Authored by Jeremiah Johnson (nom) via SHTFplan.com,

Rahm Emmanuel was/is (in)famous for his alleged attribution of the quote “Never allow a good crisis to go to waste.” Nevertheless, in the manner that Chaucer’s “Canterbury Tales” is an “English echo” of “The Decameron” by Giovanni Boccaccio, the quote assigned to Emmanuel is a paraphrase of words emitted by the equally-nefarious Milton Friedman:

“Only a crisis – actual or perceived – produces real change. When that crisis occurs, the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around. That, I believe, is our basic function: to develop alternatives to existing policies, to keep them alive and available until the politically impossible becomes politically inevitable.” – “ Capitalism and Freedom ,” by Milton Friedman, Preface, Univ. Chicago Press, 1982.

Although he was an Economist (so-called), Friedman’s Marxist economic endeavors (germinated by the Frankfurt School of Economics “alumni”) were cracked akin to a whip throughout the world and used by the U.S. to further imperialism and fostered dependence by third-world nations. Such “dependence,” it must be added, took the form of loans through the IMF and World Bank…backed by military force. The “dependence” is almost that of the Helsinki Syndrome, in which the kidnapped captive becomes psychologically dependent upon the captor…but the captivity remains. Protection and extortion in the same vein.

These same “entangling alliances” were warned about for the fledgling United States by the Founding Fathers. Such forced alliances are easily seen for what they are: the creation of vassal states through force projection and intimidation. Even when we’re not directly involved, we “underwrite” the actions. The latest (and largest) prime example was the ousting of Ukraine’s president, Yanukovych, in 2014 and the attempt to force Ukraine to become a part of NATO, as well as another IMF-vassal in the NATO-Euro-hegemony.

Such activities continue: in Syria, in Yemen, and throughout the world... a continued bolstering of U.S. military presence, backed by an ever-smiling line of “Rockettes” willing to “invest in a country’s future” with our almighty, fiat Petrodollar. Friedman’s actions as an economist can be seen enmeshed in virtually all U.S. foreign policy for the past five decades: they form the basis for the actions of “Economic Hit Men” as described by Perkins in his book.

The coerced economic policies within the imperialism of American foreign policy are not the center of this piece. Here is something relayed by Newsweek as reported by the New York Times on 2/2/18, an article entitled White House Pressures Pentagon for North Korea Attack Plan, Report Says, by John Haltiwanger that bears reading:

“The White House is butting heads with the Pentagon on North Korea as senior military officials appear apprehensive about presenting President Donald Trump with military options against the rogue state, The New York Times reported Friday. White House National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster is reportedly concerned with drawing up a specific military plan in order to reinforce Trump’s various threats to the reclusive nation. Unnamed Pentagon officials are seemingly concerned the president is moving toward the use of force too quickly and worry that additional options will increase the probability Trump will move forward with an attack, according to the report. Dana W. White, press secretary for the Pentagon, told The New York Times the defense secretary “regularly provides the president with a deep arsenal of military options,” and claimed that the reports of reluctance in that regard were “false.”

What can be gathered from this is the media is trying to paint a picture of confusion within the military command structure between the Pentagon and the administration. It is also more “predictive programming,” designed to “show” how the President wants a war: this to make him foot the blame when and if a war commences. Obviously, the United States and North Korea are still in a standoff with neither side backing away from their position. But just picture in your mind: the Emmanuel’s and the Friedman’s…smirking and smiling on the sidelines, knowing all this orchestration of the media is for the public to gulp down…knowing all of these crises have been acted upon by those of their ilk.

We have a President who has ordered the release to the public of some very sensitive information on FISA (more appropriately labeled “DISA,” as the surveillance is directed toward the zeks formerly called “American citizens”). An article came out on Lew Rockwell by former Justice Andrew Napolitano on 2/1/18 entitled Lying, Spying, and Hiding. Here is an excerpt of that article that I recommend reading in its entirety:

“The abuse summarized in the Republican memo apparently spans the last year of the Obama administration and the first year of the Trump administration. If it comes through as advertised, it will show the deep state using the government’s powers for petty or political or ideological reasons. The use of raw intelligence data by the NSA or the FBI for political purposes or to manipulate those in government is as serious a threat to popular government — to personal liberty in a free society — as has ever occurred in America since Congress passed the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, which punished speech critical of the government.”

So, to keep something from coming out of this magnitude, do you see the big picture?

What is the best way to “deflect” attention from something such as this? War, naturally.

I submit that the powers that be who are within the Deep State will either commence their lackeys to start a war or will create the conditions that will lead to one ... not necessarily starting with North Korea, but possibly one of the other theatres where tensions with the U.S. are running high.

I also submit that under such circumstances, it may not be the President who is responsible for the start of such a war: it may be a contrived crisis that the Deep State will not allow to go to waste that propels us into one. Nothing is beyond their capabilities, except to act with compassion and take into consideration the rights and welfare of the average citizen.