Skip to content

9/11 – A Cheap Magic Trick

How false flag attacks are manufactured by the world's elite.

Archive

Archive for March, 2011

Over the last week or so I’ve engaged in some vibrant email exchanges with some of the most prominent movers and shakers in the 9/11 skeptics community, most of whom are reluctant to emphasize the Israeli dimension of 9/11. While I would not publish the private correspondences of others without their permission, I thought some readers might like to appraise what I had to say.

By Joshua Blakeney STAFF WRITER
Veterans Today

I wrote this in response to two 9/11 academics who had taken issue with me distinguishing between different states (i.e. the U.S. and Israel):
Thank you both for your responses. Here’s my two-penneth; I agree that attempting to discuss politics based on ethnic or religious distinctions is usually misguided (although the various groups which constitute the ‘Israel Lobby’ are almost totally motivated by ethnic and religious based ideologies and imperatives). But it gets more tricky when it comes to analyzing the interface between states. I think we do need to recognize that the U.S. and Israel are two different, autonomous, sovereign states whose interests often differ markedly in the Middle East. It is commonly held in international relations theory that states act in their own interests.

This is the so called “realist” school of thought. What many scholars, such as Walt and Mearsheimer, James Petras, Jonathan Cook, Stephen Sniegoski, Virginia Tilley and others, have observed is that due to the influence of a foreign state, Israel, the U.S. often acts against its interests in the Middle East. This geopolitical reality has garnered a great deal of attention from political scientists because U.S. policy in the Middle East often falsifies “realist” theory. The neoconservatives and those partisan to Israel have invested much energy and money trying to persuade the U.S. elite and U.S. electorate to view Israel’s priorities as its priorities.

One of you contended that it is better to view the world through a horizontal lens (people vs. power, oppressed vs. oppressor) rather than through a vertical lens (i.e. distinguishing between states or ethnic groups); I think we need a bit of both. Could we call this a diagonal lens? It is true that there is overlap in the intelligence community between MI5, MI6, CIA, Mossad, ISI etc. But they are not the SAME agencies with the same goals ALL of the time. The goals of those agencies converge at some points and diverge at others. Israel has a long history of spying on the U.S., infiltrating its government with agents and has even attacked the U.S. on several occasions (1954, 1967, 9/11??) often evoking the wrath of those in the higher echelons of the CIA as well as the Brzezinski faction who are schooled in the “realist” mindset of prioritizing U.S. imperial interests over those of Israel. You should check out Brzezinski’s criticism of the neoconservative movement. A good example of the U.S. putting its interests over Israel’s in the Middle East was the Gulf War of 1991 where Bush senior successfully secured Kuwaiti oil and then withdrew WITHOUT deposing Saddam Hussein. Bush, as an oil man, wanted to return to the status quo ante of stability in the Middle East rather than create the kind of ethnic and religious civil war which we’ve seen since 2003. For doing so, Bush senior angered the neoconservatives, angered Israel lobbyists (who began supporting his opponents) and angered the government of Israel. Israel always hated Saddam because he was one of the only regional threats and he supported the Palestinian resistance. This is why in Iran-Contra we see Israel channeling weapons to Iran. A strong Iran attacking Iraq was good for Israel. What we’ve seen since 9/11 is the putting of Israel’s interests over those of the U.S. non-Israelcentric elite.

I feel in the 9/11 truth movement there has been a failure to engage with the scholarship which provides evidence to suggest that the war against Iraq and the broader ‘war on terror’ was primarily waged at the behest of a Likudnik faction. This essay by Walt and Mearsheimer ignited the whole debate in 2006 and many scholars have discussed and debated the issue since.

During my undergraduate degree in Sociology James Petras’s scholarship was required reading. Thus, I was surprised when I read his books on the Israel/Palestine conflict to see that he explicitly lays most of the blame for the ‘war on terror’ on what he identifies as the “Zionist Power Configuration.” This is pretty forthright coming from a scholar held in such high regard by establishment academics.

If I am barking up the wrong tree (as alleged by one professor) I would appreciate some further debate, discussion etc. In these recent emails I’ve been hoping to edify 9/11 Studies by bringing my own readings and understanding of geopolitics to the discussion. To repeat, I think it is important we understand 9/11 and the 9/11 wars in the correct context.

I wrote this to one prominent 9/11 academic:
Thank you for your response. I appreciate you taking the time to write back to me.

Firstly, I felt that Professor X’s attempt to discredit Dr. Kevin Barrett’s vast and extensive oeuvre based on his alleged views about events in 1930s and 1940s Europe (a subject which neither I nor I suspect Prof. X are experts in) was intellectually disrespectful and thus beneath my contempt. I do believe that Dr. Barrett’s contribution to the quest for 9/11 truth has been indispensable. You are welcome to attempt to persuade me otherwise, although I doubt you would be able to.

Click on link for the rest of the article Israel’s Fingerprints Are All Over 9/11 (And I’m Not Afraid to Say It!)

ECONOMIC SABOTAGE, FALSE FLAG TERROR AND RULE BY DECREE
CONSTITUTION SUSPENDED, PRESIDENT AND SUPREME COURT FAIL TO ACT

By Gordon Duff STAFF WRITER/Senior Editor

A plot is currently in motion to overthrow the government of the United States. It has already begun and has moved forward in Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin but more states are waiting to act. Shooting incidents and bombings are planned and some may already have been carried out. A major false flag terror attack on the United States is expected, followed by states openly defying the federal government, suspending the constitution and declaring a joint “state of emergency.”

Those involved are told 5 Supreme Court justices will back them up, paralyzing the United States.

Michigan has already suspended most constitutional guarantees already and plans are in motion to enact martial law. Police departments will be “defunded,” union contracts illegally dissolved and police powers will pass to mercenary groups derived from Blackwater International.

Schools are being closed in some cities, classrooms being overloaded with students stacked like “cordwood” in others. Universities are facing cutbacks while curriculums face politically inspired gutting.

Those who used to fear increasing taxes, always death to a reelection campaign are now taxing the middle class to death. There will be no more elections, not real ones anyway. In Michigan, in fact, plans are moving forward to dissolve dozens of local governments. They are being replaced by “political consultants” who will be above any court or recall authority. This law has already been written and it says exactly this.

On a federal level, a terror attack of such magnitude is in the works as to force a full scale invasion of Iran, something currently beyond the military capabilities of the United States. America will be left in such a weakened state that a “dark horse” candidate, certainly not one of the gang of political failures waiting in the wings for 2012, will be “placed” into the presidency as in 2000, approved by the Supreme Court.

The name “Petraeus” is being bandied about but there are others.

Emergency decrees are currently being enacted or planned in a dozen states which will suspend elections.The perpetrators? A cabal of international corporations and financial institutions have formed a ruling council that will replace the current government.

■First the trade unions will be disbanded, later their leaders will be “shunned”
■City and country governments, all municipal boards and authorities, schools and utilities, will be placed under private control
■Police, fire, emergency services will be privatized as have prisons in many areas already
■Courts will be “suspended,” replaced by appointed boards that will “adjudicate” both civil and criminal issues
■A VAT (value added tax) of 15% will be placed on all retail purchases. All Corporate taxes will be ended
George W Bush left the United States economically destroyed, its infrastructure crumbling and its reputation a shambles. Rule of law had failed at home, draconian laws subverted the rights of every American. Our standard of living plunged, home values are still in free fall and most American families have no net worth whatsoever with the majority of middle class families who once had equity in homes are now in debt.

Most American pension plans are insolvent and almost all state and municipal governments are facing having their credit rating lowered enough for their bonds to be rated as “junk.”

Moves have already been made to push many state and city governments into insolvency. The books are being “cooked” and revenues are being slashed while funds for vital services are being rerouted and held up. If an insurrection doesn’t begin with the failure of basic services, plans are there to create one. Martial law will follow. Groups are moving, “policy formulation advisors,” from state to state, pre-staging “emergencies” through sabotage of government functions.

This wasn’t an accident, it took years of careful planning.

Two moves in particular made what is coming up possible.

1. 9/11, the “false flag” and “inside job” of all time and

2. The Supreme Court’s bizarre decision granting political rights and citizenship to foreign owned corporations that register in the US

The intended result of these acts is the destruction of the United States and its people.

We might ask why but there is no way to find anyone who is accountable other than those who serve the foreign masters.

We are not going to be able to vote our way out of this. That right disappeared a long time ago.

Tens of thousands of Americans are protesting now. It won’t be enough, not until all of us take the first step of calling for a national strike.

Rule of law and the constitution need to be restored, but not by the pack of criminals who wormed their way into office with drug money and promises of constitutional reform.

There is a legal basis to impeach Justice Clarence Thomas immediately. That will afford the American people some immediate basic protections of their freedoms. Other justices are, we believe, equally corrupt.

The moves against the people of Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Indiana, Florida and other states has to end. There is no question of the severity of this or how illegal and unconstitutional.

It is time to abandon “left” and “right” and go American only, people, not corporations.

The mass of security bureaucracies created over the past decade have to be dismembered and the network of data collection through our cell phones, computers, cars, credit card tracking, healthcare information and more has to end.

Source: DICTATORSHIP COMING SOON TO YOUR STATE

Sunday, March 27, 2011
BY Gilad Atzmon
Source: INSIDE WHAT JOB? A FILM REVIEW.

There is definitely a fear among certain Jews in this industry…And it’s because it’s spreading past Wall Street now. There’s a growing animosity towards the wealthy, and especially the wealthy that have made money on Wall Street and real estate and finance, as so many Jews have—some legitimately, some not so. It’s very easy to generalise that it must be the entire Jewish people.” Jewish employee with a top New York investment bank who asked that his name be withheld. Jewish Journal (October 7 2008)

“Inside Job”, The Academy Award documentary film about the current financial crisis is a worthy documentary, and it certainly delivers on many fronts. It explains the disastrous shift within the American financial industry over the last decade, exposing the elements, the decisions and the people who destabilised the global economy. In doing so, it provides an insight into the systematic, faulty structures that transformed American financial services industry markets into a risky bubble. And it also explains why the bubble eventually burst.

Charles H. Ferguson, the director of the film, managed to unveil the inherent malaise within a corrupted financial elite and within the American economy. The film exposes a chain of disastrous cases of conflicts of interest. In America, credit rating agencies had been receiving huge funds from the financial institutions that they were supposed to critically asses. Clearly, America let the cat look after the milk. The cat failed to confess a conflict of interest. Seemingly, in most cases, the cat was rather corrupted, and as it happens, it still is.

But how has America arrived at such a disastrous state of affairs? How are we to begin to understand the origins of such ways of operating? In America, academics and academic institutions are largely funded by business interests and industries, establishing a relationship that, to a large extent, significantly determines the curriculum. Needless to mention that such a situation is having some grave consequences on American scholarship — In the long term, America has managed to shoot itself in the foot — It has produced generations of scholars who lack the necessary means to think theoretically and critically, let alone bring about change. America’s young economists, for instance, are more than likely to be indoctrinated by the liberal ideologies that were planted initially by the likes of Milton Friedmann, Alan Greenspan, Larry Summers and Martin Feldstein. These two were adamant supporters of zero Governmental intervention and excessive deregulation. For more than a decade American academic institutions have been producing economists who excel in speculation and risky markets — people who know how to make money out of money — yet they know very little about production, productivity and manufacturing.

This fact alone may mean that America is farther than it hopes to be from recovery. It simply lacks the brain to bounce back into the world economy. America is gravely stuck in its service economy phase.

“Inside Job” ends by contending that — despite the financial turmoil and those who are culpable for an emerging global disaster — the underlying system has not changed. The clique that turned world finance into a “Global Ponzi scheme” remain largely untouched. The protagonists who impoverished hundreds of millions around the world, have been left with hundreds of millions in their pockets; and as if this is not enough, they are still running America’s financial world.

As much as the film is brilliantly made, it has some crucial blind spots: Almost every individual or figure linked to the colossal disaster disclosed in the film is either a Jew, or a goy who worked for a company that is recognised as ‘being Jewish’. And yet, the film (probably consciously) fails to address this highly sensitive issue.

I would not suggest that Jews, as a people, are collectively responsible for the economic crisis — I have never accused Jews as a collective — And yet, a few questions need to be raised here. How is it that so many amongst the culprits of the current global disaster are Jews? Are they Zionists? Do they form a class — or are they just a bunch of individuals? Is such a severe lack of ethics (which they surely so profoundly performed) imbued within ‘Jewish secular culture’?

These questions are likely to be considered by historians of the future, and I do not see any reason not to elaborate on them now. In fact Jewish media outlets have admitted that the situation and its implications might well prove to have complex repercussions — already in 2008, The Jewish chronicle was envisaging a tidal wave of anti Semitism. The ADL too, was concerned. In 2009 the Wall Street Journal also expressed concern about the rise of anti Jewish feelings.

The film obviously fails to address the topic, but this may as well be a very clever move, since such an omission leaves these questions to the viewer.

I am convinced that Ferguson wasn’t at all blind to the disproportionate representation of Jews within his cast. Though the word ‘Jews’ or Jewish symbols are avoided, Christianity is actually clearly featured in the film — During the film, Ferguson discloses the excessive life style of his corrupted protagonists: more than once we meet a ‘fair escort girl’, who is there to tell us about the boys in Goldman Sachs’ and Lehman Brothers’ most ‘elementary needs’. Interestingly enough, on her well endowed breast, clearly visible, hangs a substantial crucifix.

In cinematic language, this symbolism is very telling. Also towards the end of the film the camera introduces us to the victims of the ‘financial shoa’. We are taken to a tent-city built for the impoverished Americans; those who lost everything they ever had while a bunch of corrupted bankers pocketed millions. In this island of poverty we meet a volunteer for a Catholic charity who is there to introduce hope.

Whether Ferguson intended to give this impression or not is unclear, but the symbolism is devastatingly obvious; the Christians here are either prostituting themselves, or just left to pay the bill.

There is more omission. Throughout the film there is not a single mention of the war in Iraq. Yet, it is an obvious fact that at the time Alan Greenspan, Goldman-Sachs, Lehman Bros, Larry Summers and Martin Feldstein were leading America and the world economy into a total disaster, America was fighting a war that was set to demolish one of the last enemies of the Jewish state. At the time that America was led to believe in its miraculous financial boom, some bankers were manufacturing false dreams.

These two occurrences go hand in hand. While America was implementing ‘the Wolfowitz doctrine’ and fighting a Zionist war, a cabal of corrupted bankers pocketed billions, creating an economy bubble that diverted the public attention from the war in Iraq.

The film fails to address these aspects. But it may be wise to do so — For it to reach the masses, the film rather ‘saves itself’ from telling the entire truth.

However, the truth will come out. It always prevails somehow.

Jonathan Cook
Another World is Possible

Last week the Guardian, Britain’s main liberal newspaper, ran an exclusive report on the belated confessions of an Iraqi exile, Rafeed al-Janabi, codenamed “Curveball” by the CIA. Eight years ago, Janabi played a key behind-the-scenes role — if an inadvertent one — in making possible the US invasion of Iraq. His testimony bolstered claims by the Bush administration that Iraq’s president, Saddam Hussein, had developed an advanced programme producing weapons of mass destruction.

Curveball’s account included the details of mobile biological weapons trucks presented by Colin Powell, the US Secretary of State, to the United Nations in early 2003. Powell’s apparently compelling case on WMD was used to justify the US attack on Iraq a few weeks later.

Eight years on, Curveball revealed to the Guardian that he had fabricated the story of Saddam’s WMD back in 2000, shortly after his arrival in Germany seeking asylum. He told the paper he had lied to German intelligence in the hope his testimony might help topple Saddam, though it seems more likely he simply wanted to ensure his asylum case was taken more seriously.

For the careful reader — and I stress the word careful — several disturbing facts emerged from the report.

One was that the German authorities had quickly proven his account of Iraq’s WMD to be false. Both German and British intelligence had travelled to Dubai to meet Bassil Latif, his former boss at Iraq’s Military Industries Commission. Dr Latif had proven that Curveball’s claims could not be true. The German authorities quickly lost interest in Janabi and he was not interviewed again until late 2002, when it became more pressing for the US to make a convincing case for an attack on Iraq.

Another interesting disclosure was that, despite the vital need to get straight all the facts about Curveball’s testimony — given the stakes involved in launching a pre-emptive strike against another sovereign state — the Americans never bothered to interview Curveball themselves.

A third revelation was that the CIA’s head of operations in Europe, Tyler Drumheller, passed on warnings from German intelligence that they considered Curveball’s testimony to be highly dubious. The head of the CIA, George Tenet, simply ignored the advice.

With Curveball’s admission in mind, as well as these other facts from the story, we can draw some obvious conclusions — conclusions confirmed by subsequent developments.

Lacking both grounds in international law and the backing of major allies, the Bush administration desperately needed Janabi’s story about WMD, however discredited it was, to justify its military plans for Iraq. The White House did not interview Curveball because they knew his account of Saddam’s WMD programme was made up. His story would unravel under scrutiny; better to leave Washington with the option of “plausible deniability”.

Nonetheless, Janabi’s falsified account was vitally useful: for much of the American public, it added a veneer of credibility to the implausible case that Saddam was a danger to the world; it helped fortify wavering allies facing their own doubting publics; and it brought on board Colin Powell, a former general seen as the main voice of reason in the administration.

In other words, Bush’s White House used Curveball to breathe life into its mythological story about Saddam’s threat to world peace.

So how did the Guardian, a bastion of liberal journalism, present its exclusive on the most controversial episode in recent American foreign policy?

Here is its headline: “How US was duped by Iraqi fantasist looking to topple Saddam”.

Did the headline-writer misunderstand the story as written by the paper’s reporters? No, the headline neatly encapsulated its message. In the text, we are told Powell’s presentation to the UN “revealed that the Bush administration’s hawkish decisionmakers had swallowed” Curveball’s account. At another point, we are told Janabi “pulled off one of the greatest confidence tricks in the history of modern intelligence”. And that: “His critics — who are many and powerful — say the cost of his deception is too difficult to estimate.”

In other words, the Guardian assumed, despite all the evidence uncovered in its own research, that Curveball misled the Bush administration into making a disastrous miscalculation. On this view, the White House was the real victim of Curveball’s lies, not the Iraqi people — more than a million of whom are dead as a result of the invasion, according to the best available figures, and four million of whom have been forced into exile.

There is nothing exceptional about this example. I chose it because it relates to an event of continuing and momentous significance.

Unfortunately, there is something depressingly familiar about this kind of reporting, even in the West’s main liberal publications. Contrary to its avowed aim, mainstream journalism invariably diminishes the impact of new events when they threaten powerful elites.

Click on link for the rest of the article An Empire of Lies: The CIA and the Western Media

The new Building 7 ad is here, and with your support, it will be saturating the NYC airwaves one month from now.

Since December over $75,000 has been raised. Another $25,000 is needed to launch the second round of TV spots, which will reach another one million viewers and bring even greater media exposure—the kind of exposure that will ignite widespread discussion of Building 7 and generate enough public pressure to bring about a new investigation.

Click on this link to donate to this new TV ad Remember Building 7.org.

Center for 9/11 Justice NEW YORK, March 23, 2011

PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — A December 2010 poll conducted by the prestigious Emnid Institute, and reported in the German magazine “Welt der Wunder,” revealed that 89.5% of German respondents do not believe the official story of 9/11.

The issue is heating up in America as well, and will soon be heard in court.

Top Secret Military Specialist April Gallop saw disturbing things up close that have not been reported in the media.

On the morning of September 11, 2001, she was ordered by her supervisor to go directly to work at the Pentagon, before dropping off her ten-week-old son Elisha at day care.

Amazingly, the infant was given immediate security clearance upon arrival.

The instant Gallop turned on her computer an enormous explosion blew her out of her chair, knocking her momentarily unconscious.

Escaping through the hole reportedly made by Flight 77, she saw no signs of an aircraft – no seats, luggage, metal, or human remains. Her watch (and other clocks nearby) had stopped at 9:30-9:31 a.m., seven minutes before the Pentagon was allegedly struck at 9:38 a.m.

The 9/11 Commission reported that “by no later than 9:18 a.m., FAA centers in Indianapolis, Cleveland, and Washington were aware that Flight 77 was missing and that two aircraft had struck the World Trade Center.”

Why then were there no anti-aircraft defenses, Gallop asks, or alarm warnings inside the Pentagon?

Gallop was briefed by officials not to tell her story in public; she also received an email from a Fox News reporter who had been told by the Pentagon not to interview her.

Gallop now believes that officials within the Bush Administration conspired to destroy the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center and WTC 7 – the third building brought down at 5:20 p.m. that day – with pre-placed explosives detonated after the planes hit.

On April 5th, 2011, at 11 a.m., at the Federal Courthouse at 141 Church Street in New Haven, Connecticut, the case of Gallop v. Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Myers will be heard by the United States Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit.

Gallop’s case relies on virtually all forms of evidence admissible in court, but significantly, on published scientific evidence that residues of these explosives were found in the rubble after the attacks. In its totality the proffered case establishes that the government hypothesis – that the buildings collapsed due to fire in combination with the airplane impacts – is scientifically untenable.

In addition, Ms. Gallop will, through photographic and other physical evidence, as well as the testimony of a multitude of military and civilian survivors, demonstrate the impossibility of her having lived through the attack on the Pentagon if it had taken place as the government and the defendants claim.

German Federal Judge, Deiter Dieseroth, stated in December 2009 that:

“No independent court has applied legal procedures to review the available evidence on who was responsible for the attacks.”

Also, that “it is not acceptable for a constitutional state…to declare war, bomb a foreign country, and place it under military occupation,” without first identifying suspects.

Dieseroth also said the U.S. “was under burden of proof” that Osama bin Laden was responsible for the attacks, yet the FBI admits it has no evidence presentable in court to back this up.

The stakes in this case are epic, including the possibility of an overwhelming transformation of the world’s understanding of history, not to mention American citizens’ relationship with their government.

Media contact: William Veale centerfor911justice@gmail.com, 292929@msn.com, 510-845-5675, 925-212-3678

SOURCE Center for 9/11 Justice

Tuesday 22 March 2011
by: Jason Leopold and Jeffrey Kaye, t r u t h o u t | Investigative Report

This diagram was included in a paper written by Dr. Bruce Jessen's and shows his view of the conflicting psychological pressures bearing down on a prisoner who is held captive by an enemy.

Dr. Bruce Jessen’s handwritten notes describe some of the torture techniques that were used to “exploit” “war on terror” detainees in custody of the CIA and Department of Defense.

Bush administration officials have long asserted that the torture techniques used on “war on terror” detainees were utilized as a last resort in an effort to gain actionable intelligence to thwart pending terrorist attacks against the United States and its interests abroad.

But the handwritten notes obtained exclusively by Truthout drafted two decades ago by Dr. John Bruce Jessen, the psychologist who was under contract to the CIA and credited as being one of the architects of the government’s top-secret torture program, tell a dramatically different story about the reasons detainees were brutalized and it was not just about obtaining intelligence. Rather, as Jessen’s notes explain, torture was used to “exploit” detainees, that is, to break them down physically and mentally, in order to get them to “collaborate” with government authorities. Jessen’s notes emphasize how a “detainer” uses the stresses of detention to produce the appearance of compliance in a prisoner.

Indeed, a report released in 2009 by the Senate Armed Services Committee about the treatment of detainees in US custody noted that torture techniques approved by the Bush administration were based on survival training exercises US military personnel were taught by individuals like Jessen if they were captured by an enemy regime and subjected to “illegal exploitation” by their captors. The committee’s report said Jessen wrote a “Draft Exploitation Plan” in April 2002 the US military used at Guantanamo and at prison facilities in Iraq and Afghanistan. Jessen also co-authored a memo in February 2002 on “Prisoner Handling Recommendations” at Guantanamo. Both of those documents remain classified.

Jessen’s notes, prepared for an Air Force survival training course that he later “reverse engineered” when he helped design the Bush administration’s torture program, go into far greater detail than the Armed Services Committee’s report in explaining how prisoners would be broken down physically and psychologically by their captors. The notes say survival training students could “combat interrogation and torture” if they are captured by an enemy regime by undergoing intense training exercises, using “cognitive” and “exposure techniques” to develop “stress inoculation.” [Click here to download a PDF file of Jessen’s handwritten notes. Click here to download a zip file of Jessen’s notes in typewritten form.]

The documents stand as the first piece of hard evidence to surface in nine years that further explains the psychological aspects of the Bush administration’s torture program and the rationale for subjecting detainees to so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques.”

Click here for the rest of the article CIA Psychologist’s Notes Reveal True Purpose Behind Bush’s Torture Program

by Zen Gardner
March 21st, 2011

Looks like the PNAC, or Project for A New American Century, agenda of 1997 is rolling along as planned. Just as has been outlined by other think tanks, Illuminati writers and social programmers.

a blind world reels on the defensive when they could have known what was coming all along. Notice, mind you, that the portrayal of an unstable middle east includes every “rogue” nation BUT Israel. Israel oddly enough is never “on the table” for discussion, when in fact they are the fomentors and co-creators of the entire “terrorist” threat fabrication.

Recent Developments

If you want to know exactly what’s happening or about to transpire, keep an eye on Neocons like Bill Kristol at rabid Zionist Murdock’s Fox News, the former head of PNAC when they made their famous study, proposal and ‘Statement of Principles’ preceding the staged 9/11 events and ensuing bogus “war on terror”.

It looks like despite Obama’s “promises” to not send troops, we’re about do it anyway. Surprise. So expect a real good reason to be fabricated soon, like tales of horrific atrocities by Gaddafi, to make sure the public is behind it. A false flag or two within Libya is probably on the table right now, like the staged theatre fire massacre in Abadan, Iran during the Iran revolution.

Here’s Kristol’s “announcement” that “we will not leave Gaddafi in power”:

(Raw Story) The operation to create a no-fly zone in Libya has just begun, but already conservative Fox News pundit Bill Kristol is wishing the U.S. would send in ground troops “sooner rather than later.”

U.S. President Barack Obama said Saturday the “Odyssey Dawn” operation launched under a UN Security Council resolution was a “limited military action,” unlike the regime change aims of the war against Iraqi president Saddam Hussein.

He pledged no U.S. troops would be deployed on the ground.

Fox News Chris Wallace asked Kristol Sunday if it was a mistake to limit the mission in Libya.

“Let’s talk about the mission,” Wallace began. “You heard Admiral Mullen, earlier in the show, say his orders are clear: protect the civilians, don’t overthrow Gaddafi. That’s not the point. Is that a mistake? Can we live with Gaddafi in any sort of power? He can create a lot of trouble.”

“No, we cannot leave Gaddafi in power,” Kristol agreed. “And we won’t leave Gaddafi in power.”

“The immediate military mission, Admiral Mullen correctly described but the political goal is to remove Gaddafi and ultimately military assets will serve that political goal Source

Bastard comes to mind.

PNAC- Project for a New American Century Agenda Rolls On
If you’ve done your homework you know this neocon “think tank” led by Kristol at the turn of the century announced their intentions to militarize the US and roll on through the middle east towards global hegemony. Almost all signatories of the PNAC Statement were also members of the Council on Foreign Relations, the admitted steering committee on U.S. policy.

However, they needed to galvanize the American people behind such a move.

“Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor”.

What has transpired since 9/11 has been an ongoing fulfillment of their plan. See the original document for yourself and decide if all that’s transpiring now isn’t a fulfullment of their Statement of Principles.

 

To Summarize the PNAC Goals in their own words in 1997: (emphasis mine)

We seem to have forgotten the essential elements of the Reagan Administration’s success: a military that is strong and ready to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United States’ global responsibilities.

Of course, the United States must be prudent in how it exercises its power. But we cannot safely avoid the responsibilities of global leadership or the costs that are associated with its exercise. America has a vital role in maintaining peace and security in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. If we shirk our responsibilities, we invite challenges to our fundamental interests. The history of the 20th century should have taught us that it is important to shape circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they become dire. The history of this century should have taught us to embrace the cause of American leadership.

Our aim is to remind Americans of these lessons and to draw their consequences for today. Here are four consequences:

• we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global
responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;

• we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;

<• we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;

• we need to accept responsibility for America’s unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.

How terribly altruistic and unselfish of them. Unbelievably Machiavellian yet the world is forced to swallow it.

PNAC Checklist Almost Complete

Let’s see how they’re faring on the above-stated agenda:

Increase defense spending: CHECK. “in the past 10 years, defense spending has accounted for two-thirds of the growth in (government) discretionary spending.” (Source) Astronomical defense (war) spending is not only killing the American economy, but its unwitting soldiers and millions of innocent foreign nationals.

Challenge Regimes: CHECK. “if you’re not with us, you’re with the terrorists”. Is that broad enough? How many countries has the U.S. machine invaded, bombed, poisoned, infiltrated and subverted in the past 10-14 years alone…never mind the rest of its sordid history?

Promote political and economic freedom abroad. CHECK. Multinationals just about have full global sway and control as sovereign economies are sacrificed to the Globalist banking cabal. What freedom–for them. As for political freedom, the whole world’s practically on lock down now, thanks to the bogus Orwellian “war on terror”.

Extend an international order friendly to OUR security, OUR prosperity, and OUR principles. CHECK. And to hell with what anyone else says or thinks.

The Importance of the Move to take Libya

Most people do not realize the historical strategic importance of Libya in the Middle East and Europe. More will be coming out about this as the days play out, but here’s a few points to ponder:

Libya is not peripheral to the world system. It is at its very core. Libya possesses 1,800 kilometers of Mediterranean coastline. The country produces 2 percent of the world’s oil, with 85 percent of exports going to Europe. Libyan nationals have been prominent jihadists in Iraq. Since the beginning of the Great Recession and the slump in global demand in 2008, Libya has allocated $200 billion toward new infrastructure spending.

This same article goes on to tell us exactly WHY Libya is so important and vital to U.S. and globalist interests:

But a brief review of Libya’s history demonstrates that Britain, France, Italy, Russia, the United Nations, and the United States have long had a great deal at stake in Libya, even before oil was discovered in 1959. Today, it is a paramount American interest that Libya not return to being a rogue state or descend into civil war. If Libyan leader Muammar al-Gadhafi reasserts control over the east or even if he fails and the country is cleaved in two, U.S. interests in the region would suffer a major setback.

What makes Libya so important? Any real estate agent could tell you: location, location, location. Control of the country has always been a remarkably effective way to project power into Egypt, the Mediterranean, and beyond. Similarly, denying a hostile power (be it the Soviet Union, Muammar al-Gadhafi, or terrorists) the ability to destabilize surrounding countries from Libyan territory has been a consistent thread in U.S. policy since the end of World War II. (more history of the region with NPR spin HERE)

Click on link for the rest of the article The Surprising PNAC Connection to Libya

Better Tag Cloud