No one could argue otherwise. Not only is the Middle East on the verge of exploding, the world's economic crisis is threatening to spread far and wide as the U.S. ability to print money 'out of thin air' may come to a close at the end of the year. Additionally, at least according to one author, the situation in the Middle East, specifically Syria, is tied to global economics and the attempted globalist takeover.
All of what we are seeing today, as playing out on the world stage seems intertwined and planned. Today's news are highly consistent with these emerging trends. For whatever reason, the news today takes a deeper look into what is really happening around the world - a deeper look that extends beyond the surface:
“We’re in the most dangerous time in modern world history and here’s why, here’s what’s happening,” stated my source deep within the spy world early this morning.
“We’re seeing a combination of a nine-percent overall approval rating for intervention in Syria, or the absence of public support for the globalist plans by the Obama regime, the UK, the Saudis and other NATO allies. When have we seen this before, and what does history tell us? The increased likelihood of a false flag event larger and causing more public outrage than the alleged chemical weapons attacks.”
Make no mistake, the global agenda has not changed,” he emphasized. “When their primary plan backfires or meets resistance, they have alternate plans. In the coming days or weeks, we could see an event that will be horrendous enough to change that nine-percent backing. Also, time is not on their side, they need to act within a shortwindow as the anti-Assad ‘rebels’ are being beaten badly without Western assistance.”
“Look at all of the military assets being moved into that region. I told you last October, and you reported it, that we are engaged in a proxy war against Russia and China. Both countries have a huge stake in Syria, militarily and economically, especially Russia. Oh, and is John McCain out of his [multiple expletives deleted] mind? This designated loser of the 2008 presidential campaign is talking as if any action in Syria is going to happen in a vacuum. As I said before, any action will not be in a vacuum or without a tit-for-tat response,” stated this source.
“This is not a ‘zero sum game’ confined to Syria. Again, this is about setting up the globalist takeover of the world’s economic system, killing off the U.S. dollar to have it replaced by a basket of currencies, or SDRs, and controlling all transactional activity everywhere on the planet under one mechanism. It will be done by using Syria as the trigger, oil as a weapon, and striking at the weakest aspect of American power—the U.S. dollar, which has been the target all along.”
“What better way to accomplish this by blaming the economic ‘collapse’ on the ‘unfortunate and unseen’ consequences of a ‘humanitarian mission’, saving the Syrians from a dictator who used chemical weapons on his own people? It’s all a lie, and we’re being played as fools. This is an international bankers’ war that will result in heavy causalities.”
“The globalists are financing all sides of this conflict to assure the accomplishments of their objectives. When things go hot in Syria and the Middle East, we could see something very bad happen in Saudi Arabia, or something to affect the production or free flow of oil, the single factor that is keeping the U.S. dollar relevant. We could see something happen to threaten, hinder or even temporarily halt oil shipments across the globe. Also, with the U.S. preoccupied, China could well move on the Japanese Senkaku islands, North Korea will ramp up their mischief, and other areas will gradually become unglued. It’s all one big transfer of power, transfer of wealth, and a globaleconomic reset.”
“Understand this: the globalist objectives have not changed. The absence of popular support just makes this whole situation much more dangerous, and raises the possibility of ‘false flag events’ of similar historical precedent to change public opinion. Something much bigger than we’ve seen to date. People are just not thinking big enough.”
One of the most respected and veteran voices in Congress told WND it would be a “scary and dangerous precedent” if President Obama does not seek approval for a military strike on Syria because there is no “direct threat to the United States.”
“It isn’t like the United States has been attacked,” observed Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., a 17-term congressman whose tenure extends back to Ronald Reagan’s 1980 victory.
President Obama has been considering whether to order a military strike on Syria for allegedly using chemical weapons against its own people on Aug. 21.
Asked whether the president is obligated under the War Powers Act to obtain congressional approval to strike Syria, or whether consultation would suffice, Wolf was adamant that the president must get authorization from Congress.
“I think we should have a vote, up or down.”
The Virginian believes, if necessary, Congress ought to be brought back into session.
“I think there are so many questions that have to answered,” he said. “I would hope most members would agree that Congress ought to be not only consulted but ought to be involved.”
Wolf noted court decisions on the War Powers Act have been somewhat unclear, but, “I think (the president) has a responsibility to come to Congress and have it approved.”
But, Wolf emphasized the gravity of the situation if the president did take that course, predicting, “[I]t would be a weakening of congressional authority.”
He said, “We don’t have a king. That was the reason we fought the Revolutionary War. We have a Constitution, and the Congress has to be involved.”
Wolf noted that British Prime Minister David Cameron faced so much opposition he called Parliament back into session. In fact, later Thursday, British lawmakers voted 285 to 272 to not participate in a strike on Syria.
After the vote, Cameron, who had previously claimed he could act without Parliament’s approval, said he will not.
The tepid, symbolic response that the US is poised to adopt in response to Syria's use of chemical weapons represents a clear signal to Iran. Both the planned strikes and the growing possibility that the US will scrap even a symbolic military strike in Syria tell Iran it has nothing to fear from Obama.
Iran achieved a strategic achievement by exposing the US as a paper tiger in Syria. With this accomplishment in hand, the Iranians will feel free to call Obama's bluff on their nuclear weapons project. Obama's "shot across the bow" response to Syria's use of chemical weapons in a mass casualty attack signaled the Iranians that the US will not stop them from developing and deploying a nuclear arsenal.
Policy-makers and commentators who have insisted that we can trust Obama to keep his pledge to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons have based their view on an argument that now lies in tatters. They insisted that by pledging to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power, Obama staked his reputation on acting competently to prevent Iran from getting the bomb. To avoid losing face, they said, Obama will keep his pledge.
Obama's behavior on Syria has rendered this position indefensible. Obama is perfectly content with shooting a couple of pot shots at empty government installations. As far as he is concerned, the conduct of air strikes in Syria is not about Syria, or Iran. They are not the target audience of the strikes. The target audience for US air strikes in Syria is the disengaged, uninformed American public.
While for a few days the bread and circuses of the planned strategically useless raid will increase newspaper circulation and raise viewer ratings of network news, it will cause grievous harm to US national interests. As far as US enemies are concerned, the US is an empty suit.
And as far as America's allies are concerned, the only way to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power is to operate without the knowledge of the United States.
The Federal Reserve has been propping up the stock market through its quantitative easing program that forced interest rates to all-time lows and drove investors out of bonds and into stocks.
But those days may be coming to an end.
For one, the Fed can’t keep printing money to buy U.S. bonds. Bond purchases by the Fed, with printed money, account for about three-quarters of all Treasury bond purchases resulting in a Federal Reserve balance sheet that exceeds $3.6 trillion.
One day, QE must come to an end.
Indeed, on June 19, 2013, Fed chairman Bernanke hinted that QE might slow from its recent pace.
The stock market reacted with a hefty decline of 2.5 percent on June 20. By June 24, the stock market had declined almost 5 percent in less than a week.
Now this isn’t a crash by any measure, but it might be a harbinger of things to come. Here’s where the predictability thesis come in.
We know that the market won’t like any reduction in Fed purchases. So what will happen when the Fed not only reduces its bond purchases, but stops them altogether? Hasn’t the market told us how it will react?
President Barack Obama on Thursday prepared for the possibility of launching unilateral American military action against Syria within days as Britain opted out in a stunning vote by Parliament. Facing skepticism at home, too, the administration shared intelligence with lawmakers aimed at convincing them the Syrian government used chemical weapons against its people and must be punished.
Despite roadblocks in forming an international coalition, Obama appeared undeterred and advisers said he would be willing to retaliate against Syria on his own.
Even before the vote in London, the US was preparing to act without formal authorization from the United Nations, where Russia has blocked efforts to seek a resolution authorizing the use of force, or from Capitol Hill. But the US had expected Britain, a major ally, to join in the effort.
Despite shortcomings in the intelligence, the White House signaled urgency in acting, with Earnest, the White House spokesman saying the president believes there is a “compressed time frame” for responding.
“It is important for the Assad regime and other totalitarian dictators around the world to understand that the international community will not tolerate the indiscriminate, widespread use of chemical weapons, particularly against women and children as they’re sleeping in their beds,” he said.
But many Congress members were pressing Obama to explain the need for military action and address fears that such a move might draw the US deeper into the Syrian civil war.
The White House has not responded directly to Boehner’s letter seeking more answers about Syria operations and the speaker’s office appeared unsatisfied after the president’s call Thursday.
The IDF deployed an Iron Dome battery in the greater Tel Aviv area overnight Thursday amid preparations for apotential US strike on Syria.
Jerusalem has assessed that their is a low probability that Syria would strike Israel in retaliation to Western military intervention, according to officials. Nevertheless, the deployment of the Iron Dome battery in the Gush Dan region was the latest in a number of preparations that the IDF has taken in recent days.
“We have a clear responsibility to prepare the army for all possibilities. We took a number of decisions to prepare ourselves for a scenario we hope will not materialize,” a military source said Wednesday.
As part of the preparations, the IAF deployed Iron Dome anti-rocket batteries in Haifa, Ashkelon and Eilat, and is set to place additional batteries in the northern regions of Amakim and Safed.
After resolute condemnation of the Assad regime’s “heinous crime” of using chemical weapons against its people, the president opted for a low-key, practically painless military strike against Syria. The Syria ruler would be able to wave his hands in a gesture of victory, followed by Vladmir Putin. Iran’s leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei would say, I told you so, the United States is a paper tiger and will never attack our nuclear program.
By voting for opposition Labor’s motion against UK involvement in military action in Syria, the British parliament not only shattered Obama’s multinational coalition for Syria; it struck at the heart of the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance (NATO), the historic bulwark of Western security since the last world war.
The alliance’s fortunes have faded progressively under the vacillating foreign and security polices of President Barack Obama.
The half-hearted military operation against Syria, due to be launched in the coming days, and its muddled objectives, may finally close the book on the current chapter of US history in the Middle East – even if it successful.
The world will be left rubbing its eyes in amazement at the achievement of one individual, president Barack Obama of the USA, in smashing American influence in this sensitive region and Europe in the space of a few short years.
British Prime Minister David Cameron’s political future is in grave doubt after the House of Commons withheld endorsement from the government’s policy of participation in a US-led strike on Syria. Parliament voted 285 in favor to 272 against, with 30 members of his own Conservative party and 9 of his coalition partner, the Liberals, crossing the line and voting with the Labor opposition against the government.
Cameron may be just the first victim among Western and Middle East leaders who opted to toe Obama’s wavering line and continually shift around their national interests.
Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is fond of saying his policies are “responsible and balanced.” This mostly translates into inaction or procrastination on such vital issues as Iran’s nuclear aspirations and Hizballah’s massive buildup of rockets.
But now, Khamenei, Assad and Nasrallah will be buoyed up by America’s loss of allied support and more likely than not make good on their threats, heard repeatedly in the past week, to destroy Israel once and for all. It won’t be enough to keep on intoning solemnly that Israel is not involved in the Syrian conflict – which no one believes anyway. Netanyahu will have to start looking squarely at the perils just around the corner and move proactively.
Also see:
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar