Ever since its inception there have been those who have
warned that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, far from offering a simple "collective security" pact to ensure
the integrity of its member nations' borders, would in fact be used as an offensive tool of imperial adventurism
and conquest. Since the NATO-led Kosovo bombing campaign of 1999 at the very least, those fears have appeared more
and more justified.
Since that time, NATO has continued to take a lead role in more and more overtly
offensive campaigns of aggression in theatre after theatre. By now it is commonly understood to be an extension of
the Pentagon itself, a convenient international military instrument for Washington to wield whenever the pretense
of an international consensus cannot be achieved at the UN Security
Council. -- James Corbett
NATO is the first attempt in history to establish an aggressive
global military formation, one which currently includes a third of the nations of the world either as members or
partners, has members and partners on five continents and has conducted active operations on four, with the
potential to expand its reach into the remaining two where it has not yet officially intruded
itself...As NATO continues to expand across the globe
through a series of partnerships, initiatives and dialogues, what was once a collective security agreement is
increasingly becoming a global military strike force capable of bombarding, invading and occupying countries
anywhere in the world.
NATO as Global
Imperial Army - Rick Rozoff on GRTV
As NATO continues to expand across the globe through a series of partnerships,
initiatives and dialogues, what was once a collective security agreement is increasingly becoming a global military
strike force capable of bombarding, invading and occupying countries anywhere in the world. Through STOP Nato
International, activists like Rick Rozoff are performing the thankless task of raising awareness of the growing
threat to the world that NATO represents. Find out more about this important topic in this week's GRTV Feature
Terror in Central Asia: Nato's Great
In this age of manufactured terror, one of the most vital regions on the global
chessboard is also an area that few in the West know anything about: Central Asia. This geostrategic and
resource-rich area on the doorstep of China and Russia finds itself in the middle of an all out terror campaign.
But, as key national intelligence whistleblowers are pointing out, these terrorists are working hand-in-glove with
NATO. This is the GRTV Backgrounder on Global Research TV.
Ever since the staged false flag attacks of 9/11, the US
government and its complicit corporate media have focused their attention on fighting the shadowy, all-pervasive,
all-powerful, ill-defined and undefeatable “Al Qaeda” enemy that is supposedly menacing the US and its allies at
home and abroad. The term “Al Qaeda” of course is merely a cipher for “excuse to invade.” In the case of
Afghanistan, for instance, the US used the threat of Al Qaeda as the excuse for their 12 year long invasion and occupation of the country. In Libya and
Syria, the US and its allies are supporting those same self-described Al Qaeda-affiliated fighters. The ruse has long
since become obvious.
Less obvious, then, because it has been taking place completely under the radar of media attention, is another
front in the so-called war on terror: Central Asia and the Caucasus region. Encompassing the region surrounding the
Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, this area has long been identified as perhaps the most geostrategically vital part
of the globe. It provides access to the exceptionally rich Caspian oil and gas deposits, hosts the “New Silk Road,” a vital trade route between China and Europe, and sits on the doorstep of
China and Russia. And it just so happens to have a terrorist problem.
At first blush, it may seem odd that in this “age of terror” the American population has been told so little
about the growing terrorist insurgency in Central Asia and the Caucasus. But when examined in the light of regional
geopolitics, this deafening silence makes perfect sense.
Indications of how and why this region is so important come from numerous geostrategists, including Zbigniew
Brzezinski, Obama’s acknowledged mentor and a key advisor to his administration. In his 1997 book, The Grand
Chessboard, Brzezinski identified the Central Asian / Caucasus region as part of a larger area he called “The
The countries in this region, he wrote, are “of importance from the standpoint of security and historical
ambitions to at least three of their most immediate and more powerful neighbors, namely, Russia, Turkey, and Iran,
with China also signaling an increasing political interest in the region. But,” he continued, “the Eurasian Balkans
are infinitely more important as a potential economic prize: an enormous concentration of natural gas and oil
reserves is located in the region, in addition to important minerals, including gold.”
Brzezinski knew very well what he was writing about. As National Security Advisor under President Carter, he had
overseen Operation Cyclone, the US government’s since-declassified plan to arm, train and fund
Islamic radicals in Pakistan and Afghanistan to draw the Soviet Union into a protracted war in the region. This,
famously, led to the foundation of what became known as Al Qaeda in the 1980s, a point that Brzezinski has since
admitted and even bragged about, claiming that the creation of a “few stirred up
Muslims” helped to bring down the Soviet Union.
It is no surprise, then, that Brzezinski went on to predict in his 1997 book that the first major war of the
21st century would take place in this region, which is exactly what happened with the NATO invasion
of Afghanistan in 2001. And it is also no surprise that even NATO’s hand-picked Afghan President, Hamid Karzai, is
now openly accusing the US of supporting the Taliban in the country to convince the public
that they will need US protection after the planned troop withdrawal date in 2014.
Global Research contributor and Stop NATO International Director Rick Rozoff appeared on the Boiling Frogs Post podcast in 2011 to discuss this region and the
overlap between NATO’s strategic interests and Islamic extremism.
It has long been understood that the terror operations in Chechnya and other key parts of the Central Asia and
Caucasus region have been supported, funded and protected by NATO to help destabilize the region surrounding their
main geopolitical rivals, Russia and China, in an operation very similar to Operation Cyclone in the 70s and 80s.
This has, until now, remained mostly within the realm of speculation. But in a recent groundbreaking series of interviews on The Corbett Report, FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds has
confirmed that this is, in fact, exactly what is happening.
If it is true that the people perish for lack of knowledge, perhaps it is nowhere more true than in the phoney,
NATO-created war of terror. Without the understanding provided by Edmonds and others in identifying the Central
Asia / Caucasus terror campaign as a NATO proxy war, the entire concept of Islamic terrorism becomes inscrutable to
As this information will never be disseminated by the complicit corporate media,
it is vitally important that the people take this task into their own hands by sharing this information with others
and contributing to the analysis of the terror campaign being waged in the region.
The seeds of the next great world conflict are being sowed in Central Asia, on the
doorstep of Russia and China, and regardless of whether or not this conflict, too, is being manipulated and managed
behind the scenes, the lives of countless millions hang in the balance of the specter of that all-out war. Only an
understanding of NATO’s active complicity in fostering and protecting these Muslim extremists can help break the
tool of propaganda by which they will try to convince their population to acquiesce to such a
Rick Rozoff Calls Out the NATO Warmongers - Interview
Published on May 9, 2014
As Ukraine remains on a knife-edge of military tension, the NATO forces continue their Eastern
European expansion and military provocations. In this must-listen interview, Rick Rozoff of Stop NATO International
breaks down the history of NATO's global partnership program, its decades-long build-up in Eastern Europe, the
people and organizations in whom the fate of the world is increasingly hanging in the balance, and the small
glimmer of hope that an informed, galvanized public can derail this headlong rush to war.
The Crime of Aggression is the most serious crime a nation can commit. The condemnation
of this crime is rooted in both Natural and Biblical Law. The preparation for committing this crime almost caused
David his kingdom. In judgment upon David for planning this crime, God destroyed tens of thousands of David's
fighting men, and had David not repented, the nation of Israel itself would have been destroyed.
Sadly, almost no preacher even deals with this subject and almost no Christian has ever heard it explained.
Yet it is one of the most important laws dealing with nations in the entire Bible. The committing of this crime
constitutes much of the current crisis in America and the world today.
In this DVD, Dr. Baldwin explains this almost forgotten and extremely important doctrine.
This is a message you will likely hear nowhere else.
Vladimir Putin has a warning for the rest of the world as the globalists push us closer and
closer to nuclear war.
Help us spread the word about the liberty movement, we're reaching millions help us reach
millions more. Share the free live video feed link with your friends & family: http://www.infowars.com/show
Media Hypes Nuclear Threat in Turkey to Justify
Published on Aug 17, 2016
In this episode of Newsbud’s Spotlight with Sibel & Spiro, we examine the motives of the
recent hype and fear mongering by the media and think tanks concerning the US nuclear weapons currently stored at
NATO’s Incirlik Air Base in Turkey. It appears the Nukes are being used as a pretext for justification for US
action in Turkey, reminiscent of the media's false reporting of the WMD’s in Iraq and other fabricated stories to
Threatens Terror Attacks In Russia If
Moscow Keeps Fighting ISIS
Published on Sep 30, 2016
In extraordinary comments that have gone virtually unnoticed by the media, U.S. State Department
spokesman John Kirby threatened Moscow with terror attacks in Russian cities and even shoot downs of Russian jets
if Vladimir Putin continued his fight against ISIS in Syria.
What's REALLY Happening in
Published on Sep 28, 2016
The U.S. is HELPING ISIS and moving closer to war with Russia.
From criticism to direct threats in just 1 month: US-Russia tension
growing over Syrian crisis
Russia [Defends Itself] Launches
No Fly Zone...
Kaine: Hillary Goes “Toe to Toe with the Russkies”
Washington has threatened to impose "costs" on Russia outside the UN, over the Syrian
conflict. It may mark the starkest warning so far from the U.S., which has been ramping up
anti-Russian rhetoric in recent weeks, moving from criticism to direct threats. However just a
month ago, U.S.-Russia talks on the Syrian peace process seemed warm and friendly.
Alex Jones breaks down how a US response to Russia could lead to WW3.
Was it a Freudian slip or a flashback to a MAD mindset of Mutually Assured
Destruction? Kaine used the term “tote-to-toe with the Russians” 3 times, bragging about the how
Hillary restarted the Cold War as Secretary of State. We look at how the insanity of the Cold War
parodied by Stanley Kubrick in “Dr. Strangelove” is being brought back with an even more dangerous
spin. This time, we’re willing to start World War 3 over an alleged “cyber-attack” as Hillary
State Dept: We Never Said No Boots on the Ground in Syria
All America's Wars Begin with False Flags
(and WWIII Will Too)
Doublespeak. Noun. Language that deliberately obscures, disguises, distorts, or reverses the
meaning of words.
To the laughter and bewilderment of the press, retired Navy Rear Admiral turned
State Dept spokesperson John Kirby actually stood at a podium recently and claimed that Obama and
his administration never said there would be no boots on the ground in Syria.
This D.C. think tank jerk off blatantly admitted all of America's wars have traditionally begun
with false flag events, and they know they will need another one to get the war with Iran started
that they've been working on for so long.
This video is a few years old now, but it's more relevant today with what's going
on in the Middle East than ever. They don't teach you this in school, kids, but whatever happens
over there, just realize how absolutely manufactured all of it is.
The world once again finds itself hurtling to the brink of war, and once again the establishment
mouthpiece puppet propaganda media is leading the charge. This time around their lies defy description. In the sick
world of the would-be warmongers, child beheading terrorist scum are now the heroes. The blood of the innocents
that spill from here on in covers the hands of the mainstream media propagandists.
The world once again finds itself hurtling to the brink of war, and once again the establishment mouthpiece puppet
propaganda media is leading the charge. This time around their lies defy description. In the sick world of the
would-be warmongers, child beheading terrorist scum are now the heroes. The blood of the innocents that spill from
here on in covers the hands of the mainstream media propagandists.
effectual engines forpacifying a
nation are the public
papers...A despotic government alwayskeeps a kind of standing army of
newswriters who, without any regard to truth or to what should be like
truth,invent and put into the papers whatever might serve the ministers. This suffices with the
mass of the people who have no means of distinguishing the false from the true paragraphs of a
Jefferson to G. K. van Hogendorp, Oct. 13, 1785. --
At this point, most Americans are aware of
the staggering dishonesty and reality twisting that the mainstream, corporate news media engages in on a daily
And it is showing.
Numbers released by Pew Research show that major news channels like CNN, Fox News and MSNBC are in
a decline of prime time viewers.
Even reporters within the major networks have admitted that the media has been corrupted by
political and corporate interests.
This is what former CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson had to say:
There is unprecedented, I believe, influence on the media, not just the news, but the images
you see everywhere. By well-orchestrated and financed campaign of special interests, political interests and
corporations. I think all of that comes into play.
But if there was any indication that the mainstream press has no credibility and is on its way to
extinction, this latest poll is it.
From the Associated Press:
Trust in the news media is being eroded by perceptions of inaccuracy and bias, fueled in
part by Americans’ skepticism about what they read on social media.
Just 6 percent of people say they have a lot of confidence in the media, putting the news
industry about equal to Congress and well below the public’s view of other institutions. In this presidential
campaign year, Democrats were more likely to trust the news media than Republicans or independents.
Nearly 90 percent of Americans say it’s extremely or very important that the media get their
facts correct, according to the study. About 4 in 10 say they can remember a specific incident that eroded their
confidence in the media, most often one that dealt with accuracy or a perception that it was one-sided.
The news media have been hit by a series of blunders on high-profile stories ranging from
the Supreme Court’s 2012 ruling on President Barack Obama’s health care law to the Boston Marathon bombing that
have helped feed negative perceptions of the media.
In 2014, Rolling Stone had to retract a vivid report about an alleged gang rape at a
fraternity party at the University of Virginia. The Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, asked by Rolling Stone
to investigate after questions were raised about the veracity of the story, called it an avoidable journalistic
failure and “another shock to journalism’s credibility amid head-swiveling change in the media industry.”
There is only one thing that can save the mainstream media, and that is the truth.
But the truth is not why networks like MSNBC exist. They exist to deceive and play lapdog for the
More than ever the American people want the truth and accuracy when it comes to their news. This is
why we are seeing a huge rise in alternative media.
By just taking a look at the popular commercial web traffic data and analytics site, Alexa.com, we
see that alternative news sites are ranking very high inside the United States and globally.
The very popular and accurate ActivistPost.com is ranked in the top 16,000 websites inside the
United States and in the top 35,000 globally!
Just to put that in perspective, there are over 1 billion websites in all globally.
Considered to be the tip of the spear of the alternative news, Alex Jones’s Infowars.com is ranking
in the top 1,200 websites in the U.S. and the top 3,200 globally!
Alexa.com gathers data on a web page’s daily unique visitors and daily
Another great example of alternative news rising to mainstream popularity is James Corbett’s
CorbettReport.com. This stunning website is ranking in the top 150,000 globally and in the top 60,000 in the
When the first edition of The Media Monopoly was published in 1983, critics called Ben
Bagdikian's warnings about the chilling effects of corporate ownership and mass advertising on the nation's news
"alarmist." Since then, the number of corporations controlling most of America's daily newspapers, magazines, radio
and television stations, book publishers, and movie companies has dwindled from fifty to ten
Published on Apr 22, 2015
After the CIA recruits a 15 year old girl to lie to congress about baby killers from
Iraq, celebrities across the U.S. rally for war. Meanwhile CNN launches a collection of fake news broadcasts and
Whitney Houston wows the nation with her Super Bowl performance of the National Anthem.
Globalist Wars Killed Over 2 Million
People in Last Decade Propaganda has hidden toll from the American people
by Kurt Nimmo | Infowars.com | March 26, 2015
U.S. wars initiated at the behest of a global
financial elite killed more than 2,000,000 people, according to a report published by Physicians for Social
This investigation comes to the conclusion that the war has, directly or indirectly, killed around 1 million
people in Iraq, 220,000 in Afghanistan and 80,000 in Pakistan, i.e. a total of around 1.3 million. Not included
in this figure are further war zones such as Yemen. The figure is approximately 10 times greater than that of
which the public, experts and decision makers are aware of and propagated by the media and major NGOs. And this
is only a conservative estimate. The total number of deaths in the three countries named above could also be in
excess of 2 million, whereas a figure below 1 million is extremely unlikely.
The average American, the report notes, is a victim of a
massive propaganda campaign designed to propagate lies about these undeclared an illegal wars.
“A poll carried out by the Associated Press (AP) two years ago found that, on average, US citizens believe that
only 9,900 Iraqis were killed during the occupation,” the reports reads.
Physicians for Social Responsibility places the blame for this on the corporate media. The NGO, however, does
not indicate why the government and the establishment media deliberately downplay the death and destruction
inflicted by the Bush and Obama administrations, although they say the current “state of affairs could be very
different if the public were made aware that the actual number is likely to be more than a hundred times higher”
than the numbers reported by The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN, Fox, et al.
“The report is sure to fuel outrage over one of the most controversial wars in US history, one in which ‘the
original pretexts for going to war quickly turned out to be spurious, and from then on only the ‘liberation of the
country from a violent dictatorship’ and the “democratization” and “stabilization” of Iraq remained as
justification for the war and occupation,’” reports Sputnik, a news agency owned by the Russian government.
It may fuel outrage in Europe and Russia, where the media covers studies indicting the U.S. government and its
foreign policy, but is unlikely to do likewise in the United States.
Growing Support in U.S. For Unlimited War
In February the Pew Research Center reported growing support for the ISIS war. “The public has grown
more supportive of the U.S. fight against ISIS, as about twice as many approve (63%) as disapprove (30%) of the
military campaign against the Islamic militant group in Iraq and Syria. Last October, 57% approved and 33%
disapproved,” Pew reported.
Earlier this month a Quinnipiac poll showed American voters strongly in support of sending ground troops to
battle ISIS by more than a 2-to-1 margin.
In February a proposed a new Authorization for the Use of Military Force was left deliberately undefined
“because we believe it’s important that there aren’t overly burdensome constraints that are placed on the commander
in chief,” White House spokesman Josh
Critics interpret this to mean the executive branch of the government wants to expand the reach of the imperial
presidency and allow it to wage war against ill-defined enemies anywhere in the world.
Additionally, the administration believes the deliberately ambiguous AUMF will bring lawmakers together in a
bipartisan coalition calling for a war against the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq without restraint, including the
use of ground troops.
Only 6 corporations control what most of you see, hear and read every single day.
Darrin McBreen looks at the history of the CIA propaganda machine and the latest release from WikiLeaks that
reveals the Obama Administrations' cozy relationship with Sony Pictures. Are you being manipulated by the
Help us spread the word about the liberty movement, we're reaching millions help us reach millions more. we all
want liberty. Find the free live feed at http://www.infowars.com/watch-alex-jo...
DIVIDE AND CONQUER
1. To divide (a country, territory, etc.) into small,
quarrelsome, ineffectual states.
2. To divide (groups, areas, etc.) into
contending and usually ineffectual faction: a movement to balkanize minority
A divide and conquer strategy, also
known as “divide and rule strategy” is often applied in the arenas of politics
and sociology. In this strategy, one power breaks another power into smaller, more manageable pieces, and then
takes control of those pieces one by one. It generally takes a very strong power to implement such a strategy. In
order to successfully break up another power or government, the conqueror must have access to strong political,
military, and economic machines.
Furthermore, in order to maintain power
and influence, large governments will often work to keep smaller powers and governments from uniting. In fact,
this use of the principles within the divide and conquer strategy is most common. It is much easier to prevent
small powers from linking forces than to break them apart once they have aligned.
Leaders who use a divide and conquer
strategy may encourage or foster feuds between smaller powers. This kind of political maneuvering requires a
great understanding of the people who are being manipulated. In order to foster feuds, for example, one must
understand the political and social histories of the parties intended to take part in the
Brzezinski knew very
well what he was writing about. As National Security Advisor under President Carter, he had
Cyclone, the US government’s since-declassified
plan to arm, train and fund Islamic radicals in Pakistan and Afghanistan to draw the Soviet Union into a
protracted war in the region. This, famously, led to the foundation of what became known as Al Qaeda in the
1980s, a point that Brzezinski has sinceadmitted and even bragged about, claiming that the creation of a “few stirred up Muslims” helped to bring
down the Soviet Union.
Meet: Zbigniew Brzezinski Obama's
Foreign Policy Advisor
Zbigniew Brzezinski, Operation Cyclone
(Part 2 Alqaeda Doesn't Exist - A James
This installment of the documentary goes into Zbigniew Brzezinski, Operation Cyclone, the
ISI-CIA-MAK-US government funding circle and CIA connections to Osama Bin Laden. For more information about this
documentary, including a bibliography of works cited, please visit the documentary website:
(Part 3 Alqaeda
Doesn't Exist - A James Corbett Doc)
This installment of the documentary goes into Zbigniew Brzezinski, Operation Cyclone, the
ISI-CIA-MAK-US government funding circle and CIA connections to Osama Bin Laden. For more information about this
documentary, including a bibliography of works cited, please visit the documentary website:
The Battle for Ukraine Was Planned in 1997 … Or Earlier
Neoconservatives planned regime change throughout the
Middle East and North Africa
20 years ago. Robert Parry correctly points out that the Neocons have successfully “weathered the storm” of disdain after their Iraq war fiasco.But the truth
is that Obama has long
done his best to try to implement those Neocon plans.
In 1997, Obama’s former foreign affairs adviser, and president Jimmy Carter’s national
security adviser – Zbigniew Brzezinski – wrote a book called The Grand Chessboard arguing
arguing that the U.S. had to take control of Ukraine (as well as Azerbaijan, South
Korea, Turkey and Iran) because they were “critically important geopolitical pivots”.
Ukraine, a new and important space on the Eurasian chessboard, is a geopolitical pivot because its very
existence as an independent country helps to transform Russia. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian
However, if Moscow regains control over Ukraine, with its 52 million people and major resources as well as
access to the Black Sea, Russia automatically again regains the wherewithal to become a powerful imperial
state, spanning Europe and Asia.
And now Obama is pushing us into a confrontation with Russia over Ukraine and the Crimea.
Late last year when Ukraine’s now-ousted president Viktor Yanukovych surprisingly canceled plans for
Ukrainian integration into the European Union in favor of stronger ties with Russia, the US may have viewed
Ukraine as slipping even further out of its reach.
In today’s Ukraine, the US runs the risk of being affiliated with anti-Semitic neo-Nazis, a prospect it
probably feels can be controlled via a friendly western media. But even if the risk is high, the US likely
views it as necessary given the geopolitical importance of Ukraine, as Brzezinski mapped out in 1997.
In other words, Obama is following the same old playbook that the Neocons have been pushing for more than a
This article was posted: Sunday, March 16, 2014 at 8:44 am
Soros Admits Responsibility for Coup
and Mass Murder in Ukraine
Color revolution collaboration began soon after engineered
fall of Soviet Union
by Kurt Nimmo | Infowars.com | May 27, 2014
George Soros told CNN’s Fareed Zakaria over the weekend he
is responsible for establishing a foundation in Ukraine that ultimately contributed to the overthrow of the
country’s elected leader and the installation of a junta handpicked by the State Department.
“First on Ukraine, one of the things that many people recognized about you was that you during the revolutions
of 1989 funded a lot of dissident activities, civil society groups in eastern Europe and Poland, the Czech
Republic. Are you doing similar things in Ukraine?” Zakaria asked Soros.
“Well, I set up a foundation in Ukraine before Ukraine became independent of Russia. And the foundation has been
functioning ever since and played an important part in events now,” Soros responded.
It is well-known, although forbidden for the establishment media to mention, that Soros worked closely with
USAID, the National Endowment for Democracy (now doing work formerly assigned to the CIA), the International
Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, the Freedom House, and the
Albert Einstein Institute to initiate a series of color revolutions in Eastern Europe and Central Asia following
the engineered collapse of the Soviet Union.
“Many of the participants in Kiev’s ‘EuroMaidan’ demonstrations were members of Soros-funded NGOs and/or were
trained by the same NGOs in the many workshops and conferences sponsored by Soros’ International Renaissance
Foundation (IRF), and his various Open Society institutes and foundations. The IRF, founded and funded by Soros,
boasts that it has given ‘more than any other donor organization’ to ‘democratic transformation’ of Ukraine,”
writes William F. Jasper.
This transformation led to fascist ultra-nationalists controlling Ukraine’s security services. In April it was
announced Andriy Parubiy and other coup leaders were working with the FBI and CIA to defeat and
murder separatists opposed to the junta government installed by Victoria Nuland and the State Department.
Parubiy is the founder of a national socialist party in Ukraine and currently the boss of the country’s National
Security and Defense Council.
Now that the billionaire “chocolate king” Petro Poroshenko is president of Ukraine, the effort to wipe out all
opposition in eastern Ukraine will pick up steam. Poroshenko is a near perfect choice for the globalists and EU
apparatchiks. He sat on the Council of the National Bank of Ukraine and collaborated with the IMF, Wall Street and
the European Commission.
Poroshenko and the February coup leaders are now killing civilians in Donetsk as the effort continues to dislodge and eradicate
“pro-Russian militants” and “terrorists,” i.e., armed resistance fighters going up against Right Sector
enforcers possibly accompanied by American mercenaries with the help of the CIA. Civilians are also victims in
“rebel”-held Slovyansk and neighboring Kramatorsk as retaliation against resistance to the junta in Kyiv
The military response with its overly fascist character, including the terrorist torching of a trade union building in Odessa by “pro-regime rioters” (i.e.,
Right Sector paramilitaries), can be directly attributed to the activism of George Soros and the hands-on
approach of the U.S. State Department, various NGOs (which are, in fact, government and Wall Street fronts), and
USAID, NED, and the malattributed “Freedom House,” etc.
Following the murder and expulsion of those opposed to the IMF lording over the government and the people of
Ukraine, Russia can expect further provocation, especially now that it has stepped away from supporting the
resistance. The financial elite and their EU collaborators are determined to diminish and ultimately eliminate any
challenge by Russia and the BRICS as these countries move to counter the neoliberal financial agenda.
“The buildup of NATO air and ground forces along the borders of Russia in eastern Europe and President Barack
Obama’s American power-influencing trip to Asia have a single purpose,” Wayne Madsen wrote earlier this month. “The seen and unseen forces who dictate policy
to their political puppets in Washington, London, Paris, Brussels, Berlin, and other vassal capital cities have
decided to smash BRICS – the emergent financial power bloc encompassing Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South
The BFP Roundtable Takes on NATO, Russia, Turkey and the
"New Cold War"
Published on Apr 11, 2014
In this edition of the BFP Roundtable, Peter B. Collins, Guillermo Jimenez, James Corbett
and Sibel Edmonds discuss the latest moves in the formation of a so-called "new cold war" between NATO and Russia.
We also tackle Seymour Hersh and his recent article in the London Review of Books examining Turkish involvement in
the Syrian chemical weapons attack in Ghouta last year.
For more information on these stories, please visit BoilingFrogsPost.com.
Criminal governments armed Isis/Al-qaeda with weapons, including estimated 20,000
missiles to steal, kill, and to destroy for a New World Order.
Al-qaeda Assists In The
Destabilization Of Libya With GENOCIDE!
NATO-backed Libyan rebels are rounding up thousands of
innocent black migrants and taking them to prison camps as part of mass reprisals that include reports of
indiscriminate killings, mistreatment and torture, as the "humanitarian" veneer of the west's military
intervention quickly crumbles.
The Covert Origins of ISIS
ISIS is a product of U.S. government’s twisted and decrepit
by SCGNews | August 30, 2014
The Islamic militant group ISIS, formerly known as Al-Qaeda
in Iraq, and recently rebranded as the so called Islamic State, is the stuff of nightmares. They are ruthless,
fanatical, killers, on a mission, and that mission is to wipe out anyone and everyone, from any religion or belief
system and to impose Shari’ah law. The mass executions, beheadings and even crucifixions that they are committing
as they work towards this goal are flaunted like badges of pride, video taped and uploaded for the whole world to
see. This is the new face of evil.
Would it interest you to know who helped these psychopaths
rise to power? Would it interest you to know who armed them, funded them and trained them? Would it interest you to
This story makes more sense if we start in the middle, so we’ll begin with the overthrow of Muammar
Gaddafi in 2011.
The Libyan revolution was Obama’s first major foreign intervention. It was portrayed as an
extension of the Arab Spring, and NATO involvement was framed in humanitarian terms.
These jihadist militants from Iraq were part of what national security analysts commonly referred
to as Al-Qaeda in Iraq. Remember Al-Qaeda in Iraq was ISIS before it was rebranded. (Article
Continues on next page)
Al Qaeda's Dark Secret Exposed
In a special video address, Alex Jones terms the al Qaeda intelligence operation a 'swiss
army knife' for destabilization. Simply put, it is a tool to foment crisis that allows the globalists to offer
up a solution.The shadowy enemy supposedly run by Osama bin Laden and top jihadists like Anwar al-Awlaki is
really run out of U.S. foreign policy and the Pentagon. It is perhaps government's greatest hoax... and one of
the oldest tricks in the book.
For the average person who has lived through the phony 'War on Terror', a post-9/11 age of fear that has swirled
around the persona of bin Laden, it may be quite confusing to now read headlines like Libya: the West and al-Qaeda
on the same side. Indeed the rebel forces trying to topple Gaddafi admittedly include thousands of al Qaeda forces
while enjoying total backing-- weapons, planes, funding and forces-- from the U.S., Britain, NATO and other
The Globalists' Swiss Army
Knife for Destabilization
****THE PROCESSES OF
From time immemorial, royalty, priest
classes and other self-appointed elites have used any means necessary to dominate the population and keep it
divided amongst itself. Alex Jones uses the games of chess, risk and monopoly to explain the classic modes of
control used by rulers, representing classic warfare between two factions, world warfare with a complex
conflict, and, of course, economic warfare.
Full Spectrum Evil Secrets of Global
From time immemorial, royalty, priest
classes and other self-appointed elites have used any means necessary to dominate the population and keep it
divided amongst itself. Alex Jones uses the games of chess, risk and monopoly to explain the classic modes of
control used by rulers, representing classic warfare between two factions, world warfare with a complex conflict,
and, of course, economic warfare.
Now those techniques have advanced with sophistication into an era of full spectrum
dominance-- where gaming the people means an attempt to control all facets of life. Under the modern scientific
dictatorship, nations, individuals, economies, cultures and environments have all become pawns at the hands of
hardened, evil offshore globalists bent on manipulating our world in attempt to complete their break away
civilization and destroying the remains, including the great masses of humanity. They have willingly distorted our
information, food, water, political systems, financial interactions and beyond with precision. Only a public aware
of the scope of their designs can begin to fight against it.
The US military is in Afghanistan for two reasons. First to restore
and control the world’s largest supply of opium for the world heroin markets and to use the drugs as a geopolitical
weapon against opponents, especially Russia. That control of the Afghan drug market is essential for the liquidity
of the bankrupt and corrupt Wall Street financial mafia. ...The second reason the US military remains in
Afghanistan long after the world has forgotten even who the mysterious Osama bin Laden and his alleged Al Qaeda terrorist organization is or even if they exist, is as a pretext to
build a permanent US military strike force with a series of
permanent US airbases across Afghanistan. The aim of those bases is not to eradicate any Al Qaeda cells that may have survived in the caves of Tora Bora,
or to eradicate a mythical “Taliban” which at this point according to eyewitness
reports is made up overwhelmingly of local ordinary Afghanis fighting to rid their land once more of occupier
armies as they did in the 1980’s against the Russians.
The business of lending blood money is one of
the most thoroughly sordid, cold blooded, and criminal acts that were ever carried on, to any considerable extent,
amongst human beings. It is like lending money to slave traders, or to common robbers and pirates, to be repaid out
of their plunder. And theman who loans money to governments, so called, for the purpose of enabling the latter to
rob, enslave and murder their own people, are among the greatest villains that the world has ever seen.
With mountains of documentation, mostly from government and corporate sources, Sutton shows that
Soviet military technology is heavily dependent on U.S. and allied gifts, "peaceful trade" and exchange programs.
We've built for, sold, traded, or given outright to the Communists everything from copper wiring and military
trucks to tank technology, missile guidance technology, and computers - even the Space Shuttle.
Background on Professor Antony C.
Antony C. Sutton — Feb. 14,
1925 - June 17, 2002 Antony Sutton has been persecuted but never prosecuted for his research and subsequent
publishing of his findings. His mainstream career was shattered by his devotion towards uncovering the truth.
In 1968, his Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development was published by The Hoover Institute at
Stanford University. Sutton showed how the Soviet state's technological and manufacturing base, which was then
engaged in supplying the North Vietnamese the armaments and supplies to kill and wound American soldiers, was
built by US firms and mostly paid for by the US taxpayers. From their largest steel and iron plant, to
automobile manufacturing equipment, to precision ball-bearings and computers, basically the majority of the
Soviet's large industrial enterprises had been built with the United States help or technical
Professor Richard Pipes of Harvard said in his book,
Survival Is Not Enough: Soviet Realities and America's Future (Simon & Schuster;1984): "In his three-volume
detailed account of Soviet Purchases of Western Equipment and Technology . . . [Antony] Sutton comes to conclusions
that are uncomfortable for many businessmen and economists. For this reason his work tends to be either dismissed
out of hand as 'extreme' or, more often, simply ignored."
The report was too much and Sutton's career as a
well-paid member of the academic establishment was under attack and he was told that he "would not
His work led him to more questions than answers. "Why
had the US built-up it's enemy? Why did the US build-up the Soviet Union, while we also transferred technology to
Hitler's Germany? Why does Washington want to conceal these facts?"
Sutton, following his leads, proceeded to research and
write his three outstanding books on Wall Street, FDR, the Rise of Hitler, and The Bolshevik Revolution. Then,
someone sent Antony a membership list of Skull and Bones and "a picture jumped out". And what a picture! A
multigenerational foreign-based secret society with fingers in all kinds of pies and roots going back to
'Illuminati' influences in 1830's Germany.
This video is in the public domain. The producers have waived their copyright to this video.
Listen to a post production conversation between the producers by clicking on this mp3: https://soundcloud.com/eonitao-state/...
If you have a PC you can use the above link (download the software first) to download it and burn it to a DVD and
it is easy to do it. It is for your friends that don't have a computer and may have a DVD player instead or to give
out to the public as a form of activism.
If you have a Mac you need a Mac compatible YouTube downloader and you will have to use iMovie or somtn to do it.
If you have any trouble you may write to me or search YouTube for tech answers.
Following WWII, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Treaty (NATO), was established in 1949 for the collective defense — Wait, hold on a minute. Isn't collective a term
the Communists use? More on that later. Anyway, NATO was established for the purpose, as NATO's first secretary
General Lord Ismay summed up, "to keep the Russians out, the American's in, and the Germans down." That the USSR
posed a serious threat to the security of Western Europe, there was no question — That Europe wanted America to
become point man for their defense against the USSR was merely a continuation of Churchill's political machinations
to draw an isolationist US into WWII and European politics. Add two world wars with Germany, and Europe gets an
additional bonus by having the US stationed in bases in Germany to disabuse them of any ideas of having another go
at conquering the continent.
Through the 1950's up to the late 1980's, NATO and the USSR stood glaring at each other across the Iron Curtain.
Dreams of an epic armor battle at the Fulda Gap between the Warsaw Pact and NATO forces that would make the tank
battle at Kursk look like a piker filled the heads of armchair wargamers and inspired books like Red Storm Rising.
Then, gosh darn it, Gorbachev's Glasnost herald a new era of open politics in Soviet Union. Some electrician named
Lech Walesa was giving the Communist party in Poland fits with organized strikes. Suddenly in 1989, East Germany
takes down the Iron Curtain. The cold war thaws into a hopeful spring. What was NATO going to do with all those
tanks, planes, and troops? Worse, what were the generals going to do to keep their jobs? No enemies to fight, and
the politicians were promising a peace dividend to citizens by closing military bases. The common quip of the
Berliners in the last days of WWII of “Enjoy the war. The peace will be terrible” now seemed a reality for poor
NATO. Without a combat command, military career advancement would come to a standstill. Without the need to
maintain ongoing weapon superiority, the military industry would lay off employees. There goes the economy.
Desperate, NATO takes a cue from the movie of Canadian Bacon, and becomes involved in the ethnic strife in
Yugoslavia between the Croats and the Serbs to look useful and from being disbanded. It becomes the strong arm of
the UN, enforcing that august body's no-fly zone mandate, as well as the UN's arms and economic sanctions. NATO
continued by initiating air strikes in Bosnia, and deploying a peacekeeping force on the ground. NATO finds a use
for its leftover cold war ordinance collecting dust by mounting an 11-week bombing campaign. NATO cleverly names
the bombing sorties with various titles such as Operation Deliberate Force, so as to assure people that the bombs
were not dropped by accident, or Operation Allied Force, in case someone doesn't already know that NATO is a
collective (there's that Communist word again!) of various nations working together to enforce the peace by killing
people. What is strange about the working relationship of NATO and UN is that the former resists attempts to by the
latter to have the final word regarding its military actions. The UN would say, "Don't bomb, we have things under
control," and NATO would reply. "Yes we will bomb, just to make sure." I guess when you have one organization whose
mission is to preserve peace, and another whose job is to break things to protect democracy, you are bound to have
some philosophical differences. As the Good Book says, "A house divided against itself cannot stand." How any
nation can belong to both organizations, and yet come to cross-proposes deciding if and who should be bombed, is
beyond me. Sounds like one of them is unnecessary and is getting in the way of the other. Better yet, to be on the
safe side, it might be best to get rid of both. But that's just my opinion.
But local European ethnic conflicts were not enough to justify the overhead cost of a coalition as large as
NATO. Fortunately, 9/11 happened just in the nick of time. In 2003 NATO was reorganized so as to take over the
duties International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan. This would set the precedent for NATO to
entertain missions outside its North Atlantic backyard. Plenty of opportunities to keep business as usual for NATO.
But while NATO enjoys a good brush war like anyone else to keep the military industrial complex economy running,
the real action is found in the defensive missiles gig. Never mind there is yet a practical missile made that can
hit the broadside of the proverbial barn, much less a ICBM coming in from the stratosphere, this is were the big
money is. Plus, it has the biggest boogieman fear component to inspire the civilians to work harder to pay taxes.
Scaring citizens with images of mechanized armies invading your neighborhood is so passé — To really play on the
sheeple's paranoia, talk about the possibility of rogue missile attacks launched from middle-eastern countries such
as Iran. Even hint darkly about a resurgent Russia, with Putin desiring to push the big red button. Never mind that
Putin enjoys Russia's prosperity with capitalism with Europe as customer. He wouldn't dream of killing the goose
that lays the golden eggs by nuking western Europe into glass parking lot. Bad for business, you know.
NATO's reinventing itself is so successful that many of the former Soviet Bloc countries are applying for
membership. Little Georgia has little to offer to NATO, other than to instigate hostilities with neighboring
Ossetia. No doubt NATO was upset that Georgia did not wait after it was initiated into its club, so NATO could get
into the act and justify its military budget by using mean old Russia as an excuse. Besides, how dare the Russians
come to the aid of Ossetia when it was attacked by Georgia! That's NATO job! If its one thing an organization
hates, it's someone else cutting in on the action.
In a recent interview by ABC's Charles Gibson, Sarah
Palin condemned Russia's invasion of Georgia as quote-unquote, "unprovoked." Which of course, is a lie. Palin
favors the inclusion of both Georgia and the Ukraine into NATO because they had demonstrated actions as being
"democratic" When Gibson asked: "and under the NATO treaty, wouldn't we then have to go to war if Russia went into
Georgia?" She replied "Perhaps." Which is another way of saying all options are on the table. Her fervor revealed
later in the interview to come to the aid of "smaller democratic countries that are invaded by a larger power"
would have sounded noble if we were not already a larger power that had invaded a smaller country that had done
nothing against us. But the difference of course, is Iraq is not a "democratic" one, so the US is excused where
Russia is not. Palin stresses the importance of not reverting back to a cold war status, yet advocates economic
sanctions and diplomatic pressure against Russia that are the equivalent of creating one. NATO could not have asked
for a better lobbyist that Palin to cheerlead for its continued existence
Palin and others ongoing support to a collectivist (there its that word again!) defense organization as NATO
reminds me of new inmates who are obliged to join a gang in order to survive in prison — Doesn't matter what crimes
you or they have committed, the thing is the colors you wear define who are your friends, and who are your enemies.
So much for the rugged individualism that once was the hallmark of America's legacy.
I find it ironic that the people who are opposed with our association in the UN are just as tenacious in
insisting that we must stay in NATO. That we must honor our commitments and treaties by continuing to belong to a
collective defense organization. All for the sake of defending democracy, which is a method of government, not a
moral definition of who is the good guy, and who is the villian. Many still think that poor Europe is too weak to
defend itself should Russia aspire to conquer Western Europe. Never mind that with the collapse of the Soviet
Union, Russia does not have near the manpower and hardware it formerly had with the Warsaw Pact.
Everyone is still thinking with a 1980's cold war mindset. Worse, these people cannot see that NATO is little
different than the UN — except it does not use white-painted armored vehicles and blue helmets, and is more likely
to shoot first and then ask questions later. America needs to get out of the NATO club and stop being a club for
NATO. NATO's original purpose has been made obsolete by the fall of the USSR. It is a holdover of the same
treaties, the "scrap of paper" signed by old men in Europe who offered their young people and treasure as
collateral for the "honor" to defend each other's decadent empires. By contractual reflex France, Britain, and
Russia were led into disastrous world war with Germany in 1914, over the assassination of an Austrian archduke by a
radical Serb. After three years of callously spending the lives and limbs an entire generation of their best young
men by sending them in frontal attacks against machine guns with bayonets, they looked to America for fresh cannon
fodder to rescue them for their folly — and Wilson provided it in the name of "making democracy safe for the
world." That any reprobate country can gain political legitimacy by declaring being a "democracy" and be admitted
into the NATO club is akin to putting lipstick on a pig, if I may use a cliché that is presently in vogue. Spilling
the blood of our soldiers and depleting our treasure in the defense such countries that wear such false garb is a
sucker's game. America should follow the example of Groucho Marx, treating any club that would invite them as a
member suspect, and not worth belonging to.
Ron Paul Rewind: 'Disband NATO!'
Written by Chris Rossini
Saturday April 19, 2014
Contrary to how the mainstream media tries to portray the
U.S. as an innocent bystander in Ukraine, the reality is that provocative meddling has been going on for a very
Below is a speech that Dr. Paul gave on the U.S. House floor on April 1, 2008. It’s
fascinating that the very same speech (with just a few minor tweaks) could be given today:
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution calling for the further expansion of NATO to the
borders of Russia. NATO is an organization whose purpose ended with the end of its Warsaw Pact adversary. When NATO
struggled to define its future after the Cold War, it settled on attacking a sovereign state, Yugoslavia, which had
neither invaded nor threatened any NATO member state.
This current round of NATO expansion is a political reward to governments in Georgia and Ukraine that
came to power as a result of US-supported revolutions, the so-called Orange Revolution and Rose Revolution. The
governments that arose from these street protests were eager to please their US sponsor and the US, in turn, turned
a blind eye to the numerous political and human rights abuses that took place under the new regimes. Thus the US
policy of “exporting democracy” has only succeeding in exporting more misery to the countries it has targeted.
NATO expansion only benefits the US military industrial complex, which stands to profit from expanded
arms sales to new NATO members. The “modernization” of former Soviet militaries in Ukraine and Georgia will mean
tens of millions in sales to US and European military contractors. The US taxpayer will be left holding the bill,
as the US government will subsidize most of the transactions. Providing US military guarantees to Ukraine and
Georgia can only further strain our military. This NATO expansion may well involve the US military in conflicts as
unrelated to our national interest as the breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia in Georgia. The idea that
American troops might be forced to fight and die to prevent a small section of Georgia from seceding is absurd and
Mr. Speaker, NATO should be disbanded, not expanded.
Ron Paul: "I rise in opposition to expanding
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution. I do so because further expansion of NATO, an outdated
alliance, is not in our national interest and may well constitute a threat to our national security in the
More than 50 years ago the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was formed to defend Western Europe and the United
States against attack from the communist nations of Eastern Europe. It was an alliance of sovereign nations bound
together in common purpose — for mutual defense. The deterrence value of NATO helped kept the peace throughout the
Cold War. In short, NATO achieved its stated mission. With the fall of the Soviet system and the accompanying
disappearance of the threat of attack, in 1989—1991, NATO's reason to exist ceased. Unfortunately, as with most
bureaucracies, the end of NATO's mission did not mean the end of NATO. Instead, heads of NATO member states
gathered in 1999 desperately attempting to devise new missions for the outdated and adrift alliance. This is where
NATO moved from being a defensive alliance respecting the sovereignty of its members to an offensive and
interventionist organization, concerned now with "economic, social and political difficulties...ethnic and
religious rivalries, territorial disputes, inadequate or failed efforts at reform, the abuse of human rights, and
the dissolution of states," in the words of the Washington 1999 Summit.
And we saw the fruits of this new NATO mission in the former Yugoslavia, where the US, through NATO, attacked a
sovereign state that threatened neither the United States nor its own neighbors. In Yugoslavia, NATO abandoned the
claim it once had to the moral high ground. The result of the illegal and immoral NATO intervention in the Balkans
speaks for itself: NATO troops will occupy the Balkans for the foreseeable future. No peace has been attained,
merely the cessation of hostilities and a permanent dependency on US foreign aid.
The further expansion of NATO is in reality a cover for increased US interventionism in Europe and beyond. It
will be a conduit for more unconstitutional US foreign aid and US interference in the internal politics of member
nations, especially the new members from the former East.
It will also mean more corporate welfare at home. As we know, NATO membership demands a minimum level of
military spending of its member states. For NATO's new members, the burden of significantly increased military
spending when there are no longer external threats is hard to meet. Unfortunately, this is where the US government
steps in, offering aid and subsidized loans to these members so they can purchase more unneeded and unnecessary
military equipment. In short, it is nothing more than corporate welfare for the US military industrial complex.
The expansion of NATO to these seven countries, we have heard, will open them up to the further expansion of US
military bases, right up to the border of the former Soviet Union. Does no one worry that this continued
provocation of Russia might have negative effects in the future? Is it necessary?
Further, this legislation encourages the accession of Albania, Macedonia, and Croatia — nations that not long
ago were mired in civil and regional wars. The promise of US military assistance if any of these states are
attacked is obviously a foolhardy one. What will the mutual defense obligations we are entering into mean if two
Balkan NATO members begin hostilities against each other (again)?
In conclusion, we should not be wasting US tax money and taking on more military obligations expanding NATO. The
alliance is a relic of the Cold War, a hold-over from another time, an anachronism. It should be disbanded, the
sooner the better.
"Serbia has not threatened us nor used any force against
any American citizen"
2001- Ron Paul fights against expanding NATO and talks about how globalization and one
world government have been popular in DC.
During a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing yesterday,
Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey brazenly admitted that their authority comes not
from the U.S. Constitution, but that the United States is subservient to and takes its marching orders from the
United Nations and NATO, international bodies over which the American people have no democratic
Coup D’etat: Pentagon & Obama Declare Congress Ceremonial
Congressman Jones introduces bill that would subject
Panetta & Obama to impeachment
Paul Joseph Watson
Thursday, March 8, 2012
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s testimony asserting that the
United Nations and NATO have supreme authority over the actions of the United States military, words which
effectively declare Congress a ceremonial relic, have prompted Congressman Walter Jones to introduce a resolution
that re-affirms such behavior as an “impeachable high crime and misdemeanor” under the Constitution.
During a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing yesterday, Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff
Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey brazenly admitted that their authority comes not from the U.S. Constitution, but that
the United States is subservient to and takes its marching orders from the United Nations and NATO, international
bodies over which the American people have no democratic influence.
Obama Admin Cites 'Int'l Permission,' Not Congress, As 'Legal
Basis' For Action In Syria
Panetta was asked by Senator Jeff Sessions, “We spend our
time worrying about the U.N., the Arab League, NATO and too little time, in my opinion, worrying about the elected
representatives of the United States. As you go forward, will you consult with the United States Congress?”
The Defense Secretary responded “You know, our goal would be to seek international permission. And we would come
to the Congress and inform you and determine how best to approach this, whether or not we would want to get
permission from the Congress.”
Despite Sessions’ repeated efforts to get Panetta to acknowledge that the United States Congress is supreme to
the likes of NATO and the UN, Panetta exalted the power of international bodies over the US legislative branch.
“I’m really baffled by the idea that somehow an international assembly provides a legal basis for the United
States military to be deployed in combat,” Sessions said. “I don’t believe it’s close to being correct. They
provide no legal authority. The only legal authority that’s required to deploy the United States military is of the
Congress and the president and the law and the Constitution.”
In an effort to re-affirm the fact that “the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and
clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II,
section 4 of the Constitution,” Republican
Congressman Walter Jones has introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives.
The full text reads;
Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and
clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article
II, section 4 of the Constitution.
Whereas the cornerstone of the Republic is honoring Congress’s exclusive power to declare war under article
I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that,
except in response to an actual or imminent attack against the territory of the United States, the use of
offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress violates
Congress’s exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution and
therefore constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the
Under the terms of Jones’ resolution, both Panetta and Obama would be subject to impeachment for abusing their
power and violating the Constitution in disregarding the authority of Congress and placing a foreign power above
Despite the Pentagon’s efforts to claim that Panetta’s words were misinterpreted, the
Obama administration itself has routinely cited the authority of the United Nations in relation to last year’s
invasion of Libya, which was conducted without approval from Congress.
last year, President Obama arrogantly expressed his hostility to the rule of law when he dismissed the need to
get congressional authorization to commit the United States to a military intervention in Libya, churlishly
dismissing criticism and remarking, “I don’t even have to get to the Constitutional question.”
In boldly asserting the authority of international powers over and above the legislative branch, Panetta and
Obama are openly declaring that they no longer represent the American people and instead are water carriers for a
global dictatorship that has usurped the sovereignty of the United States.
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison
Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones
Show and Infowars Nightly News.
Ever since its inception there have been
those who have warned that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, far from offering a simple "collective security"
pact to ensure the integrity of its member nations' borders, would in fact be used as an offensive tool of imperial
adventurism and conquest. Since the NATO-led Kosovo bombing campaign of 1999 at the very least, those fears have
appeared more and more justified.
Since that time, NATO has continued to take a lead role in more and more overtly offensive campaigns of aggression
in theatre after theatre. By now it is commonly understood to be an extension of the Pentagon itself, a convenient
international military instrument for Washington to wield whenever the pretense of an international consensus
cannot be achieved at the UN Security Council.
Find out more in this week's GRTV Backgrounder on Global Research TV
The Globalization of War – GRTV
The world's attention is increasingly focused on Syria and Iran as the region continues to
move toward military confrontation. Less noticed, however, is that the pieces are being put into place for a truly
global conflict, with military buildup taking place in every region and threatening to draw in all of the world's
Zbigniew Brzezinski Obama's Foreign
Zbigniew Brzezinski: Obama's Foreign Policy
Obama's foreign policy advisor and vocal supporter is Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jimmy Carter's national security
advisor, who says that Obama offers 'a new definition of America's role in the world'.
This is the same Brzezinski who created the Illuminati's Trilateral Commission with David Rockefeller in 1973. The
Trilateral Commission is dedicated to a world government dictatorship and closely connects with other strands in
the web like the Council on Foreign Relations (member: Barack Obama) and the Bilderberg Group.
Rise in “populist activism” a
threat to “external control”
Paul Joseph Watson
November 26, 2012
During a recent speech in Poland, former US
National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski warned fellow elitists that a worldwide “resistance” movement to
“external control” driven by “populist activism” is threatening to derail the move towards a new world order.
Zbigniew Brzezinski Still Admits The Global Political Awakening Proving Very Difficult For The
Calling the notion that the 21st century is
the American century a “shared delusion,” Brzezinski stated that American domination was no longer possible because
of an accelerating social change driven by “instant mass communications such as radio, television and the
Internet,” which have been cumulatively stimulating “a universal awakening of mass political consciousness.”
The former US National Security Advisor added that this “rise in worldwide populist activism is
proving inimical to external domination of the kind that prevailed in the age of colonialism and imperialism.”
Brzezinski concluded that “persistent and highly motivated populist resistance of politically
awakened and historically resentful peoples to external control has proven to be increasingly difficult to
Although Brzezinski delivered his comments in a neutral tone, the context of the environment in
which he said them allied to his previous statements would indicate that this is not a celebration of “populist
resistance” but a lament at the impact it is having on the kind of “external control” Brzezinski has repeatedly
The remarks were made at an event for the European Forum For New Ideas (EFNI), an organization that advocates the transformation of the European Union into an
anti-democratic federal superstate, the very type of bureaucratic “external control” Brzezinski stressed was in
jeopardy in his lecture.
In this context, it must be understood that Brzezinski’s point about “populist resistance” being a
major hindrance to the imposition of a new world order is more of a warning than an acclamation.
Also consider what Brzezinski wrote in his book Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the
Technotronic Era, in which he advocated the control of populations by an elite political class via
“The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society
would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost
continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal
information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities,” wrote
“In the technotronic society the trend would seem to be towards the aggregation of the individual support of
millions of uncoordinated citizens, easily within the reach of magnetic and attractive personalities exploiting the
latest communications techniques to manipulate emotions and control reason,” he wrote in the same book.
Brzezinski’s sudden concern about the impact of a politically awakened global population isn’t born out of any
notion that he identifies with their cause. Brzezinski is the ultimate elitist insider, the founder of the powerful
Trilateral Commission, a Council on Foreign Relations luminary and a regular Bilderberg attendee. He was once
described by President Barack Obama as “one of our most outstanding thinkers”.
This is by no means the first time Brzezinski has lamented the burgeoning populist opposition to external
domination by a tiny elite.
If you want to see the real consequences of Bilderberg, look at its plans that have
come to fruition — austerity and loss of national sovereignty and democracy in Europe, the massive transfer of
wealth and manufacturing from American to the communist elite in China.
Frequent attendee Henry Kissinger has been involved in secret wars, military coups, CIA torture and terrorism — all
of which have caused the loss of tens of thousands of lives. But the machinations of his mentor David Rockefeller
and the manipulations of the central banks could, if not stopped, cause worldwide economic disaster, famine and
An independent agency of the United States government responsible for
collecting and coordinating intelligence and counterintelligence activities abroad in the national
interest; headed by the Director of Central Intelligence under the supervision of the President and
National Security Council...There has been considerable criticism of the CIA relating to security
and counterintelligence failures, failures in intelligence analysis, human rights concerns,
external investigations and document releases, influencing public opinion and law enforcement, drug
trafficking, and lying to Congress. In 1987, the former CIA Station Chief in Angola in 1976, John
Stockwell, said the CIA is responsible for tens of thousands of covert actions and destablization
programs since it was created by Congress with the passage of the National Security Act of
1947.At the time, Stockwell estimated that over 6
million people had died in CIA covert actions.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is a governmental agency
belonging to the United StatesDepartment of Justice that serves as both a federal criminal
investigative body and an internal intelligence agency (counterintelligence). Also, it is the
government agency responsible for investigating crimes on Indian reservations in the United States
under the Major Crimes Act. The branch has investigative jurisdiction over violations of more than
200 categories of federal crime. The agency was established in 1908 as the Bureau of Investigation
(BOI). Its name was changed to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in 1935. The agency
headquarters is the J. Edgar Hoover Building, located in Washington, D.C. The agency has fifty-six
field offices located in major cities throughout the United States, and more than 400 resident
agencies in lesser cities and areas across the nation. More than 50 international offices called
"legal attachés" exist in U.S. embassies and consulates general worldwide.
'Federal Bureau of Investigation organizes almost
all terror plots in the US' ...The report reveals that the FBI regularly infiltrates communities
where they suspect terrorist-minded individuals to be engaging with others. Regardless of their
intentions, agents are sent in to converse within the community, find suspects that could
potentially carry out “lone wolf” attacks and then, more or less, encourage them to do so. By
providing weaponry, funds and a plan, FBI-directed agents will encourage otherwise-unwilling
participants to plot out terrorist attacks, only to bust them before any events fully
The Bilderberg Group meeting is an annual confab of
around 150 of the world’s most influential powerbrokers in government, industry, banking, media, academia and the
military-industrial complex. The secretive group operates under “Chatham House rules,” meaning that no details of
what is discussed can ever be leaked to the media, despite editors of the world’s biggest newspapers, the
Washington Post, the New York Times and the Financial Times, being present at the meeting.
Last Friday saw a Turkish
combat jet downed in the Mediterranean Sea by Syrian antiaircraft batteries. Syria insists that Turkey’s
F-4 Phantom was shot down inside Syrian airspace.
It appears to be a Neo-Ottoman baiting exercise by NATO, and
for all intents and purposes, it has worked - so far.
Regardless of the facts surrounding this event, the western media machine and
political operators will seek to quickly leverage this event in their efforts to move their inevitable Syrian
bombardment project forward.
To date, NATO’s role for Turkey has been to remain in the shadows, hosting the
Syrian National Council, coordinating arms shipments in Syria for foreign fighters, and giving refuge to al-Qaeda
rebels across Turkey’s border with Syria.But this latest jet incident is likely to change all
In case you missed it last Friday, here is the report hours after the incident –
another example of how this website sit much further ahead of the geopolitical analytical curve than the whole
themulti billion dollar-capitalized mainstream
Patrick Henningsen: Turkish Jets Downed Over Syria and NATO
Infowars.com correspondent Patrick Henningsen breaks down the latest reports of a Turkish
Jet which disappeared over Syrian airspace. Details of this event have yet to be determined, but it may be another
indication that Turkey will be pulled into NATO and the West's agenda for regime change and later balkanization of
The corporate mainstream
media is of course already positioned to spin this story into a pretext for a war between NATO and the Syria’s
Assad government. The world must not forget that this is the very same corporate media who aggressively sold a
collection of lies, including a White House concocted fantasy of 500 tons of yellow cake uranium sold to Iraq via
Niger, and the same corporate media who attempted to slander Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame as they exposed the Vice
Presidential office’s lies of an Iraqi nuclear program – lies which were ultimately successful in getting the
United States public to back a full-scale war and permanent military presence in the Middle East.
Ignoring the obvious fact that the last thing Syrians want is to undergo a
comprehensive NATO bombing campaign that will most certainly level the country, the mindless and reckless corporate
media in the US and its affiliates worldwide, along with state-run war propaganda outlets like the BBC in Britain,
have predictably jumped on the Turkish jet incident as an exciting opening gambit in
amuch anticipated military intervention in Syria. Their choice of wording, identical talking points
streamlined perfectly across all media outlets is both cynical in nature and frightening in rhetoric – a
reality constructed in order to force the public and political classes into an intellectual cul-de-sac where
‘there is no other alternative’ other than military intervention. TheWashington Post naturally leads this media onslaught ofconsensus reality building, as they normalize war
NATO condemned the downing of a Turkish jet by Syria last week as
“completely unacceptable” but gave no indication it would take retaliatory action. The prime minister of
Turkey, however, said his country would react militarily to any future violations along its
Shooting down the jet Friday was “another example of the Syrian
government’s disregard for international norms of peace, security and human life,” NATO said in a statement
issued in Brussels. “We stand together with Turkey in the spirit of strong solidarity.”
The language of war should be all too familiar by now.
In past years, the US Secretary of State’s role was often that of chief diplomat
and negotiator in sensitive foreign affairs. Hillary Clinton is a prime example of the new breed of foreign cabinet
envoy, whose new role is to promote wars and foreign intervention to both the American public and to other foreign
NATO ally affiliates.Condoleezza
Rice made this role acceptable, cynically deployed by the
Bush Administration on an ever politically correct modern American populace, this new role as ‘Secretary of
War’ was more effective than ever when played by a woman (and a
Democrat),rather than the traditional warmongering alpha male
character, and even more so by anAfrican-American woman – another calculated
move by the Bush government which was ultimately effective in pushing their illegal war on the American
public. Their efforts will always be backed by a mere handful of predictable political war hacks like
Senators John McCain and Joe Lieberman, along with John Bolton.
Clinton and her British counterpart William Hague, had shamelessly pushed for the
destruction of Libya in 2011, and have continued in similar fashion through steering groups
likeThe Friends of Syria,
openly coordinating the procurement and shipment of arms via Qatar and Saudi Arabia to their guerrilla army and
al-Qaeda cells within Syria. As we can now see clearly, it’s a long-running project of destabilization with the
ultimate goal of regime change and balkanization in that country – designed by western intelligence and globalist
Clearly in this case, the globalists are in a rush to advance the agenda in Syria,
and then move on to neutralize Hezbollah in Lebanon, and finally, the engage Iran – and with this, the first major
sparks of a new Third World War. This final move will set the stage for a long-running regional arch of tension
which is designed to encompass both Russia and China.
This year’s schedule of world events was most probably visible somewhere at the
Bilderberg Meeting in Chantilly, VA. The Syrian agenda was most certainly signed-off by the Bilderbergers and
delivered to their Syrian National Council representative, Bassma
Kodmani,who was in attendance at this year’s Bilderberg
Meeting. Globalist Kodmani is said to be the Head of Foreign
Affairs with the SNC, working out of Istanbul, Turkey.
Also in attendance at this year’s Bilderberg Meeting was British agent and
steering committee member, Marcus
Agius of Barclays, who happens to also serves as an executive
consultant to the BBC. No doubt that the BBC’s war propaganda pledge to Bilderberg was also agreed upon during the
Expect the European and North American domestic terror threat levels in both
government and media to also be raised as western involvement increases in Syria – and beyond.
Given that the pretext for attacking Syria is falling apart before the public's eyes, why is the US preparing to
wage war on that country? Who benefits from the ongoing destabilization of Assad's government? What will the Middle
East look like if the Sunnis take over Syria? What is Israel's role in this? What do Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia
have to gain from a war in Syria? And what does Bandar Bush have to do with all of this? Join us today on The
Corbett Report as we discuss these and other pressing issues as the world stands on the brink of yet another US-led
Middle Eastern military adventure.