Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Shadow Government’ Category

Break the matrix.

Mainstream is, generally, the common current of thought of the majority. It is a term most often applied in the arts (i.e., music, literature, and performance). This includes:

  • something that is ordinary or usual;
  • something that is familiar to the masses;
  • something that is available to the general public.

As such, the mainstream includes all popular culture, typically disseminated by mass media.

Mass media is a term used to denote a section of the media specifically envisioned and designed to reach a very large audience such as the population of a nation state.

Toward the end of the 20th century, the advent of the World Wide Web marked the first era in which any individual could have a means of exposure on a scale comparable to that of mass media. For the first time, anyone with a web site can address a global audience.

The invention of the Internet has also allowed breaking news stories to reach around the globe within minutes. This rapid growth of instantaneous, decentralized communication is often deemed likely to change mass media and its relationship to society.

The internet is quickly becoming the center of mass media.

FOX News Investigative Reporters Fired For Telling The Truth

The Fox News Channel has been the subject of several controversies. Critics of the channel accuse it of political bias towards the right. The network has denied such allegations. There have been many accusations of bias, as well as some studies that support such accusations.

In politics, right-wing, the political right, and the right are terms used in the spectrum of left-right politics, and much like the opposite appellation of left-wing, it has a broad variety of definitions.

Censorship of Ron Paul:

Ron Paul is on the “right”, so why doesn’t Fox News like Ron Paul?

He’s not their kind of right. Ron Paul is a constitutional-conservative-libertarian.

Rupert Murdoch, and the people who control the media, are neo-cons (a political philosophy that is actually leftist, but pretends to be on the right).

Right-libertarianism, more commonly called Libertarian conservatism, describes certain political ideologies with views between libertarianism and right-wing conservatism, such as limited government and capitalism.

Part 1

Part 2

Read Full Post »

The solar system is warming.

But it is the sun – not humans – that is causing climate change. Even the ice caps on Mars are melting. So tell me, how did our SUVs do that?

Formerly ignorant of the nature of the earth’s climate, and having trust in popular opinion and the media, many have quickly accepted the false notion of a constant global climate.gore_firegloablawarminghoax.jpg

Thankfully, I’m no longer one of those people.

It used to make me angry that some people denied ‘the facts’. But now I’m angry at myself, for simply accepting popular opinion and the media without learning the truth for myself.

This is not to say that global warming isn’t real. In fact, global warming is real. But it is not caused by humans or carbon dioxide. I do believe in good environmental policy. We should not pollute or destroy our environment. But we should also not accept the propaganda, over-exaggerate the facts, and fail to do our own research.

Did you know that only 70 years ago there was a global cooling scare, where it was declared that the world was going into an ice age?

Propaganda is a valuable tool for conspirators. We need to be concerned about the people and the governments that lie to us. They are the true enemy; they are our greatest threat, for which we should be terribly concerned – not the climate.

Documentaries:
CBC – Doomsday Called Off
– 44 mins
The Great Global Warming Swindle – 1 hr 15 mins

The big question is, what are the motivations behind this extraordinary hoax?

In a speech given to the US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works on July 28, 2003, entitled “The Science of Climate Change”, Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla) concluded by asking the following question:

“With all of the hysteria, all of the fear, all of the phony science, could it be that man-made global warming is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people?”

Inhofe has suggested that supporters of Kyoto such as Jacques Chirac are aiming at global governance.

Quoting Inhofe, the American Free Press stated,

“It was an unguarded moment for Chirac. World government is the main goal of the secret Bilderberg group, of which he is a luminary.”

  1. Fear / New enemy
    Does the so-called ‘war on terror’ ring a bell? Not so long ago, we also ‘faced’ the propagated fears of global cooling, population explosions, West Nile virus, SARS, Avian Flu, killer bees… But all of these former ‘threats’ have either been debunked by scientists or simply forgotten.
    By creating a common enemy (i.e. terrorists, global warming, communism, drugs) and striking fear and hopelessness in the population, the people come to crave the ‘aid’ of their government – to save and protect them.
    We are expected to give-up our rights and our freedoms for the sake of ‘protection’. And when our silent, invisible, fabricated enemy shall be conquered, the people shall rejoice, be thankful, and ever-more submissive to the will of their controllers. This strategy has used by tyrannies and dictatorships throughout history. People, ignorant and distracted from reality, remain oblivious, uneducated, and under control.
  2. Distraction
    Don’t fear your government! Don’t investigate into the real source of your ‘threats’ and ‘enemies’. If ‘terrorists’ didn’t scare the hell out of you, surely the imaginary tidal waves, hurricanes, tornadoes, global apocalypse and Al Gore films will! Go back to your televisions and video games – you’re expected to have the government be your guardian.
  3. Dissuade global development
    Indeed, the global warming scare has the detrimental effect on poorer nations, whereby wealthy societies may claim, “Do not develop, burn oil or coal, drive cars, create industry, or any other means of energy consumption – because if you do you will only bring us closer to our demise.” But why wouldn’t our puppet-masters want these countries to grow? A weaker nation is a controllable, vulnerable nation.
  4. Global-warming industry
    The creation of a giant industry has resulted in major climate-chaos profiteering.
    Surprisingly similar to the drug-war, it has already come to the point where to expose the truth will produce strong opposition by the people who’s jobs depend on it.
  5. Grants and funding
    In some cases, scientists critical of the global warming theory have been denied funding. Likewise, there are cases where hundreds of climate scientists have twisted their results to support the ‘climate change theory’ in order to protect their research funding. All this to embrace and adhere to a consensus of global disaster. Why?
    Because under this guise, government spending can now far more easily be granted, acceptably, due to a belief that we ‘need’ to do all we can to defeat the invisible enemy.
  6. Taxes
    Many are willing to pay the government to take care of their problems. Under the guise of this threat, governments and ‘protocols’ will certainly be used as an excuse to increase the taxes on carbon emissions. The ‘carbon tax’ will generate massive global revenues with which to fund the further establishment of the new world order, while making the people and the economy weaker.
  7. International governance
    The United Nations, Kyoto Protocol, and other systems have been devised to support the growth of global governance.
  8. Political leverage
    Like the so-called ‘war on terror’, the enemy of climate change gives the appearance of a threat great enough to excuse political policies and practices claiming to work against it. Also, it is an effective means of drawing support for the politicians. Furthermore, climate chaos has been used to pass bills and acts designed to combat the situation, while at the same time promoting hidden agendas.
  9. Justify oil-price increase
    Are people willing to pay more for oil and gasoline, believing high prices are justified to help reduce consumption?
  10. Other secret motives?
    The ultimate objective of the powerful elite who control the government, media, and society is to manipulate people and their governments into the formation of a border-less, world government. The complexities of this situation certainly exceed the obvious, and there are surely many other advantages the Bilderberg group and other elites are exploiting from this extraordinary hoax.

Read Full Post »

In the 70s, this film was produced by G. Edward Griffin to announce the very issues that a movement of people are finally waking-up to today. Is this perhaps the first documentary made to expose the underlying powers of governments?

Some will automatically wish to dismiss these statements as fact, but to have any desire to seek the truth would surely allow one to have an open mind. The greatest conspiracy may be – the conspiracy to make you laugh at the idea of ‘conspiracy’. Free your mind.

Full video (Google)
Playlist (YouTube)
Download (windows media, 49 MB – 47 minutes)

Conclusion:

1) There is an has been, for some time, a conspiracy among some of the richest people in the world – a conspiracy that virtually owns the money systems of the major, non-communist nations. This monopoly is protected by the power of the respected governments, and is used to perpetuate the conspiracy’ vast wealth, by the creation of money out of nothing.

2) In the United States, this monetary fraud is perpetuated though the Federal Reserve System. Although the executive branch theoretically has some control over this system though occasional appointments, in reality, it is this system and those behind it who control the executive branch.

3) The capitalist conspiracy, in this country, surfaces to public view in the form of the semi-secret Council on Foreign Relations. It’s members exercise their control over the nation through government, tax-exempt foundations, centers of education, and the mass-communications media.

4) On the surface, the capitalist conspiracy appears to oppose communism. It spends billions of dollars on spectacular military displays of anti-communism all around the world. But never to the extent of seriously harming the enemy, and certainly not to the extent of defeating it. Meanwhile, behind the scenes, the conspiracy always has nourished and aided communism, both at home and abroad. It does this, not because it is pro-communist, but because it needs the appearance of a formidable foe, and the chaos by-product of a managed conflict, to advance its own goal of totalitarian world government.

5) There is much evidence indicating that the capitalist and communist conspiracies both are directed by a single, master-conspiracy which may have continuity with the Order of the Illuminati, which was founded [240] years ago. But this historical question is not nearly as important as the immediate question of what can be done about it today.

6) As for our response, we must begin to dismantle the conspiracy’s machine of big-government. We must restore American independence. We must return our schools to local control. We must protect our police forces from federal aid, which is a certain path to a national police force controlled from Washington. We must denounce revenue sharing as a transparent device leading to control over local government. We must raise-up men for political office who not only talk about reducing government, but who will do it once elected. And that means men who are totally independent of establishment politics.

7) We must reduce the Federal Reserve System to a service function of clearing checks between banks only. Merely turning the system as it stands over to the Federal Government, as some have suggested, will not solve the problem. The same people would control it either way. The root of the evil is that money is created out of nothing, and the insiders could to that today just as easily directly through government, as they do through the Federal Reserve System. The ultimate solution is to prevent anyone, in or out of government, from manipulating the money supply. And the only way to do that, is to return our money to the gold and silver standards.

8) We must expose conspiracy to public view. If somehow, every American could be made aware of the facts contained in this presentation. If it were possible to circumvent the establishments channels of mass-communication and carry this message person-to-person to our friends and neighbors and fellow club members, the conspiracy would collapse – like a house of cards.

G. Edward Griffin – Ron Paul vs NWO Establishment

Read Full Post »

Have you peed your pants yet?

North American Army created without OK by Congress
U.S., Canada military ink deal to fight domestic emergencies
Posted: February 24, 2008

By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2008 WorldNetDaily

In a ceremony that received virtually no attention in the American media, the United States and Canada signed a military agreement Feb. 14 allowing the armed forces from one nation to support the armed forces of the other nation during a domestic civil emergency, even one that does not involve a cross-border crisis.

The agreement, defined as a Civil Assistance Plan, was not submitted to Congress for approval, nor did Congress pass any law or treaty specifically authorizing this military agreement to combine the operations of the armed forces of the United States and Canada in the event of a wide range of domestic civil disturbances ranging from violent storms, to health epidemics, to civil riots or terrorist attacks.

READ FULL

Read Full Post »

Read Full Post »

This article can be read on the CFR website, here. It can also be read on this page, in full, and explained.

Please watch the videos below, and continue to learn about this outstanding treat to American sovereignty.

Sovereignty and globalisation
Author: Richard N. Haass, President, Council on Foreign Relations
February 17, 2006
Project SyndicatePublic enemy

The world’s 190-plus states now co-exist with a larger number of powerful non-sovereign and at least partly (and often largely) independent actors, ranging from corporations to non-government organisations (NGOs), from terrorist groups to drug cartels, from regional and global institutions to banks and private equity funds.

Let me translate: There are over 190 countries in the world, they “co-exist” (are in partnership) with “independent actors” such as terrorists and drug cartels, institutions (regional and global), banks and bankers. They even have an acronym for them, the “NGOs“.

The sovereign state is influenced by them (for better and for worse) as much as it is able to influence them. The near monopoly of power once enjoyed by sovereign entities is being eroded.

He says: Terrorists, drug lords, bankers, etc. have control over these many countries of the world (which isn’t entirely a bad thing). “Sovereignty… is being eroded.”

As a result, new mechanisms are needed for regional and global governance that include actors other than states.

In other words, new mechanisms – not the states – are needed to govern the world.

This is not to argue that Microsoft, Amnesty International, or Goldman Sachs be given seats in the United Nations General Assembly, but it does mean including representatives of such organisations in regional and global deliberations when they have the capacity to affect whether and how regional and global challenges are met.

The corporations that are members of the CFR should be the representatives of the world government.

Moreover, states must be prepared to cede some sovereignty to world bodies if the international system is to function.

States will have to give-up their sovereignty and become subject to the new world order.

This is already taking place in the trade realm.

The new world order agenda has already begun.

Governments agree to accept the rulings of the World Trade Organisation because on balance they benefit from an international trading order, even if a particular decision requires that they alter a practice that is their sovereign right to carry out.

Governments will prefer to give-up their sovereign rights to the order of the WTO.

Some governments are prepared to give up elements of sovereignty to address the threat of global climate change.

Global climate change is being used as a “threat” to get governments to concede their sovereignty.

Under one such arrangement, the Kyoto Protocol, which runs through 2012, signatories agree to cap specific emissions. What is needed now is a successor arrangement in which a larger number of governments, including the United States, China and India, accept emission limits or adopt common standards because they recognise that they would be worse off if no country did.

The Kyoto Protocol was a success, now a successor is needed to get more and larger governments “adopt common standards”.

All of this suggests that sovereignty must be redefined if states are to cope with globalisation.

Globalization is the end to sovereignty as we know it.

At its core, globalisation entails the increasing volume, velocity and importance of flows within and across borders of people, ideas, greenhouse gases, goods, dollars, drugs, viruses, emails, weapons, and a good deal else, challenging one of sovereignty’s fundamental principles: the ability to control what crosses borders in either direction.

Eliminating borders, globalization increases the flows of everything (including viruses, weapons, pollution, drugs…); contrary to the principals of sovereignty.

Sovereign states increasingly measure their vulnerability not to one another, but to forces beyond their control.

Sovereign states fear “forces beyond their control”.

Globalisation thus implies that sovereignty is not only becoming weaker in reality, but that it needs to become weaker.

Globalisation destroys sovereignty.

States would be wise to weaken sovereignty in order to protect themselves, because they cannot insulate themselves from what goes on elsewhere. Sovereignty is no longer a sanctuary.

“Forces beyond their control” will destroy the sovereignty of states; they cannot defend themselves from globalization.

This was demonstrated by the American and world reaction to terrorism. Afghanistan’s Taliban government, which provided access and support to al-Qaeda, was removed from power.

The fear of terrorism can be used to overthrow government.

Similarly, America’s preventive war against an Iraq that ignored the UN and was thought to possess weapons of mass destruction showed that sovereignty no longer provides absolute protection.

Iraq showed how a sovereign can be targeted against based only on presumptive (or false) evidence.

Imagine how the world would react if some government were known to be planning to use or transfer a nuclear device or had already done so. Many would argue correctly that sovereignty provides no protection for that state.

If a government is accused of having intention to use a nuclear device, nothing could protect them.

Necessity may also lead to reducing or even eliminating sovereignty when a government, whether from a lack of capacity or conscious policy, is unable to provide for the basic needs of its citizens. This reflects not simply scruples, but a view that state failure and genocide can lead to destabilising refugee flows and create openings for terrorists to take root.

The ‘war on terror‘ can use the excuse of government scruples to eliminate a state’s sovereignty.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation’s intervention in Kosovo was an example where a number of governments chose to violate the sovereignty of another government (Serbia) to stop ethnic cleansing and genocide. By contrast, the mass killing in Rwanda a decade ago and now in Darfur, Sudan, demonstrate the high price of judging sovereignty to be supreme and thus doing little to prevent the slaughter of innocents.

NATO is an example of violating a sovereign state under the excuse of genocide and mass killing.

Our notion of sovereignty must therefore be conditional, even contractual, rather than absolute. If a state fails to live up to its side of the bargain by sponsoring terrorism, either transferring or using weapons of mass destruction, or conducting genocide, then it forfeits the normal benefits of sovereignty and opens itself up to attack, removal or occupation. The diplomatic challenge for this era is to gain widespread support for principles of state conduct and a procedure for determining remedies when these principles are violated.

Sovereignties must agree to principals against terrorism, WMDs, and genocide, or they will be open to attack, and remedied, [by another government].

The goal should be to redefine sovereignty for the era of globalisation, to find a balance between a world of fully sovereign states and an international system of either world government or anarchy.

Sovereignty must be redefined for “the era of globalization”; to be better suited to an international system of world government.

The basic idea of sovereignty, which still provides a useful constraint on violence between states, needs to be preserved. But the concept needs to be adapted to a world in which the main challenges to order come from what global forces do to states and what governments do to their citizens, rather than from what states do to one another.

The main challenges to Order are between global forces and states, not between states.

Read Full Post »

Watch the video responses. Show to everyone you know!

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »