Culling: The Sad Reality of The IMF and World Bank Loans As Triggers of Wars.

Finding Solutions To The Russian-Ukraine War.

Culling in its harshest form; soldiers, firefighters, civil servants, pensioners, women, and children.

All this as a way of making sure that borrowing countries will be able to pay back the loan.

We are Tomorrow’s World Order; established in 2018 but officially launched in April 2022. We are the new global leaders to negotiate, oversee, facilitate, meditate and take part in conflict resolution. We aim to enforce diplomacy first in all conflicts by providing such a platform to facilitate and encourage unconditional, fruitful peace negotiations.

We are here to find real lasting solutions to conflicts.

We are against wars and would like the current conflict to end with immediate effect.

We are against the killings of women and children who have no one to defend them.

We believe in a peaceful world. Free from wars and conflicts. We are tomorrow’s world.

We believe that the death of a child or a woman is an attack on all of us.

We will address all the pressing issues and document our perspectives and judgements in addressing global pressing issues.

Firstly we are against the current war and we have ordered an immediate ceasefire of the war.

We believe in exhausting channels of dialogue first.

We believe that such a platform was not there but we have provided one now.

We ordered the immediate withdrawal of troops from Ukraine as we are against invasions of sovereign countries, especially before meaningful dialogue.

All grievances must be resolved through dialogue.

But we have strong reasons to believe that the situation is more complicated than the eyes can see.

We believe that there are other underlying issues that need to be resolved first before any meaningful dialogue.

Is Ukraine sovereign in the fullest meaning of the word?

External debt from institutions like the IMF and World Bank can strip off a nation’s sovereignty in that if they can’t repay then they will lose their sovereignty as they can’t make decisions fully.

Is a debt-ridden country be regarded as in a hostage situation held against its will due to debt to such an extent that it loses the right to determine its destiny. Right to opt for peace?

Could the IMF and World Bank’s loans have Ukraine land as collateral? This could only mean that they will keep fighting for any land Russia might take.

Is Ukraine sinking in debt and is writing off the debt an option? Have they tried to write off the debt?

What are the conditions of writing off such debt? Do the conditions for writing off this debt have anything to do with countries in conflict? Conflict-affected situations FCS. Debt as enticing wars; a trigger of the war. It can be inferred that a country deep in debt can opt to have the debt written off first before opting for peace but if that conflict is not regarded as intense enough to justify such classification. That can have an effect on peace and negotiations, especially before the debt is written off.

The other critical factor is that of the ‘small print’ regarding the conditions for getting the loans written off. Did the IMF and the World Bank clarify the conditions for having the loans written off?

What is winning the war?

Do the conditions of the loan from the IMF and World Bank somehow trigger wars, especially considering that they insist on reforming the pension and the state employment. A condition that can be manipulated by externally invisible hands who I call the Hell-raisers; who think they can do better and drag the country to war with the aim to permanently cull pensioners and soldiers through wars? A real sad reality as the IMF and World Bank’s loans are always associated with wars.

The curse of the IMF and World Bank loans;- culling everyone regarded as deadwood through wars even women and children who end up dead. All this so that the government is not burdened by dependants so as to be able to repay the loans.

The true but sad reality of IMF and World Bank loans.

Can it be said that the IMF and World Bank are like loan sharks?

What would it take to write off Ukraine’s debt as a condition for a ceasefire and road to peace negotiations?

It can be argued that the IMF and the World Bank have invaded Ukraine and taken their sovereignty by sinking them into debt. Just as a loan shark would do. Offering loans to governments in crisis at high-interest rates and still requesting the loans at a difficult time. Moreover at the expense of the people of Ukraine. Especially after the destruction it suffered.

What issues need resolving to find a solution to the Russian-Ukraine war?

Background, Overview, and Working Hypothesis.

It all starts with a government deficit. The missing money. The emptiness of government coffers etc.

It’s like a wake-up call. An instant wake up from a trance. The instant harsh realisation that the money is missing. That surely something is wrong.

The deficit is the trigger of whatever follows.

Every event on earth can be explained by this working hypothesis.

This deficit instantly triggers the need for a rollback. In some cases as an IMF or World Bank loan.

The monetary world is a system that has players who exchange money between themselves to complete the circle of money. Money moves from the centralised systems. Ones that comprise the central banks, all financial institutions, governments, and to consumers.

For this monetary system to function properly for a long time without any bottlenecks or even worse system crashes. There must be a circulation of money among all players. A free flow of money from one side to the other and back. Ideally, the money must circulate freely between all players. Ideally, it must balance. A perfect system is where outputs are equal to inputs. If not then there must be ways of making sure that money moves from all players equally.

Money moves from governments to consumers as rewards for hard-working in the form of pay, salaries, wages, other benefits, etc. Money also moves from financial institutions such as loans, mortgages, etc to consumers. All these money movements from the central institutions, the banks, and governments are in high volumes to consumers.

Ideally, the consumers must send back the money to the central institutions in large quantities to complete and maintain the system. This would mean a perfect continuous system where money flows from the central systems to consumers and back in nearly the same volumes completing the perfect flow of money. This would mean that governments pay for the valuable work the consumers do. In return, the consumers send back the money to the government as bills, taxes, levies, etc, and as interest and repayments to banks, etc.

But in reality, this is not the case. For financial institutions. It is better in that they get back the money in terms of interest and repayment but for the government. The money they get back in terms of payment of services and taxes etc is not that much for them to reissue the money to complete the cycle of money. That means governments have to find another way of getting the money. Whereas the financial institutions, etc, get enough to reissue to others since there are no services they receive from the consumers. Meaning they don’t have to pay the consumers for any services.

Whereas the government must pay for the services they receive from the consumers.

Having said that, the situation over time becomes worse as inflation increases. The consumers who are the smartest people of all the players become smarter and smarter as the economic situation changes with rising inflation, cost of living and increasing taxes, etc. That means even if taxes increase the money the government collects from the taxes and other levies etc will not be enough. That in some instances they resort to banks or printing money. If they choose to print money that increases inflation and weakens the value of the money which in turn worsens the situation.

That means the only way is to borrow from the financial institutions and pay high-interest rates. In the long run money shifts from central institutions, banks, and other institutions like the IMF, World Bank, etc to consumers. These consumers make very sound judgements in relation to money. Especially as there are fears of inflation etc.

That means they save more in these times, worsening the central institutions in position. In these instances, money moves more from the central institutions to people’s bank accounts. That the other players will have little of the money and that creates deficits.

The governments are forced to announce deficits and this in turn makes the consumers even more strict, for fear of losing jobs, etc, as they know the governments in that position will start thinking about saving money, etc themselves which can mean job cuts.

The banks might increase interest rates knowing that the government has no other option but to borrow. They might increase the reserves to lend out at higher interest.

That for a certain time can go on without the government taking measures.

But in reality, most of the measures that would be taken in such a situation would be to dissolve that government and file for bankruptcy.

This then means that those in power have failed and must resign.

But there are other options available. But not all are not implementable. Just because the reason why central institutions, especially the governments end up in this situation. Is that they are dealing with the smartest players. Consumers who are of sound mind and make sound decisions in everything they do concerning money.

This means consumers make sound decisions in everything they do, and there is no way the government can expect rollbacks of money from them in sufficient quantities. Enough for them to be able to pay salaries, pensions, etc. Above all, governments may have jobs that don’t generate them any revenues like the; military. Or in terms of pensions, the people don’t contribute in terms of services to the government. Even if they had paid into the pension funds overtime inflation would have reduced the value of their contribution.

So the only solution left to governments is for governments to find a way of rolling back the money back to the government coffers. The money from financial institutions as loans like from the banks, IMF or World Bank would be costly by now and the deficit would have deepened by then.

Once again I said the reason why the flow of money is one-sided, that is from the central institutions to the consumers is the fact that consumers are the smartest of all. They make sound financial judgements and keep most of the money in their savings accounts. Any claims by the central institutions of problems regarding the money like high inflation only make the consumers tighter.

That means there is no other way.

The only option left to the government is to make the consumers stupid regarding making money decisions.

The only way the consumers will rollback money to the government in large quantities is to make them temporarily insane so that they can’t make sound decisions.

The only way to do this is to torture them to break their sound mind and temporarily make them insane.

The only quick way is to torture them to breaking point. To put them in a temporary insane condition. The only way they can rob them. This is because without this torture there is no way they can steal from them or convince them to part with their money.

This is the dilemma the governments face.

There are no services governments offer to consumers in exchange for money. Most of the services that would make consumers part with their hard-earned money are provided by private players who compete for the same money as the governments.

So straight away the government is a loser and forever must find other ways of getting financial resources as the services they provide are mainly bureaucratic.

To reiterate the only way to cause consumers to make stupid decisions is by torturing them to make them temporarily insane. This is the major reason why some governments have been implanting electric diodes and chips into all populations at birth since 1945.

To be able to control the flow of money through torture.

Now governments are involved in torturing their people and now provide services that take back some of the money. The governments are now making deals with pharmaceutical companies where they torture the people so that the people buy drugs where governments receive license fees etc.

In some countries, they make the government own heroin [poppy fields] where they torture people who in turn will be given the heroin, etc.

That’s why some governments are involved in the pimping business providing services in the hunt for this money.

Some countries have gone further to make digital watermarks and viruses etc which they attach to any money transaction. That makes the smarter consumers, now think twice about keeping the money thereby starving the governments. That means now they have to choose between parting with money and their health. These evil governments have now attached a digital watermark or virus to money transactions by chipping people at birth since 1945. Now they can make the clever consumers look not so clever. As now they have to decide between keeping their hard-earned money or their health. Now they have to choose between parting with money, meaning having good health, or keeping money as well as the digital watermarks and viruses.

These governments made sure that every money transaction is accompanied by a watermark or virus. A clever consumer in this way will have not to save the money but spend it so that he or she gets rid of the digital watermark or virus as well. If they keep the money they keep the digital watermark as well. These watermarks cause early greying of hairs, cancers, wrinkles, some blemishes that look artificial, etc. The more the people keep the money the more the watermarks and digital viruses also destroy their health. To the government, a clever consumer would choose good health. That means not saving most of the money. That means a continuous flow of money from the governments to the consumers and some of this back to the governments etc.

But what if the deficit is huge in terms of millions or trillions of dollars surely this would be impractical. That would mean chipping the country’s population and torturing all. That would mean using digital watermarks and viruses on all populations.

That can mean triggering a digital pandemic like the current pandemic as we have proof of this. That means the governments are killing most of the consumers who either keep the money as savings, thereby starving the governments. Or those consuming most of the government’s financial resources. Most governments have a high pension bill and these people are regarded as deadwood. In that, they don’t provide governments with any current imaginary or tangible benefits. After all, inflation would have reduced the value of their contributions.

So the only way is to trigger a digital pandemic or as in the current pandemic hide behind the pandemic and kill most pensioners using the digital chipping done at birth. In most developed countries. We have proof that most deaths were of the elderly and mostly in developed countries that are already chipped.

But this is not the rollback that I have in mind in that this measure only reduces the money flow going out to consumers from the government coffers.

But what if the missing money or deficit is in billions or trillions?

What if the country owes such amounts in trillions to external institutions like the IMF, the World Bank, etc? Does this not mean drastic measures as well?

That would mean cutting the costs hugely and triggering a huge rollback of money to government coffers.

That means a more robust way of triggering the rollback is needed.

But again I said that consumers are the cleverest of all the players in that they make sound decisions. They will always keep their money in savings starving the system. The government can’t torture all people to damage their brains temporarily to put them in a temporary insanity position. So that the consumers make stupid decisions. Leading them to waste their hard-earned money.

So the governments have no option.

But the huge deficit means higher risks, as well as this, means the end of the government concerned.

But other countries offer what they call protectionism.

They offer the best way out of such miseries. You must agree that such situations are regarded as the last desperate resort to hang on to power.

The Rollback.

Above I have illustrated how the consumers’ cleverness and sound mind cripple governments causing them huge deficits. The consumers in terms of decision making are the sound-minded ones as every decision is highly calculated and all done to save the hard-earned money. Putting this into savings.

This leaves the government in a huge deficit over time. In this situation, the governments owe the consumer money or are in a situation where if nothing is done they will fail to pay salaries, pensions, etc.

So to the government, a drastic measure is needed.

Now they can call the Hellraisers.

These offer what I call protection or protectorate in that the government’s sovereignty would have been lost due to the deficit.

The right to murder thousands in cold blood for two reasons. One to trigger a rollback and at the same time reduce government bills.

Recall what I said about the conditions to trigger a rollback of money from the consumers to the government?

The only way is to torture them. To destroy their sound mind so that they make stupid wrong decisions that cause them to lose money. This is the only way. Tampering with their sound mind.

But is it the only way to tamper with a sound mind?

That brings me to the method used by these Hellraisers who give protection to the government especially the president in such situations.

The brain is a strong and the most advanced system ever. That means the best decision-making system on earth is in every person on earth. Meaning the players in this money system. Have the same level and capabilities to think, act and make decisions without anyone being disadvantaged. So as to trick anyone else. Banks might have so many funds etc and governments can have so much power but all three players have the same brain. Making all equal in that all make decisions for their benefit. The situation favours the hard-working people who provide services to the government and the government becomes obligated to reward them with salaries, pay, and pension for their contributions, etc.

For the government to gain a competitive advantage to trigger a rollback something must be wrong with the consumer’s brain. Torture is the only way that can put all consumers in a temporary insanity position.

But these Hellraisesrs have another method that can put most people in a temporary insanity position.

So these Hellraisers have conditions that must trigger their services and activities.

The governments concerned must declare deficit problems first if they want this protectionism.

Then they must do whatever they are told to do by these Hellraisers.

The Hellraisers method has a double effect.

1. It triggers a rollback over a time period and the effects are felt nearly after two years or need to be renewed after two years. I will explain the need for a two-year period.
2. The method deals with the real cause of government debt and deficit. Anything causing the debt must be dealt with harshly. This means reducing all deadwood in the system. I will elaborate below this but read with caution. Read the book first before jumping to a conclusion.

There is another way to induce a temporary insanity condition and through this method, the effects last a maximum of two years. After two years, the effects of the method wear off. That means after two years either the method somehow must be repeated if the rollback or conditions to roll back are not triggered.

One thing central to this rollback method is a crash of the system. In this case, we have seen that the human brain is the most advanced system that will never crash unless something happens to the brain. Secondly, it is impossible to crash the brain systems of all consumers at the same time so that all people make irrational decisions. Decisions that can make them lose the money. To trigger a rollback of large amounts of money to banks and governments. But governments are not perfect systems even though they are made up of human beings with the best-advanced system in the world; the brain. As a whole governments are dysfunctional and make bad decisions. In most cases that results in huge deficits. Secondly, they are dependent on the people who think for themselves as individuals. Any losses of the governments will trickle back to them. So they don’t make decisions that would make governments save money. But decisions that would make the government spend in the hope that somehow that money ends up with other consumers.

So governments, as well as financial institutions, are prone to crashes. A huge budget deficit is evidence of a system crash.

So now you have seen that the flow of money is dependent on crashes. For other players to gain one or more of the players must crash. Consumers as a bunch rarely crash. The only way to crash all of them to make governments or financial institutions gain is through something that can render them temporarily insane so that they make stupid decisions.

What can crash the robust human system; the brains of a lot of people at the same time, so that the governments can get money from them to solve the deficit?

Trauma affects all people.

Trauma is any type of distressing event or experience that can have an impact on a person’s ability to cope and function. Going through very stressful, frightening, or distressing events is sometimes called trauma.

The only method that is equivalent to torture. One that can cause temporary insanity in the sense that the people will make stupid decisions. One that can make them lose their money. Is through witnessing, first-hand an event, that will make them so frightened that they will be forced to use the savings they have. This will in turn trigger the rollback of money back to the government.

But it is not just a trauma that can cause this. There are conditions to be met.

Conditions of the trauma-causing events to render all people temporarily insane.

1. The event must be broadcast live and caught on national television for many to see.
2. The event must be viewable continuously as recorded to be replayed over and over again until it scars the brain of the consumers to be remembered and to have an effect for the next two years.
3. It must be witnessed by many so that there are talks of the event over long periods.
4. Events must be raw unedited meaning live so that people see situations when people are at their worst situations and most just minutes or hours before death.
5. There must be live reactions of people with screams of people arising due to real fear. The event must be so drastic that human senses are broken down as people must be in their utmost hopeless situation.
6. There must be no help of any kind. That matters in that all people watching are also unable to help until the victims meet their death in front of everything.
7. All escape routes must be blocked to bring out the worst in humanity.
8. The victims must be given a false sense of security and be told not to worry but encouraged to be brave.
9. The victims must be told to sit and wait for help as help is coming. Or encouraged to be brave and told that they are doing well and can pull it off.
10. Provide all help but help that prolongs the situation or worsens the situation.
11. There must be two contrasting situations but all unreal situations. In which the victims must be given the greatest confidence that they don’t react like they would have reacted if that advice was not given. This in turn makes those viewing the event on television disbelieve what is happening. That if people are to die why would they not run or opt for things that remove the risk of death instantly. This contrast with reality will make the people put themselves in the victim’s position. In that, they will compare themselves to the victims, in that they are like the victims sitting on savings when they can use the savings to buy fortifications. They will see no reason to keep the savings if they are going to die and leave everything. Or why they can’t join a cult that offers them protection. They will realise that help of some kind to counteract the situation is therefore needed. That in turn will make them use the savings or join a protection offering cult.
12. The victims must meet their demise while waiting for help. Death must come while waiting for help but when all are trapped hence it is called the death trap.
13. Their deaths must be broadcast and people’s reactions recorded with screams and disbelief from the people.
14. Anyone escaping must die trying to escape.
15. This event must be repeated over and over again for the next weeks, months, and years.
16. The event must then become the trigger of what the people would do next. This is because the event must instil fears in all people and enhance the fears over and over again so that people are going to act and act fast.
17. The idea of a trauma-causing event is to trigger a further crash as well that will rollback the money back to the government’s coffers. So whatever the decision the consumers are to make will be in relation to spending money. That means using savings but then losing the item bought that in turn makes them lose everything.
18. The greatest attribute of this method is that the rolling back means there must be a rolling out first which is a second wave to attract the people’s savings and roll all back. That means the government might make deals with banks for banks to lend without any checks making sure that the people will use their savings and the trauma will make them lose their jobs. As well as the reduced circulating disposable income that means less purchasing power. In turn, it means less money to buy goods and services. That means struggling companies, etc. That means job cuts. That means the inability to repay the loans. Even more, failures to pay the interest, etc. That means repossessions. That triggers the greatest rollback of the money-back to the government which would have to bail out the banks etc.

I explained that the method adopted has two acting effects.

The second effect is a direct one.

The government is in this position simply because it is not efficient enough. It has other areas that are regarded as deadwood in that they don’t generate income. These services consume the greatest of the scarce resources. Yet they are considered vital. The most two often secretly regarded as deadwood are the pensioners and the military.

1. The pensioners don’t generate services beneficial to the government.
2. The military. The problem with the military is that it consumes money and resources yet, with the current climate of no-to-war, the weapons sales have fallen drastically. So the governments have two options in killing two birds with one stone. They can trigger military action in the hope that wars will act as traumatic events that will in turn as a multiplier effect trigger weapons sales as others might realise their vulnerabilities. These other countries will buy weapons as a result. The second way is to reduce the government’s wages and salaries bill by ‘getting the soldiers’ numbers reduced’. I know it sounds untrue but read first until the end then you will understand that in life everything happens for a reason.

This is the trauma crash-causing event and culling method. A double impact. The only one enough to reverse the fortunes. The one to trigger a meaningful rollback.

But you must understand that wherever the government has a deficit that means it must be in deep debt to outsiders. This is a fact because outsiders’ fees are high and non-negotiable. Unlike central bank loans that can be negotiated or reduced through government bonds or other fiscal measures. Owing outsiders like the World Bank or IMF can cause a nation to continually fall into debt. This is the major reason why governments directly or indirectly end up in this situation where others offer their special services to solve the problem by any means necessary and at most times. One that involves the above rollback tactic.

In most cases, the Hellraisers are the ones who create these situations to sink a country into debt. Puts the government in a hopeless situation just waiting for the government to declare publicly that they have a deficit. Once that is publicly made whether contracted or not these Hellraisers might be unannounced or un contracted. Do unwanted favours to this government.

It is a fact that in the West they chip kids at birth and other government officials are chipped for their protection as part of medical records etc. The Hellraisers hack these people.

Over time they monitor everything secretly. Sometimes they ‘whisper in the ears of the unsuspecting government officials. Passing commands, giving instructions, etc while the victims are sleeping. These instructions are converted into dreams by the brain. A process used in hypnosis.

How they do it.

They used the chips chipped at birth to hack and reduce volumes of audio and use the delayed time-space continuum tactic to insert the audio deep into the ear. That when they playback the recordings the brain hears this as an inner voice if sleeping. That in turn, the brain converts the audio into dreams.

This is the same they do to religious people, most of whom are chipped at birth secretly. These people when they wake up they truly believe that the dream was from a God. Sometimes they are so sure it was a dream from a divine God that they feel obliged to carry out the dream. In the process becoming terrorists.

In the case of governments. These Hellraisers impose their services on people without asking for them. They spy on people and I believe most of these governments had no agreements with them. They pretend to help but it’s them causing problems putting the governments in that position. Then taunt them that they can’t do it without them. If the government resists they just increase the ‘ sanctions’ so that in the end the government is in a position where the deficit becomes huge. The Hellraisers wait for the announcement of a deficit. A situation they want so that they kill people in a cold bloodied calculating murder plan employing the rollback mechanism.

Then demand things after boosting that they have helped the government and blackmail the government by saying they helped the government. That initiates what they call protectionism, a form of abuse in which they pretend to be helping that government even if the government had no agreement to all this. They pretend they communicate in a secret language even if the government doesn’t understand that sign language.

Does this sound familiar? Ever watched the 1980s gangster movies where gangs created situations to force their protection where they extorted more financial rewards, etc. Torturing and abusing that person knowing that all this is done secretly so that no one can believe the victim. Gangsters are cults that have rules of entry, etc, and are bound by certain criteria that exclude others.

Just like gangsters, the idea behind killing people or imposing their services where they are not needed is that of causing trauma so that others join them.

So they impose their services where they are not needed to cause harm but mainly for recruitment drives or to subdue that government that it becomes a puppet. Killing people or getting them killed directly or indirectly is a way to send a message to others that join only us or perish too.

Just like gangsters they use this fear to impose their services on governments that don’t need them.

Even if they are not the triggers they take advantage of the situation and claim to act on behalf of the government even if not asked. Intervene and quell the situation especially when the situation does not need any intervention. Then after that spy and make the situation worse that the government will need their services, without a contract just to intervene uninvited. What they want to hear is the sheer declaration that the government has a deficit.

They then just trigger the trauma as a way of resolving the issue unasked. Then claim that they have helped the government and from there ask the government or secretly further extract resources. Who cares what happens after when the government has already announced the missing funds. If they take after the event it makes no difference as the government would have confessed to the world that the money is missing.

This is the reason why they wait for the announcement as this is the key to them even stealing more. The very reason why it is easy for them to intervene.

In most cases, the government might not even know that they are the ones behind this. Where there is suspicion they might find a scapegoat. Someone who will die as a punishment for the traumatic event which they have caused themselves.

But they are the people behind the traumatic event in most cases without being contracted to do that but just taking over to enslave that government. Pretending to communicate in a secret sign like mirroring-language which the government doesn’t even know. Just because if the government were to know what is going on. Then they would fight these evils. But they only reveal years after the event mainly after the scapegoat has been eliminated. When people have believed that the scapegoat was the person behind that traumatic event.

Believe it or not, this is the result of the advanced digital technology with new concealed means of communication with the victims not even knowing that it’s them. Most think they are just dreams or some that it’s even God.

But the fact is that it is these thieving bastards. People who will do anything. People who would in a trickery manner sink a nation into debt by providing unwanted useless services. Obstructing easy means of resolving issues like dialogue. Giving the people a false sense of hope or arming them so that the people don’t react and feel they can defend themselves. Only until they are killed. Recall the conditions for the traumatic events above? The victims must be told to sit or fight given the hope that they can make it until their demise. This is a way to send a clear message to others who are the targets to act fast and not wait.

Their demise as a trigger for what will follow after that. The event is to enhance the fears of others, the main targets people whom they might want to join them. The ones who are expected to act to trigger the rollback.

In cults and gangsters, this trick is used for recruitment. Sacrificing those who have already refused to join and are in great debt to them that there is no way to repay the debt. That the only way is to make others kill them as a repayment of the debt. This is because the debt is irrecoverable. The country is unable to pay the debt that the only way is for their demise. In that, these Hellraisers restrict easy ways out of conflicts. As they would have already signed the death certificates of these governments who owe them money they can’t afford to repay.

Centuries ago. There used to be a ritual where those who owe huge sums of money would be asked to die, entertaining the people to whom they owe money. That means asked to die in such a manner where they fight to the death in that the lenders would recover sums of the money from the people who benefit or pay for such entertainment.

Now that I have explained the working background and general working hypothesis and overview of the issues at hand, we can look deeper to find out if this hypothesis holds water regarding all atrocities and the current Russian-Ukraine war as a means of finding real solutions to the conflicts.

The problem that led me to consider this hypothesis is the fact that there were peace talks before between Russia and Ukraine and in all cases, the talks failed.

Ukraine’s Stance.

Surely the first impression you get when hearing about the war is the fact that it is human behaviour to do whatever they can to save civilians. You would expect the government to sign whatever deals to save the people. As long as the deal will not disadvantage them. It seems the Russians [i could be wrong] just wanted the Ukraine government to give autonomy to the province of Donetsk and Luhanska. People whom they felt were being treated unfairly because they are Russian speaking. First impressions seem that all that Ukraine has to do is to give these two provinces independence. But a deeper analysis reveals a more complicated situation now.

I believe it was easy just before the 2014 conflict. But what happened soon after, has complicated the situation. That Ukraine, even if they want to, they are in no position to negotiate for peace.

The West, in 2014 has offered to train and empower the Ukraines. Arming them and training their soldiers. In the process sinking them into debt. Financially this means that they have lost their sovereignty to decide as a country their destiny.

I argued in my book Tomorrow’s World Order that since institutions were established after the second world war. These were the IMF, World Bank, United Nations, United Nations Security Council, and above all Nato which was established to quell the dangers posed by the Soviet Union.

All these institutions and cults are linked and all work with one goal. The reason they were established was to deal with Russia’s threat. But the way Russia dealt with the conflict in 2014 meant that Russia was not a threat to global peace. They had resolved an issue amicably that meant the absolution of NATO. If Russia, the only threat, can sign peace deals like that without conflicts. That would put NATO out of business, especially with NATO’s goal to increase membership and members’ contribution to 2% of GDP.

Even if the West did not intend to stall peace and trigger conflicts, their training of Ukraine troops and using the IMF and the World Bank to sink them into debt complicated peace talks.

I stress here again that even though the West had genuine motives. The debt has stripped Ukrainian of its sovereignty. I argued that sovereignty is lost by a country that is in debt, especially if it is in debt from the IMF and the World Bank because their policies command a nation to what they can do and what they should not do. So a sovereign nation in debt to the IMF and World Bank has no sovereign status but is a hostage.

This is the truth no matter how harsh this sounds. This must be addressed before any hopes of peace.

Is Ukraine a hostage?

Is Ukraine since 2014 a free sovereign country?

Is Ukraine being held against its will?

Is Russia holding Ukraine against its will?

Or should I ask, is the West holding Ukraine at ransom using the debt it owes to its banks, the IMF, and the World Bank against its will?

Who is the enemy here?

I know the first impression is to say Ukraine is free and fighting Russia.

But the number of the deaths of civilians makes you wonder if everything is what it seems. Especially the fact that the West is supplying weapons that are escalating the situation. Especially the fact that the West is cheer-leading the Ukraines that they will win the war and encouraging them to keep fighting ignoring Russia’s calls for peace negotiations.

I could be wrong but I understand that Ukraine refused the Minsk agreement.

Heavy civilian casualties would make one think that the Ukraine government would compromise something to save the people who are dying every day.

All these calls for Ukraine to win and the ability to win against Russia disregards the deaths of civilians. What is winning when civilians are dying? Russia will still have a conscience even if 23 000 soldiers die. They are soldiers and signed contracts to die fighting for the country and the president. Can we say the same about civilians who are dying?

I think Ukraine can say they are winning if the deaths of civilians were not that much.

We believe in countries protecting themselves. But the current situation means increased civilian deaths as well. The supply of heavy weapons adds to the problems as well.

I think it is open to me to decide that the West could be the obstacle to peace in that they keep providing weapons. Ukraine could have opted for peace.

Another point to look at is the fact that Russia has ever since accused Ukraine of fighting a proxy war.

A war where they fight on behalf of the West who trained their military and supplied the weapons. That means that Ukraine’s sovereignty is stripped away as well as they can’t say no to the fighting. Whatever they do is determined by the West. That could explain the continuous supply of weapons where the West determines when the war will end.

To understand this deeper we need to check first if Ukraine can be said that it is sovereign in the full sense of the word. Sovereign to such an extent that they can say no to calls of fighting a proxy war on behalf of the West.

First, we check if Ukraine owes the West [IMF, World Bank, etc] huge debt to the extent that they might lose their sovereign in that they might be told what to do by the West.

But again owing to a huge debt with the ability to repay it is another issue.

So, if Ukraine owes the West huge debt, are they in a position to repay it?

Secondly, we must check if Ukraine owes a huge debt to Russia. But debt alone cannot mean anything. So we need to check if Ukraine owes Russia and if it is in a position to repay the debt. Otherwise if not then Russia can be destroying infrastructure and killing civilians as a match for the debt they owe.

Could the West be arming Ukraine to make Russia angry enough to destroy infrastructure as a repayment of the money owed by Ukraine? The supply of weapons could mean just that in that the West might have realised that in the end, Russia will target infrastructure like railways to stop the delivery of weapons. But at the same time crippling Ukraine.

Just note that Russia has no loans from the IMF or World Bank.

“Russia does not have an IMF-supported program — nor has there been any request from Russia for financial support. We haven’t lent to Russia for decades. Moreover, we haven’t been approached for economic advice since the beginning of the war.!

IMF

I reiterate that resolving the conflict that has been going on for as long as eight years means a new way to look at this issue.

Could our hypothesis apply to the Ukraine-Russia conflict? Recall the rollback notion. Is the West or Russia having a deficit and could this war be an act to trigger a rollback of funds back to the West or Russia?

Could Ukraine be our consumer in the hypothesis above? One that is so clever that keeps the money so tight and in banks etc or not even in the bank.

Could Ukraine be frustrating the system by starving other players? Could Ukraine be avoiding the monetary system instead of depositing money in the banks keeping money in houses etc?

Or could Ukraine be offering a service or commodity that is depleting the financial resources of the West? That in turn means starving the system.

Above all, could Ukraine have a special resource or commodity that is depleting the financial resources of the West?

Or the target is Russia which has oil that could be depleting the West’s resources and fighting is a way to trigger a rollback of resources. No demand for oil can mean lower prices etc.

Ukraine’s Debt Situation And Its Ability To Opt For Peace.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr/why-ukraine-needs-foreign-debt-cancellation-now/

An article in democracynow; one that advocates for independent journalism, states that Ukraine needs a foreign debt cancellation with immediate effect inferring that if they are to resolve the conflict.

Just a day before the invasion Ukraine had asked the IMF for emergency financing.

The IMF managing director confirmed that Ukraine was seeking more funding from the institution.

She also stressed that the war and sanctions will increase economic problems, especially at a time when they are looking to see capital flows from these two nations to the emerging markets. Countries that are in the middle between the developed and the developing countries.

This is proof of the fact that some form of rollback to correct the system was wished for or conditions put in place to trigger that rollback. But when dealing with countries that have unique commodities like oil and wheat. The rollback act can only worsen the situation. This is because wars or sanctions can only mean increased prices of these commodities and make transporting these costly. So a global crisis is imminent. Other conditions need to be in place for this to work.

I will elaborate when dealing with commodities but a point to note here is the fact that to lower prices of oil, or wheat and enable proper rolling back of money to the West and the world as a whole. The war must occur for a long period. For sanctions and other factors to take effect. In the short term, nothing can work because a country like Russia receives a billion dollars a day as oil revenues, and to make them feel the pinch it will take months if not years. That can mean that even if Ukraine wants peace with Russia they are in no position to make such deals. That can also mean frustrating peace talks.

Another thing I will look at is the fact that getting loans from the IMF and World Bank makes Ukraine lose sovereignty. Remember the IMF and World Bank’s economic structural adjustment programs [ESAP]? Ukraine might have borrowed using the country as collateral meaning that parting with lands like Donetsk and Luhanska or Mariupol is out of the question as they already signed an agreement with the IMF[ just speculating]. This means that they will refuse all Russia’s demands, including parting with lands especially if they can’t pay back the loans.

The IMF and the World Bank impose conditions to which the country can’t say no.

Conditionality of loans[edit]

IMF conditionality is a set of policies or conditions that the IMF requires in exchange for financial resources. [23] The IMF does require collateral from countries for loans but also requires the government to seek assistance to correct its macroeconomic imbalances in the form of policy reform. [34] If the conditions are not met, the funds are withheld. [23][35] The concept of conditionality was introduced in a 1952 executive board decision and later incorporated into the Articles of Agreement.

Conditionality is associated with economic theory as well as an enforcement mechanism for repayment. Stemming primarily from the work of Jacques Polak, the theoretical underpinning of conditionality was the “monetary approach to the balance of payments”.[24]

Structural adjustment[edit]

Further information: Structural adjustment

Some of the conditions for structural adjustment can include:

• Cutting expenditures or raising revenues, is also known as austerity.
• Focusing economic output on direct export and resource extraction,
• Devaluation of currencies,
• Trade liberalisation, or lifting import and export restrictions,
• Increasing the stability of investment (by supplementing foreign direct investment with the opening of facilities for the domestic market,
• Balancing budgets and not overspending,
• Removing price controls and state subsidies,
• Privatisation, or divestiture of all or part of state-owned enterprises,
• Enhancing the rights of foreign investors vis-a-vis national laws,
• Improving governance and fighting corruption,

As the ESAP they will insist on reducing debt and recall the conditions of the rollback conditions at the beginning? This can mean the need for traumatising the people. So that defence becomes a priority. Out of fear they might do something they would not do if they had not witnessed the war. Not sure at the moment what it is but by the time I finished this book I could have an idea. Above all, who again are deadwood? Who eats away the government funds? Soldiers and pensions. Could this be part of the culling of soldiers as increased weapons can only mean an aggravated Russia that will use powerful weapons to kill as many Ukraine soldiers and pensioners as well?

Since Ukraine has 41.4 million people with as high as 2,9 million as a dependent. The supply of the weapons is to intensify the risks to soldiers and the pensioners who cant run to reduce these categories.

So is it a war and culling first of soldiers and pensioners? Then with the war-making people in the future think about defence and possibly make them change their decision regarding joining NATO? Bear in mind Ukraine refused to join Nato. Could the war trigger them to change their mind?

Or as at the beginning, they are to act as a lesson to trigger other countries hesitating to join NATO to end up joining NATO after witnessing what is going on in Ukraine and whatever their end is?

Countries like Sweden and Finland who are sitting on the fence, can they make a strong decision to join NATO after being temporarily rendered insane by witnessing Ukraine’s ordeal?

Russia, even if not a member of NATO, is a member of the UN. Like I said they are all linked, all these institutions.

Normally with the West what they accuse others of is what they do or are doing themselves. Having said that, Russia accuses Ukraine of fighting a proxy war?

Can Russia be working for the West? Attacking Ukraine on behalf of the West directly or indirectly? Can Russia be the country being used to punish Ukraine for refusing to join Nato? Could Russia destroy infrastructure and kill civilians as a way of punishing Ukraine for owing a debt to the West? The debt they can’t pay. In the process send a clear message that borrowing from the IMF and World bank all institutions of the West and refusing to be a member can only get everything destroyed.

It can be said that the West is holding Russia at ransom. Taking all their assets and freezing these to make them directly or indirectly punish Ukraine which is in debt.

It can be inferred [speculation] that the fact that the UN secretary general’s visit to meet the Russian president first was sending a strong message. One to trigger Russia to keep on with the war. I think most would agree that they would have expected the UN secretary-general to visit Ukraine first. But his decisions could be just because of fear of being shelled in Ukraine so he had to tell the Russian president not to shell while he was there.

The World Bank president stated that;

“We will continue to identify options for those who have decided to not leave the country at this point,” Malpass said in an internal memo to the bank’s nearly 16,000 global employees.

This can be interpreted in other ways. The World Bank imposes conditions on their loans. They insist on measures that are related to austerity, meaning they would be happy if all people left the country [Recall the rolling back and the culling of staff] so that Ukraine will be able to pay the debt back.

According to opendemocracy;

Big loans and neoliberal restructuring

Since the outbreak of the war in Donbas in 2014, international financial institutions such as the IMF and World Bank have engaged deeply in Ukraine. Since 2014, the World Bank has lent US$8.4bn, the IMF has loaned US$17bn, and the European Commission has advanced at least €13bn to the country.

The article went on to say that;

These loans have been contingent on radical neoliberal restructuring throughout the Ukrainian economy as conflict raged in the background, with demands for reforms in pensions, the energy sector, agriculture, state employment, privatisation, and political governance.

As I argued above, the loans from the IMF and World Bank come with conditions that insist on culling deadwood to afford to repay the loans. They made demands for pension and state employment reforms. Recall what I said at the beginning about deadwood. But how can they reduce the pension bill? How can they reduce state employment? There are no other means effective enough to make a mark than culling?

Recall what I said about a country declaring itself as having a deficit as a call to action by the Hellraisers.

A day before Russia invaded; the Ukraine government stated that it had a deficit and needed emergency funding. The next day there is a solution. A war to cull the deadwood. Soldiers and the pensioners.

You will believe this when I am dealing with the 9/11 attacks as a supporting traumatic event.

Did you know that a day before 9/11 the secretary of state declared that the country had a deficit of $2.3 trillion which was missing?

The opendemocracy went on to say that;

The loans have created enormous levels of debt for Ukraine. The country is drowning in external debt of over US$129bn (78.8% of GDP) and is expected to repay US$14bn of it in 2022. A significant proportion of this debt is owed to international financial institutions.

I argued [also in my book Tomorrow’s World Order] and at the beginning that external debt makes a country lose its sovereignty. Any decisions they make after that are influenced by conditions imposed by the external debt provider. The IMF and the World Bank and the US which have a controlling interest in both these organisations can dictate what Ukraine does. This has implications for the war, its length, and the peace agreement. The fact that Ukraine is sunk in debt and the US is supplying weapons can make Ukraine continue with the war instead of negotiating for peace.

The reason for all these wild suggestions and hypotheses is to look at the possibility of Ukraine agreeing to a peace agreement. Is it likely that the war can be stopped? If not, does Ukraine feel like a debt hostage? One that has lost its sovereignty and is used to fight a proxy war.

Recall what I said at the beginning that maybe someone was spying on Ukraine back in 2014 and then just imposing help without being asked to by Ukraine. Thereby trapping them in this hostage situation. Where they pretend to help them but are abusing them and blackmailing them. Sinking them into debt, holding them to ransom, and now asking them to sacrifice women and children for the debt they can’t pay as conditions for defending the country and staying in power.

https://www.openpetition.eu/petition/online/people-around-the-world-demand-imf-to-cancel-ukraines-unjust-debt

People around the world demand the IMF cancel Ukraine’s unjust debt.

​

Presently Ukraine’s foreign debt stands at $125 billion. The debt servicing expenditure for 2022 is expected to be circa $6.2 billion. That is approximately 12% of all state budgetary expenditure

The IMF component of the above sum is $2.7 billion. That is equivalent to 16.5 million average pension payments in Ukraine.

On behalf of all Ukrainians, we demand (1) the cancellation of the debt — that is now choking our state — and (2) that we are provided with multifaceted financial aid.

We demand Ukraine is freed from the debt yoke!

Chaotic borrowing and antisocial debt conditionality were a result of total oligarchisation: unwilling to fight the wealthy, the state rulers kept getting deeper in debt. Loans were issued under conditions of social spending cuts, and their repayment forced them to economise on vital needs and apply austerity to foundational economy sectors.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr/why-ukraine-needs-foreign-debt-cancellation-now/

Indeed, throughout the bloody conflict in Ukraine’s east, the Ukrainian government has repaid the World Bank approximately US$2bn (including US$664m in interest) of their loans, a substantial sum of money for a country with three million people already in humanitarian need before the Russian invasion.

The article went on to say that;

Crucially, the World Bank is also a gatekeeper to concessional lending, which is permitted to countries classified as ‘poor’ or in a ‘fragile and conflict-affected situation’ (FCS). The World Bank does not, and has never, classified Ukraine under this category. This is despite Ukraine comfortably meeting its criteria for inclusion as a country with ‘medium-intensity conflict’ for the last eight years, and being noted consistently as ‘in conflict’ in World Bank publications and country-specific programming documents.

Ukraine is excluded from the World Bank’s FCS classification for two main reasons. First, it is technically disqualified because it does not have an international peacekeeping mission and is defined as a ‘lower-middle-income economy. Second, and more tellingly, if Ukraine was classified as ‘in conflict’ by the World Bank, it could either access more flexible financing or receive concessional lending and eligibility for debt waivers as an International Development Association (IDA) country.

I argued at the beginning. That calls by a country that they have a deficit can trigger the Hells-raisers to intervene. To put that country in a traumatic state. To help and as I said at the beginning. They carry out a cold calculated murder plan to trigger the traumatic event and trigger a rollback at the same time culling deadwood.

Although the IMF and World Bank can write off the debt of a nation, that nation must be regarded as a fragile and conflict-affected situation’ (FCS). Could this mean putting that country into that situation to write off the debt?

Or could the Ukraine government stall implementing the Minsk agreement etc so that there is conflict to be categorised as such as in an FCS to qualify for loan waiving?

Could the need to fight have anything to do with the debt they have with external forces totalling $125 billion?

Is debt the trigger of the war?

If so then tackling debt is the answer to the war instead of insisting on peace.

Is Ukraine trapped by debt in a hostage situation where they are told to fight or perish with style entertaining the world who will pay somehow for the entertainment they give or services they give to all as a way of debt recovery?

Could this be the reason why Ukraine seems trapped in this war?

Or the fact that this war has been going on since 2014 is the reason and now they want to fight once and for all?

The question posed by the writer of the opendemocracy article sums everything up and points to probable reasons behind the war.

The question is;

Following the Russian invasion, will the World Bank finally classify Ukraine properly as ‘in conflict’, and permit the embattled country to access conditional lending and waive its debt?

Could debt have made Ukraine fight the war by sacrificing civilians to write off the debt?

If that is the case can it be argued that Ukraine is a victim of the loan system [loan sharks do the same] and the deaths of civilians they suffered can be blamed on the loan providers who left Ukraine with no choice but to enter a war to reduce the debt or get their debt waived?

Can the IMF and World Bank be charged with the deaths of women and children who died in Ukraine because of the war?

Is this the case I argued at the beginning of imposing unwanted help that can sink you into debt?

Recall the 1980’s gangster loan sharks movies etc?

Can this case fit that setting?

Or should I ask if blame can be apportioned to these financial institutions also?

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr/why-ukraine-needs-foreign-debt-cancellation-now/

As the Russian invasion began, the IMF managing director said that the Fund was exploring “all options” to aid Ukraine. At the same time, however, Ukraine’s projected debt payments to the IMF for 2022 remain at approximately US$2.3 bn and are expected to stay at this level until at least 2025. Even before the latest escalation in the conflict, alarm bells had been ringing at the IMF about Ukraine’s ability to service its growing debt and implement the conditions demanded in IMF loans.

Further, the IMF has historically pressured Ukraine to improve its macroeconomic indicators with little concern about the impact on ordinary Ukrainians. The previous loan agreement the IMF instituted with Ukraine, in June 2021, consisted of US$5bn. It followed a fiscal consolidation by Ukraine that was, as glowingly noted by the IMF, “achieved mainly through a reduction in the real value of wages and social benefits”. Indeed, there have been consistent concerns from international and local NGOs that IMF-instituted economic reforms attached to loans have severely affected living standards and social services, with a particularly detrimental impact on women and marginalised groups.

Unconfirmed reports from a recent closed-door meeting of the IMF board revealed that board members are very concerned about Ukraine’s ability to service its debt following the Russian invasion. Although the IMF has voiced its support for the Ukrainian people, these words will ultimately ring hollow if the Fund cannot muster the courage to materially support the suffering of Ukrainians at war, over and above a concern for Ukraine’s debt obligations.

First I think it is best if I look at several situations related to the case Ukraine is in. A state where it is in heavy debt and where it is forced to choose war and sacrificing civilian lives indirectly as a way to get the debt written off by the IMF and the World Bank. Where they have a clause that they can write off debt when a country is considered to be in a state of conflict [FCS] as I discussed above. But something I am just noticing now is that the IMF might have not explained the small print, especially considering that we are dealing with countries that speak different languages. I believe there might be small print issues that are unclear or not explained enough in that the foreign non-English speaking governments might be getting debt with the hope to simply write it off after getting into a war and getting recognised as an FCS area. Hoping to get the debt written off only to find that there are other small print clauses not declared that now they are trapped into a war with no prospect of the debt to be written off.

Questions to ask.

Are loan providers especially the IMF and World Bank misrepresenting the facts about conditions for writing off the debt?

Are they acting like loan shakes trapping people into debt?

Are they misleading countries through their West partners so the countries involved intensifies wars?

Have they highlighted that they might not write off debt if the governments in debt do something that triggers conflicts themselves? Something regarded as contributory.

Have they clearly declared the conditions in which they are able to write off the debt? Do they have guidelines easily accessible? I could not find these on the internet.

Same as with loan sharks piling debt on top of debt, especially where a country is facing a possible end without any concessions or reduced interest or fees can be a malicious act.

Offering debt where prospects of that debt not to be repaid without any option to write off that debt is a malicious act associated with loan sharks.

Even if that is not the intended act the damage experienced by the country and human life losses must be considered. They might have the money but it now comes to setting the right priorities vis-a-vis humanitarian needs.

It’s not only Ukraine. I have noticed several cases even including Russia in 1999 after the 9 September bombings. Again as in this case, the government of Russia was in a financial crisis evidenced by the deficit and default of 1998. IMF and the World Bank approved a loan on 13 July 1998. But they put conditions similar to structural adjustment programs where the IMF or World Bank make impossible declarations like asking them for the reform of the pension bill and state employment. Something hard to control. Just before this loan, there was the 12 May 1998 strike by unpaid coal miners. By 1999, the government’s budget deficit estimate was above $5 billion.

But how do you meaningfully reform the pension and state employment conditions of the loan?

On 31 August there were bombings followed by the 3 September bombings. I suspect that of the people killed in the apartment bombings most were pensioners. Then the bombings triggered the accusations against Islamist Chechnya rebels which culminated in a war with Chechnya. 10000 Russian soldiers were killed in the second Chechnya war. The rise of oil prices helped Russia’s finances but can the removal of ‘deadwood’ the pensions and the soldiers through wars with Chechnya have a part to play in all this as recommendations by the IMF?

Recall my hypothesis at the beginning about the Rollback and the need for massive culling of deadwood taking the government’s financial resources? Does it apply here all due to the deficit and the getting of the IMF loan?

Here is another example.

9/11 United States of America.

Was the US in debt with a deficit just before the 9/11 attacks and the war that followed?

Was the IMF or World Bank involved? Did the government get a loan?

Is there evidence of the need to trigger a rollback of the money as I discussed at the beginning?

If there was a plan for a loan were there conditions included to reform the pension or state employment or state bills?

https://www.city-journal.org/html/americas-missing-money-15725.html

On September 10, 2001, then U.S. Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld disclosed that his department was unable to account for roughly $2.3 trillion worth of transactions.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-war-on-waste/

On Sept. 10, Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld declared war. Not on foreign terrorists, “the adversary’s closer to home. It’s the Pentagon bureaucracy,” he said.

He said money wasted by the military poses a serious threat.

“In fact, it could be said it’s a matter of life and death,” he said.

The next day, the U.S. sustained the terrorist attacks that changed the world, and this startling revelation was forgotten.

In 2001 the US deficit was $128.

I can’t find information about whether the US borrowed from the IMF and or World bank just before 9/11 or after but I can say that 9/11 was a trigger to initiate the rollback of funds as I described at the beginning in the widest sense.

Recall the initial hypothesis.

The event 9/11 is the event responsible for what follows. Witnessing 9/11 enhanced the fears that had the consumers not witnessed this then they would have not made the decision they made after ceteris paribus. So 9/11 matches most of the criteria at the beginning. Donald Rumsfeld announced that $2.3 trillion was missing. This triggered the need for the invisible Hellraisers who came to the rescue unannounced and unwanted and took the law into their own hands. Offering what they call protection or protectorate. This means without being asked they carried out 9/11 or did they?. It could have been the Islamist jihadists but here you must understand that 9/11 was so sophisticated.

I mentioned above that the only way to trigger a rollback is the need to traumatise the people, that is to render them temporarily insane so that they spend their savings. As a direct result of the trauma witnessed that instils fear of tall rise buildings that they end up spending their savings as deposits buying houses. Witnessing the people so hopeless and trapped in the towers which then went on to collapse triggering the people into spending their savings. Something they could have never done if they had not seen the event. That means the clever consumers have been left temporarily insane due to the trauma.

The main aim of 9/11 was to make defence the most important factor and the dominant factor. This triggered the sudden rise of people taking out housing mortgages and loans. But using their savings as a deposit option to own their homes which are away from the city towers. As homes were now considered safer than the city towers. This is because the planes hit the twin towers exactly where the fire escape exits were. Leaving people trapped until witnessing their deaths. That triggered quick decisions with the rise of people taking mortgages and loans. Even though this event helped the support for the war the main concerns are that the event triggered whatever followed.

This means that once secure clever sound decision-making consumers; have now become the stupid ones who spend all their savings on houses they can’t afford with the risk of having these repossessed. Now stripped of their buffer and prone now with less disposable income as they have to repay the loans and the interests.

The lack of disposable income as bills increase means less money to spend hence less demand for goods. That in turn means fewer profits and culling of jobs as well by companies, firms, etc. That means job losses that will in turn mean the inability to repay loans and mortgages and interest. That leads to repossessions as they become unable to pay or repay. This latter triggered the housing market crash because the people used their deposits to buy. The banks had lowered their acceptance criteria due also to the 9/11 events as news spread that some of the documents in the Third World Trade Centre were destroyed. The governments encouraged the reduction of the criteria to help the people buy houses. All the people who were given the houses were people who could not afford them in the first place.

Everything that followed is still linked to the traumatic terrorist event.

9/11 attacks were meant to trigger fear so that defence became the people’s main priority and for the people to make irrational decisions based on fear…

This traumatic event was expected or supposed to last two years only.

In the beginning, the US had a deficit of $2.3 trillion. 9/11 was there to roll back the money to the government by traumatising the people and scaring them to death. That those who plan city life most of whom were saving money. Realise the dangers of city apartments and opt for houses instead. Meaning buying houses they can afford. Now using their savings as deposits leaving them with nothing. 9/11 succeeded in making the people spend their savings. 9/11 was to crash the consumers so that they spend their savings.

I explained that if action is not taken within the two years another event is needed to incapacitate the people to become temporarily insane so fear remains or becomes the main thing enough to make defence a priority.

The space shuttle disaster of 2003 further traumatised the people.

The war then followed when the culling of troops further occurred reducing the salaries list.

What are the IMF and World Bank?

The IMF works to achieve sustainable growth and prosperity for all of its 190 member countries. It does so by supporting economic policies that promote financial stability and monetary cooperation, which are essential to increase productivity, job creation, and economic well-being.

The IMF was established in 1944 in the aftermath of the Great Depression of the 1930s. 44 founding member countries sought to build a framework for international economic cooperation.

IMF, World Bank, and European Commission as triggers of wars and civilian deaths.

IMF, European Commission, and World Bank weighty strings attached as triggers of wars hence indirectly responsible for the deaths of civilians.

We as Tomorrow’s World Order press criminal charges for reckless causing of deaths of civilians which arise due to the conditions they insist on as conditions for the loans. Conditions which external entities whom we call the Hell-raiser take advantage of pretending to help but actually sink governments into debt. Tactics used by loan sharks.

It is a fact that IMF, World Bank’s [and European Commission to some extent.] restructuring demands as part of the loan conditions are the reasons why we have wars. We believe the conditions and settings [as I will explain below] makes it easy for another anonymous entity somehow associated with these institutions to trigger ways in which a country can meet their demanded conditions. But in such ways to drag nations to wars culling pensioners, soldiers, women, and children. To be able to repay the loans.

Opendemocracy;

Since the outbreak of the war in Donbas in 2014, international financial institutions such as the IMF and World Bank have engaged deeply in Ukraine. Since 2014, the World Bank has lent US$8.4bn, the IMF has loaned US$17bn, and the European Commission has advanced at least €13bn to the country………..with demands for reforms in pensions, the energy sector, agriculture, state employment, privatisation, and political governance.

IMF Loan Conditions.

To speed up growth that will allow Ukraine to catch up, the government has to act on the following challenges:

• inefficient state-owned enterprises still account for a large share of the economy, stifling growth and constituting a large drag on public finances;
• with an ageing population and generous early retirement options, too few workers finance too many pensioners, compromising the stability of the pension system and forcing pensions to below;

The IMF, therefore, urges reform and transparent privatisation of state-owned enterprises, agricultural land reform to lift the moratorium on land sales, and a comprehensive pension reform, including an increase in the effective retirement age to ensure the viability of Ukraine’s pension system and the ability to provide adequate pensions over time, and accelerated efforts in fighting corruption to achieve concrete results.

Their demands are putting huge pressure on governments to take extreme measures to meet these. The fact is that wherever there have been and have lent loans wars followed sometimes occurred after they requested the conditions see Ukraine December 2013.

It is not a coincidence.

We start to see a pattern developing. Even if there is no direct link we believe that their conditions of writing off these loans when governments realise that bit more than they can chew make them opt for conflicts where they would have simply agreed to peace to get the loans written off.

We believe also that they indirectly through the partners advise debt-ridden countries to start wars in order to get their debt written off.

Worse, they don’t explain the small print that if the countries are to contribute themselves or worsen the situation by requesting heavy weaponry then they might not qualify for that privilege of having their debt written off.

Even if this is not their aim, the conditions for writing off these loans encourage leaders to opt for conflict to get the debt written off. These conditions encourage governments to avoid negotiations.

It can be argued that Ukraine is a special case and the conditions make it mandatory to apportion blame for the death of women and children to these institutions. A country with international debt that amounts to 78.7% of GDP has no option but to react to the way Ukraine is right now. It can be argued that the debt is a direct trigger of the war and all these institutions are to blame for the deaths of women and children.

First, to get out of debt from the IMF and the World Bank these debts can be written off or repayments postponed if the country is regarded as in a conflict-affect-situation FCS or if it has international peacekeeping troops in the country.

Opendemocracy.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr/why-ukraine-needs-foreign-debt-cancellation-now/

Ukraine is excluded from the World Bank’s FCS classification for two main reasons. First, it is technically disqualified because it does not have an international peacekeeping mission and is defined as a ‘lower-middle-income economy. Second, and more tellingly, if Ukraine was classified as ‘in conflict’ by the World Bank, it could either access more flexible financing or receive concessional lending and eligibility for debt waivers as an International Development Association (IDA) country.

Could this requirement to be classified as a conflict-affected situation FCS as a condition of writing off debt, have anything to do with the heavy fighting in Ukraine? The West’s heavy supply of weapons can intensify the situation but I think this won’t help the situation but worsen it.

Opendemocracy.

This is Ukraine’s situation.

The country is drowning in external debt of over US$129bn (78.8% of GDP) and is expected to repay US$14bn of it in 2022. A significant proportion of this debt is owed to international financial institutions.

World Bank.

Classification of Fragile and Conflict-Affected Situations: World Bank

The list distinguishes between countries based on the nature and severity of issues they face. The classification uses the following categories:

• Countries with high levels of institutional and social fragility are identified based on publicly available indicators that measure the quality of policy and institutions and manifestations of fragility.
• Countries affected by violent conflict are identified based on a threshold number of conflict-related deaths relative to the population. This category includes two sub-categories based on the intensity of violence: countries in high-intensity conflict and countries in medium-intensity conflict.

Countries in conflict are identified based on the number of conflict deaths in absolute terms and relative to their population. • Countries in high-intensity conflict are defined as those with (i) an absolute number of conflict deaths above 250 according to ACLED and 150 according to UCDPvi; and (ii) several conflict deaths relative to the population above 10 per 100,000 according to both ACLED and UCDP, reflecting widespread and intense violence across many parts of the country. • Countries in medium-intensity conflict are defined as (i) countries with lower intensity conflict, as measured by (a) an absolute number of conflict deaths above 250 according to ACLED and 150 according to UCDPvii; and (b) between 2 and 10 per 100,000 population according to ACLED and between 1 and 10 according to UCDP; or (ii) countries with a rapid deterioration of the security situation, as measured by (a) an absolute number of conflict deaths above 250 according to ACLED and 150 according to UCDP; (b) a lower number of conflict deaths relative to the population between 1 and 2 (ACLED) and 0.5 and 1 (UCDP) and © more than a doubling of the number of casualties in the last year.

Loans issued in conflicts must be written off with immediate effect as a country in a conflict is in a desperate situation. And is not expected to repay such loans especially if it experiences civilian deaths and heavy infrastructure damage.

Countries in conflicts must ask for the international community’s help in terms of funding.

1. The IMF, World Bank, and European Commission have given the Ukraines a false sense of security by dumping costly loans quickly to destruct others who would have offered free loans. Unless they included an option to write off this debt. These institutions should have noted that these were not ordinary circumstances. Ukraine in that position might not exhaust-free cheaper sources of funding. Fear could have made them panic. The world offered help in $billions on the false impression created by these institutions that it had enough money but these loans are costly. We believe these institutions are taking advantage of countries in desperate situations to offload even more costly loans. Such acts are associated with loan sharks that disregard the costs in terms of human suffering, especially at the very critical stage when they are defending their sovereignty.
2. Sinking a country in debt with loans where there is no prospect to repay the loans and still expect these is a criminal offence. An act associated with loan sharks.

To understand everything you need to understand the idea of Mirror-Image.

Some nations have been collecting all the information about events since 1600 writing everything and documenting information from diaries and records. What they do now is to intervene even if not asked to and look at the situation and find similar cases from as far back as 1600. Then look if there was a similar situation matching the current situation. Then apply solutions applied then.

In such cases actually, they recreate situations as far back as 1665 to 1666 and then recreate exactly what happened then so that it happens as well but now. Like a movie script, actually finding and putting people who look just like the people then and letting them replay a person in the 1660 but killing people in cold blood.

I will first look at the 9/11 attacks on America and mirror it to the great fire of London in 1666.

The idea then was to rollback the money from the financial institutions mainly insurance firms back to the people and then to the government. London was destroyed by the fire and here houses were destroyed not just a city skyscraper that houses mainly offices. The destruction of houses released funds from housing insurance cover. Money that was ploughed back into building the houses to restart the flow of money. The people still had their savings. The difference here is that here the people, out of fear and traumatised instead of saving for city apartments. Together with the easy mortgages, loans, etc, they used their savings leaving them without a buffer. That means left vulnerable even worse now in that trauma made them buy houses they can afford. A stupid decision and with only one outcome. That they will lose the house.

I will show you the similarities between the actual people then and all the people involved in the 9/11 attacks.

The years in comparison, therefore, are 2001 vs 1666 and Newyork City vs London in 1666.

Firstly, the London map of 1665–1666 and the Newyork city map were all designed by the same person a one Christopher Wren [1632–1673] who was a British architect.

The king of England Charles II had a brother called James Duke of York the one New York was named after in his honour.

i. This Christopher Wren in 1654 was the first person who used gunpowder to demolish a building. Christopher Wren used 3,6kgs of gunpowder. He dug a trench and made a box hole in the building and poured in the 3,6kgs of gunpowder. He inserted fuse dynamite and poured some gunpowder into a trench to a safe blasting place. Far away he lit the gunpowder and watched what happened. The gunpowder blew up and displaced 3000 tons worth of rubble into the air. Pleased he realised he would save time and money as this might have taken months to demolish. Excited and about to carry out another blast the King summoned him to go to Salisbury for surveying duties leaving his second officer Tom Woodreff.

ii. This same Christopher Wren is the same architect who drew plans for London in 1665–1666 and the map used for building New York city in America.

iii. This same Christopher Wren experimented with bees and designed a bee shelter made of glass with buttress columns. Then trapped the bees inside then introduced smoke to see how the bees would react to fire and smoke [picture 9/11 smoke coming out] after sealing everything so that none can escape. This design he used is the same design used to construct the twin towers in America. The towers that were destroyed on 9/11. The same design.

iv. The same design of see-through glass that went to be used for the Guantanamo bay design.

V. He experimented with the bee colony trying to find out what happens to the bees after removing the male bees. {picture Guantanamo bay inmates}

Vi. The same person who experimented with the idea of the timeball. A time prediction tool, a design that was used to design Tower three of the World Trade Centre acted. One that acted as a prediction tool that would predict the free fall of the financial markets in 2008. This timeball was a method used to tell the time in the 1800s where a heavy ball one already incorporated in the building. On the roof would be let to free fall to determine time. The way the World Trade Centre Three free fell 6.6 seconds. A prediction from September 2001 of the time the financial crisis occurred in June 2008. So those behind this would easily predict when the financial markets would fall and make huge profits. Check which country benefited the most from all this. So it is not a coincidence.

Over years these people have been putting things in place recreating London’s 1665–1666’s Great Fire putting lookalikes in New York in the position the people in 1665–1666 had. Not a coincidence.

London 1665–1666s replayed in New York USA from 2001.

The People.

Christopher Wren (1632–1673) is played by Larry Silverstein

King Charles II (1630–1685) is played by President George W. Bush.

Mayor Thomas Bloodworth (1620–1682) is played by Mayor Rudy Giuliani the Mayor of Newyork.

Samuel Pepys (1633–1703) is played by the Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld.

10 September 2001. Donald Rumsfeld declared that $2.3 trillion was missing. One of the conditions of the rollback. Where the Hellraisers; the people who offer protectorate. A situation where a government is in trouble in this case with the budget deficit. Where they look back through their documents and find a similar situation that will solve the situation. Then implement that solution in most cases without the approval of the government on their own. Then claim secretly after the event that the government is a protectorate of that nation and they must obey what they say. In most cases, they help this nation and in most cases, they syphon money to their country. In most cases, the government that was helped is the one accused of the atrocities but sometimes the government might not even know who is behind this.

That means the government is suspected by all and this Hellraiser nation blackmails that government forever. Now killing everyone who accuses the government pretending to protect the accused government.

You will see that the cases are similar and all involve bombings that kill people. Mostly they target the old people’s residents [pensioners who are regarded as deadwood]. The second phase involves the triggering of wars. Military action where the government that suffered bombings or terrorist attacks blames other groups because they will be sure that it was not them. Then gives this as a justification for war. But it is not just a war. It’s a war to reduce the nation’s salary bill by getting soldiers killed but they won’t know this is the aim of the war. They will be revenging the deaths of the victims. But a set up by the Hell-raisers to cull soldiers as well.

i. You must understand that at first, this government; one that is bombed is in financial difficulties with a huge budget deficit that they have declared.

ii. At the same time this government will have applied for help from the International Monetary Fund IMF and the World Bank.

Iii. The IMF and the World Bank would have insisted that this government meet pension reforms and state employment reforms.

You can see the link. The bombings either kill government personnel or the pensioners or if not are used as a false flag to initiate a war that will make soldiers die. No matter how bad this sounds, this is in line with the requirements of the IMF and the World Bank to reduce what they call deadwood; soldiers, firefighters, etc. Who is paid year after year without wars or weapons sales creating any revenue, etc?

It is not a coincidence. All atrocities are linked to loans provided by these financial institutions as part of the loan.

I will list these cases here, all of which are similar and everything is the same.

The government if not bailed out this way would have been put out of power. So the situation the government is in is critical for these Hellraisers to come and intervene hence providing what they call protectorate or protection even if they did not agree.

Russia bombings 1999.

The country was in debt with a deficit of $5 billion in August 1999.

These Hellraisers took advantage of the situation and forced their services on the Russian government, killing people themselves knowing that people would turn against the Russian government. As this act is the one that will propel the leader to power.

In most cases, the leader himself doesn’t even know what is happening but believes another group of rebels is the one responsible. Taking advantage of the situation embarks on a war that he wins but at a cost.

From there these Hellraisers syphon money from this country to their country and provide this kind of protection where the leader and government are blamed for everything. Where the evidence points to the government for the killings of civilians with no other proof otherwise. The Hellraisers push people to keep the pressure. Then go on to kill all the people who accused this government and leader. They use poison on most of the people who accuse the government. Over time the government that suffered bombings. Their security services are accused of being the ones who killed the civilians. This makes them not look to who did this. This makes everyone turn against each other so that they start killing each other or resigning instead of grouping to find who exactly is behind this. Over years the accused’s government might even start killing people as long as they are in power.

USA 9/11 Bombings.

The same as the Russian bombings in that the government had a deficit. $2,3 trillion was missing. I think they have used oil imports which were depleting financial resources and wages. The solution was a war to them. Reduce the budget deficit by reducing the wage bill. Only wars can help in this area.

Ukraine 2014–2022

2014 Bombings.

In December 2013, Ukrainian Prime Minister Mykola Azarov noted “the extremely harsh conditions” of a renewed IMF loan presented by the Fund on 20 November of that year. In December 2013, Ukraine again applied to the IMF for about $20 billion to meet the costs associated with signing Ukraine–European Union Association Agreement. [23]

On 27 March 2014, the IMF announced that it would issue a $14–18 billion rescue package for Ukraine;[27] in return, the Fund demanded that Ukraine establish an anti-corruption bureau.

How do they do it?

This goes way back to decades ago when nations gave protection to others in return for control of other nations or rewards in terms of money or resources. These countries look for opportunities and offer their services to solve governments’ problems. Especially when they were seeking funds. These make the governments seeking the IMF or World Trade loans be able to meet the conditions of the loans. So that these governments would be able to repay the loans. That means they have vested interests in the loans.

Protectorate the invisible silence imposed on protection.

An example.

A protectorate is a state that is controlled and protected by another sovereign state. It is a dependent territory that has been granted local autonomy over most internal affairs while still recognizing the suzerainty of a more powerful sovereign state without being its direct possession.

] In exchange, the protectorate usually accepts specified obligations depending on the terms of their arrangement. [3] Usually protectorates are established de jure by a treaty. [1][2] Under certain conditions of Egypt under British rule (1882–1914) e.g., a state can also be labelled as a de facto protectorate or a “veiled protectorate”.

Treaty of Darin

The Treaty of Darin, or the Darin Pact, of 1915 was between Britain and Abdulaziz Al Saud (sometimes called Ibn Saud) ruler of the Emirate of Nejd and Hasa, who would go on to found the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in 1932.

The Treaty was signed at Darin, on the island of Tarut[1] on 26 December 1915 by Abdulaziz Abdulaziz Al Saud, ‘Ibn Saud [see also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_al-Khattab], and Sir Percy Cox [see also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Litvinenko] on behalf of the British.

The Treaty made the lands of the House of Saud a British protectorate and attempted to define its boundaries. [3][4] The British aim of the treaty was to guarantee the sovereignty of Kuwait, Qatar, and the Trucial States. [5] Abdulaziz agreed not to attack British protectorates but gave no undertaking that he would not attack the Sharif of Mecca[6]

Also, he agreed to enter World War I in the Middle East against the Ottoman Empire as an ally of Britain

Following the Treaty Abdulaziz acquired the following contributions from the British, including financial support: recognition as being the ruler of Najd and its dependencies under the British protection; in June 1916 a loan of £20,000 and a shipment of arms; in January 1917 a monthly stipend of £5,000 and from the end of World War I to March 1924 an annual stipend of £60,000. [7] The first article of the Treaty also acknowledged the rights of Abdulaziz’s sons to rule.

These people have sophisticated technology where they chip people, especially at birth. All life then spies on those people choosing which people they can use for their secret missions. It is not a coincidence that the people who will carry out their actions are religious. They take advantage of religion. They choose mainly Islamic jihads who strongly believe in God or Allah.

What they are doing is that they found a way to chip people at birth and then use the chip to record and replay a person’s voices. They use the delayed time-space continuum mechanism to record conversations etc and then use the voice to replay when a person is sleeping. They place the voice deep inside the person’s ear after reducing the volume to inner voice levels. When the person hears this voice while sleeping the brain somehow will turn the voice into dreams. That if the person wakes up he will think that he was dreaming. Whatever he heard he attribute this to a superpower.

Religious people will attribute these dreams to their God/Allah. Little do they know that it is very advanced technology behind all this. Which they use to deceive people so that they end up believing that the dreams are from a higher being.

The chip inserted at birth has GPS properties which they use to follow the people. This is why it is easy for these to carry out such attacks as they remove e.g. security for minutes and let these pass.

You will find most of the people who end up doing this are claimed to be known to authorities especially when people find out links to authorities etc.

Therefore they use sophisticated technology to deceive religious people who have dreams which they truly believe that the dreams are from Allah. But commands to attack. They then go to attack people or carry out terrorist attacks.

So it doesn’t matter who they use to carry out the actual bombings. They are the ones behind this.

You can look at who benefited from incidents like 9/11.

9/11 was a trigger for the rollback of the missing money from the people to the central government.

9/11 was to destroy all financial records as all financial institutions were in the World Trade Centre Towers especially tower Three. To set up the journey to the collapse of the financial markets in June 2008.

The World Trade Centre tower three was designed as a timeball. A time-telling tool used to tell the time in the 1800s.

Those who knew would use the cycloid technique to calculate when the financial markets would fall.

The third tower was designed to free-fall like the timeball this tower fell for 6.6 seconds. To be used with the cycloid to calculate exactly when the financial markets would fall.

Some countries benefited the most from the fall of the financial markets of which 9/11 was the trigger that destroyed all documents etc.

Orders by Tomorrow’s World Order’s President.

We order an end to the deaths of women and children with immediate effect.

We order the immediate end to the deaths of the soldiers who are dying. Every life matters.

We order an immediate end to the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.

We order the deployment of international peacekeeping troops from every country to Ukraine at least 10000 per country.

We order the international community to donate funds for rebuilding Ukraine and petition their debt to be written off.

We order the immediate initiation of unconditional peace talks.

We order the immediate withdrawal of troops from Ukraine.

We order immediate writing off of IMF and World Bank debt or at least the chunk.

We order clarification of the small print regarding conditions in which loans can be written off and this to be publicly available.

We order the funding of Ukraine for the rebuilding of Ukraine.

We order the banning of reforms to pensions and state employment from loan requirements as external invisible hands are taking advantage of this dragging nations into wars.

We order apportioning of blame for the death of civilians to the IMF and the World Bank.

We order the writing off of all debt issued during the conflict because of the situation in which Ukraine is in. Which will make it impossible for them to be able to repay the loans due to civilian and humanitarian needs.

We order the Russians to return the Ukrainian people they took.

We order continued dialogue now and forever.

Peace to Ukraine and Russia and the rest of the World.

We are Tomorrow’s World Order.

The new global leaders to put a platform to end all wars.

Peace to all mankind.

Signed

09 May 2022

David Gomadza

President Tomorrow’s World Order

tomorrowsworldorder@outlook.com

www.twocoming.com