Where the absence of this “normal constraint” most endangers the Federation, this report warns, is the new American Oligarchy’s propensity for global war, and which within three days of this election, President Obama began the expansion of a new Middle Eastern war by the ordering of thousands of more US forces to Iraq—but which in September, prior to this past weeks election, he hadpromised his nation would not happen.
Even worse, this report notes, are that the Obama regimes plans for a massive war with the Federation will now be accelerated, a sentiment echoed this week by the great American philosopher Noam Chomsky who warned that the US and Russia are “ominously close to nuclear war.”
Chomsky’s fears of a US-Russian nuclear war, we have previously reported on, are indeed valid, this report continues, due to President Putin’s moves to strike down the American petrodollar which the Obama regime has retaliated against by provoking a war in Ukraine, leveling sanctions (along with its EU allies) against Russia, and with its Middle Eastern allies collapsing the price of oil in itsstrategy of trying to bankrupt Russia.
Russia, however, in anticipating these actions by the Obama regime, this report notes, has amassed one of the largest gold reserves in the world to counter these economic warfare moves against the Federation no matter how low the price of oil goes, a strategic point not lost to the former US Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan who in speaking to the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR) last week stunningly admitted, “Gold is currency, no fiat currency, including the US Dollar, can match it.”
With Russia “fully prepared” to accomplish its end-game of destroying the US petrodollar system with its gold reserves and combined energy-mineral wealth (which is the greatest in the world valued at over $75 trillion), MoFA analysts in this report conclude, the new Oligarchy ruling America, in a “last stand effort” to protect its “paper only” fiat currency wealth may, indeed, see global war as its only alternative to protect itself.
From Libya to Iraq, the West has repeatedly demonstrated its inability to stabilise nations following a war that ousted an entrenched ruler, leading the countries to drop into an abyss of chaos and fragment into smaller regions. By removing entrenched dictators at the helm of a country, a power vacuum emerges which is often filled by rival tribal militias or vying political factions who fight for control over the nation. Libya is the perfect illustration of this phenomenon. Prior to the overthrow and murder of Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, Libya was seen as a stable and prosperous nation by many people around the world, which had the highest standard of living on the African continent. As William Engdahl wrote in his 2012 book ‘Myths, Lies and Oil Wars’
“Libyans enjoyed the highest living standard on the Continent. Gaddafi did not stay on top for 42 years without ensuring that his population has little room to complain. Most health services, education and fuel was state-subsidized. Gaddafi’s Libya had the lowest infant mortality rate and life expectancy of all Africa. When he seized power from the ailing King Idris four decades ago, literacy was below 10% of the population. Today it is above 90%, hardly the footprint of your typical tyrant. Less than 5% of the population is undernourished, a figure lower than the United States. In response to the rising food prices of recent months, Gaddafi took care to abolish all taxes on food. And a lower percentage of the population was living below the poverty line than in the Netherlands."
Today, Libya is a balkanised nation that has been “split into three parts” following NATO’s intervention in 2011, with Cyrenaica comprising the East of the country, and the West split into Tripolitania in the Northwest and Fezzan in the Southwest. The nation is now a failed state which is devoid of central government and is stricken by tribal warfare, where rival militias who were once fighting alongside each other are now battling against one another. Many of the rebels who fought – with the assistance of the CIA and MI6 – to overthrow Gaddafi, have also made their way across the Middle East to fight alongside the Syrian rebelsin the proxy war against Bashar al-Assad
Iraq again demonstrates this phenomenon of a power vacuum leading to a failed state and balkanisation. Since Saddam Hussein was removed from power in 2003, Iraq has been a fractured and divided nation that has increasingly been torn apart by warfare and a lack of strong central leadership. The agenda in Iraq has always been to split the nation into three regions and exploit the country’s vast oil reserves, in addition to war always equalling immense profits for the military industrial complex.
Of course both Hussein and Gaddafi were dictators who should not be glorified, and neither tyrants nor Western puppet regimes are the solutions to the problems in both countries. Yet both Iraq and Libya were far more stable nations prior to Western intervention, and both leaders were removed from power through illegal acts of war – see here and here
Iraq and Libya are both warnings to the people of Syria should the regime in Damascus be ousted. Whatever one might think of al-Assad, he is a secular ruler who has allowed various religious and ethnic sects to live in the country freely. Even though the Western orchestrated proxy war has been waging for three years and has claimed the lives of nearly 200,000 people, post-Assad Syria will be a living hell compared to today considering the volume of arms and Western mercenaries in the region. A power vacuum will emerge if al-Assad is removed from power and support from Hezbollah, Iran and Russia is withdrawn, leaving a beautiful country to be added to the list of failed states
As is well known today, much of the former Soviet empire in Eastern Europe has already been absorbed into the EU, which Gorbachev approvingly referred to as the “new European soviet” during a visit to London. When the communist regimes crumbled, though, unlike the National Socialists in Germany, communist criminals who had engaged in torture, mass-murder, and oppression on a vast scale were never prosecuted or punished. Instead, many re-branded themselves as “ex”-communists and became politicians or bureaucrats. Today, many of those same figures serve in senior posts at the EU or within EU governments. Outside of Eastern Europe, “former” communists who supported the Soviet regime similarly burrowed their way into the fast-expanding super-state that now rules Europe. Until last week, for example, the hybrid executive-legislative branch of the EU, known as the European Commission, was run by “former” Maoist revolutionary Jose Manuel Barroso.
Gorbachev, too, never faded from the global stage or from power after the USSR supposedly collapsed. Instead, his links with Western globalists came out into the open. And even today’s establishment crop of Western anti-Putin crusaders is well-connected with Gorbachev, pushing the same ends — though sometimes using different means. In 1995, fellow globalist and ex-National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, architect of David Rockefeller’s infamous Trilateral Commission, spoke at the 1995 “State of the World Forum” that was convened by Gorbachev and backed by the Rockefellers and other establishment forces in the West. “We do not have a New World Order.… We cannot leap into world government in one quick step,” Brzezinski explained. “In brief, the precondition for eventual globalization — genuine globalization — is progressive regionalization, because thereby we move toward larger, more stable, more cooperative units.”
Despite the alleged conflict between Putin and the West, both sides are following the script precisely, with the EU crushing national sovereignty in Europe as Putin builds his “Eurasian Union.” Late last month, Putin was touting the strategy, praising “integration associations” and “interaction of regional structures.” Eventually, perhaps after some more conflict and drama to grease the skids, “convergence” is the goal. “We would also welcome the start of a meaningful dialogue between the Eurasian Economic Union and the European Union,” Putin said on October 24, pushing for a “common space of economic and humanitarian cooperation from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean.” In Africa, the African Union is marching along. In South America, the Union of South American States is too. In fact, all over the world, the process of integration and regionalization on the road to world order is accelerating.
Gorbachev has admitted the end goals, too. Speaking at Lafayette College in Pennsylvania in late 2011, the former Soviet boss was again pushing what he called a “New World Order” and global government. “We have crises: we are facing problems of the environment, of backwardness and poverty, of food shortages,” he told the crowd. “All of these problems are because we do not have a system of global governance.” Global governance, of course, is simply a more palatable term for global government employed by globalists to avoid sparking too much alarm. As Gorbachev and his associates have made clear, though, they are in fact working to empower the United Nations to control virtually everything — including “regulate human interaction,” as Jim Garrison, the executive director of the Gorbachev Foundation, USA, put it in a 1995 interview with San Francisco Weekly.
William F. Jasper, senior editor for this magazine, offered a brief summary of some of Gorbachev’s more heinous crimes that are virtually never addressed by the establishment press: “That he was raised to the apex of power in the Soviet Union by his predecessor and bloody-handed mentor, Yuri Andropov, former head of the KGB, and that he continued to use the KGB in its traditional role as the terrible hammer of Communist rule; That he presided over the Soviet occupation of, and genocide against, Afghanistan; That he ordered the murderous assault of Soviet troops on unarmed civilians at Vilnius’ television station, Lithuania’s equivalent of the Tiananmen Square massacre; That he hid the documents showing Soviet responsibility for the Katyn Woods massacre of 15,000 Polish military officers. He supported Ethiopian Communist dictator Mengistu Haile Mariam’s torture, genocide, and forced famine; That he was one of the top Politburo officials who signed the orders for the 1981 assassination attempt on Pope John Paul II, carried out by Mehmet Ali Agca through Moscow’s ‘subcontractors,’ Communist Bulgaria’s intelligence service.” As Jasper put it, the list “barely scratches the surface of the catalog of crimes attributable to Gorbachev.”
Rather than facing justice, Gorbachev today sits at the heart of the globalist establishment pushing what everybody from George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton to Henry Kissinger and Putin refer to as the “New World Order.” While it is hardly surprising to see Gorbachev sticking up for Russia’s current strongman, the fact that a major international newswire would allude to an agreed-upon Soviet role in the “new European order” is news all by itself. Behind that single sentence is a rabbit hole that goes deeper than almost anyone not privy to the establishment’s machinations could imagine.
Post a Comment