Globalist Agenda Watch 2015: Update 84 – Pearl Harbor in Mayport? (+ a final thought)

Have a look at these two maps. The one on top shows the 1,800 km strike radius of a Chinese HN-2 cruise missile fired from a warship docked at Jacksonville, Florida. The bottom one shows the location of America’s active nuclear power plants…
…This is just one of the strike packages available to the Chinese Navy when it docks two of its warships at Naval Station Mayport on November 3rd.

Does it sound crazy to suggest that the Chinese might launch a preemptive strike against the US during their navy’s “goodwill visit” next week? Sure it does. Normally, I’d pay no attention to such a visit. But there are a discomforting number of coincidences surrounding this particular one, and it would be foolhardy to pay them no mind. So here goes…

Let’s begin by having a look at the headline of this USNI News article

…Note the key words I’ve underlined.

The article tells of an upcoming Jacksonville, Florida port visit by two Chinese warships and a replenishment vessel, the Type 052C Luyang II-class guided-missile destroyer Jinan (152), the Type 054A Jiangkai II-class guided-missile frigate Yiyang (548) and the Type 903 Fuchi-class fleet oiler Qiandao Hu (886).” The 2 missile ships mentioned are among the Chinese Navy’s most modern and capable surface combatants, and they’re able to carry a lot of cruise missiles. According to Wikipedia, the two ships carry a combined 24 cruise missiles of various types, and these missiles have speeds of up to Mach 0.9 and ranges of up to 1,800 kilometers. They also have a combined total of 80 vertical launch system (VLS) cells.

Current-day VLS systems are capable of carrying a variety of missile types and can hold one or more missiles in each cell. The French Navy’s Sylver VLS, for instance, is able to pack up to 4 rocket-propelled white flags per cell. Assuming that a longer-range cruise missile would take up a whole cell by itself, though, the Chinese ships could pack an additional 80 cruise missiles in their VLS, for a grand total of 104. And who knows what exotic varieties could be hidden in those cells.

So on the one hand, you have two guided missile warships that will dock inside America’s defensive umbrella on November 3rd. And on the other hand, you have propaganda floating around concerning America’s freedom of navigation operations and China’s threat of military reprisal…
…from Zero Hedge

You also have China openly proclaiming that war with the US is inevitable…

…and you have globalist windbag Paul Craig Roberts and others telling the world that Washington is preparing a preemptive nuclear strike against Russia and China…

And what does all this set the stage for? For a preemptive strike by China in order to “protect itself” and respond to America’s “provocations.” All they’d have to do is sit there at Naval Station Mayport and salvo-off their cruise missiles.

A cruise missile attack is the ideal way for China to make a first strike since it would be very hard for America to stop. Cruise missiles fly very low, and they would be hard to distinguish from the vast number of military, commercial, and personal airplanes, helicopters, and drones that operate in the airspace of the Eastern US. Not only that, they’d be hard to pick out from the ground clutter along the I-95 Corridor that runs from Jacksonville to Washington, New York City, and beyond. The driving distance from Jacksonville to New York City is 936 miles, which puts it within range of the ships’ cruise missiles. In fact, most of the Eastern US would be within range.

BUT WHY? Why would anyone think that such a crazy thing would be attempted? Normally I wouldn’t, but I can’t ignore something the Economist magazine put on one of its covers in January of this year….

This group of images forms a symbolic statement, so let’s look at the images from left to right in order to decipher what they might mean…

> The Turtle – The turtle on the cover is shown moving away from what’s behind it – it’s fleeing. There are also lines drawn above it, as if to emphasize its shell and/or convey alarm. Seeing the concepts of “shell” and “alarm” being shown, the first word that came to my mind is “shelter.” So the turtle can be interpreted as meaning “flee and take shelter.”

> The Supersonic Car (SSC) – This is an image of the UK’s Bloodhound SSC…

If you look at its Wikipedia entry, you’ll see that the project started back in 2008, and it won’t make its attempt to break the land speed record until 2016 at the earliest. So if it isn’t something new and it won’t make its record attempt till at least next year, why is it featured on a cover devoted to events in 2015? Could it be there to represent not itself, but something it looks like
…such as a cruise missile?

So the SSC can be interpreted as representing a cruise missile.

> The “Alice timeline” – I first wrote about this in a previous update, and it can be interpreted in two ways: it can represent a financial message related to the debt limit, and it can represent a warning message related to the Chinese naval visit. These are the fundamental aspects of it (excerpted from Update 83)…

>>> It was at this point that I realized I was looking at a timeline reference…
..As Alice looks forward with the Cricket World Cup behind her (during which the debt limit suspension ended on March 15), the first thing in her line of sight is the 11/3 arrow (the “debt limit is hit” date), and the second thing is the 11/5 arrow (the “we’re out of cash and in default” date). So Alice is there to show us how to look at the dates. <<<

Looking at this timeline from the Chinese naval visit perspective, it shows Alice seeing the date the warships arrive (11/3), and then seeing the date they launch their cruise missiles (11/5).

> The painting on the pile of dirt – If you look closely at the cover, you’ll see that Alice’s shadow and the shadows of the arrows fall upon the pile of dirt. This suggests that the timeline and the dirt pile are connected. And if you look upon the image of the painting sitting atop the dirt pile, one gets the impression that the gallery which held the painting has been destroyed and reduced to dirt.

Seeing this, I did a Google image search for “famous paintings of a lady,” and I found the featured painting among the results. It is a painting of an unknown lady from the Court of Milan done by Leonardo da Vinci. And once I discovered this, I decided to do a Google maps search to see if Milan had any geographic similarities to Jacksonville. Although that train of thought was a dead end, the search itself wasn’t. Off to the left side of the map, Google offered this…

Can you think of any American city that fits the description given Milan? New York City precisely fits it, doesn’t it? So this image of a painting sitting in a pile of dirt can be interpreted as showing one of the targets destroyed by the cruise missiles, NYC.

Now that we’ve explored the individual elements of the symbolic statement…

> the turtle means “flee and take shelter,”
> the supersonic car represents “a cruise missile (attack),”
> the Alice timeline gives us “the timeframe of the attack,” and
> the painting in the dirt gives us “a target of the attack, New York City.”

…let’s read it from left to right in English…

Had the Economist cover not featured this specific set of symbols, and had the port visit been arranged for any other day except November 3, I would not be writing about this scenario. But lest you think that subjective interpretations of a shady magazine cover are the only coincidences causing me discomfort, have a look at what happened on Wednesday…
…From Gizmodo

Two “aerostats” (tethered blimps) of the JLENS system had been keeping watch for cruise missiles over the East Coast airspace between North Carolina and the Canadian border since last December. From Defense Industry Daily

Due to power line damage caused by the one that broke free on Wednesday, though, the “second balloon was hauled down Wednesday and grounded indefinitely.” So in a rather unnerving real-world “coincidence,” the system that was guarding Washington, DC and New York City from cruise missile attack is now disabled. Radar-equipped AWACS aircraft can fill the gap, of course, but what if someone in the globalist-controlled National Security Establishment (NSE) arranges for a gap in AWACS coverage at the appointed time?

Let us not forget that during 9/11, the NSE fired one of its own cruise missiles at a lightly-occupied section of the Pentagon (and then covered it up by hiding surveillance footage from the thousands of security cameras monitoring the building’s interior and exterior). Given this fact, is it so hard to believe that they might be in cahoots with the Chinese in arranging this November attack? Considering that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Joseph Dunford, is a “fervent Catholic” / Jesuit asset, it’s rather easy to imagine that his network of cronies in the officer ranks could arrange for an AWACS crew mixup, mechanical problem, or network failure at the critical moment.

As I’m in the process of writing this entry module-by-module, an eagle-eyed reader has contacted me with more references he’s deciphered from the Economist cover…

> The turtle was drawn with 9 toes and 11 emphasis marks above its shell…
…(there is a tenth toe on the back foot — which I have dubbed the “plausible deniability toe” — but it is obstructed by another toe, so only 9 were drawn to be clearly visible)

So is it merely a coincidence that the turtle was drawn with a 9/11 encoding? Most unlikely. And if we add this additional information to what we’ve already covered, the turtle can be interpreted as meaning “flee and take shelter from (the next) 9/11.”

> Spider-Man is seen as he is about to swing between Alice and the painting on the pile of dirt, and his body is oriented towards the painting…
…And in the fairy tale land of comic books, where does Spider-Man live? New York City. So this is another possible reference to New York City being a target.

> Alice is looking at the Cheshire Cat’s grin, and the cat is drawn in front of Chinese President Xi, who is also grinning…

I had previously puzzled over the Cheshire Cat’s meaning, and I’d done searches on the cat’s relationship to Alice in order to figure it out. But I think the reader has found the true answer in something called the “Cheshire Cat Effect”…

“The Cheshire Cat effect, as described by Sally Duensing and Bob Miller, is a binocular rivalry which causes stationary objects seen in one eye to disappear from view when an object in motion crosses in front of the other eye. Each eye sees two different views of the world, sends those images to the visual cortex where they are combined, and creates a three-dimensional image. The Cheshire Cat effect occurs when one eye is fixated on a stationary object, while the other notices something moving. Since one eye is seeing a moving object, the brain will focus on it, causing parts of the stationary object to fade away from vision entirely.

So how does this relate to the potential attack next week? Think about it… what will be in motion next week? What will be stationary? Next week, we may see another US Navy ship doing a freedom of navigation cruise in the South China Sea, and on the 5th, Xi (who represents the Cheshire Cat) will be on the move to Vietnam (one of the nations in contention with China over its island building). So there will be lots of movement in the South China Sea on the 5th, while the Chinese warships will be sitting stationary at Naval Station Mayport. While everyone is focused on what’s happening over there, they’ll be overlooking what’s about to happen right here.

The Cheshire Cat Effect is drawn right into the symbolic statement. While Alice’s gaze is fixed on the Cheshire Cat’s grin, she is overlooking the arrows with the warning dates on them.

Another thing the reader pointed out is that the mushroom cloud at the top of the cover is aligned with Spider-Man’s head, but that connection is a bit too tenuous for my taste. Besides, I’m not expecting the potential attack to include any nuclear weapons at all. If the Chinese were to nuke New York City, they might damage or destroy the UN, and they don’t want to alienate or obliterate the institution they’re about to overhaul. My current expectation is that they would use conventional warheads to attack the big New York financial houses (Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, etc.) and the New York Fed. I’ll now explain why…

I began this entry by bringing up the most damaging conventional attack I could imagine: a strike on the containment vessels of our nuclear plants with penetrator-tipped cruise missiles. I call this particular target package the “ugly package.” To arrive at the most likely target package, though, let’s consider what we know about both the attack and the globalist agenda…

1) If my interpretation is correct, New York is clearly indicated as a target.

2) The globalist agenda calls for the Western powers to lose “control” of the UN and for the BRICS powers to reform the institution to be “fairer and more effective in enforcing peace.”

3) The globalist agenda also calls for the collapse of the Western-controlled and dollar-dominated financial system. This will clear the way for the new multilateral financial system based on the “reformed” IMF’s SDR.

Given points 1 and 2, it seems very unlikely that any attack would be nuclear. The Chinese wouldn’t want to harm the UN in any way. They are too busy slavishly implementing the UN’s “sustainable development” agenda…
…From Sputnik

And given point 3, it’s not hard to imagine what targets they would hit in New York. They would aim for the key institutions that keep the current financial system running: the headquarters of Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Citigroup, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and other such institutions. Again, the UN would be left untouched.

In addition to these strikes in New York, we can expect concurrent hits in Washington. They would target the Federal Reserve headquarters and IRS headquarters. But since the IMF and World Bank are part of the United Nations Complex, their headquarters would be left untouched. Why would they hit the IRS, you ask? Ostensibly to “starve the Pentagon war machine of the money it needs to operate,” but actually to make the strikes more palatable to the American public. Everybody hates the IRS.

Should the attacks occur, Americans would be shocked and outraged at first, but then they’d look at the fact that the Chinese…

> didn’t use nukes,

> didn’t attack our beloved military men,

> didn’t attack any national monuments such as the White House or Capitol building, and

> didn’t attack anyone but the vile banksters who hijacked America.

After the dust settles, a lot of Americans would want to buy the Chinese sailors some drinks. It’s for this reason that I call this particular target package the “pretty package.” Can you see why?

For their part, the Chinese would explain the attack like this…

“This was not an attack against the American people or military; it was a precision strike on the Wall Street – Washington Financial Axis. It is this Axis that has been firing thousands of cruise missiles and dropping thousands of bombs on people all over the world for decades. They have been funding terrorism and war everywhere on the planet, and they recently attacked China by sabotaging four of our chemical facilities in an attempt to intimidate us.

It is known to us that they have been escalating conflict to launch a new world war. and they have been planning a preemptive nuclear attack against us and our Russian allies. We had to act to protect ourselves and the world from their wicked schemes. We deeply regret any harm that came to innocents during the strikes, and we stand ready to offer vast aid and compensation to the cities and individuals effected. We hope you can understand that if we had not done this, many millions of innocents would have died from Wall Street and Washington’s plans.”

So this represents my best guess on the probable targets and likely excuses for any attack that might take place this week.

As for the timing of the potential attack, the dates on the warning arrows can be interpreted at least 3 ways: 1) 11.3 could be the date the ships arrive, and 11.5 could be the date they fire their missiles; 2) 11.3 could be the date the ships arrive, and 11.5 could be the “bug out by” date (meaning the attack could occur on the 5th, 6th, or 7th); or 3) 11.3 and 11.5 could be bookend dates (meaning the attack could occur on the 3rd, 4th, or 5th). Suffice it to say that the attacks could occur on any day during the port visit, which runs from November 3 to November 7.

All this being said, could this whole entry be much ado about nothing? Quite possibly. But given the unnerving coincidences I’ve pointed out, how could I justify not writing about it? Imagine if I had played it safe and stayed quiet, only to see the attack unfold on television in a few days – I would feel pretty terrible. And although this scenario sounds pretty crazy, think of how crazy it would’ve sounded if someone had warned you about the details of the 9/11 attacks just days before they happened:

“The gubernment is gonna crash two big airplanes into the World Trade Center buildings, then they’re gonna implode ‘em with demolition charges and thermite they already put inside ‘em. They’re also gonna bring down another building and blame it on a fire that melts steel. Then they’re gonna blow up a field in Pennsylvania with some kind of bomb or missile, and fire a cruise missile at the Pentagon. And after that, they’re gonna mail a buncha letters with anthraxes in ‘em. And when it’s all done with, they’re gonna start gropin’ folks at the airport.”

That warning would have seemed even more implausible than this one, right? But if someone had given such a detailed warning to enough people in advance, would the plotters have gone through with their plan? In answering this question, you see my motivation for giving this warning.

Now that the whistle is blown, the most likely outcome of the Mayport visit will be that the Chinese sailors play baseball and soccer, eat hot dogs and hamburgers, then sail home to make the second baby their government now allows them. All the doormen, maintenance men, mail room guys, and food service gals that work in the headquarters buildings will go home safe this week too. All in all, it’s not a bad return for an investment of a little bit of my credibility.

On a final note, I would be remiss if I didn’t draw your attention once more to the map at the very top of this entry. As you can see, the combat radius of the HN-2 missile extends far into Texas, and includes my own residence. So I think this would be an opportune time to express my great admiration for China’s proud military tradition and its great military leaders, such as Sun Tzu and General Tso. I once thumbed-through Sun Tzu’s book while I was on the can, and General Tso’s chicken soundly defeats my hunger each and every Sunday. It is for this reason I know that if World War 3 ends up being settled with a cook-off, you will rout our pot pie-baking asses quite handily. Ni hao, comrades! Don’t choke on the air, and have a great day! wink

Love always…

(P.S. – 1 November 2015) – Another reader has told me that the tortoise is one of the symbols of the Fabian Society (the founders of the infamous London School of Economics)…
…Take note that the tortoise has four toes, just like the one on the Economist cover.

Although I have used the catchall term “turtle” in talking about the shelled creature on the cover, it is technically a tortoise. Turtles spend most of their lives in water and have webbed feet, whereas tortoises are land dwellers that have stumpy feet.

Looking at the Fabian symbol, the associated motto is quite interesting considering the scenario we’re exploring…

So why would the Fabians sign their name to this warning, and why would they give it to us at all? Some say their twisted code of ethics requires them to tell us, and some say they do it to taunt us. Frankly, I don’t care why; I care only about what it says.

(P.S. – 2 November 2015) – So on the day before the port visit, the US announces this: U.S. Navy plans two or more patrols in South China Sea per quarter; the Chinese are doing this: China Sends Armed Jets Over Disputed Waters In Response to U.S. Naval Presence; and the Russians are narrating: ‘Stakes Are High’: Chance of War Between US, China Moves Up a Notch. Even though I doubt they’ll go through with any attack now, the buildup for one continues to be delivered on schedule.


Speaking of the Fabians, I wouldn’t get too caught up in the idea of this strike (or whatever black swan they end up trotting out) being about “socialism dealing a deathblow to capitalism.” Socialism/communism versus capitalism is just another artificial ideological dialectic, and “isms” themselves are contrived sets of ideas designed to entrap the minds of chumps. They are the mental boxes that discourage “outside the box” thinking.

From my current knowledge of what the globalists have planned, they seem to be aiming for an “Enhanced China Model” for the global economy. In China, the central government dictates the direction of the economy, but that direction is pursued with a capitalistic approach. And if the central planners don’t like something that’s going on in the capitalistic level, they step in and crush it. This is how I suspect the new globalist economy will operate.

At the UN level, the neo-Roman authorities will steer the direction of the economy (such as with the “Sustainable Development Agenda”), but they will allow the corporations to pursue that direction under an Austrian Economic Framework. That way, they’re in control (such as in a communist/socialist system), but things actually get done (such as in a capitalist system).

On another note, should this week’s strike occur, it doesn’t necessarily mean that World War 3 will be averted. I’m still expecting a stepwise series of escalations that will lead to a nuclear launch attempt next September. See Obama and the 2nd Coming to understand why.

(P.S. – 3 November 2015) – Speaking of the moving Cheshire Cat drawing attention away from the stationary warships, this historic event might do the trick…
…From Yahoo/AFP

(P.S. – 5 November 2015) – Here is more distracting motion in the South China Sea…

So it appears that Defense Secretary Carter’s visit to the aircraft carrier was the “provocation” arranged in lieu of a freedom of navigation patrol. Given that both Xi’s surprise summit on Saturday and Carter’s visit to the carrier today were arranged well in advance, it makes sense that they’re following through with their schedules even if any planned attack has been called off.

(P.S. – 7 November 2015) – The Chinese ships have now left Mayport with all their missiles aboard. Tomorrow, I’ll offer some final thoughts.

(P.S. – 8 November 2015)

And now for Kenny’s…

In case you’re still wondering about the other interpretation of the symbolic statement – the one relating to the debt limit and default — here is how it reads…

> the turtle means “flee (the markets) and shelter (your assets),”
> the supersonic car represents “a very fast-moving thing,”
> the Alice timeline gives us “a downward motion in the markets (symbolized by the slant of the arrows) occurring on the day of the debt limit hit (11/3) and the day of the debt default (11/5),” and
> the painting in the dirt gives us “stock markets and financial hubs (like Milan) left in ruins.”

Putting it together into a literal statement, we get this…

“Flee the markets and shelter your assets from a very fast-moving downward motion on November 3-5 which will leave the markets in ruins.”

But that didn’t happen, did it? And neither did the next 9/11. So was I just tilting at windmills or was there a real threat that one or both of these things were on the agenda? In order to think the former is true, you have to overlook a whole lot of “coincidences”…

1) You had a symbolic statement on the cover of an “elite”-owned magazine that lends itself to a description of both events.

2) You had the Treasury Department setting the date of the debt limit hit for 11/3, the first date in the symbolic statement. Of all the dates they could have chosen for D-Day, why did they opt for that specific one? They kept the whole debt limit charade going since March 15, and one gets the impression that they could’ve twisted their math to point to any D-Day they wished, either sooner or later, so why 11/3?

3) You had the Treasury Department specifically stating that there would be about $30 billion in cash on hand on 11/3, which could have kept the government’s bills paid until 11/5, the second date in the symbolic statement.

4) You had the Chinese Navy making their first-ever visit to an East Coast port on 11/3.

5) You had the Chinese announcement of a distracting surprise summit in the South China Sea just like the symbolic statement suggested.

6) You had the JLENS cruise missile detection system go down just a week before the naval visit, ensuring that any attacking missiles would have been more difficult to track and shoot down.

That’s an awful lot of coincidences to overlook, isn’t it? So even though I’ll never really know what might’ve been, I’ll accept our uneventful passage through the 11/3 – 11/5 timeframe as a victory.

On to the next risky timeframe!…
…(12/11 – 12/16, the time of the Climate Change Summit, the US Federal Budget deadline, and the FOMC meeting)