USA «

‘Arab Spring is about controlling Eurasia’

November 1, 2011 1 Comment

RT
November 1, 2011

The ultimate goal of the US is to take the resources of Africa and Middle East under military control to block economic growth in China and Russia, thus taking the whole of Eurasia under control, author and historian William F. Engdahl reveals.

The crisis with the US economy and the dollar system, the conduct of the US foreign policy is all a part of breakdown of the entire superpower structure that was built up after the end of WWII, claims Engdahl.

“Nobody in Washington wants to admit, just as nobody in Britain a hundred years ago wanted to admit that the British Empire was in terminal decline,” claims the author, noting that “All of this is related to the attempt to keep this sole superpower not only intact, but to spread its influence over the rest of the planet.”

William F. Engdahl believes the uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa is a plan first announced by George W. Bush at a G8 meeting in 2003 and it was called “The Greater Middle East Project”.

It was masterminded to take under control for the “democratization” of the entire Islamic world from Afghanistan down through Iran, Pakistan and the oil producing Persian Gulf area, across North Africa all the way to Morocco.

“The so-called Arab Spring had been planned, pre-organized and used by the instigators of the ‘spontaneous’ protests and Twitter revolts in Cairo and Tunisia and so forth,” insists the historian.

Engdahl exposes that the some of the leaders of the protests had been trained in Belgrade, Serbia, by activists of Canvas (the Center for Applied Non-Violent Actions and Strategies) and Otpor (a youth movement that played a significant role ousting the former Serbian president Slobodan Milosevic), organizations financed by the US State Department.

Engdahl names two reasons for the US State Department’s designs on the Islamic world.

The first reason is a vast wealth in the hands of the Arab world’s leaders, sovereign wealth funds and resources. The agenda – exactly as it was done with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 – is “the IMF privatization, ‘free market’ economy and so forth so that Western banks and financial agencies and corporations could come in and take the plunder.”

“The second agenda is militarize the oil sources in such places as Libya and the so-called Republic of South Sudan, that are directly strategic to China’s future economic growth,” points Engdahl.

“This is all about controlling Eurasia, something Zbignew Brzezinski talked about back in 1997 in his famous book The Great Chessgame, especially about controlling Russia and China and any potential cohesion of the Eurasian countries economically and politically,” he says.

And the results are already there – in Egypt and Tunisia the democracy has already brought weak economy, while Libya, the country with the highest living standards in all of Africa before the NATO bombings, today is in ruins.

The concern of the Western powers, especially the Pentagon, is the military control of the troubled region, not restoring normality, the historian evaluates. The NTC puppet government’s main concern is giving NATO prominent basing rights – something unheard of during the 42 years of Gaddafi rule.

“The AFRICOM [the Pentagon’s Africa command] is co-ordinating the scene,” William F. Engdahl says, mentioning that “interestingly enough [AFRICOM] was created just after 2006 China’s Africa diplomacy, when 40 heads of African nations were invited to Beijing and enormous deals were signed on oil exploration, building hospitals and infrastructure – anything the IMF did not do in Africa over the last 30 years.”

It is true that the US is acting against Chinese interests and national security but Beijing, that gets around $300 billion every year of trade income, simply has to invest this money somewhere and as there are no markets big enough to absorb such money – Beijing has to buy American treasuries – thus sponsoring the American wars that ironically are directed against Chinese interests.

“For the ‘Gods of Money’ of Wall Street, the only chance of survival and keeping dollar now is finding new areas of loot. The Arab Spring is directed at grabbing and privatizing the vast wealth of the Arab world,” Engdahl concludes.

But the future of the eurozone also looks grim because the Greek financial crisis was planted under the EU back in 2002 by none other than Goldman Sachs.The money trail shows, states Engdahl, that “the Greek crisis was programmed to be detonated at command by Wall Street and the US Treasury, as well as the Federal Reserve in order to defend the reserve currency – the US dollar.”

Engdahl warns that the US is building more and more bases around the world, like 17 new, mostly Air Force, bases in Afghanistan to be ready for the new war with China or probably Russia.

“Given the history more than the Cold War era, Russia can play a very stabilizing and constructive role as a counterforce to this highly dangerous strategy of The Greater Middle East project of NATO and the US,” Engdahl claims. “I would hope they do.”

Filed under World Tagged with africa, asia, china, crisis, global economy, history, human rights, Irina Galushko, natural resources, Oil, politics, russia, USA, War

Religious war in the Balkans was orchestrated by USA and NATO

October 20, 2011

by Sergei Balmasov
Pravda.ru
October 20, 2011

On July 18, the USA and NATO were accused of the massacre in the Balkans. Such accusations wouldn’t be surprising, if they came from the Serbs, for instance. This time, it goes about Croatia and Britain. To be more precise, it goes about the former commander of UN forces in Bosnia and Herzegovina, British General Michael Rose, and Vice President of the Republic of Srpska (RS, a part of Bosnia and Herzegovina), Emil Vlajki. The latter represents the Croats in the RS.

Mr. Rose directly accused the USA and NATO of the Srebrenica massacre. According to him, the massacre took place because UN’s peacemaking efforts were systematically disrupted during the conflict in Bosnia in 1992-1995.

The statement became Michael Rose’s response to another portion of criticism regarding the inaction of UN troops during the Bosnian war. According to the general, after the deployment of UN troops in BiH, which mostly played the humanitarian role, NATO with the United States at the head were systematically undermining UN’s peacemaking efforts, violating the embargo on arms shipments in Yugoslavia. NATO and the USA were simultaneously arming and training the Bosnian Muslims, the general said. According to Rose, it gave the Muslims certainty of their ability to defeat the Serbs with the power of weapons. It also shattered confidence in the UN mission in the eyes of the parties of the conflict. The UN was thus unable to succeed in its peacemaking initiatives. NATO’s and USA’s air raids were unable to show influence on the events that were taking place on the ground. It virtually resulted in the collapse of the UN mission in 1995, which made General Ratko Mladic attack Srebrenica, Michael Rose said.

According to the British general, if NATO forces had been deployed in BiH in 1992, as BiH’s President Alija Izetbegovic wanted in order to put an end to the conflict in Croatia, neither the war, nor the massacre would have happened. UN peacemakers in Bosnia could not do anything against it because they had no mandate for it, nor were they equipped and trained properly for combat operations. That role belonged to NATO, but the alliance only confined itself to bombardments, the British general concluded.

As for the notorious statement from Emil Vlajki, he demanded the USA should bring its apologies for the Balkan events. Vlajki said that he wanted the States to apologize for convincing the leader of Bosnian Muslims Alija Izetbegovic to refuse from observing the terms of the Lisbon Treaty from 1992, which guaranteed peace in Bosnia.

According to Vlajki, the USA initiated the bloody war, which took the Serbs back to the pre-civil society of mutual hatred and feudalism. He also criticized the Americans for breaking the UN embargo for the delivery of arms in BiH during the war. Foreign Mujahideeds were thus given an opportunity to enter Bosnia, the official said. Vlajki also accused the Americans of turning BiH into a time bomb.

“Why did you deceive the Croats and made them unite with the Muslims into the Croatian-Muslim federation of BiH, which marked the beginning of the end of the Croatian nation in this part of Bosnia and Herzegovina? They were interfering with our elections all the time after the Dayton Accord, because they were previously supporting the illegal, illegitimate and anti-Croatian government of platformists in the BiH Federation, established on the base of illegal decree from High Representative in Bosnia-Herzegovina (BiH) Valentin Inzko,” he said.

To put it in a nutshell, Emil Vlajki warns of another conflict that may erupt in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It may happen because of the efforts of the United States again, he added. According to him, America was pursuing its own interest in this case. “To realize the idea of their prominent political scientist Samuel Huntington, they turned BiH into the key territory on which two civilizations – Islam and Christianity – would clash. The final goal of the States, Vlajki believes, was to slow down the unification of Europe.

Leonid Ivashov, the President of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, commented on the notorious statements from the British general and the Croatian politician.

“I’d like to remind here of the international conference, which took place in 2009. The conference was devoted to the tenth anniversary of NATO’s war against Yugoslavia. There were two reports made during the meeting, which said that the destruction of that country was planned in the West long before the events in 1991-1999. A report from French General Pierre Gallois was especially interesting at this point. He told of the secret meeting at the French General Staff in 1985, during which NATO’s leading countries were elaborating the plans to destroy Yugoslavia.

“The report from Michel Chossudovsky of Canada was a very interesting one too. He particularly said that the World Bank was also planning the destruction of Yugoslavia. The existence of this socialist state and its system, which differed from the systems of other Western states, was threatening Europe and the West in general. Yugoslavia did not fit in the picture of the world, which Washington and Brussels would like to build.

“As for the Srebrenica events, one shouldn’t forget that it was the Americans, as well as the Vatican to a certain extent, that fostered hatred between the Serbs and the Bosnians. It was them, who pushed the Islamic clergy of Bosnia towards publishing the fatwah about the struggle against the infidels. The goal was different here – they wanted Islam and Christianity to clash.

“As for technical issues, the job was done by mercenaries from Western countries, from the USA, first and foremost. It goes about private military campaigns, in which soldiers would guise themselves as warriors of hostile sides. They would commit numerous crimes trying to provoke massacre.

“Unfortunately, one has to acknowledge today that the West achieved its goal. Yugoslavia was destroyed, but the Americans are trying to destroy even the proud Serbian spirit to completely bury their aspiration for independent politics. That was the time when the West tested a completely new kind of war, the continuation of which we can now witness in Libya and Syria,” Ivashov said.

Filed under World Tagged with anti-Croatian government, BiH, Bosnian war, humanitarian role, massacre in Balkans, Mujahideeds, nato, Serbs, UN Forces, USA, USA air raids, War, yugoslavia

World War 2011: Next Stop is Pakistan

October 12, 2011

by Wayne Madsen
Strategic Culture
October 12, 2011

Paraphrasing the old anti-Vietnam War song,

“And it’s one, two, three,
What are we fighting for ?
Don’t ask me, I don’t give a damn,
Next stop is Pakistan”

It does appear that for some Pentagon brass, including Defense Secretary Leon Panetta; the CIA under former U.S. Central Command and Afghanistan commander General David Petraeus; and top Republican and Democratic politicians that, indeed, Pakistanis next on the target list of nations that will soon be feeling the military muscle of the United States. Unlike other Muslim nations that have been subjected to U.S. military intervention, including Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Yemen, and Libya, Pakistan’s ultimate prize for the West is its nuclear weapons arsenal…

A number of observers, including former senior figures with the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency, have made no secret of western contingency plans, which appear to be going active, to secure Pakistan’s nuclear weapons in order to eliminate the nation as a nuclear weapons power. The plans have been coordinated between the CIA, India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) intelligence service, and Israel’s Mossad.

President Obama appears to have decided to ratchet up tensions with Pakistan after Pakistan’s President Asif Ali Zardari was apparently urged by Obama to attend the White House’s much-hyped Nuclear Security Summit in Washington in April 2010. Obama sent a personal letter to Zardari that was delivered to the Pakistani president’s office in Islamabad on February 16, 2010, along with a cover letter from U.S. ambassador to Pakistan Anne Patterson. The letter to Zardari was the subject of a leaked U.S. State Department “sensitive” cable dated February 17, 2010 from the U.S. embassy in Islamabad to the State Department. The cable references a previous February 10, 2010 cable from the White House to the embassy in Islamabad. The cable from Islamabad was copied to the CIA; the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the Pentagon; the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) in Tampa, Florida; U.S. consulates in Lahore, Peshawar, and Karachi – the sites of CIA stations in Pakistan – and the U.S. embassies in London and Kabul.

The cable from Islamabad to Washington stated:

(SBU) Post delivered the POTUS letter on the Nuclear Security Summit to the Office of President Asif Ali ZARDARI on February 16, with cover letter from Ambassador Anne Patterson. The Pakistanis have not yet confirmed to us whether ZARDARI will attend. PATTERSON

Zardari passed on attending the nuclear summit, opting to send Prime Minister Yusaf Raza Gilani is his place. Soon after, Washington began expressing alarm about links between Pakistan and Taliban elements in the nation’s North West Frontier Province, as well as in Afghanistan.

It is noteworthy that Israel, which officially denies it possesses nuclear weapons, although it is estimated to have some 400 warheads, sent Dan Meridor, the deputy prime minister with oversight over Mossad, and India sent its Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh. Saudi Arabia, which has been used by Washington as an interlocutor with the Taliban in Afghanistan, sent the head of its General Intelligence Service, Prince Muqran bin Abdul Aziz.

A week after Zaradari received his invitation to the Washington summit, a Secret NOFORN (not releasable to foreign nationals) cable, dated February 23, was sent from Islamabad to the State Department with copies to the CIA; the Joint Chiefs; CENTCOM; the U.S. embassies in London and New Delhi; the U.S. Consulates in Lahore, Peshawar, and Karachi; the Energy Department (an indicator that nuclear security issues were at stake), and the sanctions-wielding Departments of Treasury and Commerce. The cable discusses a February 17 meeting between the U.S. special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, the late Richard Holbrooke, and Zardari, the day after Zardari received Obama’s invitation to the nuclear summit.

In his meeting, Holbrooke thanked Zardari for Pakistan’s help in fighting Taliban militants, particularly help in capturing Afghan Taliban military leader Mullah Beradar. But Holbrooke was not satisfied. The U.S. envoy threw cold water on reconciliation efforts between Afghan President Karzai and the UN Secretary General’s Special Representative to Afghanistan Kai Eide’s on one side and senior Taliban leaders on the other. According to the Secret cable, Holbrooke told Zardari “the United States and Pakistan had weakened the Taliban leadership but noted that this was only the first stage, as success depended on turning local populations against the Taliban.” Holbrooke stressed, “the popular perception of the U.S. reintegration and reconciliation efforts with the Taliban mistakenly overemphasized the possibility for reconciliation, explaining that reconciliation with Taliban leaders was less likely than reintegrating low-level Taliban who had given up the fight.” Zardari confided to Holbrooke that the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Muqrin, had discussed possible talks between Karzai and senior Taliban officials in Saudi Arabia but with no “guarantees” such a summit would take place. The remaining sections of the cable, sections two and three, are strangely missing from what was allegedly leaked to WikiLeaks.

In April, Muqrin, Meridor, Singh and his intelligence advisers, Obama, British Foreign Secretary David Miliband, French President Nicolas Sarkozy, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili, and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper,essentially, those who would be counted on the support the seizure of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons to prevent them from falling into “radical Islamist” hands, were all gathered in Washington to discuss nuclear proliferation and security. Having been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his nuclear counter-proliferation efforts, Obama was the perfect front man for a secret coalition of the willing to carry out the de-nuclearization of Pakistan. The only obstacle remaining was to create an environment acceptable to world public opinion that would justify a multinational intervention in Pakistan.

The Pakistani media and officials like retired Pakistani Army chief of staff General Mirza Aslam Beg and former ISI chief General Hamid Gul, began reporting on U.S. private military contractors conducting unofficial activities throughout Pakistan, especially in Peshawar, Lahore, Karachi, and Islamabad, including U.S. involvement with “false flag” terrorist attacks that were later blamed on local Islamist worthies. In February 2011, the reported acting head of the CIA in Pakistan, Raymond Davis, was arrested by Pakistani police after he shot to death two Pakistani men he claimed were trying to rob him. However, it soon turned out that Davis was not telling the whole truth. Davis was found with espionage equipment and weapons and his telephone records indicated he had been in contact with Pakistani Taliban, also known as Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi militants in South Waziristan and other regions. Davis was released by Pakistan after heavy diplomatic pressure was exerted by Washington.

With tensions already frayed between the United States and Pakistan, on May 2, 2011, a U.S. Navy special operations team conducted a raid on the heavily-garrisoned Pakistani town of Abbotabad, in which Osama Bin Laden was allegedly killed. Operation Neptune Spear was clouded in mystery. Bin Laden’s body was quickly buried at sea without any independent authentication that Bin Laden had actually been killed while living under the very noses of a number of active fury and retired Pakistani military and ISI officers who lived in Abbotabad, near the Pakistani Military Academy. Indian and American military and intelligence officials suggested there were links between the Pakistani military and Bin Laden. Fifteen members of the Gold Squadron of the U.S. Navy’s Special Warfare Development Group (DEVGRU), formerly known as SEAL Team 6, all of whom participated in the alleged killing of Bin Laden in Abbotabad, were killed when their Chinook helicopter was shot down by a rocket-propelled grenade in Afghanistan. The Pentagon denied any of the dead SEAL team members were involved in the Bin Laden raid, but other SEAL Team members disputed the Pentagon denials on deep background.

Holbrooke, who died after a sudden heart attack on December 13, 2010, was, as is his successor, Marc Grossman, noted for their involvement in U.S. covert diplomatic adventures, as well as their pro-Israeli stances. After Petraeus took over as CIA chief, Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Michael Mullen and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Petraeus’s predecessor at the CIA, both charged Pakistan with aiding Afghan Islamist guerrilla groups. Mullen charged that Pakistan’s ISI provided support to the Afghan Haqqani network in carrying out attacks on the U.S. embassy in Kabul and U.S. troops on the ground in Afghanistan. The Pakistani Taliban was earlier blamed for a terrorist attack on a CIA operating base in Khost, Afghanistan. The ground was being set for a more aggressive U.S. policy toward Pakistan, although some Pentagon officials claimed that Mullen overstated the case against Pakistan. Senator Lindsey Graham, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, floated the idea of U.S. military intervention in Pakistan. The covert U.S. activity in Pakistan, including operations by the notorious mercenaries of the ex-Blackwater, now Xe Services, was emerging into more overt operations. The prize now, as it has been for the last few years, is Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. Next stop is Pakistan.

Filed under World Tagged with CIA, DEVGRU, Hamid Gul, ISI, Leon Panetta, NOFORN, Pakistan, Pakistan Inter-Services Intelligence, Research and Analysis Wing, U.S. Central Command, USA, world wars

$30 billion of U.S. War Money Given to Crooks and Wasters

August 31, 2011

RT
August 31, 2011

The US wasted at least one dollar out of six on wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which amounts to about US $30 billion, a bipartisan commission found. The sum may double in future, as foreign governments abandon unsustainable projects funded by the US.

The Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan is to report its sobering findings on Wednesday, but co-chairs Christopher Shays and Michael Thibault made parts of it public on Monday in an op-ed article in the Washington Post.

“Tens of billions of taxpayer dollars have been wasted through poor planning, vague and shifting requirements, inadequate competition, substandard contract management and oversight, lax accountability, weak inter-agency co-ordination, and sub-par performance or outright misconduct by some contractors and federal employees. Both government and contractors need to do better,” they say.

The Pentagon has been increasingly reliant on contractors to wage war over the decades. In Afghanistan and Iraq, on average, there was one private contractor for each troop serving, with the total number of contractors at times exceeding 260,000. Now America “cannot conduct large or prolonged military operations without contractor support.”

The sheer scale of private firms’ operation aggravated by lack of accountability caused a fresh set of problems and has harmed US interests in a number of ways, the authors say.

“Our final report shows that the costs of contracting waste and fraud extend beyond the disservice to taxpayers. The costs include diminishing US military, diplomatic and development efforts; fostering corruption in host countries; and undermining US standing and influence overseas,” they say.

“Poor planning, federal understaffing and over-reliance led to billions of dollars of contracts awarded without effective competition, legions of foreign subcontractors not subject to US laws, private security guards performing tasks that can easily escalate into combat, unprosecuted instances of apparent fraud, and projects that are unlikely to be sustained by the governments of Iraq and Afghanistan,” the authors add.

The potential waste from unfinished or unsustainable projects is a problem, which may equal in scale that of actual waste from poor handling of direct expenditures. Some of the examples of this are $40 million invested in a prison in Iraq which Baghdad did not want and that was never finished, and $300 million poured into a Kabul power plant which the Afghan government has neither the money nor the technical skills to use. The money came from US taxpayers and is likely to simply vanish down the drain.

The commission has prepared a set of recommendations for Congress and the US administration to approve, which they hope will improve the situation.

The Pentagon say they are aware of the problem, but refused to comment on the commission’s findings until the report is published.

“We are well aware of some of the deficiencies over the years in how we have worked contracts,” said Marine Corps Colonel David Lapan, a Pentagon spokesman. “We have worked hard over those years to try to correct those deficiencies when we come across them.”

“There have been many instances because of wartime needs where a long lengthy competitive bid contract process does not serve the needs of the war-fighters,” he said. “In many instances it’s a matter of saving lives, doing things more quickly because of the nature of conflict.”

The Department of Defense has been under increasing scrutiny recently, as the US government seeks ways to reduce the budget deficit. Lately, the Pentagon was targeted for overspending on risky weapon R&D projects, buying aircraft spare parts at inflated prices and paying money to shady Afghan transport companies possibly linked to the Taliban, among other things. The sums allegedly mishandled in all such cases range from tens of millions to billions of dollars.

According to John Glaser, an assistant editor at Antiwar.com, the latest report by the bipartisan commission is just the tip of the iceberg.

“This is just one report in a field of many describing such profligate waste in the American empire,” he said. “There have been previous reports about US aid going directly to fund the insurgency – that is, the Taliban. There is a report out done by the Center for Public Integrity that investigates the Pentagon’s practice of no-bid contracts for defense industry corporations, which has ballooned to a $140 billion problem in 2011. So this kind of waste is just widespread throughout the wars.”

Filed under World Tagged with afghanistan, Anissa Naouai, Commission on Wartime Contracting, conflict, Corruption, Iraq, Military, politics, US taxpayer money, USA, War

What’s happening in the Middle East?

February 25, 2011

by Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
February 24, 2011

If the crisis in the Middle East and North Africa blocks oil production in Libya and Algeria, oil prices could explode and reach $ 220 per barrel. According to a new report from Nomura-Tokyo, the simultaneous interruption will reduce the capacity of OPEC to produce 2.1 million barrels a day. During the Gulf War in 1990-1991, oil prices jumped 70% in seven months, when the capacity was reduced to only 1.8 million barrels a day.

Former Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger.

Porter Stansberry, founder of Stansberry & Associates Investment Research, reached the same conclusion. The agreement is the fact that by the end of 2012, the price of oil, which will cross the $ 200 a barrel, will make the dollar collapse as a reserve currency. In addition, there will be no supply of oil from the Middle East. What this means is that everything valued in dollars will be profoundly affected, including personal, business and government debt. Analysts conclude that even Saudi Arabia, which aims to supply the market with more oil, cannot calm the crisis caused by the globalists who control the Middle East, Europe, Asia and America.

Several media reports indicate that Muammar Qaddafi, Libya’s current dictator, intends to sabotage its oil production, which would accelerate the crisis. According to Lindsey Williams, a confidant of two oil producing company directors like Ken Fromm of Atlantic Richfield, the globalists who control the oil supply will violate an agreement made with OPEC in 1977, signed by former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, where the U.S. and other Western nations pledged not to use its vast reserves and instead buy oil produced in the Arab world. In return, the Arabs would use some of the money received to buy debt issued by the United States. This money has been used to finance the debt-based economic system that America has used for decades. In late 2012, “the agreement will be broken by the globalists,” which will end OPEC’s supply to the Western world. This will force companies to exploit massive reserves in the United States.

Williams provided a detailed account four months ago, that the Middle East would explode in chaos, which is true today in Egypt, Libya, Jordan, Pakistan, and others. The success of his comments are a result of information from first-hand sources, with whom he shared time for many years and who gave him the information. It is precisely these sources who also planned the execution of many of the marches and protests in the Middle East to destabilize the Arab world and unleash their plan that includes the violation of the agreement signed in the seventies. Once the globalists violate the agreement made with the Arabs, they will not have the dollars to purchase U.S. debt, which will further weaken the current reserve currency. Furthermore, any debt bought by Arabs and others like China, will be devalued and lost.

In 1971, Ken Fromm told Lindsey Williams that the producers would not open American reserves until the price of oil reached $ 200 per barrel. This price will be achieved according to various sources in 2012. The lack of oil will bring serious consequences, for the U.S. and the entire planet. Meanwhile, Russia, the largest oil producer of oil today, and China, have signed a deal to give the chinese all the oil and natural gas to develop its economy and become the world’s number one, above the United States.

According to Williams, the globalists will begin exploiting the huge reserves in U.S. territory, which have remained closed as a condition of the agreement signed between Kissinger and OPEC in 1977. Currently, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) says, there is a massive oil well right below the states of North Dakota, South Dakota and Montana, with oil reserves of about 503 billion barrels. This oil well runs through the northern border to Canada. The existence of this and other oil wells with oil of the “light sweet” type, has been there forever and the globalists have known it for decades. What is relevant about this detail is that “light sweet” oil requires little or no industrial processing, which means that would be available for use almost immediately.

This oil could be produced at a cost of just $ 16 dollars per barrel, a price that certainly the globalists will not offer to distribution centers. Instead, they will keep the price at $ 200 or more, so that consumers have to pay 7 or 8 dollars at their favorite gas stations. According to Williams, there is enough oil in this well to meet U.S. demand until 2041. To that we must add the other oil reserves in North America hidden beneath the Rocky Mountains, which is considered the largest of all wells available in the world that has not been exploited. According to studies, the available reserves in the Rocky Mountains reach 2 trillion barrels. James Bartis, one of the researchers who participated in the study, said the United States has more oil than any other country in the world, even more than several producers put together. Another massive well is found in Gull Island Alaska.

What will be the results of this massive shift in oil supply? For one, none, because the globalists that cause economic crises, wars and social unrest would still be in power and perhaps more powerful than ever. Analysts believe that a new world will emerge from the disaster that the globalists are causing in the East. In fact, one of the biggest changes will be the imposition of a new reserve currency, given the fact the dollar will not occupy that position anymore. Lindsey Williams says that the people responsible for the actual destruction of America and Western Europe will eventually rebuild these two regions of the planet, but will also have even more power over them.

Intelligence analyst Wayne Madsen, who worked for the National Security Agency (NSA) and is now an investigative reporter in Washington, DC, also agrees with Williams and Tarpley. According to Madsen, the same globalists who caused the conflict in North Africa are also responsible for the protests in Bahrain, Greece, Turkey, Iran and Pakistan. He also agrees with the fact that all these presidents and dictators have been carefully selected and placed around the world to carry out the plans of the globalists, who as payment, now get themselves overthrown. Madsen believes that Mummar Qaddafi will probably end up running out of Libya to any of the dictatorships that he has protected in the region in a matter of days, such as Zimbabwe, Gambia, or even South Africa. In Yemen, Madsen said, the independent movements will regain power from the dictators who have oppressed them for so long.

Historians such as G. Webster Tarpley has agreed with this description in several media appearances in the U.S. and Europe. Tarpley exemplifies actions such as Barack Obama’s speech Wednesday night where he said that his national security team was in the process of negotiating with allies in the world plans to intervene in Libya with the intention to appease any actions considered extreme by the U.S. and its allies. In his speech Obama used demagogic comments to support his points, saying the United States supported the people in the Middle East who are being abused by dictators. Obama however, does not do what he preaches in his own backyard. “The rights to free speech and assembly are inviolable,” said Obama, who allows oppression of American citizens when they express their discontent with the economy or the way Obama himself directs the destiny of the country.

While Obama clearly understands that the conflict in the Middle East is a direct consequence of the actions of his country and the Anglo-Saxon Empire that controls it, he has spared no effort to insist that no Western power was responsible for that conflict. He takes advantage of the fact that many people do not understand the context, history or source of the misery for thousands of Arabs who have been oppressed for many years. What the vast majority of these people do not realize is that they are being subject of a new deception, because those who claim to be helping them, are really giving them more of the same. It remains to be seen if the people allow this to happen or take onto the streets to demand accountability, but for real, without being duped, once again, by those who have kept them inside the current neo-feudal system for decades.