Anyone can post a comment to this article by clicking on the comment bubble and we would like to encourage feedback. If you wish to remain anonymous, you can log in as user ID anonymous with the password guest.
This is our question. Do you believe that the United States is a true sovereign nation or are we just a part of an unannounced global government? I would contend that when Pres. G. W. Bush signed in the shadow government and oversaw 9/11 the last real remnants of true sovereignty were swept away. Now, in private, the leadership of the New World Order global government decides what the U.S. fed. government will do. A little bit of public drama goes on to keep the chattel passive and deluded, but the NWO is really calling the shots. Consider the Kubler-Ross five stages for grieving a loss. Denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance. DENIAL: “There is no NWO global government, that’s just a conspiracy theory.” ANGER: “We’re going to take back the government from the scumbags!” BARGAINING: “If we just go along with the NWO agenda, maybe they’ll let us have some of our sovereignty back.” DEPRESSION: “There is no hope. The satanic NWO is going to kill us all. We should just pray to Jesus and wait for the rapture.” ACCEPTANCE: “The New World Order is an unannounced global government that controls our government. So what are our options now?” Personally, I am at acceptance. This does not mean that I am passive. Nor does it mean I accept the more toxic plans of the NWO leadership. I just think you have to accept reality before you can change it. Where are you at and what do you think? Inquiring minds want to know. Leave a post. I dare you. Kerth from Earth
“Some may recall “Bugs Raplin” (Giancarlo Esposito), the resolute investigative journalist depicted in Tim Robbins’ 1992 political mockumentary Bob Roberts. After being framed as the culprit in a false flag assassination attempt by corrupt political huckster Bob Roberts (Robbins), Raplin delivers a perceptive soliloquy that among other things effectively describes the American public’s moribund civic condition and short-circuited democracy. “The reason Iran-Contra happened,” Raplin begins,
is because no one did anything substantial about Watergate. And the reason Watergate happened is because there were no consequences from the Bay of Pigs. They’re all the same operatives—the foot soldiers at the Bay of Pigs, the plumbers that got busted at Watergate, the gunrunners in Iran-Contra—all the same people, same faces. Now it doesn’t take a genius to figure out the connection here: A secret government beyond the control of the people and accountable to no one. And the closer we are to discovering the connection, the more Congress turns a blind eye to it. “We can’t talk about that in open session,” they say. “National security reasons.” The truth lies dormant in their laps and they stay blind out of choice. A conspiracy of silence.
“Twenty years later amidst the vast outsourcing of intelligence and military operations many more events may arguably be added to such a shadow government’s achievements—the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the 1995 Oklahoma City Murrah Federal Building bombing, the September 11 terror attacks, the non-existent weapons of mass destruction prompting the occupation of Iraq, the July 7, 2005 London tube bombings, the shoe and underwear “bombings”—all of which have contributed to the official justification of imperial wars abroad and an ever-expanding police state at home.
“Lacking meaningful contexts with which to understand such events in their totality the general public is incapable of recognizing the road it is being forced down. The most recent set of events that give pause are the horrific, military-style shootings in Aurora Colorado and Oak Creek Wisconsin that authorities maintain were carried out by “lone wolf” gunmen.
Operation Gladio in America?
“A potential backdrop and precursor to the Colorado and Wisconsin events is the oft-forgotten Operation Gladio, a campaign involving US and British intelligence-backed paramilitaries anonymously carrying out mass shootings and bombings of civilian targets throughout Europe. Hundreds of such attacks took place between the late 1960s and early 1980s by “stay behind armies” of right wing and fascist saboteurs in an overall effort to terrorize populations, deploy a “strategy of tension,” and thereby maintain a centrist political status quo. In the uncertain environment the petrified citizenry pled for stepped-up security and stood poised to part with personal freedoms. At the same time the maneuver allowed for political adversaries—in Gladio’s time socialist and communist groups—to be blamed for the attacks and thereby demonized in the public mind.
“The string of still unresolved US political assassinations throughout the 1960s suggest how such practices were not restricted to foreign countries. Nor were they solely the terrain of intelligence agencies. Along lines similar to Gladio, in the early 1960s the US Joint Chiefs of Staff proposed Operation Northwoods, where terrorist attacks would be initiated against US civilians in American cities and the violence blamed on Cuban combatants to justify war against the island nation. The Kennedy administration rejected the proposal. While Northwoods exhibited the capacity for government to conceive and propose such plans, Gladio was demonstrably carried out against Western civilian populations in multiple locations over many years.
“Consideration of Gladio and Northwoods might be dismissed were it not for early eyewitness accounts following the Colorado and Wisconsin shootings contending how there were two or more killers present at each incident—testimonies contradicting official government narratives that have accordingly been suppressed in the public mind.
“As communications historian Christopher Simpson observes, “the tactics that created the [Gladio] stay behinds in the first place are still in place and continue to be used today. They are standard operating procedure.” Such potential explanations will appear foreign to an American public that is systematically misinformed and easily distracted. And in times of crisis especially that very public is tacitly assured of its safe remove from such practices, looking instead to political authorities and experts to reestablish a stasis to the carefully constructed “reality” major media impose on the mass psyche. …”
Years ago when new revelations about the reagan admin’s drug running and death squad activity in latin america were coming out regularly from a small number of well positioned sources, I kept waiting for american “journalism” to catch on and start talking about reality. Then I wondered how it was possible for the reaganites to control so many “independent” news organizations during and after their tenure in office. Then I started wondering at democracy now’s refusal to put current events in historical context, which would show patterns of government behavior that transcend administrations. I puzzled over the apparent agenda behind Goodman’s refusal to cover medical scandals such as psych drug-induced violence and circumcision which have important social ramifications.
Finally I realized Goodman is a captive of her main funding sources (tax exempt corporate foundations), there is no “independent” mainstream media when the same people sit on their boards of directors and there’s no way to know who actually owns these companies’ shares on the stock market, that there is a permanent government behind the scenes which ensures continuity of policy across successive administrations, and that it’s not a question of the government controlling the media, it’s a question of both government and media being under the control of an invisible third party, most likely the party which has very methodically and over successive administrations arranged for the implosion of the US economy and the degradation of american society.
The astronomical costs of implementing such machinations pretty much narrows down the responsible parties, and the patience and consistency with which they pursue their agenda says a lot about the structure and intergenerational control they exercise within their organizations. They are clearly not ideologically or even economically motivated, they know politics and money are just phantom tools of social control. They are masters of diversion, they seldom have to lie in public because they ensure that the proper questions are never asked. They don’t have to defend their policies at the academic level, they simply allocate money to ensure the correct indoctrination of the academic hamsters that explore the skinner boxes they prepare for them. The extent of their control is well illustrated by academic economists, who have apparently seldom thought to question the morality or mathematically dictated unsustainability of debt-based money.
I can only speculate at their internal structure, governance and philosophical rationales, but I suspect the core of the organization consists of wealthy interconnected families whose wealth was acquired many generations ago, which have had the time, patience, internal cohesion and shared vision needed to achieve such domination. It seems to me self-interest alone cannot account for such intergenerational cohesion, thus the heart of the enterprise must be inherently child abusive. Only systematic “pruning” and limiting of children’s mental horizons and emotional development could bring about such focused and dogged pursuit of the agenda over many generations. After all, life has unlimited opportunities for happiness that occupy less of an ecological footprint, require less attention and provide deeper fulfillment than long-term organizational and societal control.
Child rearing practices go to the heart of any family’s belief system. The beliefs required to impose such internal controls on children must be unquestioned and largely unconscious. A mirror of the wider beliefs and neuroses manifest in american obstetrical wards, but extending to encompass years of childhood conditioning right up through consistent intergenerational replication. The opportunities afforded by mind control research would have immediate and horrifying applications here, provided the parents are sufficiently compromised.
Viewed as a system, one can see how they are enslaved to their own creation. Liberating them would liberate the rest of us. The question is how.