One 77-year-old’s search for the truth: 9/11, election fraud, illegal wars, Wall Street criminality, a stolen nuke, the neocon wars, control of the U.S. government by global corporations, the unjustified assault on Social Security, media complicity, and the "Great Recession" about to become the second Great Depression. "The most important truths are hidden from us by the powerful few who strive to steal the American dream by keeping We the People in the dark."
Saturday, June 20, 2015
Even as I repost his lecture, Paul Craig Roberts is or soon will be presenting it in Delphi, Greece. And while of importance to the Greeks, you will read why it is of far greater importance to the citizens of the US and France. The message is that the neoconservatives that control both the US and its European vassals are looking toward the day when they can launch their nuclear attack on Russia and China with gullible Americans and Europeans becoming "collateral damage." The best, and perhaps only, way to avoid this horror is to ignore the lying "mainsteam media,” put away your cognitive dissonances, and make your voices heard in Washington and Paris. Digesting PCR's seminal lecture below can be your starting point.
Paul Craig Roberts’ address to the Conference on the European/Russian Crisis, Delphi, Greece, June 20-21, 2015
Paul Craig Roberts, formerly Assistant Secretary of the US
Treasury for Economic Policy, Associate Editor, Wall Street Journal,
Senior Research Fellow, Stanford University, William E. Simon Chair in
Political Economy, Center for Strategic and International Studies,
Georgetown University, Washington, D.C.
The United States has pursued empire since early in
its history, but it was the Soviet collapse in 1991 that enabled
Washington to see the entire world as its oyster.
The collapse of the Soviet Union resulted in the rise of the
neoconservatives to power and influence in the US government. The
neoconservatives have interpreted the Soviet collapse as History’s
choice of “American democratic capitalism” as the New World Order.
Chosen by History as the exceptional and indispensable country,
Washington claims the right and the responsibility to impose its
hegemony on the world. Neoconservatives regard their agenda to be too
important to be constrained by domestic and international law or by the
interests of other countries. Indeed, as the Unipower, Washington is
required by the neoconservative doctrine to prevent the rise of other
countries that could constrain American power.
Paul Wolfowitz, a leading neoconservative, penned the Wolfowitz
Doctrine shortly after the Soviet collapse. This doctrine is the basis
of US foreign and military policy.
The doctrine states:
“Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival,
either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that
poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union.
This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense
strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from
dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control,
be sufficient to generate global power.”
Notice that Washington’s “first objective” is not peace, not
prosperity, not human rights, not democracy, not justice. Washington’s
“first objective” is world hegemony. Only the very confident so
blatantly reveal their agenda.
As a former member of the Cold War Committee on the Present Danger, I
can explain what Wolfowitz’s words mean. The “threat posed formerly by
the Soviet Union” was the ability of the Soviet Union to block
unilateral US action in some parts of the world. The Soviet Union was a
constraint on US unilateral action, not everywhere but in some places.
Any constraint on Washington is regarded as a threat.
A “hostile power” is a country with an independent foreign policy,
such as the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) have
proclaimed. Iran, Bolivia, Ecuador, Venezuela, Argentina, Cuba, and
North Korea also proclaim an independent foreign policy.
This is too much independence for Washington to stomach. As Russian
President Vladimir Putin recently stated, “Washington doesn’t want
partners. Washington wants vassals.”
The Wolfowitz doctrine requires Washington to dispense with or
overthrow governments that do not acquiesce to Washington’s will. It
is the “first objective.”
The collapse of the Soviet Union resulted in Boris Yeltsin becoming
president of a dismembered Russia. Washington became accustomed to
Yeltsin’s compliance and absorbed itself in its Middle Eastern wars,
expecting Vladimir Putin to continue Russia’s vassalage.
However at the 43rd Munich Conference on Security Policy, Putin
said: “I consider that the unipolar model is not only unacceptable but
also impossible in today’s world.”
Putin went on to say:
“We are seeing a greater and greater disdain for the basic principles of
international law, and independent legal norms are, as a matter of
fact, coming increasingly closer to one state’s legal system. One state
and, of course, first and foremost the United States, has overstepped
its national borders in every way. This is visible in the economic,
political, cultural and educational policies it imposes on other
nations. Well, who likes this? Who is happy about this?”
When Putin issued this fundamental challenge to US unipower,
Washington was preoccupied with its lack of success with its invasions
of Afghanistan and Iraq. Mission was not accomplished.
By 2014 it had come to Washington’s attention that while Washington
was blowing up weddings, funerals, village elders, and children’s soccer
games in the Middle East, Russia had achieved independence from
Washington’s control and presented itself as a formidable challenge to
Washington’s uni-power. Putin blocked Obama’s planned invasion of Syria
and bombing of Iran.
The unmistakable rise of Russia refocused Washington from the Middle East to Russia’s vulnerabilities.
Ukraine, long a constituent part of Russia and subsequently the
Soviet Union, was split off from Russia in the wake of the Soviet
collapse by Washington’s maneuvering. In 2004 Washington had tried to
capture Ukraine in the Orange Revolution, which failed to deliver
Ukraine into Washington’s hands. Consequently, according to neocon
Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, Washington spent $5
billion over the following decade developing Ukrainian non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) that could be called into the streets of Kiev and
in developing Ukrainian political leaders willing to represent
Washington launched its coup in February 2014 with orchestrated
demonstrations that, with the addition of violence, resulted in the
overthrow and flight of the elected democratic government of Victor
Yanukovych. In other words, Washington destroyed democracy in a new
country with a coup before democracy could take root.
Ukrainian democracy meant nothing to Washington. Washington was
intent on seizing Ukraine in order to present Russia with a security
problem and also to justify sanctions against “Russian aggression” in
order to break up Russia’s growing economic and political relationships
with Europe. Washington feared that these relationships could undermine
Washington’s hold on Europe.
Sanctions are contrary to Europe’s interests. Nevertheless European
governments accommodated Washington’s agenda. The reason was explained
to me several decades ago by my Ph.D. dissertation committee chairman
who became Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security
Affairs. I had the opportunity to ask him how Washington managed to
have foreign governments act in Washington’s interest rather than in the
interest of their own countries. He said, “money.” I said, “you mean
foreign aide?” He said, “no, we give the politicians bags full of
money. They belong to us. They answer to us.”
Recently, the German journalist Udo Ulfkotte wrote a book, Bought
Journalists, in which he reported that every significant European
journalist functions as a CIA asset.
This does not surprise me. The same is the situation in the US.
As Europe is an appendage of Washington, a collection of vassal states,
Europe enables Washington’s pursuit of hegemony even to the extent of
being driven into conflict with Russia over a “crisis” that is entirely a
propaganda creation of Washington’s.
The media disguises the reality. During the Clinton regime, six
mega-media companies were permitted to acquire 90% of the US print, TV,
radio, and entertainment media, a concentration that destroyed diversity
and independence. Today the media throughout the Western world serves
as a Propaganda Ministry for Washington. The Western media is
Washington’s Ministry of Truth. Gerald Celente, the trends forecaster,
calls the Western media “presstitutes,” a combination of press
In the US Putin and Russia are demonized around the clock. Every
broadcast alerts us to “the Russian threat.” Even Putin’s facial
expressions are psychologically analyzed. Putin is the New Hitler. Putin
has ambitions to recreate the Soviet empire. Putin invaded Ukraine.
Putin is going to invade the Baltic states and Poland. Putin is a threat
on the level of ebola and the Islamist State. US Russian experts, such
as Stephen Cohen, who state the facts are dismissed as “Putin
apologists.” Any and every one who takes exception to the anti-Putin,
anti-Russian propaganda is branded a “Putin apologist,” just as 9/11
skeptics are dismissed as “conspiracy theorists.” In the Western world,
the few truth-tellers are demonized along with Putin and Russia.
The world should take note that today, right now, Truth is the most
unwelcome presence in the Western world. No one wants to hear it in
Washington, London, Tokyo, or in any of the political capitals of
The majority of the American population has fallen for the
anti-Russian propaganda, just as they fell for “Saddam Hussein’s weapons
of mass destruction,” “Assad’s use of chemical weapons against his own
people,” Iranian nukes,” the endless lies about Gaddafi, 9/11, shoe
bombers, underwear bombers, shampoo and bottled water bombers. There is
always a new lie to keep the fear factor working for Washington’s
endless wars and police state measures that enrich the rich and
impoverish the poor.
The gullibility of the public has enabled Washington to establish the
foundation for a new Cold War or for a preemptive nuclear strike on
Russia. Some neoconservatives prefer the latter. They believe nuclear
war can be won, and they ask, “What is the purpose of nuclear weapons if
they cannot be used?”
China is the other rising power that the Wolfowitz Doctrine requires
to be constrained. Washington’s “pivot to Asia” creates new naval and
air bases to control China and perpetuate Washington’s hegemony in the
South China Sea.
We come to the bottom line. Washington’s position is not negotiable.
Washington has no interest in compromising with Russia or China.
Washington has no interest in any facts. Washington’s deal is this:
“You can be part of our world order as our vassals, but not otherwise.”
European governments and, of course, the lapdog UK government, are
complicit in this implicit declaration of war against Russia and China.
If it comes to war, Europeans will pay the ultimate price for the
treason of their leaders, such as Merkel, Cameron, and Hollande, as
Europe will cease to exist.
War with Russia and China is beyond Washington’s capability.
However, if the demonized “enemy” does not succumb to the pressure and
accept Washington’s leadership, war can be inevitable. Washington has
launched an attack. How does Washington back off? Don’t expect any
American regime to say, “we made a mistake. Let’s work this out.” Every
one of the announced candidates for the American presidency is committed
to American hegemony and war.
Washington believes Russia can be isolated from the West and that
this isolation will motivate those secularized and westernized elements
in Russia, who desire to be part of the West, into more active
opposition against Putin. The Saker calls these Russians “Atlanticist
After two decades of Russia being infiltrated by Washington’s NGO
Fifth Columns, the Russian government has finally taken action to
regulate the hundreds of Western-financed NGOs inside Russia that
comprise Washington’ subversion of the Russian government. However,
Washington still hopes to use sanctions to cause enough disruption of
economic life within Russia to be able to send protesters into the
streets. Regime change, as in Ukraine, is one of Washington’s tools.
In China the US organized the Hong Kong “student” riots, which
Washington hopes will spread into China, and Washington supports the
independence of the Muslim population in the Chinese province that
The problem with a government in the control of an ideology is that
ideology and not reason drives the action of the government. As the
majority of Western populations lack the interest to search for
independent explanations, the populations impose no constraint on
To understand Washington, go online and read the neoconservative
documents and position papers. You will see an agenda unconstrained by
law, by morality, by compassion, by common sense. You will see an agenda
Who is Obama’s Assistant Secretary of State for the Ukrainian part of
the world? It is the neoconservative Victoria Nuland who organized the
Ukrainian coup, who put in office the new puppet government, who is
married to the even more extreme neoconservative, Robert Kagan.
Who is Obama’s National Security advisor? It is Susan Rice, a neoconservative.
Who is Obama’s Ambassador to the UN? It is Samantha Power, a neoconservative.
Now we turn to material interests. The neoconservative agenda of
world hegemony serves the powerful military/security complex whose one
trillion dollar annual budget depends on war, hot or cold.
The agenda of American hegemony serves the interests of Wall Street
and the mega-banks. As Washington’s power and influence spreads, so
does American financial imperialism. So does the reach of American oil
companies and American agribusiness corporations such as Monsanto.
Washington’s hegemony means that US corporations get to loot the rest of the world.
The danger of the neoconservative ideology is that it is in perfect
harmony with powerful economic interests. In the US the left-wing has
made itself impotent. It believes all the foundational government lies
that have given America a police/warfare state incapable of producing
alternative leadership. The American left, what little remains, for
emotional reasons believes the government’s 9/11 story. The
anti-religious left-wing believes the threat posed to free thought by a
Christian Russia. The left-wing, convinced that Americans are racists,
believes the government’s account of the assassinations of Martin Luther
The left-wing accepts the government’s transparent 9/11 fable,
because it is emotionally important to the American left that oppressed
peoples strike back. For the American left, it is emotionally
satisfying that the Middle East, long oppressed and exploited by the
French, British and Americans, struck back and humiliated the Unipower
in the 9/11 attack.
This emotional need is so powerful for the left that it blinds the
left-wing to the improbability of a few Saudi Arabians, who could not
fly airplanes, outwitting not merely the FBI, CIA, and NSA, which spies
on the entire world, but as well all 16 US intelligence agencies and the
intelligence agencies of Washington’s NATO vassal states and Israel’s
Mossad, which has infiltrated every terrorist organization, including
those created by Washington itself.
Somehow these Saudis were able to also outwit NORAD, airport
security, causing security to fail four times in one hour on the same
day. They were able to prevent for the first time ever the US Air Force
from intercepting the hijacked airliners. Air traffic control somehow
lost the hijacked airliners on radar. Two airliners crashed, one into
the Pennsylvania country side and one into the Pentagon without leaving
any debris. The passport of the leader of the attack, Mohammed Atta was
reported to be found as the only undamaged element in the debris of the
World Trade Center towers. The story of the passport was so preposterous
that it had to be changed.
This implausible account did not raise any eyebrows in the tame Western print and TV media.
The right-wing is obsessed with immigration of darker-skinned
peoples, and 9/11 has become an argument against immigration. The
left-wing awaits the oppressed to strike back against their oppressors.
The 9/11 fable survives as it serves the interests of both left and
I can tell you for a fact that if American national security had so
totally failed as it is represented to have failed by the official
explanation of 9/11, the White House, the Congress, the media would have
been screaming for an investigation. Heads would have rolled in
agencies that permitted such massive failure of the national security
state. The embarrassment of a Superpower being so easily attacked and
humiliated by a handful of Arabs acting independently of any
intelligence agency would have created an uproar demanding
Instead, the White House resisted any investigation for one year.
Under pressure from the 9/11 families who lost family members in the
World Trade Center Towers, the White House created a political
commission consisting of politicians managed by the White House. The
commission sat and listened to the government’s account and wrote it
down. This is not an investigation.
In the United States the left-wing is focused on demonizing Ronald
Reagan, who had nothing whatsoever to do with any of this. The
left-wing hates Reagan because he had to use anti-communist rhetoric in
order to keep his electoral basis while he strove to end the Cold War in
the face of the powerful opposition of the military/security complex.
Is the left-wing more effective in Europe? Not that I can see. Look
at Greece for example. The Greek people are driven into the ground by
the EU, the IMF, the German and Dutch banks and the New York hedge
funds. Yet, when presented with candidates who promise to resist the
looting of Greece, the Greek voters give the candidates a mere 36% of
the vote, enough to form a government, but not enough to have any clout
Having hamstrung their government with such low electoral support,
the Greek people further impose impotence on their government by
demanding to remain in the EU. If leaving the EU is not a realistic
threat, the Greek government has no negotiating power.
Obviously, the Greek population is so throughly brainwashed about the
necessity of being part of the EU that the population is willing to be
economically dispossessed rather than to leave the EU. Thus Greeks have
forfeited their sovereignty and independence. A country without its own
money is not, and cannot be, an independent country.
Once European intellectuals signed off on the EU, they committed
nations to vassalage, both to the EU bureaucrats and to Washington.
Consequently, European nations are not independent and cannot exercise
an independent foreign policy.
Their impotence means that Washington can drive them to war. To fully
understand the impotence of Europe look at France. The only leader in
Europe worthy of the name is Marine Le Pen. Having said this, I am
immediately denounced by the European left as a fascist, a racist, and
so forth. This only shows the knee-jerk response of the European left.
It is not I who shares Le Pen’s views on immigration. It is the
French people. Le Pen’s party won the recent EU elections. What Le Pen
stands for is French independence from the EU. The majority of French
see themselves as French and want to remain French with their own laws
and customs. Only Le Pen among European politicians has stated the
obvious: “The Americans are taking us to war!”
Despite the French desire for independence, the French will elect Le
Pen’s party to the EU but will not give it the vote to be the government
of France. The French deny themselves their independence, because they
are heavily conditioned by brainwashing, much coming from the left, and
are ashamed to be racists, fascists, and whatever epithets have been
assigned to Le Pen’s political party, a party that stands for the
independence of France.
The European left-wing, once a progressive force, even a
revolutionary one, has become a reactionary force. It is the same in
the US. I say this as one of CounterPunch’s popular contributors.
The inability even of intellectuals to recognize and accept reality
means that restraints on neoconservatives are nowhere present except
within Russia and China. The West is impotent to prevent Armageddon.
It is up to Russia and China, and as Washington has framed the dilemma,
Armageddon can only be prevented by Russia and China accepting vassal
I don’t believe this is going to happen. Why would any self-respecting people submit to the corrupt West?
The hope is that Washington will cause its European vassals to rebel
by pushing them too hard into conflict with Russia. The hope that
European countries will be forced into an independent foreign policy
also seems to be the basis of the Russian government’s strategy.
Perhaps intellectuals can help to bring this hope to fruition. If
European politicians were to break from Washington’s hegemony and
instead represent European interests, Washington would be deprived of
cover for its war crimes. Washington’s aggressions would be constrained
by an independent European foreign policy. The breakdown of the
neoconservative unipower model would be apparent even to Washington, and
the world would become a safer and better place.