Even before Trump took office
How the people behind Joe Biden are trying to unleash another big war at any cost
To say it right away, because it is very important for understanding: It is not Joe Biden who makes the decisions in Washington, as even the Wall Street Journal has now reported without contradiction, but according to the newspaper, the decisions are made by White House National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan and US Secretary of State Antony Blinken.
Threatening charges of high treason
The decisions in Washington are therefore made by unelected officials who derive their own legitimacy only from working for the demented president, whom they steer in the direction they want. And these gentlemen are provoking situations that completely bypass the decision-making power of the US Congress, which, according to the US Constitution, decides on war and peace. To put it clearly: According to the US Constitution, what the Blinken/Sullivan duo has done and continues to do is high treason.
Why this is the case and what the two gentlemen have been trying to do in recent weeks to unleash a hot war against Russia is what this article is about.
The Role of the Media
Incidentally, the events since the summer have once again shown how aligned the Western media are. First, they kept Joe Biden's dementia, which has been evident since the 2020 election campaign, a secret from their audience for four years, only to then address it (as if) on command because the US Democrats wanted to replace Biden as their presidential candidate and the issue therefore had to make the headlines.
But after the Western media also openly acknowledged Biden's dementia, not a single journalist from the liberal, pro-Democratic media asked how such a demented man, who cannot even hold a discussion with his political opponent, could remain in office as US President.
It is now clear to everyone that Joe Biden is not ruling the USA. And the uncontradicted report in the Wall Street Journal answered the question of who has actually been ruling the USA since Biden took office four years ago, but this was largely ignored in the German media.
But let's get to the real issue, namely the fires that Blinken and Sullivan are continuing to stoke in order to put obstacles in Trump's path and also save their own skin from being charged with treason. To do so, they are even risking a hot war with Russia.
submarine cable
Western media and politicians are currently running a campaign because some data cables were damaged in the Baltic Sea. There is no evidence, but of course they blame Russia and say things like, this can't be a coincidence, so it must be sabotage and of course only Russia could be responsible.
The fact that the same media want to blame the explosion of the Nord Stream on Ukraine, and that there are certainly other suspects for cases of sabotage in the Baltic Sea who even have an interest in accusing Russia, is something that Western media naturally fail to mention in this context.
To understand the issue, we should first ask ourselves how likely sabotage is, and this includes the question of how often such cables are damaged per year. I found an interesting article on this on the BBC, which is not known for "Russian propaganda". In the article, the BBC reports that there are 150 to 200 such damages every year and that this is so normal that a whole fleet of special repair ships is ready for this in strategically selected ports around the world.
I quote the interesting parts of the BBC article :
"There are 150 to 200 failures in the global network every year. So if we compare that to 1.4 million km, it's not a lot, and when that failure does occur, most of it can be repaired relatively quickly." (...) Most failures, which vary between 70 and 80% depending on where in the world the cables are located, are related to unintentional human activities such as dropping anchors or dragging trawl nets that get caught on the cables, says Stephen Holden, maintenance manager for Europe, the Middle East and Africa at Global Marine, a subsea engineering company that carries out repairs to subsea cables. These typically occur at depths of 200-300m (but commercial fishing is increasingly moving into deeper waters - down to 1,500m in some places in the North East Atlantic). Only 10-20% of failures are related to natural hazards and more commonly involve cables wearing out in places where they rub against rocks due to currents around the world, causing what are known as 'shunt failures', Holden says. (...) When a failure is detected, a repair vessel is dispatched. "All of these vessels are strategically placed around the world so that they take 10 to 12 days from base to port," says Mick McGovern, assistant vice president of marine operations at Alcatel Submarine Networks."
So we can say that it is quite normal for submarine cables to be damaged and that this is hardly a big surprise, especially in the relatively shallow Baltic Sea, through which many cables have been laid and which is actively fished. But of course the Western countries do not mention this in their current reports, which are intended to blame Russia.
The Baltic Sea
Der Spiegel, for example, has just written another article about this with the headline " Sabotage - NATO official warns of 'hybrid attack' with many victims " and is intended to explain to readers why NATO supposedly needs to become more active in the Baltic Sea. The reason given is alleged "hybrid attacks" by Russia, which have become so frequent that people have become used to them, which is dangerous, a high-ranking NATO official is allowed to explain in Der Spiegel.
The NATO man does not give any concrete examples of Russian acts of sabotage and hybrid warfare against the West, but Der Spiegel cites the Internet cable off the coast of Finland as an example and naturally suspects Russia, because Der Spiegel has to somehow make its readers understand NATO nonsense. Der Spiegel also mentions that it is still completely unclear how the cable was damaged, but that does not stop it from pointing the finger at Russia.
The Western media have launched a campaign apparently directed by NATO (since all articles about it ultimately cite NATO sources) that is targeting the Baltic Sea. Russia is accused - without evidence - of sabotaging submarine cables and spying. Russia is allegedly doing this with the help of the so-called shadow fleet with which Russia exports its oil, and under this pretext at least one ship carrying Russian oil has already been stopped by warships from NATO countries, which, without a mandate from the UN Security Council, is an act of piracy under international law and an act of war against Russia.
The pretext shows what is at stake: The West wants to take action against Russian oil exports and is creating pretexts in the media by accusing the oil tankers that have loaded Russian oil of all mortal sins. Some hardliners are even talking about a blockade of the Baltic Sea for Russian ships.
NATO certainly only does such things on the instructions of the transatlantic networks, that is, on the instructions of the US Democrats and their financiers, which brings us back to Blinken and Sullivan, without whom this escalation of hijacking ships with Russian cargo, which could also lead to a hot war because Russia would certainly not stand idly by and watch a blockade of the Baltic Sea, would be impossible.
The coup attempt in South Korea
There was an attempted coup in South Korea on December 3, when the country's president declared martial law. He wanted to take action against the opposition, which has a majority in parliament and with whom he was in dispute over the next state budget. In his statement declaring martial law, he accused the opposition of acting in North Korea's interests, which is why he had to protect " liberal South Korea from the threats posed by North Korea's communist troops ."
Because the coup was poorly organized, the military was unable to carry out the president's order and occupy parliament before the opposition could gather there and vote to lift martial law. Mass protests against the coup attempt further disrupted the coup plotters' plans, which is why the president finally gave in and martial law was lifted after six hours.
The South Korean president is an uncompromising implementer of US policy who would certainly not have taken this step without the green light from Washington - again from Blinken and Sullivan. The fact that the US government (and the West as a whole) supported the coup attempt can be seen in the fact that there was no criticism of the coup attempt from Washington, although the US State Department is always very quick to make statements about events that displease the US government.
And even after the coup, there were no demands from Washington or the West to remove the president from office after the attempted coup. The South Korean opposition pushed through this on its own; the opposition received no support from the USA in saving democracy in South Korea from a looming military dictatorship.
Korea experts have analyzed the attempted coup and the following chronology emerges: At 11 p.m. local time, just half an hour after the president's speech, a Korean special unit, the 707th Brigade, was supposed to have taken over the parliament. But because of the heavy air traffic over Seoul, the helicopters that were supposed to bring the 707th Brigade to the parliament were initially not given permission to fly, so the troops did not arrive until almost an hour later, but by that time the opposition MPs were already in the parliament, had barricaded themselves inside and were holding the vote to lift martial law, which caused the attempted coup to fail.
This also shows that the US government had a hand in it, or at least was informed, because the US troops work very closely with the South Korean army and in the event of war, command passes to the US troops, so they know each other very well. But above all, the fact that the special unit that was supposed to occupy parliament is constantly training together with corresponding US units is a clear indication that Washington must have known about the coup plans.
In addition, it has now become known that the helicopter transports to Parliament had been practiced for months beforehand. The US military must have known everything.
Another media preparation
For months, the West has been reviving the image of North Korea as an enemy because North Korean soldiers are allegedly or actually fighting in Russia against Ukraine, because North Korea is allegedly supplying Russia with weapons on a large scale, and because Russia is allegedly providing North Korea with military-technical knowledge in return.
The media campaign against North Korea doesn't really make much sense in itself, because North Korea is already an enemy in the West. And while the West may be annoyed about North Korea's support for Russia - real or alleged - the West supports Ukraine far more, so these accusations against North Korea, when they stand alone, actually seem pretty spurious.
But the Korea experts found even more in their analysis of the coup attempt. According to them, the leaders of all parties were to be kidnapped. The original plan was to murder them afterwards, but this was to be done in such a way that the murders could be blamed on North Korea. The fact that such raiding parties existed was already known on the night of the coup attempt.
What this has to do with Russia
The public would then have been presented with the following version of events: North Korea kidnapped the South Korean party leaders, the South Korean president wanted to prevent this and therefore declared martial law and secured parliament, but he arrived too late. North Korea would have been presented as an aggressor who - after concluding the mutual assistance pact with Russia a few months ago - felt strong enough with Russian backing to take over South Korea in a surprise attack.
Against the backdrop of anti-Russian and anti-North Korean hysteria in the Western media, no Western politician or editor-in-chief would have called for an investigation, but rather they would have demanded decisive steps to punish the aggressor North Korea.
This would have created a situation in Korea in which the USA and Russia would have been on the brink of direct war because of their mutual assistance pacts with North and South Korea. This would of course also have had an impact on the NATO countries in Europe and thus the potential to escalate the war in Ukraine.
For Blinken and Sullivan, whose goal is to weaken Russia, it would be a success if Russia were suddenly caught in a two-front war. And if they had achieved even some kind of involvement of US troops in this, they would also have achieved the goal of
confronting Trump after he took office with realities that would have thwarted all his peace plans for Ukraine.
What's next?
There are other trouble spots where Blinken and Sullivan can provoke escalations that could present Trump with a fait accompli. For example, the US could, as Russian intelligence services are already warning, persuade Islamists in Syria to attack Russian bases in Syria. Russian and US fighter jets are also meeting in Syria's airspace, so there are plenty of opportunities to provoke an escalation with Russia.
Then there is Taiwan, where the US government can also stir up trouble and provoke dangerous incidents that could lead to military clashes.
It should just be remembered that immediately after the US election they began to provoke an escalation with Russia by suddenly allowing US long-range missiles to attack targets in Russia.
Russia has so far only responded with heavy air strikes on Ukraine, but has not yet attacked Western targets, although at least the USA and Great Britain are now openly at war with Russia because their soldiers operate these long-range missiles . At best, Ukrainians press the launch button, but all the preparatory work, including target selection and programming, is done by American, British and possibly soldiers from other NATO countries.
So far, Blinken and Sullivan's attempts to push Russia into escalation have failed. The Russian government is apparently determined not to respond to the provocations until Trump takes office and can put an end to the chaos.
It will be very interesting to see what Blinken and Sullivan will come up with by January 20th to force Russia to react and create a situation in which Trump cannot implement his plans for detente with Russia and for an end to the war in Ukraine.
For Sullivan and Blinken, it’s about the naked skin
As I said at the beginning of this article, we must remember that what Blinken and Sullivan are doing violates the US Constitution. According to the US Constitution, only Congress has the right to lead the US into war, but the two gentlemen are trying everything to create a situation in which the US Congress is faced with a fait accompli and, due to media and domestic political pressure, would have no other choice than to approve, for example, the US entering the war against North Korea.
This is, it must be said clearly, high treason. Therefore, there are really only two possibilities: Either Blinken and Sullivan succeed, or they get the demented Biden to sign similarly extensive pardons for them as Hunter Biden has already received, so that Blinken and Sullivan do not end up in prison for life for high treason.
