Tag Archive: NATO


Lets just face the facts, main stream media is a pack of lies to benefit the international bankers and corporations. This bankporations is the new world government. They use the US military industrial complex to rule the world and do with it as they see fit.

Big Lies launch wars. Public opinion’s manipulated.

It’s done to enlist support.

Truth is suppressed.

Fear and misinformation substitute.

by Stephen Lendman

 

Waging war requires manufacturing consent.

Public opinion’s manipulated to do so.

Big Lies substitute for full and accurate reporting. 

Truth is systematically avoided. Americans get a steady diet of managed news misinformation.

On August 20, Al Jazeera America (AJAM) debuted. Qatar’s monarchy controls programming.

Ehab Al Shihabi (right), with Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, has promoted himself as the public face of Al Jazeera America. (Source: Al Jazeera America)

It’s waging war on Syria. AJAM didn’t explain. It claims to offer “unbiased, fact-based, in-depth stories of US in international news.”

On August 22, it said “Syrian activists (offered) horrific images of dead and dying children from near Damascus.”

AJAM called it “proof of a chemical-weapons attack by forces loyal to President Bashar al-Assad.”

It did so despite no verifiable evidence whatever.

It repeated the Big Lie.

Follow-up reports were just as biased.

It’s promoting war.

It spurns peaceful conflict resolution.

Nation magazine cheerleads Obama’s administration. It’s done so throughout his tenure. It’s done it shamelessly. Editor Katrina vanden Heuvel’s an establishment figure.

Katrina vanden Heuvel -- The Nation

Her maternal grandfather, Jules Stein, founded entertainment conglomerate MCA. Her father, William, was executive assistant to William Donovan. He was involved in CIA’s creation. He was a Farfield Foundation board member. During the Cold War, it was a CIA front group. Vanden Heuvel supports humanitarian interventions. She does so for “security” and “stability.” She’s a regular on scoundrel TV. She’s a Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member.

Historian Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. once called it a “front organization (for) the heart of the American Establishment.”

Last May, she discussed “the reported use of chemical weapons by Syria’s embattled Assad regime.” She did so without saying no evidence suggests it’s true.

She ignored clear proof insurgents used CW multiple times. She called Assad a “dictator.” She said he heads a “brutal regime.” She ignored Washington’s war. She blamed Assad for insurgents’ crimes.

Last June, Media Lens co-founder David Edwards said “Guardian Editors Swallow US Claims on Syrian WMD.”

He discussed “questions and doubts surrounding claims that the chemical weapon sarin has been used in Syria.”

“The Obama administration has since claimed that its ‘red line’ has indeed been crossed – it now has firm evidence that Syrian government forces have used chemical weapons.”

IRAQ PROPAGANDA

Despite no evidence suggesting it, Guardian editors said:

“That use is an outrage and is against international agreements. It adds to the charge sheet against the Assad regime.”

According to Edwards:

“These are among the most shocking comments we have ever seen in the Guardian.”

“Despite the indisputable fraudulence of US-UK claims regarding Iraqi WMD, an equally staggering litany of lies on Libya, and despite the existence of gaps and doubts so reminiscent of Iraq 2002-2003, the Guardian is willing to quietly endorse the latest claims on Syria – ‘Assad’ clearly has used chemical weapons and that use should be added to the charge sheet against him.”

“Once again, when it really matters, the Guardian editors are on-message, on-side and boosting war propaganda.”

It’s not alone. British major media misreport like their US counterparts. BBC’s a longstanding imperial tool. It’s owned, operated and controlled by Britain’s government.

It’s a propaganda service for elitist interests. It’s notoriously so for issues mattering most. None rise to the level of war and peace. BBC’s selling war on Syria. It does so by misreporting.

BBC’s selling war on Syria. It does so by misreporting.

Weeks earlier, BBC said “pressure to act has intensified in recent days after emerging evidence that Syria has used chemical weapons such as the nerve gas sarin.”

It did so despite no proof whatever. On August 23, it headlined “Syria ‘chemical attack:’ Distressing footage under analysis,” saying:

” ‘Chemical attack:’ What we know:

August 21: Facebook pages of Syrian opposition report heavy fighting in rebel-held districts of Ghouta, the agricultural belt in eastern Damascus.

Opposition posts Facebook report of ‘chemical shelling’ in Ein Tarma area of Ghouta.

Second opposition report says chemical weapons used in Zamalka area of Ghouta.

Unverified video footage shows people being treated on pavements in the dark and in a makeshift hospital.

Reports say chemical weapons were used in Ghouta towns of Irbin, Jobar, Zamalka and Ein Tarma as well as in Muadhamiya to the west, but this is not confirmed.

Syrian government acknowledges military offensive in the Ghouta area but denies chemical weapons use.”

BBC manipulates viewers and listeners. It conditions them to believe Syrian opposition claims.

Dismissively it says Syria’s government refutes them. Doing so shows its reporting lacks credibility.

Nowhere does BBC cite verifiable evidence. Opposition claims suffice. Government shelling’s highlighted. “Chemical attacks on civilians shocked the world,” it said.

“Rebel strongholds” were struck. Ignored were credible reports about homemade rockets fired from insurgent-held territory. They contained toxic substances.

Considerable coverage was given to “ambulances with sirens screeching.”

Another report “show(ed) victims being laid out on a pavement to be methodically washed down in an apparent attempt to decontaminate them.”

“And from the overwhelming and distressing litany of footage of victims an overview of the symptoms can be gleaned,” said BBC.

“Most of those being treated are men of all ages and very small children.”

“One man twisting and shivering on the floor seems to be having convulsions. Several are in such distress, they seem to be foaming at the mouth or nose.”

“One man whose stark, glazed eyes stand out from his ashen face looks almost frozen, his pupils apparently contracted – a telling indication of possible nerve gas.”

BBC duplicitously built an anti-Syrian case. It did so without credible evidence. Innuendo furthers it. Assad’s blamed for insurgents’ crimes.

It’s been this way throughout the conflict. BBC’s a weapon of mass deception. Lies substitute for truth. Pressure builds toward military intervention.

BBC and other media scoundrels bear much responsibility. Supporting imperial lawlessness makes them culpable.

America’s National Public Radio and Public Broadcasting operate the same way. They’re called public to conceal their real agenda.

Critics ridicule NPR. They call it National Pentagon or Petroleum Radio. They do so for good reason. PBS operates the same way. Calling it Propaganda Public Broadcasting more accurately explains its mandate.

Both operations long ago abandoned truth and full disclosure. They’re indistinguishable from other corporate media sources. They’re corrupted like the rest.

They’re house organs for government and business interests. They’re well funded for services rendered.

On August 21, NPR headlined “Syrian Government Accused Again of Using Chemical Weapons.” Credible sources aren’t interviewed. They aren’t cited. They’re ignored.

So-called “Syrian activists accuse President Bashar al-Assad’s forces of launching a huge chemical weapons attack in the suburbs of Damascus,” said NPR.

Washington Post reporter Loveday Morris was interviewed. A graphic account of what happened followed.

“(W)hat else could have killed these people, other than some kind of toxic gas,” was claimed. Assad was blamed.

“(I)t seem(s) very brazen for (him) to launch an attack of this size with UN weapons inspectors in the country at the time, but the West has said on multiple occasions if these red lines are crossed, there will be action.”

“And I think their government has obviously reached a stage where they feel that there won’t be any consequences.”

This type reporting repeats with disturbing regularity. Voices of truth are systematically shut out. Listeners get one-sided accounts. It happens every time.

On August 22, PBS’ New Hour interviewed Robert Zarate. He’s Foreign Policy Initiative’s policy director. FPI’s the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) successor organization.

Robert Zarate

It sells war. It deplores peace. It promotes US global military dominance. It targets independent governments. It urges replacing them with pro-Western subservient ones.

Zarante told News Hour host Margaret Warner he “think(s) the West has an obligation – the United States in particular has an obligation to intervene militarily, and not just because of what happened in the suburbs of Damascus, but because of what has happened over the last two-and-a-half years, since the Assad regime began its conflict with the Syrian people.”

He blames Assad for insurgent crimes. He ignored the worst ones they commit.

“Look, what we’re seeing right now in Syria is a rogue regime that has used weapons of mass destruction, ” he added.

Professor Joshua Landis was interviewed on the same program. His comments were more measured. He stopped short of explaining things accurately.

He called Syria “a failed nation.” It operated normally until Western-backed death squads arrived. He didn’t explain.

He’s concerned about making things worse, not better. He failed to lay blame where it belongs.

“(I)f we go in,” he said, “we have to either rebuild Syria or we have to divide it up into three states, like we did in Yugoslavia.”

He ignored international law saying so. No nation may interfere in the internal affairs of others. Doing so is brazenly illegal.

Landis didn’t explain. Zarante wants US military intervention. International law is clear and unequivocal.

No nation may attack another except in self-defense. It may only do so only until the Security Council acts. It has final say.

Syria threatens no one. Zarante didn’t explain. Nor did Landis. Host Margaret Warner betrayed News Hour viewers. One-sided reporting’s featured. It happens every time.

Democracy Now manipulates viewers. It does it subtly. It does it deceptively. Followers believe it’s a reliable alternative news and information source. At times it is. Too often it’s not. When it matters most, it’s on the wrong side of issues.

Ford, Rockefeller, Carnegie, Soros, MacArthur, and other corporate foundations provide funding. They expect payback in return. They’re not disappointed.

Misinformation’s featured. Propaganda substitutes for honest reporting. Guests represent imperial interests. Legitimate alternative media avoid them. Not Democracy Now. It shows in its Syria coverage. It’s shameless. It’s one-sidedly anti-government. Opposition figures are featured. Assad’s wrongfully vilified. He’s blamed for insurgent crimes.

On August 23, Razan Zaitouneh was interviewed. She’s actively involved in anti-Assad activities. Syria calls her a foreign agent. She blames insurgent-committed atrocities on government forces.

“(T)he regime launched a chemical attack on civilians two days ago,” she claimed. She pointed fingers the wrong way. She did so shamelessly.

Assad had nothing to do with Wednesday’s incident. She maintained otherwise. “I haven’t seen such death in my whole life,” she said.

“People were lying on the ground in hallways, on roadsides, in hundreds.”

Asked how she knew who was responsible, she said:

Rockets used came “from the regime forces, it’s clear. There is no doubt about it.”

She ignored clear evidence otherwise. Rockets fired came from insurgent held territory.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Aleksandr Lukashevich said reports circulated online. They did so hours before Wednesday’s incident.

It was a “pre-planned action,” he said. It was an insurgent attack. Assad had nothing to do with it. Claiming otherwise is spurious anti-government propaganda.

Journalist Patrick Cockburn was interviewed on the same program. He called video evidence “compelling and convincing.” He asked why would government forces use chemical weapons?

“That seems pretty extraordinary,” he said. It’s “the one thing most likely to lead to a foreign intervention. It’s not an argument they didn’t do it.”

Host Amy Goodman accepted State Department spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki’s claim. She said opposition forces “don’t have the capability to use chemical weapons.”

False! On December 9, 2012, CNN headlined “Sources: US helping underwrite Syrian rebel training on securing chemical weapons.”

“The United States and some European allies are using defense contractors to train Syrian rebels on how to secure chemical weapons stockpiles in Syria, a senior US official and several senior diplomats told CNN Sunday.”

Training takes place in Jordan, Turkey and covertly in Syria. It involves using CW.

On May 8, 2013, Michel Chossudovsky said “CNN confirmed that contractors hired by the Pentagon were in fact training the terrorists in the use of chemical weapons.”

Michel Chossudovsky

“And now we have a statement by a United Nations Independent Commission, which has confirmed unequivocally – and it was revealed on the same day – that the terrorists who are backed by the United States and its allies, are in possession of deadly sarin nerve gas, which they are using against the civilian population.”

“And once these Al Qaeda rebels had been supplied and trained in the use of WMDs by military contractors hired by the Pentagon, the Syrian government would then be held responsible for using the WMD against the Syrian people.”

Chossudovsky correctly explained a “diabolical scenario.” It’s part of Washington’s regime change strategy. Anti-Syrian media scoundrels proliferate the Big Lie. They blame Assad for insurgent CW use.

Democracy Now’s like the rest. Anti-Syrian programming betrays its viewers. It repeats with disturbing regularity.

Western media scoundrels report one way. Managed news misinformation substitutes for truth and full disclosure. It’s verboten. It’s polar opposite how things should be.

John Pilger calls journalism war’s first casualty. It’s a “weapon of war,” he says.

“(V)irulent censorship” by misinformation or “omission” condones imperial lawlessness.

George Seldes (1890 – 1995) called media scoundrels “the most powerful force against the general welfare of the majority of the people.”

AJ Liebling (1904 – 1963) said “Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one.”

“People everywhere confuse what they read (or view) with news.”

Big Lies launch wars. Public opinion’s manipulated. It’s done to enlist support. Truth is suppressed. Fear and misinformation substitute.

Patriotism means supporting what’s wrong. It means ignoring state lawlessness. Terrorism’s what they do, not us.

Imperial wars are called good ones. Reasons why they’re waged aren’t explained. Wealth and power alone matter. Sacrificing human lives and freedoms are small prices to pay. Humanity’s at risk but who cares.

Media scoundrels aid and abet state crimes. Truth is the most dangerous disinfectant. Suppressing it matters most.

Syria was largely peaceful until Washington initiated conflict. So were Libya and Iraq earlier. Iran’s moment of truth awaits.

An entire region’s being systematically destroyed. The worst of all possible outcomes may follow. Where things end, who knows.

original post at: http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/


NON- EXISTANT TERRORISM

So what this amounts too is your chances of dying by terrorist action is equivalent to getting struck by lighting twice while at the same time drowning in the shower.
Terrorist Questions
Scary, Non-Existent Terrorism: According to the State Department a mere 10 Americans were Killed by Terrorism in 2012. None of them in the U.S.

Nearly 12 years after the 9/11 attack, virtually every single element of national security policy – from the occupation of Afghanistan, to the drone war, to a massive NSA surveillance apparatus, to a defense budget the outpaces the rest of the world combined – is justified by citing terrorism as a threat. Together these policies amount to trillions of dollars, the decay of the rule of law, rampant government criminality, and the evisceration of the the constitutional rights of millions of Americans. What does this terrorist threat really amount to though? According to the State Department a mere 10 Americans were killed by terrorism in 2012. None of them in the U.S. U.S. citizens worldwide killed as a result of incidents of terrorism: 10 U.S. citizens worldwide injured as a result of incidents of terrorism: 2 U.S. citizens worldwide kidnapped as a result of incidents of terrorism: 3 Nine out of 10 of those killed were in Afghanistan, the remaining one in Iraq. One of the injured was in Afghanistan, the other in Iraq. The three instances of a single person being kidnapped occurred in Nigeria, Somalia, and Yemen. Instead of tormenting Afghans in a military occupation that costs more than $120 billion per year; instead of empowering the NSA to snuff out the Fourth Amendment and collect and store the communications of all Americans; instead of wasting almost$1 trillion annually on defense spending mostly as a wealth transfer to rent-seeking corporations; instead of granting the president the kingly power to assassinate anyone, anywhere, at any time – maybe we just shouldn’t go to the above-mentioned countries. Then our terrorism casualty rate will be zero. Read more http://antiwar.com/blog/2013/07/19/scary-non-existent-terrorism/

Mr. Roberts, if you don’t already know was assistant treasury secretary in the Reagan regime. So this is not one of your run of the mill puppet spokes people. I would wager he has a pretty good handle on the current affairs of todays concerning subjects. Listen close.

 

 

 

Does this not sound like your average black op zio banker plan of “Problem, Reaction, Solution” scenario? I can see merit in such a plan by TPTB to create a condition where the outcome would warrant U-N/N-A-T-O forces to control a civil unrest situation. What would wanna be free people do if living in a metro/urban area when they can not get to $$ and food was scarce while a suppressive regime was taking control of their lives? Wait a sec, isn’t that happenening now one step at a time? All wars are banker wars and we all work for the bankers.

 

Monday, 01 April 2013 05:35 Tom Chatham

military police

This article was written by Tom Chatham and originally published at Project Chesapeake

The past several years the federal government has  embarked on a strategy of militarizing the local law enforcement  agencies around the country. They have provided the money and equipment  to give these agencies the appearance of small military units that act  in a manner far removed from the community service of days past. This  has pushed many local departments away from the friendly approach they  utilized in the past to serve the public interest.

I have seen it myself in the local department  where I live. In a county with less than 20,000 people we now have a  police force with almost 50 officers and the sheriff wants at least 100  more auxiliary police officers. What all of these police are for in this  sparsely populated area has yet to be answered. The sheriff has also  made it a point to hire deputies from outside the county to ensure there  is no close connection between the police and the local community.

This is exactly what the federal government  wants, to ensure the local police will not be in a position to side with  locals if anything happens. It is in the governments’ best interest to  drive a wedge between the communities and law enforcement. The  government is apparently designing a confrontation between citizens and  the government and they are using local agencies to assist.

A recent purchase of shooting targets by DHS  met with outrage by the population when the pictures on them were  discovered to be pregnant women, children and old people. It is now  known that the designs were not from the target maker but in fact came  from law enforcement. This is how you desensitize people to kill others.  You reduce the enemy to nothing more than a paper target to prevent  hesitation when the time comes to shoot them.

If there is a financial crisis that shuts  down the banks for any period of time and prevents the use of plastic  forms of money, there will almost certainly be chaos nationwide. There  will eventually be riots and looting as people who are dependant on the  state for basic necessities start taking what they need. The first line  of defense in cases like this are the local law enforcement officers.  They will have the task of maintaining order in a quickly deteriorating  situation. Many of these confrontations will be violent and require  deadly force.

What happens if chaos breaks out and the  police have very little or no ammo to use in the preservation of order?  Will officers be willing to go out into hostile crowds with little or no  weapons to protect themselves? What will violent criminals and gangs do  if they realize police have no ammo to shoot them with? Will officers  show up to work in circumstances like this if they know they may get  killed with little in the way of protecting themselves?

With the support of federal funds and  equipment, and with ever more instruction from DHS, many local agencies  have become distant and even hostile to the local populations. If  something chaotic happens these locals will be less inclined to assist  local police and hostile actions will become more likely. This will  ultimately lead to the failure of local law enforcement to maintain  order in a deteriorating situation. So what would this lead to?

DHS has ordered a great deal of ammo in  recent months. Much more than is needed in normal operations. This has  helped to dry up the ammo market preventing not only civilians from  buying ammo but also police departments nationwide. Since many law  enforcement agencies around the country use the same calibers, the  massive DHS purchases have led to the shortages in the local agencies.  If DHS were really working with local agencies to insure the peace they  would be willing to make some of this government stockpile available to  local agencies for normal operations.

If chaos breaks out and local agencies are  left to their own demise they may run out of ammo early in the game. In  some instances it is likely that criminal elements will provoke gun  fights with police with the sole purpose of expending their limited  supplies of ammo. After several weeks of a slowly developing crisis,  many departments may indeed run out of ammo. This would cause an  explosion of violence and criminal activity. It would eventually cause  people to call on the intervention of federal forces to regain order  when local agencies fail.

This is what some have stated the federal  government wants to do. Allow chaos to spiral out of control until  citizens scream for government control and the government will be  waiting on the sidelines with the men and equipment to move in and take  charge. After the failure of the local departments the federals will be  seen as saviors and nothing they do initially will be questioned.

With the local agencies rendered impotent the  federal government will have complete control. This could be one reason  for the massive ammo purchases by DHS. If the ammo shortage in the law  enforcement community continues and DHS makes no attempt to bolster  local supplies then it will be a good indication of their intentions. At  some critical time DHS may offer the local agencies full access to ammo  but only if the agencies relinquish their authority and are absorbed  into DHS. Local agencies that have subverted their local community  support will find it difficult to maintain order since the bonds between  law enforcement and community have been broken. All of the actions now  being taken by law enforcement nationwide will ensure violence if a  crisis arises and the probable failure of local agencies. The people  should be prepared for that eventuality.

 

 

Does this not make you proud of the US military leaders and our elected officaials that lead this country on a path to destruction.? The banks are deeply involved with this crime against the youth of the US and the world. Profit at any cost is thier motto. Not unlike big pharma and the legal perscription drug trade that keeps a large percentage of the population on a controlled substance. Keep everyone on drugs and they will never know the truth.

 

Excerpted from Cruel Harvest: US Intervention in the Afghan Drug Trade (Pluto Press, 2013), by Julien Mercille.

As Obama proclaims that the US adventure in Afghanistan will draw to a close over the next couple years, we may look at the balance sheet with respect to one of the occupation’s alleged justifications: the fight against Afghan heroin. The outcome has been a total failure. In fact, whereas Afghanistan is sometimes referred to as the “graveyard of empires” because throughout history, big powers have attempted, unsuccessfully, to invade and control it, the country can already be labeled as the “garden of empire” because the US/NATO occupation has resulted in a drastic increase in drug production.

Opium production in Afghanistan skyrocketed from 185 tons to 8,200 tons between 2001 and 2007 (today it is down to 3,700 tons). Most commentary glosses over Washington’s large share of responsibility for this dramatic expansion while magnifying the Taliban’s role, which available data indicates is relatively minor. Also, identifying drugs as a main cause behind the growth of the insurgency absolves the United States and NATO of their own role in fomenting it: the very presence of foreign troops in the country as well as their destructive attacks on civilians are significant factors behind increases in popular support for, or tolerance of, the Taliban. In fact, as a recent UNODC report notes, reducing drug production would have only a “minimal impact on the insurgency’s strategic threat,” because the Taliban receive “significant funding from private donors all over the world,” a contribution that “dwarfs” drug money.

A UNODC report entitled Addiction, Crime and Insurgency: The Transnational Threat of Afghan Opium provides a good example of the conventional view of the Taliban’s role in drug trafficking. It claims that they draw some $125 million annually from narcotics, resulting in the “perfect storm” of drugs and terrorism heading toward Central Asia and endangering its energy resources. UNODC maintains that when they were in power in the second half of the 1990s, the Taliban earned about $75–100 million per year from drugs, but since 2005 this figure has risen to $125 million. Although this is presented as a significant increase, the Taliban play a lesser role in the opium economy than the report would have us believe as they capture only a small share of its total value. Moreover, drug money is likely a secondary source of funding for them: UNODC itself estimates that only 10 percent to 15 percent of Taliban funding is drawn from drugs and 85 percent comes from “non-opium sources” such as private donations.

 

The total revenue generated by opiates within Afghanistan is about $3 billion per year. According to UNODC data, the Taliban get only about 5 percent of this sum. Farmers selling their opium harvest to traffickers get 20 percent. And the remaining 75 percent? Al-Qaeda? No: the report specifies that it “does not appear to have a direct role in the Afghan opiates trade,” although it may participate in “low-level drugs and/or arms smuggling” along the Pakistani border. Instead, the remaining 75 percent is captured by traffickers, government officials, the police, and local and regional power brokers – in short, many of the groups now supported or tolerated by the United States and NATO are important actors in the drug trade.

Therefore, claims that “Taliban insurgents are earning astonishingly large profits off the opium trade” are misleading. Nevertheless, UNODC insists on the Taliban-drugs connection but pays less attention to individuals and groups supported or tolerated by Washington. The agency seems to be acting as an enabler of coalition policies in Afghanistan: when asked what percentage of total drug income in Afghanistan is captured by government officials, the UNODC official who supervised the above report quickly replied: “We don’t do that, I don’t know.”

Mainstream commentary blames the size of the narcotics industry and much of what goes wrong in Afghanistan partly on corruption. But to focus on bad apples in the Afghan government and police misses the systemic responsibility of the United States and NATO for the dramatic expansion of opiates production since 2001 and for their support of numerous corrupt individuals in power. The United States attacked Afghanistan in association with Northern Alliance warlords and drug lords and showered them with weapons, millions of dollars, and diplomatic support.

The empowerment and enrichment of those individuals enabled them to tax and protect opium traffickers, leading to the quick resumption of narcotics production after the hiatus of the 2000–2001 Taliban ban, as many observers have documented. Ahmed Rashid has written that the whole Afghan Interior Ministry “became a major protector of drug traffickers, and Karzai refused to clean it out. As warlord militias were demobilized and disarmed by the UN, commanders found new positions in the Interior Ministry and continued to provide protection to drug traffickers.” The United States was not interested in cleaning Afghanistan of drug traffickers either. Thus, to blame “corruption” and “criminals” for the current state of affairs is to ignore the direct and predictable effects of US policies, which have followed a historical pattern of toleration and protection of strongmen involved in narcotics.

In 2004, Afghan forces found an enormous cache of heroin in a truck near Kandahar, but both Wali Karzai, the president’s brother, and an aide to President Karzai called the commander of the group that had made the discovery to tell him to release the drugs and the truck. Two years later, American and Afghan counternarcotics forces seized more than 110 pounds of heroin near Kabul, which US investigators said were linked to Wali Karzai. But Wali Karzai was only the tip of the iceberg, as a former CIA officer asserted that virtually “every significant Afghan figure has had brushes with the drug trade.” In private, American officials acknowledge ties with drug-linked Afghan figures. A Wikileaks cable recounting US officials’ meetings with Wali Karzai in September 2009 and February 2010 stated that while “we must deal with AWK [Ahmed Wali Karzai] as the head of the Provincial Council, he is widely understood to be corrupt and a narcotics trafficker.” But in public, the ties are denied. As Senator John Kerry, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said: “We should not condemn Ahmed Wali Karzai or damage our critical relations with his brother, President Karzai, on the basis of newspaper articles or rumors.”

Of the annual $65 billion global market for opiates, only 5 to 10 percent ($3 to $5 billion) is estimated to be laundered by informal banking systems, while two-thirds ($40 to $45 billion) is available for laundering through the formal banking system. A recent UNODC report estimated that about $220 billion of drug money is laundered annually through the financial system. However, only about 0.2 percent of all laundered criminal money is seized and frozen, as governments have other priorities than regulating the banking industry, which benefits from this extra liquidity.

US COUNTERNARCOTICS POLICY

Until about 2005, American policy in Afghanistan was, by and large, not concerned with drugs. General Tommy Franks, who led the initial attack, declared in 2002 that US troops would stay clear of drug interdiction and that resolving narcotics problems was up to Afghans and civilians. When Donald Rumsfeld was asked in 2003 what the United States was doing about narcotics in Helmand, he replied: “You ask what we’re going to do and the answer is, I don’t really know.” A US military spokesman at Bagram base, Sergeant Major Harrison Sarles, stated: “We’re not a drug task force. That’s not part of our mission.” Moreover, the DEA had only two agents in Afghanistan in 2003 and didn’t open an office in the country until 2004.

Several reasons explain the early opposition to counternarcotics on the part of the White House and the military. First, Afghanistan was attacked to show that Washington should not be challenged, and destroying poppy crops and heroin labs contributes nothing in this respect. Therefore, there is no reason why any effort should have been directed toward that task. In late 2005, Lt. Gen. Karl Eikenberry, then commander of US forces in Afghanistan, made it clear that “drugs are bad, but his orders were that drugs were not a priority of the U.S. military in Afghanistan.” Furthermore, Washington’s most important target at that time was Iraq, whose oil resources and strategic location in the Persian Gulf region ensured that it would take priority.

Second, many of the United States’ local Afghan allies were involved in trafficking, from which they drew money and power. Destroying drug labs and poppy fields would have been, in effect, a direct blow to American operations and proxy fighters on the ground. As Western diplomats conceded at the time, “without money from drugs, our friendly warlords can’t pay their militias. It’s as simple as that.” According to James Risen, this explains why the Pentagon and the White House refused to bomb the 25 or so drug facilities that the CIA had identified on its maps in 2001. Similarly, in 2005, the Pentagon denied all but 3 of 26 DEA requests for airlifts. Barnett Rubin summarized the US attitude well when he wrote in 2004 that when “he visits Afghanistan, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld meets military commanders whom Afghans know as the godfathers of drug trafficking. The message has been clear: Help fight the Taliban and no one will interfere with your trafficking.” As a result, US military officials closed their eyes to the trade. An Army Green Beret said he was “specifically ordered to ignore heroin and opium when he and his unit discovered them on patrol.” A US Senate report mentioned that “congressional committees received reports that U.S. forces were refusing to disrupt drug sales and shipments and rebuffing requests from the Drug Enforcement Administration for reinforcements to go after major drug kingpins.”

Third, the Department of Defense thought that eradicating crops would upset farmers and hurt attempts at winning Afghan hearts and minds. Indeed, since 2001, the Taliban have sought to capitalize on resentment caused by eradication schemes. For example, in Helmand “they appear to have offered protection to the farmers targeted by eradication” and in Kandahar “they were even reported to have offered financial assistance to farmers whose fields were being eradicated, in exchange for support in fighting against the government.” Thus, it is far from certain that eliminating drugs would weaken the insurgency. In fact, the opposite is more likely, as it would only add to the opposition already generated by NATO operations in the country, as noted by a well-informed analyst: “As the conflict progressed, victims of abuses by both Afghan and foreign troops and of the side-effects of US reliance on air power began to represent another important source of recruits for the Taliban.”

From 2004, counternarcotics started slowly moving up the US agenda. In 2005, Washington developed its first counternarcotics strategy for Afghanistan, composed of five pillars: elimination/eradication, interdiction, justice reform, public information, and alternative livelihoods (although the pillars were not weighted equally: alternative development was relatively neglected, while eradication/elimination was the priority). The Afghan government incorporated this strategy into its own 2006 National Drug Control Strategy, which was later updated and integrated into its National Development Strategy in 2008. Around 2005, counternarcotics operations were still relatively isolated from the broader counterinsurgency strategy. Nevertheless, the Pentagon started to consider the possibility of getting involved in counterdrug missions and issued new guidelines authorizing the military to “move antidrug agents by helicopters and cargo planes and assist in planning missions and uncovering targets,” among other things. A number of counternarcotics units were set up, such as Task Force 333 (a covert squad of special agents) and the Central Poppy Eradication Force, an Afghan team trained by the American private contractor Dyncorp at a cost of $50 million and supervised by the United States through the Afghan Ministry of the Interior, where Washington’s main contact was Lieutenant General Mohammad Daoud. It didn’t seem to be a problem that Daoud was “an ex-warlord from the north who was reputed to have major connections with the drug trade.”

Since 2007, the United States has intensified its counternarcotics efforts and sought to integrate them more closely with the counterinsurgency campaign. In particular, in late 2008, the Pentagon changed its rules of engagement to permit US troops to target traffickers allied with insurgents and terrorists, and soldiers were allowed to accompany and protect counternarcotics operations run by Americans and Afghans. This shift was also adopted by NATO, whose members were allowed to participate in interdiction missions.

Since 2009, the Obama administration’s strategy has deemphasized eradication by ending support for the Afghan central eradication force while focusing on interdiction and the destruction of heroin labs, based on the reasoning that this “would more precisely target the drug-insurgency nexus.” A focus on rural development has also been announced because, as Richard Holbrooke declared, eradication is a “waste of money,” it alienates farmers, and it “might destroy some acreage, but it didn’t reduce the amount of money the Taliban got by one dollar. It just helped the Taliban.” The number of permanent DEA agents in Afghanistan has increased from 13 to over 80 in 2011 and the Pentagon has established a Combined Joint Interagency Task Force-Nexus in Kandahar to provide coordination support and intelligence for DEA interdiction missions and ISAF counterinsurgency operations that target insurgents with links to the drug trade.

Overall, an interesting question is to explain the emergence, intensification and militarization of US counternarcotics operations in Afghanistan. Although such a discussion remains somewhat speculative, what follows discusses possible reasons that may account for the evolution of the anti-drug strategy over time. Some have pointed to the resignation of Donald Rumsfeld as secretary of defense in 2006. Rumsfeld had always been strongly opposed to military involvement in drug control and thus his departure is thought to have contributed to a “sea change” in the Department of Defense’s attitude, which then became more engaged in counternarcotics. However, the significance of staff changes should be downplayed when explaining the broad outlines of policy. It is not as if Rumsfeld had prevented single-handedly an army of drug warriors in the US government from carrying out counternarcotics operations in Afghanistan. As seen above, there were clear strategic reasons for the lack of military involvement in counternarcotics in the years immediately after 2001.

Congressional pressures have also been identified as a reason. This political pressure, the argument goes, eventually led the Pentagon and CIA to accept publicly that the insurgency was funded by drugs and to approve the 2005 counternarcotics strategy. Indeed, in 2004–05, a host of critical pieces in the media urged more action in light of the large 2004 opium harvest. For example, Henry Hyde, Illinois Republican, stated that there was “a clear need at this stage for military action against the opium storage dumps and heroin laboratories” and that if the military did not get involved, the United States would need to send “troops from places like Turkey to take on this challenge.” The Democrats also pitched in, as when John Kerry criticized Bush for failing to eliminate narcotics in Afghanistan.

Such explanations might be correct in terms of immediate causes, in that congressional pressures and debates contributed to putting the issue on policymakers’ agenda and generating media coverage. However, they beg the question of why the narcotics issue became a more prominent debate within government circles in the first place? Some have pointed to the explosion of poppy cultivation in Afghanistan and the political pressures it has generated in the United States to do something about the problem. For example, Ahmed Rashid noted how the greater emphasis on drugs in US policy from 2005 onwards was prompted in part by the fact that it had become too obvious that Afghan poppy cultivation was getting out of control. The United States could less easily afford to be seen as doing nothing, for public relations purposes. The 2004 massive opium harvest embarrassed Washington and London enough for them to begin addressing narcotics more seriously: farmland under poppy cultivation had just increased by 64 percent and for the first time poppies were cultivated in all 34 of Afghanistan’s provinces. Similarly, opium production rose to 6,100 tons in 2006 and to 8,200 tons in 2007, the highest amount ever recorded, and Afghanistan now accounted for 93 percent of global heroin production. The skyrocketing of drug production in 2006 and 2007, publicized in UNODC reports, could not be ignored indefinitely.

There is probably some truth to this interpretation. Even if drug control is not a US objective, the discourse that has been created around the issue has acquired a force of its own. Therefore, when poppy cultivation spread in Afghanistan to a point that it became difficult to ignore, Washington was forced to make some gesture seemingly addressing the problem, otherwise, its image as a government allegedly concerned with drug harms could have been tarnished.

Finally, another possible reason is that from 2004–05, it became useful politically to talk about a war on drugs to make the resurgent Taliban look evil by associating them with narcotics. Indeed, the intensification of counternarcotics rhetoric and operations “took place against the backdrop of an upsurge in armed opposition” to the US-backed Afghan government. That is to say, whereas in the years immediately after 2001, the drug trade was largely controlled by US allies (warlords), from the time the Taliban reemerged as a significant force partly financed by drugs, narcotics became an issue that could be used to cast a negative light on them. Indeed, it is interesting that since 2004, the intensification of drug war rhetoric has grown in parallel with the rise of the insurgency.

In sum, while from 2001 to 2005, drugs were simply not part of the US agenda in Afghanistan, since 2005, there has been more talk about drug control, and more counter-narcotics operations have taken place. However, this does not mean that the United States is moving closer to conducting a real war on drugs. It is not the intensification of militaristic counterdrug missions per se that makes a drug war real, but the implementation of strategies known to reduce drug problems. On that count, Washington has failed. Further, the United States has continued to support allies involved in trafficking, and Obama stated explicitly that his drug war is instrumental in fighting the insurgency and not about eliminating drugs per se. Indeed, in 2009, his administration presented its new approach to narcotics and elaborated a target list of 50 “major drug traffickers who help finance the insurgency” to be killed or captured by the military. Therefore, if traffickers help the Taliban, they will be attacked – but if they support government forces, they apparently will be left alone. This suggests that the drug war is used to target enemies.

Julien Mercille is lecturer at University College Dublin, Ireland.

Posted at: http://theinternetpost.net/2013/02/25/afghanistan-garden-of-empire-americas-multibillion-dollar-opium-harvest/

I’v read and watched much of Salbuchi’s insightfullness on world events. He always appears to know what he’s talking about. Heed his warnings.

Originally posted: http://www.newdawnmagazine.com/articles/final-conflict-2012-engineering-world-war-iii 

Final Conflict 2012? Engineering World War III

September 28, 2012 By

By ADRIAN SALBUCHI—

In today’s increasingly interdependent and interactive world, every action has a myriad of causes, meanings, objectives and reactions; many visible, many invisible. Some, openly admitted and declared; others no one would dare confess.

When trying to come to grips with the many complex conflicts going on in the world and the dizzying pace at which they transpire, it would be a mistake to approach them in isolation. Only a “holistic” bird’s eye view gives us the picture of where we are and, more importantly, whereto we are being dragged.

21st century geopolitics cannot be understood applying a silo mentality. Syria’s civil war, Egypt’s “Arab Spring,” the destruction of Libya and Iraq, growing China, crippled Japan, the Eurozone crisis, America’s “missile shield” in Poland, Iran’s nuclear program, the coming Latin American “Spring…” Approached haphazardly, the picture we get is one of utter chaos. Approached applying the right model of interpretation, we begin to see how things interrelate, react and move in obedience to extremely powerful and dynamic – albeit, mostly invisible – forces silently driving today’s world.

Don’t (just) Read the Newspapers…

It’s good to be informed; it’s useless, however, if you cannot format that information into proper intelligible models. Too much unprocessed information will send your brain into overdrive. Thus, it’s good judgment to step away from all the noisy headlines, breaking news, terror alarms and show-biz news anchors. It’s like when you look at a Claude Monet impressionist painting: if you stand too close, you only see a maze of little coloured dots, but when you take a dozen steps back then the beauty of the work unfolds before your eyes.

In today’s information overdrive, we must join the dots correctly in spite of the global media’s insistence that we connect them all wrong.

By now, most of us have realised that ours is “a planet at war”; not at war with some alien world (that would make things easier to understand!). Rather, we are a civilisation waging civil war with itself and against itself.

Reading the global press, you might think this is a war between sovereign nations, but it’s more complicated than that. This world war is waged by a hugely powerful, illegitimate, authoritarian but numerically tiny Global Elite, embedded deep inside the public and private power structures of just about every nation on Earth; notably, the United States of America.

Like a cancerous malignant tumour, we can’t remove it outright; we can only hope to weaken it and arrest its growth before it metastasizes, killing mankind’s whole body politic. What the world needs now is some subtle sort of “virtual political chemotherapy” to remove and destroy this malignant tumour governing the world.

A key manifestation of this social and political illness lies in the extreme inequalities that exist in the USA, where the richest 1% of the population owns 35% of the country’s wealth, whilst the bottom 90% must do what they can with just 25% of national wealth. Worse still, the overwhelming majority of Congressmen, Senators, and top Executive Branch officers fall under the “top richest 1%” category.1

Understanding hidden intentions, long-term plans, hegemonic ambitions and the unconfessable plots necessary to achieve them is particularly important for US, UK, European and Australian citizens. After all, it’s their leaders who formally order their countries’ armed forces to ransack and destroy target countries.

When voters in Argentina, Colombia, Nigeria or Malaysia choose the wrong leaders, they themselves are the sole victims of their bad electoral judgment. But when US, British or French voters in their folly put the wrong people in power in their countries, then hundreds of millions around the world suffer from their bombs, drones, invasions, interference and regime changes.

Report From Iron Mountain

An old book from the late sixties called Report from Iron Mountain on the Possibility and Desirability of Peace2 was allegedly authored by the Hudson Institute future-prying think-tank at the request of then US Secretary of Defense Robert S McNamara. Many say the book is a hoax. But it uncannily reflects the realities of the past half century.

The book includes the claim it was authored by a Special Study Group of fifteen men whose identities were to remain secret and that it was not intended to be made public. It concludes that war, or a credible substitute for war, is necessary if governments are to maintain power.

Report from Iron Mountain states that, “wars are not ‘caused’ by international conflicts of interest. Proper logical sequence would make it more often accurate to say that war-making societies require – and thus bring about – such conflicts. The capacity of a nation to make war expresses the greatest social power it can exercise; war-making, active or contemplated, is a matter of life and death on the greatest scale subject to social control.”

The report goes on to explain that, “the production of weapons of mass destruction has always been associated with economic ‘waste’.” Iron Mountain stresses that war is an important tool, because it creates artificial economic demand, a demand that does not have any political issues: “war, and only war, solves the problem of inventory.”

Not surprisingly, Iron Mountain concludes that “world peace” is neither desirable nor in the best interests of society, because war not only serves important economic functions but also plays key social and cultural roles.

“The permanent possibility of war is the foundation for stable government; it supplies the basis for general acceptance of political authority… War is virtually synonymous with nationhood. The elimination of war implies the inevitable elimination of national sovereignty and the traditional nation-state.” Thus, “war has been the principal evolutionary device for maintaining a satisfactory balance between gross human population and supplies available for its survival. It is unique to the human species.”

So, in order to guarantee its own survival through its entrenchment inside the US, UK, European and other power structures, the Global Power Masters need war, the threat and rumours of war, just as fish need water, tigers need weak prey, and dogs need trees… and all for similar reasons!

But the United States, Britain and their allies cannot have just any enemy. They need a credible, dangerous, “scary” enemy: first it was Germany, then Japan, the Soviet Union, the global “Red Menace”; today it’s “Islamic Fundamentalist Terrorism” and, increasingly, China and Russia are going centre-stage on the Global Power Master’s geopolitical radar screen.

The Case of Russia

In recent times, Russia has variously played the role of Buffer, Brake and (now, hopefully) Wall against Western power aggression.

When Russia acts like a Buffer, the world feels frustrated as the cases of Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya and Palestine show. In all these cases, Russia sounded adversarial, “confronting” the US/UK/EU/Israel in word but certainly not in deed. The Western powers always got their way, even at the UN.

In recent times, however, Russia is increasingly acting as a Brake on Western hegemonic ambitions, notably in Syria and Iran. In November 2011 and February 2012, Russia vetoed two US/UK/French sponsored UN Resolutions against Syria which, if passed, would have had the same devastating effect on Syria as UN Resolution 1973 had last year on Libya. Also, Russia has refused to support IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) pseudo-reports and sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program. In addition, Russia has dispatched credible dissuasive military forces to counteract NATO’s militarisation of the Persian Gulf and Mediterranean.

Here we begin to wonder whether a gunfight might actually break out. This has had the sobering effect of forcing the US, UK, France and Israel to drag their feet in carrying out their threats of unilateral attacks on Iran and Syria. The downside is that this is cornering the US and its allies to resort to covert and criminal tactics involving engineered insurrection and civil war – aka “Arab Spring” (see below).

The key question is what needs to happen – what outrage must the Western powers commit – for Russia to start acting as a solid Wall, telling the Western powers in no uncertain terms, “This is as far as we’ll let you go; this is as much as we will tolerate!”

If and when Russia finally does that, will the Western powers stand down or will they bulldoze their way through the Russian Wall? This is the key question because it holds the answer of whether or not the near future will see the unleashing of World War III.

More importantly regarding the West’s decision-making process, all we say about Russia also holds for China which the Global Power Masters see as their real long-term enemy, because of its huge economic, political, demographic and military growth, and China’s increasing geopolitical control over the Pacific Basin and Indian Ocean.

The Case of China

As great air and naval powers, the US and UK well understand that China has many more options to control major oceans than does Russia, which is basically land and ice-locked. Add to this the fact that China holds over two trillion dollars in US-Dollar denominated government bonds, plus another trillion in Euros and then we begin to understand that China holds the financial valve that can trigger sudden collapse of US Dollar hegemony.

We must move away from just thinking in economic/financial terms as most in the West do, concluding that China would never swamp international markets with one or two trillion in US Treasuries because that would destroy their worth and, in a boomerang process, have a negative economic impact on China itself whose reserves would thus evaporate.

But China – the Empire of Ten Thousand Years – has a different thought process. China bides its time when it plays chess with the American Adolescent Empire. China might even decide to play a geopolitical – not financial-economic – card, sacrificing all its Dollar reserves just to cripple the US behemoth’s monetary free-ride with which it pays for its gigantic military machine. Will China fire the first geopolitical shots on the global financial stage?

In 2010, Wikileaks reported that in 2009 then Australian prime minister Kevin Rudd discussed with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton how to deal with China, both voicing their fears over its rapid rise and multi-billion dollar store of US debt, prompting Hillary to ask, “How do you deal toughly with your banker?” Both agreed that the Western powers should try to “integrate China into the international community, while also preparing to deploy force if everything goes wrong.”

The Pentagon knows full well that its long-term enemy after 2020 is China. US News & World Report quotes Aaron L. Friedberg – a former close Dick Cheney advisor, PNAC3 and Council on Foreign Relations member, and Princeton University professor – as saying that the US should spare no effort to “keep the Chinese dragon in its lair” because “strength deters aggression,” and warning “this will cost money.”

Keeping China in mind helps to better understand US moves in other far-away places as direct or indirect stepping stones on the road to China.

Take the Middle East, for instance, where geopolitical positioning and control over oil reserves by the US also acts as a beachhead into Russia’s Heartland and is geared at closing off oil sources to China – notably from Iran.

Wikileaks also exposed Kevin Rudd telling Hillary Clinton that China was “paranoid about Taiwan and Tibet,” adding that, “the West should promote an Asia-Pacific community intended to blunt Chinese influence.” Yet another example of Western double standards and misrepresentation because contrary to the US and Europeans, China has no global hegemonic ambitions.

Rather, China seeks to continue being the dominant power in the Asia-Pacific basin steering traditional Western intrusion, colonialism and interference away.

The West’s worst nightmare-scenario – as noted by Samuel Huntington in his “Clash of Civilisations” theory in the 1990’s – is if China achieves two key geopolitical goals on which it is progressing slowly but surely:

Bonding closer ties, cooperation and agreement with Russia and India on the Asian continent, and

Negotiating closer cooperation and overcoming the distrust of the past with Japan. If Japan and China agree a common geopolitical strategy as France and Germany did after World War II (leading to the EU), then the whole Asia-Pacific region powerhouse with two-thirds of the world’s population would be hands-off for the West. Just imagine marrying Japanese cutting-edge technology with Chinese resources and manpower!

The Five Types of War…

When Report From Iron Mountain was written back in the sixties, its authors went so far as to study whether substitutes could be developed for war but – alas – they surmised that war had to be maintained, even improved in its effectiveness. War could, however, take on unexpected and more subtle characteristics. The Report’s recommendations included:

  • A giant space-research program whose goal was largely impossible to achieve (a black hole, budget-wise and hence able to feed the economy);
  • Invent a new, non-human enemy: the potential threat of an extra-terrestrial civilisation
  • Create a new threat to mankind: for example, pollution
  • Implement new ways of limiting births: via adding drugs to food or water supply
  • Create fictitious alternate enemies

Almost a half century later, some of these recommendations have been achieved (e.g., 1: a military and civilian space program), others are on-going or in the making (3, 4, and, if Hollywood’s PsyOps machine is any indication, number 2 is no doubt on the books), but 5 is the real keystone: “creating fictitious alternative enemies,” of which we’ve seen so many recently: Iraq, Afghanistan, Serbia, Libya, Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, Islamic Terrorism, and now: Iran and Syria.

The huge challenge mankind faces is that the US is increasingly resorting to covert, clandestine and technology-driven warfare over outright invasions, as Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan looked really bad on the Evening News…

Thus, there are basically five types of war used by the Global Power Masters through their US/UK/NATO proxies, each characterised by increasing PsyWar and strategic/logistic complexity:

Military Invasion – Clearly visible, very territorial and using overwhelming military force and economic strength. As the Colin Powell Doctrine from the 90’s recommends, “the US should only wage war against foreign enemies where American military power is so overwhelming that victory is guaranteed.” Can a more ruthless doctrine by a major power be imagined? Cowards bombing people half-way around the world using a joystick and screen inside some safe facility.

Military Coup – Identifies dissident and treacherous elements inside the target country’s armed forces, egging them on to removing the local legal authorities and backing them with arms, money, “positive” global and local media coverage and diplomatic support. A favourite method used against Latin America in the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s, it’s still being used here and there, as Egypt shows.

Financial Coup – Consists of first cornering a country into an unpayable “sovereign debt” morass with the powerful global mega-banks. Then, when the target country cannot service that debt, the banksters send in the IMF/World Bank leeches supported by global media and rating agencies. They trigger economic and social hardship, financial and monetary collapse leading to widespread social upheaval, thus “justifying regime change.” Throughout Latin America they perfected the “Sovereign Debt Model” that is now being wielded against Greece, Spain, Italy, Ireland and – soon to come – the UK and US.

Social Coup – Consists of financing political activists to bring about controlled regime change in the target country. Here the local US/UK/Israeli embassies support all sorts of dissident groups rendering them ample financing and media coverage, plus the logistics to generate constant street turmoil, which ends up grouping around some US-friendly political party or movement. In the 80’s, they used the so-called “human rights” movements in Latin America of which Argentina’s “Mothers of Plaza de Mayo” were a leading case.4

Engineered Civil War – Consists of financing, arming and supporting militarised “opposition” groups against the target country’s on-going government. Normally, a key “national liberation” or some such “council” is set up, as in Libya, Egypt, Syria and elsewhere, around which other militant groups, thugs and mafias can revolve. Here, CIA, MI6 and Mossad fronts play a key role and, in the cases of Libya and Syria, CIA offshoots like Al-Qaeda also play a fundamental “freedom-fighter” role. In the Middle East, they dubbed this the “Arab Spring,” presenting it to global public opinion as a spontaneous, genuine and legitimate fight for freedom by the local population against allegedly repressive and authoritarian regimes.

Thus, local conflicts ready to explode are taken advantage of: regimes that have been in power for too long (as in Egypt and Libya); religious divides (Shiites against Sunnis). It comes as no surprise to learn that Bassma Kodmani, a “member of the executive bureau and head of foreign affairs” at the Syrian National Council, attended the Bilderberg Conference last June in Virginia, USA.5

Lately, this author has been warning of the rise of a “Latin American Spring” that takes advantage of grave social and political grievances throughout Latin America reflecting the huge divide that exists between the very rich and the very poor. Normally, the rich are very US-aligned and the poor have leaders that naïvely point to “Yankee corporate exploitation” as the sole culprit, missing really fundamental political and social factors.

Signs of this coming “Latin Spring” can be seen in the recent Monsanto-orchestrated coup in Paraguay, the money-sloshing election fraud in Mexico, and increasing US militarisation in Colombia and elsewhere in the region.

Often these types of war start at a lower level – say, a social coup – and are then escalated into full-fledged civil war insurrection mode if it suits Global Power Master objectives. Libya, Syria, Egypt are examples of this.

What, Why, When & Where

What then exactly does this all add up to? Basically, we can see that such chaos engineered by the Global Power Masters, although chaotic locally in specific countries and regions, really points to a “new world order” on a global scale.

The “chaos” part is deployed to destroy whole countries, especially those that have come this far preserving their national sovereignty in one way or another. That is a key characteristic shared by all attacked “rogue states” – Libya, Iraq, Serbia – prior to them being invaded. The same goes for on-going targets like Syria, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea and Ecuador. The more sovereign states can be weakened, the better for the one-worlders who, after all, basically want to drag us all towards a single, communist-like global state under their total control.

All those Arab (and Latin) “springs,” invasions, no-fly zones, sanctions; all that “rogue state” rhetoric, are ground-clearing exercises geared at positioning the Western powers and their allies for the final assault on Asia which means war with Russia and China.

Of course, such a war would be a gross contradiction of the Powell Doctrine. China and Russia are very powerful, so messing around with them carries huge risks. If – God forbid! – it ever comes to war between China/Russia and the West that dragged in other powers like India, Pakistan and Brazil, hopefully it won’t happen any time soon. However, that’s what lies beyond the 2020 threshold. Its preliminaries are being played out today in different hotspots.

Why is all of this being done? Maybe imperial overreach and the grossly hyper-inflated dollar that saved the Money Power Bankers (don’t say that too loudly!) has cornered the Western Elites into an irreversible and unsustainable corner.

It’s like chess: What do you do when all possible moves only lead to checkmate? Well, basically, you have two “options on the table”: (1) admit defeat, or (2) kick the chessboard and… go for your gun.

Footnotes

1. See Zbigniew Brzezinski, 14 October 2011 acceptance speech of the Jury du Prix Tocqueville Prize, bestowed upon him by former French president Valery Giscard D’Estaing. Not surprisingly, both belong to the Rockefeller/Rothschild Trilateral Commission, a key “rich and powerful” decision-making body.

2. Originally published in 1967; re-published 1996 by the Free Press (Simon & Schuster).

3. PNAC – Project for a New American Century; the Neo-Con think-tank group from the late nineties that designed and planned the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, promoting Israel’s strategic interests in the Middle East, that served as a blueprint for US post-9/11 policies to this day.

4. Its leader Hebe Bonafini is known to have embezzled millions of dollars.

5. See official Bilderberg site www.bilderbergmeetings.org/participants2012.html. Characteristically Ms Kodmani’s nationality is described as “International.” She serves her international masters very well.

 

ADRIAN SALBUCHI is a political analyst, author, speaker and radio talk-show host in Argentina. He has published several books on geopolitics and economics in Spanish, and recently published his first eBook in English: The Coming World Government: Tragedy & Hope? which can be ordered through his web site www.asalbuchi.com.ar, or details can be requested by E-mail to arsalbuchi@gmail.com. Salbuchi is 58 years of age, married, with four adult children, and works as strategic consultant for domestic and international companies. He is also founder of the Second Republic Project in Argentina, which is expanding internationally (visit: www.secondrepublicproject.com).

The above article appeared in New Dawn No. 134 (Sept-Oct 2012).

This is like the game of “Risk” for the would be world rulers. They will use any means possible for power. And that includes their enemies.

This article was written by Susanne Posel and originally published at Occupy Corporatism

The US agenda of proxy wars and fake revolutions in Syria are pointed to one end: to eliminate oppositional forces who have any potential of disrupting the global takeover of the Elite.

Al-Qaeda, the CIA funded Boogeyman, has been aiding and encouraging the Free Syrian Army (FSA); even in so far as recruiting more members to fuel the “political transition” of Assad out of power in his own country.

The FSA are not just tied to al-Qaeda, the fake Islamic terrorist group, they ARE al-Qaeda. In a video of members of the FSA, these men are brandishing AK-47s provided to them by the CIA and have al-Qaeda flags flying in the background.

Members of FSA openly admit they are fighting for al-Qaeda. Abu Khuder, militant in the FSA explains : “We have clear instructions from our [al-Qaeda] leadership that if the FSA need our help we should give it. We help them with IEDs and car bombs. Our main talent is in the bombing operations.”

Abu Thuha (a pseudonym) is an al-Qaeda operative who claims that “we have experience now fighting the Americans, and more experience now with the Syrian revolution. Our big hope is to form a Syrian-Iraqi Islamic state for all Muslims, and then announce our war against Iran and Israel, and free Palestine.”

As the fighting forces of the FSA are “new” to this proxy “revolutionary” war, they lean on al-Qaeda “experience in these military activities and it knows how to deal with it.”

Al-Qaeda’s role in FSA is to provide more than leadership, but become psychologically entangled in these young minds so that their mission is not deterred at any cost. The use of religion and discipline are tactics that keep the men in line and ready to kill or be killed for the cause of the US government.

Khuder says: “al-Qaeda goal is establishing an Islamic state and not a Syrian state. Those who fear the organization fear the implementation of Allah’s jurisdiction. If you don’t commit sins there is nothing to fear.”

While the ground troops are being coerced by al-Qaeda, NATO is becoming a more active presence in the convoluted mess of “freedom fighters” that seem to only have global Elite schemes in mind.

The Obama administration is focusing on increasing aid to the Free Syrian Army and other oppositional factions to facilitate a forced regime change in Syria.

Andrew Tabler, a Syria expert at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, admits that the US government “[is] looking at the controlled demolition [of the Syrian government]. But like any controlled demolition, anything can go wrong.”

The Pentagon have been plotting and overseeing terrorist activities in Syria as the campaign for regime change marches on. Along with NATO and French Special Forces, the US government has been placing strategic measures to make sure terrorism is carried out in Syria.

The globalists at the RAND Corporation admit that “al-Qaeda has conducted roughly two dozen attacks, primarily against Syrian security service targets. Virtually all have been suicide attacks and car bombings, and they have resulted in more than 200 deaths and 1,000 injuries.”

James Quinlivan, senior operations research analyst at the RAND Corporation, a globalist front for Elite agendas, regarding Syrian chemical weapons, claims that “calibration is a big deal for these things. While mustard [gas] lasts amazingly well, nerve agents do not. For nerve gases, particularly sarin, retention relies on purity, and this must be tested.”

More propaganda surrounding the framing of Syria surfaced in Austria’s Kronen Zeitung wherein a Photoshopped picture of a supposed war torn Aleppo masked a man walking with his child in his arms.

The picture was enhanced because the Syrian family in the photo “merely fleeing a city ravaged by guns and mortars apparently isn’t quite dramatic enough on its own.”

Meanwhile the Turkish army is conducting “staged tank exercises” at the Syrian border where military is deployed. While the mainstream media claim that none of the Turkish military forces will be added to the FSA and oppositional terrorists in Syria, more than 25 tanks were involved in practicing for war.

Turkey, who is a NATO member, has been setting up areas for training camps for the CIA to create more members of FSA, provide intelligence and military weaponry before sending them over the border to assist in the regime change.

Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish Prime Minister, has been working with the US government in attempting to “hand over Assad”.

The global Elite have decided that the US State Department and the Syrian National Council will control Syria .

As of now, they are involved in a strategic divide and conquer mission.

In the future, as Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State, has stated , the geopolitical objective is to turn fake humanitarian efforts by the UN’s Kofi Annan while establishing international mandate that will end in the globalist control over this region.

The false flag assertion of Syrian chemical weapons is giving the general public the necessary fuel to support the US/Israeli military attack of Syria.

It is being kept secret from the general public with the assistance of the MSM that the murder of Syrian civilians is being committed by the FSA under the direction of the CIA, the script being played out to keep Assad’s armies under foot with “little chance of turning defeat into victory.”

Martial Red Zone In America

Tuesday, 01 May 2012 03:23 Mac Slavo

This article was written by Mac Slavo and originally published at SHTFplan.com

If Transportation Security pat downs at public venues, thousands of drones over the skies of America, and the National Security Agency’s new Echelon-like listening center in Utah weren’t enough to convince you that we’re living in a police state, then perhaps the latest news out of Chicago will change your mind.

As world leaders prepare to meet in the windy city for their annual NATO summit, U.S. federal officials are working feverishly to implement a security net so broad that it encompasses the entirety of Cook County, Illinois. While international summits are traditionally met with a larger police presence and preparations for the possibility of protests or rioting, what’s taking place on American soil in anticipation of the May 20 meeting in downtown Chicago can be interpreted in only one way – the implementation of regionalized martial law.

Last week Red Cross officials reported that the City of Chicago, Department of Homeland Security and the Secret Service had instructed them to prepare for a mass evacuation of the city in the event of an emergency during the NATO summit. The Red Cross was to prepare to shelter and feed residents in the event of such an evacuation.

On the heels of that announcement, more details have emerged and they suggest the Federal security apparatus has completely lost  its marbles.

Via Off Grid Survival

The Illinois Department of Transportation is testing an emergency plan to shut off access into and out of downtown Chicago. The plan uses a network of highway security gates that are designed to shut down all traffic coming in and out of Chicago in the event of a terrorist attack.

The Illinois DOT is warning truckers that it’s best to avoid the city during the NATO Summit in Chicago May 20-21.  There will be a number of driving restrictions and rolling street closures, and the Illinois DOT is testing highway barricades that will block access to all major highways in and out of Chicago.

These barricades, which started being installed on Chicago highways back in 2005, are deigned to restrict or cut off access to roads during an emergency like a bioterrorism attack.

…The Illinois DOT’s testing of these highway entrance ramp gates has many worried about the chaos that NATO may bring to Downtown Chicago. There is already talk about widespread city wide evacuations, rioting, terrorist attacks and even large scale detention centers and arrests.

Detention Centers

It’s been reported by the local media, that Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart is devising a strategy to deal with large-scale mass arrests during the NATO Summit meeting. In fact, the Chicago Sun Times is reporting that the once abandoned Joliet State Prison may be reopened as a mass detention center for NATO.

Joliet prison is about 40 miles from Chicago and can hold about 1,300 prisoners. The Sheriff is also reportedly looking at building tents in the yard at Cook County Jail.

Militarized Red Zone

Starting May 1st, a full three weeks before the NATO Summit, the Federal Government will be setting up a Militarized Red Zone in the streets of Downtown Chicago.

In a Chicago Sun Time Article:

The head of Chicago’s NATO Host Committee said Thursday she was blindsided by the federal government’s decision to create a militarized “Red Zone” in the Loop to protect federal buildings in the run-up to the May 20-21 summit at McCormick Place.

The news of federal agents on the streets of Chicago isn’t sitting well with many. From last months urban warfare drills, to residents being warned of possible citywide evacuations, the city of Chicago is starting to look like a city that may already be under martial law.

Via Off Grid Survival

City planning officials with the Chicago NATO host committee have been reportedly kept in the dark about Federal security plans and Federal agencies like the aptly named Secret Service refuse to release any details:

…according to a CBS 2 report, the Secret Service has refused to even acknowledge the issue and “Chicago officials say the plan didn’t come from them.

…Despite the fact that the plan for evacuating citizens has stoked paranoia and confusion amongst residents, information about the procedure has seemingly been placed on lockdown.

Source: Infowars

What we do know is that the Red Cross and local government are preparing for mass evacuations of thousands of residents in case of a “national security event”, barricades are being set up to control traffic in and out of the city, city highways and streets are being completely shut down to restrict any non-official access, mass detention centers are being prepared to hold hundreds of detainees, and heavily armed security teams will be deployed weeks ahead of the summit to acclimate residents to the militarization of their city.

There also are reports that a heavily armed security team will start making a very public appearance around federal buildings in the Loop this week. Officials with the Chicago NATO host committee were completely in the dark. They had no reports of any such plans.

Source: CBS2 Chicago

Either national intelligence agencies in the United States have gotten wind of an attack to take place in Chicago in May, or they are overtly creating a manufactured crisis to instill in Americans that absolute power over our homes, lives and daily activities lies in the hands of our benevolent, all-seeing government.

Looking back at Executive Orders and Congressional Legislation over the past decade one can surmise that what’s happening in Chicago is not some half-baked training exercise. Rather, this is what life in America is destined to look like in the future. The National Defense Authorization Act, combined with elements of the Patriot Act, Presidential decrees outlining domestic military response plans, and the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act give the government the power to:

  • Restrict the ability of the people to peaceably assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances, in essence completely abridging the right to free speech
  • Identify and label any activities that threaten to undermine the State as ‘terrorist’ in nature
  • Detain said terrorists indefinitely without charge or trial
  • Deploy armed military personnel in a policing capacity on the streets of America
  • Log, aggregate, red flag and act on any intelligence acquired through emails, phone calls, text messages or social networks

For those who bury their heads in the sand and want to pretend like national security centered legislation is meant to protect us from ‘terrorists’ and not to restrict the freedoms of average Americans, look around.

The control grid is being put into place, it’s happening right here and now, and it’s no longer covert. The powers that be are showing us exactly what the plan is and they’ll implement it city-by-city, town-by-town, one American at a time – until every single one of us is living in a state of fear and compliance.

A major war is the only program that will save the U.S. from economic collapse, it has worked in the past. But, will it work this time, probably not. We no longer have the manufacturing base nor the capabilities we once had. All the manufacturing jobs where purposely outsourced to continue the fall of the American empire. If nations oppose another world war then they will oppose selling materials to the U.S. for starting and maintaining an empirical war. China would stop supplying food and other needed products to the U.S.. And, what of all the real estate they own here in the good old U.S.. Also, China has more women in their military than the U.S. has entirely. If a war of this magnitude is fought on the north American continent there will be hell to pay. As always, there are no winners in war.

China warns U.S.: military confrontation could arise over South China Sea dispute

The United States has been goading China in the South China Sea dispute for some time now by arming the Philippines – one of the parties in the dispute – and continuing to arm them with more naval vessels and training through joint exercises.

Meanwhile, the West has shifted focus over to the Asia-Pacific region and continues to pour huge sums of money into military hardware which seems to be designed to be deployed in a scenario like what might develop in the South China Sea or a more traditional conflict, perhaps with Iran.

China has been quite vocal in opposing the United States’ antagonistic hegemony and indeed has been increasing their military spending quite a bit.

Now Chinese state media has warned the United States that the dispute in the South China Sea could indeed lead to a military confrontation.

The rest of the story at; More at EndtheLie.com – http://EndtheLie.com/2012/04/22/china-warns-u-s-military-confrontation-could-arise-over-south-china-sea-dispute/#ixzz1snoFXZCN

Only the blind do not see that the US government is preparing to attack Iran. According to Professor Michel Chossudovsky, “Active war preparations directed against Iran (with the involvement of Israel and NATO) were initiated in May 2003.” http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=28542

Washington has deployed missiles directed at Iran in its oil emirate puppet states, Oman and the UAE, and little doubt in the other US puppet states in the Middle East. Washington has beefed up Saudi Arabia’s jet fighter force. Most recently, Washington has deployed 9,000 US troops to Israel to participate in “war games” designed to test the US/Israeli air defense system. As Iran represents no threat unless attacked, Washington’s war preparations signal Washington’s intention to attack Iran.

Another signal that Washington has a new war on its agenda is the raised level of Washington’s rhetoric and demonization of Iran. Judging by polls Washington’s propaganda that Iran is threatening the US by developing a nuclear weapon has met with success. Half of the American public support a military attack on Iran in order to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear capability. Those of us who are trying to awaken our fellow citizens start from a deficit that the minds of half of the US population are under Big Brother’s control.

As the International Atomic Energy Agency’s reports from its inspectors on the ground in Iran have made clear for years, there is no evidence that Iran has diverted any enriched uranium from its nuclear energy program. The shrill hype coming from Washington and from the neoconservative media is groundless. it is the same level of lie as Washington’s claim that Saddam Hussein in Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Every US soldier who died in that war died in behalf of a lie.

It could not be more obvious that Washington’s war preparations against Iran have nothing to do with deterring Iran from a nuclear weapon. So, what are the war preparations about?

In my judgment, the US government’s war preparations are driven by three factors.
One is the neoconservative ideology, adopted by the US government, that calls for the US to use its superior military and economic position to achieve world hegemony. This goal appeals to American hubris and to the power and profit that it serves.

A second factor is Israel’s desire to eliminate all support for the Palestinians and for Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. Israel’s goal is to seize all of Palestine and the water resources of southern Lebanon. Eliminating Iran removes all obstacles to Israel’s expansion.

A third factor is to deter or slow China’s rise as a military and economic power by controlling China’s access to energy. It was China’s oil investments in eastern Libya that led to the sudden move against Libya by the US and its NATO puppets, and it is China’s oil investments elsewhere in Africa that resulted in the Bush regime’s creation of the United States Africa Command, designed to counter China’s economic influence with US military influence. China has significant energy investments in Iran, and a substantial percentage of China’s oil imports are from Iran. Depriving China of independent access to oil is Washington’s way of restraining and boxing in China.

vtfree2: note – there are more women in China’s military than the entire US military. The numbers speak load and clear.

Read more: http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2012/01/11/the-next-war-on-washingtons-agenda/

Prepare For Armageddon

 

 

“Prepare for Armageddon.”

 

By Raja Mujtaba, Editor

 

 

Most frightening of everything in this FSB report, however, is the reply Putin gave to Russia’s top generals yesterday when asked what preparations should be made and he answered…. “Prepare for Armageddon.”

We will do it with or without you, US tells Pakistan

Armageddon (commonly known as the battle against the anti-Christ) according to the Bible, is the site of a battle during the end times, variously interpreted as either a literal or symbolic location. The term is also used in a generic sense to refer to any end-of-the-world scenario.

According to some Muslim and Christian interpretations, the Messiah will return to earth and defeat the Antichrist, Satan the Devil, in the battle of Armageddon. According to the Muslim belief, it would be Imam Mehdi who would precede Prophet Jesus who would fight the one eyed beast called Dajjal (Anti Christ).

Then Satan will be put into the “bottomless pit” or abyss for 1,000 years, known as the Millennial Age. After being released from the abyss, Satan will gather Gog and Magog (peoples of two specific nations) from the four corners of the earth. They will encamp surrounding the “holy ones” and the “beloved city” (this refers to Jerusalem). Fire will come down from God, out of heaven and devour Gog and Magog after the Millennium.

According to the Muslim belief, the forces to battle the one eyed beast would rise from the area of Khurasan that comprises of portion of Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan and part of Central Asia. If the anti-Christ forces have assembled in Afghanistan, it’s not a coincidence but well thought out Zionist strategy to take on Pakistan, the nuclear power of the Muslim world so its free to advance other Muslim territories without any fear.

Most historians and scholars believe that the present stretching of the US and NATO Forces far and beyond their legitimate areas of interests, is a sign of final showdown. The placement of US forces in Afghanistan is seen as the final buildup to attack the Muslim lands. This could well become the graveyard of the US troops from where they may never escape death.

Presently, the grouping of pro and anti Christ Forces is seen to be taking place. The US and NATO clearly appear to be on the side of the Anti-Christ and siding with the Zionists the real anti-Christ Forces. Zionists are known to be Satan worshipers in their secret hideouts therefore are working to create a godless world and control the entire resources.

Sensing these developments, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin prior to his departure for China, cautioned his generals to prepare for Armageddon. A similar message was also delivered to the Chinese leadership that has the Chinese Forces also on high alert. Apparently in the same context, Putin has resolved all differences with China to forge a clear unity for times ahead.

Sino-Russian alliance is very timely, seeing the hard threatening statements of Hillary Clinton that she fired at Pakistan from Kabul before flying to Islamabad is very alarming. Pakistan has some hard decisions to make.

Commander William Guy Carr, in his book ‘Pawns In The Game’ probably written in 1948 stated that third revolution and third world war are in the offing for which the grouping is taking place. He also stated categorically that the third world war would be against Islam.

Plans for this “Total Global War” or the war against Islam the Americans are preparing to launch were first revealed to China’s Ministry of State Security (MSS) by a former Blackwater agent Bryan Underwood who has been apprehended by the US authorities for spying.

If one observes the way the US and NATO are waging their wars in Muslim countries proves William Carr to be correct.

Blackwater, the global contractor for CIA is operating in almost all the target countries, arrest of Raymond Davis in Pakistan did expose the US designs; had he been retained and grilled for some indefinite time, much more would have been revealed. Pakistan is infested with Blackwater, they have made inroads in ethnic political parties more so in Karachi, the port city of Pakistan. Balochistan has also become a hotbed where secessionists forces are being patronized by CIA, MI6, Mossad and RAW. As believed now, the US has also launched biological warfare in Pakistan where dengue is killing people on daily basis.

On reading the situation of the coming US plans for Total Global War, Putin spelt out an alliance to integrate the former Soviet Republics into closer cooperation. He scheduled an emergency trip to China to meet with Hu, and ordered the FSB (Russian Agency) to notify China’s MSS of the arrest and detention of their spy Tun Sheniyun who was captured last year for attempting to steal sensitive information on Russia’s most powerful anti-aircraft system.

Today Libya has fallen, how the Libyans would benefit from it only time would tell but one thing is sure that US and her allies have formed a bridgehead in Africa. Further deployment of the US troops in Africa are taking place, its China encirclement there where China has friends in the Muslim countries. Sudan has been split, and Obama plans to occupy some other countries like Uganda, Somalia, Morocco etc.

In Africa, says Obama, the “humanitarian mission” is to assist the government of Uganda defeat the Lord’s resistance Army (LRA), which “has murdered, raped and kidnapped tens of thousands of men, women and children in central Africa”. Incidentally, Africa also happens to be the Chinese success story therefore by taking over Africa, China would also be chocked. Libya was one of the major oil suppliers to China now that hangs in air. Gaddafi was trying to dump dollar for gold that instigated the US to attack her through a cleverly manipulated and orchestrated moves.

After having been deceived in Libya where the US assured both Russia and China that it will not attack but did quite contrary to what was promised. Sensing that US plans to attack Syria, Russia and China were quick to veto the American resolution in the security council that infuriated the US Ambassador Susan Rice who left the session in rage.

Dick Cheney pointed out in his 1990s “defence strategy” plan, America simply wishes to rule the world so that’s forging ahead following the Nixonian doctrine, ‘seize the moment.’

Reported by the EU Times, the “New Great Game” moves being planned by the Americans is to strike fear into both Russia and China that includes:

1.) The deliberate implosion of both the US and EU economies in order to destroy the Global Financial System that has been in place since the ending of World War II

2.) The launching of a massive conventional war by the US and EU on the North American, African and Asian Continents to include the Middle East

3.) During this all-out war the deliberate releasing of bio-warfare agents meant to kill off millions, if not billions, of innocent civilians

4.) At the height of this war the US and its allies will sue for peace and call for a new global order to be established in order to prevent the total destruction of our planet.

Confirming the fears, an unidentified source within the US Department of Defense (DOD) warned that the Obama regime was preparing for a massive “tank-on-tank” war and that US military forces are “expecting something conventional, and big, coming down the pipe relatively soon.”

To how close this war may be the FSB in their report states that it will be “much sooner than later” as the Americans have pre-positioned in Iraq nearly 2,000 of their M1 Abrams main battle tanks, have pre-positioned another 2,000 of them in Afghanistan, and between the Middle East and Asia have, likewise, put into these war theaters tens-of-thousands of other typed armored vehicles. This should be a grave cause of concern for Pakistan.

Being at war, the US can also effect “Full Mobilization” of over 1.5 million American reserve forces which can occur at “at a moment’s notice” for which US needs no Congressional approval to expand their areas of operation is also being examined when America is fully poised to advance in Asia and Middle East.

Now that Hillary Clinton is on her Pakistan visit accompanied by the new CIA Chief, David Petraeus, Chairman US Joint Staff, General Martin Dempsey and Marc Grossman. Keeping the armoured buildup in the region and having an Armour Officer as the new Chairman of Joint Staff, could one say it a coincidence or a planned strategy?

Hillary, as expected that I mentioned in my CNBC News analysis on 19th October, has arrived with a tough warning for Pakistan, saying,We will do it with or without you.” This has certainly placed Pakistan in a very trying situation. Pakistan has other options to join the third force that is in formation led by Russia and China to counter the US moves in the region.

If Pakistan, Iran, Syria and other Muslim states including Saudi Arabia join this alliance, that would certainly deter the US and her allies, if not then every Muslim country would fall one after the other without exception and their assets would be frozen.

Important to note about the American plan for global domination through massive warfare is that it is not really a secret, and as (curiously) revealed on the tenth anniversary of the 11 September attacks upon the United States when the US National Security Archive released a memo written by former US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in September 2001 wherein he warned “If the war does not significantly change the world’s political map, the US will not achieve its aim.”

To what the “aim” of the United States is as their war against the world has now entered its 10th year, the FSB says, is to prevent “at all costs” the implosion of the US Dollar as the main reserve currency of the present global economic system before the West’s envisioned “New World Order” can be established.

The first threat to the Americans “master plan” for global hegemony came in November 2000 when the former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein quit accepting US Dollars for oil and, instead, stated his country would only accept Euros. In less than 10 months an attack on the US was engineered and used that as an excuse to topple Hussein and reestablish the US Dollar as the world’s main reserve currency.

Interesting to note is the failure of Libya’s former leader Gaddafi’s plan to introduce the gold dinar, a single African currency that would serve as an alternative to the US Dollar and allow African nations to share the wealth, but which like Iraq’s Saddam Hussein “plan” brought a swift and brutal invasion by the Americans and their Western allies to keep it from happening.

The only nation that has successfully abandoned the US Dollar is Iran, who since February 2009 abandoned all American currency opting instead to value their oil and gas in Euros. Iran, however, and unlike oil rich Iraq and Libya, has not been attacked due to the Iranians having acquired from Ukraine between 6-10 nuclear armed X-55 missiles (range of 3,000km [2,000 miles]) in 2005. Although the former Ukraine President Viktor Yushchenko denies that the missiles contain their nuclear tips, a statement disputed by the FSB who states they were armed and “ready to fire.”

As a preemption, to counter the planned American blitzkrieg into Central Asia and Pakistan from Afghanistan, Indian Army Chief General VK Singh warned yesterday that thousands of Chinese military forces have now moved into Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir joining an estimated 11,000 more of them believed to have entered that region in the past year.

Before the US ventures into other Muslim lands, the US would want a submissive or a broken and denuclearized Pakistan. In both the scenarios it would mean Pakistan’s death. In such a scenario, Pakistan maybe compelled to go for non conventional weapons; if such a development takes place, India, Israel and the US installations in the region would not be safe. Can the US risk such a situation would only depend on the arrogance and sanity level of the US leadership.

(Link Back) http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/10/21/prepare-for-armageddon/

 Old Gordon lays the obvious on the line. Like we all didn’t know this was going on in world politics. Put enough cash in pockets or fear into someones head and you own them.

“There is always the other option, appointing a real attorney general and having most of the house and senate jailed for accepting laundered drug money to run their campaigns or having them charged with treason for accepting cash from foreign governments but, didn’t you just do exactly that yourself?”

You and Biden, Holder, the phony FBI, all caught running errands for the Mossad.  The reason I suspect is blackmail or coercion of some kind.”

(LINK) http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/10/13/busted-mr-president-we-believe-iran/

Graphic Video of Libyan Rebel Beheading Gadhaffi Soldier

  This is one of the most frightening stories I have read in sometime. This goes way beyond Iraq! I can not fathom how anyone could do this to another human being.  As always, we are never allowed to know the truth about war and control of the worlds people. Because of the internet more and more people are waking up to the fact that this world is being controlled by pure evil forces. Don’t think for a moment that CONgress is not aware of this atrocities, to many of them have heavy investment in war.

 How do we get out of this mess?

Watch this videos at your own risk, you will be angered like never before.

http://www.obamaslibya.com/

Rape As a Weapon of War

Worst than you thought, right? Most notoriously up to this point, it has become evident that Rebels are using rape as a war-time punishment of pro-Gadhaffi or “neutral” families. In Islamic culture, the whole family suffers stigmas after rape, a sort of communal punishment.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/06/23/the-ugly-truth-video-of-libyan-rebel-beheading-gadhaffi-soldier-cannibalism-rape-and-other-nato-war-crimes/

Ghaddafi a Heroe Ghaddafi is considered a heroe by the majority of Libyan’s

Truth about Libya – Watch this video and be Shocked! I have Confirmed what this video claims is Truth! Libya had the Best Human Rights for the People and they were Free!

 

It’s amazing what the west will believe about the rest of the world. Propagana is at an all time high, getting the people not to use their common sence and belive what is right in front of their eyes. In the schools this year the teachers will probley be explaining to the bumbed down students how bad Ghaddafi was. There is only one side to education, thats the one the major foundations have imported into the school system.

Did you notice how clean the streets are and how nice all the buildings are in the video?  Did you notice the nice cars?  Did you notice how throughout all the streets you did not see any trash?  Did you notice there was no poverty?  Did you notice no one looked homeless and having to beg on the streets?   Did you see the truth?

(LINK) http://sherriequestioningall.blogspot.com/2011/08/truth-about-libya-watch-this-video-and.html

 

Libya Qadaffi Let me see here, no central banks, real money made of gold, a lot of oil and other natural resources, government is based on community, turned the desert into a garden. What does Libya have that the elite bankers would want? NATO bombs the water pipes and then thats not enough, they bomb the plant that makes the water pipes. Just like Iraq, Libya will be much worse off within the next two years.

It appears that NATO operations are ending just as they began, based on a verified pack of lies

(LINK) http://theintelhub.com/2011/08/23/libya-nato-psy-op-collapses-%E2%80%93-qaddafi-prevails-again/