The Blueprint For World War III

THE BLUEPRINT FOR WORLD WAR III

August 29, 2014



This article is the first of a two part series which details the coming war. This war will not be a simple war of occupation such as what we saw in Iran and presently in Afghanistan. This war will be utterly devastating and has the potential to escalate into a conflict befitting the over-used term, “Armageddon”.

Part one of this series will present what boxing fans call, “the tale of tape”. The “tale of the tape” entails identifying the combatants, their respective sides as well as the relative strengths of the participants and their military forces.

The Relative Strengths of Each Side

The coming war will largely feature what pundits call the BRIC nations and the USA and her allies. Each side of this coming conflict possesses widely divergent military strengths, weaknesses and strategies.

The US Is Dependent On a Devastating First Strike Attack

The United States and her allies have a decided advantage of quick strike, long range battlefield capabilities because of superior aircraft and carrier strike capabilities. The BRIC nations have an advantage with manpower, rocket propelled weapons and tanks. The USA and her allies cannot win a sustained battlefield campaign because of the attrition factor.

The Chinese have demonstrated the ability to negate the United States Navy’s technological advantage through the use of killer satellites. Therefore, the entire US strategy is predicated on a first strike before the Chinese can destroy the majority of the eyes and ears of the US military, namely, its superior satellite capabilities in which the US forces can quickly locate and destroy the enemy with its smart weapons before the enemy knows what hit them.

Nuclear Submarines Are the “X Factor”

SEE PICS

The BRICS cannot run or hide from this devastating weapon.

Nuclear submarines are often looked at as the great equalizer. No matter who is winning on the ground, in the air and on the surface of the oceans, the submarine force has the capability to reign down unimaginable destruction upon their enemy. In the case of submarines, the USA and her allies are matched by their BRIC counterparts. Most subs carry eight nuclear missiles, each capable of destroying a major city. The USA presumably has superior evasive techniques and therefore, would presumably survive sub-killer strategies with greater frequency than their BRIC adversaries. Therefore, the BRIC nations might win every land battle, however, the victorious BRIC nations would not have many of its cities left to return to in the case of a nuclear war. The US submarines are, in effect, a formidable doomsday weapon.

The Trigger Event

SEE PICS


Command and Control of America’s first strike capability.

For the United States and her allies to win a conventional war, a quick strike, surprise engagement is critical to the success of these forces. The BRICS would have an advantage in a longer prolonged conflict. This is particularly true when one considers that if time permitted, the Chinese have bragged that they could put 100 million men on a battlefield. Following the teachings of Sun Tsu in the famous book, The Art of War, it is critical that the BRIC nations be brought to the battlefield of choice by the USA for a quick and decisive engagement.

From a conventional warfare standpoint, the engagement is likely to be naval and involve aircraft. This plays to the advantage of the USA, whose superior long range strike capability is enhanced by their superior aircraft carriers. The USA forces would likely engage in a distracting land engagement first to hold and occupy the maximum number of the BRIC forces. The land strike, a first strike, will be directed at Syria. Given the present crisis, the Russians would have to decide on choosing between protecting its eastern border with the NATO forces poised to attack, or launching an offensive directed at protecting Syria.

The Russians will choose self-defense. The timing of the American invasion of Syria will take place when a sufficient number of American naval vessels are present in the Black Sea to checkmate the Russia military build up in Crimea which would serve as a staging area for military action in Syria. At the end of the day, once a large contingent of the American navy has moved into position off of the Baltic states, Russia will be powerless to prevent an US takeover of Syria. The path and progress of the CIA force , ISIS, as it creates more designed havoc in Syria, will provide the impetus for US forces to enter Syria, thus provoking a Russian and a BRIC nation unified response.

Conventional wisdom states that once the US occupies Syria, Russia will be powerless to intervene on behalf of America’s next target Iran, because the US medium range missile batteries will prevent the Russian army from moving south into the region. With Russia out of the way, Iran will capitulate and stop selling oil for gold to the BRIC nations and the Petrodollar will be preserved. Iran will agree to the control of their oil fields by the US to avoid an invasion. They will capitulate because nobody will come to their rescue. At least that is what the US is hoping for. In part Two, I will present a more likely scenario.

What about India and China? Won’t they move to protect Iran and thus, erode the Petrodollar? Not exactly, as China and India will have their hands full. The naval strike that I speak of will be directed at China. Before the commencement of hostilities, China will be given a short time to stand down or face destruction by the US submarines and the long range capabilities of US carriers. It is only necessary to target China’s major cities to force capitulation. This strategy would free the disenchanted Chinese, living in the rebellious outlying provinces to launch a revolution against Beijing. It is also rumored that the US does have space based nuclear weapons. If this is the case, this conflict could be over in the early morning hours of the first day.

The Chinese submarine force could be capable of taking out several US cities, however, their submarines alone will not change the outcome. India will be held in check by Pakistan. Subsequently, India will never enter the fight. US forces in Afghanistan could block a Russian invasion of Pakistan from the north. It is clear that the USA and her allies will decisively defeat the BRIC nations in a conventional war, so long as it is a short conflict.

However, there is one game-changing strategy that the BRICS could employ. If the BRIC nations were to simultaneously launch a series of high altitude ICBM’s over every theater of potential war, the high altitude nuclear blast could create an EMP attack on a global scale. Such an action would negate the technological advantage of the US military and reduce the conflict to brutal savagery which would be dominated by global famine. Certainly the super elite would experience their much-coveted population reduction on an unprecedented scale. This action would ultimately produce a military stalemate and the war would disintegrate into one brute force versus another for a very long time. The former popular TV show, Revolution, comes to mind. More on the trigger event along with a more detailed chronology will be presented in the next part of this series.

The nuclear arsenals of the BRICS vs. the USA and her allies are equivalent on paper. However, the reliability factor, related to the weapons, clearly favors the USA. To the sane person, the topic of nuclear war is almost a moot point. If either side resorts to the use of nuclear weapons on anything more than a battlefield scale with tactical nuclear weapons, this would render the conflict meaningless as the planet would be a very undesirable place to inhabit. Then again, the psychopathic elite, safely tucked away in the tunnels beneath Denver International Airport, may feel they have the ability to wait out the devastation going on above.

The following data demonstrates the ultimate futility of employing nuclear weapons on a regional and intercontinental basis. Of course, recognizing the futility of such utter destruction and hoping that this would serve as a deterrent to the psychopathic bankers from starting such a conflict, cannot be counted on. After all, if one’s ultimate goal is the destruction and reduction of 90% of the human race, and a nuclear war would constitute the level of chaos needed in order to bring forth “the order of out chaos” which would be needed to usher in the New World Order. This makes nuclear war more, not less likely!

SEE DATA

Conclusion

Your children picked a very bad time to be born. The only winners in what is coming will be the Satan-serving bankers who are bankrolling both sides of the coming conflict.

It is the hope of this author that these facts will demonstrate the utter destruction that billions of innocent people on this planet face. Could these be the last days before the Tribulation and ultimate judgment? Perhaps, but the Bible cautions us that we will not know the exact time of the return of Jesus. Certainly, the conditions are ripe for nuclear conflict and it is all so tragic and avoidable.

Jesus showed humanity over 2,000 years ago, who the real enemy of humanity is. It is unquestionably demonic but manifests itself in the human form of a banker. Man was not meant to engage in banker wars of profit. No wonder Jesus chased the money changers from the Temple with a whip. The world needs an “Occupy Basel” movement, where the Bank of International Settlements resides. Such a movement would be needed in order to save humanity. These psychopathic bankers need to be imprisoned in order to save humanity from complete destruction. Do not hold your breath, martial law, followed by World War III, is probably unavoidable.

Dave Hodges is the host of the popular radio talk show, which airs from 9 PM to Midnight (Central) Sundays. The show can be heard by clicking the following icon in the upper right hand corner of The Common Sense Show.

http://beforeitsnews.com/war-and-conflict/2014/08/the-blueprint-for-world-war-iii-2453870.html?currentSplittedPage=0

_________________________________________________
As it is below; so it is above

Ex-NSA Director, US Intelligence Veterans Write Open Letter To Merkel To Avoid All-Out Ukraine War

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 09/02/2014

Alarmed at the anti-Russian hysteria sweeping Washington, and the specter of a new Cold War, U.S. intelligence veterans one of whom is none other than William Binney, the former senior NSA crypto-mathematician who back in March 2012 blew the whistle on the NSA's spying programs more than a year before Edward Snowden, took the unusual step of sending the following memo dated August 30 to German Chancellor Merkel challenging the reliability of Ukrainian and U.S. media claims about a Russian "invasion."

Via AntiWar and ConsortiumNews, highlights ours

MEMORANDUM FOR: Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
SUBJECT: Ukraine and NATO

We the undersigned are longtime veterans of U.S. intelligence. We take the unusual step of writing this open letter to you to ensure that you have an opportunity to be briefed on our views prior to the NATO summit on September 4-5.

You need to know, for example, that accusations of a major Russian "invasion" of Ukraine appear not to be supported by reliable intelligence. Rather, the "intelligence" seems to be of the same dubious, politically "fixed" kind used 12 years ago to "justify" the U.S.-led attack on Iraq. We saw no credible evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq then; we see no credible evidence of a Russian invasion now. Twelve years ago, former Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, mindful of the flimsiness of the evidence on Iraqi WMD, refused to join in the attack on Iraq. In our view, you should be appropriately suspicions of charges made by the US State Department and NATO officials alleging a Russian invasion of Ukraine.

President Barack Obama tried yesterday to cool the rhetoric of his own senior diplomats and the corporate media, when he publicly described recent activity in the Ukraine, as "a continuation of what’s been taking place for months now … it’s not really a shift."

Obama, however, has only tenuous control over the policymakers in his administration – who sadly, lack much sense of history, know little of war, and substitute anti-Russian invective for a policy. One year ago, hawkish State Department officials and their friends in the media very nearly got Mr. Obama to launch a major attack on Syria based, once again, on "intelligence" that was dubious, at best.

Largely because of the growing prominence of, and apparent reliance on, intelligence we believe to be spurious, we think the possibility of hostilities escalating beyond the borders of Ukraine has increased significantly over the past several days. More important, we believe that this likelihood can be avoided, depending on the degree of judicious skepticism you and other European leaders bring to the NATO summit next week.

Experience With Untruth

Hopefully, your advisers have reminded you of NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen’s checkered record for credibility. It appears to us that Rasmussen’s speeches continue to be drafted by Washington. This was abundantly clear on the day before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq when, as Danish Prime Minister, he told his Parliament: "Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. This is not something we just believe. We know."

Photos can be worth a thousand words; they can also deceive. We have considerable experience collecting, analyzing, and reporting on all kinds of satellite and other imagery, as well as other kinds of intelligence. Suffice it to say that the images released by NATO on August 28 provide a very flimsy basis on which to charge Russia with invading Ukraine. Sadly, they bear a strong resemblance to the images shown by Colin Powell at the UN on February 5, 2003 that, likewise, proved nothing.

That same day, we warned President Bush that our former colleague analysts were "increasingly distressed at the politicization of intelligence" and told him flatly, "Powell’s presentation does not come close" to justifying war. We urged Mr. Bush to "widen the discussion … beyond the circle of those advisers clearly bent on a war for which we see no compelling reason and from which we believe the unintended consequences are likely to be catastrophic."

Consider Iraq today. Worse than catastrophic. Although President Vladimir Putin has until now showed considerable reserve on the conflict in the Ukraine, it behooves us to remember that Russia, too, can "shock and awe." In our view, if there is the slightest chance of that kind of thing eventually happening to Europe because of Ukraine, sober-minded leaders need to think this through very carefully.

If the photos that NATO and the US have released represent the best available "proof" of an invasion from Russia, our suspicions increase that a major effort is under way to fortify arguments for the NATO summit to approve actions that Russia is sure to regard as provocative. Caveat emptor is an expression with which you are no doubt familiar. Suffice it to add that one should be very cautious regarding what Mr. Rasmussen, or even Secretary of State John Kerry, are peddling.

We trust that your advisers have kept you informed regarding the crisis in Ukraine from the beginning of 2014, and how the possibility that Ukraine would become a member of NATO is anathema to the Kremlin. According to a February 1, 2008 cable (published by WikiLeaks) from the US embassy in Moscow to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, US Ambassador William Burns was called in by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who explained Russia’s strong opposition to NATO membership for Ukraine.

Lavrov warned pointedly of "fears that the issue could potentially split the country in two, leading to violence or even, some claim, civil war, which would force Russia to decide whether to intervene." Burns gave his cable the unusual title, "NYET MEANS NYET: RUSSIA’S NATO ENLARGEMENT REDLINES," and sent it off to Washington with IMMEDIATE precedence. Two months later, at their summit in Bucharest NATO leaders issued a formal declaration that "Georgia and Ukraine will be in NATO."

Just yesterday, Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseny Yatsenyuk used his Facebook page to claim that, with the approval of Parliament that he has requested the path to NATO membership is open. Yatsenyuk, of course, was Washington’s favorite pick to become prime minister after the February 22 coup d’etat in Kiev. "Yats is the guy," said Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland a few weeks before the coup, in an intercepted telephone conversation with US Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt. You may recall that this is the same conversation in which Nuland said, "XXXX the EU."

Timing of the Russian "Invasion"

The conventional wisdom promoted by Kiev just a few weeks ago was that Ukrainian forces had the upper hand in fighting the anti-coup federalists in southeastern Ukraine, in what was largely portrayed as a mop-up operation. But that picture of the offensive originated almost solely from official government sources in Kiev. There were very few reports coming from the ground in southeastern Ukraine. There was one, however, quoting Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, that raised doubt about the reliability of the government’s portrayal.

According to the "press service of the President of Ukraine" on August 18, Poroshenko called for a "regrouping of Ukrainian military units involved in the operation of power in the East of the country. … Today we need to do the rearrangement of forces that will defend our territory and continued army offensives," said Poroshenko, adding, "we need to consider a new military operation in the new circumstances."

If the "new circumstances" meant successful advances by Ukrainian government forces, why would it be necessary to "regroup," to "rearrange" the forces? At about this time, sources on the ground began to report a string of successful attacks by the anti-coup federalists against government forces. According to these sources, it was the government army that was starting to take heavy casualties and lose ground, largely because of ineptitude and poor leadership.

Ten days later, as they became encircled and/or retreated, a ready-made excuse for this was to be found in the "Russian invasion." That is precisely when the fuzzy photos were released by NATO and reporters like the New York Times’ Michael Gordon were set loose to spread the word that "the Russians are coming." (Michael Gordon was one of the most egregious propagandists promoting the war on Iraq.)

No Invasion – But Plenty Other Russian Support

The anti-coup federalists in southeastern Ukraine enjoy considerable local support, partly as a result of government artillery strikes on major population centers. And we believe that Russian support probably has been pouring across the border and includes, significantly, excellent battlefield intelligence. But it is far from clear that this support includes tanks and artillery at this point – mostly because the federalists have been better led and surprisingly successful in pinning down government forces.

At the same time, we have little doubt that, if and when the federalists need them, the Russian tanks will come.

This is precisely why the situation demands a concerted effort for a ceasefire, which you know Kiev has so far been delaying. What is to be done at this point? In our view, Poroshenko and Yatsenyuk need to be told flat-out that membership in NATO is not in the cards – and that NATO has no intention of waging a proxy war with Russia – and especially not in support of the ragtag army of Ukraine. Other members of NATO need to be told the same thing.

For the Steering Group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity

• William Binney, former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA; co-founder, SIGINT Automation Research Center (ret.)
• David MacMichael, National Intelligence Council (ret.)
• Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA analyst (ret.)
• Elizabeth Murray, Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East (ret.)
• Todd E. Pierce, MAJ, US Army Judge Advocate (Ret.)
• Coleen Rowley, Division Counsel & Special Agent, FBI (ret.)
• Ann Wright, Col., US Army (ret.); Foreign Service Officer (resigned)

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-09-01/ex-nsa-director-us-intelligence-veterans-write-open-letter-merkel-avoid-all-out-ukra

____________________________________________________
As it is below; so it is above

The Road to World War 3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HP7L8bw5QF4


This video we made in 2012 explains the root reason for the insanity
we're seeing unfold right now. Since that time we've uncovered new
evidence. The sequel is underway.

StormCloudsGathering

Love Always
mudra

“Greater Israel” or “Greater Khazaria”?

September 13, 2014

Israeli plan for Mideast empire aided by ISIS.

By Ronald L. Ray —

Divide and conquer is an age-old strategy for empire-builders. Drive your opponents to fight among themselves, then pillage and subjugate them. Josef Stalin successfully employed this method in World War II, with the fawning complicity of Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt. Now the Zionists—and their American lackeys—are doing the same to establish Israeli hegemony throughout the Middle East and North Africa. And it was long planned. But is the intention merely for “Greater Israel”—“from the Nile to the Euphrates,” as Theodor Herzl proclaimed—or is this the first step toward a world empire we should call “Greater Khazaria”?

In 1982, the World Zionist Organization’s Department of Information, their propaganda arm, published “A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties,” by Oded Yinon. This “Yinon Plan” has been followed for decades by Israel in order to establish “Greater Israel.”

Recently, the German-language website “National Journal” illustrated the surprising, key role the Islamic State (IS), also known as ISIS, plays in the success of this Zionist quest for regional domination—although ostensibly Israel’s enemy.

The Yinon Plan stated that Iraq was then the greatest obstacle to an Israeli Middle Eastern empire and control of the area’s wealth of natural resources. The first stage was to weaken both Iran—an Israeli ally under the shah—and Iraq through war against each other. After this, the American invasion in 2003 was to lead to the division of Iraq into three smaller, ethno-religious states operated by Sunni and Shiite Muslims in the middle and south, and a new Kurdistan in the north.

ISIS is the means by which Israel and the United States—which established, trained and supplied the terrorist organization—have nearly succeeded in the tripartition. It is no accident that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared that the Kurds “deserve” their own country for being “brave fighters” against ISIS. Ironically, he denies the same courtesy to the brave Palestinians resisting Israeli occupation.
But do not expect Israel to help destroy ISIS. “When your enemies are fighting each other, don’t strengthen either one of them; weaken both,” said Netanyahu on NBC’s Meet the Press on June 22. Nevertheless, the Balkanization of the Middle East is not just a Jewish strategy, as the U.S., Great Britain and the European Union (EU) are key players. American neoconservatives led by Richard Perle developed an amplification of the Yinon Plan in 1996 named A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm and The Atlantic and Armed Forces Journal published maps in 2006 and 2008, which demonstrate that U.S. military strategy is also founded on the same sinister intentions.

As this newspaper has reported, Israel and its U.S. and EU puppets have waged constant war for years against all the countries named by Yinon, and more: Libya, Egypt, Sudan, Iraq, Syria. According to the plan, Iran, Turkey, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and nations from Nigeria to Pakistan will fall under the Zionist sword. By fomenting racial, ethnic and religious strife, the Zionist hegemons intend to create a patchwork of smaller, ethnically and religiously homogenous states and enclaves too weak and factionalized to resist Israel, the new dominating force in the region. African Negroes will be separated from Arabs and Berbers, as will the various Muslim sects from each other and from the Christians and pagan religions. And while wars rage elsewhere, Israel will “quietly” eradicate the “Palestinian problem.”
While this may seem contrary to the single government desired by the New World Order, it will actually further that cause by preventing any large opponent to the Judaeo-Freemasonic overlords from arising.
The complete destruction of Christianity is likewise a cornerstone of this U.S.-Israeli strategy. As we see happening under ISIS, the most ancient Christian communities are being eradicated through savage murder and expulsion.
Then French President Nicolas Sarkozy cynically told the Maronite Catholic patriarch from Lebanon in 2011 that “Syria will fall,” and the Christians can come live in the EU—hardly a consolation. No help will come from the West for the Catholics and Orthodox now being martyred to satisfy corrupt American and Israeli interests. When the Christians are gone, expect that the Muslims will be eliminated, too, leaving a “racially pure” Middle East and North Africa for the Khazarian Jews who run Israel. But is that all? Zionist greed knows no limits, and the Israel-friendly Caucasus states and present conflict in Jewish-controlled Ukraine—the former heart of the Khazarian Empire—seem intended to extend the Zionist hegemony even further. Recent Israeli emigrations to Berlin and Weimar, Germany, suggest designs on that country, too. Poland had better watch its back. Will the nations of the world face reality and put down the diabolical Zionist threat, or will we see Greater Khazaria arise from the Nile to the Rhine?

http://americanfreepress.net/?p=19547
_______________________________________________________
As it is below; so it is above

Breaking The Last Taboo - Gaza and the Threat of World War


by John Pilger

September 12, 2014 "ICH" - "There is a taboo," said the visionary Edward Said, "on telling the truth about Palestine and the great destructive force behind Israel. Only when this truth is out can any of us be free."

For many people, the truth is out now. At last, they know. Those once intimidated into silence can't look away now. Staring at them from their TV, laptop, phone, is proof of the barbarism of the Israeli state and the great destructive force of its mentor and provider, the United States, the cowardice of European governments, and the collusion of others, such as Canada and Australia, in this epic crime.

The attack on Gaza was an attack on all of us. The siege of Gaza is a siege of all of us. The denial of justice to Palestinians is a symptom of much of humanity under siege and a warning that the threat of a new world war is growing by the day.

When Nelson Mandela called the struggle of Palestine "the greatest moral issue of our time", he spoke on behalf of true civilisation, not that which empires invent. In Latin America, the governments of Brazil, Chile, Venezuela, Bolivia, El Salvador, Peru and Ecuador have made their stand on Gaza. Each of these countries has known its own dark silence when immunity for mass murder was sponsored by the same godfather in Washington that answered the cries of children in Gaza with more ammunition to kill them.

Unlike Netanyahu and his killers, Washington's pet fascists in Latin America didn't concern themselves with moral window dressing. They simply murdered, and left the bodies on rubbish dumps. For Zionism, the goal is the same: to dispossess and ultimately destroy an entire human society: a truth that 225 Holocaust survivors and their descendants have compared with the genesis of genocide.

Nothing has changed since the Zionists' infamous "Plan D" in 1948 that ethnically cleansed an entire people. Recently, on the website of the Times of Israel were the words: "Genocide is Permissible". A deputy speaker of the Knesset, the Israeli parliament, Moshe Feiglin, demands a policy of mass expulsion into concentration camps. An MP, Ayelet Shaked, whose party is a member of the governing coalition, calls for the extermination of Palestinian mothers to prevent them giving birth to what she calls "little snakes".

For years, reporters have watched Israeli soldiers bait Palestinian children by abusing them through loud-speakers. Then they shoot them dead. For years, reporters have known about Palestinian women about to give birth and refused passage through a roadblock to a hospital; and the baby has died, and sometimes the mother.

For years, reporters have known about Palestinian doctors and ambulance crews given permission by Israeli commanders to attend the wounded or remove the dead, only to be shot through the head.

For years, reporters have known about stricken people prevented from getting life-saving treatment, or shot dead when they've tried to reach a clinic for chemotherapy treatment. One elderly lady with a walking stick was murdered in this way - a bullet in her back.

When I put the facts of this crime to Dori Gold, a senior adviser to the Israeli prime minister, he said, "Unfortunately in every kind of warfare there are cases of civilians who are accidentally killed. But the case you cite was not terrorism. Terrorism means putting the cross-hairs of the sniper's rifle on a civilian deliberately."

I replied, "That's exactly what happened."

"No," he said, "it did not happen."

Such a lie or delusion is repeated unerringly by Israel's apologists. As the former New York Times reporter Chris Hedges points out, the reporting of such an atrocity invariably ends up as "caught in the cross-fire". For as long as I have covered the Middle East, much if not most of the western media has colluded in this way.

In one of my films, a Palestinian cameraman, Imad Ghanem, lies helpless while soldiers from the "most moral army in the world" blew both his legs off. This atrocity was given two lines on the BBC website. Thirteen journalists were killed by Israel in its latest bloodfest in Gaza. All were Palestinian. Who knows their names?

Something is different now. There is a huge revulsion across the world; and the voices of sensible liberalism are worried. Their hand wringing and specious choir of "equal blame" and "Israel's right to defend itself" will not wash any more; neither will the smear of anti-Semitism. Neither will their selective cry that "something must be done" about Islamic fanatics but nothing must be done about Zionist fanatics.

One sensible liberal voice, the novelist Ian McEwan, was being celebrated as a sage by the Guardian while the children of Gaza were blown to bits. This is the same Ian McEwan who ignored the pleading of Palestinians not to accept the Jerusalem Prize for literature. "If I only went to countries that I approve of, I probably would never get out of bed," said McEwan.

If they could speak, the dead of Gaza might say: Stay in bed, great novelist, for your very presence smoothes the bed of racism, apartheid, ethnic cleansing and murder - no matter the weasel words you uttered as you claimed your prize.

Understanding the sophistry and power of liberal propaganda is key to understanding why Israel's outrages endure; why the world looks on; why sanctions are never applied to Israel; and why nothing less than a total boycott of everything Israeli is now a measure of basic human decency.

The most incessant propaganda says Hamas is committed to the destruction of Israel. Khaled Hroub, the Cambridge University scholar considered a world leading authority on Hamas, says this phrase is "never used or adopted by Hamas, even in its most radical statements". The oft-quoted "anti-Jewish" 1988 Charter was the work of "one individual and made public without appropriate Hamas consensus... The author was one of the 'old guard';" the document is regarded as an embarrassment and never cited.

Hamas has repeatedly offered a 10-year truce with Israel and has long settled for a two-state solution. When Medea Benjamin, the fearless Jewish American activist, was in Gaza, she carried a letter from Hamas leaders to President Obama that made clear the government of Gaza wanted peace with Israel. It was ignored. I personally know of many such letters carried in good faith, ignored or dismissed.

The unforgivable crime of Hamas is a distinction almost never reported: it is the only Arab government to have been freely and democratically elected by its people. Worse, it has now formed a government of unity with the Palestinian Authority. A single, resolute Palestinian voice - in the General Assembly, the Human Rights Council and the International Criminal Court - is the most feared threat.

Since 2002, a pioneering media unit at Glasgow University has produced remarkable studies of reporting and propaganda in Israel/Palestine. Professor Greg Philo and his colleagues were shocked to find a public ignorance compounded by TV news reporting. The more people watched, the less they knew.

Greg Philo says the problem is not "bias" as such. Reporters and producers are as moved as anyone by the suffering of Palestinians; but so imposing is the power structure of the media as an extension of the state and its vested interests - that critical facts and historical context are routinely suppressed.

Incredibly, less than nine per cent of young viewers interviewed by Professor Philo's team were aware that Israel was the occupying power, and that the illegal settlers were Jewish; many believed them to be Palestinian. The term "Occupied Territories" was seldom explained. Words such as "murder", "atrocity", "cold-blooded killing" were used only to describe the deaths of Israelis.

Recently, a BBC reporter, David Loyn, was critical of another British journalist, Jon Snow of Channel 4 News. Snow was so moved by what he had seen in Gaza he went on YouTube to make a humanitarian appeal. What concerned the BBC man was that Snow had breached protocol and been emotional in his YouTube piece.

"Emotion," wrote Loyn, "is the stuff of propaganda and news is against propaganda". Did he write this with a straight face? In fact, Snow's delivery was calm. His crime was to have strayed outside the boundaries of fake impartiality. Unforgivably, he didn't censor himself.

In 1937, with Adolf Hitler in power, Geoffrey Dawson, editor of The Times in London, wrote the following in his diary: "I spend my nights in taking out anything which will hurt [German] susceptibilities and in dropping in little things which are intended to soothe them."

On 30 July, the BBC offered viewers a masterclass in the Dawson Principle. The diplomatic correspondent of the programme Newsnight, Mark Urban, gave five reasons why the Middle East was in turmoil. None included the historic or contemporary role of the British government. The Cameron government's dispatch of £8 billion worth of arms and military equipment to Israel was airbrushed. Britain's massive arms shipment to Saudi Arabia was airbrushed. Britain's role in the destruction of Libya was airbrushed. Britain's support for the tyranny in Egypt was airbrushed.

As for the British invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, they didn't happen, either.

The only expert witness on this BBC programme was an academic called Toby Dodge from the London School of Economics. What viewers needed to know was that Dodge had been a special adviser to David Petraeus, the American general largely responsible for the disasters in Iraq and Afghanistan. But this, too, was airbrushed.

In matters of war and peace, BBC-style illusions of impartiality and credibility do more to limit and control public discussion than tabloid distortion. As Greg Philo pointed out, Jon Snow's moving commentary on YouTube was limited to whether the Israeli assault on Gaza was proportionate or reasonable. What was missing - and is almost always missing - was the essential truth of the longest military occupation in modern times: a criminal enterprise backed by western governments from Washington to London to Canberra.

As for the myth that "vulnerable" and "isolated" Israel is surrounded by enemies, Israel is actually surrounded by strategic allies. The Palestinian Authority, bankrolled, armed and directed by the US, has long colluded with Tel Aviv. Standing shoulder to shoulder with Netanyahu are the tyrannies in Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Qatar - if the World Cup ever gets to Qatar, count on Mossad to run the security.

Resistance is humanity at its bravest and most noble. The resistance in Gaza is rightly compared with the 1943 Jewish uprising in the Warsaw Ghetto - which also dug tunnels and deployed tactics of subterfuge and surprise against an overpowering military machine. The last surviving leader of the Warsaw uprising, Marek Edelman, wrote a letter of solidarity to the Palestinian resistance, comparing it with the ZOB, his ghetto fighters. The letter began: "Commanders of the Palestine military, paramilitary and partisan operations - and to all soldiers [of Palestine]."

Dr. Mads Gilbert is a Norwegian doctor renowned for his heroic work in Gaza. On 8 August Dr. Gilbert returned to his hometown Tromso, in Norway, which as he pointed out, the Nazis had occupied for seven years. He said, "Imagine being back in 1945 and we in Norway did not win the liberation struggle, did not throw out the occupier. Imagine the occupier remaining in our country, taking it piece by piece, for decades upon decades, and banishing us to the leanest areas, and taking the fish in the sea and the water beneath us, then bombing our hospitals, our ambulance workers, our schools, our homes."

"Would we have given up and waved the white flag? No, we would not! And this is the situation in Gaza. This is not a battle between terrorism and democracy. Hamas is not the enemy Israel is fighting. Israel is waging a war against the Palestinian people's will to resist. It is the Palestinian people's dignity that they will not accept this.

"In 1938, the Nazis called the Jews Untermenschen - subhuman." Today, Palestinians are treated as a subhuman people who can be slaughtered without anyone in power reacting.

"So I have returned to Norway, a free country, and this country is free because we had a resistance movement, because occupied nations have the right to resist, even with weapons - it's stated in international law. And the Palestinian people's resistance in Gaza is admirable: a struggle for us all."

There are dangers in telling this truth, in breaching what Edward Said called "the last taboo". My documentary,  Palestine Is Still the Issue, was nominated for a BAFTA, a British academy award, and praised by the Independent Television Commission for its "journalistic integrity" and the "care and thoroughness with which it was researched." Yet, within minutes of the film's broadcast on Britain's ITV Network, a shock wave struck - a deluge of emails described me as a "demonic psychopath", "a purveyor of hate and evil", "an anti-Semite of the most dangerous kind". Much of this was orchestrated by Zionists in the US who could not possibly have seen the film. Death threats arrived at a rate of one a day.

Something similar happened to the Australian commentator Mike Carlton last month. In his regular column in the Sydney Morning Herald, Carlton produced a rare piece of journalism about Israel and the Palestinians; he identified the oppressors and their victims. He was careful to limit his attack to "a new and brutal Israel dominated by the hard-line, right-wing Likud party of Netanyahu". Those who had previously run the Zionist state, he implied, belonged to "a proud liberal tradition".

On cue, the deluge struck. He was called "a bag of Nazi slime, a Jew-hating racist." He was threatened repeatedly, and he emailed his attackers to "get Xxxxxx". The Herald demanded he apologize. When he refused, he was suspended, then he resigned. According to the Herald's publisher, Sean Aylmer, the company "expects much higher standards from its columnists."

The "problem" of Carlton's acerbic, often solitary liberal voice in a country in which Rupert Murdoch controls 70 per cent of the capital city press - Australia is the world's first murdocracy - would be solved twice over. The Australian Human Rights Commission is to investigate complaints against Carlton under the Racial Discrimination Act, which outlaws any public act or utterance that is "reasonably likely... to offend, insult, humiliate another person or a group of people" on the basic of their race, colour or national or ethnic origin.

In contrast to safe, silent Australia - where the Carltons are made extinct - real journalism is alive in Gaza. I often speak on the phone with Mohammed Omer, an extraordinary young Palestinian journalist, to whom I presented, in 2008, the Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism. Whenever I called him during the assault on Gaza, I could hear the whine of drones, the explosion of missiles. He interrupted one call to attend to children huddled outside waiting for transport amidst the explosions. When I spoke to him on 30 July, a single Israeli F-19 fighter had just slaughtered 19 children. On 20 August, he described how Israeli drones had effectively "rounded up" a village so that they could be savagely gunned down.

Every day, at sunrise, Mohammed looks for families who have been bombed. He records their stories, standing in the rubble of their homes; he takes their pictures. He goes to the hospital. He goes to the morgue. He goes to the cemetery. He queues for hours for bread for his own family. And he watches the sky. He sends two, three, four dispatches a day. This is real journalism.

"They are trying to annihilate us," he told me. "But the more they bomb us, the stronger we are. They will never win."

The great crime committed in Gaza is a reminder of something wider and menacing to us all.

Since 2001, the United States and its allies have been on a rampage. In Iraq, at least 700,000 men, woman and children are dead as a result. The rise of jihadists - in a country where there was none - is the result. Known as al-Qaeda and now the Islamic State, modern jihadism was invented by US and Britain, assisted by Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. The original aim was to use and develop an Islamic fundamentalism that had barely existed in much of the Arab world in order to undermine pan-Arab movements and secular governments. By the 1980s, this had become a weapon to destroy the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. The CIA called it Operation Cyclone; and a cyclone it turned out to be, with its unleashed fury blowing back in the faces of its creators. The attacks of 9/11 and in London in July, 2005 were the result of this blowback, as were the recent, gruesome murders of the American journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff. For more than a year, the Obama administration armed the killers of these two young men - then known as ISIS in Syria - in order to destroy the secular government in Damascus.

The West's principal "ally" in this imperial mayhem is the medieval state where beheadings are routinely and judicially carried out - Saudi Arabia. Whenever a member of the British Royal Family is sent to this barbaric place, you can bet your bottom petrodollar that the British government wants to sell the sheiks more fighter planes, missiles, manacles. Most of the 9/11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia, which bankrolls jihadists from Syria to Iraq.

Why must we live in this state of perpetual war?

The immediate answer lies in the United States, where a secret and unreported coup has taken place. A group known as the  Project for a New American Century, the inspiration of Dick Cheney and others, came to power with the administration of George W Bush. Once known in Washington as the "crazies", this extreme sect believes in what the US Space Command calls "full spectrum dominance".

Under both Bush and Obama, a19th-century imperial mentality has infused all departments of state. Raw militarism is ascendant; diplomacy is redundant. Nations and governments are judged as useful or expendable: to be bribed or threatened or "sanctioned".

On 31 July, the National Defense Panel in Washington published a remarkable document that called for the United States to prepare to fight six major wars simultaneously. At the top of the list were Russia and China - nuclear powers.

In one sense, a war against Russia has already begun. While the world watched horrified as Israel assaulted Gaza, similar atrocities in Eastern Ukraine were barely news. At the time of writing, two Ukrainian cities of Russian-speaking people - Donetsk and Luhansk - are under siege: their people and hospitals and schools blitzed by a regime in Kiev that came to power in a putsch led by neo-Nazis backed and paid for by the United States. The coup was the climax of what the Russian political observer Sergei Glaziev describes as a 20-year "grooming of Ukrainian Nazis aimed at Russia". Actual fascism has risen again in Europe and not one European leader has spoken against it, perhaps because the rise of fascism across Europe is now a truth that dares not speak its name.

With its fascist past and present, Ukraine is now a CIA theme park, a colony of NATO and the International Monetary Fund. The fascist coup in Kiev in February was the boast of US assistant secretary of state Victoria Nuland, whose "coup budget" ran to $5 billion. But there was a setback. Moscow prevented the seizure of its legitimate Black Sea naval base in Russian-speaking Crimea. A referendum and annexation quickly followed. Represented in the West as the Kremlin's "aggression", this serves to turn truth on its head and cover Washington's goals: to drive a wedge between a "pariah" Russia and its principal trading partners in Europe and eventually to break up the Russian Federation. American missiles already surround Russia; NATO'S military build-up in the former Soviet republics and eastern Europe is the biggest since the Second World War.

During the cold war, this would have risked a nuclear holocaust. The risk has returned as anti-Russian misinformation reaches crescendos of hysteria in the US and Europe. A textbook case is the shooting down of a Malaysian airliner in July. Without a single piece of evidence, the US and its NATO allies and their media machines blamed ethnic Russian "separatists" in Ukraine and implied that Moscow was ultimately responsible. An editorial in The Economist accused Vladimir Putin of mass murder. The cover of Der Spiegel used faces of the victims and bold red type, "Stoppt Putin Jetzt!" (Stop Putin Now!) In the New York Times, Timothy Garton Ash substantiated his case for "Putin's deadly doctrine" with personal abuse of "a short, thickset man with a rather ratlike face".

The Guardian's role has been important. Renowned for its investigations, the newspaper has made no serious attempt to examine who shot the aeroplane down and why, even though a wealth of material from credible sources shows that Moscow was as shocked as the rest of the world, and the airliner may well have been brought down by the Ukrainian regime.

With the White House offering no verifiable evidence - even though US satellites would have observed the shooting-down - the Guardian's Moscow correspondent Shaun Walker stepped into the breach. "My audience with the Demon of Donetsk," was the front-page headline over Walker's breathless interview with one Igor Bezler. "With a walrus moustache, a fiery temper and a reputation for brutality," he wrote, "Igor Bezler is the most feared of all the rebel leaders in eastern Ukraine... nicknamed The Demon... If the Ukrainian security services, the SBU, are to be believed, the Demon and a group of his men were responsible for shooting down Malaysia Airlines flight MH17... as well as allegedly bringing down MH17, the rebels have shot down 10 Ukrainian aircraft." Demon Journalism requires no further evidence.

Demon Journalism makes over a fascist-contaminated junta that seized power in Kiev as a respectable "interim government". Neo-Nazis become mere "nationalists". "News" sourced to the Kiev junta ensures the suppression of a US-run coup and the junta's systematic ethnic cleaning of the Russian-speaking population of eastern Ukraine. That this should happen in the borderland through which the original Nazis invaded Russia, extinguishing some 22 Russian lives, is of no interest. What matters is a Russian "invasion" of Ukraine that seems difficult to prove beyond familiar satellite images that evoke Colin Powell's fictional presentation to the United Nations "proving" that Saddam Hussein had WMD. "You need to know that accusations of a major Russian 'invasion' of Ukraine appear not to be supported by reliable intelligence," wrote a group of former senior US intelligence officials and analysts, the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, to German Chancellor Angela Merkel. "Rather, the 'intelligence' seems to be of the same dubious, politically 'fixed' kind used 12 years ago to 'justify' the U.S.-led attack on Iraq."

The jargon is "controlling the narrative". In his seminal Culture and Imperialism, Edward Said was more explicit: the western media machine was now capable of penetrating deep into the consciousness of much of humanity with a "wiring" as influential as that of the imperial navies of the 19th century. Gunboat journalism, in other words. Or war by media.

Yet, a critical public intelligence and resistance to propaganda does exist; and a second superpower is emerging - the power of public opinion, fuelled by the internet and social media.

The false reality created by false news delivered by media gatekeepers may prevent some of us knowing that this new superpower is stirring in country after country: from the Americas to Europe, Asia to Africa. It is a moral insurrection, exemplified by the whistleblowers Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning and Julian Assange. The question begs: will we break our silence while there is time?

When I was last in Gaza, driving back to the Israeli checkpoint, I caught sight of two Palestinian flags through the razor wire. Children had made flagpoles out of sticks tied together and they'd climbed on a wall and held the flag between them.

The children do this, I was told, whenever there are foreigners around, because they want to show the world they are there - alive, and brave, and undefeated.

This article is adapted from John Pilger's Edward Said Memorial Lecture, delivered in Adelaide, Australia, on 11 September 2014.

Follow John Pilger on Twitter @johnpilger and on Facebook -  www.facebook.com/pilgerwebsite

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article39646.htm____________________________________________________
As it is below; so it is above

Massive Escalation Towards Global War Heralds the Coming ID Shift

by Georgi Stankov    June 1st/2015

Unbeknownst from the general attention the escalation efforts of the Western ruling cabal towards a global nuclear war have reached another unprecedented peak this last week. Initially I intended to write an article on this new trend but ultimately decided not to pour oil in the fire. There are already enough arsonists in the MSM and also in the alternative media that sing this martial song. In fact it is our duty as Logos Gods to prevent such an outcome and it has already been prevented in the eternal Now of All-That-Is where all future probability alternatives co-exist.

It is though important to note that the western cabal have firmly decided to start a new war against Russia and China and the recent US provocations in the Black Sea and the South Sea prove this conclusion. While this scenario will unfold on a lower timeline that will be interdimensionally split from this uppermost mother planet and will affect the large part of humanity, we together with this uppermost mother planet will move to a higher frequency level or will most probably merge with the new 4D worlds. In this way the new humanity will be fully separated from the ruling dark cabal that will go under during this shift.

Thus an imminent global war will be most probably prevented for us by massive natural catastrophes that will offset the belligerent plans of the dark ones as we see this already happening in Texas. But for those human beings who will remain on the lower timeline these catastrophes will not protect them from such a war that will come on top of the natural catastrophes and will destroy most of their planet.

In other words, it is impossible to stop the war-mongering escalation of the western cabal and prevent this war. This is all part and parcel of the resolution through escalation and confrontation during the End Time. The western cabal know already that they have lost and that they have no chance to establish the NWO on this uppermost mother planet, so that their last ditch attempts to escape this dire destiny are purely suicidal. Practically, they know that they are bankrupt, while the BRICS countries were able to push their agenda of de-dollarisation, exit from the Western SWIFT system and even to achieve a military superiority over NATO and the USA.

This new confidence has been recently demonstrated by Putin for the first time in a conspicuous manner and in great contrast to past very diplomatic and cautious statements on his part. This is the most reliable sign that both Russia and China are ready to respond to the US aggression even if this may mean an inevitable war. Many of the recent statements coming from these two countries support this new growing confidence, even it may come out of desperation after the elite there have put up with the fact that a war is inevitable, as the USA cannot allow to crumble as a world power without taking the rest of the world in the abyss it has created for itself.

In order to give you a glimpse into this newly acquired desperado-confidence of the Russians and the Chinese, I have decided, instead of giving you references on the inevitability of the upcoming war on the lower timeline of this uppermost mother planet, to publish here the interview with Putin on the US attack on FIFA and Sepp Blatter and also an article in the German newspaper “Deutsche Wirtschafts Nachrichten” on the open accusations of Putin against the West. Such examples give you a much better impression how far advanced the animosities between the big powers are and why a reconciliation is no longer possible.

Diplomacy has failed and this world no longer needs diplomats – probably that is why Kerry “broke his leg” and is out of the game for some time. To this latest event I will publish more revealing information that also confirms how heated and chaotic the current political situation worldwide is and how easily a single spark can ignite a devastating global nuclear war.

Vladimir Putin on FIFA scandal - See Video

See Article: Transcript of Putin's interview

See Article:  Putin: US Foreign Policy Boosted Expansion of Terrorism. BRICS countries must prepare for an efficient defense against Western masters of war

Deutsche Wirtschafts Nachrichten

http://www.stankovuniversallaw.com/2015/06/massive-escalation-towards-global-war-heralds-the-coming-id-shift/#more-17570
_____________________________________
As it is below; so it is above

I seriously doubt that Ets will allow a nuclear war given how nukes tend to rip open the space time continuum making it look like swiss cheese. CERN is even worse creating wormholes into other lower dimensions allowing the pits of hell to spew forth. Yuk.  The only escape from these negatives is to raise ones personal vibrational frequency to higher levels of light and compassion.