Thursday 11 October 2012

How To Identify The True Enemies Of Freedom

Brandon Smith


The greatest and most often exploited weakness of any revolution for freedom is the inability of the downtrodden populace to identify the true enemy.  History is littered with the shattered remnants of rebellions that were built upon legitimate causes but suffered because of misdirection and faulty assumptions.  For centuries, the real culprits of tyranny have found ways to redirect the ire of those they harmed in their quest for power, usually by offering a tempting scapegoat that appeals to the public’s darker impulses; their biases, their prejudices, their fears, etc.  Usually, this ends in an even more pervasive totalitarian environment as the insurgents and the scapegoats decimate each other while the elites sit back and enjoy the show. 

Even the most successful battles against despotism, like the American Revolution, often only had a distant sense of who they were really fighting against.  This is what makes the 21st Century extraordinarily unique in the annals of civilization.  For the first time in human record, the common man has all the information necessary to examine and define the real culprits behind his subjugation.  The truth is at our fingertips, all we have to do is reach out and take it…

Because of the decentralized nature of information flowing through the alternative web media, our ability to generate opposition to organized elitism has never been greater.  However, this also means the stakes have never been higher.  The establishment understands well that their criminality is clearly visible, and eventually, they will be personally subject to the rage of the people.  The next fight could very well be the last for them.

Their playbook may be old, but the tactics they use can always be applied on a grander and more terrible scale.  Not only will they pursue whatever menacing distractions necessary to occupy the attentions of the public, they will also attempt to pose as guiding lights in the darkness they themselves created.  They will hide behind broad generalized target groups; fabricated boogie men, branded and prepackaged like franchise coffee shops on every street corner of America’s collective psyche.  Terrorists, traitors, saboteurs, whatever ethnic group happens to be convenient at the moment, whoever is easiest to present as a target for our projected malice; false enemies will be rolled out like a nightmare buffet.

If our nation and the rest of the world have any chance of achieving peace and liberty, it will be because those who choose to dissent against the totalitarian tide focus on the authentic virus invading and assimilating our culture.  Some call them “elitists”, “collectivists”, “centralists”, etc.  They sometimes even refer to themselves as such, but the most prominent and useful label today is that of “globalist”.   That said, we must ask what it is that defines these people?  What makes them who they are?  The following is a list of behaviors and characteristics that have been common to oligarchs through most of history.  Regardless of how a political or financial leader presents himself through rhetoric, if he displays these properties in action, he is more likely than not an opponent of individual freedom and an adversary to the principles of honor and conscience that all good men strive for.

1)  They Seek Centralization Of Power 

Does your favorite political candidate, corporate “guru”, or media shill have a history of promoting globalization, economic harmonization, socialization, etc., sacrificing the protections of sovereignty in the name of some “greater good” that never seems to come?  Does every action they take only appear to benefit a select elite?  Do they regimentally remove options and choices from the system?  Do all of their solutions ultimately lead to the same outcome?  Do all the roads they build converge towards less liberty for the masses and more control for government?  Is their answer for every crisis to remove checks and balances and borders?  Do they constantly claim that sovereign and Constitutional protections get in the way of “progress”?  Do they use phrases like “the greater good” or “sustainable development” on a regular basis?  Add them to your list of potential mass murderers, and unfriend them on your social media accounts.  They do not have your best interests at heart…

2)  They Enforce Policies Despite Widespread Disapproval 

In any healthy Republic, the political class is supposed to be the servant of the people.  Their employment is supposed to be predicated on their willingness to hear and understand the wishes of their constituency.  If a bill or policy arises that threatens the civil liberties or financial safety of the people, and they call for a representative to oppose it, that is exactly what he is supposed to do.  If he does otherwise, and supports a damaging or unconstitutional bill while fully aware of massive voter resistance, it means he is not in fear for his job, which means his job has not necessarily been secured by our votes, which means he is likely working for somebody else; somebody who will benefit from the bill in question.

Two perfect examples would be the passage of the banker bailout bills, and the indefinite detention provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act.  Both were vehemently opposed by a majority of Americans on both sides of the so called political “aisle”, and yet, they were given a majority support by our representatives in government.  This reveals an ulterior motivation within our government that is, to put it bluntly, treasonous.  If they voted for a liberty killing bill, then cross them off your roster of principled leaders and add them to your list of enemies…

3)  They Find Ways To Rationalize Any Behavior 


Sociopaths and psychopaths operate on their own personal form of twisted rationalism.  The magic of pure cold logic untempered by conscience or intuitive wisdom is that truth can become whatever we want it to become as long as our inner voice remains repressed.  For them, any crime can be vindicated as long as a perceived benefit can somehow be derived.  For a globalist oligarch, however, psychopathy goes far beyond mechanical moral relativism.  They are well aware that their actions are an affront to human conscience, and, they couldn’t care less.  Instead, they use rationalism as a way to manipulate the public into accepting their maniacal behavior so that they can continue without interference.

Globalists are so convinced of their own intellectual superiority that they feel no desire for redemption, or to compartmentalize their own evil.  They embrace that evil fully as if it were a form of strength.  One weakness of this philosophy is that it comes with a strange obsession; a desperate drive to inject moral relativism into all people around the globalist.  This exposes an inherent reliance on surrounding environment, and dependency on one’s environment to reinforce a belief system is a significant psychological weakness.

The great power that truth holds over the empire of lies is that the truth is not contingent on mass perception; it exists regardless of how many people believe in it.  It is autonomous.  The truth has its own soul, and arises from the ashes again and again without the benefit of mass recognition.  Lies and perverted rationalizations require an astounding amount of energy and armies of the ignorant in order to exist.  A foundation of lies is inferior, and thus, anyone who depends upon the existence of that foundation is also, by association, inferior.  Globalists are, therefore, a sub-species, an unnecessary and outdated remnant of social evolution that should be allowed to finally fade out and die away.             

4)  They Promote Economic Dependency

Anyone who consistently tells you that you need them in order to survive has something to gain by your dependency.  A good person or government seeks to make people INDEPENDENT and self reliant, so that they can survive on their own merits and participate in the construction of their own destinies.  A manipulative person or government needs people to believe that without the services the despot provides all will come to ruin.  Totalitarian control cannot exist unless WE hand that control to them.  If the man before you claims that there is no other way to live except through him or his system, no matter how charmingly he phrases it, add him to your list as a danger to your freedom.

5)  They Belong To A Think Tank

I am usually apprehensive about using a broad brush to paint any single group or subset as fully criminal and beyond repair.  This kind of methodology is used daily by globalists to create rifts in societies and lure people into destroying each other.  However, I have tried to the utmost of my ability to find an influential think tank with ties to the government in our modern era that does not display the despicable behaviors listed so far, and for the life of me, I can’t find a single one.  From the the CFR, to the Rand Corporation, to the Washington Institute For Near East Policy, you will find many of the same exact writhing globalist tapeworms and most certainly the same exact philosophies of moral relativism on display.  If they belong to a mainstream think tank, they are not a friend to liberty.  

6)  They Cast No Reflection In The Mirror


Or perhaps I’m thinking of a different kind of monster…

7)  They Promote Military Force As The Primary Means To Achieve Their Ideological Objectives

Do they confront the dynamic of every social and diplomatic problem with the use of military force and the death of those who disagree with them?  Does every conflict between them and another culture end with the destruction of thousands if not millions?  Do they flaunt a distinct kind of “my way or the highway to hell” kind of attitude?  Do they seem to crave war to the point that they are willing to manufacture excuses to fire the first missile?  If they are a warmonger, then they are your enemy, even when they happen to be trying to kill people you don’t necessarily like at the moment.

8)  They Offer Promises They Never Intend To Keep

If a politician promises to end an illegal war and pull American troops from the battlefield if elected to office, and then doesn’t, or, pretends to pull troops out while maintaining permanent bases and shifting private Blackwater-style contractors into the field to take their place, then he is a liar.  It’s that simple.  If a central banker promises fiat printing and massive stimulus programs will unfreeze credit markets and generate an employment recovery within a couple of years, and the fiscal situation only becomes worse afterwards, then he is a liar.  It’s that simple.

If a person in a position of power continuously makes promises that are impossible to fulfill, or that he obviously knows cannot be fulfilled, then he is buying time.  But buying time for what?  Well, usually, he is buying time so that he can consolidate more power, and he is hoping the public will be duped into giving that power to him in exchange for false hopes and empty dreams.  Any entity, corporate or governmental, that is unable to attain the public’s consent without conning them, is an enemy to the welfare of the public, and should be removed like a throbbing tick.

9) You Wouldn’t Leave Your Children Alone With Them

Ask yourself, could you leave your children in a room with this person or group and feel safe about it?  If the answer is an honest “No”, then how could you leave your country and your children’s future in their hands instead…?   

In the coming years, the American people will face numerous threats; some real, some imagined in the sterile conference rooms of a black-hearted think tanks.  But, the most terrifying threat to our cultural roots of free thought, expression, and prosperity is wielded by a very particular and exclusive group of thin-blooded ego-maniacs.  Identifying them is not difficult.  Hiding their true nature is nearly impossible for a person or institution whose narcissism is so pronounced.  They adore their own insanity and wish to share it with the world.  If they fit the profile listed above, it is a guarantee that they will wreak havoc upon your life, directly or indirectly, someday.  Know who they are, so that when that time comes you know who to blame, and who to bring to justice.

The Slow but Sure Death of the US Dollar

bernanke_dollar

On September 13th the Chairman of the US Federal Reserve, Ben Bernanke announced the latest round of QE (Quantitative Easing) but with a dangerous twist. Unlike previous rounds in 2009 and 2010 although large in scale included limits, this time there are no limits and Bernanke effectively indicated that the government will do whatever it takes to achieve various targets, notably employment growth. It is very doubtful that this new policy will work, the previous rounds have summarily failed to stimulate employment and the economy continues its lethargic path. But of far greater note is the open ended nature of the current commitment, and its disastrous consequences on the US dollar and in fact fiat currencies globally.
QE
Quantitative easing is a convoluted way of describing money printing, and printing with nothing to back it up. As with all economies, companies or indeed families, it is not unusual for budgets to not balance, for short term deficits to arise, for loans to be required. Yet the US economy is in chronic deficit, with an enormous $1.5 Trillion dollars yearly shortfall within its $15 Trillion economy. For Obama’s last budget he expected to overspend their tax revenues of $2.5 Trillion by $1.33 Trillion (53%). Like the recalcitrant debtor which never balances the books the US is taking advantage of several factors in its favour.
Of paramount importance to the US is the status of the US dollar as the defacto world currency, a position it has held for most of the past century since Bretton Woods in 1944, with a fixed conversion rate of $35 to an ounce of gold, from which the rest of the world then set fixed rates against the dollar, the US had the strongest economy and the most gold. The US again set the pace when unilaterally Nixon took the US and the world, by default, off the Bretton Woods form of gold standard and launched our current reality of free floating exchange rates, with no world currency backed by any tangible assets. The results have been predictable with currencies unilaterally devaluing against gold rapidly. Since 1971 the US dollar has devalued by 98% from $35 per ounce to $1780 per ounce. The latest ruse of Bernanke’s with open-ended QE shows all likelihood to take the dollar to complete nothingness. However, the US is leading the other main economies of the world down the same path. Faced with a global recession a competitive devaluation of your currency versus your export competitors policy is rampant, its a “beggar thy neighbor” stance where your exports will be cheaper – but is in effect an impossible policy – over the longer term no one can win, and the British, Japanese, Brazil and now likely Europe and even China are following fast in the QE train. If all are devaluing their currencies it becomes difficult to gain an advantage, but the costs to the economies are enormous.
The main cost is of course via inflation whether overt or hidden, printing of substantial amounts of new money without growth in goods and services (the economy) means inflation. That it is not so obvious yet is due to the governments covertly changing their measurement of inflation in ways that underplay its true reality (since the time of Clinton the calculation of the consumer price inflation basket of goods has changed in such a way that the inflation rate has effectively halved) and due to the banking industry salting away much of the newly created money to strengthen their heavily weakened balance sheets.
Ben Bernanke’s recent announcement is nothing but a continuation of the policies to prop up a bankrupt banking system. Since 2007 he has:
  • Cut interest rates from 5.25% to .25%
  • Taken on $30 Billion in Bear Stearns junk mortgages prior to its sale to JPMorgan
  • Provided virtually open-ended lending facilities to US and related global banks
  • Provide up to $400 Billion for the Fannie Mae Freddie Mac bailout
  • Taken over the bankrupt AIG Insurance group for $85 Billion, then provided a further $45Billion
  • Provided $700 Billion for the euphemistically named “Troubled Assets Relief Programme” (TARP) for the Banks – effectively buying Bank junk assets to bail out the banks from imminent collapse.
  • Provide $540 Billion in back up loans to money market funds
  • Provided $280 Billion to back up Citigroup (Oct 08)
  • Provided $140 Billion to back up Bank of America (Jan 09)
  • QE1 of $1.25 Trillion of mortgage debts and government treasuries (Mar 09)
  • Further QE of $200 Billion in Aug 10)
  • QE2 of $600 Billion in Treasuries in Nov 10
  • Operation Twist (Nov 11)
  • And now QE3 of $40 Billion of mortgage backed securities every month from now on (Sept 12).
There is a consistent theme to the above spending, apart from there being no real money surplus to meet the payments! They are predominantly geared around the banking/financial collapse. Rather than feed money to those that are losing their homes (home price/jobs collapse) Bernanke has channeled the money to those holding the mortgages and losing derivatives gambling stubs (the bankers). With the bankers jealously holding onto the money to rebuild their balance sheets. To add insult to injury the provision of more money to banks in buying Mortgage backed securities (the latest QE) will enable the Federal Reserve to take over the multitude of mortgages which were packaged together into instruments like Collateralised Debt Obligations – many of which have severe ownership issues. The Fed will be in a strong position to foreclose on those homes where the banks dithered and struggled under a barrage of legal challenge. With partial ownership and influence (including over Board membership) of the Federal Reserve exercised by the major US banks, it is little surprise that the policies of this body overwhelmingly meets the interests, bailout and liquidity needs of those least deserving from the banking sector.
Organised theft
Bernanke caveated the latest “potentially unlimited” QE with the aim of getting the stubbornly poor employment figures of the US back on track. None of the earlier versions of QE have helped employment in the US or elsewhere, we are in the midst of a deep recession and throwing money at banks to keep them afloat is not helping employment other than Bank executives which of all people should be the first into the dole cue.
In this US election year Obama is sweating over the official unemployment rate which is stubbornly over 8%, and has remained above 8% throughout his administration, yet like the inflation “figures” the administration is adept at presenting as good a picture as possible. The 8% figure is only possible by taking more people from the labour participation rate in the US which is now at an anaemic 63.5% (less than two thirds of the population are even included as working or looking for work – and not all of the 36.5% are retired or under-age). Also little comment is made of the fact that many of the jobs that have come into the economy in recent years are part time. Western economies are severely compromised, governments are facing growing deficits and no growth. Unemployment is rising. Unofficial, yet credible independent employment statistics (shadowstats.com) show US unemployment at 22.8% with no signs of recovery on the horizon.
A Golden future?
Perhaps the biggest scandal of QE is that it is a direct theft of wealth from the masses. The constant devaluation of currencies is nothing but a hidden and oppressive tax on a massive scale. Anyone with monetary and related assets finds their purchasing power constantly eroded and wages do not keep pace with the real inflation created by money printing. The 1% are well protected, know the game, and act accordingly – keeping their wealth in commodities and real assets like land in these inflationary times. The poorest in society suffer from the lack of jobs and opportunity and without assets of note generally depend on societal welfare programmes (46.5 million Americans depend on food stamps for survival). The rest – the vast majority in society – whether in work or looking over their shoulders as companies close and austerity programmes bite, are having their wealth stolen. The high and rising costs of energy and food are strong indicators of the inflation working into the system, and it will only get worse.
The only protection that populations have in the face of this theft is via real money – gold and silver – which has a history of acting as a true store of value over millennia. As assets which cannot be produced at the flick of a central bankers computer print button, and which have intrinsic value (jewellery, industrial use, etc) they are really the only suitable medium of exchange the people deserve. The central bank dominated capitalist world will fight against gold and silver and their right to inflate tooth and nail. It is really left to the Islamic world under the Caliphate system which obliges gold and silver as currency, to lead the way back. Of course the Bernanke’s of this world are walking a tight rope between printing and a deflationary depression. The academic inside of Bernanke (he produced his doctoral thesis on the 1930’s depression) is convinced he can control the printing presses he administers without falling into a hyperinflationary spiral which will destroy not only the US dollar but most western economies, plunging the world into a protectionist and depressionary mess. Even if they can avoid hyperinflation, the high levels of inflation which his “unlimited” QE will cause, is slowly but surely killing the US and defacto world fiat currency.
Ironically the latest phase of the currency wars has seen the US attack the Iranian Rial via sanctions and market operations as part of its covert war to stop Iran’s nuclear march (the Rial has lost 80% of its value this year). The unintended consequence of which is the use of gold again in international transactions in the settlement of oil deals between Iran and China. The BRIC (Brazil, Russia, China and India) countries are already settling increasingly with their own currencies rather than the US dollar, and for very good reasons.
Jamal Harwood

America is the World’s Largest Sponsor of Terrorism


American Officials Admit that the U.S. Is a Huge Sponsor of Terrorism

The director of the National Security Agency under Ronald Reagan – Lt. General William Odom - noted:
Because the United States itself has a long record of supporting terrorists and using terrorist tactics, the slogans of today’s war on terrorism merely makes the United States look hypocritical to the rest of the world.
 

Odom also said:
By any measure the US has long used terrorism. In ‘78-79 the Senate was trying to pass a law against international terrorism – in every version they produced, the lawyers said the US would be in violation.

 (audio here).
The Washington Post reported in 2010:

The United States has long been an exporter of terrorism, according to a secret CIA analysis released Wednesday by the Web site WikiLeaks.
The head and special agent in charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles office said that most terror attacks are committed by our CIA and FBI.
Wikipedia notes:
Chomsky and Herman observed that terror was concentrated in the U.S. sphere of influence in the Third World, and documented terror carried out by U.S. client states in Latin America. They observed that of ten Latin American countries that had death squads, all were U.S. client states.
***
They concluded that the global rise in state terror was a result of U.S. foreign policy.
***
In 1991, a book edited by Alexander L. George [the Graham H. Stuart Professor of Political Science Emeritus at Stanford University] also argued that other Western powers sponsored terror in Third World countries. It concluded that the U.S. and its allies were the main supporters of terrorism throughout the world.
Some in the American military have intentionally tried  to “out-terrorize the terrorists”.
As Truthout notes:
Both [specialists Ethan McCord and Josh Stieber] say they saw their mission as a plan to “out-terrorize the terrorists,” in order to make the general populace more afraid of the Americans than they were of insurgent groups.
In the interview with [Scott] Horton, Horton pressed Stieber:
“… a fellow veteran of yours from the same battalion has said that you guys had a standard operating procedure, SOP, that said – and I guess this is a reaction to some EFP attacks on y’all’s Humvees and stuff that killed some guys – that from now on if a roadside bomb goes off, IED goes off, everyone who survives the attack get out and fire in all directions at anybody who happens to be nearby … that this was actually an order from above. Is that correct? Can you, you know, verify that?
Stieber answered:
“Yeah, it was an order that came from Kauzlarich himself, and it had the philosophy that, you know, as Finkel does describe in the book, that we were under pretty constant threat, and what he leaves out is the response to that threat. But the philosophy was that if each time one of these roadside bombs went off where you don’t know who set it … the way we were told to respond was to open fire on anyone in the area, with the philosophy that that would intimidate them, to be proactive in stopping people from making these bombs …”
Terrorism is defined as:
The use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
So McCord and Stieber are correct: this constitutes terrorism by American forces in Iraq.
The U.S. has been supporting Al Qaeda and other terrorists in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Libya, Syria and Iran.
(The U.S. has also directly inserted itself into a sectarian war between the two main Islamic sects, backing the Sunnis and attacking the Shiites. See thisthis and this.  Because Saudi Arabia is the seat of the most radical sect of Islam – Wahhabism- the U.S. unquestioning support of the Saudis  is indirectly supporting terrorism.)
Torture – which the U.S. has liberally used  during the last 10 years – has long been recognized as a form of terrorism.
Wikipedia notes:
Worldwide, 74% of countries that used torture on an administrative basis were U.S. client states, receiving military and other support to retain power.
Of course, some would say that the American policy of assassination – especially using drone strikes on people whose identity isn’t even known – is a form of terrorism. And see this and this.

Some Specific Examples …

The CIA admits that it hired Iranians in the 1950′s to pose as Communists and stage bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its democratically-elected prime minister.
As one participant in this formerly-secret program stated: “You had to attack civilians, people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, to turn to the state to ask for greater security” (and see this)(Italy and other European countries subject to the terror campaign had joined NATO before the bombings occurred).
As admitted by the U.S. government, recently declassified documents show that in the 1960′s, the American Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a plan to blow up AMERICAN airplanes (using an elaborate plan involving the switching of airplanes), and also to commit terrorist acts on American soil, and then to blame it on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion of Cuba. See the following ABC news reportthe official documents; and watch this interview with the former Washington Investigative Producer for ABC’s World News Tonight with Peter Jennings.
Nine months earlier, a false flag attack was discussed in order to justify an invasion of the Dominican Republic. Specifically, according to official State Department records, Under Secretary of State Chester Bowles wrote on June 3, 1961:
The Vice President [Lyndon Johnson], [Attorney General] Bob Kennedy, Secretary [of Defense Robert] McNamara, Dick Goodwin [who was Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs], [head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff] General Lemnitzer, Wyn Coerr, and Ted Achilles were here. Bob McNamara and Lemnitzer stated that under the terms of the contingency paper, they were required to be prepared to move into the island on short order if required to do so, and this, in their opinion, called for substantially more troops that we had in the area. After some discussion we considered two more aircraft carriers, some destroyers, and 12,000 marines should be moved into a position some one hundred miles off the Dominican Republic shore…
The tone of the meeting was deeply disturbing. Bob Kennedy was clearly looking for an excuse to move in on the island. At one point he suggested, apparently seriously, that we might have to blow up the Consulate to provide the rationale.
His general approach, vigorously supported by Dick Goodwin, was that this was a bad government, that there was a strong chance that it might team up with Castro, and that it should be destroyed–with an excuse if possible, without one if necessary.
Rather to my surprise, Bob McNamara seemed to support this view …
The entire spirit of this meeting was profoundly distressing and worrisome, and I left at 8:00 p.m. with a feeling that this spirit which I had seen demonstrated on this occasion and others at the White House by those so close to the President constitutes a further danger of half-cocked action by people with almost no foreign policy experience, who are interested in action for action’s sake, and the devil take the highmost …
[At a subsequent meeting], Bob McNamara went along with their general view that our problem was not to prepare against an overt act by the Dominican Republic but rather to find an excuse for going into the country and upsetting it.
Department of Justice lawyer John Yoo suggested in 2005 that the US should go on the offensive against al-Qaeda, having “our intelligence agencies create a false terrorist organization. It could have its own websites, recruitment centers, training camps, and fundraising operations. It could launch fake terrorist operations and claim credit for real terrorist strikes, helping to sow confusion within al-Qaeda’s ranks, causing operatives to doubt others’ identities and to question the validity of communications.”
As Chris Floyd and many others have noted, this plan has gone live.
United Press International reported in June 2005:
U.S. intelligence officers are reporting that some of the insurgents in Iraq are using recent-model Beretta 92 pistols, but the pistols seem to have had their serial numbers erased. The numbers do not appear to have been physically removed; the pistols seem to have come off a production line without any serial numbers. Analysts suggest the lack of serial numbers indicates that the weapons were intended for intelligence operations or terrorist cells with substantial government backing. Analysts speculate that these guns are probably from either Mossad or the CIA. Analysts speculate that agent provocateurs may be using the untraceable weapons even as U.S. authorities use insurgent attacks against civilians as evidence of the illegitimacy of the resistance.
There is substantial additional evidence of hanky panky in Iraq.



Labels