Today throughout most of the world there are thousands of strange organisations with names such as “Council for Tri-Lateral Coordination” or “Strategic MENA Policy Board”, etc. Etc.
These two were made up examples, mind you, but they all have names like this. They’re difficult to find unless you actively look for them. Generally you spot them in the “About” section of newspapers, or perhaps see them as a footnote in a study about some war or conflict.
They are increasingly common throughout most media, news and current events. And yet, they seem to make great efforts to lead the media from the background.
So what are these strange institutions, and why do they control the news media?
Simply put: They are think tanks, with a soft emphasis on think, and a bold emphasis on tank.
As an example I will use IISS.org
When you examine their staff and editorial boards, etc, you generally find it comprised of a few noteworthy people:
- A retired US/UK/NATO military officer, sometimes even a general.
- A retired intel officer or spy, generally from the CIA, MI5, Mossad, or similar agency.
- Some kind of business person, usually from an arms dealing firm, holdings company, or mercenary organisation.
- A couple of nobodies with business degrees or executive experience in some corporation or other.
Most of them have important sounding titles such as these:
And these people are part of the newest model of arms marketing.
Their job is to sell guns, mercenaries, tanks, helicopters, military hardware and god knows what else to prospective customers... namely, governments.
As such they spend a lot of time racking up business.
Their websites feature fun little menus that show who is out there why you should kill them. By clicking on any specific region, you are met with a bundle of info packets similar to that found at the shop floor of a sleazy car dealership, except instead of trying to sell you the sports package, they’re trying to sell you wars:
These think tanks claim to be independent, but it’s generally hard to understand how seeing as how so many members of their staff have either former or present ties to the government and its many arms dealing lobbyists. From Lockheed-Martin and BAE Systems, right down to the British army itself.
Defence procurement is literally a term for doing business with the government, and moreover, the business of war and warfare.
So it’s hard to understand how a defence procurement researcher can consider themselves independent in their participation of a think tank about foreign policy.
Having your research on war conducted by arms dealers seems like a conflict of interest to me at least.
Here’s an interesting “research paper” on how there’s a lot of nations in the Nordic countries — some of whom have not been in an active armed conflict for several centuries — can still be exploited for profit by various military-industrial lobbies, mercenary groups and weapon dealers.
This particular article speaks of the oh so dangerous ISR Gap. Apparently these countries could make more of an effort to create large and elaborate spy networks by increasing their military spending.
There is often a lot of these “gaps.” I have spoken before of the Gehlen Organisation’s missile gap, a piece of military propaganda that was not only outright fraudulent, but also almost ignited WW3.
The Gehlen Organisation was one of the first organisations that would turn military resources into private sector defense marketing. The Grandfather of military think tanks, if you will.
And the Gehlen Organisation was the product of ISR spending. It was an ISR institution, and it was full of spies and pardoned war criminals and horrific monsters from former Nazi Germany who turned a relatively stable post-war Europe into the dangerous cold war tension that we eventually became familiar with.
And the reason why is because of how, like most ISR networks, they frequently reward scams. ISR is clandestine and lacks government oversight, and more often than not they become rife with corruption and enemy infiltrators. The Gehlen Organisation in particular was a gift to the USSR, as the KGB compromised their ranks just within a few years of its establishment.
But one problem there was that the Soviets quickly realised how a lot of the Gehlen information was useless, because it was only comprised of misinformation intended to make the enemies of NATO seem more menacing than they actually were.
In other words: It was spies who worked as marketing staff for private military contractors.
And now we see a mind-boggling series of layers to this, as the modern day equivalent of the Gehlen org, namely these think tanks, are now actively proposing we begin to create more ISR assets who can trot out unverifable data about the many barbarians at Rome’s gates. It’s the gift that keeps on taking.
Because it quickly becomes a self-fulfilling, and not to mention very dangerous prophecy, as the increase in military spending in the West will ultimately result in a response from the East.
By saying that the East is plotting arms escalation, these ISR assets can in fact goad foreign governments into following their predictions by manipulating the domestic arms market and the activity of their own military spending.
And this is an extremely dangerous game.
So the next time you see articles about HIMARs, Leopard Tanks, fighter jets, or some other piece of expensive military hardware, as these organisations use newspapers as their own personal soapboxes, just remember what’s at stake.
Each weapon they sell will result in an opposite and equal reaction. Each bomb, tank, fighter jet, missile, targeting system and other ungodly means of killing will further stimulate the market, and geopolitical reactions.
And with each billion they make, the doomsday clock ticks further and further to midnight. These think tanks and the arms dealers they represent are far more dangerous than some insurgency in a tinpot republic. ISIS, Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, whatever… they might, on a good day, destroy a building or a vehicle. They might take out an embassy or hijack an airplane. Maybe.
But these mercenary groups sell weapons that can wipe out millions, including you.
The weapon that is most likely to kill a person who is living in a NATO client state is a NATO issued weapon. Either from the black market, or from arms escalation. In any case, it is not in your best interest to let these organisations continue to push an agenda of permanent war with humanity, and infinite defense spending.