Interventions into natural (?) disasters and civil (?) wars
Piotr Bein 27.2.2012
According to the Heidelberg Institute for International Conflict Research, the West leads in waging wars, and their number was the highest in 2011 since World War II. NATO countries, incl. Germany, are engaged in the majority of the conflicts as aggressors or instigate local proxies, concentrating in the Arab world and South Saharan-Africa, ostensibly due to geostrategy and natural resources. The leading position correlates with the world’s largest military budgets and exporters of military hardware being in the West. Let’s have a look at some of the “Western” conflicts.
Myanmar, Tibet and Olympics
Pretending that Myanmar has refused to accept the conditions for Western relief supplies, Germany has used the disaster inflicted by Cyclone Nargis (May 2008) for a new attack on international law. Under German presidency in 2007, the EU demanded that the states of SE Asia, incl. Myanmar, agree to EU military interventions. Transit from China through Myanmar to the Indian Ocean should facilitate trade with Europe and the Middle East, including Chinese import of raw materials, according to official rationale. But given the Tibet campaign, Judeocentric Power Complex’s (JPC) geo-strategic goal is more likely.
German foreign ministry front NGO, Friedrich Naumann Foundation affiliated with the Free Democratic Party FDP, played a decisive role in the anti-Chinese Tibet “protests” along the route of the Beijing Olympic Torch Relay. German media aided the campaign by reporting on pogrom-like attacks by Tibetan gangs on non-Tibetans in Western China, incl. Chinese Muslims. The “German” pro-Tibet campaign was developed with the US State Department and the self-proclaimed Tibetan Government in Exile. US undersecretary of state and special coordinator for Tibet, Paula Dobriansky participated: “Ms Dobriansky is considered to be one of the members of the neo-conservative inner circle in the Bush Administration and ranks as a hard-liner capable of imposing policy.”
Others also use “crises” for forward deployment. After JPC’s 1999 “humanitarian intervention“ (masterminded by “US” neocons, coined by “French” philosophers, cheered by “German” Greens and a Holocaust survivor in Poland), a military operation to ostensibly prevent non-existent ethnic cleansing of Kosovo Albanians, the US military established Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo. UN and NATO “peacekeepers” took root in Kosovo, as in Bosnia before. Bondsteel doesn‘t protect any US pipelines, either; the closest one runs away from Kosovo, through the Republic of Macedonia, where US military has deployed earlier.
Hurricanes, earthquakes and tsunamis
Fast deployment of US and Australian troops, and military bases in the disaster zone, followed the 26.12.2004 tsunami in SE Asia. US Navy ships waited beforehand in the region with abnormally large crews. The tremor looked like a nuclear blast rather than sea-bottom tectonic slip, and media reports about the epicentre were false.
Other disasters may have been man-made, too. Technologies for influencing weather and triggering earthquakes and tsunamis exist (e.g. HAARP, nuclear charges in oceanic trenches and tectonic faults). In 2005 hurricane Katrina, New Orleans levees may have been deliberately demolished, causing disastrous flooding. A number of New Orleans residents described hearing “explosions” before the floodwaters rushed in. A National Guard worker claims he was sworn to secrecy upon finding explosives residue at the site of the break. Katrina may have been artificially strengthened to a disastrous power.
The leader of JPC’s armed arm NATO, Pentagon marshalled international help so it couldn’t arrive where and when needed in the “humanitarian pacification” of Haiti following the 2010 (HAARP?) earthquake.
The 11.3.2011 tsunami killed tens of thousands Japanese and damaged shore cities and infrastructure. Nuclear catastrophe a few times Chernobyl’s size, Fukushima followed. Hundreds of isotopes, incl. deadly plutonium and uranium, have contaminated Japan, the Pacific and the global atmosphere. Extrapolating from Chernobyl’s estimated one million cancer deaths in Europe alone in the first 20 years, Fukushima may claim several million victims to cancer over a similar period. Independents have not yet had the last word on the subject, pending more data.
Stuxnet and nukes
Some analysts suspect US-Israeli Stuxnet virus planted in Fukushima’s control system, with earthquake/tsunami being a cover. The earthquake seems man-made and misrepresented by the media, while the tsunami has allegedly knocked out Fukushima I power supply, incl. backup and emergency, both direct current and alternating current, causing reactor meltdows and serious damage to spent fuel pools. Similar flooding and earthquake at Fukushima II has not damaged much.
Beside punishing Japan for support to Palestine and an offer to enrich uranium for Iran, or forcing economically strong Japan to its knees for efforts to break out from banksters’ yoke, a motive for the JPC to do 3/11 is not clear. Blackmail with further similar assaults is plausible. Neverteless, the allegation that an Israeli security company may have planted Stuxnet looks strong. For JPC, no number of civilian casualties is prohibitive, e.g. 9/11.
There are reasons to believe that Mossad has deployed nuclear charges in the world, to blackmail governments insubordinate to JPC policies. The author of this thesis is persecuted by JPC agents, which lends credence to his “conspiracy theories”.
Murder of Iraq and Libya for Greater Israel
Shortly after 9/11, JPC’s religious ideologues, the Chabad Lubavitch rabbinate “foretold” attack on Iraq to the day, but their rabbi had done it 10 years earlier, for the Judaic feast of Purim. Lubavitch magazine Emes News (24.10.2001) wrote that even though media don’t foresee it and state department denies plans for invasion of Iraq, those close to the Lubavitch rabbi know about his conviction about it happening regardless. IsraelNN (26.3.2003) illuminated the attack’s coincidence with sages’ teachings, noting that Jews “are the lead actors”, the goyim have “supporting roles” and “the evil-doers are props and background scenery”; God created the world for the sake of Jews “and it is our responsibility to implement the Torah.”
JPC-controlled Pentagon will find any pretext for conquests, via overt war or by Brzezinski’s covert action announced as The policy at Obama’s inauguration. Clinton, Sarkozy and other “democratic world” JPC lackeys’ cheers accompanied the murder of Libya in 2011, leaving orders of magnitude more dead civilians than the prelude to such operations globally in 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia. A bunch of JPC-hired, assorted thugs together with NATO special forces and bombers (just like in the Balkans) beat several million Libyans standing by their sovereignty and Gaddafi. At least in Libya, the “intervention” motive was clear: Gaddafi wanted economic and financial independence from the banksters and globalists, for Libya and much of Africa.
Libya and other Arab Spring locations coincide with Greater Israel plan. “To survive, Israel must 1) become an imperial regional power, and 2) must effect the division of the whole area into small states by the dissolution of all existing Arab states. Small here will depend on the ethnic or sectarian composition of each state. Consequently, the Zionist hope is that sectarian-based states become Israel’s satellites and, ironically, its source of moral legitimation.”
As the “revolutions” erupted in N. Africa and the Middle East, NATO navies sailed to “evacuate their citizens”. Iran, the Biblical object of hatred expressed to-date in Purim, remains relatively immune to US state department’s colour and Twitter “revolutions” and Mossad’s Fission Field Warfare that, given limited Israeli military resources, seem ideal for the sectarian divisions. Iran must be worked out differently: US-NATO-Israeli nuclear war threats, laced with hysteria over Iran’s nuclear weapon program (bogus, according to all US intelligence agencies and IAEA).
Global policeman NATO
Pentagon saw war opportunity even in climate warming. Militarist propaganda-style, The Observer overblew well-known public information as if it leaked from Washington. The British press spread extreme Islamist lies against the Serbs, too. Despite Cheney’s assurances of “wars without end”, Pentagon inadvertently revealed its fear of GWOT running out: “The threat to global stability [by climate change] vastly eclipses that of terrorism.” Pentagon policy analysts envision nuclear wars for resources fried by mega-droughts, and famine crises and widespread rioting across the world, calling for humanitarian interventions.
NATO’s New Strategy (20.11.2010) testifies that the Pact became a vehicle for global hegemony. “The Alliance remains an essential source of stability in an unpredictable world” plagued by terrorism (“a direct threat”, as if it wasn’t a creation of NATO members ), “trafficking in arms, narcotics and people,” piracy, and cyber attacks by “foreign militaries and intelligence services, organised criminals, terrorist and/or extremist groups” (as if armies, not special police and commandos, could fight all this, while NATO protectorate Kosovo remains a prime nest for activities of this kind). Novel causes of war include environmental issues: above mentioned climate change, “health risks” (such as H1N1 “pandemic” of 2009, when armies were to force compulsory untested, harmful vaccines onto NATO country populations) as well as “water scarcity and increasing energy needs” and disruption of energy supplies.
Developed by a team under Madeleine Albright, chief JPC diplomat for “humanitarian” bombing of 1999 Yugoslavia (“the Alliance is firmly committed to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the UN, and to the Washington Treaty, which affirms the primary responsibility of the Security Council for the maintenance of international peace and security”), the new strategy asserts that NATO members “form a unique community of values, committed to the principles of individual liberty, democracy, human rights and the rule of law” and obliges them to “further develop doctrine and military capabilities for expeditionary operations”. Such as Libya 2011?
Purim and “int’l” interventions
Exactly on Purim (19.3.2011), US, UK and France began intervention in Libya to implement UNSC Resolution 1973 in response to the Libyan civil war. The initial coalition of 10 states has expanded to 19 NATO members and associates. Germany has withdrawn forces from NATO operations against Libya but increased its forces in Afghanistan to free other states’ forces.
In the first week of attack on Libya, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), whose members also set the direction of US and global JPC policy through the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderberg Group, has justified the intervention by the responsibility to protect, a UN policy of 2005: “Legally, morally, politically, and militarily it has only one justification: protecting the country’s people.” This excuse echoes JPC’s intervention rationale in the Balkans. In both cases, NATO is responsible for the deaths of far more civilians than if it had not intervened. A CFR expert commented: “There is bound to be selectivity and inconsistency in the application of the responsibility to protect norm given the complexity of national interests at stake in […] the calculations of other major powers involved in these situations.”
This year, Purim falls on March 7-8.