You cant kill an ideology. Especially by trying to bomb it

Regards

King james

[del[/del

How is this a different conflict to the previous conflicts mentioned? We want to overthrow the regime in another Middle Eastern country, and replace them with a western puppet state (Afghanistan-Taliban/Bin Laden, Iraq-Saddam, Libya-Gaddafi, Syria -Assad). The only difference this time is that Russia is backing Assad which makes the situation far more dangerous.
Wars cost billions, do you really think any government would go to war just because it seems like the right thing to do, or is it something more lucrative, and insidious than that? For example Tony Blair has made close to £100 million since leaving office, working primarily for the Kuwaiti government, and JP Morgan, coincidence? The Bush family are long time bedfellows with the house of Saud, who are responsible for deaths of 1000s of people, and the oppression of millions. Surely if this was about defeating religious fascism then they'd be close to the top of the list of targets? There's been genocide going on Niger for years, and Zimbabwe for years, why haven't we intervened there?
We've been playing this game for nearly 30 years, yet the region is more unstable than ever, we chop one head off the beast, and a new bogeyman miraculously appears.
The one thing we (and our "alies"icon_wink.gif haven't tried is complete withdrawal from the region. Using violence to achieve your objectives results in the opposite of what you want to achieve. Bombing the 5hit out of these countries, and killing 1000s of people and then expecting the families of those victims to accept your ideology, and values is akin to raping someone and expecting them to marry you. In other words the cycle of violence doesn't end unless you choose not participate in it.
As for these 70,000 "moderates", I reckon there's about as much chance of there being 70,000 of them as there were WMDs in Iraq, or OBL in Afghanistan, and even if there are let's not forget that ISIS were considered moderate rebels, so we decided to arm them a few years ago , and look how that turned out.

You asked about what Western energy companies have to gain... Google "Qatar-Turkey gas pipeline" I can't seem to paste the link on here from my phone. It will also explain why Russiais so keen to keep Assad in power.

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm suggesting that humans have a tendency to believe that there is always ONE answer when very often it's more complex and a number of factors. I mentioned the Rothschilds because their name gets banded around like it's the devil running the world. It isn't. There's collaboration between any number. I mentioned the anti-Semitic because very often the right-wing sites are very quick to suggest that it's Jews behind the drive for war when, as has been said by Mugwump, it's the rich and powerful that drive it. It was not a reference to your beliefs or opinions.

Here's a short article written by one of the most important individuals ever to comment directly on the very issues which face us today in the Middle East - Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty.

In it he discusses what "counter-insurgency warfare" actually entails - as well as offering valuable insights into why it's become the de facto mode of conflict.

Just to provide some background, Prouty was the Chief of Special Operations and the primary liaison between the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency during the administrations of presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy. Back then the CIA had no military capacity which meant that whenever they needed men and materiel for a covert operation in somewhere such as Guatemala or Iran they requisitioned it from the Pentagon and Prouty. Since deniability is of paramount importance to any intelligence operation part of Prouty's job was to "sheep dip" the military's assets so they could not be traced back should the operation fail or be compromised (side note - this process of ship-dipping years later resulted in the tremendous scandal over the supposed refusal of the Vietnamese to return "thousands" of American POWs who in fact never existed since during the early years of that conflict they were working for the CIA and thus using phony identities).

In short - Prouty was connected right up the wazoo. His security clearance was so high that when Senator Joseph McCarthy demanded that he sign an Oath of Allegiance to the United States during the HUAC investigations he told him to "get stuffed" (shortly after McCarthy was out on his ear after he thought he could get away with intimidating the military).

[iTHE WORLDWIDE INVISIBLE WAR waged by the Soviet KGB and the American Central Intelligence Agency over the past fifty years, and under the cover that these war-making organizations were in fact intelligence organizations, was being fought with novel tactics. Not only was this type of underground warfare secret, but so were its methods. Discerning readers were not surprised, then, to discover on an inside page of the New York Times on July 25, 1985, a tiny two-inch article, datelined Zaragoza, Spain, describing one of these Cold War battles, being fought with these secret tactics.

TWO SPANISH OFFICERS SENTENCED
FOR ROLES IN FAKE EXECUTIONS

ZARAGOZA, Spain, July 24 (UPI)—Two army officers who herded villagers into a public square for mock executions were sentenced today to prison terms of four and five months, military authorities said.
A military tribunal ruled Tuesday that officers, Capt. Carlos Aleman and Lieut. Jaime Iniguez, had been overzealous in carrying out orders.
"They were ordered to stage a mock invasion of a town and to make it as realistic as possible, but they went too far," said a Defense Ministry spokesman, Lieut. Jesus del Monte.

This bizarre incident occurred in Spain. Similar events, using the same tactics, take place somewhere in the world almost daily, despite the apparent demise of the Cold War. They have one unique characteristic, seldom if ever seen in regular warfare, that sets them apart. Incidents such as this one, reported by the Times, serve to incite warfare rather than to bring it to an end. To give the age-old concept new meaning, "They make war...out of practically nothing."

The methods used in Spain are almost precisely those used by the CIA in, among other cases, the Philippines in the early 1950s and Indochina from 1945 to 1965. These will be discussed in later chapters. It is important to note that tens of thousands of foreign "paramilitary" and Special Forces troops have been trained at various U.S. military bases under CIA supervision and sponsorship. Some of this training is highly specialized, using advanced weapons and war-related matériel. Some of it takes place at American universities and even in manufacturing plants, where advanced equipment for this type of warfare is being made.

Then there are the paramilitary forces of other nations that have been trained in the Soviet Union. Today these graduates, by the tens of thousands, are the leaders of the "elite" forces of many countries and the professionals used to breed a world of international terrorists. For the most part, they are not individuals or members of some small group, but participants in a most sophisticated, worldwide complex of organizations. The Spanish example is a perfect case study in describing the methods and tactics of such units. (For illustrative purposes, examples of operations in other countries will be merged with the Spanish example to portray more comprehensively the potential of these tactics.)

The Spanish army's Special Forces troops had been ordered to "stage a mock invasion of a town and to make it [look and feel] as realistic as possible." The army was ordered to create a battle that would appear to support evidence of insurgency. This is one of the secret methods of the secret war. These special armed forces are used as agitators. It is as though the fire department were being used to start fires, the police department employed to steal and kill, and doctors ordered to make people sick, to destroy their brains, to poison them. Such clandestine operations are designed to make war—even when they have to play both sides at the same time.

First of all, as stated so accurately in Leonard Lewin's Report From Iron Mountain,1 "allegiance [to the State] requires a cause; a cause requires an enemy," and "...the presumed power of the enemy sufficient to warrant an individual sense of allegiance to a society must be proportionate to the size and complexity of the society."

Therefore, on a global scale, the Cold War required the USSR and the United States to have been enemies by need and by definition. Ever since the Bravo detonation of the hydrogen bomb, the world's political, economic, and military system has had to be bipolar. Those without massive weapons and the means to deliver them could not possibly take part effectively in such global warfare.

It has been politically necessary for each major power to have an enemy, even though both major powers knew that they no longer had any way to benefit from a traditional "all-out" war. Neither one could control its own destiny or its own society without the "threat" of the other. On a lesser scale, as we shall see in the Spanish example, the existence of "insurgents" lent validity to the charge of a "Communistic-supported" insurgency, even though the scope of the "conflict"—that is, the "mock invasion of the town"—was purely local.

All leaders of all nations know that, as stated in Report From Iron Mountain, "The organization of a society for the possibility of war is its principal political stabilizer. It is ironic that this primary function of warfare has been generally recognized by historians only where it has been expressly acknowledged—in the pirate societies of the great conquerors."

That is the historical perspective. It has been the primary reason for the necessary prosecution of the Cold War—"necessary," that is, in the minds of those who are unable to see, or who choose not to see, that there are other reasons than conflict for the existence of Earth and man.

The Spanish application of this tactic of the secret war is interesting and threatens us all. In this case, the two army officers had been ordered to attack a town, with regular Spanish troops (albeit some of them disguised as natives), and to make it look and feel realistic. As undercover warriors, they were trained to do this. (No doubt, some were trained in the United States, where many of the weapons, activities, and techniques mentioned below are used in training.) Under other conditions at other times, these same trained men might have been told to hijack a civilian aircraft; they might have been told to run a mock hostage operation. There is no difference. The only military objective of these battles, and of this type of global conflict, is to create the appearance of war itself.

Now, the Spanish, for reasons of their own, had decided to teach this town a lesson. To initiate this campaign, a psychological-warfare propaganda team arrived in town. They put up posters, made inflammatory speeches in the village square and showed propaganda films on the walls of buildings at night to stir up the village, warning of the existence and approach of a band of "terrorist-trained insurgents." That night, as the movies were being shown before the assembled villagers, a firefight kit, prearranged to explode in sequence to resemble a true skirmish, was detonated on a nearby hillside. Flares and rockets filled the sky. A helicopter gunship or two joined the mock battle scenario. By the time this Special Forces PsyWar team left that town, the whole region had been alarmed by the presence of these "insurgents." The stage was set for the "mock invasion of the town," as ordered.

A few nights later, these two Spanish army officers (was the CIA involved?) divided their regular force into two groups the pseudoinsurgents and (b) the loyal regular forces. The "insurgents" took off their uniforms and donned native garb, the uniform of the "Peoples' Insurgents." Then they faded into the darkness and began to attack the town. First there was sporadic gunfire. Then some buildings went up in flames. Several big explosions occurred, and a bridge was blown up. The "insurgents" attacked the town as the villagers fled into the night. There was more gunfire, more burning and explosions. The "terrorists" looted the town and fired into the woods where the townspeople were hiding.

As the sun rose, an army unit in a convoy of trucks raced toward the town, entering it with guns ablaze. Above, a helicopter gunship added to the firepower. The "terrorists" were gunned down, left and right (all staged with blank ammunition). The others were rounded up and thrown into extra trucks under heavy guard. In short order, the victorious regular army captain had liberated the town. A loudspeaker in the helicopter called the villagers to return. All was safe! Fires were extinguished. Things returned to near normal.

Meanwhile, the captain remained with his interrogators, questioning the prisoners. Two "insurgent" leaders were discovered with false "terrorist" papers in their pockets and led back to the village square in chains. Charges were read against them, and the villagers observed them backed against the wall and shot! No sooner had the bodies hit the ground than they were picked up and tossed into the nearest truck. Justice had been done.

All trucks moved down the road. The battle was over. Before leaving, the captain turned to the town's mayor and warned him against further terrorism. The townspeople cheered the heroic captain as he left the town in command of the convoy. The forces of justice had been victorious. They drove on a few more miles, and the whole gang—loyal army and "terrorists"—had breakfast together. The "dead" men joined the feast.

This was the "mock battle." Although I have added technical details to the Spanish scenario, I have been to such training programs at U.S. military bases where identical tactics are taught to Americans as well as foreigners. It is all the same. As we shall see later, these are the same tactics that were exploited by CIA superagent Edward G. Landsdale and his men in the Philipines and Indochina.

This is an example of the intelligence service's "Fun and Games." Actually, it is as old as history; but lately it has been refined, out of necessity, into a major tool of clandestine warfare.

Lest anyone think that this is an isolated case, be assured that it was not. Such "mock battles" and "mock attacks on native villages" were staged countless times in Indochina for the benefit of, or the orientation of, visiting dignitaries, such as John McCone when he first visited Vietnam as the Kennedy-appointed director of central intelligence. Such distinguished visitors usually observed the action from a helicopter, at "a safe distance." A new secretary of defense, such as Robert McNamara, who had never seen combat, especially combat in Southeast Asia, would be given the treatment. It was evident to other, more experienced observers that the tracks through the fields had been made by the "Vietcong" during many rehearsals of the "attack." The war makers of Vietnam vintage left nothing to chance.
During the 1952-54 time period, when I flew into the Philippines, I spent many hours talking with Ed Lansdale, his many Filipino friends, such as Juan C. "Johnny" Orendain, Col. Napolean D. Valeriano, and members of his CIA "anti-Quirino" team and heard them tell these same stories. They all worked with Ramon Magsaysay in those days and related how he would divide his Special Forces into the "Communist HUKS" and the loyal military and then attack villages in the manner described above. Before long Ramon Magsaysay had been "elected" president of the Philippines, and President Quirino was on his way out. Later, when I worked in the same office with Lansdale in the Pentagon, he would relate how he and his Saigon Military Mission teammates applied similar tactics in Indochina, both North and South.[/i

Any of this seem familiar today? By the way - there are some excellent interviews with Prouty on YouTube.

Here he offers his own (far more believable) opinions on why rlFrancis Gary Powers' U2 spyplane "crashed" over Russia.rl Bear in mind, the U2 was one of those joint military/CIA operations which came directly under Prouty's office - so it's not like he's uninformed.

You really can't go wrong listening to the guy. Definitely in my top-10 essential reading.

Just to stress the above point because I really do think it's critically important and absolutely relevant to what we are currently seeing in Syria & North Africa - the upshot of which is a mass migration of population fleeing from terrorism into Europe here is another interview with Fletcher Prouty in which he discusses PRECISELY THE SAME events occurring in Vietnam prior to the war.

Just rllisten to what Prouty is saying hererl because he's giving you the inside track on what is about to come crashing down on our heads.

Douglas Valentine, the award-winning author of rlThe Phoenix Program (America's Use of Terror in Vietnam)rl recently posed the question"What are you going to do when the Phoenix Program comes home to roost?"
[/i
Valentine is absolutely right to ask this question because we're being royally stitched up by the powers that be. rlClick hererl for a recent interview with Valentine (universally regarded as the leading expert on US counter-insurgency warfare) in which he openly states that they are gearing up for using it not just against foreign resource states but at home, too.

So we've got a deluded Rothschild apologist in the house, i'm not being funny mate but you've got some research to do regarding these devil worshippers. I've managed to dig out an article about their 25 point plan for world domination. I've also added a Rothschild timeline of activity dating back to the 18th century, Evil isn't the word, there's no doubt that these people are Satanist's.

In 1770, Mayer Amschel Rothschild married Gutta Schnapper. In that same year, he retained Jewish-born, Adam Weishaupt, an apostate Jesuit-trained professor of canon law, to revise and modernize Illuminism, the worship of Satan, with the objective of world domination and the imposition of the Luciferian ideology “upon what would remain of the human race” after a final orchestrated social-cataclysm. In 1773, Mayer summoned twelve wealthy men to Frankfort and asked them to pool their resources, then presented the 25-point plan that would enable them to gain control of the wealth, natural resources and manpower of the entire world. Remember these plans were idealised in the 1770's, you'll see they're very prominent today.


Those 25 points are

1. Use violence and terrorism rather than academic discussions.

2. Preach “Liberalism” to pursue political power.

3. Initiate class warfare.

4. Politicians must be cunning and deceptive – any moral code leaves a politician vulnerable.

5. Dismantle “existing forces of order and regulation.” Reconstruct all existing institutions.”

6. Remain invisible until the very moment when it has gained such strength that no cunning or force can undermine it.

7. Use Mob Psychology to control the masses. “Without absolute despotism one cannot rule efficiently.”

8. Advocate the use of alcoholic liquors, drugs, moral corruption and all forms of vice, used systematically by “agenteurs” to corrupt the youth.

9. Seize properties by any means to secure submission and sovereignty.

10. Foment wars and control the peace conferences so that neither of the combatants gains territory placing them further in debt and therefore into our power.

11. Choose candidates for public office who will be “servile and obedient to our commands, so they may be readily used as pawns in our game.”

12. Use the Press for propaganda to control all outlets of public information, while remaining in the shadows, clear of blame.

13. Make the masses believe they had been the prey of criminals. Then restore order to appear as the saviours.

14. Create financial panics. Use hunger to control to subjugate the masses.

15. Infiltrate Freemasonry to take advantage of the Grand Orient Lodges to cloak the true nature of their work in philanthropy. Spread their atheistic-materialistic ideology amongst the "Goyim" (gentiles).

16. When the hour strikes for our sovereign lord of the entire World to be crowned, their influence will banish everything that might stand in his way.

17. Use systematic deception, high-sounding phrases and popular slogans. “The opposite of what has been promised can always be done afterwards... That is of no consequence.”

18. A Reign of Terror is the most economical way to bring about speedy subjection.

19. Masquerade as political, financial and economic advisers to carry out our mandates with Diplomacy and without fear of exposing “the secret power behind national and international affairs.”

20. Ultimate world government is the goal. It will be necessary to establish huge monopolies, so even the largest fortunes of the Goyim will depend on us to such an extent that they will go to the bottom together with the credit of their governments on the day after the great political smash.”

21. Use economic warfare. Rob the "Goyim" of their landed properties and industries with a combination of high taxes and unfair competition.

22. “Make the 'Goyim' destroy each other so there will only be the proletariat left in the world, with a few millionaires devoted to our cause, and sufficient police and soldiers to protect our interest.”

23. Call it The New Order. Appoint a Dictator.

24. Fool, bemuse and corrupt the younger members of society by teaching them theories and principles we know to be false.

25 Twist national and international laws into a contradiction which first masks the law and afterwards hides it altogether. Substitute arbitration for law

You're an absolute fool apologising for these Satanist, they've done a cracking job in mind controlling you. You fit into Rule 24.


rlRothschild Timelinerl

Awesome name. I've now renamed my dog.

Ha ha i've renamed the wife

I know how the power hungry work. They're all at it. Calling them Satanists isn't helping present your viewpoint.

Btw, it's probably worth pointing out that the article you link to references evidence by Eustace Mullins, who was, for 40 years, both a serious holocaust denier and involved with several extreme right-wing organisations, including rooming with the man who would eventually go on to be the leader of the American Nazi Party. I haven't explored the other bits of evidence referred to, yet, but you see my point about the right-wing hijacking conspiracies.

The following is a famous exchange Gustave Gilbert had with Hermann Göring from his book, the Nuremberg Trials:

Göring: Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.

Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.

Göring: Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.

Really, please enlighten me.





Who Are ?




Their Satanic routes has everything to do with their Agenda's

Saying you are a "satanist" is no different to saying you are a catholic or a communist or a scientologist. I mean, Pope John Paul II could say he was a devout man of god but history suggests otherwise. Besides, it's not like satanists somehow gain special powers, leap tall buildings in a single bound and vanish in a puff of smoke on demand.

People say they are all kinds of things. In my experience the reality is something different.

One question... What did all the conspiracy theorists do before the internet?

They would be found standing on street corners shouting that the end was nigh.

Irrespective of the validity of their argument, what a wretchedly gloomy way to think and live.
And no amount of banks of can persuade me that there is ANY humour in these people.