“The university is the temple of intellect, and I am its high priest.”-Miguel de Unamuno, speaking against irrationalism as rector of the University of Salamanca (Spain), 12 October 1936
Amid Donald J. Trump’s multiple defilements, only one seems to have been entirely forgotten. This was the former president’s melding of his own “brand name” with the lofty idea of a university, an idea that 20th century Spanish philosopher Miguel de Unamuno held to be “sacred.” Ironically, at a time when Americans needed credible reassurance that the unending human struggle against anti-reason could expect support from their country’s leading universities, Mr. Trump could envision only one more crass opportunity for crude commerce and personal profit.
Even now, even after a defeated Trump has been convincingly associated with a litany of serious crimes (the most egregious being the January 6, 2021 US Capitol insurrection), this former president’s most sustained infraction was his announced war on intellect. Trump’s 2016 campaign assertion, “I love the poorly educated,” especially when complemented by his proud preference for “attitude” over “preparation,” remains conspicuous and worrisome.
Significantly, this calculated statement represented little more than a recycled version of Joseph Goebbels’ Nuremberg rally mantra back in 1934 Germany: “Intellect rots the brain.”
For Donald Trump, and from the start, hyperbole and simplification became useful and ready-to-use substitutes for dialectical thinking. All too often, and by any reasonable standard, this president’s disjointed stream-of-conscious observations on personal meetings or planned policies were limited to monosyllabic grunts or visceral spasms of “amazing,” “fantastic,” “incredible,” etc. On several noteworthy occasions, Americans were instructed: “Barbed wire can be very beautiful.” Lest we forget, Trump’s regularly recurrent observation about his signature border wall was that “it will have a beautiful door.” And all this from one who previously declared: (1) nuclear weapons could be used against hurricanes; and (2) “the Moon is part of Mars.”
There is more. Donald Trump was effectively addicted to rancor and acrimony, to “sworn” enemies of Reason.For him, always, crudely ad hominem attacks represent a calculated way to ward off any daunting challenges of intellectual complexity. Similar observations may be made about his seemingly endless resort to barren clichés and empty phrases.
“This is a nation of laws….” Trump once managed to declare from variously prepared scripts, but that contrived reassurance never had any anchorage in tangible policy. For the most part, during his tenure, matters of national and international law were casually disregarded. Confronted by a president whose highest notion of refined legal reasoning was the argumentum ad baculum – that is, an overtly aggressive and illegitimate reliance upon defamation/intimidation – the American people lost all sight of any long-term legal consequences.
Now, long and short-term, these consequences (both domestic and international) are proving themselves intolerable.
Donald Trump is no legal scholar. Still, international law remains an integral part of the law of the United States. This critically vital incorporation is codified at Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution (the “Supremacy Clause”) and at several corresponding U.S. Supreme Court decisions (principally, the Paquete Habana, 1900).
In fashioning of US national policies, reason-based intellect should never be taken as evidence of presidential liability. Yet, as the cameras pan around the audience de jour at Trump’s fearfully adrenalized “rallies,” both during and after his presidency, it is hard to imagine even a scintilla of crowd interest in logic, law or lucidity. In the fashion of other wrongly bedazzled audiences in 20th century history, this is not a crowd that wanted its “great leader” to be learned, law-minded or in any way well-read.
This same portentous conclusion applies to present-day Trump faithful and all proponents of anti-reason.
In the end, all Americans ought finally to understand that Mr. Trump himself was not and is not the underlying “pathology.” This once-unimaginable presidency was merely the most visible symptom of a more grievously systemic disorder. This much broader illness is an American society (universities included) that persistently and wittingly turns its collective back on Reason. Within this despairingly lethal society, reason-backed citizen arguments increasingly count for nothing.
“The crowd,” observed 19th century Danish philosopher, Soren Kierkegaard, “is untruth.” Obligingly, even today, Mr. Trump’s undaunted minions insist upon chanting gibberish in chorus. Even for those who have had just a minimal acquaintance with modern history, the dark tenor of any such ritualistic chanting should be palpably familiar and sinister. It’s the same chanting that brought this writer and his family to the United States from Europe shortly after the War.
Truth is exculpatory. The Trump Era was not by any means a normal or sustainable American presidency, not by any reasonable standards of assessment or comparison. Now, Americans must inquire, audibly, no longer in trepidation or sotto voce: “Was this in any way excusable and somehow repeatable American presidency?
Former president Donald Trump cherishes chaos in national and international politics, an anti-Reason affection that is impossible to reconcile with the most rudimentary legal expectations of legitimate governance. The Founding Fathers of the United States did not generally believe in democracy. Most had even agreed with Alexander Hamilton’s trenchant observation that “the people are a great beast.” Thomas Jefferson, arguably the most democratic of the Founders, tied any residual hopes for a durable democracy to a proper system of citizen education. In his Notes on Virginia, however, the future third president described “the people” as “rubbish” from which a small number of gifted individuals could be “raked” once each year.
When Sophocles, an early Greek tragedian, held “despicable” any king who would place his own personal popularity ahead of national well-being, he also (in common with Aeschylus and Euripides) lamented that corrupt leadership would inevitably spawn a corrupt commonwealth. Hence, when King Oedipus discovers his own “tragic flaw,” the Chorus recognizes distressingly causal connections to famine and disorder then prevailing in Thebes. Much later, when an American president named Trump remained focused on his own personal popularity, and not on national security and well-being, citizens faced similar connections.
Looking back, at least on its face, Trump University was less defiling than its namesake’s multiple derelictions in law, civil liberties, war avoidance and human rights. Nonetheless, in the longer term, this “university’s” open disregard for any American “life of the mind” set an egregious example of leadership contrivance. By itself, Trump University’s direct harms were limited “only” to those who bought into the illusion of a real university (some of its supporters even called it an “Ivy League university”), but its most enduring and significant harms will prove vastly more difficult to extirpate.
Going forward, to suitably combat such corrosive national harms, it should become the special responsibility of university professors and students (among assorted others) to maintain their casually venerated institutions as genuine exemplars of Intellect and Reason. In essence, even if our universities can no longer be taken seriously as “temples of intellect,” they can at least stand for something more deeply faithful to both human virtue and scientific truth.
 Recall, in this connection, Plato’s classic argument in The Republic that the Idea or “Form” is more meaningfully real than any of its tangible manifestations.
 See Karl Jaspers’ clarifying tour de force, Reason and Anti-Reason in our Time (1952).
 On the law-based closures of this “university,” see, inter alia: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/federal-court-approves-25-million-trump-university-settlement-n845181
 This preference was expressed most explicitly in Trump’s pre-Singapore Summit rhetoric on his then-upcoming meeting with North Korean President Kim Jong Un. See, Louis René Beres: https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2018/05/north-korea-nuclear-diplomacy-and-international-law/
 See, Louis René Beres: https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2020/11/louis-rene-beres-dominating-the-street/
 Dialectical thinking likely originated in Fifth Century BCE Athens, as Zeno, author of the Paradoxes, has been acknowledged by Aristotle as its inventor. In the middle dialogues of Plato, dialectic emerges as the supreme form of philosophic/analytic method. The dialectician, says Plato, is the special one who knows how to ask and then answer vital questions.
 William Blackstone, the jurist upon whose work the United States bases its own system of law, remarks at Book 4 of his Commentaries on the Law of England: “The law of nations (international law) is always binding upon all individuals and all states. Each state is expected, perpetually, to aid and enforce the law of nations as part of the common law, by inflicting an adequate punishment upon the offenses against that universal law.”
 Regarding such consequences, the peremptory rights assured by the American Declaration and Constitution can never be lawfully confined to citizens of the United States. This is because both documents were conceived by their authors as indisputable codifications of a pre-existing Natural Law. Though generally unrecognized, the United States was expressly founded upon the Natural Rights philosophies of the 18th century Enlightenment, especially Locke, Hobbes, Montesquieu and Rousseau. Thomas Jefferson was well acquainted with the classical writings of political philosophy from Plato to Diderot. In those early days of the Republic. an American president could not only read serious books, but could sometimes also write them.
 Spanish 20th century thinker Jose Ortega y’Gasset remarks presciently in The Revolt of the Masses (1932): “The mass man has no use for reason. He learns only in his own flesh.”
 See, by this author: Louis René Beres, https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2020/05/louis-beres-america-rise-and-fall/
 See, by this author, Louis René Beres, at The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/1997/03/01/opinion/the-swiss-had-their-villains-and-their-heroes.html
 See, by this author, Louis René Beres: https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2020/04/the-trump-presidency-a-breathtaking-assault-on-law-justice-and-security/
 See, in this regard, Perry Miller, The Life of the Mind in America (1965). See also: Jacques Barzun, The House of Intellect (1959).
 Seventeenth-century French philosopher Blaise Pascal remarks prophetically in Pensées: “All our dignity consists in thought…It is upon this that we must depend…Let us labor then to think well: this is the foundation of morality.” Similar reasoning characterizes the writings of Baruch Spinoza, Pascal’s 17th-century contemporary. In Book II of his Ethics Spinoza considers the human mind, or the intellectual attributes, and – drawing further upon René Descartes – strives to define an essential theory of learning and knowledge.
 “There is no longer a virtuous nation,” warned the poet William Butler Yeats, “and the best of us live by candlelight.”
 These mutually-reinforcing goals bring to mind a question posed originally by Honoré de Balzac about the “human comedy:” “Who is to decide which is the grimmer sight: withered hearts or empty skulls?”
Are Biden’s Troubles of his Own Making?
What a fractious world we live in. The somnambulist Biden has woken up in his nocturnal wanderings to hear complaints about China for its sea incursions close to the littoral areas of allies like Taiwan and Japan. Thus at the “Quad” (Australia, Japan, US and India) meeting in Tokyo, he reaffirmed US support for Taiwan, militarily if need be, to defend Taiwanese independence in what appeared to be a reversal of policy as earlier the US had recognized it as a province of China.
The Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) an economic union of the Quad and other Asia-Pacific countries has been revived — Trump had buried it earlier, aiming presumably higher but missing. Mr. Biden announced its reincarnation as the new Inter Pacific Economic Federation (IPEF).
All of which is the least of Mr. Biden’s headaches. There’s a full blown war in Ukraine to consider. And he promptly announced a $40.1 bill military aid package for Ukraine. Defense contractors couldn’t be more pleased. Lockheed Martin stock is up 6 percent in two days as it ramps up production of the Javelin anti-tank missile, doubling it according to the CEO to supply Ukraine.
Congress has now passed a $40 billion aid package. The amount is not trivial. For comparison, India, a country of more than a billion people with the third largest defence budget in the world, spends less than half that sum on weapons procurement.
The real question is going to be Mr. Putin’s response. He might well call it a move aimed at slaughtering young Russian boys, when he himself is asking for peace talks. Even President Zelensky, the quintessential blowhard politician, has been forced to admit that 50-100 Ukrainian soldiers are dying daily.
American interference in Ukraine has a long history. The planning and participation in a coup eight years ago (when Biden was vice president) and the selection of future leaders thereafter are all documented. On lack of European support for it at the time, Victoria Nuland, the then Deputy Secretary of State for Eurasian Affairs responded famously, “F–k the EU.” She has the dubious distinction of being the chief promoter of the so-called “soft coup” which led eventually to the fall of the elected Viktor Yanukovych government and thence to the divisions in Ukraine. The results have been the deaths of an estimated 13,000 people and the displacement of millions.
Since 2014 about one million refugees have left the country as a result of wars in the Donbas. Another 1.6 million were internally displaced. Following the latest fighting in 2022, the number of Ukrainians who have left the country has risen by another 6.6 million and another 7.7 million are displaced from their homes to other parts of the country. That in total is over a quarter of the country’s population of 44 million.
It is painful, pitiful, atrocious and appalling that in the 21st century, political leaders instead of resolving disputes have behaved in a manner ending in a human tragedy of these proportions. Let’s just say, none of the participants need queue up for a Nobel Peace Prize, although one had already received it before this and other misadventures.
The WW III that Biden and All Other Neocons Are Leading U.S. Toward
The intensely neoconservative U.S. President Joe Biden is leading the world into a World War III against both Russia and China, but despite the U.S. spending annually around half of the entire planet’s military expenditures (not only in its ‘Defense’ Department but in its Treasury Department and other Government agencies), America is actually inferior to both Russia and China regarding leading-edge geostrategically crucial technologies of both nuclear and laser weapons, and is getting farther behind each year, because for both Russia and China their own national sovereignty is what their enemy, the U.S. Government, aims to conquer, whereas no one poses a threat to the U.S. Government’s continuing rule over its own people (it becomes increasingly a police-state). The U.S. Government is the only and supreme champion of sanctions and coups and invasions for regime-change producing the creation of new vassal-nations throughout the globe, whereas both Russia and China must protect themselves from that or else become themselves new U.S. vassal-nations. So: they are laser-focused on NOT allowing America to grab their nation. Truly, for them, this is an existential issue, NOT a matter (such as is the case regarding the U.S. Government) of growing to become the world’s first and only all-encompassing global empire (a luxury that only America’s billionaires, who control the U.S. Government, require). This basic distinction is the reason why whereas the U.S. has over 800 military bases spread throughout the planet, Russia and China are concerned ONLY about not allowing U.S. forces to be based so near to their borders as to enable a U.S. missile to annihilate their capital’s command-and-control within less than ten minutes and so to enable the U.S. Government to grab control of them so fast that the targeted nation’s (Russia’s and China’s) retaliatory weapons won’t be launched in self-defense.
Consequently, for example, the geostrategically-focused CRUX youtube site headlined on May 23rd “Why The World Fears Putin’s ‘Flying Chernobyl’ Nuclear-Powered Cruise Missile”, and reported on Russia’s emerging “Buravestnik” nuclear-powered nuclear-warheaded missile that will be able to avoid all known types of anti-missile detection and tracking technologies and that will be able to fly for any distance because of its nuclear fuel. Though that pro-U.S.-Government, anti-Putin, CRUX-produced video says “Experts have underlined the threat that … this weapon may pose to the environment and human health” due to radioactive waste that’s released into the air during its flight, because there is no space inside the missile to store waste, even America’s National Defense magazine has admitted that “the amount of nuclear waste that this will produce is very tiny, … basically negligible,” which is hardly what CRUX headlines it as being — a “Flying Chernobyl.” CRUX went on to say, “Experts say that Putin’s Cold War mindset has normalised the development of such doomsday weapons.” It’s all regime-change-in-Russia propaganda.
In other words: the neocons’ aim to destroy Russia so fast that Russia won’t be able to destroy America in retaliation, is hogwash that’s probably funded, ultimately, by corporations such as Lockheed Martin, whose sales are exclusively or mainly to the U.S. Government and its allied governments (vassal-nations), which U.S.-and-allied weapons-making firms’ stock-values have soared ever since the end of the Cold War in 1991. It ended only on Russia’s side in 1991, but this supercharged it on America’s side. This unleashed a solely military-industrial-complex-controlled U.S. Government, which demands an ever-increasing percentage of the U.S. Government’s expenses to go toward its military, which, nonetheless, is privately owned and controlled; and its profits have soared.
The Secret U.S. & UK War Against Europe
The secret U.S.-and-UK war against Europe is well documented but little known, and some conceptual and historical background is pre-requisite in order to understand that documentation.
Historically, nations which share the same currency don’t go to war against one-another unless one of them is a colony of the other and is (like America’s colonies were in 1776) in a revolution to establish its independence against the imperialist one of them. Having a common currency is therefore a strong factor — but not a decisive one — toward peace between nations.
UK (Britain) has its pound, EU (the European Union) has its euro, and U.S. (America) has its dollar. U.S. (its dollar) and UK (its pound) are now in a war against EU (its euro), so as to help to extend into the future the dollar’s (America’s) existing dominance as the main global reserve currency — the future political and financial dominance by America, heading ultimately to control over all nations by America’s Government, practically obviating the United Nations and its (crippled) role till now as the authoritative source of international law: the laws that govern not within nations but instead between nations — replacing that existing body of international laws, by “the international rules based order,” in which America’s Government will be setting those “rules.” It’s an international struggle to replace the U.N. and all international laws, by a global dictatorship either by the U.S. and the UK, or else by the U.S. and the EU. All three of those currencies are, however, agreed together, to prevent there ever being control over international laws by the U.N. and its agencies, or by anything OTHER THAN the nations that are in America’s fundamental military alliance, which is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization: NATO. NATO is to be expanded in order to increase the U.S. Government’s (and the U.S. dollar’s) dominance, and thereby weaken the U.N.’s authority and its already-crippled and ever-weakening power.
UK’s aristocracy took control of American foreign policies on 25 July 1945, when, at the Potsdam Conference, America’s Anglophile General Dwight Eisenhower seconded Winston Churchill’s hostility against Joseph Stalin by telling the naive new U.S. President Harry Truman (who practically worshipped Eisenhower) that either the U.S. would ultimately conquer the Soviet Union, or else the Soviet Union would conquer America; and, so, the Cold War was then born, on that date, in Truman’s head, by his decision to agree with Eisenhower’s viewpoint and commence what became called “the Cold War” so as ultimately to conquer Russia. Truman then backed General George Marshall’s plan, The Marshall Plan, in 1948, to provide billions of dollars in U.S. reconstruction aid to any European country that would side with America against the Soviet Union in order to establish the planned future all-encompassing U.S. global dictatorship (control of the world by America’s billionaires and their corporations, especially granting them access to all countries’ natural resources).
America’s NATO military alliance was then created in 1949 to assist in the intended ‘anti-communist’ (actually anti-U.S.S.R) ultimate conquest (which would be the crowning achievement of America’s conquest over the entire world). Subsequently, America’s CIA brought America’s European allies together into what ultimately became the European Union, so that European nations would be controlled from Washington both militarily and economically. However, whereas formerly, the European Union was controlled by the U.S. Government almost as much as America’s NATO anti-Russian military alliance is, that is no longer the case; and, therefore, UK’s aristocracy, during 2016-2020, led a secret campaign, to remove UK altogether from the EU, and to install at 10 Downing Street, Prime Minister Boris Johnson to do Brexit — British exit from the EU — in what Britain’s billionaires saw as being the right way, keeping “the Anglosphere” (U.S. and UK) in control over the world, as opposed to the way in which UK’s then Prime Minister Theresa May was negotiating with the EU, which would have weakened not only America’s control over Europe, but also UK’s control over Europe, which latter (control over Europe) the UK controls only indirectly by virtue of its “Special Relationship” with the U.S. Government, which controls Europe. (For UK to lose its voting privilege in the EU was puny in comparison to UK’s increased power over the EU through being uniquely allied with America’s Government, which controls the EU.) That constitutes the necessary conceptual and historical background, in order to understand the following:
On May 15th, Kit Klarenberg at The Gray Zone bannered “Operation Surprise: leaked emails expose secret intelligence coup to install Boris Johnson”, and demonstrated from leaked private documents, that an authentic conspiracy by a clique of supremely well-connected individuals within Britain — Britain’s Deep State, answerable only to Britain’s billionaires and hereditary aristocracy — had actually engineered Theresa May’s downfall as Prime Minister and her replacement by Boris Johnson, so that UK would no longer be allied with EU except as being EU’s superior, because of Britain’s unique bonding with its former colony, America.
Here is how the leader of that cabal or conspiracy explained, on 4 October 2019, his strategy to a small group of followers — students, perhaps — which fortunately still remains on youtube:
However, his jargon in that stunningly revealing video (which now must be understood in light of Klarenberg’s 15 May 2022 revelations) requires some additional important historical and terminological background.
“The five-eyes alliance,” that speaker said, “keeps the free world free,” but what does this mean? His “free” is actually a lie; really, it’s the opposite of free; it is the voting and taxpaying publics’ enslavement to the U.S. and British Military-Industrial Complexes (or “MICs”), after the 1991 termination of the U.S.S.R and of its communism and of its Warsaw Pact military alliance that mirrored America’s NATO, and it now means only the U.S. regime’s rule of the world by its aristocracy, who are psychopathic and who control and profit from their armaments-makers while their publics pay for it in taxes and destructions and corpses. It means precisely what the originator of this conspiracy, Cecil Rhodes, had first stated in 1877, and it does constitute the “Special Relationship” that UK and U.S. have had ever since this “Special Relationship” was finally and fully in place and fully functioning, starting on 25 July 1945, when Truman set America onto this fateful path, of conquering the entire world — Rhodes’s vision of the world’s future, and of how Rhodes would create the organization to bring it about. Here is from that historic 1877 statement, by Rhodes (which the speaker in that video was actually — and very skiilfully — representing: this is the original statement of that viewpoint):
I contend that we are the finest race in the world and that the more of the world we inhabit the better it is for the human race. …
Why should we not form a secret society with but one object the furtherance of the British Empire and the bringing of the whole uncivilised world under British rule for the recovery of the United States for the making the Anglo-Saxon race but one Empire. …
What has been the main cause of the success of the Romish Church? The fact that every enthusiast, call it if you like every madman finds employment in it. Let us form the same kind of society a Church for the extension of the British Empire. …
To and for the establishment, promotion and development of a Secret Society, the true aim and object whereof shall be for the extension of British rule throughout the world, the perfecting of a system of emigration from the United Kingdom, and of colonisation by British subjects of all lands where the means of livelihood are attainable by energy, labour and enterprise, and especially the occupation by British settlers of the entire Continent of Africa, the Holy Land, the Valley of the Euphrates, the Islands of Cyprus and Candia, the whole of South America, the Islands of the Pacific not heretofore possessed by Great Britain, the whole of the Malay Archipelago, the seaboard of China and Japan, the ultimate recovery of the United States of America as an integral part of the British Empire, the inauguration of a system of Colonial representation in the Imperial Parliament which may tend to weld together the disjointed members of the Empire and, finally, the foundation of so great a Power as to render wars impossible and promote the best interests of humanity.
This was to be, and is, the foundation-stone of the renewed British Empire’s Deep State. (Here is its full document.)
Rhodses’s phrase “the best interests of humanity” expressed actually his racist-cultural viewpoint. It is, ultimately, an allegation that Her Majesty’s Government will be better to rule over international relations than any alternative, such as FDR’s intention for an armed United Nations, could ever be. Though Rhodes wanted international relations to be ruled by Britain’s aristocracy, FDR wanted it to be ruled by a U.N. which would be an armed democracy (federation) of nations. Hitler had his vision of a “Thousand-Year Reich,” but Churchill, who was an ardent Rhodesist, and who had been a protégé of Rhodes, favored, instead, Britain’s version of such an all-encompassing global empire, and this was/is to be achieved by harnessing Britain’s empire to the back of the far stronger American horse. Rhodes knew, even in 1877, that this would be the only way that the British Empire could successfully continue into future centuries.
Right now, the EU is sinking because by adhering to America’s demand to halt importation of gas and oil from the EU’s main supplier, which is Russia, energy-costs throughout the EU will soar and destroy their economy. And this is the strategy of Biden, and of Johnson. Biden, too, is a Rhodesist — just as Obama and Trump and Bush I & 2 and Clinton and Reagan were. The Governments of both U.S. and UK are Rhodesist. This doesn’t mean that in each and every matter, the two dictatorships agree, but that almost always they do; and, that when they don’t, UK’s Government doesn’t prod its American horse to buck and throw off its British rider, because those Brits know that this — riding on the American horse — is the ONLY way that they can continue the British empire to the extent that they have been allowed to do after WW II. The Rhodesists, and their “Five-Eyes Alliance” (Prins also refers to it as “the Anglosphere”, which is yet another phrase for what Rhodes was advocating for) are realists, who are trying to extend for as long as possible into the future their joint and collective aristocratic exploitation of the entire world. This means: keep Europe down, and all other countries out. It’s especially the case with regards to Germany, which is the EU’s industrial giant. As the New York Times reported on 5 April 2022:
Already Germany has reduced its dependence on gas from Russia [from 55%] by 15 percent, bringing it down to 40 percent in the first three months of the year, the energy ministry said.
But industry leaders have pushed back against imposing sanctions on Russian natural gas. Turning off the taps would cause “irreversible damage,” warned Martin Brudermüller, the chief executive of BASF, the chemical producer based in southwestern Germany. Making the transition from Russian natural gas to other suppliers or moving to alternative energy sources would require four to five years, not weeks, he said.
“Do we want to blindly destroy our entire national economy? What we have built up over decades?” Mr. Brudermüller said in an interview with the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung last week.
Already, due to pressure from the Biden Administration, and against German popular opinion and the pleas by German businesses of all sizes not to do it, Germany recently cancelled the recently completed Nord Stream II mammoth gas pipeline from Russia to Germany, which would have reduced gas prices in Europe. Instead, those prices are expected soon to double. And almost all of the EU will be taking a big hit from such decisions by Germany and other EU nations. It is a U.S./UK war against not only Russia but also Europe.
That is what Gwythian Prins, the leader of their cabal or conspiracy, who speaks in that youtube video, was actually talking about. (Klarenberg’s article says nothing about Rhodes, but what Prins says in this yotube video of him is likewise totally in keeping with Rhodes’s plan, about which the article by Klarenberg reveals lots of private evidence.) And America’s European stooges are doing everything they can to impose American rule, despite the fact that in certain details, UK’s aristocracy are profoundly dissatisfied with the extent to which the EU is not doing everything that UK’s aristocrats want them to do. UK’s aristocrats know that bucking the American horse would cause them to be thrown off of it. So, they choose, instead, to stay on it, and to merely nudge it whenever they want a minor change in its direction. And that is what Prins is advocating for, against the EU, upon his colleagues and students.
And that explains the documentation linked-to here regarding the U.S.-and-UK war against Europe. It is their war to keep Europe down, and all the rest of the world out, and only Britain still in the saddle riding the American horse to permanent victory, against the publics everywhere. It is for continuation of “the Washington Consensus.”
Klarenberg’s article includes lots of fascinating documentation, such as this photo of Prins’s email dated “September 22, 2018 at 4:53 AM” to a certain “Julian Blackwell, addressing his chum as ‘Trooper,’ a reference to the publisher’s SAS special forces background, and thanking him for his ‘hugely welcome and generous willingness to cover my foregone income for effectively the first half of this FY [financial year] [so that Prins would be able to engineer Boris Johnson’s replacing Theresa May].’” It would all be highly incriminating, if UK weren’t a dictatorship and Prins himself weren’t one of that dictatorship’s key agents. Interestingly, the organization at which Prins was speaking, “Veterans for Britain” (of which Prins is a board-member) was revealed on 5 December 2017 to be a “Dark Money” group fronting for Conservative Party UK and for Republican Party U.S. financial backers; and the group which revealed that was “Open Democracy,” which itself is funded by mainly Labour Party UK, and Democratic Party U.S., financial backers, but also by some middle-of-the-road (i.e., anti-Trump) U.S. Republican Party financial backers — in other words: “Open Democracy” is funded by billionaires in both America and Britain. In both countries, membership in the dictatorship class (the nation’s aristocracy) requires being a billionaire, or else close to that. The public are merely their suckers, to be manipulated (via propaganda from their media) however at least some of the billionaires want them to be suckered. There is consequently a constant contest between conservative and liberal billionaires, in order to s‘elect’ into national office only politicians who are backed by at least SOME of the billionaires. And one of the things that all of the billionaires are funding is propaganda in favor of keeping U.S. and UK on top, ruling the rest of “The Anglosphere,” and keeping Europe down, and all other countries out.
Unmasking India’s IB and RAW
India’s prime minister Narendra Modi granted a year-long extension in service to retiring heads of India’s Intelligence bureau (Arvind Kumar)...
How to Prepare for Your First Year in College
Securing college admission is an achievement you should be proud of. It feels even more fulfilling if you are admitted...
Russia Renews its Support to Mark Africa Day
Russia has renewed its unique confidence that “it will be able to ensure the development and implementation of many useful...
China and the Indo Pacific Economic Framework
The Indo Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) signed by a total of 13 countries, on May 23, 2022, in Tokyo is...
On international relations, the public is clueless, democracy fails
Nothing is more important to the people in any nation than international relations, because that includes national security, peace and...
Zelenskyy Could and Does Make Mistakes Too
The war in Ukraine has transformed President Volodymyr Zelenskyy from a rather weak leader to a world-renowned one who has...
Are Biden’s Troubles of his Own Making?
What a fractious world we live in. The somnambulist Biden has woken up in his nocturnal wanderings to hear complaints...
Economy3 days ago
Education Must Come First in our Global Economic Agenda
Russia4 days ago
The U.S. doesn’t want to protect Ukraine; it wants to defeat Russia
Tech News4 days ago
WEF Unveils Virtual Global Collaboration Village as the Future of Strong Public-Private Cooperation
Defense3 days ago
Is Fatigue Causing Twists and Turns in Russia Ukraine War?
Science & Technology3 days ago
Space exploration and the future exploitation of asteroids
Finance4 days ago
Human Consequences from the Fragmentation of the Global Economy
East Asia3 days ago
What China Does Not Know about India
Economy3 days ago
What are Market Anticipations and Policy Expectations as Shares Tumble?