This is a response to a comment on Roger’s blog, which would be too long to post.

Summary

If you have ever wondered why there was never a push back against the “left wing” campaign for Nut Zero, the answer is simple. There was an equally ruthless “right wing” or “Zionist” campaign supporting Nut Zero, but they had the sense to keep their activities silent and let the left take the blame for Nut Zero.

The result of this strong support from both the left and right/zionists is that the US is the hot bed of the insane “Global warming” cult, because that cult is supported by the right just as much as the left in the US.

The science never mattered. It was never about the science. It was always a political campaign to end the use of middle eastern oil and gas dressed up as “science”.

Historical background

Let’s start at the exodus where a group of Egyptians worshipping a monotheistic god at their large temple complexes left Egypt. It then transformed with contact with first the babylonians and especially Greeks from whom the Hebrews adopted the “synagogue” form of worship, where “synaogogue” (Greek for congregation) or as we know them “churches” became the centre of the transformed religion. This change occurred about 100BC when these synagogues/churches start to appear in the archaeology of Palestine.

Then around 70AD, presumably because the Roman occupiers insisted that the Hebrews worshipped the Roman emperor, we get the Jewish revolts, and as a consequence the religious zealots of both the early Christians and what was to become “judaism” are expelled. These spread throughout Europe to places like England, but especially beyond the then limits of the Roman empire, and we see echoes of their religion in what became the Norse religions with Odin hanging from a tree.

The Hebrews who consented to worship the Roman emperor were allowed to stay in Roman Palestine, and their descendants remain there to this day as the people we call “Palestinians”. They eventually adopted another variant derived from the ancient Hebrew religion we call “Islam”.

The group who became “Jews” intermarried with Europeans and for all reasonable purposes became another variant religion of the Europeans. Indeed, like Christians the Jews attempted to convert whole groups such as the Khazars of southern Russia who Converted to Judaism (740AD). After 2000 years away from Palestine with intermarriage with Europeans and inclusion of converted groups like the Khazars, there is little left of the original “Hebrew” blood. So modern Judaism is really just another religion. And, like the Palestinians, they most likely would have been forced to adopt the religion of their neighbours, if it weren’t for the fact the Jews interpreted their Hebrew texts in a different way to their Christian neighbours, which allowed them to lend money at interest. As such, they not only proved useful to Christian rulers, but also became far more powerful than their numbers would otherwise allow.

WWII

Wars need money, and WWII was particularly demanding on funds. So, WWII proved a very opportune time for the Jewish bankers to exert their influence over global events.

The result, was that the atrocities committed by Germans in Germany were used to justify atrocities committed by Zionists in Palestine. That started as terrorism against the then British rulers of Palestine. That terrorism continued as a series of military campaigns that have been triggered to enable yet more genocide and ethnic cleansing of the descendants of the original Hebrews, ironically justified in the press by the “holocaust of Jews” that occurred in Germany committed by Germans. So absolutely unconnected to Palestine.

Oil

So why did the west allow this appalling atrocity against the original Hebrew Palestinians to be committed? Because of middle eastern oil. It would appear the reason the US wanted the Europeanised “Jews” to takeover Palestine was to create a US power base in the middle east by which the US could control the middle east.

That became especially important when the US forced middle eastern countries to only trade oil in dollars, thereby forcing the globe to have to take dollars to use to buy oil. That in turn created an expanding market for US dollars and thus enabled the US to just keep printing dollars which is the basis of their approaching $40trillion debt.

To use a mafia analogy … the mafia forced their “clients” to “buy” goods using mafia IOU notes, which the mafia created for free, and which the mafia sold to their “clients” and which the mafia never will repay. So, the IOU notes are worthless, except that all the mafia “clients” are forced to use them. If however, any “clients” were to stop using them, the IOU notes truly would be worthless and very soon even under the threat of mafia violence, no one could afford to take the mafia IOU notes. That is why the mafia ruthlessly attack anyone who ever decides to stop using their IOU notes.

For example, Gadaffi was developing a scheme for a pan-African currency to stop their use of the dollar. Sadam had decided to stop using the dollar. They all got regime changed.

That is why the US needs to control the middle east. Not just because the Middle Eastern “kings” that it installs are willing to keep accUS epting dollars, when realistically there isn’t much they can do with them except put them back into the US financial system or buy US arms; but because the US needs to ensure that the middle eastern oil producing countries never stop supporting the “Petro-dollar”, because without the Petro-dollar, the massive debt of the US, means the dollar becomes worthless.

But, the problem with that set up, is increasingly the middle eastern dictators/kings that the US has installed to control the middle east, have grown incredibly wealthy and therefore they are increasingly challenging the power of the US.

Iran – Straights of Hormuz

Why did Netanyahu, despite saying he has wanted to destroy Iran for 40 years, and despite controlling most US politicians through the Epstein blackmail operations, wait till now to get his Zionist stooges in the US to attack Iran? Because Iran was always going to respond by blocking the straits of Hormuz and sending the global economy into meltdown. He had to wait till Nut Zero mania meant the use of middle eastern oil had fallen low enough that the globe could sustain a few months without the oil through the straits. And it appears he was led to believe, by the same “intelligence” that said Russia just had a few months of missiles before it ran out, that Iran only had a few weeks of missiles. So he believed it could not survive more than a few weeks of war.

The idea was regime change … using the pretend negotiations to enable them to locate and track the negotiators as they returned from those fake negotiations to meet with the supreme leaders … who were then murdered in cold blood in the expectation that their death and the sudden attack would lead to quick regime change and a new US-poodle “shah of Iran”.

However, Iran has known for 40 years that it was going to be attacked. So it was extremely well prepared with not just protected weapons stocks, but protected weapons production, and not just in one place. It also knew about the Zionist spy rings … which it used to feed back the fake info about the “lack of missiles”, and, it knew the Zionists would use the “negotiations” as a means to target their leaders. And, their religious leaders were nearing their end of life, and martyrdom would be a great end, bringing the entire Iranian people together. So Netanyahu made the biggest mistake of his life and Trump was the idiot Epstein compromised US president he forced to go along with his illegal immoral, and now we see, failed war.

Destabilising the Middle East/expanding the Zionist empire

That is why the US has needed to keep the middle east destabilised and prevent powerful military forces from growing or gaining control. Hence the war against Iraq. The first war the US provoked by giving the Iraqis the nudge and the wink that it was OK to take over Kuwait. The second war was “justified” by a terrorist group the US had been funding to destabilise the Russian allied government in Afghanistan that then decided to get involved in 911.

Hence the constant wars in Syria, where the US/Zionist were constantly trying to oust the Russian backed Assad. Generally, if you were not a US puppet, the treatment you got was constant US funded chaos designed to create economic crisis and force out the people. The other end of that US-Zionist policy is the forced policy on Europe of accepting mass immigration. The unwanted effect of that policy was the Islamisation of Europe so that Europe is becoming increasingly sympathetic to the Palestinians.

Why the Right supported Nut Zero

Why was it the same papers that never ceased to be hostile to the Palestinians, were also the same papers that constantly promoted Nut Zero? Why was it that no UK paper was ever interested in the lack of science backing the claims about “Global warming”. Why was it the US, the funder of the Zionist takeover of Palestine, was also the centre of the global warming religion and the funder of all the key tampered with “temperatures” that are used to justify the end of (middle eastern) oil and gas?

I think the answer is pretty clear. The reliance on middle eastern oil and gas was creating huge problems not just for the US but for the zionist project. The US is finding it increasingly difficult to control its creditors in the middle east, and it really wants to renege on the debt, but it can’t do that as long as the global economy is reliant on middle eastern oil. Similarly, the Zionist project wants to keep expanding till it controls the middle east. To do that, it needs to destroy the power of the oil-producing countries and any with strong military like Iran.

And, so the right wing Zionists in the US needed Nut Zero … or at least the Europeans to adopt Nut Zero, because even they weren’t stupid enough to destroy their own economy.

Russia

Russia has been the main sponsor of those countries in the Middle east, and e.g. Africa, who wanted to be free of the US dollar empire. So, since WWII there has been a policy of containing Russia and destroying the “Russian empire” through constant expansion of the anti-Russian war alliance called “Nato”. In other words, Nato is the military arm of the petro-dollar.

As such, for obvious reasons, Russia has not been coy to assist anything that might diminish the power of the west. Hence, Russia was also part of the funders for Nut Zero. The logic was simple: destroy European nuclear power, it destroys the ability to create nuclear weapons. Destroy European coal, oil and gas, and Europe will become a basketcase economy, incapable of sustaining the key metal industries that underpin any large scale war. In other words, Nut Zero makes Europe militarily impotent.

Brics

One way to destroy the power of the US, is to create an alternative non-dollar economic system which contains countries that are no longer prepared to fund the US debt by accepting the worthless dollar. As such, Putin wanted the Russian economy to stop dealing with dollar aligned countries. However Putin had a problem that many of the powerful people in Russia made their money through trade with the EU and US. Putin could not afford to upset them. As such, Putin wanted European and US trade sanctions, and the best way to achieve that was to support the independence movement in Ukraine.

US hostility to the EU

And as you rightly suggested, the US sees the EU as a potential rival. So, the US is very keen to see the EU commit economic suicide via Nut Zero, especially if that means the US ends up being the oil supplier to the EU.