On my way back to the U.S. from Kuala Lumpur, I picked up a copy of the Financial Times (March 7 edition) in Tokyo while waiting for my connecting flight. As expected, I found numerous articles relating to the Ukraine situation, but one stood out amongst the rest. It was titled “Putin loyalist points finger at ‘global financial oligarchy.’”
I was surprised but also pleased to see this affirmation of my long-held view that the present geopolitical turmoil is not so much a contest among nations, but a global class war being waged by an elite oligarchy bent on creating a New World Order in which they hold the reins of power. Oddly, when I later tried to locate the article on the FT website, it was nowhere to be found, but I did find an article from the previous day’s edition which quoted the same “loyalist,” Vladimir Yakunin, making the same arguments. That article is titled, US accused of ‘trying to destroy Russia.’
Yakunin is described as a “former senior diplomat” who now heads the Russian state railways. He has accused the US and a “global financial oligarchy” of organizing the violent overthrow of the government in Ukraine, and of trying to “destroy Russia as a geopolitical opponent.”
Both articles are based on the same interview and quote Yakunin as saying, “A CIA analysis . . . described three possible scenarios for the development of the geopolitical situation. The most acceptable scenario was considered to be one in which a certain world government is created – and the realisation of this project is in line with the concept of global domination that is being carried out by the US. We saw this in Iraq, we saw it in Afghanistan, we saw it in Yugoslavia and in North Africa. Today, the borders of carrying out this doctrine have moved to Ukraine.”
That article goes on to say, “Mr Yakunin said the west had consistently reneged on its assurances to Moscow since 1991 that it had no intention of encircling it by expanding NATO to include countries on Russia’s borders. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the three Baltic states have joined the alliance as well as eastern European countries – including Poland, Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania – most of which were once in the Warsaw Pact.”
“’If you look at things objectively, [the former German chancellor Helmut] Kohl swore to [Soviet leader Mikhail] Gorbachev that the exit of Soviet troops from Germany would not lead to NATO’s approach towards Russia’s borders. But in reality everything that has happened is the exact opposite.’”
If one is willing to look at the record of history, especially monetary and banking history, he can easily see that Mr. Yakunin’s charges are entirely valid.
Carroll Quigley, historian and advisor to Presidents, told us long ago that the would-be rulers of the world have a plan: “The powers of financial capitalism had a far-reaching plan, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole… Their secret is that they have annexed from governments, monarchies, and republics the power to create the world’s money…” (Tragedy and Hope, 1966).
That is the essence of the New World Order that has been touted for decades by American political leaders, notably the first President Bush.
Now, the annexation of Crimea seems a natural step for Russia to have taken to not only protect its military installations there, but also to resist the advancing NWO. While the western propaganda machine gave it short shrift in its attempt to paint Putin as the “bad guy,” Putin’s speech is well worth considering. You can find the full text here.
And lest we be seduced into thinking that the Russian reaction is a simple act of aggression, read this background and analysis by Chris Kanthan: Ukraine: A Candid, In-depth Discussion.
Even a casual observer of recent geopolitical history can see the pattern of encirclement, neutralization, and domination that has characterized western policies over the past several decades. It is clear that the consolidation of power and the imposition of the global fascist New World Order is all but complete and that all remaining obstacles must be removed, one way or another.
# # #
I agree with your article to some extent.
But there’s a bigger image. Russia is part of the NWO and it just has a role to play. Actually we are made to believe that there are two poles facing each other and Russia is one of them, when in fact they are part of the same game.
The NWO has this task and concept they follow which is build the Thesis and the Anti-Thesis, This was evident in the cold war days. The whole world was divided into two…. The West (Capitalism) and the USSR (Communism). The planners were sitting behind the scenes laughing at the ‘sheep’ which is the whole world believing this! Yes they were doing this despite the wars, spies, arms race,…etc.
Why Nuclear war didn;t happen ? They didn’t want to wipe themselves out.
Pingback: Russia being squeezed by the New World Order | Bill Totten's Weblog
That is the one good side effect of these international crisis episodes… Little by little, each one “undresses the emperor”, if you’ll allow the metaphor. (my personal mission is to help accelerate this undressing process).
The Ukraine crisis is particularly valuable- it can be combined with either the (second) Iraq war or the Bosnia intervention, or with the ouster of the Yanukovich regime. Each of these pairings gives onlookers a stark contrast in the de-facto interpretation or application of “principles of international law”.
After a lackluster theatrical performance by Obama and Kerry, the US foreign policy establishment is now grudgingly admitting to the uneducated public that, rather than “principles of justice”, it is driven almost purely by “principles of power”. And a rather crude short-term-thinking variation of those principles, at that.
I think this is a necessary first step. Once we recognize that “principles of power” are in fact driving the boat, only then can we take active measures (that is, using democracy to replace the defective elements in our government’s behavioral logic), to make the long-overdue upgrade in the programming of our foreign policy establishment, so that “universalist principles of international justice” drive the boat instead.