Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,
Globalists as an organized entity have a habit of shifting their efforts between various false-front institutions in order to avoid significant scrutiny. For example, in 2020 they ramped up the fear machine on the covid pandemic and the World Economic Forum took a lead role in that effort. Klaus Schwab was all over the media using covid as an excuse to promote every authoritarian measure imaginable.
When that agenda failed (lockdowns blocked, mask mandates ignored, vaccine passports defeated and the CDC caught inflating vaccination numbers), the WEF and Klaus Schwab conveniently disappeared from the media radar.
When globalists tried to permanently establish ESG as a way of life for corporations, they introduced the Council For Inclusive Capitalism, run by Lynn de Rothschild and partnered with the Vatican. When ESG was exposed for what it really is (a bridge to full bore communism in which corporations enforce far left social engineering), the CIC vanished from the limelight as quickly as they appeared.
That said, there is one globalist group that has consistently been in the background during most of these operations – The Atlantic Council. Whenever there’s a propaganda push in play to misdirect the western public, whenever there’s a policy initiative to take away your freedoms, whenever there’s a regional war that might explode into a world war, I always end up finding the fingerprints of the Atlantic Council.
The council was deeply involved in covid propaganda from 2020 onward and they also have their hands in climate change propaganda, but their bread and butter is regional proxy wars.
In my recent article ‘Globalists Are Trying To Escalate The Ukraine War Into WWIII Before The US Election’, I outlined how the council is deeply interwoven into the escalation of the Ukraine war through their Eurasia Center and their Scowcroft Center. They have been stoking conflict in the region for at least a decade with the intention of drawing NATO forces into a direct confrontation with Russia.
In a report published by the Atlantic Council in 2014 titled ‘A Roadmap for Ukraine: Delivering on the Promise of the Maidan’, the group notes:
“Last fall, as Ukrainians massed on the Maidan to demand a better government and closer ties to Europe, the Atlantic Council began to mobilize on Ukraine. An Atlantic Council delegation visited Warsaw and Kyiv in March to map out our strategy, and during the visit of Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk to the Council that same month, we launched a one hundred- day campaign to galvanize the transatlantic community behind Ukraine’s democratic future in Europe.
As the crisis worsened, we convened at the highest levels, making vital connections between Ukrainian, American, and European policymakers and thought leaders. We deployed our substantial expertise to launch “red team” exercises that anticipated Russia’s actions and outlined strategies to respond to likely scenarios. Our rapid response working groups (“tiger teams”) made recommendations on issues fundamental to Ukraine’s success. An Atlantic Council delegation delivered this report, which brings all of these findings together, to Prime Minister Yatsenyuk and other leaders in Kyiv the first week of July. The findings are also being shared with American and European policymakers…”
On Ukraine’s security policy, the Council advised both NATO and Ukraine officials. The document goes on to outline how NATO could covertly and overtly engage with Ukraine to strengthen their chances of joining with the EU over time; a move which Vladimir Putin claims was one of the very reasons for his invasion of the Donbas. Finally, the paper described how NATO could foster a proxy war against Russia through Ukraine without directly declaring war on Russia. As the Council states:
“Russia’s aggression provides an opportunity of strategic clarity and urgency that should be used to expedite building a robust, modern, and capable Ukrainian defense and security establishment…”
I believe the Atlantic Council is a root instigator behind every globalist scheme to trigger a larger war between the East and the West. Their ideal scenario seems to be the creation of a proxy conflict that acts as a first domino in a chain that leads to world war, a bit like DARPA’s “Linchpin Theory” which I have written about in the past.
To be clear, the council is not only interested in Ukraine and Russia. They’re happy to embroil Americans in a larger war wherever they can.
This past week, the Atlantic Council has published another war scenario report dealing with Iran titled ‘The Future of US Strategy Toward Iran: A Bipartisan Roadmap For The Next Administration’. The goal of the report is to influence a new defense doctrine with a mission to insert the US directly in the middle of the burgeoning war between Iran and Israel.
As the report states:
“In simple terms, the goal was to develop a US policy toward Iran, not a Democratic or Republican one. We termed the effort the Iran Strategy Project (ISP). And when we began recruiting experts to join our advisory committee and working group, we did so with two overriding principles in mind. First, ideological diversity and bipartisanship could not just be talking points—they were requirements. The wild swings of US policy toward Iran over the last decade created significant policy gaps that Iran exploited to more rapidly advance its regional malign influence and nuclear program…”
The assumption in the notion of a “bipartisan” posture on Iran is that there is common ground to be harvested between conservatives and leftists when it comes to war in the region. To be sure, the Democrats and the Neo-Cons are in full agreement on most things. But Neo-Cons are not conservatives and the political base on both sides of the aisle has little interest in another war in the Middle East.
The wild card here is Trump. The establishment media reports that Iran hacked the Trump campaign’s election strategies and gave them to the Harris camp. There are also rumors spread by US intelligence agencies that Iran was working to have Trump assassinated. Are these claims true? There’s little public evidence available to prove it.
Maybe Iran really wants to take Trump down. Or, maybe this is part of a plot to ensure that Trump backs a full blown war with Iran should he win the election. Trump has said repeatedly that he intends to end the war in Ukraine upon his return to the White House. This would ruin over a decade of planning by the Atlantic Council. But what if they can sink the US into a different conflict with the same potential for a world war? That’s what Iran is – Another linchpin.
The council asserts that they will seek to tie the US inexorably to the fate of Israel by positioning a permanent American military force in the region:
“Deterring the threat posed by Iran and its proxies requires a multifaceted approach that includes maintaining an adequate military presence in the region and a willingness to respond with appropriate force to attacks on US interests and those of US allies; working with allies to enhance cooperation on regional security; collaborating with partners on ways to reduce conflicts and instability that create openings for Iran to exploit; and expanding security cooperation beyond traditional realms.”
They also want the US to create its own red line declaration; if Iran obtains nukes, then Iran must be destroyed (keep in mind, it is confirmed that Israel already has its own nuclear arsenal).
“The United States needs to maintain a declaratory policy, explicitly enunciated by the president, that it will not tolerate Iran getting a nuclear weapon and will use military force to prevent this development if all other measures fail. To support this policy, the United States should refrain from stressing that it does not seek conflict with Iran; announce that it will conduct yearly joint exercises with Israel, such as Juniper Oak.”
Juniper Oak was a joint live fire war exercise organized by US and Israeli defense forces in 2023 which is viewed as a theoretical trial run for an attack on Iran. War between Iran and the US has been a sought after outcome for globalists for a long time, but it seems to me that they are particularly interested in roping Trump into the agenda. The following statement from the Atlantic Council report is highly suspicious:
“Because assassination plots against current or former US officials are a direct threat to US sovereignty, and in order to enhance deterrence, the United States needs to consider a standing policy of a kinetic military response against Iran in retaliation for a successful—or even close to successful—plot…”
This seems to be a direct reference or message to Trump concerning the rumors of Iran contracting his death. Given there have been at least two assassination attempts on Trump so far, I would not be surprised if after he wins the election new information is suddenly released linking Iran to at least one attack. I would also expect a major terror attack in the US within the next year (real or false flag).
This is not to say that Trump wants war; I can’t make that claim one way or the other yet. To his credit he was one of the few presidents that avoided the expansion of US conflicts during his first term. But as I warned back in 2016, he had a LOT of ghouls in his cabinet whispering in his ear. Keeping the Atlantic Council (among others) away from the Oval Office and Trump should be a priority in 2025.
The council appears to be positioning for a war under either administration – A war with Russia under Harris or a war with Iran under Trump. I’m not a fan of Islamic fundamentalism, but a conflict between the US and Iran is exactly what the globalists want because it can easily metastasize like a cancer.
The council notes that there are already 40,000 US troops spread across the Middle East, and that this force could be reorganized into a contingent for rapid response to Iran, along with new troops added over time. Of course, they acknowledge that Iran’s situation has changed over the years, with far closer strategic associations with China and Russia:
“This requires recognition that Iran’s relationship with Russia and China has evolved in a manner that makes it difficult to convince either country to support new economic or military restrictions against Iran…”
In other words, the council understands that a war with Iran could escalate into a larger conflict with Russia and perhaps China.
The fight between Israel and multiple nations in the Middle East does not concern me. I have no stake in the success of either side. I’m an American and I care about America, but there are powerful people out there that WANT us to become invested in foreign wars. They want us to pick a side and they want us to cheer for American troops being sent to fight and die over these foreign conflagrations.
The greater concern here is that one day these proxy wars and regional wars will explode into something that lands on our doorstep. In the past Americans have been lured into apathy when it comes to foreign entanglements because we never have to deal with them in our daily lives. They’ve always been out of sight and out of mind. In the next war, we may not have that luxury.
* * *
If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch. Learn more about it HERE.
Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,
Globalists as an organized entity have a habit of shifting their efforts between various false-front institutions in order to avoid significant scrutiny. For example, in 2020 they ramped up the fear machine on the covid pandemic and the World Economic Forum took a lead role in that effort. Klaus Schwab was all over the media using covid as an excuse to promote every authoritarian measure imaginable.
When that agenda failed (lockdowns blocked, mask mandates ignored, vaccine passports defeated and the CDC caught inflating vaccination numbers), the WEF and Klaus Schwab conveniently disappeared from the media radar.
When globalists tried to permanently establish ESG as a way of life for corporations, they introduced the Council For Inclusive Capitalism, run by Lynn de Rothschild and partnered with the Vatican. When ESG was exposed for what it really is (a bridge to full bore communism in which corporations enforce far left social engineering), the CIC vanished from the limelight as quickly as they appeared.
That said, there is one globalist group that has consistently been in the background during most of these operations – The Atlantic Council. Whenever there’s a propaganda push in play to misdirect the western public, whenever there’s a policy initiative to take away your freedoms, whenever there’s a regional war that might explode into a world war, I always end up finding the fingerprints of the Atlantic Council.
The council was deeply involved in covid propaganda from 2020 onward and they also have their hands in climate change propaganda, but their bread and butter is regional proxy wars.
In my recent article ‘Globalists Are Trying To Escalate The Ukraine War Into WWIII Before The US Election’, I outlined how the council is deeply interwoven into the escalation of the Ukraine war through their Eurasia Center and their Scowcroft Center. They have been stoking conflict in the region for at least a decade with the intention of drawing NATO forces into a direct confrontation with Russia.
In a report published by the Atlantic Council in 2014 titled ‘A Roadmap for Ukraine: Delivering on the Promise of the Maidan’, the group notes:
“Last fall, as Ukrainians massed on the Maidan to demand a better government and closer ties to Europe, the Atlantic Council began to mobilize on Ukraine. An Atlantic Council delegation visited Warsaw and Kyiv in March to map out our strategy, and during the visit of Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk to the Council that same month, we launched a one hundred- day campaign to galvanize the transatlantic community behind Ukraine’s democratic future in Europe.
As the crisis worsened, we convened at the highest levels, making vital connections between Ukrainian, American, and European policymakers and thought leaders. We deployed our substantial expertise to launch “red team” exercises that anticipated Russia’s actions and outlined strategies to respond to likely scenarios. Our rapid response working groups (“tiger teams”) made recommendations on issues fundamental to Ukraine’s success. An Atlantic Council delegation delivered this report, which brings all of these findings together, to Prime Minister Yatsenyuk and other leaders in Kyiv the first week of July. The findings are also being shared with American and European policymakers…”
On Ukraine’s security policy, the Council advised both NATO and Ukraine officials. The document goes on to outline how NATO could covertly and overtly engage with Ukraine to strengthen their chances of joining with the EU over time; a move which Vladimir Putin claims was one of the very reasons for his invasion of the Donbas. Finally, the paper described how NATO could foster a proxy war against Russia through Ukraine without directly declaring war on Russia. As the Council states:
“Russia’s aggression provides an opportunity of strategic clarity and urgency that should be used to expedite building a robust, modern, and capable Ukrainian defense and security establishment…”
I believe the Atlantic Council is a root instigator behind every globalist scheme to trigger a larger war between the East and the West. Their ideal scenario seems to be the creation of a proxy conflict that acts as a first domino in a chain that leads to world war, a bit like DARPA’s “Linchpin Theory” which I have written about in the past.
To be clear, the council is not only interested in Ukraine and Russia. They’re happy to embroil Americans in a larger war wherever they can.
This past week, the Atlantic Council has published another war scenario report dealing with Iran titled ‘The Future of US Strategy Toward Iran: A Bipartisan Roadmap For The Next Administration’. The goal of the report is to influence a new defense doctrine with a mission to insert the US directly in the middle of the burgeoning war between Iran and Israel.
As the report states:
“In simple terms, the goal was to develop a US policy toward Iran, not a Democratic or Republican one. We termed the effort the Iran Strategy Project (ISP). And when we began recruiting experts to join our advisory committee and working group, we did so with two overriding principles in mind. First, ideological diversity and bipartisanship could not just be talking points—they were requirements. The wild swings of US policy toward Iran over the last decade created significant policy gaps that Iran exploited to more rapidly advance its regional malign influence and nuclear program…”
[embedded content]
The assumption in the notion of a “bipartisan” posture on Iran is that there is common ground to be harvested between conservatives and leftists when it comes to war in the region. To be sure, the Democrats and the Neo-Cons are in full agreement on most things. But Neo-Cons are not conservatives and the political base on both sides of the aisle has little interest in another war in the Middle East.
The wild card here is Trump. The establishment media reports that Iran hacked the Trump campaign’s election strategies and gave them to the Harris camp. There are also rumors spread by US intelligence agencies that Iran was working to have Trump assassinated. Are these claims true? There’s little public evidence available to prove it.
Maybe Iran really wants to take Trump down. Or, maybe this is part of a plot to ensure that Trump backs a full blown war with Iran should he win the election. Trump has said repeatedly that he intends to end the war in Ukraine upon his return to the White House. This would ruin over a decade of planning by the Atlantic Council. But what if they can sink the US into a different conflict with the same potential for a world war? That’s what Iran is – Another linchpin.
The council asserts that they will seek to tie the US inexorably to the fate of Israel by positioning a permanent American military force in the region:
“Deterring the threat posed by Iran and its proxies requires a multifaceted approach that includes maintaining an adequate military presence in the region and a willingness to respond with appropriate force to attacks on US interests and those of US allies; working with allies to enhance cooperation on regional security; collaborating with partners on ways to reduce conflicts and instability that create openings for Iran to exploit; and expanding security cooperation beyond traditional realms.”
They also want the US to create its own red line declaration; if Iran obtains nukes, then Iran must be destroyed (keep in mind, it is confirmed that Israel already has its own nuclear arsenal).
“The United States needs to maintain a declaratory policy, explicitly enunciated by the president, that it will not tolerate Iran getting a nuclear weapon and will use military force to prevent this development if all other measures fail. To support this policy, the United States should refrain from stressing that it does not seek conflict with Iran; announce that it will conduct yearly joint exercises with Israel, such as Juniper Oak.”
Juniper Oak was a joint live fire war exercise organized by US and Israeli defense forces in 2023 which is viewed as a theoretical trial run for an attack on Iran. War between Iran and the US has been a sought after outcome for globalists for a long time, but it seems to me that they are particularly interested in roping Trump into the agenda. The following statement from the Atlantic Council report is highly suspicious:
“Because assassination plots against current or former US officials are a direct threat to US sovereignty, and in order to enhance deterrence, the United States needs to consider a standing policy of a kinetic military response against Iran in retaliation for a successful—or even close to successful—plot…”
This seems to be a direct reference or message to Trump concerning the rumors of Iran contracting his death. Given there have been at least two assassination attempts on Trump so far, I would not be surprised if after he wins the election new information is suddenly released linking Iran to at least one attack. I would also expect a major terror attack in the US within the next year (real or false flag).
This is not to say that Trump wants war; I can’t make that claim one way or the other yet. To his credit he was one of the few presidents that avoided the expansion of US conflicts during his first term. But as I warned back in 2016, he had a LOT of ghouls in his cabinet whispering in his ear. Keeping the Atlantic Council (among others) away from the Oval Office and Trump should be a priority in 2025.
The council appears to be positioning for a war under either administration – A war with Russia under Harris or a war with Iran under Trump. I’m not a fan of Islamic fundamentalism, but a conflict between the US and Iran is exactly what the globalists want because it can easily metastasize like a cancer.
The council notes that there are already 40,000 US troops spread across the Middle East, and that this force could be reorganized into a contingent for rapid response to Iran, along with new troops added over time. Of course, they acknowledge that Iran’s situation has changed over the years, with far closer strategic associations with China and Russia:
“This requires recognition that Iran’s relationship with Russia and China has evolved in a manner that makes it difficult to convince either country to support new economic or military restrictions against Iran…”
In other words, the council understands that a war with Iran could escalate into a larger conflict with Russia and perhaps China.
The fight between Israel and multiple nations in the Middle East does not concern me. I have no stake in the success of either side. I’m an American and I care about America, but there are powerful people out there that WANT us to become invested in foreign wars. They want us to pick a side and they want us to cheer for American troops being sent to fight and die over these foreign conflagrations.
The greater concern here is that one day these proxy wars and regional wars will explode into something that lands on our doorstep. In the past Americans have been lured into apathy when it comes to foreign entanglements because we never have to deal with them in our daily lives. They’ve always been out of sight and out of mind. In the next war, we may not have that luxury.
* * *
If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch. Learn more about it HERE.
Loading…
