The idea of AFRICOM had been in the works since November of 2000 but didn’t fully come to fruition until 2008, after former
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld formed a group to establish command of the African continent in 2006. By 2007, then Secretary of Defense
Robert Gates, along with former President
George W. Bush, placed a plan
in
motion for the US AFRICOM mission.\
AFRICOM’s stated goals seem akin to
Orwell’s ‘ministries of Oceania’ promoting the agenda of the ruling party:
“
The United States Africa Command, in concert with other U.S.
government agencies and international partners, conducts sustained
security engagement through military-to-military programs,
military-sponsored activities, and other military operations as
directed to promote a stable and secure African environment in support
of U.S. foreign policy.”
The last bit of that sentence is particularly important:
“
promote a stable and secure African environment in support of U.S. foreign policy.”
It all becomes clear ounce you understand the motivations of
government agencies, as they indulge in nightmare fantasies of control
within their own mission statements and programs.
U.S.
Special Operations Command,
Africa or SOCAFRICA, was also put in place in 2008, just before the
official launch of AFRICOM and was given a green light to start in
October of 2009. SOCAFRICA, is the covert brand of AFRICOM and is
located in the very same place as AFRICOM’s headquarters, near
Stuttgart, Germany.
“SOCAFRICA’s objectives are to build operational capacity, strengthen regional security and capacity initiatives, implement effective communication strategies in support of strategic objectives, and eradicate violent extremist organizations and their supporting networks.”
SOCAFRICA controls much of AFRICOM’s direct missions, including
the Combined Joint Task Force – Horn of Africa, which conducts
operations in
East Africa to protect U.S. interests – (oil).
IMAGE: Eastern Africa – Containing the Horn of Africa (Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Djibouti and Sudan).
During the ride to hell in creating AFRICOM, the US Congress approved
of a $500 million dollar counter terrorism initiative supporting
countries involved in ridding themselves of Al-Qaeda terror, some of
those countries included Mali and Nigeria, both of which have seen a
rise in terror related activity in recent years, with the terror outfit
Boko Haram.
In a recent article by geo-political analyst, Tony Cartalucci,
we are given a concise breakdown of how these terror outfits are used and funded by Western interests:
“This cooperation between AQIM, Boko Haram, and Al
Shabaab has been clearly bolstered by the immense influx of
NATO-provided cash and weapons flowing into Libya first to overthrow the
Libyan government, then to be shipped to Syria to overthrow the
government there. NATO’s assistance in expanding Al Qaeda’s operational
capacity in North Africa can only be helping terrorists like those
behind the Kenya Westgate Mall siege carry out cross-border operations
of this scale.”
That’s right, the very same command units that brought you
Operation Odyssey Dawn and the NATO backed
Operation Unified Protector during
the takedown of Libya, through an imposed no-fly-zone, opened the door
for terror outfits to control the oil-laden nation. The ousting of
Muammar Gaddafi has allowed terror linked rebels to form a shadow government in Libya.
Abd-Rabbo al-Barassi, the purported head of the Barqa government, was recently quoted stating the goals of his new government:
“
The aim of the regional government is to share resources in a
better fashion, and to end the centralized system adopted by the
authorities in Tripoli.”
Barqa has the appearance of being a localized government rising up
against a centralized system, however Barassi’s comments point to
exactly the opposite, with his call to “
share resources,” fitting in form and function to the desires of a more global centralized system
.
The truth is, Libya has been embroiled in conflict since the invasion
in 2011 and has continued to spiral out of control after being
supposedly liberated in the aftermath of Gaddafi’s rule.
 |
| IMAGE: A war torn Libya, this appears to be an apartment complex. |
Neo-Colonial Pursuits
During the past 150 years, Africa has been thrust into conflict,
divided, enslaved and pillaged for its natural resources. Today we see
the West and its allies use the guise of ’humanitarian’ need in Africa,
in order successfully secure oil contracts and other precious rare
earth minerals. Through the AFRICOM mission, the military has and will
be used to provide the muscle for land and resource control throughout
the continent, we are witnessing an accelerated takeover through proxy
wars and corrupt business deals –
this is Neo-Colonialism.
North Africa to the Horn
Somalia has been ravaged by greedy oil pursuits and
seemingly deliberate upheavals of violence for decades, AFRICOM, through
its Western backing, has allowed for the rise in military control. As
security has grown, ironically,
so has the terror.
In 2012, during the London Conference On Somalia British PM
David Cameron, laid out a new future of growth in the region:
“
I’m delighted that Denmark, Norway, the United Arab Emirates and
the Netherlands are joining us today in setting up a local stability
fund, that will provide the support to previously neglected regions,
including those emerging from conflict or from terrorist control.”
Cameron continues:
“
We’re helping to improve transparency and accountability by
establishing a joint Financial Management Board, through which donors
will work with the Somali government to make sure that revenue from key
assets and international aid is used for the good of Somali people.”
Watch
David Cameron’s YouTube video below, calling for more aid in Somalia during the
London Conference On Somalia in 2012. What Cameron won’t tell you is what financial donors get in return for generous deposits given to the oil rich region.
In 2011, the National Audit Office (NAO) and the Independent
Commission for Aid Impact ((ICAI) warned that there maybe risks that
could lead to fraud and corruption from aid provided by the Department
For International Development (DFID). The watchdog group ICAI
claimed that there was a lack of oversight in funds given to volatile regions around the world:
“
Our assessment is that DFID’s current organisation of
responsibilities for fraud and corruption is fragmented and that this
inhibits a coherent and strategic response to this critical issue.”
Also in a report by the independent watchdog ICAI it was stated that:
“
This (report)
inevitably will expose the UK aid budget to higher levels of corruption risk.”
The DFID
is a coalition in charge of future development in Somalia, they are a large part of the “
Financial Management Board” that Cameron refered to in the 2012 conference on Somalia.
We must
examine the motivations of foreign aid given to destabilized regions
of the world. What kind of local compliance is expected from regions
receiving aid? What do Western interests want in return and how are
their funds appropriated?
In August of 2013, Soma Oil and Gas Exploration, overseen by Lord
Michael Howard,
a former leader of Britain’s ruling Conservative Party, orchestrated
a deal with Somalia, the first such deal with an international oil
company. Twelve new oil blocks have been slated for Soma under the new
agreement.
Somali President
Hassan Sheikh Mohamud, was put in place under Western and United Nations backing, helping to move the Soma deal forward.
Somalian oil exploration has been pursued from sometime, with Britain leading the way. Turkey, Norway, Qatar have also been clamouring for oil contracts in the region.
IMAGE: SOMA oil signing the first international oil deal in Somalia.
Just as new aid and oil deals are being made and an economic boom is
supposedly rising in Mogadishu, Somalia’s capital, we’re told terror
outfit Al-Shabab is also on the rise. How could this be, as
“humanitarian aid” and the AFRICOM mission have contributed to new
development in the region, opening the door for new oil trade?
Perhaps one key to this question was answered in a
21Wire article from September:
“
In 2011, former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was apparently working with NGO’s to provide aid in Somalia but they had to work out a deal with the militant Al-Shabab because of the terror networks control over the region, so we’re told.”
The United States has expanded a licence issued by the Office of
Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), to protect NGO’s who provide
international aid from Anti-terror laws.
Why would they need to abruptly change this law if there wasn’t
something to hide? What did Al-Shabab expect in return, for supposedly
transferring aid?
Controlling Kenya
Power play politics in Africa would not be complete without examining
a deeper conspiracy that has sought to change the continent from
within. In a
YouTube video below published by
swilliamism in early October
,
we see the inner workings of the Kenyan political climate, much of
Africa has undergone many such changes in oil and mineral-laced regions.
Watch as
YouTube user
swilliamism investigates
critical changes to Kenya’s constitution, that seemingly benefit British
institutions. Some very important questions are raised in the video
titled “
Who’s Nudging Kenya,” with some players reaching towards the top of the UK government.
“
A radical new constitution for the East African country.”
Kenya saw the first wave of a technocratic takeover in 1999, apparently spearheaded by paleontologist
Richard Leakey and a government-sponsored class of technocrats from the private business sector.
After about two years this process failed to gain public backing, this
led to other efforts to reform Kenya’s constitution in order to lay the
ground work for technocratic control.
In the video above we see Kenya in its present state, with corporate
elected technocrats, making massive reformations to their constitution
and a central banking overhaul to entice more resource based businesses.
How is that a UK-based public relations firm called WPP, under the
moniker of TNS International, had anything to do with the reformation of
Kenya’s constitution?
Why is the British government employing the privatized
Behavioural Insights Team to change policy empirically?
It appears as if the deck has been stacked against Kenya, due to
British based insiders linked to Cameron’s cabinet, taking a foothold of
government functions, presumably to gain easier access to precious
resources.
The apparent attack in Kenya, is a door way to understanding the future of Africa
=======
