The U.S. Is On The Verge Of Making
An Extremely Costly Mistake
All day long I have just felt sick. Right at this moment, we are closer to war with North Korea than we have been at any point since the Korean War ended in 1953. If Donald Trump decides to launch a military strike against North Korea’s nuclear facilities, the consequences could be absolutely catastrophic. The North Koreans have already promised to launch nukes at South Korea and at U.S. military bases in the region in return, and they also have vast stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons that they could use as well. To get an idea of the chaos that just a handful of North Korean agents armed with biological weapons could unleash inside the United States, just see this article. A military strike on North Korea could be the spark that sets off a global war in which millions of people die, and so we need to do all that we can to prevent this from happening. My hope is that if people make enough noise that Trump will back down and decide not to attack.
Earlier today, I was sent the following piece of intel. I was told that I could share it with all of my readers as long as I kept the name of the individual that sent it to me out of it. According to this source, it certainly looks as though an attack is being prepared…
An O-5 silver maple leaf Air Force puke says the bomb buses in Guam are maximum loaded, fully fueled and reserves are topped off. Reserves are only topped off just before the buses go airborne.
Kunsan has everything pointed north and ALL gates are closed…no traffic in or out.
7 air wings have been moved into the area and an augmented Carl Vinson CVN-70 (not alone) (per CMC x 2 and an O-5) has also moved into the area.
An O-5 barker and an O-6 Marine says all Easter leave has been cancelled with ALL loaded up, geared up and warming up in several theaters.
Castle is locked and loaded.
Seoul is moving essential government and military personnel, as is true for U.S. Command Components and Personnel located at Yongsan, further south to Daegu.
AND…Red Cloud is ready to go on the war path with nobody sleeping in the wigwams, all the arrows have been taken from the box.
For those that don’t know, “Kunsan” refers to a U.S. Air Force base that is located at Gunsan Airport on the west coast of the Korean peninsula.
But just because these preparations are being made does not mean that a strike will actually happen. In fact, there are some signs that indicate that we will not see a U.S. attack over the next several days.
For one thing, Vice President Mike Pence is scheduled to be in South Korea on Sunday and Monday. So it would seem that it would be quite unlikely that anything would happen during that time.
In addition, Fox News is reporting that the Trump administration has come to the conclusion that military force should not be used against North Korea…
But a U.S. military official, who requested anonymity to discuss planning, said the U.S. doesn’t intend to use military force against North Korea in response to either a nuclear test or a missile launch. The official said plans could change in the unlikely event a North Korean missile targets South Korea, Japan or U.S. territory.
But of course things seem to shift hour to hour with the Trump administration. On Thursday, NBC News was reporting that the U.S. military was poised “to launch a preemptive strike with conventional weapons against North Korea” if it looked like the North Koreans were about to conduct a nuclear weapons test…
The U.S. is prepared to launch a preemptive strike with conventional weapons against North Korea should officials become convinced that North Korea is about to follow through with a nuclear weapons test, multiple senior U.S. intelligence officials told NBC News.
North Korea has warned that a “big event” is near, and U.S. officials say signs point to a nuclear test that could come as early as this weekend.
So I don’t know what is going to happen. But without a doubt we are very close to war with North Korea at this moment, and I am going to join with millions of others to do whatever we can to prevent that from happening.
A war with North Korea would be far different from the wars that the U.S. military has been fighting in the Middle East. An ideology known as “Juche” is essentially the national religion of North Korea. In Juche, the people are put at the center of everything, and “the leader” is considered to be at the center of the people. In other words, “the leader” is almost put at the level of a deity.
It is a very sick and twisted philosophy, but here in the western world we need to understand that when we openly talk about killing Kim Jong-Un on television and on the Internet, we are essentially threatening to kill their “god”.
And the reason that is a problem is because Kim Jong-Un is surrounded by throngs of brainwashed supporters that will carry out any order that he gives them.
Here in the western world, we consider it to be highly immoral to use chemical and biological weapons against innocent civilian populations, but the North Koreans do not share those moral values.
The North Koreans consider the United States to be the great force for evil in the world, and if they feel like their way of life is being threatened by the U.S. they will not hesitate to use those sorts of weapons.
And of course they are constantly threatening to use nuclear weapons against us. Just today I saw a report that talked about how the North Koreans are threatening to unleash “nuclear thunderbolts”, and in another report the North Koreans were quoted as saying they would “ruthlessly ravage” the United States if they are attacked…
North Korea upped its warmongering with Donald Trump today in a series of menacing boasts threatening to ‘ravage’ US troops amid fears the two countries are heading for war.
The secretive state vowed to ‘pulverize’ US bases and South Korean capital Seoul if it was threatened by the US military, which is carrying out drills on the Korean peninsula. A US aircraft carrier group is steaming towards the region.
It claimed it would ‘ruthlessly ravage’ the US if Washington attacked.
North Korea is one of the most wicked nations on the entire planet, and I would certainly greatly rejoice if their government were to fall.
But I don’t see any way that a military strike on North Korea would be successful.
If the North Koreans were able to fire even a single nuclear or chemical warhead at a major city such as Seoul or Tokyo it would be the worst foreign policy disaster in the history of the United States. The North Koreans would certainly be blamed, but the Trump administration would also be blamed for conducting such a reckless attack in the first place. Our relationships with our allies in the region would be permanently destroyed, and this would benefit China greatly.
Without using nukes in an overwhelming first strike (which would be unthinkable), I don’t believe that there is any possible way that we could take out all of North Korea’s nukes before they had a chance to at least fire some of them off.
And if North Korea did nuke Seoul or Tokyo or any U.S. military bases in the region, we would almost be forced to respond with nukes of our own, and that would have to be followed up by a massive ground invasion to topple the regime.
So if Donald Trump is reading this, for the good of humanity I would like to strongly urge him not to conduct a military strike on North Korea at this time. The risk is just way too great, and if things go wrong we could easily be looking at a scenario in which millions of people end up dead.
Rothschild Demands Western Nations Invade Syria
April 15, 2017 SOURCE: YourNewsWire.com
Sir Evelyn de Rothschild has urged western nations to “unite as one” in order to “intervene” in Syria and overthrow Assad to “usher Syrians into the new century.”
Describing Assad as “a brutal dictator who must be bought to heel” during a grim speech at a fundraiser in the City of London financial district, Rothschild demanded that western nations “topple the Assad regime” because it is “resistant to common decency” and a threat to our “corporate values.“
Rothschild also referred to his family businesses which originated with five brothers setting up the “first and only truly global banking system,” operating from London, Paris, Vienna, Naples and Frankfurt just before the turn of the 19th century.
He said: “These five brothers, working together to exchange information and ideas, built an extraordinary business that superseded boundaries and cultures.
“Just over 200 years later, these business ideals, which have stood the test of time, are now under threat by despotic regimes that are resistant to common decency. These regimes pose a threat to our international corporate values.”
Sir Evelyn, a billionaire financier who is married to Lynn Forester de Rothschild, did not explain why world governments should listen to his demands for interventionist wars in the Middle-East.
However it has been suggested he is advocating for the invasion of Syria because the nation remains one of only five nations left in the world that does not have a Rothschild controlled central bank.
In the year 2000 there were eight countries without a Rothschild controlled central bank, however Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan – immediately after western invasion – now all have established central banks.
Will Syria be next?
1983 CIA Document Reveals Plan To Destroy Syria, Foreshadows Current Crisis
by Tyler Durden
Apr 10, 2017 11:05 PM
Prophetically foreshadowing the current crisis (and apparent action plan), leaked CIA documents from the reign of Bashar al-Assad's father in the 1980s show a Washington Deep State plan coalescing to "bring real muscle to bear against Syria," toppling its leader (in favor of one amenable to US demands) , severing ties with Russia (its primary arms dealer), and paving the way for an oil and gas pipeline of Washington's choosing.
As ActivistPost.com's Brandon Turbeville detailed (just a day before Trump unleashed his
Tomahawks), as the Syrian crisis enters its sixth year, the Donald Trump administration is looking more and more like the Obama administration every day. With the Trump regime refusing to open useful dialogue with Russia regarding Syria, its obvious anti-Iran and pro-Israel positioning, and support for a very questionable “safe zone” plan for Syria, the odds of a rational U.S. policy in regards to Syria has lower and lower odds of existence as time progresses.
Yet, despite the fact that the Trump administration is apparently poised to continue the Obama regime’s proxy war of aggression against the people of Syria, an example of seamless transition, it should also be remembered that the plan to destroy Syria did not begin with Obama but with the Bush administration.
Even now, as the world awaits the continuation of the Syrian war through a Democratic and Republican administration, the genesis of that war goes back to the Republican Bush administration, demonstrating that there is indeed an overarching agenda and an overarching infrastructure of an oligarchical deep state intent on moving forward regardless of which party is seemingly in power.
As journalist Seymour Hersh wrote in his article, “The Redirection,”
To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has cooperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.
“Extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam” who are “hostile to America and sympathetic to al-Qaeda” are the definition of the so-called “rebels” turned loose on Syria in 2011. Likewise, the fact that both Iran and Hezbollah, who are natural enemies of al-Qaeda and such radical Sunni groups, are involved in the battle against ISIS and other related terrorist organizations in Syria proves the accuracy of the article on another level.
Hersh also wrote,
The new American policy, in its broad outlines, has been discussed publicly. In testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in January, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said that there is “a new strategic alignment in the Middle East,” separating “reformers” and “extremists”; she pointed to the Sunni states as centers of moderation, and said that Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah were “on the other side of that divide.” (Syria’s Sunni majority is dominated by the Alawi sect.) Iran and Syria, she said, “have made their choice and their choice is to destabilize.”
Some of the core tactics of the redirection are not public, however. The clandestine operations have been kept secret, in some cases, by leaving the execution or the funding to the Saudis, or by finding other ways to work around the normal congressional appropriations process, current and former officials close to the Administration said.
. . . . . .
This time, the U.S. government consultant told me, Bandar and other Saudis have assured the White House that “they will keep a very close eye on the religious fundamentalists. Their message to us was ‘We’ve created this movement, and we can control it.’ It’s not that we don’t want the Salafis to throw bombs; it’s who they throw them at—Hezbollah, Moqtada al-Sadr, Iran, and at the Syrians, if they continue to work with Hezbollah and Iran.”
. . . . . .
Fourth, the Saudi government, with Washington’s approval, would provide funds and logistical aid to weaken the government of President Bashir Assad, of Syria. The Israelis believe that putting such pressure on the Assad government will make it more conciliatory and open to negotiations. Syria is a major conduit of arms to Hezbollah.
. . . . .
In January, after an outburst of street violence in Beirut involving supporters of both the Siniora government and Hezbollah, Prince Bandar flew to Tehran to discuss the political impasse in Lebanon and to meet with Ali Larijani, the Iranians’ negotiator on nuclear issues. According to a Middle Eastern ambassador, Bandar’s mission—which the ambassador said was endorsed by the White House—also aimed “to create problems between the Iranians and Syria.” There had been tensions between the two countries about Syrian talks with Israel, and the Saudis’ goal was to encourage a breach. However, the ambassador said, “It did not work. Syria and Iran are not going to betray each other. Bandar’s approach is very unlikely to succeed.”
. . . . . .
The Syrian Muslim Brotherhood, a branch of a radical Sunni movement founded in Egypt in 1928, engaged in more than a decade of violent opposition to the regime of Hafez Assad, Bashir’s father. In 1982, the Brotherhood took control of the city of Hama; Assad bombarded the city for a week, killing between six thousand and twenty thousand people. Membership in the Brotherhood is punishable by death in Syria. The Brotherhood is also an avowed enemy of the U.S. and of Israel. Nevertheless, Jumblatt said, “We told Cheney that the basic link between Iran and Lebanon is Syria—and to weaken Iran you need to open the door to effective Syrian opposition.”
. . . . .
There is evidence that the Administration’s redirection strategy has already benefitted the Brotherhood. The Syrian National Salvation Front is a coalition of opposition groups whose principal members are a faction led by Abdul Halim Khaddam, a former Syrian Vice-President who defected in 2005, and the Brotherhood. A former high-ranking C.I.A. officer told me, “The Americans have provided both political and financial support. The Saudis are taking the lead with financial support, but there is American involvement.” He said that Khaddam, who now lives in Paris, was getting money from Saudi Arabia, with the knowledge of the White House. (In 2005, a delegation of the Front’s members met with officials from the National Security Council, according to press reports.) A former White House official told me that the Saudis had provided members of the Front with travel documents.
Hersh also spoke with Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, leader of the Shi’ite Lebanese militia, Hezbollah. In relation to the Western strategy against Syria, he reported,
Nasrallah said he believed that America also wanted to bring about the partition of Lebanon and of Syria. In Syria, he said, the result would be to push the country “into chaos and internal battles like in Iraq.” In Lebanon, “There will be a Sunni state, an Alawi state, a Christian state, and a Druze state.” But, he said, “I do not know if there will be a Shiite state.” Nasrallah told me that he suspected that one aim of the Israeli bombing of Lebanon last summer was “the destruction of Shiite areas and the displacement of Shiites from Lebanon. The idea was to have the Shiites of Lebanon and Syria flee to southern Iraq,” which is dominated by Shiites. “I am not sure, but I smell this,” he told me.
Partition would leave Israel surrounded by “small tranquil states,” he said. “I can assure you that the Saudi kingdom will also be divided, and the issue will reach to North African states. There will be small ethnic and confessional states,” he said. “In other words, Israel will be the most important and the strongest state in a region that has been partitioned into ethnic and confessional states that are in agreement with each other. This is the new Middle East.”
Yet, while even the connections between the plans to destroy Syria and the Bush administration are generally unknown, what is even less well-known is the fact that there existed a plan to destroy Syria as far back as 1983.
Documents contained in the U.S. National Archives and drawn up by the CIA reveal a plan to destroy the Syrian government going back decades. One such document entitled, “Bringing Real Muscle To Bear In Syria,” written by CIA officer Graham Fuller, is particularly illuminating. In this document, Fuller wrote,
Syria at present has a hammerlock on US interests both in Lebanon and in the Gulf — through closure of Iraq’s pipeline thereby threatening Iraqi internationalization of the [Iran-Iraq] war. The US should consider sharply escalating the pressures against Assad [Sr.] through covertly orchestrating simultaneous military threats against Syria from three border states hostile to Syria: Iraq, Israel and Turkey.
Even as far back as 1983, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s father, Hafez Assad, was viewed as a gadfly to the plans of Western imperialists seeking to weaken both the Iraqis and the Iranians and extend hegemony over the Middle East and Persia. The document shows that Assad and hence Syria represented a resistance to Western imperialism, a threat to Israel, and that Assad himself was well aware of the game the United States, Israel, and other members of the Western imperialist coalition were trying to play against him. The report reads,
Syria continues to maintain a hammerlock on two key U.S. interests in the Middle East:
— Syrian refusal to withdraw its troops from Lebanon ensures Israeli occupation in the south;
— Syrian closure of the Iraqi pipeline has been a key factor in bringing Iraq to its financial knees, impelling it towards dangerous internationalization of the war in the Gulf
Diplomatic initiatives to date have had little effect on Assad who has so far correctly calculated the play of forces in the area and concluded that they are only weakly arrayed against him. If the U.S. is to rein in Syria’s spoiling role, it can only do so through exertion of real muscle which will pose a vital threat to Assad’s position and power.
The author then presents a plan that sounds eerily similar to those now being discussed publicly by Western and specifically American corporate-financier think tanks and private non-governmental organizations who unofficially craft American policy. Fuller writes,
The US should consider sharply escalating the pressures against Assad [Sr.] through covertly orchestrating simultaneous military threats against Syria from three border states hostile to Syria: Iraq, Israel and Turkey. Iraq, perceived to be increasingly desperate in the Gulf war, would undertake limited military (air) operations against Syria with the sole goal of opening the pipeline. Although opening war on a second front against Syria poses considerable risk to Iraq, Syria would also face a two-front war since it is already heavily engaged in the Bekaa, on the Golan and in maintaining control over a hostile and restive population inside Syria.
Israel would simultaneously raise tensions along Syria’s Lebanon front without actually going to war. Turkey, angered by Syrian support to Armenian terrorism, to Iraqi Kurds on Turkey’s Kurdish border areas and to Turkish terrorists operating out of northern Syria, has often considered launching unilateral military operations against terrorist camps in northern Syria. Virtually all Arab states would have sympathy for Iraq.
Faced with three belligerent fronts, Assad would probably be forced to abandon his policy of closure of the pipeline. Such a concession would relieve the economic pressure on Iraq, and perhaps force Iran to reconsider bringing the war to an end. It would be a sharpening blow to Syria’s prestige and could effect the equation of forces in Lebanon.
Thus, Fuller outlines that not only would Syria be forced to reopen the pipeline of interest at the time, but that it would be a regional shockwave effecting the makeup of forces in and around Lebanon, weakening the prestige of the Syrian state and, presumably, the psychological state of the Syrian President and the Syrian people, as well as a message to Iran.
The document continues,
Such a threat must be primarily military in nature. At present there are three relatively hostile elements around Syria’s borders: Israel, Iraq and Turkey. Consideration must be given to orchestrating a credible military threat against Syria in order to induce at least some moderate change in its policies.
This paper proposes serious examination of the use of all three states – acting independently – to exert the necessary threat. Use of any one state in isolation cannot create such a credible threat.
The strategy proposed here by the CIA is virtually identical to the one being discussed by deep state establishment think tanks like the Brookings Institution today. For instance, in the Brookings document “Middle East Memo #21: Saving Syria: Assessing Options For Regime Change,” it says,
Turkey’s participation would be vital for success, and Washington would have to encourage the Turks to play a more helpful role than they have so far. While Ankara has lost all patience with Damascus, it has taken few concrete steps that would increase the pressure on Asad (and thereby antagonize Tehran). Turkish policy toward the Syrian opposition has actually worked at cross-purposes with American efforts to foster a broad, unified national organization. With an eye to its own domestic Kurdish dilemmas, Ankara has frustrated efforts to integrate the Syrian Kurds into a broader opposition framework. In addition, it has overtly favored the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood over all other opposition groups. Washington must impress upon Turkey the need to be more accommodating of legitimate Kurdish political and cultural demands in a post-Asad Syria, and to be less insistent on the primacy of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Some voices in Washington and Jerusalem are exploring whether Israel could contribute to coercing Syrian elites to remove Asad. The Israelis have the region’s most formidable military, impressive intelligence services, and keen interests in Syria. In addition, Israel’s intelligence services have a strong knowledge of Syria, as well as assets within the Syrian regime that could be used to subvert the regime’s power base and press for Asad’s removal. Israel could posture forces on or near the Golan Heights and, in so doing, might divert regime forces from suppressing the opposition. This posture may conjure fears in the Asad regime of a multi-front war, particularly if Turkey is willing to do the same on its border and if the Syrian opposition is being fed a steady diet of arms and training. Such a mobilization could perhaps persuade Syria’s military leadership to oust Asad in order to preserve itself. Advocates argue this additional pressure could tip the balance against Asad inside Syria, if other forces were aligned properly.
While Syria is not in conflict with Iraq today, after being destroyed by the United States in 2003, Western Iraq now houses the mysteriously-funded Islamic State on the border between Iraq and Syria.
That being said, this plan is not merely being discussed, it is being implemented as one can clearly see by the fact that Israel routinely launches airstrikes against the Syrian military, Turkey continues to funnel ISIS and related terrorists into Syria through its own territory, and ISIS continues to present itself as an Eastern front militarily. As a result, the “multi-front” war envisioned and written about by the CIA in 1983 and discussed by Brookings in 2012 has come to fruition and is in full swing today.
MailOnline (Some may find this article to graphic. Ed)
How the Mother of All Bombs kills people: Vaporized bodies, crushed internal organs and suffocated to death... while anyone who survives is left psychologically scarred for life
The US dropped its largest non-nuclear weapon on ISIS in Afghanistan
Was dropped on tunnels containing ISIS camp in Afghanistan's Nangarhar Province
The Pentagon estimates that 800 ISIS terrorists were in the area
GBU-43 bomb weighs 21,600 pounds, is 30 feet long, contains 11 tons of explosives
Unleashes huge explosive forces in the seconds after detonation - leveling buildings, tunnels and causing fireball which incinerates anyone
Trump pledged in 2015 that if he became president he would 'bomb the s**t out of ' ISIS
MISSILE WAR IMMINENT? by S.N.Strutt (08/04/17)
How much time do we actually have, until A MISSILE WAR erupts, between the USA and RUSSIA?
I must admit, that it is only a miracle of God, that since the 2nd World War, our planet has not yet erupted in a fiery inferno of a nuclear war.
(2TH.2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.)
This verse, would imply that God will withdraw His protection, at some stage in the near future... then ALL HELL WILL BREAK LOOSE! May God help us all!
Unfortunately, it appears that Presinent Donald Trump acted just like the proverbial "American cowboy" shooting from the hip yesterday morning, without really thinking about the possible consequences, in ordering the firing of 60 Tomahawk missiles at president Assad of Syria's small airport, which contained ammunitions. This action was taking place yesterday morning Friday 7th April, in response to Tueday's chemical attack, which harmed at least 60 persons in Syria. Of course the main media, were very quick to blame Assad as they always do. Others are not so sure, but think that it was one of the Terrorist groups which possess Sarin Gas.
The following articles spell it out very well:- (ADDED 12/04/17. PLEASE SCROLL DOWN TO READ THAT ASSAD DID NOT USE CHEMICAL WEAPONS, BUT THAT IN FACT IT WAS ONE
ONE THE REBEL GROUPS IN SYRIA WHO DO ADMIT TO HAVING DONE THE CHEMICAL ATTACK LAST WEEK ON TUESDAY 4TH APRIL.
Neo-cons Co-Opt Trump, Shadow Government Gains Choke-Hold:- (https://truthandlibertyblog.wordpress.com/2017/04/08/neo-cons-co-opt-trump-shadow-government-gains-choke-hold/)
We Are Now Watching The Final Chess Pieces Of Thermonuclear War Being Moved Into Place - Who Will Launch The First Missile Is The Only Question To Be Answered:-
- On The Course To Full-Fledged, All-Out World War Over A False Flag?
# No War In Syria April 6, 2017 by Michael Synder
April 7, 2017 by Michael Synder
Syrian “Rebels” Admit Responsibility for Sarin Gas Attack…It was NOT Assad!
08 Saturday Apr 2017
Syrian rebels in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta have admitted to Associated Press correspondent Dale Gavlak that they were responsible for last week’s chemical weapons incident which western powers have blamed on Bashar Al-Assad’s forces, revealing that the casualties were the result of an accident caused by rebels mishandling chemical weapons provided to them by Saudi Arabia.
“From numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families….many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the (deadly) gas attack,” writes Gavlak. (back up version here).
His claims are echoed by another female fighter named ‘K’, who told Gavlak, “They didn’t tell us what these arms were or how to use them. We didn’t know they were chemical weapons. We never imagined they were chemical weapons.”
Dale Gavlak’s credibility is very impressive. He has been a Middle East correspondent for the Associated Press for two decades and has also worked for National Public Radio (NPR) and written articles for BBC News.
THE MISSILE WAR
"SO THEY SHOOT BIG BOMBS INTO ISRAEL, AND ISRAEL OR AMERICA FROM NAVY SHIPS SHOOT BIG BOMBS BACK INTO EGYPT(SYRIA?)! And Russia gets so mad, 'cause she told America she want to settle the war, but America just want to settle it her way.
"SO RUSSIA GET FED UP AND SHOOT BIG BOMBS AT AMERICAN NAVY, and anyhow, they all start shooting back and forth at each other till big, big war starts from little war, and it just grows and grows, and everybody gets real mad and shoots everybody!
"YOU KNOW?--I SAW IN A PICTURE! I don't know when, but that's what
I saw!" (prophecied in 1973, by D.B.Berg)
“OUT OF THE BOTTOMLESS PIT”by S.N.Strutt © Oct 2014
(AVAILABLE as a paper-back and on KINDLE at AMAZON:-
THE NEW AMAZON DIRECT LINK TO THE SPECIAL VERSION OF MY BOOK IS :-http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00Q7ARAXW