AGENDAS: Global Control, Energy And The ‘Syrian Issue’

Energy Is The Same As Money

 I contend that what is happening in Syria is about the struggle for global control.  First of all, I dismiss the assertion that the Obama Administration wants to attack Syria because they used chemical weapons.  First, there is serious question as to which side actually used them.  It is very possible this is a false flag operation: the Syrian rebels may have used them or caused an accidental spill from mishandling chemical weapons in their possession.  But, even if Assad did attack his own people with chemical weapons, this still isn’t a justifiable reason for U.S. intervention in Syria.  First and foremost, Syria presents absolutely no threat to U.S. interests.  Second, the excuse is patently that: an excuse.  Did we attack Hussein after he gassed the Kurds?  No!  Did we intervene in any of the mass genocides in Africa?  No!  So why are we looking to attack Syria?  We are going to attack Syria because Syria threatens the interests of our hidden masters.

In a previous post, AGENDAS: The ‘New World Order,’ The Financial Elements Of Global Control, I argue that those who seek to establish global governance understand they must have a firm control of the global monetary system.  If they do not control international finance, they cannot control the masses.  In order to control the masses, the masses must be made dependent on the government, and the easiest way to make the masses dependent is by controlling monetary policy.  This is why – in spite of their claims to the contrary – the policies instituted by those who seek global government are designed to destroy the middle class.  An economic system that allows a great number of people to create enough wealth to become self-sufficient and independent from government dependency cannot be allowed to exist.  This is why the free market must be undermined.  And one of the easiest ways to undermine the free market is by controlling the free flow of cheap energy.  Controlling global monetary policy depends on the ability to control the creation of wealth; the creation of wealth depends on the free market, and the free market depends on an abundant supply of cheap energy.  Thus, if one seeks to control global monetary policy, one must also control the availability of cheap energy, which means one must control the flow of energy.    And that is what Syria is all about:

Glenn Beck: Why I Am Against War in Syria

-Another major factor is oil & natural gas. Syria is one of the most strategic places for pipelines to flow into Europe. Qatar proposed a massive pipeline that would weave through Syria, but Assad turned that down in 2009 and instead partnered up with Russia and Iran to get the pipeline, which is due to open in 2016.

When questioned about the high cost of the war, Secretary of State John Kerry assured Americans by saying Arab nations have agreed to fund the entire cost of the war. Certainly this isn’t out of the kindness of their hearts or because they enjoy the United States getting militarily involved in Middle Eastern affairs – it’s because there’s a boat load of money at stake. If you want to figure out which side of the Syria conflict a particular nation is on, just figure out if they benefit or are harmed by the ‘Islamic pipeline’ and you’ll likely have your answer.

 I would strongly urge you to read the rest of that article, because he makes a point that most Americans have missed.  Why doesn’t America exploit its own energy sources?  Why do we do everything we can to make it economically impossible to produce our own energy by making it prohibitively expensive? And whose interest does this serve?  The answer is found in the 1950’s and 1960’s, during the Cold War.  One of the ways the Russians suggested discussed to bring down the U.S. was to use the environmentalist movement to restrict our access to our own resources.  This is the subject for another post, and I will address this issue I the future.  But the point here is that this is exactly the purpose that the environmental movement has served: it provides a plausible explanation for the deliberate refusal to produce cheap, domestic energy.  The result is that the world’s largest economy has been made dependent on its sworn enemies for the very lifeblood of that economy.  In essence, the U.S. has been put in a position where it can be controlled by hostile nations while simultaneously making those hostile nations wealthy off the very economy over which they have been given control. Control: It is all about control.

What would happen if our government were to do everything it could to make it economically feasible to find and produce as much domestic energy as this nation could produce?  Look at what is happening in the Dakotas.  There is an economic boom going on there.  Wealth is being created and everyone – even the common worker – is benefiting.  Now, what if this were allowed in all parts of this nation?  The places where the energy is will share in the economic boom and people will earn a better living.  We can use the natural gas to get us off our dependency on oil for most of our transportation and electric generation needs.  The rest of the economy would benefit, as well, which would filter down to everyone in this nation who wants to work. Trickle down works and we know it.  Reagan proved it, but so did Coolidge.  But the government works in the opposite direction from that which is known to create wealth for the average person.  Why?  Control: it is all about control. 

This is what Syria is all about: CONTROL!

[NOTE:  For those who believe in the Bible, it might be of interest to know that many students of prophecy have started to believe that the ‘wine’ of New Babylon by which the merchants of the world are seduced and intoxicated is a reference to oil.  This could certainly explain why prophecy foretells a global war in the Middle East — especially when you consider that a large, un-tapped oil reserve was recently discovered in Israel.]