Who Rules?

Commenting on our post Cecil Rhodes' secret society for Anglo-Saxon global empire and Alex Jones--Master of Misdirection Alan Hopkins argues that Alex Jones' claim that the Rhodes – Milner Group, which "gave birth to South Africa would ... shape the entire World," is essentially correct.

Specifically, Hopkins asserts, if I understand him correctly, that members of the Rhodes – Milner Group were duped by one of their members who went on to devise a new plan for the domination of the World which is now being put into effect.

This is an interesting hypothesis and I should be glad of any clarification that Alan Hopkins or anyone else can provide showing the connection between the Rhodes-Milner Group, which promoted the idea of a global federation of democratic states, and the powers behind the presently unfolding system of global corporate control mediated by pseudo-democratic processes performed by puppets of the money power.

In the meantime, Jon Rappoport's Who really runs things in America? provides fascinating insight into the power and objectives of the Tri-lateral Commission (TC) founded by Zbigniew Brzezinski and David Rockefeller.

Concerning objectives, Rappoport quotes Brzezinski:

[The] nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force. International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation state.

A statement that perhaps accounts for the genocidal promotion of mass immigration and multi-culturalism by European nation states ruled by globalist tools such as Blair, Cameron, Sarkozy, Berlusconi, Barroso, who it may be assumed, take their direction from those international banks and multinational corporations that Brzezinski refers to.

Concerning the power of members of the TC, Rappoport notes:

Obama appointed eleven of them to posts in his administration. [And note that according to Rappoport, altogether there are only 87 TC members resident in the United States.]

Keep in mind that the original stated goal of the TC was to create “a new international economic order.” Knowing that you have to break eggs to make an omelette, consider how the following TC members, in key Obama posts, can help engender further national chaos; erase our sovereign national borders; and install binding international agreements that will envelop our economy and money in a deeper global collective: a new world order:

Tim Geithner, Treasury Secretary;

James Jones, National Security Advisor;

Paul Volker, Chairman, Economic Recovery Committee;

Dennis Blair, Director of National Intelligence.

All Trilateralists.

In the run-up to his inauguration after the 2008 presidential election, Obama was tutored by the co-founder of the Trilateral Commission, Zbigniew Brzezinski.

In Europe, the financially embattled nations of Greece and Italy brought in Lucas Papademos and Mario Monti as prime ministers. Both men are Trilateral members, and Monti is the former European chairman of the Trilateral Commission.

In the US, since 1973, author Wood counts eight out of 10 US Trade Representative appointments, and six out of eight World Bank presidencies, as American Trilateral members.

... other noteworthy Trilateral members: George HW Bush; Bill Clinton; Dick Cheney; Al Gore. The first three men helped sink the US further into debt by fomenting wars abroad; and Gore’s cap and trade blueprint would destroy industrial economies, while vastly increasing the numbers of people in Third World countries who have no access to modern sources of energy.

Does all this offer a clue as to why the US economy has failed to recover from the Wall Street debacle of 2008, why the federal bailout was a handout to super-rich criminals, and why Obama took actions which prevented a recovery?

A closer look at Tim Geithner’s circle of economic advisers reveals the chilling Trilateral effect: Paul Volker; Alan Greenspan; E. Gerald Corrigan (director, Goldman Sachs); and Peter G Peterson (former CEO, Lehman Brothers, former chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations). These men are all Trilateral members.

How many foxes in the hen house do we need, before we realize their Trilateral agenda is controlling the direction of our economy?

Continue reading: Who really runs things in America?

See also: 

CanSpeccy: The New World Order: What Is It? Who Wants It?
 

America's Hidden Government

The Pseudo-War on Terror: How the US Has Protected Al Qaeda "Enemies"

By Peter Dale Scott

The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 11, Issue 40, No. 2, October 7, 2013: Before World War Two, American government, for all of its glaring faults, served as a model for the world of limited government, having evolved a system of restraints on executive power through its constitutional arrangement of checks and balances. All that changed with America’s emergence as a dominant world power, and further after the Vietnam War.

Since 9/11, above all, constitutional American government has been overshadowed by a series of emergency measures to fight terrorism. The latter have mushroomed in size and budget, while traditional government has been shrunk. As a result we have today what the journalist Dana Priest has called:

two governments: the one its citizens were familiar with, operated more or less in the open: the other a parallel top secret government whose parts had mushroomed in less than a decade into a gigantic, sprawling universe of its own, visible to only a carefully vetted cadre – and its entirety…visible only to God.

More and more, it is becoming common to say that America, like Turkey before it, now has what Marc Ambinder and John Tirman have called a deep state behind the public one.2 And this parallel government is guided in surveillance matters by its own Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, known as the FISA court, which according to the New York Times “has quietly become almost a parallel Supreme Court.”3 Thanks largely to Edward Snowden, it is now clear that the FISA Court has permitted this deep state to expand surveillance beyond the tiny number of known and suspected Islamic terrorists, to any incipient protest movement that might challenge the policies of the American war machine.

Most Americans have by and large not questioned this parallel government, accepting that sacrifices of traditional rights and traditional transparency are necessary to keep us safe from al-Qaeda attacks. However secret power is unchecked power, and experience of the last century has only reinforced the truth of Lord Acton’s famous dictum that unchecked power always corrupts. It is time to consider the extent to which American secret agencies have developed a symbiotic relationship with the forces they are supposed to be fighting – and have even on occasion intervened to let al-Qaeda terrorists proceed with their plots.

For indeed it is certain that on various occasions U.S. agencies have intervened, letting al-Qaeda terrorists proceed with their plots. This alarming statement will be dismissed by some as “conspiracy theory.” Yet I will show that this claim does not arise from theory, but from facts, about incidents that are true even though they have been systematically suppressed or under-reported in the American mainstream media.

I am describing a phenomenon that occurred not just once, but repeatedly, almost predictably. We shall see that, among the al-Qaeda terrorists who were first protected and then continued their activities were

1) Ali Mohamed, identified in the 9/11 Commission Report (p. 68) as the leader of the 1998 Nairobi Embassy bombing;

2) Mohammed Jamal Khalifa, Osama bin Laden’s close friend and financier while in the Philippines of Ramzi Yousef (principle architect of the first WTC attack) and his uncle Khalid Sheikh Mohammed

3) Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, identified in the 9/11 Commission Report (p. 145) as “the principal architect of the 9/11 attacks.”

4) Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi. two of the alleged 9/11 hijackers, whose presence in the United States was concealed from the FBI by CIA officers for months before 9/11.4

It might sound from these citations that the 9/11 Commission marked a new stage in the U.S. treatment of these terrorists, and that the Report now exposed those terrorists who in the past had been protected. On the contrary, a principal purpose of my essay is to show that

1) one purpose of protecting these individuals had been to protect a valued intelligence connection (the “Al-Qaeda connection” if you will);

2) one major intention of the 9/11 Commission Report was to continue protecting this connection;

3) those on the 9/11 Commission staff who were charged with this protection included at least one commission member (Jamie Gorelick), one staff member (Dietrich Snell) and one important witness (Patrick Fitzgerald) who earlier had figured among the terrorists’ protectors.

In the course of writing this essay, I came to another disturbing conclusion I had not anticipated. This is that a central feature of the protection has been to defend the 9/11 Commission’s false picture of al-Qaeda as an example of non-state terrorism, at odds with not just the CIA but also the royal families of Saudi Arabia and Qatar. In reality, as I shall show, royal family protection from Qatar and Saudi Arabia (concealed by the 9/11 Commission) was repeatedly given to key figures like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged “principal architect of the 9/11 attacks.”

Continue reading

So What If Jesus Never Existed?

To those with the intellect of a precocious adolescent — people like Richard Dawkins or John Cleese — the validity of religious belief is determined by the answers to such questions as, did Jesus really exist or was he a figure of myth, if he lived, was he born of a virgin, did he walk on water, raise the dead, or reappear in the flesh after the Crucifixion.

But the significance and value of religious belief has nothing to do with historical fact. What matters is whether the teachings of Buddha or Confucius, Moses or Mohammed, Jesus or Joseph Smith are true.

Should we forgive our enemies or kill them, is the Kingdom of Heaven within, and should we listen to the still small voice of conscience, should we refrain from lies, theft, blasphemy, and adultery, or indulge the natural passions of lust, pride, hate, and jelousy?

Recognizing the true and difficult question about religion, makes  nonsense of the atheist's childish questions. Of course religious practice is nothing but fancy dress, glorious music, stunning architecture, beguiling verbiage and breathtaking works of art. But the function of religious practice is to instil true morality in the hearts of all mankind.

So the most significant question about religion is not the historical validity or scientific credibility of the narrative deployed by this church or that to convey its moral teachings, but the truth of that morality. The point was made with devastating simplicity by Bishop Despmond Tutu when asked how he dealt with an apparent contradiction in biblical teachings.

"Whatever," he said, "is not in the spirit of Christ, I reject. I reject it absolutely."

Which is to say that the kingdom of God is within in you and you should be ruled by the still small voice of conscience.

This is the essence of Christ's teaching, a teaching that the atheist loathes but dare not attack.

See also:

CanSpeccy: The Rationality of Christian Faith

Aangirfan: The Bible

Israel's Psychopathic Premier

Information Clearing House, October 02, 2013: - Iranian missiles will hit New York in “three to four years”. A nuclear Iran is like “50 North Koreas”.

This could be the sound of a deranged, dangerous sociopath, or this could be the sound of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu addressing the UN General Assembly.

Compare for yourself. Last week we had Iranian President Hassan Rouhani calling for the world to surf a WAVE (as in World Against Violence and Extremism).

This week we had Bibi saying that was a “cynical” and “totally hypocritical honey trap”.

In the world according to Netanyahu, “Ahmadinejad was a wolf in wolf’s clothing. Rouhani is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.” Rouhani tried to present himself as “pious”, but he’s always been involved with “the terror state of Iran”. He’s like “a serial killer going to court dressed in clerical attire and giving testimony to his nature as an ‘ethical’ and ‘religious’ man.”

Ranting aside, Bibi did change his game. Now it’s not silly cartoons and begging the US to bomb Iran virtually on a weekly basis. Now it’s Iran’s “military nuclear program” that must be shut down – a program, by the way, that the alphabet soup of US intelligence agencies says does not exist.

And this after Netanyahu told US President Barack Obama to forget – forever - UN Security Council resolution 242, which determined total Israeli withdrawal from all lands occupied after the 1967 war.

Is Blogger My Friend?

Blogger is a free service provided by Google that allows people like CanSpeccy to self-publish whatever they like at no charge. The software is well designed and spares one most of the effort associated with managing an independent Web site.

It is reasonable, however, to assume that Google provides this service not as an expression of community spirit, but solely to generate revenue for Google, which it may do in various ways, including the placement of Google ads on participating blogs.

The opportunity to earn advertising revenue is not one of which all, or even many, bloggers seem to avail themselves. In part this reluctance may be due to the fact that unless you have a readership equivalent to that of the National Enquirer, it takes a time equal to the age of the universe before your ad earnings reach the minimum payout value of one hundred dollars.

In addition, Google's adsense software seems clueless at finding appropriate ads to associate with particular blogposts. You write piece denouncing the Illumnati, the US Federal Reserve and the international bankers plot and Adsense will append and ad for, say, Rothschild's Private Wealth Management, which totally demolishes one's revolutionary cred. — as may well be the intention..

Then there is the question of Google and the NSA. For all one knows, Google is paid to pass ones most intimate blogged thoughts to the US Government's most clandestine spy agency in return for cold hard cash. Admittedly, NSA could just read my blog, but they're probably too busy, so if Google does it for them, that's not being so friendly.

But what really puzzles me is why Google does nothing to prevent multiple hits from vampirestat.com, adsensewatchdog.com, zombiestat.com, secretsearch.com and and other sites that have been described as:

worthless scumbag referrer spam-bots. Automated, unattended software programs [that] generate supposed “hits” on your site. They do not represent any human visitors and are not of any interest whatsoever. Do not visit the referring sites, because there is a high probability of malware …

Why, I would like to know, does Blogger not block these sites, which can make nonsense of one’s usage states? If anyone can offer clarification about this — Sergey Brin? Larry Page? — I’d be glad to hear from them.

In the meantime, I'm reserving judgement on whether Blogger is my friend.