Thursday, January 16, 2014

The NWO “British-Dutch Empire” endless Wars System

New World Order Sea Route Control





May 1, 1776 Jesuit Professor Adam Weishaupt who was retained by Rothschild's completes world dominance plan for the Jesuits International.
  • 1776-1790: U.S. Independence - Free Banking -no formal central bank.
  • 1791-1811: First Bank of the United States, Jesuit controlled.
  • 1816-1836: Second Bank of the United States Jesuit controlled.
  • 1837-1862: Free Banking Era -no formal central bank.
  • 1862-1913: System of National Banks (Consequence of Lincoln's War,  Jesuit controlled.
  • 1914-current: A consortium of 12 privately held banks called the Federal Reserve Bank. The largest shareholder of the bank are the Rothschild's of London, Frankfurt and Paris, Jesuits Treasure Guardian.


    The threaten Worlds leadership of British East India Company based itself a relationship between the control of the world sea route, enforced under-development of interior landmasses and the control of money supply. The acquisition of strategic naval ports was the imperative of the system. By controlling these ports and corresponding sea route, the British dominated trade, using colonies such as India and African Nations as sources of cheap raw material and slave labor and defense collaboration from their sponsored and controlled US government.
    Other nations wishing to engage in the same geographical area will have to operate through the British. The trans-Continental rail projects proposed after civil war period where therefore emphasizing interior development of landmasses such as Lincoln American Trans-Continental, Count Sergei Yulyevich Witte Tran-Siberian and Bismarck Berlin-Bagdad system were modern threats to the historic maritime based power of the British Empire. When the American was aggressively promoting their system, the British, at that point, to prevent the successful spread of the American System of Economic and the development of the rail connections and landmasses was to blow up the world.  

    Under this geopolitical view, British Imperial policy toward the end of the 19th century turned to the creation of the great World War pivoted between Russia and Germany against each other. The intention of this policy was not for any nation to come out as victor but rather for all nations which were involved to be destroyed. In Germany, Bismarck was conscious of this geopolitical strategy, in correspondence he wrote about his nightmare of coalitions, that alliance of France, Russia and Great Britain to circle Germany and destroyed in war and an economic ruin. Bismarck secretly created the alliance with Austria and Russia in order for Germany to develop. The British created the Balkan War involving Islamic and Orthodox Church network as the Russian is part of Orthodox network. So the British organized the war between Orthodox and Islamic, Western and Eastern Christianity. The British plan was to have France and Russia attack Germany at the same time. The Balkan war was created for that purposes. Every nation who wanted to implement the American System of Economy was targeted for destruction.
    The British abducted Japan with the Island mythology, Japan owns an Island in Asia like Britain own an island in Europe, as Britain rules over Europe, Japan should rule over Asia. With England help, will become a great naval power. Under this direction, Japan launched war against China in 1894 using its largely British built navy. And grabbing huge tracks of Chinese territory as US and Russian industrialists had hoped to build critical links for the Tran-Siberian rail line. McKinley continued Lincoln policy and immediately adopted the protective tariff and protective taxation policy that freaked out the British. McKinley embraced the International American Conference for the proposal the extension of the US railway system to Mexico, to the Tip of South America.  
    This project is to be completed in conjunction with the Russian plan and for the Bering Strait rail link will make it possible by the beginning of the 20th century to travel from Western Europe to the South corner of the Hemisphere by rail. Teddy Roosevelt, whose uncle was a British spy, organized the assassination of McKinley by anarchist orchestrated by London. British banks increased loan to Japan to extend war to Russia, by devastating sneaker attack of Russian station of Port Arthur shadowing Perl Harbor attack 37 years later against the United States.

    TO START A WAR: THE BRITISH-DUTCH EMPIRE STOOGE "AMERICANS" USE OF WAR PRETEXT INCIDENTS

    The following article carefully detailed documents the History of War Pretext Incidents updated with latest events.
    imperialism: the policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and dominion of a nation especially by direct territorial acquisitions or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas; broadly: the extension or imposition of power, authority, or influence.  
    For some, the Iraq invasion in 2003 seems unprecedented, as if nothing of the sort had ever happened before; and then, nearly a decade later, it happened again with Libya in 2011. In both cases, Americans were told there was an imminent threat, and military action must be taken to stop it; in both cases, the 'threat' was nothing more than fabrication (Iraq) and exaggeration (Libya).  
    These events are often analyzed separately, associated with the individual administrations in charge at the time. One might see the Iraq War as belonging to the "Bush Administration", and the Libya War as belonging to the "Obama Administration". Yet, if one examines all of the U.S. interventions as a whole, it becomes clear that the problem is not one of certain administrations or individuals, but a manipulative system which has dominated American foreign policy for decades.
    4,000 U.S. troops occupy Corpus Christi, Texas; 1846


    1846, Mexico:

    U.S. President Polk leads a national sentiment of "manifest destiny", designed to expand federal rule from the east to west coast, including territory already occupied by natives. 


    He offers to buy land from Mexico, but Mexico refuses. Texas, owned by Mexico, seeks U.S. residents to "settle" there and "help grow the population". However, these "settlers" eventually grow dissatisfied with Mexican rule and form a rebellion, thus beginning the Mexican-American War. 


    As a result, the U.S. gains control of Colorado, Arizona, California, Utah, Nevada, Wyoming and New Mexico.
    This historical review raises an important issue: Is the Pentagon (British Imperial System Administrators) seeking to trigger military confrontation in the Persian Gulf with a view to providing a pretext and a justification to waging an all out war on the Islamic Republic of Iran? With regard to the confrontation in the Persian Gulf, is the Obama administration prepared to sacrifice the Fifth Fleet based in Bahrain with a view to triggering public support for a war on Iran on the grounds of self-defense. Those opposed to war must address the issue of the "pretext" and "justification" to wage war. Of relevance, the "Responsibility to Protect under a NATO "humanitarian" mandate has also been used as a thematic pretext to wage war (Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria, Mali, ... ), The 911 Attacks and the "Global War on Terrorism" (Afghanistan, Somalia, Pakistan,...) not to mention the alleged "Weapons of Mass Destruction" (Iraq) have also been used to justify military intervention. Both 9/11 and WMD are being heralded as a justification for waging war on Iran, based on allegation that Iran was behind the 9/11 attacks and that Iran possesses nuclear weapons.

    "It is vitally important to expose this latest attempt [9/11] to fraudulently conceal the largely economic and geostrategic purposes of war. By asking who benefits from war, we can unmask its pretense and expose the true grounds for instigating it. By throwing light on repeated historical patterns of deception, we can promote skepticism about the government and media (US Corporations) yarns that have been spun to encourage this war. The historical knowledge of how war planners have tricked people into supporting past wars, is like a vaccine. We can use this understanding of history to inoculate the public with healthy doses of distrust for official war pretext narratives and other deceptive stratagems. Through such immunization programs we may help to counter our society’s susceptibility to “war fever.” " “Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!” Sir Walter Scott, Marmion. Canto vi. Stanza 17 Pretext n. [Latin praetextum, pp. of praetextere, to weave before, pretend, disguise; prae-, before + texere, to weave], a false reason or motive put forth to hide the real one; excuse. Stratagem [Gr. Strategema, device or act of a general; stratos, army + agein, to lead], a trick, scheme or device used for deceiving an enemy in war. Throughout history, war planners have used various forms of deception to trick their enemies. Because public support is so crucial to the process of initiating and waging war, the home population is also subject to deceitful stratagems. The creation of false excuses to justify going to war is a major first step in constructing public support for such deadly ventures. Perhaps the most common pretext for war is an apparently unprovoked enemy attack. Such attacks, however, are often fabricated, incited or deliberately allowed to occur.  They are then exploited to arouse widespread public sympathy for the victims, demonize the attackers and build mass support for military “retaliation.” Like schoolyard bullies who shout ‘He hit me first!’, war planners know that it is irrelevant whether the opponent really did ‘throw the first punch.’ As long as it can be made to appear that the attack was unprovoked, the bully receives license to ‘respond’ with force. Bullies and war planners are experts at taunting, teasing and threatening their opponents. If the enemy cannot be goaded into ‘firing the first shot,’ it is easy enough to lie about what happened. Sometimes, that is sufficient to rationalize a schoolyard beating or a genocidal war. Such trickery has probably been employed by every military power throughout history. During the Roman empire, the causes of war -- cassus belli -- were often invented to conceal the real reasons for war. Over the millennia, although weapons and battle strategies have changed greatly, the deceitful strategem of using pretext incidents to ignite war has remained remarkably consistent. Pretext incidents, in themselves, are not sufficient to spark wars. Rumors and allegations about the tragic events must first spread throughout the target population. Constant repetition of the official version of what happened spawns dramatic narratives that are lodged into public consciousness. The stories become accepted without question and legends are fostered. The corporate media is central to the success of such ‘psychological operations.’ Politicians rally people around the flag, lending their special oratory skills to the call for a military “response.” Demands for “retaliation” then ring out across the land, war hysteria mounts and, finally, a war is born.  
    Every time the US Corporations has gone to war, pretext incidents have been used. Upon later examination, the conventional perception of these events is always challenged and eventually exposed as untrue. Historians, investigative journalists and many others, have cited eyewitness accounts, declassified documents and statements made by the perpetrators themselves to demonstrate that the provocative incidents were used as stratagems to stage-manage the march to war.   Here are a few particularly blatant examples of this phenomenon.   1846: The Mexican-American War.

    CONTEXT

    After Mexico’s revolution in 1821, US Corporations demanded about $3,000,000 in compensation for their losses.1 Mexico abolished slavery in 1829 and then prohibited further U.S. immigration into Texas, a Mexican state. In 1835, Mexico tried to enforce its authority over Texas. Texans, rallying under the slogan "Remember the Alamo!”, drove Mexican troops out of Texas and proclaimed independence. For nine years, many Texans lobbied for US annexation. This was delayed by northerners who opposed adding more slave territories to the US and feared a war with Mexico.2 In 1844, Democratic presidential candidate, James Polk, declared support for annexing Texas and won with the thinnest margin ever.3 The following year, Texas was annexed and Mexico broke off diplomatic relations with the US. Polk sent John Slidell to Mexico offering $25 million for New Mexico, California and an agreement accepting the Rio Grande boundary. Mexican government officials refused to meet the envoy.4

    PRETEXT

    John Stockwell, a Texan who led the CIA’s covert 1970s war in Angola, summed up the start of Mexican American war by saying “they offered two dollars-a-head to every soldier who would enlist. They didn't get enough takers, so they offered a hundred acres to anyone who would be a veteran of that war. They still didn't get enough takers, so [General] Zachary Taylor was sent down to parade up and down the border -- the disputed border -- until the Mexicans fired on him.... And the nation rose up, and we fought the war.”5 President Polk hoped that sending General Taylor’s 3,500 soldiers into Mexico territory, would provoke an attack against US troops.6 “On May 8, 1846, Polk met with his Cabinet at the White House and told them that if the Mexican army attacked the U.S. forces, he was going to send a message to Congress asking for a declaration of war. It was decided that war should be declared in three days even if there was no attack.”7 When news of the skirmish arrived, Polk sent a message to Congress on May 11: “Mexico has passed the boundary of the U.S. and shed American blood on American soil.”8 Two days later Congress declared war on Mexico.9 

    RESPONSE

    Newspapers helped the push for war with headlines like: “‘Mexicans Killing our Boys in Texas.’10 With public support secured, U.S. forces occupied New Mexico and California. US troops fought battles across Mexico and stormed their capital. A new more US-friendly government quickly emerged. It signed over California and New Mexico for $15 million and recognized the Rio Grande as their border with the US state of Texas.11 General Taylor became an American war hero and he rode his victory straight into the White House by succeeding Polk as president in 1849. 

    REAL REASONS

    The US secured over 500,000 square miles from Mexico, including Texas, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, California and parts of Colorado and Wyoming. The war was a boon to US nationalism, it boosted popular support for a very weak president and added vast new territories to the US where slavery was allowed.

    1893, Hawaii

    Hawaii has a large population of American sugar cane planters, whalers, and missionaries. In 1887, a U.S. base at Pearl Harbor is constructed. When King David Kalakaua dies in 1891, his sister Lydia Paki Kamekeha Liliuokalani takes the throne and tries to restore Hawaii's monarchy to absolute power. However, Hawaii Supreme Court justice Sanford Dole stages a bloodless coup backed by the U.S. military on January 19, 1893 and dethrones the Queen, forcing her to plead with U.S. President Grover Cleveland for reinstatement. By 1895, she abdicates the throne. President William McKinley's administration then moves for Hawaii's annexation, giving the U.S. control over coaling stations in the Pacific. 
     

    1898, Cuba

    The U.S. blames Spain for destroying the USS Maine, despite evidence that the explosion which caused the sinking came from an internal - not external - source. As a result of the war, Cuba assumes independence, Puerto Rico becomes an American possession, and from Spain, the U.S. acquires Guam and the Philippines.
     

    CONTEXT

    Cubans fought several wars to free themselves from Spanish colonial rule, including 1868-1878, 1879-1880 and 1895-1898.12 In 1898, Cubans were on the brink of finally winning their independence. The US government agreed to respect Cuba’s sovereignty and promised they would not step in. "On January 24, [1898] on the pretext of protecting the life and safety of Mr. Lee, U.S. consul in Havana, and other U.S. citizens in the face of street disturbances provoked by Spanish extremists, the Maine battleship entered the bay of Havana.”13  

    PRETEXT

    On February 15, 1898, a huge explosion sank the USS Maine killing 266 of its crew.14 In 1975, an investigation led by US Admiral Hyman Rickover concluded that there was no evidence of any external explosion. The explosion was internal, probably caused by a coal dust explosion. Oddly, the ship's weapons and explosives were stored next to the coal bunker.15 

    RESPONSE

    The Maine’s commander cautioned against assumptions of an enemy attack. The press denounced him for "refusing to see the obvious." The Atlantic Monthly said anyone thinking this was not a premeditated, Spanish act of war was "completely at defiance of the laws of probability."16 Newspapers ran wild headlines like: “Spanish Cannibalism,” “Inhuman Torture,” “Amazon Warriors Fight For Rebels.”17 Guillermo Jimpnez Soler notes: “As would become its usual practice, U.S. intervention in the war was preceded by intensive press campaigns which incited jingoism, pandering to the most shameless tales and sensationalism and exacerbated cheap sentimentality. Joseph Pulitzer of The World and William Randolph Hearst from The Journal, the two largest U.S. papers... carried their rivalry to a paroxysm of inflaming public opinion with scandalous, provocative and imaginary stories designed to win acceptance of U.S. participation in the first of its unholy wars beyond its maritime borders.”18 US papers sent hundreds of reporters and photographers to cover the apparent Spanish attacks. Upon arrival, many were disappointed. Frederick Remington wrote to Hearst saying: “There is no war .... Request to be recalled.” Hearst’s now-famous cable replied: "Please remain. You furnish the pictures, I'll furnish the war." For weeks, The Journal dedicated more than eight pages per day to the explosion.19 Through ceaseless repetition, a rallying cry for retaliation grew into a roar, “in the papers, on the streets and in…Congress. The slogan was "Remember the Maine! To hell with Spain."20 With the US public and government safely onboard, the US set sail for war launching an era of ‘gunboat diplomacy.’ Anti-war sentiments were drowned out by the sea of cries for war. On April 25, 1898, the US Congress declared war on Spain.  

    REAL REASONS

    Within four months “the US replaced Spain as the colonial power in the Philippines, Guam and Puerto Rico, and devised a special status for Cuba. Never again would the US achieve so much…as in that ‘splendid little war’ as…described at the time by John Hay, future secretary of state.”21 Historian Howard Zinn has said that 1898 heralded “the most dramatic entrance onto the world scene of American military and economic power.… The war ushered in what Henry Luce later referred to as the American Century, which really meant a century of American domination.”22

    1899, Philippines:

    Through the Treaty of Paris (1898), Spain gives control of the Philippines to the United States for $20 million. The Filipino-American War begins shortly after.
    Known in U.S. history books as the "Philippine Insurrection", it was America's first true overseas war, lasting from 1898 to 1902.
    In those 3 years, as many as 70,000 Americans die, along with close to 2 million Filipinos.   

    1899, Somoa:

    Rivalries between French, British, German, and American forces -- all of which valued Pago Pago Harbor as a refueling station for coal-fired shipping and whaling -- leads to the partitioning of Samoa. The last chief of Somoa before U.S. rule, the Tui Manu'a Elisala, is forced to sign a deed of cession following a series of U.S. naval trials. 

    1903, Panama

    Seeking a canal through Panama -- a province of Colombia -- the U.S. attempts negotiations and payments, all of which fail. President Roosevelt is outraged, stating that "we may have to give a lesson to these jack rabbits". Stockholders of the New Panama Canal Company arrange a "revolution" in Panama and fund the rebels, assisted by the U.S. Navy. Shortly after, Panama declares its independence from Colombia.   

    1906, Cuba:

    The United States assumes temporary military control of Cuba under the Platt Amendment, following the reelection of an American puppet government which caused a nationalist uprising. Two years later, the U.S. builds a naval base at Guantanamo Bay and claims rights to it in perpetuity. 
     

    1910, Nicaragua:

    The U.S. seeks to establish a canal through Nicaragua, but instead chooses Panama. When Nicaraguan President José Santos Zelaya solicits funds to build a second inter-oceanic canal for Germany and Japan, Washington turns against him. After Zelaya's government executes two Americans for aiding anti-government rebels, Washington breaks diplomatic relations, threatens naval intervention, and forces Zelaya into exile.   

    1914, Mexico:

    Mexican officials detain several drunken U.S. Marines from the U.S.S. Dolphin, which is docked in the port of Tampico, Mexico, after they accidentally enter a restricted area. The Mexican government quickly releases them, and issues an apology.
    Regardless of the regret expressed by Mexican President Victor Huerta, U.S. Admiral Henry T. Mayo demands that Mexican troops salute an American flag as a sign of contrition. President Huerta refuses the salute; three days later, President Wilson orders American warships to Tampico Bay.
    Wilson insists that his anger is not directed at the Mexican people, but at Huerta, "and those who adhere to him" because he refused to salute the American flag as an official apology.
    By the end of 1914, U.S. Marines had seized Tampico, forced an apology from Huerta, and demanded his resignation from power.
    Tampico, Mexico was considered the world's largest oil port in 1901. Some of the richest oil fields were discovered within a 100-mile radius of the port between 1914-1918.
     

    1914, Europe

    United States claims to be neutral as Germany, France, and Britain engage in conflict; however, U.S. banks and weapons manufacturers continue selling to France and Britain, leading to the German sinking of the ship, Lusitania, and eventual U.S. entry to World War 1.

    1915: World War I

    CONTEXT

    In 1915, Europe was embroiled in war, but US public sentiment opposed involvement. President Woodrow Wilson said they would “remain neutral in fact as well as in name.”23

    PRETEXT

    On May 7, 1915, a German submarine (U-boat) sank the Lusitania, a British passenger ship killing 1,198, including 128 Americans.24 The public was not told that passengers were, in effect, a ‘human shield’ protecting six million rounds of US ammunition bound for Britain.25 To Germany, the ship was a threat. To Britain, it was bait for luring an attack. Why? British Admiralty leader, Winston Churchill, had already commissioned “a study to determine the political impact if an ocean liner were sunk with Americans on board.”26 A week before the incident, Churchill wrote to the Board of Trade’s president saying it is “most important to attract neutral shipping to our shores, in the hopes especially of embroiling the U.S. with Germany.”27 British Naval Intelligence Commander, Joseph Kenworthy, said: “The Lusitania was sent at considerably reduced speed into an area where a U-boat was known to be waiting and with her escorts withdrawn.”28 Patrick Beesly’s history of British naval intelligence in WWI, notes: "no effective steps were taken to protect the Lusitania.” British complicity is furthered by their foreknowledge that: · U-boat commanders knew of the Lusitania’s route, · a U-boat that had sunk two ships in recent days was in the path of the Lusitania, · although destroyers were available, none escorted the Lusitania or hunted for U-boats, · the Lusitania was not given specific warnings of this threats.29  

    RESPONSE

    US newspapers aroused outrage against Germany for ruthlessly killing defenceless Americans. The US was being drawn into the war. In June 1916, Congress increased the size of the army. In September, Congress allocated $7 billion for national defense, “the largest sum appropriated to that time.”30  

    1917, Russia:

    Woodrow Wilson funds the "White" side of the Russian civil war. In the summer of 1918, he authorizes a naval blockade of the Soviet Union to help stop the Russian Revolution. American forces penetrate westward from Vladivostok to Lake Baikal, supporting Czech and White Russian forces.  
    The White Russian forces disintegrate by 1920, and this intervention helps fuel anti-western sentiments throughout Russia during the Cold War years.  In January 1917, the British said they had intercepted a German message to Mexico seeking an alliance with the US and offering to help Mexico recover land ceded to the US. On April 2, Wilson told Congress: “The world must be safe for democracy.” Four days later the US declared war on Germany.31

    REAL REASONS

    Influential British military, political and business interests wanted US help in their war with Germany. Beesly concludes that “there was a conspiracy deliberately to put the Lusitania at risk in the hope that even an abortive attack on her would bring the U.S. into the war.”32 Churchill’s memoirs of WWI state: "There are many kinds of maneuvres in war, some only of which take place on the battlefield.... The maneuvre which brings an ally into the field is as serviceable as that which wins a great battle."33 In WWI, rival imperialist powers struggled for bigger portions of the colonial pie. “They were fighting over boundaries, colonies, spheres of influence; they were competing for Alsace-Lorraine, the Balkans, Africa and the Middle East.”34 US war planners wanted a piece of the action. "War is the health of the state," said Randolph Bourne during WWI. Zinn explains: “Governments flourished, patriotism bloomed, class struggle was stilled.”35  

    1924, Honduras:

    Civil war breaks out after liberal president Rafael Lopez Gutierrez establishes a dictatorship. The U.S. lands Marines in the country to "protect its interests". Gutierrez is killed in March, and the revolution ends in May.

    1925, Mexico:

    The U.S. and Mexico narrowly avoid war after Mexico threatens U.S. oil contracts.


    1941: World War II   

    CONTEXT

    US fascists opposed President Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) from the start. In 1933, “America's richest businessmen were in a panic. Roosevelt intended to conduct a massive redistribution of wealth…[and it] had to be stopped at all costs. The answer was a military coup…secretly financed and organized by leading officers of the Morgan and du Pont empires.” A top Wall Street conspirator said: "We need a fascist government in this country…to save the nation from the communists who want to tear it down and wreck all that we have built.”37 The Committee on Un-American Activities said: “Sworn testimony showed that the plotters represented notable families -- Rockefeller, Mellon, Pew, Pitcairn, Hutton and great enterprises -- Morgan, Dupont, Remington, Anaconda, Bethlehem, Goodyear, GMC, Swift, Sun.”38 FDR also faced “isolationist” sentiments from such millionaires who shared Hitler’s hatred of communism and had financed Hitler’s rise to power as George Herbert Walker and Prescott Bush, predecessors of the current president.39 William R.Hearst, mid-wife of the war with Spain, opposed a war against fascism. Hearst employed Hitler, Mussolini and Goering as writers. He met Hitler in 1934 and used Readers’ Digest and his 33 newspapers to support fascism.40 

    PRETEXT

    On December 7, 1941, Japanese bombers attacked the US Pacific Fleet in Pearl Harbour, Hawaii, killing about 2,460.41 FDR, and his closest advisors, not only knew of the attack in advance and did not prevent it, they had actually provoked it. Lt. Arthur McCollum, head of the Far East desk for U.S. Navy intelligence, wrote a detailed eight-step plan on October 7, 1940 that was designed to provoke an attack.42 FDR immediately set the covert plan in motion. Soon after implementing the final step, Japan attacked Pearl Harbour. After meeting FDR on October 16, 1941, Secretary of War Henry Stimson wrote: "We face the delicate question of the diplomatic fencing to be done so as to be sure Japan is put into the wrong and makes the first bad move -- overt move.” On November 25, after another meeting with FDR, Stimson wrote: "The question was: how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into the position of firing the first shot.”43 The next day, an insulting “ultimatum” was delivered to the Japanese. The US intercepted a coded Japanese cable calling the ultimatum a “humiliating proposal” and saying they would now prepare for war with the US.44 The US had cracked Japanese diplomatic and military codes.45 A Top Secret Army Board report (October 1944), shows that the US military knew “the probable exact hour and date of the attack.”46 On November 29, 1941, the Secretary of State revealed to a reporter that the attack’s time and place was known. This foreknowledge was reported in the New York Times (Dec. 8, 1941).47

    RESPONSE

    After Pearl Harbour, the US quickly declared war against Japan. With media support, “Remember Pearl Harbour!” became an American rallying cry. On December 11, Germany and Italy declared war on the US. As the war wound down, decoded messages revelaed to the US military; Japan would soon surrender. They knew the atomic destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was unnecessary. Although nuclear weapons are commonly believed to have ended WWII, they were an opening salvo in the Cold War against the USSR.

    REAL  REASONS

    The US Corporations used WWII to maneuver itself into a position of superiority over former imperial rivals in Europe. In Parenti’s words the US “became the prime purveyor and guardian of global capitalism.”48 As the only nation wielding nuclear weapons, the US also became the world’s sole superpower.  

    1950, Korea:

    Without the approval of Congress, President Harry Truman (Imperial puppet) sends troops to fight in Korea, asserting an inherent right to do so as Commander-in-Chief.
    The Korean War ends three years later, leaving behind 33,600 American casualties, 16,000 UN-allied, 415,000 South Korean, 520,000 North Korean, and an estimated 900,000 Chinese.

    CONTEXT

    There is “extensive evidence of US Corporations crimes against peace and crimes against humanity” KWCT committed after they occupied southern Korea in September 1945. The US worked to “create a police state…using many former collaborators with Japanese rule, provoke tension…between southern and northern Korea, opposing and disrupting any plans for peaceful reunification. The US Corporations trained, directed and supported ROK [South Korea] in systematic murder, imprisonment, torture, surveillance, harassment and violations of human rights of hundreds of thousands…, especially…nationalists, leftists, peasants seeking land reform, union organizers and/or those sympathetic to the north.”49 University of Hawaii professor, Oliver Lee, notes a “long pattern of South Korean incursions” into the north. In 1949, there were more than 400 border engagements. A US Army document states: “Some of the bloodiest engagements were caused by South Korean units securing and preparing defensive positions that were either astride or north of the 38th parallel. This provoked violent North Korean actions.”50

    PRETEXT

    On June 25, 1950, the North Korean military were said to have moved three miles into South Korea territory. Dr. Channing Liem, the former South Korean ambassador to the UN (1960-1961) wrote: “For Washington, the question, ‘who fired the first shot?’ carried special significance…. Assistant Secretary of State for UN Affairs…[revealed] before the Senate Appropriations Committee, 1950, the US had devised a plan prior to the start of the war to gain approval from the UN to send its troops to Korea under the UN flag in the event that South Korea was attacked. It was imperative, therefore, that the ‘first shot’ be fired by the North, or at least that such an argument could be made.”51 ROK President Syngman Rhee triggered the war “with behind the scene support of John Foster Dulles,” the former-U.S. Secretary of State who met Rhee (June 18, 1950) just days before the pretext incident. Dulles told Rhee that “if he was ready to attack the communist North, the U.S. would lend help, through the UN…. He advised Rhee…to persuade the world that the ROK was attacked first, and to plan his actions accordingly.”52 Albert Einstein told Liem in 1955 that “the US was manipulating the UN…. [It] was being exploited by the great powers at the expense of the small nations…. He went on to say great powers do not act on the basis of facts only but manufacture the facts to serve their purposes and force their will on smaller nations.”53 I.F.Stone was perhaps the first to expose how a US diplomat deceived the UN Secretary General into believing there had been an unprovoked North Korean attack.54 North Korea claimed the attack began two days earlier when ROK divisions launched a six-hour artillery attack and then pushed 1 or 2 kilometers across the border. They responded to “halt the enemy's advance and go over to a decisive counterattack.”55

    RESPONSE

    Secretary of State, Dean Acheson was “quick to seize the opportunity to blame the war on North Korea regardless of the evidence.” North Korea was accused of “brutal, unprovoked aggression.”56 The public was told that this ‘invasion’ was the first step in Soviet plans for world domination. Anyone opposing the war was called a communist. McCarthyism was on. On June 27, 1950, Truman orders US troops to support South Korea, Congress agrees and the UN Security Council approves the plan.57 About three million civilians were killed, two-thirds in North Korea.58

    REAL REASONS

    To maintain power, South Korea required major US military support. One month before the pretext, Rhee suffered a terrible electoral defeat. Opposing North Korea were diverted public attention from Rhee’s repression to the communist north. The war was used to triple the Pentagon budget, boost NATO’s military build-up and create a new military role for the UN that could be manipulated by the US.

    1953, Iran:

    British intelligence agencies join with the C.I.A. to overthrow the Iranian government out of fears it will nationalize oil production.  

    1954, Guatemala:

    Jacobo Árbenz Guzmán, the democratically-elected President of Guatemala, issues land reforms which threaten the interests of U.S.-based United Fruit Company. C.I.A. Director Allen Dules, along with his brother, both have stakes in the company. It heavily lobbies the U.S. government to take action. Shortly after, the C.I.A. begins training rebels, and sets up a radio station across the border led by fake rebels to instigate a revolution. Eventually, the Guatemalan President is sent into exile.   

    1961, Cuba:

    US mercenaries depart Nicaragua and invade Playa Girón, Cuba. They suffer a historical defeat known as the "Bay of Pigs."
     

    1961, Iraq:

    Abdel Karim Kassem, leader of Iraq, threatens western oil interests, causing the U.S. and Britain to begin arming Kurdish rebels in the country. In 1963, Kassem is forced out of power, put on trial, and eventually shot to death. By 1968, Saddam Hussein takes power in the country, backed by the C.I.A.

     

    1964: The Vietnam War  

    CONTEXT

    Long before WWII, Vietnamese fought for independence from Imperial Slaves French Indochina. Resistance continued when Imperial slaves Japanese troops occupied the colony during the war. Much of the region reverted to French control after the war. As early as 1950, the US aided French efforts to defeat the Ho Chi Minh’s revolutionary forces. When France lost a decisive battle in 1954, the Geneva Accord recognized the independence of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. Vietnam was “temporarily” divided. Ngo Dinh Diem’s repressive regime in South Vietnam was backed by thousands of US military “advisors.” A military coup overthrew Diem in November 1963.59  http://vimeo.com/20001264 A thorough, documented, criminal indictment of George Herbert Walker Bush, establishing beyond a reasonable doubt his guilt as a supervisor in the conspiracy to assassinate John F. Kennedy. You must see it to believe that former president George Herbert Walker Bush was connected to the assassination of JFK. Once you see this documentary though there should be no doubt in your mind that it's true. The evidence is overwhelming and as the author of this documentary, John Hankey says, "If we could present this evidence to a jury in Texas, he would pay with his life". Did you know that Daddy Prescott Bush was Hitler's chief banker in the U.S. before 1942? Did you know that George H.W. Bush was in the CIA and in Dallas when Kennedy was killed? This video explores the many connections between George Bush and the Kennedy Assassination and makes a very convincing argument that he was the operational leader of the most important coup in American history. That same month, President Kennedy -- who had resisted escalating the war -- was assassinated. President Johnson took power and began intensified US involvement in Vietnam.
     

    1964, Vietnam:

    The USS Maddox is gathering intelligence off the coast of North Vietnam when a group of North Vietnamese torpedo boats approach the ship. The Maddox opens fire, the North Vietnamese respond with torpedoes, but they are eventually driven away. The exchange prompts the US government and news media to report that North Vietnamese torpedo boats launched an "unprovoked attack" against the Maddox while it was on a "routine patrol".
    Two days later, Captain John J. Herrick of the USS Maddox sees two "mysterious dots" on his radar screen, determines they are torpedo boats, and sends an emergency cable to headquarters in Honolulu reporting that the ship is under attack.  
    Shortly after, Herrick sends another cable: "Freak weather effects on radar and over eager sonar men ... No actual visual sightings by Maddox. Suggest complete evaluation before any further action taken."
    Less than an hour later, Herrick sends a third cable, saying he is now uncertain of what had happened; however, by this time, President Johnson is already announcing a major military escalation in Vietnam.
    By the end of the Vietnam War, millions of Vietnamese and Laotians civilians have perished, along with more than 50,000 U.S. soldiers.  

    PRETEXT

    On July 30, 1964, enemy torpedo boats supposedly attacked a US destroyer, the USS Maddox, in North Vietnam’s Gulf of Tonkin. This lie of an “unprovoked attack” against a “routine patrol” threw the U.S. headlong into war. The Maddox was actually involved in “aggressive intelligence gathering in coordination with actual attacks by South Vietnam and the Laotian Air Force against targets in North Vietnam.” 60 They wanted to provoke a response “but the North Vietnamese wouldn't bite. So, Johnson invented the attack.”61 The US task force commander for the Gulf of Tonkin “cabled Washington that the report was the result of an ‘over-eager’ sonarman who picked up the sounds of his own ship's screws and panicked.”62

    RESPONSE

    On August 5, 1964, although he knew the attack had not occurred, Johnson couldn’t resist this opportunity for a full-scale war. Johnson went on national TV to lie about the Tonkin incident and to announce a bombing campaign to “retaliate.” The media repeated the lie ad nauseum. The fabricated assault was “used as justification for goading Congress into granting the president the authorization to initiate a protracted and highly lucrative war with North Vietnam.”63 Johnson asked Congress for powers “to take all necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces of the US and to prevent further aggression.”64 Before the war ended in 1975, about four million in Southeast Asia were killed.

    REAL REASONS

    As during the Spanish-American war, the American business elite sought to acquire colonies from failing British imperial powers. President Dwight Eisenhower propounded the ‘Domino Theory’ in 1954.65 If South Vietnam ‘fell,’ then other countries would too, ‘like a set of dominos.’ The Vietnam War was a threat to all revolutionaries and their supporters. The war also gave a huge boost to US war industries. Other US corporations (British-Dutch Empire) wanted access to region’s markets and resources, like tin, tungsten, rubber.66  And to reduce the world population.

    1970, Cambodia and Laos:

    President Richard Nixon announces that U.S. troops are invading Cambodia and Laos, the countries west of Vietnam through which the North Vietnamese are allegedly supplying their troops. For more than a year prior to the announcement, the U.S. had been conducting bombing raids, spraying the jungle with Monsanto Agent Orange and Weather Warfare in these countries.

    1982, Iraq:

    U.S. backs Iraq against Iran, supplying Saddam Hussein with intelligence, diplomatic aid, and chemical weapons (which would later be used to massacre innocent people).

    1983: The Invasion of Grenada

    CONTEXT

    For decades, Eric Gairy dominated the tiny British colony of Grenada. Gairy “a vicious dictator…[was] the only Caribbean leader to maintain diplomatic relations with Pinochet’s Chile.” When his “notorious security forces” returned from training in Chile “‘disappearances’ became frequent.”67 ‘Gariyism’ was so bad that when Britain offered independence, Grenadans united to “shut down the country…prior to Independence Day, February 7, 1974."68 The New Jewel Movement (NJM) led a successful uprising on March 13, 1979. The NJM “organized agrarian reform…, expanded trade union rights, advanced women's equality…, established literacy programs and instituted free medical care.”69 The CIA "relentlessly used every trick in its dirty bag” including "an unending campaign of economic, psychological and openly violent destabilization." Reagan met Caribbean leaders, the US urged "regional governments to consider military action" and CIA chief, William Casey, met Senate Intelligence Committee members "to discuss CIA involvement." Gairy began “recruiting mercenaries from…the Cuban exile community in Miami.”70 (ER BS p.3-5) In October1981, a US military exercise simulated an invasion of Grenada ostensibly to rescue Americans and "install a regime favorable to the way of life we espouse."71 In March 1983, Reagan exclaimed on TV that Grenada’s tourist airport threatened US oil supply routes.72 On October 19, 1983, NJM leader Maurice Bishop, and others, were put under house arrest during an coup by NJM’s Deputy PM Bernard Coard. Oddly, they were freed by a "well organized crowd…including counter-revolutionary elements…with anti-communist banners…. [led by] well known businessmen…. Who organized this rally, planned so well, and in advance?" Freed NJM leaders were whisked away and as a “crowd gathered…the soldiers, apparently panicked by explosions, opened fire.… something provoked them, leading to a massacre." NJM leaders surrendered to soldiers and were soon executed.73 Significantly, "Pentagon officials informed Members of Congress that they had known of the impending coup…two weeks in advance."74 The coup plotters were charged with the murders but their lawyer, former US Attorney General Ramsey Clarke believe them innocent of the murders.75 It seems the coup was hijacked by US interests to kill some NJM leaders, jail the rest and set the stage for an invasion.

    PRETEXT

    In his Naval Science course, Captain M.T.Carson lists the invasion’s "stated reasons" as "protect Americans, eliminate hostage potential; restore order; requested by OECS [Organization of Eastern Caribbean States]."76 The US helped form the OECS, and then got it and the Grenadan governor to "request" an invasion. Under “potential problem,” Carson notes "Act fast with surprise and present world with fait accompli. If not, world opinion of U.S. invasion of tiny country will be critical. So: · “Get OECS to request action.” · “Get Governor Scoon to request action.” · “Emphasize students-in-danger aspect"77 Carson quotes a "medical school official": "Our safety was never in danger. We were used as an excuse by this government to invade…. They needed a reason…and we were it." MTC Most students "insisted” that they were “not…in any danger before the US invasion; only afterwards."78

    RESPONSE

    On October 22, 1983, "Operation Urgent Fury" was ordered.79 Three days later, the invasion hit like a cyclone. The Organization of American States "deeply deplored" the invasion and the UN Security Council voted 11 to 1 against it.80

    REAL REASONS

    Grenada threatened the US by providing a powerful example of viable alternative ways to organize social, political and economic structures. Carson lists these reasons: · "Chance to eliminate Communist regime and replace with pro-U.S. government” · “Demonstrate U.S. military capabilities” · “President Reagan commented that U.S. military forces were back on their feet and standing tall."81 US military morale was damaged two days before the invasion when 241 Marines were killed in Lebanon.82 The Wall Street Journal said the invasion made Grenada a "haven for offshore banks."83    

    1985, Nicaragua:

    Congress authorizes $38 million over two years in "non-military" aid to Nicaragua's Contras.   

    1986, Libya:

    Islamic militants (CIA sponsored) bomb a Berlin discotheque, killing two American soldiers. The White House uses this opportunity to retaliate, and President Reagan authorizes the bombing of Libya without the authorization of Congress. At least 100 civilians were killed.
    One year prior, the National Security Council had discussed a plan to overthrow Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi using exiles in a coup, although the idea was eventually abandoned. 

    1989: The Invasion of Panama

    CONTEXT

    The Panama Canal has dominated Panama’s history. US military invasions and interventions occurred in 1895, 1901-1903, 1908, 1912, 1918-1920, 1925, 1950, 1958, 1964 and 1989.84 In November 1903, US troops ensured Panama’s secession from Colombia. Within days, a treaty gave the US permanent and exclusive control of the canal.85 Former Panamanian military leader, Manuel Noriega, recruited by US military intelligence in 1959, attended the US Army School of the Americas in 1967 and led Panama’s military intelligence the next year. By 1975, the US Drug Enforcement Agency knew of Noriega’s drug dealing. He met, then-CIA Director, George Bush in 1976.86 In 1977, Presidents Jimmy Carter and Omar Torrijos, signed a treaty to return the canal to Panamanian control in 1999. Other Americans undermined the treaty using “diplomatic…and political pressure, through to economic aggression and military invasion.”87 In the early-1980s, Noriega’s drug smuggling helped fund the contras in Nicaragua. He took control of Panama’s National Guard in 1983 and helped rig elections in 1984. Falling from US favour, the US indicted Noriega for drug crimes in 1988.88 On April 14, 1988, Reagan invoked “war powers” against Panama. In May, the Assistant Defense Secretary told the Senate: “I don’t think anyone has totally discarded the use of force.”89

    PRETEXT

    On December 16, 1989, there was what media called an “unprovoked attack on a US soldier who did not return fire.”90 The soldier was killed when driving “through a military roadblock near a sensitive military area.”91 Panama’s government said “U.S. officers…fired at a military headquarters, wounding a soldier and…a 1-year-old girl. A wounded Panamanian soldier…confirmed this account to U.S. reporters.”92 The wife of a US officer was reportedly arrested and beaten.

    RESPONSE

    George Bush called the attack on US soldiers an “enormous outrage”93 and said he “would not stand by while American womanhood is threatened.”94 Noam Chomsky questions why Bush “stood by” when a US nun was kidnapped and sexually abused by Guatemalan police only weeks earlier, when two US nuns were killed by contras in Nicaragua on January 1, 1990, and when a US nun was wounded by gunmen in El Salvador around the same time.95 The US media demonized Noriega and turned the “‘Noriega’ issue into an accepted justification for the invasion…. Colonel Eduardo Herrera, ex-Director of [Panama’s] ‘Public Forces,’…said: “If the real interest of the US was to capture Noriega, they could have done so on numerous occasions. [They] had all of his movements completely controlled.”96 On December 20, 1989, “Operation Just Cause” began. More than 4,000 were killed. US crimes included indiscriminate attacks, extra judicial executions, arbitrary detentions, destruction of property (like leveling the Chorrillo neighborhood), use of prohibited weapons, erasing evidence and mass burials.97 A US-friendly president, Guillermo Endara, was soon sworn in on a US military base.

    REAL REASONS

    The Carter-Torrijos Treaty was torn up and the Panama’s military was dismantled. A right-wing, US think tank stated in 1988 that: “once [Panama] is controlled by a democratic regime….discussions should begin with respect to a realistic defense of the Canal after…2000. These discussions should include the maintenance, by the US, of a limited number of military installations in Panama…to maintain adequate projection of force in the western hemisphere.”98 The invasion was a testing ground for new weapons, such as the B-2 bomber (worth US $2.2 billion) that was used for the first time. The invasion also: · rectified “Bush's ‘wimpy’ foreign relations image” · gave a “spectacular show of U.S. military might in the final months before the Nicaraguan elections, hinting…that they might want to vote for the ‘right’ candidate.” · “sent a signal…that the US…[would] intervene militarily where the control of illegal drugs was ostensibly at stake. · “demonstrated the new U.S. willingness to assume active, interventionist leadership of the ‘new world order’ in the post-Cold War period.”99  

    1990, Iraq

    In August, U.S. fighter jets, aircraft carriers, battleships, and half a million American troops are deployed to Saudi Arabia to defend against a possible attack from Iraq. Between its own oil fields, and those of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, western governments allegedly fear Iraq could gain control over the majority of the world's oil reserves. Dick Cheney secures the U.S.-Saudi occupation agreement, ensuring there will be no set withdrawal date from Saudi Arabia, thereby allowing U.S. forces to remain.   
    Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein eventually annexes Kuwait, triggering the first Iraq War.
    Kuwait had been part of the Ottoman Empire province of Basra, and included much of modern-day Iraq. Up until that point, Iraq had not recognized Kuwait's sovereignty, and the border between Iraq and Kuwait had never been clearly defined.
    The US ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie, claims that when she gave Iraq indications that the US would not oppose an invasion of Kuwait, she did not expect Iraq to take "all of Kuwait".
     

    1999: East Timor, Indosnesia

    Virtually, the same strategy used to occupy Kosovo with UN/NATO troops was applied by the NWO manipulators to take military control of East Timor. Once again, the same morality play is trotted out for public consumption: the local evil and demonic Indonesian Army trained militias responsible for the slaughter of innocent civilians following the August 30 vote for Independence (from Indonesian control), must be stopped at all costs. This time, Australia (to keep up the appearance of an 'international' humantarian effort) will lead the charge with 'peacekeeping' troops. Of course, it didn't take long for Madeline Albright to announce that US 'support assets' will be part of the "UN Peacekeeping Team". In a front page story in the LA Times (9/13/99), Mike Jendrzejczyk of Human Rights Watch (an Illuminati front group) in Washington DC said that it's "crucial" that "peacekeepers have the authority to disarm militia forces and any Indonesian soldiers actively working with them". ]  

    1999, Yugoslavia:

    U.S.-NATO Imperial slaves bombs drop over the country allegedly to prevent a "massacre", though this claim is challenged. More than 2,000 civilians are killed.
    A street in Belgrade destroyed by NATO bombs
    There are indications that basic infrastructure is deliberately targeted during this campaign. For example, a statement by Lt. Gen. Michael Short, US Air Force, quoted in the Washington Post, May 1999, reads: "If you wake up in the morning and you have no power to your house and no gas to your stove and the bridge you take to work is down and will be lying in the Danube for the next 20 years, I think you begin to ask, ‘Hey, Slobo, what’s this all about? How much more of this do we have to withstand?’ And at some point, you make the transition from applauding Serb machismo against the world to thinking what your country is going to look like if this continues."

    9/11 2001 False-Flag Conspiracy

    The September 11, 2001 attacks in the US were a “false flag” operation carried out jointly by the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia with “Zionists playing the lead role,”.

    A US federal court ruled that relatives of people who died in the 9/11 attacks can sue Saudi Arabia, reversing a lower court ruling in 2002 that had found the kingdom immune from lawsuits.

    Israel-Saudi-Arabia-Iran
    The complaint states that much of the funding for the al-Qaeda terrorists involved in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon came from Saudi Arabia.

    Dr. Kevin Barrett, a member of the Scientific Panel for the Investigation of 9/11rejects the official narrative, saying Saudi Arabia is a “puppet of the US and other Western governments.”

    maxresdefault“There were no hijackers, there were no hijackings, this has been proved in many, many ways,” Dr. Barrett said on Saturday. “Ten of the 19 guys they blamed were still alive after 9/11,” he added.

    Rather, he said, “Saudi intelligence was used by the real perpetrators of Sept. 11 to create a legend, to set up the patsies who would be blamed for this event.”

    Dr. Barrett said a “suppressed” report by the Congressional Joint Inquiry of 2002 would shed light on the true perpetrators of the attacks, should it become public. The controversial document, however, has remained classified to this day.

    Former Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.) who chaired the inquiry at the time has stated that the document includes information “implicating a foreign government,” Dr. Barrett said. “But there has been such a cover-up,” he added.

    The September 11 attacks, also referred to as 9/11 were a series of four coordinated attacks upon the US cities of New York and the Washington, DC which killed nearly 3,000 people.

    YouTube – Veterans Today -above

    If you are asking where the US$ 2.3 trillion "unaccounted for" are going check this out: http://seawapa.blogspot.be/2014/03/Sky-Dreadnought-and-2.3-trillion-dollars-missing-from-Pentagon.html

     

    2001, Afghanistan:

    Over the summer, negotiations between western oil companies and the Afghan Taliban to build a pipeline across the country fall through. Niaz Naikm (former Foreign Secretary of Pakistan) reveals that senior American officials told him during this time that military action to overthrow the Taliban in Afghanistan is planned to occur "before the snows [starts] falling in Afghanistan, by the middle of October at the latest". After 9/11, this objective is realized.
     

    2003, Iraq:

    Following western propaganda about Iraq's alleged "weapons of mass destruction" program, President George W. Bush launches an invasion of the country. This comes after years of western-backed "no-fly zones", and crippling economic sanctions.
    By 2011, most US forces leave the country; however, a noteworthy presence remains, including a $700 million dollar embassy in Baghdad, Iraq -- the largest U.S. embassy in the world, and a 46-aircraft air service for over 15,000 diplomats working for the State Department.   

    2009, Yemen:

    U.S. aidmissiles -- and eventually, aerial Predator drones -- are deployed to the country to fight "al-Qaeda" affiliates. From a strategic perspective, Yemen is important because it allows access to a vital world-wide oil shipping chokepoint.

    2010, Pakistan:

    U.S. Predator drones begin attacking targets along the Afghan-Pakistan border, killing dozens of civilians in the process.
     

    2010, South Korea:

    On the evening of March 26, 2010, the Cheonan, a South Korean ship, is conducting a routine naval patrol when an explosion unexpectedly tears into it, splitting the vessel in half and killing 46 sailors. Shortly after, western powers blame North Korea for the attack, though North Korea denies responsibility. The attack gives the US Corporations an opportunity to prolong its control over South Korean forces until 2015, and also extend its stay at nearby Japanese military bases.  
    Those corporations are owned by the Committee of 300 with cheap money from the Rothschild

    2011, Libya:

    The U.S. Corporations claims Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi is 'massacring' demonstrators protesting his regime; however, these accusations are drastically overblown. Regardless, a US-backed, NATO-imposed "no-fly zone" is enabled, responsible for murdering hundreds of Libyan civilians. 
    Many of the NATO attacks target Gaddafi, with one such strike taking the lives of his three grandchildren -- two toddlers, one infant. Gaddafi himself is eventually captured and killed.
    Two years prior, Gaddafi planned to nationalize Libya's oil reserves, the largest in Africa.
    ---
    It is perhaps too easy to look at U.S. foreign policy by the standards of the post-9/11 world, forgetting all that happened before. Without an accurate understanding of the past, we'll always be doomed to repeat it. The local, sovereign military force is either defeated (i.e. Yugoslavia) or, as in the case of the United States itself, replaced by foreign UN "Partnership For Peace" (PFP) troops who take over the jobs of US soldiers who have been sent overseas on 'peacekeeping' missions. In addition to being killed in ground conflicts on foreign soil, US military forces will likely be reduced in the next few years through disease induced attrition (i.e. from mandatory Anthrax Vaccinations required of all US military personnel). These vaccinations will, in all probability, eventually produce the symptoms of the so-called Gulf War Illness, which was acquired by a certain percentage of Gulf War soldiers who were given a "special" anthrax vaccine (intended by the Illuminati/CIA as a test run to ascertain how quickly (and fatally) the disease would progress with a substantial population of healthy young men and women). The corporate portion of the NWO pyramid seems to be dominated by international bankers and the big pharmaceutical cartels, as well as other major multinational corporations. The Royal Family of England, namely Queen Elizabeth II and the House of Windsor, (who are, in fact, descendants of the German arm of European Royalty -the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha family-changed the name to Windsor in 1914 ), are high level players, along with the British oligarchy which controls the upper strata of the Illuminati. The decision making Illuminati nerve centers of this effort are in the London (especially the City of London), Basel Switzerland, and Brussels (NATO headquarters). The United Nations, along with all the agencies working under the UN umbrella, such as the World Health Organization (WHO), are full time players in this scheme. Similarly, NATO is a military tool of the NWO. The leaders of all major industrial countries like the United States, England, Germany, Italy, Australia, New Zealand, etc. (E.g. members of the "G7/G8" ) are active and fully cooperative participants in this conspiracy. In this century, the degree of control exerted by the Illuminati has advanced to the point that only certain hand-picked individuals, who are groomed and selected by the Illuminati, are even eligible to become the prime minister or president of countries like England, Germany, or The United States. It didn't matter whether Bill Clinton or Bob Dole won the Presidency in 1996, the results would have been the same (except maybe for Zipper Gate ). Both men are playing on the same team for the same ball club. Anyone who isn't a team player is taken out: i.e.President Kennedy, Ali Bhutto (Pakistan) and Aldo Moro (Italy), Sadam Hessein, Gadafi, Admiral Borda and William Colby were also killed because they were either unwilling to go along with the conspiracy to destroy America, weren't cooperating in some capacity, or were attempting to expose / thwart the Takeover agenda. Most of the major wars, political upheavals, and economic depression/recessions of the past 100 years (and earlier) were carefully planned and instigated by the machinations of these elites. They include The Spanish-American War (1898), World War I and World War II; The Great Depression; the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917; the Rise of Nazi Germany; the Korean War; the Vietnam War; the 1989-91 "fall" of Soviet Communism, the 1991 Gulf War; and the recent War in Kosovo. Even the French Revolution was an orchestrated into existence by the Bavarian Illuminati and the House of Rothchild to revange the King of France taking over the Jesuit control of money supply.

    2012-2014


    "Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War"  Written by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky is a book that cuts through the chaos and deception to show the reader exactly how and why humanity is facing an existential threat. It is a wake-up call that the world is being pushed towards catastrophic conflict.  Western governments led by Washington are assiduously removing every check towards all-out hostility with the Islamic Republic of Iran, escalating economic sanctions, while mounting a fierce array of military power in the Persian Gulf.  Meanwhile, the Western public is disarmed from outright opposition to the juggernaut to war because the mainstream media has assisted Western governments in falsely portraying Iran as an imminent nuclear threat to world peace, and downplaying the gravity of what is at stake if a conflict should result - World War III.  This book shows that, incredibly, the same deception that the Western governments and media perpetrated to facilitate the war on Iraq less than a decade ago is now being repeated with Iran. But the real threat to world peace and the future of humanity is not Iran and its non-existent nuclear weapons program - it is the US-led alliance of NATO powers and their Middle East partners, Israel, Turkey and the handful of Gulf Arab monarchs.  The real agenda behind the drive for war is imperialist control of natural resources in a region that possesses some 60 per cent of all known reserves of oil and gas - the lifeblood of the capitalist global economy. Cloaked with the fictitious cover of "war on terror", "international security" and "humanitarian intervention", realities are being turned upside down.  The agenda for global control of resources is a long-term dynamic that Washington and its NATO allies have had on the drawing board for decades. The nine-year war on Iraq is but one episode of this unfolding scheme of conquest. The NATO-orchestrated regime change in Libya is also part of this military roadmap, which now has Iran in its sights. But this war lust will not stop with Iran. It is about global conquest by Western powers in which ultimately China and Russia are also marked out as future enemies.  Disturbingly, the US-led agenda of permanent war has incorporated the doctrine of pre-emptive strikes with all military options, including the deployment of tactical nuclear weapons and a new generation of so-called monster bombs. The imminent military showdown in the Persian Gulf could turn out to be not just a regional explosion of latent conflicts - it may be the trigger for a conflagration between global powers armed with nuclear arsenals capable of unleashing destruction that puts the very future of the planet in the balance.  The Western public has a vital task in preventing their governments' drive for war. Michel Chossudovsky's book is an essential tool in equipping the public for that task by showing them the truth of what is at stake. Michel Chossudovsky is an award-winning author, Professor of Economics (Emeritus) at the University of Ottawa. He is the Founder and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal, and Editor of the globalresearch.ca website. He is the author of The Globalization of Poverty and The New World Order (2003) and America's "War on Terrorism" (2005). He has taught as Visiting Professor at universities in Western Europe, South East Asia and Latin America, acted as an adviser to governments of developing countries and as a consultant for several international organizations.  Prof. Chossudovsky is a signatory of the Kuala Lumpur declaration to criminalize war and recipient of the Human Rights Prize of the Society for the Protection of Civil Rights and Human Dignity (GBM), Berlin, Germany. He is also a contributor to the Encyclopedia Britannica. His writings have been published in more than twenty languages.
    The Final phase of The NWO “British-Dutch Empire” endless Wars System 

    A BIGGER PICTURE 

    Next false-Flag?; Hoover Dam, a necessary step to build NAWAPA  

    CONCLUSIONS

    There are dozens of other examples from US history besides those summarized here. The “Cold War” was characterized by dozens of covert and overt wars throughout the Third World. Although each had its specific pretexts, the eradication of communism was the generally-used backdrop for all rationales.100 Since the Soviet Union’s demise, US Corporations war planners have continued to use spectacular pretext incidents to spawn wars. Examples include Iraq (1991), Somalia (1992), Haiti (1994), Bosnia (1995) and Yugoslavia (1999). Throughout this time, the US Corporations “War on Drugs” has been fought on many fronts. Lurking behind the excuse to squash illicit drug trafficking, are the actual reasons for financing, training and arming right-wing, US-backed regimes, whose officials have so often profited from this illegal trade. The CIA has used this trade to finance many of its covert wars.101 The “War on Drugs” has targeted numerous countries to strengthen counter-insurgency operations aimed at destroying opposition groups that oppose US corporate rule. Military plotters know that the majority would never support their wars, if it were generally known why they were really being fought. Over the millennia, a special martial art has been deliberately developed to weave elaborate webs of deceit to create the appearance that wars are fought for “just” or “humanitarian” reasons. If asked to support a war so a small, wealthy elite could shamelessly profit by ruthlessly exploiting and plundering the natural and human resources in far away lands, people would ‘just say no.’ We now face another broad thematic pretext for war, the so-called “War Against Terrorism.” We are told it will be waged in many countries and may continue for generations. It is vitally important to expose this latest attempt to fraudulently conceal the largely economic and geostrategic purposes of war. By asking who benefits from war, we can unmask its pretense and expose the true grounds for instigating it. By throwing light on repeated historical patterns of deception, we can promote skepticism about the government and media yarns that have been spun to encourage this war. The historical knowledge of how war planners have tricked people into supporting past wars, is like a vaccine. We can use this understanding of history to inoculate the public with healthy doses of distrust for official war pretext narratives and other deceptive stratagems. Through such immunization programs we may help to counter our society’s susceptibility to “war fever.”  

    Notes
    1. “History of Mexico, Empire and Early Republic, 1821-55,” Area Handbook, US Library of Congress.
    2. Shayne M. Cokerdem, “Unit Plan: Manifest Destiny and The Road to the Civil War.”
    3. P.B.Kunhardt, Jr., P.B.Kunhardt III, P.W.Kunhardt, “James Polk,” The American President, 2000.
    4. “Diplomatic Approaches: U.S. Relations with Mexico: 1844-1846,” LearnCalifornia.org, 2000.
    5. John Stockwell, “The CIA and the Gulf War,” Speech, Santa Cruz, CA, Feb.20, 1991, aired by John DiNardo, Pacifica Radio.
    6. Betsy Powers, “The U.S.-Mexican War of 1846-48,” War, Reconstruction and Recovery in Brazoria County.
    7. “The White House and Western Expansion,” Learning Center, White House Historical Association.
    8. Powers
    9. White House Historical Association
    10. Stockwell
    11. P.B.Kunhardt, Jr., P.B.Kunhardt III, P.W.Kunhardt
    12. Ed Elizondo, “History of the Cuban Liberation Wars,” Oct.2, 2001.
    13. Guillermo Jimpnez Soler, "The emergence of the United States as a world power", Granma International, Aug.7, 1998.
    14. Bill Sardi, “Remember the Maine! And the Other Ships Sunk to Start a War” Oct.16, 2000.
    15. Michael Rivero, “Dictatorship through Deception,” New Republic Forum, Dec.24, 1999.
    16. Rivero
    17. J. Buschini, “The Spanish-American War,” Small Planet Communications, 2000.
    18. Soler
    19. Buschini
    20. Buschini
    21. Soler
    22. Howard Zinn, “History as a Political Act,” Revolutionary Worker, December 20, 1998.
    23. Woodrow Wilson, Message to Congress, Aug. 19, 1914, Senate Doc.#566, pp.3-4, World War I Document Archive.
    24. Greg D.Feldmeth, “The First World War,” U.S. History Resources, Mar.31, 1998.
    25. James Perloff, “Pearl Harbor,” The New American, Vol. 2, No. 30, December 8, 1986.
    26. James Perloff
    27. Winston Churchill, cited by Ralph Raico, “Rethinking Churchill,” The Costs of War: America's Pyrrhic Victories, 1997.
    28. Harry V.Jaffa, “The Sinking of the Lusitania: Brutality, Bungling or Betrayal?” The Churchill Center.
    29. Patrick Beesly, Room 40: British Naval Intelligence, 1914-18, 1982 cited by RR
    30. Peter Young, “World War I,” World Book Encyclopedia, 1967, pp. 374-375.
    31. Wendy Mercurio, “WWI Notes, From Neutrality to War,” Jan.2002.
    32. Patrick Beesly, cited by Ralph Raico
    33. Winston Churchill, cited by Ralph Raico
    34. Howard Zinn, “War Is the Health of the State,” A People's History of the United States, 1492-Present, Sept. 2001.
    35. Zinn
    36. Steve Kangas, “The Business Plot to Overthrow Roosevelt,” Liberalism Resurgent: A Response to the Right, 1996.
    37. Gerald MacGuire, cited by Steve Kangas
    38. Dale Wharton, Book review of The Plot to Seize the White House (1973) by Jules Archer, Eclectica Book Reviews.
    39. Webster G.Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin, “The Hitler Project,” George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, 1992.
    40. David Nasaw, “Remembering ‘The Chief,’" interview, Newshour, Sept.7, 2000.
    41. Joseph Czarnecki, Richard Worth, Matthias C. Noch and Tony DiGiulian, “Attack on Pearl Harbor, 7 December 1941,” The Battles Of The Pacific.
    42. Steve Fry, “Author: FDR knew attack was coming,” The Capital-Journal, June 12, 2001.
    43. Henry Stimson, cited by Robert Stinnett, Day of Deceit: The Truth about FDR and Pearl Harbour, 2000.
    44. Percy L.Greaves, Jr., “What We Knew,” Institute for Historical Review, Winter, 1983, p.467.
    45. “The MAGIC Documents: Summaries and Transcripts of the Top-Secret Diplomatic Communications of Japan, 1938-1945,” GB 0099 KCLMA MF 388-401.
    46. Paul Proteus, “Part One: Pearl Harbour,” America's Phoney Wars.
    47. Rivero
    48. Michael Parenti, Against Empire, 1995, p.36.
    49. “Final Judgement of the Korea International War Crimes Tribunal,” June 23, 2001.
    50. Oliver Lee, "South Korea Likely Provoked War with North," Star-Bulletin, June 24, 1994.
    51. Channing Liem, The Korean War (6.25, 1950 - 7.27, 1953) - An Unanswered Question, 1993.
    52. Liem
    53. Albert Einstein cited by Channing Liem.
    54. I.F.Stone, Hidden History of the Korean War, 1952, cited by Channing Liem.
    55. Liem
    56. Lee
    57. Jim Caldwell, “Korea - 50 years ago this week, June 25-28, 1950,” ArmyLINK News, June 20, 2000.
    58. Jon Halliday and Bruce Cumings, Korea: The Unknown War, 1988, p.200, cited by Robin Miller, “Washington's Own Love Affair with Terror”
    59. Sandra M.Wittman, “Chronology of US-Vietnamese Relations,” Vietnam: Yesterday and Today.
    60. Rivero
    61. John DiNardo, “The CIA and the Gulf War,” aired by Pacifica Radio.
    62. Rivero
    63. DiNardo
    64. Joint Resolution, U.S. Congress, Aug.7, 1964, “The Tonkin Bay Resolution, 1964,” Modern History Sourcebook, July 1998.
    65. Dwight D. Eisenhower, “Domino Theory Principle, 1954,” Public Papers of the Presidents, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1954, pp.381-390. (News Conference, April 7, 1954.)
    66. Eisenhower
    67. Ellen Ray and Bill Schaap, “US Crushes Caribbean Jewel.” Covert Action Information Bulletin (CAIB), winter 1984, p.8
    68. Jeff Hackett, “Burying ‘Gairyism.’” Bibliographies
    69. Preface to Maurice Bishop speech “In Nobody's Backyard,” April 13, 1979, The Militant, Mar.15 1999.
    70. Ray and Schaap, pp.3-5
    71. Ray and Schaap, p.6
    72. Clarence Lusane, “Grenada, Airport ’83: Reagan’s Big Lie,” CAIB, Spring-Summer 1983, p.29.
    73. Ray and Schaap, pp.10-11
    74. Ray and Schaap, p.5
    75. Alan Scott, "The Last Prisoners of the Cold War Are Black," letter, The Voice (Grenada), April 20, 2001.
    76. Capt. M.T.Carson, USMC, (Marine Officer Instructor), “Grenada October 1983,” History of Amphibious Warfare (Naval Science 293), Naval Reserves Officer Training Corps, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign.
    77. Carson
    78. Ray and Schaap, p..8.
    79. Carson
    80. “Failures of U.S. Foreign Policy,” Alternativeinsight, Sept.1, 2001
    81. Carson
    82. Alternativeinsight, Sept.1, 2001
    83. Anthony Arnove and Alan Maass, “Washington’s war crimes,” Socialist Worker, Nov.16, 2001.
    84. Zoltan Grossman, “One Hundred Years of Intervention,” 2001.
    85. Commission for the Defence of Human Rights in Latin America (CODEHUCA), This is the Just Cause, 1990, p.115.
    86. Richard Sanders, “Manuel Noriega,” Press for Conversion!, Dec. 2000, p.40.
    87. CODEHUCA, pp.117, 108
    88. Sanders
    89. CODEHUCA, p.108
    90. Richard K. Moore, “The Police State Conspiracy an Indictment,” New Dawn Magazine, Jan.-Dec. 1998.
    91. Noam Chomsky, “Operation Just Cause: the Pretexts,” Deterring Democracy, 1992.
    92. Chomsky
    93. Alexander Safian, “Is Israel Using ‘Excessive Force’ Against Palestinians?” Fact sheet: Myth of Excessive Force, Nov.9, 2000
    94. Chomsky
    95. Chomsky
    96. CODEHUCA, p.106.
    97. CODEHUCA, passim
    98. Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR), “Panama: A Test for U.S.-Latin American Foreign Relations,” Interhemispheric Resource Center Bulletin, May 1995
    99. FOR
    100. William Blum, Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II, 2000.
    101. Alfred McCoy, The Politics of Heroin: CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Trade, 1991.
    See also:   The aforementioned information is deliberately presented in a relatively simple context for brevity. I encourage you to explore the sources referenced, and continue learning through your own research. For such a purpose, the following links may also be of interest:  A brief history of George W. Obama  -  Has the same U.S. President been in office for the last 11 years? The following timeline covers key events between 2001-2012 The United States of Predator Drones - From Afghanistan to Yemen, from Yemen to Mexico, from Mexico to your back yard, drone use has drastically expanded and shows no signs of slowing down America's Global Neocon War - Bush-era neocons are still very much directing foreign policy in the United States, ultimately aiming for conflict with Russia and China Democrats merge with GOP, form War Party - Bush helped Republicans justify needless war, Obama has helped Democrats; now, there is no mainstream anti-war party The Sinking of the Cheonan - South Korea blames the North for sinking a warship in 2010, giving the U.S. a reason to extend its military presence in the region A boy named "Adam" - Largely thanks to a complicit corporate-state news media, the story of a U.S. teenager executed without trial by the government has largely gone under the radar Rethinking the "non-aggression principle" - Do non-human animals lose the "right" to experience life merely on the basis of their species? War Made Easy - documentary about news media manipulation of public opinion to gain support for various war efforts throughout the last 50 years Why We Fight - documentary about 9/11, U.S. foreign policy, and defense companies Lies My Teacher Told Me A People's History of the United States