By Tony Cartalucci
Amidst imagery of chaos unfolding across Egypt the mainstream media and the interests controlling them have declared decidedly that "Hosni Mubarak" must go. From AlJazeera's over-the-top propaganda, to geopolitical chess-master Zbigniew Brzezinski himself calling for Mubarak to step down, it is clear public opinion is being pushed in the direction of bolstering the protests against the long entrenched Egyptian autocrat.
The praise and adulation of the protesters is only outmatched by the mainstream news' endearment of Mohamed ElBaradei, the International Crisis Group trustee leading the protests on behalf of US policy makers he officially works for. It is already being claimed by the media that ElBaradei has unified the opposition under his "National Front for Change," that includes the Muslim Brotherhood. ElBaradei 's premeditated agitation of the Egyptian people began in tandem with Wall Street and the World Bank's coordinated efforts to raise food prices and cripple the Egyptian economy (as well as other target nations in the region) as early as last year. ElBaradei himself had begun setting up his "National Front for Change" in February, 2010.
Revisiting the headlines in February 2010, reveals that the mainstream media was already slating ElBaradei as a potential replacement for Mubarak, as next president of Egypt.
The role the globalist think tanks have played in this unfolding engineered color revolution is strikingly overt. In March of 2010, the Council on Foreign Relations had articles already developing a strategy to usher in a "new Egypt" under the leadership of their man, ElBaradei. In Steve Cook's piece "Is ElBaradei Egypt's Hero?" he explicitly states:
"Further, Egypt’s close relationship with the United States has become a critical and negative factor in Egyptian politics. The opposition has used these ties to delegitimize the regime, while the government has engaged in its own displays of anti-Americanism to insulate itself from such charges. If ElBaradei actually has a reasonable chance of fostering political reform in Egypt, then U.S. policymakers would best serve his cause by not acting strongly."
It then comes as no surprise that President Obama, and Vice President Biden, have come out instead to support the embattled Hosni Mubarak to further agitate anti-American sentiment towards him. To compound the betrayed dictator's ordeal, Israel has delivered the coup de grâce, by "insisting" the world curb its criticism of Mubarak in an oafish effort to defend his regime. AlJazeera's claim that the Egyptian embassy in Tel Aviv is making preparations for Mubarak to flee to Israel is an almost over-the-top interpretation of the CFR's advice.
The strategy of course is to appeal to emotions; emotions of hatred toward tyranny, monarchy, elitism, toward the governments of America and Israel that have misled their people to their own detriment and the nations they have meddled in for decades - hatred so strong that they blind the people to the complexities of this engineered crisis.
The classic gambits of class-warfare, religion, and race seem to be tools well-oiled and working as smoothly as ever in the hands of the globalists as they dismantle their old ally in Egypt and prepare to replace him with their new man, Mohamed ElBaradei. If it is true that the Muslim Brotherhood is also a western intelligence front, it is no surprise then that they have come to support ElBaradei's "National Front for Change" or that they are fomenting similar unrest in Jordan, Yemen, Saudi Arabia and beyond, all with the Brookings Institute, CFR and other globalists' gleeful encouragement.
In frustrating the globalist conspiracy it is essential that emotions are put aside and instead objectivity used to dissect, expose, and balk their agenda. If ElBaradei's ties to top US policy makers were headline news before the Internet in Egypt was cut, perhaps the Egyptian people would be closer to real revolution instead of installing yet another globalist puppet.
This time, their puppet, ElBaradei, is fully removed from the nation he insincerely now claims such concern over. He is not a man of of the army nor a man of the people. His ties to the US are so abundantly overt and the conditions around his attempted rise to power so insidious he will be forever indebted to serve his masters' every command. For ElBaradei, there will be no dragging of feet or compromise when the globalists call, lest they expose him as overtly as they now do Mubarak. Having a puppet like Mubarak is nice, having one so servile and compromised like ElBaradei, nicer still.
It is essential that the globalists be stopped in their engineering of Egyptian politics, not only to head-off their other planned color-revolutions, but to set back the plans that hinge on these revolutions indefinitely. As counter intuitive as it may seem, Dr. Webster Tarpley's hope for status-quo in Egypt may be the best way to confound the globalist agenda.
In the Council on Foreign Affairs' (CFR) publication "Foreign Affairs," writer Steven Cook describes ElBaradei as "A lawyer and diplomat by training," and that he "has always played the role of the ultimate international bureaucrat -- a somewhat dour technocrat whose ties to his native country seemed purposely tenuous, to allow him to more freely contribute to improving global governance," in his piece tilted "Is El Baradei Eypt's Hero?" He goes on to write about ElBaradei's "National Front for Change" and how the Muslim Brotherhood has signaled support for it.
Cook also maintains the myth that ElBaradei cannot be accused of being "a stooge of the United States" side stepping his prominent position in the International Crisis Group and instead citing his clashes with the US during his time at the IAEA. It should be noted that these "clashes" did nothing to change America's insistence on invading Iraq or its continued belligerence toward Iran.
Finally Cook finishes his piece suggesting that "not acting strongly" in support of ElBaradei would best serve America's interests as Egyptian support for American foreign policy has long been a negative factor politically.
Indeed, if Americas' President Obama instead supported the besieged Muburak regime it may only fuel the protests. With any luck, and in the midst of emotional and violent chaos in the streets, ElBaradei may slip in without Egyptians ever considering why the real power behind America, the media and the think-tanks they work for, is so adamantly supporting him.
By Tony Cartalucci
It was previously reported that Mohamed ElBaradei, the self-proclaimed leader of the unfolding Egyptian protests, is actually sitting on the Board of Trustees of the Zbigniew Brzezinski/George Soros globalist think-tank, the International Crisis Group.
The mainstream media has been backing ElBaradei's ownership of the protests, hailing this Nobel Laurette and former UN IAEA director as the potential next president of Egypt and the "hero" of the protests. The New York Times refers to him as the "Nobelist" portraying him as standing "toe-to-toe" with hundreds of riot police and promising to run for president if and only if elections were "free and fair."
While ElBaradei poses as a critic of the United States, it is not because of their meddling with Middle Eastern affairs, it is because they are not meddling enough. ElBaradei berates the United States for not intervening in what he calls "social disintegration, economic stagnation, and political repression" in Egypt. Apparently ElBaradei isn't the only one who thinks so either.
Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) senior fellow, Project for a New American Century signatory, and Bush wrangler Elliott Abrams elaborated on the sort of "intervention" the United States should be committed to in his piece "Less 'Engagement,' More Democracy" in the New York Times. In his piece he criticizes the current policy of engaging with nations he deems repressive regimes as equals and calls for a revisit to George Bush's "freedom agenda." In other words - the export of "democracy" that has brought America the trillion dollar military adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan at the cost of thousands of US soldiers' lives and the lives of millions of foreigners killed, maimed, or displaced.
Ultimately the "freedom agenda" has created puppet governments and sweeping economic reforms giving globalist corporate cartels free reign in these "importers of democracy." Those that remember Paul Bremer's Colalition Provisional Authority, may also recall the various "liberalizations" imposed upon Iraq including 100% foreign ownership of Iraqi companies and immunity granted to foreign contractors from Iraqi law.
In the end, the "freedom agenda" is nothing more than 21st century gunboat diplomacy coupled with the one-sided "treaties" the European imperialists imposed across Africa, Asia, and the Middle East.
Fellow CFR policy wonk, Robert Danin echos Abrams' sentiments regarding the freedom agenda by regretting how President Obama had backed away from it during his 2009 speech in Cairo, and how interesting it is now that the administration seems to be interested in perhaps adopting it. He then goes on to explain how the protests are unprecedented, in that they are concerning not anit-American or anti-Israeli causes, but directed at inward problems at home.
With Tunisia and now Egypt internally infighting, a collective regional division seems to be developing. It is no secret the globalists via the United States and Israeli governments, want regime change in Iran and to desperately halt their nuclear program. Elliot Abrams in his New York Times piece states explicitly "our ultimate goal for Iran is not a nuclear deal with the ayatollahs but freedom for its people under a government they choose in honest elections." Newsweek goes one step further and reports on a covert war against Iran's nuclear program already well underway. Seymour Hersh reported as early as 2008 that the US was conducting military operations in Iran.
The floundering efforts to achieve the globalists' goals with Iran, now spanning several years, may have spurred the real policy makers, the globalist think tanks, to consider a wider regional campaign of destabilization and the installation of more reliable and more zealous allies to build the needed coalition to confront an unmovable Iran. At any rate, any opposition for the globalists' next phase in the Middle East will be muted with regimes across the region battling for their very survival.
Mohamed ElBaradei, then literally sitting on the International Crisis Group's Board of Trustees with the likes of George Soros, would not only be a trusted candidate to sow instability throughout Egypt, but would make an equally trustworthy leader of a pliable proxy regime to turn against Iran, Russia, and China. An ElBaradei controlled Egypt could equally be turned against disruptive members of the other globalist pet project Egypt is conveniently positioned to deal with, the African Union. And last but not least, Egypt controls the Suez Canal. Greater control over Egypt means greater control over the passage of freight through the canal.
Finally, globalist think-tank, the Brookings Institute, chimes in claiming Egypt's new opposition leader is indeed Mohamed ElBaradei and claims he is already reaching out for ties and a loose alliance with the Muslim Brotherhood, an extremely large and influential opposition organization in Egypt. The Brookings Institute feigns the same ignorance as the rest of the mainstream media regarding ElBaradei's position in the International Crisis Group by claiming it will be Egypt that will decide the outcome "not Washington." Brookings also laments that Israel's government holds a huge stake in the outcome of Egypt's unrest but has "absolutely no ability to influence the course of events."
It should then comfort Israel and the Brookings Institute to know that ElBaradei is working so closely with US policy makers via the International Crisis Group and that his sentiments are echoed by America's "Neo-Conservative" establishment. In other words, Israel and America have their foot in the door and seem not to even realize it. The wiser suspects they most certainly do realize it.
By Tony Cartalucci
Go to the George Soros/Zbigniew Brzezinski International Crisis Group's website and you will see that the Egyptian clashes have hit surprisingly close to home for them. That's because none other than their own Mohamed ElBaradei, sitting on their board of trustees, is the self-proclaimed leader of the unrest unfolding across the streets of Cairo. The International Crisis Group's recent condemnation of ElBaradei's detention and admission of his membership amongst "the Group" is accompanied by calls for the government to stop using violence against the protesters.
It was nearly a week ago on January 16th that respected geopolitical analyst Dr. Webster Tarpley warned prophetically, "Arab governments would be well advised to keep an eye on ICG operatives in their countries," in his piece covering the Tunisian upheaval and regime change.
CBC report "Mohamed ElBaradei: Egypt's President-in-waiting?" just about says it all in regards to ElBaradei's proposed role. CBC profiles his stint with the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Nobel Prize he won in the process. Similar mainstream news media stories can be found by news-searching the term "Mohamed ElBaradei."
Wired reports "Nuke Watchdog Wants to Lead Egypt Revolt. No, Really." While they propose ElBaradei's aspirations to be peculiar because of his employment with the IAEA, it is his position at the ICG that makes this gambit very believable indeed. The ICG has been recently seen meddling and contributing to other color revolutions, most notably the "red" color revolution in Thailand. George Soros, who sits on the ICG's executive committee, is no stranger to funding color revolutions, fueling class warfare, and backing a laundry list of NGO's working as agents for the globalist agenda.
The Economist suggests that ElBaradei may not be of America's liking because of his work in the IAEA regarding Iran. Again, they fail to mention his other job; the one in which he works with some of the most prominent American geopolitical strategists who often, very literally have the undivided attention of America's political establishment via forums like the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderberg Group which the Economist has also recently reported on. Surely they must have bumped into ElBaradei during one these meetings the Economist claims their editor attends.
by Tony Cartalucci
The globalist connections and influence the weekly published "Economist" attempts to wield is no news to readers of Land Destroyer. The Chatham House corporate member is seen often writing hit pieces in regards to Thailand, in support for the attempted red color revolution led by globalist stooge Thaksin Shinwatra.
According to the Economist's latest article, "The World's Water-Coolers, Where the influential people meet and talk" not only do the world's "globocrats" meet and work out world policy, but the Economist's editor attends such meetings as well, including the secretive and long denied Bilderberg Group's annual gathering.
Organizations that conduct regular plutocratic confabs include, according to the Economist, the Bilderberg Group, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and the World Economic Forum.
The Economist argues that business leaders, politicians, and royalty meeting in foreign countries in secret is perfectly normal and sometimes "yields results." The Economist then goes on to lament that despite all their power they can be "caught napping," as seen in the 2008 economic collapse. Never brought up by the Economist is the obvious conflict that arises between secret plutocratic meetings and the functioning of the "democratic and free societies" many of them are leaders of.
Infowars.com writer Steve Watson gives a complete break down of the article here.
The next time you are tempted to base a business or investment decision on information garnered from the pages of the Economist, remember the elite privilege the editor of the Economist enjoys by attending these exclusive "globocrat" meetings and ask yourself if you think he would honestly put journalistic integrity before doing a few favors for such people.
The motto: "Preserving our Freedoms, Protecting America," begs one to wonder how for 226 years we managed to do so without a "Department of Homeland Security." American heroes from USMC General Smedley Butler, to President Eisenhower warned us of the tyranny growing in our midst, and now it stands staring us in the face.
Read Infowars.com on what you can do now, today, to speak out against this affront to America.
By Tony Cartalucci
By now, many people are acutely aware of the term "alternative media;" its triumphs, its short comings, and the profound effect it is having as it erodes the corporate establishment. The agenda has been set for generations by the moneyed elite who held the uncontested capital and the physical means to mass produce propaganda and disseminate it amongst the population. The only way to have countered this propaganda was public speaking, mailing lists, fliers, posters, etc., all at the immense cost of the publisher. The forming of organizations to help cover these costs and produce media presented a target for the establishment to infiltrate and ultimately co-opt.
While guerrilla marketing techniques coupled with old fashioned local activism still certainly have their merits, it was the ability for a single individual to start a blog, a website, or a YouTube channel and speak to an audience of millions for little or no cost at all that has finally breached the walls of this long standing monopoly. This was made possible via information technology (IT), and the exploitation of this technology to produce alternative media is still reverberating with far reaching implications.
Obsolescence Via IT
naturally want to produce more of something as price
increases. Somewhere in between consumers and
producers meet at the market price or "market
file is in demand, the more people end up downloading it, and
the easier it is for others to find it and download it. Consider
the implications this would have if technology made physical
objects as easy to "share" as information is now.
Media moguls are now faced with a choice; innovate or try in vain through litigation to maintain their obsolete business model. They have chosen the latter, and to no one's surprise, they are losing billions in sales per year. Their strategy is to control the actual media itself as "intellectual property" and to chase down unauthorized users of their "property" literally to the ends of the earth. In the process they have alienated themselves from their own consumer base and spurred people, tired of big corporations, to delve into the world of alternative music, film, and media.
New alternative media supported by advertisements, live performances, and other innovative means have weathered this disruptive technology, and in many cases, benefited from the larger audience it gives them access to. In many ways, the big media corporations are feeding the alternative movement, by chasing people who have tasted free media, away from Hollywood and the big recording labels and into the hands of people gladly offering free entertainment.
Blogging, online videos, podcasts, and cheap domain hosting have allowed a myriad of alternative news outlets to flourish. Reputation, accuracy, honesty, and research have become the determining factors of success and reach, not funding. Funding had once been the determining factor of who set the public agenda. It now plays a diminishing role as alternative news, fixated on truth and accuracy collectively catches up to established news agencies.
With the obstacle of funding out of the way and the establishment's monopoly over information broken, people are rediscovering the value of accurate information. As with any commodity when a monopoly is broken, price and quality dictate demand. Accurate information allows people to make sound decisions regarding all aspects of their lives, from finance to travel, from medical issues to educational choices. Those outlets that repeatedly provide accurate information will procure the largest audience/demand. Those that fail, lose their audience.
In the end, it is not government regulations, legal contrivances, or licenses that govern information, but rather the free market mechanism commonly referred to as Adam Smith's self regulating "Invisible Hand of the Market." In other words, people selfishly seeking accurate information for their own benefit encourage producers to provide the best possible information to meet their demand. While this is not possible in a monopoly, particularly the corporate media monopoly of the "left/right paradigm" of false choice, it is inevitable in the field of real competition that now exists online due to information technology.
Obsolescence Via Hardware
Compounding the establishment's troubles are cheaper cameras and cheaper, more capable software for 3D graphics, editing, mixing, and other post production tasks, allowing for the creation of an alternative publishing, audio and video industry. "Underground" counter-corporate music and film has been around for a long time but through the combination of technology and the zealous corporate lawyers disenfranchising a whole new generation that now seeks an alternative, it is truly coming of age.
It is now possible for someone to go an entire day watching open-source, alternative media as entertainment, news, and education without so much as flipping on the TV, putting in a Hollywood DVD, a record company's CD or opening an establishment magazine. What's more is that someone can now spend their free-time producing media rather than consuming it.
While cheaper consumer hardware such as cameras and computers coupled with open-source software are the primary factors driving the alternative media now, another factor to consider is open-source hardware. And while the focus has been on media, it will now shift over to the physical world of production.
Like information, production has been long dominated by the moneyed elite who have had the capital and infrastructure necessary to carry it out. Factories, forges, mines, and the manpower to operate them requires vast fortunes. And like information, technology is eliminating these barriers and bringing the means of production literally into the hands of the people, not through Marxist policy, but through innovation and free market mechanics.
Computer numeric controlled machining, or CNC machining, allows a user to cut any material to shape using an automated machine. Once given a 3D design, a computer translates it into a code that directs motors and a cutting tool to cut it out of a piece of metal, wood, plastic, etc. Some CNC machines add material rather than cut it away, thus making it a 3D printer.
CNC has been around for a long time, and like computers, they started their life as incredibly expensive machines that only large corporations could afford to run. As technology has progressed, they have become smaller and more affordable. They can now be found in use by small businesses around the world, from sign and photo shops using computer controlled laser cutters to sewing shops using computer controlled embossing machines.
Already custom bike and car shops are using CNC machining, laser cutters and waterjet cutting to create custom wheels, cut out sheet metal designs for fabrication, and create custom or replacement engine parts - all operations that once required orders to be made out to a large-scale factory. Advanced fabrication techniques have given rise to companies like Local Motors, the embodiment of open-sourced localized industry where cars are literally on the menu.
Entire businesses have sprung up to supply smaller scale machines for hobbyist and small business users, including "ShopBots" and the 3D printing "MakerBot." Unlike the propitiatory machines populating modern large-scale production lines, these smaller scale machines are considered "open-source hardware." Open-source hardware entails all the blueprints, component lists, instructions for assembly, and usually a community built around it for collaborative development. While purchasing the physical hardware is still up to the user, the methods of constructing it are free to use for all.
The 3D printer MakerBot and its open source sibling Reprap are both based on computer controller platforms called Arduino, yet another example of open-source hardware going mainstream and opening up the door to a historical industrial paradigm shift. Arduino appears as a small circuit board with a USB connector. It allows users with little or no electronic expertise to bridge the gap between their computer and the physical world. Arduino controllers allow one to create everything from robots, to remote controlled webcams, interactive clothing, automated home appliances, physical devices that hook up to web applications and just about all the technological gadgets one currently depends on China Inc. for.
The best part about the Arduino controller is that not only is it open-sourced, and has a community of users built up around it and its improvement, but many of the projects based on the controller are open-sourced as well. As a beginner hobbyist or an intrepid entrepreneur ventures into the realm of technological invention, they do so with information and resources to prevent them from having to 'reinvent the wheel' and move on specifically towards their goal.
Small scale automated manufacturing like the MakerBot and RepRap have already been made possible with this open prototyping platform, and larger scale projects are beginning to take shape including this table sized laser-cutter. "Personal manufacturing" is what this revolution is being coined, and is explained in lengthy detail here, by Dominic Muren.
and open-source hardware development.
With a growing community of people determined to become collaborative producers rather than fit into the producer/consumer paradigm, and 3D files for physical objects already being shared like movies and music, the implications are profound. Products, and the manufacturing technology used to make them will continue to drop in price, become easier to make for individuals rather than large corporations, just as media is now shifting into the hands of the common people. And like the shift of information, industry will move from the elite and their agenda of preserving their power, to the end of empowering the people.
In a future alternative economy where everyone is a collaborative designer, producer, and manufacturer instead of passive consumers and when problems like "global climate change," "overpopulation," and "fuel crises" cross our path, we will counter them with technical solutions, not political indulgences like carbon taxes, and not draconian decrees like "one-child policies."
We will become the literal architects of our own future in this "personal manufacturing" revolution. While these technologies may still appear primitive, or somewhat "useless" or "impractical" we must remember where our personal computers stood on the eve of the dawning of the information age and how quickly they changed our lives. And while many of us may be unaware of this unfolding revolution, you can bet the globalists, power brokers, and all those that stand to lose from it not only see it but are already actively fighting against it.
Understandably it takes some technical know-how to jump into the personal manufacturing revolution. In part 2 of "Alternative Economics" we will explore real world "low-tech" solutions to becoming self-sufficient, local, and rediscover the empowerment granted by doing so.
The facts surrounding the Arizona shooting that claimed 6 lives including Judge John Roll, and injured several more including US Representative Gabrielle Giffords, are still forthcoming. This isn't stopping the two-headed globalist media machine from leveraging the event to suspend free speech, further disarm the public and justify the ever increasing police state being built up by various contrived federal agencies like the Department of Homeland Security.
As pundits fall into the all too familiar trap of demagogic infighting over who may have motivated the suspected and incredibly deranged Jared Loughner, suspicious circumstances are creeping by unnoticed.
It was announced with little notice by the alternative media that none other than attorney Judy Clarke would be defending Loughner. Judy Clarke has made a career handling suspects at the center of high-profile globalist gambits, including the Unabomber Ted Kaczynski, Olympic bomber Eric Rudolph, Oklahoma City Bomber Timothy McVeigh, and 9/11's Zacarias Moussaoui.
To say Judy Clarke has an impressive collection of mentally deranged patsies would be an understatement. One must wonder whether Judy Clarke's skill set is really that impressive and unique in defending a particular brand of lunatic, coincidentally involved in "anti-government" violence or whether her involvement and reliability indicates a certain level of control and quarantine needed for a cover-up.
Only time will tell as details and information trickle out, and only if the alternative media raises its head from about the demagogic infighting long enough to see and report them.
by Tony Cartalucci
The shooting in Arizona on January 8, 2011, which left 6 dead and 13 injured including Representative Gabrielle Giffords, is most certainly a tragedy for the victims, their family and friends as well as those who witnessed the murder spree unfold. This goes without saying. Equally as tragic, though more difficult to admit, are the lost minds that commit such dark deeds.
The tragedy of Jared Loughner and those gunned down in Arizona extends beyond his suspected crime and his apparent motivations, as the corporate media machine spins into action to convict not only him in the court of public opinion, but through wild speculation, those perceived to have served as the genesis of his actions.
The most brazen example this comes in the form of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) which claims it "is dedicated to fighting hate and bigotry, and to seeking justice for the most vulnerable members of our society." SPLC Director Mark Potok has no problem speculating about a crime pending full investigation and a trial, contra to his own organization's mission to seek "justice," and takes this circumvention of due process further by implicating a laundry list of political ideologies as feedstock for his yet to be convicted crimes.
Potok takes particular interest in implicating proponents of sound currency backed by gold or silver (Article One: Section 10 of the US Constitution), tax protesters (what served as the impetus of America's creation in the first place), and the writings of Ayn Rand - in particular her emphasis on individual rights. Potok continues on to claim that those repeating "falsehoods" in public regarding secret plots by Mexico to "retake the southern US" or the "death panels" contained within the recent US health care bill, are not exonerated when people react violently even if they are mentally unstable.
Potok's contempt for personal responsibility and freedom of speech is compounded when one looks into the issues he claims are falsehoods, only to find they are real issues being spoken about, not by opponents, but by proponents of the said "falsehoods."
Here is Bill Gates, a health care reform supporter "not" talking about death panels.
What can be said about a society that serves as host to organizations like the SPLC who masquerade as pursuers of justice, when in reality they serve to crush legitimate dissent? What can be said about a society whose media serves as a platform to constantly undermine the freedoms innate to us all as human beings while simultaneously attempting to derail due process and the proper course of justice?
This "leveraging of agenda" by the SPLC has been repeated on Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, as well as various printed and online publications throughout contemporary American society and truly adds a shade of gray to the tragedy in Arizona on January 8, 2011.
The Decline of the American, "The Walking Dead"
One may wonder what has gone wrong with America. What is causing tragedies like the one in Arizona and why does it serve as an impetus for dismantling the Bill of Rights?
The fact of the matter is that America has changed much since the Bill of Rights was written. Since then, America has wandered far from its Constitution and the mandate its leaders receive from it. Banks have most certainly taken over the Constitutional duty of Congress to issue America's currency, and are backing money not with gold or silver, but pyramiding fraud called "fractional reserve banking." Corporations have taken to the driver's seat of America's destiny, supplanting the American people who are now coaxed along via carefully implemented propaganda.
America has become the most heavily medicated nation on earth, the most imprisoned nation on earth, all while its education system struggles to keep up with other industrialized nations. Violence, sex, and amoral behavior of every kind is celebrated on TV, in music, movies, and video games, behind which the average American spends 4 or more hours a day consuming. Such an environment divorces many individuals from the personal responsibility required to enjoy their freedom as independent men and women, and diminishes their maturity as a nation.
Then there is the political demagoguery, that most certainly is charged as Mr. Potok suggests, with the exception that this inflaming demagoguery stems not from legitimate dissent, but from the very corporations medicating, imprisoning, and subjecting America to hours of crass media per day.
It is not angry Mexicans that have created or funded La Raza and the very real attempt to "seize" the southern US. It is the Ford Foundation and a myriad of globalist corporations, many of which share memberships on the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The CFR makes no secret about their plans to "build a North American Community" and painstakingly described their plan in their 2005 report actually titled "Building a North American Community." The amount of wealth and power these corporations backing such organizations stand to gain by operating with full impunity in such a large, resource rich region are almost incalculable and serve as a convincing motive.
The obvious obstacle standing in the way of such an "integration" and future integrations with the already combined European Union, African Union, and the emerging Asian Economic Community is the concept of national sovereignty. The elimination of national sovereignty would entail the elimination of all such a concept entails, including a national Constitution, a national identity, a self-sufficient economy, and a healthy, educated and free population to serve as stewards of the nation, as intended by the US Constitution.
The border-less corporations and banks that direct America's current destiny have their bases covered. They purposefully provoke the unstable society they have cultivated, and leverage the resulting chaos to move forward their agenda. Such provocations may include government staged operations like 9/11, promoting infighting with staged wedge issues like the CFR funded "Ground Zero Mosque," or random violence emanating from an unemployed, dying country.
Whether Jared Loughner was a man on a mission, a man given a mission, or a man just completely lost, he constitutes a rising army of what radio host Alex Jones of Infowars.com coined as America's "walking dead." Morally bankrupt, broken minds produced by a society broken by design who will be used by the establishment to continue whittling away our rights. Relatively less acute examples such as the yearly "Walmart stampedes," surely do resemble a horde of walking dead.
The problem with a plan to whittle away our rights is that our rights are inalienable, innate, and in existence long before the Founding Fathers put quill to parchment. They are irrevocable and non-negotiable. No crime can be committed, no enemy brought to our shores, no crisis suffered, and certainly no economic "opportunity" dangled above us that serves as an excuse to roll back anything enumerated in the Bill of Rights.
The key to preserving our rights is to use them responsibility. This brings us back to the beginning and the underlining premise the corporate controlled media is already laying out, that Jared Loughner took matters into his own hands after being incited by fiery rhetoric. Should this be proven true during Loughner's trial people must remember that no matter how much you disagree with the system, no matter how far it has wandered from its mandate, you have no ability to exercise violence against it without descending to the depths of evil you are opposed to.
We must also remember that we are bound by duty to exercise our rights responsibly and should we fail, we are bound by personal responsibility to suffer the consequences. "Collective punishment" in a nation of the people, by the people, for the people, is an oxymoron. Collective punishment exists only in the darkest depths of dictatorship and tyranny.
However, when confronted with run away tyranny we need to take heart in the example our Founding Father's set when declaring independence and writing the US Constitution. Boycott the system, replace the system, and if the tyrants decide to descend upon you after throwing off their oppressive system, then and only then do you take up arms to defend yourself.
The tragedy in Arizona and its unfolding consequences are a tragedy for America. Our ability to address and rectify this tragedy will be key to restoring our once great republic.
by Tony Cartalucci
Some of the largest corporations on earth have signed on as partners of the "Forum for the Future." What might first appear as just another special interest lobbyist group, pushing a corporate agenda masquerading as a humanitarian cause, is actually the coup de grace, the globalist "end game" laid out for all to see.
The seemingly innocuous cartoon with its disarming music, features the future of the human race, confined in cities built by central planning, food rationing, the end of intercity travel, allocated slots on public transportation, allocated jobs, allocated housing, and just about every other aspect of corporate fascism, communism, socialism, Orwellian police state society, the Brave New World, and every other tyranny real or imagined cobbled together into one nightmarish and very real goal.
While three other possibilities are also featured, none remotely as terrifying as the one above, they seem less likely considering their divergence from the very real UN Agenda 21, a program of literally moving people off their land, and having them converge inside tightly controlled cities.
The Prototype and Piecemeal Progress
Further proof that "Planned-opolis" is the design of choice is the fact that it isn't something you have to wait for, the prototype already exists at the tip of the Malaysia Peninsula upon the island republic of Singapore. Described as "The Singapore Solution" by National Geographic, Singapore has achieved in one generation its booming metropolis with soaring towers, an efficient mass transportation system, safe streets, and relatively low unemployment through a system of draconian central planning under a single party system.
National Geographic proposes the following question: "What price prosperity and security? Are they worth living in a place that many contend is a socially engineered, nose-to-the-grindstone, workaholic rat race, where the self-perpetuating ruling party enforces draconian laws (your airport entry card informs you, in red letters, that the penalty for drug trafficking is "DEATH"), squashes press freedom, and offers a debatable level of financial transparency?"
National Geographic, and very obviously the Forum for the Future seems to argue, yes, social engineering and the suspension of your inalienable human rights are more than acceptable to ensure their idea of a well-oiled society is realized.
Take another look at the "partners" section of the Forum for the Future. What sort of planned city do you think would benefit the interests of Royal Dutch Shell, Cargill, or Bank of America? The goals of the Club of Rome and the UN's Agenda 21 have long been denied by the mainstream media, including Reuters and Time Warner's CNN, but something is changing.
The program for global government, the systematic dismantling of traditional human society, and the creation of a socially engineered, electronically controlled humanity is being openly sold to the public. It has been piecemeal laid into place on the back of wars, staged terrorism, the fraud that is "global warming," financial collapse, and the coming wars and cold wars waged against rising states.
One can only imagine the implements of tyranny that will be developed during an ensuing stand-off between the West and China or war with Iran. One can only imagine how alluring any job or home will be, allocated or not, following the collapse of America's dollar or the bursting of China's housing bubble, or any number of collapses the ponzi-globalist system seems prone to create.
Humanity's inalienable human rights are non-negotiable. For America, these rights are enshrined in the Bill of Rights, but were existent long before the Founding Fathers put quill to parchment and are applicable not just to Americans, but to all of humanity. No crisis, no threat, no philosophical argument can undermine, usurp or side-step these human rights. Furthermore, central planning, rationing, socialism are not solutions to any given problem, but rather stop-gaps at best. It is technology, education, innovation, and exploration that solve problems permanently.
Prehistoric man didn't emerge from the ice age because of careful rationing, socialist policies, or central planning, they did so by inventing better spears and hunting techniques. They further weathered food shortages and overpopulation by developing agricultural technology and exploring new climbs and places to settle. That is how we will successfully weather the challenges we face today, through innovation, technological progress, education, and the exploration of new climbs and place, including space travel and colonization.
Those that would deny you this future and confine you in a "planned city" within which they control your very destiny, seek to deny you your humanity. They do so not for the benefit of mankind or the planet, but to feed their insatiable megalomania. One only needs to consider Forum for the Future sponsor, Bank of America's "foreclosure frenzy" in which they were literally stealing homes from people who had fully paid for them, or fellow sponsor Royal Dutch Shell, one of the greatest purveyors of real environmental and humanitarian devastation in, amongst other places, Nigeria. These are businessmen, bankers, propagandists and polluters, already plaguing the world with their complete disregard for the environment or humanity. Would confining humanity to corporate sponsored "planned-cities" be offering a solution to the world's problems, or eliminating the possibility of anyone ever solving them?
For more on the Forum for the Future and their proposed "prison cities," visit Infowars.com.