seeking right-wing white supremists.
2Peter 2:2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
2Peter 2:3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.
The ability to deal with people is as purchasable a commodity as sugar or coffee and I will pay more for that ability than for any other under the sun. – John D. Rockefeller
In keeping with the developing theme over recent weeks of recognizing psychological warfare being waged within the full scale of life I thought another look at the 9-11-2001 attack would be worthwhile.
What better point of engagement than the fixed-for-all-time anniversary of deception with the celebrated article from Esquire magazine published on Sep 9, 2016, fifteen years after the assault?
From https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a48031/the-falling-man-tom-junod/
Although he has not chosen his fate, he appears to have, in his last instants of life, embraced it
He does not appear intimidated by gravity’s divine suction or by what awaits him
The man in the picture… is in accord with the lines of the buildings behind him
…he is the essential element in the creation of a new flag, a banner composed entirely of steel bars shining in the sun
Some people… see stoicism, willpower, a portrait of resignation; others see something else—something discordant and therefore terrible: freedom.
That is quite a picture of a man headed to his certain, unexpected end; an end not likely ever envisioned; an end that placed him at the opening of an epic world restructuring play with the largest audience in history as witnesses, watching the anonymous performer deliver an unspoken message recognized only by the pitiful familiars participating in the cabalistic peculation of the Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness warranty as stated in our Declaration of Independence and enacted into law upon the acceptance and passage of the Constitution.
Though celebration of the freedom fought for and gained, then documented as God’s blessing on all People of like Spirit, the idea of being sovereign was never embraced by everyone. Some people, as reported above, find freedom is something discordant and therefore terrible.
Certainly outnumbered at our Nation’s birth, even up to the eve of the Civil War our enemies, brought and born, showed very little of themselves until after the smoke of the battlefield cleared. Then they were over the wall and following the Rothschild plan of enslavement; Settling into the bureaucratic power positions made available by follow up depressions small and great, they set upon the task of chaining the American spirit.
With the democrat FDR’s Brains Trust assistance, America was introduced to life in the Swamp.
From the Armstrong economics website information:
The core of the first Roosevelt brains trust consisted of a group of Columbia law professors Adolf Berle (1895-1971), Raymond Moley (1886-1975), and Rexford Tugwell (1891-1979). Note that they were lawyers, not market investors, technicians, or economists. They knew how to get around the Constitution, not straighten out the economy. Still, these were the men who played a strategic role in shaping the legal policies of the First New Deal in 1933 – not the economics. They also never actually met together as a group
A brief review of the Brain Trust ‘core’ reveals a diverse bearing of doctrines:
Before continuing with how the sharpening of the tools of Incremental Change is accomplished, the following link leads to an account of a feudal law in the making. https://enslavementdeception.blogspot.com/2013/06/uncovering-temple-bar-of-1666.html
You may ask yourself, is the information there valid? You may ask yourself, what is valid?
Most democrats believe the Obama administration was valid. The question is are politicians capable of such treachery as reportedly took place in 1666? We see accounts of political perfidy every day involving or instigated by democrats with no real resistance from Republicans. However, the language argument in the enslavement deception link does not hold up well against what is considered historical reference from sites like http://sites.fas.harvard.edu/~chaucer/language.htm
or https://freepages.rootsweb.com/~fordingtondorset/genealogy/Files/Glossary.html
But why would the opposing party not oppose? Part of the answer is outlined at https://www.independent.org/pdf/tir/tir_01_4_higgs.pdf
…To narrow the concept of business confidence, I adopt the interpretation that businesspeople may be more or less “uncertain about the regime,” by
which I mean, distressed that investors’ private property rights in their capital and the income it yields will be attenuated further by government action.
Such attenuations can arise from many sources, ranging from simple tax-rate increases to the imposition of new kinds of taxes to outright confiscation of
private property. Many intermediate threats can arise from various sorts of regulation, for instance, of securities markets, labor markets, and product
markets. In any event, the security of private property rights rests not so much on the letter of the law as on the character of the government that enforces,
or threatens, presumptive rights. “What does provide some degree of protection,” notes Andrzej Rapaczynski (1996),
is the political system, together with the economic pressure groups that ensure that the state does not go “too far” in interfering with
the owner’s control over assets. This politically determined thin line may be understood as the real definition of property rights
conferred by the state, as distinct from the somewhat fictitious legal notion of property rights. How broadly property rights are
defined in this real sense and how effective states’ (largely nonlegal) commitment is to their security is a more serious problem
than the issue of legal protections against the more traditional form of takings. (93)
…Despite the encroachments of taxation, regulation, and other government action at all levels that had been occurring for half a century or more (Hughes
1991, 92–135; Higgs 1987, 77–167; Keller 1990), as late as 1932 businesspeople in general and investors in particular remained—certainly in
retrospect—relatively free of major threats to the prevailing regime of private property rights
Then, during the next two presidential terms, the Roosevelt administration proposed and Congress enacted an unparalleled outpouring of laws that
significantly attenuated private property rights (Leuchtenburg 1963; Badger 1989). State legislatures followed suit with their “little New Deals”
(Leuchtenburg 1963, 198–88; Badger 1989, 283–84) and relentless tax increases (Brownlee 1996, 83, 85). Table 1 lists only some of the more important
federal enactments diminishing or threatening private property rights. As financial economist Benjamin Anderson ([1949] 1979), an astute contemporary
observer, remarked, “The impact of these multitudinous measures—industrial, agricultural, financial, monetary, and other—upon a bewildered industrial
and financial community was extraordinarily heavy” (357).
Anderson was hardly the only contemporary economist convinced that the New Deal measures caused the Great Duration. Schumpeter, one of the world’s
leading authorities on business cycles, wrote in the first edition of his Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, published in 1942,
The subnormal recovery to 1935, the subnormal prosperity to 1937 and the slump after that are easily accounted for by the
difficulties incident to the adaptation to a new fiscal policy, new labor legislation and a general change in the attitude of government
to private enterprise all of which can…be distinguished from the working of the productive apparatus as such.… [S]o extensive
and rapid a change of the social scene naturally affects productive performance for a time, and so much the most ardent New Dealer
must and also can admit. I for one do not see how it would otherwise be possible to account for the fact that this country which
had the best chance of recovering quickly was precisely the one to experience the most unsatisfactory recovery. ([1942] 1962, 64–
65; emphasis in original)
Table 1. Selected Acts of Congress Substantially Attenuating or Threatening Private Property Rights, 1933–1940
1933
Agricultural Adjustment Act Soil Conservation & Domestic
National Industrial Recovery Act Allotment Act
Emergency Banking Relief Act
Federal Anti-Price Discrimination Banking Act of 1933
Federal Securities Act
Tennessee Valley Authority Act
Gold Repeal Joint Resolution
Farm Credit Act Bituminous Coal Act
Emergency Railroad Transport Act
Emergency Farm Mortgage Act
Home Owners Loan Corporation Act
1934
Securities Exchange Act
Gold Reserve Act Fair
Communications Act
Railway Labor Act
1935
Bituminous Coal Stabilization Act
Connally (“hot oil”) Act
Revenue Act of 1935
National Labor Relations Act
Social Security Act
Public Utilities Holding Company Act
Banking Act of 1935
Emergency Relief Appropriations Act
Farm Mortgage Moratorium Act
1936
Soil Conservation & Domestic Allotment Act
Federal Anti-Price Anti-Discrimination Act
Revenue Act of 1936
1937
Bituminous Coal Act
Revenue Act of 1937
National Housing Act of 1937
Enabling (Miller-Tydings) Act
1938
Agricultural Adjustment Act
Fair Labor Standards Act
Civil Aeronautics Act
Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act
1939
Administrative Reorganization Act
1940
Investment Company Act
Revenue Act of 1940
Second Revenue Act of 1940
Criminal democrat operatives, manipulating the fear their actions helped create, successfully planted the collectivist dictatorship worry seed, clearing the democrats path for the ’33 reset to take place. While evidence shows the enemy of U.S. styled capitalism had been groomed and groomed on many levels, an organized effort to re-determine the course of our Nation through regulation was established in what has come to be known as the Swamp.
As a prelude to what the elite see as the final action to destroy the freedom God has blessed US with and the establishment of their complete control over all humanity they broadcasted their calling card around the world September 12, 2001. For those with eyes to see, who recognized the unspoken message the day before, this image made it clear; they wanted no mistake, no misinterpretation, no misunderstanding. This image is their seal of ownership
and the connection to this picture cannot be denied.
Amongst it’s many occulted interpretations you’ll find this: It is time to rest, the results of your action will become clear to you.
I believe that the time for recognizing the results of the 9/11 attack has come; the introduction of the new world order. This announcement of the Scamdemic arrival… Coronavirus expert: ‘War is an appropriate analogy’ has set the method of delivery in place, the long awaited by oligarchs everywhere, the replacement of our Constitutional modeled Law, UN enforced health law.
Oddly enough, in selling the ’33 reset, one Hugh Johnson, an advisor to the Brains Trust, used the same war analogy. And like the controlled ’33 reset, Covid-19 is a lie.
from https://spartacus-educational.com/USARjohnson.htm
Johnson therefore argued any successful scheme (my emphasis) would need to inject an element of compulsion. He told Frances Perkins, Roosevelt’s Secretary of Labor: “This is just like a war. We’re in a war. We’re in a war against depression and poverty and we’ve got to fight this war. We’ve got to come out of this war. You’ve got to do here what you do in a war. You’ve got to give authority and you’ve got to apply regulations and enforce them on everybody, no matter who they are or what they do…. The individual who has the power to apply and enforce these regulations is the President. There is nothing that the President can’t do if he wishes to! The President’s powers are unlimited. The President can do anything.”
The political emphasis on National Health Care (Clinton/Obama), this rush to vaccine (Trump), the impending mask mandate, public distancing, all these psychological manipulations are intended to implement control through social applications that will eventually usurp our Constitutional defined protections in one fell swoop.
The complete answer to the question asked earlier, ‘why would the opposing party not oppose?’ is found on Page 25 at https://ia802605.us.archive.org/9/items/nationalsecurit00housgoog/nationalsecurit00housgoog.pdf. You are encouraged to read the entire account.
https://web.archive.org/web/20200922205339/https://modernhistoryproject.org/mhp?Article=NoneDare Link to the first groomed ‘enemy of U.S. styled capitalism’ in case busy server message is encountered.
The lies change but our rate of descent is the same as it ever was