Trump Cannot Improve Relations With Russia When Trump’s Government and the US Media Oppose Improved Relations

When President Trump’s own appointees publicly disrespect and contradict him, does the president of the United States have any power whatsoever? And, why has he not yet simply said, “You’re fired!”? It would appear the deep state completely controls him, to the detriment of the entire world.

By Paul Craig Roberts

President Trump Has Been Contradicted by His Own Government, Which Has Lined Up Against Him in Favor of Hillary Clinton, the Democratic National Committee, and the Russophobic Presstitute Media that serves the military/security complex and the neoconservatives.

I am afraid that The Saker and Finian Cunningham are correct. Nothing can come of Trump’s meeting with Putin, because, as Cunningham puts it: “Trump doesn’t have freedom or real power. The real power brokers in the U.S. will ensure that the Russophobia campaign continues, with more spurious allegations of Moscow interfering to subvert Western democracies. Trump will continue to live under a cloud of media-driven suspicions. And thus the agenda of regime change against Syria and confrontation with Russia will also continue. Trump’s personal opinions on these matters and towards Vladimir Putin are negligible—indeed dispensable by the deep powers-that-be.”

Cunningham points out that instead of lauding the meeting as the beginning of the process to defuse the high tensions between the two major nuclear powers, the U.S. media denounced Trump for being civil to Putin in the meeting.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

What is missing from the media in the entirety of the Western world and perhaps also in Russia is the awareness that the dangerous tensions are orchestrated not only by Hillary and the Democratic National Committee, the neoconservatives, the U.S. military/security complex, and the presstitutes, but also by President Trump’s own appointees.

Trump’s own ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, and Trump’s own Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, sound exactly like Hillary Clinton, the Democratic National Committee, the neoconservatives, The Washington Post, The New York Times, CNN, and the rest of the totally discredited presstitute media that is committed to raising tensions between the U.S. and Russia to the point of nuclear war.

On the same day that President Donald Trump said, “It is time to move forward in working constructively with Russia,” and the day after he said, “I had a tremendous meeting yesterday with President Putin,” the ignorant, stupid Nikki Haley, who Trump appointed as U.S. UN Ambassador, publicly contradicted her president, forcefully stating: “We can’t trust Russia and we won’t ever trust Russia.”

The ignorant, stupid Haley is still in office, a perfect demonstration of Trump’s powerlessness.

The ignorant, stupid Haley has gone far beyond Obama’s crazed UN Ambassador, neocon Samantha Power, in doing everything in her power to ruin the prospect of normal relations between the two major nuclear powers. Why does Nikki Haley work in favor of a confrontation between nuclear powers that would destroy all life on Earth? What is wrong with Nikki Haley? Is she demented? Has she lost her mind, assuming she ever had one?

How can President Trump normalize relations with Russia when every one of his appointees wants to worsen the relations to the point of nuclear war?

Gideon Elite book cover

How is President Trump going to improve relations with Russia when President Trump stands powerless in the face of his dressing down by his UN Ambassador? Clearly, Trump is powerless, a mere cipher.

Joining Nikki Haley was Trump’s Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson. Tillerson, allegedly a friend of Russia, is also working overtime to worsen relations between the two nuclear powers by publicly contradicting the president of the United States, thereby making it clear that Trump is barely even a cipher. Tillerson, a disgrace, said that Putin’s refusal to admit that Putin elected Trump by interfering in the U.S. election “stands as an obstacle to our ability to improve the relationship between the U.S. and Russia and it needs to be addressed in terms of how we assure the American people that interference into our elections will not occur by Russia or anyone else.”

Trump’s incompetence is illustrated by his appointments. There is no one in “his” government that supports him. Every one of them works to undermine him. And he sits there and Twitters.

So, what is President Putin’s belief that an understanding can now be worked out with Washington worth? Not a plugged nickel. Trump has zero authority over “his” government. He can be contradicted at will by his own appointees. The president of the United States is a joke. You can find him on Twitter, but nowhere else, not in the Oval Office making foreign or military policy. The president Twitters and thinks that is policy.

The Trump administration was destroyed when the weak Donald Trump allowed the neoconservatives to remove his National Security Advisor, General Flynn. Trump has never recovered. “His” administration is staffed with violent Russophobes. Wars can be the only outcome.

We know two things about the alleged Russian interference in the Trump/Hillary presidential election. One is that John Brennan, Obama’s CIA director, and Comey, Obama’s FBI director, implied repeatedly that Trump was elected by Russian interference in the election. The other is that the charge is false. Neither the CIA nor the FBI have provided any evidence whatsoever that any such interference occurred. Indeed, months into the case, the special prosecutor, the former FBI director, can produce no evidence. The whole thing is a sham, but it is ongoing. There will be no end to it, as it is designed to undermine President Trump with the people who elected him. The message is: “Trump is not for America. Trump is for Russia.”

This is astounding! The NSA has intercepts of all transmitted data. If Russia interfered in the U.S. presidential election the evidence would be obvious and immediately available.

Despite the obvious lies told by Brennan and Comey, The New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC, and the rest of the scum, no one has been arrested and put on trial for their efforts to overthrow the elected president of the United States. This proves beyond all doubt that the president of the United States is a non-entity, a figurehead incapable of action independently of the Deep State that controls him.

If Vladimir Putin really believes from his meeting with Trump that all of the orchestrated false charges against Russia can now be removed and normal relations restored, Putin is in la-la land. Nikki Haley says that the U.S. will NEVER trust Russia. If Putin trusts Washington, Russia will be destroyed—and the rest of the world with Russia.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury under President Ronald Reagan and was associate editor and columnist at The Wall Street Journal. He has been a professor of economics in six universities, and is the author of numerous books available at the American Free Press bookstore.




We Have the Freedom to Starve

“Anti-Semitic” and “racist” epithets are trotted out any time “establishment truth” is challenged or Israeli policies are criticized, in an effort to create in the reader a knee-jerk emotional aversion to a writer or publication. But it’s valuable to pause and ask, first, what does “anti-Semitic” even mean? Furthermore, does challenging the politics or culture of a particular group—such as a nation’s government—necessarily equate with “racism”? 

By Kevin Barrett

Wells Fargo is one of America’s sleaziest and most disreputable big banks. Their deceptive credit-card pitches contain small-print clauses allowing them to suddenly jack up their “introductory rates” and hit you with usurious 30%-plus interest. So it shouldn’t really surprise anyone that Wells Fargo canceled AFP’s credit-card processing account because some billionaire banker somewhere doesn’t like some of the books AFP sells. And it is shocking—but hardly surprising—to learn that the banking industry is trying to put AFP out of business by adding it to a credit-card-processing blacklist.

A spokesman for the blacklisters said the reason for this financial war is that AFP sells “racist and anti-Semitic books,” namely those by Michael Collins Piper. Naturally, he hasn’t even read any of Piper’s books. If he had, he would know that there was never a single racist bone in Piper’s body.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

Let’s define our terms here. “Racist and anti-Semitic” is a redundant expression. “Anti-Semitism” is a form of racism holding that Jews are biologically inferior because they are a “Semitic” people related to Arabs. Actually, neither Jews nor Arabs are their own race. Judaism is a religion professed by people from many races and cultures, while “Arabs” are simply the many different kinds of people, ranging from Sudanese blacks to blond-haired, blue-eyed Syrians and Lebanese, who happen to speak Arabic.

The pseudo-scientific racist theory known as “anti-Semitism” was popular in the 19th and early 20th centuries, but today, it is Arabs, not Jews, who are the main victims of this kind of racism. Ironically, the country with the worst anti-Semitic (anti-Arab) racism is the state of Israel.

As for Piper’s books, they contain no racial hatred or bigotry of any kind. They are critical of certain aspects of Jewish culture, specifically the ruthless tribalism that prevails among some Jewish-Zionist elites, especially those that work with the criminal underworld. That is cultural critique, not racism.

I am highly critical of the segment of the Arab-Muslim political elite that runs “Saudi” Arabia. That does not make me an anti-Arab or anti-Muslim bigot.

Freedom means nothing if we are not free to critique the culture and politics of the various power elites that rule our world. Piper saw the rising power of Jewish-Zionist elites in the U.S. and discussed the issue reasonably and rationally—if sometimes passionately—in an evidence-based fashion without any reference to or interest in “race.” His investigations into such issues as the JFK assassination and 9/11 were ahead of their time.

It is a national scandal, and a symptom of our national decline, that the whole banking establishment can wage an economic war aimed at the suppression of Piper’s books—without a peep of protest from the ACLU and the supposedly free speech-supporting mainstream media.

Liberty Stickers

The economic assault on AFP is just the latest salvo in what is becoming an all-out Zionist war on free speech. Professor William Robinson’s book We Will Not Be Silenced: The Academic Repression of Israel’s Critics covers several Zionist attempts to quash academic freedom. Now they are targeting booksellers, not just academics.

When I was driven from the academy for questioning 9/11, I assumed I would be free to sell books and articles and solicit donations to support my independent scholarship and radio broadcasts. How could such activities ever be quashed? After all, we still have the First Amendment, right?

Unfortunately, the Constitution only limits the power of government, not the corporate sector. As private monopolies gobble up entire industries, grabbing as much power as governments but without any of the transparency or responsibilities, they have begun to insist that we toe their ideological line on pain of expulsion from the economy. A few months ago, Amazon banned hundreds of history books. At about the same time, my main fundraising platform and database (GoFundMe) closed my account and stole more than $1,000. Various Facebook accounts, including the Nation of Islam’s, have been frozen or shut down for political reasons. Now AFP is being blacklisted.

To buy and sell information, we will soon be microchipped with a “Mark of the Beast” guaranteeing that our views are inoffensive to the powers-that-be. Violators will be banned from economic transactions. They will still be free—free to starve.

Such evil acts of political censorship are exactly what we should expect from the too-big-to-fail financial pharaohs who seized the reins of power in America in the Federal Reserve coup d’état of 1913.

The lesson is clear: If we want to preserve what’s left of freedom in America, we need to overthrow the banksters in a Second American Revolution. 􀀀

Kevin Barrett, Ph.D., is an Arabist-Islamologist scholar and one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror. From 1991 through 2006, Dr. Barrett taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin. In 2006, however, he was attacked by Republican state legislators who called for him to be fired from his job at the University of Wisconsin-Madison due to his political opinions. Since 2007, Dr. Barrett has been informally blacklisted from teaching in American colleges and universities. He currently works as a nonprofit organizer, public speaker, author, and talk radio host. He lives in rural western Wisconsin.




Deception Inside Deception: The Alleged Sarin Gas Attack

AMERICAN FREE PRESS has repeatedly questioned the allegations that the Syrian government and military used chemical weapon on their own people. Now, respected journalist Seymour Hersh confirms this with a new report detailing his extensive interviews with U.S. officials. The problem for Hersh, though is that his account seems odd when one considers the military-industrial complex’s efforts to oust Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad. Could Hersh have fallen victim to a planned disinformation campaign?

By Paul Craig Roberts

Seymour Hersh, America’s most famous investigative reporter, has become persona non grata in the American Propaganda Ministry that poses as a news media but only serves to protect the U.S. government’s war lies. Among his many triumphs, Hersh exposed the American My Lai massacre in Vietnam and the Abu Ghraib torture prison run by the Americans in Iraq. Today his investigative reports have to be published in the London Review of Books or in the German media.

From Hersh’s latest investigative report, we learn that President Trump makes war decisions by watching staged propaganda on TV. The White Helmets, a propaganda organization for jihadists and the “Syrian opposition,” found a gullible reception from the Western media for photographs and videos of alleged victims of a Syrian Army sarin gas attack on civilians in Khan Sheikhoun. Trump saw the photos on TV and, despite being assured by U.S. intelligence that there was no Syrian sarin gas attack, ordered the U.S. military to strike a Syrian base with Tomahawk missiles. Under international law this strike was a war crime, and it was the first direct aggression against Syria by the U.S., which previously committed aggression via proxies called “the Syrian opposition.”

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

Reporting on his sources, Hersh writes: “In a series of interviews, I learned of the total disconnect between the president and many of his military advisers and intelligence officials, as well as officers on the ground in the region who had an entirely different understanding of the nature of Syria’s attack on Khan Sheikhoun. I was provided with evidence of that disconnect, in the form of transcripts of real-time communications, immediately following the Syrian attack on April 4.”

The belief that sarin gas was involved in the attack comes from what appears to be a gas cloud. Hersh was informed by U.S. military experts that sarin is odorless and invisible and makes no cloud. What appears to have happened is that the explosion from the air attack on ISIS caused a series of secondary explosions that produced a toxic cloud formed by fertilizers and chlorine disinfectants that were stored in the building that was hit.

U.S. officials spoke with Hersh, because they are disturbed that Trump based a war decision on TV propaganda and refused to listen to the detailed counter-assessments of his intelligence and military services. A national security source told Hersh: “Everyone close to him knows his proclivity for acting precipitously when he does not know the facts. He doesn’t read anything and has no real historical knowledge. He wants verbal briefings and photographs. He’s a risk-taker. He can accept the consequences of a bad decision in the business world; he will just lose money. But in our world, lives will be lost and there will be long-term damage to our national security if he guesses wrong. He was told we did not have evidence of Syrian involvement and yet Trump says, ‘Do it.’ ”

Concerns about Trump’s purely emotional reaction to TV propaganda persist. Hersh reports that a senior national security adviser told him: “The Salafists and jihadists got everything they wanted out of their hyped-up Syrian nerve gas ploy” (the flare-up of tensions between Syria, Russia and America). The issue is, what if there’s another false-flag sarin attack credited to hated Syria? Trump has upped the ante and painted himself into a corner with his decision to bomb. And do not think these guys are not planning the next faked attack. Trump will have no choice but to bomb again, and harder. He’s incapable of saying he made a mistake.”

Liberty Stickers

As we know, the White House has already released a statement predicting that Assad is preparing another chemical attack, for which, the White House promises, he will “pay a heavy price.” Clearly, a false-flag attack is on the way.

By all means, read Hersh’s report. It reveals a president who makes precipitious decisions likely to cause a war with Russia.

I do not doubt Sy Hersh’s integrity. I accept that he has accurately reported what he was told by U.S. officials. My suspicions about this story do not have to do with Hersh. They have to do with what Hersh was told.

IRS Loses Cases

Hersh’s report puts Trump in a very bad light, and it puts the military/security complex, which we know has been trying to destroy Trump, in a very good light. Moreover, the story strikes me as inconsistent with the subsequent attack on the Syrian fighter-bomber by the U.S. military. If the Tomahawk attack on the Syrian base was unjustified, what justified downing a Syrian war plane? Did Trump order this attack as well? If not, who did? Why?

If national security advisers gave Trump such excellent information about the alleged sarin gas attack, completely disproving any such attack, why was he given such bad advice about shooting down a Syrian war plane, or was it done outside of channels? The effect of the shootdown is to raise the chance of a confrontation with Russia, because Russia’s response apparently has been to declare a no-fly zone over the area of Russian and Syrian operations.

How do we know that what Hersh was told was true? What if Trump was encouraged to order the Tomahawk strike as a way of interjecting the U.S. directly into the conflict? Both the U.S. and Israel have powerful reasons for wanting to overthrow Assad. However, ISIS, sent to do the job, has been defeated by Russia and Syria. Unless Washington can somehow get directly involved, the war is over. 

The story Hersh was given also serves to damn Trump while absolving the intelligence services. Trump takes the hit for injecting the U.S. directly into the conflict.

Hersh’s story reads well, but it easily could be a false story planted on him. I am not saying that the story is false, but unless we learn more, it could be.

What we do know is that the story given to Hersh by national security officials is inconsistent with the June 26 White House announcement that the U.S. has “identified potential preparations for another chemical attack by the Assad regime.” The White House does not have the capability to conduct its own foreign intelligence gathering. The White House is informed by the national security and intelligence agencies.

In the story given to Hersh, these officials are emphatic that not only were chemical weapons removed from Syria, but also that Assad would not use them or be permitted by the Russians to use them even if he had them. Moreover, Hersh reports that he was told that Russia fully informed the U.S. of the Syrian attack on ISIS in advance. The weapon was a guided bomb that Russia had supplied to Syria. Therefore, it could not have been a chemical weapon.

As U.S. national security officials made it clear to Hersh that they do not believe Syria did or would use any chemical weapons, what is the source for the White House’s announcement that preparations for another chemical attack by the Assad regime have been identified?

Who lined up UN ambassador Nikki Haley and the UK Defense Minister Michael Fallon to be ready with statements in support of the White House announcement? Haley says: “Any further attacks done to the people of Syria will be blamed on Assad, but also on Russia and Iran who support him killing his own people.” Fallon says: “We will support” future U.S. action in response to the use of chemical weapons in Syria.

How clear does an orchestration have to be before people are capable of recognizing the orchestration?

The intelligence agencies put out the story via Hersh that there were no chemical attacks, so what attacks is Nikki Haley speaking about?

A reasonable conclusion is that Washington’s plan to use ISIS to overthrow Syria and then start on Iran was derailed by Russian and Syrian military success against ISIS. The U.S. then tried to partition Syria by occupying part of it, but were out-manuevered by the Russians and Syrians. This left direct U.S. involvement as the only alternative to defeat. This direct U.S. military involvement began with the U.S. attack on the Syrian military base and was followed by shooting down a Syrian war plane. The next stage will be a U.S.-staged false-flag chemical attack or alleged chemical attack, and this false flag, as has already been announced, will be the excuse for larger scale U.S. military action against Syria, which, unless the Russians abandon Syria, means conflict with Russia, Iran, and perhaps China.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury under President Ronald Reagan and was associate editor and columnist at The Wall Street Journal. He has been a professor of economics in six universities, and is the author of numerous books available from the AmericanFreePress bookstore.




It Is the Presstitutes, Not Russia, Who Interfered in the US Presidential Election

Even Paul Craig Roberts can only shake his head in frustration, wondering why the U.S. increases, rather than decreases, tension with Russia—especially given continuing insistence by U.S. “leadership” and mainstream press that Russia interfered in the election, despite an utter lack of evidence.

By Paul Craig Roberts

Unlike Oliver Stone, who knew how to interview Vladimir Putin, Megyn Kelly did not. Thus, she made a fool of herself, which is par for her course.

Now the entire Western media has joined Megyn in foolishness, or so it appears from a RT report. James O’Keefe has senior CNN producer John Bonifield on video telling O’Keefe that CNN’s anti-Russia reporting is purely for ratings: “It’s mostly bullshit right now. Like, we don’t have any big giant proof.” CNN’s Bonifield is reported to go on to say that “our CIA is doing shit all the time, we’re out there trying to manipulate governments.”

And, of course, the American people, the European peoples, and the US and European governments are being conditioned by the “Russia did it” storyline to distrust Russia and to accept whatever dangerous and irresponsible policy toward Russia that Washington comes up with next.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

Is the anti-Russian propaganda driven by ratings, as Bonifield is reported to claim, or are ratings the neoconservatives and military/security complex’s cover for media disinformation that increases tensions between the superpowers and prepares the ground for nuclear war?

RT acknowledges that the entire story could be just another piece of false news, which is all that the Western media is known for.

Nevertheless, what we do know is that the fake news reporting pertains to Russia’s alleged interference in the U.S. presidential election. Allegedly, Trump was elected by Putin’s interference in the election. This claim is absurd, but if you are Megyn Kelly you lack the IQ to see that. Instead, presstitutes turn a nonsense story into a real story despite the absence of any evidence.

Who actually interfered in the U.S. presidential election, Putin or the presstitutes themselves? The answer is clear and obvious. It was the presstitutes, who were out to get Trump from day one of the presidential campaign. It is CIA director John Brennan, who did everything in his power to brand Trump some sort of Russian agent. It is FBI director Comey who did likewise by continuing to “investigate” what he knew was a non-event. We now have a former FBI director playing the role of special prosecutor investigating Trump for “obstruction of justice” when there is no evidence of a crime to be obstructed! What we are witnessing is the ongoing interference in the presidential election, an interference that not only makes a mockery of democracy but also of the rule of law.

Liberty Stickers

The presstitutes not only interfered in the presidential election; they are now interfering with democracy itself. They are seeking to overturn the people’s choice by discrediting the president of the United States and those who elected him. The Democratic Party is a part of this attack on American democracy. It is the DNC that insists that a Putin/Trump conspiracy stole the presidency from Hillary. The Democrats’ position is that it is too risky to permit the American people—the “deplorables”— to vote. The Democratic Party’s line is that if you let Americans vote, they will elect a Putin stooge and America will be ruled by Russia.

Many wonder why Trump doesn’t use the power of the office of the presidency to indict the hit squad that is out to get him. There is no doubt that a jury of deplorables would indict Brennan, Comey, Megyn Kelly, and the rest. On the other hand, perhaps Trump’s view is that the Republican Party cannot afford to go down with him, and, therefore, as he is politically protected by the Republican majority, the best strategy is to let the Democrats and the presstitutes destroy themselves in the eyes of flyover America.

What our survival as Americans depends on is the Russians’ view of this conflict between a U.S. president who intended to reduce the tensions between the nuclear powers and those determined to increase the tensions. The Russian high command has already announced its conclusion that Washington is preparing a surprise nuclear attack on Russia. It is not possible to imagine a more dangerous conclusion. So far, no one in Washington or any Western government has made an effort to reassure Russia that no such attack is being prepared. Instead, the calls are for more punishment of Russia and more tension.

This most extraordinary of failures demonstrates the complete separation of the West from reality.

It is difficult to imagine a more extreme danger than for the insouciant West to convince Russia that the West is incapable of rational behavior. But that is precisely what the West is doing.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury under President Ronald Reagan and was associate editor and columnist at The Wall Street Journal. He has been a professor of economics in six universities, and is the author of numerous books available at www.AmericanFreePress.net.




U.S. Picks a Fight in Syria

Not content to allow the Syrian war to wind down, the Pentagon and the CIA continue to escalate tension. Now, they’ve shot down a Syrian army jet bound for radical Islamic targets, which Russia declared an “act of war,” in the warmongers’ latest efforts to protect their creation, ISIS. 

By Matthew Raphael Johnson

The United States has shot down a Syrian army jet on a mission to hit radical Islamic targets near Raqqa. To say that the U.S. is waging war against ISIS would be willful dishonesty. In truth, ISIS was the creation of U.S. and Israeli intelligence.

Russia’s deputy foreign minister rightly called the shooting down of the jet not only an “act of war” but also “support for terrorists.” This is something the Russian government has known for some time. As Russia makes plans to dump the dollar and as the present depression continues to wrack the U.S., the elite are demanding war.

The Russian Foreign Ministry warned that any planes interfering with the war on ISIS will be “intercepted“ by the Russian Air Force. This is the escalation the American ruling class wanted.

“In areas where Russian aviation is conducting combat missions in the Syrian skies, any flying objects, including jets and unmanned aerial vehicles of the international coalition discovered west of the Euphrates River will be followed by Russian air and ground defenses as air targets,” the Russian Defense Ministry announced.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

There is a telephone line, a channel established between Russia and the U.S. in the case of any intensification of tension. Russia claims that this was not used prior to the incident. The U.S. denies this claim.

Ironically, the U.S. stated: “The Coalition’s mission is to defeat ISIS in Iraq and Syria. . . . The Coalition does not seek to fight the Syrian regime, Russia, or pro-regime forces partnered with them, but will not hesitate to defend Coalition or partner forces from any threat.”

No one can possibly believe this. The purpose of the attack was to defend ISIS, not defeat it. Whenever the Syrian Army liberates a town from ISIS, they find tons of Israeli and American weapons.

The U.S. military claims that the Syrian army plane was sent to attack the Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), a “moderate” group whose founding purpose was to make war on the Syrian government. Damascus claims the jet was headed toward an ISIS camp, one that the SDF was protecting.

Gideon Elite book cover

The SDF allegedly seeks a “stable, secular” Syria, which is precisely what Syria was prior to the creation of this present war. American sponsorship of this Kurdish group deeply alienates Turkey, showing the continued disaster of U.S. Mideast policy.

It’s worth mentioning that most prisoners of war taken in this conflict by Russian or Syrian forces are not Syrians.

The SDF admitted its use of the banned white phosphorus shells in its operations against Damascus. The Russian military states that the purpose of the SDF is to act as a buffer between ISIS and the Syrian government, hindering Russian and Syrian forces.

In a recent interview with Le Figaro, Russian President Vladimir Putin stated about the U.S.: “Presidents come and go, but policy remains the same. Do you know why that is? Because the bureaucracy has too much power. A president is elected with new ideas. Then men in dark suits come and visit him. They tell him what to do.” This is the foundation of this reckless attack on Syria. Other, non-elected, forces have control over foreign policy.

On May 20 of this year, presidential spokesman Brett McGurk stated, “There is no government in Syria and we will never cooperate with the Assad regime.” Since the U.S. considers Assad illegitimate, any violation of Syrian sovereignty is warranted; anything goes. This is in contradiction to the military’s position stated above, because factions backed by the CIA are fighting factions backed by the Pentagon. The SDF is the Pentagon’s creation, called “our troops” by U.S. generals, while al Qaeda’s various offshoots are backed by the CIA. The larger question as to why the U.S. has authority to back any side in this war is a question few in the halls of power are asking.

This is why “self-defense” is the justification for the attack on the Syrian jet. Since these troops are essentially proxies of the Pentagon, it is considered no differently than if the warplane were going to attack Fort Leavenworth.

Recently, the Assad government was winding down this war, which in its seventh year has claimed more than 450,000 lives. Dissatisfied, however, both the CIA and Pentagon poured more money into these factions, making sure they had the resources to keep the war going.

Matthew Raphael Johnson, Ph.D. is originally from Union County, N.J. He completed his Ph.D. at the University of Nebraska, writing his dissertation on Michael Oakeshott’s critique of modernity. His first job out of college was working with The Barnes Review. He is a former professor of history at Mt. St. Mary’s University in Emmetsville, Md. Matt resides in Franklin County, Pa., where he teaches and writes on Russian history and politics. Matt’s latest books Russian Populist: The Political Thought of Vladimir Putin and The Third Rome: Holy Russia, Tsarism and Orthodoxy are available from TBR Book Club. Send payment with request to TBR. 16000 Trade Zone Avenue, Unit 406, Upper Marlboro, MD 20774. Order online at www.BarnesReview.com or call 1-877-773-9077 toll free to charge.




Why Are We Attacking the Syrians Who Are Fighting ISIS?

What happened to Donald Trump’s non-interventionist America-First policy? If the U.S. is interested in stopping ISIS, and Syria is working to stop ISIS, why is the U.S. working to stop Syria? 

By Ron Paul

Just when you thought our Syria policy could not get any worse, last week it did. The U.S. military twice attacked Syrian government forces from a military base it illegally occupies inside Syria. According to the Pentagon, the attacks on Syrian government-backed forces were “defensive,” because the Syrian fighters were approaching a U.S. self-declared “de-confliction” zone inside Syria. The Syrian forces were pursuing ISIS in the area, but the U.S. attacked anyway.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

The U.S. is training yet another rebel group fighting from that base, located near the border of Iraq at al-Tanf, and it claims that Syrian government forces pose a threat to the U.S. military presence there. But the Pentagon has forgotten one thing: It has no authority to be in Syria in the first place! Neither the U.S. Congress nor the UN Security Council has authorized a U.S. military presence inside Syria.

So what gives the Trump Administration the right to set up military bases on foreign soil without the permission of that government? Why are we violating the sovereignty of Syria and attacking its military as they are fighting ISIS? Why does Washington claim that its primary mission in Syria is to defeat ISIS while taking military actions that benefit ISIS?

Liberty Stickers

The Pentagon issued a statement saying its presence in Syria is necessary because the Syrian government is not strong enough to defeat ISIS on its own. But the “de-escalation zones” agreed upon by the Syrians, Russians, Iranians, and Turks have led to a reduction in fighting and a possible end to the six-year war. Even if true that the Syrian military is weakened, its weakness is due to six years of U.S.-sponsored rebels fighting to overthrow it!

What is this really all about? Why does the U.S. military occupy this base inside Syria? It’s partly about preventing the Syrians and Iraqis from working together to fight ISIS, but I think it’s mostly about Iran. If the Syrians and Iraqis join up to fight ISIS with the help of Iranian-allied Shia militia, the U.S. believes it will strengthen Iran’s hand in the region. President Trump has recently returned from a trip to Saudi Arabia where he swore he would not allow that to happen.

But is this policy really in our interest, or are we just doing the bidding of our Middle East “allies,” who seem desperate for war with Iran? Saudi Arabia exports its radical form of Islam worldwide, including recently into moderate Asian Muslim countries like Indonesia. Iran does not. That is not to say that Iran is perfect, but does it make any sense to jump into the Sunni/Shia conflict on either side? The Syrians, along with their Russian and Iranian allies, are defeating ISIS and al Qaeda. As candidate Trump said, what’s so bad about that?

We were told that if the Syrian government was allowed to liberate Aleppo from al Qaeda, Assad would kill thousands who were trapped there. But the opposite has happened: Life is returning to normal in Aleppo. The Christian minority there celebrated Easter for the first time in several years. They are rebuilding. Can’t we finally just leave the Syrians alone?

When you get to the point where your actions are actually helping ISIS, whether intended or not, perhaps it’s time to stop. It’s past time for the U.S. to abandon its dangerous and counterproductive Syria policy and just bring the troops home.

Ron Paul, a former U.S. representative from Texas and medical doctor, continues to write his weekly column for the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, online at www.ronpaulinstitute.org.




Russia and China Move to Dump the Dollar, Threatening the New World Order

As long predicted, the dollar’s dominance on the world’s economic stage is wavering and likely to completely collapse soon given the move away from the dollar by Russia, Iran, and China. 

By Matthew Raphael Johnson

Many have been predicting it. This writer spoke of it as early as 2004. The elite have dreaded it. It’s finally happened. The dollar is soon to be removed as the trading currency for oil and other commodities among Russia, Iran, and China. The effect on the U.S. economy will be catastrophic. However, in the long run it will serve to force the U.S. into a regional, rather than a global role.

The Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC) began operations in Moscow starting in mid-March 2017. The sole purpose was to act as a new intermediary for international commodity and energy trade. Iran has already declared its interest in following suit.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

At the end of 2015, the Russian central bank officially announced China’s currency, the yuan, as a reserve currency. It took several more years to build the infrastructure to handle a radical shift of this kind.

The U.S. cannot but act militarily, and its buildup of forces is unprecedented. It has no financial weapons to answer the massive drop in demand for the dollar once this is made operational.

It also shows that the Russian Central Bank is under state control. If it were a foreign-owned bank, this sort of cooperation would be out of the question. The building of this financial infrastructure is one of the most significant events in geopolitics.

Russia has the mechanisms in place to build its own SCO-BRICS banking system. SCO-BRICS refers to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization—an intergovernmental organization founded in Shanghai on June 15, 2001 by China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgystan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan—and the economic arrangement between Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. The two groups have held several summits over the years with the intent to foster economic and political cooperation.

Gideon Elite book cover

Compounding the situation is the fact that, since the big credit cards pulled out of Russia, local alternatives have been exploding.  Whatever dependency and Western control Russia’s banking had faced is now gone. The current SWIFT system—the computer module that governs international trade and credit—is controlled by Western bankers in Belgium. It is a manifestation of the cooperation of the globe’s financial elites. Since these are deeply in debt and largely criminal enterprises, removing Russia from their system is a positive thing. Already, Russia has its own system in place, the MIR, which is used by almost 400 banks. It is also used by members of the SCO on most occasions.

Any nation under American sanctions no longer uses the SWIFT system. Quietly, American Express and Citibank have joined the MIR, as have most Northern European banks. Profits are more important than oil company demands, and a faction of the elite realize that there is no future in Western debt. As of May 2017, they are the only two Western financial institutions to be included in the new system.

The MIR structure is proof that Russia has removed the Rothschild presence from Russia.

Russia is misinterpreted in Western financial analysis. It is not a petroleum-based economy. Roughly 20% of its foreign exports is in this sphere. It is a powerful actor, but it is not dominant. In truth, Russia is the 26th most complex economy in the world, meaning that it is not dependent on just one thing. For a little perspective, Canada is 11th. While the U.S. is an important importer, it is not an important export destination for Russians. Asia and Northern Europe are far more important. In other words, Russia does not need the U.S.

The Rothschild dynasty thought the BRICS was something it could guide and control. They were wrong. Both major powers are buying up gold at a breakneck pace, and the export of precious metals is illegal in both countries. They are also dumping treasury notes. Gold provides the SCO with a degree of independence that was unthinkable 20 years ago. Almost 50 million ounces of gold have been added to the SCO just in 2017, and about $350 billion in treasuries have been dumped. It also helps that Russia is the world’s third-largest miner of gold and China is the first.

A massive revolution is taking place right under the West’s nose, and very few understand its nature. Liberalism itself is being directly challenged.

Russia’s removing itself from the domination of the dollar means the end of American “superpower” status.

As might be imagined, the military buildup on Russia’s border has been rapid and is ready to strike at any moment. The excuse for this has been the annexation of Crimea, an event demanded by about 97% of Crimeans. The supposed evidence of Russia’s ill will has been its modernization of its missile systems and air force.

The West claims that American special forces are stationed in those countries for the purpose of “defense.” However, this has nothing to do with Romania and Bulgaria. The sole reason for the countdown to war is fear over the damage this “dollar dump” will do to the American economy. The truth is that it will force the U.S. into a more reasonable, local role rather than as the world’s enforcer of the global, liberal order.

Gen. Raymond Thomas, head of the Pentagon’s Special Operations Command, has been put in charge of the buildup in the Baltic states. He has made the claim that these countries fear an imminent “takeover” by Russian forces.

Not a shred of evidence has ever been put forward proving this claim.

Russia maintains a strong trade with all of these states and has no incentive to “invade” them.

This is crude propaganda masking the real issue: the destruction of the globalized order this financial connection between Russia and China is already completing.

Matthew Raphael Johnson, Ph.D. is originally from Union County, N.J. He completed his Ph.D. at the University of Nebraska, writing his dissertation on Michael Oakeshott’s critique of modernity. His first job out of college was working with The Barnes Review. He is a former professor of history at Mt. St. Mary’s University in Emmetsville, Md. Matt resides in Franklin County, Pa., where he teaches and writes on Russian history and politics. Matt’s latest books Russian Populist: The Political Thought of Vladimir Putin and The Third Rome: Holy Russia, Tsarism and Orthodoxy are available from TBR Book Club. Send payment with request to TBR. 16000 Trade Zone Avenue, Unit 406, Upper Marlboro, MD 20774. Order online at www.BarnesReview.com or call 1-877-773-9077 toll free to charge.




Five Things to Remember For Comey’s Testimony Tomorrow

Here, American Free Press provides a bit of comprehensive background, not commonly offered by the mainstream media, to remind readers of some of the events that have led up to the present state of affairs, in order to be able to put in context tomorrow’s highly anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey on the “Russian election hacking scandal.” 

By AFP Staff

James Comey, the FBI director who was fired by President Donald Trump on May 9, is scheduled to testify at 10 a.m. Eastern Time tomorrow, June 8, before the Senate Intelligence Committee. The mainstream media has been promoting Comey’s appearance before the Republican-led committee, hoping that what he will drop bombshells concerning allegations that Russia had hacked U.S. voting systems before last year’s presidential election in an effort to help Trump and undermine Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

Here are five things that everyone should know before Comey speaks tomorrow.

  1. While the Senate Intelligence Committee is run by Republicans, it is hardly friendly to Trump. Establishment Republicans have never been friendly to Trump, because, while campaigning, Trump was able to tap into anger among rank-and-file Republicans and humiliated Beltway insiders, including many neoconservative Republicans. This was demonstrated during the May 7 Senate Intelligence hearing, when Republican and Democrat senators grilled top intelligence figures not over the U.S. war on terror or the recent terror attacks in Europe; rather, they repeatedly pressed the officials over unfounded charges of Russian hacking and interference in U.S. elections.
  2. Despite the nearly constant reporting on allegations of Russian hacking and interference in the recent presidential election, neither Democrats nor Republicans have been able to provide any evidence to support their claims. Americans are asked to simply “trust” them that somewhere, out there in Washington, some anonymous intelligence official has something damning on Trump and his associates.
  3. Comey was already on his way out when Trump fired him on May 9. Before Comey became the darling of the Washington press corps and the Democrats, he was hated by the liberal establishment for spilling the beans on Hillary Clinton and her illegal activities. In his now-infamous statement on July 5, 2016, Comey said Mrs. Clinton and her staff were “extremely careless” and irresponsible with secret emails, but that “we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information.. . . ” On June 8, the media expects Comey will provide key revelations and advance the calls for impeaching Trump, something that the establishment in Washington has wanted since Trump took office on Jan. 20.
  4. Early reports indicate that Comey will admit that Trump asked him to let the investigation of Trump’s former national security advisor, Gen. Michael Flynn, go. In February 2017, Flynn resigned following news reports that Flynn had not told White House officials about a phone conversation he’d had with the Russian ambassador. The National Security Agency had reportedly eavesdropped on that conversation, and Flynn’s name was outed to Obama administration officials. Flynn’s name was then leaked to the press by someone inside the intelligence community. Flynn has so far complied with subpoenas from House and Senate investigators. On June 6, he turned over 600 pages of documents related to his business dealings. However, it’s worth noting that, even after months of investigation, Flynn has still not been accused of—let alone been indicted for—committing any crimes.
  5. Finally, it’s worth remembering that the whole Russia-Trump investigation led by Comey started thanks to the now-discredited opposition research document penned by former British spy Christopher Steele, which Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) turned over to the FBI. This is the research document that alleged Trump and his associates repeatedly met with Russian agents during the presidential campaign and that the Russians had incriminating intelligence on Trump that they could use to blackmail him. The FBI reportedly wasted millions of taxpayers’ dollars investigating the spurious claims in the dossier, only to dismiss it. Since then there have been multiple lawsuits filed by people named in the document against news organizations that promoted it.




Is the West Facing a Forever War?

Random killings of people on the streets, completely unknown to the murderer, has become the latest brand of Islamist terrorism now haunting the West with increasing frequency. When will imams worldwide join together to condemn this radical Islamist adulteration of their faith?

By Patrick J. Buchanan

On May 22, Salman Abedi, 22, waiting at the entrance of the Arianna Grande pop concert in Manchester, blew himself up, killing almost two dozen people, among them parents waiting to pick up their children.

Saturday, three Islamic terrorists committed “suicide-by-cop,” using a van to run down pedestrians on London Bridge, and then slashing and stabbing patrons of pubs and diners in the nearby Borough Market.

By all accounts, the killers bore no special grudge against those they murdered. They appear not even to have known their victims.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

Why, then, did they kill these strangers, and themselves?

A BBC eyewitness suggests a motive: “They shouted, ‘This is for Allah’ as they stabbed indiscriminately.”

The murderers were Muslims. The rationale for their crimes lies in the belief that their bloody deeds would inscribe them in a book of martyrs, and Allah would reward them with instant ascension into the paradise that awaits all good Muslims.

Gideon Elite book cover

Ideas have consequences. And where might these crazed killers have gotten an idea like that?

Is there a strain of Islam, the basis of which can be found in the Quran, that would justify what the murderers did at London Bridge?

On Palm Sunday, an explosion in Tanta, 56 miles north of Cairo, killed 29 and injured 71 Copts as they prayed at the Mar Girgis church. A second blast at a church in Alexandria killed 18 and wounded 35.

On May 26, masked gunmen stopped two buses carrying Coptic Christians to Saint Samuel the Confessor Monastery in Egypt and opened fire, killing 26 and wounding 25.

“I call on Egyptians to unite in the face of this brutal terrorism,” said Ahmed el-Tayeb, the grand imam of al-Azhar, Egypt’s 1,000-year-old center of Islamic learning.

Yet, years of such atrocities have effected a near-complete cleansing of Christianity from its cradle provinces in the Holy Land.

If these persecutors and killers of Christians are apostates to Islam, headed to hell for their savageries, why have not all the imams of the world, Shiite and Sunni, risen together to condemn them as heretics?

IRS Loses Cases

Clearly, from the suicide bombings and shootings of civilians in the Middle East, now across the West, there is a belief among some Muslims that what the killers are doing is moral and meritorious—taking the martyr’s path to salvation.

When have the imams of Saudi Arabia, the Middle East, and the West ever stood as one to condemn all such acts as against the tenets of Islam?

In condemning the London Bridge attack, Prime Minister Theresa May said that recent atrocities across England were “bound together by the single evil ideology of Islamist extremism.”

Correct. There is an extremist school of Islam that needs to be purged from the West, even as this school of fanatics is seeking to purge Christianity from the East.

We are at war. And the imams of Islam need to answer the question: “Whose side are you on?”

Are honor killings of girls and women caught in adultery justified? Are lashings and executions of Christian converts justified?

Do people who hold such beliefs really belong in the United States or in the West during this long war with Islamist extremism?

Other questions need answering as well.

Is our commitment to diversity broad enough to embrace people with Islamist beliefs? Is our First Amendment freedom of speech and of religion extensive enough to cover the sermons of imams who use mosques to preach in favor of expelling Christians from the Middle East and an eventual takeover of the West for an Islam where Sharia replaces constitutional law?

Are such Islamist beliefs not intolerable and perilous for our republic?

Clearly, the West is in a civilizational struggle, with the outcome in some doubt.

Four years after Pearl Harbor, the Japanese empire had ceased to exist. Japan was smoldering ruins, its navy at the bottom of the Pacific. An American proconsul, Douglas MacArthur, was dictating to the Japanese from the Dai-Ichi building.

Today, we are in the 16th year of a war begun on 9/11. We are mired down in Libya, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen. Our victory in Afghanistan is being reversed by the Taliban.

While the ISIS caliphate is being eradicated in Raqqa and Mosul, its elements are in two dozen countries of the Mideast. Muslim migrants and refugees, ISIS and al Qaeda among them, are moving into Europe.

Terrorist attacks in the West grow in number and lethality every year. The new normal. Now, second-generation Muslims within Europe seem to be converting to a violent version of Islam.

To fight them, we are being forced to circumscribe our sovereignty and empower police and intelligence agencies of which free men were once taught to be wary.

Wars, it is said, are the death of republics. And we now seem to be caught up in an endless war.

COPYRIGHT 2017 CREATORS.COM

Pat Buchanan is a writer, political commentator and presidential candidate. He is the author of a new book, Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever and previous titles including The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority. Both are available from the AFP Bookstore.




Myopic Media Refuses to Name Bilderberg

U.S. corporate media is quick to report on “behind-the-scenes” parties influencing the Trump administration … as long as that list doesn’t include the Bilderberg Group. 

By Mark Anderson

CHANTILLY, Va.—The mind-numbing mainstream media blackout of the highly secretive Bilderberg group that was evident when this AFP writer wrote an initial June 3 dispatch on the June 1-4 Bilderberg meeting in Chantilly, Va. was still in place on Tuesday, June 6, at least in terms of American orthodox media.

Additional calls to the media to inquire about their Bilderberg coverage plans went unanswered, and a call to Chantilly’s Westfields Marriott to seek a press conference was completely brushed off, as the lady who answered the phone didn’t even bother getting a security spokesman or someone else to handle the simple request.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

Yet, the Washington Post and the Kansas City Star—which in recent years broke the usual stifling silence about Bilderberg—instead published items on June 4 and June 5 pertaining to the very concept of illicit, behind-the-scenes influence on government, even while these “courageous” news outlets somehow failed to include Bilderberg in that important equation.

Here are two clear examples of such media misfires:

  • ITEM: As this AFP writer picked up the June 4 Washington Post, the front-page headline “Shadow network aided Trump’s rise to power” leapt off the page. But a quick read of the text disappointingly revealed that the nefarious “network” being named was the “far right” and some its champions, as perceived by the big media, Trump advisor Stephen Bannon and 1960s leftist radical-turned-conservative author David Horowitz.

Take note that the Post is all aflutter that these guys and their associates—but clearly not Bilderberg—are networking to strongly influence the policies of the U.S. government from backstage.

Furthermore, the Post is fretting that Horowitz created in 1988 the Center for the Study of Popular Culture as a “charity,” while noting that IRS rules that regulate charities stipulate “a substantial part” of a tax-exempt charity’s funds cannot be spent on “lobbying” or “carrying on propaganda.”

However, the Washington Post Company itself, as this writer has often reported, gave $25,000 to the American Friends of Bilderberg (AFB), according to the its 2008 “990 PF” tax filing.

The AFB is registered as a charity in the state of New York, though as a “private foundation.” Since the only listed activity of the AFB is addressing “problems of the Western Alliance” mainly by “sponsoring the annual Bilderberg Meetings,” there is no evidence whatsoever of AFB charitable activities, but plenty of evidence of “carrying on propaganda”—even while a substantial part of the AFB’s funds does go into tinkering with the economic and political machinery of the West via the hyper-exclusive Bilderberg Meetings.

  • ITEM: The Kansas City Star—which last year ran a sizable story about Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) attending Bilderberg for the first time in Dresden, Germany—went stone-cold silent on Bilderberg this year (even though Graham attended this year’s Bilderberg, too) but still managed to run a guest column on how Graham has been exercising improper and excessive influence in U.S. dealings with foreign nations, especially Israel. The columnist is Robert Leonard, an anthropologist who hosts a public affairs program for KNIA/KRLS radio in Knoxville/Pella, Iowa.

Graham, as Leonard wrote in the Star, spoke at a political event (back when Graham sought the GOP nod to run for president) where the moderator noted that he was impressed by Graham’s prominence on the world stage and that Graham had taken a phone call from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Gideon Elite book cover

“I was surprised,” Leonard wrote. “I have always assumed that conversations between world leaders and members of Congress happened at the request of the administration and that they didn’t happen during a car ride across the Iowa countryside by a senator running for president with guests and staffers in the car.

“But my gut told me it was wrong. I could see the conversation only as potentially undermining the Obama administration’s official policy toward Israel. After all, Graham was then in the opposition party and seeking the nomination for president.”

Watch an on-the-scene video from AFP’s Mark Anderson by clicking below:

Leonard added: “Let’s assume that Graham’s behavior is consistent with that of other members of Congress. If that’s true, it means that they’re talking willy-nilly with world leaders, their staffs and representatives. All the time. One can also assume that these conversations are not benign. They are all negotiations of one sort or another.”

What Leonard meant (though he didn’t go far enough) was that sitting senators and other elected and appointed officials should not be making policy with foreign leaders (or by extension, with foreign corporate titans) “off the grid” and independent of the executive branch.

Yet both Sen. Graham and Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), who are bookends in terms of the pro-war, neoconservative faction of the Republican Party, attended Bilderberg this year. So did four White House officials: equally hawkish National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, Deputy National Security Advisor Nadia Schadlow, and Christopher Liddell, a strategic advisor.

Speaking of Graham’s highway diplomacy, Leonard asked, “When would such a conversation constitute treason?”

But what Leonard doesn’t note is that the Logan Act, a law from the 1790s and still on the books, prohibits U.S. citizens from lobbying, negotiating or engaging in deal-making with foreign officials without express permission from the head of state. And the Bilderberg Meetings, which have been happening for 65 years, represent the ultimate convergence of corporate, media, banking and political power behind closed doors, where no press conferences are given and only vague topics and an attendees list are published to placate onlookers.

Mark Anderson is a longtime newsman now working as the roving editor for AFP. Email him at truthhound2@yahoo.com.




NSA Leaked Docs Alleging Russian Hacking Prove Nothing

Official National Security Agency documents supposedly leaked by federal contractor Reality Winner allege that Russian intelligence engaged in a months-long campaign to hack U.S. election systems. However, a close look at the NSA charges show there is a noticeable lack of any evidence to substantiate the claims.

By AFP Staff

“Trust us.” Apparently, that is the basis for the U.S. government claim that the Russian military and its intelligence service hacked U.S. elections systems in order to discredit Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and promote Republican Donald Trump.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

News broke of the leaked National Security Agency (NSA) documents on June 6, when “The Intercept,” an online news and commentary website, published them on its website along with a lengthy article summarizing their contents. The article can be found here.

This is how “The Intercept” leads its report:

The top-secret National Security Agency document, which was provided anonymously to The Intercept and independently authenticated, analyzes intelligence very recently acquired by the agency about a months-long Russian intelligence cyber effort against elements of the U.S. election and voting infrastructure. The report, dated May 5, 2017, is the most detailed U.S. government account of Russian interference in the election that has yet come to light.

However, a detailed analysis shows the NSA really provides no evidence of actual hacking on the part of any official Russian agency:

While the document provides a rare window into the NSA’s understanding of the mechanics of Russian hacking, it does not show the underlying “raw” intelligence on which the analysis is based.

In other words, the NSA provides a “how-to” primer on how hackers hack people, but there is nothing definitive linking any Russian agency to an attempted hack.

One thing that is damning in the NSA report touches on something American Free Press has been reporting for years: the vulnerability of electronic voting and the ease with which unsophisticated hackers can go after electronic voting machines.

Ultimately, what we learn from the NSA documents is that this is yet another case of U.S. officials asking Americans to trust them, something that even naive people should be wary of.

“Maybe the real evidence of hacking is with Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction,” a U.S. official, who wanted to remain anonymous, told American Free Press.




Russian Leader Addresses Charges of Vote Hacking in First Western Interview

In an interview with NBC news host Megyn Kelly, Russian President Vladimir Putin shot down allegations that Russia had interfered in U.S. elections in 2016, helping Republican billionaire populist Donald Trump get elected.

By AFP Staff

In his first interview with a U.S. journalist, Russian President Vladimir Putin disputed allegations made by NBC news host Megyn Kelly that the Russian military and intelligence service hacked U.S. elections systems to help get Republican Donald Trump Elected.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

In perhaps one of the best come-backs, Putin told Ms. Kelly: “You people are so creative over there. Good job. Your lives must be boring.”

When asked about Russia tampering in Western elections, Putin quipped: “I will tell you something you already know. . . . The U.S., everywhere, all over the world, actively interferes with the electoral campaigns of other countries. Put your finger anywhere on the map of the world, and everywhere you will hear complaints that American officials are interfering in internal electoral processes.”

You can watch video of the whole interview below.




Bilderberg 2017 Wraps Up in Virginia – Dispatch #1

AFP’s on-the-ground Bilderberg Meeting 2017 reporter’s Saturday morning dispatch reveals that, not surprisingly, U.S. corporate media is pretending, again this year, that participation by active American government office-holders in the secretive meeting is not worth reporting on. Fortunately, American Free Press and a few other alternative, real news sites are picking up the slack.

By Mark Anderson

CHANTILLY, Va.—On the morning of Saturday, June 3, the Bilderberg group’s 65th meeting since 1954—though vitally important, given the identity of this year’s attendees, the key topics they secretly discuss, and the relevance of those topics to major political and economic developments—had evidently been ignored by the national mainstream and regional media.

This, despite the fact that this AFP writer placed several calls and emails to newspapers ranging from the Arkansas Gazette-Democrat to the South Carolina Post and Courier—in those cases due to the Bilderberg meeting attendance of two sitting U.S. senators: Tom Cotton of Arkansas (R) and South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham (R).

Calls to the senators’ offices were not returned as of Friday, June 2. AFP will press the staffs of these senators to make some kind of statement on what role the senators played at Bilderberg 2017.

Notably, a Post and Courier editor, even while conceding that the paper published a story about Sen. Graham attending Bilderberg for the first time last year in Dresden, Germany, sounded fairly certain that the paper would not cover Bilderberg this year, while characterizing the hush-hush Bilderberg meeting as mildly interesting, at best.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

The Washington Post—whose parent company has made a $25,000 donation to the American Friends of Bilderberg “charity” group on at least one occasion in 2008—was also contacted, as was The Washington Times and USA Today. No calls or emails had yet been returned as of this writing. Same goes for the Kansas City Star, which, like the Post and Courier, ran with the story last year of Sen. Graham jetting to Dresden.

This current press indifference is especially odd given that Trump’s national security advisor, H.R. McMaster, is attending Bilderberg 2017, as is Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, strategic advisor Christopher Liddell, and, as it turns out, Deputy National Security Council Assistant Nadia Schadlow. This is perhaps the largest White House contingent to ever attend Bilderberg.

Combine that with the hot topics inside and outside the Bilderberg meeting at the Westfields Marriot in Chantilly, Va. and the press silence becomes even harder to comprehend:

  • Trump’s “Prexit” decision to exit the Paris climate accord (which the press is obsessing with) while multiple corporate interests within Bilderberg are affected by that decision, including Bilderberg’s longtime partner, Royal Dutch Shell;
  • And, among other things, the larger question, missed by the mainstream press, of whether Trump’s Prexit decision means NAFTA is the next thing in line to “walk the plank.” Trump already exited the Trans-Pacific Partnership, after all.

Indeed, the big picture is this: The Bilderberg Group’s overall credo, with only minor exceptions, is to uphold the Paris Agreement over a professedly unshakeable belief in manmade global warming and the need to combat it no matter the cost to everyday people; plus, the Bilderberg worldview is also attuned to undying support for far-reaching free-trade agreements.True Story of The Bilderberg Group Book

Thus, the important matter that the U.S. press is so far missing—partly illustrated by a broadly worded official Bilderberg 2017 topic listed at its website, “The Trump Administration: A Progress Report”—is whether Trump will follow up on his pull-outs from the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Paris accord by also pulling out of another holy grail of the Bilderberg universe: The North American Free Trade Agreement.

Furthermore, AFP found that a Bilderberg-member newspaper that sent two people to Bilderberg this year, The Financial Times (which sent common Bilderberg attendee Martin Wolf and added fellow writer Gideon Rachman), had run a story about Commerce Secretary Ross being engaged in tense negotiations with sugar barons as part of the NAFTA accord, wherein Ross is reportedly trying to protect U.S. sugar growers from Mexican interests dumping cheap sugar in the U.S. market.

The catch is that Ross reportedly has a June 5 deadline to iron out the many wrinkles in the often heated negotiations that involve other sugar interests as well. Given that Bilderberg runs through June 4, the question is how Ross could afford to take the time to attend Bilderberg and still work through this matter, besides the question of whether the sugar deal will have a bearing on the U.S. staying in NAFTA in the first place. Either way, this matter is seen as an inside Bilderberg topic in a more unofficial manner.

Meanwhile, on the ground in Chantilly on day two of Bilderberg June 2, the protestors and alternative media members together numbered about 40 on a grassy strip along the hotel’s outer property—well away from the hotel, which is engulfed on all sides by trees and thick vegetation, making it one of the most difficult Bilderberg meeting locations to photograph attendees.

IRS Loses Cases

Still, the alternative media produced constant radio and livestream video reports. The expectation for June 3 was that a larger group of protestors and alternative media was to show up around noon, to bolster the visibility of what many say is a growing awareness of Bilderberg—despite the American mainstream media’s absence, with some protestors and alternative commentators telling AFP that the situation may reach the point where the orthodox press won’t be needed anymore anyway.

Mark Anderson is a longtime newsman now working as the roving editor for AFP. Email him at truthhound2@yahoo.com.




Paris Climate Pact Must Be Stopped

Constitution or not, President Obama created an exorbitant bill for U.S. taxpayers when he signed on to the Paris Agreement within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Just as this article went to press, President Trump announced the U.S. has withdrawn from the agreement. “As of today,” stated Trump, “the United States will cease all implementation of the non-binding Paris Accord and the draconian financial and economic burdens the agreement imposes on our country. This includes ending the implementation of the nationally determined contribution and, very importantly, the Green Climate Fund, which is costing the United States a vast fortune.” 

By John Tiffany

Treaties, according to the Constitution (the supreme law of the land), are only to be ratified if approved first by the U.S. Senate. President Barack Obama figured there was no way the Senate would approve the proposed Paris Global Climate Treaty, so he or his string-pullers decided to simply relabel it as the Global Climate Agreement and pretend an obvious treaty was not a treaty.

While campaigning for president, Donald Trump made some very important promises, one of which was to cancel Obama’s phony “ratification” of the global climate treaty. After being elected president, he has been under pressure from “greens” to back off on his promise.

Under Obama, the U.S. pledged $3 billion to the “Green Climate Fund” (GCF) in connection with the unconstitutional treaty or “agreement.” Of this, $1 billion was transferred before he left office. Trump’s budget sets out to block the rest.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

Trump stated: “I can say this—we want to be treated fairly. It’s not a fair situation, because [other countries] are paying virtually nothing, and we are paying massive amounts of money.”

Prior to the Paris summit, the so-called “richer” countries committed to mobilize $100 billion of climate finance by 2020. The GCF was set up with $10 billion of initial donations. China, for one, has contributed nothing to the GCF.

IRS Loses Cases

Obama atrophied the Senate by making an end run around the Constitution. Trump now has the opportunity to make the Senate great again by canceling the illegal treaty and returning us to due process according to the rule book.

The climate deal itself is meaningless, wrote Oren Cass in Politico on Nov. 29, 2015.

“Emissions reductions are barely on the table at all,” he wrote. “Instead, the talks [were] rigged to ensure an agreement is reached, regardless of how little action countries plan to take.” In other words, the whole thing is a massive, devastating boondoggle.

The agreement would unfairly force the United States to reduce its carbon emissions, while allowing other countries to increase theirs.

Liberty Stickers

In any case, the whole thing would do “nothing to meaningfully decrease global temperatures,” says Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas).

According to a recent National Economic Research Associates Economic Consulting study, the Paris pact could obliterate $3 trillion of GDP, wipe out 6.5 million American jobs, and cut $7,000 in per capita household income in the U.S. by 2040. Just meeting the 2025 “goals” would wipe out 2.7 million jobs and cut U.S. GDP by $250 billion.

The Paris pact would seriously handicap America in the search for new sources of energy, while Russia is committing financial and military assets to developing the Arctic’s vast mineral deposits, including oil and gas, and China is also exploring and developing resources.

It is not enough and would be unwise to merely seek to renegotiate America’s role in this monstrosity. Trump’s best way forward is to repudiate the pact and insist it be submitted to the Senate, along with his recommendation that they do not ratify it.

If you agree, let Trump know right away how you feel.

John Tiffany is the editor of The Barnes Review history magazine.




New World Order to Meet in Chantilly in Early June

Will the recent deaths of longtime Bilderbergers David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski and the rise of the new Technorati, including Google executive Eric Schmidt, change the course of this infamous gathering of the world’s elite? Meeting in the U.S. for the first time in five years, AFP will be on hand in Chantilly, Va. to document—as extensively as possible, given the no-media cloak of secrecy—the secretive gathering.

By Mark Anderson

The 65th annual gathering of the shadowy Bilderberg group will take place June 1-4 at the Westfields Marriott Hotel in Chantilly, Va. Already, 131 participants from 21 countries have confirmed their attendance. This marks Bilderberg’s first North American meeting in five years, and AFP will be on the scene since the confab is being held only 25 miles from Washington, D.C. Last year, the group gathered in Dresden, Germany.

President Donald Trump’s National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster is listed as an attendee for this year’s Bilderberg meeting. Other U.S. officials attending, who are currently serving in public office, are Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Tom Cotton (R-Ark.). While Graham jetted to last year’s Bilderberg meeting in Germany, Cotton evidently is attending his first-ever Bilderberg meeting. McMaster, Graham, and Cotton all share a neoconservative ideology of aggressively patrolling the world to push American “democracy” and monopoly capitalism, while fostering hostility toward Iran, Russia, and Syria. This fits the Bilderberg credo of using U.S. power to control the natural resources and economic machinery of as many nations as possible, while co-opting or overthrowing those nations that stand firm with their own sovereignty.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

According to Bilderberg’s own anonymous press office, the 13 “key” topics “for discussion” this year include: “The Trump Administration—A Progress Report; Trans-Atlantic Relations—Options and Scenarios; The Trans-Atlantic Defense Alliance: Bullets, Bytes, and Bucks; The Direction of the EU; Can Globalization Be Slowed Down?; Jobs, Income, and Unrealized Expectations; The War on Information; Why is Populism Growing?; Russia in the International Order; The Near East; Nuclear Proliferation; Current Events; and China.”

Bilderberg consists of 140 mainly North American and European corporate moguls (including select big media), government ministers, treasury officials, parliament members, high-technology leaders, certain royalty (including Bilderberg co-founder Prince Bernhard’s daughter, Netherlands Queen Beatrix), and central bankers who annually skulk into the world’s top hotels in order to cross-pollinate to pursue One World Ltd. and related financial and political dealings.

Gideon Elite book cover

The group has an American arm, the American Friends of Bilderberg, which files annual 990 tax returns as a so-called charity and is registered in the state of New York under that amusing pretense.

The danger-ridden, tyrannical goal of creating an all-consuming, corporate-ruled world super-state dubbed the New World Order has been incrementally advanced since Bilderberg first met in Holland in 1954 under the auspices of Jesuit-trained European consolidator Joseph Retinger and his agent, Netherlands Prince Bernhard. This explains why Bilderberg goes to such lengths to keep the details of its inner-workings so secret, while functioning as an off-the-grid world networking and planning forum for private governance benefitting the banking and corporate classes. A core tactic is to parallel but eventually supersede the nation-state itself, eventually canceling effective, genuine nationhood altogether.

Bilderberg still maintains that it goes to all the trouble and expense of meeting just to chat off the record, allegedly without detailed minutes kept, with the reporting press disallowed only so attendees can relax and speak freely. Supposedly, no decisions are made or consensus is sought. Attendees, they say, must not reveal afterwards what was discussed, under Chatham House rules, though they apparently are free to use some of the ideas from the meetings without attribution.

NWO in Action cover

However, this is also a way of rigging the game so everything stays secret, even while topics that include the word “strategy” contradict Bilderberg’s position that it’s just a forum for intellectual banter about megatrends in the world.

An important question to ponder going into Bilderberg’s 2017 meeting is how the March 2017 death of longtime Bilderberger David Rockefeller and the May 26 death of Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission co-founder Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was the Carter administration’s national security advisor, will affect the status and agenda of Bilderberg—especially since the Trilateral group, which formed in 1973 and by its own admission put Carter in the White House, has for decades been a key “spoke” in the Bilderberg central “hub,” much like the Brookings Institution.

With the passing of key members of Bilderberg’s “old guard” and Rockefeller-Brzezinski associate and accused war criminal Henry Kissinger not long for this world due to his advanced age, will the younger Bilderbergers—especially Google executive Eric Schmidt and other young attendees mainly representing high technology in the “deep state” areas of surveillance, artificial intelligence, and even trans-humanism—take Bilderberg in a sharply new direction?