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?
If my bet is right (and it's becoming a White Whale of a PDF I'm working on!) the End of the World to the Committee came on like this:
ReplyDeleteAll the males in my familty in the 20th Century (dad, uncles, the bunch) were Depression-Through WWII-Through Postwar "Prosperity" babies. My Special Ops Army uncle (RIP) basically thinks that something like this happened:
The US, a basket case in 1941, was an economic miracle two decades later when Jack Kennedy was sworn in. In no way was this natural; nor did anything the Franklin Roosevelt-through-JFK change anything by themselves. Ergo, a fix was in. What sort of fix?
Masons were calling the USA a "global federation in miniature" for a century before Kennedy, and even George Washington is said to have told his (masonic) mates that it was time for "the great work of the ages to commence." The fix?
American postwar prosperity was a sham, pushed up by one-shot Levittowns here, superhighways there. But it gave the world -- the POLITICAL world-- a model. Europe ran with it from the 70s on and the rest of the world signed on in the years leading up to 2000.
Makes sense if you see how the US is being tossed aside for a fresher model, my guess something along the lines of China-Brazil since investment capital is heading that way.
The fact that the managers of the US are all from the same club really don't matter much. The old East Coast establishment simply sold out. Their stock is in Chinese and maybe their new mansions will be there too.
The US, a basket case in 1941, was an economic miracle two decades ... In no way was this natural; nor did anything the Franklin Roosevelt-through-JFK change anything by themselves. Ergo, a fix was in.
DeleteThe conventional view, I believe, is that since America's chief industrial competitors, Germany, Japan and Britain, had been literally smashed during WWII, America boomed because of the elimination of international competition.
After the war, Germany and Japan, free of the cartels and monopolies that had dominated their industry before the war, rebuilt their industry on a highly competitive model, which was well able to take back much of the business lost to the US in the early post-war years.
Since the 1994 GATT agreement, the US has had to face the further impact of unrestricted competition from low-wage Third World nations, particularly China.
The GATT agreement certainly was a sellout, indicating that the US is not a democracy but a pseudo-democracy in which the the plutocracy tell the people, via the media and state-controlled K to middle-age educational system, what to think.
Under this system, the US monied interest is, as you say, now well invested in China–Brazil, etc.
The destruction of the European nation states (and the United States as an Afro-European ethnic nation state) through mass immigration and multiculturalism is intended to insure that nationalism, i.e., democratic control of economic, immigration and cultural policy, never again obstructs the free flow of capital, goods, and labor for the maximization of profit.
Implementation of this project was made possible by the fact that since 1945 the United States has occupied the whole of Western Europe and, since the fall of the Soviet Union, has moved to occupy, i.e., expand NATO and various covert activities, into Eastern Europe.
The objective, it appears, in Europe as throughout the ME, is to reduce powerful nation states to trivial statelets easily controlled by the globalist agencies such as the UN, the
WTO, NATO, the EU, etc., etc.
For the time being, the American superpower serves as the battering ram to destroy nation-state democracy. The US itself, however, is due for destruction once its task has been fulfilled. Then racial conflict, linguistic bedlam, and an assist through various covert ops. will bring about national disintegration — leaving Canada the dominant power in North America. LOL.
There is seeming resistance to this New World Order from China, Russia and the resurgent nationalist parties of Western Europe. It remains to be seen, however, to what extent these are genuine or controlled opposition.
"...leaving Canada the dominant power in North America. LOL"
ReplyDeleteDistressing to say it, but the CIA predicted that too.
In the 70s the CIA said a new Ice Age would cause Canada's growing season to shorten so steeply that Canada's only recourse would be to invade the USA.
Herbie Brennan, the independent Irish researcher, inadvertantly reminded me of all this in one of his books, where he notes that an Ice Age MUST be presaged by a steep rise in temperature for a few years at least. Precipitation that comes down and freezes has to come from SOMEWHERE. Global warming might be a real cover for something else entirely.
Given that the US is certainly headed for a societal crack-up (at the very least) the Canuck Napoleon will have a fairly open field of battle. Like the earlier Napoleon, he'll have little more than weak alliances and local powers to contend with. But he'd be wise to wait till after the first plague or famine, since the disorder will be too intense with the current large population.
But if anyone is thinking along these lines, they already know that part.
In the 70s the CIA said a new Ice Age would cause Canada's growing season to shorten so steeply that Canada's only recourse would be to invade the USA.
DeleteGeeze. We'll have our work cut out.
We'll need to crank up the Avro Arrow project again.
Notes:
ReplyDeleteDeclassified CIA papers discussing coming Ice Age and Canada invading US: Climate and the Affairs of Men by Nels Winkless III, Iben Browning, 1975.
AMERICA NEVER HAD A GOLDEN ERA
The US is a crypto-plutocracy, which is to say a society where money is power but where that power is largely concealed, with the result that the power is wielded without responsibility.
DeleteIt has now become apparent to the majority of the American public that they are manipulated by a lying, privately-controlled and highly concentrated media and ruled by legislators owned by the money power.
It appears, therefore, that America must now undergo either some kind of constitutional reform, whereby the money power is made public and hence responsible, and is at the same time balanced by other forces, or transition to an outright fascist tyranny.
The last time fascist tyranny ruled over powerful states, constitutional reform followed defeat in a World War. America's constitutional crisis may be heading for resolution in the same way.