by Michael Ruppert
From The Wilderness Publications, November 2001
Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG) at globalresearch.ca 11 November 2001
Zbigniew Brzezinski and the CFR Put War Plans in a 1997 Book – It is “A Blueprint for World Dictatorship,” Says a Former German Defense and NATO Official Who Warned of Global Domination in 1984, in an Exclusive Interview With FTW
“THE GRAND CHESSBOARD – American Primacy And It’s Geostrategic Imperatives,” Zbigniew Brzezinski, Basic Books, 1997.
These are the very first words in the book, “Ever since the continents started interacting politically, some five hundred years ago, Eurasia has been the center of world power.” – p. xiii. Eurasia is all of the territory east of Germany and Poland, stretching all the way through Russia and China to the Pacific Ocean. It includes the Middle East and most of the Indian subcontinent. The key to controlling Eurasia, says Brzezinski, is controlling the Central Asian Republics. And the key to controlling the Central Asian republics is Uzbekistan. Thus, it comes as no surprise that Uzbekistan was forcefully mentioned by President George W. Bush in his address to a joint session of Congress just days after the attacks of September 11 as the very first place that the U.S. military would be deployed.
As FTW has documented in previous stories, major deployments of U.S. and British forces had taken place before the attacks. And the U.S. Army and the CIA had been active in Uzbekistan for several years. There is now evidence that what the world is witnessing is a cold and calculated war plan – at least four years in the making – and that, from reading Brzezinski’s own words about Pearl Harbor, the World Trade Center attacks were just the trigger needed to set the final conquest in motion.
FRENCH TROOPS IN MALI – After six days of aerial attacks, on January 16, 2013, French troops began to engage the Islamist rebels whose advances to the south are threatening to overthrow the unelected military regime – and the Rothschild-owned gold mines.
by Christopher Bollyn
Published: Jan. 19, 2013 – bollyn.com
The real reason for the French military intervention in Mali is to protect the foreign-owned gold mining operations, which produce hundreds of thousands of ounces of gold for the owners per year.
MALI IS ‘GOLD COUNTRY’ – Foreign investors profit from the gold of Mali while its people wallow in poverty. Nine out of ten people in Mali live in dire poverty and 72 percent of the population survives on less than a dollar a day. Ninety percent of the Malian population is Muslim.
by Leonid Ivashov
Published: Oct. 17, 2011 – Strategic Culture Foundation
Having coped with Libya, the West is ready to hunt down new victims, Syria and Iran being next on the hit list. The campaign against Syria runs into major roadblocks as the country’s leader Bashar al-Assad offered the society a package of reforms which are indeed long overdue, while Russia and Iran prevented the UN Security Council from passing a resolution that could expose Syria to an intervention modeled on the one recently faced by Libya. As a result, the West’s plans for Syria are being adjusted to current circumstances, and at the moment the West’s bet is on destabilizing the country from within by combined efforts of the Western intelligence community, foreign mercenaries, and the local fifth column. A revolution was similarly attempted in Iran but met with well-organized resistance, and the international sanctions imposed on Iran may create certain problems but are not lethal to its economy. Moreover, the enforcement of “democracy” in Iraq and Libya had a sobering effect even on Iran’s pro-western political forces. Yet, the impression is that at the moment the Western leaders simply cannot wait for new revolution opportunities to arise.
Published: Nov. 07, 2011 – Activist Post
Good and evil doesn’t have a grey zone. Killing and stealing is bad. Violence is never “good” or necessary unless it is used to defend against killers and thieves. Indeed, that is the morality behind the “just war” principle as defined by international laws and treaties.
Yet, this simple concept of right and wrong gets muddled by differing ideas about religion, patriotism, economics and many other divisions. The “just war” rule has crumbled under the ambitions of empires throughout history. The American-led Anglo Saxon empire is no different.
This empire has been brutally conquering and colonizing territory since the fall of Rome. However, it has only gained an American face in the last century. The United States quickly emerged as the world’s “superpower” primarily through its economic might. For some time, many believed the U.S. to be a shining example of economic freedom for other nations to emulate. Indeed, America was eager to promote “economic freedom” globally to open new markets for U.S.-based corporations.
Blueprint of the PNAC Plan for U.S. Global Hegemony
Some people have compared it to Hitler’s publication of Mein Kampf, which was ignored until after the war was over.
Full text of Rebuilding America’s Defenses here
by Bette Stockbauer
Published: Jun. 05, 2003 – Information Clearing House
When the Bush administration started lobbying for war with Iraq, they used as rationale a definition of preemption (generally meaning anticipatory use of force in the face of an imminent attack) that was broadened to allow for the waging of a preventive war in which force may be used even without evidence of an imminent attack. They also were able to convince much of the American public that Saddam Hussein had something to do with the attacks of 9/11, despite the fact that no evidence of a link has been uncovered. Consequently, many people supported the war on the basis of 1) a policy that has no legal basis in international law and 2) a totally unfounded claim of Iraqi guilt.
What most people do not know, however, is that certain high ranking officials in the Bush administration have been working for regime change in Iraq for the past decade, long before terrorism became an important issue for our country. In 1997 they formed an organization called the Project for the New American Century (PNAC). They have sought the establishment of a much stronger U.S. presence throughout the Mideast and Iraq’s Saddam Hussein has been their number one target for regime change. Members of this group drafted and successfully passed through Congress the Iraqi Liberation Act, giving legal sanctions for an invasion of the country, and funneled millions of taxpayer dollars to Hussein opposition groups called the Iraqi National Congress and The Committee for the Liberation of Iraq.
New geopolitical orientation completed: What do the killings of Milosevic, Saddam Hussein and Gaddafi have in common?Posted: October 28, 2011
by Hannes Hofbauer
Published: Oct. 27, 2011 – Strategic Culture Foundation
On the 20th of October 2011, late afternoon, international news agencies reported the death of Muammar al-Gaddafi. He was killed by some rebels in his hometown Sirte, after NATO-bombs hit his convoy. Only two days later US-president Barack Obama in Washington and NATO-officials in Brussels declared to stop the war on Libya that had lasted for almost eight months. Mission completed.
At this moment of time there was hardly anyone left who believed in the official version legitimating the foreign intervention. UN-resolution 1973 from the 17th of March 2011 empowered a coalition of willing states around NATO to intervene militarily in a regional uprising to build a shelter over the civic population, to protect civilians. The opposite was the case. In these eight months NATO flew 9600 sorties causing an innumerable figure of deaths, both soldiers and civilians. Regional uprising thereby accelerated towards a civil war. The aim of the NATO-intervention did not even respect the text of UN-resolutions 1973 and 1970.
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
by Raja Mujtaba
Published: Oct. 21, 2011 – Veterans Today
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).
by Elena Ponomareva
Published: Oct. 09, 2011 – Strategic Culture Foundation
One might be tempted to regard Russian premier V. Putin’s paper “A new integration project for Eurasia: The future in the making”, which saw the light of day in Izvestia on October 3, 2011, as the presidential front-runner’s sketchily laid out program, but upon scrutiny that appears to be only one part of a wider picture. The opinion piece momentarily ignited wide-scale controversy in and outside of Russia and highlighted the ongoing clash of positions on global development…
Regardless of interpretation details, the reaction of the Western media to the integration project unveiled by the Russian premier was uniformly negative and reflected with utmost clarity an a priori hostility towards Russia and any initiatives it floats. Mao Zedong, though, used to say that facing pressure from your enemies is better than being in such a condition that they do not bother to keep you under pressure.
The Latest Orchestrated Threat and The End of History
by Paul Craig Roberts
Published: Sep. 27, 2011 – Information Clearing House
Have you ever before heard of the Haqqanis? I didn’t think so. Like Al Qaeda, about which no one had ever heard prior to 9/11, the “Haqqani Network” has popped up in time of need to justify America’s next war–Pakistan.
President Obama’s claim that he had Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden exterminated deflated the threat from that long-serving bogyman. A terror organization that left its leader, unarmed and undefended, a sitting duck for assassination no longer seemed formidable. Time for a new, more threatening, bogyman, the pursuit of which will keep the “war on terror” going.
NATO’s War on Libya is Directed against China: AFRICOM and the Threat to China’s National Energy SecurityPosted: September 26, 2011
The Washington-led decision by NATO to bomb Gaddafi’s Libya into submission over recent months, at an estimated cost to US taxpayers of at least $1 billion, has little if anything to do with what the Obama Administration claims was a mission to “protect innocent civilians.” In reality it is part of a larger strategic assault by NATO and by the Pentagon in particular to entirely control China’s economic achilles heel, namely China’s strategic dependence on large volumes of imported crude oil and gas. Today China is the world’s second largest importer of oil after the United States and the gap is rapidly closing.
by F. William Engdahl
Published: Sep. 25, 2011 – Global Research
If we take a careful look at a map of Africa and also look at the African organization of the new Pentagon Africa Command—AFRICOM—the pattern that emerges is a careful strategy of controlling one of China’s most strategically important oil and raw materials sources.
NATO’s Libya campaign was and is all about oil. But not about simply controlling Libyan high-grade crude because the USA is nervous about reliable foreign supplies. It rather is about controlling China’s free access to long-term oil imports from Africa and from the Middle East. In other words, it is about controlling China itself.
Liberal confab sponsored by corporate fascists, big oil, big banks.
by Tony Cartalucci
Published: Sep. 21, 2011 – Land Destroyer Report
The Clinton Global Citizen Awards, held this week in New York City, claims to “recognize extraordinary individuals who have demonstrated visionary leadership in solving pressing global challenges. Through their work, these citizens have proven that diverse sectors of society including philanthropic, public service, corporate, and civic organizations can work together successfully to implement and devise solutions that effect positive, lasting social change.”
In reality, it is yet another elaborate display of self-aggrandizing by the same handful of corporate-financier interests emanating from Wall Street and London, attempting to maintain the legitimacy of their “international order.” Had the Nazis been less overt in their ambitions, and more patient in selling the world their presumed dominion over the planet, it might have looked something like this.
“Why are you attacking us? Why are you killing our children? Why are you destroying our infrastructure?”
– Television address by Libyan Leader Muammar Gaddafi, April 30, 2011
by William Blum
Published: Sep. 01, 2011 – Killinghope.org
A few hours later NATO hit a target in Tripoli, killing Gaddafi’s 29-year-old son Saif al-Arab, three of Gaddafi’s grandchildren, all under twelve years of age, and several friends and neighbors.
In his TV address, Gaddafi had appealed to the NATO nations for a cease-fire and negotiations after six weeks of bombings and cruise missile attacks against his country.
Well, let’s see if we can derive some understanding of the complex Libyan turmoil.
Ultimate betrayal by the ultimate traitors
by Tony Cartalucci
Published: Sep. 01, 2011 – Land Destroyer Report
The war is far from over – in fact, Libya’s rebels have yet to actually take Tripoli, with entire sections of the city still being contested. Further more, entire cities, including Sirte, Bani Waled, and Libya’s entire interior still stand completely under the Libyan government’s control and have repelled rebels continuously over the last two weeks even with brutal NATO bombings and the expressed desire to purposefully starve their populations into submission. Despite this, the corporate media has committed to an endless mantra of “the victorious rebels” and are focused, however unrealistically, on quickly “rebuilding Libya.” Not surprisingly, this “rebuilding” will be done according to Wall Street and London’s designs, not those of the Libyan people.
Or, “How the Devil Pays”
by Tony Cartalucci
Published: Aug. 22, 2011 – Land Destroyer Report
The Financial Times has featured an editorial penned by Council on Foreign Relations president Richard Haas titled, “Libya Now Needs Boots on the Ground,” where the arch globalist states that Libya’s rebels are in no way capable of rebuilding Libya properly and will require an “international force” to maintain order. Haas breathtakingly admits that the NATO intervention to “protect civilians” was in fact a political intervention designed to bring about regime change. With NATO leading the offensive against Tripoli, a relatively calm city until now, the alleged cause of “protecting civilians” rings hollower than ever.
Haas goes on to explain that NATO’s “success” is what requires this international assistance in the predictable form of an occupation force to deal with looting, “die-hard regime supporters,” and tribal war. Haas also implores Obama to reconsider his decision to rule out American boots on the ground and to do so quickly.
A majority of Americans believe America is an “exceptional” nation and “a shining beacon of democracy and hope to a dark world”. But, reliable and unbiased evidence shows that real America is an unequal society, oppressive, undemocratic and a violent imperialist power.
by Ghali Hassan
Published: Jul. 20, 2011 – Axis of Logic
Inequality and Poverty
A report released on 20 October 2008 by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) revealed that the U.S. has “the highest inequality level and poverty rate across the OECD, Mexico and Turkey excepted. Since 2000, income inequality has increased rapidly, continuing a long-term trend that goes back to the 1970s”. All Western Europe’s OECD states, along with Japan, South Korea, Canada and Australia have recorded better figures than the U.S., as did central and eastern European states, including Poland and Hungary. .
by Rick Rozoff
Published: Jul. 22, 2011 – Stop NATO
The unprecedented expansion of American military presence throughout the world in the last decade, in support of and consolidated by attacks and invasions in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Pakistan, Yemen and Libya, has been marked by the Pentagon securing new bases in several continents and Oceania.
In the past ten years the U.S. has gained access to and expanded and upgraded dozens of bases abroad, in most every case in nations that had been off-limits to it during the Cold War and even the last decade of the 20th century.
These include multi-service (Army, Marines, Air Force and Navy) main operating, forward deployed and pre-positioning bases, storage and logistics facilities, base camps, air and naval installations, a global strategic airlift operation, interceptor missile and related radar bases, unmanned aerial vehicle (drone) launch pads, satellite surveillance sites, permanent training programs and centers, new regional task forces and even a new overseas military command: U.S. Africa Command, which takes in 54 nations, almost 30 percent of the member states of the United Nations.
by David DeGraw
First Published: Jul. 06, 2011 – Amped Status Report
When Obama launched his re-election propaganda campaign to trick the American public into thinking that he intends to end the Af-Pak War, he said that the “War on Terror” has cost $1 trillion over the past decade. While that is a staggering amount of money, he was being deceitful once again.
As you may have heard, a newly released study by the Eisenhower Research Project at Brown University revealed that the cost of the War on Terror is significantly greater than Obama has said. The little passing coverage the study received in the mainstream press cited $3.7 trillion as the total cost, which was the most conservative estimate. The moderate estimate, which the mainstream media ignored, was $4.4 trillion. In addition, interest payments on these costs will most likely exceed $1 trillion, which brings the total cost up to at least $5.4 trillion. The report also states that the following costs are not even included in this total:
by Prof. Mujahid Kamran
First Published: Jun. 2011 – New Dawn Special Issue 16
The control of the US, and of global politics, by the wealthiest families of the planet is exercised in a powerful, profound and clandestine manner. This control began in Europe and has a continuity that can be traced back to the time when the bankers discovered it was more profitable to give loans to governments than to needy individuals.
These banking families and their subservient beneficiaries have come to own most major businesses over the two centuries during which they have secretly and increasingly organised themselves as controllers of governments worldwide and as arbiters of war and peace.
Unless we understand this we will be unable to understand the real reasons for the two world wars and the impending Third World War, a war that is almost certain to begin as a consequence of the US attempt to seize and control Central Asia. The only way out is for the US to back off – something the people of the US and the world want, but the elite does not.
Globalist think-tanks are already building a case against Pakistan
by Tony Cartalucci
Published: May 02, 2011 – Land Destroyer Report
Bangkok, Thailand May 3, 2011 – Foundation for the Defense of Democracy (FDD) scribe and all around intellectually dishonest propagandist, Bill Roggio of the “Long War Journal,” has dedicated his life to perpetuating the entirely fake “War on Terror,” abandoning all objectivity with the very name of his now officially government funded, Neo-Conservative establishment affiliated blog. The term “Long War” of course is a throwback to the Bush era and constant reassurances by the president that indeed the “War on Terror” will be endless.
From the Berlin Conference of 1884 to the London Conference of 2011
by Brian Becker
Published: Mar. 30, 2011 – Liberation News
The leaders of 14 capitalist powers in Europe plus the United States met for a conference in Berlin 126 years ago to decide how all of Africa’s land and vast resources would be divided as colonies and zones of control among themselves. No Africans were invited to the conference.
The 1884 Conference of Berlin, more than any other single event, became emblematic of the dynamic transformation of capitalism into a system of global imperialism.
By 1902, 90 percent of Africa’s territory was under European control. African self-governance was wiped off the map in most of the continent. Only Ethiopia remained an independent state. Liberia was technically independent too, but it was in fact under the control of the United States.