LIKE LIBYA AND SYRIA, VENEZUELA IS NOT “JUST ABOUT OIL”

HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. BREAKING THE EMPIRE'S MEDIA MONOPOLY IS UP TO YOU.

The G7 usurpers: the executive committee of the "Western" international plutocracy. By definition, representing pseudo democracies, they do not rest on legitimate democratic grounds. But in action and philosophy they embody Western values of racism, control, "God-given superiority", and hegemony.


[dropcap]Y[/dropcap]es, the latest research confirms that Venezuela is so rich in natural resources, that it could single-handedly satisfy all global demand for oil, for over 30 years. And it has much more than oil to offer, in its Orinoco basin and in other areas of the country.

But it is not all ‘about oil’; actually, far from it.

Those who believe that what propels the spread of Western terror all over the world, are just some ‘business interests’ and legendary Western greed, are, from my point of view, missing the point.

I noticed that such individuals and analysts actually believe that ‘capitalism is responsible for everything’, and that it creates the culture of violence of which, both victims and victimizers, already became hostages to.

After working in all corners of the world, I am now more and more convinced that capitalism is actually the result of Western culture, which is predominantly based on expansionism, exceptionalism and aggression. It is also constructed on a deeply rooted desire to control and to dictate. Financial/monetary greed is just a by-product of this culture which has elevated its superiority to something that could be defined as religious, or even religiously fundamentalist.

Or in other words: belief in its own superiority is actually now the main religion in both Europe and North America.

*

What makes the Libyan, Syrian and Venezuelan scenarios so similar? Why was the West so eager to viciously attack, and then destroy these three, at the first glance, very different countries?

The answer is simple, although it is not often uttered in the West; at least not publicly:

‘All three countries stood at the vanguard of promoting and fighting with determination for such concepts as “pan-Africanism”, “pan-Arabism” and Patria Grande – essentially Latin American independence and unity.’

Gaddafi, Al-Assad and Chavez have been, regionally and internationally, recognized as anti-imperialist fighters, inspiring and giving hope to hundreds of millions of people.

Gaddafi was murdered, Chavez was most likely killed as well, and Al-Assad and his nation have been, literally and for several long years, fighting for their survival.

The current Venezuelan President Maduro, who is determinedly loyal to the Bolivarian revolutionary ideals, has already survived at least one assassination attempt, and, is now facing direct mafia-style threats from the West. At any moment, his country could get attacked, directly or through the Latin American ‘client’ states of the West.

It is because Africa, the Middle East and Latin America have been considered, and for centuries treated, as colonies. It is because whenever people stood up, they were almost immediately smashed into pieces by the iron fist of Western imperialism. And those who think that they are in control of the world by some divine design, do not want things to change, ever.

Europe and North America are obsessed with controlling others, and in order to control, they feel that they have to make sure to exterminate all opposition in their colonies and neo-colonies.

It is a truly mental state in which the West has found itself; a state which I, in my earlier works, defined as Sadistic Personality Disorder (SPD).

To get the complete picture, one also has to recall Indonesia, which was literally liquidated as an independent and progressive nation, in 1965. Its internationalist president Sukarno (father of the Non-Aligned Movement, and close ally of the Communist Party of Indonesia – PKI) was overthrown by the handpicked (by the West), treasonous, intellectually and morally deranged, General Suharto, opening the door to turbo-capitalism, and to the unbridled plunder of the natural resources of his nation. Once a guiding light for the entire Asian independence struggle, after the US/UK/Australia-orchestrated extreme genocide, Indonesia has been reduced to nothing more than a lobotomized and dirt-poor ‘client’ state of the West.

The West has an incredible capacity to identify true regional independence leaders; to smear them, to make them vulnerable by inventing and then upholding so-called ‘local opposition’, and later, by liquidating them and with them, also their countries and even their entire regions.

Sometimes, the West attacks particular countries, as was the case with Iran (1953), Iraq, or Nicaragua. But more often, it goes directly for the ‘big fish’ – leaders of regional opposition – such as Libya, Indonesia, Syria, and now, Venezuela.

Many defiant individuals have literally been murdered already: Gaddafi, Hussein, Lumumba, and Chavez, to name just a few.

And of course, whatever it does, the West is trying to destroy the greatest leaders of the anti-Western and anti-imperialist coalition: Russia and China.

*

It is all far from only being about oil, or about profits.

The West needs to rule. It is obsessed with controlling the world, with feeling superior and exceptional. It is a game, a deadly game. For centuries, the West has been behaving like a fundamentalist religious fanatic, and its people have never even noticed that their world views have actually became synonymous with exceptionalism, and with cultural superiority. That is why the West is so successful in creating and injecting extremist religious movements of all denominations, into virtually all parts of the world: from Oceania to Asia, from Africa to Latin America, and of course, to China. Western leaders are ‘at home’ with Christian, Muslim or even Buddhist extremists.

*

But Syria has managed to survive, and up to today it is standing. The only reason why the government forces are not taking the last terrorist bastion, Idlib, yet, is because the civilian population would suffer tremendous losses during the battle.

Venezuela is also refusing to kneel and to surrender. And it is clear that if the West and its allies dared to attack, the resistance, the millions of people, would fight for the villages and countryside, and if needed, would withdraw to the jungle and wage a guerilla liberation war against the occupiers, and against the treasonous elites.

Washington, London, Paris and Madrid are clearly using an extremely outdated strategy: one that worked against Libya, but which failed squarely in Syria.

Recently, in Syria, near the frontline of Idlib, two top commanders told me that they are fighting “not only for Syria, but for the entire oppressed world, including Venezuela.” They clearly detected that the West is using precisely the same strategy against Caracas, which it tried to use against Damascus.

Now, Venezuela is also suffering and fighting for the entire oppressed world.

It has ‘no right to fail’, as Syria had no right to surrender.

The destruction of Libya had already brought a tremendously negative impact on Africa. And it has opened the doors to the renewed and unbridled French plunder of the continent. France was promptly joined by the U.K. and the U.S.A.

Syria is the last bastion in the Middle East. It is all there is now, resisting the total control of the Middle East by the West. Syria and Iran. But Iran is not yet a ‘front’, although often it appears that soon it might become one.

Venezuela cannot fall, for the same reasons. It is at the northern extreme of South America. Below, there is an entire continent; terrorized by Europe and North America, for decades and centuries: brutalized, plundered, tortured. South America, where tens of millions used to be exterminated like animals, forced to convert to Christianity, robbed of everything and ordered to follow bizarre Western political and economic models.

In Brazil, the progressive socialist government of the PT had been already overthrown.

If Venezuela falls, everything could be lost, for decades, maybe even centuries.

And so, it will fight. Together with those few other countries that are still left standing in this ‘Western Hemisphere’; countries which the dictators in Washington D.C. openly describe as ‘their backyard’.

Caracas stands and fights for the vast slums of Peru, for destitute millions in Paraguay, for Brazilian favelas, for privatized aquifers and the murdered rain forest in Brazil.

As Syria has been fighting for the Palestine, for the destitute minorities in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, for Yemen, for Iraq and Afghanistan – two countries robbed of almost everything by NATO.

Russia has already showed what it can do for its Arab brothers, and now is demonstrating its willingness to support its another close ally – Venezuela.

China is rapidly joining the coalition of anti-imperialist fighters, and so is South Africa.
*

No - Venezuela is not only about oil.

It is about the West being able to close access to the Panama Canal, by Chinese ships.

It is about the total control of the world: ideological, political, economic and social. About liquidating all opposition in the Western hemisphere.

If Venezuela falls, the West may dare to attack Nicaragua, and then the bastion of socialism and internationalism – Cuba.

That is why it – Venezuela - should never be allowed to fall.

The battle for Venezuela is now already raging, on all fronts, including the ideological one. There, we are not only fighting for Caracas, Maracaibo or for Ciudad Bolivar: we are fighting for the entire oppressed world, as we did and are doing in Damascus, Aleppo, Homs and Idlib, as we may soon have to do in many other cities, all over the world. For as long as Western imperialism is alive; for as long as it is not going to give up its dreams of controlling and ruining the entire planet, we cannot rest, we cannot let down our guard, we cannot celebrate final victory in any part of the world.

Therefore, this is all far from being ‘just about oil’. It is about the survival of our planet.


About the Author
Andre Vltchek is a philosopher, novelist, filmmaker and investigative journalist. He has covered wars and conflicts in dozens of countries. Three of his latest books are his tribute to “The Great October Socialist Revolution” a revolutionary novel “Aurora” and a bestselling work of political non-fiction: “Exposing Lies Of The Empire”. View his other books here. Watch Rwanda Gambit, his groundbreaking documentary about Rwanda and DRCongo and his film/dialogue with Noam Chomsky “On Western Terrorism”. Vltchek presently resides in East Asia and the Middle East, and continues to work around the world. He can be reached through his website and his Twitter.



Parting shot—a word from the editors
The Best Definition of Donald Trump We Have Found

In his zeal to prove to his antagonists in the War Party that he is as bloodthirsty as their champion, Hillary Clinton, and more manly than Barack Obama, Trump seems to have gone “play-crazy” -- acting like an unpredictable maniac in order to terrorize the Russians into forcing some kind of dramatic concessions from their Syrian allies, or risk Armageddon.However, the “play-crazy” gambit can only work when the leader is, in real life, a disciplined and intelligent actor, who knows precisely what actual boundaries must not be crossed. That ain’t Donald Trump -- a pitifully shallow and ill-disciplined man, emotionally handicapped by obscene privilege and cognitively crippled by white American chauvinism. By pushing Trump into a corner and demanding that he display his most bellicose self, or be ceaselessly mocked as a “puppet” and minion of Russia, a lesser power, the War Party and its media and clandestine services have created a perfect storm of mayhem that may consume us all. Glen Ford, Editor in Chief, Black Agenda Report 




There Is No Such Thing As A Moderate Mainstream Centrist



horiz-long grey

HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. SURVIVAL DEPENDS ON IT.

[dropcap]I[/dropcap] just watched two mainstream political videos back-to-back from what is conventionally referred to as America’s political “center”, and just by coincidence they happened to completely contradict each other. The first was a Bill Maher segment in which he barely even attempted to tell any jokes, spending the time instead explaining to his viewers why the Republican Party is “the party of Putin.” The second video was a recent CNN interview with Congressman Ed Royce, Chairman of the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs, who proclaimed that the US needs to be “more aggressive” toward Russia “across the board”, and described his party’s unified efforts to help escalate that aggression.

Royce is a Republican.

I have never recommended that anyone watch a Bill Maher video before, and I don’t expect that I ever will again, but this segment was really extraordinary in the shrillness and seriousness with which Maher advanced his ridiculous argument that the Republican Party loves Russia. I recommend taking a look at it and just noting the near absence of actual jokes and the few pity laughs the audience gives him. It’s fascinating:

Prior to that segment Maher had on the professional liar and “Saint Mueller Preserve Us” t-shirt salesman Malcolm Nance to give a pretend expert assessment of US intelligence and Russia. During that interview Nance falsely claimed that the Russian president was a “former director of the KGB,” and Maher ejaculated that he wishes the US intelligence community would stage a coup and take over the government of the United States.

This is what passes for the American political “center” today. Two mainstream parties, both backed to the hilt by the entirety of corporate media from coast to coast, arguing with each other over who is doing more to help advance cold war aggressions between two nuclear superpowers. They’re not arguing about whether or not the world should be destroyed, they’re arguing over who gets to push the button.

This is because both of America’s mainstream parties are fully owned and operated by a nationless plutocracy whose nationless empire is fed by war, ecocide and exploitation, and so are the media outlets which report on those parties. The Democrats and the Republicans advance policies which benefit the warmongering, ecocidal and exploitative agendas of their plutocratic owners, and then argue on Fox and CNN over who’s doing it best.

There is nothing moderate about any of this. The term “centrist” is meant to imply the moderate position centralized between two extremes, the far left and the far right, but the important issues being advanced by the Bill Maher/Ed Royce so-called center don’t fit anywhere on the left-to-right political spectrum which puts socialism on the left and capitalism on the right.


This is why I say that mainstream moderate centrists are a myth. They don’t exist. The notion that the US should definitely be escalating tensions with a nuclear superpower is being promoted by these mainstream “centrists”, as was the destruction of Iraq, Libya, and Syria, as is the continued decimation of the environment and economic injustice caused by rampant neoliberalism, as is the ever-expanding Orwellian surveillance network of the US and its international intelligence alliance, but these sociopathic policies have no place anywhere on the left-to-right spectrum anymore than the idea that it’s great to stomp on puppies does.

Where would you say someone who likes to stomp on puppy dogs sits on the political spectrum? Does her pro-puppy stomping position actually tell you anything about her political ideology or her position on socialist vs free market solutions?

Imagine if every time you turned on a TV screen or went to look up the news online, there was nothing but news reports about how important it is for everyone to stomp on puppies as often as possible. There’s lively debate about whether one’s left foot or right foot should be used to stomp on the puppies, but there’s a unanimous consensus that the puppies must be stomped upon. Because this idea is unanimously circulated to the general public and solemnly agreed upon by plutocrat-funded experts and authorities, puppy stomping has become a mainstream position that most people agree is good and right. This would be labeled the moderate, centrist position by the majority.

If you were to say to these people that you think it’s always bad and wrong to stomp puppies to death under any circumstances and using either foot, they’d brand you a crazed lunatic. The talking heads on television might even run an occasional special about the deranged extremist and their ponies-and-unicorns absolutist anti-puppy stomping position.

Now imagine if you met someone who agreed with you that it’s bad and wrong to stomp on puppy dogs. Their anti-puppy stomping position wouldn’t actually tell you anything about the rest of their political ideology, but you both agree that stomping on puppies is something that should probably be avoided. To the mainstream “centrists” in our hypothetical scenario, you would both look like you’re politically aligned with one another, even if you’ve got nothing else in common besides your opposition to puppy stomping. You might support economic equality and workers owning the means of production, and the other person might believe in rugged individualism and free market solutions to all problems, but to the mainstream, you’re both the same.


“Horseshoe theory!” they might exclaim. “They both moved so far away from the center that they’re now closer to each other than they are to us!”

And maybe that hurts your feelings. You don’t like to be told that your values have somehow led you to embrace their opposite; that you strayed so far from moderation that you now stand for everything you thought you oppose. But it only hurts because it isn’t true.

I often see horseshoe theory being used by mainstream Democrats to accuse progressives and socialists of being closer to the far right than they are to the Hillary Clinton “center”, which is a very effective shutdown because those groups generally oppose the things that the far right stands for. I’ve been told that libertarians and other antiwar conservatives are often smeared by Republican-aligned “centrists” in the same way on their side of the spectrum. But it’s pure fallacy. The fact that you might oppose military expansionism or whatever doesn’t make you ideologically “closer” to someone on the opposite end of the political spectrum anymore than mutual opposition to puppy stomping does.

Horseshoe theory is only true in the sense that the further you move away from establishment narratives, the less you buy into them. It doesn’t matter what your ideological reason for moving away from the CNN/CIA mainstream narratives, because as long as you’re not buying into the indoctrination, those narratives no longer make sense. The only way to see things like the drug war, support for Israeli government massacres of Palestinian protesters, or facilitating the slaughter of Yemeni civilians as normal and acceptable is to be propagandized into it; otherwise it just looks like the barbarism that it is. Recognizing the evils of mainstream “centrism” doesn’t make you ideologically similar to someone on the other side of the political spectrum who sees the same thing, it just means you’re two people who don’t like stomping on puppies.

 

There are of course people who espouse a central position on the left-right spectrum between proper communism and unregulated capitalism, as well as a central position between anarchism and totalitarianism, but those who maintain such a position without accepting the perverse omnicidal doctrines of the CNN/CIA mainstream are as rare as hen’s teeth. They are not mainstream by any stretch of the imagination.

No, what most people think of as “centrists” are actually violent, ecocidal, oppressive Orwellian extremists. The only reason they get to paint themselves as moderates is because vast fortunes have been spent on mass media propaganda to turn those depraved positions into mainstream perspectives. The fact that they’ve bought their way into the majority consensus doesn’t make them moderate, sensible or sane, though. Mainstream narratives do not have any rightful claim to truth or health, and everyone who sees any part of their lies should oppose those lies tooth and claw, wherever they sit on the political spectrum.

The best way to overthrow the oligarchs who profit from and promote this dangerous mainstream doctrine is to relentlessly attack the corporate media propaganda machine they use to manufacture consent for it. Expose their lies wherever you see them and ignore all their attempts to shame and bully you away from doing so. We can’t afford to let these monsters dictate mainstream perspectives any longer.

__________________________

The best way to make sure you see the stuff I publish is to get on the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My articles are entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, checking out my podcast, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal, or buying my book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers.

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

About the Author
 
Caitlin Johnstone
is a brave journalist, political junkie, relentless feminist, champion of the 99 percent. And a powerful counter-propaganda tactician.
 


 Creative Commons License  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

horiz-long grey

Parting shot—a word from the editors
The Best Definition of Donald Trump We Have Found

In his zeal to prove to his antagonists in the War Party that he is as bloodthirsty as their champion, Hillary Clinton, and more manly than Barack Obama, Trump seems to have gone “play-crazy” -- acting like an unpredictable maniac in order to terrorize the Russians into forcing some kind of dramatic concessions from their Syrian allies, or risk Armageddon.However, the “play-crazy” gambit can only work when the leader is, in real life, a disciplined and intelligent actor, who knows precisely what actual boundaries must not be crossed. That ain’t Donald Trump -- a pitifully shallow and ill-disciplined man, emotionally handicapped by obscene privilege and cognitively crippled by white American chauvinism. By pushing Trump into a corner and demanding that he display his most bellicose self, or be ceaselessly mocked as a “puppet” and minion of Russia, a lesser power, the War Party and its media and clandestine services have created a perfect storm of mayhem that may consume us all. Glen Ford, Editor in Chief, Black Agenda Report 


black-horizontal




Financial Surgery Demanded by Class Fluid Majority

horiz-long grey

HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. SURVIVAL DEPENDS ON IT.

Friday, March 8, 2019

capitalism

"Culture of Capitalism" (Puchner)


About the Author
Frank Scott is founding editor of legalienate.blogspot.com. He lives in Richmond, California.



 




Meet Pierre Omidyar, billionaire patron of US regime change operations, neocons & activist media

HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. SURVIVAL DEPENDS ON IT.


An ongoing series in MintPress News, written by Alexander Rubinstein and Max Blumenthal, is a rare look into the projects undertaken by the “progressive philanthropreneur,” who has been praised by the liberal interventionist establishment for following in the footsteps of George Soros but attracts far less media attention.

“Part of the reason for doing this investigation was to inspire more scrutiny of Pierre Omidyar,” Rubinstein told RT. “There are mountains of newsworthy bits of information about many of the organizations he funds, but the sad reality is that it would require a team of at least half a dozen journalists working overtime to fully make sense of it all.”


Detail of a chart showing the connections between Pierre Omidyar and various media outlets, foundations, activists and outfits. © MintPress News


The second part in Blumenthal and Rubinstein’s series, published Wednesday, took a particular interest in Omidyar’s ties to organizations promoting “regime change.” In Ukraine, it was a TV station (Hromadske) that backed what turned into a violent 2014 coup against the government in Kiev. In Zimbabwe, Omidyar money funded a “cultural activist network” that campaigned for the ouster of President Robert Mugabe in 2017. And in the Philippines Omidyar is backing The Rappler, a news site opposed to President Rodrigo Duterte that is developing surveillance technologies like a “mood meter” of the audience to capture – and channel? – “non-rational reactions.”

Not progressivism but power

Omidyar is not doing this on his own, either, working hand in hand with US Agency for International Aid and Development (USAID) and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

“He has the money and – for one reason or another– the desire to participate in such destabilizing policies,” Rubinstein told RT, noting that the billionaire’s embrace of such projects makes him “the perfect private partner for the US government” in seeking regime change abroad.

 

How does a self-described progressive find himself riding the horse of regime change? This is one of the questions Rubinstein and Blumenthal hope further research will answer. Their digging has found Omidyar’s money behind the Alliance for Securing Democracy and The Bulwark – projects led by NeverTrump neoconservative Bill Kristol that push “Russiagate” and carry the torch of interventionism.

“If partnering with the neocon think tank guru who was a main conduit for US government messaging in the lead-up to the Iraq War is ‘progressive’ then I think it’s time we retire the term,” Rubinstein told RT.

He believes that Omidyar is not driving the regime-change agenda, but going along with it in “the perfect alliance of convenience.”

 

 

“If you’re looking for a coherent ideology that permeates through each of Omidyar’s investments, it’s not progressivism: it’s power… and power lies with empire,” Rubinstein said.

More specifically, Omidyar is looking to manage all areas of modern life, from journalism and transportation to banking and finance and government administration, journalist Yasha Levine, author of ‘Surveillance Valley: The Secret Military History of the Internet,’ told MintPress.

To him it’s not just about running a single service, but integrating things together to give technocrats, business executives and government officials a God’s-eye view of the world – to manage and control society more efficiently.

The role of Omidyar and other billionaires – who would be called ‘oligarchs’ if they were Russian but keep being presented as ‘philanthropists’ in the West – in influencing media and politics around the world is woefully under-examined, Rubinstein and Blumenthal argue.

Controlled or ‘responsible’ opposition?

[dropcap]P[/dropcap]art of the problem is that Omidyar funds a wide range of media outlets through foundations, nonprofits and other cutouts, and many journalists who consider themselves independent or progressive aspire to work at Omidyar-backed Intercept, famous for publishing (some of) the documents leaked by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden in 2013.

 

“All of the media ventures funded by Omidyar have one thing in common: their slickness,” Rubinstein said, noting that the “cutting edge design, high production values, and the esoteric portrayal of the process of reporting” all contribute to creating the image of Omidyar-backed outlets as the “responsible opposition” in contrast to outlets with a more shoestring budget.

While Intercept editor Glenn Greenwald has been sharply critical of US foreign policy and the ‘Russiagate’ conspiracy theory, other writers at the outlet have “carried water for al-Qaeda in Syria” and pushed Russiagate, said Rubinstein.

He described as “incredibly troubling” the fact that The Intercept has rolled out only a portion of the Snowden documents, de facto making them serve the agenda of Omidyar and his First Look Media rather than be responsibly released to the public, as Snowden intended.


 

Creative Commons License
THIS WORK IS LICENSED UNDER A Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License




Who Rules the Anglosphere?

HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. SURVIVAL DEPENDS ON IT.


By Moti Nissani  • (First iteration on  
Invisible Government by Garveate. Courtesy: Rowan Wolf

“[The Controllers of the Invisible Government] would continue to grow in strength, until they had the whole silly world, the whole credulous world, the whole ingenuous world, in their hands. Anyone who would challenge them, attempt to expose them, show them unconcealed and naked, would be murdered, laughed at, called mad, ignored, or denounced as a fantasy-weaver.” — Taylor Caldwell, Captains and the Kings, 1972

The Controllers

This article argues that the five major countries of the Anglosphere — Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK, and the US — are governed behind the scenes by a coterie. This coterie shapes historical events, accounts for the near-uniformity of these five countries’ political developments, and enjoys partial or full control of most nations of the world. As far as we can guess, this coterie is comprised of a few banking families and their allies and subordinates in the information, corporate, military, intelligence, secret society, and “religious” worlds.

This coterie and its members go by such names as the deep state, One Bank, bankers, oligarchs, Directors, Men in the Shadows, Owners, or Princes of Power. In this series, I shall refer to the entity itself as the Invisible Government and, following Aldous Huxley, to its head honchos as the Controllers.

What is it that the Controllers are after? Why aren’t they content with what they already have? The best guess is that they are just as sick as the fictional Eddorians:

While not essentially bloodthirsty—that is, not loving bloodshed for its own sweet sake—they were no more averse to blood-letting than they were in favor of it. Any amount of killing which would or which might advance an Eddorian toward his goal was commendable; useless slaughter was frowned upon, not because it was slaughter, but because it was useless—and hence inefficient. And, instead of the multiplicity of goals sought by the various entities of any race of Civilization, each and every Eddorian had only one. The same one: power. Power! P-O-W-E-R!! (Doc Smith, Triplanetary, 1948)

Likewise, the head of the Invisible Government in This Perfect Day reveals his real motives:

“CHIP, LISTEN TO ME,” HE SAID, LEANING FORWARD, “THERE’S JOY IN HAVING IT, IN CONTROLLING, IN BEING THE ONLY ONE.”

_________

Why Prove the Reality of the Invisible Government?

I’m not aware of any near-conclusive proof for the existence of the Invisible Government. This article attempts to close that gap.

Also, most people are not even dimly aware of the Invisible Government. And even the few who are awake can still be mesmerized by the charade of elections, still subscribe to the fiction that the president of the USA is elected by the people (in reality, he is selected and disposed of by the Controllers), still look upon said president as an independent actor, still talk about him as “the most powerful man in the world.” They fail to see a simple truth: It doesn’t matter who the president of the USA is, who sits in Congress or on the Supreme Court, who performs for the mainstream media or organized religion. It doesn’t matter who writes for the New York Times, who recites at National Public Radio, who avers whatever in any of the major think tanks. All these people are jumping jacks. Hopefully, proving the reality of the Invisible Government will help some people extricate themselves from the Controllers’ pervasive propaganda.

But, you may wonder: Is it conceivable that so many people mistake puppets for puppeteers? Hollywood provides a trivial illustration. Most movie watchers know the actors, but few know the controllers behind the camera: producers, scriptwriters, and directors.

I shall explore elsewhere the profound strategic implications of shifting our focus from the puppets to the puppeteers. If mercenaries are invading your republic, your most logical target is their financial sponsor. Once you effectively shine the light on, impoverish, arrest, intimidate, or assassinate this sponsor, the looting of your country will cease. Likewise, reformers and revolutionaries must shift their attention from the likes of Monsanto, British Petroleum, President of the United States, Senior Senator from Arizona, Governor of Wisconsin, or Chancellor of Germany, to the handful of their financial sponsors.

_________

Who are the Controllers?

I want to know who the men in the shadows are.Jackson Browne

Jeff Nielson offers the following brilliant deduction:

At first glance; the question appears elementary. The One Bank is a financial crime syndicate which controls 40% of the global economy – a global economy with annual GDP of roughly $70 trillion. Clearly the owners of the One Bank would have to be “the world’s richest people” (richest men?).

Here the Corporate media is only too happy to be of service to us. Once a year; we are presented with a “world’s richest list”, which is then parroted by all of the other outlets of the Big Media oligopoly, ad nauseam. Thus, we simply peruse this list for the names at the top, and we have our “owners” of the One Bank. Et voila!

More than 90% of the actual wealth in the world today (real and paper) is hidden from us.

Instead, the only rational answer is that there is another, entire tier of the “world’s richest”, an echelon above all the B-List Billionaires on the official lists. The real “world’s richest” are, in fact, not billionaires at all, but rather trillionaires: the Oligarch Trillionaires who own (among other things) the One Bank.

How wealthy are these Oligarchs? Not only are these Oligarchs wealthy enough to be able to hide their names (and fortunes) from all public scrutiny, these trillionaires wield enough power to even prevent the word “trillionaire” from being recognized as an official word in our dictionaries.

Nielson then identifies the Controllers’ with the Rothschild clan.

For my part, I have been trying to fathom the Controllers’ identities for a long time. I’ve read many competing speculations but never encountered a definitive answer. So I have some vague notions about their identity and suspect that somehow the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers (Rs&Rs) are involved.

Apart from that, I can only offer a few queries.

To avoid assassination, the Controllers typically rely on proxies, shadows, and surveillance mirrors. As we shall soon see, besides the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers sit atop an immense web of regimentation. So, are the Rs&Rs collaborating as equals? Are they competitors? Or are the Rockefellers merely the American agents of the Rothschilds? (not farfetched—the “mighty” J.P. Morgan was a Rothschild agent).

Above the ordinary billionaires, way up in the stratosphere, Nielson says, are the trillionaires. That could be another way of identifying the men in the shadows: Do the Rothschild and Rockefeller clans control trillions? Does the Catholic Church? Do British or Dutch royalties? Do some secret societies?

The intelligence agencies, the police, the armed forces of the USA, UK, Israel, and allied countries, have a license to kill, and they could perhaps do away with the bankers and become the top dogs. Why don’t they? How do the Controllers keep these Praetorian Guards in line?

It’s important to note, however, that our limited information about the Controllers’ identity in no way invalidates our forthcoming conclusion that the Controllers, conniving in the background, are the real power brokers. Humans have always known that water exists, even though they were often ignorant of its constituent parts. The same goes for the Invisible Government: Truth-seekers have excellent reasons to believe it exists, although information about its internal structure and the identity of its members remains as elusive as they are.

_________

Evidence Supporting the Existence of the Invisible Government

Insider Quotes: Many Insiders Tried to Alert us:

BANKING ESTABLISHMENTS ARE MORE DANGEROUS THAN STANDING ARMIES. — THOMAS JEFFERSON, 1816A POWER HAS RISEN UP IN THE GOVERNMENT GREATER THAN THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES, CONSISTING OF MANY AND VARIOUS POWERFUL INTERESTS, COMBINED IN ONE MASS, AND HELD TOGETHER BY THE COHESIVE POWER OF THE VAST SURPLUS IN BANKS.– JOHN C. CALHOUN, 1836

AS A RESULT OF THE WAR, CORPORATIONS HAVE BEEN ENTHRONED AND AN ERA OF CORRUPTION IN HIGH PLACES WILL FOLLOW, AND THE MONEY POWER OF THE COUNTRY WILL ENDEAVOUR TO PROLONG ITS REIGN BY WORKING UPON THE PREJUDICES OF THE PEOPLE UNTIL ALL WEALTH IS AGGREGATED IN A FEW HANDS AND THE REPUBLIC IS DESTROYED.–ABRAHAM LINCOLN

BEHIND THE OSTENSIBLE GOVERNMENT SITS ENTHRONED AN INVISIBLE GOVERNMENT OWING NO ALLEGIANCE AND ACKNOWLEDGING NO RESPONSIBILITY TO THE PEOPLE. TO DESTROY THIS INVISIBLE GOVERNMENT, TO BEFOUL THE UNHOLY ALLIANCE BETWEEN CORRUPT BUSINESS AND CORRUPT POLITICS IS THE FIRST TASK OF THE STATESMANSHIP OF THE DAY.—FROM THE PLATFORM OF PRESIDENT THEODORE ROOSEVELT’S PROGRESSIVE (“BULL MOOSE”) PARTY

[W]E HAVE COME TO BE ONE OF THE WORST RULED, ONE OF THE MOST COMPLETELY CONTROLLED AND DOMINATED, GOVERNMENTS IN THE CIVILIZED WORLDNO LONGER A GOVERNMENT BY FREE OPINION, NO LONGER A GOVERNMENT BY CONVICTION AND THE VOTE OF THE MAJORITY, BUT A GOVERNMENT BY THE OPINION AND THE DURESS OF SMALL GROUPS OF DOMINANT MEN. – WOODROW WILSON, 1913


“The real menace of our Republic is the invisible government, which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy legs over our cities, states and nation. To depart from mere generalizations, let me say that at the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as the international bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both parties, write political platforms, make catspaws of party leaders, use the leading men of private organizations, and resort to every device to place in nomination for high public office only such candidates as will be amenable to the dictates of corrupt big business. These international bankers and Rockefeller–Standard Oil interests control the majority of the newspapers and magazines in this country. They use the columns of these papers to club into submission or drive out of office public officials who refuse to do the bidding of the powerful corrupt cliques which compose the invisible government. It operates under cover of a self-created screen [and] seizes our executive officers, legislative bodies, schools, courts, newspapers and every agency created for the public protection.” — John Hylan, 1922

“I find that the Morgan [=Rothschild] and Rockefeller groups alone held, together, 341 directorships in 112 banks, railroad, insurance, and other corporations, and one of this group made an after-dinner speech in which he said that a newspaper report had asserted that 12 men in the United States controlled the business of the Nation, and in the same speech to this group he said, ‘And I am one of the 12 and you the balance, and this statement is correct.’ . . . Unless we provide for the redistribution of wealth in this country, the country is doomed; there is going to be no country left here very long.” — Huey Long, 1932

WHEN THE FEDERAL RESERVE ACT WAS PASSED, THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES DID NOT PERCEIVE . . . THAT THIS COUNTRY WAS TO SUPPLY FINANCIAL POWER TO AN INTERNATIONAL SUPERSTATE — A SUPERSTATE CONTROLLED BY INTERNATIONAL BANKERS AND INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIALISTS ACTING TOGETHER TO ENSLAVE THE WORLD FOR THEIR OWN PLEASURE.”– CONGRESSMAN LOUIS T. MCFADDEN, 1932

THE REAL TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, AS YOU AND I KNOW, THAT A FINANCIAL ELEMENT IN THE LARGE CENTERS HAS OWNED THE GOVERNMENT EVER SINCE THE DAYS OF ANDREW JACKSON.— FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT, 1933

WallaceAmericanFascists

The Rockefellers and their allies have, for at least fifty years, been carefully following a plan to use their economic power to gain political control of first America, and then the rest of the world. Do I mean conspiracy? Yes, I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent. — Congressman Larry P. McDonald, 1975

_________

Views of Other Knowledgeable Observers[dropcap]T[/dropcap]he first quote is from an outraged journalist (in those bygone days when some mainstream journalists defended truth and people). The next two are from high-level captive intellectuals.

The treason of the Senate! Treason is a strong word, but not too strong, rather too weak, to characterize the situation in which the Senate is the eager, resourceful, indefatigable agent of interests [the Rockefellers] as hostile to the American people as any invading army could be, and vastly more dangerous; interests that manipulate the prosperity produced by all, so that it heaps up riches for the few; interests whose growth and power can only mean the degradation of the people, of the educated into sycophants, of the masses toward serfdom. — David Graham Phillips, Treason of the Senate, 1906

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the BernaysPropagandamasses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our countryWe are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. — Edward Bernays, 1928

There grew up in the twentieth century a power structure between London and New York which penetrated deeply into university life, the press, and the practice of foreign policy. . . . In addition to their power over government based on government financing and personal influence, bankers could steer governments in ways they wished them to go by other pressures. the advice given to governments by bankers . . . was consistently good for bankers, but was often disastrous for governments, businessmen, and the people generally. — Carroll Quigley

_________

Invisibility Slips

An article in one of the Invisible Government’s chief propaganda organsclearly underscores who is really in charge of the UK:

Governed either by or on behalf of the people who fleece us, we cannot be surprised to discover that all public services are being re-engineered for the benefit of private capital. . . . The financial sector exploits an astonishing political privilege: the City of London [London’s financial district] is the only jurisdiction in the UK not fully subject to the authority of parliament. In fact, the relationship seems to work the other way. Behind the Speaker’s chair in the House of Commons sits theRemembrancer, whose job is to ensure that the interests of the City of London are recognised by the elected members.

In the U.S., the Rockefellers played a key role for some 140 years. David Rockefeller in particular, in rare exhibitionist moments, likes to brag:

We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time magazine, and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promise of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The super-national sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.

_________

David-Rockefeller3[dropcap]S[/dropcap]o, we have it straight from the Psychopath’s mouth: It’s Rockefeller and his lackeys—and not the nominal governments—who are conspiratorially developing their “plan for the world” and who possess enough power to do so. If they get their way, we shall become the slaves to conscience-less bankers like David Rockefeller and to such “intellectual” flunkeys of theirs as Kissinger, Brzezinski, Friedman, Greenspan, and Sachs.

In another overweening moment, David Rockefeller allowed these lines to be inserted into his own encyclopedia:

Rockefeller has met with and advised every American President since Eisenhower… President Jimmy Carter offered him the positions of United States Secretary of the Treasury and Federal Reserve Chairman but he declined both instead preferring a private role… Rockefeller has been able to act as bridge to various interests around the world, including Saddam Hussein and Communist leaders such as Fidel Castro, Nikita Khrushchev, and Mikhail Gorbachev… Rockefeller also reportedly has connections to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). David was extensively briefed on covert intelligence… Additionally, he serves as the only member of the Advisory Board for the Bilderberg Group… In 1992, he was selected as a leading member of the Russian-American Bankers Forum, an advisory group set up by the head of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to advise Russia on the modernization of its banking system, with the full endorsement of President Boris Yeltsin… Rockefeller began a lifelong association with the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) when he joined as a director in 1949, the youngest member appointed to that position yet. He would later become head of the nominating committee for future membership and after that the chairman of this foreign policy think-tank. In 1965, Rockefeller and other businessmen formed the Council of the Americas to stimulate and support economic integration in the Americas. In 1992, at a Council sponsored forum, Rockefeller proposed a “Western Hemisphere free trade area”, which subsequently became the Free Trade Area of the Americas in a Miami summit in 1994… Rockefeller helped found the Trilateral Commission in July 1973.

Given this web of subjection, given the Rockefellers’ 140-year-long dominance of American politics, it seems reasonable to suppose that the Rockefeller clans belongs to the exclusive club of world puppeteers.

_________

UniformityNear-identical policies suggest that the same entity(s) is pulling strings everywhere.

At times, the Controllers are careless, treating us to such bizarre spectacle as the “heads” of Canada and Australia reciting the same speech. Is it conspiratorial to suppose that they were reading a speech handed to them by someone possessing more power than they could ever dream of having?

Here is another trivial, and yet suggestive, example of convergence:

What do New York City and London have in common? Both are eliminating their public libraries against the will of the public and replacing them with luxury housing, using secretive, deceptive tactics. . . . It is almost as if the authors of the London and NYC articles copied each other and substituted different libraries, one from London, the other from NYC.

That grotesque uniformity applies to all key policies of the Anglosphere and its colonies. They all fight “terror” and are subjected to “terror,” they all deliberately and needlessly impoverish and poison their people, they all pay lip service to environmental stewardship—while steadily undermining the physical and biological foundations of life itself.

Or take the curious case of Crimea. Any decent person who knows what really happened in the Ukraine since the 2014 CIA regime-change operation would agree that the people of Crimea—mostly anti-fascist Russians—had a right to secede from Ukraine and join their historical Russian home. Instead, the official policies of all Western countries is that this act of Russian “aggression” calls for nuclear brinkmanship that could cost—deliberately or accidentally—the lives of billions. Only a central authority controlling all these countries could bring about such suicidal compliance.

How far would the Controllers go to achieve their stated goal of “full spectrum dominance,” using the USA as their primary tool? 1. Neither the USA nor any of its allies is under the remotest threat of being invaded or encroached on by anyone. 2. The Controllers plan to enrich and empower themselves by investing $10,000 dollars of each American’s household money on weapons of mass destruction (like the one shown nearby). Couldn’t the average American put that money to better use elsewhere? 3. The Controllers probably have underground cities to wait out the aftermath of multiple explosions. Do you have a similar hiding place? 4. Does their striving for power justify the killing of billions and the possible extinction—accidental or deliberate—of humanity? 5. Why, in heaven’s name, do ordinary people take such irresponsible brinkmanship lying down?
How far would the Controllers go to achieve their stated goal of “full spectrum dominance,” using the USA as their primary tool? 1. Neither the USA nor any of its allies is under the remotest threat of being invaded or encroached on by anyone. 2. The Controllers plan to enrich and empower themselves by investing $10,000 dollars of each American’s household money on weapons of mass destruction (like the one shown nearby). Couldn’t the average American put that money to better use elsewhere? 3. The Controllers probably have underground cities to wait out the aftermath of multiple explosions. Do you have a similar hiding place? 4. Does their striving for power justify the killing of billions and the possible extinction—accidental or deliberate—of humanity? 5. Why, in heaven’s name, do ordinary people take such irresponsible brinkmanship lying down?

 _________

Aaron Russo’s Testimony

Shortly before dying of cancer, renowned filmmaker Aaron Russo said:

SO I HAD A FRIEND, NICK ROCKEFELLER, WHO WAS ONE OF THE ROCKEFELLER FAMILY. . . . AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE USED TO TALK ABOUT . . . THE GOALS OF THE BANKING INDUSTRY — NOT JUST THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM BUT THE PRIVATE BANKS IN GERMANY, AND ENGLAND, ALL OVER ITALY, ALL OVER THE WORLD — THEY ALL WORK TOGETHER, THEY’RE ALL CENTRAL BANKS. . . . AND SO, THE ULTIMATE GOAL THAT THESE PEOPLE HAVE IN MIND IS THE GOAL TO CREATE A ONE-WORLD GOVERNMENT, RUN BY THE BANKING INDUSTRY. . . THERE’LL BE NO MORE CASH. . . . AND I USED TO SAY TO HIM THAT I NEVER REALLY DID THAT BECAUSE THAT WASN’T WHERE I WAS COMING FROM. AS MUCH AS I LIKE YOU, NICK, YOUR WAY ISN’T MY WAY, WE’RE ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE FENCE. I DON’T BELIEVE IN ENSLAVING PEOPLE.

[Rockefeller said something like]:

WHAT DO YOU CARE ABOUT THEM? WHAT DO YOU CARE ABOUT THOSE PEOPLE? WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE TO YOU? TAKE CARE OF YOUR OWN LIFE. DO THE BEST YOU CAN FOR YOU AND YOUR FAMILY. WHAT DO THE REST OF THE PEOPLE MEAN TO YOU? THEY DON’T MEAN ANYTHING TO YOU. THEY’RE JUST SERFS, THEY’RE JUST PEOPLE.”

It was just a lack of caring. And that’s just not who I was. It was just sort of cold.

_________

Massive Concentration of Wealth

“You’re looking at the most expensive Congress money can buy.” Bill Moyers, 2013

Jeff Nielson reminds us:

Roughly 2½ years ago, readers were introduced to a paradigm of crime, corruption, and control which they now know as “the One Bank.” First they were presented with a definition and description of this crime syndicate.

That definition came via a massive computer model constructed by a trio of Swiss academics, and cited with favor by Forbes magazine. The computer model was based upon data involving more than 10 million “economic actors,” both individuals and corporations, and the conclusions which that model produced were nothing less than shocking.

The One Bank is “a super-entity” comprised of 144 corporate fronts, with approximately ¾ of these corporate fronts being financial intermediaries (i.e. “banks”). According to the Swiss computer model; via these 144 corporate tentacles, the One Bank controls approximately 40% of the global economy. The only thing more appalling than the massive size of this crime syndicate is its massive illegality.

Attentive readers will notice that there is nothing new under the sun: This computer model echoes what Huey Long said 84 years ago.

The golden rule of politics states: He who has the gold, rules. Wouldn’t the owners of ill-gotten almost everything use their wealth to rule the world?

_________

The Controllers are above the Law

Here is Jeff Nielson again:

On a near weekly basis; the Big Banks of the West are caught-and-convicted (but never punished), perpetrating criminal conspiracies literally thousands of times larger than any other financial crimes in human history. The U.S. government has now publicly proclaimed that its Big Banks have a license to steal.

Another example is provided by a U.S. Congressional report, entitled “Too Big to Jail: Inside the Obama Justice Department’s Decision Not to Hold Wall Street Accountable.” This report proved that—“despite criminal wrongdoing as insidious as supporting major drug cartels and catering to states considered enemies of the United States”—certain Big Banks are above the law.

That is precisely what you would expect from a Department of Justice that is ruled by the very individuals it is obligated to put behind bars.

_________

Challenging the Controllers is a Life- or Career-Threatening Business

[dropcap]I[/dropcap]f the Invisible Government exists, then its control of government and information sources confers upon it a license to sideline, smear, incarcerate, or kill, its influential challengers.

This subject has been covered extensively elsewhere; for the moment we only need to mention that 4 of the 12 people cited in this posting for hostile criticisms of the Invisible Government were probably assassinated: Presidential candidate Huey Long, muckraking journalist David Graham Phillips, Congressman Louis McFadden (“heart attack,” having survived two earlier assassination attempts), and Congressman Larry McDonald (airplane “accident”).

Four others in this list died or were incapacitated comparatively young: Ex-President Theodore Roosevelt died at age 60, President Wilson was incapacitated in office, age 62, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt died in office (years after surviving a coup attempt) age 63, and Aaron Russo died of cancer, age 64.

On the other hand, activist Upton Sinclair died at age 90. Henry A. Wallace died at 77, Oscar Callaway at 74, and NYC ex-mayor John Hylan died at 67. All four were viciously smeared by the Rockefeller media. Thanks to those media and the Controllers’ power, the last three were unceremoniously evicted from the political world.

These data are certainly more consistent with the existence of an all-powerful Invisible Government than with its absence.

_________

The Acknowledged Power of Billionaires

The Rockefellers and Rothschilds (Rs&Rs) hand-pick a few shrewd yet acquiescent individuals to positions of political power (e.g., Rockefeller stooges Kissinger or Brzezinski) or, in all likelihood, help some people become billionaires (e.g., Bill Gates, Mikhail Khodorkovsky). In return, the politicians promise obedience and the billionaires undertake to toe the line and never, ever, share their excessive wealth with the people. Some of these handpicked billionaires—unlike their cautious masters—are kept in the limelight while promoting their masters’ agenda (so that, if push comes to shove, they, and not their benefactors, will be pitchforked).

Here are a few examples:

Russia’s Criminal Oligarchs

In Russia, the Rs&Rs created, out of thin air, a few plundering oligarchs. One, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, was powerful enough at one point to challenge a popular, democratically-elected, government.

According to Andrei Raevsky, a titanic struggle is being waged between Russian patriots and the Controllers’ oligarchs who are still running Russian finance and banking, key economic ministries, and the Central Bank. These oligarchs “are, by far, the single biggest threat . . . to the Russian people as a whole.”

George Soros

David Galland and Stephen McBride write:

During the 1980s and 1990s, Soros used his extraordinary wealth to bankroll and fund revolutions in dozens of European nations, including Czechoslovakia, Croatia, and Yugoslavia. He achieved this by funneling money to political opposition parties, publishing houses, and independent media in these nations.

There’s no doubt about Soros’s great influence on US foreign policy. In an October 1995 PBS interview with Charlie Rose, he said, “I do now have access [to US Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott]. There is no question. We actually work together [on Eastern European policy].

If you wonder why Soros meddled in these nations’ affairs, part of the answer may lie in the fact that during and after the chaos, he invested heavily in assets in each of the respective countries.

He then used Columbia University economist Jeffrey Sachs to advise the fledgling governments to privatize all public assets immediately, thus allowing Soros to sell the assets he had acquired during the turmoil into newly formed open markets.

Having succeeded in advancing his agenda in Europe through regime change—and profiting in the process—he soon turned his attention to the big stage, the United States.”

Why is Soros spending a fortune establishing a variety of organizations, mimicking his “successes” in Europe? For one simple reason: to buy political power.

More recently, Soros has given more than $33 million to the Black Lives Matter group, which has been involved in outbreaks of social unrest in Ferguson, Missouri, and Baltimore, Maryland, in 2015. Both of these incidents contributed to a worsening of race relations across America.

He is intent on destroying national borders and creating a global governance structure with unlimited powers. From his comments directed toward Viktor Orbán, we can see he clearly views national leaders as his juniors, expecting them to become puppets that sell his narrative to the ignorant masses. . . .

By all appearances, Soros is conspiring against humanity and is hell-bent on the destruction of Western democracies.

Soros alone, it would appear, wields more power than America’s Congress, President, and Supreme Court. Moreover, is it just a coincidence that Soros carries out David Rockefeller’s stated agenda?

Sheldon Adelson

Eric Margolis writes about Netanyahu:

[IN 2015] CAME THE TRIUMPHANT VISIT TO CONGRESS BY ISRAEL’S RIGHTWING PRIME MINISTER . . . CONGRESS PUT ON A TRULY REVOLTING DISPLAY OF SYCOPHANCY, SERVILITY AND BROWNNOSING . . . THAT INCLUDED 23 RAPTUROUS STANDING OVATIONS.

If you have an exceptionally strong stomach, you might want to watch this video:

This is neither the first time, nor the worst: In 2011, in a disgraceful, shocking, display of subservience, the thoroughly corrupt Netanyahu received 29 standing ovations.

Why are these politicians openly betraying humanity and the American people? The intrigues of one minor billionaire, working probably with the explicit or tacit consent of the Invisible Government, provide a partial answer.

“[Sheldon Adelson] has already threatened to invest unlimited sums of money to prevent the reelection of any Senator or Representative who is absent from Netanyahu’s speech.”

"Political parties in the United States? What political parties?"

Gambling godfather Sheldon Adelson invested $92 million in the 2012 presidential election cycle

_________

Historical Episodes Illustrating the Invisible Government’s Enormous Power

American “Medicine:” Follow the Rockefellers

No other peaceful population, probably since the 1839 Opium Wars, has been so devastated by a drug epidemic encouraged by a government.—James Petras and Robin Eastman-Abaya (Genocide by Prescription)

Cutthroat oilmen, moneychangers, and despoilers of everything: John D. Rockefeller Sr. and Jr.

Cutthroat oilmen, moneychangers, and despoilers of everything: John D. Rockefeller Sr. and Jr.

Isn’t it curious that the life expectancy at birth of people born in Spain or Switzerland is 83 years, while in the USA it is 79 (38th place in the world)—even though per capita spending on health in the USA is roughly 3.5 times greater than in Spain (in 2013, $9,146 vs. $2581)? Have you ever asked yourself why a Cuban born today is likely to live as long as her American counterpart, even though the per capita spending on health in the USA is 15 times larger than in Cuba?

James Corbett:

As Americans . . . wonder how the country became enslaved to the highest healthcare costs in the world, we turn back the pages to look at how the modern medical paradigm came together in the early 20th century, courtesy of the Rockefeller Foundation and their cronies.

[The healthcare industry came into being] “as a result of a concerted and carefully plotted plan that was laid out generations ago by people with malice of forethought. . . . By taking over the medical industry in 1910 through studies which he made through the Carnegie foundation, John D. Rockefeller emerged as the kingpin of the medical monopoly in the United States. And he now presided over an allopathic system of medicine, controlled through every legislature by accreditation of hospitals, control of physicians, control of medications and which is essentially what we have today. . . . Interestingly enough, the Rockefellers control every major drug company in the world, and when I say control, I mean directly. . . . I think we understand that profit isn’t in and of itself a motivating driving factor for the David Rockefellers and others of the world. . . . America became the most expensive healthcare system in the world . . . through methodical planning over the course of generations by people with almost unthinkable amounts of wealth.

You might want to click on the nearby link, before your next chemotherapy session, bi-annual dental X-rays, or visit to a conventional physician, dentist, or pharmacist:

[youtube watch?v=X6J_7PvWoMw]

Prohibition: Follow the Rockefellers

Using alcohol as an alternative to oil would actually drive down food prices, help enrich the soil, and have a lot of other benefits. . . . So if alcohol can provide a cheaper and better fuel than gasoline, why doesn’t anyone talk about it today?

Well, John D. Rockefeller, under the ruse of Christian temperance, gave 4 million dollars to a group of old ladies and told them to fight for Prohibition (they successfully used the money to buy off Congress). Why? Rockefeller owned Standard Oil, the main company pushing gas as an alternative fuel to alcohol. By getting Congress to pass Prohibition laws, Rockefeller eliminated his competition.

Global Brainwashing Operations: Follow the Rockefellers

William Hearst remarked: “The newspapers control the nation.” The Controllers understood that, and wisely decided to subvert most information sources. After all, why should criminals who can print as much money as they wish, steal national gold hordes, manipulate governments, and possess a license to sideline, steal, defame, and kill, have to put up with inconvenient truths? Why should they have to tolerate the likes of David Graham Phillips writing in a main circulation magazine about their crime syndicate?

The wily Rockefellers rose to the occasion, with the sad result that most people—intellectuals included—remain clueless because they read newspapers, listen to radio, watch television, go to school, and study “history” books.

We may note in passing that only one in a thousand sees the obvious: As in the case of cyanide poisoning, the only way to prevent brain poisoning is to avoid exposure.

In 1917, Congressman Oscar Callaway explained how the Controllers colonized our minds:

In March, 1915, the J.P. Morgan interests, the steel, shipbuilding, and powder interest, and their subsidiary organizations, got together 12 men high up in the newspaper world and employed them to select the most influential newspapers in the United States and sufficient number of them to control, generally, the policy of the daily press. . . . They found it was only necessary to purchase the control of 25 of the greatest papers. An agreement was reached; the policy of the papers was bought, to be paid for by the month; an editor was furnished for each paper to properly supervise and edit information regarding the questions of preparedness, militarism, financial policies, and other things of national and international nature considered vital to the interests of the purchasers.

To be sure, truth served money and power long before 1915. Thomas Jefferson famously said in 1807:

I REALLY LOOK WITH COMMISERATION OVER THE GREAT BODY OF MY FELLOW CITIZENS, WHO, READING NEWSPAPERS, LIVE AND DIE IN THE BELIEF THAT THEY HAVE KNOWN SOMETHING OF WHAT HAS BEEN PASSING IN THE WORLD IN THEIR TIME.

The 1915 and subsequent campaigns merely refined the conversion of mainstream journalists into presstitutes. Here, for instance, is Upton Sinclair, writing in 1919:

I was determined to get something done about the atrocious conditions under which men, women and children were working the Chicago stockyards. In my efforts to get something done, I was like an animal in a cage. The bars of this cage were newspapers, which stood between me and the public; and inside the cage I roamed up and down, testing one bar after another, and finding them impossible to break.

Every seeker of compassion and rationality since then would recognize Sinclair’s cage as her own.

_______________

EDITORIAL DISCLOSURE
All content herein is owned by author exclusively.  Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, TGP, authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians or Veterans Today Network (VT).  Some content may be satirical in nature. All images within are full responsibility of author.


ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Moti Nissaniis the compiler of “Revolutionary’s Toolkit.” This article first appeared in The Greanville PostMany thanks to Dr. Rowan Wolf for helping to improve an earlier draft.

Creative Commons License
THIS WORK IS LICENSED UNDER A Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS