China fires SIX WARNINGS to US Navy in South China Sea ‘This is China…LEAVE IMMEDIATELY’

THE Chinese military told a US Navy plane flying over the highly-disputed island in the South China Sea to “leave immediately”.

The US Navy P-8A Poseidon jet was flying at 16,500 feet to get a view of low-lying coral reefs that have been turned into garrisons with five-storey buildings, large radar installations, power plants and runways sturdy enough to carry large military aircraft.

During the flight that was giving journalists from CNN a rare look at the islands, the crew was warned six times by the Chinese military to get out of their territory.

A voice said: “US military aircraft, this is China … leave immediately and keep out to avoid any misunderstanding.”

Each time the aircraft was challenged by the Chinese military, the US Navy crew’s response was the same.

The response was: “I am a sovereign immune United States naval aircraft conducting lawful military activities beyond the national airspace of any coastal state.

“In exercising these rights as guaranteed by international law, I am operating with due regard for the rights and duties of all states.”

CNN was granted the chance to see how the Chinese government is rapidly expanding its militarisation efforts from a US reconnaissance plane when the harsh threat was issued.

The US Navy jet had flown over four key artificial islands in the Spratly chain where China has built up fortifications: Subi Reef, Fiery Cross Reef, Johnson Reef and Mischief Reef.

China has threatened the US

China has threatened the US (Image: GETTY)

The Navy jet's sensors picked up on 86 vessels on the Subi Reef

The Navy jet’s sensors picked up on 86 vessels on the Subi Reef (Image: GETTY)

Before the crew were warned, the jet’s sensors picked on 86 vessels on the Subi Reef that included Chinese coast guard ships. On the Fiery Cross Reefs, rows of hangars stood alongside a lengthy runway.

LT. Lauren Callen who lead the air combat crew on the Navy flight said: “It was surprising to see airports in the middle of the ocean.”

Beijing has said it is necessary for the Asian powerhouse to keep growing its military presence in the South China Sea in order to protect its sovereignty.

China also blames Washington and its allies for tensions in the region.

The crew also flew over the Mischief Reef in the South China Sea

The crew also flew over the Mischief Reef in the South China Sea (Image: GETTY)

On the Fiery Cross Reefs rows of hangars were spotted on a runway

On the Fiery Cross Reefs rows of hangars were spotted on a runway (Image: GETTY)

It says that the regular US Navy patrols and flyovers of the South China Sea are efforts for the US to provoke China and therefore the country is justified in increasing its military presence.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said: “By playing up the so-called China’s militarisation in the South China Sea, certain people in the US are staging a farce of a thief crying ‘stop thief’.

“It is self-evident to a keener eye that who is militarising the South China Sea.”

Parts of the South China Sea are claimed by Vietnam, the Philippines, Taiwan, Indonesia, Malaysia and Brunei.

The South China Sea a highly-disputed part of the world

The South China Sea a highly-disputed part of the world (Image: GETTY)

The sea spans 3.6million square-kilometres and Beijing’s claims extend more than one thousand kilometres from its southernmost province, which is almost the entirety of the waters.

The United Nations has estimated that a third of global shipping passes through the waters.

The South China Sea is also believed to be rich in oil and natural gas reserves that have yet to be explored.

China reinforced its claims by constructing the artificial islands which are militarised with airfields and radar equipment.

The US Navy also flew over Johnson Reef

The US Navy also flew over Johnson Reef (Image: GETTY)

In April the military placed missiles on the Spratly island chain during naval exercises.

This broke a promise by President Xi Jinping to then US-President Barack Obama in 2015 that the Chinese government would not militarise the artificial islands.

Experts claim that time is running out to challenge China’s claims in the South China Sea.

Admiral Philip Davidson said in April that China is already very firmly entrenched.

He said: “China is now capable of controlling the South China Sea in all scenarios short of war with the United States.”

In response, the US has stepped up its military exercises as well as a way to show Washington’s naval power.

For the first time in decades, the US is moving to develop new nuclear ICBMs

As the first nation to develop atomic weapons, the United States has long enjoyed its status as among the premier nuclear powers on the globe, second in total nuclear weapon count only to its Cold War-era competitor, Russia (formerly the Soviet Union). Within the United States, Americans tend to assume that America not only possesses the most capable weapons but the most powerful and advanced — unfortunately, however, in the nuclear arena, none of that is true.

As SOFREP recently covered, America’s dated nuclear arsenal, although still frighteningly powerful, has lost the lead in nuclear weapon development to its competition in Russia and China. Much like hypersonic missile technology, long-range artillery, the narrative facets of hybrid warfare, and more, America’s two-decade-long investment into counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency warfare has drained the force of its ability to keep pace with lesser funded competitors that have not had to invest in the same breadth of continuous combat operations. In a nutshell, America’s military simply stopped emphasizing the development of new weapons platforms as it focused on fighting terrorism, and its opponents were given the opportunity to watch the U.S. military operate, and pursue technologies based on where they felt they could best counter America’s combat tactics.

As a result, both Russia and China have unveiled new nuclear-capable intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) in the past few years, and the new weapons touted by each nation positively dwarf the destructive capacity of America’s aging Minuteman III missiles, which have seen updates but no replacements since the 1970s. The argument has been made that America’s overall nuclear strength still serves as deterrent enough and that further investment into the program is unnecessary when the use of nuclear arms in a national level conflict would almost certainly mean the end of humanity regardless of the individual yield of outbound warheads — but the point of developing new and more capable platforms isn’t really about delivering even greater levels of destruction (though in all likelihood, America’s new ICBMs will need to carry quite a bit more oomph than its current missiles), the real point behind these new missiles is all about the likelihood that they’ll reach their intended target. A high likelihood of success is absolutely integral to an effective deterrent strategy.

Because the vast majority of missile defense systems now employed by America’s competitors were developed after the Minuteman III came into service, it stands to reason that they were developed with America’s nuclear arsenal in mind. By logical extension, that means America’s dated nukes likely have a higher probability of being intercepted than Russia’s RS-28 Sarmat or China’s DF-41, both of which were developed with America’s three-tiered missile defense apparatus specifically in mind, and both employ a variety of tools aimed at countering or inhibiting the efficacy of kinetic intercepts of the sort America utilizes. In short, America needs ICBMs that are just as capable of beating missile defense systems in order to maintain the status quo we’ve come to know as mutually assured destruction.

With dated ICBMs, the destruction remains assured, but there would be questions pertaining to just how mutual it would be. America could launch more than enough nukes to inundate and overwhelm any nation’s missile defense systems — but the highest value targets would likely be saved as the target nation prioritized its defensive endeavors. America needs to ensure it can match the destructive capacity of its competitors in a singular launch precision strike (no matter how unlikely that may be) or in a full-scale nuclear war in order to maintain a solid footing in the nuclear staring contest that is this sort of posturing.

Armed with that understanding, the Air Force recently awarded technology maturation funds to both Northrop Grumman and Boeing — both of whom are already at work developing their bids at the next generation of American nuclear ICBMs, which the Air Force is calling the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent, or GBSD. These new missiles are expected to reach testing phases in the early 2020s, with plans to have a winner chosen and fielded in silos around the country by the end of that decade. While the Air Force has not addressed the expected yields of these new weapons, they have pointed out that they will be equipped with significant upgrades in targeting and guidance abilities as well as the overall durability of reentry vehicles.

“GBSD will provide a safe, secure and effective land-based deterrent through 2075,” Capt. Hope Cronin, Air Force spokeswoman, told reporters. The company that secures the contract to build the next generation of American ICBMs will be tasked with building as many as 400 of the new platform.

Featured image: Airmen from the 90th Missile Maintenance Squadron prepare a reentry system for removal from a launch facility, Feb. 2, 2018, in the F. E. Warren Air Force Base missile complex. The 90th MMXS is the only squadron on F. E. Warren allowed to transport warheads from the missile complex back to base. Missile maintenance teams perform periodic maintenance to maintain the on-alert status for launch facilities, ensuring the success of the nuclear deterrence mission. | U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Braydon Williams

The End Of World Revolution

What Is Coming…

This is a particularly interesting article on the end of the Bilderberg era in light of some of the rumors that are supposedly coming out of the most recent Bilderberg meeting. And notice how it all just keeps going back to ((((((Leon Trotsky)))))):

The beginning of the end of the Bilderberg/((((((Soros)))))) vision is in sight. The Old Order will cling on, even to the last of its fingernails. The Bilderberg vision is the notion of multi-cultural, international cosmopolitanism that surpasses old-time nationalism; heralding the end of frontiers; and leading toward a US-led, ‘technocratic’, global economic and political governance. Its roots lie with figures such as James Burnham, an anti-Stalin, former Trotskyite, who, writing as early as 1941, advocated for the levers of financial and economic power being placedin the hands of a management class: an élite – which alone would be capable of running the contemporary state – thanks to this élite’s market and financial technical nous. It was, bluntly, a call for an expert, technocratic oligarchy.

Burnham renounced his allegiance to ((((((Trotsky)))))) and ((((((Marxism)))))), in all its forms in 1940, but he would take the tactics and strategies for infiltration and subversion, (learned as a member of ((((((Leon Trotsky))))))’s inner circle) with him, and would elevate the Trotskyist management of ‘identity politics’ to become the fragmentation ‘device’ primed to explode national culture onto a new stage, in the Western sphere. His 1941 book, “The Managerial Revolution,” caught the attention of Frank Wisner, subsequently, a legendary CIA figure, who saw in the works of Burnham and his colleague a fellow Trotskyite, ((((((Sidney Hook)))))), the prospect of mounting an effective alliance of former Trotskyites against Stalinism.

But, additionally, Wisner perceived its merits as the blueprint for a CIA-led, pseudo-liberal, US-led global order. (‘Pseudo’, because, as Burnham articulated clearly, in The Machiavellians, Defenders of Freedom, his version of freedom meant anything but intellectual freedom or those freedoms defined by America’s Constitution. “What it really meant was conformity and submission”).

In short, (as Paul Fitzgerald and Elizabeth ((((((Gould)))))) have noted), “by 1947, James Burnham’s transformation from Communist radical, to New World Order American conservative was complete. His Struggle for the World, [converted into a memo for the US Office of Strategic Services (OSS, the forerunner of CIA)], had done a ‘French Turn’ on ((((((Trotsky))))))’s permanent Communist revolution, and turned it into a permanent battle plan for a global American empire. All that was needed to complete Burnham’s dialectic was a permanent enemy, and that would require a sophisticated psychological campaign to keep the hatred of Russia alive, “for generations”.

What has this to do with us today? A ‘Burnham Landscape’ of apparently, ‘centrist’ European political parties, apparently independent think-tanks, institutions, and NATO structures, was seeded by CIA – in the post war era of anti-Sovietism – across Europe, and the Middle East – as part of Burnham’s ‘battle plan’ for a US-led, global ‘order’. It is precisely this élite: i.e. Burnham’s oligarchic technocracy, that is facing political push-back today to the point at which the Liberal Order feels that it is struggling for its very survival against “the enemy in the White House”, as the editor of Spiegel Online has termed President Trump.

“Burnham renounced his allegiance to ((((((Trotsky)))))) and ((((((Marxism)))))), in all its forms in 1940.”

Sure he did. The Scarlet Pill, redder than red, is to grasp the fact that the Trotskyite communists, the World Revolutionaries, the Neoliberal world order, the New World Order, Bilderberg, the neoconservatives, the Never Trumpers, NATO, the European Unionists, and the Silicon Valley technocracy are all different aspects of the same thing. And their latest vision for global empire has observably failed, and failed faster and more conclusively than anyone would have imagined.

It will be very interesting to learn if the elite can learn from its failures or not. There have been rumors floating around that the European migration is to be reversed for fear that the whole thing will come crashing down amidst a series of large-scale civil wars. Maybe saner minds have prevailed, maybe the God-Emperor is behind it, or maybe it’s just fake news.

Interesting times, to be sure.

And so it Begins… Tens of thousands march for Tommy Robinson’s release in central London.

Tens of thousands march for Tommy Robinson’s release in central London.

Thousands marched through London under the banner of free speech  after Tommy Robinson, a former leader of the far-right English Defence League, was Arrested and imprisoned.

Protesters flying national flags and holding placards decrying limits to free expression rallied at Whitehall after marching through central London from Speakers’ Corner in Hyde Park, a location seen as emblematic of free speech that has been the scene of several recent far-right rallies.

It’s to protest against all the censorship that’s going on, political correctness, cultural ((((((((((((Marxism)))))))))))) and attacks on the white, Christian culture, not just in this country but across Europe.

(((They))) now realize that the racist tag is dead: no one cares anymore with being labelled racists

Far right Dutch politician Geert Wilders gave a speech before he was escorted by police

Wilders, who leads the far-right PVV party in Holland, was pictured being escorted away by cops as police tried to contain the crowd.

The politician, who was temporarily banned from Britain in 2009, called for Robinson to be freed during a speech watched by thousands.

He said: “I am here to tell you that you will never walk alone. And we are here to tell the world, and the UK government in particular: ‘Free Tommy Robinson.’”

He added: “Tommy Robinson is a freedom fighter. He says what no-one dares to say. He has guts. He has courage.”

Rows of riot police blocked the gate down the Mall leading to Buckingham Palace where the Royal Family gathered on the balcony after celebrating Trooping the Colour just hours before.

Supporters elsewhere gathered in other British cities including Leeds and Belfast — while some demos were staged outside British embassies in Europe.

Police held back protesters from the gates of Downing Street as banners reading Free Tommy were waved.

One flag read “police state” followed by an Islamic crescent moon.

Other protesters scaled the steps of Nelson’s Column in Trafalgar Square where they chanted slogans.

Hundreds of flag-waving demonstrators overran an open-top tourist bus — with one climbing onto the roof wearing a Donald Trump mask.

A spokeswoman for megasightseeing.com said: “Our London sightseeing bus was on its normal route when it got caught up in the demonstrations.

“The bus was stormed by demonstrators and the driver and a small number of customers got off.

“The demonstrators have caused a significant amount of damage to the bus which meant it had to be towed away.”

Our enemies only understand ONE thing, violence, we stand we fight, we take back our nations from the left, and expel the alien hordes that infest our lands, then we deal with the traitors and demons which have destroyed our nations.

As 40% of Americans Can’t Pay $400 Bill, Pentagon Spends $1 BILLION Developing Killer Robots

By John Vibes

The Pentagon reportedly plans to spend more than $1 billion over the next few years developing advanced robots for military applications that are expected to complement soldiers on the battlefield, and potentially even replace some of them. As the US government uses $1,000,000,000 of your tax dollars to build killer robots, a new report just showed that forty percent of adults in America would have had to borrow money or sell something to pay an emergency expense of just $400.

The government’s war spending has reached epic proportions and all Americans have to show for it is poverty, less freedom, and now, a potential terminator-esque future in which to look forward.

Army Project Manager Bryan McVeigh told ((((((((((((Bloomberg)))))))))))) that over 800 robots have already entered the ranks in the past two years.

“Within five years, I have no doubt there will be robots in every Army formation. We’re going from talking about robots to actually building and fielding programs. This is an exciting time to be working on robots with the Army,” McVeigh said.

McVeigh and other military agents celebrate the addition of robots into their ranks as a cost-saver and tool to aid them on difficult missions, but humanitarians fear that this could desensitize powerful nations from the consequences of war even more than they already are with the use of drones or far-reaching missiles.

There are currently no public reports of autonomous killing machines, as the military insists that all of these weapons will be operated by humans, but many experts are concerned that it is only a matter of time until the technology is taken to that level.

“It seems inevitable that technology is taking us to a point where countries will face the question of whether to delegate lethal decision-making to machines,” said Paul Scharre of the Center for a New American Security.

Last year, more than 100 tech experts, including Elon Musk, sent a letter to the UN urging the ban of autonomous robotic weapons.

“Once developed, lethal autonomous weapons will permit armed conflict to be fought at a scale greater than ever, and at timescales faster than humans can comprehend. These can be weapons of terror, weapons that despots and terrorists use against innocent populations, and weapons hacked to behave in undesirable ways,” the letter warned.

At least 26 countries have made similar calls for a ban on fully autonomous weapons, according to the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots.

“If you buy into the notion that it’s a moral and humanitarian issue—that you have machines making life-and-death decisions on the battlefield—then it’s a very simple issue. People have a sense of revulsion over this,” said Steve Goose, director of Human Rights Watch’s arms division and a co-founder of the campaign.

Goose also pointed out how this could make it easier for members of the military to kill people, entirely removing them from the consequences of war.

“There’s a value of someone being able to appreciate the human consequences of war. A world without that could be potentially more harmful. If we went to war and no one slept uneasy at night, what does that say about us?” he said.

It is likely that we are in the early days of a military robotics arms race. This week it was also reported that India is building a formidable artificial intelligence division in their military as well, even openly admitting the development of autonomous robots.

Ajay Kumar, the secretary of the Defense Production Department in the Indian Defense Ministry, told the Times of India that his agency was developing intelligent, autonomous robotic systems.”

“The world is moving towards AI-driven warfare. India is also taking necessary steps to prepare our armed forces because AI has the potential to have a transformative impact on national security. The government has set up the AI task force to prepare the roadmap for it,” he said.

India expects that they will have AI integrated into their military within the next two years, and despite the fact that the U.S. military claims that they are not working on autonomous weapons, it is not like them to allow anyone else to get the upper hand in an arms race.


This article originally appeared on The Free Thought Project.