Donbass is the exception to the rule: not all wars are bankers' wars

When any crisis, conflict or social turmoil erupts in the world, to understand what is really happening, we need to pause, keep a neutral eye on the nature of what is going on and ask: who benefits? Someone always benefits when another loses. Whoever benefits the most also has a motive to cause any event to achieve the benefit. The fact of the matter is that politics cannot afford coincidence, especially geopolitics.

When analysing military history, I learned that conflicts often point to repeating paths of development and wars are sparked by scientific rigour. Because of this, any state or region can be led to war if there is a wish, and in the worst cases, people have almost no influence on their own future. The influence have those who have power, the ones who control social instruments of power: political parties, media, administrative institutions and, in particular, financial resources and the right to create money, by which all the former can be seized.

War is the biggest business in the world because it is the biggest consumption and wars are fought by taxing citizens' incomes. As legendary wisdom from the days of the French Revolution says: ”Why should I lend you money for bread when I can lend you money for a sword to get you the bread you need?” This wisdom has been at the heart of resource management ever since the very beginning of the history of private profit from wars.

The development of the internet opened up the superhighways of knowledge to mankind, and at the turn of the millennium, an awareness that was historically at the hands of a select few – kings, bankers, and special advisers – was made available to all who knew how to search for knowledge and take advantage of the vast transnational cultural archive that was expanding as the internet spread rapidly. A new truth movement was born in the world, particularly in the investigation of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, which dug deeper and deeper into universal questions striving to find out the horrific events of the day of September 11, 2001. The natural question to be asked was, who benefited from that?

For more than 200 years, the supranational banking power, the international banking dynasties, managed to preserve their great secrets almost perfectly. The great French Revolution of 1789 was far from the overthrow of the king, as proclaimed in western propaganda, and the triumph of the advertised ”national democracy,” but a brutal attack was carried out to seize the French royal currency, the franc, directly under the control of private bankers. The world's first international banking company, Rothchild & Co, which traditionally lent money to kings for their wars, ascended to the real throne in France, taking advantage of the crisis and conflict it created with great success. Neither the nation nor the royal house that shed their blood were victors in the war.

But France's great revolution was only the beginning, and since then the privatisation of central banks has been the defining consequence of crises, conflicts, and wars. The banking dynasties, with their rights vested only in states and kingdoms, which have acquired the power to create money through the coup d'état, have been the ones who begin and the ones who end wars, not the Vatican and the Pope, although the ceremonial value was preserved and the Jesuits played an important role in safeguarding interests on all sides of the wars.

The next great economic power grab in the West happened when the Britain's economy and the central bank, the Bank of England, in majority was taken under the control of Rothchild, who took advantage of the economic collapse made possible by the Battle of Waterloo. Of course, the family of bankers who financed the war on both sides was aware of the situation of the war and the expected outcome of the settlement struggle. With mail couriers riding horses from the battlefields, Reuters' predecessor, the first true international news agency, carried the telegrams straight for Lord Rothchild to read – the fast ate the slow in the stock market crash.

Replacing Kingdoms, the new ”democracies” hid the real holders of social power behind the curtains, where the bankers of the ”Deep State” remained in a safe position until the birth of the internet. Rumours and revelations had been easy to deny and the effects of even the worst data leaks limited. The world lived for 200 years in an era of great conspiracy theories, because it was difficult, if not impossible, to expose the conspiracies of power to the public consciousness.

In the early 2000s, the internet truth movement brought together information from all over the world and forums were buzzing with great findings that proved the real beneficiaries of the 9/11 state terror and the subsequent wars of the Project for the New American Century doctrine around the world, revealing that the real power is not the states, kings, presidents, or parliaments, but the Central Bank of the BIS central bank, which are controlled by private hands through central banks beyond the reach of all laws, not just endless amounts of money, but most of all the world's currencies. The Tower of Basel used to be a conspiracy theory.

Not only the international news agencies of the West are controlled by the banking dynasties, but also by the state intelligence services, whose main task is to supply “black budgets” with all the money and wealth needed for geopolitical activities outside the parliamentary control of the states, such as payments to dictators, payments to terrorist groups and mercenaries, financing coups, and the endless corruption of politicians and officials to keep power in the private hands of bankers – above all laws.

In this BIS system – yes, every war is undeniably a bankers' war. From the Tower of Basel, they lift and topple economies, corporatise national fortunes, and decide the fates of entire nations. Resistance is suppressed by causing crises, unrest, inciting confrontation, conflict, and war – if necessary, by bombing countries that stick to their national interests to the roots. This happened again and again, and always someone benefited when whole nations just lost. This is how the Western power alliance works.

The civil war in Ukraine is a huge tragedy, a terrible conflict, but at the same time a fascinating and the most significant war of the modern era, because it brings together a long history and the present time. And it is not just the Russian patriots of World War II and the neo-Nazis of Western Power who are facing off again on the same battlefield, as has been the case in Donbass since 2014. When we look at old maps, we can see that the mathematical centre of Jewish rule in the Khazarian Empire of the past is Donbass, and when we look at the banking dynasties and their ethnic backgrounds of those who ruled the West, we find that they are almost invariably of old Khazarian Jewish heritage.

When the war in Donbass began, it was well known that the Ukrainian armed forces were attacking the coup-ridden region of Eastern Ukraine with the support of the West. This meant that Kyiv's forces had the backing of the BIS, the EU, the US, NATO, the IMF and all other institutions of the Western power alliance, as well as the forces of influence, including the information warfare media institutions, such as Reuters and AP. But who supported the resistance in Donbass, or who financed the defenders of Donetsk and Lugansk, who set out to prevent the economic occupation by the Western powers controlled by Khazar Jews? Was the civil war in Ukraine that broke out in the summer of 2014 really the result of the Basel plan, or in other words – who benefits?

In early 2015, when I first arrived in Donbass, I found out that all banks and financial institutions were closed. The economy of the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics was a 100% cash economy, initially including Ukrainian hryvnya and Russian ruble at fixed exchange rates against the euro and dollar, but later using only ruble. All loans and financing had been written off, meaning that the Civil War made Donbass, which became independent through referendums, debt-free. How could bankers benefit from such a situation?

For several years, I worked as the only Western official in the Donetsk (DPR) administration and was in charge of international information warfare defense. Once in the evening, speaking with the first Head of the DPR, Alexander Zakharchenko, I got to know how Donbass was arming and gearing up for civil war in the spring of 2014. He was a wealthy businessman before the war – by no means an oligarch who controlled Ukrainian heavy industry corporations, but a big contractor for them. He said he had gathered his wealthy business friends in support of the people's army, all of whom put ”their own wealth on the line” to defend Donbass. They bought weapons from Ukrainian armories, in the dark of night, at the risk of their lives, to equip units for an impending war. Thus the famous people's army was born to repel the forces of the West.

The RAND Corporation is a leading Pentagon strategy facility that produces war plans implemented by the West. In the summer of 2014, documents from the strategic planning of that institution were revealed to the public, according to which the strategic objective of the nationalist forces in Kyiv was to occupy Donbass and put the rebels in Eastern Ukraine to the ”sea of concentration camps” which would be expected to be a serious genocide-of-Russians-provocation – so serious that Russia would conduct a military intervention in the situation in Ukraine, which was a geostrategic objective. None of that ever happened because the large anti-Ukrainian coup and anti-corruption independence movement in Donbass, founded and led by the local Mr. Zakharchenko, disapproved of the West's actions and eventually repelled Kyiv's forces, funded by bankers and equipped by oligarchs.

The war in Donbass was not planned. This was done neither in the West, nor in Moscow. There has been no documentary revelation, at least so far, that there were the parties aimed to spark civil war in Donbass; only a territorial occupation by Ukrainian nationalist forces of the West was revealed. The West successfully seized power in Kyiv, but underestimated the inhabitants of Donetsk and Lugansk, who mounted major resistance. Although there were no armed forces in the Donbass in February 2014, just a couple of months later, they began to form there, and transnational bankers were confronted by businessmen from a patriotic Russian population.

"The exception proves the rule,” as they say, and the war in Donbass finally proved the rule that ”all wars are bankers' wars," but not in Donbass. The Ukrainian civil war is a conflict between two genuinely opposed parties armed and financed in opposite directions. This is why there is no plan for the war in Ukraine, no scripted policy, and no foreseeable outcome. The West attacked the Donetsk and Lugansk regions, but they received their own independent central banks, and although the central banks did not start to use the right to create money when the rubles were contested for the cash needs of the people's republics, Donbass kept strict watch that bankers did not benefit from the Ukrainian civil war.

The Statesman Zakharchenko admitted to me in our conversation his extensive historical and geopolitical knowledge. He knew well how huge are the forces against which the citizens of Donbass had risen up in the fight – against corruption and even against his own roots. He knew how the circle of a long history of bankers closed in the former Khazaria region, where rebels gathered among local miners took up arms and threw bankers out of Donetsk and Lugansk, scaring the ”Deep State” of the West to death. For once, without a plan, the war in Donbass, sparked by brave men and chance, has been in the hands of a greater Lord than all mortals – even Lord Rothchild – in the hand of the greater Lord, who rules not by earthly greed, not by the pursuits of profit, and not by the weaknesses of people, but by the will of the nations and by faith in God.