Tag Archive | "Trilateral Commission"

Trilateral Commission Continues to Dominate Obama

Tags: , , ,

Find­ings & Fore­casts 06/05/2013

The posi­tion of National Secu­rity Adviser acts like a gate keeper to the Pres­i­dent. This fact has never been lost on the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion, where Zbig­niew Brzezinski was National Secu­rity Adviser to Pres­i­dent Jimmy Carter in 1976. Brzezinski chore­o­graphed Carter’s every move, even brag­ging about it years later.

When it comes to national secu­rity issues (over­seas and domestic), nothing reaches the President’s eyes or ears without being fil­tered and screened by his Adviser. You can imagine pos­si­bility for manip­u­la­tion if the NSA has a secret agenda to use the Pres­i­dent in order to pro­mote goals favor­able to the mem­ber­ship of a pri­vate organization.

When Obama first took office, he appointed 12 per­cent of the U.S. Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion mem­ber­ship to top posts. Three of these posts related to national security:

  • National Secu­rity Adviser, Gen. James L. Jones
  • Deputy National Secu­rity Adviser, Thomas Donilon
  • Director of National Intel­li­gence, Admiral Dennis C. Blair

When Jones stepped down in October 2010, Tri­lat­eral Thomas Donilon was pro­moted to National Secu­rity Adviser, where he has served until he announced his res­ig­na­tion today.

Alas, that is not the end of Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion hege­mony over Obama. His new appointee? None other than Susan Rice, also a member of the Tri­lat­eral Commission.

Rice has been a key policy adviser to Obama since before he even took office. As Ambas­sador to the United Nations, Rice infa­mously presided over the pro­pa­ganda sur­rounding the Beng­hazi ter­rorist attack, which caused her to with­draw from con­sid­er­a­tion for appoint­ment to Sec­re­tary of State to replace Hillary Clinton (Bill Clinton was a member). Rice knew that her Senate con­fir­ma­tion hear­ings would not only be unsuc­cessful, but would force her to answer ques­tions, under oath, regarding her role in Benghazi.

As National Secu­rity Adviser, Senate con­fir­ma­tion for Rice is not required — she will simply take over the posi­tion without fur­ther fan­fare in early July.

The old guard Tri­lat­erals such as Zbig­niew Brzezinski, David Rock­e­feller and Henry Kissinger, are cer­tainly gloating over the unre­strained igno­rance of the Amer­ican public. After all, Tri­lat­erals  have dom­i­nated and con­trolled every pres­i­dent since Jimmy Carter in 1976. Walter Mon­dale, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Al Gore and Dick Cheney were all mem­bers, and loaded their respec­tive high-level posi­tions with other Trilaterals.

What is wrong with this pic­ture? When Lin­coln closed his famous Get­tys­burg Address with the words, the “gov­ern­ment of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth”, he had never met the likes of the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion. This pri­vate and elite group of glob­al­ists would more likely say to them­selves, “gov­ern­ment of the Com­mis­sion, by the Com­mis­sion and for the Commission.

Var­ious sto­ries have recently appeared recently that feign out­rage over paid access to the Pres­i­dent. That is, given a cer­tain level of cam­paign con­tri­bu­tions, a person can actu­ally secure a few min­utes with the Pres­i­dent one-on-one.  Talk about straining over a gnat while swal­lowing a camel: The Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion has mul­tiple points of 24x7 access to the Pres­i­dent and has had it for decades. Express con­cern over this and you will be handed a tin­foil hat while being made to sit in the corner.

There is another aspect to Rice’s appoint­ment to National Secu­rity Adviser — she will imme­di­ately fall under Obama’s “exec­u­tive priv­i­lege” defense to gain immu­nity that will let her skip tes­ti­fying before Con­gress on the Beng­hazi affair. Every­thing she touches from here on will be shrouded under the cloak of national security.

Tech­noc­racy Update

The fifth require­ment nec­es­sary for the imple­men­ta­tion of Tech­noc­racy was recorded in the Tech­noc­racy Study Course in 1932: “Pro­vide spe­cific reg­is­tra­tion of the con­sump­tion of each indi­vidual, plus a record and descrip­tion of the individual.”

His­toric Tech­noc­racy was the direct inspi­ra­tion for Huxley’s Brave New World and Orwell’s Nine­teen Eighty Four.  If you have never read these books, you should do so imme­di­ately. This is where we are headed and at break­neck speed. There is no turning back.

It has now been revealed that the Obama Admin­is­tra­tion has ordered, via secret court order, at least one major cell phone car­rier, Ver­izon, to turn over all phone call infor­ma­tion to the National Secu­rity Agency (NSA). This sur­veil­lance is specif­i­cally tar­geting Amer­ican citizens.

Sto­ries abound. The Atlantic Wire head­lines “Phone Sex, Banks & Google for Emails: The NSA Spying Is Bigger Than Ver­izon”:

“The National Secu­rity Agency’s war­rant for meta­data on every single Ver­izon call for three months is jaw-dropping in its scope. Except, well, the NSA’s sur­veil­lance of our com­mu­ni­ca­tions is most likely much, much bigger than that. Tech­nology has made it pos­sible for the Amer­ican gov­ern­ment to spy on cit­i­zens to an extent East Ger­many could only dream of. Basi­cally every­thing we say that can be traced dig­i­tally is being col­lected by the NSA. We’re sup­posed to trust that our gov­ern­ment will be much better behaved, but they’re not, and the White House almost admits it. That doesn’t mean they’re admit­ting everything.”

The NSA is not only col­lecting phone calls, but also bank trans­fers, finan­cial records, emails, travel records, social media com­mu­ni­ca­tions, health records and more. All of this will soon be housed in the NSA’s new mega-data-center in Utah, where a 5-zettabyte storage facility will be com­pleted this fall. All of the known dig­ital infor­ma­tion in the world is believed to be only about 2.7 zettabytes, so the NSA has big plans to spy on you. In fact, they will know more about you than you know about yourself.

The fol­lowing video by John White­head of the Ruther­ford Insti­tute expresses some of these concerns.


— —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  — –  Note: Addi­tional con­tent on this page is avail­able only to Pre­mium sub­scribers of Find­ings & Fore­casts.
To sub­scribe, please click here.
VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

Findings & Forecasts 04/10/2013

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


In his classic book Nine­teen Eighty-Four, George Orwell invented and per­fected the psy­cho­log­ical notion of “dou­ble­think.” That is, simul­ta­ne­ously believing two con­tra­dic­tory ideas or opin­ions. Orwell’s Min­istry of Truth building dis­played slo­gans like “War is Peace,” “Freedom is Slavery,” and “Igno­rance is Strength.”

“The power of holding two con­tra­dic­tory beliefs in one’s mind simul­ta­ne­ously, and accepting both of them… To tell delib­erate lies while gen­uinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become incon­ve­nient, and then, when it becomes nec­es­sary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the exis­tence of objec­tive reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies – all this is indis­pens­ably nec­es­sary. Even in using the word dou­ble­think it is nec­es­sary to exer­cise dou­ble­think. For by using the word one admits that one is tam­pering with reality; by a fresh act of dou­ble­think one erases this knowl­edge; and so on indef­i­nitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.” (Orwell, George 1949. Nine­teen Eighty-Four;  p 32)

In America today, dou­ble­think is prac­ticed with fine pre­ci­sion at the national level. People who give up and drop out of the work force  become “unper­sons” and are not heard of or from again; but according to the gov­ern­ment, “the economy is fine and unem­ploy­ment is falling.” Con­tinued global mil­i­tary action is con­ducted in the name of “peace.” The onslaught of never-ending cit­izen sur­veil­lance is for our “safety and secu­rity.” Thought police mon­itor inten­tions, resulting in the destruc­tion of rep­u­ta­tions and liveli­hoods. The “Min­istry of Pro­pa­ganda” is never wrong and cit­i­zens are never right.

Orwell, H.G. Wells (Things to Come) and Aldous Huxley (Brave New World) all penned their respec­tive future­casts while looking straight into the face of the Amer­ican Tech­noc­racy move­ment. The move­ment as a move­ment failed soon after it started, but only because the tech­nology did not exist yet that could enforce and sus­tain their utopian dreams. Those dreamers — and their dreams — con­tinue to live on from gen­er­a­tion to gen­er­a­tion, encour­aged by gar­gan­tuan advances in technology.

When the curve of tech­no­cratic desire inter­sects with critical-mass tech­nology, Tech­noc­racy will sprint to rule the world with a brutal total­i­tar­i­anism not yet seen in the his­tory of man.

As I wrote in Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion Influ­ence in the Euro­pean Union in 2011, Com­mis­sion co-founder David Rock­e­feller readily boasted of their influ­ence in estab­lishing the EU:

“Back in the early Sev­en­ties, the hope for a more united EUROPE was already full-blown – thanks in many ways to the indi­vidual ener­gies pre­vi­ously spent by so many of the Tri­lat­eral Commission’s ear­liest mem­bers.” [Cap­i­tals in orig­inal] (Rock­e­feller, David; In the Begin­ning; The Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion at 25, 1998, p.11)

 This was in accor­dance with the ideas of Com­mis­sion co-founder Zbig­niew Brzezinski who wrote Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Tech­netronic Era:

“The nation-­state as a fun­da­mental unit of man’s orga­nized life has ceased to be the prin­cipal cre­ative force: Inter­na­tional banks and multi­na­tional cor­po­ra­tions are acting and plan­ning in terms that are far in advance of the polit­ical con­cepts of the nation-state.” [emphasis added]

Banks and multi­na­tional cor­po­ra­tions are oper­ated according to prin­ci­ples of Tech­noc­racy: Science-driven effi­ciency is always the utmost goal. When applied to “man’s orga­nized life” you have the reality of science-driven social con­trol, which is exactly what we are expe­ri­encing today.

Should the world be run like busi­ness is run at IBM, Gen­eral Elec­tric, Mon­santo, Goldman Sachs, etc.? Most would say “No” but this is exactly what is hap­pening all over the world.

In 2001 Time Mag­a­zine cor­rectly called China a Tech­noc­racy, noting a new form of “Neo-Authoritarianism” that was easily mis­taken for Com­mu­nism, but was not Com­mu­nism. How did China get “con­verted” and by whom? Again, Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion mem­bers played the lead role as they opened up China for trade in the early 1970’s. The impact of China’s new author­i­tarian Renais­sance is seen in the fol­lowing chart:


Between 1974 – 1984, Chi­nese infra­struc­ture was built up to create a new man­u­fac­turing empire con­trolled by a Western-led con­sor­tium of com­pa­nies like Bechtel Engi­neering, Gen­eral Elec­tric, IBM, etc., all of which had direct ties to the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion. Starting in 1984, their strategy began to bear fruit. Between 1984 and 2012, the U.S. trade deficit with China grew from a minis­cule amount to over $450 bil­lion per year. America per­ma­nently lost mil­lions of jobs as com­pa­nies and indus­tries aban­doned Amer­ican shores for the Chi­nese nir­vana of cheap labor. In the process, America was lit­er­ally plun­dered by these global corporations.

America is rapidly becoming a Tech­noc­racy as gov­ern­ment func­tions are turned over to unelected and unac­count­able experts, engi­neers, sci­en­tists and tech­ni­cians. When Obama recently called for a $100 mil­lion ini­tia­tive to map the human brain, he even gave him­self the new title of “Scientist-in-chief.” So, we have an evolving nation­wide smart grid elec­trical system, mas­sive data­bases on cit­i­zens that are being updated in real-time, com­put­er­ized eaves­drop­ping on all phone calls and emails, a never-ending “war on terror” that has mys­te­ri­ously refo­cused itself on Constitution-loving Amer­ican cit­i­zens instead of Islamic enemy combatants.

In the midst of this global and stealthy tech­no­cratic takeover, let’s recon­sider the for­merly sov­er­eign nation of Cyprus. After its com­mu­nist and socialist gov­ern­ment leaders ran their fiscal system into the ground, they finally ran out of cash and had to beg the EU for a bailout. The EU lead­er­ship instead forced them to do a “bail-in” before they would get any “bail-out” funds. Thus far, the bail-in resulted in the con­fis­cating up to 60 per­cent of all bank deposits in excess of 100,000 euros.

The con­fis­cated deposits are being plowed back into equity shares of the nation’s banks prior to being absorbed by global banks for pen­nies on the dollar.

Cit­i­zens 0 — Tech­nocrats 1.

To add insult to injury, Cypriot leaders announced today that they are being forced (by the EU tech­no­cratic lead­er­ship) to dump $530 mil­lion of their national gold reserves as an addi­tional part of the “bail-in.” This rep­re­sents approx­i­mately 70 per­cent of the entire Cypriot gold hoard. If this isn’t a pic­ture of national plun­dering, then I don’t know what is.

Who will buy this gold from Cyprus? Not cen­tral banks! Rather it will be the global bul­lion banks, con­sisting pri­marily of Bar­clays, Deutsche Bank AG, HSBC, Goldman Sachs, Citi Group, JP Morgan Chase and UBS. Freeing up a 10 ton block of gold is a huge win for the global elite who have been accu­mu­lating gold over the years.

Cit­i­zens 0 — Tech­nocrats 2: Game over

I sug­gested in a 2008 report Tri­lat­eral Plan to Corner World Gold Market that the “hidden” gold reserves of many coun­tries would be even­tu­ally attacked and absorbed by these bul­lion banks, all of which have some mem­ber­ship con­nec­tion to the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion. My con­clu­sions at the time were:

  • “The mas­sive amounts of gold leased to bul­lion banks will ulti­mately be seized by these same banks as col­lat­eral against worth­less paper loans made to the Cen­tral Banks.
  • “Cen­tral Banks (including the Fed­eral Reserve) could well be left to dis­in­te­grate in order to give way to a single global cen­tral bank con­trolled and fueled by the bul­lion banks who have monopoly con­trol over the world’s gold.
  • “These super­banks are all closely tied to the goals and mem­ber­ship of the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion, whose mem­bers have method­i­cally car­ried out a mon­e­tary policy designed to bring about this eventuality.
  • “For all prac­tical intent, indi­vid­uals will be frozen out of the gold market at any price.”

Five years later, my analysis looks better now than it did then.

If the Tri­lat­eral elite intend to create a global tech­noc­racy, then they are cer­tainly doing a good job of it. The plun­dering of Cyprus sends a strong mes­sage to the global com­mu­nity: “Don’t mess with us or we will crush you.” Are Italy, Spain, France and Greece lis­tening? It won’t take long to find out. One way or another, expect addi­tional sales of national stores of gold to take place in the future.

My last obser­va­tion is that global Tech­noc­racy will ulti­mately con­trol people by the issuance of energy credits instead of money. The tech­no­crat elites, how­ever, will mea­sure their wealth in terms of the gold they own — and that’s why they want it today!

— —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  — –  Note: Addi­tional con­tent on this page is avail­able only to Pre­mium sub­scribers of Find­ings & Fore­casts.
To sub­scribe, please click here.
VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

Findings & Forecasts 03/13/2013

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Depres­sione: Italy on the Brink

Gov­ern­ment aus­terity has pre­dictable after-effects, namely, a con­trac­tion of eco­nomic activity. Just ask Greece or Italy. It also has the effect of par­a­lyzing the social and polit­ical arena because trust is chal­lenged on every level.

It’s a Cache 22 sit­u­a­tion though. When gov­ern­ments accu­mu­late so much debt that the market starts to ques­tion their ability to pay it all back, then lenders start demanding pay­ment. That’s not totally unrea­son­able, con­sid­ering that a lender has every right to expect pay­ment from the borrower.

When a gov­ern­ment racks up debt faster than the economy grows, the even­tual cur­tail­ment of all reck­less spending is guaranteed.

By November 2011, Italy’s debt crisis had already grid­locked the polit­ical process. Someone was going to get seri­ously hurt no matter which way they turned. If they defaulted on debts, then investors would be burned. If they raised taxes, then cit­i­zens would be burned. If they tried to shrink the size of gov­ern­ment, the economy would con­tract and everyone would get burned.

It’s tempting to say “What a mess they had made of their national affairs” except that America has done exactly the same thing. The U.S. is on the same track, just a few miles behind.

When it became obvious that Italian politi­cians could not move for­ward with any solu­tion, the lenders stepped in and took over gov­ern­ment operation.

This is how and why Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sioner Mario Monti came to be appointed (not elected) as Prime Min­ister of Italy. He was widely hailed as a tech­no­crat, in the sense of “rule by expert” vs. demo­c­ra­t­i­cally elected gov­ern­ment. According to BBC News at the time,

Mario Monti has been asked to form a new Italian gov­ern­ment to tackle an acute debt crisis which prompted the res­ig­na­tion of Silvio Berlus­coni. Mr Monti, an ex-EU com­mis­sioner, said he was starting urgent talks on his cab­inet, aiming to restore finances.

EU leaders hailed Monti’s appoint­ment as “a fur­ther encour­aging signal… of the Italian author­i­ties’ deter­mi­na­tion to over­come the cur­rent crisis.” They com­pletely mis­read the appoint­ment: The Italian gov­ern­ment did not ask for Monti, but rather the EU lead­er­ship forced him down their col­lec­tive throats!

This was plainly evi­dent by the foot­note that stated “An EU team has begun work in Rome, mon­i­toring how Italy plans to cut its debt burden, 120% of annual eco­nomic output (GDP).” Thus, the lenders essen­tially appointed a bank­ruptcy judge who would pre­side over the affairs of the bank­rupt nation, to pro­tect the inter­ests of the lenders, not the debtors.

Over the next 12 months, Monti made sure that Italy fol­lowed the EU’s ulti­matum to reduce gov­ern­ment debt by imposing aus­terity pro­grams to cur­tail spending.

On March 12, 2013, just 14 months after Monti’s appoint­ment, the New York Times reports that

“Since a gov­ern­ment aus­terity plan took hold last year, the Italian economy has tum­bled into one of the worst reces­sions of any euro zone country… Busi­nesses of all sizes have been going belly up at the rate of 1,000 a day over the last year; espe­cially hard hit among Italy’s esti­mated six mil­lion com­pa­nies are the small and mid­size com­pa­nies that rep­re­sent the back­bone of Italy’s $2 tril­lion economy.

“But Italy’s long­standing prob­lems have grown worse in the last year as tax increases and spending cuts were pressed by Mr. Monti, who took over as prime min­ister in November 2011 after the euro crisis forced out Silvio Berlus­coni. Last year the economy shrank 2.4 per­cent.“

One small Italian busi­nessman Emanuele Tedeschi, stated “In one and a half years, every­thing changed. People started feeling afraid, and they stopped spending money. All the promises Monti made to relaunch the economy and help us enhance pro­duc­tivity never materialized.”

The article closes on a depressing note:

“Econ­o­mists worry that the pace of busi­ness clos­ings may accel­erate as long as the country lacks a func­tioning gov­ern­ment. The departing prime min­ister, Mario Monti, was ousted by austerity-weary voters, but the elec­tion left Par­lia­ment grid­locked.

Ousted, indeed. Voters rightly blame Monti for crashing their economy, but they don’t under­stand that his pri­mary goal was to “pri­va­tize” Italy’s remaining hold­ings in order to pay off debts and enrich the mer­chants of glob­al­iza­tion. Pri­va­ti­za­tion has long been a major strategy of the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion and its “New Inter­na­tional World Order,” designed to con­sol­i­date wealth into the priv­i­leged few who belong to it.

In fact, pri­va­ti­za­tion has plagued Italy since at least 1992, thanks to the same people who have engi­neered modern glob­al­iza­tion. As this OECD report from 1997 shows, pri­va­ti­za­tion was in full swing by 1997 as gov­ern­ments sold off prized pos­ses­sions by the billions.

What assets Italy has left today, if fully sold off, would only pay down about 7 per­cent of its overall debt. And yet, that is what is next for Italy. After all is said and done, Italy will have no public ser­vice assets and will still be mas­sively bank­rupt with a trashed economy. In the end, the cit­i­zens will ulti­mately bear 100 per­cent of the debt. Pre­dictably, they will rebel just as they have in Greece.

Noted econ­o­mist Nouriel Roubini recently called Italy a “tsunami risk”:

“In Italy there’s the begin­ning of a polit­ical storm. The result of the Italian elec­tions signal that the majority of people are against aus­terity and not just in Italy also in Lisbon half a mil­lion people were in the streets and 25 per­cent unem­ploy­ment in Greece and Spain, 50 per­cent amongst young people and there is restlessness.

“Italy is not Greece and it has leverage within the euro zone and can cred­ibly threaten Ger­many by saying that if there is no loos­ening of con­di­tion­ality things could become implo­sive and [it could poten­tially] exit from the euro zone.”

Unfor­tu­nately, there is no fix for Italy, and it will go from bad to worse as polit­ical forces clash with each other, the finan­cial com­mu­nity and lenders. The pri­mary blockage to any for­ward progress is that trust has evap­o­rated. People don’t trust gov­ern­ment, bankers and glob­al­ists. Polit­ical par­ties don’t trust each other. The gov­ern­ment doesn’t trust the EU gov­er­nance machine. The bankers cer­tainly don’t trust the gov­ern­ment. Basi­cally, it’s reducing to a state of anarchy where society just melts from the top down.

The con­ta­gion of Greece has thor­oughly infected Italy and for all the same rea­sons. Por­tugal, Spain and France are close behind. Ger­many is also showing signs of weak­ness. When suf­fi­cient EU coun­tries are reduced to rubble, their euro cur­rency will dis­solve and Europe’s age-old rival­ries will resur­face to threaten another con­ti­nental war. All because of debt, greed and stupidity.

As I have said before, there is no pos­si­bility that America will be unaf­fected by what hap­pens in Greece, Italy and Europe. This is a global problem of the greatest mag­ni­tude, and in the end we will all sink or swim together.

Mean­while, a recent ABC head­line sums our President’s posi­tion — Pres­i­dent Obama: There Is No Debt Crisis”.

— —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  — –  Note: Addi­tional con­tent on this page is avail­able only to Pre­mium sub­scribers of Find­ings & Fore­casts.
To sub­scribe, please click here.
VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

Findings & Forecasts 03/06/2013

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Tech­noc­racy in Europe

Tech­noc­racy is gaining fur­ther trac­tion in Europe, and espe­cially in Italy. Yesterday’s head­line, “Italy pres­i­dent mulls new tech­no­cratic gov­ern­ment” is a case in point. With the par­lia­men­tary gov­ern­ment in grid­lock, Pres­i­dent Giorgio Napoli­tano is con­sid­ering the out­right appoint­ment of a tech­no­cratic government.

You would think that the Ital­ians had their fill of Tech­noc­racy when former Pres­i­dent Mario Monti (Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion) was appointed — not elected — to fix Italy’s eco­nomic prob­lems. The first thing that Monti did was to appoint a 100 per­cent tech­no­cratic cab­inet that included no politicians.

Italy is no better off under Monti’s tech­nocrats and yet, as Monti trans­fers power to Napoli­tano, the moths con­tinue to fly toward the flame.

Europe is not the first to explore Tech­noc­racy. The United States had a good taste of it under Pres­i­dent John F. Kennedy. Michael Burleigh wrote in the Tele­graph (UK) in 2011,

The Kennedy admin­is­tra­tion was the high point of tech­nocrats col­o­nizing gov­ern­ment by invi­ta­tion. Bright, “can-do”, forty-something whizz kids were recruited from acad­emia and industry – the supreme example being Robert McNa­mara, the pres­i­dent of Ford Motor Cor­po­ra­tion in Detroit. The fact that he had been co-responsible for one of the largest dis­as­ters in Ford’s his­tory – the Edsel car, which lost $400 mil­lion and is still a syn­onym for com­mer­cial failure – was ignored.

Nothing was fully com­pre­hen­sible to “Mac” unless expressed in math­e­mat­ical terms. In this spirit, as sec­re­tary of defense, he set about mod­ern­izing South Vietnam in order to win a war he con­strued in terms of bomb ton­nages dropped and body counts achieved. Con­trary infor­ma­tion simply did not com­pute as he set about installing elec­tricity and a fridge in every peasant hut, unmindful of the fact that the Viet­cong took over the vil­lage at night.

It is note­worthy that McNa­mara, like Monti today, was a prin­cipal member of the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion. The per­sis­tent atti­tude of “can do no wrong” that we saw then and again see today, is never rec­on­ciled with per­sis­tent failure. That some­thing didn’t go the way they planned is not their fault, but rather the fault of count­less others who didn’t per­form or follow orders correctly.


With the DJIA reaching new all-time highs this week, the ques­tion must be asked if the economy is close behind. The evi­dence sug­gests not.

The above chart showed Real Retail Sales adjusted with ShadowStats.com Alter­na­tive CPI index, using 1990 as a base. It is still 23 per­cent below the 2000 peak, and barely off the bottom of the 2008 – 2009 Great Recession.

It’s no wonder that retail has not made a great come­back, con­sid­ering that Jan­uary saw the biggest decrease in per­sonal income since 1993, falling 3.6 per­cent in a single month. Con­sumer spending makes up almost two-thirds of the U.S. economy, so less income ulti­mately means even less spending.

How­ever, in the short term spending has actu­ally increased. This is explained to a cer­tain extent by the fact that the sav­ings rate dropped from 6.4 per­cent in December to only 2.4 per­cent in Jan­uary, meaning that people are using sav­ings to stock up on con­sumer items.

There is a growing per­cep­tion that real estate and stocks will recover together, bringing back the “good old days” seen prior to the 2008 crash. Housing and mort­gage ads are run­ning again on TV and radio. Direct mail is returning, offering all kinds of debt-related offers from cars to houses to appli­ances. Many con­sumers are taking the offers.

One must reason that anyone accepting food stamps from the gov­ern­ment is expe­ri­encing finan­cial dis­tress. Since 2000, as the above chart shows, the number of recip­i­ents has sky­rock­eted, cul­mi­nating 2012 with 47.7 mil­lion in the pro­gram; that is, 14.92 per­cent of the entire U.S. pop­u­la­tion. During Obama’s first four years, there were 11,133 new enrollees every day! In addi­tion, the average monthly food-stamp ben­efit has risen almost 600 per­cent from $21 in 1975 to $132.96 in 2012.

In November 2012, Bre­it­bart reported that the total number of food stamp recip­i­ents, “exceeds the com­bined pop­u­la­tions of: Alaska, Arkansas, Con­necticut, Delaware, Dis­trict of Columbia, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Mis­sis­sippi, Mon­tana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hamp­shire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Okla­homa, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Utah, Ver­mont, West Vir­ginia, and Wyoming.”

Wealth inequality in America con­tinues to widen. The bottom 50 per­cent of our pop­u­la­tion own only 2.5 per­cent of our wealth. The wealth­iest 1 per­cent have more com­bined wealth than the bottom 90 percent.

When con­sid­ering the cap­ital infra­struc­ture of Amer­ican man­u­fac­turing and ser­vice indus­tries, it is note­worthy that durable goods orders fell by $9.6 bil­lion or 2.0 per­cent in Jan­uary. This is a sig­nif­i­cantly steeper loss than December 2012, which only declines by 1.3 percent.

So if the economy still stinks, why has the DJIA made it to new high ground? Answer: The Fed­eral Reserve.

Quan­ti­ta­tive Easing has put tril­lions of dol­lars into the finan­cial system since 2008. Where has this money gone? First, it has been sucked up by big banks who have a propen­sity to hoard cash instead of putting it into cir­cu­la­tion. Second, gov­ern­ment spends money on every­thing from defense to highway equip­ment; this money almost always ends up being spent on con­tracts with global cor­po­ra­tions, with little par­tic­i­pa­tion from smaller businesses.

New York Times reported in Jan­uary that “If you’re trying to start a busi­ness today, you can almost forget about going to a bank for financing.” There has been very little trickle-down of actual money to the bottom of the eco­nomic food chain. Estab­lished busi­nesses with a good credit are able to borrow, but gen­er­ally have resisted bor­rowing even at low rates because their expec­ta­tions for future expan­sion are slim to none.

The Fed has thus cre­ated a new bubble that promises to be the “mother of all bub­bles” when it explodes. Remember that it was the Fed’s easy money policy that cre­ated the “dot-com” bubble in 2000. It was the same policy that cre­ated the housing bubble in 2008 – 9.  It is the con­tinued policy that is cre­ating the equi­ties bubble of 2013. Again, here is the pro­gres­sion: dot-com, housing, equities.

The fate of the equi­ties bubble will be the same as the others — they will plunge, pre­cip­i­tating another finan­cial crisis. As big banks burn cap­ital, the Fed will again bail them out as before at the expense of the tax­payer and middle class. The hubris will push another large seg­ment middle-class Amer­i­cans into poverty.

— —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  — –  Note: Addi­tional con­tent on this page is avail­able only to Pre­mium sub­scribers of Find­ings & Fore­casts.
To sub­scribe, please click here.
VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

Findings & Forecasts 01/30/2013

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Gun Con­trol

The global elite has worked pri­marily through the left-wing polit­ical appa­ratus to remove guns from society. Con­sti­tu­tion­al­ists from the both the left (yes, there are some) and right tend to pro­vide the resis­tance to such efforts because the Second Amend­ment is a key part of the U.S. Constitution.

The gun con­trol lobby appears always ready to launch for­ward when­ever a gun-related crisis hits, such as was the case with the Sandy Hook school shooting. Their strategy is under­stand­able because without an emo­tional event, the Amer­ican public quickly repu­di­ates any attempt to degrade the Second Amendment.

In this post-Sandy Hook attack on gun own­er­ship, the person leading the leg­isla­tive attack against gun own­er­ship is ultra-liberal Sen­ator Dianne Fein­stein (D-CA). Notably, Fein­stein is also a member of the elite Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion! Another Tri­lat­eral member, Sen. John D. “Jay” Rock­e­feller (D-WV), is a co-sponsor on the bill.

Since the Sandy Hook shooting on December 14, 2012 and the intro­duc­tion of Feinstein’s leg­is­la­tion on Jan­uary 24, 2013, a mas­sive media cam­paign was launched against firearms, and par­tic­u­larly against  “assault rifles.” In fact, almost 100 per­cent of the “public dis­cus­sion” — care­fully orches­trated by major media — has focused directly on military-style rifles such as the M-4 and AR-15. Demands have ranged from an out­right ban on such rifles, to lim­iting the mag­a­zine capacity to 5 or 10 rounds.

The manic irra­tionality over assault rifles has led to a mass decep­tion that such a rifle was used to kill  20 inno­cent chil­dren at the Sandy Hook school. In fact, the shooter had stolen such a rifle from his mother, but left it in the trunk of the car that he drove to the school. It was not taken out of the trunk until police offi­cers did so after the inci­dent. It had not been recently fired. It was not used in the shootings.

The fol­lowing clip shows that all the major news ser­vices ini­tially reported that the shooter used only hand­guns and that the Bush­master rifle was dis­cov­ered — unused — in the trunk of his car.

Given the facts, why did the sub­se­quent dis­cus­sion demo­nize assault rifles like the Bush­master? The answer is: Agenda #2. Simply put, the global elite want to extract these military-style weapons because they are a hin­drance to their plans for global gov­er­nance. There are at least 4 mil­lion of these weapons, along with mil­lions of rounds of ammu­ni­tion, scat­tered throughout the Amer­ican pop­u­la­tion. Many owners, if not most, have mil­i­tary training with sim­ilar weapons, the only dif­fer­ences being fully auto­matic cycling and per­haps more advanced sighting systems.

Weapons in the hands of a large cit­i­zenry is a potent deter­rent to any would-be usurper, much as “mutu­ally assured destruc­tion” thinking was a deter­rent to nuclear war during the cold war with the former USSR.

But, aren’t guns already con­trolled to a large degree? While there might be sev­eral thou­sand local, state and fed­eral laws affecting firearms, there are likely only a few hun­dred that are cur­rent and rel­e­vant; that is, older laws have been super­seded by more recent leg­is­la­tion. Nev­er­the­less, a Con­gres­sional Research Ser­vice report notes that it is already illegal to own a firearm for

  • per­sons con­victed in any court of a crime pun­ish­able by impris­on­ment for a term exceeding one year;
  • fugi­tives from justice;
  • unlawful users or addicts of any con­trolled sub­stance as defined in Sec­tion 102 of the Con­trolled Sub­stances Act (21 U.S.C. §802);
  • per­sons adju­di­cated as “mental defec­tive” or com­mitted to mental institutions;
  • unau­tho­rized immi­grants and non-immigrant visitors;
  • per­sons dis­hon­or­ably dis­charged from the U.S. Armed Forces;
  • per­sons who have renounced their U.S. citizenship;
  • per­sons under court-order restraints related to harassing, stalking, or threat­ening an inti­mate partner or child of such inti­mate partner;
  • per­sons con­victed of a mis­de­meanor crime of domestic vio­lence; and
  • per­sons under indict­ment in any court of a crime pun­ish­able by impris­on­ment for a term exceeding one year.

This means that valid laws have been in place for vir­tu­ally every shooting inci­dent in modern his­tory. Enforce­ment has obvi­ously been lacking, but adding addi­tional laws on top of unen­forced laws is totally irra­tional. Why would we expect better enforce­ment on new laws?

There must be another reason for Sen. Feinstein’s Senate bill that bans assault rifles and pro­hibits the sale of 157 spe­cific weapons while lim­iting mag­a­zine capac­i­ties to 10 rounds. Pro­po­nents say that the bill does not pro­mote con­fis­ca­tion, and yet the text clearly says that if you pur­chased a banned gun before the law takes effect, you will not be able to transfer, sell or gift (even to your own chil­dren) your firearm without first sur­ren­dering it to a Fed­eral Firearm Licensed dealer. The FFL dealer will con­fis­cate any­thing that is banned, including high-capacity mag­a­zines or specif­i­cally banned firearm models.

Agenda #1: Fur­ther­more, Obama is in process of syn­chro­nizing the national gun reg­istry data­base, whereby every person involved in the transfer of a firearm must be fin­ger­printed and undergo a renewed back­ground check; records will be kept indef­i­nitely and will be enhanced with data from other public and pri­vate sources. In par­tic­ular, health records will be matched for signs of mental ill­ness, drug pre­scrip­tions for anti-depressants or anx­iety, or other drugs that have neg­a­tive psy­chotropic side-effects.

Within a few years, the gov­ern­ment will know the pre­cise own­er­ship and loca­tion of every firearm in America. Even if out­right con­fis­ca­tion is not attempted, levying taxes against your firearms would be straight­for­ward and would quickly con­vince many to sell their firearms to gov­ern­ment col­lec­tion centers.

— —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  — –  Note: Addi­tional con­tent on this page is avail­able only to Pre­mium sub­scribers of Find­ings & Fore­casts.
To sub­scribe, please click here.
VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

Findings & Forecasts 12/12/2012

Tags: , , , ,

Anatomy of an End run

For all intents and pur­poses, cap and trade is dead in the U.S., but the global elite’s dream of a Technocracy-based economy is still alive and well.

Last month, Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion pitchman Al Gore  “again called for a ‘cap and trade’ system by warning Amer­i­cans the country faces a ‘cli­mate cliff’ in addi­tion to a ‘fiscal cliff.’” According to Gore,

“I think all who look at these cir­cum­stances should agree that Pres­i­dent Obama does have a man­date, should he choose to use it, to act boldly to solve the cli­mate crisis, to begin solving it.”

Far short of any voter-specified man­date, Gore pushes on: The cir­cum­stances that he (and he alone) cites pro­vide their own man­date to elected officials.

The best eco­nomic schol­ar­ship avail­able sug­gests that any kind of cap and trade sit­u­a­tion would impose a sig­nif­i­cant drag on the economy. Gore pays no atten­tion to such cri­tique, claiming that a carbon tax would def­i­nitely solve both fiscal and his dreamed-up “cli­mate cliff.”

What­ever frontal attack Gore (and other Tri­lat­erals) have launched in recent years, they have not gotten very far. How­ever, the have not and will not give up on their quest for the destruc­tion of the brown economy and the cre­ation of their utopian green economy — Technocracy.

So what hap­pens when they don’t get their way? We need not look any fur­ther than the writing of the Council on For­eign Rela­tions (CFR), which has long been a policy center driven by a Tri­lat­eral agenda.

The CFR pub­lished The Global Cli­mate Change Regime on July 5, 2012, which states in part,

“One way for Obama to force progress is to issue more exec­u­tive orders and admin­is­tra­tive rule­mak­ings to par­tially sub­sti­tute for Con­gres­sional oppo­si­tion to his cli­mate and energy agenda. Working through the EPA and the Clean Air Act, he could enact tougher rules that would cut carbon pol­lu­tion from power plants and mit­i­gate the poten­tial effects of the failure to enact a national cap-and-trade program.”

Their con­de­scending atti­tude towards the cit­i­zenry of this country is indeed insulting. Are they the “enlight­ened ones” with some mystic man­date to save us from our­selves whether we like it or not? Apparently.

From a strategic point of view, how­ever, you can see the value of the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion hijacking of the Exec­u­tive Branch of the U.S. gov­ern­ment with the elec­tion of Jimmy Carter in 1976. They knew that the Amer­ican people would never go along with their screw­ball schemes, so they have forced them upon us by Exec­u­tive fiat — exec­u­tive orders, reg­u­la­tions and law-creating trade agreements.

Even though some mem­bers of Con­gress are fully aware of the Tri­lat­eral Commission’s agenda, there is no public recog­ni­tion of their iron-clad hege­mony over the Exec­u­tive Branch. Nei­ther are there any com­plaints about the loss of Con­gres­sional authority and inability to rep­re­sent their con­stituents who voted them into office in the first place.

Mean­while, voters are laboring under the delu­sion that those they elect will somehow rein in the Exec­u­tive Branch. How­ever, this has not hap­pened, is not hap­pening, and will not happen in the future.

How can the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion hege­mony be over­come? Only by a direct and forceful Con­gres­sional con­fronta­tion, including leg­is­la­tion ban­ning their mem­bers and oper­a­tives from serving in the Exec­u­tive Branch.

Arab Spring Coming to US

While most Amer­i­cans will be focused on cel­e­brating Christmas and the birth of Jesus Christ, Chicago will host the 11th Annual MAS-ICNA Annual Con­ven­tion on December 21 – 24, 2012.

The title of the con­fer­ence is Toward a Renais­sance: Believe, Act & Engage, and it is decid­edly ori­ented toward Islamic youth in America. The orga­nizers are expecting 9,500 atten­dees. A full list of speakers appears here.

Spon­sors of the con­fer­ence include Islamic orga­ni­za­tions such as Mus­lims for Humanity, Turkish Air­lines, Iman Fund, Azzad Funds and one sup­pos­edly non-Islamic com­pany — Dish Net­work.

Con­di­tions in the U.S. are ripening for youth to be manip­u­lated and mobi­lized in rebel­lion against the status quo.

A dif­ferent con­fer­ence to be held at Uni­ver­sity of Toronto in 2013, says this about Renaissance:

“The Arab Spring led some to iden­tify the 1990s and 2000s as a Renais­sance period.  From Islamist insti­tu­tions and GLBT groups to the social move­ments that brought about the Arab Spring, this Renais­sance is made of people who orga­nize and mobi­lize through social media, imagine com­mu­ni­ties through online fatwa banks and dating sites, and pro­duce lit­erary works wherein Eng­lish and Arabic, tweets and verse, seam­lessly coexist.  This new Renais­sance should be dis­tin­guished from yet com­pared to the Nahda, the Renais­sance asso­ci­ated with the Arab project of cul­tural and polit­ical moder­nity from the mid-nineteenth onward.” [emphasis added]

Thus, the con­fer­ence title Toward a Renais­sance: Believe, Act & Engage cannot pos­sibly be inter­preted as any­thing other than a call for action toward an Arab-American Spring.

— —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  — –  Note: Addi­tional con­tent on this page is avail­able only to Pre­mium sub­scribers of Find­ings & Fore­casts.
To sub­scribe, please click here.
VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

Findings & Forecasts 11/28/2012

Tags: , , , , , ,


This is a good time to step back and look at the big pic­ture. The fol­lowing 24 minute inter­view on the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion was aired last week by WHDT on the east coast, reaching a poten­tial of 6 mil­lion viewers. It is an appro­priate back­ground for the cur­rent discussion.

Every Admin­is­tra­tion since Jimmy Carter has been dom­i­nated by this group of super-elitists. The eco­nomic poli­cies they imple­mented were accom­plished with lead­er­ship from their own mem­bers as they worked their way into top levels of gov­ern­ments around the world.

In the U.S., the Com­mis­sion began its hege­mony over the U.S. Exec­u­tive Branch with the selec­tion of Jimmy Carter and Walter Mon­dale to run on the pres­i­den­tial ticket in 1975. First, they inducted them into mem­ber­ship and “trained” them in mat­ters of for­eign and eco­nomic policy. Sec­ondly, they backed and orches­trated their suc­cessful elec­tion, with ample help from mem­bers of the media who were also rep­re­sented on the Com­mis­sion. Thirdly, as soon as Carter was inau­gu­rated, he filled his cab­inet and other key appoint­ments with fellow mem­bers of the Tri­lat­eral Commission.

No less than twenty eight per­cent of the U.S. mem­ber­ship of the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion ended up serving in the Carter Admin­is­tra­tion. Mind you, the North Amer­ican mem­bers only rep­re­sented one-third of the total mem­ber­ship — the others were from Europe and Japan!

So, whose poli­cies were actu­ally imple­mented in the U.S.? Not Amer­ican poli­cies. Not Congress-created or approved poli­cies. Not Con­sti­tu­tional poli­cies. Rather, it was the glob­alist poli­cies ham­mered out in pri­vate meet­ings by Com­mis­sioners from Europe, Japan and North America!

Since 1976, six out of eight World Bank pres­i­dents appointed by the U.S. Pres­i­dent have been Com­mis­sion mem­bers; eight out of eleven U.S. Trade Rep­re­sen­ta­tives; seven out of twelve Sec­re­taries of State; nine out of thir­teen Sec­re­taries of Defense. Of our exec­u­tive leaders, mem­bers have included Jimmy Carter, Walter Mon­dale, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Al Gore and Dick Cheney.

Not bad for such a tiny group that picks its own mem­bers, writes its own poli­cies, and then launches their mem­bers into public office. In the early 1980’s, a member of the Com­mis­sion actu­ally responded to me that it was just coin­ci­dence and that the high quality of people within the Com­mis­sion made it a com­pelling resource to pull appointees from. He lied; not just a pas­sive lie or with­holding of part of the truth — he com­pletely and falsely misled with intent to deceive and conceal.

As 2012 draws to a close, the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion is “first and ten” on the goal line of ful­filling all of its orig­inal objec­tives, espe­cially the cre­ation of a “New Inter­na­tional Eco­nomic Order.”

As I have pre­vi­ously written, how­ever, the ulti­mate Tri­lat­eral goal is to estab­lish an eco­nomic system based on Tech­noc­racy: A “green” economy that will be reg­u­lated by energy (and carbon) as opposed to supply and demand. The nat­ural resources nec­es­sary for all pro­duc­tion will be sequestered away into a “global trust fund” where the “trustees” will be the top global elite fam­i­lies. (The analogy of “global trust” and “trustees” is my own, although you will hear the term “global com­mons” used fre­quently in glob­alist writ­ings.) Pri­vate prop­erty will be elim­i­nated. Short-term essen­tials for staying alive will be granted to cit­i­zens in good standing with the elite. Resources needed for man­u­fac­turing will be made avail­able only to chosen elite-connected organizations.

My favorite term for this coming New World Order is “neo-feudalism.”

Country music legend Merle Travis wrote the song “Six­teen Tons” back in 1946:

Now, some people say a man’s made out of mud,
But a poor man’s made out of muscle and blood,
Muscle and blood, skin and bones,
A mind that’s weak and a back that’s strong.

You load six­teen tons and what do you get?
Another day older and deeper in debt.
Saint Peter, don’t you call me ’cause I can’t go,
l owe my soul to the com­pany store.

It is not enough for the global elite to merely own all the resources… they will even­tu­ally own your soul as well.

Update on Benghazi

On November 1, 2012, I wrote “The Beng­hazi Affair: Tri­lat­eral Policy Failure Or Suc­cess?”, sug­gesting that the President’s National Secu­rity Adviser, Thomas Donilon, is the most likely can­di­date to have orches­trated the Beng­hazi dis­aster, including the editing of the CIA report that clearly stated that the attack on the Con­sulate was accom­plished by ter­ror­ists with an al-Qaeda con­nec­tion. Donilon, along with U.N. Ambas­sador Susan Rice, are both mem­bers of the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion. Plus, Donilon’s asso­ci­a­tion with Obama goes way back, even to their days at Harvard.

Two days before my analysis, I had missed a TV inter­view with Newt Gin­grich, where he stated very plainly,

“There is a rumor — I want to be clear, it’s a rumor — that at least two net­works have emails from the National Secu­rity Adviser’s office telling a counter-terrorism group to stand down,” Gin­grich said. “But they were a group in real-time trying to mobi­lize marines and C-130s and the fighter air­craft, and they were told explic­itly by the White House stand down and do nothing. This is not a ter­rorist action. If that is true, and I’ve been told this by a fairly reli­able U.S. sen­ator, if that is true and comes out, I think it raises enor­mous ques­tions about the president’s role, and Tom Donilon, the National Secu­rity Adviser’s role, the Sec­re­tary of Defense Leon Panetta, who has taken it on his own shoul­ders, that he said don’t go. And that is, I think, very dubious, given that the pres­i­dent said he had instruc­tions they are sup­posed to do every­thing they could to secure Amer­ican personnel.”

To my knowl­edge, there has not been any other men­tion of Donilon or these “rumored” emails since then. Gin­grich was careful to call his sus­pi­cions a rumor, but the details of his state­ment are far too spe­cific and plau­sible to dismiss.

What­ever twisted and non-American poli­cies that are being car­ried out in the Mideast, both Tri­lat­erals Donilon and Rice are in the middle of the heat.

— —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  — –  Note: Addi­tional con­tent on this page is avail­able only to Pre­mium sub­scribers of Find­ings & Fore­casts.
To sub­scribe, please click here.
VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)

Findings & Forecasts 11/01/2012

Tags: , , , , , ,

The Beng­hazi Affair: Tri­lat­eral Policy Failure Or Success?

Many people, including this writer, have been fol­lowing the after­math of the ter­rorist attack on the U.S. Con­sulate in Beng­hazi, Libya. The White House is tight-lipped and the major media refuses to inves­ti­gate or report new find­ings. Con­gress is demanding emails, doc­u­ments and videos.

There is little doubt that the 7-hour attack was care­fully mon­i­tored by State Depart­ment per­sonnel, the Pres­i­dent and his National Secu­rity Advisers in the Sit­u­a­tion Room, and that someone issued an order to nearby mil­i­tary com­mands to “stand down” during the heat of the attack. The rest of the story is a miss-mash of con­flicting accounts.

One promi­nent ques­tion in my mind is whether or not Beng­hazi was an orches­trated effort to throw Obama under the bus and thereby kill his chances at reelec­tion. A second pos­si­bility is that the Beng­hazi oper­a­tion could not come to the light of day because it was a black-ops arms-running center between Libyan and Syrian rebels. A third pos­si­bility is that National Secu­rity per­sonnel were so incred­ibly inept that they froze under crisis cir­cum­stances and were somehow unable to act. And of course, there could be a mix­ture of motives and means.

According to ABC News,

“the White House has dis­closed that Pres­i­dent Obama was informed about the attack on the diplo­matic out­post in Beng­hazi at roughly 5pm by his National Secu­rity Adviser Tom Donilon as he was in a pre-scheduled meeting with Defense Sec­re­tary Leon Panetta and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen­eral Martin Dempsey.”

My par­tic­ular interest here is Tom Donilon, member of the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion and Obama’s point man for all national secu­rity issues.

Option 1: Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion Influence

When Obama first took office, the three people who con­ducted daily intel­li­gence and secu­rity brief­ings with the Pres­i­dent were all mem­bers of the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion. In par­tic­ular, the National Secu­rity Adviser (NSA) was Gen. James L. Jones, who later resigned in 2010. The orig­inal Deputy National Secu­rity Adviser was Tri­lat­eral member Thomas Donilon, who Obama sub­se­quently appointed to replace Jones.

One of Donilon’s key staff is Michael Froman, Deputy National Secu­rity Adviser for Inter­na­tional Eco­nomic Affairs. Froman is also a member of the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion. Essen­tially, nothing gets to the President’s ears or eyes except through the fin­gers of the NSA or his imme­diate Deputies.

Thus, it was Donilon who was sit­ting at Obama’s side, offering his real-time assess­ment and advice, during the Beng­hazi attack. In fact, it was Donilon who first informed the Pres­i­dent of the attack.

Donilon’s roots into Obama’s polit­ical career can be traced back to Har­vard, where the two were class­mates in law school. They also worked on the Har­vard Law Review and had what others have called a “strong friendship.”

During Obama’s sen­a­to­rial cam­paign, it was Donilon who orig­i­nally intro­duced him to Tri­lat­eral Robert Rubin, who soon became a cen­tral adviser to Obama during all of his sub­se­quent cam­paigns. Donilon’s rela­tion­ship with Rubin date back to when Rubin was Sec­re­tary of the Trea­sury — Donilon was his Chief of Staff!

When Obama was elected in 2008, Donilon served on his tran­si­tion advi­sory board, and was first in posi­tion to sug­gest other mem­bers of the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion for promi­nent posi­tions. Other Tri­lat­erals who were brought on board in 2009 included,

  • Sec­re­tary of Trea­sury, Tim Gei­thner
  • Ambas­sador to the United Nations, Susan Rice
  • National Secu­rity Adviser, Gen. James L. Jones
  • Chairman, Eco­nomic Recovery Com­mittee, Paul Volker
  • Director of National Intel­li­gence, Admiral Dennis C. Blair
  • Assis­tant Sec­re­tary of State, Asia & Pacific, Kurt M. Campbell
  • Deputy Sec­re­tary of State, James Stein­berg
  • State Depart­ment, Spe­cial Envoy, Richard Haass
  • State Depart­ment, Spe­cial Envoy, Dennis Ross
  • State Depart­ment, Spe­cial Envoy, Richard Hol­brooke

How­ever, Donilon’s cozy rela­tion­ship with Obama goes even deeper… his brother, Mike Donilon, is Joe Biden’s lawyer! According to the Prov­i­dence Journal’s 11/26/2008 story, Obama, Biden relying on the Donilons of Prov­i­dence,

The Donilons of Prov­i­dence are shaping up as a well-placed broth­er­hood in the Obama-Biden White House.

Prov­i­dence native Mike Donilon — a lawyer and polit­ical con­sul­tant whose clients have included Jack Reed and Sen. John F. Kerry, the 2004 Demo­c­ratic pres­i­den­tial nom­inee — has been named coun­selor to President-elect Joe Biden.

“Mike Donilon has been one of my closest advisers for more than 25 years, and is one of the most astute coun­selors in national affairs I have ever met,” Biden, the former sen­ator from Delaware, said in a press release. Donilon was a key member of the team that pre­pared Biden for his debate with Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the GOP vice-presidential nominee.

Another long­time Biden asso­ciate, Donilon’s older brother Tom, is leading Obama’s State Depart­ment tran­si­tion team and may be headed for the National Secu­rity Council. The Wash­ington Post has reported that Donilon, once chief of staff to Sec­re­tary of State Warren Christo­pher [also a Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion member], is a top can­di­date to be deputy national secu­rity adviser.

That’s not the end of the Biden-Donilon family net­work. The newly named chief of staff to Biden’s wife, Jill Biden, is Cathy Rus­sell, who is mar­ried to Tom Donilon.

So, let’s unravel this web of rela­tion­ships: Tom is mar­ried to Cathy who is chief of staff to Biden’s wife Jill. Cathy’s brother-in-law Mike is Jill’s husband’s lawyer and a close adviser for over 25 years. Mean­while, Tom is prin­cipal adviser to the Pres­i­dent on every­thing related to national secu­rity. Got that?

Back to Beng­hazi. There have been signs over the past few months that the global elite were done with Obama and were pulling their sup­port in favor of Romney.

A sim­ilar sce­nario was seen with one-term Pres­i­dent Jimmy Carter. Carter exe­cuted many “shock-and-awe” poli­cies that accom­plished cer­tain Tri­lat­eral goals, but the right was too fired up against Carter to permit a second term like the first. Thus, after dumping Tri­lat­eral Carter for Reagan and Tri­lat­eral George H.W. Bush, they con­tinued on with their glob­alist plans with little scrutiny or resistance.

Is Obama being expelled like Jimmy Carter? If so, could Donilon be playing the part of Shakespeare’s Brutus in the assas­si­na­tion of Julius Caesar? Well, Donilon was largely respon­sible for pro­moting Obama to the Tri­lat­erals in the first place, so who better to remove him when he has out­lived his usefulness?

The Senate com­mittee that will ulti­mately inves­ti­gate the Administration’s role in the Beng­hazi attacks would be well advised to care­fully scru­ti­nize Donilon and his inces­tuous rela­tion­ship with his Tri­lat­eral cronies.

Option 2: Cov­ering up a poten­tially scan­dalous gun-running operation

The fol­lowing news inter­view is plau­sible enough that nothing more needs to be said.

Option 3: Gross incompetence

When Gen. Jones stepped down as National Secu­rity Adviser in 2010, arti­cles appeared that panned Tom Donilon as his replace­ment. The Huff­in­gton Post wrote,

Out­going National Secu­rity Adviser Jim Jones once dis­par­aged his replace­ment and cur­rent deputy, Thomas Donilon, for his lack of over­seas expe­ri­ence, telling him that as a result: “You have no cred­i­bility with the mil­i­tary,” according to Bob Woodward’s “Obama’s Wars.”

In addi­tion, Donilon, who pre­vi­ously worked as a vice pres­i­dent for floun­dering mort­gage giant Fannie Mae and was known for his strong views and opin­ions, once offending Defense Sec­re­tary Robert Gates so much during a meeting that the Pen­tagon chief almost walked out, according to Woodward.

Gates asserted that Donilon would be a “dis­aster” as National Secu­rity Adviser, the book alleges.

Jones called Donilon into his office late last year to dis­cuss Jones’s plans to step down from the post, writes Wood­ward. After praising his deputy for his “sub­stan­tive and orga­ni­za­tional skills” which made him indis­pens­able to the pres­i­dent, he also rep­ri­manded Donilon for three major mistakes:

  • First, he had never gone to Afghanistan or Iraq, or really left the office for a serious field trip. As a result, he said, you have no direct under­standing of these places. “You have no cred­i­bility with the mil­i­tary.” You should go over­seas. The White House, Sit­u­a­tion Room, inter­a­gency byplay, as impor­tant as they are, are not everything.
  • Second, Jones con­tinued, you fre­quently pop off with absolute dec­la­ra­tions about places you’ve never been, leaders you’ve never met, or col­leagues you work with. Gates had men­tioned this to Jones, saying that Donilon’s sound-offs and strong spur-of-the-moment opin­ions, espe­cially about one gen­eral, had offended him so much at an Oval Office meeting that he nearly walked out.
  • Third, Jones said that Donilon was not good in his deal­ings with his staff at the National Secu­rity Council, dis­playing “too little feel for the people who work day and night.…”

Thus, one could easily argue that gross incom­pe­tence spoiled the party, and that fact in itself is worth cov­ering up.

One factor remaining in Obama’s favor for reelec­tion is that the Con­sumer Con­fi­dence Index has just hit a five-year high rising to 72.2 in October from 68.4 in Sep­tember. By con­trast, Busi­ness Sen­ti­ment has been falling. It is people who cast votes how­ever, not busi­nesses. There are no fun­da­mental rea­sons why con­sumer sen­ti­ment should be rising at this point, but people vote (and spend) on feel­ings, not facts.

— —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  — –  Note: Addi­tional con­tent on this page is avail­able only to Pre­mium sub­scribers of Find­ings & Fore­casts.
To sub­scribe, please click here.


VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

Findings & Forecasts 10/17/2012

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Obama and the Tri­lat­eral Commission

Since Jimmy Carter in 1976, the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion has exe­cuted a hege­mony over each Admin­is­tra­tion, using their power and influ­ence to fur­ther their own narrow, self-interested goals. The first Obama admin­is­tra­tion was no dif­ferent. As I wrote in Obama: Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion Endgame,

For anyone who doubts the Commission’s con­tin­uing influ­ence on Obama, con­sider that he has already appointed no less than eleven mem­bers of the Com­mis­sion to top-level and key posi­tions in his Administration.

According to offi­cial Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion mem­ber­ship lists, there are only 87 mem­bers from the United States (the other 337 mem­bers are from other regions). Thus, in less than two weeks since his inau­gu­ra­tion, Obama’s appoint­ments encom­pass more than 12% of Commission’s entire U.S. membership.

Is this a mere coin­ci­dence or is it a con­tin­u­a­tion of dom­i­nance over the Exec­u­tive Branch since 1976? (For impor­tant back­ground, read The Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion: Usurping Sov­er­eignty.)

  • Sec­re­tary of Trea­sury, Tim Gei­thner
  • Ambas­sador to the United Nations, Susan Rice
  • National Secu­rity Advisor, Gen. James L. Jones
  • Deputy National Secu­rity Advisor, Thomas Donilon
  • Chairman, Eco­nomic Recovery Com­mittee, Paul Volker
  • Director of National Intel­li­gence, Admiral Dennis C. Blair
  • Assis­tant Sec­re­tary of State, Asia & Pacific,  Kurt M. Campbell
  • Deputy Sec­re­tary of State, James Stein­berg
  • State Depart­ment, Spe­cial Envoy, Richard Haass
  • State Depart­ment, Spe­cial Envoy, Dennis Ross
  • State Depart­ment, Spe­cial Envoy, Richard Hol­brooke

There are many other inci­dental links to the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion, for instance,

Sec­re­tary of State Hillary Clinton is mar­ried to Com­mis­sion member William Jef­ferson Clinton.

Gei­thner‘s informal group of advi­sers include E. Gerald Cor­rigan, Paul Volker, Alan Greenspan and Peter G. Peterson, among others. His first job after col­lege was with Henry Kissinger at Kissinger Associates.

Brent Scow­croft has been an unof­fi­cial adviser to Obama and was mentor to Defense Sec­re­tary Robert Gates.

Robert Zoelick is cur­rently pres­i­dent of the World Bank

Lau­rence Sum­mers, White House Eco­nomic Adviser, was men­tored by former Trea­sury Sec­re­tary Robert Rubin during the Clinton administration.

There are many other such links, but these are enough for you to get the idea of what’s going on here.

Ana­lyze the positions

Notice that five of the Tri­lat­eral appointees involve the State Depart­ment, where for­eign policy is cre­ated and imple­mented. Hillary Clinton is cer­tainly in line with these poli­cies because her hus­band, Bill Clinton, is also a member.

What is more impor­tant than eco­nomic recovery? Paul Volker is the answer.

What is more impor­tant than national intel­li­gence? Gen. James Jones, Thomas Donilon and Adm. Dennis Blair hold the top three positions.

What is more impor­tant than the Trea­sury and the saving of our finan­cial system? Tim­othy Gei­thner says he has the answers.

The State Depart­ment is vir­tu­ally dom­i­nated by Tri­lat­erals: Kurt Camp­bell, James Stein­berg, Richard Haass, Dennis Ross and Richard Hol­brooke.

This leaves Susan Rice, Ambas­sador to the United Nations. The U.N. is the chosen instru­ment for ulti­mate global gov­er­nance. Rice will help to sub­vert the U.S. into the U.N. umbrella of vassal states.

As the First Obama term draws to a close, it is worth noting that our for­eign policy is in total sham­bles, national intel­li­gence appears to be worse than it was prior to 9/11 and the economy is still depressed. Yet, these areas were the ones tar­geted for Tri­lat­eral hege­mony, for “experts” who osten­sibly know more than anyone else. In Europe, these people would be prop­erly labeled as “technocrats.”

In a recent video inter­view with Sheila Bair, former head of the FDIC (Fed­eral Deposit Insur­ance Cor­po­ra­tion), she was point­edly asked “Why do you think he (Obama) chose (Trea­sury) Sec­re­tary Gei­thner?” Bair answered, “I assume this was a rec­om­men­da­tion of former Sec­re­tary Rubin who had been actively involved in the cam­paign. Most of his nom­i­nees were drawn from the Rubin Trea­sury department.”

Robert Rubin, a promi­nent member of the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion, served as Sec­re­tary of the Trea­sury for 8 years under the Clinton/Gore Administration.

A person can hammer all he wants on the Obama char­acter and record, but his energy would be wasted. Obama is a puppet on a string, an empty suit, a teleprompter junkie reading speeches he could not and did not write. How­ever, locating the puppet-masters is not dif­fi­cult: They have been in plain sight all along.

Repub­li­cans take note: If you think that a vote for Romney will be a vote against Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion hege­mony, you are wrong. They are already sur­rounding him just as they sur­rounded Obama. A Romney pres­i­dency will only extend the Tri­lat­eral con­tinuum for another four years, and allow them more time to create/complete their “New Inter­na­tional Eco­nomic Order” that they have been pushing since 1973.

The Battle for GMO Foods: CA Prop 37

Cal­i­fornia cit­i­zens are waging a lop-sided war against genet­i­cally mod­i­fied food by asking for food labels that list GMO com­po­nents and per­cent­ages. I haven’t talked to any person who doesn’t want to know which foods con­tain GMO elements.

The global GMO industry thinks oth­er­wise, and the finan­cial war chest is swelling with money from donors such as Mon­santo ($7.1 mil­lion), Dupont ($4.9 mil­lion), BASF Plant Sci­ence ($2 mil­lion), Bayer Crop­science ($2 mil­lion), Dow Agro­sciences ($2 mil­lion), Pep­sico ($1.7 mil­lion),  Nestle USA ($1.1 mil­lion), Coca Cola ($1.1 mil­lion), Conagra Foods ($1 mil­lion) and Syn­genta Corp ($1 million).

These are the com­pa­nies who make GMO seeds (Mon­santo, Bayer, Dupont, BASF, Dow, Syn­genta) and those who use their prod­ucts (e.g., high-fructose corn syrup) by the mil­lions of tons per year (Pep­sico, Coca Cola, Nestle, etc.) High-fructose corn syrup is made from mostly GMO  corn, which rep­re­sents over 80 per­cent of the U.S. corn crop.

There are mul­tiple dan­gers and risks with GMO crops, including corn, that have led to con­sumer blow-back. Many coun­tries have out­right bans on growing GMO crops, such as France, Hun­gary and Japan.  It’s no wonder that the GMO industry is freaked out that people in Cal­i­fornia should have a choice to eat GMO or not because they would lose a ton of revenue.

— —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  — –  Note: Addi­tional con­tent on this page is avail­able only to Pre­mium sub­scribers of Find­ings & Fore­casts.
To sub­scribe, please click here.

VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

Findings & Forecasts 10/10/2012

Tags: , , , , , , , ,


I have written in the past that there were signs of the global elite dumping Obama much like Jimmy Carter was dumped in 1979 after a single Pres­i­den­tial term. In spite of that and in light of O’s strong elec­toral vote showing, it seemed like he would sail to vic­tory on November 6, with ease.

It’s time to revisit the first sce­nario again. After a lop­sided Pres­i­den­tial debate against Romney, it appeared that the estab­lish­ment pulled the rug out from under Obama, and then threw him under the bus. Sev­eral promi­nent Democ­rats have turned against him. Some of the lib­eral media are crit­i­cizing him.

Nev­er­the­less, as of today, Huff­in­gton Post elec­toral tracking shows Obama ahead with 263 elec­toral votes, com­pared to Romney’s 206. The winner must cap­ture at least 270 elec­toral votes. Electoral-Vote.com shows Obama with 317 and Romney with 206. Either way, Obama is still ahead with a con­sid­er­able margin.

There are more debates ahead, but don’t expect Obama and Biden to make the same mis­takes again. They may make dif­ferent mis­takes, but they are far from being overwhelmed.

Mean­while, take note of some of the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion gad­flies in and around the Romney campaign:

Robert Zoel­lick, former member of TC and Pres­i­dent of the World Bank

Robert D. Black­will, Henry A. Kissinger Senior Fellow for U.S. For­eign Policy, Council on For­eign Rela­tions, Wash­ington; former Deputy Assis­tant to Pres­i­dent George W. Bush and Deputy National Secu­rity Advisor for Strategic Plan­ning; former Ambas­sador to India

Paula J. Dobri­ansky, Dis­tin­guished National Secu­rity Chair at the U.S. Naval Academy; Adjunct Senior
Fellow, Belfer Center for Sci­ence and Inter­na­tional Affairs, John F. Kennedy School of Gov­ern­ment,
Har­vard Uni­ver­sity; former U.S. Under Sec­re­tary of State for Democ­racy and Global Affairs

Con­doleezza Rice, Pro­fessor of Polit­ical Sci­ence, Stan­ford Uni­ver­sity, and Thomas and Bar­bara
Stephenson Senior Fellow on Public Policy, Hoover Insti­tu­tion, Palo Alto; former U. S. Sec­re­tary of
State; former National Secu­rity Advisor to Pres­i­dent George W. Bush

Eliot Cohen, Robert E. Osgood Pro­fessor of Strategic Studies, Director of Strategic Studies Pro­gram, and Director of Philip Mer­rill Center for Strategic Studies, Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced Inter­na­tional Studies, The Johns Hop­kins Uni­ver­sity, Wash­ington; former Coun­selor to the U.S. Sec­re­tary of State

Susan Schwab, Pro­fessor of Public Policy, Uni­ver­sity of Mary­land, Col­lege Park, and Strategic
Advisor, Mayer Brown, LLP; former U.S. Trade Representative

Henry A. Kissinger, Chairman, Kissinger Asso­ciates, Inc., New York; former U.S. Sec­re­tary of State;
former U.S. Assis­tant to the Pres­i­dent for National Secu­rity Affairs; Life­time Trustee, Tri­lat­eral
Com­mis­sion. (names and bio infor­ma­tion taken from the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion mem­ber­ship list)

As has been the case since the elec­tion of Jimmy Carter in 1976, the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion has dom­i­nated both the Repub­lican and Demo­crat par­ties and their sub­se­quent Admin­is­tra­tions. (See The Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion: Usurping Sov­er­eignty).


The IMF is not to be viewed as a friend to humanity. It is a global elite sumo wrestler that oper­ates a tag team with the World Bank and the Bank for Inter­na­tional Set­tle­ments, in order to pro­mote the poli­cies of globalization.

Inter­est­ingly, the IMF has issued two point­edly bearish reports in the last few days. The first, World Eco­nomic Out­look, was reported in The Tele­graph (UK), IMF sees ‘alarm­ingly high’ risk of fresh global slump:

“The Inter­na­tional Mon­e­tary Fund has slashed its growth fore­cast for large parts of the world economy and warned of a full-blown global slump if pol­i­cy­makers in Europe or the US mis­handle serious threats

The report states that “risks for reces­sion in the advanced economies are alarm­ingly high” and that “the inten­sity of the euro area crisis has not abated as assumed in pre­vious pro­jec­tions.”  

The second IMF state­ment of gloom (Global Finan­cial Sta­bility Report) was scooped by Bloomberg, IMF Sees Euro­pean Banks Facing $4.5 Tril­lion Sell-Off.

“The Inter­na­tional Mon­e­tary Fund said Euro­pean banks may need to sell as much as $4.5 tril­lion in assets through 2013 if policy makers fall short of pledges to stem the fiscal crisis, up 18 per­cent from its April esti­mate. Failure to imple­ment fiscal tight­ening or set up a single super­vi­sory system in the timing agreed could force 58 Euro­pean Union banks from Uni­Credit SpA (UCG) to Deutsche Bank AG (DBK) to shrink assets.

 Shrinking assets by a more proper name is defla­tion, but bankers under­stand that the public reacts very neg­a­tively toward the use of such a word. Infla­tion is a split part­ner­ship of debauchery where banks get rich while investors who play the debt game get rich also. With defla­tion, which cannot be reg­u­lated with Fed policy tools, the down­ward spiral takes back every­thing and more. All those who live on or in the debt tower, get crushed in the end. The Fed’s response to this is to replace bank liq­uidity lost to defla­tion, with freshly cre­ated money. This keeps the banks afloat while everyone else gets crushed… but the Fed can’t keep this game up indef­i­nitely, and I strongly sus­pect that they know this. As gov­ern­ments, munic­i­pal­i­ties, cor­po­ra­tions and indi­vid­uals con­tinue to de-leverage, the spiral is vir­tu­ally guar­an­teed to take the cen­tral banks and their bankster mem­bers, into the same crushing machine.

Another inter­esting view of the global eco­nomic slow­down is seen in the Export Trends for Top FedEx Mar­kets below.

Growth in all mar­kets has slowed since Jan­uary 2010 and four out of nine mar­kets are cur­rently expe­ri­encing out­right contraction.

— —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  —  — –  Note: Addi­tional con­tent on this page is avail­able only to Pre­mium sub­scribers of Find­ings & Fore­casts.
To sub­scribe, please click here.


VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

Premium Subscriber Access


Forgot Password

News & Analysis

  • Transhumanism, Technocracy, Total Surveillance Society

    Tran­shu­manism, Tech­noc­racy and Total Sur­veil­lance Society are show­cased in this 3 hour radio pre­sen­ta­tion with Patrick Wood, Carl Teichrib and Kaye Beach. It is a good primer and helpful to bring the lis­tener to a solid basic under­standing of what it … Con­tinue reading

  • Is Trayvon Sparking a Communist Revolution?

    Are you puz­zled by the over-reaction and civil unrest over the George Zim­merman trial? Con­sider this: Com­mu­nist front groups are throwing every­thing they have at fomenting and con­tin­uing the protests for their own agenda. Many of these groups have no … Con­tinue reading

  • Risk of Global Financial Freeze-up Rising

    If you thought it couldn’t happen again, get ready: A new global finan­cial freeze-up could be straight ahead. It’s too bad that eco­nomics, trade, finance, etc., are such boring topics to most people. Well, they actu­ally are boring because they … Con­tinue reading

People want to know…


What is Globalization?

It is the col­lective effect of pur­poseful and amoral manip­u­la­tion that seeks to cen­tralize eco­nomic, polit­ical, tech­no­log­ical and soci­etal forces in order to accrue max­imum profit and polit­ical power to global banks, global cor­po­ra­tions and the elit­ists who run them. It is rapidly moving toward an full and final imple­men­ta­tion of Technocracy.

VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

What is the Tri­lat­eral Commission?

Founded in 1973 by David Rock­e­feller and Zbig­niew Brzezinski, the Com­mis­sion set out to create a “New Inter­na­tional Eco­nomic Order”, namely, Tech­noc­racy. The orig­inal mem­ber­ship con­sisted of elit­ists (bankers, politi­cians, aca­d­e­mics, indus­tri­al­ists) from Japan, North America and Europe. Col­lec­tively, they have dom­i­nated and con­trolled trade and eco­nomic policy in their respec­tive coun­tries since at least 1974.

VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

What is Technocracy?

Tech­noc­racy is a move­ment started in the 1930’s by engi­neers, sci­en­tists and tech­ni­cians that pro­posed the replace­ment of cap­i­talism with an energy-based economy. Orig­i­nally envi­sioned for North America only, it is now being applied on a global basis. Authors Aldous Huxley and George Orwell believed that Tech­noc­racy would result in a Sci­en­tific Dic­ta­tor­ship, as reflected in their books, “Brave New World” and “1984″.

VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

What is Smart Grid?

Smart Grid is the national and global imple­men­ta­tion of dig­ital and Wi-fi enabled power meters that enable com­mu­ni­ca­tion between the appli­ances in your home or busi­ness, with the power provider. This pro­vides con­trol over your appli­ances and your usage of elec­tricity, gas and water.

VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

Who is M. King Hubbert?

Hub­bert was a geo-physicist who co-founded Tech­noc­racy, Inc. in 1932 and authored its Tech­noc­racy Study Course. In 1954, he became the cre­ator of the “Peak Oil Theory”, or “Hubbert’s Peak” which the­o­rized that the world was rapidly run­ning out of carbon-based fuels. Hub­bert is widely con­sid­ered as a “founding father” of the global warming and green movements.

VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

Who is R. Buck­min­ster Fuller?

A pio­neer in global eco­log­ical theory, Fuller (1895 – 1984) was the first to sug­gest the devel­op­ment of a Global Energy Grid that is today known as the Global Smart Grid. Fuller is widely con­sid­ered to be a “founding father” of the global green move­ment, including global warming, Sus­tain­able Devel­op­ment, Agenda 21, etc.

VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

Is the Venus Project like Technocracy?

The Venus Project, founded by Jacque Fresco, is a utopian, modern-day iter­a­tion of Tech­noc­racy. Like Tech­noc­racy, it scraps cap­i­talism and pro­poses that “a resource-based economy all of the world’s resources are held as the common her­itage of all of Earth’s people, thus even­tu­ally out­growing the need for the arti­fi­cial bound­aries that sep­a­rate people.” The appli­ca­tion of tech­nology is the answer to all of the world’s prob­lems, including war, famine and poverty.

VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)