In these contrived chaotic times the number of articles written purportedly looking to identify responsible parties for the ongoing attacks on all fronts of Western Civilization has in effect turned the subject into a game of ‘who struck John?’ which brings to mind all the times I’ve heard or read a news story of interest only to have it end just shy of recognizing the perp responsible. Heading into the third year of this declared war on the imagined pandemic, a goodly portion of the population still shows no sign of being capable of grasping the reality of ‘how we got here’; and yet they appear willing to continue their descent for as far as they’re pushed.
The easy and immediate answer to who is behind these attacks is Satan but that answer doesn’t carry enough meat on its bones to generate interest either these days.
Here’s some advice to anyone offering up the usual subjects as responsible parties. Save everybody some time by skipping over the politicians. Not that I’m making excuses for politicians or bureaucrats; in a perfect world they be getting rolled up in the righteous reset real quick but very few of them are organizers; they’re participants, not planners; there is a reason most of them leave government wealthier than when they entered, they’re good at following directions, they know that’s one skill they can handle and it pays very well.
Oh yeah, Soros presents another opportunity for how-to-chase-your-tail and drag the public along . Read this https://www.richardpoe.com/2021/06/18/how-the-british-invented-george-soros/ and look up the meaning of Soros.
Same thing with China. While their leadership’s POV is differently sophisticated than U.S. politicians it’s not likely they have the capability to complete every stage of a knock down brawl even if it’s not dragged out.
That China, recently hauled from its lair spitting biological fire and UNseemly boasts, is about to invade the world and soon thereafter officially claim control over humanity does not seem likely; at least not by riding their war wagon that distance anytime soon and not by themselves; yet there is no doubt the weekly reports MSM churns out about China the Giant is designed to convince US our day is done and like Hillary promised US a while back, they’re going to take some/most of our stuff (not Hillary’s & friends) and give it to those in need so the world is equally poor and this http://un-documents.net/our-common-future.pdf is the vehicle that’s going to make it happen and fear is going to be the fuel providing the power because fear is the energy capable of turning lies into reality.
So who is behind the curtain working the levers? I’m sure you know and I’m just as sure few want to understand.
The path to a potential 21st century American tyranny emerged from a tangle of 19th Century eastern European trails originating from defeated revolutionary attempts to end the remaining world’s monarchs reign, starting in Russia and heading west.
Meanwhile, back in the US, a branched passage in one man’s life was providing a series of opportunities for him that unfolded into realities with the help of his trusted advisors. Together they extended his family’s interests from industrial domination to civic uniformity to world governance and engineering humanity. Most people appreciated his success because we believed the benefit extended throughout civilization and was worth the price.
Alas, those benefits also provided a means to facilitate our acknowledged benefactor’s dark side.
A few examples:
Benefit: Organized Education Format
The Price: Opened the door to an acceptance of defense spending and the influence of European socialist revolution loser refugees and the emerging financial elite.
https://www.colonialpublishingco.com/app/download/14933160/Dodd+Report+web.pdf
Benefit: Warmth in the winter
The Price: http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5735/
…Mr. Walsh read an article by Professor John J. Stevenson of Columbia University in the Popular Science Monthly, which Mr. Rockefeller in a letter to Mr. Lee had pronounced the best article he had ever seen on the labor question. The article declared that “one E. H. Harriman was of more lasting service to a nation than a million unskilled laborers;” that “unskilled labor is merely animated machinery,” and that “owners of industrial concerns assumed all risks.” Members of trade unions were referred to as “peons,” and it was said that the principles of the unions were “no better than those of the India thugs, who practiced robbery and murder.”
Mr. Walsh wanted to know if Mr. Rockefeller thought these two statements were true. The witness declined to give his opinion of the statements separately, but said that the article as a whole was sound and of great value…
Benefit: Domestic Tranquility
The Current Price:
Dear Chairmen Roberts and Hoekstra, Vice Chairman Rockefeller, and Ranking Member Harman:
As you know, in response to unauthorized disclosures in the media, the President has described certain activities of the National Security Agency (“NSA”) that he has authorized since shortly after September 11, 2001. As described by the President, the NSA intercepts certain international communications into and out of the United States of people linked to al Qaeda or an affiliated terrorist organization…
Of course, a few random examples shouldn’t convince a confirmed cynic burdened with partially developed humanist beliefs, a solid starting point is needed.
Let’s start by looking at the character of the people who are yanking our chains.
https://sangam.org/taraki/articles/2005/11-25_The_Addiction_Trade_Wars.php?uid=1326
https://www.alternet.org/2015/06/5-elite-families-fortunes-opium-trade/
From http://www3.nccu.edu.tw/~lorenzo/Ninkovich%20Rockefeller%20Foundation.pdf
…Influential figures such as the lawyer Raymond B. Fosdick, soon to become the foundation president, believed that scientific analysis and tested fact should be made available for social purposes, to the point that he could speak almost mystically of “the possibilities of ultimate social intelligence.” Reflecting that new instrumentalist orientation, a resolution adopted by the trustees early in 1929 stipulated that henceforth “the possibilities of social experimentation were to be kept constantly in mind.”
A few years later a foundation officer stated more bluntly that policy would aim at “the advance of knowledge, with the idea of social control as a general guiding line.”20 From that perspective, the problem with the PUMC was its ivory tower preoccupation with pure research, not its emphasis on science and knowledge. The reorientation took place in a decade when the fledgling social sciences appeared to be on the verge of a takeoff in their development, which the Rockefeller philanthropies had done much to promote. The foundation perceived nothing sinister or undemocratic in the renewed faith in the possibilities of scientific social intelligence. As Edmund E. Day put it, “If we cannot get anywhere with the scientific attitude in the social field, if we cannot effect anything like substantial control on the basis of scientific study of social phenomena, then the prospect of civilization assumes different color.” It seemed as much a matter of historical necessity as of ideology to pursue the new branch of knowledge to its widely ramifying frontiers.21 Granting the beneficial consequences of the change of direction, some trustees, nevertheless, blanched at its practical implications. “We used to be so careful about entering politics,” moaned Frederick Strauss, thereby illuminating one reason behind the foundation’s earlier fixation with medicine; the new approach seemed to him to be “loaded with dynamite.” His objections were overridden, however, by the arguments of Fosdick, who reassured Strauss that the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, another family philanthropy, had long been engaged in such funding and that, moreover, foundation interests were adequately protected by a policy of indirect funding. “If there is any taint about this work,” he concluded-a point that he was not prepared to concede in any case-“the taint is once removed.” x22
The taint is once removed. In a few years after that was said they won’t be concerned at all how close they are seen to the taint.
More later.