Tag Archives: nato

White Horse, Red Horse, Black Horse: The United States reveals its plans for conquest, war and slavery. Creation of new U.S. Joint Force of 2020. U.S. Congress could be military’s greatest enemy!

I looked, and there before me was a white horse! Its rider held a bow, and he was given a crown, and he rode out as a conqueror bent on conquest.

Then another horse came out, a fiery red one. Its rider was given power to take peace from the earth and to make men slay each other.

I looked, and there before me was a black horse! Its rider was holding a pair of scales in his hand. Then I heard what sounded like a voice among the four living creatures, saying, “A quart of wheat for a day’s wages, and three quarts of barley for a day’s wages, and do not damage the oil and the wine!”

            “I’d like to begin by thanking President Obama for coming here this morning, and for his vision, guidance and leadership as this Department went through the intensive review we undertook to develop the new strategic guidance we are releasing today.

“This guidance recognizes that this country is at a strategic turning point after a decade of war and large increases in defense spending. As the President mentioned, the U.S. military’s mission in Iraq has now ended, continued progress in Afghanistan is enabling a transition to Afghan security responsibility, the NATO effort in Libya has concluded with the fall of Qaddafi, targeted counterterrorism efforts have significantly weakened al Qaeda and decimated its leadership, and now as these events are occurring, the Congress has mandated that we achieve significant defense savings.

“But even as our large-scale military campaigns recede, the United States still faces a complex and growing array of security challenges across the globe, challenges that call for a reshaping of America’s defense priorities, focusing on the continuing threat of violent extremism, proliferation of lethal weapons and materials, the destabilizing behavior of Iran and North Korea, the rise of new powers across Asia, and the dramatic changes in the Middle East.

“All of this comes at a time when America confronts a serious deficit and debt problem which is itself a national security risk that is squeezing both the defense and domestic budgets. Even facing these considerable pressures, including the requirement of the Budget Control Act to reduce defense spending by $487 billion over 10 years, I do not believe that we must choose between national security and fiscal responsibility. The Department of Defense will play its part in helping the nation put its fiscal house in order.

“But the President has made clear, and I have made clear, that the savings we have been mandated to achieve must be driven by strategy and rigorous analysis, not by the numbers alone.

“Consequently, over the past few months, we have conducted an intensive review to guide defense priorities and spending over the coming decade, in light of strategic guidance from the President and the recommendations of this Department’s senior military and civilian leadership. This process has enabled us to assess risk, set priorities, and make hard choices. Let me be clear, this Department would need to make a strategic shift regardless of the nation’s fiscal situation. That is the reality of the world we live in.

“As difficult as it may be to achieve the mandated defense savings, this has also given us in the Department of Defense the opportunity to reshape our defense strategy and force structure to more effectively meet the challenges of the future, deter aggression, shape the security environment and decisively prevail in any conflict.

“From the beginning, I set out to ensure that this strategy review was inclusive. Chairman Dempsey and I met frequently with Departmental leaders, including my Under Secretaries, the Service Chiefs, Service Secretaries, Combatant Commanders and senior enlisted advisors. We’ve discussed this strategy and its implications with the President, with members of Congress, and with outside experts.

“Four overarching principles have guided our deliberations:

  • First, we must maintain the world’s finest military, one that supports and sustains the unique global leadership role of the United States;
  • Second, we must avoid hollowing out the force– a smaller, ready, and well-equipped military is preferable to a larger, ill-prepared force that has been arbitrarily cut across-the- board;
  • Third, savings must be achieved in a balanced manner with everything on the table, including politically sensitive areas that will likely provoke opposition from parts of Congress, industry, and advocacy groups;
  • Fourth, we must preserve the quality of our All-Volunteer Force and not break faith with our men and women in uniform or their families.

“With these principles in mind, I will focus on some of the significant strategic choices and shifts that are being made. But first, let me be clear that the U.S. military will remain capable across the spectrum. We will continue to conduct a complex set of missions ranging from countering terrorism and weapons of mass destruction to maintaining a safe, secure and effective nuclear deterrent. We will be fully prepared to protect our interests, defend our homeland and support civil authorities.

“Our goal is to achieve this U.S. force for the future with the following significant changes:

“First, the U.S. joint force [notice no explanation of what the “joint” U.S. force is] will be smaller and leaner, but its great strength will be that it is more agile, flexible, ready to deploy, innovative and technologically advanced.

“Second, as we move towards this new joint force, we are also rebalancing our global posture and presence, emphasizing the Pacific and the Middle East — these are the areas where we see the greatest challenges for the future. The U.S. military will increase its institutional weight and focus on enhanced presence, power projection, and deterrence in Asia-Pacific. This region is growing in importance to the future of the United States economy and our national security. This means, for instance, improving capabilities that maintain our military’s technological edge and freedom of action.

“At the same time, the United States will place a premium on maintaining our military presence and capabilities in the broader Middle East. The United States and our partners must remain capable of deterring and defeating aggression while supporting political progress and reform.

“Third, the United States will continue to strengthen its key alliances, build partnerships and develop innovative ways to sustain U.S. presence elsewhere in the world.

“The long history of close political and military cooperation with our European allies and partners will be critical to addressing the challenges of the 21st century. We will invest in the shared capabilities and responsibilities of NATO, our most effective military alliance. The U.S. military’s force posture in Europe will of necessity continue to adapt and evolve to meet new challenges and opportunities, particularly in light of the security needs of the continent relative to emerging strategic priorities elsewhere. We are committed to sustaining a presence that will meet Article 5 commitments, deter aggression, and the U.S. military will work closely with our allies to allow for the kinds of coalition operations NATO has undertaken in Libya and Afghanistan.

In Latin America, Africa and elsewhere in the world, we will use innovative methods to sustain U.S. presence, maintaining key military-to-military relations and pursuing new security partnerships as needed. Whenever possible, we will develop low-cost and small-footprint approaches to achieve our security objectives, emphasizing rotational deployments and exercises, and other innovative approaches that maintain presence.

“Fourth, as we shift the size and composition of our ground, air, and naval forces, we must be capable of successfully confronting and defeating any aggressor and respond to the changing nature of warfare.

“Our strategy review concluded that the United States must have the capability to fight in several conflicts at the same time. We are not confronting the threats of the past. We are confronting the threats of the 21st century and that demands greater flexibility to shift and deploy forces to fight and defeat any enemy anywhere. How we defeat that enemy may vary across conflicts. But make no mistake — we will have the capability to confront and defeat more than one adversary at a time.

“As a global force, our military will never be doing only one thing — it will be responsible for a range of missions and activities across the globe of varying scope, duration, and strategic priority. This will place a premium on flexible and adaptable forces that can respond quickly and effectively to a variety of contingencies and potential adversaries.

“In addition to these forces, the United States will emphasize building the capacity of partners and allies to more effectively defend their own territory and interests through better use of diplomacy, development and security force assistance.

“In accordance with this construct and with the end of U.S. military commitments in Iraq, and the drawdown already underway in Afghanistan, the Army and Marine Corps will no longer need to be sized to support the large scale, long-term stability operations that dominated military priorities and force generation over the past decade.

“Lastly, as we reduce the overall defense budget, we will protect our investments in special operations forces, new technologies like ISR and unmanned systems, space and cyberspace capabilities and our capacity to quickly mobilize. These investments will help the military retain and continue to refine and institutionalize the expertise and capabilities that have been gained at such great cost over the last decade.

“Most importantly, we will structure and pace the reductions in the nation’s ground forces in such a way that they can surge, regenerate, and mobilize capabilities needed for any contingency. Building in reversibility and the ability to quickly mobilize will be key. That means reexamining the mix of elements in the active and reserve components, maintaining a strong National Guard and Reserve, retaining a healthy cadre of experienced NCOs and midgrade officers, and preserving the health and viability of the nation’s defense industrial base.

“This strategic guidance is a first step in this Department’s goal to build the Joint Force of 2020, a force sized and shaped differently than the military of the Cold War, the post-Cold War force of the 1990s, or the force built over the past decade to engage in large-scale ground wars.

“This strategy and vision will guide the more specific budget decisions that will be finalized and announced in the coming weeks as part of the President’s budget. In some cases we will be reducing capabilities no longer of top priority. In other cases we will invest in new capabilities to maintain a decisive military edge against a growing array of threats.

“There is no question that we have to make some tradeoffs, and that we will be taking on some level of additional but acceptable risk in the budget plan we release next month. These were not easy choices.

“We will continue aggressive efforts to weed out waste and reduce overhead, reform business practices, and consolidate duplicative operations. But budget reductions of this magnitude will inevitably impact the size and capabilities of our military. And as I’ve said before, true national security cannot be achieved through a strong military alone — it requires strong diplomatic, development, and intelligence efforts and, above all, it requires a strong economy, fiscal discipline and effective government.

“The capability, readiness and agility of the force will not be sustained if Congress fails to do its duty and the military is forced to accept far deeper cuts, in particular the arbitrary, across-the-board cuts currently scheduled to take effect in January of 2013 through the mechanism of sequester. That would force us to shed missions, commitments, and capabilities necessary to protect core U.S. national security interests, resulting in a demoralized and hollow force.

“And finally, I’d also like to address our men and women in uniform, and the civilian employees who support them, whom I know have been watching the budget debates here in Washington with concern about what it means for them and their families. You have done everything the country has asked you to do, and more.

“You have put your lives on the line, and fought to make our country safer and stronger. I believe this strategic guidance honors your sacrifices and strengthens the country by building a force equipped for the future. I have no higher responsibility than fighting to protect you and your families, just as you have fought and bled to protect our country.

“There is no doubt that the fiscal situation this country faces is difficult, and in many ways we are at a crisis point. But I believe that in every crisis, there is opportunity. Out of this crisis, we have the opportunity to end the old ways of doing business and build a modern force for the 21st century that can win today’s wars and successfully confront any enemy, and respond to any challenge of the future. Our responsibility is to protect the nation’s security and keep America safe. With this joint force [again, no clear explanation of “joint force”], I am confident we can effectively defend the United States of America.

“Thank you.”-Leon Panetta, Secretary of Defense for the United States

White Horse, Black Horse, Red Horse & Political Hypocrisy: Obama signs record military spending bill, then says spending needs to be cut. What he means is to cut spending on troops, increase spending on weapons. 80,000 soldiers will lose their jobs. More Wars to follow

I looked, and there before me was a white horse! Its rider held a bow, and he was given a crown, and he rode out as a conqueror bent on conquest.

I looked, and there before me was a black horse! Its rider was holding a pair of scales in his hand. Then I heard what sounded like a voice among the four living creatures, saying, “A quart of wheat for a day’s wages, and three quarts of barley for a day’s wages, and do not damage the oil and the wine!”

Then another horse came out, a fiery red one. Its rider was given power to take peace from the earth and to make men slay each other.

On January 1, U.S. President Barack Obama signs the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012.  That means at least $662 billion taxpayer dollars will be spent on the Department of Defense.

On January 5, Obama hypocritically states that defense spending must be cut! He blames it on “…the Budget Control Act passed by Congress last year.”

But here’s the thing, Obama is not really talking about overall defense spending cuts, he’s talking about shifting defense spending, and targeted cuts.  U.S. troops could lose out on pay and benefits, in order to increase spending on high tech weapons systems.  They’re already losing their jobs.

“As we reduce the overall defense budget, we will protect and in some cases increase our investments in special operation forces in new technologies, like…. unmanned systems, in space and in particular in cyberspace.”-Leon Panetta, Defense Secretary

Obama and company said the cuts would not affect pay and benefits for troops and veterans, but that’s already happened.  There are many cases across the country where veterans have been cut off because of budget problems.

Analysts say there’s no way to keep spending on high tech weapons without affecting troop pay/benefits, or even without reducing the number of military personnel (already in 2011 the U.S. Army laid off 50,000 personnel).

According to a report by Military.com Leon Panetta has asked the U.S. Army to cut another 80,000 troops in 2012!

That’s fine if your not going to fight wars anymore, but Obama and company flat lied about that.  Obama said “Yes, the tide of war is receding…”   Well, if the tide of war is receding then why spend more money on more weapons?  Because the tide of war is not receding, at least in the eyes of our leaders.  Obama even says so: “As I made clear in Australia, we will be strengthening our presence in the Asia Pacific, and budget reductions will not come at the expense of that critical region.  We’re going to continue investing in our critical partnerships and alliances, including NATO, which has demonstrated time and again, most recently in Libya, that it’s a force multiplier.  We will stay vigilant, especially in the Middle East.”

What Obama is saying is that the he expects more war in the Middle East, and a new front to open in Asia!  Defense Secretary Panetta backs that up: “…as we move towards this new joint force, we are also rebalancing our global posture and presence, emphasizing the Pacific and the Middle East — these are the areas where we see the greatest challenges for the future. The U.S. military will increase its institutional weight and focus on enhanced presence, power projection, and deterrence in Asia-Pacific. This region is growing in importance to the future of the United States economy and our national security.

World War 3: Afghan & Pakistan Taliban joining forces, will jointly attack U.S./NATO forces

Despite reports from Reuters, stating that the Afghan and Pakistani Taliban are “at each other’s throats”, Japanese media are reporting that various ‘taliban’ groups have agreed to put aside differences to jointly target U.S. led forces.

Over the weekend representatives from Afghanistan’s and Pakistan’s Pashtun dominated Taliban (Mujahideen) groups met.  Japan’s NHK claims they talked with Mujahideen officials and were told they have decided to put aside their differences, and focus on fighting the U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

Pakistani Mujahideen agreed to back off of attacking Pakistani government forces, and, beginning in March, will help their Afghan cousins focus their fight against the U.S.

They’ve established a 5 member council to help co-ordinate their efforts.  This news comes after reports that the Afghan Taliban have accepted an offer from U.S. President Obama, and the government of pro-U.S. Qatar, to open a diplomatic office in Qatar.

World War 3: Taliban New Year’s Day offensive

The Mujahideen of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (aka Taliban) claim a list of attacks on U.S./NATO/ISAF forces on New Year’s Day.

First they claim to have launched at least nine missiles (unguided rockets) at Bagram air base, causing dozens of casualties.  They also claim a missile attack against Sahara Bagh airbase in Khost, with no casualties effected, and a missile attack on Kandahar airfield, claiming deadly results.     

 

 

In the province of Kandahar they claim they’ve been attacking U.S./NATO/ISAF forces relentlessly: Several vehicles destroyed by home made bombs, killing the occupants. Several foot patrols ambushed, at least three foreign troops killed.  Intense fighting in Maiwand district after foreign troops were brought in by helicopter and repelled by locals.

In the province of Helmand: At least two foreign vehicles blown up by home made bombs/mines, resulting in at least three killed and three wounded.  Taliban snipers kill several foreign troops.

The Mujahideen of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan also claim killing several “puppet” forces, meaning Afghan government military and police forces.


World War 3: U.S. Bagram airbase hit by missile attack, excuse for war with Iran?

Taliban (Mujahideen) confirm missile attacks on Bagram.  The Mujahideen of Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan states that Bagram air base has been attacked with missiles at least three times in the past 24 hours.  At least four missiles (unguided rockets?), from overnight attacks, landed within the base compound.  They claim attacks are continuing.

Breaking news reports out of Afghanistan say the Taliban hit the U.S. controlled Bagram air base with at least nine missiles.  Some reports say the attacks took place on New Year’s Eve (western Gregorian calender), as U.S. personnel were celebrating the coming New Year.

Some Afghan government officials say their sources confirm the attacks, but there are no casualties reported.

There’s been no clarification if the attacks were done with guided missiles, or unguided rockets.  Some Taliban sources say they were long range missiles.

Bagram is located in Parwan (aka Parvan) Province, in northwestern Afghanistan.  Ever since the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, Bagram has been the target of many attacks.

Reports say there are many casualties from the latest attacks.  Already there is internet chatter that this might be used by the United States to launch an all out war with Iran.  The U.S. government has ignorantly claimed that the Taliban are linked to Iran (it’s ignorant because the Taliban and the Iranian’s are mortal enemies). Also, all U.S. military bases in the Middle East are within range of Iran’s growing missile systems.

Also, on December 27, 2011, Taliban claimed they launched two missiles at Bagram, with no casualties effected.

World War 3 & One World Government: 12 Warning signs from Argentine Political Analyst

The following warning signs came from Adrian Salbuchi, a political analyst in Argentina.

1) Financial Meltdown. Since 2008, the Global Financial System continues on life-support. Ben Bernanke, Timothy Geithner and the US economic hit team – Robert Rubin, Larry Summers and Goldman Sachs, CitiGroup, JPMorganChase mega-bankers working with the Bank of England and the European Central Bank – have not and will not take any measures to help the populace and ailing economies.  They just funnel trillions to the banking elite, imposing the media myth that certain banks are “too big to fail” (Orwellian Newspeak for “too damn powerful to fail”). Why? Because it’s not governments overseeing, supervising and controlling Goldman Sachs, CitiCorp, HSBC, Deutsche Bank, JPMorganChase, but exactly the other way around…

2) Economic Crises.  Today, “Destructive Extreme Capitalism” [like Mitt Romney’s Bain Capital] is collapsing national and regional economies, reformatting them into international slave-labour Gulag-like entities that Joseph Stalin would envy.   Our woes lie not with the world’s real economy (mostly intact), but with the fake world of finance, banks, and speculation;

3) Social Upheavals.  Meltdowns in Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Iceland and – soon to come – Italy, Spain and others, trigger violent social uprisings, even in the US and UK;

4) Pandemics.  Get ready for more “flu surprises” leading to mandatory vaccinations: a discreet opportunity to slip RFID chips into our bodies and test “intelligent viruses” targeting specific DNA strains.  Racially and ethnically selective viruses as part of mass depopulation campaigns?

5) Global Warming. As the global economy sinks into zero growth mode, economic drivers shift from growth expansion to consumption contraction. Will coming “carbon credits” open the path to full societal control?

6) Terrorist “False Flag” Mega-Attacks. The Elite have this wildcard up their sleeve to jump-start new “crises” as short-cuts towards world government.  Will new “attacks” dwarfing 9/11 justify further global wars, invasions and genocide?  A nuclear weapon over a major city to be blamed on the Elite’s “enemies”?

7) Generalized War in the Middle East. As we speak, naval forces, bombers, entire armies are poised to attack and invade Syria, Iran…

8) Ecological/Environmental “Accidents”. The 1986 Chernobyl nuclear accident sparked the beginning of the end of the former USSR by showing the world and the Soviets themselves that their State could no longer manage their own nuclear facilities.  April 2010 saw the BP “Deepwater Horizon” oil rig eco-catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico; since March 2011, Japan and the world have been grappling with a much larger nuclear accident in the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear complex.  Was foul play involved?

9) Assassination of a major political or religious figure to be blamed on an Elite enemy.  Mossad, CIA, MI6 are really good at playing this type of dirty trick;

10) Attacks on “Rogue States” – Iraq, Libya… Who’s next? Iran? Syria?  Venezuela?  North Korea?

11) Staged “Religious” Event. The growing need of the masses for meaning in their lives makes them easy victims of a Hollywood-staged, 3D virtual reality hologram show, orchestrating a “second coming”.  An electronically engineered “messianic figure” acting in sync with Elite global objectives?   Who would dare go against God himself?

12) Staged “Alien Contact.” This too may be in the works.  For decades, large sectors of world population have been programmed to believe in aliens.  Here too, hologram technology could stage a “space vehicle landing” – on the White House lawn, of course – highlighting the “need” for Mankind to have “unified representation” in the face of extraterrestrials.  Further justification for world government?

Scotland moving fast towards independence from England, independence from NATO, could join Nordic Alliance, yet still be led by the Queen? The Royal Nordic Alliance is a revival of the Hanseatic League, and they’ve got big plans!

“The Scottish Government will of course publish a white paper in advance of the referendum, detailing independence, including the new relationship of equality with England, such as the Queen remaining as our head of state, and this will be the positive platform for Scotland’s future that people will be asked to approve.”-Scottish government statement

In an article found in the Scotsman, Scottish officials are working fast on legislation that would not only free them from the English tyranny but create their own military force.

Plans could also include leaving NATO in favor of a military partnership with the recently created Nordic Alliance. The Nordic Alliance is currently made up of Norway, Sweden and Denmark.

Despite what some bloggers say about Scotland not being Nordic, a check of Scottish history proves a direct connection with Nordic peoples (and lets not forget the even older pan-European Celtic peoples).

However, it’s now clear that while Scotland wants independence from England, it does still want to be part of the Monarchy. I don’t base that on just the official Scottish government statement, but the fact is that the current members of the Nordic Alliance are monarchies, with direct ties to the Queen of England.

So much for Scottish Independence.  In fact, this whole “independence” movement in Scotland could just be part of bigger plans to create a grand Royal Nordic Alliance, with the Queen of England in charge.

According to the HeraldScotland it’s all about money and control. Their article calls it a Scottish-Nordic financial institution that will eventually include Scotland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and possibly  Iceland, Greenland and the Faroe Islands.  These regions were all part of the Hanseatic League in the Middle Ages.

This new Nordic Alliance is part of an anti-government, pro-privatization (pro-business, modern day feudalism) movement:  “…the public sector is failing to engage with this [business, private] sector when it comes to procurement. There is also a serious funding gap, both the difficulty of obtaining ‘micro’ credit from banks and the total absence of any ‘microinvestment mechanism’.”-Anne-Grethe Eckman, Nordic Enterprise Trust

Supporters of the Nordic Alliance movement claim they are doing this for the good of small/micro businesses. They point to the fact that governments seem only interested in helping big businesses. That sounds good, but the major problem I have is the connection of the Nordic Alliance to the monarchies of northern Europe, like the Queen of England. History shows that the little guy always suffers by the hands of Royalty.

I also wonder if this Nordic Alliance movement is also part of a conspiracy to take down the European Union and replace it with a more corporate/private sector centered system.  (research Club of Rome, Trilateral Commission and Bilderberg)

World War 3: Iran will block Strait of Hormuz, if the U.S. is successful in getting oil sanctions imposed, U.S. says that’s all the excuse they need for going to War, oil could hit $500 per barrel

“If sanctions are adopted against Iranian oil, not a drop of oil will pass through the Strait of Hormuz. We take no interest in animosity and hostility, our belief is friendship and brotherhood, but the West will not end its scheming….The enemies will only drop their plots when we put them back in their place!”-Reza Rahimi, Vice President of Iran

More than a third of the world’s oil (carried by tanker ships) passes through the 34 mile (54 kilometer) wide Strait of Hormuz.  In the past few weeks Iranian media have been pushing for selective blocking of the Strait, saying the West is already at War with Iran.  A well known British commentator backs that up saying: War on Iran has already begun….For months the evidence has been growing that a U.S./Israeli stealth war against Iran has already begun, backed by Britain and France.”-Seumas Milne, The Guardian

Some of that evidence includes:

• Two nuclear physicists were killed, and the head of the Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran was wounded, after bombs were attached to their cars or detonated near them in 2010.

• The Stuxnet computer worm infected Iranian nuclear facilities in 2010; numerous reports suggest this was a U.S./Israeli attack to cripple Iranian nuclear centrifuges.

• On November 12, 2011, an explosion destroyed the Revolutionary Guard base at Bid Kaneh, killing 17, including a founder of Iran’s missile program.

• On November 28, 2011, an explosion in the western Iranian city of Isfahan badly damaged a uranium enrichment facility.

• On December 4, 2011, it was proven that the U.S. has been sending military aircraft into Iranian airspace after the IRGC used electronic warfare to bring down an expensive stealth UAV.

Read what “christian” U.S. Senator Rick Santorum said: “There have been scientists turning up dead in Russia and in Iran. There have been computer viruses. There have been problems at their facility. I hope that the United States has been involved with that.”  (doesn’t sound very ‘christian’ like to me)

By the way, recent bills for new sanctions against Iran will make it legal, under U.S. law, to designate civilian scientists as military targets!

In a recent interview with CBS Evening News, U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said the Obama administration now thinks Iran will have nuclear weapons in 2012.  When asked about Israel’s publicly stated plans to attack Iran, Panetta responded: “The United States does not want Iran to develop a nuclear weapon. That’s a red line for us and that’s a red line, obviously, for the Israelis. If we have to do it we will deal with it.”

But U.S. officials also consider the closing of the Strait of Hormuz a reason to bomb Iran. Texas based think tank Stratfor (Strategic Forecasting) said: “The importance of this waterway to both American military and economic interests is difficult to overstate. Considering Washington’s more general, and fundamental, interest in securing freedom of the seas [for U.S. interests only, of course], the U.S. Navy would almost be forced to respond aggressively to any attempt to close the Strait of Hormuz.”

By the way, oil analysts have said that if the Strait of Hormuz was closed for 30 days, or even if one bomb fell on Iran, the price of oil could go as high as $500 per barrel.  Try commuting to work on that!  (maybe this is some kind-a insane conspiracy by the elitist oil industry to drive up oil prices)

 

 

 

 

 

Global Economic War: U.K. prepares for collapse of the Euro, believes Britain will be flooded with economic refugees, Swizterland taking action

Several days ago there were reports that banks around the world were preparing for the demise of the Euro.  Banks are getting ready to go back to older European currencies.

On December 28 the British government discussed contingency plans for such a Euro collapse. Her Majesty’s Treasury (that’s the official title, and proof the Queen of England is no figure head) has announced plans to prevent a flood of currency refugees from overwhelming British banks.

The United Kingdom is part of the European Union, but does not use the Euro.  The British pound has been gaining in value as the Euro, and the U.S. dollar, looses value. The collapse of the Euro could see the value of the British pound skyrocket, which is bad for British exports (making them too expensive to buy, thus breaking Britain’s fragile economy).

It’s not just “The Treasury” that’s making plans, the British Foreign & Commonwealth Office (aka The Foreign Office) announced plans to stop people fleeing the expected chaos of mainland Europe, from flooding into Britain.

The Foreign Office said it would even attempt to rescue British tourists on holiday, and even British expatriates who need help returning to the U.K. 

The British media is also reporting that the rich 10% of Greece, and other EU countries that are in economic trouble, are already transferring large amounts of  wealth to British banks.

This happened to Switzerland a few months ago.  The result was that the value of the Swiss France skyrocketed.  But the Swiss dealt with it in an unusual way; they “attached” the value of their Swiss Franc to the value of the Euro (even though they are not a member of the European Union).

A few days ago there were reports that EU members were going to ground all flights out of their countries, and block all border crossings, to prevent mass exodus of people and cash.  British officials at Whitehall (the part of the British government directly controlled by the Queen of England, and which controls their military, named after a royal palace that once stood there) said they would do the same, but only to prevent foreign people, and their foreign cash, from coming into the United Kingdom.  Whitehall officials said they believe the collapse of the Euro would result in widespread civil unrest in Europe.

 

World War 3: Finland seizes U.S. made Patriot missiles, Germany says legitimate cargo bound for South Korea

“We have impounded the explosives and missiles and asked the Defense Ministry to transport and store them.”-Petri Lounatmaa, Finnish Customs

Finland has cleared an Isle of Man (a British Crown Dependency) registered ship, but only after taking the 69 Patriot missiles and 160 pounds of explosives.

German officials are upset. They claim the missiles came from German inventory, and were properly declared for shipment to South Korea.  Finnish officials basically say Gemany is lying: “Of course, there are legal transports of weapons or defense material (through Finland), but in this case the cargo was marked as containing fireworks. That is quite unusual.”-Paivi Rasanen, Interior Minister of Finland

Finnish port authorities say the 160 pounds of explosives, mainly picric acid (a nitrate based explosive which is also used in fireworks),  were stacked on pallets fully exposed to the elements.  Knowing what it was they began to open crates and that’s when they found the Patriot missiles.  The missiles were in crates marked “fireworks”!

The Finnish government has properly stored the explosives along with the missiles.  Finland is keeping the missiles and explosives, pending further investigation.

The ship, M/S Thor Liberty, is free to sail, but the 11 crew, including the captain, are in custody: “She can sail, but customs is still holding the cargo and the (detained) crew isn’t allowed to leave Finland.”-Markku Koskinen, Port of Kotka