NATO is described as The North Atlantic Treaty Organization also called the North Atlantic Alliance, is an intergovernmental military alliance. It can be considered a system of collective securities.
This notion of collective securities, one must ask the securities of whom? Most persons who are from a western member state would conceptualize NATO as a group of nations that respond to conflict to ensure the sustainability of our freedoms and contribute to the development of freedoms for others.
What is the consequence of a multilateral collective if most of it members are in opposition to the freedom of the people. Would that not make it a military alliance seeking to remove our freedoms and ensure the control of a master?
So what do people think will be the outcome of letting more and more nations that are totalitarians, authoritarians, or even social democratic. What is the effects of giving a voice of influence and the value of the vote in decision making. It is only a matter of time before their master becomes yours.
If I am not mistaken this the a strategy of the German 3th Reich. Centralize power and control on a national and international level. The Persian 4th Reich is achieve the failing of yesterdays Reich. For those who do not conform to such ideas of control and power, the influence and susceptibility of being a King or Queen the vehicle driving the transition within such actors. Everyone has a price and for some that price goes beyond monetary value.
Russia did help us destroy the 3rd Reich but they were allies prior to becoming the enemy of the Reich. Like yesterday, we must be able to identify the enemy. Russia is running a bait and switch and using a demolition program rooted in development of Ukraine to trap us in a bait and switch scenario.
Most are right now say how dare he call the Ukrainian conflict a development program. Question what is it worth to have the enemy infiltrate our line of defence? I guess a new Google smart city is within that value. So the conflict between Ukraine and Russia is a conflict of companions driven by pursuit.
Europe is showing itself as the opposition but there are many member states in Europe that are socialist or are seeking to become master within a new generation. Canada has acted as the promoter of narrative, misleading the public.
What ties all these nations together is the Aga Khan and his Persian 4th Reich pursuant of hereditary control. The Aga Khan has seized Canada through institutional management and resource control like so many other nations. The Aga Khan, through Germany has become a major influence on the European vision of tomorrow.
One of the biggest conflicts within NATO is that between America and Europe and the pursuit of backing currency with oil. Did you know that Iran and Iraq were going to sell oil exclusively in the euro. Do you know who is Your Majesty in Iran - the Aga Khan.
Now NATO is a strong military alliance that puts an end to many of the ill intended efforts. So if you are not capable of standing and fighting is the next best idea to infiltrate that which fight you in the name of your opposition. NATO is that organization.
Sweden and Finland, the applying member are also aligned with the Aga Khan through a organization trust for culture. I have to ask who's culture. The only cultural element that these Persian 4th Reich companion nations are seeking to build is that of the people having a master.
As stated by the Aga Khan, the pursuit is hereditary control of the religious and secular sectors with a labour market rooted in volunteerism. How does this differentiate from a master and a slave? The Aga Khan is attempting to colonize the world into a New World Order.
The Aga Khan is engineering conflict in order to position our enemy. If violent conflict arises the enemies‘ militia is here. If conflict does not occur his militia is here to pressure institutions into resource strain and exhaustion.
The Persian 4th Reich militia is known as civil society and through this network of organization the Aga Khan has us funding his war against us. We pay to bring them here. We fund their efforts to pressure institution into resource exhaustion.
Making matters worse is the fact that me saying this makes me a villain as ill intention has been masqueraded as good will. To stand in self defence in opposition to cries of oppression and discrimination is next to impossible as no matter you articulation you are the villain.
Which is the most complex aspect of the Aga Khan's war effort. Redefining a hero as a villain and a villain as a hero. Correction, a villain cannot be redefined as a hero for the actions of the villain lend themselves in opposition to that which characterizes a hero. But a villain can easily become a victim.
Just think about it for a second. All hero's stand above the villain in victory waiting for justice to be served. If you remove the context which lead to the hero stand over the villain the hero quickly become a villain through notion of oppression and exclusion. In the course of redefining the hero the villain goes through a natural transition to the victim.
We are living in the greatest bait and switch and the Persian 4th Reich with its national and civil society companions are like a Pied Piper marching us off the cliff of self preservation. It is our responsibility to be informed and it is time we see the world uncoloured by the lens of seized media and institution and come to understand who is the enemy and how they are seeking a new global colonial power. A new world order.
Do you want your line of defence to be for or against you, your identity, and ideological concept of self and community.
This piece was inspired by this article