• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Is Russia Still Communist?

By Richard Salbato

This last weekend the highly secret and controversial Bilderberg Group met in Canada to “share ideas” on world wide social and economic problems. Or at least that is what they claim to be doing. The only way to really know what they are doing is to see what happens in the world after the meetings. Interesting to note that the European Union met a few days after the Bilderberg Meeting and chose to not talk about economic issues and to not talk about the constitution that was rejected by the people of Europe. This is also interesting since the first Bilderburg meeting in 1954 was to bring about a single European Government and a single European Currency. See below.

The Bilderburg Group is only interested in International issues and not National issues. As you will see based on their history, they are in fact the enemy of Nationalism. The Rothschild family, who runs the Group, invented Internationalism, International Banking, the idea of World Government, World Banks, and a world wide fake currency called “notes” or the Bancor system.

It is the object of this Newsletter to show the true and real connection between the Bilderburg Group, the Illuminati, the International Bankers, the Communists and Fatima. It is to lend some insight to who the real enemy of Our Lady of Fatima really is, and to see if Russia is converted or not.

History of the Bilderberg Group

The first meeting of the Bilderberg Group was called together in May of 1954 by Communist philosopher, Dr. Joseph H. Retinger of Poland. This meeting was held at Hotel de Bilderberg in Holland and included the richest and/or influential people of the world. Dr. Retinger called this meeting under the direction of the Royal Institute of International Affairs, an organization run by the power financers of the world, Lord [Victor] Rothschild and Laurence Rockefeller.

They handpicked 100 of the world's elite. Their purpose was to regionalize Europe. The Bilderberg Group gave birth to the European Community. Originally chaired by Prince Bernhard, husband of Queen Juliana of the Netherlands (partner of Victor Rothschild in Royal Dutch Shell Oil Co. and Exxon). Bernhard said that the reason for meetings was to find ways to reeducate people away from nationalism into the sovereignty of a super-national body.

The permanent secretariat of the Bilderberg Group is The Hague in the Netherlands. The Goals 2000 program, developed at the April 1970 meeting, was to revamp national public school systems to --- "subordination of national ambitions to the idea of the international community." World citizens and not nationalistic citizens!

The 1971 meeting in Woodstock, Virginia was the "change in the world role of the United States." After the weekend conference, Kissinger was sent to Red China to open up trade relations, and an international monetary crisis developed, which prompted the devaluing of the dollar by 8.57% which made a tremendous profit for those who converted to the European Currency.

In 1976, fifteen representatives from the Soviet Union attended the meeting which was held in the Arizona desert, and it was believed that at that time the plans were formulated for the break up of the communism in the Soviet Union.

At the 1978 meeting, they predicted that a depression would hit the world in 1979, and that the dollar would die. Their solution was to replace the dollar with an international 'Bancor' system (international bank note) of currency that would be universally acceptable as a medium of exchange.

At their 1990 meeting at Glen Cove, Long Island in New York, they decided that taxes had to be raised to pay more towards the debt owed to the International Bankers.

At their 1991 meeting at the Black Forest resort in Baden Baden, Germany, they discussed plans for a common European currency and European central banking; and reviewed Middle Eastern events and developments in the Soviet Union

David Rockefeller said during the meeting: “… the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The super-national sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."

At their 1992 meeting, the group discussed the possibility of "conditioning the public to accept the idea of a U.N. army that could, by force, impose its will on the internal affairs of any nation." Henry Kissinger, who attended the meeting, said: "Today, Americans would be outraged if U.N. forces entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow, they will be grateful."

The Founders of The Bilderberg Group

To understand the above reasons for the conferences of the Bilderberg Group, you must understand the history of the founders.

By the middle of the eighteenth century remnants and parallels of various destructive movements began to associate under a central group which was to plan and create a continuing organizational structure that would someday rule the world after all existing religions and governments had been destroyed.

The philosophical base for this movement was laid in the mid-eighteenth century by Voltaire, Rousseau, Diderot and other members of the Paris Academy, particularly D'Alembert.

The publication of Diderot's Encyclopedia would become a standard reference source wherein every literate person would seek knowledge on all subjects and thus receive propaganda against civil order and the Christian religion.

Voltaire’s major concern was the destruction of all religion (first and foremost, the Catholic Church) and of all monarchs and of all morality derived from religious belief. Out of the resulting chaos an elite group of aristocratic philosophers would rule the world.

Inspired by these radical philosophers, a professor of Canon Law at the University of Ingolstadt, Germany, established a continuing organizational structure to direct the worldwide attack on religion and monarchy, and which organizational structure would, it was hoped, eventually rule the world.

His name was Adam Weishaupt and the organization he founded on May 1, 1776, was called the Order of the Illuminati. His first pupil became his boss and financer, Lord Rothschild.

In order to conduct a first experiment in destruction of monarchy, religion and morality, the Illuminati artificially engineered a revolt. The Illuminist Joseph Balsamo engineered the "Diamond Necklace" scheme to bring disgrace to the Church and to an innocent Queen Marie Antoinette.

The Duke of Orleans bought up a huge quantity of bread and grain and had some hidden and some sent out of the country. He did this deliberately so that when the starving people demanded something to eat, the Duke's agents could tell them that their food had been taken by the King. By this means, the Illuminists created an artificial famine.

In what is now called the “French Revolution”, the clergy were particularly marked for extermination and persecution. The churches were profaned and prostitutes worshiped on their altars. The rule of civil government and authority in Paris dropped to an unprecedented low during the Reign of Terror which began in 1794.

About the time of his execution in 1794, the Illuminist Robespierre, director of much of the Terror, it is estimated that over three hundred thousand Frenchmen died during the Terror. Illuminists hoped that an agent of the Order would seize control of France and militarily conquer the rest of the world, thus establishing the Order's goal of a Universal Republic or New World Order.

Napoleon Bonaparte was recruited into the Illuminati and prepared for such a role but he became their demise and a temporary setback for the Conspiracy. The Congress of Vienna set about to restore Europe and stop the Conspiracy.

Now on the defensive the Illuminati organized under names like the Sublimes Maitres Parfaits (Sublime Perfect Masters), the Société des Saisons (Society of the Seasons), and the League of the Just, which became the Communist League in 1848.

Among the subversive and revolutionary nineteenth and early twentieth century movements created by the Illuminati were the Marxian and "utopian" socialist movements; anarchism; syndicalism; Pan Slavism; Irish, Italian and German "nationalism;" German Imperialism; the Paris Commune; British "New Imperialism;" Fabian Socialism and Leninist Bolshevism.

Some of the projects of the Illuminati were the creation of hatred and violence between Catholics and Protestants in Ireland, anti-Colonialist movements, destruction of Catholic influence, building of Communist power in Mexico, controlled "nationalist" or "unification" movements in Italy - Carbonari, Young Italy and Germany - Tugenbund, Burschenschaft) creating the German National Socialist and Italian Fascist movements.

The United States was established as a Constitutional Republic in 1789, the same year the Illuminati's devastation of France began. Illuminists began organizing to destroy the American Republic as early as 1794. Their efforts did not work so they produced the rebellion ("civil war") of 1861-1865 and their agents assassinated President Abraham Lincoln after he defeated their plans to destroy the Union.

The Illuminati’s influence in the governments Europe combined to trigger a totally unwanted and avoidable world war in 1914 to justify a world government structure (the unsuccessful League of Nations). The strategy was repeated again with another world war in 1939 and the framework for a world government structure was created in 1945 as the United Nations.

Communism and Illuminati

On March 2, 1919, the Russian communist government established the Communist International (Comniterm) to spread the revolution to other countries. This fulfilled the prophecy of Fatima that an atheistic government would take control of Russia and spread her errors all over the world. The word “communism” was never used by Our Lady of Fatima, but instead “the errors of Russia” was used. What Our Lady knew that we do not know is that communism is just a tool of a bigger error.

To understand this real and true error against the faith of God, we need only listen to a member of the true communist party at the time of Hitler and Stalin. His name is Christian G. Rakovsky. Rakovsky was facing execution in Russia for plotting to overthrow Stalin. In a 50 page transcript of his interrogation we learn the true origin, meaning and goals of communism in the world.

This transcript is dubbed "The Red Symphony" and the complete transcript can be found on the internet is several web sites. Rakovsky belonged to the powerful Trotskyite faction that took their orders from the Rothschilds. Many of this group were shot in Stalin's 1937 Communist Party purge.

According to Rakovsky, "The Rothschilds were not the treasurers, but the chiefs of that first secret Communism...Marx and the highest chiefs of the First International ... were controlled by Baron Lionel Rothschild, [1808-1878] whose revolutionary portrait was done by Disraeli the English Premier, who was also his creature, and has been left to us [in Disraeli's novel 'Coningsby.']"

Lionel's son Nathaniel (1840-1915) needed to overthrow the Christian Romanoff Dynasty. Through his agents Jacob Schiff and the Warburg brothers, he financed the Japanese side in the Russo Japanese War and an unsuccessful insurrection in Moscow in 1905. Then he instigated the First World War (Trotsky was behind the murder of Archduke Ferdinand) and financed the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution. Rakovsky says he was personally involved in the transfer of funds in Stockholm.

International Communism vs. National Communism

Leon Trotsky (International Communist) was supposed to become the leader of the USSR.
Unfortunately a "national" Communist, Lenin took power. This was not the Rothschild's plan.

Trotsky was responsible for an attempt to assassinate Lenin in 1918 but Lenin survived. When Lenin had a stroke in 1922, Trotsky had Levin, Lenin's Jewish doctor, finish him off. At this critical moment, Trotsky got sick and Stalin took power. Stalin was not in the Rothschild’s plan. He was another Napoleon Bonaparte, another plan that backfired.

Rakowsky characterizes Stalin as a "Bonapartist," a nationalist as opposed to an International Communist like Trotsky. "He is a killer of the revolution, he does not serve it, but makes use of its service; he represents the most ancient Russian imperialism, just as Napoleon identified himself with the Gauls..."

Rakowsky insinuated that Marx was controlled and knew it and that his supposed “contradictions of capitalism” were in fact orchestrated by his bosses to make a case against capitalism:

“Don't you suspect that the much-mentioned contradictions of Capitalism, and in particular the financial ones, are also organized by someone? . . . By way of basis for these deductions I shall remind you that in its economic struggle the Proletarian International coincides with the Financial International.”

To make his point that FI is the same as PI, Rakowsky says:

“ (Note that the) five-pointed star like the Soviet one, which shines all over Europe, the star composed of the five Rothschild brothers with their banks, who possess colossal accumulations of wealth, the greatest ever known. . .”

To prove this point, Rakowsky points to history:

“ … we can all confirm that when the masses take possession of a city or a country, then they always seem struck by a sort of superstitious fear of the banks and bankers. One had killed Kings, generals, bishops, policemen, priests and other representatives of the hated privileged classes; one robbed and burnt palaces, churches and even centers of science, but though the revolutions were economic-social, the lives of the bankers were respected, and as a result the magnificent buildings of the banks remained untouched. . . According to my information, before I had been arrested, this continues even now...”

“… have you paid attention to the strange similarity which exists between the Financial International and the Proletarian International? Objectively they are identical. … Now we can already guess the reasons why Marx concealed the financial contradictions. … The Financial International deny and do not recognize anything National. They do not recognize the State; and therefore it is anarchical and would be absolutely anarchical if it — the denier of any National State — were not itself, by necessity, a State in its own basic essence. The State as such is only power. And money is exclusively power.

“Historiographers and the masses, blinded by the shouts and the pomp of the French Revolution, the people, intoxicated by the fact that it had succeeded in taking all power from the King and the privileged classes, did not notice how a small group of mysterious, careful and insignificant people had taken possession of the real Royal power, the magical power, almost divine, which it obtained almost without knowing it.

“The masses did not notice that the power had been seized by others and that soon they had subjected them to slavery more cruel than the King, since the latter, in view of his religious and moral prejudices, was incapable of taking advantage of such a power.

“So it came about that the supreme Royal power was taken over by persons, whose moral, intellectual and cosmopolitan qualities did allow them to use it. It is clear that these were people who had never been Christians, but cosmopolitans.

False International Money

“In addition to the immensely varied different forms of financial moneys, they created credit-money with a view to making its volume close to infinite. And to give it the speed of sound ... it is an abstraction, a being of thought, a figure, number, credit, faith. .

“Do you understand already? … Fraud; false moneys, given a legal standing . . . , using other terminology, so that you should understand me. Banks, the stock exchanges and the whole world financial system — is a gigantic machine for the purpose of bringing about unnatural scandals, according to Aristotle's expression; to force money to produce money — that is something that if it is a crime in economics, then in relations to finances it is a crime against the criminal code, since it is usury.

“I do not know by what arguments all this is justified; by the proposition that they receive legal interest. … Even accepting that, and even that admission is more than is necessary, we see that usury still exists, since even if the interest received is legal, then it invents and falsifies the non-existent capital. Banks have always by way of deposits or moneys in productive movement a certain quantity of money which is five or perhaps even a hundred times greater than there are physically coined moneys of metal or paper. … crowds go there with a faith which is not given by heavenly gods, in order to bring assiduously their deposits of all their possessions to the god of money, who, they imagine, lives in the steel safes of the bankers, and who is preordained, thanks to his divine mission to increase the wealth to a metaphysical infinity.”

When asked who “they” were, those people are who run the Financial International and therefore the Communist International, Rakowsky at first dogged the subject:

“I think I shall not be wrong if I tell you that not one of ‘Them’ is a person who occupies a political position or a position in the World Bank. As I understood after the murder of Rathenau in Rapallo, they give political or financial positions only to intermediaries. Obviously to persons who are trustworthy and loyal, which can be guaranteed a thousand ways and thus one can assert that bankers and politicians are only men of straw even though they occupy very high places and are made to appear to be the authors of the plans which are carried out.”

Pressed again for real names, Rakowsky names only people who were already dead:

“You know that according to the unwritten history known only to us, the founder of the First Communist International is indicated, of course secretly, as being Weishaupt. You remember his name? He was the head of the masonry which is known by the name of the Illuminati; this name he borrowed from the second anti-Christian conspiracy of that era, Gnosticism.

“This important revolutionary, Semite and former Jesuit, foreseeing the triumph of the French revolution decided, or perhaps he was ordered (some mention as his chief the important philosopher Mendelssohn, plurality of truth) to found a secret organization which was to provoke and push the French Revolution to go further than its political objectives, with the aim of transforming it into a social revolution for the establishment of Communism.

“In those heroic times it was colossally dangerous to mention Communism as an aim; from this derive the various precautions and secrets, which had to surround the Illuminati. More than a hundred years were required before a man could confess to being a Communist without danger of going to prison or being executed. This is more or less known.

“What is not known are the relations between Weishaupt and his followers with the first of the Rothschilds. The secret of the acquisition of wealth of the best known bankers could have been explained by the fact that they were the treasurers of this first Comintern.

“There is evidence that when the five brothers spread out to the five provinces of the financial empire of Europe, they had some secret help for the accumulation of these enormous sums. It is possible that they were those first Communists from the Bavarian catacombs who were already spread all over Europe. But others say, and I think with better reason, that the Rothschilds were not the treasurers, but the chiefs of that first secret Communism.

“This opinion is based on that well-known fact that Marx and the highest chiefs of the First International—already the open one—and among them Herzen and Heine, were controlled by Baron Lionel Rothschild, whose revolutionary portrait was done by Disraeli (in Coningsby—Transl.) the English Premier.

“Who was his creature that has been left to us? He described him in the character of Sidonia, a man, who, according to the story, was a multi-millionaire, knew and controlled spies, carbonari, freemasons, secret Jews, gypsies, revolutionaries etc., etc. All this seems fantastic. But it has been proved that Sidonia is an idealized portrait of the son of Nathan Rothschild, which can also be deduced from that campaign which he raised against Tsar Nicholas in favor of Herzen. He won this campaign.”

Is Russia Still Communist?

This begs the question: “Is Russia Communist today?” If you mean National Communist or Stalinist Communist, you could make a good argument that Russia is still communist or a market based communism. But if you mean a tool for the International Finance to eliminate all nationalism, it is definitely not communist. If, in fact, Russia is becoming the enemy of the Illuminati, then it is becoming the friend of the Christian Faith and someday the friend of the Catholic Church. How can we know if Russia is controlled by the Illuminati or free of it?

We do not know? But there are some hints to what might be happening. The Illuminati is working for a world government from two angles, The United Nations, and if that does not work, then through the European Union. In both cases Russia seems to be working against these two International bodies. Another indication is the Illuminati’s control of world wide oil deposits and distribution, of which Russia holds 20% of the world’s known reserves.

With the fall of communism, the Russian oil companies were privatized and created extreme wealth in the hands of one man, Mikhail Khordondovsky, head of Russia’s largest oil company. Vladimir Putin arrested Mikhail Khordordovsky, on charges of corruption and moving money out of the country to avoid taxes.

Putin announced that Russia would seize his $12 billion 26% stake in the oil company, one of many national assets plundered in the reorganization of Communism 15 years ago.

Then we read that these oil shares had already had passed to none other than banker Jacob Rothschild under a "previously unknown arrangement" designed for such a circumstance.

When Putin tried to re-negotiate oil transfer from Russia though other Eastern European countries to the West, he met with strong and unreasonable resistance and had to cut off supplies to get to an agreement.

Russia’s move away from the European Union and towards The Shanghai Cooperation Organization is not welcome by Westerners but it may prove that Russia is not bending to the International Financers and thus the International Communists.

Russia could change over from Dollars to Euros as its International Currency but it has not done so, which is another indication that it is not under the thumb of the Internationalists.

Only time will tell what is the truth about Russia, and that will come when we are forced into war with Radical Islam. If Russia stands in the side lines and does not get involved in one side or the other, I will judge them as Nationalist and not Internationalist, and this is not true communism.

World War I – World War II – World War III

According to Illuminati and KKK clansman, Albert Pike (too big a mouth), the world wars were planned many years even before World War I. (See below) According to him, world war III would be a war between the Jews and Islam. According to Catholic Prophesy this would be the war of all wars and the death of 75% of the world population.

The object of this Newsletter is to show that the enemy is not communism but International Financial Atheism and its child - International Communism. The real enemy is false currency, black gold, and credit. I believe that the only way to save the world is for America to quickly mobilize the American Society, even the army, to shift from foreign oil to corn oil and then to get rid of the Federal Reserve Board, and print American Government money.

I believe America will do both of these things but only after World War III starts and only after the American public sees the truth of the Federal Reserve Board and the International Communists or the IF. Remember that Communism is not mentioned in Fatima but only the Errors of Russia, which are Atheism and International Financial Communism as apposed to Nationalism and the Catholic Church.

Richard Salbato


1. International Communism: One World Government with no god, no monarch, no national currency, no private ownership of land or natural resources and no nationalism.
2. House of Rothschild

The Rothschild Empire was founded by Mayer Amschel Bauer. Mayer Amschel Bauer was born in Frankfurt-On-The-Main in Germany in 1743. He was the son of Moses Amschel Bauer, an itinerant money lender and goldsmith. Bauer had a money leaning business on Jew Street with a Red Shield on the door. Mayer Amschel Bauer went to work for the Oppenheimers in Hannover and became a junior partnership.

Recognizing the true significance of the Red Shield (his father had adopted it as his emblem from the Red Flag which was the emblem of the revolutionary minded Jews in Eastern Europe), Mayer Amschel Bauer changed his name to Rothschild, meaning Red Shield.

In 1770 Rothschild married Gutele Schnaper who was aged seventeen. They had a large family consititing of five sons and five daughters. Their sons were Amschel, Salomon, Nathan, Kalmann (Karl) and Jacob (James).

William of Hanau was a dealer in professional troops. His best customer was the British government which wanted troops for such projects as trying to keep the American colonists in line. When he died he left the largest fortune ever accumulated in Europe to that time, $200,000,000. Rothschild became an agent for this "human cattle" dealer. He must have worked diligently in his new position of responsibility because, when William was forced to flee to Denmark, he left 600,000 pounds (then valued at $3,000,000) with Rothschild for safekeeping.

The simple truth of the matter is that Rothschild embezzled the money from Prince William. But even before the money reached Rothschild it was not "clean" (or Kosherl). The vast sum had been paid to William of Hess by the British government for the services of his soldiers. The money was originally embezzled by William from his troops who were legally entitled to it.

With the twice embezzled money as a solid foundation, Mayer Amschel Rothschild decided to vastly expand his operations - and become the First International Banker.

Nathan invested the $3,000,000 in "gold from the East India company knowing that it would be needed for Wellington's peninsula campaign." On the stolen money Nathan made "no less than four profits; (1) On the sale of Wellington's paper [which he bought at 50 cents on the dollar and collected at par; (2) on the sale of gold to Wellington; (3) on its repurchase; and (4) on forwarding it to Portugal.

The family established branches of the House of Rothschild in Berlin, Vienna, Paris and Naples, with a son in charge of each branch. The headquarters of the House of Rothschild was, and is, in London.

When he died on September 19, 1812, the founder of the House of Rothschild left a will that was just days old. In it, he laid down specific laws by which the House that bore his name would operate in future years. (1) All key positions in the House of Rothschild were to be held by male members of the family (2) The family was to intermarry with their own first and second cousins, thus preserving the vast fortune. (3) most explicitly to hide all assets from any public inventory, the courts, any legal action and any publication of the value of the inheritance. (4) perpetual family partnership

Mayer Amschel Rothschild and his five sons were "wizards" of finance, and "fiendish calculators" who were motivated by a "demonic drive" to succeed in their secret undertakings.

Even on work days...Mayer... read from the big book of the Talmud.

The Five Rothschild brothers and their five banks invented a new banking system of fresh money channels via clearing-houses; a method of replacing the old unwieldy shipping of gold bullion by a worldwide system of debits and credits. One of the greatest contributions was Nathan's new technique for floating international loans. He didn't much care to receive dividends in all sorts of strange and cumbersome currencies.

There were vast fortunes to be made on the outcome of the Battle of Waterloo. Nathan continued to sell, and sell and sell. London stock was selling for about five cents on the dollar.
Nathan Rothschild then bought every consul in sight for just a "song" because he knew the outcome of the Battle of Waterloo. Nathan had bought control of the British economy. Overnight, his already vast fortune was multiplied twenty times over.

During October 1818, Rothschild agents, using their masters' limitless reserves, had bought huge quantities of the French government bonds issued through their rivals Ouvrard and Baring Brothers. This caused the bonds to increase in value. Then, on November 5th, they began to dump the bonds in huge quantities on the open market in the main commercial centers of Europe, throwing the market into a panic. The Rothschilds had gained control of France...and control is the name of the game!

There has, however, been a major change in the tactics used to fleece the public of their hard earned money. From being brazenly open in their use and exploitation of people and nations, the Rothschilds have shrunk from the limelight and now operate through and behind a wide variety of fronts. Today the family grooms the inaudibility and invisibility of its presence.

Though they control scores of industrial, commercial, mining and tourist corporations, not one bears the name Rothschild. Being private partnerships, the family houses never need to, and never do, publish a single public balance sheet, or any other report of their financial condition.

Destroy America

Following their conquest of Europe early in the 1800s, the Rothschilds cast their covetous eyes on the most precious gem of them all - the United States.

America was unique in modern history. It was only the second nation in history that had ever been formed with the Bible as its law book. Its uniquely magnificent Constitution was specifically designed to limit the power of government and to keep its citizens free and prosperous. The results - the "fruit" - of such a unique experiment were so indescribably brilliant that America became a legend around the globe. Many millions across the far flung continents of the world viewed America the Beautiful as the promised land.

The Big Bankers in Europe - the Rothschilds and their cohorts - viewed the wonderful results borne by this unique experiment from an entirely different perspective; they looked upon it as a major threat to their future plans.

The establishment Times of London stated: "If that mischievous financial policy which had its origin in the North American Republic [i.e. honest constitutionally authorized no debt money] should become indurated down to a fixture, then that government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off its debts and be without a debt [to the international bankers]. It will become prosperous beyond precedent in the history of the civilized governments of the world. The brains and wealth of all countries will go to North America. That government must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe."

The Rothschilds and their friends sent in their financial termites to destroy America because it was becoming "prosperous beyond precedent."

The first documentable evidence of Rothschild involvement in the financial affairs of the United States came in the late 1820s and early 1830s when the family, through their agent Nicholas Biddie, fought to defeat Andrew Jackson's move to curtail the international bankers. The Rothschilds lost the first round when in 1832, President Jackson vetoed the move to renew the charter of the "Bank of the United States" (a central bank controlled by the international bankers). In 1836 the bank went out of business.

President Andrew Jackson, the only one of our presidents whose administration totally abolished the National Debt, condemned the international bankers as a "den of vipers" which he was determined to "rout out" of the fabric of American life. Jackson claimed that if only the American people understood how these vipers operated on the American scene "there would a revolution before morning."

Congressman Louis T. McFadden, who for more than ten years served as chairman of the Banking and Currency Committee, stated that the international bankers are a "dark crew of financial pirates who would cut a man's throat to get a dollar out of his pocket... They prey upon the people of these United States."

John F. Hylan, then mayor of New York, said in 1911 that "the real menace of our republic is the invisible government which, like a giant octopus, sprawls its slimy length over our city, state and nation. At the head is a small group of banking houses, generally referred to as 'international bankers.'"

In the years following Independence, a close business relationship had developed between the cotton growing aristocracy in the South (slave trade) and the cotton manufacturers in England. The European bankers decided that this business connection was America's Achilles Heel, the door through which the young American Republic could be successfully attacked and overcome.

The southern states swarmed with British agents. These conspired with local politicians to work against the best interests of the United States. Their carefully sown and nurtured propaganda developed into open rebellion and resulted in the secession of South Carolina on December 29, 1860. Within weeks another six states joined the conspiracy against the Union, and broke away to form the Confederate States of America, with Jefferson Davis as President.

The plotters raided armies, seized forts, arsenals, mints and other Union property. Even members of President Buchanan's Cabinet conspired to destroy the Union by damaging the public credit and working to bankrupt the nation. Buchanan claimed to deplore secession but took no steps to check it, even when a U.S. ship was fired upon by South Carolina shore batteries.

Shortly thereafter Abraham Lincoln became President, being inaugurated on March 4, 1861. Lincoln immediately ordered a blockade on Southern ports, to cut off supplies that were pouring in from Europe. The "official" date for the start of the Civil War is given as April 12, 1861, when Fort Sumter in South Carolina was bombarded by the Confederates, but it obviously began at a much earlier date.

In December, 1861, large numbers of European Troops (British, French and Spanish) poured into Mexico in defiance of the Monroe Doctrine. This, together with widespread European aid to the Confederacy strongly indicated that the Crown was preparing to enter the war. The outlook for the North, and the future of the Union, was bleak indeed.

In this hour of extreme crisis, Lincoln appealed to the Crown's perennial enemy, Russia, for assistance. When the envelope containing Lincoln's urgent appeal was given to Czar Nicholas II, he weighed it unopened in his hand and stated: "Before we open this paper or know its contents, we grant any request it may contain."

Unannounced, a Russian fleet under Admiral Liviski, steamed into New York harbor on September 24, 1863, and anchored there, The Russian Pacific fleet, under Admiral Popov, arrived in San Francisco on October 12. Of this Russian act, Gideon Wells said: "They arrived at the high tide of the Confederacy and the low tide of the North, causing England and France to hesitate long enough to turn the tide for the North"

History reveals that the Rothschilds were heavily involved in financing both sides in the Civil War. Lincoln put a damper on their activities when, in 1862 and 1863, he refused to pay the exorbitant rates of interest demanded by the Rothschilds and issued constitutionally-authorized, interest free United States notes. For this and other acts of patriotism Lincoln was shot down in cold-blood by John Wilkes Booth on April 14, 1865, just five days after Lee surrendered to Grant at Appomattox Court House, Virginia.

Booth's grand-daughter, Izola Forrester, states in This One Mad Act that Lincoln's assassin had been in close contact with mysterious Europeans prior to the slaying, and had made at least one trip to Europe. Following the killing, Booth was whisked away to safety by members of the Knights of the Golden Circle. According to the author, Booth lived for many years following his disappearance.

Undaunted by their initial failures to destroy the United States, the international bankers pursued their objective with relentless zeal. Between the end of the Civil War and 1914, their main agents in the United States were Kuhn, Loeb and Co. and the J. P. Morgan Co.

A brief history of Kuhn, Loeb and Co. appeared in Newsweek magazine on February 1, 1936: "Abraham Kuhn and Solomon Loeb were general merchandise merchants in Lafayette, Indiana, in 1850. As usual in newly settled regions, most transactions were on credit. They soon found out that they were bankers... In 1867, they established Kuhn, Loeb and Co., bankers, in New York City, and took in a young German immigrant, Jacob Schiff, as partner. Young Schiff had important financial connections in Europe. After ten years, Jacob Schiff was head of Kuhn, Loeb and Co., Kuhn having retired. Under Schiff's guidance, the house brought European capital into contact with American industry."

Schiff's "important financial connections in Europe" were the Rothschilds and their German representatives, the M. M. Warburg Company of Hamburg and Amsterdam. Within twenty years the Rothschilds, through their Warburg-Schiff connection, had provided the capital that enabled John D. Rockefeller to greatly expand his Standard Oil Empire. They also financed the activities of Edward Harriman (Railroads) and Andrew Carnegie (Steel).

At the turn of the 20th century the Rothschilds, not satisfied with the progress being made by their American operations, sent one of their top experts, Paul Moritz Warburg, over to New York to take direct charge of their assault upon the only true champion of individual liberty and prosperity - the United States.

At a hearing of the House Committee on Banking and Currency in 1913, Warburg revealed that he was "a member of the banking firm of Kuhn, Loeb and Co. I came to this country in 1902, having been born and educated in the banking business in Hamburg, Germany, and studied banking in London and Paris, and have gone all around the world...."

In the late 1800s, people didn't study banking in London and "all around the world" unless they had a special mission to perform!

Early in 1907, Jacob Schiff, the Rothschild-owned boss of Kuhn, Loeb and Co., in a speech to the New York Chamber of Commerce, warned that "unless we have a Central Bank with adequate control of credit resources, this country is going to undergo the most severe and far reaching money panic in its history."

Shortly thereafter, the United States plunged into a monetary crisis that had all the earmarks of a skilly planned Rothschild "job." The ensuing panic financially mined tens of thousands of innocent people across the country - and made billions for the banking elite. The purpose for the "crisis" was two-fold:

(1) To make a financial "killing" for the Insiders, and
(2) To impress on the American people the "great need" for a central bank.

Paul Warburg told the Banking and Currency Committee: "In the Panic of 1907, the first suggestion I made was, "let us have a national clearing house" [Central Bank]. The Aldrich Plan [for a Central Bank] contains many things that are simply fundamental rules of banking. Your aim must be the same...."

Digging deep into their bag of deceitful practices, the international bankers pulled off their greatest coup to date - the creation of the privately owned Federal Reserve System, which placed control of the finances of the United States securely in the hands of the power-crazed money monopolists. Paul Warburg became the "Fed's" first chairman!

Congressman Charles Lindbergh put his finger firmly on the truth when he stated, just after the "Federal" Reserve Act was passed by a depleted Congress on December 23, 1913: "The Act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President [Wilson] signs this Bill, the invisible government of the monetary power will be legalized....The greatest crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency bill."

Having consolidated their financial grip on most of the European nations by the middle of the last century, the international bankers worked feverishly to extend their sphere of influence to the ends of the earth in preparation for their final assault on the United States - a nation which, through its unique Constitution, remained free.

In the decades that followed it became apparent that, in order to achieve their goal of world domination, they would have to instigate a series of world wars which would result in leveling of the old world in preparation for the construction of the New World Order.

1871 Plan for World Wars I, II and III

This plan was outlined in graphic detail by Albert Pike, the Sovereign Grand Commander of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry and the top Illuminist in America. In a letter to Guisseppe Mazzini dated August 15, 1871.

Pike stated that the First World War was to be fomented in order to destroy Czarist Russia - and to place that vast land under the direct control of Illuminati agents. Russia was then to be used as a "bogey man" to further the aims of the Illuminati worldwide.

World War II was to be fomented through manipulation of the differences that existed between the German Nationalists and the Political Zionists. This was to result in an expansion of Russian influence and the establishment of a state of Israel in Palestine.

The Third World War was planned to result from the differences stirred up by Illuminati agents between the Zionists and the Arabs. The conflict was planned to spread worldwide. The llluminati, said the letter, planned to "unleash the Nihilists and Atheists" and "provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil.

Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass [directionl, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view, a manifestation which will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquored and exterminated at the same time."

At the time Pike wrote this remarkable leaflet there were five different ideologies extant on the world scene and involved in a "struggle for space and power." These were:

1. The secret ideology of the international bankers or the Illuminati as laid out in Fourth Reich Of The Rich. Their aim was the creation of a One World Government to be ruled over by the "Illuminated ones" at the top.

2. The Russian "Pan-Slavic" ideology which was originally conceived by William the Great and expounded in his will. According to A.H. Granger, the author of England World Empire, 1916, p. 173, this ideology called for the elimination of Austria and Germany, then the conquest of India and Persia and ends with the words: "...which will ensure the subjugation of Europe."

3. The ideology of "Asia for the Asiatics" as expounded by the Japanese. This called for a confederation of Asian nations dominated by Japan.

4. The ideology of Pan Germanism which called for German political control over the European continent, freedom from the Crown's restrictions on the high seas and the adoption of an "open door" policy in trade and commerce with the rest of the world.

5. Pan-American or the ideology of "America for the Americans." This called for "trade and friendship with all, alliances with none." Secretary of State Root stated in 1906 that, under this ideology which was given expression in the Monroe Doctrine of 1823, we are "debarred from sharing in the political aims, interests, or responsibilities of Europe, just as by the equally potential doctrine, now nearly a century old, the European powers are excluded from sharing or interfering in the political concerns of the sovereign states of the Western Hemisphere."

If the plans of the international banker/llluminati cabal were to be brought to fruition, Russia, Germany, Japan and the United States would surrender to poverty and ignominy.

The llluminati plan for world conquest, referred to by Albert Pike, was a diabolical masterpiece of Luciferian ingenuity that would take the lives of hundreds of millions of human beings and cost hundred of billions of dollars in its accomplishment.

The plan that the Illuminati devised to accomplish their world conquering goal is as simple as it is effective. Along the way towards the accomplishment of their final objective this plan has been adapted by the international bankers and their comrades in arms around the globe to amass vast fortunes in real estate. As we shall see, the implementation of the plan has been so smoothly executed that it has frequently won applause from the ranks of those it is destroying. Their plan can be called Urban Renewal.














<!--emo&:drool--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/drool.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='drool.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Overseas Indians should work to make adopted nations a winner: Kalam
16 Oct 2007, 1455 hrs IST,PTI
Print Save EMail Write to Editor

WASHINGTON: With millions of Indians now living abroad, former President APJ Abdul Kalam has asked the Diaspora to work with dedication to make their adopted countries a winner.

"Today the overseas Indian population is 23 million, either as citizens of other countries or working there. So it is essential that whichever country you go, you make that country a winner. That is your mission," Kalam said addressing an enthusiastic audience on the occasion of the first Anniversary of the JSS Mission at Gaithersburg, Maryland.

"Whichever country the Indian population is there, particularly in the US, we must always give to that country your best of knowledge, your best of work. Everything you have to give to that country," the septuagenarian leader told the gathering which turned out in strength on a working day to listen to him.

At a luncheon interaction, Kalam, who is considered as the father of India's missile programme, said political parties should focus more on development politics instead of "political politics".

"Politics has got two components. One of political politics and the other is developmental politics. Political politics, every party has to do it...is a necessary function" Kalam remarked.

"Developmental politics is when one party will say I will do it in ten years to make my nation great and another saying it will do it in seven years. But political politics takes up 30 per cent of the time 70 per cent of the time it is developmental politics. But the reverse happens throughout the world," the former President said.

Pointing that spirituality was common to all religions, Kalam said it should be used to bridge the gap between various faiths.

"I believe religion has got two components. One is theology and another is spirituality. Theology, no religion would like to change... But fortunately spirituality is common to all religions," he said.

"So we have to see how we can bridge religions with spirituality."

Kalam, who arrived from New York yesterday, went to the NASA Centre in Maryland before coming to the JSS Mission in Gaithesberg to spend several hours with the crowd that waited patiently for hours to hear the former President speak.

But Kalam did not offer any comment on current issues except to recall briefly the visit of President George W Bush to India last year.

"When President Bush came to India I gave an energy presentation--on how we can become independent of fossil fuel driven oil, gas and coal. He (Bush) said America and India have to work together for energy independence. That means you go on solar power, bio-fuels...." Kalam remarked.

He emphasising that it was the duty of the human kind to see how the divine mission could be turned into a vision.

"Where there is righteousness in the heart, there is beauty in the character. Where there is beauty in the character there is harmony in the home. Where there is harmony in the home there is order in the nation and when there is order in the nation, there is peace in the world," Kalam said.

Several religious heads and politicians and diplomats, including Indian Ambassador to the United States Ronen Sen, were present at the function.

<b>Putin eyes full merger with Belarus </b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->MOSCOW - President Vladimir Putin may be about to unveil a political bombshell: a full-scale union between Russia and its smaller Slavic neighbor Belarus.

It's a plan that not only would expand Russia's territory and national prestige; it could also give Mr. Putin, required to step down when his second term ends in March, a new lease on power by producing a fresh Constitution.

Citing Kremlin sources, the independent Ekho Moskvy radio station reported Friday that <b>Putin and Belarussian President Alexander Lukashenko will sign a union treaty during Putin's two-day visit to Minsk this week.</b>

A Kremlin spokesman said the report came "from the realm of speculative fantasies," though he did not deny that the long-debated Russia-Belarus union might be on the verge of realization.

The purported deal, to be endorsed by popular referendum, would involve a full merger of the two countries, including common currency, legal system, armed forces, and state symbols. Putin would be likely to become the new superstate's provisional leader and Mr. Lukashenko its speaker of parliament, the station said.

<b>Belarus's beleaguered opposition called on Belarussians to the streets this week to protest "imminent annexation"</b> by Russia.

"It has become clear that Russia will use economic levers [such as high energy prices] to annex Belarus, or at least compel it to join a 'union state,' " Viktar Ivashkevich, deputy head of the Belarussian Popular Front coalition, said in a statement.
<b>WHat is going on here ?</b>

Need to study this event,
Why? How? Who? Long term vision?

<b>4th undersea cable snaps, Qatar-UAE traffic hit</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Even though sources attributed the disruption on Sunday night to power outage and not a ship's anchor that affected the earlier two Mediterranean cables (FLAG Telecom's FLAG Europe-Asia cable and SeaMeWe-4), thousands of bloggers across the world are attributing this to a possible sabotage in the Mediterranean Sea in a bid to isolate Iran.

<b>Cutting these cables might affect Iran's ability to defend itself since communication is of vital importance during military action, they allege.</b>

<b>The fourth submarine cable was damaged between Haloul (Qatar) and Das (the UAE). Egypt's ministry of maritime transportation, after reviewing the satellite pictures, said there were no ships (which led to the speculation and allegations) near the cable channel 12 hours before or after the damage near Alexandria, Egypt.</b>

"...to have three undersea cables � or is it actually four cables? � cut in the same region in just a two-day span, strains credulity; the more so, when we look at how the damage has played out across the region...<b> communication cable cutting in West Asia leaves Israel and Iraq still connected, while completely shutting down the Iranian internet.</b> Funny how that works, isn't it?" asks a professor on his site.

"Seriously, is there anyone who doesn't think this is either a precursor to military action, or a direct attack on Iran's about-to-launch Euro-based oil market?" asks another blogger.

<b>"Iran is back online, but... its traffic is now passing through the UK and the US, the latter controlling the 13 primary routers. Can you say wiretap?" </b>queries another.

Others recall spy stories of the US Navy sending out special operations teams to go out on submarines and deploy undersea operations, on the seabed itself, specifically for cutting or tapping communication cables with special airlocks and very sophisticated equipment � much of it thoroughly documented in Blind Man's Bluff: <b>The Untold Story of American Submarine Espionage by Sherry Sontag and Christopher Drew. </b>

Incidentally, the reason for the damage to FLAG's FALCON cable about 50 km off Dubai remains unclear. This cable is reportedly designed on a "ring system", taking it on a circuit around the Persian Gulf and enabling traffic to be more easily routed around the damage.

Did the Belarus merger or ties take place?
Not yet.
India must return to Eurasian energy game
Declaration of Independence by Kosovo and its effect on India.
Any thought?
<b>US, EU powers recognize Kosovo </b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->PRISTINA, Kosovo - Major European powers and the U.S. recognized Kosovo on Monday, a day after the province's ethnic Albanian leaders declared independence from Serbia. Giddy Kosovars danced in the streets when they heard of the endorsements.

Kosovo's leaders sent letters to 192 countries seeking formal recognition and Britain, France, Germany and U.S. were among the countries that backed the request. But other European Union nations were opposed, including Spain which has battled a violent Basque separatist movement for decades.

"The Kosovars are now independent," President Bush said during a trip to Africa. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Bush "has responded affirmatively" to Kosovo's request to establish diplomatic relations.

"The establishment of these relations will reaffirm the special ties of friendship that have linked together the people of the United States and Kosovo," Rice's statement said.
<!--QuoteBegin-Mudy+Feb 18 2008, 11:32 PM-->QUOTE(Mudy @ Feb 18 2008, 11:32 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Declaration of Independence by Kosovo and its effect on India.
Any thought?
Proves that if uncle and aunty decide, any part of India can also gain independence. Even Russia could not do anything to prevent Kosovo from declaring independence.

Lesson for India: Do not assume that when India gets into trouble Russia or somebody else will help us. Indian military should accelerate its modernization, and eliminate secessionist movements, EJ and Naxal operations.
This is very serious, currently dummies are ruling India, anything can happen.
India should not recognize kosovo, the Serbs have been raped and brutalised by Uncle Sam who has made sure that they will always be portrayed as the aggressors, people who openly collaborated with the Nazis (Croats and Muslims) are now portrayed as the victims and Serbs are blamed for everything.

This is also a warning to us that with the kind of demographic changes going on in Bharat (due to Muslim breeding, Christian conversions and Illegal infiltration) tomorrow it could be us in the same situation with the entire North East declaring itself to be an extension of Bangladesh.

Some say that the Muslim identity of Kosovars is very weak but that is what they also said about Bangladesh in 1971, now look at Bangladesh.

Already jihadi donkeys are braying about this:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->‘After Kosovo, it would be Kashmir’

Pro-freedom leadership jubilant over declaration of Azadi by Kosovo

Ozair Nissar
Srinagar, Feb 18:The declaration of Azadi (independence) by the people of Kosovo has buoyed up pro-freedom leadership of Kashmir which believes the development is “yet another example” of new nations coming into existence “despite repression and suppression.” The pro-India leaders, however, say “there can be no comparisons between Kosovo and Kashmir.”
Yasin Malik
“The freedom of Kosovo should serve as a source of inspiration for the people of Kashmir to continue our struggle till we achieve our goal,” Yasin Malik, chairman of pro-independence Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front, told etala’at.
Independence of Kosovo, according to Malik, “immortalizes the fact that sacrifices of martyrs for freedom of their motherland never go in vain.”
Malik added: “The international community, particularly the European Union, should play a pro-active role towards the resolution of Kashmir issue as they did in case of Kosovo.”
Syed Geelani
Veteran pro-freedom leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani sounded more enthusiastic over the creation of Kosovo, a Muslim-majority area, which announced its independence from Christian-Serbia on Sunday.
“It is a moment of delight for Muslims all over the world,” Geelani told etala’at by phone from New Delhi.
Geelani, who heads a faction of Hurriyat Conference, said the creation of a Muslim state within the European Union has strengthened the resolve of the people of Kashmir to achieve their right to self- determination.
“The day is not far away,” Geelani said, “when the people of Kashmir will announce their Independence from imperial India.”
Geelani said it was “very unfortunate” that both Russia and Serbia have cited apprehensions about the welfare of the minorities in the newly-created state of Kosovo. “This shows their double-standards,” he said. “When it comes to Muslims who are facing oppression under several regimes across the world they shut their eyes by saying that Muslims are in minority under a secular set up and are equally enjoying their rights.”
Shabir Shah
Senior leader Hurriyat Conference (M) Shabir Shah said, “We congratulate the people of Kosovo for achieving freedom for which they have laid innumerable sacrifices. Independence of Kosovo should serve as an eye-opener to those who say that (Kashmir’s) Accession with India is final and rule out the creation of an independent Kashmir.”
Shah said, “Such people and parties should stop serving the interests of their masters for petty interests and join hands with us towards the formation of an independent Kashmir as the day is not far away when the people of Kashmir will announce their independence as done by the people of Kosovo.”
Mehbooba Mufti
According to Mehbooba Mufti, who heads pro-India Peoples Democratic Party, a partner of Kashmir’s coalition government, “there can be no comparisons between Kosovo and Kashmir.”
“The issue of Kashmir is a political one whereas the issue of Kosovo was a religious one,” Mehbooba told etala’at. “However, both India and Pakistan need to get serious about the issue for which more than one lakh Kashmiris have laid down their lives.”
She added: “The people of Kosovo have been demanding independence for many years from an oppressive regime which committed many atrocities on them and the announcement of independence itself indicates that the international community needs to get serious about such disputes across the world.”
Mehbooba said that Kashmir’s tallest leader Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah “decided to accede with India” after evaluating its secular credentials. “But under the present circumstances both India and Pakistan need to show urgency to resolve the lingering dispute and for the resolution of Kashmir issue a stable Pakistan is important as the recent developments in Pakistan have not helped the cause of Kashmir.”
Mehboob Beigh
Commenting over Kosovo’s declaration of Azadi from Serbia, provincial president of opposition National Conference, Dr Mehboob Beigh said, “These things are bound to happen when political issues are not addressed politically.”
He said, “Similar emotions were observed in Kashmir in early 90s and I fear if the issue is not resolved immediately anything can happen in future.”


Terrorism will increase, attack on innocent citizens will increase in India, Watch out north east and other states.

Only good thing here is , NATO created this mess. Now they have created Muslim country and they will tell Islamic world, we are with you and don't hate us, show your anger somewhere.

For India, other then Pakistan and proxy power, no direct involvement, but morons of India will think they just got free ticket.

Lack of will by current rulers of India is dangerous at this moment. Puppet appointed Prime Minister of India and foreigner who is sitting on throne is a good recipe for trouble.
<b>Europe and America: Sharing the Spoils of War</b>
<i>by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya
August 19, 2007</i>

Europe and America have been long-term partners as well as rivals. New spheres of influence between the European Union and the United States have unfolded. The Middle East and its peripheral geographic areas lie at the heart of this process.

In the wake of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, a unified stance has developed within both the E.U. and NATO in regards to this geopolitical re-division. This unified stance is a reflection of an unfolding political and strategic consensus between the U.S., Britain, France, and Germany.

While Iraq falls within the Anglo-American orbit, the Eastern Mediterranean and its gas resources have been set to fall into that of the Franco-German entente. In fact, the entire Mediterranean region, from Morocco and gas-rich Algeria to the Levant is coveted by Franco-German interests.

<b>The Franco-German Entente and Anglo-American Alliance: Rivalry and Partnership</b>

The Anglo-American alliance and Franco-German entente are economic, political, and military alliances that have been forged by historic and socio-cultural realities that gave rise to opportunities of great magnitude. The Franco-German entente is a continental European entity, whereas the Anglo-American alliance is the incarnation of maritime trade and the overseas legacy of Britain.

The Franco-German entente is based on the post-war partnership of France and the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany) after the Second World War. After the unification of West Germany and East Germany the Franco-German partnership evolved, strengthened, and spawned the European Economic Community (EEC). France and a unified Germany were the basis for the evolving structure of the European common market and later the European Union.

European nations such as Belgium and Luxembourg are members of the Franco-German entente. These European countries are economically integrated with France and Germany. This is why Belgium and France have been aligned together in an economic face-off against the Anglo-American alliance in the African continent. Countries like Belgium, Luxembourg, and Austria also sided with Paris and Berlin against the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq. In February of 2003, Belgium even assisted France and Germany in obstructing Anglo-American plans involving the use of NATO in Iraq.

The Anglo-American alliance is formed from the remains of Britain’s overseas colonies and territories. Unlike the Franco-German entente, the base of the Anglo-American alliance is outside of Eurasia. This becomes apparent after one considers the island nature of Britain in addition to the geographic situation of America. This is additionally reflected in the naval strength of Britain and America.

Australia and Canada fall within the orbit of the Anglo-American alliance. English is also the official language of many of the nations within the alliance, which are also part of the Anglosphere (English-speaking World). This is a reflection of the historical roots of the Anglo-American alliance. The Anglo-American alliance also has an intimate relationship with Israel. Countries like the Philippines, Japan, South Korea, and Guam that have been under the military control of America in the past also fall within the orbit of the Anglo-American alliance.

<b>America: The European Union’s Fourth Power</b>

The E.U. is the creation of France and Germany, but it has become a shared body for the four most powerful nations of the so-called Western World. Without giving recognition to the fact that the E.U. is a creature of France, Germany, Britain, and America, it is hard to conceptualize Anglo-American foreign policy objectives being implemented through Europe. It should also be remembered that the E.U. is not the sole representative of the European continent or European civilization.

The three major powers in the E.U., the so-called “European Union-Three,” are France, Germany, and Britain. Yet, these three European countries are not alone. America in reality is the European Union’s fourth power, which acts through, or more properly with, Britain. The alliance between Washington D.C. and London makes America a de facto power in the European Union. London is also America’s voice in Europe. Several other mechanisms including control of Eastern European E.U. members and NATO also allow America to exert itself in Europe.

When it is recognized that the E.U. is a creature of both the Anglo-American alliance and the Franco-German entente, it can be recognized that American interests, like those of the British, are served through E.U. expansion. The expansion of the E.U. is an indirect expansion of America’s orbit and interests. This is why the E.U. is called a part of America’s bridgehead in Eurasia.

E.U. expansion also serves a second purpose for Anglo-American interests. The strength of the Franco-German entente can also be diluted or undermined as a result of E.U. expansion. However, this depends on the rate or velocity of E.U. expansion. A fast rate of E.U. expansion, but not exceedingly fast, serves Anglo-American interests by not allowing the Franco-German entente to consolidate its power within the E.U. and commandeer it. A steadier rate of E.U. expansion is in the best interests of the Franco-German entente. This is one of the reasons why tensions existed between Britain and France over E.U. expansion in Eastern Europe. This is also the reason why the U.S. openly called for the entry of several Eastern European countries such as Poland into the European Union.

Although the E.U. is a body of both the Anglo-American alliance and the Franco-German entente, the European bloc is overtly managed by the Franco-German side. France and Germany, with their allies, are still the dominant forces within the European Union. When international analysts talk about rifts or arguments between the E.U. and America they really mean the disagreements are between the Franco-German entente and America (and by extension Britain).

<b>Dividing the World between the Twin Pillars of NATO</b>

When NATO acts it does not necessarily serve Anglo-American interests. Just as when one conceptualizes that the E.U. also serves the interests of America they must also recognize the Franco-German relationship in NATO. NATO is the iron rod that both alliances share within the broader trans-Atlantic framework which evolved after the Second World War. In parallel to the dichotomy of the E.U., NATO is also divided into two main branches: the Franco-German entente and the Anglo-American alliance. The stronger of the two is the Anglo-American side because of the military might of America.

NATO is both a Franco-German and Anglo-American tool and has been used to further the economic and geo-strategic interests of both. Yugoslavia is one case where Germany and America worked hand-in-hand, reducing the former Yugoslav states into military garrisons and economic territories.

However, just as the E.U. is dominated by the Franco-German entente it is the Anglo-American alliance that inversely dominates NATO. In other words within the framework of Europe the Franco-German entente has the political upper hand, while the Anglo-American alliance holds military sway. It is this political-military imbalance which creates an economic equilibrium for both sides and a power sharing scheme.

This division of military and political power between NATO and the E.U., which also forms a triad with economic power, has allowed America to cleverly insert itself into the E.U. via Britain. Furthermore, the military sway that the Anglo-American side holds has always been a point of contention, to the point where the French left NATO for a period of time. The creation of a Eurocentric defensive strategy for the E.U. has been part of the past Franco-German attempt to gain control over the European Union. This initiative was also resurrected during the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq when France, Germany, Belgium, and Luxembourg held a meeting on the issue. The subject was so corrosive that Britain said that it was a return to the splits of the Cold War in Europe in regards to its own Cold War allies.

Under Anglo-American geo-strategic planning, it was recognized at the end of the Cold War that the Franco-German entente and the Anglo-American alliance would eventually have to work together, if America wished to proceed with Britain in a quest for global primacy.

Zbigniew Kazimierz Brzezinski, one America’s most influential geo-strategic experts, in 1997 foretold of the pivotal role that the Franco-German entente would play in extending American control of Eurasia. He maintained, like many of his colleagues at the Council for Foreign Relations (CFR), that E.U. expansion was equivalent to covert American expansion. It would be America that would be in the shadows of an expanded European Union. However, it was maintained that without the cooperation of France and Germany the task would prove next to impossible and for the naïve. NATO could not be applied and the E.U. would not expand without Franco-German cooperation. This meant that the Anglo-American alliance and the Franco-German entente would have to arrive to a compromise based on broader power sharing or a system of consensus that would cut across the board.

An understanding had been reached at some period during the eve of the “Global War on Terror” that the areas being encompassed within the geographic boundaries of United States Central Command (CENTCOM), along with vast geographic stretches, would be divided between the two pillars of NATO. In late-2001 preparations to essentially create the mechanisms for sending troops and naval power into the Eastern Mediterranean were made. Without these preoperational mechanisms the NATO naval contingent off Lebanon’s coast in 2006 would not have materialized as it did. The logistical mechanisms for the operation were prepared years beforehand. This is just one facet to add to the dossier that illustrates the preplanned nature of the 2006 Israeli attacks against Lebanon and NATO’s role. The confessions of the Israeli government at the Winograd Commission also are a direct verification of the calculated nature of the war against the Lebanese.

<b>Bush Jr. Administration Deviates from Anglo-American Geo-Strategy</b>

After the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the White House had a change of heart. The Bush Jr. Administration believed that the Anglo-American alliance could discard forming a greater partnership with the Franco-German entente, therefore ruling out any division of the proceeds of war and conquest. This infuriated the Franco-German entente which, with the help of Russia, created a worldwide political firestorm for Britain and America.

The Franco-German entente had been cut out of the agreement by the Anglo-American alliance. It seemed for a time that the Bush Jr. Administration was going to ignore what Anglo-American planners said was a necessity in geo-strategic planning. However, it appears that the American ruling establishment and the realities of the “Global War on Terror” have forced the White House to return to the path originally charted by Anglo-American geo-strategists in both Washington D.C. and London.

The sector scheme is being utilized. It is also under this framework that the spoils of war and the Middle East are supposed to be divided into areas of management by the Franco-German entente and Anglo-American alliance. The word management is employed as a suitable term due to the nature of the arrangement. Like in the former Yugoslavia, both sides can share a territory and its spoils, but one is responsible for supervision operations and administrating in their area of responsibility. This is comparable to the arrangement in Bosnia-Herzegovina between the Franco-German entente and Anglo-American alliance.

It is this deviation by the Bush Jr. Administration from the original track (set years before), which demarcates the so-called “neo-conservatives” in relation to the so-called “liberals” in America and Europe. In Israel the case is also similar. Liberalism in mainstream politics, as represented in the U.S. by the Democratic Party, prefers to be more subtle in its approach and therein is where the difference lies, but there should be no mistake about the fact that liberals will not hesitate to resort to an outright war as an instrument of foreign policy.

<b>Exposing the Political Myth of Conservatism versus Liberalism</b>

<b>Both liberalism and conservatism in mainstream global politics have identical goals, but differ in discretion levels. Both conservatism and liberalism in the mainstream political environment are different sides of the same coin and serve the same interests. The difference between both is methodological and not about objectives. Their differences lack real substance. </b>

Both liberals and conservatives complement one another and take turns at having power and being in office like a swinging pendulum. One side is labeled “Left” and the other side is tagged as “Right,” but the same source holds and controls the pendulum. The labels they use only serve the goal of presenting alternatives in monopolized political environments, controlling political platforms, and dividing populations. Why else would a supposed liberal like Prime Minister Blair of Britain, from the Labour Party, and a neo-conservative like President George W. Bush Jr. have worked on a single-track.

NATO’s Riga Summit seems to have been a deepening and a fine-tuning of the understanding between the Franco-German entente and the Anglo-American alliance. [1] It was an Anglo-American return to basics, so to speak. However, the process towards reconciliation was started shortly after the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq. France and Germany cancelled Iraqi debts after talks with Britain and America.

Despite the fact that new governments have taken office in Berlin and Paris, under Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany and President Nicholas Sarkozy of France, Franco-German objectives have not changed. French and German policies like American are part of a continuum. The administrations of Merkel and Sarkozy are continuations of their predecessors, Jacques Chirac and Gerhard Schröder (Schroeder).

At a summit between the U.S. and E.U. both sides stated that economics was the most important factor in their relationship and that politics was merely secondary. What appear to be radically pro-American governments in Europe are merely European administrations which reflect the merging of Franco-German and Anglo-American interests. Gerhard Schröder, a German social-democrat, laid all the groundwork for Merkel’s conservative administration and for German rapprochement with America and Britain. It is also worth noting that Angela Merkel would be considered a liberal by North American standards. This also further exposes the misleading and unreliable use of the terms conservative and liberal in modern politics.

<b>The “Pivotal Area” Discovered: Defining Geo-Strategic Boundaries </b>

The “pivotal area” was used in Sir Halford J. Mackinder’s “Heartland” to describe the area of Eurasia that formed the pivotally important core of the global geo-strategic and geo-political environment. We now find that through geo-political realities and necessity the area in question must be redefined. Halford Mackinder coined the term to define an area within the Eurasian landmass, but it is apparent that the “pivotal area” in the truest sense of the word and possibly the “Heartland” itself is a much broader and diverse area that not only lies in Eurasia, but extends into Africa. The global environment is not static. It seems that this area is anchored by geographic reality, but is shifting because of socio-economic, demographic, and political factors.

To define the pivotal area, we must look at the area(s) in which — in the course of the post-Cold War era — the U.S. military has been heavily involved in, from low spectrum to high spectrum warfare and operations. This also includes hostile economic actions and covert intelligence operations.

After pinpointing these areas one can set a conceptual boundary. This subject area is of vast geography, it includes the Balkans, the Caucasus, Central Asia, the Middle East, and East Africa. These regions, arguably, together form the tectonic plate that holds the globe together in a geo-political sense. It is this geographic stretch that has been, and continues, to be a geo-strategic chessboard for competitions of expansion and repulsion. These areas are also some of the most important cultural bridges on the face of the earth. The cultures and knowledge of different civilizations have interacted here for thousands of years. Intense cultural diffusion has also taken place within this geographic stretch as a global cross-road.

Zbigniew Brzezinski has also stipulated that an area roughly corresponded in geographic boundaries to the area that has just been defined is pivotal to global power and Eurasian security. Henry Kissinger has also more or less made similar statements by explaining the importance of neutralizing Iraq and Afghanistan (before its pro-Soviet government was overthrown), both Soviet allies, and containing an Iran fresh with revolutionary fervor in 1979. This was according to Henry Kissinger because of the pivotal importance of the area. [2] Global security encompasses this vast and “pivotal” area as a singularity and it is the Middle East that is the focal point of this geographic stretch.

<b>From “Pivotal Area” to “Arc of Instability”</b>

An arc of uncertainty and instability has been generated by Britain, Israel, the U.S., and their partners, including their intelligence apparatus, from East Africa and the Balkans to the Middle East, the Caucasus, and Central Asia.

Decades of American-led military confrontations, low-intensity warfare, sanctions, economic manipulation, and intelligence operations have undermined the nation-states of the subject area. From the remains of the former Yugoslavia, Sudan, war-torn Somalia, and Anglo-American occupied Iraq to Afghanistan, Kashmir, and the South Federal District of the Russian Federation where Chechnya is located the U.S. has fomented instability. This area roughly corresponds to what Zbigniew Brzezinski calls the “Eurasian Balkans” an area that the U.S. must seek to manipulate and ultimately control should it continue to be a superpower. [3] The pivotal area has also synthetically been manufactured into a zone of instability that can be called the “Arc of Instability.”

In 1993, Zbigniew Brzezinski stated that, “The tragedies of Lebanon of the 1980s, or of Kurdistan and the former Yugoslavia of the early 1990s are previews of things to come within the Eurasian oblong of maximum danger.” [4] What was implied by Brzezinski was balkanization ranging from sectarianism to ethnic clashes. The situation in Iraq is part of this process, as are the tensions in Lebanon, Kosovo, Turkey, and Caucasia.

A classical “divide and conquer” strategy is at play. The underlying objective is to provoke ethnic clashes across the Middle East and Central Asia. This venture, which is linked to Bzezinski’s forecast, is part of an agenda which consists in literally redrawing the map of this broader region. Moreover, there have also been attempts at sparking sectarian and ethnic differences in Iran from adjoining areas in Anglo-American occupied Iraq and NATO-garrisoned Afghanistan that implicate America and its allies.
United States Central Command (CENTCOM)</b>

Tension has gradually been building up in the Middle East, which is the central focus of this vast geographic area called the “Arc of Instability.” This area also roughly corresponds to what the U.S. military identifies as U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM or USCENTCOM).

The U.S. military, through the inheritance and legacy of British geo-strategic projects, is acquainted with the pivotal area and has identified it in roughly the same corresponding areas that have just been defined. CENTCOM is the active manifestation of this conceptual geographic area.

CENTCOM is one of five U.S. military regional active theatre-stage command zones. It is also no mere coincidence that the geographic area that CENTCOM encompasses is also the most active plain of U.S. military action on the face of the earth.

CENTCOM is composed of East Africa, the Middle East, and Central Asia. Although the Balkans, Turkey, the Caucasus (Caucasia), and Russia are located within the operational boundaries of another U.S. military region, United States European Command (EUCOM or USEUCOM), they are also vital to CENTCOM operations and are integrated into the preparation and the planning of CENTOM by the Pentagon and NATO.

It should be noted that Israel is not within the boundaries of CENTCOM by the Pentagon. Syria and Lebanon were also recently, in 2004, re-categorized or redrawn into the borders of CENCTOM. Both Syria and Lebanon were previously included as part of EUCOM, like Israel and Turkey, prior to 2004. This is an important fact to keep in mind and it is linked to the interests of the E.U. in the Mediterranean area.

With the recognition of a strategic consensus within NATO, the Franco-German entente has allowed NATO and the E.U. to play a far stronger role in the outer periphery of the theatre of operations from Central Asia to the Mediterranean Sea and the coast of Somalia. This has allowed the Anglo-American alliance to concentrate its resources on the central area of the theatre of operations, which corresponds to both CENTCOM and the “Arc of Instability.”

Anglo-American occupied Iraq, Eastern Syria, the Persian Gulf, portions of Turkey, and Iran seem to be the centre of this strategic area. The outer peripheries are currently the following; (1) the Eastern Mediterranean and the Levant, (2) NATO-garrisoned Afghanistan and Pakistan, (3) the ex-Soviet republics of Central Asia, (4) the Horn of Africa and East Africa, and (5) the Balkans.

<b>CENTCOM and the Rimland: Encircling Russia, China, and Central Asia</b>

CENTCOM more or less corresponds to what Brzezinski calls a “large geographic oblong that demarcates the central zone of global instability” which runs from the Balkans through the Middle East and Central Asia to Kashmir and East Africa. [5] This “central zone of global instability” is also linked to the central area of Nicholas Spykman’s “Rimland.” It must be noted that, during the Cold War, Nicholas Spykman was also known as a master of containment theory.

The Rimland is the concept of a geographic area adjacent to the “Heartland” that is comprised of most of Europe, the Middle East, the Indian sub-continent, Southeast Asia, and the Far East. This area forms an enveloping geographic ring around Mackinder’s “Heartland.” In other words, the Rimland essentially surrounds the central, core region of Eurasia. CENTCOM lies in the axis or midpoint of Spykman’s Rimland.

This area, the Rimland, was central to Cold War containment theories in regards to the Soviet Union and China, the “Red Giants.” The concept of this area was also used in geo-strategic planning in regards to Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan. This is an important fact to remember, because it deeply influences American geo-strategy in regards to the Iraq-Iran War and the Soviet-Afghan War. The encirclement of the Eurasian core, which was where the Soviet Union was geographically placed, is still a U.S. objective after the end of the Cold War. Containment theory it appears may really have been more about “penetration.”

Penetration of the Eurasian core is underway. NATO is a bridgehead from Europe that is pushing towards Russia. An Asiatic sister-alliance of NATO is being forged against China.

The axis of the Rimland, which includes the Middle East and Afghanistan, is being militarily infiltrated and mobilized by NATO and its allies. CENTCOM indeed is an appropriate and suitable name for this mid-area that is crucial and “central” to connecting the Asiatic and European flanks of any trans-Eurasian military network surrounding Russia and China. Furthermore, this area can also be used for creating a wedge between the European portion of Russia, which is the nerve of Russia, and China. Additionally, if one also examines the geographic position of U.S. and NATO military bases they are concentrated in the Rimland.

<b>NATO’s Extinct Sister-Alliances in the Middle East</b>

Two defunct military alliances that were animated by the Anglo-American alliance, the Middle East Treaty Organization (METO), also called the Baghdad Pact, and the Central Treaty Organization (CENTO) were also located in the axis of the Rimland, where CENTCOM is presently located. Both the dead military pacts were modeled after NATO. In regards to the later military alliance, CENTO, it should be noted that the phrase “central” is used which denotes the geographic centrality of this area in Anglo-American geo-strategies. There is a direct correlation between the strategic nomenclature (naming system) used to denote CENTO and CENTCOM. Simply put, this demonstrates that this geographic area has been viewed as a central area for a historic period of time in Anglo-American strategic circles.

Both METO and CENTO were Anglo-American constructs. Britain, Turkey, Iran, and Pakistan were all full members of CENTO, whereas the U.S. was an associate member. CENTO was forged out of the remains of METO, which became non-operational in 1958 when Iraq withdrew. Iraqi withdrawal from the Baghdad Pact was a result of Baghdad’s wishes to follow an independent path after an Iraqi revolution overthrew the Anglo-American puppet Hashemite king.

Baghdad would eventually ally itself to the Soviet Union and cut its ties with America in 1967. Almost overnight Iraq became known in London and Washington D.C. as a radical Arab state that was a threat to Israel and to a monarchical Iran allied to America and Britain. Anglo-American geo-strategists would always make calculations in regards to Iraq based on two goals: neutralizing Iraq and regaining the lost Iraqi oil fields. It would be the Iraq-Iran War that leads to this objective.

<b>The Geo-Strategic Importance of the Middle East in regards to Eurasia

The Middle East, formerly called the Near East, is an abstract geographic concept that has been shifting with geo-strategic, political, and socio-economic policy. For example, there was a time when academics, map makers, and geographers considered the Balkans as a part of the region. In the mind of many the Middle East is a synonym for Arab World or for Southwest Asia, but both terms are different. The Middle East includes non-Arab countries like Iran, Turkey, and Cyprus. The term Southwest Asia also excludes Egypt, the European portion of Turkey in Thrace and even Greece, depending if you categorize it as a part of the region. The Middle East is a region that embraces three continents (two if you look at Europe and Asia as Eurasia); Europe, Asia, and Africa. It is from here that Anglo-American geo-strategists believed they could establish global hegemony by controlling Eurasia.

Three important maritime passages and five important bodies of water also are located or embrace the area around the Middle East. The important maritime passages and straits can be used to manipulate, cut, and control global navigation, international trade, maritime traffic, and energy supplies. Theses strategic maritime passages are the Suez Canal of Egypt, the Bosphorus/Bosporus of Turkey, and the Gate of Tears (Bab al-Mandeb) located between Djibouti and Yemen at the southern tip of the Red Sea. The five important bodies of water in this area are the Black Sea, the Caspian Sea, the Persian Gulf, the Red Sea, and the eastern end of the Mediterranean Sea. Control over these maritime passages would have grave ramifications for Russia, China, Iran, and any adversaries of NATO in regards to trade, naval movements, and energy supplies.

It is safe to say the post-Cold War objective of the United States in Eurasia is penetration. The different geographic regions of Europe and Asia are important, but they are not as pivotal in geo-strategic value as the Middle East and its geographic periphery (including Central Asia), which are also important energy hubs. If one scrutinizes a map of the earth or Eurasia they will notice that Indo-China or Japan or the Korean Peninsula cannot lead to any meaningful “penetration” of Eurasia. The Russian Federation also acts as a barrier to any drive from Eastern Europe that would be meaningless unless Ukraine fell into NATO’s orbit and Russia lost its Caucasian territories. Due to political realities India, the giant of the Indian sub-continent, can only be used as a counter-weight to China or to spoil the formation of a Eurasian alliance led by Russia, China, and Iran. Whatever value these geographic areas have in regards to containment theory is lost in regards to penetration, aside from India and Ukraine under the proper circumstances.

It is from the Middle East and the area that has been mandated to the U.S. military under CENTCOM that Eurasian penetration can commence. Thus, it is by way of instability and war in this region that the U.S. and NATO have a pretext and justification for their military presence. It is also this area that will be the linkage between the military flanks being created against Russia, China, and their allies on the outer edges of Eurasia.

<b>The Outer Peripheries of the “Arc of Instability” are manned by NATO</b>

The hub of the “Arc of Instability” is where Iraq, Iran, Eastern Syria, and portions of Anatolia are geographically situated. This area is the most dangerous and volatile section of the “Arc of Instability.” Should a crisis with Iran and Syria be lit then the whole “Arc of Instability” can be lit ablaze like a powder keg. Iraq and the Persian Gulf are currently active and tense military zones of operation. This hub within the “Arc of Instability” is distinctly Anglo-American in its characteristic. It is the Anglo-American alliance that manages and oversees this war zone.

Several European countries had initially posted their troops in Anglo-American occupied Iraq, but gradually reduced and removed their military contingents. Italy and Spain were amongst these countries. The European troop movements were publicly correlated to political changes in national governments within the respective capitals of these European countries. The aim of the troop movements was to portray the departures as acts of opposition to the war in Iraq. Angry European populations were misled into believing that a shift in foreign policy was underway, but this was an act of public deception. These nations compensated the broader war effort and agenda by deploying or re-shuffling their troops to Afghanistan or to Lebanon. Their actions were almost inconsequential to the broader war effort.

NATO members, such as Germany, are also involved and present in military operations in the Horn of Africa. The military activities of NATO and its members, including their almost perfectly coinciding military operations in the Eastern Mediterranean, the Red Sea, and the Arabian Sea, discloses advanced insight about a larger war agenda.

The whole “Arc of Instability” is manned by NATO and close NATO allies, such as Australia and Israel. NATO as a whole is involved in the war project and American, British, Polish, Danish, Czech, and Romanian troops are present in Anglo-American occupied Iraq. Moreover, NATO is also responsible for certain aspects of military training inside Iraq. Additionally, there is a Franco-German presence in the Persian Gulf and NATO also has made security arrangements in the Persian Gulf with nations such as Kuwait.

However, what gives a particular NATO characteristic to the outer peripheries (tiers) of the “Arc of Instability” (in reality the area of military operations) is that greater numbers of NATO countries are involved in the military operations in these zones. Also NATO has an official mandate in these areas and has a role in the so-called “post-conflict” phase of operations in these areas. This phase in reality is the occupational and restructuring phase of the conflicts ensuing in the “Arc of Instability.” This form of “post-conflict” participation could also be linked to the low tolerance the populations of many of these NATO states would have in regards to casualties or supporting the war effort.

The bulk of NATO troops have been positioned within the eastern and western outer peripheries of the military theatre of operations. Once again, the war zones almost precisely correspond to what is defined by the U.S. military as CENTCOM. It is only the former Yugoslavia that falls outside CENTCOM’s borders.

It is from the Balkans that academics get the geo-political term “balkanization,” meaning to divide. The Balkans constitutes the westernmost periphery of the “Arc of Instability.”

Yugoslavia was effectively divided by the “Big Four” of NATO as Henry Kissinger refers to America, Britain, France, and Germany. [6] In the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM), NATO operations wield great control over the country and its government. Germany and the U.S. both play major roles. Under the shadow of the E.U., NATO still plays a role in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

Slovenia, the northernmost and smallest republic of the former Yugoslavia, has been absorbed into both NATO and the European Union. Nothing remains of the Yugoslav Federation. Serbia, the last and declining bastion of independence in the Balkans, is under siege and has been reduced to a landlocked and paralyzed status.

In Bosnia-Herzegovina, NATO used to reside as the Implementation Force (IFOR) and the Stabilization Force (SFOR), before operations were handed over to the so-called European Union Forces (EUFOR). France, Britain, and the U.S. divided the Slavic country into three militarized sectors before the “Global War on Terror.” Despite the name change, nothing changed on the ground in Bosnia-Herzegovina in regards to the deployment of NATO troops. EUFOR was merely a facelift for Franco-German and Anglo-American operations.

While Bosnia-Herzegovina was divided between France, Britain, and the U.S., the German military was deployed to Croatia, where Germany had major interests. In fact, in regards to the former Yugoslavia, both Germany and the U.S. played the lead roles of dismantling the federation.

After the Kosovo War of 1999 between NATO and the remnants of the Yugoslav Federation, Serbia and Montenegro, the province of Kosovo was occupied and divided under a formal U.N. mandate into sectors. Kosovo Force (KFOR) was created by NATO to be in charge of Kosovo. Kosovo was divided into five zones by NATO. The U.S., France, Britain, Germany, and Italy all commanded one zone and the military forces of other NATO members in their respective zones of responsibility. However, Russian forces rushed into Kosovo to secure the area and their interests. Thus, the situation in Kosovo was complicated for NATO by the presence of Russia.

In all the conflicts in the western periphery of the “Arc of Instability” the Europeans are taking the political lead, independently from America. However, there subsists a unified stance and policy between America and these European countries, pertaining to the former Yugoslavia, Lebanon, and Syria.

After all, the whole project is a NATO project. However, there is a distinctly Franco-German characteristic in the Eastern Mediterranean. In the western outer periphery, in particular the Eastern Mediterranean, the Franco-German entente, working politically through the E.U. and militarily through NATO, is overseeing NATO operations.

The informal presence of NATO on the ground and off the shores of Lebanon is merely part of this manning process by NATO in the broader war agenda. The NATO presence in the Eastern Mediterranean is also part of the eastward expansion or thrust of NATO that is matched by a westward push in East Asia and a growing American-led military position in the Indian Ocean that is pushing northwards from posts such as Diego Garcia in British territory.

In Afghanistan NATO is deployed under the mantel of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). Aside from Britain and the U.S., the French, the Germans, the Italians, and the Canadians play lead roles on the ground in Afghanistan. In addition to Afghanistan, NATO is also present and involved within the borders of Pakistan. NATO has also established bases near the borders of China and Iran, which have concerned Beijing and Tehran.

<b>The Militarization of Japan and NATO Expansion </b>

The Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO), created in 1954 and dissolved in 1977, included the U.S., France, Pakistan, Britain, Australia, Thailand, New Zealand, and the Philippines. This military alliance was in reality a small trans-Eurasian military arrangement positioned in the Rimland. Its mandate was to contain both the U.S.S.R. and the People’s Republic of China.

It is the structural design of this bridging alliance, SEATO, which the U.S. is in the process of restoring. SEATO created a formal military link between the western and eastern ends of the Eurasian landmass.

America’s objective is to create an enduring trans-Eurasian military bloc in which Japan is slated to play a key role from both an economic and military standpoint.

The projected Japanese role in Asia falls along the lines of the Nixon Doctrine, which calls for the transformation of regional nations into the regional arms of America. Presently, Japan is in the process of transforming itself from a pacifist country to a military power that will be the engine of an “Asiatic NATO.” Japan is an economic power which has the capabilities of developing its military strength and challenging China.

However, the Japanese government does not have the political capital to transform Japan into a military power because of internal opinions within Japan and the external opinions and fears of the rest of Asia. Asian societies will fear and view Japanese rearmament as a return to Japanese militarism and imperial ambitions in Asia. This is where the demonization of North Korea, China, and Russia plays an important role. North Korea has armed itself because of the legitimate fears of an American attack. Chinese and Russian activities are also of a defensive nature. The demonization of these three countries in Asia is meant to legitimize the militarization of Japan and several other Asian countries.

The other step being taken to alleviate the concerns of Asian societies about the militarization of Japan is the formulation of an Asiatic military alliance. This is where Australia has played a key role, by creating a framework for an alliance with Japan. In the mantle of collective security, a militarily robust Japan will not be seen or feared as a threat. It will be China and China’s allies which will be portrayed as the threat to Asian security. Thus, Japan and Australia will lead a military front in Asia as American surrogates.

This is part of the project to create three strategic fronts against Russia and China. Pressure will be exerted from NATO in the western end of Eurasia, while in the Middle East there is a strong NATO presence and a “Coalition of the Moderate” is being formed and armed, which will eventually become a de facto extension of NATO. The arming of Saudi Arabia and the Arab Sheikhdoms of the Persian Gulf is directly linked to the inward penetration of Eurasia from the Middle East via Iran. While NATO exerts pressure from Europe and the Middle East, Japan and Australia will do the same from the eastern end of Eurasia. Russia, Iran, and China are all being addressed through three Eurasian fronts.


[1] Michel Chossudovsky, Debating
Aging Americans unsure they can afford to retire: survey

By Pedro Nicolaci da Costa Wed Mar 12, 10:27 AM ET

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A third of Americans 50 and over are not confident they will have enough money to retire, and more than two-thirds expect to keep working well into old age, according to a survey published Wednesday.

The report, commissioned by retirement services firm SecurePath by Transamerica, suggests the surge in companies offering defined-contribution 401(k) plans has not displaced Social Security as the ultimate safety net for retirees. Sixty-one percent said the program would provide them with their main source of income in retirement.

"A huge percentage of people say they rely on government because it's the one thing they know is dependable," said Will Prest, chief marketing officer at Transamerica Retirement Management in St. Paul, Minnesota.

Encouragingly, 65 percent of respondents said they feel in control of their life in retirement, and seven in 10 said they were well-equipped to handle the uncertainties associated with big life transitions like leaving the workforce.

Yet this confidence comes at a cost.

"Seven in 10 workers aged 50 and older have already faced a period of financial difficulty that shook their confidence and created stress," the study found.

The survey also uncovered a general aversion to risk among the broader population, although respondents' appetite for taking chances varied depending on their circumstances and personalities.

"Many more workers 50-plus say they understand savings vehicles for their money better than other investment options, and are not as comfortable with putting their retirement funds in the vehicles they do not understand as well," the survey said.

Just under half said they were not very willing to put money into investments with risk associated with them.

"The average American isn't looking for a life of leisure or luxury," said Prest. "They're just looking to live life on their own terms and lower their stress level, but still participate."

The report's findings were based on 2,015 online interviews among working adults aged 50 or older, and was conducted by GfK Roper Public Affairs & Media.

(Reporting by Pedro Nicolaci da Costa; Editing by Jan Paschal)
<span style='color:purple'>[size=14]<span style='font-family:Geneva'>http://o3.indiatimes.com/BHAARAT_FUTURE_PLAN_NOW</span></span>
Friday March 21, 2008

US financial crisis closer than you think


We better steel-lock ourselves and our savings to face another worldwide economic meltdown.

WHILE all of us had our eyes on the general election for the past 30-odd days and the after effects of the shocking results, there was another more important event playing out on the other side of the world.

As I have been working every day since Feb 11 and getting home 1am daily, watching the telly had been my way of winding down.

At that hour, the best thing to watch are the financial channels like CNBC and Bloomberg on Astro.

Tracking the US economy, the decline of the dollar and the rising price of oil became a form of distraction from the campaigning, politicking and accusations going on then.

Just two days before polling day, oil prices went past the US$111 per barrel and the US dollar fell below the 100-yen mark. On top of that gold prices reached US$1,000 per ounce. All were record highs.

It was as if the moon, stars and planets were lined up. It seemed that disaster was beckoning on a global scale.

In 1997, the hedge funds and currency speculators caused the Asian financial crisis and 11 years on, the same financial wizards have caused the US economy to go into a tailspin.

Their speculative bets against the Asian currencies then, caused a crash in all the financial markets in our region.

This time they bet on the great American financial institutions and lost.

Asian companies had to come to the rescue of several financial institutions by buying stakes into huge global firms but their investments may not see any returns for a long time.

Among the major investments were:

> State-owned China Investment Corp invested US$3bil (RM9.53bil) last May for a 9% stake of Blackstone Group LP, the world’s biggest buyout fund but its investment value has already shrunk to less than 50%.

> The same Chinese firm spent US$5bil (RM15.89bil) on Morgan Stanley and the shares has lost 30% of its value.

> Government of Singapore Investment Corp and a Middle East investor paid over US$11bil (RM34.96bil) for a stake in the Swiss-based UBS and the stock has fallen 57% since Dec 10.

The Federal Reserve has repeatedly cut interest rates in the United States since December and the latest was a reduction of 75 basis points on Tuesday.

The Fed (as the US central bank is called) is trying to kick-start the stalling economy hoping this will contain damage to the economy and financial system from housing troubles and a credit crisis.

Yes, the stock markets around the world reacted positively to the latest move but listening to many financial commentators, I think that the rebound will be temporary.

The financial turmoil, which I dub the American Financial Crisis (as opposed to the Asian one in 1997), started late last year with the sub-prime (risky) mortgage crisis outbreak.

Speculators lost confidence in investing their money in banks that were lending to people, who technically did not qualify for such big loans, to buy property at a higher interest rate. The banks in turn recalled these loans thus starting a crisis that has led us to where we are today.

All signs are there that the contingent effect is spreading across the world and no country will be spared just like the one 11 years ago.

The collapse of financial supermarket Bear Stearns last weekend was another nail in the world’s economic coffin. A company whose share traded at US$30 per share on a Friday was sold the following Monday for US$2.

It had over US$30bil (RM95.34bil) in cash and assets and yet the 82-year-old Bear Stearns was sold to JP Morgan for only for US$236mil (RM750mil).

There are numerous reasons for the crisis but it is suffice to say that the speculation put paid to the world’s economy. The same speculators lost confidence in what they were doing and sold out thus causing this mess.

It is truly a global crisis, and although not officially called so, the United States is in recession.

But what does it mean for us in Malaysia?

Immediately? Nothing actually. For one thing, the ringgit has appreciated quite a bit against the US dollar and this means that if you are going to the US, you will have more money to spend.

If you got kids studying in the United States then quickly pay the tuition fees now and save a whole load of ringgit.

But our joy will be short-lived. Our exports to the United States (our number one trading partner) will get more expensive and Americans, who already have less in the pockets, will soon shun our goods.

This, of course, means our factories in Penang, Perak and Selangor will have to cut their production and people will eventually lose their jobs if the trend does not change.

Will the huge Chinese market come to our rescue? If the Americans stay in trouble, the Chinese factories will also be in trouble for the same reasons.

The contingent effect will hit us. Malaysia, as the world’s number 24th trading nation, will not and cannot be spared.

This brings me to the point about keeping one eye on the election and the other on the collapsing world economy – whatever that was promised in the manifestos by ALL political parties will not be fulfilled because it is not economically possible.

>PKR will not be able to cut petrol prices because oil prices have climbed higher than Petronas’ profits of last year;

>PAS’ welfare state programme will also be thwarted because unemployment will climb and there will not be enough money to offer help to everyone;

>The DAP’s bonus of RM6,000 per family with an annual income of less than RM6,000 will also not be possible because of Petronas’ problems; and

> The Barisan Nasional will be hard pressed to keep its promises of continued development because the cost of maintaining the subsidies will become too exorbitant. Their total subsidies are about RM81bil if oil prices stayed at US$100 per barrel. There will be no money left for development.

So for us ordinary citizens – get ready for a bumpier ride this year.

Issue Date: April 1, 2008, Posted On: 3/28/2008

Harvard panelists debate toll of India’s economic growth

Infrastructure issues still seen as crucial to future


CAMBRIDGE, Mass. – Sometime within the next few weeks, the Indian government will issue a report card on the country’s economic performance during the 2007-2008 fiscal year, which ended March 31. If the government reports economic growth of at least 8.7 percent during the period, then India will continue a trend that has seen the country’s economy grow by an average 8.75 percent over the last five fiscal years.

No matter what the Indian government reports, however, economists who are familiar with “the India story” are debating how long India can sustain its current rate of growth. The subject was the focus of a panel discussion at the recent Harvard Business School India Conference, a daylong event on March 16 that featured nine other forums on India’s economic development and carried the theme “Charging Ahead.”

Dubbed “The Macro Picture: Maintaining India’s Growth in a Changing World,” the aforementioned panel featured input by Udayan Bose, chairman of Tamara Capital Advisors Pvt. Ltd., a Mumbai private-equity firm; Tushar Poddar, vice president of Asia economic research at the Goldman Sachs Group Inc.; Ron Somers, president of the U.S.-India Business Council in Washington, D.C.; and Sanjay Puri, chairman of the Washington-based U.S. India Political Action Council. Richard Vietor, the Sen. John Heinz Professor of Environmental Management at Harvard Business School, moderated the forum.

Puri led off the discussion with comments on education and infrastructure – two areas that he said will determine whether the Indian economy soars or crawls in the years ahead. “One of the challenges that we see down the road for India is education. It may shock you to understand that every time we take a delegation of businessmen and politicians to India, the one message that consistently comes up is that not enough attention is being paid to vocational training and secondary education in India,” Puri said. “When you want to see the income dividend of any one individual, it is when you go past secondary education. When people talk about doing business with India, education is a tremendous sector of the country that people should be looking at; it is the great leveler that gives people equity in society, and not just growth to the economy.”

Puri noted India’s staggering economic expansion in recent years, and predicted that as the country continues to grow, hundreds of millions of Indians will leave the country’s rural areas and head for the cities. But therein lies a major challenge: These transplants will need jobs, which India’s manufacturing sector appears capable of handling – but not without substantial investments in the country’s dilapidated infrastructure, Puri warned.

Tushar Poddar, VP of Asia economic research at Goldman Sachs spoke at the recent Harvard Business School India Conference. Photo by Chris Nelson

“Infrastructure plays directly into the manufacturing sector. You have so many people in the agricultural sector – about 60 percent of the population – yet over the next five years, approximately 500 million Indians will be moving into the country’s urban areas and they’ll need jobs,” he said. “Right now, there are no jobs for them. The manufacturing sector can absorb them, but not until India builds up its power supply, builds roads and special economic zones – all of those things come into play.”

India’s infrastructure deficit is so critical that economists and academics around the world are in agreement that it is preventing the country from achieving its true economic potential. India is home to more than 3 million miles of paved roadways – the second-largest network of roads in the world, behind the United States – but decades of underinvestment and political inertia has led to their decline. The country is also prone to widespread power outages and lacks a reliable water supply. Jagdish N. Bhagwati, a professor of economics at Columbia University in New York City, has stated that India’s gross domestic product growth would run two percentage p­o­ints higher if the country had decent roads, railway and power.

“The challenge for India right now is how to pay for the half-trillion-dollar price tag for building the country’s infrastructure – the roads, the airports and all the basic wires and tubes of the country’s economy,” Somers, the U.S.-India Business Council president, said at the forum. “Here we are right now in the United States sliding into a recession, and the question that looms is how are we going to raise the money to plow back into India?”

Somers said this dilemma surfaced in 2003, when Indian conglomerate Reliance Industries Ltd. discovered a massive, deepwater natural gas field in the Bay of Bengal. At the time of the discovery, there was no pipeline capable of delivering the gas from its source to the company’s Jamnagar refinery in the western state of Gujarat. But with so much at stake, Reliance secured funding and tapped U.S.-based contractor Bechtel to build it.

“In 2008, the first natural gas will be produced and transported via a 48-inch pipeline from the Bay of Bengal to the Jamnagar refinery. This is a major transnational pipeline that will pump 2.5 billion feet of natural gas a day. That’s a lot of gas,” Somers said. “What does this mean? Well, if you think of the HBJ pipeline (currently carries most of India’s natural gas), all along that pipeline you have power stations, fertilizer plants and every kind of downstream [operation] that you can think of – and they don’t even need to be Reliance-specific.”

Somers praised India for encouraging more foreign-direct investment in the country’s retail sector, which he said will improve the efficiency of the domestic supply chain, and called on Indian leaders to ratify the 123 Agreement of the United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006, which remains stalled. “I want the nuclear deal to happen – it’s the end of India’s nuclear isolation – and if that happens, it will unleash collaborations and unlock India’s access to entirely new technologies,” Somers said. “In part of the bargain, it calls for major defense cooperation between the United States and India. But India needs to upgrade its entire defense establishment, which is the world’s second-largest but uses obsolete equipment. Indian [MiG fighter aircraft] are falling out of the sky. Well, who makes the best military equipment? Frankly, the United States of America does.”

Somers spoke beyond his allotted 10 minutes – Vietor, the moderator, politely asked him to wrap up his comments at one point – yet neither his fellow speakers nor the audience seemed to mind.

In fact, his final point drew a round of applause from the roughly 100 people in attendance.

“We are about to go to the Moon, the United States and India are. India’s first mission to the moon will launch this May,” he said. “It will be the first time in our history that American technology will be sitting on top of an Indian rocket that is going to the Moon. And 54 percent of India’s population and all of American youngsters will be looking up to the sky together as the United States and India go to the moon together.”
<b>US, EU responsible for 'explosive' food prices: UN official</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Jean Ziegler held fuel policies pursued by the US and the EU to be main causes for the current worldwide food crisis.

Last year the <b>US used a third of its corn crop to create bio-fuels, while the European Union is planning to have 10 per cent of its need supplied by bio-fuels</b>, he said and called for a for a five-year moratorium on the production of bio-fuels.

Ziegler also said that speculation on international markets was behind 30 per cent increase in food prices. Besides, hedge funds are also making huge profits from raw materials markets and called for new financial regulations to prevent such speculation.

The Special Reporter, in a press conference, warned of worsening food riots and a "horrifying" increase in deaths by starvation<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)