The past year in general has been a firestorm of news events, many of them misrepresented by the mainstream media but nevertheless important signals that the economic, social and geopolitical systems we are familiar with are changing or destabilizing rapidly. It is important to understand, however, that the implications of these events have been building for YEARS, not for mere weeks or months. They are not sudden and inexplicable consequences of “linchpin theory”, the outcome of these events was pre-planned and engineered far in advance.
This does not mean that establishment interests including globalists will necessarily get what they want. Which is why I believe they intend to produce multiple crises at once, hoping that at least a few will produce the effects they desire in the population. I call it the “scattershot strategy”; by creating a swarm of manipulated “bullets” of social/psychological leverage each with the same intended target, the result becomes more certain and predictable. Much like smashing troops into the same point in a line of defense over and over again – eventually it is more likely to break where you expect it to break.
Some of these scattershot events are a little more obvious than others, at least in terms of how they are handled. Not all of them are started by the globalists, but all of them are certainly seen as opportunities for exploitation. Here are three of the latest events that I believe represent a dire end-game if the public is not made aware that their reactions to the events are just as important if not more important as the events themselves.
1. The Murder Of Jamal Khashoggi
Few of us had ever heard of Saudi Arabian journalist Jamal Khashoggi a month ago, and most in the public still have no clue as to the implications of his death. I’m not going to theorize much on the reasons why the Saudi government apparently trapped Kashoggi in their consulate in Istanbul, Turkey and then allegedly tortured him to death. The mainstream theory is that this was punishment for the journalist’s escape from Saudi Arabia and subsequent criticisms of Prince Mohammad bin Salman, the rising dictator within the Saudi regime.
Why did Khashoggi willingly and stupidly enter a Saudi consulate, considered sovereign Saudi soil, when he knew he was a potential target for the government? Why would Saudi agents murder the journalist in such an obvious way and in such an obvious place? If he was such a threat, why not kill him away from a Saudi facility? Why not make it look like a robbery or an accident?
It seems to me that normal procedures for assassination were not followed in the slightest when it came to Jamal Kashoggi. And, as Turkish authorities released information on Saudi involvement, the normal attempts at cover-up by multiple governments were missing. This story could have been muddled in a fog of disinformation leading away from Saudi Arabia, but it wasn’t.
The consequences are immense. The end of diplomatic relations with Saudi Arabia could result on the part of Western nations. There is even talk of Prince Salman being removed from power and his “Vision for 2030” economic plan going the way of the dodo. I see this as highly unlikely, though.
While the mainstream misrepresents Salman’s economic plan as a means to make Saudi Arabia less dependent on oil, the Vision for 2030 was primarily about distancing Saudi Arabian oil from dependency on U.S. and Western markets.
The decoupling of the U.S. from Saudi Arabia has been in the making for years. This is not something new, or something that would be decided by the killing of a single Saudi journalist. From the passage of a bill by Congress to make the Saudi government liable for damages during the 9/11 attacks, to Saudi threats to dump $750 billion in U.S. assets (under the Obama Administration), to the Saudi atrocities in Yemen, to the rise of Mohammad bin Salman through extortion, there is no shortage of reasons why the U.S. and Saudi Arabia might end relations.
I am of course talking about mainstream narrative, here. The deeper issue at hand is that globalists are seeking an end to the U.S. dollar as the world reserve currency and the petro-currency, and Saudi Arabia is a key catalyst to breaking the dollar’s back in a way that makes it appear as though global banks had nothing to do with the situation.
As I have been pointing out for quite some time, Mohammad bin Salman’s Vision for 2030 is not his vision; it is part of a larger globalist dynamic for a completely centralized world monetary system and economy. Salman’s Vision for 2030 is bankrolled through his Public Investment Fund (PIF) by well know n globalist institutions like the Carlyle Group, Goldman Sachs, Blackstone and Blackrock.
Saudi separation from the U.S. has been ongoing, including far reaching oil trade deals with China and Russia , two countries seeking to remove the dollar in bilateral trade. The moral question of trade relations with a tyranny like Saudi Arabia is not what I am questioning here. I am simply pointing out the US dollar's dependency on petro-status, which is tied inexorably to Saudi oil.
The path has already been set. The murder of Khashoggi and its exposure does not hurt globalist intentions, it actually HELPS them by creating a narrative in which the Saudi move away from the U.S. becomes a product of “random chaos” rather than part of a “vision” funded by globalists. If Prince Salman is removed from the equation (an action I am doubtful will take place), the "Vision for 2030" will continue.
Even with Donald Trump’s apparent apprehension to break aggressively from the Saudis over the issue, Congress has already suggested they will move ahead with actions against the vital oil nation without the White House.
Is this to say that Khashoggi was killed in order to create a geopolitical linchpin to aid globalist schemes for de-dollerization? No. Khashoggi is not that important. But this is certainly an event that the globalists and the media they control seem intent on exploiting, adding weight to a long running plan to divide the US from its key oil partner and thus ending the petro-dollar without any links back to them.
2, The Immigrant Caravan
Illegal immigration is a pillar issue within U.S. politics, at least in terms of conservatives and their support far any particular piece of legislation or government action. My position is the conservative one because it is the logical one – I am not against immigration as long as it is done legally. Open border policies are a travesty that create an influx of people who do not necessarily share the values set forth in the American Constitution. We have already seen the economic and social disasters that have befallen Europe due to their open border policies, and it would be foolish to repeat that process here. No foreign person has a “right” to access to the U.S., just as no American has a right to access to any other country.
Now comes the part of this issue that conservatives might not want to hear.
Is illegal immigration a form of invasion? I would say yes, especially if it is being encouraged or funded by globalist interests. That said, we must be careful not to respond to this invasion as if it is a military one. It isn’t.
Why? Because military invasions require military responses, and military responses invariably lead to more power for governments. Troops on the southern border of the U.S. might sound rational given the circumstances, but I would remind liberty movement activists of a little program they should all be familiar with: Rex 84 and Operation Garden Plot.
As I warned in my article ‘How A Collapse In South America Could Trigger Martial Law In The U.S.‘, published in 2016, the globalists have long been planning a potential trigger for martial law measures in America using a southern border “invasion” as a rationale. The exposure of Rex 84 came unexpectedly during the Iran/Contra hearings, and the documents are available to read here.
Rex 84 mentions the use of facilities, or detention camps, as a means to control the hypothetical border invasion. This led to the long running “conspiracy theory” of so-called FEMA camps. The pre-existence of FEMA camps is not an issue I delve into (as we saw during Katrina, a sports stadium could easily be turned into a FEMA camp in a matter of days). That said, the posture of the Trump Administration at this time due to the coming migrant caravan reminds me in a disturbing way to the script outlined in Rex 84.
How far will Trump go to secure the border? Will he declare martial law on the border as he seems ready to do? Would it stop at the border, or would it spread like a cancer? After all, once martial law is used to deal with unruly migrants, why not use it to deal with unruly leftists? Will conservatives go against their constitutional principles and support such a policy?
There is a good reason why the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 was passed. Originally, it prevented the use of military as law enforcement within the US unless an act of Congress bid otherwise. Of course, George W. Bush and the Neo-cons changed all that with the John Warner Defense Authorization Act, an act that was barely covered by the mainstream media at the time, and which gives the President full power to declare martial law unilaterally.
Some people may argue that Posse Comitatus is an outdated concept and that other protections are in place to prevent a totalitarian outcome. But are there really any protections?
As Gen. Wesley Clark once publicly proclaimed in an MSNBC interview, internment camps could be used in the U.S. for anyone considered “disloyal to the U.S.” Trump has recently announced a plan for "tent cities" for incoming migrants, which, again, sounds a lot like the plan described in Rex 84.
Where would the dominoes stop once they start to fall? I suggest that they will not stop. I suggest that if we support martial law measures on the southern border rather than revamping existing border patrol agencies and building that wall that Trump was so fond of promising, the end result will be martial law measures applied to the rest of us as outlined in Rex 84.
3. Trump’s War With The Federal Reserve
I predicted Trump’s eventual war with the Fed over a year ago, and I have written on the dangers if such a war recently, so I will not go into as much detail on this event. I will say that like the immigrant caravan, this is another issue in which conservatives could be tricked into reactingwithout thinking of the long game.
In my article ‘The Economic End Game Explained‘, I outline the strategy being used by globalists to diminish the U.S. economy as a means to open the door to mass support for a global monetary system controlled by the IMF and possibly the BIS. This is a strategy they have openly discussed in their own publications.
To be clear, the Fed has indeed acted as a destructive force within the U.S. economy. Fed officials have openly admitted on numerous occasions to creating and then bursting financial bubbles that have led to disastrous results for the American public. Jerome Powell, the current Fed chairman, warned in 2012 of the eventual and pervasive market crash that would occur if the Fed raised interest and cut balance sheet assets while markets were still addicted to easy credit. Now, he is enacting those exact policies knowing what will happen.
While I fully support the dismantling of the Federal Reserve as a saboteur of the U.S. economy, what I am concerned about is who will rebuild the U.S. system afterwards? A White House war on the Fed will help cause the death of the dollar’s world reserve status. This is a guarantee. Our economy is utterly dependent on this status for it’s continued stability.
You see, the globalists have created a Catch-22; if conservatives do not shut down the Fed, the Fed will continue raising rates and cutting its balance sheet into economic weakness just as they historically always have. The “everything bubble” will burst and a collapse will result. If we shut down the Fed our currency will lose reserve status and dollars held overseas will come flooding back into the U.S. through various channels causing hyperinflation (among other things). A collapse is unavoidable.
Again, who will be in charge of the rebuilding? Will it be the American public, or will it be the globalists? Given the fact that Trump retains banking elites and globalists within his own cabinet, we cannot rely on him to do the work in favor of a free citizenry. Conservatives should be very careful in the coming months as to who they support and why. Most narratives are NOT what they seem.
* * *
If you would like to support the publishing of articles like the one you have just read, visit our donations page here. We greatly appreciate your patronage.