Note to reader: This article contains a lot of information put together from multiple sources. If you are unfamiliar with the sources of any of the claims highlighted here, it is highly recommended that you check out the links provided.
With conflicts raging from Libya to Mali in the aftermath of the widely
misunderstood “Arab Spring,” it is not surprising that few commentators seem to
realize the special significance of the battle for Syria. The outcome may determine
the success or failure of the effort to create a global corporate Empire
nominally directed by the government of the United States and backed by the
power of the US military. It is critical that westerners understand this
because once such a New World Order is fully established, resistance in the US
and elsewhere can only be violent. That could only serve to provide the perfect
excuse to use the powers of the police state that is being constructed all
around us.
Those who only follow the news in the mainstream media have enough clues to
piece the story together, though the truth is to be found in plain sight
through the alternative media. To appreciate the real danger humanity faces, we
must look at the available information with open eyes, a justified skepticism of
government claims and an understanding of the realities of how the global game
of Risk is played today. We won’t get this perspective from the political
pundits whose analyses are premised on an uncritical acceptance of the need for
a “war on terror.” Anyone who understands the goals of Strategy for Rebuilding America’s Defenses (SAD), the white paper
put out by Project for a New American Century in 2000, knows that the America’s
war of terror is a smokescreen for the creation of what amounts to a permanent
fascist New World Order.
PNAC laid out its plans for world domination in this seminal document,
published one year before the attack on the World Trade Center provided the
opportunity to put the strategy into action. PNAC was founded on the assumption
that the US had the right and duty to assure a Pax Americana would endure for
at least a century, established and maintained through American military superiority
in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union. SAD described a plan to
destabilize any nation whose leaders dared challenge “American interests.” In
context, the term can only be assumed to mean the interests of international
corporations whose executives have dictated foreign policy to the US government
at least since the 1954s, when the CIA staged the Guatemalan coup on behalf of
the United Fruit Company.
Among nations specifically identified as potential threats in SAD were Iraq,
Libya, Syria and Iran. It may seem surprising that Afghanistan was not on the
list, given that negotiations for an American pipeline had broken down in 1998,
but perhaps by 2000 the invasion was already a foregone conclusion. After all,
General Wesley Clark has reported being informed of a classified memo on or
about September 20, 2001 that laid out plans
to take down these governments along with Sudan, Lebanon and Somalia. For
those who haven’t been paying attention, oil-rich southern Sudan seceded in
July of 2011, Hezbollah has recently been accused of masterminding a terror
attack against Israelis in Macedon, leading to the EU considering putting them
on its terrorist list, and the CIA is still busy trying to gain control in
Somalia through drones, private contractors and covert means. The claim that Hezbollah was behind the
Macedon attack is at best suspicious, pointing to a
deliberate effort to implicate a key ally of Syria and Iran.
The timing of the CIA and MI-6 based coup in Libya may have been related to
Gaddafi’s renewed threat to create a gold-backed
dinar to challenge the supremacy of the petrodollar. There had been threats
to take out Gaddafi at least since Reagan was in office.
In 1996, two MI-5 whistleblowers
revealed that one was approached by an agent of MI-6 about illegally
funneling money to foreign mercenaries to finance a coup. Gaddafi’s
socialist government and his efforts to promote Pan-African unity and
independence were threats to NATO’s vision of an American-led New World Order.
When the time came to take him out, NATO used the same means proposed in 1996.
Mercenaries backed by the US and its Gulf partners infiltrated the Benghazi
region and gained the support of a few malcontents to give themselves a veneer
of legitimacy. NATO then sought UN cover in the form of a no-fly zone
authorization, which was used as a pretext to eliminate loyalist civilians and
the Libyan military through massive air strikes, allowing the terrorist army to
murder Gaddafi and take control of the country.
Many wondered why Russia and China did not veto the UN decision on the no-fly
zone. After all, they stand to be the biggest losers in the winner-take-all
game of global Monopoly in which average citizens of the planet are merely
token players. What they did was abstain. By tradition though not law, this is
taken to mean that a measure passes in the Security Council. However, when NATO
exceeded the mandate of the resolution and murdered an estimated 10,000 loyal
Libyan civilians under the doctrine of “responsibility to Protect,” both
nations decided it was in their interests to not allow the same thing to happen
in Syria. This is probably the main reason the Assad government remains in
power.
Syria is the key line of defense against US/NATO/Gulf
Cooperation Council/Israeli domination of the world’s oil supplies
exclusive of Latin America and Russia. Its citizens increasingly realize that
the survival of sovereignty in Syria may be the last hope of stopping a small
band of bankers and their minions from controlling the world. From a larger
perspective, the quest to achieve dominance over the rest of the planet in the
interest of perpetuating a carbon fuels-based world economy threatens the
survival of human civilization as we know it. As long as geopolitics is
centered on the conflict over oil and natural gas, the threat of global climate
change grows and becomes ever more immediate.
Here is how the dominoes line up: If Syria falls and Hezbollah is named a
terrorist organization by the EU, Iran and Russia will stand virtually alone
against the powerful alliance of western “democracies,” Israel, the Gulf monarchies, the Qatar-backed
governments dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood and the terrorist groups
backed by Saudi Arabia, the CIA, MI6 and Mossad. US policy has
since 2007 has been to back cooperative “moderate” Sunni monarchies over “radical”
Shia governments and groups and their secular allies in Syria and pre-invasion Iraq.
This is essential to understanding the US plan to carry out its program of
regime destabilization. The Muslim Brotherhood, including Hamas, seems
committed to securing its place in what they seem to assume will be a permanent
fascist New World Order. If Iran is
destabilized through economic sanctions or eventually attacked by NATO forces
with the implicit or explicit blessing of citizens of EU nations, Russia will
be essentially isolated and economically devastated by the loss of access for
its oil and natural gas to European, Chinese and Indian markets. China in turn
will find itself virtually alone in the fight against a worldwide western
corporate Empire.
China is heavily dependent on oil from Iran, Myanmar and other regions that
have been targeted by NATO, which is seeking to absorb SEATO (the Southeast
Asian Treaty Organization). Australia and Japan are going along with the plan
to establish NATO economic and military dominance over Asia. Meanwhile, drone
bases are being set up in Africa, throughout Asia and in the Americas.
Everything is in place to allow the international corporate terrorists who
control the US government, military and intelligence agencies to take over the
world militarily in areas where it cannot yet dominate economically. In the
face of a
dollar that is increasingly seen as endangered, the impetus to move rapidly
toward a final solution to the problem of democracy is compelling.
With all this happening in front of their eyes, a clueless American public dithers
over the economic consequences of having unwittingly allowed corporations to take
control of their government, without recognizing that is the problem. Most of
those who have not given up on politics altogether engage in endless debate
over whether Democrats or Republicans have allowed this to happen when clearly
both are responsible. As an example of the lunacy of the state of American
politics, supporters of right wing politicians are so fearful of a “socialist”
takeover that they have made gun rights a central issue in the political
dialogue, joined in support by left wingers who have also concluded that violent
revolution is unavoidable.
What would be left in this corporate-controlled New World Order is a China
under increasing pressure by the Anglo-American Empire, an economically
crippled Russia, a Mideast dominated by overseers of the slave owners of the
corporatocracy, a recolonized Africa and Asia and a defenseless and demoralized
world citizenry, unable to fight back effectively because any effort to resist would
simply increase support for a police state by those remaining in the middle
class who are fearful of a mob rule formerly known as “democracy.”
Is there any hope to change the tide of history? In a word, yes. That will be
the topic of the next essay in Soldiers For Peace International.
For a more detailed discussion of the outline of the plan for global
domination, listen to this podcast
from SFPI Radio, the voice of Soldiers For Peace International on the
worldwide web.
