We cannot ignore the vast network of Soros-backed NGOs operating in Central America and, much to the chagrin of the Mexican government, also in Mexico.
What can we make of Kamala Harris’ trip to Mexico? The public reads reports about success, but without anything to back that up. Naturally, from corporate media and from Harris, we are left with meaningless platitudes and cackling vagueities. We are roughly informed that Harris (and not Biden) goes to meet with heads of state of Guatemala and Mexico. Guatemala is one of the Northern Triangle (Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador) states caught up in the ‘Root Causes’ of the refugee crisis.
Harris has been under pressure to visit the U.S. border with Mexico, since the Biden administration had appointed her Czar of the border issue.
In the most clear and simple terms, Kamala Harris’ trip to Mexico was a clean-up job in the aftermath of an aborted plan to flood the U.S. with refugees in the event that Trump attempted to remain in office after January 20th. Without that understanding, we are left with vague generalities about ‘Root Causes’ of migration which are almost always going to be described in banal economic terms, or (conveniently within the rubric of Great Reset mythology), climate change.
This may appear to the uninitiated as a big claim, but we have provided even larger proofs in our past work on the subject in exposing the Transition Integrity Project. If we are going to talk about the ‘Root ‘Causes’ of the crisis, then the TIP stands front and center. This was the project financed by a group including George Soros and Nicolas Berggruen of the World Economic forum (under Klaus Schwab), and led by John Podesta of the Clinton clique. Its war-games were published in all the major Operation Mockingbird-type operations of the intelligence services – The Atlantic, The Washington Post, the New York Times, etc.
Alex Soros and Kamala Harris after the Final Interview round in Biden’s VP vetting process in 2020
Borrowing from the language and methods of standard destabilization/color revolution schemes, the ‘Transition’ was based on the all-out gambit to remove Trump from office. This even included an openly promoted secession movement wherein “Cascadia’’ (California, Oregon, Washington) would all secede if Trump won the election or refused to accept a Biden victory, and these actions would be endorsed publicly by Biden and Harris. This much isn’t speculation, but the openly published outcomes of the TIP war-game.
Because color revolution and coup techniques involve destabilization campaigns, we know that all assets that can be wielded in that direction, will be. One very visible sign of intentional destabilization is when ‘conditions’ create large population displacement.
Therefore, we cannot ignore the vast network of Soros-backed NGOs operating in Central America and, much to the chagrin of the Mexican government, also in Mexico. These NGOs were activated to organize ‘Root Causes’ into actual human waves of migrants who magically arrived into U.S. facilities with their documentation completed, well-dressed and well-fed, and already coached on the precise words to use to qualify them not as a regular migrant, but as a victim (refugee) of inhumane conditions.
Honduran migrants aiming to reach the U.S. border walk alongside a highway in Chiquimula, Guatemala, Saturday, Jan. 16, 2021
And these ‘economic problems’ at the ‘Root Causes’ themselves are not acts of nature nor of God, but calculated cycles intended to produce certain outcomes. Corporate media continues to misinform the public that specific economic realities are too complex to be projected and controlled for specific outcomes by conscious actors on the global stage. In that make-believe world, it is as if interest rates determined by central banks, or the future of any publicly traded company at the hands of the hedge fund practice of short-selling, are random market-driven events and not operationalized as part of globalist policy.
But since Biden was inaugurated, why did we have a migrant crisis anyhow?
Simply put, the inertia of the assets already deployed and the process already in play to ‘hit the ground running’ pre-determined that a certain initial flow would hit the U.S.. The number of people involved, organizations, promises, moneys spent, bureaucracies involved – all together created the scenario of steering the Titanic away from the iceberg. The captain of the ship in a “worse-case scenario” (for the IMF and WEF) would have been Trump. And so what we saw, and are seeing in Harris’ trip, is purely damage control and clean-up.
The “New Era” of this scheme took place when then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave the green-light for a coup to overthrow the popular left-nationalist Honduran President Zelaya in 2009. This led to a dehumanizing policy of austerity, that countless hundreds of thousands fall into austere and destitute conditions.
Subsequently, Soros-backed NGOs began to organize ‘Human Waves’ out of Honduras and into the U.S. over the following years. In other words, Soros organized the coup against Zelaya: a private-sector moratorium on Honduran firms, using hedge funds to harm the Honduran economy. This may well have included his own Soros Fund Management, a hedge fund company. Soros after all is number 27 on Forbes’ list with a net worth of $23 billion. At the end of the havoc, this compelled the military to seize power to ‘save the country’.
The solution to the Soros created economic crisis that lead to austerity and rising poverty, was for Soros NGOs to go in and organize the malcontent into a human migration wave. Problem – reaction – solution.
Likewise, we have been disinformed in corporate media that Hurricane Amanda is responsible also for the refugee crisis. And of course, that these (actually seasonal) events are now attributable to global warming, and if because of cooling conditions, then of climate change in general. Is this really credible?
Hurricane Amanda claimed the lives of just 17 people in El Salvador and Guatemala, and temporarily displaced some 7,000 citizens across 154 shelters in El Salvador. Is this what we, in part, owe the massive migration crisis at the border? Prudence tells us, probably not. But corporate media insists otherwise.
We cannot underscore the significance of the Soros human-wave phenomenon, which was also carried out after the Arab Spring in Syria into Turkey, Lebanon and finally Europe – or conversely, into Michigan.
While human beings have naturally migrated in trickles for time immemorial, or in waves in relation to massive changing climactic conditions or vastly changed political realities (the end of the last ice-age, or the Mongol incursions westward), a mass human wave had not been consciously organized until late modernity. This fact alone should impress upon anyone the sheer power of that intersection of capital, NGOs, and sociology, in such a planned undertaking as the transplantation of massive numbers of people.
It is important to note that the crisis facing many would-be migrants is a real one. While it is questionable if these are caused by local governments, natural disasters, or climate change, there is no doubt that they are caused chiefly by the capital-driven motives of transnational corporations and banking structures like the IMF. The general trend, towards the aim of restoring the post-cold war unipolar moment, of the trans-Atlantic power establishment, has been to upwards distribute wealth and geographically relocate this. As a rule, this has been from the periphery of global development (the so-called global south) to the core of global development (the so-called global north).
The Crisis Planned for Trump
While Harris scrambles to do damage control, and now inform migrants ‘not to come’, we know that these NGOs were informing migrants that U.S. policy would create an open door for them if Biden won the election. Long before November, these organizations began to prepare the next wave, and after the election, received the green light. Bear in mind that any number of possibilities regarding an unclear succession process were still in game until late January 20th.
Color Revolutions and related destabilization campaigns involve a number of assets including traditional soft-power mechanisms and media campaigns. It appears that the thinking was that if Trump were to somehow invoke a state of emergency to remain in power post January 20th, then the secession plan and a refugee crisis would be engaged.
Trump with top military brass in the State Dining Room of the White House on October 7th, 2017 quoted as stating ‘This is the calm before the Storm’. Credit: Getty Images
But this refugee crisis would have been orders of magnitude greater than what we have seen, and what Harris is trying to wind-down. In conjunction with this, we consider the media hysteria surrounding Covid-19, and the prospect that migrants would be carriers.
The IMF would have placed additional pressures on Northern Triangle States and Mexico for Covid-19 compliance, regarding lockdowns. Only Mexico would have been strong enough to buck these pressures, but as for the Central American states, it is clear that their conditions of lockdowns would have further destroyed those economies. That would contribute to the ‘Root Causes’, economic destitution misframed as ‘Covid’, along with ‘Global Warming’. Hence, economic destitution created intentionally by the IMF and WEF (which openly opposed Trump) for a destabilization campaign, would be misframed by media as ‘acts of Nature or God’.
Media would play upon fears in all directions, and Trump would be forced to use the only tools at hand, the same that Obama had: people in cages.
But such numbers would have overwhelmed the present facilities, and the solutions would be limited. Any solution would have been characterized a catastrophe, and politically destructive for a Trump-in-power, already by now being called a military dictatorship.
Trans-Atlantic media would have gone full-court press, and the U.S. would have been a pariah state, with the refugee crisis full of Covid-19 stricken inmates placed on par with the concentration camps of Hitler’s Germany. The ‘civil-war’ scenario with the secessionist states, and likely military operations underway to resolve this, would have only contributed to the planned scenario. With programs like HARP, we might also see weather disasters within the U.S., and more (and this time, serious) in the Northern Triangle to spurn further human waves.
Taken together with Klaus Schwab’s ‘warnings’ of cyber-terrorism striking energy and food supplies, we can understand the scope and magnitude of what was planned.
Forensically, we can say with a high degree of certitude that this indeed was the plan.
An interesting fact about destabilization strategies like Arab Springs or Color Revolutions, and related coup-techniques that involve complex systems and multivariate/multipronged vectors of attack, is that even when this or that part of the plan is aborted, or even if the whole plan becomes superfluous, we nevertheless see fragments of it in vestigial or primordial form. Furthermore, those elements may be re-integrated into any number of concurrent contingencies of value.
This is what we are seeing with the border crisis currently. This does not exclude that going forward, to a lesser extent, with this or that destabilizing disaster doesn’t also come with realizable benefits for those well-connected interests anyhow. Political divisions, cheap labor, and the general mantra of ‘never let a good disaster go to waste’ would still be fruitful.
It is also what we have seen currently with the cyber-attacks in the U.S. that have effected energy and food supply: they serve a purpose for the IMF and the transition from plutocracy to technocracy within the context of the Great Reset, but also (and chiefly) are fragments of a larger, but aborted, plan to create a failed-state scenario in a Trump-led nationalist military dictatorship against the neoliberal IMF globalist plan.
The reason why the public has heard nothing concrete about the real nature of these meetings with Latin American leaders, is that in all likelihood these were conducted to flatten-out the remains of the planned refugee crisis. It’s simply too politically inconvenient, and ill-suited for the administration now responsible for it. We are likely to hear of various economic commitments, but not of the agreements to curtail the activities of the NGOs involved in this plot. This, in conclusion, explains the administration’s about face with Kamala’s new slogan “Do Not Come”.