16 June 2011
Congressional investigator for the Reece Committee on the illicit actions of tax-exempt foundations, Norman Dodd, very well documented the subversive agenda of such organizations during the mid-20th century.[1] Having had the privilege to view the minutes of early meetings (i.e. 1909) from the Carnegie Endowment, he came across discussions on modes of societal control.[2] War (as later affirmed again in the 1967 Report from Iron Mountain), they concluded, was the ultimate mode of control.[3] The question that followed was: how to induce the United States into a war? Five years later, we had our first great war for civilization, obviously implicating the foundation networks in their agenda.
Clearly, the events leading up to the First World War were not some organic process. Even Gavrilo Princip’s secret Serbian society, the Black Hand, had reported connections to various intelligence agencies, which is likely the case of any other secret society today (i.e. Freemasonry). Furthermore, we had Colonel Edward Mandell House (not really a colonel) representing the internationalist or globalist establishment along with forces within the U.S. who deliberately sent a full passenger ship (the Lusitania) to certain death in order to foment entry into war, a formula that has been used again and again with great success (the false flag operation).[4] The Germans had clearly warned that the ship would be sunk and tried to dissuade passengers from voyaging.
The key point here to establish is cui bono or who benefits? Always examine the result. The (Cecil) Rhodesian League of Nations was painfully birthed into being, the framework for a global government.
As time passed and the movement failed to gain ground, the forces behind the scene assembled the chessboard once again. Their greatest prize, that of global governance via a global government, was continually being assembled through a process of asymmetric network building. The foundations dealt with the engineering of society via educational reform. The grip on mainstream media and enterainment engineered culture. Monopoly formation of industry through dealings with the Soviets, Germans, Latin America and elsewhere built up the technological framework for governance down the road (i.e. IBM, oil, pharmaceuticals, etc.). Finally, cunning finance strategies ensured all the money they would ever need.
Both sides were played yet again in the Second World War. Supporting Hitler and Stalin in various manner, they were able to bleed the two powers while ensuring the destruction of Europa, paving the way for the “American Century” which would eventually lead the way toward global government.[5] "Order out of chaos" being their motto, for when you end up with a clean slate of earth, you may "remould it nearer to the heart's desire." Is the emergence of another League of Nations any wonder? This time, in 1945, it was called the United Nations.
Upon having finally established the framework for world government, it was time to develop the military and technological framework for this scientific dictatorship. Another key point is the manufacture of artificial or real enemies and the establishment of a metanarrative. Hence, the Cold War which ranged from 1945 to 1990. The results? CIA and other national security apparatus were established to wage covert global war. NATO was founded for the express purpose of fighting Communism yet when that story ended, it became the world police force backed by UN dictate. The military-industrial-complex led to a revolution in military affairs (RMA) which drastically transformed technological capability from which we obtained everything from computing and the Internet to microscopic fly cameras, terminators, the prophetic drones of H.G. Wells literature and police state architecture.
The end of the Cold War era marked a transitory phase known as “globalization” (though it has been active throughout the ages). Globalism, as defined by a globalist, is the “network of connections that span multi-continental distances.”[6] Localism, is, well, the custom, devotion and rule of a locality. Nationalism, is the separation of interests from a sovereign state to those of other sovereign states. Originating in the United Nations era, globalism is the placing of the interests of the world above that of sovereign nation states. Globalization is the road to globalism, global governance and finally, global government.
Globalist WTO Director Pascal Lamy horribly fails at differentiating the terms "governance" and "government", claiming they are "profoundly different."[7] Honestly, if ones critical thinking skills are utilized upon reading the article, the deceptiveness of it all smacks the face. Liars. Even basic dictionary definition defines "governance" as "government, control or authority", what a "government" usually does. Even if global governance is not a "global government" rather a "global authority", really, what is the difference?
The goal has always been convergence of the Sino-Soviet model with the American. As the USSR collapsed and as we witness the USA collapse, the “friendly fascism” or “totalitarian democracy” Chinese model is set to replace both.[8] Meanwhile, the European Union model of regionalization progresses in tandem to North America, South America, Asia, Africa and what we are now witnessing as the project for a “New Middle East.”[9]
As the Bilderberg sanctioned EU President Herman von Rompuy declared, “2009 is the first year of global governance [and] the global management of our planet.”[10]
It is very clear that “global governance” is merely a euphemism for “global government”, “world government” or “world state” as the historically unprecedented system of global management for the establishment of a “planetary regime”.[11]
Media programming tells us nothing happens at the Bilderberg syndicate meetings. They also tell us that bombing Libyan civilians is to humanitarian (as war is to peace). Attendees themselves tell us, in one example, whereupon hearing a speech by a fellow, all were "convinced" and in returning to their respective positions in the real world, were able to impose sanctions upon Argentina during the Falklands war. Again, a former NATO Secretary-General admits attendees are to implement the consensus policy in their respective environments.[12] No, nothing happens at these meetings. Don't worry that Amazon, Google, LinkedIn, Facebook and Microsoft are all now fully represented yonder.
"To say we were striving for a one-world government is exaggerated, but not wholly unfair. Those of us in Bilderberg felt we couldn't go on forever fighting one another for nothing and killing people and rendering millions homeless. So we felt that a single community throughout the world would be a good thing."[13]
There are roughly five responses to the idea of global governance:
In explaining this to the common folk, many feel indifferent. They cannot be bothered as they have lesser important things to attend to such as the carnal satisfaction of their abnormal appetites or the sexual stimulation of their promiscuous desires they so fail to realize were engineered upon them via the Rockefeller-funded Kinsey Institute (for example), mass media and the educational system which have effectively overturned the ancient and functioning traditional order in this postmodern age.
Those that deny exhibit delusion: a fixed false belief that is resistant to reason or confrontation with actual fact. These are the cave dwellers of Plato's allegory, who will resist reevaluation of their worldview.
Some simply lie and go along for profit, status and religious belief in the power structures of a world system. In general, the new age movement is a crucial component of the system (and is founded upon the ancient mystery religions as well as the glorification of an angel called Lucifer).
The rest are useful idiots, who actually believe the propaganda that world peace and brotherly love will be achieved. If only we allow these networks, who admittedly are literally responsible for the death and impoverishment of untold billions, to realize full and total control of these international institutions they have themselves constructed will we able to achieve heaven on earth. This is equal to giving the leader of a cult (oh say Heaven’s Gate) the necessary power to save the collective. How well that turned out.
Finally, there are those of functioning faculty who through discernment, resist with their spirits.
No comments:
Post a Comment