Trilateral Commission member Lucas Papademos, an unelected career central banker with decades of experience, is taking over the Greek government after being sworn in as Prime Minister last week. His main priority will be to keep Greece in the crumbling euro-zone he helped erect by raking in more bailout money from European taxpayers. 

“Our membership in the euro is a guarantee of monetary stability and creates the right conditions for sustainable growth,” Papademos claimed after rising to power. “Our membership of the euro is the only choice.”

Other reforms at the top of his agenda include chipping away at what little remains of national sovereignty in Europe and instituting better Brussels “oversight” of member states. He also hopes to expand the emerging bailout regime — which critics have referred to as a “dictatorship” — by giving it more “firepower.”

"Dealing with Greece's problems will be more difficult if Greece is not a member of the euro-zone," Papademos alleged in parliament on November 16. "We must take more radical measures to deal with the crisis which include ... boosting the resources and the flexibility of the [European Financial Stability Facility bailout machine] and creating a stronger framework of economic governance in the euro-zone."

Italy’s new Prime Minister Mario Monti, who rose to power in what critics called a “coup d’etat,” is a prominent member of the world elite in the truest sense of the term. In fact, he is a leader in at least two of the most influential cabals in existence today: the secretive Bilderberg Group and David Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission.

Nicknamed “Super Mario,” Monti is also an “international advisor” to the infamous Goldman Sachs, one of the most powerful financial firms in the world. Critics refer to the giant bank as the “Vampire Squid” after a journalist famously used the term in a hit piece. But its tentacles truly do reach into the highest levels of governments worldwide. 

 

JBS CEO Art Thompson's weekly video news update for November 14-21, 2011.

For weeks, nations across the world have speculated over a potential Israeli attack on Iran. While there have been a number of indications that Israel could be considering a military strike on Iran, the conjecture has been exacerbated by Israel’s unwillingness to inform the United States of its intentions.

Early last week, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) released a report that allegedly proves Iran is in fact pursuing a nuclear weapons program. The UPI writes:

A report by the International Atomic Energy Agency released Tuesday provided the strongest evidence yet that Iran is close to developing nuclear weapons, including clandestine procurement of equipment and design information needed to make nuclear arms, high explosives testing and detonator development to set off a nuclear charge, computer modeling of a core of a nuclear warhead, and preparatory work for a nuclear weapons test — powerful evidence that refutes the regime's specious claims that its nuclear program is peaceful.

 

Speculation over a potential Israeli attack on Iran has circulated via media reports and governmental agencies, and was heightened following the release of an IAEA report this week that portrayed Iran as a major nuclear threat. According to a United Kingdom foreign official, an attack on Iran by Israel could take place as early as next month.  A senior Foreign Office figure told the Daily Mail newspaper, “We’re expecting something as early as Christmas, or very early in the new year,” adding that Israel will attack Iran’s nuclear sites “sooner rather than later.”

 

Much has been written and argued over the Israeli settlements that now exist on land that the International Community considers to be the “occupied territories” of the incipient Palestinian state. That state is supposed to include the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. It is being argued that the existence of these Israeli settlements is the cause of the impasse between Israel and the Palestinians in their mutually stated aim of creating two states, living side by side in peace and security.

In 2005, then-Prime Minister of Israel Ariel Sharon believed in that vision and with the approval of the Israeli parliament ordered the dismantling of all 21 Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip as the first step in reaching a peace agreement with the Palestinians. Those Jewish settlements included private homes, schools, synagogues, farms, businesses, hothouses, and small industries that actually provided Israel with the best produce available. Indeed, the unilateral dismantling of those communities, without any reciprocal gestures by the Palestinians, was traumatic for the settlers, and represented considerable economic loss for the Israelis. But they were willing to make that sacrifice in the interest of peace.

 

Gadhafi is now dead. After more than four decades of brutalizing the Libyan people, he died a brutal death. His convoy was hit by NATO bombs as it fled the city of Sirte. Western-backed revolutionaries finished the job, wildly shouting “Allahu Akbar” — usually translated as “God is great” — as they ripped his hair out, smashed his face in, and finally, put the fatal bullet through his skull. American officials celebrated the ghoulish announcement.

 

Gadhafi was born in 1942 to poor parents outside of Sirte, Libya, a country then ruled by Italy. Raised in a tent, he eventually joined the military. And in 1969, while pro-Western Libyan King Idris was away, Gadhafi led a coalition of military officers in a bloodless coup that abolished the monarchy.

After seizing power, the budding despot promptly shut down Western military bases in Libya and set up “Revolutionary Committees” to quash opposition. While working to bring in his version of Arab socialism, Gadhafi also developed a massive system of informants to silence dissent. Critics were often publicly executed.

Using oil money instead of debt, Gadhafi’s regime did significantly raise Libyans’ standards of living — life expectancy and literacy rates surged. Blacks and women were also given equal “rights.” Many analysts cite the dictatorship’s socialist programs and robust welfare state as a reason he was able to cling to power for so long. Like most governments, Gadhafi ensured some level of popular support by using divide-and-conquer tactics and creating whole classes of citizens dependent on his regime’s largesse. Fear also played a key role.

Retired Army General Otto Pérez Molina won Sunday's runoff presidential election in Guatemala, seizing on voters' concerns about growing insecurity in the Central American nation. Pérez led with more than 53 percent of the vote, Guatemala's election authority said. His opponent, businessman Manuel Baldizón, garnered 46 percent of the vote. Both candidates had promised to tackle growing insecurity and the presence of Mexican drug gangs in the country, an area of special concern to the Central American nation, due to its prominence as a key transit point for drugs from South America to the United States.

Pérez, a retired army general who pledged to take a tough stand on crime, was the frontrunner heading into the election. He won the most votes in the first round of voting in September. Low voter turnout was reported in Sunday's election, according to the state-run AGN news agency. The issue of security in Guatemala, which has worsened as Mexican drug cartels have stepped up operations in parts of the country, dominated the vote. In a Vox Latina national survey in July, more than two-thirds of Guatemalans said violence was what concerned them most, far outpacing the combined totals for the economy, unemployment, poverty, and lack of education. In a debate co-hosted by CNN en Español this year, Pérez called for "elite units of the army" to play a larger role in the nation's battle against gangs and drug cartels. The retired general pledged to bring a mano dura — firm hand — to Guatemala's highest office.
 

As speculation continues over possibilities of a unilateral attack by Israel on Iran’s nuclear program, the Obama administration is sending a clear signal that it is prepared to work with the victorious factions arising through the Middle East in the aftermath of the Arab Spring — including self-avowed “Islamists.” In the words of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, “what parties call themselves is less important to us than what they actually do.”

According to a story from the Associated Press, the Obama administration is now openly embracing the Islamist shift which is taking place as a result of the past year’s series of revolutions that have swept through a series of Islam-dominated countries. Speaking to the National Democratic Institute, Clinton made it clear that a profound shift is taking place in American foreign policy. In the words of the AP story:

Clinton offered a forthright embrace of the democratic changes enveloping North Africa and the Middle East at a time when the euphoria of the successful revolutions from Egypt to Libya is giving way to the hard and unprecedented work of creating stable democracies.
After decades of partnering dictators throughout the region, her message was that the U.S. would approach the new political landscape with an open mind and the understanding that long-term support for democracy trumps any short-term advantages through alliances with authoritarian regimes.

JBS Facebook JBS Twitter JBS YouTube JBS RSS Feed