US legislators are fighting to prevent America from becoming involved in the Israel-Iran conflict, but it is too late. The war cycle cannot be stopped, and the next cycle will peak in 2026/2027 on target. Our computer warned that there was an elevated risk for a confrontation beginning in 2025 on a global scale.
US senators on both sides of the political spectrum are attempting to introduce legislation that would prevent Donald Trump from declaring war on Iran. The Bipartisan House War Powers Resolution has received support from the Republican Senator Thomas Massie, who is perhaps the most outspoken against declaring war on Israel’s behalf. “This is not our war. But if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution,” Massie stated. The bill is not an actual bipartisan bill, as Massie is the only Libertarian leaning Republican championing such a measure. Many are now questioning the GOP as everyone seems keen to attack Iran. Yet, Donald Trump repeatedly promised that the US would not enter into any foreign wars under his command. In fact, Trump accused Obama of attempting to attack Iran back in 2011, but Obama had other priorities in the Middle East.
Senator Bernie Sanders introduced the No War Against Iran Act, which would prohibit the use of federal funds for military action against Iran without approval from Congress. The only exception would be if war was declared through the War Powers Act, or War Powers Resolution of 1973, which grants the POTUS the ability to send American troops into battle if Congress receives a 48-hour notice. The stipulation here is that troops cannot remain in battle for over 60 days unless Congress authorizes a declaration of war. Congress could also remove US forces at any time by passing a resolution.
The War Powers Act was last enacted under Barack Obama in 2011 when he sent troops into Libya. The resolution had not been enforced since 1998 when President Bill Clinton sent armed forces into Kosovo. Yet, Obama was able to bypass the law and the military remained in Libya for over 60 days without Congressional approval, marking the first time in US history that a president defied the War Powers Act. House Republicans attempted to block any federal funding, but their efforts were ultimately unsuccessful. Obama single-handedly dismantled the entire War Powers Act, as it did not matter what Congress did or did not do—the president had the sole authority to wage war.
There was a major ECM turning point on June 13, 2011. That marked the beginning of a new 8.6-year wave within the broader 51.6-year cycle. What happened right then? The Arab Spring, the destruction of Libya, and a sharp rise in geopolitical instability. That intervention was unauthorized and illegal by constitutional standards.
Senator Tim Kaine would also like to invoke the War Powers Act, but these people must understand that the act died in 2011 when the US entered Libya to overthrow Gaddafi. The government can say anything to propel a nation into war, and weapons of mass destruction are a tried and true premise. What makes this more dangerous is that we’ve since entered a cycle where unelected bureaucrats—Neocons, intelligence operatives, and shadow advisers—run foreign policy, not the American people or even Congress. Obama’s disregard for the War Powers Act helped solidify that shift.
Posted originally on Jun 12, 2025 by Martin Armstrong
Once upon a time, requiring noncitizens to return home was not controversial. The left is not protesting migration; rather, they are protesting Donald Trump. Former President Barack Obama broke records for deportations under his administration and received bipartisan support.
Forcible removals reached 400,000 in 2012 alone, a record-high number for deportations at the time. Obama became the president to oversee the highest number of migrant removals with over 3 million people forcibly or voluntarily leaving the United States between 2009 and 2017. Only far-left extremist groups complained, labeling Obama the “Deporter-in-Chief.”
In comparison, George W. Bush expelled 3 million migrants, with Bill Clinton only removing 900,000. Prior to Trump, immigration rules were common sense. I could not travel to [insert the name of any country here], overstay my visa or illegally enter, and then expect that nation to financially support me and my extended family indefinitely.
“If they committed a crime, DEPORT THEM, no questions asked,–they’re gone!” Hillary Clinton said on the campaign trail. She said that migrants who wished to become naturalized citizens should be required to learn English, pay a fine for illegally entering the US, pay back taxes, and wait in line for their turn to legally immigrate. The Democrats cheered her plan. Again, these were common-sense concepts.
The media now remembers Obama for providing an easier path for citizenship and pandering to groups who repeated the “don’t separate families” line. Yet, Obama campaigned on the promise of removing illegal migrants because it was a danger to national security and a burden to taxpayers.
The pandemonium we see today has absolutely nothing to do with migration. Migration is the excuse to attack Donald Trump, the most hated man in politics, to cause and blame him for nationwide chaos. The Democratic Party once had values, but they no longer stand for anything other than violence and opposition without proposed solutions.
Posted originally on Jun 3, 2025 by Martin Armstrong
The United Kingdom admitted it “lost control” over its own national security and permitted the invasion of thousands of illegal migrants. Once the naval powerhouse of the world, the former British Empire has “lost” the ability to protect its own shores from the onslaught of migrants that have been pouring in since its leaders adopted open border policies. Men with little to no resources in canoes are suddenly overpowering the long-admired British fleet. In truth, the government has not “lost control,” as this is a calculated effort to reshape the UK.
Others are blaming France for not preventing migrants from launching from their shores. French police stopped 38% of migrants (8,347 people) attempting to reach the UK by boat this year. French authorities prevented 45% of new arrivals in 2024, and 47% in 2023. France is receiving €541 million over a three-year period from the UK government to prevent illegal crossings in the English Channel. France has hired hundreds of new law enforcement officers to patrol the waters, but the number of asylum seekers continues to rise.
Upon taking office, Sir Keir Starmer announced that the Rwanda plan was “dead” as he would not deport migrants to third nations. Labour has stated they are seeking a “calm and patient rebuilding” of migration policies and refuse to accept any large-scale deportation efforts. If you can make it to shore, you can likely stay. Starmer has said the UK is becoming an “island of strangers” but refuses to adopt any policies to curb the inflow.
The United Kingdom is experiencing a mass repopulation event. The former population is being replaced with both legal and illegal immigrants. Birth rates are plummeting, public debt is rising, and the government is openly permitting migrants to enter to maintain its public welfare state. Rather than fixing the issues that are causing the population to contract, the government is importing a new population. The British political elite, both Tory and Labour, have failed to grasp the historical implications of these shifts. It is not racist or xenophobic to observe patterns and hard truths. The core identity of the UK and other Build Back Better nations has been abandoned and replaced. They are not bringing in migrants for humanitarian purposes, and it would be a lie to think that the UK was completely unable to secure its border. If they can’t prevent a few thousand men on cheap boats from entering, how could they protect themselves in time of war? The government is allowing this to happen because it needs new taxpayers to replace the workers it failed to produce.
This is why conservative leaders are attempting to rebuild domestic manufacturing and providing incentives for women to have children. The global mainstream media is controlled by the left, and therefore, these nationalist values are painted as a form of hatred or superiority. Quite the contrary, as conservative leaders are attempting to save their nation’s culture and traditions by encouraging the success of their own population.
Globalism is directly tied to repopulation theory. “In the future, countries with aging populations may need migration to sustain their economies,” Bill Gates said, as he strongly believes that the world is overcrowded. “The world today has 6.8 billion people… that’s headed up to about 9 billion. If we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.”
Repopulation theory is more of a tactic than a theory. Hence, leaders like Starmer are ignoring warnings and standing idle as a demographic shift permanently alters their nation. As it stands, first-generation migrants will compose 25% of the UK’s population by 2035, according to the Centre for Migration Control, and the UK’s overall population will surge to 73 million. It may seem far off, but that is only a decade from now. All Build Back Better nations will be utterly unrecognizable thanks to repopulation tactics.
Posted originally on May 21, 2025 by Martin Armstrong
BREAKING: Hillary Clinton slams President Trump for insisting that Americans have more kids, arguing that is what immigrants are for. pic.twitter.com/7j1UeK92as
Hillary Clinton infamously blamed women for failing to secure the presidency. Clinton felt entitled to the female vote, but more women voted for Donald Trump than for Hillary Clinton. Instead of acknowledging that women are permitted to hold independent ideas and beliefs, she continually bashes women at every opportunity for not aligning with her views.
“They left me because they just couldn’t take a risk on me, because as a woman, I’m supposed to be perfect. They were willing to take a risk on Trump, who had a long list of, let’s call them flaws, to illustrate his imperfection, because he was a man, and they could envision a man as president and commander in chief,” Clinton said of her 2016 election fail.
In fact, Rodham–or Clinton, as she prefers her married name– believes that Republican women are unfit to lead. “Well, first of all, don’t be a handmaiden to the patriarchy, which kind of eliminates every woman on the other side of the aisle, except for very few,” Clinton said when asked if she had advice for a potential future woman president. “The Handmaid’s Tale” by Margaret Atwood has been a popular portrayal of the far left who believe that allowing individual states to vote for abortion, a motion that was implemented by the US Supreme Court and not the president, is akin to a dystopian society where women are silenced and forced to reproduce.
Clinton said that there are a few conservative women, notably those who have attacked Trump, such as Liz Cheney, who are the rare exception. She then perpetuated the lie that is the Project 2025:
“It’s all in there—the return to the nuclear family, the return to being a Christian nation, return to producing a lot of children, which is sort of odd since the people who produce a lot of children are immigrants.”
Take that all in. Hillary was horrified that voters would like America to return to its roots, believing it would be an absolute tragedy if women had the CHOICE whether to work or raise a family, unlike today, where the economy simply does not allow one income to comfortably support a household in most situations. Children should be placed in expensive child care, run by the state, and parents should continue focusing on churning out taxable wages, and allow the system to raise the next generation.
Project 2025 has been debunked, but repopulation theory is alive and well. Hillary admits that immigrants here “legally and undocumented” produce “larger than normal—American standard—families.” The left in America and Europe are aggressively pushing mass migration not out of compassion, but out of desperation and control. When you destroy the economic incentive for families to grow through taxation, inflation, and debt—you kill natural reproduction. The West has done exactly that. Financial constraints are the number one reason that young adults are refraining from having children.
The left believes migrants will be engineered into dependency, relying on government welfare and therefore voting for the party that promises perpetual handouts. This is why lawmakers want to prohibit voter ID checks. It is why states are spending their funds on countless social programs for noncitizens. Traditional Western culture is conservative in nature. Replacing the population with people who do not adhere to the traditional Judeo-Christian ideology changes the dynamics of the population at large.
The traditional nuclear family does not revere the government. Friedrich Engels (pictured above), a pioneer of Marxism, argued against the nuclear family. He believed that the nuclear family perpetuated capitalism, private property ownership, and familial wealth, calling families a “unit of consumption.” Engels believed in communal living, polygamy or group marriage, and the removal of any private property. He argued that this was a feminist concept, as women in that time period were dependent on their husbands rather than the government.
As he writes in “The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State”:
“The significant characteristic of monogamous marriage was its transformation of the nuclear family into the basic economic unit of society, within which a woman and her children became dependent upon an individual man. Arising in conjunction with exploitative class relations, this transformation resulted in the oppression of women that has persisted to the present day.”
Marxism believes that the patriarchy controls women and the state controls men. It believes we should hand over all power to government who will ensure we are all equal—in poverty, as history has shown time and time again. Traditional roles, and gender roles, threaten Marxist philosophy, which is why we have seen gender identity become a massive controversy in recent years, with the left promoting a genderless society.
Hillary Clinton and everyone on the far left has damned the nuclear family because they uphold Marxist beliefs rooted in centralized government power and control.
Posted originally on CTH on May 20, 2025 | Sundance
In order to understand where we are today, we must understand our journey by remembering its origin.
Context is needed in order to truly appreciate events soon upon us. A Big Hat Tip to Daniel Bocic Martinez who provides one of the most succinct encapsulations of the Hillary Clinton -vs- Barack Obama dynamic.
“Hillary Clinton didn’t trust Barack Obama because he was supposed to have waited his turn.
When the Bill Clinton presidential team in 2000 burrowed into the DNC, and installed HRC into the NY Senate seat, through heavy influence in primary machine politics, the Clintons were the happiest Dems in the country when W squeaked by Gore, leaving them in full control of the DNC money laundering operation for the duration of the W years.
“8 years of Bill, then 8 years of Hill,” was all going according to plan, with Hollywood planting Hillary as President “Easter eggs” throughout media of the 1990’s.
The 2008 primary was the culmination of their plan started decades earlier.
Obama’s 2004 DNC Speech and his Jefferson-Jackson speech were to place him as the heir apparent, but their lock over the DNC (and the superdelegates) was fait accompli.
Even Obama running a near flawless campaign wouldn’t have been enough on its own.
The factors that pushed him over the top, and that were outside his control, were 1) Hillary ran an abysmal campaign, due in large part to her abysmal interpersonal skills and genuine dislike of most human beings; and 2) then patriarch of the Kennedy political dynasty, Ted (whose always loathed the Clintons), pounced on the chink in HRC’s inevitability armor highlighted by her loss in Iowa (where she was outhustled in all 99 counties), and literally embraced Obama in New Hampshire shortly before the primary voting, and crowned Obama as heir apparent of what remained of the political capital once described as Camelot.
The superdelegate tsunami was stopped in its tracks and the rest is history.
With an embittered Hillary not ready to abandon decades of planning and ride off into the sunset, she first hoped McCain would somehow best Obama and then moved to burrow into his administration to maintain some level of control/access to the DNC money laundering operation her crime family ruled over for the better part of two decades.
Obama knew she would be disloyal outside of the administration, even worse in the Senate, spending each moment plotting a 2012 primary challenge (same reason she could never have been VP, she would have poisoned him if given the slot).
So, he made the Faustian bargain that would one day destroy his legacy and place in History and made her the one offer he knew she could not refuse, Secretary of State.
Out of sight, out of mind. He always cared more about his domestic agenda than foreign policy, and if she’s too busy selling political indulgences around the world, she’d put off 2012 primary ambitions and keep her eye on 2016.
Obama’s only obligation was to ensure that he did his part and ensure that his VP choose not to stand for President in 2016, which Biden dutifully complied with. HRC’s remaining embeds at the DNC then did their part in the 2016 primary and ensured the “mistake” of 2008 (heavily contested primary and near-infinite debates) was rectified.
The DNC went on to implement the “pied piper” strategy boosting Donald Trump in the early GOP primary, while being caught completely off guard as previously unknown Vermont Senate gadfly rallied the near plurality of Democrat primary voters who found her character and lack of authenticity repellant.
As the frailty of her campaign become apparent to threats from both Trump on the right and Bernie on the left, Hillary’s embeds in the administration at FBI/DOJ put their insurance plan into effect.
The FBI opened investigations into both [political] threads. For Bernie, the investigation targeted his wife and allegations of fraud surrounding a real estate transaction at her non-profit. For Trump, it was Crossfire Hurricane.
Neither was Obama’s operation by design but nonetheless happened under his watch and with the enthusiastic support of then VP Biden.
Once Trump finishes putting Chapter 9 of Art of the Deal into practice, it will be Obama’s lasting legacy.”
Posted originally on CTH on April 8, 2025 | Sundance
After previously saying her number one concern about President Trump’s tariff program was Beijing dumping all their excess products into the EU at a discount, EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announces she is coordinating the tariff response with China.
Apparently, the EU recognizes the ideological alignment of support from Canada just isn’t going to be enough to pressure President Trump and retain leverage into the U.S. market. This is quite a remarkable admission from von der Leyen all things considered. [STATEMENT]
President von der Leyen held today a phone call with Premier Li Qiang to discuss the state of EU-China relations, as 2025 marks the 50th anniversary of diplomatic ties.
The two leaders held a constructive discussion during which they took stock of bilateral and global issues.
The President underscored the vital importance of stability and predictability for the global economy. In response to the widespread disruption caused by the US tariffs, President von der Leyen stressed the responsibility of Europe and China, as two of world’s largest markets, to support a strong reformed trading system, free, fair and founded on a level playing field.
The President called for a negotiated resolution to the current situation, emphasising the need to avoid further escalation.
President von der Leyen emphasised China’s critical role in addressing possible trade diversion caused by tariffs, especially in sectors already affected by global overcapacity.The leaders discussed setting up a mechanism for tracking possible trade diversion and ensuring any developments are duly addressed. (more)
In the 2017 – 2019 version of the same dynamic, the EU was slow to realize the Trump impact to the Chinese economy would lead to less industrial purchases from Beijing. This dynamic pushed the EU toward recession. In 2025 von der Leyen is trying to proactively mitigate that outcome.
This coordination of response between Brussels and Beijing is happening simultaneous to the Chinese central bank beginning a rapid devaluation of their currency. Direct subsidies and currency manipulation are the first two approaches taken by any economy dependent on access to the U.S. market.
The difference this time is the scale of the tariffs President Trump is delivering. There’s no way to subsidize and lower currency value at a rate significant enough to mitigate a near 50% tariff impact across all sectors. China and the EU will subsidize and devalue, but they cannot repeat their prior defensive programs to this scale.
The key takeaway from this public admission by the EU President is to note how consequential the tariffs are to their parasitic endeavors.
The EU is directly working with Beijing against American interests.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 
