The Labyrinth

Webster Tarplay gives an interview about Obama and Brzezinski and their plans to manipulate and possibly even confront China and Russia. He is very alarmed.

Here's a quick recap. He's saying that Obama's policies put us into grave danger because he is controlled by a 'clique of bankers', the Trilateral Commission (Rockefeller, Soros, etc.), and they are determined to smash Russia and China apart as the new center of world power. Rather than pursuing the neocon policy of picking on "shitty little countries" like Iraq, Iran, and Syria, Zbig would have those countries used as tools against Russia and China.

New targets include Sudan, which supplies 7% of China's oil, and Pakistan, which will be carved up -- just like Iraq -- to destroy their usefulness as allies to China or Russia. India and Japan become something like swing states in this battle. The end goal is to pit China against Russia, who then (theoretically) destroy each other, leaving the US and UK as the last power standing. European countries would be used as pawns to execute this plan. Many of the destabilizing actions undertaken would be covert ops predictably resulting in humanitarian missions, and that is how the conflicts begin and blossom.

This all represents imperialism under new ownership. Tarplay's main worry seems to be that Obama will be very effective selling this new imperialism given his mantra of change, great appeal, and the world's willingness to meet him half way after eight years of GWB and the neocons.

Let's think about the choices being presented to people in power today. On the one hand, we have this NWO agenda, which comes dressed as some kind of UN/kumbaya/let's all get along and share currencies thing, but of course which requires that nations sacrifice their sovereignty in exchange for 'peace.' This is the poison pill. Understandably, patriotic people recoil at this thought, and that drives them to oppose the NWO agenda. But that leaves them, naturally, protecting their national sovereignty from challenges. From there, it's a short step to war.

In this case, Tarplay describes a situation where our status as a world power is now challenged by Russia and China. We may conflate our world power status with national sovereignty, since we have always been accustomed to getting whatever we wanted in the world, by use of force when necessary. And in the sense that the winner makes the rules, being a world power does in fact bequeath a supra-national sovereignty. We can do whatever we want, and we don't want China and Russia to ever be in a position to dictate to us. This attitude weakens the NWO-agenda, doesn't it? But it is somewhat warlike at the same time.

What is the alternative? Isn't it better for the US to balance it's power against very intelligent and worthy opponents like Russia and China rather than run amok destroying the relatively defenseless Middle East on behalf of Israel? Does a multi-polar world provide more stability than the one currently disintegrating before our very eyes? I think it does.

China and Russia have intelligent leaders. They have tremendous intelligence operations which will help them avoid falling into traps. Who knows what secrets have been sold or otherwise compromised, thereby foiling all sorts of nefarious plans for world domination? They will not easily be lured into conflicts, and smaller countries like Syria and Iran have also shown tremendous restraint to being baited into conflicts. While it's very important that people remain aware of these large agendas in play, executing these grand plans is much easier said than done.

The problem today is that everything appears suspicious. If people talk peace, they must be looking to sacrifice national sovereignty and institute the NWO. If people talk war, they must be looking to break countries down and institute the NWO. All roads seem to lead to the same place. And maybe they do. Maybe the NWO bankers have the game rigged to benefit themselves in 9 out of 10 possible scenarios, or maybe even 99 out of 100. They know how to profit from war, and they know how to profit from any 'peace' that they define and offer. Real peace they cannot profit from, but real peace requires people to rise above their petty selves, and that might require toning down the nationalism a few clicks, and that brings you back to the kumbaya and the NWO...

See what I mean? It's like a labyrinth. We don't know how to get out. But there is a way out, and we have to find it. Of course, we can always go up and rise above it.


MarcLord said...

your dudeness,

I greatly respect your intellect. But I can tell you exactly what Obama's going to do.

Rahmbo is his bad cop. He's the dog that's going to tame Israel, and this is the way it has to be.

Obama is going to do what any smart leader in this situation would. He'll get the injured parties together and say, "OK, let's chill the fuck out. I'm on this, and nobody's nuking nobody else. We are going to sit here and talk about and think about solutions."

There is an adult in the White House with the self-control to be faithful to his wife. The last time that happened was Carter, who was hero enough to set this country back on victory's course for another 30 frigging years, despite all the bullshit and incompetence inbetween. And his thanks for that was being torn apart. Leadership matters.

A. Peasant said...

I hope you are right. Believe me, I'm looking for any reasonable explanation other than the one which seems obvious (ie: the "sellout"). It is true that keeping Rahm so close allows Obama to keep tabs on Israel (the friends close; enemies closer theory). The knife cuts both ways.

I *was* hoping for more than ONE DAY of relief, however, before all this crap started. Gah.

legal mumbo jumbo

Disclaimer: The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.

Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.