It's great to have James Corbett back on kla.TV.
James, thank you so much for agreeing to another interview!
[James Corbett: Thank you very much for the invitation.
I would like to hear James Corbett's opinion on America's strange behavior towards
Iran, Greenland, Venezuela, Cuba and Palestine.
I know that's a lot. We could talk about it for two hours.
But I wonder if you could sum it all up succinctly to summarize the crazy, well, let's just say the US stance,
or would you like to go through the issue point by point?
Let's divide them into two groups.
I would say that Iran and Palestine and what is happening there are definitely connected.
And the common factor in the US stance in both situations is, of course, Israel.
And I think Israel's desire to undermine Iran as a potential regional rival fully
explains why the US is taking this stance on Iran.
Does anyone in the entire world believe that the US government is involved in destabilizing the Iranian regime
because it cares about the Iranian people and wants to see democracy flourish, blah, blah, blah?
Of course not.
We are old enough to understand that this is absolute nonsense and garbage.
So what is the real answer to this?
Well, I think it has more to do with the Zionist faction that wants to create a Greater Israel and recognizes that
Iran would be a bulwark against the creation of such a state.
And of course with Hezbollah and other groups that operate against Israel and of course also in Palestine.
And to what extent Trump is now actually the capable businessman we're supposed to publicly perceive him as, to what extent he may
really just be trying to make Trump-Gaza work with those casinos on the beach - and whatever else is supposed to happen in
these AI monster fantasies constructed by Trump fans online - to whatever extent that may play a role in his mind.
He is only there because, of course, he is actually working with his friend, his accomplice, the
literally unconvicted war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu.
I think that explains this side of the geopolitical spectrum.
But when we talk about the 'Donroe Doctrine' and its various effects on Venezuela, Cuba, Greenland and other countries in the
Western Hemisphere, I think we need to look at this in the context of an interesting
map that can be found in the Cornell Library.
It is available online in very high resolution if you would like to download it.
It is called "Technate of America" .
This map was created in 1940 by Howard Scott, an absolute charlatan who had somehow managed to worm his way into academic
and high-level circles in the 1920s and 30s to found something called "Technocracy Inc.", an organization
dedicated to the social engineering of society by technocrats.
Mainly engineers and scientists who knew exactly how to balance the inputs and outputs in the
economy in order to stop the large fluctuations in it.
These were, of course, the defining feature of the lives of people living through the Great Depression, who wondered how
they could solve this problem in the face of failed capitalism.
Well, there was Howard Scott and his friend M. King Hubbert, who is known for the Hubbert Curve or peak oil
theory, a researcher at Shell Oil who worked on oil and so on.
In any case, he came up with the topic of peak oil.
He also wrote the 'Technocracy Study Course', a comprehensive study course on how the Technocrats will rule over their Technat.
So they said: "We don't want governments. We don't want elected politicians. We don't want any of that.
We will establish a technocracy."
And, as you can see on a map on the Internet, the Technat of America will also include Greenland.
Interestingly, it also includes part of Venezuela, Cuba, Panama, Central America and so on.
All of this is combined into a single entity called the Technat of America, which is administered by these technocrats.
Well, obviously Technocracy Inc. has been around for a long time.
It actually still exists, but it is currently only a rump organization.
But the idea of technocracy is still relevant in the 21st century.
And there are some interesting historical parallels with some people who are still present on the international stage today,
such as Elon Musk, whose Canadian grandfather, was actually a member of Technocracy, Inc. in Saskatchewan in the
1930s, before he was expelled from Canada and eventually ended up in South Africa, where the Musk family originated.
His grandfather is Joshua Haldeman.
Look it up and check my details!
But it's true. His grandfather was a real technocrat.
And then Elon Musk tweets things like "Preparations for Mars Technocracy" and so on.
So I think technocracy is the lens through which we see this evolving Donroe Doctrine . must understand.
What will really develop from this is the merger of the Western Hemisphere into this Technate of America.
Well, this consolidation, I mean, it's just too far-fetched to imagine that it's going to happen in
the near future as an invasion of these countries.
I mean, you can't imagine troops being stationed in Greenland, Venezuela or Cuba, can you?
No. I want to put that into perspective.
Let's take Greenland as an example.
We have seen this very clearly over the last month.
Yes.
Suddenly it's the main topic of discussion at the World Economic Forum: Will Trump invade Greenland?
And then NATO is talking about stationing troops there, and Canada wanted to come to Greenland's aid - all this madness.
And then it came to Trump announcing, "Well, we're not going to take it by force."
And so it seemed to be just another negotiating strategy.
Trump obviously gets people thinking and talking one way and then backs down to make it
look like we can make a deal together now.
But of course all that was just a distraction, because in fact the US already has a
military base in Greenland that is up and running.
Since the Second World War, there has been a long-standing agreement with Denmark to station American
forces in Greenland, which have been deployed there for over half a century, i.e. for around 80 years.
So the idea that it would ever take a full-scale American invasion to make these things
happen seems abstruse, but maybe that's the point.
No, the military side is not the operational part of it.
In a way, it's about securing resources, including of course the deposits of rare earths and other things that Greenland
apparently has in abundance, just waiting to be mined in this new, geopolitically motivated race for the Arctic.
More precisely, however, it is about securing resources for the Technat of America, i.e. for the
political structure that is currently emerging.
And I think we have been prepared for the consolidation of these larger geopolitical regional entities for some time, because we
have been seeing a kind of multipolar battle between NATO and the BRICS countries on the
grand chessboard of geopolitics for some time.
I think we have been prepared for the idea that there will be a merger of a North American or Western
hemispheric, continental, regional security apparatus.
Will it literally be a government that will implement all this with troops on the ground?
I don't think this is the most likely route.
But a kind of union in political and economic terms as well as in terms of supply lines and supply chains, which will probably
be the decisive factor for development in the 21st century.
I would like to preface this question with the following:
Look at the two wars in Iraq and the interim period when President Clinton was in power in the United
States and we still had an economic embargo on Iraq.
We still had a no-fly zone.
I think we were still bombing them.
Certainly we have blocked many types of supplies, including, as far as I know, medicines and food.
So could you say that this interim period was simply a continuation of the war and that the war wasn't actually over?
Absolutely, yes.
No, of course the war just took on a different form.
And at that time, of course, he concentrated on the civilian population.
And that was actually known and intended.
Because of course there's that infamous clip of Madeleine Albright from the 1990s on "60 Minutes" talking about the half a
million Iraqi children who died as a result of the sanctions.
And she said, "Well, you know, the price is worth it."
This is, of course, the infamous clip that I hope people have seen by now.
So yes, that was simply war by other means.
Warfare by other means.
So if we look at economic strangulation as war and then look at the case of Venezuela and Cuba.
And just thinking about the confiscated oil tanker that was on its way from Venezuela to Cuba.
A country that is already in a difficult situation.
And I think for them, the loss of an oil tanker could be quite significant.
So are we at war with Venezuela and Cuba in the sense that we are economically strangling these countries?
Is the USA currently at war with Venezuela and Cuba?
I take it that there has clearly been a state of war with Venezuela in recent months.
Perhaps this state of war no longer exists simply because America has apparently achieved its goal of being
able to control the current Venezuelan government at will.
To the extent that the Venezuelan government is now complying with American requirements, I assume that there is no state of war.
But the danger of war does of course exist.
And yes, there are still elements of an economic blockade, but I think this is just positioning to establish
American corporate interests there to essentially take over the oil industry, etc. there.
Of course, we have already seen that this was explicitly mentioned as the reason for the takeover of Venezuela.
I don't think that's the whole story, but it certainly contributed to it.
As long as the current Venezuelan government complies with US demands, I think America is happy not to be involved in this war.
Yes. Do you believe that these corporate interests will also be successful in Cuba?
Do you think the Cuban people will soon be able to enjoy McDonald's, BlackRock and all
the other things we enjoy in the United States?
If the current government gets its way, it looks like that's where things are heading.
And if it cannot get its way, at least not in the way it wants, there could be a kind of spontaneous popular uprising when people
begin to rise up against their government because of these strangulating blockades,
which ultimately have their political effect.
If that doesn't happen, then we've already seen that it's common for the U.S. president to send Navy SEAL Team 6
or whomever to kidnap those who claim to be in power today and do whatever else needs to be done.
Can we even say that anything would be excluded?
No, of course not.
I think everything we have already seen, for example in Venezuela, is quite conceivable for Cuba.
Well, James Corbett, thank you very much!
I wish you all the best! And please come back to Kla.TV at some point.
Thank you very much for the invitation!
Ukraine, Russia, Israel, Gaza, USA, Iran.
Are we on the brink of a third world war?
The first thing to die in a war is the truth, and with it the true writing of history.
While Europe's governments invest unlimited amounts in weapons and armaments, Kla.tv has exposed warmongers
and their perfidious methods in over 25,000 broadcasts.
Safe, true historiography, before it is falsified once again.
How?
Click now on the link in the video description www.kla.tv/2plus and secure the free history
archive with a work value of one billion francs.
Fill out the form right now and you will receive an exclusive free hard disk directly
from the hands of your regional Kla.tv employee.
Really free?
Absolutely.
The only price is that you help to copy this unique history archive and pass it on to two other contacts free of charge.
Save this world with us.