not. We are not discussing a crime scenario where anger plays a role, sometimes, the only role. To me there should never be any anger or annoyance or hatred. Just hit the target and get done. Do a professional job. I don’t really understand the Hollywood mental anguish about such things. Once the decision is made, legally justifiable, then the only feeling that remains is quiet satisfaction in a job well done. It is also very easy to pull that trigger or squeeze it. With enough training and indoctrination it is never a problem. But there is an immense amount of personal responsibility and accountability running in the background. Should you shoot the wrong person you will have to live with the consequences which might be facing murder charges. Of course, if in the US Military, that will be covered up – see my book VOICES, War Crimes USA. You almost certainly will get away with your crimes and be promoted. It should not happen but I can show you many instances where the wrong person was killed even by the most experienced assassin state in the world, Israel. That country took out more than 3,000 enemies of the state since 1948, not all of them justifiable. The Mossad method of getting close and personal is designed to prevent mistakes but sadly does not. Mistakes can and will be made. Every time such a mistake is made, another terrorist is born. Remember that when statistics tell me that the US drone strikes kill the wrong person or innocents 96.5% of the time. It is the most pathetic record on counterterrorism known to man. But I suppose it is different for a pilot or drone operator. He is not involved in the killing as such. No, he drops a bomb or missile and flies home, a real hero back home (sarcastic). He never sees the effects of his acts. Neither do those turds ordering the kills. No, they sit in the White House and watch a television screen as well as the photographer taking pictures to show their commitment to murder. They have never served, mostly, and neither do their children (1.2% of US Congress members have children in the military). And those that served were lawyers, mostly, staying stateside, or intelligence officers never leaving the secure base whilst collecting medals for future use. It is another matter for the soldier on the ground or those behind enemy lines. It is another matter when you see first-hand what bullets and explosives do to humans including your own. Yes, you grow up and away from Hollywood in seconds. However, I will stand by my view based upon experience. No hatred or anger is required to kill a human being. Only desire and motive as well as ability. It is in many ways disturbing that almost anyone can be trained and motivated to be like this
It is no secret that I have serious doubts about Switzerland with its much-acclaimed neutrality. Let me explain some Swiss history to you. During World War Two, the chief of the Swiss Army, General Henri Guisan, entered into negotiations with France to assist Switzerland in case of a Nazi German attack. This attack never came. Now this was not because of fear of the Swiss Army but because the place has nothing worth conquering. It has no minerals, no oil, no gold, no diamonds, no strategic value, and is simply not worth having. I might in a future blog write on exactly why I rate the place so low on their so-called “military prowess which prevented a Nazi invasion,” but for now, on subject, let me stay with the so-called neutrality. Let me show you their pattern of deceit.
After the 1940 French defeat (and that is another story too, not what you read in the schoolbook histories written on behalf of Winston S Churchill) the Germans found the Guisan correspondence breaking Swiss neutrality. Yes, as so often, in the French archives (or, some say, in an abandoned truck). Berlin was obviously annoyed because it was much more than just talk, as is claimed falsely today. The Swiss did indeed improve the roads and build the revetments for heavy artillery for the French army’s use as agreed to during the Guisan talks. That was a clear breach of neutrality and for a time very worrisome to them. They speculated that the Germans would use it as a reason to attack them and if attacked, the end was always going to be a disaster for Switzerland. That fear was nothing but a grave indication of a guilty conscience. The Guisan talks should never have happened if they were genuinely neutral. But then again, we must bear in mind that Nazi Germany never needed a pretext to attack or lacked the capacity to manufacture one as was demonstrated in Poland in September 1939, the Polish Gleiwitz Incident. Something which I write about in Code Name Cadillac, and Code Name Jen. This is not the place to repeat it.
Then, something else happened. Swiss financier Francois Genoud. This fellow, in life from Lausanne, Switzerland, met Adolf Hitler in 1932 whilst a teenager. He was so impressed that he joined the pro-Nazi National Front in 1934 and stayed a forceful Nazi supporter all his life, stating in 1992 to a London newspaper, “My views have not changed since I was a young man. Hitler was a great leader, and if he had won the war the world would be a better place today.” There is no doubt that he financially supported the escaping Nazis after the war ended (the “Odessa Project,” later known as “The Spider”) or that he was closely involved in the laundering of ill-gotten SS money during the war. He also worked with the Nazi Era Abwehr (German Military Intelligence) to set up the Oasis nightclub in Lausanne to serve as a covert operation front to entrap whoever visited it. There were many that ran to Switzerland, the rich, they could bribe their way in. About 25,000 Jews were not so lucky, yet another story, soon to be told in a book that my wife wrote. It is ridiculous to say that the Swiss counter-espionage agents did not know about Genoud’s activities breaking Swiss neutrality or supporting the Nazi cause. They stripped 50 citizens’ of their Swiss passports by the end of the war for supporting the Nazis. Genoud was not one of them. He never faced any justice. Why not? It is bizarre and demands an explanation. Genoud, I am glad to say, committed suicide late in life.
But it gets worse. In 1989 it came out that the Swiss espionage service, FIS, the Swiss Federal Intelligence Service, kept files on 900,000 people. That is one in every twenty Swiss and one in three foreigners. They had zero legal basis to do so. They learned nothing from their mistake. In 2010, they had a database, again without any legal basis, of more than 200,000 people. The ones they spied on were those that criticized their army and nuclear power (of which they have very little to begin with) and trade unionists. If the FIS had any successes it is not known. As an intelligence agency they are rated with that of Cameroon or perhaps I should be kind and say not rated highly.
In my circles, we know that the Swiss entered into a deal with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) not to hijack Swiss aircraft or aircraft on / from Swiss airports. That was after the Swissair Flight 100 hijacking in September 1970. That airframe, with three others, were later blown at Dawson's Field, a desert airstrip near Zarqa, Jordan, formerly Royal Air Force Station Zerqa. You can see videos of it on YouTube if interested. So they paid the PLO to ensure that it never happens again. Yes, Switzerland paid, according to Swiss journalist Marcel Gyr (see https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35384354) to have its aircraft left alone. You might say “so what?” Note please, once you pay a terrorist, you are not neutral anymore. The money that you pay will be used to pay for operations against someone else. Therefore, that is the end of your claim of neutrality. You are as guilty as the terrorist that you supported. That is what the law says and how it is seen. It must be noted that the Swiss are denying this too but there is really very little doubt. I heard about it in the 1980s already. It is an open secret. And I wonder who laundered that money, Genoud? What about influence? Recognising perhaps a terrorist organisation as a political one? Yes, that was part of the deal.
And then there is the Crypto AG saga about which can be read at https://www.moonofalabama.org/2020/02/us-warms-up-old-spy-story-to-warn-of-foreign-espionage.html#more. Basically, the company manufactured supposedly unbreakable cipher machines. Being Swiss, and neutral, more than 120 countries bought the machines and used them for decades. Sadly, the company was nothing but a CIA / West German Intelligence front. Yes, those idiots that used the Crypto machines had their correspondence read at will. This came out in the 1990s during the wave of CIA bragging that buggered them ever since. So much for Swiss neutrality. By doing this, and allowing it, see the pattern please, link the dots, they took sides yet again. Based on the above, I will then state that the entire Swiss Neutrality is just so much nonsense not to be taken seriously. And if you wish to hear a joke, in 2014 an aircraft was hijacked and flown to Geneva. Sadly, the Swiss Air Force could not escort it, nope, they don’t work on weekends or after hours. Nor do they fly at night. Yes, true story.
I think that should you bother to follow press releases by the White House / US Government / Pentagon officials you will soon realise that they speak either from ignorance or deliberate untruths or more probably both. As we know, I blogged on it extensively, and got banned from Facebook for my efforts, that a US drone strike killed Iranian General Soleimani on 3 January 2020. The murder practically led to war with Iran and almost the Third World War.
Now the Middle East starting a Third World War is predicted by one Albert Pike, the leading authority on Freemasonry, in his book Morals and Dogma. He also predicted two world wars, both happened. There are analysts that say that The State of Israel was created only as a Hegelian Dialectic to ensure this coming war which has nothing to do with the end times, as believed. Luckily, here, it did not, yet. A lot of begging from the Trump White House through Swiss diplomats and a single highly accurate retaliatory ballistic missile strike from Iran prevented the Third World War for now. Sadly, innocents suffered when a Ukrainian civilian airliner was shot down by the Iranians. It was a mistake that they owned up to but 176 died – a direct result of the US stupidity as per Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. There were many Canadian-Iranians on that flight, the Prime Minister had every reason to be furious.
The White House then lied about US casualties from the Iranian retaliatory strike. First, they said that the US suffered no casualties, then 5, then 18, then 24, then 36, the score is now at 60 traumatic brain injuries... Only Satan knows what the claims would be tomorrow. It also came out that the US logic behind the attack, the so-called bombardment of the American base (K-1) in Kirkuk on 27 December 2020 was not conducted by who the US blamed, the Iranian-backed militia called Khataib Hezbollah, but by the defeated ISIS in a false flag operation. Brigadier General Ahmed Adnan, the Iraqi chief of intelligence for the Federal Police: “All the indications are that it was Daesh at the K-1 air base. We know Daesh's movements.” Yet the US attacked Khataib Hezbollah in revenge and retaliation.
ISIS is known as Daesh in Arabic. It is an entirely Sunni Muslim group that hates everything and everyone not Sunni. Their hatred includes the Shia Iranians. The two groups are natural enemies. Bizarrely, ISIS is supported by NATO Forces, another topic but proven beyond any doubt. They even brag of NATO as being their “Air Force.” Nevertheless, the US blamed the Iranian group that was and is fighting ISIS and launched airstrikes on them with dozens killed. Note that Khataib Hezbollah is part of the official Iraqi Forces. It was Iraqis that died under the US airstrikes. This led to a furious protest surrounding the US Embassy in Baghdad.
This embassy is the largest US embassy in the world. It forms the key element in worldwide CIA shenanigans – see my blog at https://www.georgemjames.com/blog/trumps-neocons-caught-lying-again-on-foreign-policy, and book, VOICES – War Crimes USA, where this “embassy” is exposed. In what might be panic or not, probably panic and a desire to start a war, the embassy protests led to the attack on General Soleimani, a man that did more to combat ISIS than any other person living or dead. With him died Iraqi commander Abu Mahdi al Muhandis, the leader of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces, which includes Khataib Hezbollah. It cannot get more stupid but let us explore the lies further. As is written, all will be shouted from the roofs.
US Special Representative for Iran Brian Hook spoke at a State Department press briefing in April 2019: “I can announce today, based on declassified U.S. military reports that Iran is responsible for the deaths of 608 American service members. This accounts for 17 percent of all deaths of U.S. personnel in Iraq from 2003 to 2011.”
Okay. So that is the US Military and Intelligence Community belief. They further link this idea, there is zero evidence, with Iranian General Soleimani. Therefore, they say, he was behind the attacks on the US troops. Mind, the US troops are occupiers under international law since they have no legal justification to be in Iraq in the first place. America is on the wrong side of history and the law here. If this was taken to trial at Nuremberg, then George W Bush would be executed as a war criminal by now. So would be Tony Blair and whoever supported the 2003 Iraqi Invasion based upon CIA / MI6 lies. But is it true? Can the statement that Iran and Soleimani, to be precise, is behind the deaths of hundreds of US soldiers made so brazenly be proven? Note please that Mr Hook was not the only one saying so, many others spoke along similar lines.
The answer is nope. US Navy Commander Sean Robertson was asked for evidence of Hook’s statement and had to admit that “the Pentagon doesn’t have any study, documentation, or data to provide journalists that would support such a figure.” So it is a lie or at least they have no evidence. It is easy to link the lies to where they began, they go back all the way to President George W Bush and Vice President Cheney, 2007, all of them, sprouting the “Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops.” Yet this is what was and is pushed by the fired National Security Adviser John Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo also. Well, these two and others think that Donald J Trump is the new Messiah that will save the Jews. Yes, see my blog https://www.georgemjames.com/blog/the-third-temple-futurism-theory-a-jesuit-scam. The insanity in Washington is beyond logical description.
What must we make of these lies? What is the cost to American prestige worldwide? Contempt only accompanies those that were once looked up to. From a technical view, I can go in great detail on how the explosives were and are made to kill American troops, the so-called IED types. I know all about such devices. Let me explain, Explosively Formed Penetrators (EFPs) are not new, not difficult to make, and were always going to kill until neutralised (in many different ways). The Iraqis are able to make their own devices, they don’t need outside assistance to do so. It is not hard. In fact, I might write a book on this subject in the future since there is a South African link that no one outside a select few knows about. That is another subject and one that I am still thinking about. More concerning, what is happening now with the lies coming out, exposed, all over the place, is stupid diplomacy. Jamal Abdi, president of the National Iranian American Council tweeted on the latest exposure: “Al-Qaeda attacked the U.S. on 9/11 and we went to war with Iraq. If this report is true, ISIS attacked the U.S. and we nearly went to war with Iran.” Yes, “exceptional,” is it not? As an Irishman might have said, “Jaysus, you cannot even lie properly!” And if so, why do ordinary Americans and others believe them? That is perhaps the greatest sin, to fall for crude propaganda.
Recently the USS Tennessee began patrolling the Atlantic whilst armed with low yield nuclear warheads known as the W76-2, fastened upon Trident ballistic missiles, aimed at Russia. It is almost certain that other US Navy missile boats have the same weapon systems on board and can be found inside the Pacific too, aimed at China.
As expected, the Pentagon was quite proud: Secretary of Defence Mark Esper,
“Low-yield nuclear weapons give the president options. We always want to give options. Options allow us to deter conflict, at the end of the day we want to deter conflict. But if necessary we want to be able to fight and win.”
The Russians were less than amused: Sergei Ryabkov, Deputy Foreign Minister:
“The US is actually lowering the nuclear threshold and conceding the possibility of waging a limited nuclear war and winning this war… this is extremely alarming.”
Yes, it is. The problem here is exactly what Esper stated and probably not even realized it. A low yield nuke gives the US President the option to use it against whoever is designated as America’s latest enemy. The President really should never have such an option, ever. It is only human nature to use a weapon if you have it available. Therefore, the Russian view is correct. The low yield warhead lowers the nuclear threshold to where stupidity will takeover.
The question is what will the consequences be of a low yield nuclear strike? Let us look at the thinking behind the bomb. Within weeks of World War Two ending with the USAAF August 1945 Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings, the Pentagon was demanding a minimum 123 atomic bombs and preferably 466. The purpose for this desire, to bomb 66 Soviet cities. The Soviets knew about that too. It made them pull all stops to become the owners of nuclear weapons. The Pentagon’s war mongrel demand ensured that all the major powers have nuclear weapons pointing at each other since 1949. The world was on an edge called the First Cold War. Since then, the UK, France, China, Israel, Pakistan, India, North Korea and (formerly) South Africa, all got nuclear bombs. As a footnote, the South African nuclear weapons were dismantled and handed over to the USA in the early 1990s to prevent the new black government from getting them (the Mandela government would not have wanted nukes anyway). See Code Name Angel for a history on South African nukes if interested. The South African nukes were not, repeat not, copies of the Israeli ones. Of course, as warned many times in my books, South Africa still has the knowledge to re-manufacture nukes whenever it pleases to do so and to deliver them accurately. Somehow that point is not remembered by "Western Experts."
Of all the nuclear armed countries only the USA is not committed to a non-first-strike or first use of nuclear weapons. The rest all declared that they will launch only after detecting a strike on themselves. They understand the danger. They understand that a nuclear strike will lead to hundreds of millions of dead. In fact, it will be the end of this planet as we know it. Nukes under formal government control will not easily be used since there will be a counter strike that will bring forth mutually assured destruction (MAD Principle, Mutually Assured Destruction). Thus the weapons keep peace between major powers. Such countries will respond with every nuclear weapon they have and Russia has more powerful ones than the USA (see American Military Might – Debunked). A low yield strike will never be contained to the battlefield. The launching country, that is the US mainland as things stand now, will be destroyed. Vladimir Putin, Russian President: “We would be victims of aggression and would get to Heavens as martyrs, while those who would launch the strike would just die and not even have time to repent.” The highly respected Federation of American Scientists stated that “although the nuclear weapon has been touted as a deterrent to Russian battlefield nukes, it’s actually much more likely that the new low-yield weapon is intended to facilitate first-use of nuclear weapons against North Korea or Iran amid an increasingly assertive US nuclear posture.”
But note that the MAD Principle will not work with terrorists that do not have a country to be destroyed and don’t care anyway. See Code Name Caribbean where we dealt with maritime terrorism and especially the danger that large LNG ships bring – 55 times the Hiroshima bomb if an LNG ship explodes. Have no doubts, a terrorist will use a nuke against US cities (US includes any NATO country). It is the ultimate terrorism act. They dream of that day.
Low yield does not mean low power – the W76-2 nuclear warhead delivers between 5,000 to 6,000 tons of conventional explosives. There will also be the radiation fallout afterward. I don’t believe that such a weapon should exist in any arsenal but they do. The difference is the actual deployment of them where they can be used within minutes. The temptation to use them will be too high to resist. Somewhere down the line the use will be authorized. The consequences will be too high for the White House to spin away. The weapon should be dismantled and kept in a warehouse under armed guard if not destroyed.