This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Chaos In Iraq Is By DESIGN
Neoconservatives like Paul Wolfowitz planned regime change in Iraq more than 20 years ago … in 1991.
But the goal wasn’t just regime change (or oil). The goal was to break up the country, and to do away with the sovereignty of Iraq as a separate nation.
The Guardian noted in 2003:
President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt predicted devastating consequences for the Middle East if Iraq is attacked. “We fear a state of disorder and chaos may prevail in the region,” he said.
***
They are probably still splitting their sides with laughter in the Pentagon. But Mr Mubarak and the [Pentagon] hawks do agree on one thing: war with Iraq could spell disaster for several regimes in the Middle East. Mr Mubarak believes that would be bad. The hawks, though, believe it would be good.
For the hawks, disorder and chaos sweeping through the region would not be an unfortunate side-effect of war with Iraq, but a sign that everything is going according to plan.
***
The “skittles theory” of the Middle East – that one ball aimed at Iraq can knock down several regimes – has been around for some time on the wilder fringes of politics but has come to the fore in the United States on the back of the “war against terrorism”.
Its roots can be traced, at least in part, to a paper published in 1996 by an Israeli thinktank, the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies. Entitled “A clean break: a new strategy for securing the realm”, it was intended as a political blueprint for the incoming government of Binyamin Netanyahu. As the title indicates, it advised the right-wing Mr Netanyahu to make a complete break with the past by adopting a strategy “based on an entirely new intellectual foundation, one that restores strategic initiative and provides the nation the room to engage every possible energy on rebuilding Zionism …”
***
The paper set out a plan by which Israel would “shape its strategic environment”, beginning with the removal of Saddam Hussein and the installation of a Hashemite monarchy in Baghdad.
With Saddam out of the way and Iraq thus brought under Jordanian Hashemite influence, Jordan and Turkey would form an axis along with Israel to weaken and “roll back” Syria. Jordan, it suggested, could also sort out Lebanon by “weaning” the Shia Muslim population away from Syria and Iran, and re-establishing their former ties with the Shia in the new Hashemite kingdom of Iraq. “Israel will not only contain its foes; it will transcend them”, the paper concluded.
***
The leader of the “prominent opinion makers” who wrote it was Richard Perle – now chairman of the Defence Policy Board at the Pentagon.
Also among the eight-person team was Douglas Feith, a neo-conservative lawyer, who now holds one of the top four posts at the Pentagon as under-secretary of policy.
***
Two other opinion-makers in the team were David Wurmser and his wife, Meyrav (see US thinktanks give lessons in foreign policy, August 19). Mrs Wurmser was co-founder of Memri, a Washington-based charity that distributes articles translated from Arabic newspapers portraying Arabs in a bad light. After working with Mr Perle at the American Enterprise Institute, David Wurmser is now at the State Department, as a special assistant to John Bolton, the under-secretary for arms control and international security.
A fifth member of the team was James Colbert, of the Washington-based Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (Jinsa) – a bastion of neo-conservative hawkery whose advisory board was previously graced by Dick Cheney (now US vice-president), John Bolton and Douglas Feith.
***
With several of the “Clean Break” paper’s authors now holding key positions in Washington, the plan for Israel to “transcend” its foes by reshaping the Middle East looks a good deal more achievable today than it did in 1996. Americans may even be persuaded to give up their lives to achieve it.
(Before assuming prominent roles in the Bush administration, many of the same people – including Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Cheney, John Bolton and others – advocated their imperial views during the Clinton administration via their American think tank, the “Project for a New American Century”.)
Thomas Harrington – professor of Iberian Studies at Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut – writes:
[While there are some good articles on the chaos in Iraq, none of them] consider whether the chaos now enveloping the region might, in fact, be the desired aim of policy planners in Washington and Tel Aviv.
***
One of the prime goals of every empire is to foment ongoing internecine conflict in the territories whose resources and/or strategic outposts they covet.
***
The most efficient way of sparking such open-ended internecine conflict is to brutally smash the target country’s social matrix and physical infrastructure.
***
Ongoing unrest has the additional perk of justifying the maintenance and expansion of the military machine that feeds the financial and political fortunes of the metropolitan elite.
In short … divide and rule is about as close as it gets to a universal recourse the imperial game and that it is, therefore, as important to bear it in mind today as it was in the times of Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, the Spanish Conquistadors and the British Raj.
To those—and I suspect there are still many out there—for whom all this seems too neat or too conspiratorial, I would suggest a careful side-by side reading of:
a) the “Clean Break” manifesto generated by the Jerusalem-based Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies (IASPS) in 1996
and
b) the “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” paper generated by The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) in 2000, a US group with deep personal and institutional links to the aforementioned Israeli think tank, and with the ascension of George Bush Junior to the White House, to the most exclusive sanctums of the US foreign policy apparatus.
To read the cold-blooded imperial reasoning in both of these documents—which speak, in the first case, quite openly of the need to destabilize the region so as to reshape Israel’s “strategic environment” and, in the second of the need to dramatically increase the number of US “forward bases” in the region ….
To do so now, after the US’s systematic destruction of Iraq and Libya—two notably oil-rich countries whose delicate ethnic and religious balances were well known to anyone in or out of government with more than passing interest in history—, and after the its carefully calibrated efforts to generate and maintain murderous and civilization-destroying stalemates in Syria and Egypt (something that is easily substantiated despite our media’s deafening silence on the subject), is downright blood-curdling.
And yet, it seems that for even very well-informed analysts, it is beyond the pale to raise the possibility that foreign policy elites in the US and Israel, like all virtually all the ambitious hegemons before them on the world stage, might have quite coldly and consciously fomented open-ended chaos in order to achieve their overlapping strategic objectives in this part of the world.
Antiwar’s Justin Raimondo notes:
Iraq’s fate was sealed from the moment we invaded: it has no future as a unitary state. As I pointed out again and again in the early days of the conflict, Iraq is fated to split apart into at least three separate states: the Shi’ite areas around Baghdad and to the south, the Sunni regions to the northwest, and the Kurdish enclave which was itching for independence since well before the US invasion. This was the War Party’s real if unexpressed goal from the very beginning: the atomization of Iraq, and indeed the entire Middle East. Their goal, in short, was chaos – and that is precisely what we are seeing today.
***
As I put it years ago:
“[T]he actual purpose was to blow the country to smithereens: to atomize it, and crush it, so that it would never rise again.
“When we invaded and occupied Iraq, we didn’t just militarily defeat Iraq’s armed forces – we dismantled their army, and their police force, along with all the other institutions that held the country together. The educational system was destroyed, and not reconstituted. The infrastructure was pulverized, and never restored. Even the physical hallmarks of a civilized society – roads, bridges, electrical plants, water facilities, museums, schools – were bombed out of existence or else left to fall into disrepair. Along with that, the spiritual and psychological infrastructure that enables a society to function – the bonds of trust, allegiance, and custom – was dissolved, leaving Iraqis to fend for themselves in a war of all against all.
“… What we are witnessing in post-Saddam Iraq is the erasure of an entire country. We can say, with confidence: We came, we saw, we atomized.”
Why? This is the question that inevitably arises in the wake of such an analysis: why deliberately destroy an entire country whose people were civilized while our European ancestors were living in trees?
The people who planned, agitated for, and executed this war are the very same people who have advanced Israeli interests – at America’s expense – at every opportunity. In “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm,” a 1996 document prepared by a gaggle of neocons – Perle, Douglas Feith, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was urged to “break out” of Israel’s alleged stagnation and undertake a campaign of “regime change” across the Middle East, targeting Lebanon, Libya, Syria, Iraq, and eventually Iran. With the exception of Iran – and that one’s still cooking on the back burner – this is precisely what has occurred. In 2003, in the immediate wake of our Pyrrhic “victory” in Iraq, then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon declared to a visiting delegation of American members of Congress that these “rogue states” – Iran, Libya, and Syria – would have to be next on the War Party’s target list.
(Indeed.)
And Michel Chossudovsky points out:
The division of Iraq along sectarian-ethnic lines has been on the drawing board of the Pentagon for more than 10 years.
What is envisaged by Washington is the outright suppression of the Baghdad regime and the institutions of the central government, leading to a process of political fracturing and the elimination of Iraq as a country.
This process of political fracturing in Iraq along sectarian lines will inevitably have an impact on Syria, where the US-NATO sponsored terrorists have in large part been defeated.
Destabilization and political fragmentation in Syria is also contemplated: Washington’s intent is no longer to pursue the narrow objective of “regime change” in Damascus. What is contemplated is the break up of both Iraq and Syria along sectarian-ethnic lines.
The formation of the caliphate may be the first step towards a broader conflict in the Middle East, bearing in mind that Iran is supportive of the al-Maliki government and the US ploy may indeed be to encourage the intervention of Iran.
The proposed re-division of both Iraq and Syria is broadly modeled on that of the Federation of Yugoslavia which was split up into seven “independent states” (Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Macedonia (FYRM), Slovenia, Montenegro, Kosovo).
According to Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, the re division of Iraq into three separate states is part of a broader process of redrawing the Map of the Middle East.
The above map was prepared by Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters. It was published in the Armed Forces Journal in June 2006, Peters is a retired colonel of the U.S. National War Academy. (Map Copyright Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters 2006).
Although the map does not officially reflect Pentagon doctrine, it has been used in a training program at NATO’s Defense College for senior military officers”. (See Plans for Redrawing the Middle East: The Project for a “New Middle East” By Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, Global Research, November 2006)
Notes: While a senior Bush adviser said that the Iraq war was launched to protect Israel, that is too simplistic an explanation. The architects of foreign policy in both the U.S. and Israel are either literally one and the same – e.g. Richard Perle – or see things identically.
And if you think things are different under the Obama administration, please note that not only are the Neocons back, they never actually left.
»
- advertisements -
You're the one bringing obama into this. I haven't called you any of those. I called you a Zionist.
Slow you are no? Analogy isn't your forte'?
Why do you use the grammatical structure of Yoda? To do it correctly, you should have a comma after the are...
"Slow you are, no?"
ANALOGY: Logic. a form of reasoning in which one thing is inferred to be similar to another
thing in a certain respect, on the basis of the known similarity between the things in
other respects.
Poor attempt at misdirection. Answer the question.
You need to respond to my original post. How fucking dare you ask me such a question. Respond factually to my original post. But I know by your two posts that you are utterly incapable of mustering a single cogent retort. Your question is akin to the SS or GDU, NKVP, KGB, you're a vile little pernicious ratfuck jackboot.
Herr Reich Uber SchiessenKopf,
I vill naver sobmeet to yoour SS tactics.
So I am nazi because I called you a zionist and question Israel's apartheid policy and genocide?
If you hated nazis you would be denoucing the Ukrainian nazis. But they're fulfilling the design of your pal Robert Kagan and sponsored by your pal Kolomoisky, so they're kosher.
If you hated nazis you would denounce Saudi Arabia's sponsorship of islamic wahhabism around the middle East. But they are helping fulfill the design of Great Israel, so they're kosher too.
I am a just a human being who recognise and oppose who the real nazis are who wish to enslave mankind. Our numbers grow each day. That's why you're afraid.
zzzzzzzzzzzz
Send me a bumper sticker
Will do.
It will read "Kosher Nazist"
BTW also...I have actually BEEN to Portmerion.
Be seeing you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portmeirion
Prisoner, fwiw, I'd say the ensuing dialogue indicates an affermative answer to your original question.
If you are going to be so lame, then really, no reposte is necessary.
You know what they do to horses in your condition, yes?
Talking about lame...you do know that cows have a brain disorder similar to yours?
"you do know.."
i would continue to offer what i do know, to our discussion, but thought it reckless to assume you 'know' much, of anything
dirty kike jew. you would make a great lamp shade!
there. now do you feel better? fn idiot.
I can Eff your tight azz anytime I chose. :)
Foulcon Flight. -- not enough to be a dirtbag. Now a shitbag too? How far is far enough?
Fight Club you hypocritical sissy. I'd say the blood libel over flowing here is far more filthy, not to mention evil, than my juvie comment.
Shoteh.
Israel as a religious state was destroyed in 70ad with the end of animal sacrifices with the Romans destroying the temple. Maybe Jews benefit from military conflict because of military spending but may suffer unforeseen consequences from large scale conflict in the area being such a small country surrounded by millions of hostiles.
Having smaller, regional countries trying to slit each others throats has been standard policy for a dominant country over the last century. Britain holds considerable blame for allowing the rise of hitlers germany at the expense of european countries who vigorously objected in the interests of securing lasting peace.
Factional muslims at war with each other, including iran, is like a heaven sent gift of an opportunity for israel and america. It enables mutual enemies to go at each each other for awhile while setting up another long term military conflict to appease defense spending. soaring oil prices are less of a consideration. Big oil wont object - govt cronies will be happy to hand it to them. The fed res isnt acting in interests of americans anyway, so they play along. Putin wont mind either because it affords him political opportunity against obozo, and gasprom prices get to go along for the ride. How it offsets the move against the petrodollar is open for speculation.
Everyone happy? Yep. Everyone but the rank and file american, that is.
you have done good work in exposing the ziocon terrorists who control the usa....isis = cia = bush crime syndicate = john mccain. veterans today published a great picture of mccain with isis last summer....the monsters running america must be stopped. democrat = rupublican = communist. mccain is one of the most filthy traitors in america after the bush and clinton murdering trators.
the project for a new american century was developed by the ideological heirs of ww2 instigation - the ziocon banksters who started the war, and jews were at its center creating the holocaust lie.
america and israel are the most vicious terrorist states in the world and americans stand behind it. it is a pure disgust what murders and violence this country has foisted on the world over the past century.
I hate to agree with this...I really do...but the evidence is overwhelming.
These right wingers are total lunatic fringe. I don't know anyone who supports these wackos. They hate veterans, they hate Generals, they hate America. They appear to have no clue of what the reality on the ground has been for twelve straight years. I have no idea who even listens to these dopes other than the psychos at AIPAC.
The clowns can't win a Republican Primary without hard core left wing support. The irony of course is that the President has absolutely no connection whatsoever to these senile nut cases.
They don't appear to be advising him anymore either but ordering a full scale banzai charge on THEIR entire war effort.
I really think they've never read a history book in their entire life. They look at the Middle East and "see a bunch of backward ass towell heads" and leave it at that. After 85 billion in a single year while losing maybe they should start questioning that assumption.
Maybe they could start by putting a towel on THEIR head.
Nobody needs to create chaos in the middle-east. It has always been in chaos because they (muslims) have a religion that has two sides, Medina and Mecca. One is peaceful and the other is violent. There will NEVER be peace there. Study the religion and you will learn about the people and what drives them.
Study history and you might find out that there was a vibrant debate on the role of democracy and Westernization in the Islamic world right up until WWI. It was centered in Cairo and mostly considered French Republican models as examples.
This debate was extinguished by the same psychopathic power struture which is even now attempting to extinguish democracy here at home....
Our greatest failing is the refusal to admit that a stable middle class and the ability of the shopkeeper (small business) to accumulate capital in a rational risk environment is paramount. Corruption, hubris, and terminal decadence is to blame.
The Middle East is no different than anywhere else.
Just ask a shopkeeper.
Yeah but I'm not aware of shark attacks upon tourists being officialy blamed on specially trained Zionist sharks anywhere but in the Muslim/Arab nation of Egypt whose gov't made said pronouncement.
Falcon - Isn't it time you got on the horn, sorry - shofar - to Abe Foxman at the ADL to sue all these bad people saying bad things about Israel?
What? No, it doesn't matter that they are all true, it never has. Abe's connected.
Oh, a competition for the most macabre delusional tripe? There'll be no winner there. Sorry, but human nature is immutable. It is....get this....adaptable. That is the trick. Angels and demons, within each and every one of us.
ZH is not the place to try to draw bright lines and cry 'vermin' to just one side.
moral relativism and equivocation is what is destroying whatever vestiges remain of that ideal called a "virtuous Republic."
I agree. That is what makes the death of those 500,000 Iraqi children, in the name of Zealotry and Zionism, brought to you by PNAC and the Israelites, so abysmal.
Are you actually refuting my post?
Your posts are actually self-refutational, to be quite honest
The U.S. Is Supporting the Most Violent Muslim Terrorists
and US policy was so taken with replacing Hussein, they gave rise to Al Qaeda. Makiki has none of the nationalist ambitions of Hussein, wo invaded Kuwait, suppressed the rebellion with the Kurds and fought a war with Iran. and for that we figure he's a failure. reagan said if its not broke, and he had the smarts to leave Beirut after a terrible defeat. since then its been, since then its been you break you bought it, now break it into tranches and resell it for a profit (or not)
Behind the wars for natural resources are the wars by which the murder systems back up the money systems, because control over the money is what controls the natural resources. The ability to make the public "money" supply out of nothing is the primary way that the robbery of natural resources takes place. One of the deeper reasons why the bankster dominated Western powers are attempting to wipe out the competing organized crime gangs known as Islamic states is that Islam still does not allow the banksters' core frauds.
In my view, anyone who spends enough time looking at the money systems and the murder systems recognizes more and more how they overlap, and tend to be directed by the same pyramidion people at the top of the social pyramids. Obviously, the natural resources are BASIC, however, the actual human control over those resources is primarily mediated by the symbolic means of money, as the most abstract form of measurement backed by murder, within the context of all other private property being claims backed by coercions.
The differences between the different religions that emerged out of the Middle Eastern history of Neolithic Civilization are less important than their crucial similarities, which is that they all are based on claims to have PRIVATIZED GOD, which they back up with coercions. That privatization of god was then followed by more and more privatization of the environment. At the present time our deeper problems are that our civilization has become globalized privatizations, which are all based on backing up deceits with destruction, or claims with coercions. All of private property, including staking ownership over natural resources, are fundamentally systems of lies backed by violence. That was the way that Neolithic Civilization developed to recently become globalized electronic frauds, backed by the threat of the force of atomic bombs.
The history of Neolithic Civilizations have been the privatization of god, followed by the privatization of the environment. The fights over natural resources have become the fights over control over the monetary systems. The greatest and deepest conflicts between the bankster dominated Western governments, and the governments of Islamic states, is their disagreements over the fundamentals of the monetary system.
The Western banksters want to consolidate their global hegemony of being able to create the public "money" supply out of nothing as debts, which fraud is enforced by Western governments, while the Islamic countries are the single biggest obstacle to doing that. In a similar vein, Russia and China, etc., are also obstacles to the continued dominance of the globalized banksters' systems, as promoted by the Anglo-American (Zionist) Empire.
In my metaphorical view, the banksters are the Vicious Wolves, who are feeding some of the Wild Dogs, due to their greater overall criminally insane global agenda. However, beneath all of that are the more basic issues of the ways that Neolithic Civilizations regard time and space, which favoured their attempts to privatize god, which supported their ways of privatizing the environment. Now that those systems have become globalized electronic frauds, backed by the threat of the force of atomic bombs, the criminal insanities in those attitudes are becoming amplified to more astronomical sizes.
A grand paradox is that the history of the success of backing up claims with coercions is now seriously risking the annihilation of that entire system. The basic ways that we think about time and space are wrong. Those attitudes originated with the ways that god and the environment were attempted to be privatized. The old-fashioned religions that most developed their assertions to have privatized god are those which are most at war with each other, despite that they are now locked in the MADness of Mutual Assured Destruction.
Of course, while they are ultimately fighting over natural resources, their symbolic struggles are over the MADness of Money As Debt. All of those things were entangled more and more during the history of Neolithic Civilizations. Another of the grand paradoxes has been progress in science and technology NOT being matched by progress in human affairs. While there have been developed globalized electronic frauds, backed by the the thread of the force of atomic bombs, the metaphysics that should follow from that progress is physics is nowhere to be found in the old-fashioned religions, which were based on attempts to privatize god, as the supreme expression of backing up lies with violence.
In that context, it is quite understandable that the people who most believe in their claims to have privatized god are also those who most tend to back up those assertions with coercions. "The most violent Muslim Terrorists" actually share those character traits with the most violent Zionist Terrorists. The basic problem is that all human realities are organized lies, operating robberies, while the people who are the most fanatical about that are those who are the least able to negotiate with each other. Overall the Neolithic style of civilization has become start raving MAD criminal insanities, in which the struggle to control resources is probably going to destroy almost everyone involved eventually.
We are stuck with the problems that history has selected for the best organized criminal gangs to tend to have become the most fanatical religions, who are the least able to negotiate any better resolutions of their conflicts with each other. As I said in my previous reply, that is why everyone appears to be falling into that black hole, and we appear to have already gone past that event horizon, as demonstrated by how both the events on 9/11/2001 and the financial crises in 2008, were deliberately designed inside jobs, whereby the established murder/money systems have been attempting to continue to carry through their overall criminally insane agenda.
The clincher for me was the establishing of a Central Bank in Benghazi within weeks of the, ahem, 'liberation'. Even as the bullets were literally still flying overhead and the war in full flight they had to rush to establish a CB. 'Nuff said, IMHO.
Radical Marijuana
Great post.
That's why my mind keeps coming back to http://www.monetary.org/ and http://www.geoeconomics.wordpress.com
This system is indeed, clinically insane.
Let's free God.
I'm not sure I can follow your argument of a privatized god. In ancient (Greek/Roman) times, any god was considered to be the god of a group. Specifically, of a (Greek) genos or (Roman) gens, i.e. of a "tribe", a group of people related to each other and often bearing the name of that group, which often could be the name of the god or god-like hero-founder of that group
one method the early Romans used in conquest was to make elaborate priestly cerimonies in front of the walls of a besieged city. the gods of this city were called by the priests to leave the city and come to Rome. when the people saw that their gods abandoned them, the theory was that they had to join Rome, and so regain "communion"
see the Pantheon (the House of All Gods), where the invited gods were "asked" to reside
example: when Jerusalem was besieged and the Temple was captured, the sacred objects in the Temple were brought - as per standard procedure - to Rome in triumph and then deposited in the Pantheon. where they were kept until the Vandals sacked Rome
further example: Gaius Julius Caesar claimed descent from Venus - though the gens Iulia or Julia, from Aeneas (Iulius)
so all in all I'd say you shouldn't blame the Neolithic civilization too much in this - in the eyes of the Ancients our modern monotheism would be responsible for way more madness and blood than the ancient way of regarding gods, besides being very, very intolerant of other people's religions
Ghordius, by "privatized god" I simply mean the degree of fanaticism present in a group of believers. Of course, they never actually privatize god, but the more arrogant they are, then the more they can rationalize using violence to back up their lies.
The European invasion of the rest of the world during the previous five hundred years or so was done with a gun in one hand, and a Bible in the other. Human realities are ALWAYS organized lies, operating robberies. Those who assert their brand of monotheism then to be more extreme in promoting their kind of biggest bullies' bullshit stories as the absolute truth.
The paradoxes are that fanaticism, as the most extreme form of lies backed by violence, are the most extreme form of short-term successes leading eventually to longer term failures. The Middle East, with it long history of rampaging military invasions and environmental destruction developed the most psychotic personalities, collected into the most psychotic organized crime gangs, which were able to spread out and conquer the rest of the world, due to that.
However, that success in warfare based on deceits, in which religions were the systems of organized lies which rationalized the robberies, is now faced with the paradox of final failure from too much of that kind of success. We are still living in the first generation that had to cope with the existence of weapons of mass destruction, while we have done nothing but barely maintain the policy of MADness (Mutual Assured Destruction) as the dynamic equilibria that cope with that.
You are right that Neolithic Civilization (such as now manifested in the Judeo-Christian and Islamic traditions) were not unique, except in some relative degrees to which they were particularly psychotic. That is why we are forced to pay attention to them, when I would rather otherwise be able to ignore them. They are the maximum social black hole of fanatical madness, which are drawing everyone else in the world into that black hole of madness.
The USSR versus the USA used to be more rational materialists, that would not actually deliberately cause World War using weapons of mass destruction. However, the old-fashioned religious people appear to be insane enough to do that!
Great posts as always RM. They are a treat to read. The lie that is organized relgion is becoming exposed at a very fast rate. The immediate reaction from the religious figureheads is to ramp up the extremist rhetoric to take advantage of people's emotions, and to prevent them from realizing their gods and belief systems have been fabricated (which is now plain to see). This is a dangerous place to be since rationality is now out the window. The religious zealots (Christian, Jews & Muslims) will be appealing to the lowest common denominator amongst their flocks from now on. Their survival is at stake, and they will eat each other to stay in power.
Hey GW, do you think that the Muslim Spring Was Chaotic By DESIGN?????
- Ned
GW usually and assiduously avoids naming Israel and related entities in his analyses, especially those that deal with 9-11. So does Michel Chossudovsky, globalresearch.ca, who established presence on the web just 3 days before 9-11-2001. GW quotes MC extensively above. JR of "antiwar.com"? Do the research! According to my source, verifiable, MC is reportedly an Orthodox Jew. Nothing against "Jews", per se! Just connect the dots.
Is the USI the master mind and instigator? Who pulls the strings on the USI and Israeli forces? When we talk about "neo-cons", who are they? When we talk about "Mossad", what is that?!
Along the way we have traveled, first now the Middle East, including Ukraine, then chaos, then the NWO. As the Protocols indicate, the "Jews" are NOT the centerpiece of this operation. That's a trap. The perpetrators do not have such simple labels, in my opinion. I prefer TPTB.
Let's make this a race to consciousness, therefore, the first to enlightenment wins! Avoid the pitfalls, minefields, and psy-optic traps set for the intellectually weak and mentally weary. The article as is seems more disinformation than truth. Just my opinion.
"Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes it's laws" — Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild
Look at a list of central bankers across the world over the past 100 years --- see the common thread?
Huh?
I've previously written:
It is pretty clear that 9/11 was state-sponsored terror … although people argue about which state or states were responsible (we personally believe that at least two allied governments were involved).
My real view: 3 allied states were involved.
Wanna guess which 3?
Not nearly as much evidence of Saudi involvement as there is of Israeli and Jewsh sayanim [your Perles and Feiths] involvement. And yes there had to be US govt involvement at the level of the joint chiefs and probably cia.
but tossing in "saudi" is a little anti-hominem proofing... the hasbrats are ready to pounce on any suggestion Israel/5th columnist Jews were involved in staging 9/11, to include Bibi and Larry and Ehud... call it "anti-Semitic" and bring up Hitler or some such... as if Israel can't commit crimes [King David Hotel bombing? Lavon Affair? USS Liberty?] and as if Jews can't be traitors [ Rosenbergs, Pollard, Libby, AIPAC staffers].
Saudi seems to have supplied the patsies and little else.
It is bullshit to equate the evidence of Saudi connections with the Israeli/Jewish Zionist/Mossad ones...
100% correct and on the ball. Especially the Saudis seem to have supplied the patsies and little else.
China
Sorry, you lose ...
Bandar bush-abia and
the city of tony blairistan.