The Case Against Immigration | Foreign Affairs - Why the United States Should Look Out for Itself - By Steven Camarota

Outlining his position on immigration in August of last year, Donald Trump, then the Republican candidate for U.S. president, made his motivating philosophy clear: “There is only one core issue in the immigration debate, and that issue is the well-being of the American people.” Although this nationalistic appeal may strike some readers as conservative, it is very similar to the position taken by U.S. civil rights icon and Democrat Barbara Jordan, who before her death in 1996 headed President Bill Clinton’s commission on immigration reform. “It is both a right and a responsibility of a democratic society,” she argued, “to manage immigration so that it serves the national interest.” Trump’s rhetoric has of course been overheated and insensitive at times, but his view on immigration—that it should be designed to benefit the receiving country—is widely held.

In the United States, there is strong evidence that the national interest has not been well served by the country’s immigration policy over the last five decades. Even as levels of immigration have approached historic highs, debate on the topic has been subdued, and policymakers and opinion leaders in both parties have tended to overstate the benefits and understate or ignore the costs of immigration. It would make a great deal of sense for the country to reform its immigration policies by more vigorously enforcing existing laws, and by moving away from the current system, which primarily admits immigrants based on family relationships, toward one based on the interests of Americans.

IMMIGRANT NATION

Trump did not create the strong dissatisfaction with immigration felt by his working-class supporters, but he certainly harnessed it. Voters’ sense that he would restrict immigration may be the single most important factor that helped him win the longtime Democratic stronghold of the industrial Midwest, and thus the presidency. There are two primary reasons why immigration has become so controversial, and why Trump’s message resonated. The first is lax enforcement and the subsequently large population of immigrants living in the country illegally. But although illegal immigration grabs most of the headlines, a second factor makes many Americans uncomfortable with the current policy. It is the sheer number of immigrants, legal or otherwise. The United States currently grants one million immigrants lawful permanent residence (or a “green card”) each year, which means that they can stay as long as they wish and become citizens after five years, or three if they are married to a U.S. citizen. Roughly 700,000 long-term visitors, mostly guest workers and foreign students, come annually as well. 

Such a large annual influx adds up: In 2015, data from the U.S. Census Bureau indicated that 43.3 million immigrants lived in the country—double the number from 1990. The census data include roughly ten million illegal immigrants, while roughly a million more go uncounted. In contrast to most countries, the United States grants citizenship to everyone born on its soil, including the children of tourists or illegal immigrants, so the above figures do not include any U.S.-born children of immigrants.

https://www.theatlas.com/i/atlas_SyQXAao3e.png

Proponents of immigration to the United States often contend that the country is a “nation of immigrants,” and certainly immigration has played an important role in American history. Nevertheless, immigrants currently represent 13.5 percent of the total U.S. population, the highest percentage in over 100 years. The Census Bureau projects that by 2025, the immigrant share of the population will reach 15 percent, surpassing the United States’ all-time high of 14.8 percent, reached in 1890. Without a change in policy, that share will continue to increase throughout the twenty-first century. Counting immigrants plus their descendants, the Pew Research Center estimates that since 1965, when the United States liberalized its laws, immigration has added 72 million people to the country—a number larger than the current population of France.

https://www.theatlas.com/i/atlas_r1IRhTong.png

Given these numbers, it is striking that public officials in the United States have focused almost exclusively on the country’s 11 to 12 million illegal immigrants, who account for only one quarter of the total immigrant population. Legal immigration has a much larger impact on the United States, yet the country’s leaders have seldom asked the big questions. What, for example, is the absorption capacity of the nation's schools and infrastructure? How will the least-skilled Americans fare in labor market competition with immigrants? Or, perhaps most importantly, how many immigrants can the United States assimilate into its culture? Trump has not always approached these questions carefully, or with much sensitivity, but to his credit he has at least raised them. 

TIMES CHANGE

Regarding cultural assimilation, advocates of open immigration policies often argue that there is no problem. During the last great wave of immigration, from roughly 1880 to 1920, Americans feared the newcomers would not blend in, but for the most part they ended up assimilating. Therefore, as this reasoning goes, all immigrants will assimilate.

Immigrants currently represent 13.5 percent of the total U.S. population, the highest percentage in over 100 years.

Unfortunately, however, circumstances that helped Great Wave immigrants assimilate are not present today. First, World War I and then legislation in the early 1920s dramatically reduced new arrivals. By 1970 less than 5 percent of the U.S. population was foreign-born, down from 14.7 percent in 1910. This reduction helped immigrant communities assimilate, as they were no longer continually refreshed by new arrivals from the old country. But in recent decades, the dramatic growth of immigrant enclaves has likely slowed the pace of assimilation. Second, many of today’s immigrants, like those of the past, have modest education levels, but unlike in the past, the modern U.S. economy has fewer good jobs for unskilled workers. Partly for this reason, immigrants do not improve their economic situation over time as much as they did in the past. Third, technology allows immigrants to preserve ties with the homeland in ways that were not possible a century ago. Calling, texting, emailing, FaceTiming, and traveling home are all relatively cheap and easy.

Fourth, the United States’ attitude toward newcomers has also changed. In the past, there was more of a consensus about the desirability of assimilation. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, the son of Jewish immigrants, said in a 1915 speech on “True Americanism” that immigrants needed to do more than just learn English and native manners. Rather, he argued, they “must be brought into complete harmony with our ideals and aspirations.” This was a widely held belief. In his book The Unmaking of Americans, the journalist John J. Miller has described how at the turn of the twentieth century, organizations such as the North American Civic League for Immigrants put out pamphlets celebrating the United States and helping immigrants understand and embrace the history and culture of their adopted country.  

In the United States today, as in many Western countries, this kind of robust emphasis on assimilation has been replaced with multiculturalism, which holds that there is no single American culture, that immigrants and their descendants should retain their identity, and that the country should accommodate the new arrivals’ culture rather than the other way around. Bilingual education, legislative districts drawn along ethnic lines, and foreign language ballots are all efforts to change U.S. society to accommodate immigrants in a way that is very different from the past. Newcomers additionally benefit from affirmative action and diversity initiatives originally designed to help African Americans. Such race- and ethnicity-conscious measures encourage immigrants to see themselves as separate from society and in need of special treatment due to the hostility of ordinary Americans. John Fonte, a scholar at the Hudson Institute, has argued that such policies, which encourage immigrants to retain their language and culture, make patriotic assimilation less likely.

Of course, many Americans still embrace the goal of assimilation. A recent Associated Press survey found that a majority of Americans think that their country should have an essential culture that immigrants adopt. But the kind of assimilation promoted by Brandeis and the North American Civic League no longer has elite backing. As a result, even institutions seemingly designed to help immigrants integrate end up giving them mixed messages. As political psychologist Stanley Renshon points out, many immigrant-based organizations today do help immigrants learn English, but they also work hard to reinforce ties to the old country.

SHOW ME THE MONEY

A further area of contention in the immigration debate is its economic and fiscal impact. Many immigrant families prosper in the United States, but a large fraction do not, adding significantly to social problems. Nearly one-third of all U.S. children living in poverty today have an immigrant father, and immigrants and their children account for almost one in three U.S. residents without health insurance. Despite some restrictions on new immigrants’ ability to use means-tested assistance programs, some 51 percent of immigrant-headed households use the welfare system, compared to 30 percent of native households. Of immigrant households with children, two-thirds access food assistance programs. Cutting immigrants off from these programs would be unwise and politically impossible, but it is fair to question a system that welcomes immigrants who are so poor that they cannot feed their own children. 

To be clear, most immigrants come to the United States to work. But because the U.S. legal immigration system prioritizes family relationships over job skills—and because the government has generally tolerated illegal immigration—a large share of immigrants are unskilled. In fact, half of the adult immigrants in the United States have no education beyond high school.  Such workers generally earn low wages, which means that they rely on the welfare state even though they are working. 

This past fall, an exhaustive study by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine found that immigrants and their dependents use significantly more in public services than they pay in taxes, and the net drain could be as high as $296 billion per year. The academies also projected the fiscal impact into the future with mixed results—four of their scenarios showed a net fiscal drain after 75 years, and four showed a net fiscal benefit. What is clear, however, is that at present the fiscal effect is large and negative. The study also showed, unsurprisingly, that college-educated immigrants are a net fiscal benefit, while those without a degree are typically a net fiscal drain. Drawing on the academies’ finding, the Trump administration has suggested moving to a “merit-based” immigration system that would select immigrants who can support themselves. 

Immigration has also affected the U.S. labor market. One of the nation’s leading immigration economists, Harvard’s George Borjas, recently wrote in The New York Times that by increasing the supply of workers, immigration reduces wages for some Americans. For example, only 7 percent of lawyers in the United States are immigrants, but 49 percent of maids are immigrants, as are one-third of construction laborers and grounds workers. The losers from immigration are less-educated Americans, many of them black and Hispanic, who work in these high-immigrant occupations. The country needs to give more consideration to the impact of immigration on the poorest and least-educated Americans. 

Another common argument for immigration is that it will solve Western countries’ main demographic problem—that of an aging population. Immigrants, so the argument goes, will provide the next generation of workers to pay into welfare-state programs. But to help government finances, immigrants would have to be a net fiscal benefit, which is not the case. Furthermore, the economist Carl Schmertmann showed more than two decades ago that “constant inflows of immigrants, even at relatively young ages, do not necessarily rejuvenate low-fertility populations… [and] may even contribute to population aging.” Analysis by myself and several colleagues supports this conclusion. In short, immigrants grow old like everyone else, and in the United States they tend not to have very large families. In 2015 the median age of an immigrant was 40 years, compared to 36 for the native-born. And the United States’ overall fertility rate, including immigrants, is 1.82 children per woman, which only falls to 1.75 once immigrants are excluded. In other words, immigrants increase the fertility rate by just four percent. The United States will have to look elsewhere to deal with its aging population. 

A final argument in favor of immigration centers on the benefits to immigrants themselves, especially the poorest ones, who see their wages rise dramatically upon moving to the First World. But given the scope of Third World poverty, mass immigration is not the best form of humanitarian relief. More than three billion people in the world live in poverty—earning less than $2.50 a day. Even if legal immigration was tripled to three million people a year, the United States would still only admit about one percent of the world’s poor each decade. In contrast, development assistance could help many more people in low-income countries.

Even if legal immigration was tripled to three million people a year, the United States would still only admit about one percent of the world’s poor each decade.

THE ART OF THE DEAL?

The last time that limiting immigration was on the U.S. legislative agenda, in the mid-1990s, Barbara Jordan’s commission suggested limiting family immigration and eliminating the visa lottery, which gives out visas based on chance. Clinton first seemed to endorse the recommendations, but then reversed course after Jordan died and the political winds shifted. The effort to lower the level of immigration was defeated in Congress by the same odd but formidable coalition of businesses, ethnic pressure groups, progressives, and libertarians that has dominated the immigration discourse from then until the Trump era.

With the election of Trump, a political compromise in the United States might be possible. It could involve legalizing some illegal immigrants in return for tightening policies on who gets to come in. Prioritizing skilled immigration while cutting overall numbers would increase the share of immigrants who are well educated and facilitate assimilation. The RAISE Act, sponsored by Senators Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and David Perdue (R-Ga.), would do just that. Perhaps coupling the RAISE Act with legalization for some share of illegal immigrants could be a way forward.  

Yet no matter what policy is adopted, immigration will remain contentious because it involves tradeoffs and competing moral claims. And for the foreseeable future, the number of people who wish to come to the developed countries such as the United States will be much greater than these countries are willing or able to allow. 

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2017-03-31/case-against-immigration?cid=int-lea&pgtype=hpg

America, BEWARE the FOREIGN SOLDIERS living in your midst -David Brockett

I’ve read dozens of articles warning of Muslim immigrants rising up to take over the country, community by community, state by state. While I don’t doubt that some Muslims (maybe even a significant number) would like to see us fall to their swords, I wonder if there isn’t something even more sinister going on—something that also involves many of our actual government leaders and those who seek a different future for America.

What I’m talking about is a plan

 Pitting foreigners against Americans isn’t as far-fetched as you might think.  Before you, my favorite reader, write me off and send the boys in white to take me away, hear me out. It’s actually happened here before, not with Muslims, but with half-a-million foreign soldiers recruited to kill Americans—tens-of-thousands of them. What I’m referring to is the war between the states…the war of secession…the war of Northern aggression…or, as I like to call it, the War to defend Nullification.

Very interesting

This excerpt is from an article written by Don H. Doyle, an expert on the contributions of immigrants to the Union’s victory over the Confederate States:

Trending: The Pistol That Jack Wilson Used to Take Down the Church Shooter

“In the summer of 1861, an American diplomat in Turin, Italy, looked out the window of the U.S. legation to see hundreds of young men forming a sprawling line. Some wore red shirts, emblematic of the Garibaldini who, during their campaign in southern Italy, were known for pointing one finger in the air and shouting l’Italia Unità! (Italy United!). Now they wanted to volunteer to take up arms for l’America Unità!

Meanwhile, immigrants already in the United States responded to the call to arms in extraordinary numbers. In 1860, about 13% of the U.S. population was born overseas—roughly what it is today. One in every four members of the Union armed forces was an immigrant, some 543,000 of the more than 2 million Union soldiers by recent estimates. Another 18% had at least one foreign-born parent. Together, immigrants and the sons of immigrants made up about 43% of the U.S. armed forces.

America’s foreign legions gave the North an incalculable advantage. It could never have won without them.”

In addition to those recruited to come to the US to fight the Confederacy, thousands of Germans had already arrived here after their failed “Revolution of 1848.”

Today, our nation is being flooded with poorly-educated, unskilled men of military age.

 Let’s return to the writings of Don H. Doyle:

“In the 1860s, Confederate diplomats and supporters abroad were eager to inform Europeans that the North was actively recruiting their sons to serve as cannon fodder. In one pamphlet, Confederate envoy Edwin De Leon informed French readers that the Puritan North had built its army “in large part of foreign mercenaries” made up of “the refuse of the old world… Immigrants tended to be young and male.” (and I might add, unskilled at anything.)

What is the upside?

Haven’t we all marveled at why those in power in the US government (let’s just call them the Deep State) would bring in hundreds of thousands of uneducated and unskilled young men, of military age, often from regions that hate us? It can’t be cheap labor, because they can’t do anything of value. They’re no longer school-age, so educating and training them would be difficult. They don’t know our language, and they have no desire to assimilate. They disrespect, abuse, even rape and kill our women. Plus, it is damned expensive.

Let’s look back in time

When Europeans “immigrants” came to the US during colonization, they had no issues with waging war against the red man. They brought their own religious leaders, who told them these dark-skinned natives didn’t have souls—they were un-redemptive heathens to be dispatched with no remorse. If the “injuns” refused to take on the ways and religion of the new settlers, it was no more sinful to kill a man, rape and kill a woman, or even a child (they called them nits) than to take out a marauding bear or wolf.

Colonists were used to develop the resources (land, timber, furs, and later minerals) and push the original inhabitants out. To take the history lesson forward almost two hundred years, my relatives in what became Texas, were used by Spain to displace Indian tribes and settle the land.

Open Borders—better than a Trojan horse

Funny how our politicians never seem alarmed when they hear about foreign Muslim fighters being captured at our border. Surely they know for every one captured, several got through. It is a weekly occurrence to hear about young men from places like Somalia being apprehended down south. Somalia is one of the poorest countries on the planet, and over 8,000 miles away—who paid for them to get this far—and why?

Global Puppet masters

“We the people” are a thorn in the side of those who would burn our Constitution and bend us to their will. It is no secret that those who would govern and rule us from afar need to find a way to get these pesky well-armed patriotic Americans—these nationalists and populists—out of the way.

It wouldn’t be easy to convince our American military men and women to turn on American citizens, but there is no human or religious bond between most of these new Christian-hating  military-age immigrants and the people of this nation. I think 9-11 proved that point—they even killed hundreds of their own to get to us.

During the Civil War, the North made it easy for their European recruits to kill Southerners and commit atrocities, by focusing on the evils of slavery, telling them that the South was fighting for slavery, not state’s rights and the right of states to nullify federal statutes. The propagandists forgot to mention that five Union states were allowed to keep slaves, two even after the war was over.

Is anything beginning to sound familiar?

I’ll leave you to ponder this issue of young military-aged immigrants being intentionally introduced to our society, despite the human and financial costs they incur. Keep all of this in the back of your mind as you observe the machinations of our immigration system and the Deep State. Maybe you can fathom what is really going on behind the curtain.

What I’ve learned over the years is, if something seems to make no sense at all—then I don’t have all the information—because someone hasn’t coughed it up yet.

David Brockett is a Vietnam Veteran and former Marine aviator. He has worked in the field of mental health as a counselor and hospital administrator. After retirement he volunteered with the US Forest Service as a wilderness ranger and horse packer. He writes fiction and historical fiction, as well as articles on politics, religion, gun-rights and current events. In his free time he volunteers with veteran’s groups and community projects. He and his wife divide their time between their home state of Texas and Idaho.

This article was previously printed in October 2019.

I think you’d enjoy checking out our two sites for more articles:

DC Dirty Laundry and DC Clothesline

https://dcdirtylaundry.com/america-beware-the-foreign-soldiers-living-in-your-midst/ 

Recipe Concocted for Perpetual War is a Bitter One – Consortiumnews - By Robert Wing and Coleen Rowley

Perpetual war is leading to a host of societal ills, yet debates on war and peace are almost entirely absent from public discourse.

Last October marked the 16th anniversary of our unending war – or military occupation – in Afghanistan, the longest conflict on foreign soil in U.S. history. The cost to human lives in our current cycle of U.S.-initiated “perpetual wars” throughout the Middle East and Africa is unthinkably high. It runs well into millions of deaths if one counts – as do the Nuremberg principles of international law – victims of spinoff fighting and sectarian violence that erupt after we destroy governance structures.

Also to be counted are other forms of human loss, suffering, illness and early mortality that result from national sanctions, destruction of physical, social and medical infrastructure, loss of homeland, refugee flight, ethnic cleansing, and their psychological after-effects. One has to witness these to grasp their extent in trauma, and they all arise from the Nuremberg-defined “supreme crime” of initiating war. Waging aggressive war is something America is practiced in and does well, with justifications like “fighting terrorism,” “securing our interests,” “protecting innocents,” “spreading democracy,” etc. – as has every aggressor in history that felt the need to explain its aggressions.

Yet few gathered across the country in October, much less gave a thought of lament to the harm we are doing. It’s a topic we’d like to forget. Recalling that domestic opposition to the Vietnam War grew exponentially over the similar (but far shorter) timespan of that aggression, one might wonder what has changed.  A numbed, distracted America has reached the point where bellicose presidential threats to destroy North Korea with its puny nuclear arsenal, and cancel the agreement keeping Iran from developing one, barely elicit shrugs among us.

One explanation for our current apathy is that our Military Industrial Complex (President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s term for the institutionalized promoter-beneficiaries of warfare) has long since developed means to effectively counter any collective war-weariness. Vietnam-era MIC apologists publicly worried that “sickly inhibitions against the use of military force” would jeopardize American “interests” around the globe. In time-honored fashion they cast “back-stabbing” blame for the “Vietnam Syndrome” on war-opposing figures of the time like Daniel Ellsberg, Jane Fonda, Dr. Benjamin Spock, even Walter Cronkite, and the millions of so-called “me-generation” draft-resisters who they said caused the “loss” of Vietnam.

Does Vietnam look “lost” to America today? Hardly. What was lost in Vietnam were millions of its own people, a countryside devastated by saturation bombing and the eco-poison Agent Orange, whose toxicity still devastates people there, and the still-present effects of that war.

Lest we forget, it was visited upon them in our name, at our hands, by our leaders and the profit-making military-industrial backers we tolerate. Add the millions of deaths and utter destruction of Cambodia, along with Laos, and we arrive at a massive, prolonged Holocaust-level crime perpetrated by our country, which also suffered – although not nearly at the same rate.

Along with 58,000 official American lives lost, plus hundreds of thousands of physically and many more emotionally damaged veterans, we as a society lost whatever post-World War II moral standing we thought we enjoyed. However we may try to fool ourselves, we all know this inside.

The MIC managers’ answer to our Vietnam unease was brilliantly synergistic, and has made the subsequent costs of war largely invisible to us. First, they quickly eliminated the draft, fine-tuning Vietnam-era social engineering via temporary college-deferments – which had reduced but did not eliminate military service burden-sharing among the better-off – into no burden at all for that class.

In its stead they created a “professional” army whose ranks are manned by “volunteers” from the ever-growing pool of de-industrialized America’s less-advantaged – joined more recently by immigrants seeking US citizenship. The British imperialistic model of employing “surplus” populations as enforcers of global military dominance was thus reborn here. Our “poverty draft” does not elicit much concern among well-off conservatives and liberals as long as token soldiers get honored in commercials, sporting events and holidays.

Our remarkably swift transition from “boots on the ground” to overwhelming reliance on aerial bombing, drone, mercenary, and surrogate (including US-supported Al Qaeda and ISIS proxy) warfare under Obama completed the domestic pain-relieving process of engaging globally in the “foreign entanglements” our first president warned us against.  The lopsided asymmetry of this kind of war-making is such that our casualties have become a tiny fraction of a percent of the totals.  American war deaths have dropped to levels so infinitesimally low that government lawyers can claim with a straight face (arguing against the need for congressional war authorization) that US-NATO’s aggressive bombing campaigns do not even constitute “war” anymore.

Nor has our government raised taxes to cover war costs (something our Founding Fathers assumed would provide inherent constraints and help make war unpopular). Rather, it has put war costs, already conservatively estimated to be $5.6 trillion since 9/11, onto the ever-expanding national debt ceiling, which “like a speed limit sign that is never enforced” now stands at over $20 trillion, with no end in sight. This level of debt would normally and will eventually – particularly combined with our unending trade deficit – reduce the buying power of the dollar and raise prices for everything we import. It has not yet done so because the dollar’s status as the surrogate world trade currency is propped up by U.S. hard and soft power.

This is the poison icing on the cake of the MIC’s maintenance of war: our abundance of cheap world goods depends on it. On a level we fear to examine, our livelihoods are complicit in the ongoing wars being waged in our name.

Unsurprisingly, we tend not to concern ourselves with our government’s harming of distant others when we do not see it. If those harmed are effectively demonized by our compliant consent-manufacturing mass media so as to make us believe “they deserve it,” our sympathy tends to disappear altogether. But to be human is to care about other humans, and we pretend otherwise at our own moral peril. Veterans who cannot keep buried their psychic wounds of combat – from Vietnam to the present wars – are committing suicide at the rate of 22 per day.

Given our somnolent acceptance of the notion that this unprecedented state of perpetual war is somehow protecting our safety, it’s ironic that military service is emerging as significantly correlated with, if not a cause of, America’s dramatic increase in mass shootings and other domestic terror-type killings.  (PTSD-related murders overall also remain uncounted.)  Researchers studying recent lists of mass shooters find veterans are over twice as likely to be mass shooters. Post-combat related “copy-cat” homicidal violence might be a direct externality of training and then assigning young people to commit murder overseas.

A super-hero style militaristic culture promoted by the Pentagon and CIA-backed entertainment industry (also see this) helps sustain public momentum for war but does not generate peace at home.  How much worse will this problem become now that the military is relaxing its standards and accepting applicants with histories of mental illness?  Earlier writing-on-the-wall consequences appeared when “Oklahoma bomber” Timothy McVeigh killed 168; “DC Sniper” John Muhammad killed 17, and Robert Flores shot his three professors. All three were veterans of the first Gulf War.

A Homeland Security analyst warned that we were creating human time bombs – only to be personally disparaged for his politically incorrect but accurate prediction.

We have an engorged, non-stop war-making machine that is reliant on high tech weapons systems, normalized ubiquitous surveillance, the congressional hostage-taking presence of defense manufacturing and support industries or bases in every district, the narrowing of mass media discourse to stage-managed, stereotyped liberal-conservative mudslinging and subsidized glorification of war prowess, and not least, the continual re-creation of enemies to fight.

Beyond post-traumatic killings and suicides, and our massive debt, the costs of maintaining this behemoth afflicts America in other ways. Blowback is likely a factor in our record-level teen suicides, road rage incidents and shootings both of and by an increasingly militarized police force; an epidemic in opioid and other addictions; a hollowed out productive economy that underpays most workers; “Ponzi” style financing of our economy, and our utterly unsustainable late-stage imperial dependence on the war industry for our economic vitality.

We can also add the compounding of poisons into the air, water, and soil that will touch everyone’s children long into the future as we focus our wars where the oil is. This is in order to control the world’s petroleum supply, which is wrecking the world’s weather – via the activities of the number one institutional polluter in the world: the U.S. military.

Our out of control national destructiveness and its unspeakable costs constitute the “spiritual death” that Martin Luther King warned us about at the height of the Vietnam War, yet they remain mostly unaddressed in public discourse.  How much longer before, finally, we can no longer pretend not to notice the taste of poison in this recipe concocted to make war palatable?

Robert Wing is a former diplomat and Asia/China analyst. As acting Consul General in Sumatra, he monitored the Aceh insurgency and set up safety networks to protect US citizens. In Hong Kong, he tracked reports of American POW/MIAs and oversaw the US program for Vietnamese “boat refugees”, enacting measures to protect those who were endangered and securing the release and resettlement of refugees from longstanding detention at a camp in China.

Coleen Rowley is a retired FBI agent and former Minneapolis Division Legal Counsel who disclosed serious pre 9-11 FBI failures to the Joint Intelligence Committee Inquiry, the Senate Judiciary Committee and to the Inspector General of the Department of Justice.  Rowley was consequently selected along with two other whistleblowers as Time Magazine’s 2002 “Persons of the Year.”

https://consortiumnews.com/2018/02/04/recipe-concocted-for-perpetual-war-is-a-bitter-one/

The Cancer of the National-Security State - By Jacob G. Hornberger

Suppose that after you visit your doctor for a physical examination, he informs you that you are suffering from the following ailments:

1. A stiff knee, which requires six months of physical therapy.
2. Being overweight, which requires a big change in diet.
3. Kidney problems, which require you to give up drinking.
4. A growing malignant tumor on your stomach that can be removed by surgery.

The doctor recommends that you give priority to ailment 4, but you instead decide to give priority to the first three ailments. 

At the end of six months, you have resolved your knee problem, you have brought your weight down to an acceptable level, and you have totally given up drinking. At your six-month review, your doctor commends you on your accomplishments.

There is just one big problem, however. Your malignant tumor has grown so large that it can no longer be removed. Worse, the cancer has spread throughout your body. Your doctor advises you to get your affairs in order because you only have three months to live.

That’s the situation that the American people face with respect to the society in which we live. There are multiple problems facing our nation. But the biggest one is the national-security state form of governmental structure under which we have been living for some 75 years. It is this governmental structure that is a malignant tumor on the American body politic. This political cancer is taking us down from within. That’s why it is imperative that Americans make its removal their top priority.

Consisting of the Pentagon, the vast military-industrial complex, the enormous empire of domestic and foreign military bases, the CIA, and the NSA, along with its foreign policy of interventionism, the national-security establishment is the root cause of the perpetual wars in which the United States has been embroiled since 1947, when the federal government was converted from a limited-government republic to a national-security state. 

The Cold War. The Korean War. The Vietnam War. The Persian Gulf War. The war on terrorism. The war on Islam. The War on Afghanistan. The War on Iraq. The war on Syria. The war on Yemen. The war on China. The war on Iran. Multiple military incursions. Multiple coups and state-sponsored assassinations. And now the renewed Cold War on Russia, which has gotten us perilously close to all-out, life-destroying nuclear war, just like it did back in October 1962.

Of course, there is lots of focus on ending America’s “endless wars.” But that’s akin to focusing on our knee problem rather than on our cancer problem. Ending one forever war accomplishes nothing from a longterm perspective because always around the corner is another forever war. That’s because the national-security state apparatus is the root cause of each forever war in which they embroil America.

A national-security state necessarily depends on forever wars or, at the very least, crises, dangers, and threats from official enemies, adversaries, opponents, and competitors in order to justify its existence and its ever-growing taxpayer-funded largess. The wars, crises, dangers, and threats keep people agitated and afraid. They become convinced that without the national-security establishment keeping them safe, the nation would inevitably be conquered by the Reds, the terrorists, the Muslims, the illegal immigrants, the drug dealers, the Russians, the Chinese, the Iranians, or some other scary boogeyman.

There is, of course, the out-of-control federal spending, debt, and monetary debauchery that comes with all this to consider. It’s not just the welfare state (e.g., Social Security, Medicare, etc.) that is taking us down from within. It’s also the warfare state, which is costing American taxpayers close to a trillion dollars a year. 

There is also the omnipotent, totalitarian-like, dark-side powers that come with a national-security state, such as assassination, kidnapping, torture, and indefinite detention. Such powers are able to be exercised against both foreigners and American citizens.

For many years, I have been recommending a book titled National Security and Double Government by Michael J. Glennon, who is a professor of law at Tufts University and served as counsel to the U.S. Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee. 

Glennon’s thesis is a simple but extremely ominous one. He persuasively makes the case that it is the national-security branch of the government — that is, the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA — that is actually running the federal government, especially in foreign affairs. The other three branches — the executive, legislative, and judicial — are permitted to maintain the veneer of power. But that’s all it is — an appearance. The real power, Glennon argues, lies with the national-security establishment.

That means that it is the Pentagon, not the deferential executive or legislative branches, that is calling the shots and running the show in Ukraine. Given the extreme anti-Russia hostility that drove the national-security establishment and its willingness to risk nuclear war during the Cold War, Glennon’s thesis does not bode well for the longterm future and well-being of the American people.

The national-security state is a malignant tumor on the American body politic. Although our nation faces lots of problems, the priority should be given to the removal of this cancer and to the restoration of our founding governmental system of a limited-government republic, before it is too late. 

Reprinted with permission from The Future of Freedom Foundation.

The Best of Jacob G. Hornberger

Jacob Hornberger [send him mail] is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation.

Copyright © The Future of Freedom Foundation

 https://www.lewrockwell.com/2023/07/jacob-hornberger/the-cancer-of-the-national-security-state/

The Anger Campaign Against China, by Larry Romanoff - The Unz Review (Is China the new German threat of the last century? Or so we are told? - CL)

Introduction

It shouldn’t be a secret, though it still seems to be, that neither of the two World Wars were started (or desired) by Germany, but were the creation of a group of European Zionist Jews with the stated intent of the total destruction of Germany.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7] However, that thesis is not the purpose of this essay and I will not expand on it here, but the content should prove to the average reader that World War I certainly fits this description. The main purpose of this essay is to demonstrate not only that ‘history repeats itself’ but that the history being repeated today is a mass grooming of the Western world’s people (but most especially Americans) in preparation for World War III – which I believe is now imminent.

In 1940, these European Zionist and media owners (hiding behind the stage-set of the UK government) initiated what they called an “anger campaign” with the stated cause of “instilling personal hatred against the German people and Germany”, the related parties pleased that the original 6% of the British population that ‘hated Germany’ increased to over 50% by the end of the campaign, and it didn’t stop there. The radio waves were full of descriptions of the “cruelty and blackness of the German soul”.[8] There were articles in the British newspapers advocating the “systematic extermination of the entire German nation” to be carried out after the war ended. Thus, after victory over Germany, every person of German extraction was to be executed and the nation of Germany itself to disappear forever. Those executions were actually begun – Eisenhower’s Death Camps, followed by the Morgenthau Plan, both of which eventually failed. The methods of “instilling personal hatred” of Germany was perhaps too successful. The anti-German hysteria became so severe that King George V had to change his German name of ‘Saxe-Coburg’ to ‘Windsor’, and relinquish all his German titles.

It wasn’t only the US and UK where this hatred of Germans was being propagated. In countries all around the world, the media spread the same message of hatred against Germany and the Germans. Teams of ‘specialists’ were following the same script in most other nations, all instilling massive hatred for the Germans who were in every nation vehemently portrayed as evil incarnate, this nature stemming merely from the fact of their being of German origin. In Brazil, anti-German demonstrations and riots consumed the country, with German businesses being destroyed and Germans being assaulted and killed. In almost every nation, the German-language press and use of the German language completely disappeared during the war from fear of reprisal, as did all German schools and most businesses. None re-opened. Brazil initially was determined to remain neutral, but a newly-created university student union was co-opted and used with such great effectiveness that within a year Brazil declared war on Germany.[9] In Brazil, the US, Canada and Australia, many names of towns, streets, foods, were changed to eliminate their German origin.

Throughout the world, as in the US, false wartime propaganda was used during both World Wars to incite entire populations into an irrational hatred of everything German, even to the extent of powerful media recommendations that the entire German race be exterminated – in all nations. With all of this and much more, America was a hotbed of hatred for the entire German population. After the Second World War, Germany was widely accused of using propaganda against the Jews, while our history books have airbrushed out the massive and unspeakably evil storm of worldwide hate propaganda against Germans by the Jews prior to and during both World Wars. Details below.

The Origins of Mass Manipulation of the Public Mind

Many years ago, the Jewish-American political commentator Walter Lippmann realised that political ideology could be completely fabricated, using the media to control both presentation and conceptualisation, not only to create deeply-ingrained false beliefs in a population, but also to entirely erase undesirable political ideas from the public mind. This was the beginning of not only the American hysteria for freedom, democracy and patriotism, but of all manufactured political opinion, a process that has been operative ever since. Lippmann created these theories of mass persuasion of the public, using totally fabricated “facts” deeply insinuated into the minds of a gullible public, but there is much more to this story. An Austrian Jew named Edward Louis Bernays who was the nephew of Sigmund Freud, was one of Lippmann’s most precocious students and it was he who put Lippmann’s theories into practice. Bernays is widely known in America as the father of Public Relations, but he would be much more accurately described as the father of American war marketing as well as the father of mass manipulation of the public mind.

Bernays claimed “If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind” it will be possible “to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing about it”. He called this scientific technique of opinion-molding the ‘engineering of consent’, and to accomplish it he merged theories of crowd psychology with the psychoanalytical ideas of his uncle Sigmund Freud.[10][11]Bernays regarded society as irrational and dangerous, with a “herd instinct”, and that if the multi-party electoral system (which evidence indicates was created by a group of European elites as a population control mechanism) were to survive and continue to serve those elites, massive manipulation of the public mind was necessary. These elites, “invisible people”, would have, through their influence on government and their control of the media, a monopoly on the power to shape thoughts, values, and responses of the citizenry. His conviction was that this group should flood the public with misinformation and emotionally-loaded propaganda to “engineer” the acquiescence of the masses and thereby rule over them. According to Bernays, this manufactured consent of the masses, creating conformity of opinion molded by the tool of false propaganda, would be vital for the survival of “democracy”. Bernays wrote:

“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. People are governed, their minds molded, their tastes formed, their ideas suggested, largely by men they have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner . In almost every act of our daily lives we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.” [12]

In his main work titled ‘Propaganda’,[13] which he wrote in 1928, Bernays argued that the manipulation of public opinion was a necessary part of democracy because individuals were inherently dangerous (to the control and looting of the elites) but could be harnessed and channeled by these same elites for their economic benefit. He clearly believed that virtually total control of a population was possible, and perhaps easy to accomplish. He wrote further that:

“No serious sociologist any longer believes that the voice of the people expresses any … wise idea. The voice of the people expresses the mind of the people, and that mind is made up for it by … those persons who understand the manipulation of public opinion. It is composed of inherited prejudices and symbols and clichés and verbal formulas supplied to them by the leaders. Fortunately, the … politician is able, by the instrument of propaganda, to mold and form the will of the people. So vast are the numbers of minds which can be regimented, and so tenacious are they when regimented, that [they produce] an irresistible pressure before which legislators, editors, and teachers are helpless.”

And it wasn’t only the public masses that were ‘inherently dangerous’, but a nation’s leaders fit this description as well, therefore also requiring manipulation and control. Bernays realised that if you can influence the leaders of a nation, either with or without their conscious cooperation, you can control the government and the country, and that is precisely where he set his sights. Bernays again:

“In some departments of our daily life, in which we imagine ourselves free agents, we are ruled by dictators exercising great power. There are invisible rulers who control the destinies of millions. It is not generally realized to what extent the words and actions of our most influential public men are dictated by shrewd persons operating behind the scenes. Nor, what is still more important, the extent to which our thoughts and habits are modified by authorities. The invisible government tends to be concentrated in the hands of the few because of the expense of manipulating the social machinery which controls the opinions and habits of the masses.”

And in this case, the “few” are the wealthy industrial elites, their even wealthier banker friends, and their brethren who control the media, publishing and entertainment industries.

Until the First World War, these theories of creating an entirely false public opinion based on misinformation, then manipulating this for population control, were still only theories, but the astounding success of propaganda by Bernays and his group during the war laid bare the possibilities of perpetually controlling the public mind on all matters. The “shrewd” designers of Bernays’ “invisible government” developed a standard technique for what was essentially propaganda and mind control, or at least opinion control, and infiltrated it throughout the US government, its departments and agencies, and its leaders and politicians. Coincident with this, they practiced infecting the leaders of every identifiable group – fraternal, religious, commercial, patriotic, social – and encouraging these men to likewise infect their supporters.

Many have noted the black and white mentality that pervades America. Much of the blame must be laid on Bernays’ propaganda methods. Bernays himself asserted that propaganda could produce rapid and strong emotional responses in the public, but that the range of these responses was limited because the emotional loading inherent in his propaganda would create a kind of binary mentality, eventually forcing the population into a programmed black and white world – which is precisely what we see in the US today. This isn’t difficult to understand. When Bernays flooded the public with fabricated tales of Germans shiskababbing babies, the range of potential responses was entirely emotional and would be limited to either abhorrence or perhaps a blocking of the information. In a sense, our emotional switch will be forced into either an ‘on’ or ‘off’ position, with no other reasonable choices.

The elite few, as Bernays called them, realised early on the potential for control of governments, and in every subsequent US administration the president and his White House staff, the politicians, the leaders of the military and intelligence agencies, all fell prey to this same disease of shrewd manipulation. Roosevelt’s “intense desire for war” in 1939[14][15][16] was the result of this same infection process and, once infected, he of course approved of the infection of the entire American population. Walter Lippmann and Edward Bernays succeeded beyond their wildest expectations.

Bernays – Marketing War

In the discovery of propaganda as a tool of public mind control and in its use for war marketing, it is worthwhile to take a quick look at the historical background of Bernays’ war effort. At the time, the European Zionist Jews had made an agreement with England to bring the US into the war against Germany, on the side of England, a favor for which England would grant the Jews the possession of Palestine as a location for a new homeland.[19] Palestine did not ‘belong’ to England, it was not England’s to give, and England had no legal or moral right to make such an agreement, but it was made nevertheless.

US President Wilson was desperate to fulfill his obligations to his handlers by putting the US into the First World War as they wished, but the American population had no interest in the European war and public sentiment was entirely against participating. To facilitate the desired result, Wilson created the Committee on Public Information (The Creel Commission),[20] to propagandise the war by the mass brainwashing of America, but Creel was merely the ‘front’ of a group that consisted of specially hand-picked men from the media, advertising, the movie industry, and academia, as well as specialists in psychology. The two most important members were Walter Lippman, whom Wilson described as “the most brilliant man of his age”, and Bernays who was the group’s top mind-control expert, both Jews and both aware of the stakes in this game. Bernays planned to combine his uncle Freud’s psychiatric insights with mass psychology blended with modern advertising techniques, and apply them to the task of mass mind control. It was Bernays’ vast propaganda schemes and his influence in promoting the patently false idea that US entry to the war was primarily aimed at “bringing democracy to all of Europe”, that proved so successful in altering public opinion about the war. Thanks to Edward Bernays, American war marketing was born and would never die.

Note to Readers: Some portion of the immediately following content which details the specifics of the propaganda of Lippman and Bernays for World War I is not my own work. It was extracted some years ago from a longer document for which I cannot now locate the original source. If a reader is able to identify this source, I would be grateful to receive that information so I can properly credit the author for his extensive research.

“Wilson’s creation of the CPI was a turning point in world history, the first truly scientific attempt to form, manipulate and control the perceptions and beliefs of an entire population.” With Wilson’s authority, these men were given almost unlimited scope to work their magic, and in order to ensure the success of their program and guarantee the eventual possession of Palestine, these men and their committee carried out “a program of psychological warfare against the American people on a scale unprecedented in human history and with a degree of success that most propagandists could only dream about”.

Having received permission and broad authority from the US President and the White House to “lead the public mind into war”[21] and, with their success threatened by widespread anti-war sentiment among the public, these men determined to engineer what Lippman called “the manufacture of consent”. The committee assumed the task to “examine the different ways that information flowed to the population and to flood these channels with pro-war material”. Their effort was unparalleled in its scale and sophistication, since the Committee had the power not only to officially censor news and withhold information from the public, but to manufacture false news and distribute it nationally through all channels. In a very short time, Lippman and Bernays were well enough organised to begin flooding the US with anti-German propaganda consisting of hate literature, movies, songs, media articles and much more.

According to Bernays, the key was to dehumanise and demonise the German people by filling American minds with fabricated tales of horror. The compliant media, largely Jewish-owned, obediently carried fake stories of poisoned candy being dropped from airplanes, German soldiers skewering babies like shish kebabs, the raping of nuns, and so much more. Eventually, the stories were accepted as true and the public’s natural resistance to war was overcome. “They [Bernays and his group] practiced revealing fabricated stories of atrocities, false accusations of terror and brutality against any nation or people they wanted the public mind to view as “the enemy”, then tested and evaluated public reactions to their manipulations of this false propaganda.”

In his 1922 book Public Opinion,[22][23] Lippman wrote, “The only feeling that anyone can have about an event he does not experience is the feeling aroused by his mental image of that event … For it is clear enough that under certain conditions men respond as powerfully to fictions as they do to realities.” And it was this psychological manipulation that these men employed to turn an entire nation of peaceful Americans into rabid war-mongers. The historical record of this years-long tapestry of lies and hate has been quite well buried, and the White House, Congress and the Committee conspired after the war to destroy most of the evidence of their crimes, but I believe both America and the Jews will one day need to openly acknowledge this chapter of history.

Because of Bernays, atrocity propaganda – the deliberate spreading of fabricated evils and inhuman war crimes – became the foundation of the Committee’s efforts. Harold Lasswell wrote,

“So great are the psychological resistances to war in modern nations that every war must appear to be a war of defense against a menacing, murderous aggressor. There must be no ambiguity about who the public is to hate … if at first they do not enrage, use an atrocity. It has been employed with unvarying success in every conflict known to man.”[24]

Of course, the causes and aims of the propaganda were far more evil than anything the supposed ‘enemy’ had contemplated, but the goal was to not only invent an enemy but to make that enemy “appear savage, barbaric, and inhumane”, and thus worthy of destruction. Usually, the compliant media repeat and embellish the stories without attempt at confirmation and, in virtually every instance, later attempts to confirm the atrocity tales prove fruitless with researchers able to uncover no evidence whatever of the events, the Bryce Report being typical, the entire catalogue of “authoritative documentation of German atrocities” suddenly disappearing without a trace when time came to confirm them.[25][26][27]

Lippman and Bernays divided their Committee into nineteen ‘divisions’, each responsible for a different type of propaganda, and each utilising the abilities of vast numbers of psychologists, advertising experts and media personnel. The intention was to flood every means of communication with the goal of inciting hatred of everything German and to promote American entry into the war as the only option for patriotic Americans. Their new Committee produced tens of thousands of articles filled with anti-German hate propaganda and literally stuffed every part of US print media with them . In an average week more than 20,000 newspaper columns carried entirely false propaganda articles produced by the Committee, promoting hatred of Germany and Germans, describing atrocities that had never occurred and painting Germans as vicious and inhuman monsters. The Committee enforced a powerful self-censorship in the American media by implementing “voluntary guidelines” meant to suppress contradictory content.

They created a ‘Syndicated Features’ Division employing popular writers to produce essays containing “official” propaganda, and which reached 10 to 15 million people each month. Another division was responsible for the cartoon sections of newspapers and other media, with the stated intention to “mobilize and direct the scattered cartoon power of the country for constructive war work”. They employed thousands of cartoonists who “achieved new heights in hate-mongering”,picturing the Germans as primitive and evil animals who stole, killed or raped everything they encountered.[28]

They created a similar Division for cinema that resulted in the production of dozens of outrageous and virulently anti-German movies, hate films containing completely fictional tales of atrocities and bestialities committed by the Germans. This was the source of the movie scenes where Germans (and Japanese) machine-gunned brave American pilots while parachuting to the ground. None of these tales were ever true; these and many more were total fabrications.

Then, as now, the motion picture industry in the US was mostly controlled by Jews, who were eager to assist. One Jewish editorial stated that “every individual at work in this industry wants to do his share” and that “through slides, film leaders and trailers, posters and newspaper publicity they will spread that propaganda so necessary to the immediate mobilization of the country’s great resources”. In addition to movies produced by the film studios, the CPI created its own Film Division which produced 60 or 70 “official” films that were viewed by many tens of millions of people each week. They created an Advertising Division to influence general commercial advertising, and which inserted anti-German war propaganda into advertising in newspapers and magazines which often gave them free space, with almost every major US publication carrying a large quota of these ads. They also produced and distributed many thousands of ‘official’ press releases, virtually functioning as the information arm of the US government and were in fact the major provider of war news to the nation. They enlisted the aid of most of America’s Christian religions that were more than eager to cooperate in warmongering as they had always done.

Lippmann and Bernays organised the “Four Minute Men”, with 75,000 volunteers delivering nearly 8 million prepared brief speeches on German atrocities in schools, movie theaters, churches, synagogues, union halls, anywhere and everywhere. Bernays claimed they delivered nearly 8 million speeches to about 315 million people. A huge amount of this was conducted by Jews. See the extensive note

They created a ‘Division of Work With The Foreign Born’ to reach all immigrants in the country in their own languages, and used members of these communities to propagandise their own people, and especially targeted all military-age foreigners who might be conscripted in a war. Lippman and Bernays wrote:

“It is a matter of pride to the Committee on Public Information, as it should be to America, that the directors of English, French, and Italian propaganda were a unit in agreeing that our literature was remarkable above all others for its brilliant and concentrated effectiveness”.

They used farmers to appeal to farmers and businessmen to appeal to businessmen. In total, their speakers gave more than 7 million speeches to more than 300 million Americans, all provoking hatred of Germany and Germans, and urging war. After many of these emotional travesties, people from the audience would gather into mobs that would attack and destroy German homes and businesses in their city.

The Committee particularly targeted women, establishing a major women’s Division to counter female resistance, from fear that women “might constitute a subversive element in the nation, detrimental to wartime unity and the smooth functioning of [mandatory military conscription]”. Through their close media contacts, they controlled the cover and much of the content of many women’s magazines, which they used to encourage women to send their sons to war, claiming he would return as “a man” instead of as a corpse.

They created a music division and hired thousands of songwriters to create songs with anti-German lyrics, then again milked their media contacts to have these played constantly on the nation’s radio stations. Another division was responsible for public library content, tasked with the removal of all German books, including the works of famous German authors and philosophers. Everything favorably German was censored, removed from public accessibility, or destroyed.

Perhaps the division most indicative of the moral bankruptcy of these men was their work with public school children. They heavily utilised psychologists in programs to spread hatred of Germany throughout America’s public school system where small children were taught the full gamut of Bernays’ hateful propaganda, then used as travelling salesmen to visit other schools and spread the propaganda to their classmates, instilling totally fabricated tales of German atrocities into the minds of all small children. After these inflamed propaganda sessions, many American children demonstrated their “patriotism” by attacking German-Americans in groups and stoning them, sometimes being congratulated by local newspapers for “doing their duty”. Bernays’ group published many thousands of children’s books and comics containing the most vile and hateful propaganda lies. Sunday School children were given coloring books depicting and encouraging violence against Germans. Libraries sponsored anti-German childrens’ ‘story hours’ that used hate propaganda supplied by Bernays.

Bernays’ Public literature attacked everything German in America, including schools and churches. In many schools the German language was forbidden to be taught to “pure Americans”, and administrators were urged to fire “all disloyal teachers”, meaning any Germans. The names of countless towns and cities were changed to eliminate their German origin: Berlin, Iowa became Lincoln, Iowa. German foods and food names were purged from restaurants; sauerkraut became ‘liberty cabbage’; dachshunds became ‘liberty dogs’ and German Shepherds became ‘Alsatians’. All American orchestras were ordered to eliminate from their performances any music by classic German composers like Beethoven, Bach and Mozart. In some states, the use of the German language was prohibited in public and on the telephone. German professors were fired from their universities, German-language or German-owned local newspapers were denied advertising revenue, constantly harassed, and often forced out of business. The ‘patriotic’ Boy Scouts of America contributed to the effort by regularly burning bundles of German newspapers that were on sale, and Germans were regularly insulted and spat upon by other citizens.

Bernays instituted a program of questioning the patriotism and loyalty of all Germans in America, labeling any with anti-war views as prima facie evidence of treason. Germans were forced to gather in public meetings and denounce Germany and its leaders. They were forced to purchase war bonds and publicly declare their allegiance to the US flag. As Bernays’ rhetoric reached dangerous levels, the anti-German hysteria and violence increased proportionately. Many Germans were forcibly removed from their homes, often torn from their beds during the night, taken out into the street and stripped naked, beaten and whipped, then forced to kneel and kiss the American flag. Many were tarred and feathered, then forced to leave their cities or towns. Some were lynched from trees. Priests and pastors were dragged out of their churches and beaten for giving sermons in German.

The anti-German hysteria had people seeing spies everywhere, with House and Bernays greatly inflaming this trend by preparing Wilson’s infamous “Flag Day” speech where he claimed “The military masters of Germany have filled our unsuspecting communities with vicious spies and conspirators and have sought to corrupt the opinion of our people”. Newspaper editors were screaming that all Germans were spies who were poisoning American water supplies or infecting medical shipments to hospitals, and that most “ought to be taken out at sunrise and shot for treason”. Congressmen recommended hanging or otherwise executing all Germans in America, State Governors urging the use of firing squads to eliminate “the disloyal element” from the entire state. The US Secretary of the Navy Josephus Daniels stated that Americans would “put the fear of God into the hearts” of these people. Most Americans are aware that during the [again Bernays-induced] national hysteria during the Second World War the US government forced more than 100,000 US-born Japanese into concentration camps, but history has deleted the fact that many more Germans were interned in concentration camps in the US prior to and during the First War, and again during the Second World War, after which all their assets were seized.[30]

While Bernays was “making the world safe for democracy”, that safety was not meant for Americans. Under the coaching of Col. E. M. House who was Wilson’s Jewish handler, Wilson passed oppressive legislation including the Espionage Act and Sedition Act that were entirely fascist in content and which made illegal anything that might hinder American entry into the war.[31][32] Freedom of speech and assembly, and press freedom virtually disappeared from America during this time, it eventually becoming illegal to say or write anything critical of the US government, its officials and even its “symbols”. Any expression of objection to American entrance into the war would result in a fine of $10,000 (ten years’ average wages at the time) or 20 years in prison, with much of the policing power given to what were in effect private vigilante groups like the infamous American Protective League that operated virtually without oversight. The suppression of public opinion and of dissent, and the control exercised on anti-war communication was universal. The Espionage Act stated “Every letter, writing, circular, postal card, picture, print, engraving, photograph, newspaper, pamphlet, book, or other publication, matter or thing of any kind containing any matter which is intended to obstruct the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States is hereby declared to be non-mailable.”

Nothing was permitted that might prevent the successful recruitment of American soldiers for a war that only the Jews wanted. With all of this and much more, Bernays and Lippman turned America into a hotbed of hatred for the entire German population, accomplishing the goal of the Zionist Jews to use the US military as a tool, their own private army, in the European war to fulfill their ambition for Palestine, and thus these two men changed the course of history.

This wouldn’t be the last time Lippman and Bernays would use these techniques against Germany. This massive attack was repeated little more than ten years later to destroy Germany and push it into yet another war the Germans didn’t want. In the 1930s, the same Jewish European bankers with largely the same agenda wanted the US to join another war they planned to initiate against Germany . In 1933 they embarked on an extensive worldwide commercial war intended to destroy Germany financially, with newspaper headlines reading “Judea Declares War on Germany”. [33][34][35][36] They had already induced in Roosevelt “an intense desire for war”, but were having the same problem again with the unwilling American public, hence the “anger campaign” referred to earlier, and they repeated the German atrocity stories in all Western countries until almost the entire world wanted to kill all Germans.

 

Bernays theories and the template for the manipulation of public opinion would form the plan and pattern that the US government would use repeatedly for the next century to successfully deceive the American public about its motivations and actions in more than 100 military adventures, and to blind everyone to the tragic results of America’s brutal foreign policy.

In all of this, Lippman and Bernays were not working independently or without guidance. Prior to their massive ‘war effort’ in the US for World War I, they had operated a successful pilot test case in the UK, using British newspapers owned by Rothschild and other Jews, to determine the efficacy of their methods. The plan to mass-engineer public opinion began in a propaganda factory at Wellington House in London in the early 1900s, with Lords Northcliffe and Rothmere, Arnold Toynbee, and of course our two war-marketing geniuses Lippman and Bernays.[37][38][39][40] It was from this source that the scheme was hatched to force the Rothschild’s privately-owned Federal Reserve banks onto the US Congress, and that trained and coached Lippman and Bernays on the methods of molding American public opinion to push the US into the First World War for the promotion of Zionism. Bernays’ book ‘Propaganda’ offers a clear vision of his training, not only for war marketing but for the pathology of American consumption, automobiles, the hysteria of patriotism and much more.

Wellington House eventually morphed into the Tavistock Institute[41], which was created at Oxford University in London by the founders of the Royal Institute of International Affairs and the Round Table, and was essentially a kind of mass brainwashing facility beginning as a psychological warfare bureau. It was the Tavistock Institute’s studies in psychological programming that were used to create and then exploit a grand mass hysteria during the cold war, evoking fearful delusions of a nuclear conflict with the Soviet Union that even led to millions of Americans building bomb shelters in their back yards. In Tye’s biography of Bernays, he wrote that “It is impossible to fundamentally grasp the social, political, economic and cultural developments of the past 100 years without some understanding of Bernays and his professional heirs.”

Funding reportedly came from the UK Royal Family, the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers, and eventually included the formation of trans-Atlantic relationships. At various periods, memberships in the Tavistock Institute, the Royal Institute of International Affairs, the Rothschild’s Round Table, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Club of Rome, the Stanford Research Institute, the Trilateral Commission and NATO, were interchangeable. They also created the ideology for the large American Foundations like Rockefeller and Carnegie that today play a silent but major role in population management.

Many dirty things emerged from this rat’s nest of Satan-worshippers, one being Britain’s Psychological Warfare Bureau which hatched a plan to destroy Germany not by attacking the military but by virtual genocide of the population. It seems that international bankers owned munitions plants and other valuable military targets on both sides of the war fence, and wanted their property maintained in working order in spite of the war. The Jewish solution recommended to Churchill was saturation bombing of the civilian population to collapse the morale of the German people. These ‘scientific sociologists’ determined that the destruction of 65% of German housing, usually including its occupants, would be sufficient to achieve such a collapse. This was the origin of the fame of the British aviation hero “Bomber” Harris, who carried out these night raids – always at night – that culminated in the fire-bombing of Dresden. The explanation of night raids is usually given as safety for the bomber crews, but its purpose was mostly to engender more terror among the civilian population. Harris himself testified that his directive was to not specifically aim at anything, but just “blast German cities as a whole. Working class housing areas were targeted because they had a higher density and firestorms were more likely.” This would disrupt the German workforce and Germany’s ability to produce war materials in its defense. Harris’ widespread deliberate massacres of German civilians – and those by the Americans as well – were desperately kept secret from the public and still appear nowhere in history books in useful detail or with any sincere attempt to accurately estimate civilian casualties. This was the plan that US General Curtis Lemay was following, the same low-level night raids attempting to exterminate the populations of Japan and Korea.[42]

Everything we have read above about the marketing of war during preparation for the two World Wars, is from a template created by Lippman and Bernays exclusively to support the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine and to promote the agenda of Zionism. That template has been in constant use by the US government (as the Bankers’ Private Army) since the Second World War, ‘engineering consent and ignorance’ in the American and Western populations to mask almost seven decades of atrocities, demonising innocent countries and peoples in preparation for 60 or 70 politically-inspired color revolutions or ‘wars of liberation’ fought exclusively for the financial and political benefit of a handful of European bankers using the US military as a private army for this purpose, resulting in the deaths and miseries of hundreds of millions of innocent civilians.

Bernays carries the blame for more than American entry into the two world wars, having been instrumental in paving the way for the US cannibalisation and military colonisation of much of the world, and for the US installing and supporting the dozens of brutal military dictatorships around the world. His first international project was helping to engineer the US overthrow of the popular elected government of Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala. At the time, the Rockefellers’ United Fruit Company and various US elites and international financiers owned most of Guatemala including 70% of all the arable land, the communications facilities, the only railroad and shipping port, and controlled most exports. When Arbenz commenced expropriations and land redistribution, Bernays developed a massive propaganda campaign that colored Arbenz as communist, a terrorist, an enemy to democracy, a blot on humanity, and much more, to the extent that American public opinion supported an outrageous travesty and one of the most brutal violations of human rights in US history. Bernays’ template has been used about 70 times with US invasions of that many nations, which is one source of the vast disconnect between what the American people believe their government has done and what it has actually done. As a side note, Guatemala appealed to the United Nations to stop the Americans’ massive interference in their country, a plea that was sympathetically received by UN Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjold who proved troublesome for the US. He would do so again a few years later, and would be assassinated by the CIA for his trouble.

Quick Summary

Many of us have seen stories of German soldiers skewering babies on bayonets, of machine-gunning parachuting soldiers, tales of tubs-full of eyeballs collected by the Nazis, of Germans slashing off the breasts of every woman they encountered, of eating babies, of rendering the bodies of massacred civilians for fat and glycerine to make weapons. After the war, Bernays openly admitted that he used fabricated atrocities to provoke hatred against Germany and, in both World Wars, no evidence was ever discovered to prove any of these outrageous accusations.

We can easily think of George W. Bush’s demonisation of Iraq, the sordid tales of mass slaughters, the gassing of hundreds of thousands and burial in mass graves, the nuclear weapons ready to launch within 15 minutes, the responsibility for 9-11, the babies tossed out of incubators, Saddam using wood shredders to eliminate political opponents and dissidents. We can think of the tales of Libyan Viagra, all proven to have been groundless fabrications – typical atrocity propaganda. Vietnam, Afghanistan, Syria, Iran and dozens of other wars and invasions followed this same template to get the public mind onside for an unjustified war launched only for political and commercial objectives.

Fast Forward to 2020

We are at the same place today, with the same people conducting the same “anger campaign” against China in preparation for World War III. John Pilger agrees with me, evidenced in his recent article “Another Hiroshima is coming – unless we stop it now.”[43] And so does Gordon Duff.[44] The signs now are everywhere, and the campaign is successful. It is necessary to point out the need for an ‘anger campaign’ as opposed to a ‘hate campaign’. We are not moved to action from hate, but from anger. I may thoroughly despise you, but that in itself will do nothing. It is only if I am moved to anger that I want to punch your lights out. And this, as Lippman and Bernays so clearly noted, requires emotionally-charged atrocity propaganda of the kind used so well against Germany and being so well used against China today. Since we need atrocity propaganda to start a war, there seems to be no shortage.

Today, China has “millions of Xinjiang Uigurs being tortured in hundreds of concentration camps”,[45] in “a campaign of repression”[46], with the nowadays-almost-compulsory “forced sterilisations” of millions.[47] But it’s not all bad because “All Jewish Americans want to help stop this genocide“.[48] Moreover, the “Communist Party” has destroyed “hundreds of Uigur graveyards”,[49] and is not only violating all possible human rights, but has forbidden religion.[50]

Most readers know that China ordered the closure of the US Consulate in Chengdu in retaliation for the forced closure of the Chinese consulate in Houston, but few are aware this constituted another “holocaust”, evidenced by the wife of Jim Mullinax, the US consul general in Chengdu, wondering to the world “whether the Jews were like us when they left their homes to hide from the Nazis before World War II”.[51]

Then we have Huawei, the world’s single most dangerous spying entity, who are no doubt responsible for “Beijing trying to ‘steal’ the American COVID-19 vaccine” but, in further breaking news, the Chinese are “Trying to steal everything”. Not only that, but China recently hacked into the Vatican, and here’s why they did it.[52]

Everyone knows that Hong Kong’s new Security Law spells “the death knell of freedom and democracy in Hong Kong”. We have read much of China’s “threatening militarism” in its own China Pond, but not everyone knows that China is presenting the Japanese air force with “a relentless burden” with 947 (count them) incursions into Japanese airspace “in the last fiscal year ending in March.”[53][54] I didn’t know that provocative military incursions operated on a fiscal year, but maybe things are different in Japan.

Then, Mr. Pompeo tells us, “The truth is that our policies . . . resurrected China’s failing economy, only to see Beijing bite the international hands that were feeding it.”[55] Further, that (due to COVID-19) China “caused an enormous amount of pain, loss of life,” and the “Chinese Communist Party will pay a price”.[56] Of course, we all know that “China” stole the COVID-19 virus from a lab in Winnipeg, Canada, then released it onto the world – and Pompeo has proof[57], and even “A Chinese virologist has proof” that “China” engaged in a massive cover-up while contaminating the world[58] and then “fleeing Hong Kong” because “I know how they treat whistle-blowers.”[59] And of course, “China needs to be held accountable for Covid-19’s destruction” [60] which is why everyone in the US wants to sue “China”. “Australia” demands an international criminal investigation of China’s role in COVID-19.[61] What a surprise.

And of course we have an almost unlimited number of serious provocations, from Hong Kong, Tibet, Xinjiang, Taiwan, the South China Seas, to Chinese consulates, media reporters, students, researchers, visa restrictions, spying, Huawei, the trade war, all done in the hope of making the Chinese leaders panic and over-react, the easiest way to justify a new war.

The list could continue for several hundred pages. Never in my life have I seen such a continuous, unabating flood of hate propaganda against one nation, surely equivalent to what was done against Germany as described above to prepare for US entry into the First World War. And it’s working, doing what it is intended to do. Canada, Australia, the UK, Germany, India, Brazil, are buying into the war-mongering and turning against China. More will follow. The Global Times reported “Mutual trust between Australia and China at all-time low”.[62]

“Boycott China” T-shirts and caps are flooding India, Huawei is being increasingly banned from Western nations, Chinese social media APPs like Tik-Tok are being banned, and Bryan Adams recently slammed all Chinese as “Bat-eating, wet-market-animal-selling, virus-making, greedy bastards”.[63][64] In a recent poll (taken because we need to measure the success of our handiwork in the same way Bernays and the Tavistock Institute did as noted earlier), half of all ethnic Chinese in Canada have been threatened and harassed over COVID-19.

About 45% of Chinese in Canada said they had been ” threatened or intimidated in some way”, fully 50% said they had recently been insulted in public, 30% said they had experienced . . . “some kind of physical altercation”, and 60% said the abuse was so bad “they had to reorganise their daily routine to avoid it”. One woman in her 60s said a man told her and her daughter “Every day I pray that you people die”.[65]

This deliberate, systematic targeting of China and the Chinese (by the Jewish media, I’m sorry to say) has resulted in a 700% increase in hate crimes against Chinese, and Canada is by no means the only country experiencing this phenomenon. It is not better in the US, the UK, Australia, and much of Europe. It would seem the laws against hate speech are only for the benefit of the Jews, certainly not for the Chinese. Lippmann and Bernays would be proud.

Several years ago, CNN was sued by one of their news anchors for being ordered to lie in the newscasts. CNN won the case. They did not deny ordering the news anchor to lie. Their defense was based simply on the position that American news media have “no obligation to tell the truth”. And RT recently reported that nearly 9 out of 10 Americans see a “medium or high” bias in all media coverage,[65] yet, as we can see, most of those same people, and a very large portion of the population of many nations still succumb to the same hate propaganda.

I would add four final points to this essay.

(1) There is no way to avoid the conclusion that history is indeed repeating itself, demonising yet another nation, deliberately engendering sufficient hatred and anger to justify another world war.

(2) While the impetus for this is surely from the US, the Americans are not entirely to blame because they are merely following orders. The root of all this absolutely resides in Europe among the cabal of International Jews and Zionists, with the Americans once again being “The Bankers’ Private Army”. Our New World Government cannot come into existence without the destruction of both China and Russia (and Iran), but China is the primary stumbling block and must be eliminated. World War Three will have China and Russia on the same side and, with luck, both will be destroyed in one swoop. That is the plan. Your belief in it is not material to its execution.

(3) The International Jews have some reason (in their minds) to resent China. For one, China was intended to be dismembered and turned into a perpetual cash cow, a plan frustrated by Mao and his revolution. Everyone is aware that the Jews had been evicted from many countries many times over many hundreds of years, but no one seems aware that two of these evictions occurred relatively recently, one from Japan immediately prior to World War Two (the source of the huge Jewish Ghetto in Shanghai, not escapees from Hitler as the myths tell us), and the second from China. It was not “the British” but the International Jewish banking families, the Rothschilds, Sassoons, Kadoories and others that were entirely responsible for China’s 150 years-long opium travesty. I won’t go into details here, but immediately after World War Two, one of Mao’s first acts was to expel all the Jews from China and confiscate all their opium assets – including all of the city of Shanghai and the Mainland Branches of the HSBC. They haven’t forgotten, and they want their money back.

(4) Given the source of the push for a Third World War and the planned destruction of China, one is left to consider what, if anything, can be done to prevent a third worldwide holocaust. Even knowing the sources, it is hardly practical to declare war on at most a few thousand individuals scattered among perhaps ten nations.

I know of only one way to prevent the World War Three that is now imminent: make Israel pay for it. If in the final position of authority, I would call in the Israeli ambassador and inform him that if my nation were pushed into a war with the US, my first retaliation would be not against the US but against Israel, that I would apply whatever portion of my nuclear arsenal was necessary to achieve that. It is my thesis that Israel is too important to these people to be sacrificed, and that faced with such a threat deemed credible, they would back off. With everything I know, I do not believe a third world war can be otherwise prevented.

Notes

[1] https://hofs.online/david-irving-churchills-war/

[2] https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2020/01/13/germanys-war-chapter-4-the-allied-conspiracy-to-instigate-prolong-wwii/

[3] https://thegreateststorynevertold.tv/the-war-criminal-churchill/

[4] ttps://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/schul05.htm

[5] “Germany is getting too strong. We’ve got to smash her.” – Winston Churchill speaking during a private lunch in 1936. Reminiscenses in 1961 of General Robert E. Wood. World War II. By Carl J. Schneider, Dorothy Schneider. Page 15.

[6] “We will force this war upon Hitler, if he wants it or not.” – Winston Churchill (1936 broadcast). “This war is an English war and its goal is the destruction of Germany.” – Winston Churchill (Autumn 1939 broadcast)

[7] “You must understand that this war is not against Hitler or National Socialism, but against the strength of the German people, which is to be smashed once and for all, regardless of whether it is in the hands of Hitler of a Jesuit priest.” – Winston Churchill [1940]; Emrys Hughes, Winston Churchill, His Career in War and Peace p. 45); This book was published in Great Britain in 1950 under the title “Winston Churchill in war and peace.” The American version titled “Winston Churchill: British bulldog : his career in war and peace”, was published in 1955 and was an edited version with selected quotations removed.

[8] http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20161021-the-psychological-tricks-used-to-help-win-world-war-two

[9]https://library.brown.edu/create/fivecenturiesofchange/chapters/chapter-7/student-movement/

[10] https://www.amazon.com/Engineering-Consent-Edward-L-Bernays/dp/B0007DOM5E

[11] http://classes.dma.ucla.edu/Fall07/28/Engineering_of_consent.pdf

[12] https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/203430-the-conscious-and-intelligent-manipulation-of-the-organized-habits-and

[13] https://www.amazon.com/Propaganda-Edward-Bernays/dp/0970312598

[14] https://famguardian.org/Subjects/Scams/FDR/fdr.htm

[15] https://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/article/wikileaks-1941/

[16] https://mises.org/library/roosevelt-nobody-knows

[17]http://www.rationalrevolution.net/war/condition_of_modern_american_soc.htm

[18]http://www.rationalrevolution.net/war/condition_of_modern_american_soc.htm

[19] https://www.history.com/topics/middle-east/balfour-declaration

[20] https://publicdiplomacy.wikia.org/wiki/Creel_Committee

[21] https://www.ebooks.com/en-us/book/712398/media-control/noam-chomsky/

[22] https://www.amazon.com/Public-Opinion-Original-Walter-Lippmann/dp/1947844563

[23]https://wps.pearsoncustom.com/wps/media/objects/2429/2487430/pdfs/lippmann.pdf

[24] http://www.revisionist.net/hysteria/cpi-propaganda.html

[25] http://www.revisionist.net/hysteria/cpi-propaganda.html

[26] https://net.lib.byu.edu/~rdh7/wwi/comment/bryce.html

[27] https://www.ataa.org/armenian-issue-revisited/the-bryce-report-british-propaganda-and-the-turks

[28] http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5052.html

Committee on Public Information, Bureau of Cartoons, Bulletin No. 16, September 28, 1919, 1–2.

[29] http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/4970/

Four Minute Men – Volunteer Speeches During World War I. Reprinted in Alfred Cornbise, War As Advertised: The Four Minute Men and America’s Crusade, 1917–1918 (Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1984).

News Headlines on Four-Minute Men:

• Yiddish-Speaking Four Minute Men Reach Jewish Section of New York

• Organized Under Rabbi Robinson to Carry Government Messages Into Jewish Theaters and Playhouses

• Now Planning to Send Yiddish Speakers Into Shops where Jewish People Are Largely Employed

• The New York City division of Four Minute Men carry on very effective work among the large Jewish population of that city.

Mr. Joseph B. Thomas, former local chairman of Four Minute Men in New York City, wrote as follows:

“The work is organized under the direction of Rabbi A. G. Robinson, executive director of the Young Men’s Hebrew Association. At the present time the Jewish section is operating in 30 theaters, sending speakers to each twice a week. Among these are all the large Jewish playhouses of the city, each one of which has an average attendance of 2,000 at a performance. In this way we are reaching about 25,000 people per week. We expect soon to have every Jewish audience in a motion-picture house or a Jewish playhouse addressed by a Jewish playhouse addressed by a Jewish speaker. Both Yiddish and English are used in accordance with the character of the audience. The directors of several Young Men’s Hebrew Associations in Greater New York are enlisted as ‘Four Minute Speakers,’ and also address their members occasionally on the subjects assigned from Washington. We are now planning to send Yiddish speakers into the various shops of the city where Jewish help is most largely employed. We are also arranging to reach the thousand or more synagogues of the city where Yiddish is best understood. The speakers are introduced in the motion-picture theaters by slides bearing the usual announcement, printed in Yiddish.”

[30] http://www.revisionist.net/hysteria/cpi-propaganda.html

[31] https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/u-s-congress-passes-sedition-act

[32] https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/u-s-congress-passes-espionage-act

[33] https://www.nationalists.org/library/hitler/daily-express/judea-declares-war-on-germany.html

[34] https://vimeo.com/49275330

[35]https://archive.org/stream/JewsDeclareWarOnGermany1933/JewsDeclareWarOnGermany1933_djvu.txt

[36]https://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/articles/jdecwar.html

[37] https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/historical-journal/article/wellington-house-and-british-propaganda-during-the-first-world-war1/0E3BEB8F4CC3EAD3D1B415D4E6A832F4

[38] https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p032m651

[39] https://military.wikia.org/wiki/Wellington_House

[40] http://britishdeepstate.net/propaganda-bureau-british-deep-state-wellington-house/

[41] https://thebridgelifeinthemix.info/in-profile/in-profile-the-tavistock-institute-of-human-relations-and-the-destruction-of-the-west/

[42] https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/japan-ending-a-war-and-saving-lives/

[43] https://www.rt.com/op-ed/497096-john-pilger-hiroshima-china-us/

[44] https://journal-neo.org/2020/08/04/trump-s-secret-war-plan-for-the-south-china-sea/

[45] https://edition.cnn.com/2018/08/13/asia/china-xinjiang-uyghur-united-nations-intl/index.html

[46] https://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/3095618/us-sanctions-chinese-entity-individuals-over-xinjiang-repression

[47] https://news.yahoo.com/china-forcibly-sterilises-uighurs-control-population-report-195121873.html

[48] https://forward.com/opinion/452047/want-to-do-something-to-prevent-genocide-in-xinjiang-here-are-some/

[49] https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/02/asia/xinjiang-uyghur-graveyards-china-intl-hnk/index.html

[50]https://lite.cnn.com/en/article/h_ccd01a5d63b9699a83409e2c4729bf0f

[51] https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1195688.shtml

[52] https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/29/world/vatican-china-hacking-burke/index.html

[53] https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/28/asia/japan-china-fighter-jet-scrambles-intl-hnk-dst/index.html

[54] https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1195688.shtml

[55] https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/26/asia/chengdu-us-consulate-china-closure-intl-hnk/index.html

[56] https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/coronavirus-pandemic-04-24-20-intl/h_05246e4e5b879b16869e4a7c47702cfe

[57] https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/18/politics/state-department-cable-coronavirus-chinese-lab/index.html

[58] https://www.foxnews.com/world/chinese-virologist-coronavirus-cover-up-flee-hong-kong-whistleblower.amp.

[59] https://www.foxnews.com/world/chinese-virologist-coronavirus-cover-up-flee-hong-kong-whistleblower

[60] https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/20/opinions/china-needs-to-be-held-accountable-for-covid-19s-destruction/index.html

[61] https://www.foxnews.com/politics/australia-joins-us-china-coronavirus-pandemic

[62] https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1192669.shtml

[63] https://www.theguardian.com/music/2020/may/12/bryan-adams-attacks-china-coronavirus

[64] https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/11603551/bryan-adams-lets-rip-china-bat-eating-greedy-coronavirus/

[65] https://sputniknews.com/society/202006251079720558-half-of-ethnic-chinese-in-canada-threatened-and-harassed-over-coronavirus-new-poll-shows/

[66] https://www.rt.com/usa/497117-mainstream-media-bias-poll/

ttps://www.unz.com/lromanoff/the-anger-campaign-against-china/