Russia and Iran vs. The New World Order

3
2737

…by Jonas E. Alexis

Peace is a frightening thing for New World Order agents, Neocon ideologues, and Zionist puppets. They freak out whenever they hear nations are dealing with their differences peacefully, respectfully, and diplomatically.

New World Order agents want bloodshed, death, pain and suffering virtually all over the world, most particularly in the Middle East. They want the destruction of families, nations, and livelihood. This is not conspiracy theory at all. Listen again to one of the most leading lights of the New World Order, Michael Ledeen:

“Creative destruction is our middle name, both within our own society and abroad. We tear down the old order every day, from business to science, literature, art, architecture, and cinema to politics and the law.

“Our enemies have always hated this whirlwind of energy and creativity, which menaces their traditions (whatever they may be) and shames them for their inability to keep pace.”[1]

According to this view, New World Order agents like Ledeen cannot live without “creative destruction.” If there is no destruction, then they have to invent one under the umbrella of “democracy” and “freedom.” Keep also in mind that Ledeen is one of the Jewish Neocons who helped create destruction in Iraq.

Ledeen is known for writing propaganda books like The Iranian Time Bomb: The Mullah Zealots’ Quest for Destruction. He is a former scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a Neoconservative think tank where he worked with “Prince of Darkness” Richard Perle, and for over twenty-five years was actively involved in “the Jewish Institute of National Security Affairs (JINSA), an activist group that promotes a strategic alliance between the United States and Israel.”[2]

Central to Ledeen’s thesis in The Iranian Time Bomb is that Iran is responsible for September 11th. Not only that, Iran has always sought “to destroy or dominate” the United States![3] Moreover, for Ledeen, Iran is “the mother of modern terrorism.”[4] He believes the best way to destroy “the mother of modern terrorism” is through war. In fact, Ledeen has been a proponent of the idea that peace can come through violent war. “I don’t know of a case in history where peace has been accomplished in any way other than one side winning a war [and] imposing terms on the other side.”[5]

Ledeen also maintains that Iran was the chief mine of terrorism, proven, says Ledeen, by court documents (even though he never tells where to find the court documents or what they actually said); in the same article, Ledeen even implied that the quicker the U.S. invaded Iran, the better.[6]

Iran & Russia

By invading Iran, Ledeen argued, the U.S. would eventually bring down “the mullahcracy, for they will keep killing our people and our friends.”[7] It is not surprising that Ledeen has been described as “one of the most dishonest and ludicrous jokes on the political scene.”[8]

As the United States moved toward war against Iraq, Ledeen claimed that countries that did not fully support the United States were allying themselves with terrorism. “The Franco-German strategy was based on using Arab and Islamic extremism and terrorism as the weapon of choice, and the United Nations as the straitjacket for blocking a decisive response from the United States,” he wrote, claiming that both France and Germany should be treated as “strategic enemies.”[9] Not only that, he further stated that both France and Germany had “struck a deal with radical Islam and with radical Arabs.”

Although Ledeen admits that the theory “sounds fanciful, to be sure,” he was clear that if it happens to be correct, “we will have to pursue the war against terror far beyond the boundaries of the Middle East, into the heart of Western Europe. And there, as in the Middle East, our greatest weapons are political: the demonstrated desire for freedom of the peoples of the countries that oppose us.”[10]

In response to this, Jonah Goldberg proposed the “Leeden doctrine,” which simply is that “every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business.”[11]

Once again we are back to perpetual wars, not only in the Middle East, but wherever neoconservatives like Ledeen want them. As Ledeen himself declared, the level of casualties in the Iraq War are “secondary. It may sound like an odd thing to say. But all the great scholars who have studied American character have come to the conclusion that we are a warlike people and that we love war.”[12]

This is not the first time Ledeen had turned to blatant fabrication in order to promote an ideology—he was one of the people who promoted the falsehood that Saddam Hussein had bought uranium in Niger.[13]

Ledeen later denied any involvement in the matter.[14] Neoconservatives such as Mark R. Levin have stood up for Ledeen, saying things like the “Left’s narrative” has produced a libelous accusation against Ledeen when he had nothing to do with the forgery.[15]

*********************************

Has Ledeen stopped inventing things over the years? Has he refrained from making one crazy statement after another? Has he repented from perpetuating lies and fabrications in order to drink the blood of people he doesn’t like?

No.

He has recently declared that “there is an anti-American alliance among the world’s leading tyrannies,” and these include Russia, Iran, China, North Korea, etc.[16] Those countries, said Ledeen, “aim to destroy us, as they say with tedious monotony, but hardly anyone here seems to notice.”[17]

Ledeen is mad and sad because he has noticed that people aren’t paying attention to the voice of destruction anymore. He moved on to say: “I ask the pundits ‘what do you think ‘death to America’ means?’ They give me a funny look, as if that was the first time they’d thought about it. And the notion that we face a global enemy alliance seems fanciful to them.”[18]

Well, they ought to give you a funny look, Mr. Ledeen. Why do you think they say “death to America”? Is it because they hate decent Americans so much? Or could it be that the Zionist machine, the New World Order ideology, and Neoconservative pundits have continued to demonize Iran, manipulate Americans, and engage in covert operations to destroy the country?

Does Ledeen mean to tell us that he doesn’t know what America did to Iran in 1953?[19] Does he mean to tell us that he doesn’t know that both Israel and the United States destroyed Iranian computers in 2012?[20] What if Iran did the same thing? Wouldn’t Ledeen go to virtually every single radio and TV show and incessantly declare that America needs to bomb, bomb, bomb and bomb Iran?

Ledeen is obviously desperate because he sees that the Neocon plan isn’t really working in the Middle East anymore, specifically in Syria. He lamented:

“Look at Syria, where Assad is currently winning.  Why?  Because of Iranian fighters and their proxies.  Until recently, that wasn’t good enough to save the Syrian dictator.  Now it is, because the Iranians begged Putin to help them.  Which he did.”[21]

Then Ledeen moved on to produce this categorical lie: “As they fight on in Syria, they are preparing to tackle us in the near future. There is extensive evidence of enemy infiltration of the United States, and our hemispheric neighbors.”[22]

The source for this crazy theory? Ledeen cited PJ Media, a thoroughly Zionist and Neoconservative website, which also cited Adm. Kurt Tidd who reported to the Pentagon that Iran is dangerous.

Ledeen is obviously one of the greatest jokers in the history of the Neoconservative ideology. He wants decent American soldiers to give their blood for Israel,[23] while he and his brethren are enjoying a lucrative and influential career. At this current moment, the national debt is $21 trillion![24]


  • [1] Quoted in John Laughland, “Flirting with Fascism,” American Conservative, June 30, 2003.
  • [2] Jim Lobe, “Veteran Neo-Con Advisor Moves to Iran,” Asia Times, June 26, 2003.
  • [3] Michael Ledeen, The Iranian Time Bomb: The Mullah Zealots’ Quest for Destruction (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2007), 19.
  • [4] Michael Leeden, “Faster, Please,” National Review, April 1, 2002.
  • [5] Lobe, “Veteran Neo-Con Advisor Moves to Iran,” Asia Times.
  • [6] Michael Ledeen, “Iran Connects the Dots: The Mullahs and the Global War on Terror,” National Review, June 9, 2006.
  • [7] Ibid.
  • [8] Glenn Greenwald, “Stephanopolous and Ledeen: Together in the Most Accountability-free Profession,” Salon, November 4, 2009.
  • [9] Lobe, “Veteran Neo-Con Advisor Moves to Iran,” Asia Times.
  • [10] Michael Ledeen, “A Theory,” National Review, March 10, 2003.
  • [11] Jonah Goldberg, “Baghdad Delenda Est, Part II: Get On With It,” National Review, April 23, 2002.
  • [12] “Iraq: What Lies Ahead,” American Enterprise Institute, March 25, 2003.
  • [13] Joshua Micah Marshall, Laura Rosen, and Paul Grastris, “Iran-Contra II?,” Washington Monthly, September 2004.
  • [14] Philip Giraldi, “Forging the Case for War,” American Conservative, November 21, 2005.
  • [15] Andrew C. McCarthy and Mark R. Levin, “Rolling Smear: James Bamford Writes a Fiction about our Michael Ledeen,” National Review, July 28, 2006.
  • [16] Michael Ledeen, “We’re at war,” FrontPage Magazine, March 16, 2018.
  • [17] Ibid.
  • [18] Ibid.
  • [19] See Stephen Kinzer, All the Shah’s Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror (Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2003 and 2008); Ervand Abrahamian, The Coup: 1953, the CIA, and the Roots of Modern U.S.-Iranian Relations (New York: The New Press, 2015).
  • [20] Ellen Nakashima and Joby Warrick, “Stuxnet was work of U.S. and Israeli experts, officials say,” Washington Post, June 2, 2012.
  • [21] Ledeen, “We’re at war,” FrontPage Magazine, March 16, 2018.
  • [22] Ibid.
  • [23]  Gregg Zoroya, “360,000 veterans may have brain injuries,” USA Today, March 5, 2009.
  • [24] Pete Kasperowicz, “National debt hits $21 trillion,” Washington Examiner, March 16, 2018.

Biography
Jonas E. Alexis has degrees in mathematics and philosophy. He studied education at the graduate level. His main interests include U.S. foreign policy, history of Israel/Palestine conflict, and the history of ideas. He is the author of the new book Zionism vs. the West: How Talmudic Ideology is Undermining Western Culture. He is currently working on a book tentatively titled, Kevin MacDonald’s Abject Failure: A Philosophical and Moral Critique of Evolutionary Psychology, Sociobiology, and White Identity. He teaches mathematics in South Korea.
ATTENTION READERS
Due to the nature of independent content, VT cannot guarantee content validity.
We ask you to Read Our Content Policy so a clear comprehension of VT's independent non-censored media is understood and given its proper place in the world of news, opinion and media.

All content is owned by author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images within are full responsibility of author and NOT VT.

About VT - Read Full Policy Notice - Comment Policy

3 COMMENTS

    • MOSCOW (AP) — With his best election showing ever, President Vladimir Putin is shifting comfortably into his next six-year term, but the gnawing question of what comes next already looms on Russia’s horizon.

      At his first appearance after Sunday’s victory, Putin was immediately asked about his plans beyond 2024, reflecting Russia’s nervousness about the succession issue that will dominate the political landscape for the near future.

      Putin piled up nearly 77 percent of the vote, burnishing his credentials as a leader who enjoys overwhelming public support. That will give him more room to ponder his choice: groom a reliable successor, scrap term limits or create a new position of power so he can continue pulling the strings after his fourth term ends.

      All those options will remain on the table, and Putin probably will wait a few more years before making his choice.

      Asked if he could initiate changes to the constitution, he answered with a characteristic reticence, saying he has no such plans “yet.” He also laughed off a suggestion that he could take a six-year break before moving to reclaim the presidency in 2030.

      “It’s a bit ridiculous, let’s do the math. Shall I sit here until I turn 100? No!” he said.

Comments are closed.