by Zahir Ebrahim
December 5, 2010
from
HumanBeingsFirst Website
The myriad manufactured crises which afflict humanity today,
-
from the
riveting Wikileaks intrigues to the perpetual 'War on Terror'
-
from the
Financial Crisis and Pandemics to Global Warming and the Carbon Credit
scams
-
perhaps even Alien landings/sightings and/or intergalactic
catastrophes soon if Project Camelot has been accurately primed,
...are merely
the successive Hegelian mind-fcks, ahem the “acts” and “deeds”, of making
current affairs,
“look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion’ to use
William James’ famous description of reality”.
Each new ‘booming, buzzing
confusion’ provides the new enabling pretext for inching the world one
baby-step closer towards the Global Governance of the Planet.
Gideon Rachman of the Financial Times wrote in his oped almost two years
ago:
'I have never believed that there is a secret United Nations plot to take
over the US. I have never seen black helicopters hovering in the sky above
Montana. But, for the first time in my life, I think the formation of some
sort of world government is plausible. A “world government” would involve
much more than co-operation between nations. It would be an entity with
state-like characteristics, backed by a body of laws.
The European Union has
already set up a continental government for 27 countries, which could be a
model. The EU has a supreme court, a currency, thousands of pages of law, a
large civil service and the ability to deploy military force. So could the
European model go global? There are three reasons for thinking that it
might.
First, it is increasingly clear that the most difficult issues facing
national governments are international in nature: there is global warming, a
global financial crisis and a “global war on terror”.'
( Gideon Rachman,
And
now for a world government, Financial Times, December 8 2008 )
Mr. Rachman accurately reflected the immense momentum today towards world
government which many a
globalist had been working toward across generations
rather openly, often boldly proclaiming that:
'We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only
question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or
consent.'
(James Warburg in 1950 to the US Senate, cited in Project Humanbeingsfirst's Monetary Reform Bibliography)
The EU Council President, Herman Van Rompuy, only 59 years later on November
19, 2009, openly admitted in his first press conference in Brussels after
being appointed president, that finally,
“2009 is also the first year of
Global Governance”:
'We are living through exceptionally difficult times. Financial crisis and
its dramatic impact on employment and budgets, the climate crisis which
threatens our very survival - a period of anxiety, uncertainty, and lack
of confidence.
Yet these problems can be overcome, by a joint effort, in and
between our countries. 2009 is also the first year of Global Governance with
the establishment of the G-20 in the middle of financial crisis.
The climate
conference in Copenhagen is another step towards the Global Management of
our Planet. Our mission, our presidency is one of hope, supported by acts,
and by deeds.'
(press conference November 19, 2009 -
below video)
Van Rompuy too was accurate in his message of hope that Global
Governance is “supported by acts and by deeds”.
But just what might these be?
A Council on Foreign Relations author had rather holistically outlined the
underlying character of these supporting “acts” and “deeds” way back in the
middle-stages of their planning-execution cycle in April 1974 as follows:
'In short, the ‘house of world order’ will have to be built from the bottom
up, rather than from the top down. It will look like a great ‘booming,
buzzing confusion’ to use William James’ famous description of reality, but
an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will
accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.
Of course, for political as well as administrative reasons, some of these
specialized arrangements should be brought into an appropriate relationship
with the central institutions of the U.N. system, but the main thing is that
the essential functions be performed.
The question is whether this more modest approach can do the job. Can it
really bring mankind into the twenty-first century with reasonable prospects
for peace, welfare and human dignity? The argument thus far suggests it
better had, for there seems to be no alternative. But the evidence also
suggests some grounds for cautious optimism.'
(Richard N. Gardner,
The Hard
Road To World Order, Foreign Affairs April 1974 issue)
Herman Van Rompuy's message of hope at the completion stages decades later
was merely the cross-generational echo of Richard N. Gardner's,
“prospects
for peace, welfare and human dignity” that had been long sewn “bottom up,
rather than from the top down” such that to the uninformed public, it would
always “look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion’ to use William James’
famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty,
eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned
frontal assault.”
The blood-drenched transformation stage that we find ourselves in today
- the wreckage of civilizations - is truly “Between
Two Ages”.
That brilliant
description is not mine, but the title of
Zbigniew Brzezinski's seminally
self-serving 1970 book which [presumably] got him appointed as the Executive
Director of
David Rockefeller's
Trilateral Commission.
There are more than a
dozen Trilateralists and CFRs in President Obama's Administration too,
pushing the
banksters' globalist agendas finally to fruition across multiple
fronts simultaneously.
The money behind them, at least in the United States,
is primarily the Rockefellers' who own the majority stake in the New York
Fed, which in turn largely controls the
Federal Reserve System.
In Europe,
the money is primarily the Rothschilds' who control all the world's private
central banks (including America's Federal Reserve and international
lending-policing agencies such as the
World Bank-IMF tag-team and the WTO)
with complex interlocking relationships among a closed-knit tiny fraternity
who exercise their will upon international banking and global finance and
thus upon all nations of the world, through their largely unknown
Bank for
International Settlements (http://BIS.org) located in Basle, Switzerland.
Entirely coincidentally of course, BIS is located in the same secretive
banking capital where Theodor Herzl had earlier made his notorious Jewish
manifesto,
Der Judenstaat public in the First World Zionist Congress in 1897
to set the public stage for the creation of the exclusively Jewish state of
Israel in 1948.
Also entirely coincidentally, the British Empire had
gratuitously issued its famous 1917 Balfour Declaration in the name of Lord
Rothschild, the principal owner and founder of the international financial
system who had controlled the Bank of England since Waterloo.
And again
entirely coincidentally, America's entry into World War I was facilitated
after the founding of its own 'Bank of England', i.e., the Federal Reserve
System principally by Paul Warburg, the banking fraternal twin of Lord
Rothschild in whose palace the Treaty of Versailles was signed after World
War I to enable the British Mandate over the lands of historic Palestine.
These remarkable coincidences have today made
the Rothschilds the most
revered family name in Israel. Some call them the King of the Jews - and to
live up to that Solomon-ly title, the Rothschilds have architected, financed
and built the Jewish state's principal hall of Justice, the Israeli Supreme
Court in Jerusalem.
The Jewish State today enjoys the unparalleled privilege
of an “Iron Wall” that none can breach. The Rothschild's frankenstein can
with brazen impunity exterminate, assassinate, and bomb, to the applause of
the world leaders (see 'Pamphlet: How to Return to Palestine').
And yet,
strangely, the Rothschild's role in seeding and orchestrating the affairs of
the modern world is consistently downplayed almost universally.
No media, no
academic, no scholar, no historian, no dissent-chief, no corporate
executive, no billionaire on Forbes list, the Forbes list itself, and of
course no politician and world statesman, dare utter that name publicly - and so long as they don't, they can say anything else they want. Elusive
power such as this is not a figment of someone's imagination.
Prof. Carroll Quigley was permitted to openly state the following in his
1966 book
Tragedy And
Hope, and his controlled revelations which continued
that tradition of downplaying the name of the Rothschilds, only came on the
heels of the free-wheeling Eustace Mullins'
well-documented exposé of how
the Federal Reserve System in the United States was conspiringly created by
forces representing the same globalist banking elite, and he had not spared
the Rothschild name.
This was followed by a series of books and documentary
films in the 1970s by many others including Gary Allen, W. Cleon Skoussen,
G. Edward Griffin, Antony Sutton et. al.
These passages from Quigley's 1200
page ode to the International bankers underscores the base axiomatic reality
upon which the entire web of control of the globalists is fabricated:
'The powers of financial capitalism had (a) far-reaching aim, nothing less
than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to
dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world
as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the
central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived
at in frequent meetings and conferences.
The apex of the systems was to be
the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland; a private bank
owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves
private corporations.
Each central bank, in the hands of men like Montagu
Norman of the Bank of England, Benjamin Strong of the New York Federal
Reserve Bank, Charles Rist of the Bank of France, and Hjalmar Schacht of the
Reichsbank, sought to dominate its government by its ability to control
Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of
economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians
by subsequent economic rewards in the business world.'
(Carroll Quigley,
Tragedy And
Hope, 1966, Chapter 20, page 324)
'It must not be felt that these heads of the world's chief central banks
were themselves substantive powers in world finance. They were not. Rather,
they were the technicians and agents of the dominant investment bankers of
their own countries, who had raised them up and were perfectly capable of
throwing them down.
The substantive financial powers of the world were in
the hands of these investment bankers (also called “international” or
“merchant” bankers) who remained largely behind the scenes in their own
unincorporated private banks. These formed a system of international
cooperation and national dominance which was more private, more powerful,
and more secret than that of their agents in the central banks.
This
dominance of investment bankers was based on their control over the flows of
credit and investment funds in their own countries and throughout the
world.'
(Carroll Quigley,
Tragedy And
Hope, 1966, Chapter 20, page 326)
The following observations made in 1970 by W. Cleon Skoussen in his
extensive commentary on Tragedy and Hope is entirely empirical today:
'The real value of Tragedy and Hope ... [is the] bold and boastful admission
by Dr. Quigley that there actually exists a relatively small but powerful
group which has succeeded in acquiring a choke-hold on the affairs of
practically the entire human race.
Of course we should be quick to recognize
that no small group could wield such gigantic power unless millions of
people in all walks of life were “in on the take” and were willing to
knuckle down to the iron-clad regimentation of the ruthless bosses behind
the scenes.
As we shall see, the network has succeeded in building its power
structure by using tremendous quantities of money (together with the vast
influence it buys) to manipulate, intimidate, or corrupt millions of men and
women and their institutions on a world-wide basis.'
(W. Cleon Skousen,
The
Naked Capitalist, pg. 6)
Gary Allen argued matters in such an elegant style in 1971 in his short book
None Dare Call It Conspiracy, that the logic of the highlighted sentences in
the passages quoted below even elicited a long chuckle from a most cynical
MIT trained Silicon Valley engineer friend of mine who has designed dozens
of microchips and is not easily given to levity on current affairs:
'Most of us have had the experience, either as parents or youngsters, of
trying to discover the "hidden picture" within another picture in a
children's magazine. Usually you are shown a landscape with trees, bushes,
flowers and other bits of nature. The caption reads something like this:
"Concealed somewhere in this picture is a donkey pulling a cart with a boy
in it. Can you find them?"
Try as you might, usually you could not find the
hidden picture until you turned to a page farther back in the magazine which
would reveal how cleverly the artist had hidden it from us.
If we study the
landscape we realize that the whole picture was painted in such a way as to
conceal the real picture within, and once we see the "real picture," it
stands out like the proverbial painful digit.
We believe the picture painters of the mass media are artfully creating
landscapes for us which deliberately hide the real picture. In this book we
will show you how to discover the "hidden picture" in the landscapes
presented to us daily through newspapers, radio and television. Once you can
see through the camouflage, you will see the donkey, the cart and the boy
who have been there all along.
Millions of Americans are concerned and
frustrated over mishappenings in our nation. They feel that something is
wrong, drastically wrong, but because of the picture painters they can't
quite put their fingers on it.
Maybe you are one of those persons. Something is bugging you, but you aren't
sure what. We keep electing new Presidents who seemingly promise faithfully
to halt the world-wide Communist advance, put the blocks to extravagant
government spending, douse the fires of inflation, put the economy on an
even keel, reverse the trend which is turning the country into a moral
sewer, and toss the criminals into the hoosegow where they belong.
Yet,
despite high hopes and glittering campaign promises, these problems continue
to worsen no matter who is in office. Each new administration, whether it be
Republican or Democrat, continues the same basic policies of the previous
administration which it had so thoroughly denounced during the election
campaign. It is considered poor form to mention this, but it is true
nonetheless. Is there a plausible reason to explain why this happens? We are
not supposed to think so.
We are supposed to think it is all accidental and
coincidental and that therefore there is nothing we can do about it.
FDR once said,
"In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you
can bet it was planned that way."
He was in a good position to know.
We
believe that many of the major world events that are shaping our destinies
occur because somebody or somebodies have planned them that way. If we were
merely dealing with the law of averages, half of the events affecting our
nation's well-being should be good for America. If we were dealing with mere
incompetence, our leaders should occasionally make a mistake in our favor.
We shall attempt to prove that we are not really dealing with coincidence or
stupidity, but with planning and brilliance.
This small book deals with that
planning and brilliance and how it has shaped the foreign and domestic
policies of the last six administrations. We hope it will explain matters
which have up to now seemed inexplicable; that it will bring into sharp
focus images which have been obscured by the landscape painters of the mass
media.
Those who believe that major world events result from planning are laughed
at for believing in the "conspiracy theory of history."
Of course, no one in
this modern day and age really believes in the conspiracy theory of history
-except those who have taken the time to study the subject. When you think
about it, there are really only two theories of history. Either things
happen by accident neither planned nor caused by anybody, or they happen
because they are planned and somebody causes them to happen.
In reality, it
is the "accidental theory of history" preached in the unhallowed Halls of
Ivy which should be ridiculed. Otherwise, why does every recent
administration make the same mistakes as the previous ones? Why do they
repeat the errors of the past which produce inflation, depressions and war?
Why does our State Department "stumble" from one Communist-aiding "blunder"
to another?
If you believe it is all an accident or the result of mysterious
and unexplainable tides of history, you will be regarded as an
"intellectual" who understands that we live in a complex world. If you
believe that something like 32,496 consecutive coincidences over the past
forty years stretches the law of averages a bit, you are a kook!'
(Gary
Allen,
None Dare Call It Conspiracy, 1971, Chapter 1)
Can today's handful of rabble-rousing moral activists with their
chest-thumping internet-jihad and the occasional street-dance protesting
with loud drum-beating, fight such a nemesis that is not only legally
endowed with an infinite supply of money conjured out of thin-air, but whose
controlling power pervades all public and private institutions from
universities to businesses to governments to non-profit supra-organizations
like
the United Nations and none dare talk about it without being called a
'kook'?
To genuinely reverse this unstoppable impetus towards global
management surely requires an order of magnitude different strategies and
tactics other than blaring into bull-horns and publishing books and eloquent
websites, don't you think?
To an engineer's eye attuned to building real systems rather than merely
talking about their future possibility in glossy brochures, it requires mass
mobilizations and the common man's commandeering of structures of power
worldwide to shut down the world.
No food on the store shelves, no garbage
picked up, no containers unloaded, all civic services stopped, etc.
A global
strike that demands the juridical hanging of the oligarchy, the
nationalization of their amassed wealth, and the un-privatization of usurped
public commons worldwide.
Apart from the fact that all such effective mobilization requires money,
global organizations, time to build them up, labor unions and political
institutions which can mobilize the rank and file for common cause,
unfettered access to media to carry the message, and intellectual strategies
and tactics which can launch a thousand cuts of no less overwhelming
convolution than what the oligarchy conjures up to overwhelm the public
senses, there are also no masses to mobilize.
More importantly, there are no
un-compromising leaders to lead them.
With no resources outside of the institutional parameters of the status quo
for any emerging leadership to be effective in rebelling against those very
institutions, and all legalisms and security apparatuses calculatingly
stacked in favor of the establishment's own ruling paradigms - the
unfettered promulgation of hegemony of the oligarchy fronted by the
'national security state' with its colossus military-industrial-academe-media-congressional-juridical-executive complex
- what can even courageous leaders do when even the brains of the President
of United States, the mightiest superpower on earth, is not safe from being
blown to smithereens when it becomes a threat to the status quo?
(See below video 'The
Eight Bay of Pigs of JFK' in Jim Douglass' November 2009 talk “JFK and the
Unspeakable” at COPA Dallas.)
JFK and the Unspeakable
by
talkingsticktv
July 19, 2008
from
YouTube Website
Random public riots in the streets out of individual desperation does not,
and will not, cut it. Ineffectual rowdyism is in fact, the calculated
tactical plan of the globalists themselves.
Because, destructive riots
enable them to play their final fait accompli inducing trump card -
martial
law!
And
the FEMA detention camps on military sites have already been made
ready to welcome many an unwise malcontent! (See 'Why bluff martial law')
Those attempting to uncontrollably rile up the public anger with bull-horns
in the style of Television Network's Mad Prophet of the Airwaves (Network,
1976 movie):
'Well, I am not gonna leave you alone. I want you to get mad. I
don't want you to protest, I don't want you to write to your congressman
because I wouldn't know what to tell you to write. I don't know what to do
about the depression and the inflation and the Islamofascists and the crime
in the street. All I know is that first, you've got to get mad.
You've got
to say,
“I am a human being god dammit, my life has value”.
So, I want you to
get up now, and go to the window, open it, and stick your head out and yell:
“I am mad as hell and I am not gonna take this anymore”', cannot not know
this.
While it has today become next to impossible to tell fabricated
dissent from manufactured consent, and with reformed cats piously trying to
represent the silly mice, the underlying political science basis of the
ubiquitous social engineering which employs this “cognitive infiltration” is
documented in the two reports 'Manufacturing Dissent: The Master Social
Science', and 'Anatomy of Conspiracy Theory'.
Also see: 'Did David Ray
Griffin and Steve Lendman miss the real purpose of Cass Sunstein's
“Conspiracy Theories”?'
As one can glean in these aforementioned analyses, there is effectively no
dissent today that can impact the status quo.
And establishment's systems
are already in place to ensure that it does not happen either. Only
narratives are permitted to exist. And the narrators are often generously
rewarded too, with many even openly seeking and accepting their harvest of
peace prizes and other glamorous accolades, lucrative appointments and
tenures, from the same empire which they ostensibly oppose in their
prominent dissent!
I am told that there is a very generous single Biblical
word for them: hypocrite. Not being divinely inspired, mine are of course
considerably less generous.
Never mind waking up the sheeples. The genuine “ostrich” activists, the
“quite gallant and graceful-looking people” as H. G. Wells described the lot
(see quote below), themselves need to wake up to the grotesque reality
first, and take accurate cognizance of the battlefield the way it really is.
The way things stand today - see the reality-check in 'Why Not Be An
Ostrich?' - without birth-panging radical transformations to dissent-space
and the concomitant emergence of a focused global resistance, Global
Governance of the oligarchy is fait accompli. That is simply a factual
statement with no emotional syntactic sugaring applied.
The myriad manufactured crises which afflict humanity today, from
...and perhaps
even Alien landings/sightings and/or intergalactic catastrophes soon if
Project Camelot has been accurately primed, are merely the successive
Hegelian mind-fcks, ahem the “acts” and “deeds”, of making current affairs,
“look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion’ to use William James’ famous
description of reality”.
Each new ‘booming, buzzing confusion’ provides the new enabling pretext for
inching the world one baby-step closer towards the
Global Governance of the
Planet.
And all that the “malcontent” and “graceful-looking people” can do, just
like the “history's actors” accurately predicted that we shall do, is study
it:
'We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while
you’re studying that reality - judiciously, as you will - we’ll act again,
creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things
will sort out. We’re history’s actors... and you, all of you, will be
left to just study what we do.'
(Ron Suskind, New York Times, Oct. 17, 2004)
More tragically, our tortuous zeitgeist was also accurately presaged even
before most of us were born:
'When the struggle seems to be drifting defiantly towards a world social
democracy there may still be very great delays and disappointments before it
becomes an efficient and beneficent world system.
Countless people - will
hate the New World Order - and will die protesting against it. When we
attempt to evaluate its promise, we have to bear in mind the distress of a
generation or so of malcontents, many of them quite gallant and
graceful-looking people.'
(H. G. Wells,
The New
World Order, page 127)
Isn't that where all the world's rebels precisely stand today, blindly and
ineffectively resisting a fait accompli in false hopes? With most of the
world's 'untermenschen' happy-happy in hope and voluntary servitude waiting
for a savior? (See 'Happy-Happy in Hope and Voluntary Servitude')
But perhaps it is not because of false hopes. That is only for ostriches.
Perhaps it is really that elusive spirit of the swashbuckling rebel, Captain
Rhett Butler of Gone with the Wind which inspires this lot.
At least in so
far as his penchant for supporting lost causes after they were truly lost
was concerned.
“Why?”, said Captain Butler to Mrs. Hamilton as he gallantly
abandoned his unrequited love in the middle of the road to go join the
Confederate Army after Atlanta had been completely burned to the ground by
Sherman and his northern soldiers, “maybe it's because I have always had a
weakness for lost causes once they are really lost.”
Admirable, perhaps even heroic by grandmotherly standards.
But hardly any
cause for indigestion for the henchmen at
the CFR and the EU Council who,
under the “iron-clad regimentation of the ruthless bosses behind the
scenes”, are striving to bring us “reasonable prospects for peace, welfare
and human dignity” in the twenty-first century.
Nevertheless, rebels don't necessarily always measure their categorical
imperatives in the same way.
For many among the 'untermenschen', to simply
exist is to resist. And obviously no self-delusion is involved there. For
others, to merely survive the daily oppression and daily burials of their
loved ones with their dignity and mental faculties intact, is unsurpassed
heroism.
Such earthly struggles when wholly circumscribed by moral
dimensions, even when motivated by narrow existential self-interests such as
the self-defense of one's own loved ones, or the safeguarding of one's own
sanity, is perhaps best captured by the pithy wisdom from the Islamic
tradition narrated in my 'Muslim's Voice
- Why we endeavor even when it
appears futile!':
'When the Prophet Abraham (in the Orientalist's spelling) was being thrown
in the fire by the tyrannical ruler Nimrod, all creation was in tremendous
angst. Even the stones spoke out against the tyrant. Every moral creature
endeavored to the rescue of Prophet Ibraheem (AS) to put out the fire. To
the extent that a tiny bird picked a droplet of water in its minuscule beak
and started to fly over the fire.
An angel of God asked the little bird:
“Surely you are not going to put out
the fire with that droplet(!), and surely the high flames will consume you!
- what do you think you are doing?”
The tiny bird replied:
“yes, you are right, and I know that my tiny droplet
will not save the Ulul-Azam (Great Prophet) of God. But I bring to the
endeavor of standing up to this evil tyrant whatever I am capable of, and
this tiny droplet is all I am capable of.”'
The rebel is not an ostrich.
He and she is that tiny bird with the tiny
droplet in its beak.