Please do your own research. The information I share is only a catalyst to expanding ones confined consciousness. I have NO desire for anyone to blindly believe or agree with what I share. Seek the truth for yourself and put your own puzzle together that has been presented to you. I'm not here to teach, preach or lead, but rather assist in awakening the consciousness of the collective from its temporary dormancy.
Americans who cherish our country’s legacy are horrified by our headlong rush to war. America at its best was the very motor of world progress, higher living standards and peace.
That is our true national identity. We betray “the better angels of our nature” by making military threats against those who are advancing world powers, as we once were. We commit suicide when we dishonor historic agreements that keep the world safe from nuclear annihilation.
When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the U.S. promised Russian leaders that the U.S.-led military alliance known as NATO would not be extended eastward toward Russia. The transatlantic Globalist war-making faction broke this promise. NATO has moved eastward with eight new members, heavily armed and hostile to Russia. The U.S. installed a far-right anti-Russian regime in Ukraine on Russia’s border, and armed them for conflict.
China has been similarly ringed by threatening U.S. fleets and military bases.
Russia and China have made it plain they find this intolerable, and cannot permit it to go further.
The world is hurtling toward the unimaginable horror of nuclear war.
We must look soberly and deeply into U.S. history to see how our nation changed from a force for peace into an aggressive provocateur.
We were industrialized by progressive patriots. They won out against Southern slave-owners and imperial financiers who blocked American progress. The U.S. at its best boosted other nations to technological prowess.
Abraham Lincoln and his allies organized the greatest advances ever made in technology and living standards, and a long era of peace with the world. Franklin Roosevelt and John Kennedy sought a partnership with Russia to bring peace and a humane existence to all mankind.
America changed course after Kennedy’s murder. We gave up our industries and lost our skills. We gave power to unaccountable Globalist financiers. Their speculation and deindustrialization have bankrupted the Western world. Other powers are now rising who won’t follow Globalist rules into poverty and national suicide.
The gravest danger now comes from America abandoning its own historic mission, which is to elevate the common man. Those who know history are especially challenged to act now, to speak out, so that we may protect the civilization that America at its best did so much to advance.
Over the past half century since Kennedy’s death, the United States, guided by a transatlantic war-making faction, has launched war after war, winning nothing and bringing chaos and suffering to countless millions.
Our greatest past leaders warned that waging aggressive war would destroy our country
George Washington led our Revolution against the British Empire’s invading armies. But as President, Washington sought peace with the world. He warned,
The nation which indulges towards another an habitual hatred … is a slave to its animosity … which … lead[s] it astray from its duty and its interest. [This hatred] disposes each [country] more readily to offer insult and injury … and to be haughty and intractable when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur … The government … makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of nations has been the victim.”Why Democracies in G7 and NATO Should Reject U.S. Leadership
(Washington, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796)
Abraham Lincoln as a congressman exposed the lies that President James Polk used to justify aggressive war against Mexico. (Lincoln’s “Spot Resolutions,” December 22, 1847). And just before he himself ran for President, Lincoln denounced war-makers as barbarians:
From the first appearance of man upon the earth … the words “stranger” and “enemy” were … almost synonymous. Long after civilized nations had defined robbery and murder as high crimes, and had affixed severe punishments to them, when practiced … upon their own people … it was deemed no offence, but even meritorious, to rob, and murder, and enslave strangers, whether as nations or as individuals … To correct the evils … which spring from want of sympathy … among strangers … is one of the highest functions of civilization.
(Lincoln, speech to Wisconsin Agricultural Fair, September 30, 1859).
As President, leading the defense of the Union against the slave-owners’ attack, Lincoln urged peace with the world:
With malice toward none; with charity for all … let us … do all which may achieve and cherish a just, and a lasting peace, among ourselves, and with all nations.
(Lincoln, Second Inaugural Address, March 4, 1865)
President Franklin Roosevelt organized the United Nations and proposed that world peace and poverty-fighting must be centered on continuing the anti-fascist partnership of the U.S., Russia, Britain and China.
The UN Charter begins,
We the peoples of the United Nations, determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war…
This is the bedrock of real human rights, not a phony cover-up for regime-change.
President John Kennedy pulled the USA and Russia away from nuclear catastrophe by a deal that removed U.S. missiles from Turkey in exchange for Russian missiles taken out of Cuba.
Kennedy asked Americans to
re-examine our attitude toward the Soviet Union… the American people [should] not … fall into the same trap as the Soviets, … to see only a distorted and desperate view of the other side, … [with] communication as nothing more than an exchange of threats.
No government or social system is so evil that its people must be considered as lacking in virtue. As Americans, we find communism profoundly repugnant as a negation of personal freedom and dignity. But we can still hail the Russian people for their many achievements—in science and space, in economic and industrial growth, in culture and in acts of courage….
[Our] two countries have … [a] mutual abhorrence of war…. [W]e have never been at war with each other. And no nation … ever suffered more than the Soviet Union suffered in … the Second World War. At least 20 million lost their lives…. A third of the nation’s territory, including nearly two thirds of its industrial base, was turned into a wasteland…
Today, should total war ever break out again … all we have built, all we have worked for, would be destroyed in the first 24 hours…. We must conduct our affairs in such a way that it becomes in the Communists’ interest to agree on a genuine peace….
(Kennedy, Commencement Address at Washington University, June 10, 1963)
A pioneering international treaty partially banning nuclear weapons was soon thereafter signed by the U.S., U.S.S.R., and 100 nations.
President Kennedy fired top officials (Allen Dulles, CIA, and Gen. Lyman Lemnitzer, Pentagon) who treacherously sabotaged U.S. peace policy. As he was working to prevent full-scale war in Vietnam, and seeking diplomatic ties with Cuba’s Fidel Castro, Kennedy was murdered.
Martin Luther King risked increased government oppression and even the condemnation of his civil rights allies when he took upon himself leadership of the movement against the Vietnam War.
King’s 1967 New York speech reaches out to us today and calls us to action.
I speak as one who loves America, to the leaders of our own nation: The great initiative in this war is ours; the initiative to stop it must be ours…
Each day the war goes on the hatred increases in the heart of the Vietnamese and in the hearts of those of humanitarian instinct. The Americans are forcing even their friends into becoming their enemies… they are incurring deep psychological and political defeat. The image of America will never again be the image of revolution, freedom, and democracy, but the image of violence and militarism…
The war in Vietnam is but a symptom of a far deeper malady within the American spirit, and if we ignore this sobering reality…, we will find ourselves organizing [anti-war] committees for the next generation… [We will have war] without end, unless there is a significant and profound change in American life and policy…
[The] words of the late John F. Kennedy come back to haunt us. Five years ago he said, “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable” …
[The] Western nations that initiated so much of the revolutionary spirit of the modern world have now become the arch antirevolutionaries….
[We] call for a worldwide fellowship that lifts neighborly concern beyond one’s tribe, race, class, and nation … an all-embracing and unconditional love for all mankind…
We still have a choice today: nonviolent coexistence or violent co-annihilation…
A time comes when silence is betrayal…
(Martin Luther King, Speech at Riverside Church, April 4, 1967)
Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt, Kennedy and King, who inspired America and the world, urge us not to remain silent when humanity’s existence is threatened.
A simulation took place on December 9th 2021 in Israel. It was about a major cyber security attack on global financial systems. The simulation took place with 9 other countries, the World Bank, as well as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the Finance Ministry in Jerusalem.
The exercise simulated several scenarios, including sensitive data surfacing on the dark web alongside fake news [i.e. censoring the truth after labelling it “fake news“], leading to global financial chaos.
Just two months before China reported a mysterious pneumonia outbreak in the city of Wuhan, which marked the beginning of COVID-19, government officials and business leaders met in New York to simulate a novel coronavirus emergence in Brazil that killed 65 million within 18 months. The event was called ‘Event 201’ and was put on by Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, along with the World Economic Forum and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
According to the Israeli government, cyber security threats are possible especially in the wake of multiple large cyber attacks on large companies and the only way to contain any damage is through global cooperation.
The National Cyber Directorate in Israel issued a warning to Israeli businesses regarding potential cyber attacks last October. On average, one in every 60 Israeli organizations is targeted every week with ransomware attacks. This is an increase of 30 percent over the rate in 2020. The rate happens to be increasing all over the planet.
Coincidences? Nah, False Flags!
Event 201 and the ‘war game exercise’ involving a new variant of COVID were held right before these events actually occurred. Event 201 led many people to believe that the COVID outbreak was a planned event by the powers that shouldn’t be. Mainstream media outlets and “fact-checkers” claimed this was false news and a “conspiracy theory.”
Sure, there is no way to determine whether or not COVID was a planned event used as a tool for ulterior motives, but any discussion that this could be a possibility was not had within the mainstream dialogue.
Despite being labelled as a conspiracy, many academics early on in the pandemic were sharing these feelings. For example, Francis Boyle, a law professor who drafted the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act, shared his thoughts about this early on.
Whether or not these major global events are planned, there’s two common themes they all share: profit and control. Big corporations seem to profit exponentially while wealth is stripped from the masses.
The world’s richest 10 percent own approximately 90 percent of the world’s wealth, and the rich have become richer during the pandemic.
Governments themselves seem to capitalize tremendously off of global crises as well, gaining more power and control over the citizenry. We saw this with 9/11 and a following increase in the surveillance state.
Are we seeing the same thing with COVID? Our rights and freedoms have been extremely restricted during the event, with precedents set that can be called upon any time in the future.
“As authoritarianism spreads, as emergency laws proliferate, as we sacrifice our rights, we also sacrifice our capability to arrest the slide into a less liberal and less free world. Do you truly believe that when the first wave, this second wave, the 16th wave of the coronavirus is a long forgotten memory, that these capabilities will not be kept?” – NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. VICE.
All of the measures taken to combat crises’ like 9/11 and COVID have caused a tremendous amount of harm. Take lockdowns for example, the science and evidence explaining how lockdowns have caused more harm than COVID itself has been completely unacknowledged. There are well over 400 studies on the failure of compulsory COVID interventions, but the studies showing success are the only ones acknowledged within the mainstream.
How can the public know what to support if information is not given to them openly and honestly in a transparent manner?
We are living in an age where any evidence or opinion that is critical of measures that governments take is subjected to censorship and ridicule.
Why have we given governments the power to control the citizenry under the guise of goodwill in “emergency” situations? Are we going to see the same thing in the future with major cyber security attacks on global financial systems?
Mismanagement of the COVID-19 crisis has initiated a socioeconomic chain reaction that has only begun to play out. Nevertheless, this story has a silver lining: the chance to make the world a better place.
But it has to start with an honest assessment of how we got here, and point to a positive course of action…
Imagine ten years ago if someone described to you what the world would look like as we entered the 2020’s. Would you have believed them?
Interesting times eh? It’s about to get a lot more interesting.
History will remember this decade as a critical turning point. The end of an era.
2020 was the year that ideas like this went mainstream. Headlines that used to be relegated to the lunatic fringe were now being promoted by the corporate media.
Then of course we had the COVID-19 debacle. Though the ‘authorities’ would blame the disease itself, it was their ill-conceived response that actually served as the catalyst.
Their short sighted policies initiated a chain reaction. Some consequences of this chain reaction are inevitable (like a bullet that has left the barrel of a gun). Others hang in the balance. There will not, however, be any going back to normal.
This story has a silver lining; a chance to make the world a better place. But it has to start with an honest assessment of how we got here, and point to a positive course of action.
In the winter of 2020 as COVID-19 went exponential a panic was spreading even faster.
Those who hatched this plan had made no provision for a pandemic that would linger on for months or years. They didn’t even account for the socioeconomic chain reaction that the first round of lock downs would set in motion.
By the summer of 2020 flash points of violence and social unrest were flaring up in cities around the world. Pent up frustrations were building, for obvious reasons. Billions of people had just spent months locked in their houses.
Most stress relieving activities had been banned: social gatherings, sports, time with friends at restaurants or bars… even places of worship were restricted. This was a powder keg waiting for a match.
Politicians obviously saw the danger in this equation. When millions of people are suddenly left hungry and homeless that’s a recipe for revolution. Something had to be done, and quickly. So they did something. Boy did they do something.
When all you have is a hammer every problem looks like a nail, and the governments around the world were looking at a very, very large nail. The fiscal stimulus programs of 2020 were epic; absolutely off the charts. By June over 18 trillion had been disbursed globally.
Then there were the forgivable loans – via the paycheck protection program and similar schemes around the world – which were supposed to help prop up small businesses. Some of these loans ended up being extended to some rather strange small businesses.
If you’ve never heard of Quantitative Easing (or QE) you might want to look that up. The short version is that when central banks purchase assets new money is created.
The money that is transferred to the asset holders account is literally typed into existence. These asset holders typically reinvest this new money, causing asset prices (including the stocks) to rise. Poor people don’t typically own these kinds of assets so it’s basically welfare for the rich.
And while it’s wonderful that we can provide a such a nice safety net for the upper crust of society it does have one little side effect: inflating markets with liquidity creates asset bubbles. It’s like filling up a water balloon more and more… till its so big you can see through it. Sooner or later it always pops.
The first round of QE started in 2009 after the housing bubble collapsed. Cutting interest rates to zero just wasn’t enough. 2020 brought us round four (affectionately referred to by some as QE Infinity).
In this round the Fed would take their liquidity experiment to a whole new level; buying financial assets never touched during QE1, 2, or 3 including corporate debt and etfs.
In one month they purchased more assets than they had during the entire first year following the 2009 crisis.
With unemployment numbers still hovering at great depression levels and hopes of a quick, V-shaped recovery evaporating, all eyes were on governments and central banks. The question was not if there would be more stimulus and money printing, the real question was how big it would be this time.
Would it be enough? No one seemed to be asking what would happen if they went too far.
Our fearless leaders had painted themselves into a corner at this point. If unemployment benefits, mortgage forbearance and eviction moratoriums weren’t extended, those in power would soon be facing millions of homeless, hungry and angry people.
With violence and unrest already smoldering in many major cities, this would be like throwing gasoline on a fire. Extending these protections however, would not be without a price.
Eviction moratoriums and mortgage forbearance programs had temporarily prevented millions from being suddenly made homeless. But with no rent coming in, landlords would soon be defaulting on mortgages en masse, as would many homeowners and businesses.
By imposing sanctions on any individual, company or bank which did business with Chinese officials enforcing the new security law, this legislation set the stage for Washington to cut China’s access to the dollar; a move which would ultimately divide the world into Yuan and Dollar based currency blocs.
Spoiler alert: it doesn’t end well for Uncle Sam.
These economic provocations were accompanied by multiple rounds of good old fashion saber rattling.
It’s worth noting that by this time these islands were fully militarized and operational; complete with ports, runways and other facilities that gave the Chinese a clear strategic advantage.
At this stage the rest of the world was beginning to suspect that Uncle Sam was experiencing some form of cognitive decline. He wasn’t playing four dimensional chess here. He didn’t even seem to be playing with a full deck.
This was like a drunk guy poking a tiger with a stick (probably not going to end well).
The provocations would continue on multiple fronts: embassies ordered to close, Chinese companies sanctioned or banned from operating in the U.S. Anything and everything connected to China was open game.
China condemned each of these provocations but they didn’t take the bait. Their response would come when was in their strategic interests. They would choose their own timing. If direct conflict could be averted long enough, the U.S. was likely to collapse on its own. The war could be won without firing a shot.
The high probability of war when an emerging power threatens the dominance of an international hegemon.
Meanwhile back in the U.S. of A. the violence and mayhem in the streets was intensifying. Businesses, government buildings and vehicles had been burning virtually every night for months on end. Protesters and counter protesters were now bringing semiautomatic weapons to the scene.
By September there were multiple fatalities on each side.
Perception of these events was increasingly polarized. The left and the right were no long behaving like political factions of a nation. They had devolved into hostile tribes fighting for control of a territory.
A radicalized strain of thought that directly endorsed violence as a political tool was metastasizing among a new generation of activists. A growing contingent had convinced themselves that they could win in an armed conflict. This was a serious miscalculation.
(If you try to outgun the police and the military you’re going to have a bad time).
Here humanity approached a crossroad. Probabilities were coalescing as the crisis progressed.
Those who saw the stakes would feel an urgency. With every moment of inaction the likelihood of a tragic ending increased. Something had to be done.
What could an ordinary individual do to improve the outcome? Could the trajectory of history really be altered?
Some questions are best answered with a riddle.
Rather than predicting what comes next, let’s tell a story. This story has multiple endings and you get to choose.
It’s been said that every nation is three meals away from a revolution.
Never before had this principle been tested in so many countries simultaneously as it was in the 2020’s.
At first many held onto the hope that everything would soon go back to normal, but as the long term realities of the decade set in, more and more people would come to the same startling conclusion: the ‘authorities’ were out of their depth.
There was no exit strategy. The situation was not ‘under control’…
In the early stages of the crisis, when the first few governments were collapsing, very few realized how the conflux of economic, geopolitical and social variables were coalescing in a perfect storm.
But when G20 nations started dropping like flies the phenomenon it became impossible to ignore. Like dominoes falling, the collapse of one major economy destabilized every country connected to it. In the age of globalization very few would be spared.
What began as a trickle suddenly accelerated as the downfall of the U.S. dollar precipitated an unprecedented shock to global supply chains.
Imports ground to a halt all around the world. In countries dependent on outsourced food production and manufacturing this translated into widespread shortages and social unrest. In this environment extremist movements of all stripes flourished.
A small handful of nations would weather this storm peacefully. Rather than tearing themselves apart from within or transforming into totalitarian dictatorships, they would unify and adapt.
As economic and monetary shocks disrupted global supply chains and trade, these countries would quickly reorganize their economies to replace imports with local production – starting with food and essentials. Reducing dependence on fossil fuels was an important element of this transition.
To accomplish this feat every aspect of modern life was re-imagined.
Lawns were replaced by gardens; golf courses converted to orchards. Waste streams were recuperated to minimize losses. It wasn’t easy, but these countries pulled through, and before the decade was over, they were building regional trade networks that hadn’t existed before the crisis.
A lot of wealthy countries didn’t do so well in the second phase of the crisis; the part where real hardship kicked in. Populations accustomed to easy living and constant entertainment had a very short fuse.
As shortages and rationing became the new normal and homeless encampments grew, protests would morph into riots, armed uprisings and civil wars.
Governments that were ill prepared for these challenges crumbled quickly; some into the hands of populist movements, others to military juntas. In most cases the replacement was more brutal and repressive that the old system.
The underlying paradigm was rarely questioned at all.
Many regimes would extend their lifespan by totalitarian means. Emergency powers established under lockdown would prove invaluable here.
Policies previously justified by public health would now be implemented in the name of national security; control mechanisms adapted and repurposed to crack down on dissidents.
It was every petty dictator’s wet dream: granular control over every aspect of human behavior and interaction. No one allowed to gather in public without permission. Every contact tracked and traced. If you’re outside you better be prepared to show your papers.
This approach was most effective when the latent fears and hatreds of the population could be rallied against an enemy.
Convince a people that they are under attack and it’s easy to unify them under a flag.
Rather than rioting in the streets, impoverished youth can be conscripted into the military.
Their identities shattered and remolded; conditioned to obey; trained to kill on command.
Send them abroad to steal land and resources.
Use them at home to crush dissent.
War is – after all – the health of the state.
Regardless of which axis prevailed in these conflicts the result would be the same.
A new totalitarian order was the universal prescription; the only cure for the chaos.
The world’s first truly global currency would replace the dollar. This currency would be completely digital; coins and bank notes phased out. Every single transaction conducted using this currency would be recorded on a block blockchain.
Unlike the original cryptocurrencies this blockchain was controlled by a central authority and monitored with AI. Economic privacy a thing of the past.
It was the holy grail of ruling elite, the precursor for global governance with teeth, but before they even had time to properly congratulate themselves, their house of cards was already catching wind.
As living conditions deteriorate, and fear and uncertainty prevail, certain psychological forces are always unleashed. These forces are like the incoming waves of a tsunami.
Once they gather momentum there can be no stopping them.
Throughout history there have been individuals and movements who rode these waves; channeling the tides of human sentiment towards a course of action. Though the science of crowd psychology is complex and nuanced, the application of its principles is mind bogglingly simple.
So simple in fact, that intellectuals typically recoil from them, while bonafide idiots wield them easily (and to great effect).
Like riding a tsunami on a surfboard, attempting to redirect the momentum of a society is highly dangerous.
The crowd can lift a leader to great heights, but one mistake can leave them hanging from a lamp post. Those who manage to navigate these forces usually guard the formula carefully. Failure to do so would threaten the foundations of their power.
This time around however, humanity flipped the script.
In the age of the internet the science of crowd psychology and color revolutions had been available to the public for some time now, but very few saw the utility in studying it.
However as the 2020’s progressed, and it became more and it became more clear that that those in power were pushing civilization toward a dystopian nightmare, a contingent of activists would reverse engineer the tools being used against them.
The work of Gustave Le Bon and Edward Bernays would be modernized and tempered with a cultural code:
the positive application of human instinct.
The instinctual psychology of species can be harnessed for good or for evil. In the modern era it has been weaponized by the military industrial complex for regime change, and by corporations for marketing and public relations.
The same principles however can applied to create rather than destroy. Visions and values can spread like viruses from mind to mind, and from place to place.
The contagion of a single idea can inspire generations towards a new paradigm.
To topple a government is surprisingly easy when conditions are right. Silver spoon politicians who’ve never served or worked a day in their life can easily lose the respect and obedience of military and law enforcement. When that happens, it’s game over.
The question that always comes up in such events (usually as an afterthought) is what will you replace the old system with?
There is nothing more dangerous than armed men with utopian dreams. Sometimes the cure can be worse than the disease.
History provides many cautionary tales. To avoid the trap of oppressed rising up to become the oppressor the paradigm that facilitates this dynamic has to be questioned.
The vast majority of modern governments, businesses and organizations utilize a social structure called vertical collectivism. Vertical collectivism is top down system of organizing human groups which amplifies power by stacking layers of authority in pyramids.
The result is a highly stratified society where those on the bottom have little or no say, and are left to fight over scraps from above.
Vertical collectivism is apolitical. Capitalists companies and Communist regimes both use it without contradiction, as do republics that call themselves democracies.
The vertical model was born of military strategy. A general or warlord alone can only control a small army, but by using subordinate officers in layers of rank, a single individual, or a small ruling class can dominate millions of people and vast territories.
This is why a state is often defined as the monopoly on violence within a region.
Vertical collectivism didn’t spread to every corner of the globe because it improved peoples lives.
Vertical collectivism spread like a cancer because it is brutally effective in the in the context of war.
Every culture that it encountered was either crushed on the battlefield or forced to copy the model to survive. The dawn of civilization – as many euphemistically refer to it – is a story of conquest and colonialization that began approximately 10,000 years ago and continues to this day.
This was not however, the beginning of the human story.
For over 300,000 years – long before the first empires of Asia and Europe began to absorb surrounding tribes – humans organized themselves using a very different model.
Rather than building top down, stratified societies that concentrated wealth and power in the hands of an upper class, these cultures organized horizontally.
Organizing horizontally didn’t mean that there were no leaders.
The authority and instincts are far older than humanity.
Like all social animals, our species is hardwired to follow those who demonstrate courage and intelligence.
However in horizontal societies disparities of wealth and power were significantly smaller.
The leaders and councils responsible for group decisions were not insulated by armies and law enforcement conditioned to obey without question.
Defense and order were maintained by an armed citizenry, bound by a code of conduct. This dynamic forced leaders to be directly accountable to the population.
Their power was rooted in their ability to communicate with the people, build consensus and chart a course of action to the benefit of all.
The fact that horizontal societies required leaders to work with the public in such a personal way had one obvious disadvantage: it limited the size of the group. After all, why would someone voluntarily follow someone far away that they never met?
There is however, a way around this limitation. By forming federations horizontal societies can expand their sphere influence significantly.
An example of this adaptation can be found in the Iroquois confederacy which unified 5 tribes for hundreds of years in the region that came to be called New York.
Each member tribe in the confederacy had their own culture and and internal governance, but a set of shared values enabled them to cooperate economically and militarily. If one tribe was attacked they quickly mounted a common defense.
Many historians believe that United States federal system was based on the Iroquois model. One significant difference however, was that the Iroquois had no central government. There was a central council comprised of representatives from each tribe, but this council had no power to enforce its will.
Each representative was tasked with building a consensus that would resonate with their people.
A modernized adaptation of this Iroquois model gained traction in the mid 2020s as the gears of globalization ground to a halt. While governments proved incapable of solving the most basic problems, decentralized networks were replacing the system from the ground up.
They would start by organizing local food production in their communities and gradually expand cooperation to other sectors.
Their revolution was driven by an idea worth spreading. Not only was it possible to live on this planet without destroying it, this way of life was more abundant and fulfilling than the alternative. There was no need to wait for governments to act. Humans are perfectly capable of organizing themselves.
Those that succeeded became epicenters of a new renaissance; attracting skilled workers and artists from all around the world.
Some of these travelers would put down permanent roots.
Others would return to their homeland to plant seeds of their own.
From the fragments of fallen empires new nations would be born.
From the ashes of dying cultures new cultures would rise.
The great collapse of the 2020’s was not the end of the world.
It was the end of an era, and the dawn of a new one…
Time To Flip The Script
Remember how we said this story has multiple endings?
We’re going take one of them to a literal extreme; and we’re going to do it in the real world.
Now if you’re living in a crowded city center, maybe pushing the boundaries starts by planting a garden in your front yard, organizing a community compost, or speaking out against a war.
However it’s important to understand that in the era we have entered the stakes are rising, and the trajectory we’re on needs to be altered significantly.
This implies fundamental changes in the way we livRemember how we said this story has multiple endings? We’re going take one of them to a literal extreme; and we’re going to do it in the real world.
(Those who piece together the clues, get through the filters, and pass quarantine will at some point find themselves standing here. GPS COORDINATES FLASH)
Now if you’re living in a crowded city center, maybe pushing the boundaries starts by planting a garden in your front yard, organizing a community compost, or speaking out against a war.
However it’s important to understand that in the era we have entered the stakes are rising, and the trajectory we’re on needs to be altered significantly. This implies fundamental changes in the way we live, not just gestures in right direction.
You have to decide what kind of story you and your family want to be a part of. In some cases this might involve immigrating to another country. Others will be more inclined to stay, and fight to change the outcome at home. One way or the other you’ll want to be in a place where you can grow food, and you’ll want to be set up to do this without agrochemical inputs or fossil fuels.
You also don’t want to be reliant on the grid. Utilities can and will go down. Some will be shocked by how long they can stay down.
These aren’t the kind of lifestyle changes you want to make at the last moment, or put off until you can do something large scale. Far better to start transitioning to a new way of life right now. Do what you can with what you have. Join forces with others to amplify.
The learning curve for this kind of transition can be steep. There are a lot of practical skills that we should be taught in school but aren’t. Most kids when they graduate… don’t know how to build a house, or grow a garden, or even how to make bread.
The best way to learn this stuff isn’t really in a classroom anyway. People learn best by example, anchored with hands on experience.
That’s why we built this place. You could think of it as an experiential learning center / maker space. This whole landscape is a laboratory.
Here we can put ideas to an extreme test.
Rather that just reading about this stuff or watching a presentation, volunteers and travelers from all over the world come here to do it themselves. They get their hands dirty in the field: planting plants, working with animals, building crazy structures like these.
They also get to experience first hand what it takes to self organize and live in a different way.
The experience is extreme, because the challenges we face are real. We’re completely off-grid here. Our electricity comes from the sun. We have running water by pumping from the spring up to a tank on the hill.
It’s also up to us to us to maintain the road and drainage. Up here when there’s a problem we have to put our heads together and find a way to solve it.
To put this in perspective, our first long term volunteer was here when we sustained a direct hit from hurricane Maria. He also assisted in the recovery and became part of the story.
Talk is cheap. If you really want to change the world you have to be able to show people how.
We’re doing this here in the Commonwealth of Dominica cause these people are moving in the right direction, and their culture holds some of the keys to the solution.
But where ever you decide to make your stand now is the time to get serious about food security.
Our challenge in the next phase is to grow more and develop local production systems to replace imports.
Don’t throw those face-diapers away just yet, boys and girls. The Sons of Covid “variant”count has just reached the 15th letter of the 24-letter Greek alphabet. Like a script for a cheesy Hollyweird film, “Omicron” has escaped from Africa. You see, when you’re writing fictitious fecal matter, you can make Son of Covid — and even Grandson of Covid — appear wherever and whenever you need him to.
From the article:
“Omicron, a new variant first detected in Botswana, sent Europe into high alert on Saturday after cases were detected in the United Kingdom, Germany and Italy. Omicron cases were already detected in Belgium on Friday. The Czech Republic, Austria, Israel and the Netherlands were all investigating suspected cases of the variant.“
Oooh. So scary! Of course, from a health standpoint, regular readers of The Anti-New York Times do not need to be told that there is nothing to worry about because the original Stupid-19 (itself a “variant” of a previous coronavirus) doesn’t actually exist. But we’re also confident in reassuring folks that even in terms of the geo-political, there is nothing to worry about either. After nearly two years, even many normies are losing their fear. The Stupid-19 / Great Reset plot is gradually turning into the Great Yawn and Great Backlash as patriots assume control.
Nonetheless, this article makes for some good comic rebuttal. Hazmat suits and hip waders on, boys and girls. Into Sulzberger’s Cesspool we go for some “debunking” clean-up work.
Slimes: There is still relatively little known about Omicron. Rebuttal: Then why are certain government and “the paper of record” freaking out over it?
Slimes: It has mutations that scientists fear could make it more infectious and less susceptible to vaccines. Rebuttal: Has that “fear” actually been established scientifically?
Slimes: — though neither of these effects is yet to be established. Rebuttal: (Palm to face, shaking my head, sighing) — No comment necessary.
Slimes: Most confirmed cases of the variant are contained to southern African countries … Rebuttal: If there are no “confirmed cases” of the original (purified, isolated) — then how the bloody heck were “variants” ™ of the fake original ever “confirmed?”
Slimes: … but there are worries the virus could have spread more widely before scientists there discovered it. Rebuttal: There are “worries” over a non-existent “variant” — of which “relatively little is known” — of a non-existent original??? Say what kind of “scientists” are these?
Slimes: “There’s been a window of probably about two weeks conservatively that this virus has been spreading,” said Andrew Pekosz … Rebuttal: Pekosz, eh? A “Polish” scientist.
Slimes: … an epidemiologist from Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Rebuttal: Johns Hopkins! Of course — a wholly-owned whore house of NWO “sub-capos” Mike Bloomberg & Bill Gates. —- Boom …. and boom!
Professor Pekosz (left) works for Globalist billionaires Gates & Bloomberg (both of whom have been strangely quiet and unseen lately)
Slimes: It is likely the variant is already in New York, Pekosz said. “There certainly is a chance that it has already spread globally, but we just don’t know yet,” Mr. Pekosz added. Rebuttal: “We just don’t know.” —– but be afraid anyway.
Slimes: Britain will require travelers from abroad to get a PCR test within 48 hours of their arrival and require contacts of those who test positive with a suspected case of Omicron to self-isolate for 10 days, regardless of vaccination status. Rebuttal: The PCR “test” — and this is according to its Nobel-prize-winning inventor, Kary Mullis — was never intended to be a diagnostic tool. Conveniently for the Globalists, the outspoken Mullis died of “pneumonia” a few months before Stupid-19 was launched. The scamsters rely upon the deliberate misuse of his invention to yield false positives.
Slimes: Philip A. Chan, an infectious disease doctor at Brown University cautioned that without a robust global vaccination effort, “we are half-treating the pandemic” and leaving the world open to new and more transmittable variants. Rebuttal: A “robust global vaccination effort,” eh? Ah, show us the shekels, Dr. Chan. Show us the shekels.
****END OF REBUTTALS****
Quite appropriately, as an astute reader just pointed out to us, OMICRON is an anagram for MORONIC. And indeed, even by the standards of many dumb-as-dirt normies, one would have to be an abject moron to keep falling for this manifest idiocy.
Keep right on pushing your endless “booster shots” Deep Staters. For with every new Greek letter “variant”, a new handful of jabbed and re-jabbed normies begin to slowly — and I do mean “slowly” — awaken. There can be no “storm” without the impassioned masses of Normiedom awakened, or at least neutralized — and that takes time.
Downstream effects of the antibodies that people produce against the corona-virus spike protein may lead to myocarditis and even neurological concerns, two veteran medical researchers have written in the top medical journal in the United States.
Our immune systems produce these antibodies in response to both vaccination and natural infection with Covid. However – though the researchers do not say so explicitly, possibly because doing so would be politically untenable – spike protein antibody levels are MUCH higher following vaccination than infection. Thus the downstream response to vaccination may be more severe.
The NEJM published the short paper Wednesday in its Basic Implications of Clinical Observations series. One of the writers is an oncologist and professor at Harvard Medical School; the other is a cancer researcher who has his own lab at the University of California, Davis.
Secret societies, the unseen hands that steer national and international affairs from the shadows, go back to the dawn of Western civilisation. The individual most famously linked to these occult forces is Adam Weishaupt (1748-1830), a Jesuit trained philosopher and lay professor of canon law at the University of Ingolstadt in southern Germany.
Some investigators suggest that rather than being wound up in 1785, the Illuminati (‘enlightened ones’) continued in existence to the present day. For the past 200 years controversy persisted over its role in influencing global affairs.
In 1798 John Robison, professor of philosophy at the University of Edinburgh, published Proofs of Conspiracy, a book alleging an Illuminati/Freemasonry plot to conspire against all religions, kings and governments of Europe.1
According to Robison, the Illuminati had been instrumental in fomenting the worst excesses of the French Revolution. That same year the Jesuit Abbé Augustin de Barruel published Memoires pour Servir a l’Histoire de Jacobinisme which supported Robison’s thesis.2
A century and a half later, Nesta Webster and William Guy Carr revived conspiracy theories about the Illuminati.
Nesta Webster (1876-1960), who was linked to the British Union of Fascists, wrote that rather than being banished, the Illuminati remained active and within a few years had “multiplied its hotbeds all through the south of Germany, and as a consequence in Saxony, in Prussia, in Sweden, and even in Russia.”3
William Guy Carr, an English born Canadian naval officer and lay Christian preacher, supported this thesis, maintaining that Weishaupt had been retained by moneylenders, including the House of Rothschild. Carr claimed there was an evil force at the forefront of an international conspiracy to destroy religious institutions and national governments in order to bring about a “Satanic One World Government.”4
According to Carr, the conspirators use a variety of methods to help them accomplish their aims, including:
1) Monetary and sex bribes to obtain control of individuals already occupying important positions. Such recruits are then held in bondage through blackmail, threats of financial ruin, public exposure or physical harm or death of their loved ones.
2) Illuminati in colleges and universities recruit students possessing exceptional mental ability.
3) Individuals trapped into Illuminati control are placed behind the scenes of all governments as ‘experts’ and ‘specialists’ who advise adoption of policies which serve the secret plans for one world government.
4) Control of the press and all other agencies which distribute information to the public.5
However, Illuminati researcher Dr. Tony Page says that Webster and Carr totally misrepresented the situation and were anti-Semites indulging in madcap conspiracy theory.
Page translated Weishaupt documents from the original German and presents him as a much maligned moral and virtuous man whose intentions were “assuredly high minded and benign.” A man who “strove for far nobler and morally exalted goals than are properly ascribed to him.
In fact, his intention (naive perhaps) but in my view, sincere, was to promote and disseminate human virtue, equality and freedom, and the happiness and dignity that flow from them.”6
Today, some see the Illuminati “as a major factor and influence in international power politics, allegedly fomenting wars, civil disorder and revolutions in their attempt to establish a one-world government.”7 It appears the jury is still out on whether the Illuminati is an ongoing occult force.
What we can say is that in our own intensive research over the past 10 years on the true origins of the First World War, we found no direct connection whatsoever to Weishaupt’s creation.
The secret society that we identify as responsible for the war employed similar tactics, but was a very different, very English creation. Furthermore, it remained concealed until exposed by the late Professor Carroll Quigley in the latter half of the 20th century.
Quigley (1910-1977) was a highly esteemed American historian who moved in Establishment circles, lectured at top universities, including Harvard, Princeton and Georgetown, and was a trusted consultant to both the US Department of Defense and US Navy.
He studied this secret network for 20 years and was permitted to examine its records. In 21st century parlance, Carroll Quigley was the whistle-blower par-excellence.
THE QUIGLEY ENIGMA
Professor Quigley wrote that the Rhodes secret society, or the ‘Milner Group’ as he called it after Cecil Rhodes’s death, was “one of the most important historical facts of the twentieth century” and of such significance that “evidence of its existence is not hard to find, if one knows where to look.”8
The ‘Milner Group’ exposed by Quigley is now widely recognised and variably named by others as the ‘Hidden Power’, the ‘Money Power’, the ‘Deep State’, or ‘the men behind the curtain’. All these labels are pertinent, but we call them, collectively, the Secret Elite.
Without Quigley’s revelations, the lid on this secret society would still be closed today. By opening Pandora’s Box and revealing some of the evils therein, he enabled others to see the truth.
His work exposing this powerful group has been enhanced and developed through years of careful research by other investigators into an explanation of how control of the civilised world has steadily been acquired through wars, economic manipulation and political chicanery by generations of privilege and money.
We garnered solid evidence that its members were directly responsible for taking the world to war in 1914 and deliberately prolonged the terrible carnage for over four long years while making massive fortunes from it.
The immensely rich and powerful Secret Elite controlled the British and US governments from behind the scenes, then as now, and much of the global mayhem over the last century arose at their instigation.
While Professor Quigley did mankind a great service, he remains an enigma. He exposed this ruthless, anti-democratic, totalitarian organisation and anguished over their determined attempts to suppress his writings, yet back-tracked on some of his original findings as if in fear of his life.
He also side-stepped a number of key issues and failed to discuss the Secret Elite’s role in the genesis of the 1914-18 war, or their audacious coup d’etat in 1916 whereby they literally took over the British government.
Rather bizarrely, Quigley stated that he agreed with their goals and aims.9 He did, however, disagree with their methods.
Their tendency to place power and influence into hands chosen by friendship rather than merit, their oblivion to the consequences of their actions, their ignorance of the point of view of persons in other countries or of persons in other classes in their own country – these things, it seems to me, have brought many of the things which they and I hold dear close to disaster.
In this Group were persons… who must command the admiration and affection of all who knew them. On the other hand, in this Group were persons whose lives have been a disaster to our way of life.
Unfortunately, in the long run, both in the Group and in the world, the influence of the latter kind has been stronger than the influence of the former.… I feel that the truth has a right to be told, and, once told, can be an injury to no men of good will.10
There is something deeply puzzling about Quigley’s assertion that while their methods brought much of what he held dear “close to disaster,” he agreed with their goals and aims for global control. These powerful men intended to replace democratically elected governments, arguing that their rule would be the rule of the best, whether or not the people wanted it.
A few researchers raise the possibility that Quigley was at some stage an actual member of the secret society, but failed to admit it. We believe it far more likely his strange statements of support were down to self-preservation.
In his major works – Tragedy and Hope and The Anglo-American Establishment – he narrated a history peopled by men who successfully concealed their power and influence, their connivance and common purpose. These individuals (and their descendants and agents ever since) conspired in secret towards the establishment of a world government that ultimately they, and they alone, would control.
It is worth noting that Quigley’s histories have themselves been subject to suppression. Tragedy and Hope was removed from bookstore shelves by unknown persons and withdrawn from sale shortly after its release. His publisher, the Macmillan Company, destroyed the book’s original plates and lied to him for the next six years.11
Quigley believed that powerful people suppressed the book because it exposed matters they did not want known. In this instance, unlike his exposure of the British Establishment, he did not name his tormentors.
IN THE BEGINNING
The opening passage of Quigley’s The Anglo-American Establishment may read like a John le Carré thriller, but it is no spy fiction:
One wintry afternoon in February 1891, three men were engaged in earnest conversation in London. From that conversation were to flow consequences of the greatest importance to the British Empire and to the world as a whole.
The staunch British imperialists who met that day – Cecil Rhodes, William Stead and Lord Esher – were well-known public figures but it should be noted from the outset that each was linked to infinitely greater wealth and influence. They were joined weeks later by Lord Alfred Milner and Lord Nathaniel Rothschild, the international merchant banker and richest man in the world.
He was inducted together with Lords Salisbury and Rosebery, whose families had for generations controlled the Conservative and Liberal parties in Britain and ruled the country as their personal fiefdom. Rothschild provided the financial clout while Salisbury and Rosebery provided the long-standing patronage and political networks.12
Cecil Rhodes, in association with Rothschild, had made his fortune in the gold and diamond mines of South Africa. Stead was the most prominent English journalist of the day and a moral crusader of great standing.
Esher represented the interests of the monarchy from Queen Victoria’s final years, through the exuberant excesses of King Edward VII, to the more sedate but pliable King George V. It was through Esher that the monarch was kept fully appraised of Secret Elite business.13
Alfred Milner, a contemporary of Rhodes at Oxford University, was a self-made man of ability and ideas who began his working life as an aspiring lawyer, turned to journalism, led the political agitation against the Boer separatists in South Africa, and eventually emerged as an immensely powerful and successful power-broker.
Milner was the master manipulator, the iron-willed assertive intellectual who offered that one essential factor: strong leadership. On Cecil Rhodes’s death in 1902, he became the undisputed leader of the world’s most powerful and far reaching secret society. These were the founding fathers of what we recognise today as the ‘New World Order’ movement.
They met at private town houses and magnificent stately homes. These might be lavish weekend affairs or dinners in private clubs which provided suitable London bases for their intrigues. The heady mix of international finance, political manipulation and the control of government policy was at the heart of this small clique who set out to dominate the world.
They drew up their plan for a secret society that would take political control in Britain and, later by extension, the United States of America. They renewed the Anglo-Saxon bond between the two countries – the ‘special relationship’ – expanding their power base to bring Anglophile Americans into the secret brotherhood; men who would go on to dominate the world through financial institutions, global corporations and dependent governments.
Wars, revolutions and other major events of the last 100 years are directly attributable to these individuals. The Boer War and the destruction of Germany in 1914-18 were merely the first steps in their long-term strategy.
The secret society comprised concentric circles with an inner core of trusted associates known as “The Society of the Elect” who unquestionably knew that they were members of an exclusive cabal devoted to taking and holding power worldwide.
A second circle “The Association of Helpers” was larger and quite fluid in its membership. A third outer ring comprised members who may or may not have been aware they were either an integral part of, or inadvertently being used by, a secret society, though “it is more likely they knew it.”14
The overlapping rings are themselves concealed, hidden behind formally organised groups of no obvious political significance. As Quigley put it, the group was able to “conceal its existence quite successfully, and many of its influential members, satisfied to possess the reality of power rather than the appearance of power, are unknown even to close students of British history.”15
In the early 20th century its tentacles spread throughout the British Empire to America, Russia, France, the Balkans and South Africa. Their targets were agents in the highest offices of foreign governments who were bought and nurtured for future use.
What’s more, they had the power to control history, to turn history from enlightenment to deception. The Secret Elite dictated the writing and teaching of history from the ivory towers of academia down to the smallest of schools. They carefully controlled the publication of official government papers, the selection of documents for inclusion in the official version of history, and refused access to any evidence that might betray their covert existence.
Incriminating documents were burned, removed from official records, shredded, falsified or deliberately rewritten, so that what remains for genuine researchers and historians is carefully selected material. Their ambitions overrode humanity and the consequences of their actions have been minimised, ignored or denied.
SPREADING THEIR TENTACLES
One of the problems facing anyone who turns to Quigley’s seminal The Anglo American Establishment is that it makes for a difficult read. Like several of the early chapters of the Christian Bible, his inter-connecting lists name many from the aristocracy, big business, high finance, politics and the press. Some were linked by matrimonial alliances while others by their gratitude for titles and positions of power.20 He devotes an entire chapter revealing how the Secret Elite controlled The Times (then Britain’s most influential newspaper) for more than 50 years with the exception of the period 1919-1922.21
A list of Oxford graduates, especially those given fellowships at All Souls College, included Milner’s heir apparent, Lionel Curtis, and numerous others who later gained positions of great significance and power.
Indeed, they all did, every single name listed by Quigley. Oxford gave the Secret Elite access to influential professorships, some of which they created and funded themselves, such as the Beit Chair of Colonial History, established in 1905.
It remains a serious concern that Carroll Quigley was absolutely correct when pointing an accusing finger at those who monopolised “so completely the writing and the teaching of the history of their own period.”22
There is no ambivalence in his accusation. The Secret Elite controlled the writing and teaching of history through numerous avenues including the press, but none more effectively than at Oxford University where they held huge influence over Balliol, New College and All Souls, and largely dominated the intellectual life of Oxford in the field of history.23 They ensured we learn only those ‘facts’ that support their version of history.
The influence was so powerful that they controlled the Dictionary of National Biography, meaning the Secret Elite wrote the biographies of its own members. They created their own official history of key members for public consumption, striking out any incriminating evidence and portraying the best public-spirited image that could be safely manufactured. Has anything changed?
Oxford University was also the Secret Elite base for the Rhodes Scholarships, funded by the legacy left by Cecil Rhodes when he died in 1902. Rhodes’s wish was to create a “worldwide” secret group devoted to English ideals and to the Empire as the embodiment of these ideals,24 and the scholarships brought that international dimension to the society.
They “were merely a facade to conceal the secret society, or, more accurately, they were to be one of the instruments by which members of the secret society could carry out his purpose.” Professor Quigley leaves us in no doubt that the secret society is the real power behind the scholarships.25
From its inception, Rhodes Scholarships favoured American students, with 100 places allocated, two for each of the 50 states and territories, whereas only 60 were made available for the entire British Empire and, strangely, several from Germany. The ‘best talents’ from the ‘best families’ were to be nurtured at Oxford University and imbued with an appreciation of ‘Englishness’ and the importance of the “retention of the unity of the Empire.”
In The Anglo-American Establishment, Quigley concluded that the secret cabal advanced its power-base through a triple-front penetration in politics, the press and education.26 We would go further, and can but wonder why he omitted banking and the military-industrial complex from his analysis. Politicians will always be easy targets.
Ambition, greed and sexual proclivity can be nurtured and harnessed. Sometimes men of real stature come to the fore and bring strong leadership to the cause.
In the early years Alfred Milner assumed that mantle. Fired by a zeal forged by Ruskin at Oxford, he was consumed by the need to establish the primacy of upper-class Englishness at the pinnacle of world power. He believed in the need to bring the British Empire and the American ideal together to sweep aside any rival for world domination.
Milner went to South Africa in 1897 to save it from falling to the Boers. He deliberately started the Boer War and saved the diamond and gold mines for fellow Secret Elites Rhodes, Rothschild, Beit and Bailey. He was idolised by Cecil Rhodes who placed his legacy in Milner’s safekeeping, and he was rewarded by the King with a knighthood and then a Viscountcy.
Critically, in South Africa between 1897 and 1905, he built a personal following of young carefully chosen civil servants who loyally followed his every decision behind the scenes in British and world politics. Lord Alfred Milner was arguably the most important man living in the first decades of the 20th century, yet his name remains virtually unknown outside academic and political circles. Why?
To demonstrate the privileged path that the Secret Elite created in their quest to establish a ‘New World Order’, we have chosen to follow the trail that began with Alfred Milner, the undisputed leader for 23 years following Rhodes’s death in 1902.
Critically, his most important achievement in South Africa was the creation of a network of extremely able acolytes to whom he entrusted the future direction of his cause: the domination of the world by the Anglo-Saxon race. His secretariat in South Africa comprised young men of “breeding, ability and conviction” from Oxford University, All Souls College in particular.
Dubbed “Milner’s Kindergarten,” they absorbed his commitment to Ruskin’s philosophy, his disdain for career politicians and his concern that democracy as it had developed in the Western world was corrupt and untrustworthy. It was akin to “a religious brotherhood like the Jesuits, a church for the extension of the British Empire.”27
From 1909 Milner began expanding the Kindergarten into a highly secretive organisation called the “Round Table,” with branches in South Africa, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and, crucially, the United States. (It is not to be confused with a benign charitable organisation of the same name.)
The grand Arthurian title suggested equality of rank and importance, nobility of purpose and fairness in debate, but was nothing of the kind.
Milner, and most of the Group, held democracy in contempt, and far inferior to rule by those who had an “intellectual capacity for judging the public interest” and “some moral capacity for treating it as paramount to their own.”28
Wealth, of course, also counted and “the key to all economics and prosperity was considered to rest with banking and finance”29 which the Secret Elite controlled. Alfred Milner acted as both elder statesman and father figure to the Round Table with his role described as “President of an Intellectual Republic.”
The Round Table groups across the world kept in touch through regular correspondence and a quarterly journal called The Round Table that was controlled by the Secret Elite.
They saw Britain as the defender of all that was fine or civilised in the modern world. Her “civilising mission” was to be carried out by force if necessary, for the “function of force is to give moral ideas time to take root.”
Asians, for example, would be compelled to accept “civilisation” on the grounds they would be better off under British rule than that of fellow Asians.
“To be sure, the blessings to be extended to the less fortunate peoples of the world did not include democracy.” They would simply be educated up to a level where they could appreciate and cherish “British ideals.”30 The ‘White Man’s Burden’ is indeed great.
Milner, his Round Table, and the Secret Elite generally saw the new Germany with its economic, industrial and commercial strength as the great threat to their global ambitions.
In The Round Table journal of August 1911, Lord Lothian, a member of the Secret Elite’s inner core, wrote: “There are at present two codes of international morality – the British or Anglo-Saxon and the continental or German. Both cannot prevail.”31
Alliances with France and Russia were created for the specific task of destroying Germany through a prolonged war.32 These men had no fear of war, though they rarely put themselves in the direct firing line.
EXPANDING THE ANGLO-AMERICAN PRIMACY
Cecil Rhodes had long dreamed of Anglo-American unity, and in 1891 actually discussed the possibility of achieving it by Britain joining the United States.33 On his death, the Secret Elite developed an even greater appreciation of America’s vast potential and the need for closer union.
They adjusted the original concept of British race supremacy to Anglo-Saxon supremacy, so that Rhodes’s dream had only to be slightly modified. They created a common ideology and world outlook among the peoples of the United Kingdom and the United States, and the instruments and practices of cooperation in order to pursue parallel policies.34
Alfred Milner believed these goals should be pursued by a secret political and economic elite influencing “journalistic, educational and propaganda agencies” behind the scenes. The flow of money into the United States during the 19th century advanced industrial development to the immense benefit of the millionaires it created: Rockefeller, Carnegie, Morgan, Vanderbilt and their associates. The Rothschilds represented British interests, either directly through front companies or indirectly through agencies they controlled.
Small groups of massively rich individuals on both sides of the Atlantic knew one another well, and the Secret Elite in London initiated the very select and secretive dining club, the Pilgrims, that brought them together on a regular basis. On 11 July 1902, an inaugural meeting was held at the Carlton Hotel of what became known as the London Chapter of the Pilgrims Society. It was to have a select membership limited by individual scrutiny to 500.
Ostensibly, The Pilgrims was created to “promote goodwill, good friendship and everlasting peace” between Britain and the United States, but its highly secretive and exclusive membership leaves little doubt as to its real purpose.35
Seven months later the American chapter was formally created on similarly exclusive lines. This was the pool of wealth and talent that the Secret Elite drew together to promote its agenda in the years preceding the First World War.
Behind an image of the Pilgrim Fathers, the persecuted pioneers of Christian values, this elite cabal advocated the idea that “Englishmen and Americans would promote international friendship through their pilgrimages to and fro across the Atlantic.”
It presented itself as a spontaneous movement to promote democracy across the world, and most of the membership probably believed that. But the Pilgrims included a select collective of the wealthiest figures in both Britain and the United States who were deeply involved with the Secret Elite. They shared Rhodes’s dream and wanted to be party to it.36
In Britain, at least 18 members of the Secret Elite, including Lords Rothschild, Curzon, Northcliffe and Esher, and Sir Edward Grey and Arthur Balfour, attended Pilgrims dinners, though the regularity of their attendance is difficult to establish. Such is the perennial problem with secret groups. We know something about the guests invited to dinner but not what was discussed between courses.
In New York, members included both the Rockefeller and Morgan dynasties, and many men in senior government posts. The power elite in America was New York centred, carried great influence in domestic and international politics, and was heavily indulgent of Yale, Harvard and Princeton universities.
Within a short period of time they created an American version of what Carroll Quigley termed the triple-front penetration of politics, the press and education. The Pilgrims Society brought together American money and British aristocracy, royalty, presidents and diplomatic representatives. It was indeed a special relationship.37
Because closer ties with the United States were considered of such crucial importance, a Round Table group was also established in New York to further develop links between Westminster and Washington, and high finance in the City of London and Wall Street.
It was supported by Rockefeller and Morgan, managed in secret, hidden from the electorate and the politicians, and normally its meetings went unreported in the press. Members aimed to gain political influence and set the political agenda in the US, but they were rarely willing to speak out in public.
All was to be carried out in secret.38 How dangerous are those who believe they have the capacity to think and plan for the world’s good, impervious to the will of the people and disdainful of democracy itself?
The first American to be directly associated with the Round Table was George Louis Beer, an outspoken Anglophile academic and writer who contributed reports and articles to their magazine for many years. Beer called Alfred Milner “the intellectual leader of the most progressive school of imperial thought throughout Europe,” and was one of the chief supporters of America’s intervention in the First World War. His link to the Secret Elite opened many associated doors and Beer became the recognised expert on colonial questions at the Paris Peace Conference in 1918-19.
In the manner which typifies how these powerful men write their own histories, Beer and his Secret Elite compatriot, Lord Eustace Percy, later drew up the outline plan for the History of the Peace Conference.
In other words, the Secret Elite made sure that the record for future generations was one they dictated. They supported Beer’s appointment to the head of the Mandate Group of the League of Nations and he was one of the creators of the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London (Chatham House), its American branch, The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and sister organisation the Institute of Pacific Relations.39 Lest there be any doubt, these were all Secret Elite creations.
Milner’s Kindergarten had been expanded into the Round Table and that, in turn, had been expanded into the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London, the CFR in New York, and other Institutes across the globe.
The dominant role of the CFR in controlling American policy and politics cannot be overstated because almost all of America’s leadership has stemmed from this elite group.
That includes US presidents and their advisors, cabinet members, ambassadors, members of the board of the Federal Reserve, directors of the largest banks and financial houses, presidents of universities and heads of metropolitan newspapers, news services, and television networks.
“It is not an exaggeration to describe this group as the hidden government of the United States.”40
It is no less than a carbon copy of how the Secret Elite took control of Britain in the 20th century. These organisations were direct extensions of the Round Table Groups and have helped drive the Secret Elite agenda through the 20th century and beyond.
Carroll Quigley was the trailblazer in unmasking the Secret Elite, and it is plain to see they still dominate the British and American governments among others; still control banking and finance, politics, the press, the military-industrial complex, the universities and the key offices of state.
Wherever you live, ask yourself this, “is it happening here?” The grotesque plan set in motion by Rhodes and Milner at the end of the 19th century rolls on. Can it be stopped from reaching its ultimate destination – totalitarian, elite-controlled one world government?
The challenge is to reach beyond what Gore Vidal described as a conditioned response to the word ‘conspiracy’ where people react with a smirk and a chuckle; where historical analysis and contemporary evidence that demonstrates the power these people wield is dismissed as the product of ‘nuts and loners’ or fringe extremists.41
If we give up trying to educate the doubters, give up telling it as it really is, we the people are doomed to an Orwellian nightmare.
A closer look at the “Big Four” of America’s media at the time should be enough to induce even the dimmest “newbie” on this subject to begin asking himself: “Were we lied to about World War II?”
If it can be said, as I have coined and long-maintained, that Fake History is the Fake News that has passed into the rear-view mirror – then only a proper exposure of the identities and motives of Fake News patriarchs from years gone by can allow us to correct false history and thus better understand the present. And if it can also be said, as I have also coined and long-maintained, that World War II is the foundational mythology which defines the modern world – then it becomes essential to identify the original myth-makers behind the “official” narrative of “The Good War.”
First, let us note that a full six & 1/2 years before that grand and tragic history-altering event, the leaders of International Jewry formally issued a “Declaration of War” against Germany and its new Chancellor, Adolf Hitler. On March 23, 1933, 20,000 Jews protested at New York’s City Hall. Rallies and boycotts were directed against German goods. The front page of the March 24, London Daily Express carries the headline: “Judea Declares War on Germany”
Three days later, 40,000 hysterical Jews and other assorted Communists gathered in Madison Square Garden to protest Hitler – who hadn’t even done anything to harm anybody, except maybe a few Red terrorists who had it coming to them. The New York Daily News front page blared: “40,000 Roar Protest Here Against Hitler.”
Worldwide Jewry had fired the opening economic and propaganda shots of what, in due time, would escalate into World War II. Hitler responded to the false “atrocity” charges being made against the new Germany, stating on March 28:
“Lies and slander of positively hair-raising perversity are being launched against Germany. Horror stories of dismembered Jewish corpses, gouged out eyes and hacked off hands are circulating for the purpose of defaming the German Volk in the world for the second time, just as they had succeeded in doing once before in 1914.”
Had the Jews been some powerless minority with little influence, then their declared war against Germany could be dismissed as the inconsequential barking of a dog at the moon. But with the most powerful political weapon ever known to man — the national news media of the United States — — being mainly under their dominance, their threats against Germany were not to be taken lightly. A closer look at the “Big Four” of America’s media at the time should be enough to induce even the dimmest “newbie” on this subject to begin asking himself: “Were we lied to about Hitler and World War II?”
Let’s have a look at the main media masters of the 1930’s & 40’s.
Six 1/2 years before the actual shooting part of the war began, International Jewry had already declared the economic & propaganda war to be in effect — referring to it as “a holy war to combat the Hitlerite enemies of the Jew.”
* The New York Times // The Ochs-Sulzberger Family
Since its founding in 1851 by Republican Henry Jarvis Raymond, the mighty New York Times has been a big player in shaping public opinion. In 1896, the Times, — still experiencing financial problems due to the Panic of 1893 — took a turn to the internationalist left when it was sold on the cheap to a German-Jew named Adolph Ochs.
Ochs’ daughter was married to Arthur H Sulzberger, who became publisher when Adolph died in 1935. Sulzberger’s great grandson, Arthur G Sulzberger, is the publisher of the Times today. For 125 consecutive years and counting, America’s mighty “paper of record” has been in the hands of this same Jewish-Globalist family.
* NBC Radio // David Sarnoff
In 1900, David Sarnoff, who was born in a small Jewish village in Tsarist Russia, immigrated to New York City. At the age of 15, he joined the Marconi Wireless Telegraph Company of America. By 1919, Sarnoff was General Manager of RCA radio. In 1926, Sarnoff’s RCA formed NBC, the first major broadcast network in the U.S.
Sarnoff was instrumental in building the AM broadcasting radio business which became the preeminent public radio standard for the majority of the 20th century. During World War II, he would serve under General Eisenhower as a “Communications Consultant” (psychological warfare). Sarnoff, who had no military experience, would be awarded the rank of Brigadier General.
David Sarnoff and family went on to control RCA-NBC Radio & TV for more than 60 years.
Sarnoff was an immensely powerful media giant of the 20th century.
* CBS Radio // William Paloff (Paley)
William S. Paley (Paloff) was the son of Jewish immigrants who came from the Ukraine region of the Czarist Russian Empire. In 1928, the 27-year old businessman secured majority ownership of the CBS radio network (of which his father Samuel Paloff had been part owner). During the 1930’s, Paley expanded CBS into a national powerhouse with 114 affiliate stations. During World War II, Paley, like Sarnoff of NBC, would also serve under General Eisenhower as a “colonel” in the Psychological Warfare branch of the Office of War Information.
As the King of the CBS radio (and later TV), Paley was without question, one of the most powerful figures of the 20th Century. With David Sarnoff already controlling RCA-NBC, and Paley now in control of CBS, the important pre-TV medium of radio was by then mainly under Jewish control. Like Sarnoff’s NBC, Paley’s CBS will shape what Americans believe for many years to come.
* The Washington Post // Eugene Meyer
Washington Post was one of many businesses to go bankrupt during the Great Depression – just like the New York Times had been struggling after the Panic of 1893. In June of 1933, owner Ned McLean unloaded The Post at a bankruptcy auction. The buyer was Jewish Federal Reserve Chairman Eugene Meyer.
Having just stepped down from the Federal Reserve, Meyer immediately changed The Post’s editorial policy, transforming the influential newspaper into a pro-FDR, anti-Germany, and soft-on-Stalin propaganda sheet. The Post will lose money for 20 more years, but Meyer didn’t care. He bought the Post for influence, not profit. The Post will later be handed down to his daughter, the late Katherine Meyer-Graham.
The World Health Organization’s (WHO’s) Director General, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, now claims that climate change is the ‘single biggest health threat facing humanity’. This proves again this man should never lead a worldwide organization of any kind.
We first noticed Dr. Tedros shortly after the COVID outbreak in China was first reported in the press. Tedros claimed COVID had a mortality rate for those who caught the virus of 3.4%, scaring the entire world. This proved to be a faulty estimate based on faulty calculations we soon discovered.
Now the WHO under Tedros has released a publication claiming climate change is the world’s most pressing issue. Breitbart reports:
In its report titled “The Health Argument for Climate Action,” the W.H.O. calls climate change the “single biggest health threat facing humanity” and calls on governments to “act to tackle the climate crisis, restore biodiversity, and protect health.”
“While no one is safe from the health impacts of climate change, they are disproportionately felt by the most vulnerable and disadvantaged,” the report asserts.
To “avert catastrophic health impacts and prevent millions of climate change-related deaths,” the world must limit temperature rise to 1.5°C, the report states, referencing the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
“The climate crisis is upon us, powered by our addiction to fossil fuels,” writes Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, W.H.O. Director-General in his foreword to the report. “The consequences for our health are real and often devastating.”
It is remarkable that given the magnitude of the negative impact of air pollution on human health, the United Nations is spending its efforts trying to convince first-world countries to curb the emission of carbon dioxide (a colorless, odorless, non-toxic gas) rather than focusing on cleaning the air in third-world countries where people are dying daily from the pollution.
In an October 7 essay in the Wall Street Journal, climate expert Bjorn Lomborg declared that working to end global warming “could hurt the poor more than help” because of its negative impact on economic development.
Malnutrition deaths “have declined dramatically over the past three decades and will continue to drop rapidly over the next three,” Lomborg noted, a phenomenon overwhelmingly driven by economic growth…
…It does not take a conspiracy theorist to wonder whether the U.N.’s exclusive interest in climate change — which has not been convincingly tied to a single death — and its relative disregard for the established killer air pollution is not tied to geopolitical and economic interests unrelated to human health.
Tedros and his WHO are at it again. Promoting devastating and erroneous information that helps China, perhaps the biggest killer these past few years when accounting for COVID and air pollution, and harms the West.
A savvy UK quantitative data analyst named Joel Smalley recently uploaded a video highlighting data from John Hopkins University showing insane spikes in Covid-19 deaths after countries introduced Covid injections.
The data points from dozens of countries shows the same upward trend: as soon as the vaccines got introduced, COVID deaths skyrocketed.
Johns Hopkins data proves COVID shots are causing the majority of illness and death:
As it turns out, all the scientists and doctors who insisted that Merck’s “revolutionary” COVID drug molnupiravir is extremely safe weren’t faithfully adhering to “the science” after all.
Because according to a report published Thursday by Barron’s, some scientists are worried that the drug – which purportedly cut hospitalizations in half during a study that was cut short – could cause cancer or birth defects.
It’s perfectly understandable why Merck might choose to play down this safety risk: assuming it’s approved, the drug is widely expected to be one of “the most lucrative drugs ever” – which is one reason why Merck’s shares soared into double-digit territory after the announcement.
As we reported earlier this week, Merck and its “partner” Ridgeback Biotherapeutics will profit immensely by charging customers up to 40x what it costs to make the drug, which Ridgeback originally licensed from Emory University for an “undisclosed sum”. The drug was developed with funding from the federal government.
According to Barron’s, some scientists who have studied the drug believe that its method of suppressing the virus could potentially run amok within the body.
Some scientists who have studied the drug warn, however, that the method it uses to kill the virus that causes Covid-19 carries potential dangers that could limit the drug’s usefulness.
Molnupiravir works by incorporating itself into the genetic material of the virus, and then causing a huge number of mutations as the virus replicates, effectively killing it. In some lab tests, the drug has also shown the ability to integrate into the genetic material of mammalian cells, causing mutations as those cells replicate.
If that were to happen in the cells of a patient being treated with molnupiravir, it could theoretically lead to cancer or birth defects.
In particular, Raymond Schinazi, a professor of pediatrics and the director of biochemical pharmacology at Emory who studied the drug while it was being developed, and published a number of papers on NHC, the compound that’s the active ingredient in the drug. He published a paper that showed the drug can produce a reaction like the one described above, and insisted it shouldn’t be given to young people – especially pregnant women – without more data.
Schinazi told Barron’s that he did not believe that molnupiravir should be given to pregnant women, or to young people of reproductive age, until more data is available. Merck’s trials of molnupiravir have excluded pregnant women; the scientists running the trial asked male participants to “abstain from heterosexual intercourse” while taking the drug, according to the federal government website that tracks clinical trials.
Barron’s even shared a paper published in the Journal of Infectious Diseases in May by Schinazi and scientists at the University of North Carolina which reported that NHC can cause mutations in animal cell cultures in a lab test designed to detect such mutations – something Merck claims it has tested for. The paper’s authors concluded that the risks for molnupiravir “may not be zero”.
Merck told Barron’s that it has run “extensive tests” on animals which it says show that this shouldn’t be an issue. “The totality of the data from these studies indicates that molnupiravir is not mutagenic or genotoxic in in-vivo mammalian systems,” a Merck spokesman said.
Still, scientists and doctors who have studied NHC say that Merck needs to “be careful,” and it’s not just Schinazi warning about the drug’s potential risks.
Dr. Shuntai Zhou, a scientist at the Swanstrom Lab at UNC, said “there is a concern that this will cause long-term mutation effects, even cancer.”
Zhou says that he is certain that the drug will integrate itself into the DNA of mammalian hosts. “Biochemistry won’t lie,” he says. “This drug will be incorporated in the DNA.”
Merck hasn’t yet released any data from its animal studies, but the scientists believe that it would take long-term studies to show that the drug is truly totally safe.
“Proceed with caution and at your own peril,” wrote Raymond Schinazi, a professor of pediatrics and the director of the division of biochemical pharmacology at the Emory University School of Medicine, who has studied NHC for decades, in an email to Barron’s.
Analysts are already warning that these questions about the drug’s safety suggest the reaction in Merck’s shares was a little “overblown”, to say the least. Investors apparently were so eager for a new “pandemic panacea” (now that the mRNA jabs have proven to be much less effective than advertised) that they didn’t ask too many questions about safety, or even question the paucity of data. One analyst for SVB Leerink Dr. Geoffrey Porges described investors’ reaction from Friday as “wishful thinking”.
Even once the FDA authorizes the drug, Dr. Porges believes it will come with strict limitations on who can and can’t use it. “I think it is effectively going to be a controlled substance”, Dr. Porges said, adding that the risks to pregnant women, or women who may soon become pregnant, could present thorny problems for the FDA’s advisory committee reviewing the drug.
Given that the safety risks of the drug seem well-documented already, Wall Street’s gushing about the drug’s prospects – “it really is THAT good”,one analyst insisted – seems like an idiotic blunder in retrospect. The product of what one might call “magical thinking”.