Russian analyst predicts decline and breakup of U.S.

[vector7]

IS SARS VIRUS A BIO-WEAPON THAT SETS UP A PERSON FOR A SECONDARY DISEASE, AND IS IT SPECIFICALLY AIMED AT ORIENTALS?

Resources to aid your Understanding

Deadly Biological Agents, Deadly Vaccines, and Scientists Who Knew Too Much - Audio Tape

Subtitle: Evidence that SARS is a man-made bio-weapon is fairly conclusive, while evidence that it is aimed at Orientals is inconclusive, though very interesting. "In my heart of hearts, I believe SARS is engineered to target Chinese..." [Medical Doctor]

The New World Order is coming! Are you ready? Once you understand what this New World Order really is, and how it is being gradually implemented, you will be able to see it progressing in your daily news!!

Or maybe the PLA has been testing ethnic bio-weapons that would be less harmfull to Asians.

[American Patriot]

Vector - how accurate is that speech, really?

Where did it come from originally?

rick

[vector7]

I know some say it never happened, while others say it did.

Do you think this a Hal Turner regurgitation from Epoch Times??

JR Nyquist had some of the same information in his article.

I have to admit this one did keep me up last night thinking about it.

[vector7]

[American Patriot]

Well.. Hal Turner and Nyquist are different sides of a similar coin if you ask me.

Given that they both tend toward sensationalism to further their various goals, I think that a good portion of everything you read by these guys is questionable.

This group here can make a better strategic assessment given open source information than those two can.

Turner is a creep, and a white supremacist - people I will give NO quarter to. I don't like them, and like the Black Panthers and other such groups, they are all just plain, old racists. He is a "Jew Hater" and an all around evil guy, if you ask me.

Nyquist fights against Socialist take over, but he does it in a pretty... emotional way. Turner is just a plain creep.

I think that any sort of "conspiracy theory" really needs to be taken apart, seam by seam, stitch by stitch and this of course is just that - Conspiracy Theory.

Over the course of the last ten years or so I've basically "done battle" with these folks and their laying out of conspiracies. I think most of the folks on this site are quite well aware of the crap we went through right after 9-11 with the "Government did it" crap on Anomalies. "No plane hit the Pentagon" BS and so forth.

One thing has become VERY clear to me - there are indeed conspiracy theorists on both sides of the political spectrum (ok, ALL sides, Ron Paul is somewhere in there as well) but a majority of them are Left-leaning fools who think that if they tell a story over and over, eventually it will "become truth".

These folks have it in their minds to change the world to their view by confusing and obfuscating facts. It's a fact that a Russian has stated this is going to happen, do we not understand the implications in his words?

No, America will not "fall apart". But, it is the hope and dream of all Soviet era people that indeed America does.

So, they will continue to tell the story over and over until people BELIEVE them.

[vector7]

I believe there are moderates and hardliners in every group of people.

We know where Russia stands but where does the PLA fall in all of this?

During the early 90's and now the global down turn has made the majority of Russian people to be angry at America, Putin has capitalized on this.

If this financial trouble shifts over to China and their population suffers will they also turn it against America? Will the Financial Crisis Bring Upheaval to China?

Did Defense Minster Chi Haotian never say any of this or did he have senior moment?

Did he just speak his mind for a couple of minutes or did the PLA really have a survey on war with America?

This would show that it's beyond a lone war horses statements and real PLA strategy being considered.

What about their new weapons technology developments?

Are they aimed at only defending their territory or are they building up to take Taiwan and more importantly face American forces?

If so, in the Taiwan straits or beyond?

And finally looking at the Axis movements and new relations where are they developing pawns in this game?

Do they fund and back Americas enemies?

You are right to question the validity to every puzzle piece which has to be done.

But it's impossible to know the secret war plans being drawn up in the different war rooms of the Axis aside from questionable leaks.

The question is, does the Axis movements, activities and developments validate the rumored information.

Not to say that the information is a total fact but a reasonable possibility that needs to remembered and shelved.

Then when another piece of the same or similar corroborating information shows up it then needs to be pulled out and examined, compared and assessed.

I believe this is what TAA is all about.

[American Patriot]

I guess my issue is this... who is the guy that said this? Does the CIA know of him and of this (they probably do) and most importantly, does this guy have any sway over the majority of the Chinese military?

[vector7]

Very important questions, the CIA may know but is probably classified. One thing that's becoming more aparent is the PLA's actions are speaking louder than Defense Minister Chi Hoatian's alleged statements.

[vector7]

Just in case anyone forgot.

From The Sunday Times
March 30, 2008
Bridge-building Vladimir Putin wants tunnel to US

Nicola Smith and Chris Hutchins



VLADIMIR PUTIN, the Russian president, is to raise plans for a tunnel to link his country with America when he meets his US counterpart, George W Bush, next Sunday.

The 64-mile tunnel would run under the Bering Strait between Chukotka, in the Russian far east, and Alaska; the cost is estimated at £33 billion.

Roman Abramovich, the owner of Chelsea football club and governor of Chukotka, has invested £80m in the world’s largest drill but has denied that it is linked with the development.

Proposals for such a tunnel were approved by Tsar Nicholas II in the early 20th century but were abandoned during the Soviet era. If finally built, the tunnel would allow rail connections between London and New York.

A Kremlin spokesman confirmed last week that Putin seeks to build “a real bridge” between Russia and America when he meets Bush at the Black Sea resort of Sochi.



Officials in Washington and Moscow view the talks as an opportunity to ease expected tensions about this week’s Nato summit in Romania. Clashes are expected over America’s planned missile defence system in eastern Europe and whether to allow Ukraine and Georgia into Nato.



Russia said last month that it would have to aim its own missiles at Ukraine if it joined Nato and hosted military facilities.

While Russia cannot block Nato membership, allies know that boosting links with the two former Soviet states would strain ties with Moscow – ties that are already damaged over the independence of Kosovo and the US missile shield.

Although Nato’s 26 members agree in principle that the future of Ukraine and Georgia lies within the alliance, some are wary of angering Russia, which provides a quarter of Europe’s natural gas.

[vector7]

January 18, 2009
U.S. Losing Superpower Status: Russia, China, Venezuela, Iran Rising



The Sole Superpower in Decline Throughout history, rising powers have overtaken superpowers. The United States will not prove an exception.

Originally Published on August 22, 2007
By Dilip Hiro

The Rise of a Multipolar World

With the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the United States stood tall - militarily invincible, economically unrivaled, diplomatically uncontestable, and the dominating force on information channels worldwide. The next century was to be the true "American century," with the rest of the world molding itself in the image of the sole superpower.

Yet, with not even a decade of this century behind us, we are already witnessing the rise of a multipolar world in which new powers are challenging different aspects of American supremacy -- Russia and China in the forefront, with regional powers Venezuela and Iran forming the second rank. These emergent powers are primed to erode American hegemony, not confront it, singly or jointly.

How and why has the world evolved in this way so soon? The Bush administration's debacle in Iraq is certainly a major factor in this transformation, a classic example of an imperialist power, brimming with hubris, overextending itself. To the relief of many - in the United States and elsewhere - the Iraq fiasco has demonstrated the striking limitations of power for the globe's highest-tech, most destructive military machine. In Iraq, Brent Scowcroft, national security advisor to two U.S. presidents, concedes in a recent Op-Ed, "We are being wrestled to a draw by opponents who are not even an organized state adversary."

The invasion and subsequent disastrous occupation of Iraq and the mismanaged military campaign in Afghanistan have crippled the credibility of the United States. The scandals at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and Guantánamo in Cuba, along with the widely publicized murders of Iraqi civilians in Haditha, have badly tarnished America's moral self-image. In the latest opinion poll, only 9 percent of Turks - whose country is a secular state and a member of NATO - have a favorable view of the United States, down from 52 percent just five years ago.

Yet there are other explanations - unrelated to Washington's glaring misadventures - for the current transformation in international affairs. These include, above all, the tightening market in oil and natural gas, which has enhanced the power of hydrocarbon-rich nations as never before; the rapid economic expansion of the mega-nations China and India; the transformation of China into the globe's leading manufacturing base; and the end of the Anglo-American duopoly in international television news.

Many Channels, Diverse Perceptions

During the 1991 Gulf War, only CNN and the BBC had correspondents in Baghdad. So the international TV audience, irrespective of its location, saw the conflict through their lenses. Twelve years later, when the Bush administration, backed by British Prime Minister Tony Blair, invaded Iraq, Al Jazeera Arabic broke this duopoly. It relayed images - and facts - that contradicted the Pentagon's presentation. For the first time in history, the world witnessed two versions of an ongoing war in real time. So credible was the Al Jazeera Arabic version that many television companies outside the Arabic-speaking world - in Europe, Asia and Latin America - showed its clips.

Though, in theory, the growth of cable television worldwide raised the prospect of ending the Anglo-American duopoly in 24-hour TV news, not much had happened due to the exorbitant cost of gathering and editing TV news. It was only the arrival of Al Jazeera English, funded by the hydrocarbon-rich emirate of Qatar - with its declared policy of offering a global perspective from an Arab and Muslim angle - that, in 2006, finally broke the long-established mold.

Soon France 24 came on the air, broadcasting in English and French from a French viewpoint, followed in mid-2007 by the English-language Press TV, which aimed to provide an Iranian perspective. Russia was next in line for 24-hour TV news in English for the global audience. Meanwhile, spurred by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, teleSUR, a pan-Latin-American TV channel based in Caracas, began competing with CNN in Spanish for a mass audience.

As with Qatar, so with Russia and Venezuela, the funding for these TV news ventures has come from soaring national hydrocarbon incomes - a factor draining American hegemony not just in imagery but in reality.

Russia, an Energy Superpower

Under President Vladimir Putin, Russia has more than recovered from the economic chaos that followed the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. After effectively re-nationalizing the energy industry through state-controlled corporations, he began deploying its economic clout to further Russia's foreign policy interests. In 2005, Russia overtook the United States, becoming the second-largest oil producer in the world. Its oil income now amounts to $679 million a day. European countries dependent on imported Russian oil now include Hungary, Poland, Germany and even Britain.

Russia is also the largest producer of natural gas on the planet, with three-fifths of its gas exports going to the 27-member European Union. Bulgaria, Estonia, Finland and Slovakia get 100 percent of their natural gas from Russia; Turkey, 66 percent; Poland, 58 percent; Germany, 41 percent; and France, 25 percent. Gazprom, the biggest natural gas enterprise on earth, has established stakes in 16 EU countries. In 2006, the Kremlin's foreign reserves stood at $315 billion, up from a paltry $12 billion in 1999. Little wonder that, in July 2006 on the eve of the G8 summit in St. Petersburg, Putin rejected an energy charter proposed by the Western leaders.

Soaring foreign-exchange reserves, new ballistic missiles and closer links with a prospering China - with which Russia conducted joint military exercises on China's Shandong Peninsula in August 2005 - enabled Putin to deal with his American counterpart, President George W. Bush, as an equal, not mincing his words when appraising American policies. "One country, the United States, has overstepped its national boundaries in every way," Putin told the 43rd Munich Trans-Atlantic conference on security policy in February 2007. "This is visible in the economic, political, cultural and educational policies it imposes on other nations ... This is very dangerous."

Condemning the concept of a "unipolar world," Putin added: "However one might embellish this term, at the end of the day it describes a scenario in which there is one center of authority, one center of force, one center of decision-making ... It is a world in which there is one master, one sovereign. And this is pernicious." His views fell on receptive ears in the capitals of most Asian, African and Latin American countries.



The changing relationship between Moscow and Washington was noted, among others, by analysts and policy makers in the Persian Gulf region. Commenting on the visit that Putin paid to longtime U.S. allies Saudi Arabia and Qatar after the Munich conference, Abdel Aziz Sagar, chairman of the Gulf Research Center, wrote in the Doha-based newspaper the Peninsula that Russia and Gulf Arab countries, once rivals from opposite ideological camps, had found a common agenda of oil, antiterrorism and arms sales. "The altered focus takes place in a milieu where the Gulf countries are signaling their keenness to keep all geopolitical options open, reviewing the utility of the United States as the sole security guarantor, and contemplating a collective security mechanism that involves a host of international players."



In April 2007, the Kremlin issued a major foreign policy document. "The myth about the unipolar world fell apart once and for all in Iraq," it stated. "A strong, more self-confident Russia has become an integral part of positive changes in the world."



The Kremlin's increasingly tense relations with Washington were in tune with Russian popular opinion. A poll taken during the run-up to the 2006 G8 summit revealed that 58 percent of Russians regarded America as an "unfriendly country." It has proved to be a trend. This July, for instance, Maj. Gen. Alexandr Vladimirov told the mass circulation newspaper Komsomolskaya Pravda that war with the United States was a "possibility" in the next 10 to 15 years.

Chavez Rides High

Such sentiments resonated with Hugo Chavez. While visiting Moscow in June 2007, he urged Russians to return to the ideas of Vladimir Lenin, especially his anti-imperialism. "The Americans don't want Russia to keep rising," he said. "But Russia has risen again as a center of power, and we, the people of the world, need Russia to become stronger."

Chavez finalized a $1 billion deal to purchase five diesel submarines to defend Venezuela's oil-rich undersea shelf and thwart any possible economic embargo imposed by Washington. By then, Venezuela had become the second-largest buyer of Russian weaponry. (Algeria topped the list, another indication of a growing multipolarity in world affairs.) Venezuela acquired the distinction of being the first country to receive a license from Russia to manufacture the famed AK-47 assault rifle.

By channeling some of his country's oil money to needy Venezuelans, Chavez broadened his base of support. Much to the chagrin of the Bush White House, he trounced his sole political rival, Manuel Rosales, in a December 2006 presidential contest with 61 percent of the vote. Equally humiliating to the Bush administration, Venezuela was, by then, giving more foreign aid to needy Latin American states than it was.

Following his reelection, Chavez vigorously pursued the concept of forming an anti-imperialist alliance in Latin America as well as globally. He strengthened Venezuela's ties not only with such Latin countries as Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and debt-ridden Argentina, but also with Iran and Belarus.

By the time he arrived in Tehran from Moscow (via Minsk) in June 2007, the 180 economic and political accords the Chavez government had signed with Tehran were already yielding tangible results. Iranian-designed cars and tractors were coming off assembly lines in Venezuela. "[The] cooperation of independent countries like Iran and Venezuela has an effective role in defeating the policies of imperialism and saving nations," Chavez declared in Tehran.

Stuck in the quagmire of Iraq and lashed by the gusty winds of rocketing oil prices, the Bush administration finds its maneuverability woefully limited when dealing with a rising hydrocarbon power. To the insults that Chavez keeps hurling at Bush, the American response has been vapid. The reason is the crippling dependence of the United States on imported petroleum, which accounts for 60 percent of its total consumed. Venezuela is the fourth-largest source of U.S. imported oil after Canada, Mexico and Saudi Arabia; and some refineries in the United States are designed specifically to refine heavy Venezuelan oil.

In Chavez's scheme to undermine the "sole superpower," China has an important role. During an August 2006 visit to Beijing, his fourth in seven years, Chavez announced that Venezuela would triple its oil exports to China to 500,000 barrels per day in three years, a jump that suited both sides. Chavez wants to diversify Venezuela's buyer base to reduce its reliance on exports to the United States, and China's leaders are keen to diversify their hydrocarbon imports away from the Middle East, where American influence remains strong.

"The support of China is very important [to us] from the political and moral point of view," Chavez declared. Along with a joint refinery project, China agreed to build 13 oil-drilling platforms, supply 18 oil tankers, and collaborate with the state-owned company, Petróleos de Venezuela S.A., in exploring a new oilfield in the Orinoco Basin.

China on a Stratospheric Trajectory

So dramatic has been the growth of the state-run company PetroChina that, in mid-2007, it was second only to Exxon Mobil in its market value among energy corporations. Indeed, that year three Chinese companies made it onto the list of the world's 10 most highly valued corporations. Only the United States, with five, had more. China's foreign reserves of over $1 trillion have now surpassed Japan's. With its gross domestic product soaring past Germany's, China ranks No. 3 in the world economy.

In the diplomatic arena, Chinese leaders broke new ground in 1996 by sponsoring the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, consisting of four adjoining countries: Russia and the three former Soviet Socialist republics of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. The SCO started as a cooperative organization with a focus on countering drug-smuggling and terrorism. Later, the SCO invited Uzbekistan to join, even though it does not abut China. In 2003, the SCO broadened its scope by including regional economic cooperation in its charter. That, in turn, led it to grant observer status to Pakistan, India and Mongolia - all adjoining China - and Iran, which does not. When the United States applied for observer status, it was rejected, an embarrassing setback for Washington, which enjoyed such status at the Association of South-East Asian Nations.

In early August 2007, on the eve of an SCO summit in the Kyrgyz capital of Bishkek, the group conducted its first joint military exercises, code-named Peace Mission 2007, in the Russian Ural region of Chelyabinsk. "The SCO is destined to play a vital role in ensuring international security," said Ednan Karabayev, foreign minister of Kyrgyzstan.



In late 2006, as the host of a China-Africa Forum in Beijing attended by leaders of 48 of 53 African nations, China left the United States woefully behind in the diplomatic race for that continent (and its hydrocarbon and other resources). In return for Africa's oil, iron ore, copper and cotton, China sold low-priced goods to Africans and assisted African counties in building or improving roads, railways, ports, hydroelectric dams, telecommunications systems and schools. "The Western approach of imposing its values and political system on other countries is not acceptable to China," said Africa specialist Wang Hongyi of the China Institute of International Studies. "We focus on mutual development."

To reduce the cost of transporting petroleum from Africa and the Middle East, China began constructing a trans-Burma oil pipeline from the Bay of Bengal to its southern province of Yunan, thereby shortening the delivery route now traveled by tankers. This undermined Washington's campaign to isolate Myanmar. (Earlier, Sudan, boycotted by Washington, had emerged as a leading supplier of African oil to China.) In addition, Chinese oil companies were competing fiercely with their Western counterparts in getting access to hydrocarbon reserves in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan.

"China's oil diplomacy is putting the country on a collision course with the U.S. and Western Europe, which have imposed sanctions on some of the countries where China is doing business," comments William Mellor of Bloomberg News. The sentiment is echoed by the other side. "I see China and the U.S. coming into conflict over energy in the years ahead," says Jin Riguang, an oil-and-gas advisor to the Chinese government and a member of the Standing Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Council.



China's industrialization and modernization has spurred the modernization of its military as well. The test firing of the country's first anti-satellite missile, which successfully destroyed a defunct Chinese weather satellite in January 2007, dramatically demonstrated its growing technological prowess. An alarmed Washington had already noted an 18 percent increase in China's 2007 defense budget. Attributing the rise to extra spending on missiles, electronic warfare and other high-tech items, Liao Xilong, commander of the People's Liberation Army's general logistics department, said: "The present-day world is no longer peaceful, and to protect national security, stability and territorial integrity, we must suitably increase spending on military modernization."

China's declared budget of $45 billion was a tiny fraction of the Pentagon's $459 billion budget. Yet, in May 2007, a Pentagon report noted China's "rapid rise as a regional and economic power with global aspirations" and claimed that China was planning to project military farther afield from the Formosa Strait into the Asia-Pacific region in preparation for possible conflicts over territory or resources.

The Sole Superpower in the Sweep of History

This disparate challenge to American global primacy stems as much from sharpening conflicts over natural resources, particularly oil and natural gas, as from ideological differences over democracy American-style or human rights as conceived and promoted by Western policy makers. Perceptions about national (and imperial) identity and history are at stake as well.

It is noteworthy that Russian officials applauding the swift rise of post-Soviet Russia refer fondly to the pre-Bolshevik Revolution era when, according to them, Czarist Russia was a great power. Equally, Chinese leaders remain proud of their country's long imperial past as unique among nations.

When viewed globally and in the great stretch of history, the notion of American exceptionalism that drove the neoconservatives to proclaim the Project for the New American Century in the late 20th century - adopted so wholeheartedly by the Bush administration in this one - is nothing new. Other superpowers have been there, and they, too, have witnessed the loss of their prime position to rising powers.

No superpower in modern times has maintained its supremacy for more than several generations. And, however exceptional its leaders may have thought themselves, the United States, already clearly past its zenith, has no chance of becoming an exception to this age-old pattern of history.

Dilip Hiro is the author of Secrets and Lies: Operation "Iraqi Freedom" and, most recently, Blood of the Earth: The Battle for the World's Vanishing Oil Resources, both published by Nation Books.

Putin, Chavez Plug 'Multi-polar World'
Can the "Axis of Oil" Topple the U.S. Dollar?

[vector7]

MEGA DEPRESSION - THEN MEGA CIVIL WAR

Posted By: TOMCHITTUM
Date: Monday, 13 October 2008, 9:32 p.m. Mega Depression First, Then Mega Civil War in the Glorious Empire

I am Thomas W. Chittum, the author of the book, Civil War Two - The Coming Breakup of America.

My book asserted that because America is a multiethnic empire it will experience a violent shattering along tribal lines just as other such empires have throughout history. I further predicted that this implosion will occur relatively soon, probably no later than the year 2020, based on ongoing demographic trends. My book was published in 1993 and it ignited a mini firestorm of controversy. To date, it is still the ONLY non-fiction book on the topic of a civil war here in America.

Did anyone write a book predicting our first civil war? I did some research on that subject and I was unable to find a single book warning Americans that they were fast approaching an abyss. That’s not to say that people were unaware of the approaching war. In fact, many people were perfectly aware that a civil war was inevitable. My guess is that not a single person wrote a book on the coming war because they thought it would be a sort of picnic with a little gunfire mixed in, and in any case it would be over in a few months. As history records the war ground the entire southern half of America into a smoking wasteland and killed or crippled almost an entire generation of American men.

Today, people are even less aware of the seriousness of the approaching calamity than our ancestors were. If you mention the possibility of a Yugoslav-style ethnic war here in America in our lifetime most people will scoff at the idea. Five years ago most people would have likewise scoffed at the prospect of a second depression. Now, most people are waking up to the horrid fact that a second depression is upon us – that their retirement cookie jars have been systematically looted.

I’m sure that most visitors to the Rumor Mill News site are perfectly aware that a devastating depression is unfolding and that the economy is in a crash and burn mode with no plausible salvation in site. In this and following rants I will attempt to make the case that this economic meltdown will hasten our descent into an internal civil war that will depopulate the entire North American continent, wiping out 50% or more of the population.

No, I’m not kidding. I’m going to say that again – most of you people reading these words right now are going to starve to death in the tribal wars that will follow close on the heels of the economic meltdown.

Before I go on I’d like to revisit my book and go over what I got right and what I got wrong. I mentioned the New World Order in my book. At the time I wasn’t aware that the New World Order was an active conspiracy of bankers and aristocrats centered in London. I thought it was a sort of lose alliance of giddy globalists, trendy tree huggers and politically correct airheads. Then along came both the internet and the 911 terrorists attacks. I took me approximately three months to wise up to the fact that 911 was an inside job. I’d always followed military events closely and that’s how I woke up to the 911 scam. For years the American military had been encircling Afghanistan with military bases and pre-positioned stockpiles of military goodies. Then along came Osama bin Subcontractor like some boogie man in a bad movie. It all seemed like a low-budget Hollywood production. That’s because it was.

So … I got on the internet and started listening to commentators like Eustace Mullins, John Coleman, Henry Makow, Charles Savoie and anybody else who didn’t depend on the establishment for their supper.

Even before 911 I knew from personal experience that nothing in this rotting empire was as it was spray painted by the establishment media. After my book was published I got my 15 minutes of fame. I was on Television. I was a guest on numerous radio shows. I was a guest speaker at a lot of political meetings. I met a lot leaders of (mostly) right-wing type extremist groups. I remember telling one rightist-type leader that my presence as a speaker at their meeting did not mean that I was endorsing his organization or its stated goals. I told him I’d gladly speak to a “roomful of Rabbis” if they would invite me.

I made it plain to everybody that I was pretty much a one-trick pony. My self-assigned task was simply explaining to people why we were headed for a Yugoslav-style civil war and in our lifetime. I wanted to explain this to every living American, and I didn’t care two cents what their own political beliefs were. I made no apologizes then for speaking to right-wing extremists and I make no apologies now. After a while I began to realize that something really strange was going on inside the so-called extremist right-wing groups.

At every meeting there were always one or two dudes who just didn’t fit in. My favorite was a investment banker and Yale graduate. What, I wondered, was a blue-blood Yale investment banker doing mixing it up with all these guys who drove pickup trucks draped with confederate flags. Mind you, I wasn’t totally naive. I knew that the FBI and/or the CIA routinely sent guys to monitor these groups. Frankly, I didn’t give a damn. As far as I was concerned the more people that listened to me the more I liked it. Nazis, rabbis, government spooks, good-ole-boys in pickup trucks – I didn’t care – the more the merrier because my warning was for everybody.

Ultimately, it dawned on me that these obvious government spooks weren’t there to spy on these groups – these government spooks were there because THESE GOVERNMENT SPOOKS WERE ACTUALLY RUNNING THESE RIGHTIST GROUPS. Most of these right-wing groups were conceived, planned, created and then run by government spooks. It’s all part of what I call peasant management.

The powers that be know full well that their policies will always generate opposition both leftist and rightist … so … they create and subsidize false flag opposition movements that they can lead around in eternal circles thus creating no real problems for the establishment. And don’t forget that it’s the same exact scam with the phony baloney leftist groups. They are mostly establishment creations. In fact, it’s a double payoff for the establishment. They create false flag rightist groups to stampede leftists into the ranks of their false flag leftist groups, and they create the false flag leftist groups to stampede rightists into their false flag rightist groups.

Our Current Mess:

Here are my guesses about the future:

The New World Order is in a hell of a jam. Both Russia and China have how shaken off communism which was imposed on them by the London Banking Cartel. Both have turned to state-directed development and growth policies and are striving to feed their people and increase their standard of living. This is the exact opposite of the global depopulation and genocide via starvation and war that the New World Order is imposing on the rest of the globe via the Club of Rome and their other psychotic think tanks and NGOs. Russia and China and some neighboring states have formed a double whammy military and economic bloc called the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

The London Banking Cartel cannot let this situation continue or it’s just a matter of time until the Russian/China economic bloc takes their place. Furthermore, it has long been the military doctrine of the London Banking Cartel that the Eurasian landmass is the key to the military control of the globe. See Halford Mackinder. From the perspective of the London Banking Cartel it’s all or nothing and here and now. The clock is ticking against the London Banking Cartel and the only solution to fulfilling both their military and economic blueprints is pedal to the metal all-out war.

It isn’t like the good old days when a handful of Zionist assassins in communist clothing could overthrow a decadent Russian government, and the tiny British fleet and army can no longer kick a decadent Chinese oligarchy around and impose imported communism. Nothing but all-out war will suffice, and that means nuke warfare.

The only card the London Banking Cartel has to play is the American nuclear arsenal. They have to get America into a nuclear shootout with both Russia and China, and the sooner the better. Now I know what some of you are thinking: But golly, don’t these guys realize that a nuclear war will leave the planet a radioactive wasteland? Now hear this: The nutcase LBC boys perceive nuclear warfare as winnable and survivable. In any case that’s the ONLY card they have left to play. It didn’t get much play in the national media, but VP Cheney has been digging his personal nuke bunker in DC deeper and deeper like a beaver on go pills. He’s getting ready for it … and so should you.

The LBC has to sell global war to the American airheads, hence the 911 terrorist attacks. Dictatorships cannot stampede the people into giving up their property and their liberty without conjuring up both foreign AND DOMESTIC ENEMIES. That’s why a civil war is in the offing. A civil war in America is not only possible – IT IS ESSENTIAL. It’s all part of the plan. Flood the Southwest with millions of Mexicans and then trash the economy so the starving and ticked off Mexicans will burn an entire geographic region right down to the ground. This should be sufficient to stampede the rest of the peasants into accepting anything the LBC pukes up and presents as a solution to the resulting mess.

To understand their logic we’ll have to take a quickie refresher course in the history of Western war. Napoleon resurrected the concept of the citizen soldier that had been doormat since the Roman Republic. He was thus able to raise massive armies of peasants who perceived themselves as citizen soldiers. Deluded as they were they nevertheless simply swept aside smaller armies of professional soldiers. The ONLY military reply his opponents could make was to raise massive armies of their own so-called citizen soldiers.

Under the new military system large populations were an absolute military necessity. The increasing mechanization of warfare didn’t change the situation at all. Massive peasant armies were still required because hordes of deluded peasants were still needed to drive the trucks and armored vehicles that delivered themselves to the slaughterhouse. There existed a rough balance between the quantity of military supplies an industrial society could churn out and the quantity of “citizen soldiers” needed to transport and then use the supplies at the front. Massive quantities of peasants were necessary for both production and subsequent usage at the front.

The pendulum didn’t begin to swing back the other way until the arrival of nukes on the scene. Massive peasant armies were no longer a necessity due to the extreme energy density of nukes. The industrial infrastructure necessary to generate a really impressive nuke arsenal was far greater than the relatively small number of professional soldiers (read airforce) necessary to deliver them.

When peasants became useless for war the bulk of them became useless. Before nukes the rule was the more peasants the better. After nukes only a smaller number of peasants were needed to produce goodies for the idle aristocrats.

Today, massive peasant armies are obsolete and are maintained chiefly on a reduced scale for theatrical purposes. They are there for peasant perception control purposes exactly as are the false flag leftist and rightist mock opposition groups I mentioned earlier. Ordinary infantry such as our current army and marine divisions are obsolete. Ordinary infantry are useful only for fighting other likewise obsolete infantry, and for suppressing uprisings of lightly armed domestic peasants … and for pure theatre.

Now that you understand this point I can get back to America via a short detour through the Middle East. The primary objective of our current insane activities in Asia is the conquest of the Asian heartland. A secondary but also necessary objective is the total destruction of our current and obsolete military machine to transform it into one more useful to insure the destruction and dismantling of the American Republic. Russia and China have both slipped the grasp of the London Banking Cartel and they dare not risk America going the same route, hence their stealth plot to carve up America like pizza into manageable mini-states.

The destruction of the American military in Iraq and Afghanistan will pave the way for its replacement by privatized military contractors formerly known as warlords. Citizen soldiers might balk at massive ethnic cleansing operations in California for example, but warlords won’t. Picture armies of Blackwater mercs composed of mostly non-Americans recruited from all points of the globe. They will gladly slaughter everything in their path including any remaining American military units who might oppose them. The LBC must first ignite a civil war in America and then ultimately ensure the that the secessionist win after their hired warlords and mercenary hordes have stomped the new mini states into malleable mush which may or may not be glued together in some sort of North American Confederation with “Ameros” for money and some multi-colored rag for a flag.

I basically think it will work. I think the coming tribal/civil war in America will be roughly proportional to the severity of the economic collapse that sets it off. Meanwhile, while you are waiting for Osama bin Subcontractor to nuke us and waiting for your starving neighbors to batter your door down, keep an eye on California. It’s the canary in the coal mine. When it croaks the rest of America will follow sooner or later.

The E-book version of Civil War Two can be purchased at http://amfirstbooks.com/

[vector7]

Food Riots, Civil Unrest, and the Disunited States of America

Written by Dave Nalle
Published December 02, 2008

It may be mostly schadenfreude, but Russian economist Igor Panarin is convinced that the current economic crisis has a political component which will eventually break the United States apart into as many as six separate nations. He's not alone in this belief. It has long been a staple belief of racist extremist groups and is now being predicted by some on the religious right who are ready with plans for how to rearrange the nation in the face of the Obama presidency. Conspiracy monger Alex Jones even got in on the act on his radio show this weekend, suggesting that there is an active globalist plot to weaken America by breaking it into several smaller nations.

On Russia Today Panarin predicted the outbreak of a civil war in the United States by 2010. Panarin has developed some following as a trends forecaster, and while his predictions may seem outlandish, he is not alone in subscribing to the idea that a breakup of the US in a civil war might be the outcome of the current economic crisis. Panarin blames the impending crisis on poor monetary policy and the US abandonment of the gold standard, a concern which he shares with many on the extreme right in America. He sees a collapse in America equivalent to the Russian collapse of the 1980s as the economic crisis leads to infrastructure failures and a backlash from outraged citizens.

Panarin is not alone in his beliefs. Trends forecaster Gerald Celente from the Trends Research Institute is also predicting tax rebellions, food riots, and the potential for civil war by 2012, largely as a result of the Obama administration's policies which he believes will accelerate economic collapse. Celente has made some successful trend predictions in the past, though his predictions seem to be directed largely by a far-right political ideology which includes the now-standard hatred for the Federal Reserve system which is common among Ron Paul supporters.

The scenario for the collapse of the United States usually starts with food shortages and food riots, mirroring international food distribution problems which we saw emerging last year with the food shortages in Haiti and the problems with the rice crop in the far east. Couple that with sudden fuel shortages which cause the breakdown of the interstate trucking system, and you have a formula for regional failures in the supply of food. This might even be compounded by the collapse of the dollar leading to the inability of the US to buy food on international markets.

Blame for this would immediately attach to the government and anger would increase as the government attempted to use forced redistribution of resources to help out the most vulnerable parts of the country. With a negative reaction to this in the more self-sufficient areas of the nation, most of which did not support Obama and are not represented by Democrats in Congress, you have a scenario for regional rebellion. Perhaps not armed uprisings, but obstructionism, refusal to comply with the federal government, and state governments demanding more local autonomy and less interference from Washington.

One aspect of the red state vs. blue state dynamic of the country which is often overlooked, is that while the Blue States have come out on top politically, the red states are much more self-sufficient in resources and infrastructure.

In a time of crisis this underlying dynamic would become painfully obvious, as overpopulated and under supplied states in the North and Midwest began demanding resources from politically disenfranchised states in the South and West where most of the agricultural and energy resources are located.

When the force of the federal government is turned to massive redistribution of wealth and resources, those who are on the losing end of that redistribution are going to be very disgruntled. When a central government which you feel does not represent you comes to take the food from the mouths of your children and give it to someone else, suddenly concepts like secession and civil war seem more appealing than they might under ideal conditions.

The potential for a breakdown of loyalty to the federal government and for states turning against each other on a regional basis is certainly real. The country could easily split in two on red-blue lines, or break up as some have suggested with the West Coast, the South, Texas, the Midwest, and the East Coast all becoming autonomous regions.

The question is whether the current crisis is bad enough or will become bad enough to precipitate such a breakup, and whether the federal government would actually engage in the kinds of actions which would precipitate the breakup of the union.

Right now certain indicators suggest that while the economic crisis is real, it does not extend to the parts of the economy which would precipitate this kind of critical breakdown in society. The crisis still remains primarily limited to the large-scale financial sector of the economy. Small businesses, regional economies, and regional banking seem little effected by the failure of large institutions.

Loan defaults for agriculture and small businesses are not rising like real estate foreclosures and are remarkably low when compared with even the crisis period of the late 1980s. The food and goods distribution system also seems pretty secure. The combination of the fall in oil prices and ongoing reduced demand have put OPEC in a situation where oil prices may continue to go down or stabilize at a lower level, keeping trucking profitable and goods flowing around the country.

Even fertilizer and feed prices appear to be on the decline as a result of low natural gas prices and a record corn harvest. All of this makes food shortages which might precipitate a crisis seem he main concern is how much money can be sucked out of the strong parts of the economy to underwrite the mistakes and mismanagement of the large financial sector.

It's really not the food shortages we need to look out for, but the possibility that government may decide to bankrupt the productive 80% of the economy to subsidize the failing 20%. If the Obama administration continues the policy of trying to cover the losses of the financial sector and starts paying for dubious employment schemes by picking the pockets of working people, farmers and small businesses, they may reach the point where people won't put up with it any longer.

That outrage over wealth redistribution is more likely to precipitate a crisis than any problems with the food supply, but implementing such a policy would take enough time that the likely outcome would just be a backlash against Democrats in the 2010 and 2012 elections.

If the worst case scenarios these trend analysts predict somehow do come true and our leaders forget the rights of those who did not vote for them in their eagerness to subsidize the unions and big money interests which put them in office, we may be left with nothing but an emotional appeal for the union and hearkening back to the words of Daniel Webster at the onset of the Civil War:

"When my eyes shall be turned to behold for the last time the sun in the heaven, may I not see him shining on the broken and dishonored fragments of a once glorious union; on States dissevered, discordant, belligerent: on a land rent with civil feuds, or drenched in fraternal blood! Let their last feeble and lingering glance rather be on the gorgeous ensign of the republic, now known and honored throughout the earth, still full high and advanced, its arms and trophies streaming in their original luster, not a stripe erased or polluted, nor a single star obscured, bearing for its motto...that...sentiment dear to every true American heart--Liberty and Union, now and forever, one and inseparable!"

[vector7]

As if Things Weren't Bad Enough, Russian Professor Predicts End of U.S.

In Moscow, Igor Panarin's Forecasts Are All the Rage; America 'Disintegrates' in 2010

• Article
• Comments (655)

more in World »


By ANDREW OSBORN

MOSCOW -- For a decade, Russian academic Igor Panarin has been predicting the U.S. will fall apart in 2010. For most of that time, he admits, few took his argument -- that an economic and moral collapse will trigger a civil war and the eventual breakup of the U.S. -- very seriously. Now he's found an eager audience: Russian state media.

Igor Panarin

In recent weeks, he's been interviewed as much as twice a day about his predictions. "It's a record," says Prof. Panarin. "But I think the attention is going to grow even stronger."

Prof. Panarin, 50 years old, is not a fringe figure. A former KGB analyst, he is dean of the Russian Foreign Ministry's academy for future diplomats. He is invited to Kremlin receptions, lectures students, publishes books, and appears in the media as an expert on U.S.-Russia relations.

But it's his bleak forecast for the U.S. that is music to the ears of the Kremlin, which in recent years has blamed Washington for everything from instability in the Middle East to the global financial crisis. Mr. Panarin's views also fit neatly with the Kremlin's narrative that Russia is returning to its rightful place on the world stage after the weakness of the 1990s, when many feared that the country would go economically and politically bankrupt and break into separate territories.

A polite and cheerful man with a buzz cut, Mr. Panarin insists he does not dislike Americans. But he warns that the outlook for them is dire.
"There's a 55-45% chance right now that disintegration will occur," he says. "One could rejoice in that process," he adds, poker-faced. "But if we're talking reasonably, it's not the best scenario -- for Russia." Though Russia would become more powerful on the global stage, he says, its economy would suffer because it currently depends heavily on the dollar and on trade with the U.S.

Mr. Panarin posits, in brief, that mass immigration, economic decline, and moral degradation will trigger a civil war next fall and the collapse of the dollar. Around the end of June 2010, or early July, he says, the U.S. will break into six pieces -- with Alaska reverting to Russian control.

In addition to increasing coverage in state media, which are tightly controlled by the Kremlin, Mr. Panarin's ideas are now being widely discussed among local experts. He presented his theory at a recent roundtable discussion at the Foreign Ministry. The country's top international relations school has hosted him as a keynote speaker. During an appearance on the state TV channel Rossiya, the station cut between his comments and TV footage of lines at soup kitchens and crowds of homeless people in the U.S. The professor has also been featured on the Kremlin's English-language propaganda channel, Russia Today.

Mr. Panarin's apocalyptic vision "reflects a very pronounced degree of anti-Americanism in Russia today," says Vladimir Pozner, a prominent TV journalist in Russia. "It's much stronger than it was in the Soviet Union."

Mr. Pozner and other Russian commentators and experts on the U.S. dismiss Mr. Panarin's predictions. "Crazy ideas are not usually discussed by serious people," says Sergei Rogov, director of the government-run Institute for U.S. and Canadian Studies, who thinks Mr. Panarin's theories don't hold water.

Mr. Panarin's résumé includes many years in the Soviet KGB, an experience shared by other top Russian officials. His office, in downtown Moscow, shows his national pride, with pennants on the wall bearing the emblem of the FSB, the KGB's successor agency. It is also full of statuettes of eagles; a double-headed eagle was the symbol of czarist Russia.

The professor says he began his career in the KGB in 1976. In post-Soviet Russia, he got a doctorate in political science, studied U.S. economics, and worked for FAPSI, then the Russian equivalent of the U.S. National Security Agency. He says he did strategy forecasts for then-President Boris Yeltsin, adding that the details are "classified."

In September 1998, he attended a conference in Linz, Austria, devoted to information warfare, the use of data to get an edge over a rival. It was there, in front of 400 fellow delegates, that he first presented his theory about the collapse of the U.S. in 2010.

"When I pushed the button on my computer and the map of the United States disintegrated, hundreds of people cried out in surprise," he remembers. He says most in the audience were skeptical. "They didn't believe me."

At the end of the presentation, he says many delegates asked him to autograph copies of the map showing a dismembered U.S.

He based the forecast on classified data supplied to him by FAPSI analysts, he says. He predicts that economic, financial and demographic trends will provoke a political and social crisis in the U.S. When the going gets tough, he says, wealthier states will withhold funds from the federal government and effectively secede from the union. Social unrest up to and including a civil war will follow. The U.S. will then split along ethnic lines, and foreign powers will move in.

California will form the nucleus of what he calls "The Californian Republic," and will be part of China or under Chinese influence. Texas will be the heart of "The Texas Republic," a cluster of states that will go to Mexico or fall under Mexican influence. Washington, D.C., and New York will be part of an "Atlantic America" that may join the European Union. Canada will grab a group of Northern states Prof. Panarin calls "The Central North American Republic." Hawaii, he suggests, will be a protectorate of Japan or China, and Alaska will be subsumed into Russia.

"It would be reasonable for Russia to lay claim to Alaska; it was part of the Russian Empire for a long time." A framed satellite image of the Bering Strait that separates Alaska from Russia like a thread hangs from his office wall. "It's not there for no reason," he says with a sly grin.

Interest in his forecast revived this fall when he published an article in Izvestia, one of Russia's biggest national dailies. In it, he reiterated his theory, called U.S. foreign debt "a pyramid scheme," and predicted China and Russia would usurp Washington's role as a global financial regulator.
Americans hope President-elect Barack Obama "can work miracles," he wrote. "But when spring comes, it will be clear that there are no miracles."
The article prompted a question about the White House's reaction to Prof. Panarin's forecast at a December news conference. "I'll have to decline to comment," spokeswoman Dana Perino said amid much laughter.

For Prof. Panarin, Ms. Perino's response was significant. "The way the answer was phrased was an indication that my views are being listened to very carefully," he says.

The professor says he's convinced that people are taking his theory more seriously. People like him have forecast similar cataclysms before, he says, and been right. He cites French political scientist Emmanuel Todd. Mr. Todd is famous for having rightly forecast the demise of the Soviet Union -- 15 years beforehand. "When he forecast the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1976, people laughed at him," says Prof. Panarin.




Write to Andrew Osborn at andrew.osborn@wsj.com

[vector7]

Digital Journal
November 26, 2008 Wednesday 6:42 AM EST
Top Russian Analyst Predicts U.S. Breakup and New North American Currency

Nov. 26, 2008 (Digital Journal delivered by Newstex) -- Monday a top Russian political analyst predicted that the United States is heading for collapse and will divide into six separate parts. Canada, Mexico and the U.S. will adopt the Amero currency, and China and Russia will regulate world markets.According to RIA Novosti(Russian News and Information Agency), Professor Igor Panarin was interviewed by Izvestia and the interview was published on Monday.If and when the U.S. breakup comes about Panarin states that "we (Russia) œcould claim Alaska - it was only granted on lease, after all."Panarian said that because the dollar œis not secured by anything, and because Americas debt has œgrown like an avalanche and is now more than 11 trillion, this œis a pyramid that can only collapse.Panarin has been making this prediction since 1998. RIA Novosti reported that Panarin made these dire predictions at an international conference in Australia 10 years ago when the U.S. economy appeared to be strong.Panarin hedged when it came to pinpointing the exact time of the œexpected U.S. economic collapse.When asked when the U.S. economy would collapse, Panarin said: "It is already collapsing.

Due to the financial crisis, three of the largest and oldest five banks on Wall Street have already ceased to exist, and two are barely surviving. Their losses are the biggest in history. Now what we will see is a change in the regulatory system on a global financial scale: America will no longer be the world's financial regulator." Panarin said that China, œwith its vast reserves, and Russia, œcould play the role of a regulator in Eurasia."Panarin stated that millions of Americans have lost their savings and because General Motors and Ford are on the verge of collapse and whole cities will be left without work. Because governors are also demanding money from the federal government, dissatisfaction is growing. Panarin continued:"Dissatisfaction is growing, and at the moment it is only being held back by the elections and the hope that Obama can work miracles. But by spring, it will be clear that there are no miracles."RIA Novosti also reported that Panarin points to a vulnerable political setup in the U.S., which includes "lack of unified national laws," and "divisions among the elite, which will bring the breakup about in the very near future.He predicted that the U.S. will break up into six parts - the Pacific coast, with its growing Chinese population; the South, with its Hispanics; Texas, where independence movements are on the rise; the Atlantic coast, with its distinct and separate mentality; five of the poorer central states with their large Native American populations; and the northern states, where the influence from Canada is strong. . . He even suggested that "we could claim Alaska - it was only granted on lease, after all." According to RIA Novosti, Panarin claimed that a secret (North American Union) agreement in 2006 was reached between Canada, Mexico and the U.S. making the Amero currency the new monetary unit. This Amero will replace the dollar under the pretext that œterrorists are forging them and they need to be checked."For a little perspective on Russias failing economy read Wednesdays article, Russia and the Global Economic Crisis by Stephen Sestanovich published by the Council on Foreign Relations.Apparently Russias economy isnt doing all that well. Export earnings from energy and metals are sharply declining, corporate balance sheets are over-leveraged, there is a œchorus of bailout appeals, bank failures, credit crunches, failing real-estate and mortgage defaults . . . and the list goes on. Newstex ID: DIJO-0001-29908935


Professor Igor Panarin: When America fell to pieces the shouting was outrageous.

As early as autumn 2009 the economic crisis may lead to a civil war in the USA and then to its division into parts. Igor Panarin, doctor of political science, dean of the foreign affairs department at the Diplomacy Academy of the Russian Foreign Ministry, presented this forecast ten years ago. At that time his forecasts seemed unrealistic, but now many of them are coming true.

We present a new version of the event’s development through the eyes of the scientist, even though it may seem disputable and even scandalous.

In his interview with Izvestia, professor Panarin shares his opinion on the following issues: why the United States decided on monetary reform; who Obama is working for; and why it is better for Russia to be friends with China.

Question: Mr. Panarin, where did this idea of the breakup of the US come from back in 1998, when this country was prospering and when it was an unconditional world leader?

Answer: In September 1998 an international conference called the Informational War was held in Austria. I presented my analytical research there. 150 out of 400 participants were from the USA. There was outrageous shouting in the audience when I was talking about the division of America in my presentation. However my reasons were well-grounded. Back then it was obvious that finance and economy would be the main destructive power for the USA. The dollar was not secured by anything. The external debt of the country was growing like an avalanche in spite of the fact that it was non-existent at the beginning of the 1980s. In 1998, when I was making my forecast, it had reached 2 trillion dollars. Today it’s more than 11 trillion. This is a pyramid which is bound to collapse.

Q: Will the entire American economy collapse?

A: It is collapsing now. Three out of the five largest and oldest banks on Wall Street ceased to exist because of the financial crisis; and the other two are on the verge of surviving. Their losses are the largest in history. Now we are talking about replacing the regulation system in the world: America will no longer be the world regulator.

Q: Which country will replace it?

A: Two countries are making a claim for this role: China with its large reserves, and Russia as a country which could play the role of a regulator on the Eurasian territory. A rather remarkable event took place at the G20 summit which has just taken place in Washington. Participants put forward the new architectonics of the international affairs where a key role would belong to the International Monetary Fund. But the International Monetary Fund needs funds. Thus the participants addressed China and Japan with a request to provide money. The gold reserves of China come to more than 2 trillion dollars. It is the largest creditor to the USA. Now it will definitely affect the policy of the fund. By the way, it is not accidental that Mr. Hu Jintao met two leaders at the summit: the Russian President and the leader of the UK. There are plans to hold the spring G20 meeting in England. And the meeting with Russia as a country which is putting forward the basic principles of reconstructing the world financial system also clearly fits the vision of the Chinese reformation process.

“Skeleton which keeps the USA together is fragile”

Q: We are clear about the world leaders. But let’s go back to the USA. What makes you believe in the possible division of the country?

A: There are a number of reasons. First, the financial problems of the USA will increase. Millions of citizens have already lost their savings. Prices and unemployment keep growing. General Motors and Ford are on the verge of collapse which means that entire towns will end up unemployed. The governors are now harshly demanding money from the federal center. Complaints are growing. They’ve been restrained so far by the presidential election and by hope that Obama could perform a miracle. However, by spring it will become clear that a miracle will not happen.

The second factor is the vulnerability of the political mechanism in the USA. There is no uniform legislation on the territory of the country. There aren’t even general uniform traffic rules. The skeleton which keeps the USA together is fragile. Even the armed forces in Iraq are represented by the non-citizens of the United States to a large extent. They fight for the promise of American citizenship. Thus the army, as a melting pot has stopped fulfilling a consolidating function for the American state. And finally, the split of the elite has made itself especially clear under the conditions of the crisis.

“Hundred dollar notes may get frozen”

Q: How will the country be divided? Mexico is obviously in the south. What else?

A: There are six parts altogether. The first one is the Pacific Ocean coast of the USA. I can give you an example: 53% of San Francisco’s population is Chinese. The Governor of Washington state was an ethnic Chinese; its capital, Seattle, is called the gate of the Chinese emigration to the USA. It is obvious that the Pacific Ocean coast has been gradually influenced by China. The second part in the south is definitely the Mexicans. In some areas, Spanish has become the official language already. Then comes Texas which has been openly fighting for independence. The Atlantic coast has a totally different ethnos and mentality. It could be split into two parts as well. And we are left with two central depressive areas. May I remind you that five central states where the Indians live had announced their independence. It was perceived as a joke or a kind of a political show. But the fact remains the same. Canada is making a strong influence in the North. By the way, Russia may require returning Alaska, as it had been rented out…

Q: What will happen to the dollar then?

A: In 2006 a secret agreement was made between Canada, Mexico and the USA on preparing to implement the Amero as a new currency unit. This may mean replacement of the dollar. At the same time 100-dollar notes which have flooded the world may just get “frozen”. An excuse may be used, for example, that terrorists have made false notes which need to be checked.

"Confrontation between the clans has become open”

Q: Could you tell us about the division of the elite. Are these the democrats and the republicans?

A: No, that is not right. There are two groups in the US authorities. The first one may be called the globalists, or the Trotskyites. Leon Trotsky had already formulated their idea in the past: it’s not Russia that we need, but a world revolution. Soviet Russia was viewed by them as a base for control over the world. The second group is the statists which want prosperity for their country. Representatives of these two clans are present in both Democratic and Republican Parties. Take voting for the anti-crisis plan of Paulson, which was suggested by the Republican administration, for example. It was voted down in the Congress by the Republicans first of all.

Q: Who is in charge of the clans?

A: The key persons of the globalists are Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Vice President Dick Cheney. The key persons of the statists are Robert Gates, Defense Secretary; Michael Hayden, CIA Director; and Admiral Mike McConnell, director of national intelligence. Globalists are mainly the financial elite, and statists are the armed forces, special services and military and industrial complex. Recently the confrontation between these two clans has become open. In December last year the statists presented a report which completely denied the existence of the nuclear program in Iran. It directly contradicted conclusions made by Condoleezza Rice and Dick Cheney. The second important event took place at the hearings of the US Congress concerning the 5-day war in the Caucasus. The globalists represented by Condoleezza Rice insisted that Russia had started the war and that it would be punished for it. Georgia was the project of Condoleezza. And representatives of the intelligence community presented a diametrically opposite statement: that Georgia had started the war. We see an open confrontation between very outstanding political figures.

Q: And who’s Obama’s company?

A: The statists with Gates in charge were the key players who had enabled Obama to win. They are demanding that he change the general line in return. In this light, a very interesting factor is that Gates the Republican is viewed as the most important candidate as to whether he remains the US Defense Secretary or becomes the Secretary of State. This is the influence of the statists on the President. By the way, the first session which Obama held was with the American intelligence community.

“We have to cut the ropes tying us to Titanic.”

Q: What does the victory of the statists mean for Russia?

A: It’s a rather good chance for us, as they acted on our side in the conflict in the Caucasus. According to President Medvedev’s visit to the USA we see that he was not subject to any obstruction in relation to the events in the Caucasus. The atmosphere in Washington was rather calm and friendly.

Q: What should Russia do in order to avoid shocks in relation to a possible economic collapse of the United States?

A: It should develop the rouble as the regional currency. It should form an efficient petroleum exchange which would sell oil for roubles. Several days ago an agreement was signed between Russia and Belarus on transferring payments for oil and gas to roubles. This is the beginning of establishing the ruble as the regional currency as well. We’ve been receiving our currency from Kazakhstan and Belarus for electricity already. Now our task is to try to make as many rouble contracts as possible for the year 2009 before the end of this year. In this case Russia will be able to escape the growing global crisis. We have to cut the ropes tying us to the financial “Titanic” which, in my opinion, will drown in the nearest future.

Courtesy of Izvestia daily.
Translated by RT.

[vector7]

Russian scholar says US will collapse _ next year

By MIKE ECKEL – 7 hours ago

MOSCOW (AP) — If you're inclined to believe Igor Panarin, and the Kremlin wouldn't mind if you did, then President Barack Obama will order martial law this year, the U.S. will split into six rump-states before 2011, and Russia and China will become the backbones of a new world order.

Panarin might be easy to ignore but for the fact that he is a dean at the Foreign Ministry's school for future diplomats and a regular on Russia's state-guided TV channels. And his predictions fit into the anti-American story line of the Kremlin leadership.

"There is a high probability that the collapse of the United States will occur by 2010," Panarin told dozens of students, professors and diplomats Tuesday at the Diplomatic Academy — a lecture the ministry pointedly invited The Associated Press and other foreign media to attend.

The prediction from Panarin, a former spokesman for Russia's Federal Space Agency and reportedly an ex-KGB analyst, meshes with the negative view of the U.S. that has been flowing from the Kremlin in recent years, in particular from Vladimir Putin.

Putin, the former president who is now prime minister, has likened the United States to Nazi Germany's Third Reich and blames Washington for the global financial crisis that has pounded the Russian economy.

Panarin didn't give many specifics on what underlies his analysis, mostly citing newspapers, magazines and other open sources.

He also noted he had been predicting the demise of the world's wealthiest country for more than a decade now.

But he said the recent economic turmoil in the U.S. and other "social and cultural phenomena" led him to nail down a specific timeframe for "The End" — when the United States will break up into six autonomous regions and Alaska will revert to Russian control.

Panarin argued that Americans are in moral decline, saying their great psychological stress is evident from school shootings, the size of the prison population and the number of gay men.

Turning to economic woes, he cited the slide in major stock indexes, the decline in U.S. gross domestic product and Washington's bailout of banking giant Citigroup as evidence that American dominance of global markets has collapsed.

"I was there recently and things are far from good," he said. "What's happened is the collapse of the American dream."

Panarin insisted he didn't wish for a U.S. collapse, but he predicted Russia and China would emerge from the economic turmoil stronger and said the two nations should work together, even to create a new currency to replace the U.S. dollar.

Asked for comment on how the Foreign Ministry views Panarin's theories, a spokesman said all questions had to be submitted in writing and no answers were likely before Wednesday.

It wasn't clear how persuasive the 20-minute lecture was. One instructor asked Panarin whether his predictions more accurately describe Russia, which is undergoing its worst economic crisis in a decade as well as a demographic collapse that has led some scholars to predict the country's demise.

Panarin dismissed that idea: "The collapse of Russia will not occur."

But Alexei Malashenko, a scholar-in-residence at the Carnegie Moscow Center who did not attend the lecture, sided with the skeptical instructor, saying Russia is the country that is on the verge of disintegration.

"I can't imagine at all how the United States could ever fall apart," Malashenko told the AP.

Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

[vector7]

Chaos, Confusion, and Civil War

by J. R. Nyquist

Weekly Column Published: 03.13.2009

Print O n 29 December 2008 the Wall Street Journal ran a piece about Igor Panarin, dean of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s diplomatic academy.



A Former KGB officer, Panarin made a splash by predicting that America will probably come under martial law by the end of 2009, and may fracture into several states by 2011. When this happens, says Panarin, Russia and China will become the mainstays of a new global order.

Americans are naturally skeptical of Panarin’s analysis. But his conclusions are quite pedestrian. If North America sank beneath the ocean like the fabled continent of Atlantis, the world would belong to Russia and China. No significant obstacle would stand in their way.

The proof of this is found in the history of all empires, in the character of the leaders in Beijing and Moscow, and in the appalling weakness of Europe and Japan. Unthinking people are sometimes heard to say that Russia and China aren’t expansionist powers. It is laughable to think this, because you don’t become the largest country or the most populous unless you’ve conquered a considerable territory inhabited by many millions of people.

Without the United States in the picture, Russia and China would be the dominant powers. They would dictate terms to the world. No country or group of countries could possibly stand against them. This is because Russia and China possess thousands of nuclear weapons. The small nuclear arsenals of France, Britain, Israel and India do not pose a serious threat to large countries with large arsenals like Russia and China. Psychologically speaking, these small powers are helpless against great powers.

If Panarin is right about the breakup of the United States, then he is also right about the coming of a new global order under Moscow and Beijing. But is he right about the breakup of the United States? It was an anonymous Russian diplomat quoted in Pravda last July, who first intimated that the United States was about to suffer a profound crisis – a crisis of existence.

How did the Russian diplomat know that the United States was headed for a financial crash? He knew because Russia has the best information service in the world, formerly known as the KGB. Russian spies have penetrated everywhere, and provide high quality information to people like Panarin – who is a “former” KGB analyst.

The Russian intelligence services have long tracked economic, financial and demographic changes in the United States. Russian analysts know that certain trends lead to political crisis. Such trends include ethnic balkanization, an ideological split in the ruling class, rising indebtedness, economic collapse, and declining moral standards. A country like the United States is ripe for civil war. If this should happen, foreign powers would intervene and the country would be split along geographical lines: California and the West would fall under Chinese control, Texas and the south would go to Mexico, and Russia would lay claim to Alaska. “It would be reasonable for Russia to lay claim to Alaska,” says Panarin. “It was part of the Russian empire for a long time.”

Panarin is saying, basically, that the present economic crisis signals a political crisis. The divisions within American society, and the narcissistic pathologies of consumer society, will cause an implosion. The people of America will turn against one another. The protective nuclear umbrella provided by the United States will cease to function. Europe and Asia will fall to Russia and China. From that point forward, the outcome of every political conflict on the planet will be determined in Moscow or Beijing. This would include, of course, the conflict within America itself.

Could America turn against itself in a matter of months? There are already inklings of a fissure. Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va) wrote a letter to President Barack Obama warning the administration to desist from bypassing the Senate’s authority over Executive Branch appointments. According to Senator Byrd, the new administration is creating new agencies out of the White House that “can threaten the Constitutional system of checks and balances.” In effect, Byrd explained, the White House is taking “direction and control of programmatic areas that are the statutory responsibility of Senate-confirmed officials.”

The new administration sees the economic crisis as an opportunity to create a new bureaucracy, less accountable and more powerful than ever.

This new bureaucracy is preparing to take charge in the areas of health care reform, urban affairs, energy policy and the fight against climate change. Each new government office signifies a massive claim against the well-being of every American. The fight against global climate change will put the country in an environmental stranglehold. Health care reform signifies the nationalization of 14 percent of the U.S. economy. And what is meant by “urban affairs”? It is a wealth transference program bound to demoralize the suburbs. Administration energy policy promises expensive, unworkable energy alternatives while ignoring enormous oil deposits recently discovered under Montana and the Dakotas.

The Obama administration is headed for failure on every front. The economic healing process is being interfered with by a government that doesn’t know what it’s doing. The country is bound to suffer grievously, and lose patience. We already catch a glimpse of the future from Alan Keyes, who recently said that the country was headed for “chaos, confusion and civil war.” According to Keyes, “Obama is a radical communist, and I think it is becoming clear. That is what I told people in Illinois and now everybody realizes it’s true. He is going to destroy this country, and we are either going to stop him or the United States of America is going to cease to exist.”

The sentiments expressed by Mr. Keyes are those attending civil war. But matters have already taken a turn for the worse. There is a rumor in Washington that is making the rounds. It is alleged that the president has fended off dozens of law suits regarding his citizenship status, without producing a birth certificate to prove that he is a natural born citizen. In fact, Keyes will not acknowledge that Obama is actually the president.

According to Keyes, “[Obama] has refused to provide proof that he is in fact a natural born citizen, and his Kenyan relations say he was born in Nairobi at a time when his mother was too young to transmit U.S. citizenship.”

The lines are being drawn, and we are headed for national tragedy. Panarin’s analysis isn’t farfetched at all. The country needs to wake up. Danger approaches, and it is coming on fast.

[vector7]

USA Sick and Ready to Collapse for Three Reasons

8.09.2009 Source: Pravda.Ru The map of the collapse of the United States in 2010, made by Russian scientist of politics Igor Panarin, has received millions of views in the United States over one day only. The Wall Street Journal published the map on its front page at the end of 2008.

Alaska is pictured on the map as a part of Russia. Hawaii were shown as a territory of Japan, whereas four new states were pictured on the territory of the USA: the Californian Republic, the Central North American Republic, the Texas Republic and the Atlantic America, which included the traditional states.

In spite of the fact that the map was published many months ago, it attracted public attention only a while ago. Will the United States break up like the USSR did?

Anatoly Vasserman, a political advisor, believes that Igor Panarin created the map on the base of several important arguments.

First and foremost, the US state debt has skyrocketed from $2 trillion to $11 trillion within a decade. The USA will never be able to pay off the debt.

Secondly, the political structure of the nation is vulnerable. There is neither universal legislation in the country, nor common traffic rules. The US Army does not execute its major function – defense – anymore since many foreign nationals prefer to serve in the army to obtain the US citizenship.

Thirdly, the split of elites, which was especially visible under the conditions of the crisis.

The problems, which Panarin named, are absolutely real. However, there is only one thing that is real: America will not be able to cope with these problems.

The USA is sick, but the illness began a long time ago and had a number of exacerbations. However, none of those illnesses has ever resulted in the collapse of the nation. The USA survived several immigration and economic crises. There was the split of elites before – it once resulted in the civil war between the North and the South.

Winston Churchill once said that Americans will find a way out of a difficult situation only after they try all other ways. It goes without saying that the map of the United States will remain unchanged in 2010. Igor Panarin made his map in 1998, although it did not produce any attention on either the Russians or the Americans.

Any American knows that the economy is based on a large market. The larger the market can be, the faster the nation can overcome economic difficulties. America has never suffered from any crisis after WWII, that is why they perceive the current crisis so painfully. However, the interest, which so many Americans have shown to the research of the Russian professor, proves they treat the imminent threat seriously.

The USA will not take a risk of triggering a global war. If it does, the nation will suffer from much greater damage than it did during WWII.

There were no intercontinental ballistic missiles 70 years ago. However, the nation can provoke smaller, local wars, for example a conflict between China and India. If it happens, the USA will not try to have Russia involved in any regional conflict because Russia, for the time being, is the only state that is technically capable of destroying America.

[vector7]

Chavez Predicts The End Of America At Moscow University

Written by Toby Westerman

Thursday, 17 September 2009 06:15

International News Analysis Today Venezuela's Marxist president-dictator Hugo Chavez addressed an influential university in Moscow stating that America's influence in the world is"dying," and will be replaced in "the next decades" by a "multi-polar" world in which Russia plays a leading role. Chavez wants to "accelerate" the process, a sentiment which receives support from the Moscow elite. During his Sept. 9-10 2009 visit,Chavez received an enthusiastic reception from about 1,000 students at Moscow's Patrice Lumumba Peoples Friendship University, an institution founded in 1960 as a KGB training ground for communist revolutionaries and pro-Soviet activists. The university's namesake was a prime minister of the Republic of the Congo (now the Democratic Republic of the Congo) who attempted to bring his nation into an alliance with the Soviet Union. Lumumba was executed by anti-communist forces. Today's students at Lumumba U. appeared to continue the school's Marxist traditions as they gave their approval to Chavez's two-plus hour denunciation of the United States as a center of terrorism, while praising Bolshevik revolutionary leader and mass murderer, Vladimir Lenin, and Fidel Castro, the founder of the Cuban gulag. Chavez's university speech was in stark contrast to his previous visits which tended to be low-key in tone and reduced the public exposure of the Venezuelan dictator's fiery rhetoric. The growing authoritarianism in Russia and Moscow's increasing militarism receives Chavez support. The burgeoning power of Russia will be an important element in the new world which Chavez believes is being born, as the power and influence of the United States ends. In a statement directed to Russian President Vladimir Putin, Chavez said that at their initial meeting in 2001, "we were in the old world" - when the U.S. was strong, in contrast to the present situation, in which "another world has arose" as the U.S. declines. Chavez demonstrated his commitment to world revolution as he declared to Putin, " we need to accelerate this step." Both Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and President Dmitry Medvedev received praise from Chavez for "getting Russia off its knees," and establishing Russia as a "superpower" again. Chavez is putting his revolutionary words into practice. Among the agreements reached between the Chavez regime and Russia was military-technology pact. The specific provisions are not known, but advanced tanks, missiles, possibly submarines, are reported to included. Russia is providing two plus billion dollars in credits to assist Chavez in his arms acquisition. In addition to conventional weapons, Russia has expressed its willingness to assist Chavez in his nuclear ambitions. Chavez is in contact with the Islamic Republic of Iran seeking nuclear technology, which has its origins in Russia, and build what he calls a "nuclear city." The kind of world Chavez and the Russian elite are planning for humanity is seen in the revolutionary tradition mentioned in the address to Lumumba U. Putin embodies that tradition. Putin is an "ex"-KGB spymaster who sees himself as a "Chekist," part of the tradition of spies and secrete police personnel which extends back to Lenin's protégée in murder, Felix Dzerzhinsky, who started the Bolshevik internal spy service, originally known as the "Cheka." The term comes from the Russian abbreviation for the Bolshevik secret police organization, the "All-Russia Extraordinary Commission to Combat Counter-revolution and Sabotage." At Lenin's direction, the director of the Cheka, Felix Dzerzhinsky, set a bloody precedent for communist oppression by killing millions and imprisoning millions more. Stalin would merely accelerate the mayhem. The midnight visit by the secret police, censorship, fraudulent "elections," and the control of all possible sources of opposition are all necessary elements in any Marxist revolutionary society - from Lenin to Chavez. This is the governmental system which Chavez wants to see dominant, and this is the system that Moscow and Chavez are fostering in Latin America. Our leaders must understand that we are the targets of a neo-communist offensive. Chavez and company are not hiding what they are doing, we are merely ignoring this threat - to our peril and that of our children, and their children.

[vector7]

U.S. To Break Up Soon?
by Chuck Baldwin
September 29, 2009

According to Macedonian Radio and Television On-line (MRT), a Russian professor predicts the United States will fall apart in July 2010. MRT reports, "'Mr. Obama is similar to the last Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. Gorbachev was also making great promises for the Soviet Union, but the situation was only getting worse,' he said. By next summer, according to Professor Panarin, the US will disintegrate into six blocs--and everyone will get their piece. 'The probability that the United States of America fall apart in July 2010 is more than 50 percent,' said Igor Panarin, Professor at Moscow's Diplomatic Academy within the Russian Federation's Ministry of Foreign Affairs."
MRT went on to report, "Panarin came up with his grim forecast while analyzing the parallels between the Soviet Union in its final days and the current situation in the United States. 'American dream ballooned seven times in 11 years. During Gorbachev era, the Soviet dream ballooned five times.' Americans hope [President] Barack Obama 'can work miracles,' he wrote. 'But when spring comes, it will be clear that there are no miracles.'"

See the MRT report at
http://tinyurl.com/mrt-report

The Drudge Report confirmed the MRT report and added, "Professor Igor Panarin said in an interview with the respected daily IZVESTIA . . . 'The dollar is not secured by anything. The country's foreign debt has grown like an avalanche, even though in the early 1980s there was no debt. By 1998, when I first made my prediction, it had exceeded $2 trillion. Now it is more than 11 trillion. This is a pyramid that can only collapse.'"

At least some of what Panarin said back in the fall of 2008 either has taken place or is in the process of taking place. Drudge reported, "When asked when the U.S. economy would collapse, Panarin said: 'It is already collapsing. Due to the financial crisis, three of the largest and oldest five banks on Wall Street have already ceased to exist, and two are barely surviving. Their losses are the biggest in history. Now what we will see is a change in the regulatory system on a global financial scale: America will no longer be the world's financial regulator.'"

Drudge continued reporting Panarin as saying that "the U.S. will break up into six parts-- the Pacific coast, with its growing Chinese population; the South, with its Hispanics; Texas, where independence movements are on the rise; the Atlantic coast, with its distinct and separate mentality; five of the poorer central states with their large Native American populations; and the northern states, where the influence from Canada is strong."

Panarin further suggested that Russia might even "claim Alaska."
See an archived version of Drudge's report at
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/read..._20090107.html

Reporting on the same story, The Wall Street Journal said, "Prof. Panarin, 50 years old, is not a fringe figure. A former KGB analyst, he is dean of the Russian Foreign Ministry's academy for future diplomats. He is invited to Kremlin receptions, lectures students, publishes books, and appears in the media as an expert on U.S.-Russian relations."

The WSJ goes on to say that Panarin believes that "mass immigration, economic decline, and moral degradation will trigger a civil war next fall and the collapse of the dollar."

See The Wall Street Journal report at
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123051100709638419.html
This is not the first time that Comrade Panarin has made such a prediction. Joseph Farah, editor of World Net Daily, noted in December of 2008 that Panarin has been making similar projections for the past ten years. In a column regarding Panarin's predictions, Farah wrote, "Until recently, no one took him very seriously. And then came the economic calamity that has rocked Americans and the rest of the world, too. Now, Panarin's predictions of an end of the United States, due to economic and moral collapse, is being taken seriously by many."

Read Farah's column at
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=84884
So, will the United States break up in 2010? Or 2011? Or 2012? Or anytime in the near future, for that matter? If history is any teacher, the chances would seem good that Panarin's predictions may be closer to reality than anyone would like to admit.

A historian and linguist from South Africa recently wrote me a fascinating letter, in which he chronicled the major world empires of history, dating the time of their rise and fall. Here is what his calculations look like:
Assyria (859-612 B.C.): a 247-year reign.

Persia (538-330 B.C.): a 208-year reign.
Greece (331-100 B.C.): a 231-year reign.
The Roman Republic (260-27 B.C.): a 233-year reign.
The Roman Empire (27 B.C.-180 A.D.): a 207-year reign.
The Arab Empire (634-880 A.D.): a 246-year reign.
The Mameluke Empire (1250-1517 A.D.): a 267-year reign.
The Ottoman Empire (1320-1570 A.D.): a 250-year reign.
Spain (1500-1750 A.D.): a 250-year reign.
Romanov Russia (1682-1916 A.D.): a 234-year reign.
Great Britain (1700-1950 A.D.): a 250-year reign.
The USA (1790-2009 A.D.): 219 years and counting.

My honorable historian-friend calculates America's reign using its post-Revolutionary War years. He notes that America's reign is currently at 219 years. He further notes that the average duration of every world superpower listed above is a little over 238 years.

One does not need to be a master mathematician or possess a Ph.D. to realize that America is fast approaching the mark in which every major world power in history has either collapsed or, at a minimum, lost its world leadership and power.

My friend also reminded me of his homeland's (South Africa's) demise.

He told me that he noticed the handwriting on the wall in time to relocate his family to a more peaceful and stable European country.

Many of his friends and countrymen were not so fortunate, however, and thousands were killed and their properties confiscated. He then warned me, "The period of Grace is closing, in what is your homeland."

In addition, serious students of Holy Writ are also struck with the similarities between societal conditions in America and those of Old Testament Israel (as well as with Gentile nations) at those times of divine judgment and retribution. As someone trenchantly said, "If God spares the United States, He will have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah."

Will the Russian analyst's prophecies come true in 2010? Probably not. Does that mean that America is impervious to some sort of national demise? Not at all. Is America already in serious trouble? You bet. Could there be some sort of break-up within the United States in the near future? In my opinion, that is a very realistic probability. If this happens, will freedom suffer? Almost certainly. Will those with tyrannical tendencies use the opportunity of any national disaster to try and enslave us? They already do. I personally do not believe that there is any "If" to the question. The only questions are, "When?" and "To what degree?"

And, of course, there is another question: "When the break-up comes, how many Americans understand the principles of liberty enough, and are personally prepared enough, and are willing enough to resist whatever power it may be that seeks to place us under the thumb of oppression and fight for the same protections and vanguards of liberty that first established this land?" Obviously, the answer to that question is yet to be determined, isn't it?

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php

© Chuck Baldwin
This column is archived as http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20090929.html

[American Patriot]

If Panarin is right about the breakup of the United States, then he is also right about the coming of a new global order under Moscow and Beijing. But is he right about the breakup of the United States? It was an anonymous Russian diplomat quoted in Pravda last July, who first intimated that the United States was about to suffer a profound crisis – a crisis of existence.

Well? Still waiting.

He's not right.

Venezuela's Marxist president-dictator Hugo Chavez addressed an influential university in Moscow stating that America's influence in the world is"dying," and will be replaced in "the next decades" by a "multi-polar" world in which Russia plays a leading role.

Chavez wants to "accelerate" the process, a sentiment which receives support from the Moscow elite.

Ummm no, not gonna happen.

Look, if somes States had "issues" with other States, this might be true.

The PROBLEM in the US has nothing to do with disagreements between states, it has to do with the people have a disagreement with the GOVERNMENT.

You see, Chavez and Panarin, you really do NOT grasp the gravity of the situation.

The Constitution WILL NOT be thrown out. The US will not "fall apart" in that respect. We MIGHT replace some of the dumb asses in DC, but the country will indeed hang together, as Franklin and Jefferson said at various time, so that we will not hand separately.