Editorial
500 Year Old Global 'Roll-Up' Founders?
And another one gone, and another one gone ... Another one bites the dust − Queen
Is it possible that the biggest roll-up in history is foundering?
What roll-up? Well ... roll-up, of course, is a money-industry term of art. It means that someone − an enterprising banker backed by big money − begins to buy up mom and pop shops to turn them into one large industry with "economies of scale" and an intrinsic value that is larger than its individual moving parts.
In this case, the roll-up that is taking place is of nation-states.
The bankroll comes from central banks.
And the supervisory business council is made up of the great Anglosphere families that control them around the world.
But if such a roll-up is taking place, it just hit a snag. The Anglosphere power elite that is trying to create worldwide government seems to have suffered yet another setback with the withdrawal of Britain and three other countries from upcoming treaties designed to make the EU even more of a massive nation-state.
Ironically, Britain (home of the City of London's mile-square nexus of elite, global domination) has led the way. Apparently, there is simply too much resistance among the population and even the political class to overcome. I would like to thank the Internet for that. Perhaps people for the first time in a long time are waking up and realizing what is being done TO them in THEIR name.
Unless something changes very quickly (and it always could), Britain shall remain outside of the core Eurozone. But another 23 European countries will participate in a new treaty mandating strict oversight of how they spend their taxpayer's money.
The treaty is supposed to be written by March. It will probably mark the first time in history that 23 countries voluntarily gave up their sovereignty without a single shot being fired. Britain won't be among them. We'll see how far the treaty actually gets.
Britain's top men supposedly made the decision to leave in order to ward off regulatory attacks against its financial services industry. Do you believe that? Britain's been moving toward the Union for decades.
What is more likely is that a tipping point was finally reached. Had Britain's political class followed its instincts and handed over the last vestiges of sovereignty to the EU, it might have faced open rebellion at home. It was, therefore, a bridge too far ...
Why should this be? Well, we've explained it before. The Internet era and what we here at the Daily Bell call the Internet Reformation is making it increasingly difficult for the power elite to pull together tens or hundreds of millions in a single, bureaucratic entity, let alone seven billion. In this Internet era, where this sort of manipulation is either known or suspected, the end result is increasingly difficult to mandate.
Sometimes a rose is a rose and a setback is a setback. It may be what we have here. For 50 years, the elite that wants to rule the world lied and dissembled to the British people about the EU. Step by step a union was built like a gilded cage around the British Isles – and around Europe as well.
It begs common sense to maintain that this was built up so painfully and with such determined malevolence with the idea of its destruction in mind. No, the preferred plan, as is obvious and evident, is to build up "unions" of countries around the world – and then to build global governance on top of it.
There can be NO doubt of this. There are now "unions" – and planned currency unions – around the world.
Are we to believe it is all "coincidence"? We find them in South America, Africa, Asia, even the Middle East. Lift the blanket and you will find unions scurrying about like bed bugs. They are likely being organized by the same Money Power that built up the EU and has been trying to create, as well, a North American Union.
The initial reorganization could date back to colonial times. During the so-called "colonial era" European countries spread out around the world and "colonized" Africa, South America and Asia. All of a sudden regions that had no countries were given specific designations, governments and boundaries.
Today, of course, all this is looked upon as an "aberration" and a "mistake." Really?
I've long since given up on the idea that history is full of "mistakes." World War I was a mistake. World War II was a mistake. Versailles was a mistake. Yalta was a mistake. And yet each mistake yields more and more global tension, chaos and ultimately, globalist "solutions" leading inevitably to global governance.
So was the colonial era simply another aberration? Another mistake. Another era of greedy pillaging with no larger purpose. Or was there a method to the seeming madness? Am I wrong to ask the question?
It certainly SEEMS like a mad question, to be sure. Could the great Money Power families even 500 years ago have ALREADY been contemplating world government? Could they have set out from Europe on a colonizing mission to create nation-states that would then form the fulcrum of regional unions and finally global government?
Could this international "roll up" have roots that go back a millennium?
It's a big project, to be sure! One of those projects that is so big it's almost impossible to wrap your mind around it. But take a step back and the parameters become achingly familiar and shockingly – brutally – simple. Build up nation-states, convert them to regions and roll them up!
Of course, it is merely coincidence ...
Merely the sweep of history ...
Merely the evolution of culture and power ...
And yet ... The result is always CENTRALIZATION. Always. Never anything else. Always the solution is more power for the center, more "leadership," more technocratic advances by those who cluster around the modern central banking establishment.
So ... yes, one can view such inevitable results as accidental. But when the same results repeat themselves over and over, no matter the circumstances, one can surely make the argument that what is taking place may NOT be accidental but "directed." Here's something from Wikipedia about the colonial era:
In history, the early modern period of modern history follows the late Middle Ages. Although the chronological limits of the period are open to debate, the timeframe spans the period after the late portion of the Middle Ages (c. 1500) through the beginning of the Age of Revolutions (c. 1800). From a global standpoint, the most important feature of the early modern period was its globalizing character — it witnessed the exploration and colonization of the Americas and the rise of sustained contacts between previously isolated parts of the globe. The historical powers became involved in global trade. This world trading of goods plants, animals, and food crops saw exchange in the Old World and the New World. The Columbian Exchange greatly affected almost every society on Earth.
Now, three other events. First was the creation of the Gutenberg Press in the mid-1400s. Wikipedia tells us that:
From a single point of origin, Mainz, Germany, printing spread within several decades to over two hundred cities in a dozen European countries. By 1500, printing presses in operation throughout Western Europe had already produced more than twenty million volumes. In the 16th century, with presses spreading further afield, their output rose tenfold to an estimated 150 to 200 million copies. The operation of a press became so synonymous with the enterprise of printing that it lent its name to an entire new branch of media, the press. As early as 1620, the English statesman and philosopher Francis Bacon could write that typographical printing has "changed the whole face and state of things throughout the world."
Second was the Reformation. This split the Roman Catholic Church asunder and was quite possibly the work of the power elite itself, or certain banking facilities that saw the Church as an imminent threat. Wikipedia tells us:
Martin Luther's spiritual predecessors included John Wycliffe and Jan Hus, who likewise had attempted to reform the Roman Catholic Church. The Protestant Reformation began on 31 October 1517, in Wittenberg, Saxony, where Martin Luther nailed his Ninety-Five Theses on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences to the door of the Castle Church, in Wittenberg.
Third was the creation of what today is known as the Illuminati, with all its secret hand-signs, Masonic involvement and furious speculation about what it is today, and whether in fact it even exists – and for what purposes. Wikipedia tells us:
The Illuminati (plural of Latin illuminatus, "enlightened") is a name given to several groups, both real (historical) and fictitious. Historically the name refers to the Bavarian Illuminati, an Enlightenment-era secret society founded on May 1, 1776. In more modern contexts the name refers to a purported conspiratorial organization which is alleged to mastermind events and control world affairs through governments and corporations to establish a New World Order. In this context the Illuminati are usually represented as a modern version or continuation of the Bavarian Illuminati.
Let's try to summarize. Philosopher Francis Bacon wrote that the Gutenberg Press "changed the whole face and state of things throughout the world" – much as the Internet has changed the world today.
The Gutenberg Press was no doubt immensely threatening to the powers-that-be as its initial impact was to generate the rediscovery of scientific thinking – which has been mis-described today as the Renaissance. (Of course, we've argued that a similar Renaissance is taking place today, sweeping away the nonsense of gravitational physics, Peak Oil and the like.)
The powers-that-be seem to have counterattacked in several ways. Here's one (hypothetical) way to look at it: First, they began to create false-flag "movements" such as the Reformation and the Enlightenment. Second, they set up various secret societies to control the advances of knowledge via the printing press. Third, they "took a step back" − and substituted "democracy" for monarchy. It was also at this time that the European countries became far more aggressive in terms of their colonial efforts.
Accept there's possibiy some validity to the above and we can ask ourselves: Are there parallels to what is going on today? This is what we here at DB attempt to cover regularly. We try to write about the way the modern power elite is apparently responding to the 'Net and the "Internet Reformation" that is now taking place. Just like the previous Reformation − perhaps founded by the elites of the time − this one, too, is spinning out of control.
The elites evidently and obviously have tools they use to try to create an ever closer global union. We have labeled these dominant social themes – fear-based promotions that provide internationalist solutions.
These solutions, of course, are ones that have been created by the same elites: the United Nations, International Monetary Fund, Bank for International Settlements, World Bank, International Criminal Court, World Health Organization, etc.
This power elite continually seems to use central bank fiat "money from nothing" to create an integrated and seamless media matrix that speaks with one voice. It is a simple enough procedure and allows the power elite to create convulsive sociopolitical and military movements.
Over the past decade, we believe we've begun to see these dominant social themes founder and fail. The war on terror, global warming, peak oil, central banking, government efficacy – each and every meme propounded by the Anglosphere elite appears to have been undermined by the Internet and the dissemination of information about the Way the World Really Works. This Internet Reformation, as it spins out of control, hasn't reached everyone of course, but it's reached and illuminated tens of millions.
Within this context, I'd argue that Prime Minister David Cameron's move to reduce British exposure to the European Union is perhaps NOT something that the power elite wished to occur. It is being driven by forces in the British Isles beyond their control. It is a setback, a result of what we call the Internet Reformation, not merely a cunning ploy.
Of course, elite strategies are multifarious. The setback itself will no doubt be used to attempt to build a more viable and inclusive European Union. Every setback must inevitably be seen as an opportunity to reinforce a one-world order.
There are plans within plans and strategies within strategies. Hidden in plain sight are apparently whole corporations (Tavistock) devoted to creating, evaluating and re-evaluating the memes of the elite in order to make sure they are viable and appropriately adaptable. (Already, we think we see signs of how this Euro-schism will be put to good use by the globalists.)
But, as I wrote above, a setback is a setback. And the Internet, in my view – and the out-of-control Reformation it is spawning – has provided an unexpected and formidable obstacle to the elite's compulsive internationalism. No doubt, they will be working 24-hour shifts at think tanks around the world to remedy this.
Over the next weeks and months we'll continue to try to analyze the elite's promotional memes as regards what seems to be the collapsing European Union and how they may be attempting to use the setback to buttress their quest for world government. This struggle has ramifications for everything from investing to how and where we live.
It also may mark at least a modest turning point in a 500-year-old roll-up – and thus is history-in-the-making on a grand scale.
l 
|
You must be a site member to submit suggested edits or post feedback. In addition to submitting edit suggestions and posting feedback, your Free Membership to The Daily Bell gives you access to our Member Zone where you will discover a plethora of other member benefits. Want to learn more? click here |
|||||
|
|
||||
 |
Posted by James Jaeger on 01/02/12 12:44 AM
Anthony, good article. As far as the Internet Reformation foiling the plans of the power elite, you say their "elite strategies are multifarious. The setback itself will no doubt be used to attempt to build a more viable and inclusive European Union. Every setback must inevitably be seen as an opportunity to reinforce a one-world order."
I agree. Therefore we must continuously not only guard the current Internet, but continuously design it to be more flexible, free and indestructable. Already power elite termites are trying to clamp down on email and make the web more proprietary and centralized. They already effectively have the ability to shut parts of it down with the domain name servers, thank god we now have many of these unlike the early days whene there was just InterNIC.
My new article, "A TECHNOLOGICAL RENAISSANCE -- Peer-to-peer, Amorphous, Non-Internet, Solar-charged, IP Walkie-talkie Networks" (available at Click to view link which you are welcome to re-print at the DB) postulates a new network that's LIKE the Internet, but it's TOTALLY peer-to-peer making it utterly impossible to CENTRALIZE in any way, shape or form. I have already submitted this idea to computer engineers at the MIND-X and they say such a system can be built. See Click to view link
So if the power elite ever manages to compromise the Internet, an amorphous, peer-to-peer, solar-power network that runs on TCP/IP but NOT over the standard Internet, could be a real thorn in their butts. And oh, did I mention, this network, while doing ALL the things the current Internet and World Wide Wed can do (text, data, graphics, voice, HD video) will be totally FREE. In other words, no ISP charges, no broadband connect charges, no monthly fees. Let the power elite smoke that in their pipes. -- James
Reply from The Daily Bell
Good idea ...
 |
Posted by Lamb on 12/14/11 03:44 AM
Hi dotti,
It appears to me that my phrase "standing up for justice" has suggested an image that's far from what I intended to convey, so I'd like to redact it.
When you write about the OWS folks standing up against "the system", you are describing certain cells of the beast blaming other cells (the bottoms of the feet blaming the rectum, in the OWS instance), while the conscienceless beast continues on his rampage through Tokyo (with a mild case of hemorrhoids that he doesn't even notice). In my view, that's standing up for maintaining the grand delusion, and lobbying for a spot higher on the beast.
The "street lawyer" is perhaps an even better example of the delusion. The lawyer, the quintessential servant and rook of "the system", helping the poor downtrodden left in the wake of the system he legitimizes and serves... It may be a touching emotional story, but the actions don't ever acknowledge the nature of the system that causes most of the suffering, and therefore not a dent will be made in the barrel of suffering to come.
And so, if the lawyer is to make a genuine stand for justice, his "stand against" would appropriately be against himself, since he's the cog in the system that he can directly change. If he only fights and protests and raises hell against the system he serves, he's a hypocrite, with the alibi of ignorance and some motivation to ease his conscience.
In ten thousand ways, virtually all of us legitimize and serve "the system". Almost every waking moment we march around in lines like little soldier ants, honoring all of the rules and reinforcing the matrix with our agreeable thoughts and actions, all living in accordance with the same social blueprint, sharing in collective emotions and judgments, while pretending we're free individuals and not part of the collective, multi-dimensional machine.
Unless a person can get to a vantage point where they can begin to see the interconnectedness of each and every individual part, and how they all cooperate to produce the end product, obviously they will feel powerless and tend to deny any and all responsibility. Lacking this perspective, I agree that it appears as if individuals aren't responsible for the collective results. You've to get out of the matrix of the collective consciousness before you can see it.
For obvious reasons (Agent Smith might be lurking), I'm not going to go into detail about how I live my life. Anyway, it would be a distraction, with no bearing on the message.
Rather than "standing up for justice" in the commonly-conceived way, I'll revise my statement to "I'm a transcendental force".
Regarding actually walking the talk, that's a different path for each of us. We are what we think, and so to the extent that our thoughts, conscious and subconscious, are in line with the collective, societal norms, we are adding our creative force to help flesh out "the system". Conversely, to the extent that our thoughts have transcended the collective and are held there, we influence other individuals and the collective mind, and they influence us, each pushing and pulling and inducing resonant frequencies. If we can resist being pulled back in, we can become a constant force pulling others forward. (And, the same dynamic works in the other direction as well.)
To be the transcendental force, the genuine force for justice, one must build a detailed understanding of the workings of the laws of cause and effect (which leads to the impossibility of denying personal responsibility), with which they can build constructive intention, from which constructive action will spring, all the while doing so with a heart and body that's as open and vibrant as the mind, to create an energetic continuum. That's the basis of what I think and do every day.
 |
Posted by Agent Pete 8 on 12/13/11 02:37 PM
Hi Lamb, I too.
I can't take off my shades these days, knowing the way They Live.
Click to view link
 |
Posted by dotti on 12/13/11 08:20 AM
Lamb, I'm trying to understand. If your "standing up for justice now" is more than just something nice to say, tell me what you are doing to stand up for justice.
I just read John Grishom's "Street Lawyer" and it made me WANT to open a soup kitchen/day house for homeless women and children. But it did not cause me to do same.
The only "killing" i meant to refer to was the "beast" that you say we are all feeding. I will stand by the appropriateness of that phrase.
Re OWS, I think that they would agree that more people should stand up against "the system". They are "standing up". They are standing up against the people who are profitting from the system that supports the beast--and by doing so, continue to support the beast. I do very little, if anything, to support the beast. Wall Street and the Fed, however, are part of the problem--enablers at the least.
I realize my potential--what it is and what it is not. I have the ability to make people feel good about themselves--because I truly love people and see the good in them. I have been told more than once that I "project the image of Jesus". It is a wonderful compliment.
Re: "You won't convince me of your lack of potential, and I won't convince you that you're more than you know."
I probably will not convince you that I am more than you know. I have a talent for making art and for making people feel good about themselves. That's my little world.
And I feel very much alive, although I am not in total denial about the world we live in. I haven't taken the blue pill, but I'm not a William Wallace.
And I don't believe in the company line or "being in". I still am asking you to explain what you mean when you say that you are standing up for justice. Are you a street lawyer or something? I'm trying to think what action you could be taking that would make you feel that you are changing the world.
BTW, I would not continue this dialogue if i didn't think we were making at least a little progress.
Well. I guess I should admit that I'm more than a little curious, as well.
Another BTW: I'm more open than most to changing my opinions--if I cannot support my opinions, then I consider other choices. However, I'm stubborn as a bull as long as i'm convinced as I'm right and will not "give in" just to be nice. I may walk away, but I won't give in.
I need coffee... .
|
Posted by Lamb on 12/12/11 11:02 PM
I don't agree that all the OWS folks would agree; very few of them would. And I'm not promoting trying to kill anything; to the contrary, I'm promoting trying to become alive.
The OWS movement is all about blaming others, and demanding that someone else do something to fix things so that we can all go back to where we were, in oblivion. My message is exactly the opposite.
Being small is the human condition, so I don't suggest that you "should" be something else. That condition is relatively easy, and provides the ultimate alibi, so it's bound to be popular. It even comes with the humble judgment that if I think I'm brighter than that, it's just ego running away with me, so I should be real and stay small.
That's quite a trap you're in.
At the end of the day, it's your own self image that projects into the world. You won't convince me of your lack of potential, and I won't convince you that you're more than you know.
Too bad that you think my "standing up for justice now" is a platitude. Perhaps you'd prefer I gave you the company line, so I could be "in", and you could feel better too. Sorry, but I'm standing up for justice.
|
Posted by dotti on 12/12/11 10:16 PM
Lamb, your intentions are wonderful:
"And, I open my heart to those whom my prior ignorance has harmed, and I vow to make amends by standing up for justice now. "
I'm just not too sure what you mean by--is the word "platitudes"?--like "... standing up for justice now."
I think that all the OWS folks would totally agree with your post--and the thoughts are good ones for the most part. And the OWS crowd is doing, in my mind, what you are promoting--trying to kill the beast. But in the end, it will simply serve the interests of Soros and company.
I've thought a lot about the OWS folks. They are probably the only ones right now--as a semi-organized group--standing up against the system. And they are, unfortunately, IMHO misguided.
I'm doing very little to support the beast. I don't pay taxes--but then I don't owe any. My art is just pretty stuff--nothing that would advance mankind or anything. And I focus on my own environment rather than the big picture that you find so important. I love the folks and try to help them out when I can. Smiles and encouragement mostly. Kind words now and then. A smoked chicken on occasion.
You apparently think that I am not realizing my own importance in the scheme of things--that I could AND SHOULD make a difference. I guess I think that you are exaggerating my importance--maybe yours as well.
It's just a thought... .
|
Posted by Lamb on 12/12/11 09:25 PM
dotti and NAPpy,
I agree that it's not easy to delineate personal responsibility from what we do collectively as a society. That's the intoxicating allure of collectivism. By creating the artificial entity we call government, we thereby create an artificial beast that has no conscience, no morals, and no responsibility linked to the individual. Everyone has deniability, no matter what the beast does. The masses claim "I'm not to blame because I'm not the brains, I'm only the guts and the hands and the feet", while the leaders claim "I'm not to blame, although I'm the brains, because I've got to feed my guts and my hands and my feet". And they all conspire to make up "the Law", which decrees that no one's to blame so long as they remain a loyal member of the beast, no matter whether brains or toes.
It's a wonderful system for some. Yet, the beast isn't real, so the thing that commits all of the acts we claim we abhor isn't real. All that's real is billions of individuals pretending to be part of a beast, doing things they abhor, because so long as they play that part, they can go places and do things, and have the adventures and power and respect, that only a massive beast can. The world appears to be only a world for massive beasts, so few can even imagine jumping off and going it alone.
We're all so indoctrinated in this perception that few can see it for what it is. We grow up believing that our place is as a part of this fictitious beast, and we convince ourselves that he's really a nice beast, if you only get to know him (and stay a loyal part of him, too).
Life, if you accept the blessings of it, is a learning process, each and every day, and so dotti, I don't suggest that anyone accept a pile of guilt to burden them. Guilt doesn't heal anything; responsibility, and the actions that stem therefrom, does.
So, what does a person do who's willing to accept responsibility for their part? I'll speak for myself on that question. I've committed myself to discover every way in which my beliefs and actions support the fictitious beast, and strand-by-strand I work to dis-entangle myself from it. In what ways do I support the establishment politics, the federal government and it's thousand tentacles, the state and local governments that form redundant compartments within the beast, the banking/insurance cartel, the armaments industry, the oil/chemical/pharmaceutical cartel, the lawyers, judges, law enforcement officers and agents, courthouse workers, and prison industry that all serve to force compliance and prevent escape, the media that tries their best to convince me of how real and good the illusion is, the thousands of corporations and their businessmen and lobbyists who seek to grow the beast bigger for their own illusory benefit, etc.? And, just as importantly, what beliefs do I hold that tell me I'm too small to be responsible, that I can't understand the world, that nature is chaos and so artificial is protective and safe, etc.?
Literally everyone we each know is part of it, and I've had to face that fact. I don't pretend, anymore, that the willful ignorance is harmless, and I don't pretend that I am helpless. This is what I look at, patiently and deliberately, learning to understand every part of it so that I can break its grip on me. And, I open my heart to those whom my prior ignorance has harmed, and I vow to make amends by standing up for justice now.
|
Posted by dotti on 12/12/11 08:47 PM
Thanks, NAPpy. Those are wonderful ideas.
Evade taxes.
Don't vote.
I was wonderin' how to deal with that responsibility thingie.
I feel much better now.
Yours was the best response. Thanks.
|
Posted by NAPpy on 12/12/11 07:39 PM
This was a good post. I'm having a hard time delineating personal responsibility from what others around me do.
Take taxes for example. I don't want to pay them, but I don't want to go to jail either. I think it's perfectly moral for me to pay my taxes. However, I think it's more moral to minimize or evade some of them.
As far as anything a government does--if I don't vote, then I'm not responsible.
I guess I'd lean toward the idea of withdrawing support for the system to the extent that you don't get killed for it as my preferred strategy.
|
Posted by dotti on 12/12/11 06:46 PM
Re: "By separating the collective acts from individual responsibility, you're inadvertently buying into the core of collectivist ideology, which requires that they be separate."
"The greatest tragedy, by far, is that so many billions of people feel completely devoid of responsibility for what's happening in the world."
I'm not sure what you are expecting of someone like me--and billions of others who may not like what is going on in this world, but don't really "feel responsible". I feel responsible for myself and my family and I do what I can to help others--friends, neighbors, church members, sometimes strangers.
I do not accept all the guilt that could be placed on all Americans or all Europeans, or all of any other nationality or ethnic group.
Oh, yes. And I'm a Southerner. And I have gotten over the guilt of Southern slavery days.
What do you recommend for all of us as individuals to do to accept responsibility for the collective acts of USA? Seriously. Do tell.
|
Posted by Lamb on 12/12/11 05:02 PM
DB: "OK. What of "Americans" fighting eight wars with depleted uranium weapons?
What of "Europeans" fighting via NATO with the same?
What of the atrocities in Tibet? Are the "Chinese" responsible?
Etc. There is a difference between the manipulator and the manipulated ... "
Yes DB, to the degree that we supported the establishment and society that carried out these acts, we are each responsible. History shows, time and again, that it's very easy to get entire nations to support the commission of atrocities, just as it's easy to get them to gorge on fiat currency and credit. It's easy because the message is what a lot of people like to hear.
By separating the collective acts from individual responsibility, you're inadvertently buying into the core of collectivist ideology, which requires that they be separate.
If I support the government that's perpetrating the war, and pay taxes that I know are funding it, and enjoy the prosperity that comes from the resultant looting, and encourage the naive 18-year-olds who will be pulling the trigger in my stead, then I am, without a doubt, as responsible as the soldier who's pulling the trigger.
The greatest tragedy, by far, is that so many billions of people feel completely devoid of responsibility for what's happening in the world.
For there to be the real reign of justice, and for a free, voluntaryist society to be possible, this must become the prevailing understanding.
For each of us, there's a cardinal spiritual question: How far into the darkness will we go with a crowd, before we just say "No". Ultimately, we each have to be willing to stand up and prove that we have a soul. This is the essence of what it is to be a sovereign.
|
Posted by memehunter on 12/12/11 04:37 PM
DB (in a reply to Lamb): That's because you haven't read enough about the antecedents of the Jewish state. Just read Herzl's diary, where he admits himself that he needs pogroms to frighten his people ... . And here is a succinct analysis: "If antisemitism were to disappear, the real basis for Zionism would disappear too." (Andrew Rothstein, Labour Monthly, 1953).
There is no question that the flames of "anti-Semitism" have been fanned by Zionist rulers, in part to frighten the Jewish masses into accepting the Zionist plans. The DB is right to point that out.
However, I still maintain that anti-Zionism is far from being a dominant social theme at the moment. The fact that, as Robnen also pointed out, Jewish masses are manipulated by their elites partly through these claims of "anti-Semitism" does indeed show a kind of fear-based promotion at work, but only on a specific target, not on the population at large.
In fact, we are very far from a situation where anti-Zionism is promoted in the mainstream media and where we are free to discuss the holocaust, or to be able to publicly entertain viewpoints that disapprove of Zionist interests without risking serious consequences. I think it's safe to say that it's actually the opposite scenario that is prevailing at the moment (i.e., a pro-Zionist "implicit dominant social theme" in the mainstream media).
Of course, the DB knows all this.
----------------------
DB: OK. What of "Americans" fighting eight wars with depleted uranium weapons?
What of "Europeans" fighting via NATO with the same?
Yes, but these wars are fought on the behest of the elite bankers (a point that the DB has mentioned numerous times), which happen to be of a mostly Zionist persuasion. Again, we come back to our starting point...
|
Posted by Robnen on 12/12/11 04:02 PM
DB: "There is a difference between the manipulator and the manipulated ... "
On the subject of manipulation, if anyone is interested and hasn't seen it yet, here is a film made by an Israeli Jew called "Defamation".
Click to view link
It vividly shows how claims of anti-semitism are manipulated in the U.S. by organizations such as the ADL. What's especially interesting is the segment on how Jewish youth from an early age are psychologically traumatized by their elders into an "us vs. them" mentality. It seems this would go a long way in explaining how Jews are socialized from birth, and why many have a paranoid view of the world, and why so many "at the top", so to speak, tend to engage in leftist one-worldist counter-cultural activity.
The short answer is that they engage in this behavior because they view it as re-shaping their environment in a way which makes it less hostile to Jewish interests and survival. It's a survival strategy, pure and simple. It shouldn't be illegitimate to challenge them on this basis and to point out that perhaps their fixations are damaging and distorted, but when they are, a wall immediate comes up and the challenging party is excoriated and dismissed as "anti-semitic."
So much for dialogue in a free and pluralistic society. When you have an activist coterie of like-minded people at the top pushing an agenda at the expense of a majority whose opinions and interests are increasingly marginalized, and their nation-states, cultures, and very identities are deconstructed, that's a problem.
|
Posted by Thingumbobesquire on 12/12/11 01:08 PM
Silly me, I thought of the term "roll-up" as in the Tavistock/MI6/Occult Bureau's Beatles lyrics "Roll up for the Mystery Tour." Of course, the Magical Mystery Tour promotion of the present day multi-billion dollar drug counterculture was in the tradition of that bulwark of drug trafficking East Indies Company City of London British Empire was quite in the tradition of John Dees 007 and Beatles' hero Aleister Crowley's Order of the Golden Dawn. Why, such untrammeled money laundering of drug profits by the City today might do "old Adam" Smith proud.
|
Posted by Lamb on 12/12/11 12:36 PM
"DB: Yes, there are several fear-based promotions in play at once. It is not a question of either/or."
I think we are in agreement, until we get to your drama about me approving Darkmoon's rhetoric and suggesting that I "tar an entire race of people with a delicious single brush... ".
The difference between you and I, it seems, is that I assign some of the responsibility to the millions upon millions of people who knowingly support and benefit from all of the dark schemes that we discuss here, while you seem to promote the idea that, outside of the elite, ruling cabal itself, all of humanity are helpless victims, operated via puppet strings.
Reply from The Daily Bell
The difference between you and I, it seems, is that I assign some of the responsibility to the millions upon millions of people who knowingly support and benefit from all of the dark schemes that we discuss here, while you seem to promote the idea that, outside of the elite, ruling cabal itself, all of humanity are helpless victims, operated via puppet strings.
-----
OK. What of "Americans" fighting eight wars with depleted uranium weapons?
What of "Europeans" fighting via NATO with the same?
What of the atrocities in Tibet? Are the "Chinese" responsible?
Etc. There is a difference between the manipulator and the manipulated ...
|
Posted by dotti on 12/12/11 12:36 PM
Abu, I consider the information about the Morman cannery to be extremely important. I hope that anyone else who has such information will post it.
I have looked into utilizing such a facility that is in Knoxville TN. I haven't been able to motivate myself to do it because--well, I'll admit it--I feel silly for even considering that such action is prudent. We follow a low-carb diet, which means lots of meats and fresh veggies--salads, etc. We eat very little canned or dried, such as beans and rice. People who eat canned good can easily justify purchasing a few months--or even years--of food that they will eventually consume even if there is no crisis.
For myself, I have to admit that I really think the unthinkable could happen. Else there's no reason to purchase things that we would never eat in normal circumstances.
Back to the idea of records being kept of people who are "hoarding"--a term BTW that I find extremely unfair when applied to those who would prepare for a crisis--this is truly frightening.
It seems that we get bits and pieces of information here--sometimes even chunks--but information like what you exposed puts me into the mode of thinking that I really should swallow my pride and make the trip to Knoxville--cash in hand.
Maybe I should push for chickens, also! Seems like a few chickens would provide an excellent food supply if the food chain gets badly broken.
Hmmmmm.
It makes who the Republican nominee is seem relatively unimportant.
And the Soros thing adds to the mix. I haven't gone to the link yet, but am of the opinion that he hates America and is working in the direction of ruling the world. Or at the least destroying America.
Now that our gov can do pretty much anything to combat terrorism, none of us is safe.
Thanks Abu. Have a nice day!
 |
Posted by Abu Aardvark on 12/12/11 11:04 AM
DB: "Ironically, those behind OWS - and calls for prosecution of Wall Street, for instance - are the same elite bankers that have continued the power consolidation begun at least a century ago"
-----------------------------------
Indeed ...
"The Elitists Behind the Internet-Based Effort to Shake Up Presidential Politics"
Click to view link
"Occupy's 'nerve center' staffed by Soros activists"
Click to view link
Meanwhile ...
"A fellow veteran contacted me concerning a new and disturbing development. He had been utilizing a Mormon cannery near his home to purchase bulk food supplies. The man that manages the facility related to him that federal agents had visited the facility and demanded a list of individuals that had been purchasing bulk food. The manager informed the agents that the facility kept no such records and that all transactions were conducted on a cash-and-carry basis. The agents pressed for any record of personal checks, credit card transactions, etc., but the manager could provide no such record. The agents appeared to become very agitated and after several minutes of questioning finally left with no information. I contacted the manager and personally confirmed this information."
Click to view link
 |
Posted by DwightJohnson on 12/12/11 10:43 AM
Today we see two things happening: a consolidation of wealth and a consolidation of power. OWS correctly identified the former, but failed to see the latter. The Daily Bell has shed a spotlight on the concentration of power, and those who are pushing for it: the bankers and those who own them.
OWS would have us reverse the consolidation in wealth by destroying the free market and doing the simplistic thing of redistributing the wealth. What really needs to happen is for all of us to push back against every attempt to consolidate power, and more, to work for the redistribution of power into the hands of those to whom it rightly belongs, the people.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Ha, well put. Wish more could actually verbalize what you just did ... Overt consolidation of wealth is not possible without an initial consolidation of power. Ironically, those behind OWS - and calls for prosecution of Wall Street, for instance - are the same elite bankers that have continued the power consolidation begun at least a century ago ...
|
Posted by dotti on 12/12/11 08:14 AM
Re: "Consider that you too, are readying to take the leap to believing that the unbelievable, (and that includes your inner strength and insight) is more real and powerful than your current self is ready to admit/permit."
Well put, Agent Pete 8! Without the various feedbackers, I doubt that many of us would continue to read here daily as we do. We would fall back into disbelief. The discomfort of believing that 911 was an inside job, etc.--would be too much. I believe cognitive dissonance is the term. We are all beginning to believe things that previously were beyond even our mere consideration.
Truth is rare and precious, but acceptance of Truth can be disconcerting and painful.
One minor disagreement: "Disagreement is an industry for sane folk to avoid."
I like to say, "not every disagreement is an argument." If we here were closed to "disagreement", we would not be here. We are open to competing ideas--ideas that run counter to the "Truths" (note quotes) that we previously held dear.
Assimilation, as you point out, is a process. We are moving along together.
Thanks for your posts Agent Pete 8--and yours, Tawny!
|
Posted by Agent Pete 8 on 12/12/11 06:01 AM
This website really likes you too, tawny.
Disagreement is an industry for sane folk to avoid. I sense your sensitivity to all the shouting around.
Inside you/me/us there is an inherited strength - a peace that you and others need to rely on more confidently as a inverted crumbling world claims rationale - to gain clarity.
Consider that you too, are readying to take the leap to believing that the unbelievable, (and that includes your inner strength and insight) is more real and powerful than your current self is ready to admit/permit.
Of the large audience of viewers here, more than a handful are bursting boundaries as disorienting scene-changes sustain daily dramatic action levels.
Assimilation requires a denser braided process - a thought train woven on three or more tracks throughout day and night. Leaving no stone unturned until the truth is found, because you know Truth is rare and precious, like you and all Life.
How else does one grow rapidly to acclimatise new surroundings, other than to understand we are made to live, discover, invent and test, including failures? It is the old way, with new tools and possibilities these days.
|
|
