Editor's note: The Shepard Ambellas Show airs LIVE weekdays (Mon-Fri) on the Shepard Ambellas YouTube channel from 5-7 pm Eastern/4C/2P. Subscribe now! Turn notifications on immediately. An archived version of the show is also available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Google Podcasts, Castbox, Deezer, Podcast Addict, Podchaser, JioSaavn, and Spreaker for you listening pleasure.
September 22, 2011
A recent article in USA Today raises the question if the developments in Libya show Obama’s overall approach to foreign policy and the beginning of what properly might be called “The Obama Doctrine.”
Well, if Obama’s approach to foreign policy can be called a doctrine, it could easily be defined in these terms:
“I will use the full power of the CIA and the U.S. military to steal the resources of any country who opposes the intrusion of Wall Street bankers, oil magnates and transnational corporations.” However, isn’t this exactly what American presidents have been doing since Woodrow Wilson’s times?
On the other hand, given the fact that most doctrines attributed to American presidents have actually been written at the Harold Pratt House by the Rockefellers and other members of the dreaded Council of Foreign Relations — the true government of the United States —, and implanted in the president’s minds by their CFR-controlled advisors, should we properly call them “presidential doctrines?”
Of these, probably one of the most obvious examples of policies whose only purpose is to protect the rapacity of Wall Street bankers and transnational corporations is the U.S. policy document “National Security Strategy of the United States,” also known as the Bush Doctrine, released in September 2002.
Its most radical postulate is a new preemptive strikes policy, which is nothing but an even more aggressive approach toward countries that get in the way of the CFR’s Wall Street Mafia.
However, further proof that the so-called war on terror was planned way before September 11, 201, is that the “National Security Strategy” is based on two papers dating back to the early 1990s: one is a 1992 internal government document entitled “Defense Planning Guidance,” authored by then Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney (CFR) and his deputy Paul Wolfowitz (CFR), which contemplated the use of military force against any nation the conspirators perceived to be hostile against their interests.
The other one is the report “Rebuilding America’s Defenses,” released in September 2000 by the Project for the New American Century, a neocon think tank composed almost exclusively of CFR members.
Typical of these CFR-created presidential “doctrines” is George Kennan’s (CFR) 1947 article in Foreign Affairs, written under the pseudonym “X,” explaining his —actually the CFR conspirators’— theory of “containment.”
According to Kennan, the U.S. role in the coming Cold War should be limited to containing the expansion of Soviet Communism, not fighting to reverse or defeat this expansion. Soon after, President Truman made Containment the core of “his” Truman Doctrine.
Probably one of the most overused adjectives attached to American presidents is “Wilsonian,” honoring the alleged creator of the League of Nations, the Thirteen Points, and many other aberrations that, luckily, ended up in failure.
Unfortunately, we are still suffering from “his” creation of the Federal Reserve Bank and the Internal Revenue Service, the two U.S. government institutions that have stolen more money from the pockets of American citizens than thieves and gangsters.
Nevertheless, Wilsonianism has become a sort of recurring curse of American politics.
In an address to the United States Senate in three parts, June 29, June 30 and July 1, 1992, “On the Threshold of the New World Order: The Wilsonian Vision and American Foreign Policy in the 1990’s and Beyond,” then Senator Joseph R. Biden, a proud member of the Council on Foreign Relations, said,
When the peace conference convened at Versailles in 1919, Woodrow Wilson presented, to a world desperately eager to hear it, America’s second vision of a new order. The first American vision —the Founders’ vision— had concerned the establishment of a just new order within nations through institutions of democracy. The second American vision —Wilson’s vision— concerned the establishment of a just new order among nations through institutions of cooperation.
. . .
Modern-day conservatives who are instinctively frightened by the Wilsonian vision have propounded a mythical image of Woodrow Wilson as a dangerously naive idealist. Idealist he was. But there was no naivete in the Wilsonian vision. As history soon proved the danger lay in a failure to implement what Wilson proposed.
. . .
How is it, then, that the United States failed so conspicuously and so fatefully to join the League of Nations that Woodrow Wilson himself had designed and advanced as the ultimate protection against future cynicism and future cataclysm?
. . .
With that turn of history, the League of Nations was doomed and a new world was born, but not a new world order.
. . .
Now, as the century nears it close, the near-universal repudiation of the totalitarian idea has removed the last great obstacle to the Wilsonian vision.
What CFR agent Joseph Biden did not say, however, was how this “near-universal repudiation of the totalitarian idea” could actually bring about the totalitarian, communo-fascist “Wilsonian vision” of Edward Mandell House.
Apparently Biden ignores, or wants us to ignore, that Wilson had no ideas of his own. All of them had been implanted in his feeble brain by his controller, Col. Edward Mandell House, an agent for the Rothschild-Warburg-Rockefeller banking cartel (gang) and founder of the Council on Foreign Relations. Wilson himself publicly admitted it when he said, “Mr. House is my second personality. He is my independent self. His thoughts and mine are one.”
The most important documents in the history of the U.S. since the beginning of the past century, like Wilson’s Fourteen Points, the League of Nations, the Federal Reserve Bank, the Federal Income Tax, the Lend Lease, the Containment Doctrine, the Marshall Plan, the National Security Act that created the CIA, the Alliance for Progress, FEMA, as well as the nefarious Patriot Act the Office of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration, up to Obamacare, have been written by CFR Conspirators at the Harold Pratt House in Manhattan and placed on the President’s desk for him to sign.
For example, though generally attributed to JFK, actually the first person who mentioned the Alliance for Progress was CFR secret agent Fidel Castro. On May 2, 1959, during a session of the Economic Assembly of the Latin American States, Castro suggested that, in order to avoid problems in Latin America, the U.S. should help the Latin American countries economically through the creation of a common market. Next month, during a speech at New York’s Central Park, he called for an American “Marshall Plan” for Latin America in order to avoid communism.
As expected, Castro’s suggestions were received with laughter and contempt. But less than two years later, President Kennedy created his Alliance for Progress, pledging $10 billion for the first ten years. Later, President Johnson promised another $10 billion to continue the program.
And less than ten years later, in the spring of 1967, a hemispheric conference was held in Uruguay where the decision was made for the creation of a Latin American common market.
Incredibly, both of the apparently far-fetched suggestions Castro made eventually became a reality — which does not prove that Castro has extraordinary powers of clairvoyance, but that he gets his marching orders from some Wall Street bankers, particularly the Rockefellers.
Despite of the use of the Wilsonian (actually Housian) rhetoric of intervening militarily for humanitarian purposes or to enlarge the community of democratic, free-market nations, Obama’s foreign policy is nothing but a rehash of the naked imperialistic policy exposed in a 1992 Department of Defense planing document drafted at the Harold Pratt House by then-Under secretary of Defense for George W, Bush, Paul Wolfowitz (CFR). The document laid out in extremely blunt and arrogant language the need for a unipolar world under full spectrum dominance by Wall Street bankers and transnational corporations using the U.S. military as their obedient tool to coerce and intimidate the whole world.
A few years later, in September 2000, the Department of Defense document materialized again in the Report “Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century,” produced by a neocon organization called the Project for the New American Century (PNAC). Key PNAC members who wrote the Report were Richard Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Norman Podhoretz, Richard Perle, Lewis “Scooter” Libby, John Bolton, Elliot Abrams, and Robert Kagan, all of them CFR agents.
In synthesis, the Report called for an era of open, uncontested global American imperialism based on brute military force. Because of the openness and cynicism in the way it told the world the course of action the conspirators will follow, some people have compared the PNAC Report to Hitler’s Mein Kampf.
Actually, the plan to surreptitiously invade Libya and other countries is not new. It was mentioned by NATO commander Wesley Clark (CFR) during a speech he gave at the University of Alabama in October of 2006. According to Clark, a general at the Pentagon told him that they had plans to invade seven countries in five years, “starting with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, then Libya, Somalia, Sudan, then we’re going to come back and get Iran in five years.”
And the best part of it is that the Wall Street Bankers’ Wilsonian-Housian-Rockefellerian vision of a new world order under their control is for free, because we the people are the ones paying the U.S. armed forces and the CIA to impose it upon the weak nations of the world.
Therefore, if you are a Wall Street banker, oil magnate or CEO of a transnational corporation, the least you can do is to thank every single member of the U.S. military and the CIA for the good job they are doing protecting your interests abroad.
Obama’s main campaign theme was that of Change. However, after close to the end of his third year as a temporary resident of the White House (he spends most of this time vacationing) the only thing that has changed is that he has not only continued all warfare programs of the Bush era, but has expanded and intensified them.
Consequently, if Obama has put forward something close to a presidential doctrine, we can only call it Obama’s “Lack of Change” doctrine. Or, even better, the Rockefeller doctrine.
Somebody said that the only thing that doesn’t change is change itself. However, the only thing that doesn’t seem to change in Washington, D.C. is lack of change.
. Michael O’Hanlon, “Is Libya a Policy Cornerstone of an Obama Doctrine?,” USA Today, August 29, 2011, p.7A.
 National Security Strategy of the United States, The White House, September 20, 2002.
 Wilson quoted in Charles Seymour, The Intimate Papers of Colonel House (New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1926), vol. I, pp. 114-115.
 The Containment Doctrine was first expressed by CFR agent George Kennan in the famous article he wrote for Foreign Affairs under the synonym “X,” and later polished by the CFR’s “Wise Men.” See Evan Thomas, The Very Best Men: The Daring Early Years of the CIA (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2006), pp. 9, 29.
 The Marshall Plan was actually written by CFR secret agent Richard Bissell. See, Walter Isaacson and Evan Thomas (1986) The Wise Men: Six Friends and the World They Made: Acheson, Bohlen, Harriman, Kennan, Lovett, and McCloy (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1986 p. 10.
 Bush’s Patriot Act was just a version on steroids of Clinton’s Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, passed one year after the Oklahoma City bombing. The Act gave the attorney general the power to use the U.S. armed forces against American citizens, nullifying the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, as well as selectively suspending habeas corpus, the keystone of Anglo-American liberty.
 See, Herbert Matthews, Fidel Castro (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1969), pp. 166-167.
 See, Hispanic American Report, Vol. XII, (No. 4, 1959), p. 205.
 Kurt Nimmo, “Libya and Syria: The Neocon Plan to Attack Seven Countries in Five Years,” Infowars.com, September 2, 2011.
 See, J.D. Heyes, “CIA lawyer says Obama administration backed and continued virtually all Bush-era programs,” Infowars.com, September 7, 2011,http://www.infowars.com/cia-lawyer-says-obama-administration-backed-and-continued-virtually-all-bush-era-programs/
 To see my theory that perhaps Obama is just implementing a plan set up by Col. Edward Mandell House in 1912, see Servando Gonzalez, Obamania: The New Puppet and His Masters (Oakland, California: Spooks Books, 2011), Chapter 2, Barack Obama, Administrator, pp. 28-37.
Servando Gonzalez is a Cuban-born American writer, semiologist and intelligence analyst. He has written books, essays and articles on Latin American history, intelligence, espionage, and semiotics. Servando is the author of Historia herética de la revolución fidelista, The Secret Fidel Castro, The Nuclear Deception and La madre de todas las conspiraciones, all available at Amazon.com.
He also hosted the documentaries Treason in America: The Council on Foreign Relations and Partners in Treason: The CFR-CIA-Castro Connection, produced by Xzault Media Group of San Leandro, California, both available at the author’s site at http://www.servandogonzalez.org.
His latest book, Psychological Warfare and the New World Order: The Secret War Against the American People just appeared and is available at Amazon.com. Ordownload a .pdf copy of the book you can read on your computer or i-Pad.
Servando’s new book, OBAMANIA: The New Puppet and His Masters, is already available at Amazon.com.