The Threat of Nuclear War and the Distinct Possibility of Cyber and Biological War?

By: Gary D. Barnett

“The survivors (of a nuclear war) would envy the dead.”

 ~ Nikita Khrushchev

There is no certainty of a global nuclear war, but given the players involved, there is the possibility. Nuclear war has been constantly threatened by insane rulers, mostly in the U.S., for many decades, but other than the abhorrent and murderous slaughter of innocents in Japan at the hands of the U.S. war machine, no nuclear attacks have been forthcoming since. There is good reason for this, but I fear few take into consideration the complete lunacy and deranged minds of totalitarian-minded rulers. They thrive on propaganda, sabre rattling, and threats, as if this is a harmless political game, but it would take only one idiot to start an all-out nuclear exchange. That would be devastating to all on earth, so why is there so much antagonistic threating of nuclear war among the empirical nation states?

The absolute insanity of such irresponsible behavior belies all logic, but since when has logic or reason held a place among nation states and the ruling class? In my opinion, no one could want or purposely pursue nuclear war; not because of the risk to normal people of course, but because it would know few if any bounds, and put at risk the very murderers who would perpetrate such a sadistic and evil plot in the first place. The ruling class are unmistakable cowards who obviously want to rule over others, but not at the expense of their own lives. This may be the only saving grace for the common man, at least concerning nuclear war, as those who seek war do so with the knowledge that others and the children of others will die in their place, and with nuclear war, there is no guarantee of that outcome.

Most of these lowlifes, at least the highest ranking of them in the ruling class and politics, have built special bunkers for themselves in the event of all out war, but what would be left to rule after total annihilation? What pleasure would they gain if all was destroyed and poisoned, and all economic systems and infrastructure were left in shambles, and humanity itself obliterated? This is why all out nuclear war is not likely, or at least not desired, by the scum who hold major positions of power. Killing off much of mankind is craved by technocrats, political scum, eugenic monsters, and genocidal psychopaths, but not at the expense or possibility of harm to themselves, as these skulking parasites cannot rule a society that has lost all, is desperate, and has nothing else to lose. The powerful want compliant and obedient subjects who worship the state, and look to it for safety and sustenance. Nuclear war would probably change that slave-like relationship between the powerful and the masses, and cause large-scale dissent instead of a pathetic submissive citizenry.

But other types of war can be used to not only kill off the ‘undesirable,’ the dissenters, and the non-conforming freedom seekers, but do so in a manner that can be used to propagandize the masses even further, thereby keeping them acquiescent to their masters. By blaming death and destruction on fake ‘viruses,’ on food and energy shortages, and on so-called rogue states and dictators, the people will most assuredly go along with the tyranny just as they always have. This would allow democide and genocide to continue due to purposely planned agendas, including selling the idea that bioweapon injections are necessary, ‘safe, and effective,’ causing death to millions or even billions over time. The state would lay false blame of course, but continue to manufacture fabricated threats claimed to be natural or caused by some feigned foreign enemy state.

There are continuous ‘news’ stories coming from the mainstream and alternative sites claiming that cyber war is constantly active or being pursued by some of the countries not in favor with the West, but in most all these circumstances, this is just a set-up for the gullible masses, so that when their host country actually commits cyber warfare against its own population, all responsibility will be shifted to others, and the people will likely accept this lie without question. For Americans, cyber war will probably become reality, but it is doubtful that it will be an attack by a foreign state like Russia, China, or Iran, but will be an inside job at the hands of U.S. ‘intelligence’ and enforcement services, and high government officials, blamed on a claimed enemy state. I do not believe this to be only a possibility, but more a certainty. Many nefarious agendas can be achieved in any operation of this type, because it can allow for energy services to be shut down, food supply and distribution to be dramatically altered or worse, communication system disruption, financial system breakdowns; all meant to allow total control over people. In addition, this could be targeted to any specific area, or could be broad-based, depending on the particular agendas sought.

The same of course could happen in any biological war scenario, where the host state could affect more harm and death by intentionally releasing poisonous agents, new and even more dangerous bioweapon injections and boosters, spraying additional heavy metals, toxic chemicals, and deadly biologic agents in targeted areas; all blamed on alleged enemies of the state. These kinds of events stoke extreme nationalism, whereby the general populace will back any number of aggressive responses by the state and its murderous enforcement arms made up of police and military order takers.

More and more are beginning to distrust the real rulers and their government pawns, but few are actually doing anything of value to actively resist state efforts to control them. Part of this is due to a purposeful lifting of certain restrictions evident in the past two-and-a-half years; a trick to fool the naïve herd into believing that the agenda of world control is lessening, when in reality, it is going ahead full steam. Because this dynamic of discontent is evident, the ruling class is aware that other avenues of terror and confusion are necessary in order to quell any possible resistance by the masses. This demands that the state continue to create more false flag events, and instill great fear into the ‘public’ mind, so that mass compliance will once again rear its ugly head.

This winter, especially after this next corrupt and totally worthless election cycle in November is over, will most likely bring much more chaos, planned state abuse of the people, dangerous false flag events, fearmongering, more sickness and death, and staged terror meant only to create extreme fear.

The most terroristic state by far in the world today is the United States, as it is still the head of the snake concerning aggression and war, nuclear weapons, bioweapon production, violent coups, and regime change control; regardless of any propaganda or rhetoric to the contrary. There are many bad actors worldwide, as this fake ‘virus’ and horrendous response by virtually all countries exposed, but the U.S. is still the most dangerous enemy of the world’s population.

So, what is the answer to this dilemma we face? I cannot give you that information, because each and every one of us is not only different, but has to come to the truth, accept it, and act on that knowledge as an individual; whether alone or with a collective of other individuals working together. There is no political answer, because politics and governments that were voluntarily accepted are what got us here in the first place. Any ruling system existence will necessarily eliminate freedom, so voting for another to rule over you (and others) can only exacerbate the tyranny, and can never support liberty. The essence of this thinking is that all who desire freedom must take it; not ask for it. That means taking full responsibility for self, without regard for the risk of doing so. Yes, this is difficult, but life is difficult, especially when one survives only by allowing others to rule and control him in what will always be a life as an indentured servant of the state.

“Politically speaking, tribal nationalism [patriotism] always insists that its own people are surrounded by ‘a world of enemies’ – ‘one against all’ – and that a fundamental difference exists between this people and all others. It claims its people to be unique, individual, incompatible with all others, and denies theoretically the very possibility of a common mankind long before it is used to destroy the humanity of man.”

~ Hannah Arendt

Source: Gary Barnett