Domination Strategies of the Anglo-Zionist Empire


The psychopathic quest for total world domination by what some (e.g., the Saker) call “the Anglo-Zionist Empire” and many others “the American Empire,” involves establishing global hegemony by any means: endless wars and coups d’etat, economic warfare (ruinous trade pacts, blockades and sanctions), financial terrorism (debt enslavement, currency manipulation),  or threats thereof.The Anglo-Zionist campaign for global hegemony currently unfolding in the world (the Middle East, Far East Asia, Africa, South America and the Pacific limitrophe states, and around Russia’s borders) is described and analyzed in Michel Chossudovky’s excellent exposé called The Globalization of War.Nevertheless  it is true, as Lasse Wilhelmson remarked in a comment, that Chossudovsky  “forgot something, and that is to name those in control of the US.”

Lasse is right. This reminds me of the old Soviet joke in which the interrogator tells the arrested man,”We have information that last night at the pub you insulted the Beloved Leader repeatedly calling him The Pig.” “No, comrade,” pleads the frightened man. “I was talking about a neighbor of mine.”
“Stop lying,” says the interrogator, “we all know who the The Pig is!”

At least Chossudovsky, unlike the kosherized “left,” does not misidentify who is in control of the US, he does not peddle the “white race” hasbara. Chossudovsky’s analysis is excellent, his alarm call is well justified, and we all know who The Pig is. Well, maybe not all of us, so for this I agree with Lasse that there is room for improved precision in this exposé.

The twin companions of these “procedural” domination strategies are the“cognitive” strategies aimed at achieving an ideological makeover: imposing upon the nations in their dominion unquestioning acceptance of the Orwellian doctrine of Upside Down (“patas para arriba” per Galeano and Salbuchi) morality, according to which unprovoked wars are “humanitarian interventions,” state terrorism is “the war on terror,” genocidal massacres are “our right to defend ourselves,” unchecked immigration is “multiculturalism” (while resistance to it is “racism” or “fascism”), subversion to undermine and destroy national culture, religion and traditions and rewrite history is enlightened “secularism” (while resistance is “bigotry” and “anti-semitism”  — the apex of all thought crimes).

The pockets of resistance to the official narrative, the opposition to thought control seen only in the alternative media, are to be neutralized by “gatekeeping.”

A gatekeeper’s mission is to block the political discourse from veering into forbidden territory, thus controlling and rigging the game. The mission demands that the gatekeeper stay inside the perimeter and be credible.

What happens, however, when the public awareness surges against the gate and threatens to topple it? Some things need to be abandoned, sacrificed, like continuing to deny the existence of the Jewish lobby, about which the don of gatekeeping, Chomsky, once said that it is no more powerful than the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP). That gatepost has been moved: it is OK to admit and even criticize the Jewish lobby a bit. Just so it is done with “balance,” like for example claiming that the Saudi lobby is far more dangerous to the US than the Jewish lobby (per Michael Scheuer).

The war on Iraq, ardently pushed and supported by the neocons, is another gatepost that has been moved. It is Ok now to say it was a “mistake” (mainly due to faulty/misunderstood intelligence) and to add that you are “anti-war” or a “non-interventionist.”

It’s a little like when your house is on fire: you gather only the most valuable possessions and get out. Efficient gatekeeping means grabbing the Holocaust and 9/11 (the core taboos) and moving the gateposts. The gatekeeper who moves the posts gets to continue his role inside the perimeter and gets increased credibility: he is the hero who boldly walked into the enlarged territory of dissent.
Michael Scheuer is such a heroic gatekeeper, who boldly moves a few gateposts. But who is he?

Scheuer has had a 22-year career with the CIA during which which working in both the Directorate of Intelligence (DI) and the Directorate of Operations (DO) — thus acquiring a vast experience in both “procedural” and “cognitive” strategies. During this time he was Chief of the CIA’s “Osama bin Laden unit” at the Counterterrorist Center.

David Cohen, head of the CIA’s Directorate of Operations, wanted to create a unit that “would fuse intelligence disciplines into one office—operations, analysis, signals intercepts, overhead photography and so on” (per wikipedia). He recruited Michael Scheuer, an analyst then running the CTC’s Islamic Extremist Branch who was “especially knowledgeable about Afghanistan.” Scheuer must have become emotionally attached to his mission since he codenamed the Bin Ladin unit the “Alec Station,” after his own son’s name.

Scheuer is considered “the foremost expert on Osama Bin Laden.” One might say he is to Bin Laden  what Homer is to the Iliad (not discounting nevertheless the accretions contributed in both cases by anonymous bards reciting the myth). So imagine his discomfiture when competing narratives emerged, exalting Zacarias Moussaoui as the “mastermind of 9/11.”

He resigned from the CIA at the end of 2004 (three years after Bin Laden died) but he has kept busy, not only as a professor at Georgetown University’s Center for Peace and Security Studies, author of acclaimed books (“Imperial Hubris”), and analyst on CNN and other TV channels, but also as a defender of Bin Laden’s (for lack of a better word) legacy, steadfastly maintaining that 9/11 was Bin Laden’s masterwork, in essence “blowback” for our foreign policy in the ME that has enraged the Muslims.

In what can only be seen as a touching gesture of gratitude and reciprocal favor, Bin Laden majestically rose from the dead in 2007 not only to read Scheuer’s book, Through Our Enemies’ Eyes: Osama bin Laden, Radical Islam, and the Future of America, but to also allegedly release a video in which he said:

“If you want to understand what’s going on and if you would like to get to know some of the reasons for your losing the war against us, then read the book of Michael Scheuer in this regard.”[We only have an illegible transcript of it but it’s good enough for me.]

A blurb to kill for. Speaking of killing, Scheuer warned us that,

‘The threat to the United States, inside the United States, comes from al Qaeda….These people are going to detonate a nuclear device inside the United States, and we’re going to have absolutely nothing to respond against.”[“Marching toward Hell,” p XIII]

He is an acerbic critic of Obama, a weak leader unable to do what is needed, namely to fully use the might of the US military to stamp the Islamic terrorism for good. Appreciated by ardent zionist Bill Maher, he espoused his views on his shows as an invited guest.

So what gateposts did he move as a gatekeeper?

— Yes, there really is a Jewish lobby but oy, watch the Saudis…

Scheuer said to NPR that “They [Mearsheimer and Walt] should be credited for the courage they have had to actually present a paper on the subject. I hope they move on and do the Saudi lobby, which is probably more dangerous to the United States than the Israeli lobby.””[31]

— The US must “dump” Israel because it is its support of Israel that has caused all of the “blowback” from the Muslim world. Why, that was a big post to move. Our attitude to Israel, however, must not be one of condemnation but of a sort of indifferent equanimity because… America comes first (play the Stars and Stripes for Ever here).

— They don’t “hate us for our values”, Scheuer says, moving another gatepost 2 cm farther, closer to the one about the “blowback,” but for our interventions  and wars in which we don’t even have the resolve to defeat Islam and defend the American people: “air power is nothing,” full military power must be applied.

— We must stop “sending our kids to die so Mr Mohamed can vote in a free election” and then turn around and become a Jihaddist. (Apparently our wars are not all for Israel and oil but also out of our sincere but naive altruistic desire to bring democracy to the Muslims. No more, America must come first.)

— We must also know that “there is a growing Islamic terrorist movement” afoot, which is “an existential threat to the US.” We must stop supporting Israel (this must be repeated because it is a great credential builder in gatekeeping), and we must also end our dependence on ME oil (start drilling offshore vigorously to spite the jihaddists).

— “Kill as many of them (‘Islamic terrorists’) as possible,” he says to Bill Maher. Presumably his non-interventionism and anti-war stance has its limits, he being a red-blooded American and all.

— The Islamic terrorists are our creation, he says. No, not as you think, by arming, training and directing them, but by our support of Israel that has enraged them — he cannot stress it enough — which engendered the blowback thing.

— The worst part is not that we intervened but that we did it indecisively: we withdrew from Afghanistan and left it in the hands of Jihaddists and now we have Obama who is not mensch enough to “fully use our military force” and just plays with drones.

Watch him and spot his gatekeeping footwork in the video entitled:

Michael Scheuer: “ISIS Could Not Ask For Any Greater Gift Than The One Obama’s Giving Them”

I realized that the “gift” he was referring to might not be the tents so generously donated to them, on which they neglected to cover up the marks of their provenance before making their training video:

Play Hatikva now.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *