Will Globalists Trigger Yet Another World War?
Giordano Bruno

World War III is the most iconic event in American culture that never happened. Since the early 1950's, generations have been preparing for it, writing books about it, producing films and fictional accounts on it, and even playing video games based on it. The concept of another world war is so ingrained into our popular consciousness that it has become almost mythological. It is a legend, a fantasy story of something far away and incomprehensible, often associated with Tim Lahaye novels and action adventure narratives of religious prophecy and Armageddon. World War III has become "entertainment."

The cartoon-ization of a "last great global conflict" is due to a natural tendency of human beings to cope with terrifying ideas, often by intellectually trivializing them, and thereby making them easily digestible, much like the proverbial public speaking tactic of imagining the audience with their clothes off.

The problem with this development in our society is that it causes us to become cynical to the point of idiocy when confronted with very real threats. By convincing ourselves that such an event is an impossibility we leave ourselves unguarded and without a conceptual point of reference, because we have not thought about the scenario in a practical levelheaded manner. This is akin to a man who has never even considered the likelihood of being mugged on the street, versus a man who has trained in self defense for just such a situation. When the event occurs, the two men will have totally different psychological reactions; the first man utterly surprised and out of his element with little to no constructive response, and the latter man far less mentally phased and thus more likely to survive.

With this fact in mind, we will endeavor to explore recent world events, along with international agreements and tensions, and how they could be used by Global Elites to trigger a war reaching around the planet.

Elites often attempt to paint a pretty picture, a glossy flower filled love-fest, when it comes to the creation of World Government. The truth however has been and always will be that the road to globalization is paved with the death of innocents and civilizations. Every movement towards the formation of centralized global government has been preceded by unthinkable destruction. This may seem futile and horribly regressive to us, but to Globalists, war is a highly effective and useful tool.

Conflict on a massive scale creates an atmosphere of tension and terror, giving the average man, even men who are nowhere near danger, a sort of perpetual tunnel vision. World War has the ability to trigger the "fight or flight" psychological response and sustain it in an entire society over long periods of time. Maintaining such a mental state in a human being can cause severe exhaustion and emotional imbalance. Imagine the process of interrogation and torture used on a prisoner in places such as Guantanamo Bay, then, apply that to an entire nation of people. War breaks down our psychological defenses as a society, and makes us vulnerable to suggestion.

By creating war, Globalists change not only the political landscape of nations, but also the emotional and rational checks and balances of every individual who has not prepared himself to handle the pressures of fear. In this way, people can be made to forget how things were before, and accept a new world, a world designed around the corrupt appetites of elite minorities, if only to make the fear stop.

I often hear arguments that war is simply a product of temporary mass insanity. That it is often a "blunder," an "oversight." Make no mistake, governments and the power brokers behind them WANT war. Indeed, they commonly design wars that never would have happened without their help. Here are only a few of the many examples:

The Spanish American war was one of the first to be a wholly media driven event, created out of thin air and forced on the American public. Elites in Washington, including Theodore Roosevelt, wanted to move the U.S. into an expansionist policy and the realm of empire building. Most American citizen wanted nothing to do with expansionism. Our country had been built in opposition to empires after all. Enter William Randolph Hearst; newspaper mogul and elitist. Hearst papers across the country went on a tabloid spree, reporting on battles between the Spanish government and Cuban guerrilla fighters that were not actually happening, along with exaggerated dramatizations of Spanish government mistreatment of civilians. Of course, the Spanish were certainly not treating the Cuban people well, but the fact that Hearst made stories up in order to paint a grave picture with which to manipulate Americans at home is what is important here.

Upon his arrival in Cuba, Hearst correspondent Fredrick Remington cabled to Hearst: "Everything is quiet. There is no trouble. There will be no war. I wish to return." Hearst reportedly replied: "Please remain. You furnish the pictures and I'll furnish the war."

Hearst's propaganda though was not quite enough to make the people want to forcefully overtake another country or adopt expansionism. So, on February 15, 1898, an explosion was set on the USS Maine off the coast of Havana, Cuba. 260 out of 355 sailors lost their lives, though strangely, only two ranked as officers were killed. Hearst papers went into overdrive claiming the Spanish had sunk her with a mine or torpedo, and the pretext for war in Cuba was established. Ever since, the U.S. has held an ever more prominent policy of expansionism and empire building.

Interestingly, recent studies, including those of National Geographic, show that the debris from the Maine explosion pointed outward, indicating an explosion from INSIDE the ship, not outside. The government still maintains that this must have been "accidental":

http://loc.gov/law/help/usconlaw/pdf/Maine.1898.pdf

The beginning of WW I is often blamed on a "mindlessly mechanical series of events," but this is simply nonsense. The embroilment of America in the affairs of Europe was carefully orchestrated and far from accidental.

Norman Dodd, former director of the Committee to Investigate Tax Exempt Foundations of the U.S. House of Representatives, testified that the Committee was invited to study the minutes of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace as part of the Committee's investigation. The Committee stated: "The trustees of the Foundation brought up a single question. If it is desirable to alter the life of an entire people, is there any means more efficient than war…. They discussed this question… for a year and came up with an answer: There are no known means more efficient than war, assuming the objective is altering the life of an entire people. That leads them to a question: How do we involve the United States in a war. This is in 1909."

http://www.threeworldwars.com/world-war-1/ww1.htm

Once again, Americans had no interest in expansionism or fighting wars along side Monarchies that we with good reason despised. The key to how we were fooled once again into going against our better instincts lay in the sinking of yet another ship; the Lusitania.

The Lusitania was attacked by a German U-boat and sunk on May 7, 1915, killing 1198 passengers and was later used as a pretext for drawing the U.S. into WWI; this is the commonly held view taught in every high school history class. The problem is that it is only half the story. What it does not mention is the fact that the British goaded the Germans into the attack.

In that era, there still existed "rules of war," one of which was the expectation that German U-boats should surface before destroying any merchant vessel and allow the passengers to flee the ship. The Germans adhered to this standard until the British began arming merchant ships and ordering them to fly the colors of neutral countries. They were then to sink any U-boat that surfaced to deliver a warning. The good faith of the understanding was ruined, and the Germans decided it was safer to sink the ships without warning and be done with it.

The British also began smuggling arms and explosives using regular merchant ships as cover, making them participants in the war, and therefore targets. The Lusitania was no exception.

When the Lusitania was hit by a German torpedo, the initial explosion was certainly destructive, but not as destructive as the massive secondary explosion passengers witnessed as they were fleeing the scene, which ripped the ship apart. For decades the U.S. and British governments denied that the Lusitania was carrying arms, until divers exploring the wreckage discovered cases of nearly 4 million rounds of ammo! Meaning according to the articles of war, the Lusitania was in fact classified as a combatant, not a non-threatening ocean liner:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1098904/Secret-Lusitania-Arms-challenges-Allied-claims-solely-passenger-ship.html

The most shocking element to this engineered disaster however was the fact the U.S. and British governments were well aware that the ship would be attacked, and ALLOWED it to occur.

The German Embassy took out ads in 50 U.S. newspapers warning that the Lusitania could be made a target. The U.S. State Department in turn contacted each of the newspapers and in a threatening fashion suggested that they refrain from printing the ad. A small portion of the newspapers ignored the State Department and printed anyway, but most of the passengers of the Lusitania never saw it.

Finally, and most importantly, is a fascinating discussion from the book "The Intimate Papers of Colonel House," between House; an advisor (some would say puppeteer) to Woodrow Wilson, and Sir Edward Grey, the Foreign Secretary of England before the attack on the Lusitania occurred. The coldness of the exchange is haunting:

Grey: "What will America do if the Germans sink an ocean liner with American passengers on board?"

House: "I believe that a flame of indignation would sweep the United States and that by itself would be sufficient to carry us into the war."

World War II:

World War II was perhaps the first war in which Globalists created an enemy completely from scratch. That's right; the Nazis were organized and funded by Elites from across the world, including those here in America.

Hitler himself was considered a joke among Germans when he first began his tirades for an "Aryan Empire," and was shrugged off by the mainstream as a lunatic. But Germany was also in the middle of the worst economic collapse in recent memory, and when Hitler gained support from the Thule Society, a Freemason-like secret society in Europe, and also began receiving investment from Wall Street interests, including the Rockefeller family, the German people started taking notice. Hitler's new aristocratic friends could bring to Germany what the people desperately wanted; jobs and cold hard cash.

The collusion between the Rockefellers and the Nazis is well documented, and was first exposed by the discovery of the Von Knieriem Documents during the Nuremberg Trials. The documents outline how the Rockefellers, through their company Standard Oil, supplied investment, as well as secret fuel technology, without which Nazi warplanes would have been inoperable:

http://neithercorp.us/npress/?p=22

http://www.mazal.org/archive/nmt/07/NMT07-C001.htm

The Rockefellers also started the first eugenics population control program here in the U.S. in 1909, forcefully sterilizing over 60,000 "genetically inferior" Americans long before Hitler put the idea into practice in Germany:

http://hnn.us/articles/1796.html

The Rockefeller Foundation helped found the German eugenics program and even funded the program that Josef Mengele worked in before he went to Auschwitz.

And how about the exposure of George W. Bush's grandfather, Prescott Bush, as a Nazi collaborator and launderer of Nazi funds:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar

This is only a small portion of the evidence which proves that the Nazi's were an elitist creation, and World War II deliberately engineered.

I won't go into the long and sordid background of the 9/11 attacks and how they were used to foment a never-ending war in the Middle East. To do so would take an entirely separate article. What I will say is, the "official story" of that event has been shown on numerous occasions by thousands of researchers, many of whom are architects and engineers, to be riddled with holes and completely unsatisfactory by any measure of logic. The collapses themselves have been left scientifically unexplained by NIST, the government agency tasked with constructing "answers" for the many oddities surrounding the structural failure of WTC 1, 2 and 7. NIST continues to refuse to release the source data for their computer models they claim prove that the towers fell naturally due to burning jet fuel. Without this source data, none of their conclusions hold any validity. They are simply opinions backed by nothing.

Dr. Steven Jones along with eight other scientists around the world have published a peer review paper in the Open Chemical Physics Journal proving beyond a doubt that military grade nanothermite (demolitions) is present in large quantities in the rubble of the WTC:

http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM

http://www.journalof911studies.com/

This means that demolitions were placed in the buildings most likely by someone with easy access and were used to aid in their collapse. The suspects for such an operation I leave for you to decide, though I find it highly improbable that "Muslim Extremists" were involved.

After each of these wars was concocted, governments and Globalists around the planet pushed for even greater centralization of authority and consolidation of power. After the Spanish American War, Americans were herded towards accepting the idea of U.S. expansionism. After World War I, we were convinced to hurtle ourselves into European affairs and squander money and resources on unnecessary conflicts. We also witnessed the formation of the League of Nations, a pre-UN global body meant as a beginning foundation for world government. After World War II, Europe was nearly wiped off the map, its people downtrodden and psychologically ripe for centralization. Without WWII, the European Union would have never been possible. The U.S. also joined the United Nations, the body which is now being pushed along with the IMF for oversight of global financial regulation, as well as unified trade law and "harmonization." After the Iraq / Afghan war began, a new threat was fabricated in the guise of "terrorism," a faceless enemy with no real nation or border, no identifiable army, and an elusive and sloppily defined ideology. Anyone can be labeled a terrorist, even an American citizen, thus, a war on terrorism can be sustained indefinitely.

This sets the stage for the next possible global conflict which could be used as the final motivator to pressure the masses into an oppressive New World Order.

World War III: A Realistic Assessment

On Christmas Day 2009 a young Nigerian man by the name of Umar Abdulmutallab was lead into an airport in Amsterdam by what witnesses describe as a "well dressed Indian man" who lied about Umar's status as a Sudanese refugee. Although Umar was already on a terrorist watch list, he was not flagged, and was allowed to board the plane without a passport and without difficulty:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2009/12/witness_alleged_bomber_possibl.html

Also according to witnesses, another man on the plane reportedly (and rather oddly) filmed the would-be terrorist during the entire flight. As the plane approached landing in Detroit, Umar proceeded to ignite an explosive substance hidden in his underpants. Only days after, Al-Qaeda agents allegedly based in Yemen took responsibility. Why anyone would take responsibility for a botched underwear bomb attack I leave to your imagination.

And how has the U.S. Government been proceeding in Yemen? Air strikes killing 63 civilians including 28 children:

But lets set aside the obvious false flag attack used to move into Yemen and ask the larger question: why?

Why Yemen? There are a few solid explanations, including the rather suspicious financial dealings of Umar Abdulmutallab's father, who has been involved heavily with Yemen Government debt:

http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2009/12/30/billions-in-recent-yememi-investments-and-the-underwear-bombers-daddy-its-a-small-world-aint-it/

But this seemingly small affair in this very small country I believe is part of a much larger design.

There are most likely little to no "Al Qaeda" fighters in Yemen, but the Yemeni government has been fighting Houthi rebels in its mountain regions for years, and it seems, not doing very well. In response, Saudi Arabia insinuated itself into the fight, perhaps fearing what a revolution might do to their interests in the region. Only days before the Christmas false flag, U.S. officials were leaking their "concerns" over possible Yemeni rebel "connections" to Al Qaeda in the press:

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/terrorism-security/2009/1221/Saudi-air-strike-kills-Yemen-rebels-as-US-drawn-into-fight

What we are seeing is yet another instance in which our government labels any insurgency group not as rebels with their own particular cause, but as "Al Qaeda," a global James Bond-ian terrorist conspiracy. Its simple really; if someone stands in the way of your interests, label them as Al Qaeda and a decent sized portion of the American public will look the other way while you bomb their children.

Russia Expanding In the Middle East:

Now we get to the heart of the matter. Many of us have already forgotten the brief war between Russia and Georgia, started when U.S. backed Georgia invaded South Ossetia unprovoked, randomly shooting and bombing civilians, causing Russia to intercede. Not long after this event, Russia began announcing openly plans to expand its navy into the Middle East, including the construction of Navy Bases in Yemen, and Libya, as well as the modernization of a navy base the Russians already control on the coast of Syria:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/01/16/2468180.htm

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1020643.html

Yemen's dealings with Russia also include major arms sales:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/27/world/africa/27iht-27yemen.20489549.html?_r=2

Yemen recently announced plans to work closely with Iran in defending its coast from pirates:

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=99165&sectionid=351020101

What does the U.S. presence in Yemen mean? It means a lot of ruffled feathers (or at least the appearance of such) and the increase of Middle Eastern tension to whole new level, conceivably putting us in a position of clashing with Russian interests.

Enter Israel

The Israeli Government has said openly and often that it deems Iran a target if they continue to build nuclear power facilities, even going so far as to draw up plans to use low-yield nuclear weapons against them:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article1290331.ece

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/aug/30/opinion/oe-zenko30

This leads us to what may end up being the most important news of last year besides the "Great Recession"; a defense pact signed between Iran and Syria:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1260447419513&pagename=JPArticle%2FShowFull

So, what elements are we dealing with here?

We have a nuclear armed Israel itching to attack Iran. We have Iran engaged in a defense pact with Syria against Israel. We have Syria with Russian navy bases and weapons on its soil, and we have the U.S. rampaging through the Middle East encroaching on the borders of Pakistan and Yemen, essentially pissing off everyone. What we have is a Globalist made recipe for disaster, using the same ingredients they have used for the last several major wars.

An Israeli attack on Iran could draw in the U.S., especially if Russia were to intervene through Syria. The likelihood of a large scale false flag attack is also very high over the next couple years, designed to frighten the American people into support for police state conditions at home, as well as greater complicity in an expanded war overseas. The war would not even necessarily have to become a nuclear event as is commonly expected (the elites would rather keep the planet in good condition for themselves), or even develop far beyond the Middle East. Its effects would still be felt everywhere.

As we have covered in previous articles, Russia and other BRIC nations are moving to shore up wealth, buying gold and diversifying their currency holdings away from Treasuries and U.S. Dollars. This indicates the probability that they will soon drop the dollar as the world reserve currency if not entirely. Russia has in several instances stated its desire for a "world currency" and even world government, just as political elements of the U.S. and Europe have in the past. I believe what we see unfolding is a scenario much like that of WWII, except this time, the U.S. sits in the position of the Weimar Republic, its currency ready to hyperinflate, it treasury on the edge of insolvency, its debt holders becoming its enemies, and its government looking for any excuse to dilute personal liberties for the "greater good".

Russia and other eastern nations appear to be forming an opposing economic (and perhaps political) block, yet the ultimate goal of the elites there is the same as it is for elites here. If war were to occur, it would once again be puppet governments set loose upon each other in an illusory conflict in which the real targets are the masses themselves.

The goal is to force the people to take sides, to divide them against each other and make them forget the true enemy; the elites who cultivated the problem in the first place. Under the threat of world conflict or rampant terrorism, the average American could be made to feel "disruptive," or even "traitorous" for speaking out against the war, while those who point out the dangers of the police state could simply be labeled terrorists themselves. Such an atmosphere could also distract our attentions away from the eminent economic breakdown. It is difficult to imagine this happening here, but think of how many Germans laughed at Hitler in his early days, as opposed to how many eventually followed him when they were faced with absolute desperation.

In the midst of all this of course would stand the EU and the UN. I believe whether a war is triggered or the economy is simply left to disintegrate, it will be the UN and European interests that "dash to the rescue" with a new stabilized currency and unified government when all seems lost. Just as in the past, Globalists want to erase history, rewrite it, and play the part of the hero. With an extra century or more of constant propaganda, who would know to argue otherwise?

What we have just covered is a possible state of affairs based on the circumstances of the moment. It is by no means our fate. What this examination is meant to convey is the gravity of the task before us, and the reality that it is we who must halt the machine in its tracks. We cannot leave it to future generations; to our children or theirs. It must stop right here. This is our fight, and if we do not succeed then there may not be a second chance for humanity. By continuing to educate our neighbors on the threats confronting us, and by preparing for the worst, mentally as well as physically, no future is set in stone.

I sometimes hear words like "impossible," "pointless," "futile," in regards to our situation, and the obstacles which we face. "Impossibility" is an empty term driven by doubt, not by concrete reality. There is no "impossibility," only destiny, and destiny is something we make, not follow. As far as I have seen men fall, I have never in the whole of my life believed there was anything we could not do. As long as we hold by what is true, there is no such thing as the insurmountable.

Regardless of where we are headed, be it moderately troubling times, or the worst of all possible worlds, our job here now is to at once walk through fire and yet stand immovable. This is what we are here to do.

neithercorp.us