Q: The subordinate attitude that the European Union has in relation to the United States has resulted in a serious refugee and migrant crisis afflicting the continent. The agenda of destabilizing, weakening, and demographically changing Europe, implemented primarily by the Soros machinery, is no longer a conspiracy theory but an obvious fact. The terrorist attacks in Paris, as well as the sexual and physical assaults across Germany, don’t seem to be causing serious changes in official Berlin’s policy regarding the continuous reception of huge numbers of migrants and refugees.
Why is it that the leading European leaders in this matter work not only against their national interests, but also against those of Europe in general? And how do you comment on the measures that the Macedonian government has been implementing in this context and the efforts of the Western machinery to stop the decision to protect our border with Greece from illegal entries with a fence?
The first thing that I need to do is refresh our audience with my analysis of the “refugee” crisis. It’s a byproduct of the wars that the US helped engineer all throughout the Mideast, using the so-called “Arab Spring” events to usher in a theater-wide regime change scenario. The brave and patriotic resistance of the Syrian people in fighting back against the terrorists for over five years now was a major impediment in the US’ plans for retaining its unipolar hegemony in the region. Realizing that one of the expected tangential results of its War on Syria would be the massive increase in refugees (both international and internal), the US sought to weaponize this human flow in order to achieve one of the other important grand objectives that it’s had, which is to deepen its control over the EU.
None of this is a ‘conspiracy theory’ either, as I warmly welcome your audience to read to the work from Cornell University’s Kelly M. Greenhill about “Weapons of Mass Migration: Forced Displacement as an Instrument of Coercion” (available for free PDF download here). The author summarized some of the key findings from her 2010 book (available for sale here if anyone was interested) in proving that refugees have been exploited as strategic weapons since at least the end of World War II, documenting at least 56 incidences of this occurring. The way that it relates to the present predicament is that Turkey had already built several refugee-hosting facilities along its border with Syria since before the war even began, obviously expecting some sort of oncoming influx. After ‘incubating’ the two million or so refugees that entered the country over the past couple of years, Turkey, in coordination with the US, ‘set them free’ from their movement-restricted refugee camps and utilized intelligence-affiliated drug and human trafficking networks to bring them to Europe, including the Albanian mafia in the Balkans.
The goal was to create the socio-political circumstances where once previously peaceful and stable EU societies, hitherto largely ethno-religiously homogenous in terms of their demographics, were now overwhelmed to such an extent by an unexpected flood of civilizationally dissimilar individuals (both in terms of the sheer size of this wave and the perception that the recipient population has of it) that they would remain in a state of tense and easily manipulatable division for the foreseeable future. There would obviously be a vocal outcry against this, both by pragmatic patriots and nefarious fascist-affiliated provocateurs, which would divide society along the triple strata of citizen vs. citizen, citizen vs. government, and citizen vs. refugee. These are near-perfect ‘laboratory’ conditions for utilizing Color Revolution threats against the targeted government, since experienced external actors such as US intelligence agencies could easily exploit the situation on command in order to prompt uncontrollable riots and guaranteed violence, be it in patriots fighting against fascists, “refugees” attacking regular citizens, or a panicked government responding with unnecessary and disproportionate violence to a subjectively peaceful anti-government demonstration.
The purpose of achieving such a strong degree of control over the EU via this Machiavellian mechanism is to keep the EU and its strongest states in an indefinite state of weakness and tension, thereby giving Washington the blackmailing upper hand in provoking destabilizing violence if its European subordinates don’t support its hegemonic policies and instead turn their back on the US by pragmatically working with Russia and China. To explain, Germany is totally vulnerable to ethno-religious destabilization if it moves too closely and rapidly in its rapprochement with Russia, and the same goes for France. Additionally, the heightened military and police measures that these states have found necessary to implement in order to try to control their borders and internal situations means that they’ll expand their respective budgets for the coming years by taking these pressing factors into account. It goes without saying that the US would find a way to divert this money into its ‘partners’’ NATO ‘commitments’ in ‘paying their fair share’ to ‘contain Russia’. Finally, pro-American forces inside the EU can start promoting the talking point that the TPP is the best way to ‘create jobs’ for the “refugees” and newly unemployed Europeans, when in reality this is only a means of “lawfare” in institutionalizing the US’ control over Europe and preventing it from ever independently negotiating a trade agreement with China.
It must be said at this point that there are legitimate refugees and then there are what I term “economic piggybackers”, or what are more politely and more commonly referred to as “economic migrants”. I draw a difference between the latter two because an “economic migrant” actually wants to work for his or her share of Euros or whatever other currency they may be receiving, whereas an “economic piggybacker” wants to abuse the EU’s generous welfare state privileges and live a comfortable life without contributing anything. Unfortunately, many of the people that have entered the EU as a result of this manufactured crisis are economic piggybackers and they regretfully tarnish the reputation of legitimate refugees and only make the situation more difficult for those that sincerely need as much help as they can get.
Having explained the essential background context for the “refugee” crisis and its strategic imperatives vis-à-vis the US’ grand unipolar designs, we can now talk about why Merkel and others are so blatantly working against their national and continental interests. It was already explained that Germany is being strategically blackmailed, and not only that, Turkey is literally forcing billions of euros worth of economic concessions from the EU in exchange for its ‘compliance’ in this crisis. Spineless bureaucrats can’t say no in the face of intimidating bullies, and they meekly agree to whatever is being demanded of them. There’s also the possibility that the US’ globally embedded NSA surveillance system, specifically targeting politicians in many cases, is to blame as well, since it’s plausible that the US government has some kind of physical blackmail that they can use against individual EU leaders such as Merkel (e.g. if it turned out that she was a closet lesbian and they had proof). Sometimes a single or a handful of blackmailed individuals at the upper echelons of government can be all that an external power needs to control the entire state apparatus, but other times it’s necessary to take ‘precautions’ and ‘guarantee’ success by influencing on-the-ground factors such as wide-scale demographic engineering and the manufactured creation of socio-political conflict (i.e. Color Revolution social and structural preconditioning).
The final explanation addressing the feebleness of EU leaders in defending their national and continental interests is that quite a lot of them are Cultural Marxists, including Merkel for the most part. What is meant by this is that these individuals believe in the most radical form of leftist ideology, which the author has previously at times termed “hyper liberal-progressivism”, which is pretty much the same thing in this context. As it relates to the topic at hand, Cultural Marxists/hyper liberal-progressives categorically deny the existence of socio-cultural differences between individuals and blindly believe that all people have the same set of psychologically conditioned traits. These ideas manifest themselves through the anti-religious promotion of homosexual privileges such as “gay marriage” (including with state-supported benefits) and an open-door policy to civilizationally dissimilar “refugees”, while simultaneously refusing per the latter to acknowledge that there are embedded socio-cultural psychologically preconditioned differences between the ‘new arrivals’ and the native locals that could instigate identity tensions. These concepts are so abnormal and fringe that not even the Marxist-espousing states of the Soviet Union and China practiced them, instead keeping homosexuality out of the public purview and giving preference to ethnic minorities through the granting of autonomous territories and government preferences (“korenizatsiya” in Russian).
If we look at what the Republic of Macedonia and its leadership have chosen to do, it’s the complete opposite of what the EU has done. Prime Minister Grueveski and the National Security Council acutely recognized that their country is on the literal frontlines in the US’ unconventional campaign against the EU and that decisive action needed to urgently be taken. Adhering to its international obligations, Macedonia allows legitimate refugees fleeing the war-torn countries of Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan to transit its territory en route to their further destinations, and those that would sincerely like to integrate and assimilate into Macedonian society are warmly welcomed to do so. For better or for worse, most of them are not interested in this and are eager to get to the welfare ‘utopias’ of Germany and Sweden.
Macedonia wouldn’t have had to take the step of building border fortifications in order to defend its sovereignty and more efficiently process the tens of thousands of refugees and economic piggybackers streaming into the country if Greece had done its fair share in helping to stem this flow. That absolutely hasn’t happened in any single way, and Athens has eschewed its legal responsibilities in handling the situation for a variety of reasons. This could partly be blamed on the overwhelming nature of the situation at hand and the fact that the penniless government simply doesn’t have the economic resources to deal with it, but on the other hand, Syriza’s Cultural Marxist ideals and the antipathy that some Greek authorities feel towards the Republic of Macedonia and its independent and proud identity undoubtedly played a role. Per the last remark, there is no other way to explain why the Greek government directed the refugees and economic piggybackers to the Macedonian border when they could have just as easily (and in some cases, even more easily) been transported to the Albanian and Bulgarian ones instead. The US obviously has an interest in seeing this human tidal wave crash into the Balkans and unbalance each and every transit state it passes through, but that by itself doesn’t explain the sheer enormity of individuals that the Greek authorities and civil society conscientiously chose to place on Macedonia’s southern doorstep.
What the Republic of Macedonia and its leadership has chosen to do is courageously defy the US and its Cultural Marxist proxies in the EU and make a strong stand for national sovereignty, which by extension also supports the security and independence of the rest of Europe. It’s for these reasons why the Soros network, the wealthy US government-allied transnational network of Cultural Marxists and anti-border/anti-sovereignty individuals, hates Macedonia so much at the current moment, even more than they ever have before.
Q: The aggressive actions of the Western dirty players in their attempts to retain dominance in the unipolar world, as opposed to the multipolar approach offered by the BRICS countries like Russia and China, is a conflict that will continue in the New Year. What will happen in the region around Macedonia in 2016 in this context, especially regarding the 2 major roadmaps with BRICS for the Balkan (Turkish) stream project as well as for the Balkan Silk Road?
Let’s begin by talking about what could be in store for the Balkan region before I speak more specifically about Balkan Stream and the Balkan Silk Road. Up north, the US has provoked aCroatian-Serbian missile race in order to raise tensions, pressure Serbia, and create a pretext for deepening the American and NATO footprint in the area. The pressure point between these two rival states is Bosnia, which is going through its own internal crisis at the moment. At no point before in its post-war history has Sarajevo behaved as legally and physically aggressive against Republika Srpska as it has now, and this is pushing Banja Luka into a corner where it’s forced to defend its constitutionally guaranteed sovereignty. The US would like for President Dodik to lose his cool and react in a violent manner, which would then create the pretense for openly working towards the dismantlement of Republika Srpska’s existence, seen by American strategists as a major impediment for the Balkans’ incorporation into the unipolar fold.
With Sarajevo stating that it will formally apply for EU membership this year, Brussels will be more involved in the country’s affairs than ever, and this renewed focus on its domestic dynamics will serve as the ‘plausible’ reason for the bloc to bully Republika Srpska in the future. Let’s not forget that a small-scale terrorist attack already occurred in Zvornik and one was narrowly foiled in Janja. In such a tense situation as the one that currently exists between the Muslim-Croat entity and Republika Srpska, all it may take to set the entire unit aflame is one strategically directly terrorist attack. Serbia is also vulnerable to terrorism (both Albanian- and ISIL/Wahhabi-affiliated) in Sandzak and the Presevo Valley, but also in other parts of the countries possibly traversed by “refugee”-pretending terrorists. However, the most discernable destabilization scenario in Serbia comes from the actions of the Serbian government itself, particularly Prime Minister Vucic’s surprise announcement to hold elections two years before schedule.
This announcement was made in order to catch his political opponents off guard and deny them the opportunity to properly run a competitive political campaign, but it also reveals that Vucic is not at all confident that he’ll still have the public’s support by 2018. It appears as though he predicts that the domestic situation will deteriorate to such a level that he’ll be embarrassingly voted out of office by a huge margin (similar to how Zaev is expected to lose the forthcoming elections in April), which explains why he feels compelled to summon the little remaining political capital that he still has left in order to hold on to power and push forward with his pro-EU agenda. That’s another thing, too, and it’s that his preferred policy in attempting to balance between the US/EU and Russia is untenable. Russia sees no problem with it so long as Serbia doesn’t advance towards NATO, but then again, Serbia signed an Individual Partnership Action Plan (IPAP) with the military bloc almost exactly one year ago, which was an unnecessary step taken solely to further ingratiate the Vucic government towards the West. Anyhow, it’s the US, not Russia, which will eventually apply pressure on Serbia and force it to choose sides, just as it did to Ukraine, and predictably, with similarly destructive results if this scenario advances (especially if Vucic betrays his countrymen and de-facto recognizes “Kosovo” as ‘independent’).
Moving along, the NATO-occupied Serbian Province of Kosovo is a complete mess, a failed state by any metrics. It’s a drug- and human-trafficking powerbase for the Albanian mafia, and it’s also bleeding thousands of disaffected people a year that flee to Central and Western Europe in order to escape the social devastation. ISIL, and Wahhabism in general, has made strong inroads there, and there’s a real fear that the totally dysfunctional entity of “Kosovo” might turn into a European base for jihadists, most likely with the full backing of the American instructors at Camp Bondsteel (the same forces who advised the Kumanovo terrorists). Neighboring Montenegro is in a very unpredictable situation, but it looks like there’s a high risk of political violence sometime in the near future. The opposition won’t back down in their appeal that the government put its unilateral NATO-joining decision up to a public referendum, but contrarily, Djukanovic is dedicated to retaining power at all costs, including the use of wanton violence against his people. This makes for an explosive situation that could blow up again at any time, especially as the country progressively moves closer to the day that it becomes a formal member of the pro-American bloc.
On Macedonia’s western flank, Albania is prone to experiencing more political unrest if its domestic problems don’t subside and the government doesn’t find a way to properly deal with them (they seem neither eager to do so nor even capable of this if they wanted to). One of the less-discussed consequences of the “refugee” crisis has been that the EU isn’t as welcoming to illegal Albanian migrants as it was before, and if anything, these Balkan emigrants are seen as less urgent of a people to accommodate than Mideast- and North African-originating ones, so Albania no longer has as unrestricted access to the socio-economic pressure valve that it had earlier depended on for years. The return of deported Albanians to the country and the arrival of their Kosovo-based counterparts in desperate search of work are creating a situation where people are finally beginning to direct their anger against the real culprit, the Albanian authorities. It’s likely that the decrease in Albanian emigration and the continued arrival of Kosovo-originating Albanians will lead to more political protests such as the ones that shook Tirana in early December, panicking the authorities and leading to their reactionary impulse in promoting the savage myth of “Greater Albania”. If the agitated masses fall for this ploy just like they did when it was last evoked in full during the 1997 crisis, then it’s foreseeable that Macedonia will inevitably be victimized by this virus just as Serbia was at the end of the last century.
Looking to the east, Bulgaria remains an oligarchic state with a barely functioning government. Civil society and the economy still exist, but the state is all but invisible except in matters pertaining to taxation, extortion, and any other type of money-making enterprise that the elite can partake in against the population. In fact, except for these instances, the Bulgarian government only really shows itself whenever the US, NATO, or the EU need something from them, remaining practically invisible for the rest of the time. Bulgaria is sadly a shadow of its former self, and it represents the archetypical vassal state that the US wants to replicate the world over. Greece is regretfully somewhat similar, except the oligarchy that operates there is mostly foreign-based. The Cultural Marxist coalition that governs the country is slightly more visible in civil affairs, although it’s shown no interest in defending the country’s sovereignty from the refugees and economic piggybackers that the US has unleashed against it. If anything, it actually aims to facilitate this process judging by its radical ideological precepts and how actively they’ve ushered these individuals towards the Macedonian border. However, Syriza is in a tight position, with discontent rising from both fellow leftists and right-wing elements (including fascist ones), and the civil war- and military coup-era hostilities between the Left and the Right might violently burst back to the forefront of domestic affairs if Tsipras isn’t careful (or if the US sees the need to do this in intensifying its control over the country).
Shifting the focus to speak more about the regional multipolar processes that are underway, I’d like to direct the audience’s attention to my article from late November where I spoke about the current state of Balkan Stream and the Balkan Silk Road in-depth (accessible here). To summarize, Balkan Stream is indefinitely suspended due to Turkey’s aggression against Russia by shooting down its anti-terrorist jet in Syria, but in the event that Erdogan leaves office (be it through a democratic uprising, constitutional or military coup, or otherwise), however unlikely that may appear at the moment, the project will immediately be continued. Still, things don’t look too good for its viability in the short-term, so it’s better to concentrate on the Balkan Silk Road. This project, if the audience isn’t all that familiar, is China’s plan to construct a high-speed rail network from Budapest to the Greek port of Piraeus via Belgrade and Skopje. The meeting late last year between China and the Central and Eastern European countries (the China-CEE format) in Suzhou saw Beijing officially committing to the Budapest-to-Belgrade portion of the project. When and if it’s completed, then this would give the Balkans an economic alternative to the EU, thereby safeguarding their sovereignty but also presenting a transit route for strong multipolar influence into the heart of Europe. Accordingly, the US is fearful that it could lose its influence over the continent and thus wants the project scuttled, which could happen if the Republic of Macedonia is thrown into Hybrid War chaos.
I discuss more of the details in the aforementioned link and strongly encourage all interested readers to check it out, but for the most part, the Balkan Silk Road is much more of a current target of the US’ destabilizing designs than the now-suspended Balkan Stream is. In spite of this, Russia is not giving up on engaging the region, as although energy played an important role in its plans, it wasn’t the sole determinant. Russian investment and diplomatic-strategic engagement still continues, and China’s plans are beholden to the goodwill that the Moscow can help the region maintain towards Beijing. Being a civilizationally similar state to the Balkans than China is, the local people trust it and its judgements, thereby having no misgivings about interacting with China since it’s currently Russia’s number one strategic partner. Hand in hand, Russia and China are working to liberate the Balkans from unipolar influence, but it’s just that the current dynamics have shifted to where China is playing the leading infrastructural role while Russia moves into the less-publicized but still important one of providing support for this ambitious and globally impactful endeavor.
Q: The Syrian president Bashar al Assad has described his Russian college Vladimir Putin as the sole defender of the Christian civilization on which it can rely. The New World Order will continue in its systematic attempts to weaken, demoralize and destroy Christian countries. In what direction can we expect these attacks to occur in the upcoming year?
Absolutely, there’s definitely a concerted campaign at play to attack Christianity, but not only that, to attack all global religions in general, including conventional Islam. Allow me to explain. Like we spoke about earlier, Cultural Marxism is a big thing in the West, especially in the EU and the Democratic Party in the US. It’s one of the elite’s ideologies, not the only one, but one of the main concepts that they use to advance their agendas. There are definitely those that truly believe in it such as Angela Merkel and Barack Obama (in different ways for each), but then there are those who cynically understand its value in the strategic sense, represented by the Deep State triad of the Defense-Intelligence-Diplomatic permanent bureaucracies in Washington.
Cultural Marxism has a two-track policy whereby it ‘succeeds’ even if it ‘fails’. If it’s able to accomplish its desired objectives, then it removes socio-cultural attributes that once were the source of uniqueness and pride and replaces them with an indiscernible yet impressionable mass of beings that are very easy to control. To tie this in with the War on Religion that’s playing out all across the world right now (and which I’ll describe in more detail momentarily), getting rid of countries’ established and traditional religious identities is part and parcel of this strategy. On the other hand, even the attempt to impose Cultural Marxism can reap strategic successes for the US simply by virtue of its existence, since it immediately divides the population, especially those not initially preconditioned to its principles like populations in Eastern Europe and the Balkans or those that aren’t prepared for its full-scale implementation like what is being experienced in Western, Central, and Northern Europe vis-à-vis the manufactured “refugee” crisis. As the geopolitical inheritor of the British Empire, the US is a master at divide-and-rule strategies, and strategically promoting a Cultural Marxist agenda in certain targeted states can bring about the intended results of fracturing a society and turning it against itself for facilitated external manipulation.
Now about the War on Religion, one of its subsects, the War on Christianity, is being fought against believers in Europe on behalf of the Cultural Marxist ruling clique and in the Mideast through ISIL and other Wahhabi terrorists, but something similar is happening against conventional Islam (which the absolute vast majority of Muslims practice). Instead of a war from “without”, that is, one community being victimized by a separate one, the War on Islam is largely fought using internal means. The Wahhabi ideological virus was cultivated and promoted by the US and its Saudi ally in order to appeal to the over one billion Muslims in the world to join the worldwide anti-Soviet coalition that Reagan was creating through his 1980s “rollback” policy (ideologically inherited from Zbigniew Brzezinski and Jimmy Carter). Afterwards the US kept using misinterpreted Islam as a recruiting instrument in seeking to cull de-facto mercenaries from this massive population pool, guiding them against strategic targets afterwards and continuing to do so up to the present day.
The conventional Muslim community is well aware of the danger that this weaponized version of their religion poses both to them and to other people, but it’s very difficult to root out once it’s been embedded in certain areas like parts of the Mideast, North Africa, and even select immigrant communities abroad in Western countries. There’s also the Muslim Brotherhood, which while not being Wahhabi, is “Islamist”. This latter adjective is commonly misused by people who aren’t aware of what it fully connotes, but to educate the reader in case they’re unaware, “Islamists” are those that want to violently impose their religion onto others, be they conventional or secular Muslims or any sort of non-Muslim such as Christians, Hindus, Jews, Buddhists, or atheists. Aside from certain divergences and disagreements over religious interpretation which are too esoteric for most secular individuals and non-Muslims to understand, Wahhabis and the Muslim Brotherhood basically work towards the same goal as it relates to their victims (both Muslim and non-Muslim), and this has the effect of dividing the Muslim community and making it pliant to externally directed manipulation like the kind that the US is currently practicing.
That being said, the War on Religion will intensify on all fronts, be it the War on Christianity, the War on Islam, or the ‘fabled’ “Clash of Civilizations” between them and others that US strategists so desperately want to set into full motion. The Wahhabis and Muslim Brotherhood Islamists that have infiltrated into Europe under the cover of being “refugees” will continue their sexual terrorism and engage in more stereotypical terrorist acts such as suicide bombings, indiscriminate machine-gunning, and beheadings. They will also keep committing these acts of violence and intimidation against Mideast- and African-based Christians as well, and we could even expect a jump in attacks to take place in Buddhist and Hindu areas of Asia soon, too. These same individuals will simultaneously eat away at conventional Islam and continue the “Muslim Civil War” that the US created between the misguided radicals and the conventional and secular followers of the faith like the majority of the people in Syria. The Wahhabis and Muslim Brotherhood Islamists want to discredit conventional Islam, radicalize it, or destroy it, and that’s part of the reason why they’re fighting in Syria against the most historically tolerant civilizational manifestation of Islam. Furthermore, there’s also the chance that the Sunni-Shia split that the US worked so hard to resurrect after over a millennium of dormancy might soon become a tangible factor in geopolitical affairs, which could then see sectarian killings against the Shia skyrocket anywhere that they reside (such as Lebanon, Nigeria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, etc.).