There has been no doubt in my mind that the past sixty years world events have been manipulated by world elites of varying stripes. Old European blue-bloods, mega-corporations, The Tri-lateral Commission, Council On Foreign Affairs, the Bilderberg Group, Atonists, Luciferians, Satanists, what have you, have been mentioned by many sources as being the Master Puppeteers behind the curtain. But all are grouped into one organization, the New (or One) World Order, or NWO for short. Many of my readers and commenters would say this organization has been in existence for thousands of years. For the sake of brevity, I’m only going to refer to the past hundred years, the past sixty in particular because it directly affects us linearly.

In my post yesterday about the Iron Mountain Report, I copied the recommendations list and it showed some revealing statements from the members of the study. The members themselves were bipartisan, so all of their recommendations were reached on consensus. So with that in mind, here is a little tidbit from Space War:

The bipartisan conclave in Oklahoma this week was designed as a bridge between moderate Republicans and moderate Democrats who seek to use “smart power” to build a new world order. Smart power is the skillful conjugation of soft (diplomacy) and hard (military intervention) power, which kept the world at peace for half of the 20th century. (Wars in Korea and Vietnam were bumps in the road.) Smart power, bipartisan luminaries — e.g., former Sens. Sam Nunn, Chuck Robb, Gary Hart, Bob Graham and David Boren (the convener) for the Democrats, and William S. Cohen, Bill Brock, John C. Danforth and Chuck Hagel, the only sitting senator, for the Republicans — agreed on a formula for national salvation. The recipe, a coalition government of national unity, has been tried in other Western democracies with varying degrees of success. In Washington, this would translate into a Cabinet of experts drawn from both parties who would reach across party lines on the most critical areas facing the nation over the next 10 years. National security, the Iraq War-drained military, healthcare, education, the environment and infrastructure are at the top of the list. Nunn, the elder statesman of the group, said “rampant partisanship” has paralyzed government’s ability to act decisively. “If we unify,” he said, “we can turn America’s peril into America’s promise.” Germany is currently governed by a coalition of Social Democrats and Conservatives under the leadership of Chancellor Angela Merkel. It can also be a formula for inaction, e.g., left of center wants Germany to bring back its troops from Afghanistan, right of center wants them to stay — provided they are not involved in any fighting. So Merkel won the vote to extend Germany’s participation — for another year.

The surprise attendee at the Norman, Okla., gathering of 17 “outstanding public servants” was New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, the moderates’ undeclared favorite as an independent candidate who could bring about the bipartisan consensus they seek. But judging from the early presidential smoke signals from Iowa and New Hampshire, Sen. Barack Obama, as the bipartisan moderates understood his message, could become a more plausible unifier than Bloomberg.

The switch from Bloomberg to Obama came when the senator from Illinois said, “The time has come to move beyond the bitterness and pettiness and anger that’s consumed Washington.” Obama’s recipe: “A working coalition for change.” Which is precisely what the elders from both parties originally had in mind for Bloomberg. Obama now looks like a long-distance runner who can make it all the way to the White House. Bloomberg’s chances are not quite as promising.

Smart power was one of the catch phrases during the Cold War, along with detente, Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD), Iron Curtain, Radio Free Europe (I always liked that one), Star Wars and Evil Empire. With the exception of the JFK assassination in 1963, American foreign policy was fairly consistent from Truman to Reagan, which was to cage in the Soviet “Evil Empire”.

According to the Report though, this was a carefully crafted, choreographed act to ensure the stability of the United States and the world. After the Cold War ended, no more observable enemy. What was going to happen?

The Clinton years are remembered for prosperity for all and peace. But was it really peaceful?

Does anyone remember Blackhawk Down, Hotel Rwanda, Iraqi no-fly zones, Bosnia, Haiti, Ruby Ridge, Waco, World Trade Center I and Oklahoma? The last two put “terrorist” into the common American lexicon and would come in handy later.

New enemy? Anti-freedom terrorism around the world for all! And the U.S. to lead the vanguard! Who can resist any sympathy for a nation who lost over two thousand citizens in a horrifying “attack”?

It is interesting to note that Mr. Obama has turned up in the above post as the new consensus candidate to unite the government and clean out the old order. Is that the reason for his sudden support and popularity? Or is it the reverse?

I know I’m not the first to post any concerns relating to this and I’m sure I won’t be the last. Historians who aren’t “in the know” have already written scads about the last seven years. So far, none of them has referenced Iron Mountain. Is it a hoax?

Or is it a guide for the 21st Century?

Article written by Arnaud De Borchgrave