NATO’s War Of Resources Is Causing A Humanitarian Crisis In West Africa

As millions suffer from hunger, disease, illiteracy and grinding poverty in the Lake Chad region of West Africa, a sinister game of resource extraction and exploitation is playing out, with geopolitics at the heart of it all.
By | Follow on Facebook | @stopimperialism |
Be Sociable, Share!
  • Reddit
    • Google+
    Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power speaks with Multinational Joint Task Force Commander Maj. Gen. Lamidi Adeosun, right, as she departs their headquarters in N'Djamena, Chad,, April 20, 2016. (AP/Andrew Harnik)

    Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power speaks with Multinational Joint Task Force Commander Maj. Gen. Lamidi Adeosun, right, as she departs their headquarters in N’Djamena, Chad,, April 20, 2016. (AP/Andrew Harnik)

    NEW YORK — (Analysis) In late February 2017, Norway hosted an international humanitarian conference on Nigeria and the Lake Chad region in hopes of attracting major donors to fund relief work.  As Norway’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Børge Brende explained, “The conference has three aims: to raise awareness about the crisis, to gain more support for humanitarian efforts, and to secure greater political commitment to improve the situation.”

    Brende’s concern for the region may be laudable. But no serious examination of the crisis in West Africa can ignore the political and strategic calculus that surrounds the region. As with all conflicts in Africa, questions about resource extraction and neocolonial exploitation abound, with corrupt governments in the region (and their backers in wealthy countries) making the discussion all the more uncomfortable for the most privileged members of global society.

    A real discussion of the issue would highlight the questionable connections between regional governments and the development of Boko Haram, the Nigerian terror group that is responsible for much of the havoc being wreaked in the region. It would note the vast energy deposits beneath Lake Chad that evoke an almost Pavlovian response from the leaders of surrounding countries, blinded by the dollar signs in their eyes. It would point out the moves that former colonial powers in Europe are making within the region to enrich themselves and expand their military presence, as well as increase their influence and political power.


    In short, the humanitarian crisis around Lake Chad is a symptom of a much larger sickness afflicting the region. We must diagnose the illness in order to treat it, not simply observe its side effects and call for more drugs.


    The Shadowy Networks Behind Boko Haram

    United States Special Operations Command Africa Commander Brig. Gen. Donald Bolduc, left, accompanied by U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power, center, meets with President Idriss Deby Itno, right, at the presidential palace in N’Djamena, Chad, Wednesday, April 20, 2016. Power was traveling to Cameroon, Chad, and Nigeria to highlight the growing threat Boko Haram poses to the Lake Chad Basin region. (AP/Andrew Harnik)

    United States Special Operations Command Africa Commander Brig. Gen. Donald Bolduc, left, accompanied by U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power, center, meets with President Idriss Deby Itno, right, at the presidential palace in N’Djamena, Chad, Wednesday, April 20, 2016. Power was traveling to Cameroon, Chad, and Nigeria to highlight the growing threat Boko Haram poses to the Lake Chad Basin region. (AP/Andrew Harnik)

    Some of the statistics on the humanitarian situation around Lake Chad are truly appalling.

    According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, there are at least 2.1 million internally displaced people in the region, as well as 7.1 million suffering from hunger. One in every two families need life-saving assistance, according to aid workers. Countless thousands have been killed, injured or otherwise terrorized by Boko Haram and other terror groups. The situation is dire.

    So when the UN announced that the conference had raised 672 million dollars to help the people of the region, the news was obviously welcome. With such funds come very serious questions about how the funds will be distributed and who should be responsible for overseeing the distribution process. But determining the real causes of the crisis is perhaps the real million-dollar question.

    First and foremost is the question of Boko Haram, its murky origins in Nigerian political conflicts and the ramifications of its actions in the region. While definitive knowledge of the group’s sponsorship remains elusive, there is ample circumstantial evidence to suggest that elements within Nigeria’s government (and potentially other regional governments) have been sponsoring the group from its infancy.  

    Renowned hostage negotiator and Boko Haram intermediary Dr. Stephen Davis has gone on record as saying that high-ranking elements within the administration of former Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan were involved, including Ali Modu Sheriff, the former governor of Nigeria’s Borno State (the heart of the Boko Haram insurgency) and one of the country’s top military commanders.  

    The Jonathan Administration and Nigeria’s military in turn have accused Chad’s government, led by President Idriss Déby, of fueling the unrest for geopolitical and strategic reasons. According to these sources, Déby facilitated the rise of Boko Haram in order to destabilize Nigeria and take advantage of growing energy extraction from the Lake Chad Basin.

    Nigeria's Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau speaking to the camera. Shekau has allegedly made a formal allegiance to ISIS on, March 7, 2015, in an audio message posted on Twitter. (AP Photo)

    Nigeria’s Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau speaking to the camera. Shekau has allegedly made a formal allegiance to ISIS on, March 7, 2015, in an audio message posted on Twitter. (AP Photo)

    While the claim was certainly convenient for a Nigerian government that then was fending off accusations of its own collusion with Boko Haram, it does substantiate a 2011 intelligence memo from field officers in Chad, which noted that “members of Boko Haram sect are sometimes kept in the Abeche region in Chad and trained before being dispersed. This happens usually when Mr. Sheriff visits Abeche.”

    Though the details remain murky and may never be fully publicized, even a conservative assessment would note that the domestic politics of Nigeria, as well as regional political infighting, facilitated the emergence of Boko Haram. Indeed, as former President Jonathan’s own presidential panel investigating Boko Haram noted:

    “The report traced the origin of private militias in Borno State in particular, of which Boko Haram is an offshoot, to politicians who set them up in the run-up to the 2003 general elections. The militias were allegedly armed and used extensively as political thugs. After the elections and having achieved their primary purpose, the politicians left the militias to their fate since they could not continue funding and keeping them employed. With no visible means of sustenance, some of the militias gravitated towards religious extremism, the type offered by Mohammed Yusuf [leader of Boko Haram].”

    From its origins as a collection of gangs used to intimidate people and influence elections to its later development as a cohesive terror organization, Boko Haram has been one of the driving forces of the humanitarian crisis in the region.

    Of course, Boko Haram’s rise would have been impossible without the criminal U.S.-NATO war on Libya, which not only toppled the Libyan government, but also led to a tsunami of weapons flowing out of Libya and into the hands of regional terror groups such as al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) and the nascent Boko Haram.  

    In a very direct way, the U.S.-NATO war birthed the violent conflict we see today in the region.


    A Humanitarian Crisis and a Resource War

    A malnourished child receives heath care at a feeding center run by Doctors Without Borders in Maiduguri Nigeria. The U.N. Security Council on Friday, March. 3, 2017 kicked off a visit to spotlight Africa's worst humanitarian crisis as millions face hunger amid the Boko Haram insurgency in Nigeria and the Lake Chad region, Aug. 29, 2016. (AP/Sunday Alamba)

    A malnourished child receives heath care at a feeding center run by Doctors Without Borders in Maiduguri Nigeria. The U.N. Security Council on Friday, March. 3, 2017 kicked off a visit to spotlight Africa’s worst humanitarian crisis as millions face hunger amid the Boko Haram insurgency in Nigeria and the Lake Chad region, Aug. 29, 2016. (AP/Sunday Alamba)

    Sadly, most humanitarian crises in the world stem from politics and greed; the human tragedy unfolding in the Lake Chad region is no different. At the heart of the issue is oil.

    In recent years, oil discoveries throughout the Lake Chad Basin have transformed how the states of West Africa view their economic future. At the heart of the basin is Lake Chad, surrounded by the countries of Nigeria, Chad, Cameroon and Niger.  According to a 2010 assessment from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Chad Basin has “estimated mean volumes of 2.32 billion barrels of oil, 14.65 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and 391 million barrels of natural gas liquids.”  The potential size of these resources has likely attracted the attention of political and business leaders, both in the region and internationally.

    All of the countries surrounding the basin have expressed strong desire in recent years to begin exploiting the energy reserves there. However, until only very recently, Nigeria had been unable to do so due to the Boko Haram insurgency. E&P (Exploration & Production), a publication issued by Hart Energy, noted in March 2014:

    “Hopes of stepping up oil exploration in Nigeria’s Lake Chad Basin have been dashed by the brutal attacks of Islamic Boko Haram and the Ansaru sect terrorists in the country’s northeastern region…Between 2011 and 2013, the Nigerian government provided 240 million dollars to facilitate oil and gas exploration activities in the Lake Chad Basin.”

    So while Nigeria was forced to put the brakes on its oil exploration and development in the Chad Basin, its neighbors, particularly Chad, continued theirs. Nigeria has jump-started its exploration activities in Lake Chad just in the last few months, presumably thanks to progress that has been made in the fight against Boko Haram.

    As Dr. Peregrino Brimah explained in 2014, “The Boko Haram insurgency has conveniently provided Chad, under the government of Idriss Déby, unfettered access to oil under Nigeria’s soils through 3D oil drilling from within its territorial borders, which the country exports.”  

    It seems that Déby has engaged in siphoning off Nigeria’s oil wealth and exporting it for massive profits for himself and his cronies. But of course, Chad is not alone in this endeavor, as it has company from Cameroon and Niger, both of whom are doing precisely the same thing.

    The regional dynamic is key here, as fighting has spilled over the borders into neighboring Cameroon and Niger on numerous occasions. This is precisely the pretext that the U.S. and its European partners are using to become further involved militarily in the region.


    Lake Chad and France’s Neocolonial Agenda in West Africa

    French soldiers (3rd RPIMa) and Nigerien. Fort Madama in Niger, 12 November 2014.

    French soldiers stationed in Niger as part of Operation Barkhane, speak with a Nigerien soldier at Fort Madama in Niger, November 12, 2014. (Photo: Thomas Goisque/CC)

    For the last five hundred years, colonial powers have dominated the political and economic life of Africa. But while formal colonialism may have ended decades ago, the informal dominance and control of Africa continues. This neocolonial control over the continent and its resources is at the root of all conflicts in Africa, including the current crisis in Lake Chad.

    Francophone West Africa includes Cameroon, Niger and Chad. This makes France, which continues to be the main trading partner for these countries, into a dominant player in the scramble for Lake Chad. The 2012 coup in Mali and the civil war that subsequently ensued gave the French military the opening it needed to permanently station military forces throughout the region. The ongoing Operation Barkhane has at least 3,000 French troops spread across the Sahel region, including in Niger and Chad.

    However, the real question is not whether or not France is right in coming to the defense of its former colonies, but what its real agenda actually is.

    Despite its rhetoric of maintaining democracy, stability and the rule of law, France has very self-interested motives. With regard to Boko Haram, Nigeria and the Lake Chad basin, France is the primary beneficiary of the energy extraction taking place there, as its port of Le Havre is the final destination for the unrefined oil. Taken in terms of both actual and potential exports, the area’s vast energy reserves are worth billions. But France’s economic interest in the region does not stop with energy.

    France has a keen interest in exploiting lucrative mineral deposits throughout the area, as is evidenced by the fact that the government of French President François Hollande is investing more than half a billion dollars in a new state-owned mining company.

    French President Francois Hollande, left, welcomes Chad President Idriss Deby Itno, prior to a meeting at the Elysee Palace in Paris, Saturday, Aug. 20, 2016. (AP/Kamil Zihnioglu)

    French President Francois Hollande, left, welcomes Chad President Idriss Deby Itno, prior to a meeting at the Elysee Palace in Paris, Saturday, Aug. 20, 2016. (AP/Kamil Zihnioglu)

    As French industry minister Arnaud Montebourg stated while announcing the creation of the new venture, “Francophone African countries, notably, would like to work with us, rather than do business with foreign multinationals.” Naturally, one should take such a statement with a healthy dose of skepticism as to just how much choice those countries, let alone their citizens, will have in the matter. Not only will France be looking to exploit mineral deposits of lithium and germanium, but also rare earth metals that have become highly lucrative due to significant demand for the metals in the tech manufacturing industry.

    Moreover, Montebourg’s use of the phrase “foreign multinationals” is quite revealing. For one thing, it seems that the French political and business elite do not consider themselves to be “foreign” when operating in Francophone countries. The neocolonialism of such a mentality is impossible to ignore.

    Secondly, it seems almost self-evident that the “foreign multinationals” to which he is referring are ]Chinese companies (both private and state-owned) that have made tremendous inroads throughout the region in terms of mineral extraction and investment. France is clearly cognizant of a possible turf war between themselves and China over West Africa’s resources.

    There are also vast deposits of uranium throughout the region that have piqued France’s interest.  As Think Africa Press reported in 2014:

    “France currently sources over 75 percent of its electricity from nuclear energy and is dependent on Niger for much of its immediate and future uranium supply. This dependence could grow even further when production at the recently-discovered Imouraren uranium deposit is up and running in 2015. The mine is set to produce 5,000 tonnes of uranium per year and would help make Niger the second-largest uranium producer in the world. Areva, which is 87 percent owned by the French state and holds a majority share in three out of the four uranium mining companies operating in Niger, is funding the new mine.”

    Add to this the fact that Nigerian President Mahamadou Issoufou is a former employee of Areva, a company that still maintains a near monopoly over the uranium trade. It should come as no surprise that the main competition for Areva (and France) for this lucrative trade is China, which “already owns a 37-percent stake in Niger’s SOMINA mine and has carried out uranium exploration throughout the country.”

    The battle between France and China for control of strategic resources and markets is becoming an increasingly critical part of France’s overall policy in the region. France’s goal is to re-establish economic hegemony in its Francophone sphere of influence, as is evidenced by the French government’s policy paper “A partnership for the future: 15 proposals for a new economic dynamic between Africa and France,” which could be seen as a blueprint for French policy in the area.  

    This increased emphasis is likely due to the fact that “over the past decade, France’s share of African trade plummeted from 10 to 4.7 percent, while China’s African market share soared to over 16 percent in 2011.” The contours of this proxy war are unmistakably apparent.


    The Growing U.S. Military Footprint

    Compared to France, the U.S. is waging an even greater geopolitical and strategic proxy war with China over Africa’s resources. While China’s influence on the continent has grown by leaps and bounds, Western countries, especially the U.S., have been left scrambling to shore up their hegemony over the continent. The U.S. has chosen to meet Chinese economic penetration with military occupation, both overtly and covertly.

    The U.S. has established a vast network of drone bases in the region, though military officials refuse to describe the facilities as anything more than “temporary staging areas.” But a simple look at the map above, combined with disparate reports in multiple media outlets, paints a much more insidious picture of what the U.S. is doing.

    The U.S. Military’s Pivot to Africa as of 2013. (Image: TomDispatch)

    The U.S. Military’s Pivot to Africa as of 2013. (Image: TomDispatch)

    Under the auspices of AFRICOM, the U.S. operates in nearly every significant country on the continent.  In Chad, which figures prominently in the Boko Haram narrative, the U.S. has indefinitely stationed military personnel, ostensibly to search for Nigerian schoolgirls who were kidnapped by Boko Haram.  

    However, the White House’s own press statement reveals a much more far-reaching objective:

    “These personnel will support the operation of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft for missions over Northern Nigeria and the surrounding area.”  

    Translation: The U.S. has drones and other surveillance covering the entire Lake Chad Basin.

    While the U.S. only acknowledged sending a small contingent of soldiers, the reality is that far more U.S. forces are engaging in Chad in one form or another. This is perhaps best illustrated by the not-so-coincidental fact that Chad played host to AFRICOM’s Flintlock 2015 military exercises “which [took place on] Feb. 16, 2015 in the capital N’Djamena with outstations in Niger, Nigeria, Cameroon and Tunisia, and will [run] through March 9, 2015.”  

    To summarize, U.S. military personnel led exercises all throughout the region, with specific attention to the Lake Chad Basin countries. But it certainly doesn’t stop there.

    The U.S. now operates two critical drone bases in the region, with one base in Cameroon’s city of Garoua and another in the Nigerian city of Agadez.  As the Intercept reported:

    “’The top MILCON [military construction] project for USAFRICOM is located in Agadez, Niger to construct a C-17 and MQ-9 capable airfield,’ reads a 2015 planning document. ‘RPA presence in NW Africa supports operations against seven [Department of State]-designated foreign terrorist organizations. Moving operations to Agadez aligns persistent ISR to current and emerging threats over Niger and Chad, supports French regionalization and extends range to cover Libya and Nigeria.’

    The strategic value of such bases is perfectly clear. As the Washington Post noted:

    “The Predator drones in Niger…give the Pentagon a strategic foothold in West Africa… Niger also borders Libya and Nigeria, which are also struggling to contain armed extremist movements… [Nigerien] President Issoufou Mahamadou said his government invited Washington to send surveillance drones because he was worried that the country might not be able to defend its borders from Islamist fighters based in Mali, Libya or Nigeria… “We welcome the drones,” Mahamadou said… “Our countries are like the blind leading the blind,” he said. “We rely on countries like France and the United States. We need cooperation to ensure our security.”

    And here the connection between U.S. military engagement and Boko Haram becomes painfully clear.  The U.S. cynically exploits the instability in the region – a direct outgrowth of the U.S.-NATO war against Libya – to further entrench its military.


    U.S. Military Empire Expands Elsewhere in Africa

    A soldier stands guard outside the Splendid Hotel in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, in the wake of a weekend attack that killed up to 32 people, Jan. 18 , 2016. (AP/Sunday Alamba)

    A soldier stands guard outside the Splendid Hotel in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, in the wake of a weekend attack that killed up to 32 people, Jan. 18 , 2016. (AP/Sunday Alamba)

    Recent years have seen other countries in sub-Saharan Africa struggling with terrorism and in desperate need of “assistance” from the U.S. While some might recall the January 2016 attack on a luxury hotel in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso’s capital, few know that the U.S. uses the country as a key node in its aerial surveillance and military intelligence network in Africa.

    As the Washington Post reported in 2012:

    A key hub of the U.S. spying network can be found in Ouagadougou, the…capital of Burkina Faso… Under a classified surveillance program code-named Creek Sand, dozens of U.S. personnel and contractors have come to Ouagadougou in recent years to establish a small air base on the military side of the international airport. The unarmed U.S. spy planes fly hundreds of miles north to Mali, Mauritania and the Sahara.

    Of course, these examples only scratch the surface of the vast military and surveillance architecture constructed by the U.S. in Africa over the last decade or so.  

    With China becoming an increasingly dominant economic force on the continent, the U.S., France and other powers have moved to consolidate their control over both the resources and politics of Africa through militarization. The crisis in Lake Chad is just one of the sad results of these efforts.

    It would be incorrect to say that the crisis in Lake Chad is entirely and solely attributable to imperialist intrigue. It must be said that climate change is also playing a huge role, as Lake Chad, once the largest reservoir in the Sahel region of Africa, has lost roughly 80 percent of its total area. The loss of portions of the lake has had a direct negative effect on people’s livelihoods and access to water. This has had the effect of driving desperate young men into the arms of Boko Haram and other criminal groups.

    Though the circumstances may be complex, the Lake Chad crisis cannot be fundamentally resolved without addressing the political and geopolitical questions at the heart of it all.

    There is a certain dialectical irony in the fact that climate change helps fuel the loss of Lake Chad which, at the very same moment, is being exploited for its oil wealth. There is an almost tragicomic quality to such a reality.
    Sadly, it is an all too painful reality for the millions of Africans who live it every day.   

    Be Sociable, Share!


      Print This Story Print This Story
      You Might Also Like  
      This entry was posted in Foreign Affairs, Front Page: Inside Stories, Inside Stories, Investigations, News, Top Stories, Top Story and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
      • James Wherry

        “tapatio” is determined to turn THIS and every other thread on MintPressNews into his personal vendetta against Jews, gays and any Christian who does not agree with him. It’s proof he is a neo-NAZ!.

        Despite my disagreements with “TeeJae,” we were at least trying to have an intelligent conversation about U.S. activities in west Africa. “tapatio” has spent the past 2 days spewing forth hatred of Jews to incite violence against them and telling us that homosexuality is “abnormal” and a “disease” and that “all gays agree” that it is the result of aberrant DNA or childhood sxxual trauma.

        “tapatio” is no more a “Green Party member” than Donald Trump is. He is simply here to proselytize for like-minded trolls who share his hatred of Jews, Gays and Anyone Else he disagrees with. You can judge which one of his spent all his time on this thread, yesterday and whether that neo-NAZ! “has a life.”

      • tapatio


      • Pingback: NATO’s War Of Resources Is Causing A Humanitarian Crisis In West Africa | Shafaqna English()

      • TeeJae

        Excellent analysis, Mr. Draitser. Thank you.

      • James Wherry

        America is working with West African nations to train with them to destroy Boko Harem. The author of this article apparently is opposed to that work and must support Boko Harem. Does MintPressNews?

        • TeeJae

          You might want to actually read the article before parroting the same false Washington propaganda as its lapdog media. You’ll then realize your questions make no sense.

          • James Wherry

            TeeJae, I stated a simple fact: the American military just finished up joint training exercises with west African militaries to combat Boko Harem.

            If you have evidence that the U.S. military was secretly on vacation in Thailand, that week, please provide the evidence (I want in on it!).

            • TeeJae

              You should know by now that combating terrorists (aka “fighting the war on terror”) is just a guise the US uses to justify intervening in countries in order to further its economic interests. In Africa, it’s Boko Haram and al-Qaeda and now also ISIS. In Syria (and now Iraq…again), it’s ISIS.

              The US’s joint exercises with foreign militaries all over the world are about protecting US interests, period. Africa is no exception. Despite all its ridiculous rhetoric about “humanitarianism” and “democracy-building,” the US doesn’t really want to defeat the terrorists. It needs them to continually justify its non-stop imperialism.

              Again, I urge you to read the article to gain some (much-needed) knowledge.

              • James Wherry

                No, TeeJae: I’ve worked for the DoD in Africa, before, and that is not the case. You do what many Leftists do: you attack America by challenging its motives. The reason is a simple lack of integrity on your part. “Motives” are generally impossible to prove or disprove. I would hope that any defeat of global terrorists WOULD advance American interests. ANY American policy should do so, including giving to charity. Why do you think any other nation acts otherwise? The reason I dismiss the Left is the “Blame America” mantra gets old.

                “Trans-Saharan Counterterrorism Initiative”

                “US-led exercise in Chad prepares troops to fight terror”
                By Thomas Fessy Mao, Chad

                “U.S. Increases Antiterrorism Exercises With African Militaries”
                By HELENE COOPERMAY 26, 2016

                • TeeJae

                  No, I’m stating the US’s motives, as a matter of fact, based on its past actions. It has nothing to do with being Left or Right, or up or down, or front or back, or whatever label you want to slap on me so you can pigeon-hole me into some irrelevant box. Lose the labels. They’re meaningless.

                  And speaking of meaningless, don’t cite mainstream media sources to support your arguments.

                  • tapatio

                    Wherry’s POV is that of a US Army major, employed by “Civil Affairs” – the critters that we called “hearts-and-minds” or psychological warfare (psy-ops) in Vietnam. Civil Affairs was responsible for the Phoenix Program – “Here’s a candy bar. Don’t you love America? No? Then, here’s some napalm or W-P”.

                    I can’t imagine anyone with that mind-set and his predatory sxxual behavior being capable of rational discussion/argument.

                  • James Wherry

                    I’ll cite any credible source. The fact that an item comes from the mainstream media does not make it inaccurate or false. Most of the problems with the mainstream media come from their bias – what they focus on – not the facts.

                    Your argument is that “America has acted on behalf of its economic interests in time past, THEREFORE everything it will ever do is based on that sole motivation and nothing else.”

                    1. America is made of many people influencing the government. Those people have many motives including altruistic motives.

                    2. This is simply a fallacy and is based on what appears to be your own, anti-American bias.

                    • TeeJae

                      The mainstream media are not credible because they present one-sided (often non-factual) narratives dictated by Washington for the purpose of manufacturing public opinion. This is done by distorting, obscuring and outright omitting the facts.

                      1. No. Most people influencing government are greedy and only looking out for their personal interests.

                      2. No. It is based on the US’s past actions. But you won’t see it if you refuse to open your eyes. Why such denial? Why such disbelief that the US has committed horrific atrocities across the globe throughout history? As a US citizen, I understand how difficult it is to see the truth. It’s very disturbing, even horrifying, to learn what this country’s government has done to its fellow humans. But for the good of humanity, it’s important to know and understand.

                      The information is there if you seek it out. I just read this about Korea. Sickening.

      • tapatio


        BTW…..the Kagan war profiteer family has just been brought into the regime of America’s new Führer – Donald Trump. YOU are still paying the huge salaries of these murdering Zionist criminals (their activities are in DIRECT violation of the US Constitution and international laws/treaties).


        The Rothschilds created Zionism, the Saudi “royals” and the Bolshevik “Revolution” as vehicles to expand its power. Bolshevism (Communism) failed. Zionism (Judeo-Fascism) has, so far, partially succeeded.

        First is a plan, written for Netanyahu’s reign as Emperor of Greater Israel. The writer is the pseudo-American Zionist fanatic, Richard Perle, written in 1996………

        “………by establishing the precedent that Syrian territory is not immune to attacks emanating from Lebanon by Israeli proxy forces.”

        Next is a report A Report of The Project for the New American Century completed in September 2000………..

        Compare actual events from 2001 to date to the plans outlined in this “report”. Please note, at the end of the report, the list of fanatical Zionists and their sycophants who are responsible for……

        “REBUILDING AMERICA’S DEFENSES Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century”

        “Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq — an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right”

        Paul Wolfowitz
        William Kristol
        Alvin Bernstein
        Eliot Cohen
        David Epstein
        Donald Kagan
        Fred Kagan
        Robert Kagan
        Robert Killebrew
        Steve Rosen
        Gary Schmitt
        Abram Shulsky
        Dov Zakheim

        • James Wherry

          Pretending that Judaism is responsible for Islam is absurd. It shows you cannot deal with reality. ISIL, Boko Harem and Al-Quaeda all preach from the Koran – not the Talmud.

          • tapatio



            • James Wherry
            • James Wherry

              Your Fuhrer’s propaganda about Jesus is well known, but the Bible foretold of Jesus that the Messiah would be a Jew “born of a woman/born under the Law.”

              • tapatio

                Adolf Hitler was a backward, poorly educated creature (much like your beloved Reichskanzler Drumpf and his followers). He learned a bit about Judaism, very possibly from his Jewish grandfather, which horrified him. He saw the rape of Germany by Jew banksters and, like most backward people, decided that all Jews were evil. He wasn’t quite right – most Jews support evil in the hope of riding its coat-tails. They are far, far too cowardly a cult-ure to actually BE evil.

                Hitler used Judaism, in the full knowledge that the REAL criminal Jews were out of reach, laughing in New York and London, as a focal point for the justifiable rage of the German people – who had been manipulated into WW I. Some of the Jews that Hitler killed were complete innocents. The rest were nasty little disease vectors, hoping to get in on the spoils of the Rothschilds and the other predatory Jewish gods.

                • James Wherry

                  And yet you PRAISE Adolph Hitler for the Holocaust and you PRAISE the NAZ! Party of WWII Germany for the Holocaust as “an act of self-defense by non-Jews.” Sounds like he’s YOUR boy.

                  • tapatio


                    President Roosevelt convened the Evian conference July 6-15 1938, to deal with the Jewish refugee problem. The Jewish Agency delegation headed by Golda Meir (Meirson) ignored a German offer to allow Jews to emigrate to other countries for $250 a head, and the Zionists made no effort to influence the United States and the 32 other countries attending the conference to allow immigration of German and Austrian Jews. [Source]
                    On Feb 1, 1940 Henry Montor executive vice-President of the United Jewish Appeal refused to intervene for a shipload of Jewish refugees stranded on the Danube river, stating that “Palestine cannot be flooded with… old people or with undesirables.” [Source]
                    Read “The Millions That Could Have Been Saved” by I.DombIt is an historical fact that in 1941 and again in 1942, the German Gestapo offered all European Jews transit to Spain, if they would relinquish all their property in Germany and Occupied France; on condition that: a) none of the deportees travel from Spain to Palestine; and b) all the deportees be transported from Spain to the USA or British colonies, and there to remain; with entry visas to be arranged by the Jews living there; and c) $1000.00 ransom for each family to be furnished by the Agency, payable upon the arrival of the family at the Spanish border at the rate of 1000 families daily.
                    The Zionist leaders in Switzerland and Turkey received this offer with the clear understanding that the exclusion of Palestine as a destination for the deportees was based on an agreement between the Gestapo and the Mufti.
                    The answer of the Zionist leaders was negative, with the following comments: a) ONLY Palestine would be considered as a destination for the deportees. b) The European Jews must accede to suffering and death greater in measure than the other nations, in order that the victorious allies agree to a “Jewish State” at the end of the war. c) No ransom will be paid This response to the Gestapo’s offer was made with the full knowledge that the alternative to this offer was the gas chamber.
                    These treacherous Zionist leaders betrayed their own flesh and blood. Zionism was never an option for Jewish salvation. Quite the opposite, it was a formula for human beings to be used as pawns for the power trip of several desperadoes. A perfidy! A betrayal beyond description!
                    In 1944, at the time of the Hungarian deportations, a similar offer was made, whereby all Hungarian Jewry could be saved. The same Zionist hierarchy again refused this offer (after the gas chambers had already taken a toll of millions).
                    The British government granted visas to 300 rabbis and their families to the Colony of Mauritius, with passage for the evacuees through Turkey. The “Jewish Agency” leaders sabotaged this plan with the observation that the plan was disloyal to Palestine, and the 300 rabbis and their families should be gassed.
                    On December 17, 1942 both houses of the British Parliament declared its readiness to find temporary refuge for endangered persons. The British Parliament proposed to evacuate 500,000 Jews from Europe, and resettle them in British colonies, as a part of diplomatic negotiations with Germany. This motion received within two weeks a total of 277 Parliamentary signatures. On Jan. 27, when the next steps were being pursued by over 100 M.P.’s and Lords, a spokesman for the Zionists announced that the Jews would oppose the motion because Palestine was omitted. [Source]
                    On Feb. 16, 1943 Roumania offered 70,000 Jewish refugees of the Trans-Dniestria to leave at the cost of $50 each. This was publicized in the New York papers. Yitzhak Greenbaum, Chairman of the Rescue Committee of the Jewish Agency, addressing the Zionist Executive Council in Tel Aviv Feb. 18 1943 said, “when they asked me, “couldn’t you give money out of the United Jewish Appeal funds for the rescue of Jews in Europe, I said NO! and I say again, NO!…one should resist this wave which pushes the Zionist activities to secondary importance.” On Feb. 24, 1943 Stephen Wise, President of the American Jewish Congress and leader of the American Zionists issued a public refusal to this offer and declared no collection of funds would seem justified. In 1944, the Emergency Committee to Save the Jewish People called upon the American government to establish a War Refugee Board. Stephen Wise testifying before a special committee of Congress objected to this proposal. [Source]
                    During the course of the negotiations mentioned above, Chaim Weizman, the first “Jewish statesman” stated: “The most valuable part of the Jewish nation is already in Palestine, and those Jews living outside Palestine are not too important”. Weizman’s cohort, Greenbaum, amplified this statement with the observation “One cow in Palestine is worth more than all the Jews in Europe”.

              • tapatio
                • James Wherry

                  This is a fake quote, as well. Typical of your NAZ! Party.

                • James Wherry

                  Gotta love your fake quote. Here’s what Einstein really said:


                  “You were the focus of much attack on the part of the Nazis in Germany because of your Jewishness. What explanation have you come up with for why the Jews have been hated so much throughout history?


                  “It seems obvious to me that Jews make an ideal scapegoat for any country experiencing social, economic, or political difficulties. The reason for this is twofold. First of all, there is hardly a country in the world that does not have a Jewish segment in the population. And secondly, wherever Jews reside, they are a minority of the population, and a small minority at that, so that they are not powerful enough to defend themselves against a mass attack. It is very easy for governments to divert attention from their own mistakes by blaming Jews for this or that political theory, such as communism or socialism.

                  “For instance, after the First World War, many Germans accused the Jews first of starting the war and then of losing it. This is nothing new, of course. Throughout history, Jews have been accused of all sorts of treachery, such as poisoning water wells or murdering children as religious sacrifices. Much of this can be attributed to jealousy, because, despite the fact that Jewish people have always been thinly populated in various countries, they have always had a disproportionate number of outstanding public figures.”


                  • tapatio

                    Einstein Letter Warning Of
                    Zionist Facism In Israel
                    Letter That Albert Einstein Sent to the New York Times
                    1948, Protesting the Visit of Menachem Begin

                    Letters to the Editor
                    New York Times
                    December 4, 1948


                    Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our times is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the “Freedom Party” (Tnuat Haherut), a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Naz! and Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine.

                    The current visit of Menachem Begin, leader of this party, to the United States is obviously calculated to give the impression of American support for his party in the coming Israeli elections, and to cement political ties with conservative Zionist elements in the United States. Several Americans of national repute have lent their names to welcome his visit. It is inconceivable that those who oppose fascism throughout the world, if correctly informed as to Mr. Begin’s political record and perspectives, could add their names and support to the movement he represents.

                    Before irreparable damage is done by way of financial contributions, public manifestations in Begin’s behalf, and the creation in Palestine of the impression that a large segment of America supports Fascist elements in Israel, the American public must be informed as to the record and objectives of Mr. Begin and his movement. The public avowals of Begin’s party are no guide whatever to its actual character. Today they speak of freedom, democracy and anti-imperialism, whereas until recently they openly preached the doctrine of the Fascist state. It is in its actions that the terrorist party betrays its real character; from its past actions we can judge what it may be expected to do in the future.

                    Attack on Arab Village

                    A shocking example was their behavior in the Arab village of Deir Yassin. This village, off the main roads and surrounded by Jewish lands, had taken no part in the war, and had even fought off Arab bands who wanted to use the village as their base. On April 9 (THE NEW YORK TIMES), terrorist bands attacked this peaceful village, which was not a military objective in the fighting, killed most of its inhabitants ? 240men, women, and children – and kept a few of them alive to parade as captives through the streets of Jerusalem. Most of the Jewish community was horrified at the deed, and the Jewish Agency sent a telegram of apology to King Abdullah of Trans-Jordan. But the terrorists, far from being ashamed of their act, were proud of this massacre, publicized it widely, and invited all the foreign correspondents present in the country to view the heaped corpses and the general havoc at Deir Yassin. The Deir Yassin incident exemplifies the character and actions of the Freedom Party.

                    Within the Jewish community they have preached an admixture of ultranationalism, religious mysticism, and racial superiority. Like other Fascist parties they have been used to break strikes, and have themselves pressed for the destruction of free trade unions. In their stead they have proposed corporate unions on the Italian Fascist model. During the last years of sporadic anti-British violence, the IZL and Stern groups inaugurated a reign of terror in the Palestine Jewish community. Teachers were beaten up for speaking against them, adults were shot for not letting their children join them. By gangster methods, beatings, window-smashing, and wide-spread robberies, the terrorists intimidated the population and exacted a heavy tribute.

                    The people of the Freedom Party have had no part in the constructive achievements in Palestine. They have reclaimed no land, built no settlements, and only detracted from the Jewish defense activity. Their much-publicized immigration endeavors were minute, and devoted mainly to bringing in Fascist compatriots.

                    Discrepancies Seen

                    The discrepancies between the bold claims now being made by Begin and his party, and their record of past performance in Palestine bear the imprint of no ordinary political party. This is the unmistakable stamp of a Fascist party for whom terrorism (against Jews, Arabs, and British alike), and misrepresentation are means, and a “Leader State” is the goal.

                    In the light of the foregoing considerations, it is imperative that the truth about Mr. Begin and his movement be made known in this country. It is all the more tragic that the top leadership of American Zionism has refused to campaign against Begin’s efforts, or even to expose to its own constituents the dangers to Israel from support to Begin.

                    The undersigned therefore take this means of publicly presenting a few salient facts concerning Begin and his party; and of urging all concerned not to support this latest manifestation of fascism.

                    ALBERT EINSTEIN
                    ISIDORE ABRAMOWITZ
                    HANNAH ARENDT
                    ABRAHAM BRICK
                    RABBI JESSURUN CARDOZO
                    HERMAN EISEN, M.D.
                    HAYIM FINEMAN
                    M. GALLEN, M.D.
                    H.H. HARRIS
                    ZELIG S. HARRIS
                    SIDNEY HOOK
                    FRED KARUSH
                    BRURIA KAUFMAN
                    IRMA L. LINDHEIM
                    NACHMAN MAISEL
                    SEYMOUR MELMAN
                    MYER D. MENDELSON
                    M.D., HARRY M. OSLINSKY
                    SAMUEL PITLICK
                    FRITZ ROHRLICH
                    LOUIS P. ROCKER
                    RUTH SAGIS
                    ITZHAK SANKOWSKY
                    I.J. SHOENBERG
                    SAMUEL SHUMAN
                    M. SINGER
                    IRMA WOLFE
                    STEFAN WOLF.

                    New York, Dec. 2, 1948

      • Pingback: TOON OF THE DAY ~~ NATO’S ‘WAR ON TERROR’ | Desertpeace()

      • Pingback: NATO’s War Of Resources Is Causing A Humanitarian Crisis In West Africa | samgo65()