The reason the european Rothschild's (non British) have not done as well is because they failed to invest in the US and were to an extent excluded. The British Rothschild's, that is N M Rothschild, were far more savvy, but, have supported the UK and US in opposition of Rockefeller globalist goals. If you look at the conflict in the early 20th century between Standard Oil and Noble Oil you will start to get an idea of what I mean, also the Rothschild's influence over the Russian oligarchs.

This is something I am still working on myself so I can't go into any clear detail as I'm still hunting out the information BUT in a sense you can consider Jacob Rothschild as the opposition to Rockefeller's goals, look at those in the US that he has cultivated - Warren Buffet and Arnie for starters...plus the Rothshild trust works on a system whereby the individual has to prove themselves, no automatic hereditary power...Jacob is a self-made man despite his familial wealth not necessarily because of it.

Also a name to add to your list;

Wallenberg (take a look I think you'll find it of interest)

All the best

I would like to know where you get your information from?

Who will carry out this "attack" ???

This scenario seems rather predictable and chiched post 9/11. something has to happen that will trigger a simultaneous international response re: martial law. and the legislative and military mechanisms need to be in place before anything global can occur.

If the USA suddenly clamps down on its citizens after 'the event' and starts locking people in fema camps etc, the rest of the world (think europe, eurasia, s.e. asia, africa, oceania) will look on in derision at the Guantanamo States of America. the wider world is no where near the point of swallowing such action...yet. a big event in the USA will not have much impact on the rest of the world, particularly places like russia, china and india who are not so concerned about the USAs domestic affairs. Americans so often have this habit of thinking their country constitutes the whole world.

It took Australia 3 years to react to New York's 9/11 tragedy. Autralia's anti-terrorism bills wern't enacted until the middle of 2004. and the Anti-Terrorism Act was only passed by paliament in 2005. One could argue these laws might not have been passed if the Bali and Jakarta bombings didn't occur.

consequently i think what we have seen in Bali, Jakarta, Madrid, London, Pakistan, India, Turkey, Chechnya, Beslan and other smaller acts of violence and terrorism all over the globe, is a more gradual approach to world martial and economic domination by this great beast. where does the centre of power lie anyway - washington, london or rome? or perhaps moscow, jerusalem, delhi, bejing? every third person has a different answer for different reasons. perhaps its all of the above.

i think the noose is tightening gradually all over the world, and i see it creeping more in economics and citizenship status laws, rather than blatant rehashings of major terrorist attacks and world war II nazi-style mass round-ups and detention.

9/11 has done its job. we are still living in its aftermath, and all terrorist attacks since and to come are just waves in the wake of 9/11 - they are all contributing to the global revolution toward a centralised power, not towards US martial law.