Trilateral Commission (TC)

Zakheim, Zelikow and the ADL

 By M.K. Styllinski

“‘According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions,’ Rumsfeld admitted. $2.3 trillion — that’s $8,000 for every man, woman and child in America.”

— CBS News, 1/29/02


A day before the September 11 attacks in an impossible proclamation of openness, the Secretary of State for Defence Donald Rumsfeld humbly acknowledged that the Pentagon had made a tinsy-winsy error and “could not track some $2.3 trillion in transactions” (one thousand times one billion = one trillion) the worst of the rot having set in during the Clinton Administration. This figure came from the Pentagon’s own Inspector General where according to a CBS News report: “Its own auditors admit the military cannot account for 25 percent of what it spends.” [1] Though the issue had been raised before, with explanations given that it was a systems and bureaucracy problem rather than core corruption, it still begs the question: why announce it then? Or was it another coincidence to add to the burgeoning pile? Looks like Rummie was taking the opportunity to announce wholesale corruption amidst the shock of 9/11.

Just add it to the mounting list of Zio-Conservative state crimes.

Donald Rumsf 2-3 Trillions Missiing

Donald Rumsfeld

$2.3 trillion is an almost unimaginable amount of money. In fact, it is equivalent to the entire budget of the U.S. government simply vanishing. It is also true that the Resource Services Washington, accounting offices and records at the Pentagon were destroyed along with the deaths of 34 0f 65 individuals most of whom happened to be civilian accountants, book-keepers and budget analysts, who were sitting at their desks when disaster struck. [2]

There are many researchers who have found convincing evidence that the 9/11 attacks were also planned as a cover-up for financial crimes dating back to 1991. Though by no means the only reason for engineering 9/11, one investigator in particular, Mr. E.D. Heidner, has provided compelling evidence that the secretive Black Eagle Trust Fund was at the centre of a huge money laundering operation totalling $200 billion in bonds. On the board were some of the most well-known US government hawks including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, Richard Armitage and Paul Wolfowitz.

Funding a covert economic war against the Soviet Union beginning in 1991, such financial corruption required a massive laundering of money well outside of congressional and federal oversight. Wall Street and corporate investors pillaged Soviet oil, gas industries and destabilised the Soviet infrastructure while lining the coffers of Western government officials and related interests. The 9/11 attacks served to cover-up all the evidence and derail multiple federal investigations of crimes associated with the 1991 covert operation.

Heidner states:

“… hundreds of billions of dollars of government securities had to be destroyed. A critical mass of brokers from the major government security brokerages in the Twin Towers had to be eliminated to create chaos in the government securities market. A situation needed to be created wherein $240 billion dollars of covert securities could be electronically ‘cleared’ without anyone asking questions – which happened when the Federal Reserve declared an emergency and invoked its ‘emergency powers that very afternoon.’ ” [3]

Ending the Cold War and dismantling the Soviet Union required massive amounts of covert securities which were housed in the brokers’ vaults of the World Trade Centre. Just like everything else, they were pulverised on September 11th before they could be settled and cleared which was scheduled for September 12th. The Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) had been tasked with investigating these bonds and it is just so happens that the ONI headquarters was the primary target and completely destroyed during the Pentagon attack.

010914-F-8006R-002

The Pentagon attack after the collapse of a section of the outer ring. The Naval Command centre was the hardest hit with all but one of the 30 ONI employees surviving the attack.

The three major securities brokers in the World Trade Centre were Eurobrokers, Garbon Inter Capital and Cantor Fitzgerald, the latter being the largest securities dealer in the US.

Heidner also found that:

“… 41 percent of the fatalities in the Twin Towers came from Cantor Fitzgerald and Eurobrokers. 24 percent of the 125 fatalities in the Pentagon were from the Naval Command Center that housed the Office of Naval Intelligence. 29 of 30 Office of Naval Intelligence employees died. The Naval Command Center had been moved into that newly opened section of the Pentagon only a month earlier. And in the vaults beneath the World Trade Center Towers, any certificates for bonds were destroyed.

On that fateful day, the Securities and Exchange Commission declared a national emergency, and for the first time in U.S. history, invoked its emergency powers under Securities Exchange Act Section 12(k) easing regulatory restrictions for clearing and settling security trades for the next 15 days. These changes would allow an estimated $240 billion in covert government securities to be cleared upon maturity without the standard regulatory controls around identification of ownership.” [4]

If you were similarly struck by a bolt of conspiratorial speculation you might even consider that incompetent accounting and securities fraud could conceal a host of operations that needed paying for. You might also recall that unacknowledged Special Access Programs (USAP), better known as “black projects”, have currently siphoned off several trillion since 1998-2002. God only knows how much has been sucked out of the Amercian tax payer after another 13 years. (See Table below).

Year

Missing

Sources

1998

$3.4 trillion

Washington Times

1999

$2.3 trillion

Congressional meeting

2000

$1.1 trillion

Congressional meeting; Insight Magazine

2001

$2.3 trillion

CBS quoting Rumsfeld

2002

$1+ trillion

San Francisco Chronicle; CBS

Source: The Institute of Globalisation and Covert Politics [5]

Not a whisper of this astounding criminality reached the prime-time news. If it did gain a story it was wrapped up in bias which suggested this was a bureaucratic problem rather than systematic fraud that was part of “normal” government life.

One person to swiftly resign when the $2.3 missing trillions was announced was Rabbi Dov S. Zakheim the Comptroller of the Pentagon during the attacks. We must add another $1 trillion that was lost under Zakheim’s watch during his tenure from May 4, 2001 to March 10, 2004. Not only could he not account for this truly massive monetary drain of financial transactions, but dozens of missing tanks, missiles and planes. [6]

An adjunct scholar of the right-wing Heritage Foundation, a Senior Associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, he has published over 200 articles and monographs on defence issues. Zakheim is also a CFR member and signatory of the PNAC keynote paper “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” in 2000, which as the reader might recall, pushed for “a New Pearl Harbor.” [7] Zakheim’s resumé reads like a John le Carré novel, full of insider posts and covert dealing. If you were looking for a MOSSAD mole within the US administration allowed to do precisely as he pleased then Zakheim seemed to fit the bill.

zakheimDov Zakheim at a White House press briefing in 2002.

From 1985-1987 he was Deputy Under Secretary of Defence for Planning and Resources, before nesting down at the Congressional Budget Office. In 1998, Zakheim worked as a policy advisor during the Bush 2000 campaign and did such a good job that he was sworn in by the Bush Administration as Under Secretary of Defence (Comptroller) of the DOD in the following year. Zakheim also just happens to be an expert in ballistic missile technology which is somewhat unusual for a campaign advisor and Comptroller. Zakheim, who had been hob-knobbing around the Pentagon and US administrations for over 25 years had also been supplying the latest in offensive and defensive missile systems to Israel including F-15’s, F-16’s, patriot missiles, Merkava tanks, ICBM’s, nuclear smart bombs and even space satellite technology worth billions – a huge proportion of which was paid for with American tax dollars. [8] This would explain why Israel has become the top recipient of U.S. foreign aid, receiving close to $3 billion in largely military assistance each year. No wonder too, that Israel has one of the biggest air forces in the world. [9]

Merkava-1-latrun-2

Israeli Merkava Mk I MBT in Yad la-Shiryon Museum, Israel. 2005. (wikipedia)

The Rabbi had been working very hard behind the scenes to benefit Israeli military interests. This, despite Navy Intelligence Analyst and Israeli mole Jonathan Jay Pollard who was discovered and arrested for stealing “… vast quantities of classified information on Israel’s behalf for almost 18 months.” He was also linked to another US national Ben-ami Kadish, who pleaded guilty to charges of passing classified information to Israel in the same year. [10]  Dov Zakheim had no need to carry out Pollard’s remit when he had clearance to do as he wished.

It becomes somewhat clearer when we look further back to 1996 when The Washington Post reported on a Defence Investigative Service’s confidential memo warning military contractors that the Israeli government was: “’aggressively’ trying to steal U.S. military and intelligence secrets, partly by using its ‘strong ethnic ties’ to the United States to recruit spies.” When we remember the MOSSAD’s intelligence operations within the US, employing thousands of sayanim * from a Jewish socio-cultural foundation, then the “ethnic ties” becomes easier to understand.

The Post’s report continued:

482px-Peacekeeper_missile_after_silo_launch

U.S. Peacekeeper missile after silo launch (wikipedia)

“…Israel ‘aggressively collects [U.S.] military and industrial technology,’ including spy satellite data, missile defense information, and data on military aircraft, tanks, missile boats, and radars.

Drawing on the example of the Pollard case and of other Israeli espionage operations in the United States, the memo said that the country’s recruitment techniques include ‘ethnic targeting, financial aggrandizement, and identification and exploitation of individual frailties’ of US citizens.

‘Placing Israeli nationals in key industries … is a technique utilized with great success,’ the memo said.” [11]

Sounds like Zakheim to me. The memo warning was nonetheless cancelled for reasons we will look at further on.

According to artist and author Uri Dowbenko in an article from Government Executive magazine, Zakheim admitted: “… we are in the business of fighting wars” which fits like a glove into the PNAC doctrine and explains his true role within the US administration. After Zakheim conveniently resigned and washed his hands of the little matter of the missing $3 trillion, Online Journal’s Jerry Mazza states: “In May 6, 2004, Zakheim took a lucrative position at Booz Allen Hamilton, one of the most prestigious strategy consulting firms in the world. One of its clients then was Blessed Relief, a charity said to be a front for Osama bin Laden. Booz, Allen & Hamilton then also worked closely with DARPA, the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency, which is the research arm of the Department of Defense.” [12]

dovz1

Dov S. Zakheim giving a talk the Neo-Conservative Foreign Policy Initiative 2013 forum: “What Defense Does America Need?” Zakheim’s quote:  “There are things we can do, but what we shouldn’t do… is eliminate those capabilities that we will bitterly regret not having should some new contingency come up that of course we did not foresee.”  Zakheim is very big on “contingency.” Militarising America means strengthening Israel at any cost, both financially and ideologically.

Having retired as Senior Vice President at Booz Allen Hamilton in 2010, he became Senior Fellow at the CNA Corporation which operates the Centre for Naval Analyses a federally funded research and development centre founded in 1942 and serves the Departments of the Navy and other agencies. The centre pioneers research into: “… military preparedness, operations evaluation, systems analysis, foreign affairs, strategic relationships, humanitarian operations and logistics.” It has special field research studies dedicated to the Marine Corps and the “role of China in the International Order.” Their customers are essentially everyone operating within US intelligence and the Department of Defence. Its contract is administered by the Office of Naval Research (ONR) “which allows for task order awards via a DD Form 448 MIPR.” [13] (The latter being a military interdepartmental purchase request or MIPR).

Zakheim also finds time to act as a Senior Advisor at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies a right wing think-tank, and a Co-Vice Chair of Global Panel America (Global Panel Foundation) a corporate and ex-government think-tank with a globalist vision. Going back further, Dov’s grand-father Julius Zakheim (Zhabinka) was a Russian rabbi who married a relative of Karl Marx and had a leading role in paving the way for the Bolshevik Revolution. Dov’s father Rabbi Jacob I. Zakheim on the hand, was a hard core Zionist and an active member of Betar terrorist organisation which forged links with Haganah, Irgun and the Stern gangs. [14]

Aside from this background which is alarming enough, what is a dual nationality Zionist rabbi doing in control of the accounting of the United States of America?

Is that not just slightly strange notwithstanding the uneasy spy vs. spy nature of America and Israel?

Why is it that our Dov keeps coming up time and again in connection to financial irregularity and the 9/11 attacks?

spcWhat is even more interesting is that before becoming the Pentagon’s financial Tzar, he was chief executive officer and president of SPC International and an executive at System Planning Corporation, (SPC) linked to DARPA, a weapons contractor specializing in electronic warfare technologies including remote-controlled aircraft systems. The company specialises in advanced Command Transmitter Systems, designed to provide: “remote control and flight termination functions through a fully redundant, self-contained solid state system.” Although designed to control unmanned flights such as Global hawk from remote positions on the ground, one British aviation engineer said after 9/11: “the planes used in the attacks could have been equipped with, or suitable for, such remote control units.” [15]

If anyone was going to provide the technical and financial know how to turn hijacked planes into remotely controlled projectiles from the ground with hijackers as suicide patsies, then Zakheim was the man. Clearly, there should be a heavy weight suspicion concerning the role of Dov Zakheim, not just in the loss of inordinate amounts of American tax-payers’ money, his ties to militant Zionism and dubious weapons shipments to Israel, but his role in the 9/11 attacks.

Jerry Mazza mentions, coincidentally:

“… in May 2001, when Dov served at the Pentagon, it was an SPS (his firm’s) subsidiary, Tridata Corporation, that oversaw the investigation of the first ‘terrorist’ attack on the World Trade Center in 1993. This would have given them intimate knowledge of the security systems and structural blueprints of the World Trade Center. From the ’90s through 2001, WTC Security was handled by Securacom, a Kuwait-American firm, on whose board Marvin Bush, the president’s brother, sat. After 9/11, Securacom was let go, changed its name to Stratosec, and was delisted from the Stock Exchange in 2002.” [16]

It is Securacom that was hired by owner of the World Trade Centre Towers, Larry Silverstein among whose closest friends is none other than former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who was nearly falling over himself to suppress his glee on September 11th. As we might recall, when asked what the attacks would mean for US-Israeli relations: He replied: “It’s very good … Well, it’s not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy [for Israel].” It was also Mr. Netanyahu, who back in 1986, coined the phrase “the War on Terror” and who is presently a stalwart supporter of messianic cult of Chabad Lubavitch who is also calling for the destruction of Iran as part of a divine prophecy. [17] (More on this in later posts).

291040761_3_294_220-horz

Benjamin Netanyahu and Dov Zakheim cut from the same cloth – the difference is largely one of IQ.

Rabbi Dov Zakheim was merely a more obvious indication of the takeover of American politics by the Zio-Conservatives and their plans to set the USA on the road to perpetual war against Islam. Jewish-American top level posts within the administrations such as Elliot Abrams, Michael Chertoff, Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and more recently Rahm Emmanuel, all have their allegiance first and foremost to Israel. Everything was in place to launch “a catastrophic and catalyzing event” to move forward and actualise a Greater Anglo-American-Israeli domination of the Middle East.

Geo-political analyst Professor James Petras explains the broader rationale behind the 9/11 false flag:

The key to the success of the operation was to encourage terrorists and to facilitate calculated and systematic ‘neglect’ – to deliberately marginalize intelligence agents and agency reports that identified the terrorists, their plans and methods. In the subsequent investigatory hearings, it was necessary to foster the image of ‘neglect’, bureaucratic ineptness and security failures in order to cover up Administration complicity in the terrorists’ success. An absolutely essential element in mobilizing massive and unquestioning support for the launching of a world war of conquest and destruction centered in Muslim and Arab countries and people was a ‘catastrophic event’ that could be linked to the latter. [18]

And it was this “neglect” and the Intel/security “failures” which may have allowed a joint operation – despite the uneasy alliance with Israel – between top level officials of the US military, CIA, FBI and other US agencies and the MOSSAD to carry out the greatest false flag attack ever on US soil.

There is no doubt that members of the Bush Administration not only had access to intelligence reports and prior common knowledge of imminent attacks but lied under oath to the 9/11 Commission. Cheney, Rumsfeld and Condoleezza Rice among many others all covered up the fact that they knew at some point this was going to happen and likely had some part to play in its formation. However, they were clearly not the major players.


 “Al-Qaeda is the enemy,” they are an unslayable power.”

– Philip D. Zelikow, Honors College Commons lecture 2011


In 2011, author, academic, diplomat and arch-propagandist Philip D. Zelikow (another with dual US-Israel nationality) was wooed from his post as associate Professor for graduate academic programs in the University of Virginia, and appointed by President Barack Obama to his Intelligence Advisory Board. Zelikow’s special talents were crucial in persuading the public that America was on a Wild-West road to vengeful redemption and a cathartic reclamation of American values, but only if it was imposed with blood and bombs on the rest of the world. [19]

In the best tradition of Hollywood script-writing Zelikow was able to weave a fantasy for the 9/11 operation with a flourish of his propaganda quill that would have made Edward Bernays swoon with paternal pride. In a Millar Report from 1999 Zelikow writes of the importance of beliefs about history, calling attention to “‘searing’ or ‘molding’ events [that] take on ‘transcendent’ importance and, therefore, retain their power even as the experiencing generation passes from the scene.” [20] To that end, he also described himself: “as an expert in the ‘creation and maintenance of public myths.’ He defines ‘public myth’ as a “public presumption” about history that may or may not be true, but which nevertheless exerts a powerful influence on public opinion, and through that influence affects history.” [21] This is probably why he remains consultant to the Office of the Secretary of Defence and offers his expertise to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

He became the natural choice for the appointment of architect and head of the 9/11 Commission Report, leading a grouping of suitably debriefed and/or clueless ex-government officials and Congressman who could be relied upon to tow the official line and support its findings. Zelikow was tasked with writing a report that would keep the truth about 9/11 from the scrutiny of the public, civil society and wayward journalists. Given Zelikow’s skills in formulating doctrines aligned to Zio-Conservative policy he was the perfect man for the job. Indeed, according to New York Times Investigative reporter Philip Shenon: “Zelikow had written all of the chapter outlines of the 9/11 Commission Report before the Commission even began its investigation. Zelikow completely controlled the investigation, ordering underlings to basically just fill in the chapter outlines of his pre-scripted novel. The Report became a “surprise bestseller” because it reads like a novel – which is exactly what it is.” [22]

philip-zelikow

Philip D. Zelikow, Like Dov Zakheim, is big on contingency and external threats – to Israel. The latter uses financial, geopolitical  and business strategy, the former uses propaganda and myth-making talents to maintain a fictional narrative. For Israel, he was the perfect man to act as executive director for the 9/11 Commission.

It’s also worth mentioning that several members and officials related to the Commission made it quite clear that they were extremely unhappy with almost every aspect of the Report. After the Report was finally released to the press, Former New Jersey Governor and Commission Chair Thomas Kean and Vice Chair Lee H. Hamilton, former Democratic U.S. Representative from the 9th District of Indiana wrote a book in 2006 about their experiences during and after the 9/11 Commission Report. They accuse officials and authorities within the Pentagon and FAA of ignoring their recommendations, putting out disinformation and misstatements to the media and overseeing systematic obstruction during the investigations. In summary, they charge that the 9/11 Commission Report was “set up to fail” right from the start. [23]

In a world where conflicts of interest are the norm when it comes to matters even partially related to 9/11, Zelikow’s meteoric rise from genius academic to Bush /Obama favourite not only shows the illusion of Republican and Democrat differences but his talent for telegraphing future scenarios. In that sense, he operates in much the same way as Zbigniew Brzezinski during his time at the Trilateral Commission, Council on Foreign Relations and in his influential books on geo-strategy. Propaganda and myth-making are cornerstones of the Zelikow world-view as it is with any Machiavellian neophyte.

In a 1998 issue of the PNAC Mark II think-tank magazine Foreign Affairs, he co-authored an article entitled: “Catastrophic Terrorism” where Zelikow served up what appeared to be a “warning” to the faithful, but was in fact a narrative of Zio-Conservative ideology and future policy, yet again mentioning that well-worn phrase: “Like Pearl Harbor, this event would divide our past and future into a before and after. The United States (sic) might respond with draconian measures, scaling back civil liberties, allowing wider surveillance of citizens, detention of suspects and use of deadly force…” He further states: “Belatedly, Americans would judge their leaders negligent for not addressing terrorism more urgently.” [24]

Which then might lead to a situation of eyebrow-raised finger-wagging, followed by a decree to hand over ALL our freedoms and stop whining…

Zelikow was ordered by his colleague Condoleezza Rice to re-write America’s national security strategy immediately after the September 11, 2001 attacks. It was to be the sequel to PNAC’s “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” and equally important in priming minds still reeling from fear and anger from the events of 9/11. The document, “The National Security Strategy of the United States of America” was issued on September 17, 2002, and represented a turning point in the realisation of perpetual war for the world’s resources, under the guise of exporting American democracy. It would give significant credence to the formula of the “War on Terror” functioning as a propaganda nail driven into an already traumatised public mind. It was designed to bolster support for “future crime” scenarios where rogue nations would harbour Weapons of Mass Destruction intent on using them against an unprepared United States. [25]

Philip_D_Zelikow,_University_of_Virginia_(4799290374)

Zelikow delivering a lecture at the University of Virginia, July 2010.

Although Zelikow had been against CIA torture during the Bush years and had actively written against “enhanced interrogation”– at least as official policy – it was only due to the fact that the fear and anxiety induced would eventually prove counter-productive and “be exploited by zealots and fools.” [26] Zelikow is a perfect example of Brzezinskian pragmatism. Yet for his 9/11 Commission fantasy to work, certain torture related “successes” had to be made viable. For instance, the whole official story, as 9/11 academic and journalist Keith Barrett explains, hangs on “… third-hand testimony taken under brutal torture from [supposed 9/11 mastermind] Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who apparently had to be waterboarded 183 times in one month in order to brainwash him into remembering and parroting the details of Zelikow’s novel.” [27] Whether that is precisely true, Mohammed certainly claimed he provided a lot of false information which he assumed the interrogators wanted to hear in order to stop the torture, something that can be used as metaphor for almost every aspect of Zio-Conservative support for pre-emptive politics. [28]

Khalid-Sheikh-Mohammed

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed

It was for this reason that the 9/11 Commission proved to be nothing short of a whitewash thanks largely to the talents of Zelikow and his legion of presstitutes. Anyone who could think critically (which meant the MSM and Congress were automatically excluded) immediately saw the gaping holes and errors and which conveniently side-lined any reference to government culpability. To those who were naturally sceptical of the 9/11 Commission’s findings James Petras describes Zelikow’s response which was extremely telling in that he:

“… went on an insane rage, calling the sceptics ‘pathogens’ or germs whose ‘infection’ needed to be contained. With language reminiscent of a Social Darwinist diatribe, he referred to criticisms of the Commission cover up as ‘a bacteria (that) can sicken the larger body (of public opinion)’. Clearly Zelikow’s rant reflects the fear and loathing he feels for those who implicated him with a militarist regime which fabricated a pretext for a catastrophic war for Zelikow’s favourite state – Israel.” [29]

It is not simply fear and hatred operating here. We might be discerning a standard slipping of a “Mask of Sanity” so characteristic of embedded psychopaths who otherwise project an icy demeanour of clinical control and confidence. What is intriguing in the context of ponerology is the use of the exact same language, thoughts, ideas and concepts of their perceived enemies, projecting onto their accusers the very crimes of which they are guilty. In truth, Zelikow, Cheney, Karl Rove and so many others in successive US Administrations personify those “pathogens” who “sicken the larger body” of government. It is also clear that Zelikow’s allegiance is not to either the US constitution or the American people. While speaking on a panel of foreign policy experts regarding the possible implications of the September 11th attacks, he told a crowd at the University of Virginia on September 10, 2002: “I’ll tell you what I think the real threat [is] and actually has been since 1990 – it’s the threat against Israel …” [30]

Recall Prime Minister Netanyahu who told an audience at Bar Ilan University in September 2008 when he was acting head of the Likud party: “We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq,” and further added that the events had “swung American public opinion in our favor.” [31] If a politician can so brazenly cater to cheap political ambitions in public it does make one wonder what he would be willing to sanction in private. And it is very obvious indeed that Israel has a huge stake in the “Clash of Civilisations” shtick, the “War on Terror” and the whole 9/11 charade.

bibi_bomb

Netanyahu embarrassing himself in front of the UN. Since Iran is on the list of regimes to topple Netanyahu must keep pressing for an attack on Iran to fulfil Ultra-Zionist religio-political imperatives. In the same way, the events of 9/11 were a vital phase in achieving the long sought after domination of the Middle East and the extermination of Arabs, seen as the ancient Amalekites. (Photo Source: AP)

With a history of involvement in the far-right politics overseeing intelligence agencies Shin Bet, the MOSSAD and serving as Israel’s Prime Minister at the time of the 9/11 attacks, Netanyahu is the most likely candidate as one of its primary insiders or architects. He has been a major mover in politics and a prominent member of the Likud Government since 1993. The Likud Party evolved from the Irgun Jewish terrorist organisation created by Vladimir Jabotinsky, founder of the  Jewish Self-Defense Organization and ODESSA fame and is enmeshed in covert Zionist operations abroad.

Though there was the Israeli concept of “TNT,” Hebrew for “Terror Neged Terror” (“terror against terror”) which existed in the 1970s [32] it was Netanyahu’s own book Terrorism: How the West Can Win written in 1986 which first introduced the term: “War on Terror.” With undercurrents of Straussian and ultra-right aspirations throughout, he explains how the West needs “a better understanding of terrorism” in order to mobilise against it, clearly desperate for “… a coherent and united international response” so that: “… a broad-based, vigorous campaign against the terrorists and their sponsors,” can begin to take place. In other words, it provides another clarion call for both the creation of and “resistance” to a joint Western-Israeli manufactured Global War on Terror and the manifesto for a Greater Israel. [33]

Zeev_Jabotinsky

Vladimir Jabotinsky (Wikipedia)

The late expert on Arab-Israeli relations Edward W. Said spoke of the “low-level oddities” in the book which marked it out as a propaganda exercise:

Very few efforts are made to convince readers of what is being said: sources and figures are never cited; abstractions and generalizations pop up everywhere; and, except for three essays on Islam, historical argument is limited to the single proposition that terrorism has never before presented such a threat to ‘the democracies.’ I was also struck that the verb in the book’s subtitle, How the West Can Win, doesn’t seem to have an object: Win what? One wonders. So great is the number of contributors, so hortatory the tone, so confident and many the assertions, that in the end you retain little of what has been said, except that you had better get on with the fight against terrorism, whatever Netanyahu says it is. [34]

Obviously, whatever the threat may be, you can be sure it’s against Israel and we all have to step into its shadow.

Likud_Logo.svgLikud Party Logo

The forging of US-Israeli leadership in tackling the nature of terrorism was given major boost at the close of the 1970s when Netanyahu and Former Prime Minister Ehud Barak founded the Jonathan Institute named after Bibi’s brother Yoni, who was killed in the Israeli anti-terrorist raid in Entebbe, Uganda. This was partly thanks to the mentoring of Netanyahu by Betchtel board member and Reagan’s Secretary of State, George P. Shultz who saw Bibi’s fascist record as an effective tool in re-working the World Order and thus a another tool for Anglo-American dominance. To do that, he needed Zionism as much as Zionism needed the American Establishment. At that moment, Netanyahu was flavour of the month.

In June 1984, an international conference on terrorism was held in Washington, D.C., hosted by the Institute at which Shultz gave a keynote address to announce Paul Wolfowitz’s policy of pre-emptive force. He stated: “… a purely passive defense does not provide enough of a deterrent to terrorism and the states that sponsor it. It is time to think long, hard, and seriously about more active means of defense—defense through appropriate preventive or pre-emptive actions against terrorist groups before they strike.” [35] It was as if Bibi’s book and Wolfowitz’s vision had become one – all for Israel.

The conference was also the breeding ground for implementing the cooked up Intel for what would become the “axis of evil” and the invasion and destruction of Iraq. In relation to 9/11, many speculate that this was a centre for not just studying terrorism but planning it. Egyptian Intellectual, Dr. Hassan al Bana in a televised interview with a Middle Eastern TV station stated publicly that he thought Netanyahu planned 9/11 at the 1984 conference with other Establishment and Zio-Conservative luminaries.  [36] (See footnote for complete extract).

shultz-wolfowitz

George P. Shultz circa early 80s and Paul Wolfowitz  (right)

Isser Harel, the recognised founder of Israeli intelligence; former head of Shin Bet, (1948–1952) and director of Mossad, (1947-1963) was likely the inspiration – if not one of the original architects – of an ambitious attack on US soil. Journalist and author Christopher Bollyn describes a dinner meeting between Harel and American Zionist Michael D. Evans where he is told that terrorism would come to America in no uncertain terms:

Isarharel

Isser Harel spymaster and Director of the MOSSAD

“Arab terrorists would strike the tallest building in New York City, ‘a symbol of your fertility,’ Harel said. Harel had dinner with Evans on September 23, 1979, according to Evans, and told him that America’s alliance with Saudi Arabia ‘was dangerous and would develop a tolerance for terror among Americans.’ Harel went on to say that ‘Islamic fundamentalists would ultimately strike America.’

When Evans asked where the Arab terrorists would strike, Harel said: ‘In Islamic theology, the phallic symbol is very important. Your biggest phallic symbol is New York City and your tallest building will be the phallic symbol they will hit.’

… ‘Isser Harel prophesised that the tallest building in New York would be the first building hit by Islamic fundamentalists twenty-one years ago,’ Evans said in the 2004 interview.” [37]

Unless Harel was psychic, there is little doubt that one of the first intelligence agents in the world knew about the long-term planning of such an Islamic terrorist attack, if he didn’t have a hand in the planning himself. As we continue we will see that the foundation and implementation of such a design was right under everyone’s noses.

The history of Zionist influence in contemporary America and the domination of Jewish thought in the media, entertainment and political lobbying acted as the backdrop to the presence of a vast Israeli spy ring and a Zionist “fifth Column” in the US government. It has allowed individudals like Zelikow and Zakheim to work their way up through the ranks with an agenda that is not only anti-American but fanatically pro-Israel to the exclusion of all else. For the planning and execution of September 11th attacks the US needed to be infiltrated not just within the departments of military intelligence but at the level of propaganda, the legacy of which had already been firmly pioneered by the genius of Edward Bernays and others.

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has played a significant part in spying since its founding in 1913. It also happened to be the creation of B’nai B’rith founded in New York in 1843, by German-Jewish immigrants. Known as the “Sons of the Covenant” and rooted in a Jewish branch of freemasonry, it is the oldest “Jewish service organisation” in the world. [38] The House of Rothschild was involved in the manufacture of the religion which was a direct product of the criminal network agency of the Order of Zion and organised as a “covert intelligence front” to extend its PR financial Empire. [39]

ADL logoThe ADL describes itself as a “… civil rights/ human relations agency”, which “fights anti-Semitism and all forms of bigotry, defends democratic ideals and protects civil rights for all,” doing so through: “information, education, legislation, and advocacy.” [40] This however, had to be squared with San Francisco Bay area activists who were spied upon by the ADL and who sued the organisation for violation of their privacy rights as provided under California law. The 1993 ruling by the District of Attorney of San Francisco: “… released 700 pages of documents implicating the Anti-Defamation League, an organization that claims to be a defender of civil rights, in a vast spying operation directed against American citizens who were opposed to Israel’s policies in the Occupied West Bank and Gaza and to the apartheid policies of the government of South Africa and passing on information to both governments.” [41] The extensive nature of ADL’s spying activities included not just Arab Americans but “…members of Greenpeace, NAACP, the Mills College faculty and various other institutions, groups and individuals.” Political pressure caused Smith to later drop the charges settling the suit out of court in February 2002. [42]

During these investigations one of ADL’s operatives Roy Bullock was found to have been involved in CoIntelpro activities since 1960 and which even suggested an involvement in murder:

“Ten days before he was assassinated in South Africa, Chris Hani, the man who would have succeeded Nelson Mandela as the country’s president, was trailed by Bullock on a trip through California who reported on it to the South African government.” […] After Los Angeles Arab American leader Alex Odeh was murdered, Bullock was discovered to have a key, and a floor plan, of the murdered man’s office.  This is evidence that ADL operatives may have helped plan and execute political assassinations in the US and abroad.  But don’t hold your breath for the FBI to investigate or charge Bullock, or any other ADLer, in connection to these murders.” [43]

The fact that the ADL can continue to operate under the status of a tax-exempt “religious and charitable” organisation is drawn from an historic court case where B’nai B’rith could have been prosecuted for failing to register as agents of a foreign power under the U.S. Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938. A sworn testimony was given at the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in 1961, where Saul Joftes – former director general of the B’nai B’rith’s Office of International Affairs – revealed that B’nai B’rith “engages in international politics and more often than not does the bidding of the government of Israel. Its leaders make frequent trips to Israel for indoctrination and instructions.” [44]

By the 1970s however, the potato was too hot to touch and B’nai B’rith and the ADL were not prosecuted. This allowed them to carry on pretending they were charitable, religious and educational organisations rather than propaganda outposts of the Israeli government. The job of B’nai B’rith/ADL is to restrict all and every form of criticism levelled at Israel using the tools of anti-Semitism and psychological coercion.


“B’nai B’rith International’s Israel/Middle East policy includes issues such as fighting terrorism; supporting Israel’s right to defend itself; preventing Iran’s efforts to acquire nuclear weapons; preserving the unity of Jerusalem; promoting the rights of Jewish refugees from Arab and Muslim countries; and supporting direct negotiations between the parties to the Middle East conflict while affirming the importance of Israel’s critical security needs.”

bnai-brith-deplora-teorias-antisemitas-de-conspiracion

B’nai B’rith International logo

 (Since there inherent assumptions in this description from B’nai B’rith International’s website, we can deduce that Middle East policy actually serves not as a peace-making initiative for all peoples but yet another arm of Israeli propaganda, distorted geo-political ideology and Jewish ethnocentrism.

“B’nai B’rith Europe (BBE) is represented in 29 countries, with 7,000 members in more than 150 associations or lodges.  Based in Brussels, BBE has delegations at the European Parliament, the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, the United Nations in Geneva, and UNESCO in Paris.”

That belies some serious political leverage.


You might be thinking what has this got to do with the war on terror and 9/11? Quite a lot. The ADL,  B’nai B’rith and other orgranisations like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) serve as powerful buffers to Zionist and Jewish supremacy using intimidation tactics which include spying on activists and academics critical of Israel’s lobbying and the treatment of the Palestinians, all of which has increased since 9/11. According to a Counterpunch report: “… at least 51 percent of the activities at its San Francisco office were devoted to defending Israel.” Its self-anointed role as an “education organization” seems tenuous in light of its activities or, as the report bluntly stated: “The settlement offered by the ADL is recognition on its part that it could not afford to go to a trial in front of a jury and face the likelihood that more of its dirty secrets would be revealed.” [45]

There has also been a curiously close relationship between the ADL and the FBI which has oiled the wheels of the organisation on more than one occasion. The FBI routinely display ADL posters in FBI offices throughout the country and have hosted ceremonies and conferences at FBI headquarters. One such event in 2000 saw an ADL press release announcing the participation of more than 500 representatives from Law Enforcement agencies from across The U.S. in a Joint ADL-FBI Conference on Terrorism in New York. The conference was held at the FBI Academy in Quantico, VA titled: “Extremist and Terrorist Threats: Protecting America After 9/11.” This was apparently an: “outgrowth of ADL’s long-time involvement in providing information and training to law enforcement on threats posed by extremists.” Subjects under discussion were extremist groups, investigative techniques, counterterrorism strategies, domestic security and threat assessment.” [46]

ADL’s National Director Abraham H. Foxman proceeded to teach the FBI to suck eggs, exclaiming:

“Now more than ever, law enforcement must have the resources and know-how to prevent future acts of terrorism. In order to assess threats against the United States, law enforcement must have credible information about domestic and foreign extremists whose rhetoric promotes violence. Through our network of regional offices and our experts in the field, ADL is uniquely suited to aid in the war against terrorism.” Foxman went on to say that the conference was: “… an opportunity for law enforcement and extremism watchdogs to compare notes and forge alliances.” [47] [Emphasis mine]

What was being said in the above was not a plea to work together but a barely veiled command. What is a self-appointed human rights education and advocacy group doing sitting in the lap of the FBI? Could it be that the only reason for “comparing notes” and “forging alliances” from ADL’s perspective is to monitor and then subvert any FBI investigations that may be potentially threatening to the anti-Semitic barrier used to insulate it from criticism on Israel’s foreign and domestic policies?

On May 7, 2002, Robert S. Mueller III, Director of the FBI (someone who regularly lied about what he knew and didn’t know during 9/11 Congressional reports) addressed the ADL’s 24th National Leadership Conference where he said:

“A few months ago, Abe [Abraham H. Foxman] and Jess [Jess N. Hordes, ADL Washington representative] came by my office for a visit.  I appreciated their taking the time to meet with me. I have long admired and respected the work of ADL, and I appreciate your longstanding support of the FBI.  I know that under my predecessor, Louis Freeh, this partnership reached new heights. As I told Abe and Jess, I am absolutely committed to building on that relationship.” [48]

Appreciated them taking the time to meet him? Shouldn’t it be the other way around? This is the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation speaking as though he is about to take a scented bubble bath with dear old Abe and Jess and reveal more than just FBI secrets. The ADL now has access to government’s confidential investigative files with ADL employees even invited to take a ride with FBI agents making raids or arrests which are of interest to the organisation. The FBI is not wearing the trousers in this “relationship.”

It seems the FBI is still in the pocket of the ADL in 2015. Mueller’s successor was former US Deputy Attorney General during the Bush years and Senior Vice President of Lockheed Martin weapons manufacturer James Comey Jr. who has been told to continue the obsequious tradition. In a speech to ADL members he reiterated that the organisation: “… has even greater reach;” which has meant the training of “…12,000 law enforcement personnel last year alone” and the mandatory programs on the  “Hate Crimes Training Manual” developed by the ADL and FBI. With the definitions of “terrorist” suitably blurred and the FBI’s penchant for entrapment formulas, this is nothing more than indoctrination which ensures a hyper-vigilance on anti-Semitism and politically correct reflexes out of all proportion. It does however, increase Israel’s bubble of socio-cultural protection against any and all criticism. [49]

AbrahamFoxmanJan2011

Abraham H. Foxman National Director of the Anti-Defamation League; FBI director James Comey Jr. (top left) and former FBI Director Robert S. Muelller (top right) 

The ADL’s response to the Defence Investigative Service memo mentioned previously and reported by The Washington Post was an example of how to utilise the anti-Semitism canard in the face of more accusations of an Israeli spy ring. It was highly effective. Journalist R. Jeffrey Smith writes: “The warning, which described Israel as a ‘non-traditional adversary’ in the world of espionage, was circulated by the Defence Investigative Service with a memo noting similar intelligence ‘threats’ from other close U.S. allies. The warning about Israel was ‘cancelled’ and withdrawn by the Pentagon in December after senior officials decided its author had improperly singled out Jewish ‘ethnicity’ as a specific counterintelligence concern.” [50]

In a letter to Defence Secretary William J. Perry, the ADL Director Abraham Foxman launched into his job description which requires him to deflect any further scrutiny away from Zionist infiltration claiming: “This is a distressing charge which impugns American Jews and borders on anti-Semitism,” and earlier complaining about its reference to Israeli recruitment techniques but also its “harsh tone.” This thumb-sucking outrage and the mere thought that Israelis could ever employ recruitment techniques even though they are famous the world over for doing just that, all point to the real intent of the ADL. Therefore, it was of no consequence that: “Many military counterintelligence officials remain[ed] scarred by the 1985 revelation that Navy intelligence analyst Jonathan Jay Pollard stole what the memo refers to as ‘vast quantities of classified information’ on Israel’s behalf…” [51]

When society is so fearful of being labelled anti-Semitic when levelling criticism of anything remotely Jewish and/or Israeli, then the outlook is bleak when it comes to exploring 9/11 and Israel’s role. It is for this reason that all the forces of the Israeli lobbies are committed to the prohibition of any and all discussion concerning Israel and 9/11 in the mainstream media. With social surveillance riding knee-jerk PC conformity across American society it is hardly shocking that an extensive Israeli spy ring was operating all over the US and in preparation for the participation in the events of September 11th.  Does that mean that acts of anti-Semitism do not occur? We know very well that they do. Yet, we must look at the ADL in context, as arms of the overall Israeli lobby and intelligence apparatus. Anti-Semitism is as essential to the perpetuation of cultural victim-hood and geo-political ideology as entrapment is to the FBI or CIA regime change. It all feeds into the vast illusion of the terror industry and the role of state sponsorship – most importantly, the role of Israel’s MOSSAD. Unless we understand this, we are doomed to fall into their ever-present engineering of the mass mind.

The military love-hate affair with Israel continues according to a 2012 Washington Post report where the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers “… plans to supervise the construction of a five-story underground facility for an Israel Defense Forces complex … at an Israeli Air Force base near Tel Aviv.” Operating under the U.S. Foreign Military Sales program (FMS) the project is thought to be the largest yet, costing $100 million dollars of American tax payers’ money. The facility is no slap-dash affair with “… classrooms on Level 1, an auditorium on Level 3, a laboratory, shock-resistant doors, protection from non-ionizing radiation and very tight security. Clearances will be required for all construction workers, guards will be at the fence and barriers will separate it from the rest of the base.” [52]

The name of this base: “Site 9/11”.

 


* Sayanim – Describes persons of Jewish origin living outside Israel as foreign citizens and who volunteer to provide assistance to the Mossad. This includes medical care, financial support, research; intelligence gathering i.e. anything that can aid the Mossad in their global operations. Estimates put the number of sayanim in the thousands. This is one reason why the Mossad operates with fewer agents than other intelligence agencies.


Notes

[1] ‘CBS Reports Pentagon Cannot Account for $2.3 Trillion’ “According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions,’” Rumsfeld admitted. $2.3 trillion — that’s $8,000 for every man, woman and child in America.” CBS News January 29 2002. | ‘Defense Dollars’ PBS Online News Hour, February 12, 2001. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/jan-june01/dollars_2-12.html
[2] South Coast Today Pittsburgh Post-Gazette December 20, 2001. | http://www.s-t.com/daily/12-01/12-20-01/a02wn018.htm
[3] For much more information on securities fraud and Black Eagle Trust cover up read E.P. Heidner’s meticulously researched article: ‘Collateral Damage: U.S. Covert Operations and the Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001’ By E.P. Heidner: http://www.wanttoknow.info/911/Collateral-Damage-911-black_eagle_fund_trust.pdf
[4] Ibid.
[5] ‘Unacknowledged Special Access Programs: US deep black programs out of control?’ By Joël van der Reijden, September 10, 2005. Institute for the Study of Globalisation and Covert Politics. www. wikispooks.com/ISGP/index.html Veteran journalist Seymour Hersh has reported on just one USAP that he discovered set up to circumvent national and international humanitarian laws with full knowledge from Condeleeza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld, whereby in late 2001, early 2002 President Bush: “…had signed a top-secret finding, as required by law, authorizing the Defense Department to set up a specially recruited clandestine team of Special Forces operatives and others who would defy diplomatic niceties and international law and snatch — or assassinate, if necessary — identified ‘high-value’ Al Qaeda operatives anywhere in the world. Equally secret interrogation centers would be set up in allied countries where harsh treatments were meted out, unconstrained by legal limits of public disclosure. The program was hidden inside the Defense Department as an ‘unacknowledged’ special-access program, or SAP, whose operational details were known only to a few in the Pentagon, the CIA and the White House.” This would come under the net of subsequent drone attacks in Pakistan under the Obama administration amid condemnation by most people of conscience.
[6] ‘Military waste under fire / $1 trillion missing — Bush plan targets Pentagon accounting’ By Tom Abate, SanFrancisco Chronicle May 18, 2003.
[7] Radar Physics Group, sysplan.com, [cached] | Flight Termination System, sysplan.com, [cached] via http://www.911research ‘Missing Trillions Rumsfeld Buries Admission of Missing 2+ Trillion Dollars in 9/10/01’
[8] ‘US: The Fatal Flaws in the Patriot Missile System’ by Jeffrey St. Clair, Counterpunch, April 17th, 2003. |‘Israel’s Palmachim Spaceport’ Space Today, 2005. “Israel is developing an Ofeq-7 spysat and a radar satellite known as Techstar, a radar satellite, both for launch in 2008.” | Judicial Inc. http://www.72.52.208.92/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/Zakheim_surplus.htm
[9] ‘Israel To Receive $8 Billion’ By Adam Entous March 18, Reuters, 2003.
[10] ‘Defense Memo Warned of Israeli Spying; ‘Ethnic Ties’ Charge Draws ADL Rebuke’By R. Jeffrey Smith, The Washington Post, January 30, 1996, p. A1.
[11] Ibid.
[12] ‘Following Zakheim And The Pentagon Trillions To Israel And 911’ By Jerry Mazza, Online Journal Associate Editor March 28, 2007.
[13] http://www.cna.org/centers/cna | 448 MIPR or “Department of Defence Form 448, Military Interdepartmental Purchase Request” is a standard for the ease of transfer of funds between U.S. military organizations rather than limited to funding within a single entity. If one reads the reglulations and loopholes inherent in such a method it is easy to see how trillions can go missing. See: ‘Code of Federal Regulations, Title 48 – Federal Acquisition Regulations System – DD Form 448, Military Interdepartmental Purchase Request.
[14] Ibid.
[15] ‘Dov Zackheim, Pentagon Comptroller, Has Misplaced A Trillion $’ by Likud Watch Monday, Jan. 31, 2005. Cleveland Indymedia. http://www.cleveland.indymedia.org/news/2005/01/14509.php
[16] Op.cit. Mazza.
[17] A Day of Terror: The Israelis; Spilled Blood Is Seen as Bond That Draws 2 Nations Closer’ By James Bennet, The New York Times, September 12, 2001.
[18] ‘Provocations as Pretexts for Imperial War: From Pearl Harbor to 9/11.’ May 25, 2008. http://www.petras.lahaine.org/
[19] ‘Zelikow Appointed to Obama’s Intelligence Advisory Board.’ By Rob Segal, UVA Today, http://www.news.virginia.edu
[20] ‘Thinking About Political History’. By Philip Zelikow. Miller Center Report, Winter 1999.
[21] ‘Zelikow: 9/11 Master Criminal Appointed By Obama’ Obama appoints 9/11 scriptwriter & master criminal Zelikow to Intelligence Advisory Board, by Kevin Barrett, September 2011, Veterans Today. wwwveteranstoday.com
[22] p. 111; The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation By Philip Shenon. Published by Twelve, 2008. | ISBN-10: 0446580759.
[23 p.14; Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission By Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamiliton. Published by Alfred A. Knopf 2006.
[24] ‘Catastrophic Terrorism: Tackling the New Danger’. By Ashton B. Carter, John Deutch, and Philip Zelikow. Foreign Affairs, November/December 1998.
[25] ‘The National Security Strategy of the United States of America’. The Washington Post. September 17, 2002. “To forestall or prevent such hostile acts by our adversaries, the United States will, if necessary, act preemptively.”
[26] ‘Six Questions for Jane Mayer, Author of the Dark Side’ By Scott Horton, Harper’s Magazine, 14 July 2008
[27] op. cit Barrett
[28] ‘ICRC Report on the Treatment of Fourteen “High Value Detainees” in CIA Custody’ (PDF).
[29] op. cit. Petras.
[30] p.456; Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil By Michael C. Ruppert. Published by New Society Publishers, 2004.
[31] ‘Report: Netanyahu says 9/11 terror attacks good for Israel’ “According to Ma’ariv, Netanyahu said Israel is ‘benefiting from attack’ as it ‘swung American public opinion.” By Haaretz Service and Reuters, April16, 2008.
[32] Brother Against Brother:Violence and Extremism in Israeli Politics from Altalena to the Rabin Assassination By Ehud Sprinzak Published by Free Press, 1999.
[33] Terrorism: How the West Can Win By Benjamin Netanyahu. Published by Douglas & McIntyre, 1986. (Preface)
[34] ‘The Essential Terrorist’ By Edward W. Said, The Nation, August 14, 2006. http://www.thenation.com
[35] ‘Netanyahu’s Fascist Record: All Roads Lead to Shultz’ by Steven Meyer February 24, 2006 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
[36] Egyptian Intellectual: Former Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu Planned 9/11| September 11, 2004 TV Clip No. 278. The following are excerpts from an interview with Egyptian intellectual Hassan Al-Bana, that aired on Sahar 1 TV:
Dr. Hassan Al-Bana: “This is a book written by Benjamin Netanyahu on the uprooting of terrorism. He talks about attacking the Twin Towers. He talks about attacking the U.S. National Security Council, and about attacking the U.N. Take, for example, the Twin Towers operation. Such an operation doesn’t require placing a car bomb under the two towers but placing small nuclear bombs and detonating them. The scenarios were ready. This scenario was prepared by the Jews at the Jonathan Institute.”
Interviewer: “What scenario are you talking about?”
Dr. Hassan Al-Bana: “The scenario of bombing [the WTC]. I’m talking now about the bombing scenario and how it was a planned operation, and not an act of revenge. He had to find an excuse; a reason for intervention.”
Interviewer: “Dr. Hassan, you talk of the perpetrator. Are you saying there was an Israeli plan ready for operation?”
Dr. Hassan Al-Bana: “The scenario was prepared by Israel and the U.S. Henry Ford and George Bush attended the Jonathan Conference in 1984. They agreed with Netanyahu on the scenario for the bombing of the Twin Towers. When Netanyahu was asked how a force can be mobilized… He said: ‘In America you have religious factions that oppose abortions in hospitals. This religious sentiment can be exploited and channelled into these kinds of operations.’ This all exists [in writing]. Anybody who read Uprooting Terrorism [sic] and many other American books [would understand]. “Moreover, there is no such thing as a conspiracy. What conspiracy? George Bush Sr. and George Bush Jr. are the only American presidents to control the CIA. George Bush Jr. declared that the Twin Towers operation would remain completely secret.”
[37] ‘The Architecture of Terror: Mapping the Network Behind 9/11’ By Christopher Bollyn, July 25, 2008.| http://www.bollyn.com
[38] “In 2000 it was reported that Mr. Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director, was working with the Grand Master of Anglo-American Freemasonry HRH The Duke of Kent, the founder of the Jerusalem Lodge, Grand Master of the Grand Orient of Italy Count Giuliano di Bernardo, and the Worshipful Master of the prestigious Quatuor Coronati Research Lodge Lord Northhampton, who has been atop the Temple Mount conducting studies. Evidently these mystical adepts intend to reconstruct the 2,500 year old King Solomons Temple. It seems the brethren are anticipating a forthcoming resurrection of Grand Master Abiff’s architectural endevours.” – ‘British Masons And US Fundis Launch Apocalypse’ by Mark Sonnenblick Executive Intelligence Review Nov. 1, 2000 | From B’nai B’rith – The Story of a Covenant, by Edward E. Grusd, Appleton-Century, New York 1966: From the Forward pg. xi: “Those whose responsiblity it is to interpret B’nai B’rith to the public have a formidable task… from small beginnings, has grown into a vast enterprise of nearly half million men, women, and young people in forty-four countries. It has become so complex in its structure and activities that most of its members-to say nothing of others-have only a limited knowledge of its achievements, purposes, and scope. This book, the first full-length history of B’nai B’rith,…”
…From Chapter 2 – The very beginning: “B’nai B’rith was founded on October 13, 1843, for the expressed purpose of ending, or at least reducing, the chaos and anarchy in Jewish life-or, as one of the founders put it, of “uniting and elevating the Sons of Abraham. […] There were twelve founders, all in their twenties or thirties. All had been born in Germany, and had come to New York in the late 1820’s or 1830’s. All lived on the lower East Side, where most of them, at the time, were petty shopkeepers. The majority had not known one another in Germany, and only a few were acquainted before 1843…” […]  Those few included Henry Jones, Isaac Rosenbourg, William Renau, and Reuben Rodacher. They met, apparently, because they were members of the Free Masons or Odd Fellows, as well as of several secret benevolent socities…[…]  …There is a legend, which is occasionally mentioned to this day, that B’nai B’rith was founded because in 1843 Jews were barred from membership in the Masonic orders and the Odd Fellows. Obviously, that was not the case, since several of the Order’s founders were themselves members of those organizations. We have fragments of memoirs written by Jones, Rosenbourg, and Renau, as well as by others who joined B’nai B’rith soon after it was founded, which leave no doubt about this…
[39] p.27; Dope Iinc: Britain’s opium war against the U.S by a U.S. Labor Party Investigating Team directed by Konstandinos Kalimtgis, David Goldman and Jeffrey Steinberg. Konstandino. 1978.
[40] http://www.adl.org/about_more.asp
[41] ‘Plaintiffs in the of ADL Spying Case -The ADL Spying Case Is Over, But The Struggle Continues’ by Jeffrey Blankfort, Anne Poirier And Steve Zeltzer Plaintiffs In The Of ADL Spying Case, Counterpunch, February 25, 2002. http://www.counterpunch.org.
[42] ‘The Changing Role of B’nai B’rith’s Anti-Defamation League’ By Dr. Alfred M. Lilienthal, http://www.wrmea.org,June 1993,
[43] Ibid.
[44] ‘ADL -A History of Disinformation and Intimidation’ www. archive.org/stream/AdlAnti-defamationLeagueOfBnaiBrithNewsArticles/ADL_djvu.txt
[45] Ibid.
[46] ADL Press Release: June 6 2002: ‘Law Enforcement From Across The U.S. Participate In Joint ADL-FBI.
Conference On Terrorism’ http://www.adl.org/presrele/Mise_00/4108_00.asp
[47] Ibid.
[48] Robert S. Mueller, III Director Federal Bureau of Investigation, Anti-Defamation League’s 24th Annual National Leadership Conference, Washington, D.C. May 07, 2002.
[49] ‘Remarks by James B. Comey, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation (As Prepared)To ADL’s National Leadership Summit in Washington, D.C., April 28, 2014 http://www.adl.org/press-center/c/fbi-director-james-b-comey-adl-summit.html#.U162xTgU_IU
[50] op. cit R. Jeffrey Smith.
[51] Ibid.
[52] ‘U.S. overseeing mysterious construction project in Israel’ By Walter Pincus, Washington Post, November 29. 2012.

Osama and Al-Qaeda I

By M.K. Styllinski

“The idea which is critical to the FBI¹s prosecution that bin Laden ran a coherent organisation with operatives and cells all around the world of which you could be a member is a myth. There is no Al Qaeda organisation. There is no international network with a leader, with cadres who will unquestioningly obey orders, with tentacles that stretch out to sleeper cells in America, in Africa, in Europe. That idea of a coherent, structured terrorist network with an organised capability simply does not exist.”

Jason Burke, author, quoted in The Power of Nightmares, documentary


The key to understanding some of the key reasons for the September 11th attacks lies in the history of bin Laden and the creation of Al-Qaeda. The problem is still perpetuated by a common public misconception that there is still a case of “us and them” between government forces and Al-Qaeda terrorism. The American public and some within the 911 Truth Movement and MSM are pressing for culpability for members of the Bush Administration and their part in allowing Al-Qaeda to launch attacks on the United States. So called politicians turned whistleblowers are largely criticising failure of intelligence or incompetence without seeing the root causes which lies at the heart the War on Terror as a piece of large-scale propaganda of which Edward Bernays would have been proud. As author and economist Professor Michel Chossudovsky mentions: “… in a bitter irony, the very process of revealing these lies and expressing public outrage has contributed to reinforcing the 9/11 cover-up. ‘Revealing the lies’ serves to present Al-Qaeda as the genuine threat, as an ‘outside enemy’, which threatens the security of America, when in fact Al-Qaeda is a creation of the US intelligence apparatus.” [1]

Al-Qaeda is more of a mercenary tool of global intelligence than a real terrorist threat. Regime change and resource exploitation are some of its goals. This necessarily incorporates radicalised individuals who serve as patsies and agents furthering the overall geo-strategy. They are a common form of collateral and cannon fodder. There is a wealth of evidence  for the interested researcher confirming the myth of Al-Qaeda from the mouths of whistleblowers, ex-Intel operatives, politicians, statesmen, authors and academics.

Leonid Shebarshin ex-chief of the Soviet Foreign Intelligence Service, who heads the Russian National Economic Security Service consulting company, said in an interview for the Vremya Novostei newspaper, that Al-Qaeda was an “all-mighty ubiquitous myth deliberately linked to Islam” in order to target “… the oil-rich Muslim regions.” He further commented: “The U.S. has usurped the right to attack any part of the globe on the pretext of fighting the terrorist threat…” and with military bases in Afghanistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, Shebarshin said, “the United States has already established control over the Caspian region — one of the world’s largest oil reservoirs.” [2]

938px-Flag_of_Jihad.svg

The Shahada – the Flag of Jihad often seen flying with Al-Qaeda, Taliban and ISIL (Source: wikipedia)

It is here that the Three Establishment Model (3EM) interests converge. They do so from the seemingly innocuous beginnings of the Safari Club which had its relatively humble beginnings in homage to the colonial hunters of the British Elite, Cecil Rhodes and the Round Table.

Russell E. Train (cousin of John Train, the Pilgrims Society member and former financial advisor to CIA-ally John Hay Whitney) was a co-founder of the African Wildlife Foundation set up since 1961. According to Train’s biography his foundation had drifted away from the Safari Club which was in existence before 1958 and coyly described by him as “a newly formed organization set up by a local group of businessmen who had gone on a hunt together in Mozambique.” [3] Although certainly a white man’s big-game hunting troupe for Pan-European and Anglo-American big-wigs, one of these businessmen and founders was Kermit Roosevelt Jr. who had set up the club as an anti-communist outpost, the evolution of which was given the seal of approval by Henry Kissinger several years later. Among other states, Saudi Arabia had a large hand in financing operations in Morocco, Egypt and Iran, with a view to countering Soviet operations in the Middle East and Africa. [4]

The other important founder was Count Alexandre de Marenches, the director of French intelligence services representing Pan-European Synarchism in the region. It would thus represent the next phase in Anglo-American dominance in Africa. The WWF and the 1001 club were involved in its formation via Train, Arthur Windsor Arundel and Sue Erpf van de Bovenkamp [5]

With Nixon booted out over the Watergate Scandal 1974, this saw the arrival of a new breed of psychopaths in power who would preside over criminal rule just as they did on 9/11: Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld; Chief of Staff, Dick Cheney; Vice president Nelson Rockefeller (brother of David) and George H.W. Bush as CIA Director, who joined the Ford Administration and the Kissinger cabal. Under this motley crew, 1976 would see the consolidation of a coalition of intelligence agencies that would begin the comprehensive carving up of Africa. The Safari Club would become the central hub for American intelligence financing; the organisation of an international network of terrorists; the CIA’s role in the global drug trade; the emergence of the Taliban and the origins of Al-Qaeda.

The Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) formerly a small Pakistani merchant bank was transformed into an ISI/CIA front for the biggest world-wide money laundering enterprise in history. Its job was to accrue a network of banks to finance intelligence in Africa and other nations. Under Bush, the intelligence groups in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Iran worked closely with the CIA who found could out-source their Intel operations through these nations which otherwise have been logistically difficult not least because French intelligence was still at the helm of the Safari Club.

1977 was the year that the Trilateral Commission were able to exercise their power more actively through Jimmy Carter’s administration, though in truth, the real power was sourced from Zbigniew Brzezinski as National Security Advisor, just one of many Trilaterals which infested the government at that time. Foreign policy would be steered towards Trilateral objectives which saw the colonisation of Eurasia as vital in eroding the power of the Soviet Union, seen as a continuing threat to US supremacy and resource scarcity. Iran would become the fulcrum of revolution which would lead to the destabilisation of Russia and her interests. “There was this idea that the Islamic forces could be used against the Soviet Union. The theory was, [that] there was an arc of crisis, and so an arc of Islam could be mobilized to contain the Soviets. It was a Brzezinski concept.” [6] The same old patterns of interference ensued.

Brzezinski_1977

Zibigniew Brzezinski 1977 (wikipedia)

In 1953, the United States’ CIA initiated a coup in Iran under the codename of Operation AJAX, which sought to remove the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh. Almost thirty years later the Royal Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the dictator of Iran was suddenly no longer useful and Anglo-American allegiances now supported the fundamentalist Islamic opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini in favour of containment regarding Russia and access to oil. The media propaganda went into full swing for Revolution as preparations for a military coup inside Iran. In 1979, a coup proved unnecessary and Ayatollah Khomeini was smoothly installed as the Ayatollah of an Islamic Republic of Iran.

Much like the kinds of US-NATO-led incursions we saw in Libya and Syria in the last few years, human rights abuses, real and imagined, were floated excessively in the media. As social tensions rose in Iran the Shah’s secret police the notorious SAVAK were encouraged by US diplomats to embark on a campaign: “of ever more brutal repression, in a manner calculated to maximize popular antipathy to the Shah.”

True to form, the Shah fell into the trap laid by Zbigniew Brzezinski who had advised him: “… to be firm” in the face of demonstrations. [7]

After assisting the installation of fundamentalist Islam and just prior to the Iran-Iraq war Brzezinski met with Saddam Hussein and gave his support for the war ensuring that arms would be secured with the support of Arab oil-producing nations such as Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. [8] Though this war provided a bonanza for weapons manufacturers in the US, Britain and Russia it also served the American interests in fermenting continuing radicalism in the region so that pockets of conflict and the background of war would serve as cover for securing economic interests.

Meanwhile, as Islamic fundamentalism had been seeded and watered in Iran, Osama bin Laden had left Saudi Arabia to train the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan which the US government were training, arming, and funding to the tune of $3 billion thanks again to Brzezinski transplanting the Islamic foreign policy over to the “holy War.” Very soon, as the late Robert I. Freidman describes in The CIA’s Jihad: “… young Muslim men from across the Arab world, as well as from the U.S., flocked to Mujahedeen base camps outside Peshawar, Pakistan, where they were instructed in everything from making car bombs to shooting down Russian MiGs with U.S.-made Stinger missiles. Most of these recruits were fanatical Islamic fundamentalists who despised America just as much as they hated the Communist occupiers, but the CIA was willing to overlook that.” [9]

Osama bin Laden’s leadership in Afghanistan was vital in driving out Russia. The pretext used on this occasion was that the incumbent Afghan government was communist, which it wasn’t. The enormous investment handled by the CIA meant the creation and consolidation of bin Laden’s Al-Qaeda terrorist network with the blessing of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan – and American tax-payers’ money. [10]  Brzezinski’s strategy to lay a trap for Russia whereby the Mujahedeen’s guerrilla war would embroil the Soviet Union in their own Vietnam was supremely successful, leading to its withdrawal and eventual collapse. [11]

october_87-muja

Afghan Mujahedeen,October 1987. By Erwin Lux (Wikipedia)

Now that the Safari Club had managed to send out word through its extensive network of intelligence, numerous new recruits were harvested for the glorious jihad and holy war taking place in Afghanistan. Ahmed Rashid writing in Foreign Affairs explained: “With the active encouragement of the CIA and Pakistan’s ISI, who wanted to turn the Afghan Jihad into a global war waged by all Muslim states against the Soviet Union, some 35,000 Muslim radicals from 40 Islamic countries joined Afghanistan’s fight between 1982 and 1992. Tens of thousands more came to study in Pakistani madrasahs. Eventually, more than 100,000 foreign Muslim radicals were directly influenced by the Afghan jihad.” [12] Islamic fundamentalism provided ample opportunity for martyrdom with a fantasy paradise of umpteen virgins waiting for their courageous warriors should they take up arms against the Russian infidels.

Bcci_logoBy the time the Reagan Administration took over Vice President George H.W. Bush made sure the BCCI banking funds were on hand for an expansion of operations in Afghanistan and other regions primed for divide and conquer tactics. Journalist Seymour Hersh termed the Safari Club a “private intelligence group [which was] one of George H. W. Bush’s many end-runs around congressional oversight of the American intelligence establishment and the locus of many of the worst features of the mammoth BCCI scandal.” [13]

Australian journalist John Pilger also placed the onus firmly on the Anglo-American intelligence structure: “More than 100,000 Islamic militants were trained in Pakistan between 1986 and 1992, in camps overseen by CIA and MI6, with the SAS [British Special Forces] training future al-Qaida and Taliban fighters in bomb-making and other black arts. Their leaders were trained at a CIA camp in Virginia. This was called Operation Cyclone and continued long after the Soviets had withdrawn in 1989.” [14]

taliban

Taliban fighters

In the early 1980’s Osama bin Laden already had firmly established ties between Saudi intelligence agency (GIP) their favourite Afghan warlord Abdul Rasul Sayyaf and the Intel chief, and possible middle man for the Mujahedeen groups – Prince Turki al-Faisal, bin Laden’s friend. Though bin Laden “… did have a substantial relationship with Saudi intelligence,” as journalist Steve Coll stated, he was likely not an agent. The CIA and the Safari Club were both working through al-Faisal and “ISI stooge and creation” war-lord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar in Afghanistan as well as the Pakistani ISI which had now become a powerful adjunct to the CIA thanks to General (later President) Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq’s military coup of 1977 who assumed the presidency in 1978. [15] It was no coincidence that Haq passed pro-Islamic legislation, created Islamic banking systems, and Islamic courts and introduced a new religious tax for the creation of tens of thousands of madrassas, or religious boarding schools. This was an offshoot of US policy to build radical Islam, via education that would indoctrinate generations of future Islamic militants for decades to come. This extended to the Pakistani military where “Radical Islamist ideology began to permeate the military and the influence of the most extreme groups crept into the army…” [16]

In 1984, bin Laden moved to Peshawar, a Pakistani town on the border of Afghanistan, so that he could help set up and run Maktab al-Khidamat (MAK) (meaning “Services Office” in English). This was a front organisation for the Mujahideen which funnelled weapons, money, and willing Jihad fighters from all over the burgeoning militant Islamic network straight into the increasingly ferocious Afghan war. [17] Meantime, Pakistan’s General Akhtar Abdul-Rahman met bin Laden on a regular basis in the city for Intel and financial dealings related to drug profits from the opium fields which by then were totalling around $100 million. By 1985, bin Laden and the ISI – effectively the CIA – were splitting the proceeds. [18]

202_george_bush_sr

George H. W. Bush and BCCI

Rahman was a close friend of Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq, who by now, was a CIA asset and recognised as an international drug trafficker at Interpol. A top US official said that Haq “was our man … everybody knew that Haq was also running the drug trade” and that “BCCI was completely involved.” [19] Then CIA Director William Casey and Vice President George H. W. Bush were fully aware of the connection and while meeting Haq in Pakistan allowed him to move his drug money through the BCCI in return for his role in the program which was to provide Intel, keep the radical Islamic factions at fever pitch and finance the war on terror network. On one such secret visit to training camps near the Afghan border in 1984, the CIA director spoke of a strategy to “… take the Afghan war into enemy territory—into the Soviet Union itself. Casey wanted to ship subversive propaganda through Afghanistan to the Soviet Union’s predominantly Muslim southern republics.” [20] It proved easy to do so. However, it would only be 3 years later that the two Generals Rahman and Haq would both be killed in a plane crash in 1988, widely believed to have been sabotage conducted by the MOSSAD who were concerned about Pakistan’s nuclear proliferation instigated by Haq. [21]

Zia_ul-Haq

Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq circa 1977

In 1990, the blind Egyptian cleric, Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman was travelling to the United States in style – and on a CIA-supported, one-year visa as a reward for his propagandizing lectures in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Much to the confusion and consternation of many intelligence agents he was also on a State Department terrorism watch list that should have barred him from the country. Hand-picked as a spellbinder in order to whip up disaffected Arab immigrants for the required Holy War and in turn, to stir the support for Muslim rebels needed to topple the Soviet-backed government in Afghanistan, Rahman was proving an extremely useful part of a burgeoning Islamist network of agents. There were “Jihad offices” in Atlanta, Jersey City, and Dallas, the most important being the “Al-Kedah” (meaning “struggle”) set up in Brooklyn, New York, as the Al-Kedah Refugee Centre which served as fertile ground for Rahman and others’ spellbinding skills.

However, the winds of “blowback” were beginning to whistle through the ranks of Arab-CIA assets, most of whom gave lectures at Al-Kedah which would eventually be implicated in the World Trade Centre Bombings in 1993. Over $600 million was funnelled to this precursor organisation to Al-Qaeda and from several smaller outfits benefiting from CIA funds along with rich Pakistani and Saudi Arabian donors. [22] It would continue to be the main financial hub for CIA chaperoned, Al-Qaeda terrorists so that they could form the so-called network of cells within the United States, heavily monitored and managed by the FBI and CIA. In the words of private Washington attorney and former investigative counsel for the Senate Foreign Relation, Jack Blum: “We steered and encouraged these people. Then we dropped them. Now we’ve got a disposal problem. When you motivate people to fight for a cause – jihad – the problem is, how do you shut them off?” [23]

wtc1993

World Trade Centre Bombings 1993 – Another FBI entrapment set up?

But it was much more than simply forgetting to switch off a tap. This was adapted to a much larger, long-term objective where Al-Qaeda would come home to roost and serve as the bogeyman for a highly ambitious attack on American soil. The object of the CIA exercise was to keep other US agencies and even certain team members from looking too closely into the various issues related to assassinations and terrorist attacks on the homeland. As a growing number of FBI and CIA whistleblowers have proven – not always an easy thing to accomplish.

Another CIA asset rubbing shoulders with bin Laden was Sheikh Abdullah Azzam, a Palestinian preacher/spellbinder recruited from a small village Jenin, ostensibly as a diplomatic tool for uniting squabbling rebel factions in Pakistan. He became bin-Laden’s mentor persuading him to join the Jihad against the Soviets in Afghanistan. Azzam was asset gold due to his connections the Muslim Brotherhood, Saudi intelligence, and the Muslim World League and the Islamic Coordination Council in Peshawar, which supervised the military activities of the Arab Mujahedeen. Meantime, he could sip martinis and chat with the air stewardesses as he travelled for his frequent lectures in New York, at Al-Kifah and the Al-Farooq Mosque in Brooklyn and the Al-Salam Mosque in Jersey City calling for the “spark” of revolution “… that may one day burn Western interests all over the world.” As Freidman wryly mentions, a fact which drew so many of the CIA assets: “Azzam then asked his audience for donations, made out to his personal account at the Independent Savings Bank.” [24]

Having got too big for his Keffiyeh, Azzam was eventually murdered in a car bomb after accruing many enemies, including Osama bin Laden. No one really knew who had pressed the button but most were glad someone had. As with all allegations of foreknowledge and duplicity the CIA always plays dumb. As a New York investigator observed: “Left with the choice between pleading stupidity or else admitting deceit, the CIA went with stupidity.” [25]

From 1984 onwards, the CIA’s ability to twist itself into a spaghetti junction of lies became tragi-comic. As covert importation of Al-Qaeda terrorist and Islamic militants continued via MAK, one Ali Mohammed came to the attention of the media. A  major in the Egyptian army and a US operative he was tasked with training Islamic militants within the US. As yet another visitor to the Al-Kifah Centre and part of the army unit that was responsible for the assassination of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat he was involved in a special training program for foreign officers at the US Army Special Forces School at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, as far back as 1981. Mohammed was apparently purged from the Egyptian Army after the assassination and joined the Green Berets, reportedly travelling to Afghanistan in 1992 to aid the Mujahedeen.

In 1984, US officials told the media that they were forced to remove Mohammed due to his religious beliefs which were considered too extreme. Mohamed found his way to the CIA in Egypt and asked to join as a spy. (It’s as easy as that). CIA subsequently decided that he couldn’t be trusted on account of his associations with Hezbollah. He found himself on a terrorist watch list order to prevent him from coming to the US. However, Mohamed turned up with a brand new visa and moved to America sailing through customs without any problems, with the US State Department choosing not to explain to a thoroughly confused media. [26] Like so many of these stories, they are quickly forgotten.

In 1995, it was revealed at the trial of terrorist Sheikh Omar Abdul-Rahman, that Mohammed had been admitted to the US under a special visa program controlled by the CIA’s clandestine service. A subsequent search of his New Jersey home turned up forty boxes of evidence which had the D.A.’s office and the FBI looked at it more carefully, would have revealed an active terrorist conspiracy about to boil over in New York. In addition to discovering thousands of rounds of ammunition and hit lists with the names of New York judges and prosecutors, investigators found amongst the evidence classified U.S. military-training manuals. They also found a video made at Fort Bragg featuring the Green Beret Ali Mohammed lecturing U.S. officers and officials on the politics of Jihad. On the video, Ali Mohammed sounds oddly like a radical fundamentalist himself, declaring that the Muslim world will never accept the existence of Israel.

The CIA was lying again and not quite getting away with it. Nonetheless, no action was taken and before long, Mohammed had found himself a wife and had settled into the American dream.

***

cook_robinRobin Cook

The late Robin Cook as UK Foreign Secretary, was outspoken in his resistance to the Iraq war and the lies of the then Prime Minister Tony Blair. Cook was one of the very few who resigned over the issue to become an ordinary back-bencher, stating: “I can’t accept collective responsibility for the decision to commit Britain now to military action in Iraq without international agreement or domestic support.” Cook also wanted to stop the export of aerospace jet fighters to General Suharto’s repressive regime in Indonesia. As he told the Guardian: “we will not permit the sale of arms to regimes that might use them for internal repression or international aggression. We shall spread the values of human rights, civil liberties and democracy which we demand for ourselves”. He was to be a vehement opponent and thorn in the side of the Blair government before his untimely death.

Many insiders believed that Cook was destined for a senior Cabinet post under the Brown premiership but this would have been problematic for the British Establishment who was set on Middle Eastern conquest. As Foreign Secretary, Cook would have had plenty of access to intelligence reports and related operations abroad. He is known to have considerably ruffled some feathers by breaking the official secrets act and discussing policy and future proposals. He was to do this in spectacular fashion by courageously speaking the truth regarding the War on Terror and the nature of Al-Qaeda which was “literally ‘the database’, and in Cook’s words: “… originally the computer file of the thousands of Mujahedeen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians.” [27] The Guardian article appeared just after the 7/7 bombings and the incendiary speeches by Cook. Whatever ball the respected politician had started to roll it was not to last.

Robin Cook’s legacy in standing for truth was corroborated by a former French Intelligence agent Pierre-Henri Bunel, who wrote an article for the World Affairs journal based in New Dehli in 2004 where he repeated so many top level analysts’ conclusions: “The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al Qaida. And any informed intelligence officer knows this. But there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an identified entity representing the ‘devil’ only in order to drive the ‘TV watcher’ to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the US and the lobbyists for the US war on terrorism are only interested in making money.[28]

This is where global drugs market comes in …

 


Notes

[1] ‘“Revealing the Lies” on 9/11 Perpetuates the “Big Lie”’ by Michel Chossudovsky – Text of Michel Chossudovsky’s keynote presentation at the opening plenary session (27 May 2004) to The International Citizens Inquiry Into 9/11, Toronto, 25-30 May 2004. http://www.globalresearch.ca 27 May 2004.
[2] ‘Russian Intelligence Chief Says Al-Qaeda A Myth,’ MosNews| March 21, 2005.
[3] p.39; Politics, Pollution, and Pandas: An Environmental Memoir By Russell E. Train, Published by Island Press 2003.
[4] Good Muslim, Bad Muslim: America, the Cold War and the roots of Terror by Mahmood Mamdani, Published by Three Leaves Publishing; Reprint edition, 2005. ISBN-10: 0385515375. (p.84)
[5] ‘World Wildlife Fund: The 1001 Club Mafia dons, intelligence agents, and raw materials executives striving for a sustainable future’ http://www.whale.to
[6] p.67; Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire, and the Future of America by Peter Dale-Scott, Published by University of California Press, 2008. ISBN-10: 0520258711.
[7] Ibid. (p.81)
[8] The eight year Iran/Iraq war (1980-1988) is remembered as one of the most shockingly harrowing conflicts of the 20th century. It was reminiscent of the First World War in terms of sheer numbers of dead; territory shifting back and forth between the two sides like bone-dry seas, heavy with the burden of teenage corpses and the endless pain of grieving families. It was a lucrative time for the US, Russia, and various European nations eager to extend this barbarism in order to squeeze out the highest profits from a whole generation of beleaguered youths. Meanwhile, the rest of the Middle East looked on, until the final combined casualty list total reached one million. The combined profit from these arms deals however, is unknown, but we can guess at the obscene sums of money accrued. To further compound the misery and the arrogance of its leaders, nightmarish monuments were erected on the backs of an already broken people: the fountain of blood in Teheran, the soldier statuaries in Basrah and two giant crossed swords clasped by equally giant arms modelled on Hussein himself. They were also cast in a British foundry. It is testament to Zbigniew Brzezinski’s skill as a geo-political tactician and strategist as it is his cold absence of conscience.
[9] ‘The CIA’s Jihad’ By Robert I. Friedman, June 30, 2002. Current View Point -www.currentviewpoint.com
[10] ‘Who is Osama Bin Laden? BBC News, 18 September, 2001.
[11] ‘The Soviets’ Vietnam’. Richard Cohen Washington Post. April 22, 1988.
[12] ‘The Taliban: Exporting Extremism’, by Ahmed Rashid, Foreign Affairs, Issue November-December 1999.
[13] ‘Seymour Hersh and the men who want him committed’, Salon.com by Matthew Phelan, February 28 2011.
[14] ‘Why Good Friends left behind.” By John Pilger, The Guardian, September 20, 2003.
[15] ‘It ain’t over till it’s over’ By Marc Erikson Asia Times November 15 2001.
[16] I Is for Infidel: From Holy War to Holy Terror: 18 Years Inside Afghanistan by Kathy Gannon, Published by Public Affairs, 2005. |ISBN-10: 1586483129. | (pp.138-142)
[17] ‘The Real Bin Laden’ by Mary Jane Weaver, The New Yorker, 2000.
[18] p. 29; Why America Slept: The Failure to Prevent 9/11. By Gerald Posner, Published by Random House, 2003.| ISBN-10: 0375508791.
[19] op. cit. Dale-Scott, (pp. 73-75).
[20] ‘Anatomy of a Victory, the CIA’s Covert Afghan War’ by Steve Coll Washington Post, July 19 1992.
[21] ‘Editorial:Another clue into General Zia’s death’ Daily Times Pakistan, December 2005. […] “former US ambassador to India, John Gunther Dean, suspects that General Zia ul Haq was killed by the Israelis. This is interesting enough but perhaps would not have made it beyond the slew of conspiracy theories that have been cropping up since Zia was killed in a C-130 plane crash if the US State Department had not chosen to ignore Mr Dean and later cashier him on grounds of being mentally imbalanced.
According to Ms Crossette’s account under the title ‘Reflections — Who Killed Zia?’, Mr Dean suspects that General Zia, his top commanders, the US ambassador to Pakistan, Arnold Raphael, and a US brigadier-general were killed by the Israeli secret agency Mossad because Tel Aviv was concerned about Pakistan’s nuclear ambitions following a statement by General Zia in 1987 that Pakistan was a “screwdriver’s turn away from the bomb”.But when Mr Dean expressed his views to the State Department at the time and insisted that the US must thoroughly investigate the Israeli-Indian axis, the Department accused him of mental imbalance and relieved him of his duties; this, despite that fact that Mr Dean was a distinguished diplomat who had garnered more ambassadorships than most envoys. Ms Crossette says that Mr Dean, now 80, wants the stigma of mental imbalance removed and is collecting his papers and is ready to share his thoughts. He lost his medical and security clearance because of his views and was forced to seek retirement in 1988.”[…]
[22] pp. 279-280; Devil’s Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam by Robert Dreyfuss (American Empire Project) Published by Metropolitan Books; 2005 | ISBN-10: 0805076522.
[23] op. cit. Freidman.
[24] Ibid.
[25] Ibid.
[26] ‘The Masking of a Militant’ By Benjamin Weiser and James Risen – A Soldier’s Shadowy Trail In U.S. and in the Mideast The New York Times, December 1, 1998.
[27] ‘The struggle against terrorism cannot be won by military means – The G8 must seize the opportunity to address the wider issues at the root of such atrocities’ By Robin Cook, The Guardian, July 8, 2005.
[28] ‘Al Qaeda: The Database’ By Pierre-Henri Bunel, Global Research, May 12, 2011 | Wayne Madsen Report 20 November, 2005.

Bernays and Tavistock

By M.K. Styllinski

“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses 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 country. … We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. … In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons … who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.”

― Edward L. Bernays, Propaganda


One of the most common questions regarding the nature of 9/11 is how could anyone pull the wool over the eyes of the populace so comprehensively? If the events of 9/11 were engineered and were indeed an “inside job,” how was it possible to conduct such a complex operation without political, military and intelligence personnel blowing the whistle? Such a conspiracy  surely would not be feasible?

Quite apart from the fact that many persons did act as whistle-blowers from an array of government departments, the nature of the media network, law and justice system always censors and restricts any serious breaches and thus threats to its own existence. Effective dissemination of information and awareness is therefore limited unless painted with various colours of propaganda. Perhaps most importantly of all, the firewall of standard beliefs is the most effective method to ensure that state-sponsored atrocities remain in the realm of fantasy.

As we will discover, an effective blackout on 9/11 issues along with a concerted disinformation campaign has dogged any real breakthroughs in achieving an independent inquiry into the events of that day. Furthermore, what applies to the media is the same for any domain within our present culture which prevents the free-flow of ideas and accountability so that any threats to the structure of the status quo are, if not instantly dissolved, gradually eroded by various belief systems. The cultivation of negative myths and memes in the aftermath of a traumatic event has the effect of sealing in the cracks where truth might seep out. As John F. Kennedy wisely stated: “The greatest enemy of the truth is not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth – persistent, pervasive, and unrealistic.”

consumerism1Still from “They Live” (1988) Directed by John Carpenter

Propaganda techniques are now the province of a melding between outsourced PR companies and lobbying groups and the Top Secret actions of military PSYOPS which use highly sophisticated methods of media manipulation and electronic warfare to influence mass consciousness. It is common to misunderstand the nature of belief in 21st Century America and the level of socio-cultural engineering which has occurred since the early 1930s. The media’s role has been crucial in weaving an official story which has little connection to facts on the ground. Carefully selected words and images obliterate objective reality, something which one man knew very well indeed. Much of these initial techniques were drawn from Edward Bernays’ insights and taken to stratospheric levels. 911 cannot be understood without this knowledge. So, let’s have a brief refresher.

Jewish Austrian-American Edward Louis Bernays was a pioneer in the manipulation of the mass mind. His techniques have been used by successive governments, oppressive regimes, advertising agencies and intelligence agencies the world over. With a mix of concepts inspired by the psychology of Gustave Le Bon, Wilfred Trotter and his uncle Sigmund Freud he became known as the “the father of public relations” and the darling of the Establishment. “Propaganda” would morph into “Public Relations” under Bernays’ definition.

The man himself appeared to lack any conscience or sense of responsibility for his experiments and willingly sold his ideas to the highest bidder, whether they were an aspiring despot or corporate racketeer. His influences from psychoanalysis and  B.F. Skinner’s behaviourism meant that he saw manipulation as a necessity in society. He saw ordinary people as part of a wild and selfish group-mind that needed to be controlled, preferably by Elite stewards who could steer society in a “superior” direction of their choosing. As with all the other neo-feudalists whom we have explored so far, he had an extremely dim view of humanity and believed his “engineering of consent” was vital to maintain order and direct its evolution. Accordingly, he was to be hugely useful to the emerging Elite who took Bernays and his “enlightened despotism” to their hearts. [1]

edward-bernays

Edward L. Bernays

One of Bernays techniques was the “third-party authority” whereby traditionally independent and trusted members of society are bought and paid for by PR firms to promote a particular product or political spin for their clients. If a doctor, scientist, or journalist gives their seal of approval then the public is more likely to believe what is being said. Although nowadays the public is a little more savvy and cynical regarding these basic methods, in previous years it proved extremely successful for a range of products. The third party technique is obviously still employed though with much greater subterfuge, where government or corporate clients will often keep their PR and lobbying connections hidden from prying eyes – the money involved is often too seductive to declare these conflicts of interest.

The instinct of fear as a linchpin of Freudian thought was integral to Bernay’s methods. He believed it was key to the success of propaganda techniques and urged the US government to ratchet up the fear quota in relation to communism so that the public would become more compliant and malleable to suggestion. He was employed by marketing and advertising companies as well as celebrities, charities and government agencies. Soap, perfume, cigarettes and commerce were all used as an experimental testing ground which proved time and again to be successful in predicting and leading public desires to prearranged outcomes.

Working for the Woodrow Wilson government he was yet another rising star to attend the infamous Paris Peace Conference in 1919 along with all the other World government advocates, international bankers and industrialist families who would later go on to form the Council on Foreign Relations, the Federal Reserve, and the House of Rothschilds’ Round Table Group   Bernays was crucial to the development and formation of social engineering that would be tested on the American people. It was to be the same promotion of the “scientific technique” underpinned by psychoanalysis, the hub of which was found at the Tavistock Institute in England.

The manipulation of the American public saw great strides under Bernays and his colleagues, CFR man Walter Lippmann, and media magnate Lords Rothmere (Harold Harmsworth) and Lord Northcliffe. The latter individuals were employed by Britain’s War Propaganda Bureau otherwise known as Wellington House founded in 1913 and named after the Duke of Wellesly. His task was to assist in the preparation of the American mind to accept and support entry into the First World War. Brainstorming sessions took place where the main target of propaganda operations were young working class men who were required to become machine-gun and cannon fodder on the fields of Flanders and the Somme, all of which was unknown to the American public.

The funding came firstly, from the British Royal Family, Rockefeller family trusts and several years later from the Rothschilds, to whom Lord Rothmere was related by marriage.  As the members of the board had links to Lord Milner’s Oxford set, the Round Table group, the Fabian Society, the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers, the formation of “mass brain washing” meant that Bernays and his set of skills was employed directly in the service of the Establishment’s emerging Pathocrats. The tripartite relations of the arms industry, banking and Elite designs is a lucrative ideological and geopolitical formula that have defined the financial architecture up to the present day.

War propaganda also came under the guidance of the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIAA) whose director of Future Studies, Fabian historian Alfred Toynbee acted as an important liaison. As Lord Rothmere owned both The Times of London and the Daily Mail it was deemed more than feasible that the shaping of the Anglo-American mind in favour of war could proceed.

Various propaganda techniques were tried out through Rothmere’s newspapers under Bernays’ expert tutelage. They discovered that the ability to reason was poor amongst the population, especially the uneducated which made up the vast majority of conscripts. It was the stimulation of mass emotional reaction accompanied by appropriate slogans and images of national pride and family protection that proved the greatest success.* As author and anarchist Edward Abbey has pointed out: “The tragedy of modern war is that the young men die fighting each other – instead of their real enemies back home in the capitals.” This applied not just to seducing young men to fight wars but to all aspects of society that indirectly contribute to such a conclusion.

di_20090830-133430-tavistockcentre-sign_w475

The headquarters of the Tavistock Institute for Human Relations

The late ex-Intelligence analyst Dr. John Coleman and his own research tells us:

With the Tavistock plan modified to suit American conditions, Bernays and Lippmann led President Woodrow Wilson to set up the very first Tavistock methodology techniques for polling (manufacturing) so-called public opinion created by Tavistock propaganda. They also taught Wilson to set up a secret body of “managers” to run the war effort and a body of “advisors” to assist the President in his decision-making. The Creel Commission was the first such body of opinion-makers set up in the United States.  [2]

In 1921, the ideology of Woodrow Wilson’s handlers met the Duke of Bedford, Marquis of Tavistock, the 11th Duke, who gave a building to the Institute to study the effect of shell-shock on British soldiers who survived World War I. The British Army Bureau of Psychological Warfare sent for Sir John Rawlings-Reese who was given the job of discovering the threshold or “breaking point” of men under severe stress. This was the official starting point, but the ambitions of the Institute were far broader.

Edward Bernays helped to spread Freud’s theories into the USA while assisting the rise of a particular brand of corporatism and social science based on the same. His books Crystallizing Public Opinion (1923) and Propaganda (1928) became bibles of manipulation in business and government circles alike, spawning the growth of Public Relations in Europe and America. In 1919, he had opened for business as a Public Relations Counsellor in New York, with clients falling over themselves to learn the art of engaging the public mind, tailoring their goals to want what they didn’t need. Selfishness, instinct, fear and the importance of Pavlovian responses sat upon an abiding materialism and distrust in human nature, all of which served to feed the machine of the 4Cs. **

German-born Dr. Kurt Lewin became director of Tavistock in 1932. He went on to set up the Harvard Psychology Clinic, which worked closely with Edward Bernays’ propaganda campaign to make the American mind amenable to war with Germany. A ratline of psychologists began to create a conduit between the US and UK. By 1937, Wellington House had transferred operations to the Tavistock Clinic which became the Tavistock Institute for Human Relations in 1946. The Climax of Civilization (1917) by Correa Moylan Walsh and Oswald Spengler’s The Decline of Western Civilization (Untergange des Abenlandes) were incorporated into an ideological model which included world government and the precepts of A New World Order. Both authors drew from the usual neo-feudal beliefs which augmented the need to regulate and shape societies. This led to the Institute becoming host to renowned behavioural psychologists and the study of group psychodynamics.  [3] The founding members of the Tavistock Institute were dispatched across the world stage to tweak social and political policy. Brigadier John Rawlings Rees was psychiatrist to Rudolph Hess, Adolf Hitler’s deputy whilst Ronald Hargreaves became deputy director of the World Health Organization (WHO).

As another round of economic destabilisation was required as per the “break and make” formula, World War II loomed into view and the same techniques were employed. The key to this success was to place undue emphasis on the irrationality of the human mind; to elevate this “natural human flaw” to a level that was abnormal in the public consciousness, so much so, that we would all come to believe that this made up a large proportion of the human condition. This implanted conditioning meant that it became easier and easier to manipulate through an array of Pavlovian distractions. In combination with the Hegelian formula, human psychology was like putty in the controllers’ hands.

Tavistock was at the centre of the Nazi elite exodus after of the war and acted as the lab for the continuation of Nazi experimentation in psychology already advanced in wartime Germany through the discoveries of Josef Mengele  in the concentration camps. Tavistock gave the psychological foundation for the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) the precursor to CIA, which continued to work from Tavistock guidelines.

ossWith the 1938 Special Operations Executive agreement between Roosevelt and Churchill already in place allowing British interests to dominate American operations, Dr. Lewin took on the directorship of the Strategic Bombing Survey, which was tasked with bombing civilian housing and avoiding military targets and munition depots inside Germany. As we have established, World War II was a bonanza for the international bankers who did not want to see their liquid assets destroyed. Germany had always been a national asset to be preserved for a long term economic power base within Europe. Instead, the ordinary German populace was to be the bulls-eye. Women, children and old people perished in their thousands amid urban fire-storms perpetrated by the Royal Air Force and the celebrated Sir Arthur Travers “Bomber” Harris. Such carnage was celebrated in war-time news reels as inflicting crucial blows against Germany’s war machine. The truth was rather different. The machine was to remain intact – it was far too useful, the truth of which was buried.  Germany was a vast experiment with Tavistock collecting valuable data for future operations.

Committeeof300RoundtablewithTavistock

Diagram of Tavistock connections from ex-Intel operative John Coleman’s: “The Conspirator’s Hierarchy: The Committee of 300” (2000).

The Rockefeller impetus to shape the sexual behaviour of Britain and America stemmed from their meetings with their members at the Tavistock Institute. By inverting sexual and social mores, weakening the public’s ability to think critically and breaking down the family unit, ethics and the concept of the sacred, new forms of mass identity and psychological states of mind were inculcated which would best serve the Elite. (See: The Sex Establishment)

Cultural Marxism conjoined with psychoanalysis, and psychodynamics would eventually be used as part of the National Security State, from MK-ULTRA to present day torture techniques in a variety of rendition nations. Freudian psychology would form the basis of a mass defragmentation of character by implanting new socio-sexual “norms” and the introduction of the LSD “counter-culture” fused with New Age psychedelia. A distinctly Kinseyian “revolution” became not so much about love but a mechanistic tool for gratification which further eroded meaning, male and female identity and the proliferation of tribal labels and groupings. The net result was confusion, nihilism, narcissism and the consequent loss of meaning in society. And all that meant populations much easier to control in the face of rising fields of information.

***

The Tavistock network is firmly embedded in the UK-US institutions, extending from Britain’s University of Sussex to America’s Stanford Research Institute (SRI) and Esalen Institute who have garnered a reputation for mind control studies linked to CoIntelpro operations within the New Age movement. The Heritage Foundation, MIT, Hudson Institute, Centre of Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) at Georgetown, where US State Dept. personal are trained and US Air Force Intelligence who joined hands with the RAND corporation: all these were foci for crowd psychology, the experimentation of which was – and still is -visited on the American public.

Today, the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations is still very much involved in research and consultancy work in social science and applied psychology. The organisation claims its clients are: “international agencies, the EU and its research bodies, UK local and central government and UK research bodies, … private sector and other clients such as regional agencies, health authorities, local authorities, charities and small family firms … and some private clients. In other words, pretty much anyone. Alongside ownership of the international social sciences journal, Human Relations, it owns none other than a very popular and substantial conspiracy forum: “Godlike Productions”.

It is an extremely high probability that this forum is the product of a social experiment devised by Tavistock in order to not only monitor the pulse of alternative and conspiracy-minded individuals in cyberspace, but to muddy the waters of such research. Why else would an institute rooted in unpleasant social engineering programs on behalf of the UK government own such a forum? Moreover, since Godlike Productions has built a considerable reputation as a primary CoIntelpro honey-pot and a major source of the most abject disinformation available on the internet, it is more than curious that Tavistock has ownership. And as one commentator noted: “If it’s happening in the backwoods of the internet, in a place like Godlike Productions, what does that say about the Facebooks and Twitters of the world?” Not that you would have any suspicion of Tavistock’s dark history and present government connections. Upon visiting their website at www.tavinstitute.org it offers a suitably clinical yet wholesome image of sociocultural assistance. [4]

Tavistock’s behavioural psychology and social engineering advances are ensconced in the minds of various Anglo-American think-tanks. These in turn, are associated with political old boys’ clubs like the Trilateral Commission and the Club of Rome, who then come up with mass mind memes designed to create the required responses. This is, in part, Bernays’ legacy, where the relationship is one of a constant feedback loop of information design adhering to the mix of occult “Olympian” belief systems.

In his ground-breaking book entitled: Propaganda (1928) Bernays argued that manipulation of the public was natural and necessary in the maintenance of democracy:

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses 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 country. …We are governed, our minds are moulded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. …In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons…who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind. [5]

conform2Still from “They Live” (1988) Directed by John Carpenter

If it was so in the early part of the last century, it is has become turbo-charged in today’s society with the advent of many sophisticated psychological techniques which have trickled into the commercial and public realm. One such operation was under Dwight Eisenhower’s administration who was duped into giving the go ahead for a program of “psychological warfare and political action” and “subversion,” dubbed Operation PBSUCCESS against the democratically elected president of Guatemala, Jacobo Arbenz Guzmán.

With the help of Guatemalan military general Carlos Castillo Armas, who formed a military junta, the president and his government were removed and replaced with a military junta which was all based on Bernays’ carefully constructed package of lies and manipulation predicated on the already sensitive fear of Communism. Arbenz was branded a communist in the US and European media until “Reds-under-the-bed” paranoia was clamouring for his removal. In truth, Jacobo Arbenz Guzmán’s social welfare policies proved highly successful in providing work and a variety of social benefits which were eventually deemed a threat Western interests, in particular the multinational corporation United Fruit Company (today’s Chiquita Brands International). [6]  We have seen the same formula play out over Latin America for decades and most particularly with the late Hugo Chavez and other South American leaders finally taking the courageous step to reject the role of lap dogs for Anglo-American imperialism. (Yet, it seems the CIA finally had its way as Venezuela descends into another round of chaos).

Propaganda has been used to plant false stories in the media to oust legitimate governments and whip up collective fears so that the suppression populations around the globe with violence and intimidation can take place without there being much of a hue and cry. Latin America in the 1970’s and 1980’s was perhaps the most vicious and sustained attack against the right of peoples to determine their own destiny. The USA used the spread of Communism as justification for banking and resource control. It was this experimentation that provided much of the groundwork for what was to come.

Secrecy of the National Security State has fused with the corporate world and private security firms, allowing unfettered greed and power to multiply as cancer in a vast petri-dish. It is for this reason that enormous PR companies like Burston-Marsteller can straddle the world acting as channels for immoral and corrupt influence. The ambitious engineering of 9/11 would simply not have been possible to pull off without this groundswell of financial, military and PR power to back it up. As writer John Stauber observes: “Public relations is now inseparable from the business of lobbying, creating public policy, and getting candidates elected to public office. The PR industry just might be the single most powerful political institution in the world. It expropriates and exploits the democratic rights of millions on behalf of big business by fooling the public about the issues.” [7] When this is combined with an intelligence apparatus, think-tanks and global policy institutions, it represents another indicator of a breakaway society completely set apart from civil society. We are all forced to indulge their psychopathic fantasies for ultimate control, which of course, can never work despite creating untold destruction along the way.

Since the days of Bernays, virtual reality is not found within the software of new technology but is hardwired into our very brains. Our perceptions have been managed with greater alacrity by the advent of transhumanist technology but it is the principles of American education which have been responsible for eroding understanding and independence of mind in favour of info-tainment and the cult of artifice. It is belief and iconography that is the arbiter of reality in ways which have become so ingrained it is difficult to see how it can be outgrown.

Official culture grows not just from a habitual mediocrity and fear of change but a gradual disabling of our ability to think. This stems from dissociative states drawn from trauma and slow-burn, emotional hurts accumulated over decades from the encroachment of societal pathology. A link to meaning and the promise of something more than materialism is suffocated by the sheer speed of a technocratic mainframe designed to change the very cognitive processes involved in learning. Education in America has been dumbed down since the invasion of the industrialist families and Rockefeller-Tavistock agents got to work to shape the public mind in concert with Bernays-led Public Relations.

So, in this way, it is no surprise that, in combination with the deep state and pervasive corruption as a way of life, the events of 9/11 were permitted to run their criminal course. This has been a long-term experiment which culminated in an ambitious false flag terrorist attack designed to take the world into the next phase of global operations.

 


* Peter Francis in article commemorating the centenary of the First Great War puts it all into perspective when he states: “If all the British Empire’s dead of the First World War were to march four abreast down Whitehall, it would take them almost four days and nights to pass the Cenotaph.” – ‘Mapping the Impact of the Great War’ ,August 16, 2012, by Peter Francis | http://www.1centenary.oucs.ox.ac.uk/space-into-place/mapping-the-impact-of-the-great-war/

** 4Cs = commercialisation, consolidation, centralisation and control.


Notes

[1] ‘The Century of the Self: The Untold History Of Controlling The Masses Through The Manipulation Of Unconscious Desires’ By Adam Curtis, BBC Documentary, 2006. [2] The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations : Shaping the Moral, Spiritual, Cultural, Political and Economic Decline of The USA by John Coleman. Published by Joseph Holding Corporation, Incorporated, 2005 | ISBN 0963401971, 9780963401977.
[3] ‘Tavistock: The Best Kept Secret in America’ Dr. Byron T. Weeks, MD, July 31, 2001.

[4] A list of articles on why it is better to steer clear of GLP:  ‘Why can’t you say “Tavistock” on Godlike Productions?’ By Rob Daven, September 2012, Rob Daven https://decryptedmatrix.com/why-cant-you-say-tavistock-on-godlike-productions/ I ‘Godlike Productions and the Science of Shill’ By Frater Isla http://disinfo.com/2013/09/godlike-productions-and-the-science-of-shill/|’Beware of GodLikeProductions’: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qI9sfY8xOck |Will the REAL “Dr. Grant Gartrel(l)” please stand up? By Joe Quinn, June 6, 2004 http://www.sott.net/signs/Aussie_Bloke.htm | ‘How to Spot CoIntelpro Agents’ http://cassiopaea.org/2012/08/13/how-to-spot-cointelpro-agents/
[5] p. 10; Propaganda By Edward L. Bernays, 1928.
[6] ‘War on Truth: The Secret Battle for the American Mind’ by John Stauber, The Sun, March 1999.
[7] CIA and Assassinations: The Guatemala 1954 Documents. U.S. National Archive.
[8] op.cit Stauber.

Save

Dark Green IX: UN Agenda 21 and US Land Grab

“One of the big lies about UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is that it ‘builds strong communities’. It does. But not in the way you would expect. It is managed democracy and manufactured consensus.”

– Rosa Koire, Executive Director, Post-Sustainability Institute


If we are to live our lives supporting and deriving benefit from Nature’s bounty, sustainable development must be an essential part of human destiny. However, in the hands of our leaders the concept of sustainability in its present incarnation may be very far from what many environmental activists believe it to be.

One of the many initiatives to come out of the Rio conference in 1992 was a 300 page document called Agenda 21 which the UN defines as: “… a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and major groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment.” Out of the summit came a National Strategy for a Sustainable America which led to the announcement in July 1993 by US President Bill Clinton of the President’s Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD) to implement a “national Strategy” for sustainable development. By 2010, this had advanced to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s mission of advancing the principles and goals of sustainable development through partnerships, collaboration, and outreach. [1]

The 1992 Earth summit’s Rio Declaration on Environment and Development set out 27 principles intended to guide future sustainable development around the world. The PCSD also had a set of “We Believe Statements” outlining 16 principles which paraphrase the Rio Declaration. Both these sets of principles are incorporated into Agenda 21 (“21” refers to the 21st Century).

The Agenda 21 document comprises of 40 chapters grouped into 4 sections:

  • Section I: Social and Economic Dimensions
  • Combating poverty in developing countries, changing consumption patterns, promoting health, achieving a more sustainable population, and sustainable settlement in decision making.
  • Section II: Conservation and Management of Resources for Development
  • Includes atmospheric protection, combating deforestation, protecting fragile environments, conservation of biological diversity (biodiversity), control of pollution and the management of biotechnology, and radioactive wastes.
  • Section III: Strengthening the Role of Major Groups
  • The roles of children and youth, women, NGOs, local authorities, business and workers and strengthening the role of indigenous peoples, their communities, and farmers.
  • Section IV: Means of Implementation Science, technology transfer, education, international institutions and financial mechanisms. [2]

In the above, we find the complement to the Earth Charter, where the opposite poles of political beliefs come together to create maximum noise ratios and thus obscure any rational discourse on the issue. A “divide and rule” friction is set up between so called “lefties” and “right-wing whackos” for which Agenda 21 is the devil incarnate or a practical framework for a sustainable future. Is Agenda 21 an innocent “soft law” platform for change? Or are the “radical right, conspiracy theorists” correct and this is an an attempt to impose a vast template for technocratic global governance via Agenda 21?

treeeee © infrakshun

The UN Commission on Global Governance established in 1992 with full support from then Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali published a report in 1995 called “Our Global Neighbourhood.” Sustainable development (SD) and environmental protection are seen as integral step to the long-term security of that vision. As the report confirms: “The concept of national sovereignty has been immutable, indeed a sacred principle of international relations. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation.” And further: “Regionalism must precede globalism. We foresee a seamless system of governance from local communities, individual states, regional unions and up through to the United Nations itself.” [3]

The problem that many have with this process as it is being developed in both EU and the United States is that it removes the public from the decision-making process, by default. If elected officials are by-passed by non-elected officials who have been tasked with an agenda, however well-intentioned, it means that democracy and civil liberty is side-lined in favour of a consensus that may have no relation at all to the values, culture and self-determination of the country involved. Regionalism and the communitarianism are fine ideas – even welcome theories for socio-economic development. However, the devil is in the details. The overriding importance for members of the UN and Establishment circles is the dismantling of national sovereignty and the absolute control of the domestic population with the means to see that come about. When you get these people whole-heartedly supporting such potentially massive changes you can be absolutely sure it has nothing whatsoever to do with the greater good but the interests of the “lesser evil.”

Areas which are prompting most concern involve policy making procedures defined by collaborative consensus building a conflict resolution label appropriated by SD and SMART redevelopment and is inaugurating drastic changes in the way public policy is created in the United States. This consensus process as defined in Agenda 21 and the “We Believe” Statements of the PCSD serves to circumnavigate elected officials and place power in the hands of unelected officials who then determine Agenda 21 policy. This gives a free reign to a multitude of SMART redevelopment programs, where government and the corporate sector merge in ethically compromised, ideologically questionable ways.

With the United States having already had much of its constitution eviscerated by both the Bush-Cheney and Obama-Biden Administrations, the legitimate concern here for this one-time Republic and for the nations of Europe is that governments are exercising entirely undemocratic powers through seemingly benign programs. They do this because such passion can be usefully diverted to agendas which piggy-back the initial intent from public and officials, which is sincere. The Agenda 21 platform certainly has collectivist principles to its policy changes which immediately causes the political right to raise its hackles at the merest hint of such a thing. Since the US has an appalling record on global resource use and environmental safeguards in general, the kinds of changes which are being demanded under Agenda 21 will mean that there will be a forced redistribution of wealth and the confiscation of private property under the guise of “protecting the environment.” Therefore, the “social equity” in such a context, is a collectivist dream.

The concept of sustainable development does require a system of governance that is even more centralised under an integrated package of social equity, environmental protection and economic activity. (And we haven’t even looked at carbon tax yet). The PCSD brought the concept of Sustainable Development (SD) into the policy process of every agency in the US federal government. In partnership with the same environmental organisations who drafted Agenda 21, federal government agency grants are allowing SD programs to be seeded into the infrastructure of American life. So, while the UN cannot impel communities to adopt Agenda 21 policies its influence and beliefs are outsourced to hundreds of environmental groups and NGOs – the latter often paid quangos for government meddling – who carry out its operations so that Agenda 21 dove-tails seamlessly into future SMART growth infrastructure.

As a prelude to the Agenda 21 framework and The Convention on Bio-Diversity which has yet to be ratified, the Ecosystem Management Policy spear-headed by the UNEP is up and running in many US states. This means that where federal management of ecosystems exists it would inevitably expand federal control of the use of privately owned land and increased restrictions on the use of public lands for economic purposes. Since ecosystems do not have a defining boundary, private lands would be included in an expanded regulatory framework with the imposition of restrictions and guidelines mandated by law. The scope for the abuse of power would be limitless.

In Agenda 21’s vision for America, the protection of the ecosystem and sustainable development would take precedence over economic activity and private property rights. If the authority for implementing ecosystem management eventually meshed with Agenda 21 and continues to lie with the federal government, the vested interests of stakeholder input and authoritarian environmental activists, a massive transfer of power from the individual to the state is the only possible outcome.

The political and social equality pushed in Agenda 21 does not necessarily equate with a free society.

The repeated statement that a “transformation of society” is required includes an irreversible change in the process through which decisions affecting citizens are made. Extensive land use planning delivering SD to local communities dispenses with these democratic processes, or as commentator Henry Lamb correctly observes: “The fundamental principle that government is empowered by the consent of the governed is completely by-passed in the process … the natural next step is for government to dictate the behavior of the people who own the land that the government controls.” [4]

The lure of partnership-privatisation, be it water or forestry management and the wider issues involved, are often eclipsed by the approach of financial dividends. Everyone is always keen to make a buck and nothing is more seductive when one’s conscience is perceived to be clean while doing it. Bailing out bankers is a euphemism for maintaining an exploitative system. Such bailouts can operate under corporate lawyers and foundation executives offering financial assistance while making sure that they can gain much more for their money in return. Local officials and rural communities are seldom aware of what they are being “sold” and wouldn’t know a biodiversity clause or an Agenda 21 stipulation if it was deftly flashed in front of them on an i-pad screen. But it would sure look benevolently green.

One of the most surprising and little known facts related to SD and the present land grabs which are now taking place in the USA are the Executive Orders No.11490 and No.11647 enacted by President Richard Nixon on February, 10, 1972. The United States was divided into 10 Regional Councils, each federally controlled by bureaucrats for the improvement of coordination of activities between different levels of government. These 10 federal regions were to be given powers over everything pertaining to regionalism. Within those regional divisions, this included conservation, land use, water and all other natural resources within the United States. Fairly momentous and dramatic contributions to the US yet very few people know about it thanks to a compliant media and a corrupt Congress.

fedregional Standard Federal Regions

A bureaucratic binding has now arrived in the form of four federally chartered regional commissions: the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC), signed into effect by President Kennedy in 1963 and amended numerous times up until the present; The Delta Regional Authority (DRA) signed into effect by President Ronald Reagan (1988) and the Northern Great Plains Regional Authority (NGPRA) signed into effect in 1994 and the Denali Commission (DC) signed into effect in 1998 – both by President Clinton, the latter being the only commission targeting a single state (Alaska).

Each commission is responsible for a variety of legislative operations and procedures implementing a long term economic plan:

  • ARC: On top of a mandate to improve “regional infrastructure, reducing regional isolation; water and wastewater management resources; natural resources development; and human resources development, including housing, education, job skills, and health care” the Truman Administration expanded this to “… promot[e] economic development in the region; and establishing a framework for joint federal and state efforts in developing basic facilities essential to promoting coordinated regional responses to the region’s problems.”
  • DRA: “The Rural Development, Agriculture, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for FY1989.9 Title II of that act, known as the Lower Mississippi Delta Development Act, authorized the creation of the Lower Mississippi Delta Development Commission (LMDDC […] the Commission’s legislative mandate was to identify the economic needs and priorities of the Lower Mississippi Delta region, and to develop a 10-year economic development plan for the region.
  • NGPRA: “… directed it to study and make recommendations for improving the economic development prospects of residents of rural Northern Great Plains communities. The Commission was charged with developing a 10-year rural economic development plan for Northern Great Plains (NGP) with the assistance of interested citizens, public officials, groups, agencies, businesses, and other entities. […] “The act charged the NGPRDC with developing a 10-year plan that would address economic development, technology, transportation, telecommunications, employment, education, health care, housing, and other needs and priorities of the five-state region. The act encouraged the NGPRDC to develop the plan in collaboration with Native American tribes, federal agencies, non-profit and specific issue areas: value-added agriculture, international trade, business development, telecommunications, transportation infrastructure, health care, and civic and social capacity.”
  • DC: “… the Commission’s mission included providing job training and other economic development assistance to distressed rural areas in the state. The act also charged the Commission with providing for rural power generation and transmission facilities, modern communication systems, water and sewer systems, and other infrastructure needs of remote areas in the state.” [5]

All these Commissions are in turn, focused on a highly complicated jumble of state and local county development programs many of which are integrated or in the process of being integrated into the Agenda 21 blueprint. What Nixon and the Clinton-Gore administration did was to create a new government eco-bureaucracy or “regional” government placing the states into the aforementioned Ten Regions and their requisite federal funding. However, as regional government was the assigned vehicle for federal fund distribution it meant that local government officials were unaware that they were effectively reducing their power by being answerable to administrators of regions. Local authorities would be bypassed in favour of regionalism which isn’t just a system of grant distribution but an extension of State power.

The justification for all these eco-imperatives comes from the United Nations which – in much the same way as the Eurocrats in Brussels – overrides democratically elected decision-makers in favour of SD and SMART associated stake-holder legislations. Fusing management and administration systems based on new technology, redevelopment and eco-imperatives are making regionalism very far from democracy and constitutional accountability. We are faced with a situation where decisions are rubber-stamped by international regional government administrators and their connected councils serving a desperately hierarchical world management system which has nothing whatsoever to do with serving Mother Earth or its people.

The concept of Sustainable Development as it was sold to the public was never a grassroots ignition. It is a top-down product of a world management system dressed up in green language which will allow yet another vast channel of technocratic control to merge with fake land ethics, laws, and regulations. Environmental protection of fauna and flora will certainly take place but society will be in no position or have the legal right to enjoy it! Nature’s new found liberalisation, sagely bestowed by global stewards will always know best it seems.

The UN works through the emerging civil society which is actually made up of thousands of NGOs with largely the same beliefs as UN personnel. They are not necessarily representative of society as a whole. Via summits, national and international conferences, seminars and local outreach groups policy documents are formulated drawn from the gospel of Agenda 21, they are all overseen by Maurice Strong’s UNEP. Under the ever-present influence of NGOs and environmental pressure groups, local governments become un-elected members of “stakeholder councils” managing “empowerment zones”, or “enterprise committees” and “visioning councils” determined to adhere to the concepts of SMART growth. *

Despite many recommendations still to be implemented, the UN has spent – and continues to spend – millions of dollars whilst holding various international meetings which are attended by hundreds of political leaders, corporate CEOs and thousands of other non-governmental organizations who expend equal amounts of time drafting massive policy documents. Clearly, this is much more than a whimsical green distraction. They mean business. Although Agenda 21 is entirely “voluntary” and “non-binding” that is not how it’s playing out on the ground. Using an array of Delphi-based psychological techniques a veritable army of “facilitators” are descending on American cities and part of the neighbourhood councils and planning associations. Often, eco-SMART NGOs are nothing more than pincer movements into communities in order to extract support for redveelopment proposals under Agenda 21/SMART auspices.  Most importantly, they represent a fusion of corporate and government sponsorship which stands to make a lot of money for both parties at great expense to specific communities, most notably in suburbia.  As these new vested interests are drawn from Rockefeller-type Foundations and corporate CEOs it does not bode well for the future that will be defined by the disempowerment of civil society and the dilution, if not disappearance of truly representative local government and community.

The ubiquity of SD activists and advocates becomes especially problematic when so many of these people are tuning in to what is after all, a genuine wish to protect the environment and improve the quality of societies for future generations. Yet there is a refusal and a lack of knowledge as to how an ideology and system can be co-opted and used for something quite different. The young’s natural passion to protect the Earth is strong, so too are the dangers of the dogma and fascism that are intimately connected to the history of the environmental movement. With the present global economic system in terminal decline and media propaganda as potent that it has ever been, we are reminded of Peter Staudenmaier’s observation in the context of rising fascism: “The attraction such perspectives exercised on idealistic youth is clear: the enormity of the crisis seemed to enjoin a total rejection of its apparent causes. It is in the specific form of this rejection that the danger lies.” [6]

So Agenda 21 network continues to infiltrate every aspect of society and local development plans from biosphere reserves, wetlands, greenways, railways, carbon footprints, partnerships, conservation /environmental protection, land use, environmental protection, heritage areas and planning to name but a few. While securing more legislation and government control it reduces the rights of the individual and usurps power from local, democratically elected councils. Perhaps most importantly, after our exploration of eco-fascism and depopulation we should be extremely concerned when a vast blueprint for ecological management and sustainable development is sourced from those who cheerily support perpetual war, state-sponsored terror, cartel capitalism, eugenics, forced sterilisation; a global tax, (usually on those who will be least able to pay) and massive reduction of the human population by any and all means to reach that objective.

So, the perceived belligerent fears from the right-wing resistance to Agenda 21 stems from a much more complex dynamics playing out in plain sight. Therefore, there needs to be much more bipartisan support for rooting out what really gives on this issues both politically and within the public. The refusal to address legitimate fears from liberal and left-wing groups displays the same tunnel vision.

UN-Logo© infrakshun

Building on the advances made from the 1992 Rio summit, the Rio+20 Summit on Environmental Sustainability took place in late June of 2012. Though no real breakthroughs or commitments were forthcoming, the “larger achievement [may have been] making global sustainable development goals a priority on the international agenda” according to a recent Council on Foreign Relations report. The summit produced Rio+20’s outcome document, The Future We Want the greatest contribution of which “… catalyses a global call to make sustainable development priorities central to global thinking and action.” [7]

Whether this is a turn for the better for humanity is entirely dependent on whom we choose to preside over this transformation. Some of the perceived enemies of environmental activism such as large polluting corporations and bureaucratic government departments also play a part as effective double agents on the panoramic stage of social engineering. Presenting and even encouraging the rifts between the two serves to prop up the illusion that the overall conflict is real when it is all part of the programming. That is not to say that is ALL a conscious ruse. Clearly not. But we can hopefully begin to see how these ambitious macro-social projects connect like a vast net across the globe. And a big part of this eco-Intelpro involves the confiscation of land.

The rush to grab land and resources across the world has defined a new form of colonialism in the 21st century. China, America, Britain and other European countries are leading the way in carving up African land under the pretext of offering environmental or humanitarian assistance. [8]But how many of us know about the vast tracts of land which are being bought up by federal government programs in partnership with Establishment families, and hundreds of conservation trusts and environmental groups a bit closer to home?  In the US these “buffer zones” and “rural corridors”; heritage sites and designated conservation areas of “re-wilding” which are falling under the protection of SD and biological diversity legislation sometimes run into anything from 100,000 to 25 million acres where human presence is seen as “interference.” [9]

The re-introduction of species which have died out in specific regions, the management of forests and lakes, reservoirs and various types of land reclamation rides on the powerful and deep-seated wish for people to care for their environment. Difficult as it may be to accept – especially for ecologists and environmentalists who are traditionally some of the most passionate in their beliefs – the US is experiencing a gradual but inexorable large-scale theft of US land by those with money and power in order to turn almost 50 percent of America into protected habitats and reserves for the good of biological diversity. It is a theft because the vast majority of the public has neither access to, nor the necessary information to make an informed decision as to where they stand on the issue. Thanks to the usual lack of proper investigative reporting by the US media and the constant noise and distraction of Republican and Democrat knockabouts, the required public awareness on this agenda is non-existent and thus proceeds with ease, with locals and their councils oblivious to the larger implications, all too often embroiled in the impenetrable bureaucracy that SD has spawned.

The Wildlands Network (formerly the Wildlands Project) is more radical than the vision of SD though it is sitting alongside its ideological platform quite comfortably. The United Nations gave its seal of approval in its “Global Biodiversity Assessment” when it mentioned The Wildlands Project as a possible approach to preserving biological diversity. [10]  It is vast in scope, extending from one end of the continent to the other. Equally impressive is the enormous list of Wildlands Network affiliated organisations and groups, councils and foundations which in turn have sub-categories of affiliates which are thousands in number. And what do you know? The Rockefeller Foundation is there among the donators as is The Turner Foundation, from media mogul and depopulation advocate Ted Turner, the largest sponsor of environmental causes in the country. The Environmental Grantmakers Association makes sure a steady stream of cash keeps this long-term project afloat and on course.

The network was created from the concept of “re-wilding” a term first coined by conservationist and activist Dave Forman, one of the founders of the group Earth First! The term described the creation of “reserve networks” across the United States which would provide vast areas of wildlife habitat, the goal being to maximize biological diversity across the land. Humans, however, do not feature in this grand plan. Having laid the blueprint for the Wildlands Network in the 1980’s with colleagues Howie Wolke, and Bart Koehler, conservation biologists Michael Soulé and Reed Noss continued to build on the ideas, most notably in an influential paper published in 1998. [11]While Forman’s involvement has faded somewhat, Reed Noss, has become the leading spokesman for the Plan, expanding the possibilities with federal government support.

The philosophy which suffuses the Wildlands Network is Deep Ecology. In the words of Forman, from his popular 1991 book Confessions of an Eco-Warrior: “The only hope of the Earth is to withdraw huge areas as inviolate natural sanctuaries from the depredations of modern industry and technology. Move out the people and cars. Reclaim the roads and the plowed lands.” Deep Ecology is essentially a mix of the rich tradition of Pantheistic nature worship with streams of Taoism, Buddhism and American and German eco-revivalism thrown in. It is in fact, a beautiful philosophy. However, in radical hands it becomes something quite different.

Norway’s premier Philosopher Arne Naess and recognised pioneer of the Deep Ecology movement drew up eight basic principles that describe the philosophy:

  • The well-being and flourishing of human and nonhuman life on Earth have value in themselves. These values are independent of the usefulness of the nonhuman world for human purposes.
  • Richness and diversity of life forms contribute to the realisation of these values and are also values in themselves.
  • Humans have no right to reduce this richness and diversity except to satisfy vital needs.
  • The flourishing of human life and cultures is compatible with a substantial decrease of the human population. The flourishing of nonhuman life demands such a decrease.
  • Present human interference with the nonhuman world is excessive, and the situation is rapidly worsening.
  • Policies must therefore be changed. These policies affect basic economic, technological, and ideological structures. The resulting state of affairs will be deeply different from the present.
  • The ideological change is mainly in appreciating life quality rather than adhering to an increasingly higher standard of living. There will be a profound awareness of the difference between big and great.
  • Those who subscribe to the foregoing points have an obligation directly or indirectly to try to implement the necessary change. [Emphasis mine]

Eminently sensible. Except that this same philosophy is also embraced by eco-fascists who define our “obligations”, in slightly more authoritarian ways thereby hoping to change political policies to a situation “deeply different from the present.” We might hazard a guess what they might be prepared to do to get that ideal differential.

Deep Ecology has many positive connections to past traditions which involve co-creating with Nature rather than exploiting it, thus exhibiting a much needed humility. Nonetheless, since it appeals to those harbouring eco-fascistic views and authoritarian designs it is easily absorbed into the Agenda 21 framework.  Despite the central premise of Deep Ecology as philosophical (which often means impractical) and a guide to a deeper awareness of nature and our relationship to it, in the context of Pathocracy it becomes another nail in the coffin of true awareness; the case of the horse bolting before the cart. When Deep Ecology becomes grafted on to the State – much like anything other truth – it cannot become anything else but subverted.  The radicalism of the Wildlands Network in combination with Agenda 21 and Deep ecology advocates has the potential to become something quite different to the romance of us all returning to a more harmonious connection to the Earth. Such radicalism invites it as John Davis, editor of Wild Earth magazine exemplifies: “Does all the foregoing mean that Wild Earth and The Wildlands Project advocate the end of industrialized civilization? Most assuredly. Everything civilized must go …”

So, to what does the Wildlands Network comprise? Reed Noss defines it in the following terms: “A wilderness recovery network is an inter-connected system of strictly protected areas (core reserves), surrounded by lands used for human activities compatible with conservation that put biodiversity first (buffer zones), and linked together in some way that provides for functional connectivity of populations across the landscape.” [12]

 agenda21wildlandssustainabilitydiagramThe 4C’s meets the 3E’s 

The characteristics of these core areas include the expansion of parks and “wilderness areas to include adjacent old growth, roadless areas, and ecological areas,” where size means “bigger is better.” (So much for E.F. Schumacher’s Small is Beautiful) Existing roads would be closed and “Human access greatly reduced or eliminated altogether.” Noss interjects that: “Many ecologists (myself included) would just as soon see huge areas of land kept off limits to human activities of any kind.” [13] “Buffer zones” allow for some human activity, while “corridors” permit wildlife to travel freely from one core area to another, extend reserve habitats; allow seasonal migration genetic interchange between core reserves; “provide for long distance migration in response to climate change” with the average width of corridor one mile wide where little or no human use is encouraged. All of which seems to confirm the idea of that humans are to be controlled and managed in order to preserve Nature. The Integration and marriage of the natural world of which we are a part seems an unworkable hypothesis, but such segregation would certainly appeal to a super-rich Elite who have made it their long-term purpose to live in these reserve habitats while the rest of us get used to living in Mega-cities.

SD principles and the parallel visions of conservation biology share a special place in collectivist minds. The three pillars of SD which can be found in almost every article or paper related to Agenda 21, ecology and environmental ethics are: “Equity”, “Economy” and “Environment” or “The three E’s of Sustainability.” (See above). Each sector requires a total transformation towards global government. The “transformation of society” under the auspices of the UN and its agencies, the Club of Rome and many other think tanks and non-elected institutions and NGOs is not about a paradigm shift to more freedom and ecological emancipation but to accept a carefully engineered set of beliefs in order to welcome its exact opposite. Equity, Economy and Environment are embedded in the collectivist-corporatist ethos of the 4Cs of: commercialisation, consolidation, centralisation and control. Equity is about social justice that will put nature before humans and thus create the conditions by which private ownership is diluted and eventually seen as “eco-unfriendly” and against the “greater good”. Integrated into a SMART infrastructure a police state will be relatively “soft” due to the pervasive sanitising of consciousness drawn from socio-eco-engineering principles. In this way, Fabian economics has always been behind much of the new ecological visions currently capturing the minds of the Western young bureaucrats and technocrats. It is the core force behind the 4Cs, the 3Es and the 3EM.

Ecologists, environmental activists, politicians and bureaucrats are so bound up in green visions or the cash incentives for green technology that they cannot seem to entertain the possibility that such huge projects may serve a totalitarian game-plan. As discussed the shadow of right-wing paranoia and conspiracy theory lunacy, rather than a cold-bloodied appraisal of some obvious sign-posts holds sway.  One wonders if the Rockefeller, Oppenheimer, Windsor, and Rothschild dynasties and the protégés of One World, eco-fascists are going to be inhabiting the carefully regulated, SD-designed SMART cities of the future where everything conforms to a bland monotony of ecological and technocratic “efficiency”. I doubt it. The poor of course will remain where they always have – in centralised systems, on the margins of society scratching a living without access to nature (or nurture) while the middle class will be suffocated under more and more eco-SMART technocracy with very little ability to free themselves from  biometric “convenience.” The Elite will be residing in “secure zones” with grand ranches, mansions and resorts set deep in the wilderness away from the human species that does not respect her; like demi-Gods on earth whose stewardship and spiritual status demand their presence as custodians of the New World Religion. The World State writ large. Meantime, the rest of humanity will be corralled into cities known as “safe zones” and far away from “sacred” wild lands. These mega-cities will house what’s left of the human populations, after wars, disease and manufactured crises have done their work…

Dystopian fantasy? Hysterical hyperbole?  Or perhaps we really believe that all of this is really for us, and everyone will be happily paragliding, hiking and rafting the rapids at their leisure from core wilderness centres to the grand corridors of their choosing?

In the next post we will look deeper into the Sustainable Development, UN Agenda 21 and how it is currently affecting cities in America.

 


* In the unlikely event that you still unclear as to what SMART growth actually means, wikipedia provides as good a summary as I can come up with describing it as:

“… an urban planning and transportation theory that concentrates growth in compact walkable urban centers to avoid sprawl. It also advocates compact, transit-oriented, walkable, bicycle-friendly land use, including neighborhood schools, complete streets, and mixed-use development with a range of housing choices. The term ‘smart growth’ is particularly used in North America. In Europe and particularly the UK, the terms ‘Compact City’ or ‘urban intensification’ have often been used to describe similar concepts, which have influenced government planning policies in the UK, the Netherlands and several other European countries.”

As we get to the section on Technocracy you’ll see how snugly all this “exciting” and “liberating” SMART technology fits into Sustainable Development and Agenda 21.


Notes

[1] ‘Sustainable development,’ U.S. Department of Agriculture.
[2] http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/
[3] The Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.
[4] ‘Is your private property in jeopardy?’ By Henry Lamb, October 31, 2005 | http://www.sovereigntinternational.com
[5] CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web, Federal Regional Authorities and Commissions: Their Function and Design Updated September 21, 2006, By Eugene Boyd, Analyst, Government and Finance Division. http://www.hsdl.org
[6] op. cit. Staudenmaier.
[7] ‘Examining Rio+20’s Outcome’ Authors: Suan Ee Ong, Senior Research Analyst, Multilateralism Studies, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University Rômulo S. R. Sampaio, Professor of Environmental Law, Getulio Vargas Foundation Andrei Marcu, Senior Advisor and Head of Carbon Market Forum, Centre for European Policy Studies Agathe Maupin and Elizabeth Sidiropoulos, Research Fellow and National Director, South African Institute of International Affairs. http://www.cfr.org/ July 5, 2012.
[8] The Land Grabbers: The New Fight Over Who Owns The Earth by Fred Pearce. Published by Eden Project Books. 2012.
[9] The Wildlands Project: Summary: http://www.wildlandsprojectrevealed.org
[10] Section 13.4.2.2.3, page 993, ‘Global Biodiversity Assessment’ Cambridge University Press, 1995.
[11] Michael Soulé and Reed Noss, “Rewilding and Biodiversity: Complementary Goals for Continental Conservation,” Wild Earth 8 (Fall 1998) 19-28.
[12] “The Wildlands Project: Land Conservation Strategy, ”by Ross F. Need, Wild Earth Journal, .January 1992.
[13] Maintaining Ecological Integrity in Representative Reserve Networks by R. Noss, World Wildlife Fund Canada Discussion Paper, 1995. p.12.

World State Policies IX: Food as a Weapon and GM Crops Unleashed

“If you control oil, you control nations. If you control food, you control people.”

– Henry Kissinger


henrykissinger“Food is power! We use it to change behaviour. Some may call that bribery. We do not apologize.” So said past Executive Director of the United Nations World Food Program, Catherine Bertini.

One can imagine that humility may be very low down on the list of qualities for a person voted “the most powerful woman in the world” by The Times of London newspaper in 1996. And by a spooky quirk of fate, Bertini is also a member of the Advisory Council at Rockefeller College on Public Affairs and Policy, Trilateral Commission, Council on Foreign Relations and a Senior Fellow of the Rockefeller supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation. If her Elite membership doesn’t tell you all you need to know from the outset then her mentor Henry Kissinger will place her remarks in context.

One of a number of Elite pensioners who seem to live forever while avoiding any kind of accountability for their crimes, Kissinger is one of the most reviled and revered elder Statesman who has never left the political game. CEO of Kissinger Associates, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission and a long-time Bilderberger, he is the public face of those who prefer to remain out of the spotlight. He has strong ties to the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA), JP Morgan Chase Bank, the Rockefeller Foundation and is international advisor to the Hollinger Group. He has held many public office positions including Head of the State Department and National Security Council under Nixon in the late 1960s and early 70s. He received the Noble Peace Prize in 1973 despite being instrumental in creating the Vietnam and Yom Kippur war between Egypt / Syria and Israel.

henry_kissinger

Kissinger 1971 (wikipedia)

Kissinger’s presence has been around like a persistent stain on the carpet of US geo-politics since the 1950s and no matter what truth rises to the surface, the old man still appears on T.V. shows and gives authoritative interviews despite volumes of evidence for his crimes including conspiracy to commit murder, kidnap, alleged child rape and torture. He encouraged the Kurds to take up arms against Saddam Hussein in 1972-75 and then abandoned them to a slow death; his participation in the promotion of South African apartheid; the destabilisation of Angola; the whitewashing of Central American death-squads; political protection for the Pahlavi dynasty in Iran and its system of torture and repression; the genocide of civilian populations in Indochina; the planning of the coup in Chile and the assassination of democratically elected President Salvador Allende and many other crimes extending to Bangladesh, Cyprus, East Timor, and Washington, D.C.

So, it was fitting that Kissinger would continue his crimes undetected by coming up with the policy to use food as a weapon. [1]

On Dec. 10, 1974, a 200 page classified study (later de-classified in the 1990s) was completed by the US National Security Council called: “National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.” Overseen by Kissinger, it landed on his desk for review and then on to President General Ford to be adopted as official policy in 1975.  The basic thrust of the study followed the same Malthusian line that population growth in developing countries was a threat to US National Security and therefore had to be curbed by overt and covert means. The former was to be birth control and the latter, the creation of war and famine. It just happened to neatly coincide with political and strategic interests which were underway in countries that were chosen for depopulation. These included: India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines, Turkey, Nigeria, Egypt, Mexico, Brazil and Colombia. The power status of each of these countries could not be allowed to exceed the level that would put US interests at risk. The report stated: “Already the most populous country on the continent, with an estimated 55 million people in 1970, Nigeria’s population by the end of this century is projected to number 135 million. This suggests a growing political and strategic role for Nigeria, at least in Africa.” [2] Which certainly wouldn’t do since America had grand plans for an unimpeded resource grab. US economic dominance and population control strategies converge in the following paragraph:

The U.S. economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries [see National Commission on Materials Policy, Towards a National Materials Policy: Basic Data and Issues, April 1972]. That fact gives the U.S. enhanced interest in the political, economic, and social stability of the supplying countries. Wherever a lessening of population pressures through reduced birth rates can increase the prospects for such stability, population policy becomes relevant to resource supplies and to the economic interests of the United States [3] [Emphasis mine]

Many, if not most of the problems now experienced in the developing world are a direct result of Western economic policy. Rockefeller Foundation, Planned Parenthood International and others were still busy in India pushing through birth control policies under threat of economic sanctions just as Kissinger was suggesting to withhold food supplies unless mass birth control became standard practice:

“There is also some established precedent for taking account of family planning performance in appraisal of assistance requirements by AID [U.S. Agency for International Development] and consultative groups. Since population growth is a major determinant of increases in food demand, allocation of scarce PL 480 resources should take account of what steps a country is taking in population control as well as food production. In these sensitive relations, however, it is important in style as well as substance to avoid the appearance of coercion.” [4]

Spoken like a true Machiavellian. He continued:

“Mandatory programs may be needed and we should be considering these possibilities now,” adding: “Would food be considered an instrument of national power? … Is the U.S. prepared to accept food rationing to help people who can’t/won’t control their population growth?” [5]

It was only in the late 1980’s that the Brazilian Ministry of Health began investigating reports of systematic sterilisation of Brazilian women and was amazed to find that: “… an estimated 44 percent of all Brazilian women aged between 14 and 55 had been permanently sterilized,” while older women had been sterilized fourteen years before at the start of the program. As they pursued their investigations various American and some Brazilian organisations and agencies were found to be involved including the US Pathfinder Fund, International Planned Parenthood Federation, the Association for Voluntary Surgical Contraception, Family Health International – all under the guiding hand of the US Agency for International Development (USAID). [6]

The NSSM 200 study allowed what was essentially a eugenics-based National Security policy for depopulation to secretly develop in third world countries enhancing and expanding the work already carried out by Rockefeller minions twenty years before. Using euphemisms such as “family planning” and “population explosion” the propaganda of imminent population growth tied to the availability of strategic minerals could advance world Establishment designs in a way that had not been possible before the Nixon-Kissinger double act.

Author on geopolitics F. William Engdahl wrote from his 2007 book Seeds of Destruction:

While arguing for reducing global population growth by 500 million people by the year 2000, Kissinger noted elsewhere in his report that the population problem was already causing 10 million deaths yearly. In short he advocated doubling the death rate to at least 20 million, in the name of addressing the problem of deaths due to lack of sufficient food. The public would be led to believe that the new policy, at least what would be made public, was a positive one. In the strict definition of the UN Convention of 1948, it was genocide. […]

Kissinger was, in effect, a hired hand within the Government, but not hired by a mere President of the United States. He was hired to act and negotiate on behalf of the most powerful family within the post-war US establishment at the time — the Rockefellers. [7]

The Rockefeller Foundation had already established itself as part of the factions behind post war Washington policy where oil, defence and global agriculture were all integral to the expansion of American hegemony. Or in Kissinger’s words: “If you control oil, you control nations. If you control food, you control people.” [8]

Food as a weapon is nothing new but the consolidation of this tactic has reached a degree of technological sophistication not seen for hundreds of years. By 1974, the biggest six companies controlling 95 percent of world food were (and still are) Cargill, Continental, Louis Dreyfus, Bunge, André, and Archer Daniels, Midland / Töpfer all of whom are spawned from an Anglo-Dutch-Swiss food cartel, though all based in the US.

Under the rationale of “efficiency” and “maximizing profit ratios” US agriculture policy drove hundreds of thousands of family farmers into bankruptcy in order to pave the way for the monolithic machine of agribusiness, where the remaining farmers would exist only as serfs to trans-national corporations’ production methods. William Pearce, Cargill’s vice-president of Public Affairs was instrumental in this domination. He was on President Nixon’s 1974 Committee for Economic Development and made sure that US trade policy would leave a clear run for American agrichemical business to monopolize the world market in seeds, pesticides and most importantly, genetically modified plants. From that moment on, corporations like Cargill and Archer Daniels would not only reorganize farming policy but work to create a new one.

cargill

Cargill food giant logo

All legislation regarding family farm protections were phased out in favour of a rapidly deregulated “free market.” Just like the 2008 financial warfare perpetrated by Goldman Sacs et al and the federally mandated use of billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money in bailouts, so too Nixon’s farming policy was to change the face of America and the very nature of food. Wall St. only saw dollar signs as the social fabric of farming was torn apart.

The net result of such a systematic grab for power meant that Third World countries were especially vulnerable to these predator corporations who wanted to divert all self-sufficient and sustainable operations into a long-distance relationship of dependency where only fruits, sugar, coffee and vegetables would feature. US grains and other products were offered in return for payment by exporting their fruit and vegetables. This was to be the open door to massive worker exploitation and the loss of domestic food production. It was to signal the arrival of huge fields with cheaper yields dependent on a host of chemical products while the local and often ancient farming practices either instantly died or were absorbed into mechanised and synthetic “efficiency.”

Rather than ensuring that local farmers could provide for their communities by planting high-protein/high calorie crops and even sell the excess abroad at competitive prices, corporations oversaw the rise of a New World of poverty and its underclass, comprehensively denying them the assistance and ability to become self-sufficient in a monopoly that was both ecologically damaging as it was extraordinarily myopic. Cheap imports devalued their economies whilst access to their land was denied. Ensuring healthy, local economies could prosper was never the objective of American agri-business. Exploitation and ruthless stripping of the land, culture and people was the only way forward to ensure maximum profits divorced from limitations, morals and values.

The infamous General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) underwent several incarnations before finally being replaced with the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1993, fully operational by 1995. During President Richard Nixon’s tenure and through the auspices of the GATT Toyko round he was able to give carte blanche to the new global agribusiness export agenda while ensuring that developing countries would never gain their own independent food production. Nixon proposed to Congress a new way of managing trade negotiations which were termed “fast track”, for which Congress had to vote “yes” or “no” on a particular trade agreement. All changes to U.S. law had to conform to its terms – without any amendments. This was typical of the Kissinger-Nixon tag team. Under fast track, not only had Congress to conduct a vote within a brief 60 to 90 days of the President’s submission of the agreement, but the subsequent debate had to be limited to 20 hours.

As Congress was effectively removed from the negotiation process this opened the way for Nixon’s idea for a system of advisory groups and think-tanks drawn from the private sector. These appointed groups have enormous power and influence. Closed to public scrutiny, the documents are confidential with security clearances in operation for representatives. Indeed, the documents themselves are virtually unreadable to any but the initiated. Independent presidential candidate and social activist Ralph Nader wrote: “Once the agreements are completed – or on those rare occasions when a draft of the agreements is “liberated” – any person who wants to figure out what the agreements say faces a Herculean task. The agreements are very complex and written in arcane, almost impenetrable technical jargon that bears only a passing resemblance to the English language.” [9]

richard-nixon-and-henry-kissinger-1972

Puppets & players on a mission: Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger 1972

This obfuscation is intentional. The last thing the high priests of unfettered corporatism want is for the public, media or any democratic body casting a curious eye over agreements which are inherently anti-human. The big transnational food corporations intend to keep the public ignorant of trade agreements and excluded from the approval process as they know full well that if they were cross-examined the practices would be seen for what they are – a product of unrestrained, cartel capitalism.

What is perhaps the most dangerous development is the use of genetically modified foodstuffs under the pretext of feeding the world’s poor which were made poor by the very same entities and for that very same purpose.

The success of the WTO was mainly down to the Cargill Corporation’s aggressive lobbying of Congress (otherwise known as mass-bribing) through the auspices of the influential Business Round Table group (An off-shoot of the Round Table of European Industrialists) which is an alliance of corporatists pushing for total deregulation of trade. In other words, limitless exploitation of the world’s resources without national borders or bureaucracy. This lobbying took the form of a WTO paper entitled: “The WTO Agreement on Agriculture” which was penned by a gaggle of corporate plunderers such as Cargill, Monsanto, DuPont, Nestlé, Unilever, and others. [10]Most of these companies had many thousands of patents on new trans-genic plants. It was to be a perfect platform for GMO companies like Monsanto, Dow AgroSciences, and Syngenta to merge their monocultures towards the 4Cs: commercialisation, consolidation and centralisation leading to absolute control of the world’s food and its destiny.

The WTO’s remit was to be primarily a global free trade enforcer, a supranational entity fuelled by the insatiable drive of agribusiness and therefore answerable only to private agribusiness companies. Lip-service was paid to the plaintive cries for accountability because it had real power compared to the less efficient GATT agreements of the past. That usually means if the socio-economic and GMO order is not adhered to, the WTO can levy financial penalties to keep countries in line with the agribusiness agenda. For that reason, the WTO was designed to be above the laws of nations, answerable to no public body beyond its own walls. As we shall see presently, this organisation was to be used as the primary means by which genetically modified food and crops would become dominant in the world agriculture market.

By the time the 1986 Uruguay round of GATT talks had arrived and after a successful dismantling of public health and safety provisions in the US and the onset of rapid financial deregulation care of the Reagan and Clinton Administrations, agribusiness was primed to road test its new WTO toy. World cereals and grain supplies, meat, dairy, edible oils and fats, sugar, fruits and vegetables and all forms of spices are controlled by these corporations which operate as a food cartel working in tandem with the various principles of World State visionaries. They can apply enormous pressure to the West and developing countries. In combination with financial warfare and the “shock doctrine”of the World Bank and IMF, infrastructure support and capital goods are routinely denied and so too the possibility for self-reliance and self-sufficiency if a country doesn’t wish to play the game of cartel economics.

Thanks to historic monopolies forged in the dim and distant past these corporations have had a progressively ruthless stranglehold on much of the third world. Most countries don’t have any choice but to import from the food cartel’s export regions or see their populations starve. The shocking disappearance of thousands of global farmers is testament to the power of the food cartel and the crucial part they play in the 4Cs.  $90 million in grants for molecular biology and genetic research were dispensed by the Rockefeller Foundation between 1932 -1957, excited at the prospect of seeing their passion for social engineering bolstered by these new fields of science. For the Rockefellers, eugenics was about to become turbo-charged with much greater advances in manipulating the human mind and body.

GMOslabelling

10 Scientific Studies Proving GMOs Can Be Harmful To Human Health

With the Rockefeller Foundation’s well-established web of micro-biologists and bio-technicians spanning the globe the next war against natural food and human health of the most vulnerable was to proceed. On December 9, 1959, with some extra support from the Ford Foundation and the Philippines government, the Rockefeller’s International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) was established. The Institute’s research headquarters are located on the University of the Philippines campus in Los Baos, south of the Philippine capital, Manila, the largest non-profit agricultural research centre in Asia. With offices in 11 other countries, agricultural research institutes, international development agencies, and philanthropic organisations recently celebrated its 50th anniversary with much back slapping and congratulations by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation who have continued to support its work with hefty donations.

With close ties to business, government and biotech industries in the Philippines, the Manila bulletin gushes about the influence of the Institute and lays out the philanthropic Rockefeller script we’ve come to know so well: “In the 50 years of IRRI, the institute’s work has helped feed much of the world’s population, reduce poverty and hunger, improve the health of rice farmers and consumers, and ensure that rice production is environmentally sustainable. IRRI’s high-yielding rice varieties have helped significantly increase world rice production, especially in Asia, saving millions from famine while protecting the environment and training thousands of researchers.” [11]

In fact, the above quote is a woeful misrepresentation of the big picture riding on the assumption that global monoculture farming methods have been a grand success for all concerned, rather than the obvious ecological and social disaster they truly are. Yet, still the Rockefeller Foundation and its enormous corporate and civil society connections thrives on its perceived innovation and philanthropy. The IRRI is major player in the corporate take-over of Asia and its food. Sustainability and assisting sections of the population living in poverty is just another cynical ruse, though many of those employed by these companies no doubt want to believe the fantasy.

Over several decades IRRI has genetically modified over 300 High Yielding Varieties (HYVs) and as Dr Richard Hindmarsh of the University of Queensland points out, prior to such attempts to improve on nature over 100,000 different rice varieties thrived in farmers’ fields. [12] Yet once agribusiness technology tore into natural crop diversity and the ecological balance which existed then it was not long before the natural varieties became extinct, often without seed documentation or collection. Once a monoculture dominates, their genetic uniformity is inherently weaker with increasing vulnerability to disease, pest invasions, biological stress and weed proliferation due to intensive fertiliser use. Intensive farming becomes a false economy since it cannot exist without the inflow of high quantities of pesticides, herbicides and the deployment of massive irrigation projects, all of which destroy communities and eventually the land.

riceRegarding the PR of high yields of rice, with expanding irrigated land and large-scale chemical fertiliser use, IRRI claims that there was significant increase from 2.3 percent per annum before 1964 to 4.5 percent between 1965 and 1980. However, as the Food Security Fact Sheet states, IRRI rice yields at their research farm actually decreased: “… at a rate of 1.25 percent per year from 1966 to 1987, a decline of 27.5 percent in 21 years. From 1966 to 1980, the yield from a variety named IR8 fell from 9.5 tons per hectare to about 2 tons per hectare while still receiving 120 kilograms of pure nitrogen fertilizer per hectare. Yet by 1990, IR8 and similar varieties were planted on about 80 percent of Philippine rice crop area.” [13]

Foundations and NGOs lay the groundwork for a new colonisation under the mantle of philanthropy, which is why IRRI’s annual reports from 1963-1982 show grants from a multitude of US and European chemical corporations from such as Monsanto, Shell Chemical, Union Carbide Asia, Bayer Philippines, Eli Lilly, Occidental Chemical, Ciba Geigy (later part of Novartis Seeds / Syngenta), Chevron Chemical, Upjohn, Hoechst, and Cyanamid Far East. [14] With bio-safety and regulatory frameworks still to be implemented or reinstated, this new form of monopoly is set to continue regardless of the consequences to ordinary people on the ground. Even IRRI’s host country the Philippines, has been importing increasing amounts of rice every year despite following IRRI’s programs with religious conviction. This is in part caused by geography and climate but the heavy use of insecticide and the resultant poor soil content also caused financial and health-related health problems for farmers, the effects of which were inevitably passed onto consumers.

Marketed and promoted by the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations and their bid to gain control over the world’s rice supply and replace it with GM varieties, the IRRI was a big player in riding the mythological wave of this “Green Revolution” and the tag-line of “solving the world’s hunger problem.” A concentrated effort to neglect indigenous rice varieties with a proven high yield was put into action as the start of a multi-pronged campaign to push the developing world into the palm of biotechnology. [15] The IRRI; the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation; UN development Program; the World Bank and several other environmental and agribusiness organisations formed a global steering Group on International Agriculture Research (CGIAR) established in 1972. The much vaunted “success” of this Green Revolution was given a major thumb’s down by Philippines’ famers during a CGIAR Annual General Meeting in 2002 near the offices of IRRI. Demonstrations and street protests called for both institutions to be dismantled with statements decrying the record of the IRRI and CGIAR believing them to be “failed research institutions.” Farmers made it clear that they believed: “… a genuine, farmer-centred research institution should develop technologies that shall liberate farmers from dependence on any agro-chemical TNC [Trans-National Corp.] promote sustainable agriculture, conserve the environment, and protect the health of farmers.” [16]

One of the world’s leading experts on rice science Dr. R.H. Richaria, has been warning of the real nature of the “Green Revolution” since the 1980s. His concern over the severe disturbance of the agro-ecological balance has led to: “… intensive use of inputs such as genetically uniform seeds, fertilisers, pesticides, and water and energy, [which] certainly resulted in major environmental degradation, including salinity, soil erosion, desertification, chemical pollution of land and waterways, die-back, loss of crop diversity, and the turning of renewable resources, such as soil and water, into non-renewable resources.” [17]

gmoratios

Source: Issues Surrounding Genetically Modified (GM) Products’ by Subhuti Dharmananda, Ph.D., Director, Institute for Traditional Medicine, Portland, Oregon

The global farming revolution was part of an ambitious strategy to steer the world from agriculture towards agribusiness, with an exclusively GM-centred production line. A global concentration of hybrid seed patents would be in the hands of just a few seed companies. The in-built sell-by-date of these GM seeds meant that farmers were forced into a modern-day form of bonded labour from which it is almost impossible to escape.

The creation of vast tracts of land for the planting GM crops displaced many peasant families and communities who wound up in in the poorest parts of cities and therefore vulnerable to exploitation by those same companies who were always on the look-out for cheap labour. Moreover, developing nations were forced into debt to pay for the expensive technology that produced initially high yields only to rapidly fade in the middle to long-term thus becoming the hook to purchase more and more “add-ons” to sustain the fertility of soil and crops. Those who could not afford it had to borrow the money but with interest rates so high many peasant farmers lost their farms (and generations of farming history) to larger land-owners sponsored by trans-national companies. World Bank loans were easily extended while the banking cartels quite literally, had a field day.

The main task of CGIAR was to achieve excellence in the field of agronomy and agricultural science in general and to apply monoculture production back in the US and the developing world. From that blitzkrieg it laid the foundation for the “Green Revolution” which was in fact the pretext for the “Gene Revolution” and the distribution of GMO-based farming, riding on the wave of a deregulated free market. It followed the same 4Cs formula as John D. Rockefeller’s Standard Oil where the once the seed was planted and in the right way, it was just a matter of time before the planter could monopolise the whole garden and control the parameters of production so that they serve multiple objectives benefiting only the “Master.” Once families like the Rockefellers controlled the food supply they were able to extend their reach over a hundreds of companies and their subsidiaries in the supply line, from petroleum and agrichemicals to irrigation projects and food aid.

Behind this façade of helping the world’s poor quite apart from the obvious ecological and health dangers Rockefellers’ remit is to introduce the science of eugenics (social biology, Planned Parenthood etc.) through as many of societies’ domains as it can. Genetic modification of food is one such important spoke in the wheel. The food chain would be under corporate control matching the aspirations underpinning the human genome program.

Using the banner of a Green Revolution, the agri-chemical business has expanded into Africa courtesy of the Rockefellers and Bill & Melinda Gates foundation’s innocently named ‘The Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa’ (AGRA). Its advisory board of directors is riddled with Rockefeller go-betweens such as Strive Masiyiwa, Board Chair (Rockefeller Foundation) Jeff Raikes, Co-Chair, Programs and Policy Committee, (Rockefeller Foundation); Judith Rodin, Co-Chair, Programs and Policy Committee (Rockefeller foundation); Akinwumi Adesina, Associate Director, (Rockefeller Foundation) Pamela K. Anderson, Director of the Agricultural Development Program, (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation) [18]

Different name, same story.

Looking at the website you would be forgiven for thinking that so many happy, smiling faces denotes an agricultural future where all such agendas and drawbacks are fantasies of the pessimistic and deranged. Africans will be saved from their poverty by the goodness of a corporate West and their utopian world of hybrid seeds and high yields. That is, if you forget that a chemically saturated Africa and the diminishing returns of GM foods will mean that the long-term health and prosperity of Africa and its people is under question.

Amid the UN sex trafficking and abuse scandals Kofi Annan is no stranger to being used as an Establishment tool should the salary be sufficient. Annan’s job as Board Chair Emeritus of AGRA is to penetrate GM crops deep into the African heartland. Along with the geo-political shenanigans of AFRICOM, AGRA represents the same resource grabbing goals dressed up as agricultural emancipation. With the help of the World Bank, USAID, Monsanto, CGIAR member Syngenta AG of Switzerland, handsomely paid African scientists awash with sweeteners, incentives, sponsorships and initiatives, Africa’s governments are being seduced into accepting a New African Order of biotechnology.

logo

The GM crop leaders are presently the United States, Canada, India, Argentina, Brazil, and China. 1996 – 2006 saw the biggest leap in the production of genetically modified foodstuffs and crops with new countries signing up including South Africa, Paraguay, Uruguay and Australia. The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA) has stated that the world’s farmers planted 148m hectares of genetically modified crops in 29 countries in 2009. The USA is the leader in GM cultivation at 66.8m hectares over 2 million more than the previous year. [19]

Brazil’s economic boom (and inevitable bust sometime in the future) has meant that Genetically Modified Organisms have been included in the ascent with some 10m hectares planted since 2008 overtaking Argentina as the second-biggest grower in 2010. By 2011, that had reached 303,000 km2. [20] 50 percent of GM crops grown worldwide were grown in developing countries, with the largest increase in Brazil in the same year. There has also been rapid and continuing expansion of GM cotton varieties in India since 2002 (Cotton is a major source of vegetable cooking oil and animal feed) with 106,000 km2 of GM cotton harvested in India in 2011.

By 2004, global GM crop acreage had hit the 167 million mark. By 2010, Latin America had been breached with Mexico, Chile, Colombia, Honduras and Costa Rica all yielding an average of 0.1 million hectares. Negligible but present nonetheless. Asia and Latin America are providing many hectares set aside for GM crops and associated biotechnology. The rise in GM farming is likely to increase year by year on these continents and in the developing world.

Agri-business makes the idea of choice a pipe dream. Soyabean crops have wreaked ecological destruction on much of Latin America producing huge profits for invested companies. Soya and herbicide resistant crops remain the most popular products that farmers ending up needing once stuck on the monoculture system. GM crop production is still not popular with Europeans due to an ethical and environmental reasoning which has expressed itself through an organised activist movement at local and national levels. Europe is also subject to clear restrictions on growing GM crops. Nevertheless, creeping acreage is appearing with GM maize production having taken place in Spain, Portugal, Germany and France and more recently in the Czech Republic, Sweden, Poland, Slovakia and Romania, all with an average of 0.1 million hectares. [21]

As Africa is invaded by Chinese, European and American corporations, so too the potential for GMOs to hitch a ride. Burkino Faso and Egypt are the latest victims (or innovators depending on your position) with Pakistan, the newly and conveniently “liberated” Myanmar and the Philippines following closely behind. [22] Iran climbed aboard in 2005.

See also:

Redesigning Nature

Update: Big Biotech’s big lie: National sciences group concludes GMOs do not increase crop production

 


Notes

[1] ‘The Case Against Henry Kissinger Part One The making of a war criminal’ by Christopher Hitchens
Harpers magazine, March 2001. | http://harpers.org/archive/2001/02/the-case-against-henry-kissinger-2/
[2] National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests (NSSM200) 1974.
[3] Ibid.
[4] ‘Kissinger’s 1974 Plan for Food Control Genocide,’ by Joseph Brewda, December 8, 1995 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
[5] Ibid.
[6] op. cit. Engdahl (p.53)
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid. (p.41)
[9] ‘The Globalisation Agenda – Grave New World – The Democracy Grab’ by Ralph Nader and Lori Wallach from The Case Against the Global Economy and For a Turn Towards the Local by E. Goldsmith and Jerry Mander – Sierra Club Books, 1991.
[10] http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/14-ag_01_e.htm
[11] ‘International Rice Research Institute celebrates its 50th Anniversary’ December 9, 2009, Manilla Bulletin.
[12] http://www.panap.net/docs/analysis/gerice.pdf
[13] Rice, Trade and Biotechnology in the Philippines by Steve Suppan Food Security Fact Sheet No. 5, September 1996.
[14] ‘Laying the Molecular Foundations of GM Rice Across Asia’
[15] IRRI powerbase.info.
[16] ‘Richaria’s study proves deliberate neglect of indigenous varieties’ by Bharat Dogra Leisa India Supplement December 1999.
[17] IRRI powerbase.info. dismantal IRRI / CGIAR.
[18] http://www.agra-alliance.org/
[19] Ibid.
[20] ‘The adoption of genetically modified crops – Growth areas’ Feb 23rd 2011, The Economist online.| ‘ISAAA Brief 43, Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2011’ By James C (2011). ISAAA Briefs. Ithaca, New York: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA).
[21] Op. cit. The Economist
[22] Ibid.

Puppets & Players VII: Trilateral Commission

organigramme_Trilateral-commissionTrilateral Commission networking (Click on the image)


Founded by David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski in July 1973, the Trilateral Commission (TC) also describes itself as a non-governmental, non-partisan discussion group set up to encourage closer cooperation among the United States, Europe and Japan. Or in the TC’s own words it was formed: “…by private citizens of Western Europe, Japan and North America to foster closer cooperation among these three regions on common problems. It seeks to improve public understanding of such problems, to support proposals for handling them jointly, and to nurture habits and practices of working together among these regions.” [1]

The Executive Committee chooses members with a suitable insider pedigree, offering some form of expertise in their chosen field be it finance, economics, politics or media. Most important however is the kinship to globalist ideals. These members total around 350 for a three-year renewable period, meeting several times a year to discuss their work and organize TC strategies. As with the CFR and Bilderberg, TC annual reports are available and its beliefs and ideologies are clear. The real operations and strategies for the coming years are not revealed and to do so would be dangerous, the simple reason being that their objectives would be seen for what they are: irresponsible and undemocratic albeit dressed up in the civilised language of the government technocrat.

Disarmingly described as a high level “discussion group” it publishes a quarterly magazine called the Trialogue in which all kinds of barely restrained empire-building ideas clash to together in frightfully civilised fashion. Yet, as author Anthony Sutton wrote in Trilaterals over Washington: “… this group of private citizens is precisely organized in a manner that ensures its collective views have significant impact on public policy.” When combined with CFR and the Bilderberg Group along with a multitude of other branches we quickly realise that there is a very significant and powerful force at work which influences foreign and domestic policy. [2]

The suitably nebulous and vague terms used in the introduction to the TC found at trilateral.org serves to limit the attention from media and public alike. Indeed, the website itself looks sombre and dull enough to send even the most avid geo-political watcher straight to sleep. For all most disinterested people know, they might be meeting to play chess or past the time chatting good-naturedly over a game of golf while setting the world to rights for all. The impression given is one of economic benevolence; fatherly leaders and venerable statesmen doing rarefied work on the Great-Unwashed’s behalf; striving to bring the economic model of East and West together so that all may share its numerous bounties.

The TC membership operates along the same lines as the CFR and as might be expected, many members ping-pong between both groups. If the Council on Foreign Relations is the crucible of world state concepts and ideas then the Trilateral Commission is tasked with commissioning those ideas into reality extending their visions into the strategically important geography of Eurasia. Tucked away on the founding members page of the website there is finally a mention of Zbigniew Brzezinski who: “… played an important role in the formation of the Commission and served as its first director from 1973 to 1976. After serving in the Carter Administration, Dr. Brzezinski rejoined the Commission in 1981 and served on the executive committee until 2009.” [3]In 1970, as a young Polish intellectual, Brzezinski foresaw the rising economic power of Japan, and post-war Europe. Brzezinski was also a big fan of Karl Marx, adapting and expanding his theories. World-order politics was to be promoted through a trilateral economic linkage between Japan, Europe, and the United States. David Rockefeller was excited by Brzezinski’s vision of collectivism and capitalism which dove-tailed neatly into the Rockefellers’ love of China. This merging of corporatism and Maoism/Stalinsim was to be the template for the New Economy under Banking rule. Hand in hand, Rockefeller provided the income and Brzezinski academic clout and together they brought to bear a formidable network of high level contacts.

TrilateralList2010

Trilateral Commission Executive Committee 2010 (www.publicintelligence.net/)

Like David Rockefeller and his family, Brzezinski’s chameleon-like influence is enormous (if not infamous) which is why his presence on TC is understated despite his conceptual echoes present on every page. As a geo-political strategist and tactician; a Machiavellian insider and all-round, intellectual genius, Brzezinski built a reputation for providing insights into the future that were both compelling and accurate, exemplified in his book: Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives (1997). He would be an obvious choice to organise and manifest David Rockefeller’s equally neo-feudalist vision for integrating Asia into their ambitious visions of a “New Economic World Order.”

Brzezinski’s grooming and educating of Jimmy Carter to be Presidential material and aligned to TC’s interests – like Obama – began years earlier in 1973 when Carter was offered a place as founding member of the newly–created commission, which he duly accepted. It was to be a coup for the TC. The late former Republican Senator and opposing candidate Barry Goldwater saw the writing on the wall when he wrote:

“David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski found Jimmy Carter to be their ideal candidate. They helped him win the nomination, and the presidency. To accomplish this purpose, they mobilized the money power of the Wall Street bankers, the intellectual influence of the academic community – which is subservient to the wealth of the great tax-free foundations – and the media controllers represented in the membership of the CFR, and the Trilateral.”[4]

3bzhezins

Zbigniew Brzezinski

The Carter administration with Brzezinski as US National Security Advisor had 19 Trilaterals either with government posts or with cabinet positions. [5]That was a lot of political power directed in a decidedly Rockefeller-Brzezinski direction. Carter the peanut farmer, much like the law student Barack Obama would be a figurehead for something quite different to the political marketing. The perceptions which underpin the TC and CFR groups are Capitalist-Marxist philosophies. Capitalist in the sense that deregulated corporatism and privatisation reigns supreme and Marxist in the sense of Jewish-influenced Cultural Marxism of the Frankfurt School topped off with traditional Fabian socialism. This is why this belief system is so attractive to the Rockefeller dynasty and their worshippers – it provides the perfect template for World State rule and centralised control.

There is no conspiracy here at all.  They are very open in their views as they know the general public and most government and agency officials have little understanding of their true objectives, nor do they have the conceptual understanding of the long term strategy and the background of occult principles involved.

In Brzezinski’s Between Two Ages his belief hinged around the idea that three important stages of evo­lu­tion, had been passed and that mankind was presently midway through the fourth and final stage. Stage 1 was “Religious”, the second stage “nationalism” and the third stage was “Marxism” which he described as: “… a further vital and creative stage in the maturing of man’s universal vision.” This would lead to the final transformative stage of the Technetronic Era where humanism, technocracy and a World State hybrid of capitalism and Marxism would be engineered around exact mechanisms of a “scientific technique.” Barry Goldwater suggested TC’s objective was: “… a skilful, coordinated effort to seize control and consolidate the four centers of power: political, monetary, intellectual, and ecclesiastical … [in] the creation of a worldwide economic power superior to the political governments of the nation-states involved. They believe the abundant materialism they propose to create will overwhelm existing differences. As managers and creators of the system they will rule the future.” [6]

The Senator was correct in that they believe in an economic utopia but incorrect that such a vision extended to all. The TC, CFR game-plan has always been predicated on an Elite class which expects global serfdom to meekly roll over to their rulers, doffing their hats in subservient awe. Like all Trilateralists, Brzezinski believed that national sovereignty and: “… Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization.” And therefore: “… as America becomes an increasingly multi-cultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat.” [7]

And this has been the constant siren call of the various sectors of the Three Establishment Model (3EM). This “threat” – and many others since – was certainly delivered in the guise of the September 11th attacks which served to speed up Anglo-American-Israeli hegemony in the form of the Police-Surveillance State, a brutal Middle Eastern resource grab and the emergence of a a new cold war, despite the best efforts of Vladimir Putin to prevent it. Russian-hater Brzezinski was well aware of what was coming down the pipeline, probably because he was one of the many advisory architects. American dominance can only be assured by maintaining conflict, breaking the spirit of the people and challenging Russia’s independence. It cannot be allowed to offer an alternative model – however imperfect – to the 3EM. The trilaterals are therefore very keen indeed to demonise Russia and the media propaganda has been put into action in ways not seen since the Bay of Pigs.

This brings us to the next and perhaps most important outpost for globalist strategy: the Bilderberg Group.

See also: The Trilateral Commission by Prof. Antony C. Sutton

 


Notes

[1] http://www.trilateral.org
[2] p.5; Trilaterals over Washington By Anthony C. Sutton. Published by August Corporation 1981. | ISBN-10 0933482012.
[3] Ibid.
[4] p.286; With No Apologies: The Personal and Political Memoirs of United States Senator Barry M. Goldwater. Published by William Morrow and Company; 1st edition, 1979 | ISBN-10: 0688035477
[5] ‘America Plundered by the Global Elite’ by Patrick Wood, The August Review, December 13, 2005.
[6] op. cit. Goldwater (p.285)
[7] p.35; The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and It’s Geostrategic Imperatives by Zbigniew Brzezinski, Published by Basic books, 1997. | p.211; Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era By Zibgniew Brezezinski, Published by The Viking Press, Inc. 1970.

The Light Bringer II: The Lucis Trust

“Alice and Foster Bailey were serious students and teachers of Theosophy, a spiritual tradition which views Lucifer as one of the solar Angels, those advanced Beings Who Theosophy says descended (thus “the fall”) from Venus to our planet eons ago to bring the principle of mind to what was then animal-man. In the theosophical perspective, the descent of these solar Angels was not a fall into sin or disgrace but rather an act of great sacrifice, as is suggested in the name “Lucifer” which means light-bearer.”

– lucistrust.org


After years of contact with her “spirit masters” Russian esotericist Helena Petrovna Blavatsky was contacted by the Master Morya in 1851. A co-founder of the Theosophical Society in 1875, she went on to publish the hugely influential Isis Unveiled in 1877 while establishing Lucifer, an occult magazine in London in the same year. The equally controversial and occult classic The Secret Doctrine followed in 1888.

clip_image002Alice Ann Bailey and her husband 32° mason Foster Bailey had become acquainted with students of Madam H.P. Blavatsky and joined the Theosophical Society soon after in 1917. Master Koot Humi had apparently been in “telepathic contact” with Bailey since 1895 which paved the way for contact with another hierarchical master, “the Tibetan” otherwise known as Master Djwhal Khul who asked her to assist him in some dictation work in 1919. As this was all carried out via telepathy it is hardly surprising that Bailey who had been raised a devout Christian, was little put out. Her refusal to act as a PA to Khul’s esoteric “overshadowing” was short-lived, apparently “persuaded” by Koot Humi to be the needed channel for telepathic dictation.

Twenty-four books of esoteric philosophy were produced by Bailey over the next thirty years and would become the foundation of much of the New Age or Human Potential Movement. The basic premise behind these 24 tomes was to prepare humanity for the “re-appearance of the Christ” and “the externalization of the Hierarchy.” This is to include several of the Masters descending from “the etheric plane” and setting up shop in cities around the globe. With what appears to be an army of planetary civil servants rather than spiritual advisors, these Masters will begin reshaping economics, religion, education and politics and everything else on their own particular anvil of reality so that they can usher in their New World Order for us all, which would lead to peace, prosperity and right human relations …

dwal-kul

Artist’s rendering of alleged Tibetan Master Djwhal Khul

To that end, the Baileys founded The Lucis Trust in 1922, as a non-profit service organisation incorporated in the United States with headquarters in New York City, London, and Geneva. The trust was primarily set up to further the distribution and dissemination of the books under the banner of the “ageless wisdom teachings” which served as a template for affiliated organisations which included:

The Arcane School – “The Arcane School was established by Alice A. Bailey in 1923 to help meet an obvious and growing demand for further teaching and training in the science of the soul. The Arcane School was created as a training school for adult men and women in meditation techniques and the development of spiritual potentiality. The School provides sequential courses of study and meditation, and practical training in group service.” [1] The school had 20,000 graduates by 1954. A veritable occult university, its remit is to continue to be the main training ground for New Age disciples.

World Goodwill – founded in 1932, has been recognized by the United Nations as a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO), and is represented during regular briefing sessions for NGOs at the United Nations. The Lucis Trust has consultative status at the roster level with the United Nations Economic and Social Council. The dropping of the atomic bomb is seen by freemasonic initiates as the spiritual manifestation of Luciferian light. The UN is seen as the harbinger and enforcer of a monopoly over all countries so that global governance and One World principles can supersede national sovereignty. It is a Federalist dream. Consequently, World Goodwill works directly with the “world federalists,” and follows closely the explication as found in Bailey’s The Externalisation of the Hierarchy that gives the work of the UN and its agencies to externalize a so-called Hierarchy of “Illumined Minds,” bringing forth an “Age of Maitreya,” an esoteric label for the return of Christ.

lucis-cloud_thumb.jpg

Lucis Trust insignia

Triangles – Founded in 1937, is the name for a global network of cells, whose members use a prayer called the “Great Invocation,” [2] especially on the night of the full moon, when members can be influenced by the astrological signs of the zodiac. “A triangle is a group of three people who link each day in thought for a few minutes of creative meditation. They invoke the energies of light and goodwill, visualising these energies as circulating through the three focal points of each triangle, and pouring out through the network of triangles surrounding the planet.” [3]

The Beacon magazine – “Alice and Foster Bailey established The Beacon in 1922. They conceived it as a forum for esotericists to contribute their visions, share their experiences and develop their ideas about the evolution of humanity and the unfolding Plan for our world. The quarterly magazine “… focusses its work on the nature of man, of God and the universe, on the Plan for humanity, the Hierarchy of Masters, the reappearance of the Christ, the emergence of new age principles in the world…” [4]

The Findhorn Foundation deserves a mention here, a magical place on the one hand and fairly compromised on the other. While the Lucis trust could be said to the intellectual centre of the New Age movement the Findhorn Foundation could be seen as its emotional centre.

Formed in 1962 and famous for being the “Vatican of the New Age” it is one of the first of such centres in the world the foundation offers an eclectic mix of nature-based, ecological and spiritual courses, out-reach programmes, seminars and workshops. It has a community eco-village and plays host to conferences on a range of topics from “Angels,” “Sexing the Spirit” to “Love, Magic, Miracles” promoting the idea of a “New Spirituality” in line with the the core philosophy of the Lucis Trust.

Like the Lucis Trust, Findhorn has enormous potential and creativity, heavily focussed on what are termed the realm of angelic and nature spirits which brought it initial fame care of its now deceased owners Eileen and Peter Caddy. Experiments in ecology and “co-creating” with Nature had impressive, if not phenomenal results. However, like any movement that becomes popular and starts to expand – most especially when it has a spiritual in focus and therefore threatening to darker forces –  without sufficient understanding of either negative para-physical realms and knowledge of ponerology, then corruption is inevitable.

I attended three conferences and found many wonderful people there. After attending several workshops and conferences in the late 1990s I also found a high proportion of participants exhibiting various stages of mental illness ranging from delusional to psychotic states. This appeared to be drawn from the sensitivity of the individuals’ personality married to an insufficient knowledge of non-physical realms and a naive embrace of that which was assumed to be “spiritual” which was quite clearly to me – and I suspect a few others – anything but. The notion of deception as the primary mode of attack appears to be entirely blanketed with a feeling-based interpretation of phenomena. Angels, earth spirits, and new age speakers are embraced without any psychic protection or analysis whatsoever. And when certain psycho-physiological symptoms of what might called possession occurred, this was put down to various rationalisations ranging from “etheric adjustment” or unresolved “karmic resistance”.

The New Age movement contains some extraordinary people who are inspiring and gifted in their teachings and intutive renderings of new visions. It is also wide open to various forms of abuse at the emotional and para-physical levels which has effectively derailed an awful lot of good work. It is for this reason that the new age centres remain the primary mode of spiritual obfuscation and deception in our current times.

Which brings us back to the Lucis Trust as the foundation to such centres and the disemination of a way of viewing the world and its subtle twists on ancient wisdom and perennial philosophy.

the-fallen-angel-by-gustave-dore_thumb.jpg

“The Fallen Angel” by Gustave Doré | “Alice and Foster Bailey were serious students and teachers of Theosophy, a spiritual tradition which views Lucifer as one of the solar Angels, those advanced Beings Who Theosophy says descended (thus “the fall”) from Venus to our planet eons ago to bring the principle of mind to what was then animal-man. In the theosophical perspective, the descent of these solar Angels was not a fall into sin or disgrace but rather an act of great sacrifice, as is suggested in the name ‘Lucifer’ which means light-bearer. ” lucistrust.org

Perhaps a small hiccup and indication of where their sentiments lay was seen in the naming of The Lucifer Publishing Co. in the early 1920s. Probably realising that this was a little inflammatory even for their theosophical brethren, they changed the name to Lucis Publishing Co. in 1925. The reasoning behind this is that In Latin lucern ferre translates to “light-bearer” and lucis means “of light.” However, we read on the Lucis Trust website that: “The Baileys’ reasons for choosing the original name are not known to us, but we can only surmise that they …. Sought to elicit a deeper understanding of the sacrifice made by Lucifer.” [5]

It is certainly true that “Lucifer” means Lightbringer, Lightbearer, Bringer of Dawn or Morning Star. The latter meaning having its origins in the planet Venus. There are also those who associate the Fallen Angel of Lucifer to the Fall of Man or humanity. The negative attributes – as with all the shadow sides of archetypes, Gods and Goddesses – are used on the left hand path of black magick. It is also safe to say that Lucifer and its various cultural incarnations have become associated with a strictly satanic pathway long before the Bailey’s arrived on the scene. So, why choose this emblem? What quality of Promethean light is it bringing? Is it an alchemical fire or the fire of inversion which distracts and deceives – “even the very elect”?

Nonetheless, the objectives of the Lucis Trust as stated in its charter are:

“To encourage the study of comparative religion, philosophy, science and art; to encourage every line of thought tending to the broadening of human sympathies and interests, and the expansion of ethical religious and educational literature; to assist or to engage in activities for the relief of suffering and for human betterment; and, in general, to further worthy efforts for humanitarian and educational ends.” [6]

It all sounds thoroughly noble and worthy. *

We can, however, read the same nebulous sentiments and platitudes from affiliated think-tanks and clubs, ostensibly for world economic and geo-political harmony from the likes of Council of Foreign Relations (CFR) Trilateral Commission (TC) and Bilderberg Group (BG). A cursory look at all four websites (with the exception of BG who decided not to give us that pleasure) the average person would come away thinking very little was amiss and nothing but butter would melt in their mouths. Dig a little deeper however and something is very much amiss with some obvious red flags right from the get-go.

clip_image004

Alice A. Bailey circa 1930s

“The Plan” as espoused by the Lucis Trust appears to be a direct mirror of Establishment worldviews. Freemasons and New Agers have joined the throng in propagating collectivist symbolism and motifs that are both pagan and pantheistic. Nothing wrong with nature-religions but animal totems and the God of Materialism also have pride of place in existential Satanism. It is no coincidence that the Lucis Trust lies at the heart of the occult foundation of New World Order philosophy which has been enthusiastically embraced by all the usual globalist suspects in full awareness – or inexcusable ignorance. This fact alone should give us pause.

The Lucis Trust is intensely political as it is occultly religious. Globalist ideology can be read on every page of its books and articles promoting centralisation and group consciousness – something quite different to being group conscious – at the expense of individuality.

The Trust founded its “World Goodwill” initiative in 1937 which just so happens to be embraced by a host of pathological signatories for whom corporatism, exploitation and globalism is the prime-mover of their beliefs. Anyone with a modicum of awareness should have their alarm-bells ringing at such a discovery. Some of these luminaries are: Helmut Schmidt, former Chancellor of West Germany; Malcolm Frasier, former Australian Prime Minister; Robert McNamara, former US Foreign policy advisor and Secretary of Defence; Paul Volcker, former chairman of the Federal Reserve and recent chairman of the Economic Recovery Advisory Board under President Barack Obama and of course, Elder statesman and essential psychopathic insider: Henry Kissinger.

The Lucis Trust is run through an international board of trustees whose membership is said to have included: John D. Rockefeller, Norman Cousins, Thomas Watson, Jr. (IBM, former U.S. Ambassador to Moscow) and Henry Clauson, Grand Commander of the Supreme Council, 33rd Degree, and Southern District Scottish Rite.

“World Goodwill’s activities are essentially educational” and it has three main purposes:

  • To help mobilise the energy of goodwill;
  • To cooperate in the work of preparation for the reappearance of the Christ;
  • To educate public opinion on the causes of the major world problems and to help create the thought form of solution.” [7]

Lucis Trust programming is essential for a New World Religion and New Social paradigm to be sold to the masses. It’s template must tick all the feel good boxes for aspiring neophytes whilst appealing to the metaphysical-freemasonic intelligentsia who have attained certain degrees from other esoteric schools. Then there are the children, the new generations to which the Lucis Trust and it’s United Nation vehicle must direct its spiritual energies.

In 1968, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) spearheaded a lobbying effort – along with the United Nations Economic and Social Council headed by Robert Muller – to adopt Resolution 1296 which grants “consultative” status to certain NGOs. In 1970, the Lucis Trust was one of the first to be granted such as status on the UN roster. Muller, a former Assistant Secretary General to the U.N., had good reason to set about his task in further integrating the Lucis Trust with the United Nations. As a devoted disciple of Alice Bailey, he took inspiration from her book A Treatise on White Magic, and “Education in the New Age” in order to create his vision of education for the world. This eventually formed the basis for the Robert Muller schools. [8]

In 1995 Muller delivered a speech at the University of Denver where we can gleam some understanding as to what brand of education he and UNESCO was preparing for the world’s generation of children.

He stated:

“I had written an essay which was circulated by UNESCO, and which earned me the title of “Father of Global Education.” I was educated badly in France. I’ve come to the conclusion that the only correct education that I have received in my life was from the United Nations. We should replace the word politics by planetics. We need planetary management, planetary caretakers. We need global sciences. We need a science of a global psychology, a global sociology, a global anthropology. Then I made my proposal for a World Core Curriculum.” [Emphasis mine] [9]

Muller’s Curriculum offers a primary objective which involves:

“… Assisting the child in becoming an integrated individual who can deal with personal experience while seeing himself as a part of … the greater whole. In other words, promote growth of the group idea, so that group good, group understanding, group interrelations and group goodwill replace all limited, self-centred objectives, leading to group consciousness.”

The World Core Curriculum Manual says: “The underlying philosophy upon which the Robert Muller School is based will be found in the teachings set forth in the books of Alice A. Bailey, by the Tibetan teacher, Djwhal Khul.” And this “enlightened” individual wants a New World Order ethos which displaces diversity and the “one in manyness” in favour ONE THOUGHT expressed through regulated building blocks of servitude dressed up as spiritual holism. This is global, One World philosophy which lends itself to something diammetrically opposite to “holding hands across the ocean.” This is a curricula for homogenity of the kind where bland conformity is the new normal. (For Muller’s work in environmentalism along aide Maurice Strong see: Dark Green VII: The Club of Rome and “World Problematique”)

Muller’s ideas simply mirror the Alice Bailey teachings where “World Citizenship” and a “World Federation” will begin to manifest as a result of the activation of a “World Brain” developed by so-called “enlightened” individuals or “World Servers.” [10]  And who would preside over this “enlightened” Synarchy? Once again, the constant harping on global consciousness as the only way to be harmonious means subservience to a centralised global order where the individual is secondary to the Group Mind. Education is a means to introduce uniformed thinking where diversity and creativity exist insofar that it conforms to the One World philosophy. This description could be straight out of a Marxist or Fabian treatises tied up with a rainbow ribbon of New Age floss. (Keep in mind the agency of UNESCO which served to introduce the same agenda from a humanist perspective. (It is also interesting in terms of Common Purpose in the UK and Common Core education initiatives causing so many problems in the U.S.  (We will explore all these ties in the next and future posts.)

tet

The Tetrahedron or “triangular pyramid” logo of the World Core Curriculum

This is where fascist Synarchists, elements of Theosophy and the gradualism of Fabian socialists held close ties precisely due to their common ground on forging a World State. Unusually for a woman, Annie Besant founded the British Federation of the International Order of Co-Freemasonry and was heavily involved with Fabian socialism co-founding the Fabian Society. This potent occult mix drew together Gnostic Christians and Spiritualists, including Frank Podmore, later Lord and Lady Passfield, the Freemason William Clarke, Viscount and Viscountess Snowden, British Prime Minister J. Ramsay Macdonald, Lord Sidney Oliver, Lord Thomson and Soviet agent Lord Haldane, and others.  In the same year, Scottish noble Douglas Dunglas Home, who had sponsored Blavatsky as early as 1858 and given séances for the Czar, returned to Great Britain, where, with support of the Cecil family, he founded the Society for Psychical Research, whose members included Arthur Conan Doyle, Lord Balfour, John Dewey, William James and Lord Bertrand Russell.

Along with 33rd degree mason C.W. Leadbeater, Annie Besant joined the theosophical society in 1907 after digesting Blavatsky’s The Secret Doctrine, finally becoming the leader of the movement. Besant cultivated further cult status by grooming a young Indian adept Jiddu Krishnamurti as the new messiah. As is often the case with the best laid plans, the no-nonsense Indian rejected the mantle much to the chagrin of Besant and her followers. With no love lost between her rival, Bailey was able to take over the theosophical Plan allowing it to continue on its way despite these messianic setbacks.

By the 1930s, the British Establishment and intelligence services employed Satanist Edward Aleister Crowley and his Order of the Golden Dawn (or Stella Matutina) which joined hands with his aforementioned off-shoot of Ordo Templi Orientis (OTO) Germany’s Thule Society which, in turn, oversaw the rise of the Nazi Party. The Corporatists and International bankers did the rest. Much of the re-building from World War II came directly from occult imperatives, the principles of which overshadowed ALL of the new institutions that arose out of its purposely created ashes.

149548903.QziCUe3i.IMG_4362

Whitehall, London

Any directive must allow free-will and the opportunity for humanity to decide their own destiny without interference. As the Lucis Trust works with such people who support the principles inherent within the beliefs of an authoritarian brand of a New World Order, then we have to question what kind of spirituality the trust is really promoting. As the vast majority of global governments and their leaders are, without doubt psychopaths or sub-categories of psychologically deviant individuals, then what kind of Plan do we think is going to manifest?

World Good Will to all men?

The Lucis Trust would likely give all kinds of esoteric reasoning that the old world is dying and the New World Servers are ushering the New Age of true spiritual freedom and “right human relations”. However, real spiritual guidance needs no subtle forms of coercion and what amounts to forced choices. To that end, it is very clear to see which “Plan” is in operation at this present time characterised as it is by certain themes and signs which denote status, hierarchy, centralisation, group consciousness and an entirely autocratic brand of spirituality.

What underlies the Lucis Trust’s particular type of “education” is the placing of our energy, faith and responsibility in an external, subtly authoritarian force of “supermen” based on hierarchical principles instead of our own independent and collective empowerment. Surely, if there is such a thing as “Christ consciousness” then it will manifest through a co-linear network of like minds where “right human relations” can emerge naturally without systems of belief instead of being focused in a “divine” saviour or group of “Ascended Masters” now so ubiquitous in the New Age Movement as a whole.


 triangles2double

Arcane School Triangles – disbursing energy to crumble the Old Order… But do we know who is behind this New Order? A Treatise on white magick or merely a more sophisticated rendering of black magick?


Corralling human thought into a prescribed and rigid belief system is seldom creative or sustainable but often incendiary, as it is drawn from invocations and so called “white magic.” The Lucis Trust describes occult meditation as: “a means of consciously and purposefully directing energy from a recognized source to the creation of some specific effect.” And this is the essential problem with “Magick” of any kind, (the “k” emphasizes occult ritualistic elements involved) especially with its focus on group consciousness and status. It seeks to create effects in the external world; to manipulate matter to gain some specific outcome and to “invoke” a particular thought form and/or entity. Whether it is a Baal or a Lord Maitreya is irrelevant. White and black magick are two sides of the same coin. White magick is simply more coy about its intent to manipulate matter towards its perception of what is perceived as “good.”

There is no need to base Synarchist precepts upon a world that does not operate according to elitist beliefs systems whether termed “spiritual” or otherwise. The implicit message from the Lucis Trust is that ordinary men and women need to be schooled and instructed by those in the know, which at the moment comprises of authoritarian followers and social dominators of various degrees. The last thing humanity needs is to have its spirituality defined by more authority, yet that is exactly what the Lucis Trust and the United Nations would have us adopt. Working on ourselves can naturally manifest the effects in the outer world without recourse to a centralised belief system and it’s hierarchy of spiritual administrators. We surely have to be extremely careful that such a funnelling of potent human energy is being directed to the correct quarters and for what purpose. No such public discussion has taken place as to whether organisations like the Lucis Trust should be sitting at the table of hundreds of influential think-tanks and NGOs not least the United Nations. We only have Alice Bailey’s word that what she was channelling was indeed benevolent. And given the evidence it appears slick and heavy with a technical integration of Western magick and Eastern techniques but ultimately devoid of anything approaching spiritual emancipation.

Given the nature of “The Absolute” and the Mixtus Orbis of this world that is characterised by deception in order that we grow, do we really think that such monolithic expressions of occult authority are actually offering something genuinely liberating? Or are they merely offering the illusion of such a possibility? In order to try and answer that question we will have to look at the possible roots of Alice Bailey’s “overshadowing” Tibetan.

 


* I must confess some personal interest in the Lucis Trust. I was a member of the Arcane School for five years in my early twenties and attended many of their seminars and conferences based in Whitehall, London. It is only now in hindsight that I realise what an extremely clever and high-level disinformation project it truly is.  This does not discount the many and varied expositions on esoteric truth contained within. However, it’s important to be aware exactly how spiritual information of this kind can be co-opted, distorted exactly because so much of the reality of our hyperdimensional reality has been left out.

It is especially sad, since there are many genuine and well-intentioned people within its ranks who come from a variety of backgrounds. An overwhelmingly white, middle-class demographic, many are drawn from UN-linked NGOs, the civil service and corporate machine. What defines this group is a centre of gravity focused in the intellect, a strong pull towards status (though often subconscious) and a genuine desire to serve humanity. These of course, can be recognised at the lower and mid tiers of the freemasonic degree process. An overriding emphasis on a Christ figurehead and his hierarchy of “Masters” is the proffered carrot despite the insistence on inner work and soul integration.  In my view, the original ancient wisdom – even from the original mix of theosophy from which the Bailey works were drawn – suggests that a “Christ consciousness” will manifest through a network of individuals rather than to be focused in an architecture of authority managed through a network of hierarchical New Group of World Servers structured around magical invocation, often at the Establishment level.  At the higher levels of freemasonic operations, it is anyone’s guess what is occurring, but given what we know about ponerology and the red flags all over the Lucis Trust itself, the prognosis isn’t good.

However, I would urge readers to discover for themselves the nature of Alice Bailey / D.K. material in order to judge for yourselves. It  will require deep study in parallel to other esoteric systems and with a keen inner eye cognizant of  how such a system of spiritual teaching is now being used in our present culture.  There is, at one level, much to commend it – up to a point.  Then you might like to compare it to Gurdjieff’s Fourth Way Teachings and the latter day Fourth Way School of paleo-Christianity, both of which can be found at cassiopaea.org and paleochristianity.org.

 


Notes

[2] ‘The Great Invocation’
From the point of Light within the Mind of God
Let light stream forth into the minds of men
Let Light descend on Earth.
From the point of Love within the Heart of God
Let love stream forth into the hearts of men.
May Christ return to Earth.
From the centre where the Will of God is known
Let purpose guide the little wills of men-
The purpose which the Masters know and serve.
From the centre which we call the race of men
Let the Plan of Love and Light work out
And may it seal the door where evil dwells.
Let Light and Love and Power restore the Plan on Earth.
[3] http://www.lucistrust.org/en/service_activities/triangles
[4] http://www.lucistrust.org/en/books/the_beacon_magazine
[5] ‘The Esoteric Meaning of Lucifer’ – http://www.lucistrust.org/en/arcane_school/talks_and_articles/the_esoteric_meaning_of_lucifer
[6] Luci Trust Charter | http://www.lucistrust.org
[7] http://www.lucistrust.org/en/service_activities/world_goodwill/purposes_objectives
[8] A Treatise on White Magic By Alice A. Bailey, Published by Lucis Publishing Co. 1934. http://www.alice.bailey.it/testi…/A-Treatise-on-White-Magic.pdf
[9] ‘A World Core Curriculum for Global Education Framework of Our Global Knowledge| http://www.unol.org/rms/wcc.html | http://www.robertmuller.org/rm/R1/World_Core_Curriculum.html
[10] Education for a New Age By Alice A. Bailey, Published by Lucis Publishing Co. 1954 | Updated in PDF online version 1998: http://www.bailey.it/images/testi-inglese/Education-in-the-New-Age.pdf

Save

Save