COMMENTARY: NWO Schedule Of Implementation 2017

The NWO is a Maquiavelian plan that has been working its way up for centuries. Today we see how it is all happening right in front of our eyes, but most fail to admit it due to their ignorance or lack of intelligence. It is very sad to see how the world has been destroyed and how little humanity is doing about it. 

“NWO Schedule of Implementation 2017,” Source:

The globalist advance towards the New World Order is analogous to an American football team’s advance towards a touchdown: they can slowly and incrementally drive towards their goal using their running game (small, dull, publicly-unnoticed institutional changes that accumulate over time), or they can quickly leap towards their goal using their passing game (staging big crises like 9/11 that demand large, sudden “solutions”). The purpose of this NWO Schedule of Implementation page is to anticipate, expose, and hopefully prevent their passing plays. By forcing them to grind slowly towards their goals with their ground game, time is bought to allow people to wake up to their agenda and begin to counteract it.

That being said, let’s start examining the goal they’re driving towards and the pass plays they’re setting up to get there quickly…


In order to overcome the UN’s jaded reputation and get people to accept its leadership, they will take it through a “reform” process to rebrand it and give it an image makeover. This reform effort will make it appear as though Western domination and “corruption” of the institution has been ended, and it will include two very important elements…

1) The Security Council will be reformed to include permanent members from all 10 UN regions, and the power of the P5 nations to unilaterally veto resolutions will be eliminated. The elimination of unilateral veto power will be sold as being necessary to allow the UN to effectively address divisive conflicts, but its real purpose will be to ensure that no nation can insulate itself from UN action by casting a veto. All nations will be equally helpless against the multilateral UN mob and the Occulted Powers who pull their strings.

[The Occulted Powers are the intermarried / interacting network of local royals and international Jewish banksters, along with their subordinate secret society commoners (such as the Freemasons) who run things for them from behind the facade of democratic government. When you lump these OPs together with their publicly visible minions that operate at the government/banking / corporate level, you get the “globalists” to whom I so often refer.]

2) The size and powers of the UN’s military and police forces will be significantly increased to ensure that “no unilateral power can ever again threaten world peace.” I wrote about this element in a previous entry…


Putin’s Drive to Militarize the UN

Once the UN-centered New World Order is put in place, the globalists have scripted a honeymoon period during which things will look much better than they do now. But once we hit the 3.5 year mark, Putin and the UN will start doing some ominous things with the upgraded military and police powers the UN will then possess.

It should come as no surprise, then, that less than a month after Putin was handed the Russian Presidency by Yeltsin, he was hosting the UN Secretary-General and talking about strengthening the “authority and influence of the UN”…

A few months later, he attended the UN Millennium Summit and started getting specific about increasing the UN’s power…


…from The People’s Daily. Here is an excerpt…

“During the meeting, they discussed conflict resolution, rapid reaction capability for peacekeepers, post-conflict reconstruction, and the U.N. reform.

Putin expressed interest in reviving the U.N. Military Staff Committee which coordinates military activity of the five permanent members of the Security Council in support of international peace and security, but which has never been effective.”

Now if we look into the UN Military Staff Committee, we see this…

“The Military Staff Committee (MSC) is the United Nations Security Council subsidiary body whose role, as defined by the United Nations Charter, is to plan UN military operations and assist in the regulation of armaments.

The greatest purpose of the MSC, arising from Article 45 of the UN Charter, was intended to be providing command staff for a set of air-force contingents. These contingents, provided by the Permanent 5 members (P5) of the Security Council (the People’s Republic of China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States) to be held at ready for the discretionary use of the United Nations.” – From Wikipedia

Clearly, Putin wants the “reformed” UN he will lead to have military teeth. But his (and his globalist handlers’) plans go beyond mere military power, as is shown by this Russian statement at the UN
… Here are some key passages [with my comments added in brackets]…

>>> Russia places a high emphasis on the role that peacekeeping [UN intervention in the internal affairs of nation-states] plays in maintaining international peace and security…

we attach great importance to the establishment of the Peacebuilding Commission, which operates at a cross-juncture of the activities of the Security Council, the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council as well as international financial institutions[the UN “Peacebuilding” Commission is designed to move in after the UN military rolls into an area and alter the political and economic order of the invaded area to suit the globalists; it is essentially a colonizing force]

The importance of the UN civil police is increasing. We follow with great interest the implementation of the Summit’s decision to establish a Standing police capacity

It is fundamentally important that all these activities be carried out in accordance with… rational division of labor with the regional organizations. In this connection, I would like to stress our conviction that relevant capacities of the Commonwealth of Independent States, Organisation of the Collective Security Treaty and Shanghai Cooperation Organisation might be in high demand. [in other words, they want the UN to use peacekeepers that the Russians and Chinese have trained] I note with satisfaction, that our efforts in strengthening the UN peacekeeping capacity are bearing fruits…

The Peacekeepers’ Training Centre of the Advanced Police Training Academy of the Russian Ministry of Interior organized between the 2nd and 30th of November, 2006 a course “The Civilian Policeman in the UN Missions” for thirty-eight representatives of law enforcement institutions from ten African states.

In accordance with the decision of the Russian Government, the Ministry of the Interior is planning on training up to 80 people a year till 2010. The next course of training African peacekeepers in Russia is scheduled for the period from March 1st to April 2nd of this year… [so Russia has been recruiting and training agents to embed in UN civil police forces that come from nations they don’t control]

In conclusion, I would like to touch upon one more issue. We believe that the improvement of the thorough consideration of all military aspects of specific peacekeeping operations by the UN Security Council would promote greater efficiency of all aspects of UN peacekeeping. The Charter body – the Military Staff Committee (MSC) that is called upon to ensure an appropriate level of military expertise for the UN Security Council decisions, which have a military aspect, might provide a contribution to this. That is why the President of Russia V. Putin set forth the idea of the MSC’s revitalisation at the Millennium Summit. <<<

“Peacekeeping” is an Orwellian doublespeak word for “war making.” It involves the UN invasion of a nation-state in order to produce an internal outcome the UN desires. And according to the globalist / Putin plan for a stronger UN, it will involve…

1) more effective application of UN military force, followed by

2) UN civil police to weed out “troublemakers” and pacify the population, and

3) UN “Peacebuilding” agents to remake the affected area’s political and economic structure in accordance with globalist guidelines.

With this 3-step colonization protocol set before us, it’s not hard to imagine where they’re going with it. During the first 3.5 years of the NWO, they might use it only in areas where there are humanitarian crises. This will allow them to practice and fine-tune their approach. But after the 3.5 year mark, they’ll start using the protocol in areas that contain…

> large pockets of resistance to the UN (because “the UN is the source of world peace, so if you’re against the UN, you are a threat to world peace”), and

> large pockets of religious “extremists” (those who cling to traditional religious ideas over the UN’s “It’s All Good” One World Religion).

In both cases, the globalists will use false-flag shootings and bombings to simulate conflict and justify UN intervention.


So how will the globalists get the nations to agree to these reforms, you ask?

Their tried-and-true method is to offer their plans as a solution to a crisis they deliberately create. If they apply that standard method to UN reform, it would mean…

1) They will orchestrate a war that the UN can’t prevent due to the existence of P5 veto powers. The current war in Syria is perfect for that purpose. Note the competing resolutions on Syria that were circulated in the Security Council last October; neither had a chance because both sides had vetoes…
…From the UN website

2) They will be sure that all of the P5 nations get a serious bloody nose from the unprevented conflict. The harm they’ll suffer will provide the motivation to surrender their veto powers “so it will never happen again.”

As to how these bloody noses will manifest, one particular scenario is already being resurrected by the globalist propagandists…

…It is the “Armies of Rome versus ISIS final battle” scenario.

The globalists already attempted an East vs. West version of this scenario back in early September, but now they seem poised to attempt a Trump + Putin version. In this version, the combined “Christian Crusader armies” of Putin and Trump will fight the final battle against ISIS and Turkey, which will cause ISIS to unleash its big terror finale in the P5 nations. The resulting terror attacks will be sufficiently shocking to convince people that the UN must be strengthened and P5 veto power must be surrendered “so something like this can never happen again.”

If you’ve been paying attention to the preparatory propaganda for the Syria endgame, you’ll know that…

1) Putin has been presented as the great savior of Christians all over the world…
…From The Christian Post

2) And now, Trump too has been presented as a Christian…
…and a defender of the faithful…
…Also from The Christian Post

This establishes the potential for a united Christian front against ISIS, which will supposedly trigger ISIS’s long-awaited apocalyptic showdown against the religion of Rome.

3) All P5 nations are now engaged in the Syrian conflict, including China…
…From RT

4) And the propaganda organs have made sure to point out that “thousands” of China’s Uyghurs have joined ISIS in Syria (and might go back home to commit terrorist acts)…

Here is a notable excerpt…

>>> The communist superpower has long been concerned about a growing number of “Chinese-origin” terrorists tied to the abhorrent jihadi sect.

And Mr Li, who heads the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, warned returning jihadis could pose a “major” threat to China.

According to India Today, he said: “I believe this will be a major source or threat because if these people come back to the country of origin they could constitute a considerable threat to the security of the country of origin.” <<<

So all of the P5 nations supposedly have returned ISIS fighters or ISIS “refugees” inside their countries. Their alleged presence will provide cover for each nation’s security services to actually carry out the attacks (ISIS is just a front, like Wikileaks and Snowden, through which the globalist intelligence agencies do their mischief).

5) At least two specific high-shock attack methods have been foreshadowed by the propaganda organs. The first is dirty bombs…

…From a March 2016 Google News search for ISIS “dirty bomb”

And the second attack method is airliner downings using MANPADS
…From Newsweek

When it comes to this “ISIS MANPADS” threat against airliners, it is important to note that both the US mainstream media and Russian alternative media have hinted that Obama has started handing out MANPADS to the “Syrian rebels” (as of December 23, 2016). This preparatory propaganda is being put out so the coming attacks can be blamed on ISIS (and Al Qaeda)…

…From The Washington Times (top) and Sputnik (bottom)

Putting all this together, this is the scenario the globalists are putting in motion…

Trump joins Putin in the final assault against “ISIS,” and the intelligence agencies subsequently carry out “ISIS’s” final terror barrage. After watching their airliners getting blasted out of the sky and/or seeing areas of their cities rendered temporarily uninhabitable by dirty bombs, the stunned people of the P5 nations undergo a propaganda barrage about how the UN could have prevented what happened if only it had been stronger and unencumbered by P5 vetoes. And with that pretext established, the newly elected pro-Putin Western leaders of 2017 join with the BRICS in “reforming” the UN.

Now that we’ve covered what the NWO will look like politically, let’s take a look at what it’ll look like financially and economically…


I first wrote about the Enhanced China Model in November 2015…

>>> From my current knowledge of what the globalists have planned, they seem to be aiming for an “Enhanced China Model” for the global economy. In China, the central government dictates the direction of the economy, but that direction is pursued with a capitalistic approach. And if the central planners don’t like something that’s going on in the capitalistic level, they step in and crush it. This is how I suspect the new globalist economy will operate.

At the UN level, the neo-Roman authorities will steer the direction of the economy (such as with the “Sustainable Development Agenda”), but they will allow the corporations to pursue that direction under an Austrian Economic Framework. That way, they’re in control (such as in a communist/socialist system), but things actually get done (such as in a capitalist system). <<<

So the socialist/communist New World Order you’ve been programmed to fear is the decoy NWO. The real NWO will be based on Austrian Economics operating within UN-defined (globalist-defined) boundaries.

To learn more about who’s really behind the Austrian Economics fad, read these entries…

The coming BRICS gold standard, Ron Paul, and the Rockefellers

Like it or not, here is more on the Rockefeller connection to Austrian economics

Turning our attention to the IMF, the first steps towards its “reform” were taken early last year when the 2010 quota reforms took effect. But the really big step will occur in the near future when China offers a portion of their gold reserves to help provide gold “backing” for the SDR. In return for their gold, China will receive a large special allocation of SDRs, and these new SDRs will dilute the US’s share of total SDRs to below the 15% level. This will eliminate America’s veto power in the IMF, which will unleash even more reforms. At the time this is done, we’ll also see a Chinaman replace Christine Lagarde as the Managing Director of the IMF.

As for the SDR, moves towards its reform and wider use were taken last year when China’s renminbi was added to its currency basket and SDR-denominated bonds were sold by the World Bank and Standard Chartered Bank…
…From the (the article is a short and informative read, so have a look at it)

It is the intention of the globalists to replace the US dollar as the primary reserve currency with the SDR and then promote the SDR’s use as a global consumer currency. To see their detailed plans for replacing the dollar with the SDR, read this speech given by Zhou Xiaochuan, the Governor of China’s central bank (and the currently designated replacement for Christine Lagarde at the IMF)…
…The speech was given during the depths of the 2007-2009 financial crisis and follows the standard globalist “let’s create a problem, then offer our solution” template. He begins by pointing to the problems posed by the (engineered) economic meltdown, then he goes on to explain how a new kind of global reserve currency would solve all those problems. Finally, he makes his recommendation…

“The scope of using the SDR should be broadened, so as to enable it to fully satisfy the [IMF] member countries’ demand for a reserve currency.”

And to see how the globalists will promote the SDR as the world’s consumer currency, have a look at this Economist article from 1988…
…Here is an excerpt…

>>> THIRTY years from now, Americans, Japanese, Europeans, and people in many other rich countries, and some relatively poor ones will probably be paying for their shopping with the same currency. Prices will be quoted not in dollars, yen or D-marks but in, let’s say, the phoenix. The phoenix will be favoured by companies and shoppers because it will be more convenient than today’s national currencies, which by then will seem a quaint cause of much disruption to economic life in the last twentieth century…

…The phoenix would probably start as a cocktail of national currencies, just as the Special Drawing Right is today. In time, though, its value against national currencies would cease to matter, because people would choose it for its convenience and the stability of its purchasing power…

…The phoenix zone would impose tight constraints on national governments. There would be no such thing, for instance, as a national monetary policy. The world phoenix supply would be fixed by a new central bank, descended perhaps from the IMF…

…Governments are far from ready to subordinate their domestic objectives to the goal of international stability. Several more big exchange-rate upsets, a few more stockmarket crashes and probably a slump or two will be needed before politicians are willing to face squarely up to that choice…

…Pencil in the phoenix for around 2018, and welcome it when it comes. <<<

To learn more about this, read Mainstream globalist propaganda reveals East/West conflict is a farce.

Now that we’ve seen what the real NWO will look like, let’s move our focus to the globalists’ two paths for getting us there: the war path and the peace path

Last year under Obama’s reign, the war path involved a direct military conflict between Russia and the US in Syria. It was to be orchestrated under the pretext of “the Western globalists’ last-gasp effort to save their agenda before Trump takes office.” But now that we’re approaching Trump’s inauguration, the revised war path involves…

Just like last year’s planned war option, these conflicts would create a global economic collapse due to market reactions to the war in the Middle East and the temporary shutdown of trade and financial payments between the US and China due to the war in the South China Sea. The rest of 2017 would be devoted to Putin, Trump, Li, and the newly elected “anti-Establishment” leaders of Europe putting the world back together both politically and economically. The “reformed” UN Complex (the UN, IMF, and World Bank) and a new “commodities-backed” financial system will be the result of their efforts. So the New World Order could be in full effect by late 2017 or early 2018.

The peace path bypasses open military conflict and instead uses a last-gasp “ISIS” terror barrage to plunge the world into an unconcealable economic depression…

  • The terror barrage would result in widespread calls to “reform” the UN to prevent a conflict like Syria’s from ever again spinning out of control.
  • The terrible economic conditions, possibly augmented with a Wikileaks operation targeting the EU’s “Establishment” leaders, would lead to popular unrest in Europe and the election of “anti-Establishment” leaders, particularly in the P5 nations (France and the UK).
  • And like the war path, the remainder of 2017 would be devoted to “reforming” the existing world order into the New World Order.

Now let’s look a little deeper at the core elements of the peace path…

1) The globalists want their controlled-opposition “anti-Establishment” figures to win the European elections of 2017. To ensure their “(s)election” occurs in a convincing way, they will do most or all of the following…

  • Increase economic pressures in the EU nations.
  • Continue the migrant offensive against the European populace.
  • Conduct more “terrorist” attacks in Europe.
  • Launch more EU policies that are blatantly outrageous.
  • Unleash their Wikileaks front on the “Establishment” politicians and parties of the EU nations.

2) As was covered earlier in this entry, the globalists want to provide a pretext for taking away the veto powers of the P5 nations in the UN. The crisis which precipitates this solution could be one of these potential events…

  • A global terror wave that is unleashed after Putin and Trump team up to “annihilate ISIS.”
  • A mass casualty event in Syria. The most effective approach would be to unleash a nuclear explosion in a Syrian city, and the most likely target of such an attack would be Damascus (in order to artificially fulfill the Biblical prophecy of Damascus becoming a “ruinous heap”). If such a nuclear attack does occur, expect Bashar Assad to survive.
  • As a third, low-key option, the “Anti-Establishment” leaders could point to the total Middle Eastern carnage caused by the “Western Establishment” from the 2003 invasion of Iraq through the ongoing regime change operation in Syria as ample justification for doing away with Security Council vetoes.

3) The globalists want to transition to a financial system that revolves around their “multilateral institutions” and a “gold backed” IMF SDR. I use quotes around the term “gold backed” because the new currencies won’t have a traditional gold backing; it will be more of a gold valuation, but the public will perceive it as gold backing. The crisis which precipitates this solution could take one of these forms…

  • An economic collapse triggered by the final “ISIS” terror barrage.
  • An economic collapse triggered by a deadlock between Trump and Congress over the US budget and debt limit
  • An economic collapse triggered by shocking developments in the EU (like the election of Le Pen and other “anti-Establishment” figures) and their effect on weak, systemically important financial institutions (like Deutsche Bank).
  • As a fourth, low-key option, the Western “anti-Establishment” leaders could simply resolve to move the world out of the economic doldrums by instituting the new system in collaboration with the BRICS nations.

With these basic strategies in mind, let’s start looking at specific times that offer opportunities to advance these strategy paths…

> Mid-March to mid-April: This is when Trump and Congress will lock horns over the debt limit and the budget deficit. Given the Democrats’ scripted insanity towards Trump, they might attempt to trigger a US government shutdown and debt default in order to sabotage Trump’s presidency early.

> Mid-September to mid-October: If Trump and Congress delay their conflict over the debt limit and budget deficit till the end of the fiscal year, the ugliness will begin in this timeframe.

> First half of the year: This is when Trump and Putin will likely join forces to double-team ISIS and set off the jihadist holy war. It is also the likely timeframe for Trump and Xi to start fighting. The combination of Trump’s mouth and the Chicoms’ hypersensitivity shouldn’t leave us waiting long for the conflict.

To track how this year’s agenda is unfolding, see these articles…

Globalist Agenda Watch 2017: Update 1 – The globalists will take down China’s Xi this year (+ Xi’s role under the peace path to the NWO)

Globalist Agenda Watch 2017: Update 2 – What Xi’s speech in Davos tells us about the globalist strategy for economic restructuring

Globalist Agenda Watch 2017: Updates 3-4 – The first week of the Lubavitch presidency & The globalist schedule for the Trump-Putin Summit

Globalist Agenda Watch 2017: Update 5 – The globalist preparations for the Ides of March

Globalist Agenda Watch 2017: Update 6 – China’s coming humiliation in the South China Sea

Globalist Agenda Watch 2017: Update 7 – Why the globalists might replace Trump with Rand Paul

Much love…

TPP Trump

Trump Withdraws U.S. From Trans-Pacific Partnership Deal

Finally, some good news! This is an important move for America and for the world as well. Let’s see what the reaction will be, we’ll have to watch carefully and see, but it was a slap for the evil tribe that wants control. 

TPP Trump

“Trump withdraws US from Trans-Pacific Partnership deal,” Source:

US President Donald Trump has signed an executive order formally withdrawing the US from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal, following through on a promise from his presidential campaign.

“We’ve been talking about this for a long time,” Trump said as he signed the executive order in an Oval Office ceremony on Monday, calling the move a “great thing for the American worker”.

In the same ceremony, Trump also signed an order imposing a federal hiring freeze, with the exception of the military, and a directive banning US non-governmental organizations receive federal funding from providing abortions abroad.

The TPP accord was negotiated by former President Barack Obama’s administration but never approved by US Congress.

Signed by 12 countries in 2015, the TPP trade agreement had yet to go into effect and the US’ withdrawal is likely to sound its death knell.

It had been the main economic pillar of the Obama administration’s “pivot” to the Asia-Pacific region to counter China.

Its signatories are Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the US and Brunei. They together represent 40 percent of the world economy.

Trump has sparked worries in Japan and elsewhere in the Asia-Pacific with his opposition to the TPP and his campaign demands for US allies to pay more for their security.

The new president also met a dozen manufacturers in the US at the White House on Monday, pledging to slash regulations and cut corporate taxes, but warning them he would take action on trade deals he felt were unfair.

Trump, who took office on Friday, has promised to bring manufacturing plants back to the US, an issue he said helped him win the November 8 election.

He has not hesitated to call out by name companies that he thinks should bring outsourced production back home.



Time Bomb


This film was produced in 1965 at the height of the Civil Rights movement in America. But, instead of being out of date, it provides lessons and insights as to how the enemies of freedom manipulate people into acts of self-destruction. This is happening in America today and people have not yet realized that they keep falling into the trap. What is Black Lives Matter if not a tool to divide us? What was the Bolshevique Revolution all about if not a tool to incite hatred? The number one enemy of freedom is Communism. Communism is Talmudic Judaism.

Talmudic Jews are after the destruction of all religions because they want to be ‘the religion’ of the world, they want to control and have the Goyim under their evil command. We have to open our eyes to this.


VIDEO: The Perestroika Deception & World War III

We recently posted, for the second time, Anatoliy Golitsyn’s eBook: “The Perestroika Deception – Memoranda to the Central Intelligence Agency.” If you have not read it yet (you can download it here), you might want to listen to the videos below, which discuss what Golitsyn warned us of in his book which is exactly what is happening today. 

Dimitri Manuilski, Professor at the Lenin School of Political Warfare, in Moscow (1930) said: “The bourgeoisie will have to be put to sleep.  So we shall begin by launching the most spectacular peace movement on record…The capitalist countries, stupid and decadent, will rejoice to cooperate in their own destruction.  They will leap at another chance to be friends.” 

Don’t let Communism deceive you. You might also want to check what Yuri Bezmenov, Russian Dissident, and ex-KGB agent exposed during a television interview in the United States in the 80’s. You can find the video on our website by typing his name in the search box on our homepage. It is CRUCIAL that people understand Russia’s role in the world. 

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3


Putin: Key Player in the “New World Order”

Shortly before getting on the plane, 10-year-old Miguel Calehr, as countless children do before flying, asked his mother what would happen when it crashed. “Come on, don’t be silly, you’ve been traveling already so many times,” Miguel’s mom, Samira Calehr, remembers telling her nervous son. “Everything’s going to be OK.” The boy was still frightened despite his mother’s soothing words. But with his older brother, Shaka, 19, by his side, Miguel shuffled through the security checkpoint anyway.


“Mama, I love you,” Miguel said nervously before waving goodbye and boarding the flight from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur. It would be the last time Samira would hug her two boys. The two siblings, leaving their middle brother (who was also their best friend) behind because the Malaysian Airlines flight was fully booked, were on their way to visit Grandma in Indonesia. They never made it. Instead, along with 296 others on Flight MH17, Miguel and Shaka were blown out of the sky over Ukrainian airspace on July 17.

Samira and the whole family are devastated and will never fully recover. “If I could just turn back time. I didn’t listen to him. I don’t know, I have no words to say,” the heartbroken mother told CNN. “Why didn’t they take my life? They are still young, they still have a future. Why? Why the children? Why not me?” The boys’ grandmother, Yasmine Calehr, could not hold back her tears either. “Everybody is crying, everybody is losing something that belonged to them, but we feel like we have lost ourselves as well,” she said.

All across Ukraine, thousands of other families are mourning the loss of loved ones as well. According to the United Nations, by early September, more than 3,000 people had been killed in the ongoing Ukranian conflict. The real numbers are probably even higher as the civil war — fueled by the Russian government on one side and Western powers on the other — continues to claim more victims. The shoot-down of MH17 served to further inflame those geopolitical tensions.

In Moscow, strongman Vladimir Putin blames the West for the carnage, while many in the West blame Putin, seeing him as a communist thug.

Other Westerners, horrified by the actions of their own out-of-control political leadership, have started to view Putin and his regime as an obstacle to the machinations of the U.S. and European Union governments — perhaps not a force for good, but at least no worse than establishment insiders in the West. Even in the American “Liberty Movement,” Putin has been winning friends among those who view him as a roadblock to globalism.

In Brussels and Washington, D.C., meanwhile, President Obama and various European leaders point to the Kremlin as the real culprit behind the bloodshed in Ukraine. Indeed, many neoconservatives and establishment Democrats imagine that Putin threatens freedom in the West. The saber rattling over Ukraine, coming not long after similar barb trading between Putin and Obama surrounding the war in Syria, has only added fuel to the fire.

But what if everything is not quite as it seems? What if — despite the “East vs. West” and “New Cold War” hysteria whipped up by politicians and the mainstream media — both sides are actually working toward the same goals using largely the same means? Sounds impossible, right? The evidence, however, suggests it is not only possible — it is exactly what is happening.

“Regional” Approach to World Order

Despite the saber rattling, globalists on both sides of the East-West divide refer to their goal as the creation of a “New World Order.” This “order” they speak of, as we shall show, represents, essentially, a global system of political and economic control over humanity. And Putin, a former KGB boss, is following precisely the strategies toward world order outlined openly by the same Western establishment he purportedly stands as a bulwark against. He often refers to his vision as the imposition of a new, “multi-polar” world order. But a growing amount of evidence shows that it is exactly the same order sought by globalist Western powerbrokers.

One of the keys to understanding Putin’s crucial role in imposing the “New World Order” on humanity is a grasp of how its proponents plan to build it. Rather than aiming to foist a full-blown totalitarian global government on the world all at once, top globalists around the world have outlined a different strategy. In essence, the plot aims to divide the planet’s people and nations into massive “regions” ruled by supranational institutions — such as the European Union, which is now responsible for the bulk of European laws — virtually free of public control or oversight. The outline of that plan is now in full public view.

Indeed, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger — one of the most visible and outspoken globalist “New World Order” schemers — has explained the strategy openly on numerous occasions. Most recently, writing in the Wall Street Journal on August 29, Kissinger, using opaque and rather unexciting writing, explained how the process should work. “The contemporary quest for world order will require a coherent strategy to establish a concept of order within the various regions and to relate these regional orders to one another,” he explained in the op-ed, headlined “Henry Kissinger on the Assembly of a New World Order.”

But the strategy is nothing new. In 1995, fellow globalist and ex-National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, architect of David Rockefeller’s infamous Trilateral Commission, outlined essentially the same plan. “We do not have a New World Order…. We cannot leap into world government in one quick step,” he said in 1995 at the “State of the World Forum,” convened by former Soviet dictator Mikhail Gorbachev and backed by the Rockefellers and other establishment forces in the West. “In brief, the precondition for eventual globalization — genuine globalization — is progressive regionalization, because thereby we move toward larger, more stable, more cooperative units.”

Among the most obvious examples highlighting the trend is the European Union, which is further along than any other regional regime in crushing national sovereignty and ruling over diverse nations by bureaucratic decree. Former Soviet dictator Gorbachev, an outspoken proponent of the “New World Order,” approvingly referred to the Brussels-based super-state as “the new European Soviet” — under communism, of course, a “Soviet” was a governmental council used to control the people and prevent counterrevolution. Gorbachev was correct in more ways than one.

While the Sovietes que EU serves as a model for other areas of the world, it is hardly alone. Closer to home in North America, top globalists such as former general and CIA chief David Petraeus, a member of the globalist-minded Council on Foreign Relations and the shadowy Bilderberg group, openly acknowledged what comes next earlier this year. “After America comes North America,” Petraeus said confidently in answering the question about what comes after the United States, the theme of a panel discussion he participated in. “Are we on the threshold of the North American decade, question mark? I threw that away — threw away the question mark — and boldly proclaimed the coming North American decade, says the title now.” As in Europe, the foundation of it all was a misnamed “free trade” agreement.

Putin’s Eurasian Union

Putin’s saber rattling over Ukraine is providing a rationale for continued Western integration — via the EU, NATO, and the “transatlantic partnership” — to counter the Russian bear. But in addition, Putin is also pursuing a “New World Order” via the regionalization approach. Chief among the schemes, for now at least, is the “Eurasian Union,” which brings together the regimes ruling Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. Eventually, Putin and his counterparts hope to expand the union to include other former Soviet regimes in the region, particularly members of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). In late May, the three strongmen signed what Putin described as a “historic” treaty ushering in the “Eurasian Economic Union.”

Many analysts see the developments as the ongoing re-emergence of the Soviet Union. In a 2011 piece by Putin about the scheming published by Izvestia, headlined “A new integration project for Eurasia: The future in the making,” the former KGB boss denied that his emerging regional union represented a rebirth of the USSR. However, his words revealed an almost total adherence to the publicly announced Western globalist strategy for building the New World Order — using progressive regionalization of power on the road to true global government while manufacturing and exploiting crises along the way.

“It took Europe 40 years to move from the European Coal and Steel Community to the full European Union,” Putin observed in theIzvestia op-ed, now published on the website of the Kremlin’s diplomatic mission to the EU. “The establishment of the Customs Union and the Common Economic Space is proceeding at a much faster pace because we could draw on the experience of the EU and other regional associations.” Indeed, even the harmonized Eurasian regulatory regime being imposed via the regional scheme is “in most cases consistent with European standards,” he added. Soon, it may be compatible with regulations in “North America,” too, as the EU-North America “Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership” moves along.

As for Putin and company’s broader vision, again, it may as well have been spelled out by Kissinger in one of his “New World Order” op-eds. Putin wrote:

“We suggest a powerful supranational association capable of becoming one of the poles in the modern world and serving as an efficient bridge between Europe and the dynamic Asia-Pacific region. Alongside other key players and regional structures, such as the European Union, the United States, China and APEC, the Eurasian Union will help ensure global sustainable development.” Sustainable development, of course, as regular readers of this magazine know well, represents the pinnacle of the Western globalist vision for its new order — centralized, global control over every facet of human life.

Putin also explained that his regional regime would be “based on WTO principles,” referring to the globalist World Trade Organization. Like the other regional building “blocs” of the New World Order, it will pursue the same goals. “The Eurasian Union will be based on universal integration principles as an essential part of Greater Europe united by shared values of freedom, democracy, and market laws,” he explained.

Eventually, as part of the globalist strategy, the quest for world order will have to “relate these regional orders to one another,” as Kissinger recently put it. Again, Putin follows the line. “Russia and the EU agreed to form a common economic space and coordinate economic regulations without the establishment of supranational structures back in 2003,” he wrote. “In line with this idea, we proposed setting up a harmonized community of economies stretching from Lisbon to Vladivostok, a free trade zone and even employing more sophisticated integration patterns. We also proposed pursuing coordinated policies in industry, technology, the energy sector, education, science, and also to eventually scrap visas. These proposals have not been left hanging in midair; our European colleagues are discussing them in detail.”

Integration with the EU is on the agenda, too, though it may have to wait for Ukraine to settle down. “Soon the Customs Union, and later the Eurasian Union, will join the dialogue with the EU,” Putin said. “As a result, apart from bringing direct economic benefits, accession to the Eurasian Union will also help countries integrate into Europe sooner and from a stronger position…. In addition, a partnership between the Eurasian Union and EU that is economically consistent and balanced will prompt changes in the geo-political and geo-economic setup of the continent as a whole with a guaranteed global effect.”

Ultimately, as Putin makes clear, the whole world will be involved. “We believe that a solution might be found in devising common approaches from the bottom up, first within the existing regional institutions, such as the EU, NAFTA, APEC, ASEAN inter alia, before reaching an agreement in a dialogue between them,” he wrote.

“These are the integration bricks that can be used to build a more sustainable global economy.”

As an example of how it could work, Putin pointed to the two largest regional regimes on the continent, the EU and his “currently under construction” Eurasian Union.

“In building cooperation on the principles of free trade rules and compatible regulation systems they are in a position to disseminate these principles, including through third parties and regional institutions, all the way from the Atlantic to the Pacific Oceans,” he said. “They will thus create an area that will be economically harmonized…. At that point, it will make sense to engage in a constructive dialogue on the fundamentals of cooperation with the countries of the Asia-Pacific region, North America and other regions.”

Of course, Putin is hardly the only glob­alist pursuing that vision. Senior members of the Western establishment have been openly promoting the exact same strategy. In late 2012, for example, top EU and Russian leaders, including Putin, met in Brussels for the 30th EU-Russia Summit.

“By working together, the EU and Russia can make a decisive contribution to global governance and regional conflict resolution, to global economic governance in the G8 and G20, and to a broad range of international and regional issues,” explained European Council President Herman Van Rompuy, who met with Kissinger and other top globalists at the Bilderberg summit shortly before being appointed to his post as “president” of Europe. “I would like to congratulate President Putin for taking over the presidency of G20.”

Putin Visits Latin American Despots to Push New World Order

Putin has been pursuing the “regionalization” approach to the new world order not only in Eurasia but on the other side of the Atlantic, where he is rekindling old Soviet-era alliances with the most virulent anti-American regimes in America’s so-called backyard.

In July, for example, both Putin and Communist Chinese dictator Xi Jinping, an extremely close ally of the Kremlin, visited Latin America to push what they described as a new “international order.” In addition to boosting relations between their regimes and the region’s totalitarian-minded rulers, Putin and Xi signed huge deals with their counterparts in the Western Hemisphere on everything from trade and economic cooperation to military issues and espionage. More than a few analysts pointed out that the official Sino-Russo trips illustrated the fast-shifting geopolitical scene, with the world being shepherded in controlled fashion toward the new, “multi-polar” world order — featuring a neutered United States, strong regional groupings, and more unaccountable regional and global “governance.”

From the start, Putin emphasized that  regionalization was among the major purposes of his trip.

“We are interested in [a] strong, economically stable and politically independent, united Latin America that is becoming an important part of the emerging polycentric world order,” he said.

The ex-KGB boss also touted multiple integration schemes as partners in his efforts — especially the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), which includes all governments in the Americas except the United States and Canada.

It is not just CELAC, founded in recent years by Latin American socialists with strong Sino-Russo support as a “counterweight” to U.S. “imperialism,” that Putin is interested in. In fact, the Russian strongman said Moscow is “open to substantive interaction with all integration formations in the Latin American region.” That would include the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), the Common Market of the South (Mercosur), the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA), the Pacific Alliance, the Central American Integration System (SICA), and the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), Putin said in Havana.

“It is vital that all these associations, as they develop their external relations, should work towards the unity of Latin American countries … both politically and ideologically,” Putin said. “We hope that consolidation of multilateral cooperation will be an additional factor in the successful development of our bilateral relations with Latin American partners.” Similar trends are taking place around the world, the Russian ruler observed, saying, “Integration processes in Latin America reflect to a large extent the worldwide regional integration tendencies and indicate the pursuit of political consolidation in the region and reinforcement of its influence on global affairs.”

Chinese Communist ruler Xi, whose regime now regularly calls for a “New World Order,” and Putin unveiled a new-world “development bank” run by the socialist- and communist-minded BRICS regimes — Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa — when the two autocratic rulers met in Brazil in mid-July. Discussions on the international banking outfit, supposedly designed to serve as a “counterweight” to Western-dominated institutions, have been ongoing for years. At this year’s annual BRICS meeting, the five regimes finally signed the deal to put it all together.

More than a few analysts have wildly misdiagnosed what the latest developments mean, claiming that the new BRICS bank somehow represents a “challenge” to the Western establishment’s vision for what it calls a “New World Order.” In reality, though, most of the BRICS regimes and their allies have strong backing from the U.S. and European political class. And they are all pushing virtually the same nightmarish plot for a “New World Order” — at least if their own public declarations and statements are to be believed.

In June, Beijing and over 130 other national governments at the G77 signed a declaration calling for a “New World Order to Live Well.” It is, of course, the same order pushed by Obama, Kissinger, Brzezinski, and others. Billionaire glob­alist and Rothschild dynasty protégé George Soros, another key player in the emerging global order, has previously called for Beijing, one of Putin’s closest allies, to “own” the “New World Order.”

UN boss Ban Ki-moon was even at the Bolivia summit to celebrate the “New World Order” being pushed by the Third World regimes. He praised the ruthless governments assembled there, calling on them to keep agitating for autocratic “sustainable development” and “solutions” to “climate change,” a key pillar of the “global governance” schemes aimed at shackling humanity.

“All countries need to act on these priorities — individually and collectively,” Ban told attendees, claiming the “fate of billions” depended on the success of their efforts. “That is how I understand the theme of this summit — a New World Order for Living Well.” As the largest bloc of governments in the UN, he added, they have a “key role” to play in advancing the global outfit’s goals.

Putin and the “Globalization” Strategy on World Order

The other key element of globalist strategy, also outlined in the recent Wall Street Journal piece written by Kissinger in late August, involves the imposition of what he described as a “structure of international rules and norms” that “must be fostered as a matter of common conviction.” In other words, alongside the “regionalization” approach to global governance, truly global structures must be built in tandem to eventually run the emerging “New World Order” as the regional blocs become integrated.

A crucial component of the globalist New World Order is the eventual creation of truly global monetary and financial governance. On both fronts, Putin has helped lead the charge. In 2009, the Kremlin even published a statement outlining its priorities ahead of the G20 summit, demanding the creation of a “supranational reserve currency to be issued by international institutions as part of a reform of the global financial system.” The IMF, the Kremlin statement said, should consider using its proto-global currency known as “Special Drawing Rights,” or SDRs, as a “super-reserve currency accepted by the whole of the international community.” The basket of national currencies undergirding the SDR would be expanded, too.

The same year, Putin protégé Dmitry Medvedev, then serving as Russia’s “president,” pulled what he called a “united future world currency” coin out of his pocket at a G8 summit. The coin featured the words “unity in diversity.” Then, he explained to the audience that it “means they’re getting ready. I think it’s a good sign that we understand how interdependent we are.” In June of 2010, Medvedev was at it again. “We are making plans for the future,” he gushed at an international economic forum in St. Petersburg, Russia. “We are talking about creating other reserve currencies, and we are counting on other countries to understand this.”

Unsurprisingly, other “countries” — Western governments and politicians, really — did understand that. Then-French President Nicolas Sarkozy, for instance, said at the same forum that world powers “should think together about a new international currency system” at the upcoming G20 summit. He also said the world’s financial system was “outdated” and should be replaced. “We all need to think about the foundations for a new international financial system,” Sarkozy urged. “We’ve been based on the Bretton Woods institutions of 1945, when our American friends were the only superpower. My question is: Are we still in 1945? The answer here is, ‘no.’”

What about American globalists? They are fully on board, too. Former Fed boss and then-chairman of Obama’s “Economic Recovery Advisory Board” Paul Volcker, for example, has long been a strong proponent of a global fiat currency and a global central bank. He is widely reported to have said, “A global economy needs a global currency.” And he has repeatedly called for such a system, hoping to see it emerge during his lifetime.

In China, George Soros’ proposed leader of the world order, the “people’s” central-bank boss Zhou Xiaochuan has also frequently called for a new reserve currency — in addition to frequent calls by the communist regime in Beijing for a “de-Americanized” New World Order. In a 2009 report published on the central bank’s website entitled “Reform the International Monetary System,” Xiaochuan explained that “the desirable goal of reforming the international monetary system, therefore, is to create an international reserve currency that is disconnected from individual nations and is able to remain stable in the long run, thus removing the inherent deficiencies caused by using credit-based national currencies.”

When asked about the Communist Chinese regime’s idea at a Council on Foreign Relations event, Obama’s tax-dodging U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy “TurboTax” Geithner, a regular proponent of global regulation and an important glob­alist, after acknowledging that he had not read it yet, said,

“We’re actually quite open to that.”

What would a global currency mean for Americans? For starters, it would necessarily require the loss of the U.S. dollar’s status as the world reserve currency. That means a dramatic devaluation of Americans’ currency, with all that implies — surging prices for imports on which America is now totally dependent, for example. Right now, America’s central bank, the privately owned Federal Reserve, helps the U.S. government finance its wars, armies of bureaucrats, loyalty-purchasing welfare, and other schemes by printing debt-based currency.

If a global central bank were able to do something similar, which is exactly what globalists such as Putin and his Western counterparts are pushing, the emerging global government would likewise be able to finance its own armies, police, courts, bureaucrats, and more. All it would require is simply printing “liquidity,” secretly confiscating humanity’s wealth via inflation of the currency supply. Besides funding government bureaucracy, the new financial leaders would literally be able to determine which businesses and countries would flourish and which would fail — as did the Federal Reserve in the United States when it bailed out some too-big-to-fail entities while ensuring others went bankrupt in 2008.

Putin is also helping to globalize the financial regulatory regime. In early 2013, when Putin assumed the presidency of the G20, he had nothing but praise for the suspiciously named “Financial Stability Board” (FSB) — not to be confused with the other FSB, the successor to the Soviet KGB that Putin came from originally. The new FSB, supposedly hatched by G20 governments and dictatorships, is meant to serve as the global financial police. It will be housed, of course, at the shadowy Bank for International Settlements (BIS), another key globalist institution.

Outlining the globalist machinations in his 1966 book Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time, the late Georgetown University professor and Bill Clinton mentor Carroll Quigley, a devoted globalist, wrote:

“The powers of financial capitalism had a far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations.”

Putin Loves Global “Governance,” Too

More broadly, on the UN, which is set to serve as the nucleus of “global governance,” Putin, again, is fully on board with the globalist agenda. Consider, as just one example among many, the former KGB chief’s posturing amid the recent brouhaha over Syria. “The United Nations’ founders understood that decisions affecting war and peace should happen only by consensus,” Putin wrote in the New York Times as Obama and the United States were being made to look like rogue warmongers and imbeciles, as contrasted with the “responsible” Russian statesman (who never mentioned the massive Soviet role in creating the UN to begin with). “The profound wisdom of this has underpinned the stability of international relations for decades.”

“We are not protecting the Syrian government, but international law,” Putin continued. “The law is still the law, and we must follow it whether we like it or not. Under current international law, force is permitted only in self-defense or by the decision of the Security Council. Anything else is unacceptable under the United Nations Charter.”

Before Syria, Putin and his Communist Chinese allies also endorsed the UN resolution purporting to authorize international “intervention” in Libya against their former ally, Moammar Gadhafi. Both regimes also supported efforts to try Libyan officials at the UN’s kangaroo judicial branch, the self-styled “International Criminal Court” — yet another key tentacle of the “New World Order” that Obama has offered unprecedented support for (despite never obtaining ratification in the U.S. Senate for it).

Before singing the UN’s praises in the Times op-ed, Putin and his fellow BRICS rulers signed a declaration openly calling for global governance under the UN, a world currency, and more. “The UN enjoys universal membership and is at the center of global governance,” the 2013 BRICS declaration stated. “We underscore our commitment to work together in the UN to continue our cooperation and strengthen multilateral approaches in international relations based on the rule of law and anchored in the Charter of the United Nations.” Everything from terror and “global warming” to “human rights” enforcement ought to be dealt with by the UN, they said.

Putin’s unabashed support for the entire architecture of global governance should hardly be surprising. Indeed, long before Putin came on the scene, the Soviet regime he served played a key role in creating the UN, the IMF, the World Bank, and more after World War II. Even many of the most important supposed American architects of the global system — Alger Hiss and Harry Dexter White, for instance — were later exposed as agents of the Kremlin.

Admittedly, despite all of the evidence, it may still seem preposterous to some that the supposedly adversarial and competing political and economic blocs on both sides of the East-West divide could someday be merged into one to form a genuine world government. But what may not be realistically achievable today could become very realistic in the not-too-distant future, should the current frigid relationship between Russia and the West thaw. Western relations with Russia have changed in the past, when Russia has been alternatively viewed as an enemy (during the Cold War) and as a friend (during détente and glasnost, after the apparent collapse of Russian communism, and even during the post-9/11 “war on terror”).

Of course, the fact that Putin is a key player on the road to world order does not mean there are no genuine disagreements between the Kremlin and the Western establishment. It also does not mean that Putin is indispensable — countless globalist minions have been eliminated by the establishment after outliving their usefulness.

Finally, Putin’s globalist and establishment credentials hardly preclude the orchestration of a real war between “East” and “West” at some point, particularly if America cannot be induced to surrender its sovereignty to a global regime. Indeed, more than a few analysts have suggested that another World War between the two sides may be in the cards as a way of accelerating the move toward global government.

In 1962, globalist Lincoln P. Bloomfield with the Institute for Defense Analyses prepared a report for the U.S. State Department entitled “A World Effectively Controlled by the United Nations.” In it, he explained how competition or even wars between regional super-regimes could dramatically accelerate the quest for global government.

“A ‘normal’ historical process, in which ever-larger units evolve through customs unions, confederation, regionalism, etc., until ultimately the larger units coalesce under a global umbrella, could take up to two hundred years, on past performance figures, and even this may be optimistic,” wrote Bloomfield. “I have suggested that an alternative road may bypass the main path of history, short-circuiting the organic stages of consensus, value formation, and the experiences of common enterprise generally believed to underlie political community.”

The plan, he said, “relies on a grave crisis or war to bring about a sudden transformation in national attitudes sufficient for the purpose.” Using such plotting, the “order” could “be brought into existence as a result of a series of sudden, nasty, and traumatic shocks,” Bloomfield explained. “Thus a hypothetical model can be constructed, fulfilling the characteristics of ‘a world effectively controlled by the United Nations.’ … We concluded that in theory it could come about in the short, medium, or long run by a brink of war — or a war — combined with the development of evolutionary trends that might favor it as the time span stretches out.”

Either way, as globalists continue their plotting, young Miguel Calehr, his brother, and the other 296 victims on MH17 are unlikely to be the last “collateral damage” tragedies on the road to world order. Unless the American people become educated and organized, the New World Order will march on, leaving even more misery and death in its wake.




COMMENTARY: The Marxist-Leninist Roots Of The European Union

Below is my translation of an interview I found very interesting with former Soviet dissident and political prisoner Vladimir Bukovsky by Alessandra Nucci, published in the December 2012 issue of the Italian periodical Radici Cristiane. What he says provides a very useful background to understand what lies behind the European Union project and its similarities with the Soviet Union, a subject on which Bukovsky has written a book.


Vladimir Bukovsky, 70, is one of the most famous ex-political prisoners of the former Soviet Union. In total he spent twelve years of internment, including prisons, labour camps and psychiatric hospitals, before being ejected and swapped for the Chilean prisoner Luis Corvalan in 1976. Since then he has lived in Cambridge and took British citizenship.

In 2007 he co-authored with Pavel Stroilov EUSSR: The Soviet Roots of European Integration in which he reconstructs, on the basis of documents copied from the Soviet archives in 1992, plans to transform the European Union into a Union of Socialist Republics in all identical to the former Soviet Union.

Radici Cristiane has asked his opinion on current developments.

Mr. Bukovsky, at least since 2000 you have been saying that the European Union is the exact copy of the Soviet Union. Aspects in common you highlighted include the new Europe’s structure itself: a union of republics with a socialist structure, run by a handful of unelected people who make typically Bolshevik promises – equality, fairness and justice – and do not recognize nations but only citizens of a new people, with “European” instead of “Soviet”. In common, in addition, the two unions have the typical corruption of a socialist republic, a corruption organized from the top, aggressiveness towards the outside and even gulags inside. Many years later, are the events proving you right?

You forgot the similarity in the way they started. How was the USSR created? Of course, by military force, but also by forcing the republics to join with the financial threat, making them economically fearful. So there we are.

But we are still at the beginning, at the first stage. The ultimate goal of all unions that have been built so far does not end with the submission to the control of Brussels, but it goes further. The target is the building of a single state, under one world government, with a single law, a single pension….

The financial crises serve to push in this direction.

The general impoverishment would then be wanted?

It is the very concept of “union” that removes flexibility from the economy. A single economy makes the constant adjustments necessary to facilitate trade impossible.

Don’t let’s forget that the Soviet Union went bankrupt. Of course, we were far ahead on the road to integration towards a single state: not just a single currency, but also one people. And the Soviet Union, in contrast to Europe, had enormous resources, so, every time it was on the verge of bankruptcy, it would discover new resources: oil, diamonds, gold… That’s what made them carry on. Otherwise they would not have failed in the eighties but by the end of the thirties.

You said that the crisis was the first stage. What about the second?

Over time there is a development of distrust that can lead to hostility. That is the next stage. Examples abound, just think of Yugoslavia, the USSR… Countries forced to live under the same roof. I myself grew up under a federal flag. But it is a pressure cooker that sooner or later blows up.

Is this why they are gradually unifying the military?

It still has to do with the construction of a single state. One government, one president, one policy. The economic difficulties help to reduce the sovereignty, because people are more willing to accept and obey. In Italy not coincidentally you have an unelected Prime Minister.

Are they using the economy to crush the nation state? It seems to me that they use it to crush people. They manipulate people to prevent them from opposing the new policy, which must, on the contrary, appear to them as the only hope.

Are they therefore all socialists in Brussels?

The project is socialist. I do not know these people personally, but most of them are on the Left, more or less extreme. That means that they favour statist solutions and the regulation of everything. And they all talk like in Lenin’s book The State and Revolution, which explains how the nation state will die. His words are that it will “fade until it disappears.”

For their part, the Conservatives hold the curious idea that the project can change from within. The EPP does not resist, and trying to influence it from within becomes a good excuse for doing nothing.

Is then in Lenin the matrix of what we are experiencing?

The dream of socialists, the Maximum Programme, has always been to eliminate the private property, the family and the nation state. With the private property they have not succeeded, but they continue on the path of destruction of the family and the nation.

The plan that failed in the East has been transferred to the West; Europeans and Moscow have worked together to implement the “convergence” of the “Common European Home”. Prior to 1985, the Left was opposed to the European Community because it was saying that it helped the owners, industrialists, capitalists, and let down the workers. Then they made a U-turn.

“Socialist” for us is a term very different from “communist”. You seem to apply it to the Soviet paradigm as a synonym for “communist”.

No, socialism is the gradual and less violent form of communism, and socialist is the project of the European Union, which was born in Maastricht in 1992. The intent was to save socialism in Europe after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the predictable bankruptcy of the welfare state in the West as well. Welfare costs were growing and there was no way to counter them or stop them.

You can give benefits to people but cannot take them away without alienating a huge part of the population, because you do not get re-elected. So when leftist leaders realized that they were going into the red and that their socialist innovations in Europe would go belly up, they decided to create this administration of unelected people, who could not be sent home.

An administration that however already existed!

Before Maastricht there was no European Union. There was a common market, created to facilitate trade, movement of capital. That’s why no one has had anything to object for so long. But in the mid-eighties, rather than an economic community they decided to set up a state. Before Maastricht they never said “union”, they were saying “community”. And they were not talking about it publicly.

Among your predictions for the EU-USSR there was also the gulag. Do you confirm it?

Unfortunately, yes. The EU is creating them slowly. The politically correct is imposed not by persuasion but by repression. In Britain just last month they jailed for hate speech a nineteen-year-old who had written something offensive on Twitter about a football player with black skin. He was sentenced to a month and a half in prison.

As nobody protests, they will gradually widen the net and eventually we will get the gulag. And remember that the European police force is granted immunity, something that was not granted even to the KGB!

Is Barack Obama not part of all this?

For now, Americans do not perceive the European Union, do not see where it is going. But America has a parallel special project, the American Union.

If the process includes the United States of America, what hope is there to stop this global government? It will fail, because it is too big to handle. It is impossible to govern such a huge entity. And notice that the most common resistance is not open, but passive: sabotage.

On the other side is Putin. I know that you have an entirely negative opinion of him, but times change and its strong ties with the Orthodox Church have meant that a few weeks ago Russia joined the majority of other nations in opposition to the United States and the countries of Western Europe on the subject of abortion. Thus Russia is, and has been for a while, a reference point for the Orthodox churches and also for the Catholic Church.

For that matter the same applies to Muslims, who on these issues make a common front at the UN with the Church, but in obedience to their own religion. This does not make them “good”, because outside of this topic they are opposed to us as their enemies. It is one of the paradoxes of this world.



MONEY: Confirmed, The Banking System Has Been Manipulating The Precious Metals Market

X22 is a Report Spotlight that cuts through propaganda of the corporate media and gets right into the real issues. By interviewing experts in financial, government, geopolitical situations it paints the full picture of what is really going on in the world.

In this episode, initial jobless claims just so happened to fall to 43 year lows. While all other indicators show the opposite. Macy’s will now take old clothing and give a gift card to purchase new clothing. Deutsche Bank admits it has been manipulating gold and silver. So now we see the banks have been manipulating Libor, and the precious metals market. Yellen says the Fed focus is on main-street making everything better for the little person. IMF says negative interest rates is good for the economy. Shoe manufacturing says Obama trying to push them into supporting the TPP.