Why the Anglo-American establishment fears the appointment of Tulsi Gabbard
+ THE FETISHISM OF PRIESTLY EURO-CASTE PERCENTAGES
Today I am providing my English translation of 2 articles, both originally in Italian.
The first one is a short article published on Movisol.org last Thursday, 2nd January 2025. (All emphasis mine).
Why the Anglo-American establishment fears the appointment of Tulsi Gabbard
What the world will be like after 20th January [2025] and the inauguration of Donald Trump as President of the United States is the subject of intense speculation around the world. Given his known unpredictability and propensity to make provocative proposals, no one knows what policies President Trump will implement. The only point he has repeatedly made is that he wants to end the wars, particularly the one in Ukraine, and that is a good thing. Otherwise, the cabinet appointments he has announced so far are very mixed.
One, however, that could prove decisive in cracking the power of the “deep state”, the military-industrial complex that rules the United States, is that of former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence (DNI). It is feared that Gabbard will [may?] expose past crimes committed by her predecessors and the general hypocrisy of the intelligence establishment.
Ahead of the Senate battle to confirm her nomination, nearly one hundred former US diplomats, intelligence and national security officials signed a letter complaining of her “lack of intelligence experience”. The letter also calls for a challenge to Trump's appointment of Kash Patel as head of the FBI (https://newrepublic.com/post/189689/former-fbi-cia-head-senate-reject-trump-nominees).
Prominent among the signatories is the now 100-year-old former FBI and CIA chief William Webster, an emblematic figure of the “Deep State”. Webster's political credibility with Trump and the Republicans is as low as zero, as he has also called on the Republicans to vote for Kamala Harris in the November elections.
This is the same William Webster who enthusiastically granted Henry Kissinger's request in the now famous “Dear Bill” letter of 19th August 1982, in which the former Secretary of State asked Webster to help him silence Lyndon LaRouche. There had been years of government harassment against LaRouche, but this 1982 letter and Webster's response initiated what would later be called the “Get LaRouche Task Force” that led to the indictment, mock-trial and conviction of the late US statesman and economist.
The second article was published on Comidad.org on Wednesday 1st January 2025. (All emphasis mine).
THE FETISHISM OF PRIESTLY EURO-CASTE PERCENTAGES
From the height of his wisdom, [Italian] Economy Minister [Giancarlo] Giorgetti let us know that reaching 2% of GDP in military spending would be too ambitious a target. In reality, the whole question of military spending is posed in rather confusing terms, since GDP is not an absolute number, i.e. it can rise but also fall in the event of an economic recession; hence setting a percentage is not in itself indicative of a precise amount of spending.
Even NATO secretary Rutte focuses on the percentage of military expenditure in relation to GDP, which is to be increased without restraint; perhaps winking at the possibility of taking something away from welfare. Once again, this is pure numbers fetishism, i.e. vague statements that have no programmatic value. In terms of military strategy, it would in fact be necessary to establish beforehand which weapons systems would be needed and in what quantities, this in relation to the size of the armed forces. A realistic military strategy also could not afford to ignore the question of long-term cost sustainability. If costs get out of control, the strategy itself will get out of control.
If these military expenditure targets do not make sense from a strategic point of view, they do from the point of view of arms lobbying. It is not about military strategy but sales strategy: buy more weapons and you will be happy. The fetishism about the percentage numbers of military spending implies a fetishism of the commodity-weapons. Even Trump said it explicitly: spend more on arms in relation to GDP, and then he added that you have to buy natural gas as well. In his messages, Trump adopts the same fetishism as the Europeans for percentages, without missing the American fetishism for threats and racket manager tones. But all this is an end in itself, since European countries already buy arms and LNG from the US, which, however, does not have the production capacity to meet demand in the long term. The disregard of our oligarchies for the fate of their peoples has earned them the apologetic and celebratory epithet of “globalist elites”, which may falsely suggest that there is a programmatic capacity. In reality, they are simply oligarchic bubbles uprooted from their territories and living hand-to-mouth with money and superstition.
The European oligarchs are professionals in the fetishism of percentages. By now we have familiarised ourselves with the percentages of the 60% debt-to-GDP ratio ceiling and the 3% budget deficit ceiling. The European Union was born with austerity embedded in those symbolic percentages, mythical insurmountable thresholds that are, however, often crossed because they are unrealistic. Various legends circulate about the birth of those percentages; but the meaning of their existence has been clarified over time; that is, it was to create a chronic financial emergency to squeeze taxpayers in order to drain resources to be channelled to the credit multinationals.
The fetishism of percentages has a considerable bamboozling function in Europeanism, and it goes without saying that it also has one in European militarism. Giorgetti's statement once again underlined the problematic compatibility of budget deficit and public debt thresholds with military spending growth intentions. On the other hand, the suggestive and advertising effect of percentages consists precisely in suggesting a false sense of concreteness and seriousness, creating an illusion of precision, where precision cannot exist, since the quantity from which the percentage is taken is by definition variable. Even room disinfectants are sold with the promise of eliminating 99.9% of germs, but this is pure suggestion since it tells us nothing definite about the number of germs surviving in that 0.01[%]. While the advertising technique is similar, there is a difference in that the disinfectant is a concrete product that can claim to be useful.
The European kleptocracy, on the other hand, has to disguise itself as a technocracy in order to sell imaginary dangers and supposed catastrophes to be averted. Even the European priestly caste imposes human sacrifices to avert the extinguishing of the sun; but the priestly castes of the Mayas or the Aztecs at least possessed astronomical knowledge that could be useful in managing the timing of sowings, whereas today we have to put up with [Mario] Draghi who preaches that if you don't vaccinate you die1, and that you have to choose between peace and the air conditioner2. This implies a double failure on the part of the oligarchies of self-styled modernity: not only has there been no secularisation and superstitions continue to reign, but these superstitions float on the plane of mystification and fraud in their purest state, with no longer any connection to any real competence, as was the case with the priestly castes of antiquity. We have now reached the absurd point of considering conflicts of interest and revolving doors between careers in the public and private sectors as a guarantee of competence; once legalised, corruption takes on the title of competence. It is a sign of extravagance that the fetishism of GDP percentages is making more of a fuss than the GDP itself, which is instead beginning not only to grow little but also to decline, especially in the German “locomotive”. On the mythological catastrophe of Putin in Lisbon, the real catastrophe of the deindustrialisation of Germany was determined.
Since the failure of the priestly castes and the blatantness of their frauds are now perceived by the subaltern classes, another superstition is proposed to the masses, that of the messiahs of the underclass. Trump was the first, but today he appears to us as an amateur messiah compared to Elon Musk, who also makes excursions into the domestic politics of European countries. The American “Deep State” (the Pentagon, the NSA, the CIA) had created a “deep capitalism” of revolving doors between public appointments in federal agencies and private careers in multinational corporations. In addition to the revolving doors, there are also the “front men”, i.e. the various Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Mark Zuckerberg and, indeed, Elon Musk; those who privately market the technologies and information processed by government agencies. Jokingly (but not so jokingly) one could say that even the names of certain characters sound fake: Gates, Jobs, Zuckerberg (sugar mountain), Musk (moss [in Italian muschio, pronounced as mùskeeo]), but that has a certain assonance with Mask. One who is born fake, like Musk, does not even need further instructions from above to continue being a clown.
He really said it in 2021, during the COVID-19 pandemic, when he was Prime Minister of Italy: watch this video!
He also said this, a couple of months after the start of the Russian Special Military Operation in Ukraine in 2022: watch this other video! (Turn on closed captions and enable automatic translation in English).
America Corporate FASCISM,Militarization of EUROPE has been happening since the end of WW2,implement of the MARSHALL PLAN AND THE FORMATION OF AMERICAN CONTROLLED NATO. Among all European Leaders STALIN was the smart one. He refused the MARSHALL PLAN.
I will surely watch what she does and not only what she says.