Israeli Lobbyist Suggests using False-flag to Attack Iran

By LUIS MIRANDA | THE REAL AGENDA | SEPTEMBER 26, 2012

Patrick Clawson a Washington lobbyist and director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), said that the west, especially the United States and Israel are “in the game of using covert means against the Iranians”.

Clawson cited a series of false-flag events as examples that triggered the invasion of non-aligned states and explained how those false-flag events served the plans of the Anglo-saxon military industrial complex.

Clawson was once a senior economist for the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. “We can do a variety of things to increase the pressure,” said Clawson. “We could get nastier about it. So, if in fact the Iranians aren’t going to compromise, it would be best if somebody else started the war,” he asserted.

At a later point, Clawson said that he was in no way recommending the use of such events to attack Iran, even though he said that very same thing throughout his explanation of Iranian-Israeli tensions.

See the video below:

The Real Agenda encourages the sharing of its original content ONLY through the use of the tools provided at the bottom of every article.
Please DON’T copy articles from The Real Agenda and redistribute by email or post to the web, unless you request and receive written permission to do so. If permission is granted, you must publish the article EXACTLY as it appears on The Real Agenda.

Italy ready to beg for a Bailout

By LUIS MIRANDA | THE REAL AGENDA | JULY 17, 2012

The time for handouts doesn’t seem to end in Europe. After ‘solving’ the Spanish problems, the European bankers are now looking forward to ‘rescuing’ Italy from financial disaster. Italy will be the sixth nation to request and receive a financial bailout of its banking system before the country is officially absorbed by the international banking institutions that have, to a great extent, caused the current crisis.

Today, Italy is the third largest economy in the Euro zone and a shiny holder of a G-7 membership card. But that shiny membership is worth nothing as the Italians are also the third largest holder of sovereign debt. The debt to GDP ratio in Italy surpasses 120%. Italy’s dire situation has not been widely publicized due to the fact it is been hiding behind Spain’s  economically genocidal financial agreement with the bankers, which is the same agreement that Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti has in mind for his country.

Monti’s policies, although fairly accepted in his country, have failed to take Italy out of the hole. Instead of pulling the country out of the recession or depression — depending on who you ask — Monti’s so-called reforms aided a contraction of the economy by 0.8% in the first quarter of 2012. With such contraction also came the reduction in economic activity including the manufacturing, services and retail sectors. Retail sales fell below estimates in the past two months, and they are expected to continue the slide to levels between -0.8% and -1.6%.

The same measures taken by Spain before the bailout, a series of conditions imposed by the European bankers as a condition to start looking into a possible financial bailout of the Spanish banking system, were also applied by Monti’s-led government. Much austerity and the transfer of Italian infrastructure to the European lenders was the prelude to the upcoming rescue. Neither the people of Italy nor the markets liked Monti’s plan, but then again, it is not them who Monti works for, is it?

Despite the inevitability of the rescue, some issues have arisen regarding Italy’s standing in Europe and whether these conditions would be limiting when it comes to requesting and getting the funds to bailout its banks. For example, financial consultants cite the fact that the European Stability Mechanism has not been approved by all EU members. They also say that the current measures may not be enough to rescue Italy due to the fact its debt is much larger than that of Spain or Greece, for example.

“Placing Italy in a bailout scheme casts an even bigger shadow over the euro-zone,” says Yohay Elam at Forex Crunch. An Italian bailout, Elam says, would create a bigger hole in the debt crisis, because Italy itself has functioned as a supporter of past bailouts, so having to rescue the Italians would mean a larger burden for the region.

But neither Italy’s standing in Europe not the approval of the ESM by all countries is the big enchilada here. Italy will be absorbed by the banks just as Greece and Spain were. The matter is not if, but how. Should things run the bankers way as it happened with Greece and Spain, Italy will also have to surrender complete sovereignty to Brussels, as explained in the memo of understanding signed by both rescuers and rescues. “Spanish authorities will take all the necessary measures to ensure a successful implementation of the programme. They will also provide the European Commission, the ECB and the IMF with all information required to monitor progress in programme implementation and to track the financial situation.”

In the case of Spain, and most likely with Italy, Portugal, France and then Germany, Brussels will begin as a negotiator, but will end as a manager of all European economies. After receiving the proposals for financial bailouts, the World Bank, IMF, European Central Bank, the European Banking Authority and the Prime Ministers will sit down and agree to accept the request for aid and write the conditions for the rescues to occur. However, once the agreement is signed by all parties, the sole management of the programme falls on the hands of the ESM, a banker controlled institution.

Under the ESM, banking institutions that do not belong to large powerhouses will be either absorbed by mandating that they take bailout money, or dissolved. At this time, their assets will be given to the banks. The money that comes from the financial rescue will be given to partner banks, those who are owned by powerful European bankers, and the toxic financial assets will be re-circulated into other nations or financial entities. (MoU page 3)

Most likely, as in the case of Spain, Italy will have to meet the requirements established by the ESM, which are based on a timeline that begins at the signing of the MoU and goes well into 2013 and 2014. The rescue of banks in Spain may work as a model to be utilized in Italy. According to the MoU the losses incurred into by those participating in the financial rescue will be shared by equity holders and subordinated debt holders who may participate voluntarily of these losses, or otherwise be mandated to accept the mandatory Subordinated Liability Exercises (SLEs).

Through the execution of these supposed rescue plans, the European bankers also reassure their position and that of their decaying model as the only ‘legitimate’ way to take on the current crisis, even though that exact same model is the origin of the crisis itself. In Spain, for example, more independence is warranted to the Spanish Central Bank, which is a branch of the powerful European banking institutions.

“A further strengthening of the operational independence of the Banco de España is warranted. The supervisory procedures of Banco de España will be further enhanced based on a formal internal review,” says the MoU. The central bank will be more of a vigilante for the European bankers.

Less Sovereignty is the Central Bankers Solution for the Crisis

By LUIS MIRANDA | THE REAL AGENDA | JUNE 29, 2012

Everyone on the main stream seems to believe that the continuous meetings between European central bankers and government officials are seeking to save the Euro and to help the governments deal with their sovereign debts. It is common to hear on television how journalists and so-called analysts explain that their expectations include the proposal of real solutions to the crisis which immediately produce jobs and bring stability to the markets.

They just don’t get it. These meetings between central bankers and European leaders are nothing about stability, a solution to the debt problem or the creation of jobs around the euro zone. The latest agreement between the EU Council and the Prime Ministers of Italy and Spain is an example of how the bankers are in complete control. Although the media has painted the bailout of the Spanish and Italian banks as a triumph for both governments, which according to the reports “had their way” when negotiating with the bankers, the reality is they are simply following orders. It wasn’t the Spanish and Italian governments the ones who imposed the conditions that will rule the bailout, but the banks.

The rescue of the banking system in those countries is indeed a result of Italy and Spain submitting, accepting and supporting the idea that the European Central Bank will officially turn into the manager of all Euro economies. Only after Mariano Rajoy and Mario Monti accepted that condition, was that the central bankers gave the green light to ‘lend the money’ to the Spanish and Italian banks, not the other way around. The main stream media is portraying an outcome that is completely the opposite to reality by saying that Mr. Rajoy and Mr. Monti twisted German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s arm into accepting their conditions. The truth is that Merkel herself had to accept the centralization of economic planning sought by the banks as a condition not to let the EU zone collapse before the expected time, and with it drag every single nation including Germany into the rabbit hole they are all going towards in a controlled fashion.

Less sovereignty in exchange for solidarity; this is the latest talking point that emerged from European leaders to justify the loss of self-rule and the intervention of European bankers in the decision making process at the national level. Governments have publicly adopted what seems to be a socialist standing to try to sell their fiscal irresponsibility and to deviate attention from the acquisition of European nations by the central bankers who are the origin of the current financial crisis. But it is not socialism you see, it’s fascism. Countries must get more debt and surrender their sovereignty in order to solve a crisis that is not supposed to get solved, but that was created and planned to further centralize power in the hands of the bankers themselves.

Everyone who is well-informed is familiar with the World Bank and IMF’s plans to cause the current crisis, — and all the other ones that came before — how they’ve applied the same neo-feudal model throughout history to destroy economies and artificially recreate them using models for growth based on the acquisition of debt and the never-ending payments of interests on that debt. It needs to be said: This crisis is not accidental or unexpected. It was planned and executed for decades to seek a justification for a central government just as it has been promoted by the bankers and the media for the past 12 months. The result of the current negotiations in not to seek an exit to the debt problem or to encourage economic growth, but to hand even more power to the bankers.

The meeting held today where European Prime Ministers pose as the saviors is nothing else than window dressing. There is no solidarity on a proposal that intends to make nations less independent and more enslaved to the central bankers. The result that will came from the meeting held by Mariano Rajoy, Angela Merkel Mario Monti and François Hollande is further consolidation of financial power; nothing else. As explained by Joseph Stiglitz, the World Bank and the IMF pursue a policy of financial enslavement against every country by following four simple steps.

Privatization, which is more like ‘Briberization’, he told Greg Palast. Under this scheme, economies are collapsed from the inside while consolidating national assets for pennies on the dollar. Briberization yields then to the second step,  a one-size-fits-all rescue-your-economy plan, which in theory intends to rescue a country’s economy by using  capital market liberalization. This, again in theory, would allow the free flow of investment in and out of the country, but in reality it is the process through which the bankers complete the theft of resources and send them out every time a country buys into the “rescue your economy’ non-sense. As explained by Palast in his article The Globalizer who came in from the Cold, foreign monies come in to the countries for speculative acquisitions in various sectors of the economy and then leaves just as suddenly as it came. The result is the literal disappearance of a nation’s reserves in a matter of days. In order to get back some of those monies, entities like the IMF and the World Bank immediately demand that the country raise interest rates to anywhere between 30% and 80%.

Next, on step three, the bankers mandate that the government impose steep increases in the prices of basic needs such as food, water and gas. In the mid-term, the unexpected increases cause what Stiglitz calls the “The IMF riot.” During this time the bankers “turn up the heat until, finally, the whole cauldron blows up,” said Stiglitz. The bankers simply cut any and all subsidies to food and fuel for the poorest people as it happened in Argentina at the turn of the century and in Indonesia in 1998. Other examples of these riots were the ones in Bolivian riots over water prices last year and this February, the riots in Ecuador over the rise in cooking gas prices imposed by the World Bank.

Secret documents were also obtained by the BBC and The Observer which showed that the banks wanted to make the US dollar the official currency of Ecuador and by doing that, they would submit more than half of the population there under the poverty line. This is something similar to what was done in Argentina and what is being tried now in Europe. According to Stiglitz, although millions of people end up as losers under this system, there are indeed a handful of winners: The Banks. The western banks and the US Treasury make gigantic amounts of cash by infliction pain over developing nations. He cited the case of Ethiopia, where the World Bank and IMF ordered the government to ‘invest’ money on the Federal Reserve’s Treasuries which pays only 4 percent interest, while the country had to borrow money at 12 percent. Ethiopia was looted by the banks.

On step four of the bankers propose and impose the so-called Free Trade, as they did through NAFTA, CAFTA and other trade agreements. They call these programs “poverty reduction strategies”. However, all they do is open markets for a one way flow of products from powerful nations like the United States and China to the poor countries, while closing their own markets to foreign products. The almost automatic consequence of this free trade agreements is the destruction of the local production and farming since they cannot compete with the ridiculous low prices offered by corporations that have their products manufactured by slave labor in Asia and Africa.

As Greg Palast puts it, let there be no confusion about the role of the IMF, World Bank and World Trade Organization in the destruction of nation-states, private property and sovereignty, because they are just three masks that hide the faces of the monopoly men who seek to impose a centralized government model based on absolutist conditions.The results of the negotiations to supposedly save the euro zone are not such, they are just another step into the creeping arrival of world tyranny being sold as the only possible solution to deliver all of us from the consequences of “unbalanced economies”. The plans for the creation and implosion of economies were drafted long ago and the result of those practices is one and only one: World Government. This outcome, by the way, is not a solution or the solution to the current economic crisis.

When you have leaches sucking you dry, the only possible solution is to remove the leaches. The bleeding is the collapsing economy, the leaches are the central bankers, the solution is to remove them from our bodies. Nothing else has worked, nothing else will work.

World Bank proposes global coalition to “save oceans”

Agence France Presse
February 24, 2012

The World Bankwas on Friday to propose a coalition of governments, global organisations and other groups to protect the oceans, aiming to raise $1.5 billion in the next five years for the purpose.

World Bank president Robert Zoellick was to tell a global conference in Singapore that the new partnership would bring together various groups to confront problems of over-fishing, marine degradation and loss of habitat.

“The world’s oceans are in danger, and the enormity of the challenge is bigger than one country or organisation,” Zoellick, who is in Singapore for the World Oceans Summit, was expected to say, according to prepared remarks released by the World Bank ahead of his speech.

“We need coordinated global action to restore our oceans to health. Together we’ll build on the excellent work already being done to address the threats to oceans, identify workable solutions, and scale them up.”

“So today, I want to propose a new approach — an unprecedented Global Partnership for Oceans,” he added.

Zoellick said the coalition “will bring together countries, scientific centers, NGOs, international organisations, foundations and the private sector to pool knowledge, experience, expertise, and investment around a set of agreed upon goals.”

As a starting point, the partnership is committing to raise at least $300 million in “catalytic finance”, meaning funds that would be used for technical assistance for key governance reforms, he said.

Another $1.2 billion would be raised “to support healthy and sustainable oceans,” he added.

“This would total $1.5 billion in new commitments over five years,” he said, adding that the World Bank would convene the first meeting of the partnership in Washington in April.

Zoellick proposed several targets for the coalition to achieve in the next 10 years, including rebuilding at least half of the world’s fish stocks.

About 85 percent of ocean fisheries are fully exploited, over-exploited or depleted, including most of the stocks of the top 10 species, he said.

The partnership should also aim to “increase the annual net benefits of fisheries to between $20 billion and $30 billion” from the current net economic loss of about $5 billion a year.

Marine protected areas should be more than doubled, he said, noting that less than two percent of the ocean’s surface is protected compared to around 12 percent of land.

“Let’s increase this to five percent,” he said.

On the economic side alone, the implications are enormous if little is done, he said.

In developing countries, one billion people depend on fish and seafood for their primary source of protein and over half a billion rely on fishing as a means of livelihood, Zoellick said.

For developing countries, including many island and coastal nations, fish represent the single most traded food product, and for many Pacific Island states, fish make up 80 percent of total exports.

“The world?s oceans are in danger,” Zoellick said. “Send out the S-O-S: We need to Save Our Seas.”

World Bank Depopulation Plans Make Sense Now

by Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
February 16, 2012

Sometimes reality can stare you in the face, but you can’t see it. This is true today more than ever, even for those who fancy themselves as having an understanding of reality. The clearest example is with the masses, that seem to live in a “version of reality” that does not represent the real world. Their world is full of emptiness, distractions and selfishness. Many of us grew up inside this fake alternative version of reality, and it is hard to leave it. Millions of people have been successful in their attempt to leave the “other version” of reality and entering the real world, but most have failed. Failing to see reality has a lot to do with the human incapacity to see beyond the nose, to realize things may be different, and many times even having the knowledge isn’t enough to break loose.

Yesterday we reported on how the World Bank, together with other international organizations are responsible for promoting and carrying out a depopulation program which seeks to bring the number of human inhabitants to less than 10% of the current number. They have been implementing this program for decades now, and the efforts have been directed mainly to the underdeveloped and developing world. Their plans include sterilization of the people through modern medicine, chemicals in the food and water and population reduction plain and simple through warfare, economic policies and so on.

Unless one looks carefully at history, it is difficult to realize how these organizations have successfully carried out their agendas. But the common denominator is control. What good, or in this case bad policy does when it can’t be enforced? The people who want to get rid of humans, at least most of them, control the World Bank, the UN, the World Health Organization, the World Trade Organization and effectively also control the corporations which in turn dominate the governments and politicians. Indirectly, they control the educational systems, they write history to their liking, implement health, financial, environmental and demographic policies and are responsible for making sure those policies are followed at the local, and national levels without the necessary consultation to Congress or the people.

In the case of the World Bank, as we showed yesterday, it has its own plan to reduce the number of people on this planet. Many of the policies the Bank promotes appear in what it calls the World Development Report. This document has been issued once a year at least since the mid 1970’s. But how could the World Bank come up with and implement depopulation practices in many different countries? It is necessary to have people in all places, who directly or otherwise agree with such policies. It is also necessary to have people who write the policies and who pass them on to their accomplices in each nation. Although the supposed overpopulation is nothing other than a myth, many people genuinely believe the planet is out of breath when it comes to sustaining 7 billion people. Facts show a different story, though. As we have reported before, the overpopulation myth came out of Thomas Malthus’ ill-conceived theories that compared food availability and population growth. In fact, the World Bank’s 1984 World Development Report cites Malthus’ ideas as the cornerstone for global depopulation.

So how have the globalists behind the depopulation initiative been able to achieve such a goal so far? They have used the economic and military machinery from the 7 or 8 most powerful countries in the world. Specifically, the United States has been as bastion in their efforts to decrease the number of undesirables, useless eaters, as they call us. One particular detail — this is what I’ve unconsciously missed all this time — is that since its inception, the World Bank has been managed by an American politician or elitist. From Eugene Mayer to Paul Wolfowitz, every single head of the infamous organization has been a US citizen. If we connect the dots, we can easily learn that additionally to controlling the World Bank through the US, the globalists — also through the US — established another set of policies on behalf not of the World Bank, but the US itself, to use all means necessary to reduce the world’s population. I am obviously talking about the National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests (NSSM200) . This document was written under and least sponsored by Henry Kissinger, who back in 1974 was the US National Security Advisor.

So if a government as powerful as the US decided at the time that reducing population would be an official policy as the National Security Memorandum 200 revealed, one can only conclude that having a strong position in the World Bank would greatly help that effort. Today we know it did. But the United States influence in reducing population is not limited to the World Bank. Traditionally, it’s had its way in other agencies such as the World Trade Organization, the World Health Organization and of course the UN.

This week, the corporate media reported that Hillary Clinton seems to be the strongest replacement for Robert Zoellick, the current head of the World Bank who has announced his retirement. Clinton has progressively leaked her desire to leave Barack Obama’s cabinet to pursue other projects, and it seems those projects don’t include running for president of the United States — for now. Meantime, China has jumped to publicly oppose Clinton’s arrival to the presidency of the World Bank, a position that is more valuable than occupying the White House. Along with all the powers vested under the position of president of the globalist organization, there are a list of unrevealed tasks which include finger pointing who the presidents of the European countries are, a decision that just as it happens in the case of the US, is usually concocted during the Bilderberg meeting. The chinese have said that the next president of the World Bank should be someone who has earned it, a person with merit, and that the choice shouldn’t be based on nationality.

But the United States will not give away another opportunity to control world economic affairs, a tradition on its own. Clinton is only one of the American choices. Along with her is Larry Summers, also an American who served as a White House economic adviser. Summers is also a supporter of the idea of depopulating the planet. “It is very important that we continue to have strong, effective leadership in this important institution,” said the current head of the US Treasury, Timothy Geithner. According to the Associated Press, just as the World Bank president has always been an American, the IMF has always had an European head.

“We must help break the link between spiraling population growth and poverty….Where they have been tried, family planning programs have largely worked. Many pro-life advocates .. . contend that to condone abortion even implicitly is morally unconscionable. Their view is morally shortsighted. . ..if we provide funds for birth control . . .we will prevent the conception of millions of babies who would be doomed to the devastation of poverty in the underdeveloped world,” said Richard M. Nixon about the US’s new policy back then. “…a definitive interagency study of the threat of overpopulation to U.S. security … NSSM 200 details how and why world population growth threatens U.S. and global security.”

Henry Kissinger, later wrote: “Depopulation should be the highest priority of U.S. foreign policy towards the Third World.”

“Depopulation policy became the top priority under the NSC agenda, Club of Rome and U.S. policymakers like Gen. Alexander Haig, Cyrus Vance, Ed Muskie and Kissinger. According to an NSC spokesman at the time, the United States shared the view of former World Bank President Robert McNamara that the “population crisis” is a greater threat to U.S. national security interests than nuclear annihilation.In 1975, Henry Kissinger established a policy-planning group in the U.S. State Department’s Office of Population Affairs. The depopulation “GLOBAL 2000″ document for President Jimmy Carter was prepared. It is no surprise that this policy was established under President Carter with help from Kissinger and Brzezinski – all with ties to David Rockefeller. The Bush family, the Harriman family – the Wall Street business partners of Bush in financing Hitler – and the Rockefeller family are the elite of the American eugenics movement,” reports Leuren Moret.

“There is a single theme behind all our work-we must reduce population levels,” said Thomas Ferguson, the Latin American case officer for the State Department’s Office of Population Affairs (OPA). “Either they [governments] do it our way, through nice clean methods or they will get the kind of mess that we have in El Salvador, or in Iran, or in Beirut. Population is a political problem. Once population is out of control it requires authoritarian government, even fascism, to reduce it. “The professionals,” said Ferguson, “aren’t interested in lowering population for humanitarian reasons. That sounds nice. We look at resources and environmental constraints. We look at our strategic needs, and we say that this country must lower its population – or else we will have trouble”.

The depopulation policies go beyond a single agency or organization. In fact, depopulation is worked through multiple organizations in order to carry out more effectively. According to Sott.net, depopulation includes practices such as hunger. “Two thirds of the world’s 1 billion starving people live in Asia, where the lack of water has resulted in unprecedented food shortages that threaten the continent’s ability to feed its growing population. Elsewhere, weird weather – chronic drought in Australia, Argentina and Kenya, excessive rain in the northeastern US, freezing summer temperatures in Canada – is contributing to the perfect storm of rising food prices and increasing scarcity, an unfolding disaster of truly pandemic proportions.”

But in most cases, famine and poverty are not consequences of overpopulation, but the manipulation of water, soil, food and other resources. One clear example is the food exchange markets, where speculators buy and sell corn, soy, and other food staples as if they were stocks. They do this not because they want to buy the food, but because there is money to make in the process of buying and selling those food crops. Most of the contracts for deliveries aren’t even completed because most buyers sell their purchases to the best bidder as soon as they see an opportunity to make a buck. And what do the traders have to say about this? “I never think about the scarcity or speculation issue when I’m on the floor.” While millions of people die of thirst or have to pay premium prices for their water supply, large food conglomerates bribe governments to acquire the water resources in many countries so then they can sell it for 3 or 4 dollars a bottle of 350ml. This situation is shown in the documentary film FLOW: Love for Water.

So the practice of depopulation either through sterilization, famine, medication, intoxication, monopolistic practices or warfare has found a fertile place in the global organizations our governments trust or follow orders from. In fact, they were created to carry out depopulation at a large scale. The practice of depopulation makes sense now. It is a concerted effort to slowly but surely get rid of as many humans as possible for the sake of whatever the controllers say it is. The problem for them is we’ve found out.