Refugee Crisis: Using Chaos To Build Power

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Alex Newman via,

A European Union military force with power to intervene in member states. A new “Marshall Plan” to radically redesign whole regions of the world and impose regional government. A United Nations empowered to manage it all. Christendom under siege. And the end of nationhood as it is understood today. That is where the “refugee crisis” is heading, as the engineered disaster wreaks havoc across Europe and beyond. Despite the appearance of chaos, though, it is all by design, with a series of radical goals in mind.

While the establishment’s demands on Europe to accept millions of Middle Eastern refugees have been couched in “humanitarian” rhetoric, the real agenda is nothing of the sort. Rather than helping out their fellow human beings, globalist forces actually created the refugee crisis and the suffering behind it. And they are using it to advance multiple, related agendas — primarily globalism and statism. That the crisis is being exploited to undermine Western culture, national sovereignty, and even nationhood itself is now beyond dispute. Top globalists are openly bragging about it.

“I will ask the governments to cooperate, to recognize that sovereignty is an illusion — that sovereignty is an absolute illusion that has to be put behind us,” declared former Goldman Sachs chairman Peter Sutherland, an ex-member of the Bilderberg Steering Committee who currently “serves” as the UN special representative of the secretary-general for international migration. “The days of hiding behind borders and fences are long gone. We have to work together and cooperate together to make a better world. And that means taking on some of the old shibboleths, taking on some of the old historic memories and images of our own country and recognizing that we’re part of humankind.”

Billionaire globalist and open-borders zealot George Soros, in denouncing European officials trying to control the human tsunami coming across their borders, similarly declared, “Our plan treats the protection of refugees as the objective and national borders as the obstacle.”

In essence, then, the engineered refugee crisis was created and is being used, at least in part, to advance what globalists often refer to in public as “global governance” and their “new world order.” As part of that, even the idea of nationhood is under fire — everybody is just part of “humankind,” as Sutherland put it. And as such, people must be governed by the “Parliament of Humanity,” as UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon referred to the dictators club known as the UN last year.

Already, the UN manages a global refugee program via the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). This agency decides which refugees will be settled where, including those destined to be settled in the United States at U.S. taxpayer expense. Further clues about the agenda can be found in the fact that the UN refugee outfit was until very recently led by António Guterres, the former president of the powerful global socialist-government-promoting Socialist International, as senior editor William Jasper documented in an October 19, 2015 cover story for this magazine.

There are several elements to the globalist plot as it relates to the refugee crisis.

Creating the Refugee Crisis

To begin with, it is important to understand that the same self-styled humanitarians claiming to be concerned about refugees, while demanding that they be given asylum in the West by the millions, are, in reality, the same people responsible for making their victims into refugees to begin with. As this magazine documented extensively in its October 19 cover story package, the globalist establishment literally unleashed the refugee exodus.


Among other actions to spark the crisis, Western governments and their allies — not to mention the globalist forces behind them, such as the Council on Foreign Relations and other global-government-promoting powerhouses — destroyed multiple Middle Eastern nations via war and chaos. These include Libya, bombed to smithereens by Obama and NATO under the supposed authority of the UN; as well as Syria, destroyed by civil war fueled by the globalist establishment; and of course Iraq, also crushed by Western intervention and globalist-fueled civil war.


Those same globalist forces were also responsible for wreaking havoc in many more nations — such as Yemen, Egypt, Ivory Coast, and Tunisia — through supporting uprisings, revolutions, terror groups, dictatorships, and more.


The predictable response to having one’s nation destroyed, of course, is attempting to leave — particularly if wealthier, freer nations throw down the welcome mat. And that is exactly what has happened and is still happening. Many of the same globalists responsible for creating the chaos and terror that refugees are fleeing from are publicly and loudly opening Europe’s doors to the growing tsunami of displaced victims. Obama and his billionaire supporter Soros, for example, were both instrumental in the UN-authorized war to destroy Libya, which was based on lies, and in fueling the civil war that is destroying what remains of Syria. And both of those figures have been very outspoken in demanding that the West welcome millions of refugees, regardless of the costs or the desires of Western voters.


The question that must be asked is: “Why?” The answers can be found in what has happened and what is happening, and especially in the policy prescriptions allegedly aimed at dealing with the crisis that globalists unleashed. At this point, Europe, Africa, and the Middle East are all in the cross hairs of internationalists, who are exploiting the refugee crisis to build up supranational institutions at the regional and global level to smash national sovereignty and even nationhood, to build up the power of government generally, and to destabilize societies. If left unchecked and unexposed, the refugee crisis will serve as a powerful tool to push the world ever closer to “global governance,” with a great deal of pain and misery along the way.


A New Marshall Plan: Regional Government for the Middle East

With the refugee situation quickly spiraling out of control across parts of the continent — the mass sexual assaults on New Year’s Eve across Germany and beyond, the implosion of law and order around Calais in France, the widely reported overrunning of Stockholm’s central station by refugee youths, and more — the public is now growing increasingly outraged. Indeed, even the establishment forces responsible for unleashing the chaos are now in some cases denouncing it. The New York Times, an establishment mouthpiece that dutifully promoted the globalist wars that sparked the refugee crisis and the subsequent flooding of the West with the victims of those wars (and many opportunists who joined the exodus), ran an op-ed pointing out that Germany was “on the brink” due to the crisis. Top European political bosses have also been sounding the alarm.


Another senior globalist, Rothschild banking dynasty protégé and billionaire hedge-fund boss Soros, played an instrumental role in encouraging the myriad wars and the subsequent tsunami of refugees into Europe that was sparked by those wars. And now, like other establishment voices, Soros is also pointing out the obvious. The European Union, he said in a recent interview, is “on the verge of collapse” due to the sudden influx of well over a million Islamic refugees last year. Not coincidentally, Soros also has ideas about “solutions.” And not surprisingly, those alleged “solutions” involve more globalism for Europe, Africa, and the Middle East — along with less sovereignty, self-government, and liberty.


In an interview with Bloomberg from the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland, the radical anti-national sovereignty statist claimed that Europe needed to finance a new “Marshall Plan” for the regions of the world from which the refugees are fleeing — regions and nations destroyed in large part by the globalist Western establishment figures pushing the new plan. Soros was expressing support for a proposal made earlier by a fellow globalist, German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble. The new Marshall Plan they envision seeks to transfer wealth from struggling European taxpayers to areas of the globe ruined by globalist machinations — but the real agenda goes much deeper, as did the last Marshall Plan after World War II.


“What is most important is for us to invest billions in those regions from which the refugees come to reduce the pressure on the external frontiers of Europe,” Schäuble argued in a panel discussion at the globalist WEF, speaking alongside several European prime ministers who also played a key role in flooding Europe with refugees displaced from the nations they helped destroy. “That will cost Europe much more than we thought.” Of course it will, and taxpayers, already suffering under a crushing burden, will pay for it all. Writing in the Soros-backed “Project Syndicate” propaganda organ in 2014, Schäuble previously called for a global taxation regime in a piece called Why Taxation Must Go Global,one of his many calls for more globalism and statism.


So what would a new “Marshall Plan” for the Middle East and Africa look like? A brief history of the original Marshall Plan might offer some clues. Officially known as the “European Recovery Program,” or ERP, the scheme involved transferring the equivalent of almost $150 billion in today’s dollars from U.S. taxpayers to Western European governments. The ostensible purpose was to help rebuild Europe after World War II. In practice, though, it served as a key tool in the transformation of Western Europe into a statist region dominated by Big Government and supranational institutions, eventually culminating in the subjugation of Europeans under the unaccountable EU super-state. That was the goal all along.


As far back as 1947, then-U.S. Secretary of State George Marshall (CFR) — a key player in handing China to Chairman Mao’s murderous communists, and perhaps mass-murdering dictator Joseph Stalin’s most important ally in the world — called for European “economic cooperation” as a precondition for the desperately needed American aid after the war. “It is already evident that, before the United States government can proceed much further in its efforts to alleviate the situation and help start the European world on its way to recovery, there must be some agreement among the countries of Europe as to the requirements of the situation and the part those countries themselves will take in order to give proper effect to whatever action might be undertaken by this Government,” said Marshall, the man after whom the scheme was named. “The initiative, I think, must come from Europe.... The program should be a joint one, agreed to by a number, if not all European nations.” The Committee of European Economic Cooperation responded with a major report signed by government representatives from across Europe outlining efforts to create a “customs union” that could eventually lead to even further cooperation. U.S. officials were pleased.


Members of Congress even tried to get language in the statement of purpose for the original Marshall Plan bill of 1948 explicitly declaring that it was the policy of the United States to encourage the economic unification and the political federation of Europe. In the end, language calling for the development of economic cooperation was included instead. The next year, the “political federation” amendment was pursued again, with the result being the addition of the sentence: “It is further declared to be the policy of the people of the United States to encourage the unification of Europe.” By 1951, Congress finally came out and said it openly, with a clause included in the 1951 Mutual Security Act stating that its purpose was “to further encourage the economic unification and the political federation of Europe.”


The goals of U.S. government support for European integration were explained in part decades ago, though largely ignored, by top U.S. officials. On September 20, 1966, for example, then-Under Secretary of State George Ball (CFR) testified before Congress on the State Department’s view on forming an “Atlantic Community,” essentially merging the United States with Europe. “I find little evidence of any strong interest among Europeans for any immediate move toward greater political unity with the United States,” he explained. “They fear the overwhelming weight of U.S. power and influence in our common councils.... We believe that so long as Europe remains merely a continent of medium- and small-sized states there are definite limits to the degree of political unity we can achieve across the ocean.” Globalism was the agenda then, just as it is today.


Creating a Middle East Union

Not coincidentally, the new “Marshall Plan” is being pushed by the same globalist establishment that has been openly advancing the imposition of a “Middle East Union” on the region in recent years. “Just as a warring [European] continent found peace through unity by creating what became the EU, Arabs, Turks, Kurds and other groups in the region could find relative peace in ever closer union,” claimed Mohamed “Ed” Husain, a former caliphate-seeking Islamist and current “adjunct senior fellow for Middle Eastern studies” at the CFR, in a piece published in the Financial Times and on the CFR website in mid-2014. “After all, most of its problems — terrorism, poverty, unemployment, sectarianism, refugee crises, water shortages — require regional answers. No country can solve its problems on its own.” That is, of course, nonsense, but it is standard globalist rhetoric.


Plenty of other globalists have offered similar admissions. It has become fashionable for establishment figures and their hangers-on to compare today’s Middle East with Europe before the EU. Indeed, Richard Haass, the CFR boss and a former leader at the U.S. State Department, writing in Soros’ Project Syndicate, does precisely that. In an incredible admission, Haass explains, without admitting the CFR’s giant role in instigating all of the tragedies he mentions, that the CFR-backed globalist wars of the last decade and a half were crucial in setting the region on fire — the same blaze that now supposedly can only be extinguished by a CFR-inspired “Middle East Union.” The globalist strategy used over and over again goes like this: Create a problem, then exploit and manage the inevitable reaction to push a “solution.”


“The 2003 Iraq war was highly consequential, for it exacerbated Sunni-Shia tensions in one of the region’s most important countries and, as a result, in many of the region’s other divided societies,” Haass wrote. “Regime change in Libya [by Obama, the UN, NATO, and CFR apparatchiks] has created a failing state; lukewarm support for [CFR- and Soros-backed] regime change in Syria has set the stage for prolonged civil war.” And the chaos, bloodshed, and terror will continue, he says, until “a new local order emerges or exhaustion sets in.” In the meantime, globalists should treat the region as a “condition to be managed,” Haass said. How convenient — the CFR sets a fire, and now purports to have the fire extinguisher, promising a raging inferno unless and until everyone submits to the globalist demands, including a new regional “order,” which, as in “new world order,” is globalist-speak for transnational government.


Of course, Husain, Haass, and the CFR are not alone. In 2011, the Islamist president of Turkey at the time, Abdullah Gül, also called for an EU-style regime to rule the Middle East. Speaking in the United Kingdom, Gül claimed “an efficient regional economic cooperation and integration mechanism” was needed for the region. “We all saw the role played by the European Union in facilitating the democratic transition in central and Eastern Europe after the fall of the Berlin Wall,” he claimed. Islamic Turkey is also working to join the EU.


Various Middle Eastern tyrants have echoed the calls for a regional regime, too — the kings of Saudi Arabia and Jordan, for example. As Husain pointed out, the radical Muslim Brotherhood and the terrorist group Hamas are also working to unify the Middle East under one single tyrannical government of gargantuan proportions. With financial backing from the West under a new “Marshall Plan” and the bloodshed fueled by globalist-engineered wars, not to mention EU and UN support, the plot could easily become a reality.


Further Empowering the European Union

Also being advanced using the refugee crisis is the further empowerment of the EU itself, the regional government created thanks in large part to the original Marshall Plan. Among the various schemes allegedly needed to deal with the immigrant influx is the creation of military outfits — a border and coast-guard force — ostensibly aimed at “protecting Europe’s borders” from the immigration tsunami. The force would also fight “transnational crime and terrorism,” according to an EU outline of the scheme. The plan calls for mandatory biometric ID checks to come or go from the super-state’s territory, so everyone can be checked against Interpol’s databases.


Most alarmingly, perhaps, the EU military force would be able to “intervene” in European nations — even without permission from national authorities, as long as EU bosses claim the situation is “urgent.” In fact, even if the nation “considers that there is no need for additional intervention” from the new EU force, it could still be imposed by Brussels. The force would also have the power to commandeer national governments’ resources, something even the U.S. federal government cannot do to state or local authorities.


At the national level, some European officials were appalled. Creating such a structure “that is independent of member states is shocking,” said Polish Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski, noting that nobody even knew who the force would be accountable to. Greek and Swedish officials also spoke out.


Among EU leadership, though, it is par for the course. “Managing Europe’s external borders must be a shared responsibility,” claimed European Commission “First Vice President” Frans Timmermans with the Dutch Labor Party, a Bilderberg summit attendee. Noting that the new force could take over the management of national borders in some circumstances, the globalist official claimed, “It is essential to restore the credibility of our border management system.”


Meanwhile, EU officials and apparatchiks have taken to shrieking whenever a government actually takes serious actions to “restore the credibility” of border management. The howls have been especially pronounced when border checks were re-introduced along some intra-EU borders. When Hungarian authorities tried to stop the tsunami with a fence along the border with Serbia, for instance, eurocrats were fuming. In a letter sent to the government of Hungary, the European Commission — essentially the unelected regime now ruling Europe — blasted the use of troops on the border, complained about criminal sanctions imposed on illegal immigrants who damage the fence, and demanded that refugees stop being denied entry on the grounds that they transitted through a safe country. In short, actually guarding the borders appears to be the last thing on the EU’s agenda, except as an excuse to create a paramilitary force with powers to intervene in member nations.


Also at the top of the EU-empowerment agenda is a new agency in charge of refugees, with the power to resettle refugees in EU members against their will. A number of Eastern European governments have fought back against the plot, but it continues to advance, having already allocated a number of immigrants throughout the bloc. Last year the EU agreed to relocate 40,000, with that number set to balloon even further. (More than a million others are simply staying in nations where they registered without involvement with EU.)


For the UN, even all of that has not been enough. “UNHCR is deeply disappointed that although a majority of member States were in agreement with a wider relocation proposal involving 120,000 people, a final consensus on this could not be reached,” a UNHCR spokesperson said after the EU approved the deal. “Decisive agreement is needed without further delay to address the needs, as is bold action based on solidarity from all member States.” The then- “High Commissioner” himself, former Socialist International boss António Guterres, has also been loudly demanding that the EU usurp all power over asylum and resettlement. In other words, more assaults on sovereignty.


Some Europeans, though, have seen through the scheming and the exploitation of the refugee crisis by the Brussels-based super-state to advance its radical agenda. “Is Western Europe to be a series of democratic nation states that govern themselves, control their borders and trade with each other, or is the supra nationalist agenda of Brussels going to win? That’s the real debate that’s going on,” said EU Parliamentarian and U.K. Independence Party chief Nigel Farage.

Separately, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has described the orchestrated refugee tsunami as a tool of a “treasonous conspiracy” to destroy nationhood, Western civilization, and Christendom. “Ladies and gentlemen, what we face is nothing less than the challenge of finding ourselves at the gateway to the implementation of a deliberate conceptual project, which could be described as left-wing and which seeks to marginalize the nation states of Europe,” he told his countrymen. “Where this project has failed to overcome Christianity and the identity of the nation state — and the values and responsibility springing from it — in conventional political struggle, it will strive to eliminate it on ethnic grounds.”


Beyond crushing sovereignty, the crisis is also advancing assaults on liberty. Especially useful to the assault on individual freedoms has been the threat of terrorism posed by the influx of millions of Muslims, at least some of whom are and will be radicalized.


ISIS has been boasting that its operatives are among the refugees, and U.S. presidential contender Ben Carson even said it would be “jihadist malpractice” not to send terrorists into the West among the immigrants. He is right, of course, as the Paris attacks last year showed. Now, the jihadists will be used as the justification to wage war on liberty.


Already, as The New American has documented extensively, “Islamic” terror — much of it fomented behind the scenes by globalists and communists — is being used as a pretext to radically expand government. Just last year, EU “police,” known as Europol, announced the creation of a new unit to censor the Internet under the guise of fighting “extremism.” In Britain, authorities are cracking down on homeschoolers and Sunday schools under the guise of rooting out Islamic extremism. Attacks on gun rights, free speech, and more are all advancing under the guise of stopping “Islamic terrorism” and “Islamic extremism.” And as millions of Muslims continue to flood Europe, the totalitarian advances will only accelerate.

The end game is clear: using the increasingly powerful regional blocs such as the European Union, the African Union, Putin’s Eurasian Union, and the Middle East Union as building blocks to build what globalists such as Soros, Bush, Clinton, Biden, and others often refer to in public as their “New World Order.” In his recent book World Order, globalist operative and former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger laid out the plan. “The contemporary quest for world order [world government] will require a coherent strategy to establish a concept of order [regional government] within the various regions and to relate these regional orders [governments] to one another,” he wrote. State Department documents going back decades outline the same strategy.

If humanitarianism were truly the motivation, countless experts have pointed out, it would be radically more cost effective, not to mention humane, to help refugees and victims of globalist wars closer to their homes. Literally 25 to 50 times more people could be supported in Lebanon or Jordan than in Europe for the same amount of tax funds. The wars that destroyed Middle Eastern countries and caused the crisis to begin with would never have been launched if the purported “humanitarian concerns” of the establishment were genuine. Instead, the agenda is to advance globalism, pure and simple, and the establishment seems barely interested in concealing it anymore.

In short, the “refugee crisis” appears to have been engineered in yet another typical example of what legendary French philosopher Frédéric Bastiat described as concocting the antidote and the poison in the same laboratory. Now that the deed is done, politicians and establishment figures are pointing out the obvious while exploiting the inevitable public reaction. Hopefully the people of Europe and the world will be smarter than to fall for the ruse yet again, as the consequences are deadly serious.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
jm's picture

Stupid to presume any one or any group has this much control over events.

History is made by mistakes and well-intentioned idiots doing exactly the wrong things at the wrong time.

Dr. Engali's picture

It's even dumber to suggest that a powerful group of people couldn't coordinate a series of events that will change the landscape of the globe. If you don't think that creating chaos in the Middle East and then opening the borders to allow an invasion while marginalizing dissenters wasn't by design then you are a fool.

jm's picture

Man plans, God laughs.  

Some bureaucrat in one department plans destabilizing Syria so that a pipeline to the EU can be built. Another bureaucrat reads some economic theory textbook and cooks up an idea to import a bunch of high breeding savages. Because... well... GDP.  They never coordinate or even talk to each other. The police in Belgium can't even talk to each other when there is an imminient terrorist threat! I'm supposed to believe these idiots deliberately shape the contours of history?!?

This is how history more or less "works". A bunch of clowns thinking they are in control all the while making everything worse.  And people on top are in perpetual spin control mode.

VWAndy's picture

You learnt that in school?

jm's picture

The school of hard knocks.

jm's picture

Give me facts, not emotion.

VWAndy's picture

Fact. They had the Patriot act ready to go before 9/11. All 17000 pages.

WTFRLY's picture

and VWAndy is your liberty award winner for this thread.

jm's picture

The Patriot Act was was ready to go years before it was called the Patriot act.  As Rham said famously "never waste a good crisis".

Fact. The legislation has been used by an agency that has nothing to do with security or defense... the IRS. More than any other reason, it is deployed to secure tax revenue. The government got a new tool for bill collectors. becasue ti sure doesn't work to stop marathn bombings.

Certainly doesn't follow that 9/11 was a inside job or that Jews did it or any of the other stupid articles of faith conspiracy nuts hold dear.

VWAndy's picture

Facts can just bounce right off a good dogma.

jm's picture

Occam's razor isn't a dogma.  Conspiracy nuts wear dogma like a stamp stamp.

VWAndy's picture

What was it you were just sayin about name calling?


jm's picture

The truth isn't name calling.

VWAndy's picture

Boy you do say some stupid stuff. The truth can be a mean and nasty thing. Thats why they call female dogs bitches.

jm's picture

Thanks for the laughs.

quadraspleen's picture

My karma ran over my dogma

Ms No's picture

"...More than any other reason, it is deployed to secure tax revenue."

Where is all of this evidence that the Patriot act was all about the IRS?  Thank gawd, I was worried for a minute that our constitution and rights may be at stake.  Luckily rationalists such as yourself can help put these nutter concerns to rest.  Occam's razor?  WTF

jm's picture

In spite of any terrorism-stopping intent: the IRS, more than any other agency, has used the act to snag tax cheats. The Boston marathon shows it hasn't worked in its purported intent to stop terrorism.  Other agencies opportunistically used its content in other ways like tax revenue. 


Ms No's picture

Money isn't the only motive in the world.  When two or more people conspire together to commit a crime, which is essentially the definition of conspiracy, you can often follow the money.  If that's the only motive that people can see then how would one catch psychopath pedophile?  That's not about money it's about power and twisted psychology.  Power is probably your second prevalent motive.  Some people already have limitless money and all that is left is control.

jm's picture

I'm not trying to explain proper motives are how the universe works. This isn't possible. I am saying that there is no vast political plan in place that executes history.  The article posits that everything going on in Europe and the Middle East is going according to some plan.

I see no proof of this and think the idea preposterous.  This obviously offends many strongly-held beliefs.

Ms No's picture

There are always "vast political plans" in place.  Whether or not they are successful is another story.  Just the creation of a nation alone is a vast political plan.  So is war or a central banking system.  These things don't create themselves.  I am actually conspiring to kill a neighbors tree on the fence line right now.  We will see if it works.

jm's picture

Not sure you read the article very well.  According to it, the chaos of the Middle East is happening because a plan is being executed with precision. No proof is given. 


Ms No's picture

I was referring to your comment.  Still waiting on the IRS info.  You know, the vast conspiracy to pass the Patriot Act in order to catch tax cheats? 

DeathMerchant's picture

What's the old saying about forest and trees???

jwoop66's picture

I'm inclined to agree with you, jm.  There is no one plan.  It would be too complex to carry out. especially as some think, it started with the napoleonic wars and they've been manipulating everything in detail ever since.  Why do they plan so much failure and so many setbacks in their plans?    


I'm sure there are many conspiracies.  A lot of them competing.  The original Rothschilds would probably have thousands of descendents now.  I bet, like most families, half of them can't stand the other half and are still pissed about "that time ten years ago when you screwed me over" type shit.    Especially since most of those super wealthy types are (probably) raised with an extreme sense of entitlement.  

guitarzaan's picture

17,000 pages?  Really?


My PDF viewer shows 132 pages.




Another eventually futile attmpt by mankind to control entropy.

SillySalesmanQuestion's picture

Dear jm,
You are a BBB (Bruised Brain Bastard or Bitch)sufferer, no doubt caused by repeated blows to your head, while attending The School of Hard Knocks...or are you a recent graduate of Emory University?

jm's picture

Dear salesman,

The last refuge of the man with no legs to stand on is to flail around throwing insults.

Dr. Engali's picture

Said the man slinging insults.

jm's picture

Sorry that "conspiracy nut" offends you. Please provide a more PC term that doesn't offend you sensibilities.

VWAndy's picture

Hahahahahaha. Look up its origin.

Clashfan's picture

Coined and popularized purposefully by the CIA and its media minions to degrade and shame folks who researched the JFK assassination and refused to accept the ludicrous, official narrative.

Omen IV's picture

Cause and effect are critical path facts not emotion

These people walked in mass -  most of which are men - hasnt happened this way in 1,000 years -

Facts =  chaos  in each state - Libya / Syria / Iraq / Afghanistan / Yemen were NOT necessary  - gaddafi was minding his own business for 40 years  until Obama / Clinton got involved - sure Syria was a pipeline request for SA / Qatar  to limit Russia and Iran but the rest?

CFR is creating catalysts - you can sense the energy and speed is accelerating - it's as if  - as David Rockefeller reaches terminal point he wants to see it all finished before he leaves

Bananamerican's picture

"Give me facts, not emotion."

here's a fact. you can suck my dick.

snodgrass's picture

James Warburg, you know, one of those Jewish international bankers, said in an appearance before the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on February 17, 1950, "We shall have world government, whether or not we like it. The question is only whether world government will be achieved by consent or by conquest."

new game's picture

read my comment above. there is a fly in the ointment, called islam, but i think the bankers will prevail...

MalteseFalcon's picture

David Rockefeller also copped to the NWO.  He's on his last legs.  Maybe that's why the rush.

CFR?  Tri-laterals?  Bildebergers?  Any number of think tanks directly connected to world leaders?  Bohemian Grove?  The pyramid that is international banking?  BIS?  Rothschilds?

These guys all talk a lot.

It's not about sports.

justdues's picture

Council on Foreign Relations ? Hard knocks to your brain ?


back to basics's picture

Not likely, my guess simply by having the ability to think.

Dr. Engali's picture

You're thinking small potatoes. The bureaucrats don't do any planning. All they do is carry out orders handed down from higher up. They're pasties in in the grand scheme of things. They carry out their duties without even knowing that there is a larger plan.

jm's picture

Let me break it to you striaght: there is no grand scheme of things.  Just myopic politicians with no vision hatsover but to stay in power as long as tey can.  They have to look "smart" like everything is going according to "plan" because the cardinal, unforgivable sin of a poliician is to look as stupid as they really are. You're just buying into what they peddle on a daily.

We're all stupid in the same way the minute we think we have it all figured out.  Nobody or group ever will. 


Dr. Engali's picture

Once again you don't get it. The politicians mean nothing. Their only purpose is to give the illusion of representation and to confuse and divide the country. In exchange they get a small amount of wealth (a pittance compared to their owners), and all the _________(insert sexual deviancy of choice here) that they want. The only requirement is that they don't go too far off script. How on earth do you think they had the patriot act ready , a 17,000 page document, ready days after 911?

jm's picture

Zeus' butthole.

OK. So it isn't bureaucrats. It isn't politicians.

Corporations?  Then shareholders are the beneficiaries. The C-suite? They are managers that work for stock options--inherently short-term in vision.

Some shadowy cabal/deep state/neferious ya-ya peoplehood? Well, the billionaires and their lackeys that like to meet in Davos and stroke their egos lost as much in 2008-2009 as everybody else did. 

Vested interests of a more shadowy sort? Explain how Trump has been able to upend all possible plans they have laid.


Once again, the Patriot Act (thank Andy for bringing it up, BTW).  It was a written years before the 9/11, laying around waiting for an opportunity to sail through Congress. The intent? To snag tax cheats.  But you won't pass a bill called the "IRS Empowerment Act". So you use a crisis and wrap it up in a "Patriot Act" package. This doesn't prove any kind of plan, just short-term opportunism.

There is no Foundation; it is science fiction.  I understand the need to believe is strong, but it is a blind faith. 


VWAndy's picture

The mental gymnastics should be a sport with prizes for all. Nice touch sliding DT in by the way.

jm's picture

Well, I'm honestly left guessing as to who is calling the shots in the mythology.  There never is a clear explanation of this. As soon as it is clarified the whole construction dissolves like water.

VWAndy's picture

I have no idea who is runing it. But I can say for sure it is under some form of multi generational control. That much is clear.

jm's picture

Pray tell how are rational people (no offense meant, used purely by definition) supposed to believe in the existence of a multigeneratonal control group without any proof?

How can you believe this while admitting in the same breath that you have no idea who they are?


Good night. 


VWAndy's picture

Well its pretty simple. I can prove the control system exists. The who I cant prove up to my standards.

Ms No's picture

The article did a very good job establishing motive.  The is a common investigative tactic.  You determine who benefits then you find evidence to support it.  The evidence is everywhere.  History is full of this tactic being used.  Every war is a banker war.  Divide and conquer is the number one rule of war and everybody already knows who runs the show and where it began, when the Rothschilds created a central bank.  As of yet very few political systems have withstood the cental banking coups, even our own that arguably was designed to prevent it.  Any direction you point is an example.