That Wikileaks Thing…

conspiracy
Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
March 21, 2017

Most readers of this website know that I seldom rely on Wikileaks as a source nor comment on any of its major leaks. Indeed, the organization reached a new high – or, depending on one’s lights, low – during the last American presidential election cycle when leaks began to emerge during the last days of the campaign that were particularly damaging to Darth Hillary. Granted, she didn’t need much help, for the stink of corruption and “suspicious deaths” have followed the Clintons since the Arkancides of the 1970s and 80s’ up to and including the weird “suicide” of Clinton aide Vince Foster and the strange details around the bloody massacre of the Branch Davidians at Waco, the weirdness around the Oklahoma City bombing, the dubious financial activities in Haiti, and so on.  These matters have been covered by other researchers in depth, so there was no need here to comment on them.

But Wikileaks itself has not been much of a subject here, either, though most regular readers here probably suspect that to gain access to the information contained in its “leaks,” it had by the nature of the case to have “inside help,” as it were. This, at least, has been my own suspicion, which is why when I saw the following article shared by Mr. S.D., and read a certain passage within it, that I had to pass it along, together with my daily dose of high octane speculation. The article in question is by Professor Michel Chossudovsky and appears at the website Global Research; the article, you will note, was dated December 13, 2010:

Who is Behind Wikileaks?

The pattern of backers here is intriguing, for one has the usual suspects; Professor Chossudovsky writes:

Wikileaks had also entered into negotiations with several corporate foundations with a view to securing funding. (Wikileaks Leak email exchanges, January 2007):

The linchpin of WikiLeaks’s financial network is Germany’s Wau Holland Foundation. … “We’re registered as a library in Australia, we’re registered as a foundation in France, we’re registered as a newspaper in Sweden,” Mr. Assange said. WikiLeaks has two tax-exempt charitable organizations in the U.S., known as 501C3s, that “act as a front” for the website, he said. He declined to give their names, saying they could “lose some of their grant money because of political sensitivities.”

Mr. Assange said WikiLeaks gets about half its money from modest donations processed by its website, and the other half from “personal contacts,” including “people with some millions who approach us….” (WikiLeaks Keeps Funding Secret, WSJ.com, August 23, 2010)

Acquiring covert funding from intelligence agencies was, according to the email exchanges, also contemplated. (See Wikileaks Leak email exchanges, January 2007)

At the outset in early 2007, Wikileaks acknowledged that the project had been

founded by Chinese dissidents, mathematicians and startup company technologists, from the US, Taiwan, Europe, Australia and South Africa…. [Its advisory board]  includes representatives from expat Russian and Tibetan refugee communities, reporters, a former US intelligence analyst and cryptographers.” (Wikileaks Leak email exchanges, January 2007).  (Emphasis added)

Note that the backers, by Wikileaks’ own admission, includes:

1) Chinese dissidents, mathematicians, and start up company technologies;

2) from the USA, Taiwan, Europe, Australia and South Africa;

3) Expat Russian and Tibetan refugees;

4) Reporters;

5) A former US intelligence analyst;

6) Cryptographers; and

7) “people with some millions who approach us.”

Chossudovsky then notes:

From the outset, Wikileaks’ geopolitical focus on “oppressive regimes” in Eurasia and the Middle East was “appealing” to America’s elites, i.e. it seemingly matched stated US foreign policy objectives. Moreover, the composition of the Wikileaks team (which included Chinese dissidents), not to mention the methodology of “exposing secrets” of foreign governments, were in tune with the practices of US covert operations geared towards triggering “regime change” and fostering “color revolutions” in different parts of the World.

In addition, further on in the article, Chossudovsky notes the ties of Wikileaks to The Economist and to the Rothschild interests:

Wikileaks and The Economist have also entered into what seems to be a contradictory relationship. Wikileaks founder and editor Julian Assange was granted in 2008 The Economist’s New Media Award.

The Economist has a close relationship to Britain’s financial elites. It is an establishment news outlet, which has, on balance, supported Britain’s involvement in the Iraq war. The Economist’s Editor-in-Chief, John Micklethwait was a participant in the June 2010 Bilderberg conference.

The Economist also bears the stamp of the Rothschild family. Sir Evelyn Robert Adrian de Rothschild was chairman of The Economist from 1972 to 1989. His wife Lynn Forester de Rothschild currently sits on The Economist’s board. The Rothschild family also has a sizeable shareholder interest in The Economist. Former Editor of The Economist (1974-86), Andrew Stephen Bower Knight is currently Chairman of the J. Rothschild Capital Management Fund. He is also reported to have been member of the Steering Group (1986) of the Bilderberg.

The broader question is why would Julian Assange receive the support from Britain’s foremost establishment news outfit which has consistently been involved in media disinformation?

Are we not dealing with a case of “manufactured dissent”, whereby the process of supporting and rewarding Wikileaks for its endeavors, becomes a means of controlling and manipulating the Wikileaks project, while at the same time embedding it into the mainstream media.

It is also worth mentioning another important link. Julian Assange’s lawyer Mark Stephens of Finers Stephens Innocent (FSI), a major London elite law firm, happens to be the legal adviser to the Rothschild Waddesdon Trust. While this in itself does prove anything, it should nonetheless be examined in the broader context of Wikileaks’ social and corporate entourage: the NYT, the CFR, The Economist, Time Magazine, Forbes, Finers Stephens Innocent (FSI), etc.

What caught my eye in all of this was the strangeness of these combinations of interests: Western financiers and members of the “oligrachy”, expatriates from Russia and Tibet, Chinese dissidents (including, presumably Taiwanese), South Africa, and so on. Additionally, it is to be noted that the inclusion of intelligence analysts, cryptographers, and mathematicians, would appear to give Wikileaks its own in-house encryption, decryption, and analysis capability, backed by unknown persons with “millions.” Clearly, at one level, one has all the presence of “Mr Globaloney” that could be interpreted to mean Wikileaks has an inside track to that group and, to that extent, represents their interests and agendas. The citations Professor Chossudovsky has provided in his article are alone a gold mine of information and he deserves credit for exposing it.

It’s that pattern of involvement with South Africa, Taiwan, and “Chinese dissidents”, however, that attracted my attention, for in it, one detects another pattern, one associated with the former World Anti-Communist League, which was, not surprisingly, based from much of the period of its operation in Taiwan. That organization has since changed its name, with the collapse of the Soviet Union, to the World League for Freedom and Democracy. Same organization, new name.  If one searches for the organization under its new name, one comes here:

World League for Freedom and Democracy

And scrolling down, one reads this:

In 1978, Roger Pearson became the World Chairman of the WACL. Pearson was described in a Washington Post article as having neo-Nazi associations[1][2][3][4][5][6] and sources report that as a result of an article in the Washington Post in 1978 critical of WACL and alleging extreme right wing politics of Pearson that either he was expelled from WACL or at least was pressured into resigning from his position as World Chairman.[7][8][9]

The U.S. chapter of WACL, the United States Council for World Freedom (USCWF) was founded in 1981 by Major General John K. Singlaub. Singlaub was the former US Chief of Staff of both United Nations and American forces in South Korea, but was relieved in 1977 by U.S. PresidentJimmy Carter after publicly criticizing Carter’s decision to reduce the number of troops on the peninsula. Singlaub became a member of the WACL in 1980, and founded and became president of its U.S. chapter, the United States Council for World Freedom. This branch generated controversy when it supported Nicaraguan guerrillas in the Iran–Contra affair[10] and, in 1981, the USCWF was placed under watch by the Anti-Defamation League, which said that the organization had increasingly become “a point of contact for extremists, racists, and anti-Semites”.[11][12] During the 1980s, the USCWF and WACL conducted a purge of these elements, and invited ADL observers to monitor its conferences;[13] by 1985, the Anti-Defamation League declared itself “satisfied that substantial progress has been made since 1981 in ridding the organization of racists and anti-Semites.”[14]

It is alleged that in the mid-1980s WACL had become a supplier of arms to anti-communist rebel movements in southern Africa, Central America, Afghanistan and the Far East.[15] During the 1980s, the WACL was particularly active in Latin America, notably by aiding the Contra forces in Nicaragua.[16] During this period, WACL was criticized for the presence in the organization of neo-Nazis, war criminals, and people linked to death squads and assassinations.[11] Other allegations have included reports claim that the World League for Freedom and Democracy is responsible for producing what its opponents call “troops of killers”, while ostensibly organizing to provide support for Corazon Aquino from the right-wing in the Philippines[17] and for supporting the Mozambican National Resistance (RENAMO) movement in Mozambique.[18]

The World Anti-Communist League held annual conferences at various locations throughout the world. Numerous groups participated, including the Unification Church of the Rev. Sun Myung Moon. WACL also enjoyed support from many U.S. Congressmen, most notably 2008 presidential nominee Senator John McCain (RAZ),[10][19] who sat on the United States Council for World Freedom (USCWF) Board of Directors in the early 1980s.[20][21] McCain has said previously he resigned from the council in 1984 and asked in 1986 to have his name removed from the group’s letterhead.[22]

In other words, the organization is not only well-connected to the upper echelons of the American political and intelligence establishment, but also connected to the post-war network of Neo-Nazis and their influence over Latin American death squads.

Why should the Taiwanese and therefore, the possible World Anti-Communist League/World League for Freedom and Democracy connection concern us? In his crucial study The Beast Reawakens: Fascism’s Resurgance from Hitler’s Spymasters to Today’s Neo-Nazi Groups and Right-Wing Extremists (Routledge, 2000), Martin A. Lee notes, in an extended footnote on pp. 226-227 the following disturbing series of connections:

On rare occasions, the (Institute for Holocaust Revision) managed to entice mainstream historians, such as Pulitzer Price-winner John Toland, to present papers at its conferences. Ex-CIA agent Victor Marchetti also lecture at an IHR gathering…. Another favorite IHR speaker and collaborator was Issah Nakleh of the World Muslim Congress(WMC). Basied in Pakistan, the WMC was initially headed by the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who, like his friend H. Keith Thompson, stood by the Third Reich until his death in 1974. A few years later, the WMC, then headed by Pakistani Dr. Inamullah Kahn, mailed Holocaust-denial literature to every member of the U.S. Congress and the British Parliament…. Dr. Kahn also served as an advisor to the Saudi Arabian royal family, which lavished funds on the WMC. In addition, the Saudi Arabian government retained the services of American neo-Nazi William Grimstead as a Washington lobbyist. Like many European neofascist groups, the WMC adopted a third-position stance toward the superpowers, as demonstrated by this headline from Muslim World: U.S. AND USSR – BOTH SERVE ZIONIST INTERESTS. But Khan tempered his anti-American tirades when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979. Soon the World Muslim Congress began working closely with U.S. intelligence and Pakistani military officials, who were covertly supporting the Afghan mujahideen in their fight against the Soviet-installed regime in Kabul. This effort was strongly endorsed by Dr. Khan, who served for many years as the Pakistani representative of the Nazi-infested World Anti-Communist League, which played an important role in the Reagan administrations “secret war” in the Golden Crescent.(Emphasis added0

Global Crescents and secret wars and Afghanistan imply a covert war for control of drug money coming from that region.

In other words, one is looking at a mouthpiece not just for globalism, but one which could conceivable have deep connections to other global networks: radical Islam and its dubious connection to the Saudis (and again, note that Saudi-Nazi connection), global terrorist networks, and, of course, global fascist networks.

And that should give everyone pause.

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

The Russian Hacking Meme: Trump & A Coming Showdown With The CIA?

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell PhD
January 7, 2017

In the last two News and Views from the Nefarium I’ve been concentrating not only on the geopolitical realignments that the coming year(s) portend, but also on the international and domestic realignments that are concomitant with them, including what I have been calling “international mafia wars,” as the neo-con globalist-Atlanticist factions within various great powers attempt to hold on to power and chorale and channel their unanticipated opposition into policies acceptable to them. In that  vein, consider the following stories shared by various readers here:

Trump on Alleged Russian Hacking: I know things others don’t

As this RT article citing Sean Spicer points out, the Russian hacking meme has been getting all the attention – no doubt in part in an attempt to de-legitimize the election results – while Chinese hacking has been downplayed, if it is mentioned at all:

Political retribution? Trump press sec questions Russia sanctions, brings up unanswered ‘China hack’

And finally, these articles from our friends at  The Daily Bell about a possible looming battle between the incoming Trump administration and the CIA:

Supposed Russian Hack Further Illustrates the Divide Between CIA and Trump

http://www.thedailybell.com/news-analysis/supposed-russian-hack-further-illustrates-the-divide-between-cia-and-trump/embed/#?secret=5OOGExhWeM

A similar story is being reported by Zero Hedge:

Trump Is Working On A Plan To Restructure, Pare Back The CIA And America’s Top Spy Agency

And finally, this find, by one alert reader of this website:

US Govt Data Shows Russia Used Outdated Ukrainian PHP Malware

https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2016/12/russia-malware-ip-hack/embed/#?secret=irF84cJ0qg

Note the conclusion of the last article:

The IP addresses that DHS provided may have been used for an attack by a state actor like Russia. But they don’t appear to provide any association with Russia. They are probably used by a wide range of other malicious actors, especially the 15% of IP addresses that are Tor exit nodes.

The malware sample is old, widely used and appears to be Ukrainian. It has no apparent relationship with Russian intelligence and it would be an indicator of compromise for any website.

The relationship of the malware sample, originating from the Ukraine, raises unpleasant but necessary questions: since it it widely known that the USA was a main sponsor of the events in the Ukraine that overthrew a legitimate (if corrupt) government with a new (and even more corrupt) government. That question is rather obvious: could the entire hacking meme have been an attempt at a “cyber false flag” originating in the West to embarrass Russia? Possibly, but here our criticism of the hacking meme and a Russian origin for the hacking, works in reverse: if the Russians were unlikely to have used such a clumsy method, perhaps the West would be to. And as the conclusions point out, the mere use of addresses in Russia does not, as any hacker knows, mean that Russia is the one using them. In effect, it proves nothing.  And we must hold out the possibility of non-state actors, and such a possibility would fit well with my “emergent international Mafia wars” hypothesis, as factions of Globaloneyists and the fascist sympathizers in various nations’ deep states close ranks.

In my high octane speculation of the day, it appears that what is looming here is a showdown between Mr. Trump and his deep state supporters, and the neo-con factions within the American intelligence community, represented by the CIA (which, let it be noted, is not a monolithic anti-Trump agency either, if one takes the pre-election revelations of Dr. Steve Pieczenik at face value). The Daily Bell suggests this looking showdown:

It seems obvious at this point that the CIA and Trump have entirely different positions when it comes to Russian maliciousness, which Trump downplays while the CIA works to advertise it.

But the issue is even more serious than that.

The larger issue is one we’ve been talking about for 15 years or more. The CIA is accountable to overseas banking interests in the City of London, not to American intelligence operations. The latter accountability is just a smokescreen.

The split has now become public knowledge and Trump is being directly threatened as a result.

Such statements strongly imply a showdown is looming, and give even more credence to those stories that Mr. Trump has retained his private security for protection, and of course, they give credence to those rumors that perhaps even Russian speznaz units are running security interference for Mr. Trump without his knowledge or involvement. If so, then this means that Mr. Trump is very aware of the power blocs aligned domestically against him, and give strong support to those rumors that he, like Mr. Kennedy, may be planning to reign in the agency. Unlike Mr. Kennedy, it appears that Mr. Trump is not so naive to believe he can do so without his own private and trusted security.

Time of course, will tell, and this is definitely a case of “you tell me.”

See you on the flip side.

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
_____________________________________________

About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

It’s Beginning to Smell a Lot Like Totalitarianism, and I Don’t Mean Russia

It’s Beginning to Smell a Lot Like Totalitarianism, and I Don’t Mean Russia
Source: WilliamEngdahl.com
F. William Engdahl
December 13, 2016

If we smell precisely the stench of the totality of steps taken in NATO countries in recent months, especially in the United States and the European Union, we can smell the stench of totalitarian rule or some would call it, fascism, being quietly imposed on our basic human freedoms. Some recent examples give pause for reflection as to where we are allowing our world to drift.

Let’s begin with a most ominous, bizarre, Jesuitical interview that the Roman Catholic Pope Francis gave to a Belgian paper December 7, comparing what he calls defamatory news to what he called the “sickness of coprophagia.” He stated:

QUESTION – A final question, Holy Father, regarding the media: a consideration regarding the means of communication…

POPE – The communications media have a very great responsibility…It is obvious that, given that we are all sinners, also the media can…become harmful… They can be tempted by calumny, and therefore used to slander, to sully people, especially in the world of politics. They can be used as a means of defamation: every person has the right to a good reputation, but perhaps in their previous life, or ten years ago, they had a problem with justice, or a problem in their family life, and bringing this to light is serious and harmful… This is a sin and it is harmful. A thing that can do great damage to the information media is disinformation: that is, faced with any situation, saying only a part of the truth, and not the rest. This is disinformation…Disinformation is probably the greatest damage that the media can do, as opinion is guided in one direction, neglecting the other part of the truth. I believe that the media should…not fall prey – without offence, please – to the sickness of coprophilia, which is always wanting to communicate scandal…And since people have a tendency towards the sickness of coprophagia, it can do great harm.

Coprophilia is defined in the Merriam-Webster dictionary as “marked interest in excrement, especially the use of feces or filth for sexual excitement.” And coprophagia is eating feces by humans, literally, eating shit.

What people precisely, Holy Father, have a “tendency to towards the sickness of coprophagia”? Is this the dominant sickness of the human race? And if not, why do you make such a disgusting likeness between eating shit and citizens who read about politicians and their misdeeds or media that report on same? And who is to judge if factually true dissemination of facts about political figures from their past is relevant or not to help voters judge their character? I would say the comments are a perfect example of what he pretends to condemn.

Were it only a single, off-the-cuff remark by a religious figure, we could dismiss it along with claims such as the papal infallibility declaration proclaimed by the Vatican I on 18 July 1870. However, precisely because of such dogma and of the influence of the Roman Catholic Church and its Pope, notably in the countries of Western Europe, the United States and Latin America, such vague and dangerous remarks ought to be taken seriously as a signal of what lies ahead for the public freedom of speech.

“Fake News”

The papal comments on coprophagia and journalism come amid an explosion of charges in the USA and EU that Russia is planting “fake news” as it is now being called, about Hillary Clinton in the US media by way of certain alternative media. Robby Mook, Hillary Clinton’s former campaign manager, said “fake news” was “huge problem” the campaign faced in the recent US election: “I still think we have to investigate what happened with Russia here. We cannot have foreign, and I would say foreign aggressors here, intervening in our elections. The Russian were propagating fake news through Facebook and other outlets, but look, we also had…Breitbart News, which was notorious for peddling stories like this.”

Online stories that claimed a Washington D.C. pizza restaurant, Comet Ping Pong, was used by candidate Hillary Clinton and her campaign manager John Podesta for child sex, the so-called “Pizzagate” Scandal, is now being used to drum up popular opinion for censorship of the Internet as well as Facebook and other social media. Senior New York Times reporter David Sanger wrote a vague, anonymous “according to senior Administration sources,” article on December 9 under the headline, “Russia Hacked Republican Committee but Kept Data, US Concludes.” What we are seeing is precisely the kind of fake news that Hillary Clinton and the Pope talk about. But it is mainstream establishment media doing the fakery.

The fakery is being orchestrated by the highest levels of the mainstream media in collusion with NATO circles and intelligence agencies such as the CIA, which has saturated the ranks of mainstream media with their disinformation agents according to former CIA head William Colby, who once allegedly said, ““The CIA owns everyone of any significance in the major media.” The campaign will continue, likely with some horrendous stories about some psychopath taking a gun and bursting into Comet Ping Pong pizza place shooting innocent customers, because it was said he read in alternative media fake news about the pedophile ring. That already took place, but the man fired no shots. The population is being manipulated to accept extreme censorship of internet and other alternative media, something unimaginable just months ago.

Like clockwork, the “fake news” campaign has spread to the European Union. After announcing she will run again in 2017 for Chancellor, Angela Merkel spoke ominous words suggesting government censorship of independent “populist” (sic) media might be necessary: “Today we have fake sites, bots, trolls — things that regenerate themselves, reinforcing opinions with certain algorithms and we have to learn to deal with them.” She declared, “we must confront this phenomenon and if necessary, regulate it…Populism and political extremes are growing in Western democracies..” Her remarks came after Google and Facebook cut off ad revenue to what they declared to be “fake” news sites.

In the EU, especially Germany, populist has an implicit negative or even fascist connotation as in “right-wing populist” parties who oppose Merkel’s open door to war refugees policies, or who these days oppose almost anything her heavy-handed government puts forward.

War on Cash

Now if we begin to see stealth propaganda preparing us to accept severe clampdown on the one remaining free media, the Internet and related social media, we can also see an equally ominous, indeed, totalitarian move to create acceptance for the idea we give up the right to hold paper money, giving private, often corrupt, banks total control over our money, and in turn giving government agencies total control over where we spend for what.

This is the so-called cashless society. Arguments put forward are that elimination of cash will be more convenient to consumers or that it will eliminate or greatly reduce organized crime and shadow economy that evades taxation. In the EU, Sweden has already virtually eliminated cash. Sweden cash purchases today are down to just three per cent of the national economy compared to nine per cent in the Eurozone and seven per cent in the US. Public buses don’t accept cash. Three of Sweden’s four largest banks are phasing out the manual handling of cash in bank branches. Norway is following the same path.

In France today, it’s now illegal to do cash transactions over €1,000 without documenting it properly. France’s finance minister Michel Sapin, in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo attacks, blamed the attacks on the ability of the attackers to “buy dangerous things with cash.” Shortly after the Hebdo attacks he announced capital controls that included the €1,000 cap on cash payments, down from €3,000, to “fight against the use of cash and anonymity in the French economy.” In high-inflation Eurozone €1,000 is not a huge sum.

Even in conservative Germany, a leading member of the Merkel coalition proposed to eliminate the €500 note and capping all cash transactions at €5,000. Some weeks later the European Central Bank, where negative interest rates are the order of the day, announced it would end issue of €500 notes by December 2018 arguing it made it too easy for criminals and terrorists to act.

And in the United States, as the campaign to sell skeptical citizens on cashless digital bank payments increases, JP Morgan Chase, the largest and one of the most criminal banks in the US, has a policy restricting the use of cash in selected markets. The bank bans cash payments for credit cards, mortgages, and auto loans; and it prohibits storage of “any cash or coins” in safe deposit boxes. So if you have a rare cold coin collection, you better stuff it in the mattress…

Negative Rates and Cashless Citizens

As long as cash–bills and coins of a national currency–are the basis of the economy, the central banks of the USA and EU as well as Japan, are unable to impose a severe negative interest rate policy much beyond the flirtation today by the ECB and Bank of Japan. If central bank rates were to go very negative, banks would be charging customers the absurd charge to make them pay to keep their cash on deposit or in savings at those banks. Naturally, people would revolt and withdraw in cash to invest in gold or other hard, tangible valuables.

Harvard economist and member of the Economic Advisory Panel of the Federal Reserve, Kenneth Rogoff, an advocate of the “war on cash,” noted that the existence of cash “creates the artifact of the zero bound on the nominal interest rate.” In his 2016 book, The Curse of Cash, Rogoff urged the Federal Reserve to phase out the 100-dollar bill, then the 50-dollar bill, then the 20-dollar bill, leaving only smaller denominations in circulation, much like what the mad Modi has just done in India.

Any serious observer of the world economy, especially of NATO nations in Europe and North America since the financial crisis of September 2008, would have to realize the current status quo of zero or negative central bank interest rates to prop up banks and financial markets is not sustainable. Unless cash is eliminated that is.

On April 5, 1933 President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 6102, “forbidding the Hoarding of gold coin, gold bullion, and gold certificates within the continental United States.” That was rightly denounced by many as outright theft, confiscation of privately held gold, by the Government.

Radical solutions such as done by President Roosevelt in 1933, yet in a monetary order where gold no longer dominates, is clearly becoming more attractive to the major bankers of Wall Street and the City of London. Rather than confiscate citizens’ gold, today the Gods of Money would have to find a way to steal the cash of citizens. Moving to their “cashless” banking, limiting how much cash can be withdrawn and then eliminating cash entirely as Swedish banks are doing would enable tax authorities to have perfect totalitarian control on every citizen’s use of money. Moreover, governments could decree, as did FDR, that cash above certain levels must be taxed under some or another national declaration of emergency.

As such bold, radical moves advance, they would of course be vociferously attacked not on CNN or The New York Times or Financial Times or other mainstream media tied to those criminal financial institutions, but in alternative media. Keep in mind it was the uncritical New York Times and Washington Post that uncritically retailed the fake news that led to declaration of war on Iraq in 2003, namely that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction aimed at Washington. That war has spread death and destruction of a scale unimaginable. No one complained at the time about that fake news.

The protest over moves to confiscate citizens’ bank holdings would come through alternate, independent media such as Zero Hedge or countless others. Recently, US media uncritically republished a purported list of “fake news” blogs and websites prepared by Assistant Professor of Communications at Merrimack College, Melissa Zimdars. Zero Hedge was on it.

This is not about endorsing or not endorsing any alternative blog or website. It is about the essential freedom of us all to be able to read and decide any and all opinions or analyses and not to have government decide what I am or am not allowed to read. It’s about the freedom to keep privacy about what I choose to buy and not leave a digital trail that my bank could release to the tax authorities or to Homeland Security or the FBI, or sell to profiling consumer operations. Controlling public communication and controlling private money would go a long way to creation of the perfect totalitarian state. Not a good idea, I would say.

Read More At: WilliamEngdahl.com
_______________________________________________________________
F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”

Vatican, Bilderberg and a ‘Migration’ Crisis

Vatican, Bilderberg and a ‘Migration’ Crisis
Source:WilliamEngdahl.com
F. William Engdahl
December 17, 2016

The annual meeting of the secretive Bilderberg Group took place this year in Dresden, Germany from June 9-12. Notable is their terminology in an official press release announcing topics for discussion. Point three (not necessarily in terms of importance) is curiously titled “Europe: migration, growth, reform, vision, unity.” Curious is the choice of the word “migration” for the EU refugee crisis that began in Spring 2015 as Turkey opened the detention centers and refugee camps from Syrian war refugees and pointed them to the EU. More about that later on. Here I want to concentrate on the little-known historical ties or links between the Bilderberg Meetings, founded in 1954, and the Vatican, and the role of both in heating up the current EU refugee instability.

In May, 1954 in Oosterbeek, near to the German border, a highly secret meeting was held at the Hotel de Bilderberg. The meeting was hosted by Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, husband of Queen Juliana. It was called simply, “Bilderberg Conference,” from the name of the hotel where the first talks were held. Out of three days of private discussion, a new Trans-Atlantic think-tank was created. It was to become one of the most effective organizations for influencing world events after 1954 up to the present, and one of the most damaging and secretive.

German-born Prince Bernhard was a controversial figure, a notorious philanderer, who had been a member of the German NSDAP and Reiter SS. In 1976 Bernhard was accused of accepting a $1 million bribe from the US fighter aircraft maker, Lockheed, to influence jet purchases by the Dutch Air Force. When Bernhard was forced to resign because of the scandals, he was succeeded as Bilderberg Chairman by then German Bundespräsident, Walter Scheel, and then afterwards by Britain’s Lord Carrington, a confidante and later business partner of Henry Kissinger. From the beginning it was clear Bilderberg was not the Little League of world politics.

In 2014 the Bilderberg Group’s official website, with sparse information, stated its purpose as simply to, “foster dialogue between Europe and North America.” It adds that it meets once a year with around 120 select attendees from finance, politics, industry, media and academia. Its rules mandate that two-thirds come from Europe and the remainder from the USA and Canada, with one third of the total always from the world of politics. Bilderberg participants from the US are always members of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

Shadowy origins

The Bilderberg Group, in the words of the first Bilderberg Secretary General, a shadowy and enormously influential Polish exile, Joseph Retinger, came from an initiative Retinger made in 1952 to counter, “growing distrust of America which was making itself manifest in Western Europe and which was paralleled by a similar distrust of Western Europe in America.” In brief, its aim was to make certain that the strategic policy orientation of Western Europe and of the United States was in harmony. The decisive question to be asked was harmony in pursuit of which and whose geopolitical goals?

Joseph Retinger

Joseph Retinger was one of the most influential political figures shaping the pro-Atlanticist architecture of post-World War II Western Europe. He founded the Strasbourg-based Council of Europe, to lobby for the Washington-backed plan for creation of a United States of Europe, today called the European Union. He created the CIA-funded European Movement, as well as the CIA-funded European Youth Campaign. By far his most influential project was bringing the Bilderberg Group into being, and serving as its key European director and Secretary General, all far away from the public eye, as he preferred.

At the time his Bilderberg project took form the Korean War was ending and US Marshall Plan aid to Europe as well. Józef Hieronim Retinger had spent the war years in London as adviser to the exile government of Prime Minister General Wladyslaw Sikorski. While Retinger’s name was virtually unknown to the world at large, he was one of the most influential string-pullers of the postwar period in Europe and the United States. He was able to get private audiences with the Pope as well as the American President at will. It was he who selected Prince Bernhard to act as figurehead host and who selected which Americans and which Europeans would be invited to Bilderberg.

The American Steering Committee for the first Bilderberg Meeting in 1954 consisted of USA chairman Joseph E. Johnson, president of the Rockefeller-tied Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Others included George Ball, who during the Second World War was in London serving as director of the Strategic Bombing Survey, to analyze the impact of British and American bombing of German cities and civilian populations.

The American Bilderberg Steering Committee also included H. J. Heinz II, of the food group and father-in-law of John Kerry’s current wife; George Nebolsine, a State Department consultant on the Marshall Plan; and Dean Rusk, then President of the Rockefeller Foundation, later Secretary of State.

The real guiding hand behind the American side of the Bilderberg Group, however, was the first head of the newly-established Central Intelligence Agency, General Walter Bedell Smith. In 1950 Smith became Director of the CIA. The CIA helped organize, and sponsored the formation, and operation of the Bilderberg Conferences.

In late 1952, Retinger went to America to test his Bilderberg idea on his American contacts, where he met with Averell Harriman, David Rockefeller, and Bedell Smith, then director of the CIA. After Retinger explained his proposal, Smith reportedly said, “Why the hell didn’t you come to me in the first place?” The CIA chief then told Retinger to go to C. D. Jackson, who was about to become President Eisenhower’s Special Assistant for Psychological Warfare, and Eisenhower’s liaison between the Pentagon and CIA. viii.

The attendees at the 1954 initial Bilderberg Meeting included David Rockefeller, who today is the only Bilderberg “Advisory Group” Member. It included State Department official, Paul Nitze. As well, Gardner Cowles, US media baron and founder of Look magazine, who had been the US Government deputy director of the Office of War Information, the US propaganda ministry that created the Voice of America (VOA). It included J.P. Morgan Bank director Nelson D. Jay, a close Rockefeller associate.

The first Bilderberg attendees also included C.D. Jackson, by then Eisenhower’s architect of the Cold War; Alcide de Gasperi, Italian Prime Minister; and Antoine Pinay, a former French Prime Minister. Pinay was to become, the decisive personality shaping the long-term agenda of Bilderberg.

In Retinger’s words he founded Bilderberg Group simply to, “foster dialogue between Europe and North America.” That was for public consumption. In reality he built a very dark agenda that drew in the most reactionary circles in postwar Europe and tied them to the most powerful of postwar American oligarch families, that of Rockefeller, Harriman and their emerging “American Century.” The Bilderberg Group was to insure that that Century would be heavily influenced by postwar Vatican geopolitics. Its first meeting in 1954 was funded by Walter Bedell Smith’s CIA, with subsequent meetings financed by the CIA’s close ally during the Cold War, the Ford Foundation.

Le Cercle—The Vatican-Rockefeller Alliance

The key to the extraordinary power and influence of the annual Bilderberg Meetings from 1954 laid in the unpublished role of the secretive pan-Europeanist organization then known as Le Cercle, sometimes referred to as Cercle Pinay, a reference to the pivotal role in shaping Bilderberg played by the network of French Prime Minister Antoine Pinay, an intimate friend of Bilderberg founder Retinger.

Pinay’s Le Cercle (The Group) was the link that covertly tied most European intelligence services including the German BND and BfV, MI-6 in Britain, France’s SDECE, Holland’s BVD, Belgium’s Surete de l’Etat and Swiss and later even Saudi intelligence and apartheid South Africa’s secret service, BOSS. Prominent politicians associated with Pinay and Le Cercle included Franz Josef Strauss, Otto von Habsburg, Konrad Adenauer, Julio Andreotti of Italy, General Antonio de Spinola of Portugal, a conservative who went on later to become President; Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan.

Antoine Pinay’s group, Le Cercle, in turn was tied as well to the powerful and very right-wing Roman Catholic lay organization, Opus Dei, which had just been given final Catholic Church official approval in 1950, two years before plans for Bilderberg began, by Pope Pius XII. The organization was made well known, to its discomfort, as a subject of the 2003 Dan Brown historical novel, Da Vinci Code.

Among the later achievements of Le Cercle was the manipulation of the 1979 British elections that successfully brought in anti-labor right-wing Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. It was done with Le Cercle leading members, Sir Brian Crozier, MI-6 head Sir Arthur Franks, and MI-6 division head, Nicholas Elliott.

The late Bavarian political czar, Franz Josef Strauss, “The Lion of Bavaria,” noted in his memoirs that he had held a friendship with Le Cercle’s Antoine Pinay since the two first met in 1953. Le Cercle networks in Germany promoted Strauss’s candidacy, unsuccessfully, to become German Chancellor. In 1955 Strauss also became a regular member of the Bilderberg Meetings.

Bilderberg founder, Josef Retinger, a Polish-born Roman Catholic, organized his European network of the Bilderberg through the mediation of an Italian CIA asset, Prof. Luigi Gedda, head of Azione Cattolica. Gedda was also medical adviser to Pope Pius XII, a very strong right-wing anti-communist pontiff, who before the Second World War, as Cardinal Eugenio Giovanni Pacelli, had been architect of the 1933 Reichskonkordat with Hitler’s Nazi Party. Already in 1932 Pacelli as Vatican Secretary of State had played a key role in convincing Roman Catholic German Chancellor Franz von Papen to steer his Catholic Center Party into an anti-left alliance and join with the NSDAP of Hitler.

Clerical fascism and Pius XII

As Pope, Pius XII had a clear political bias and it was towards support of clerical or nominally Roman Catholic fascist or extremely repressive right-wing regimes, a form of what some termed clerical fascism, the fusion of the Church with fascist or dictatorial political regimes, such as in Franco’s Spain or Spinola’s Portugal.

During the Second World War Pius XII refused to condemn the clerical fascist pro-Hitler regime of Roman Catholic Ante Pavelić, the leader of the newly proclaimed Croatian state. Informed by Catholic clergy of the genocidal murders of Orthodox Serbs who had refused to embrace the Catholic faith, Pius XII, even though he possessed a list of Croatian clergy members who had “joined in the slaughter,” did not condemn the Pavelić regime or take action against the clergy involved. Instead he elevated Aloysius Stepinac—a Croatian archbishop convicted of collaborating with the Ustaše—to Cardinal.

In effect, Retinger’s European Bilderberg networks linked the extreme right-wing European anti-communist networks—including the Vatican of Pius XII, of Opus Dei, of the Franco government in Spain, of Portugal’s General Spinola and numerous other right-wing European anti-communist networks—to the triumphant American elites around the powerful Rockefeller group, through the networks and person of David Rockefeller. It was a power marriage that was to have a profound effect on the development of postwar European society and politics.

Francis and the ‘Migrants’-Words are all I have…

Now against this background of Bilderberg true history, the question to be asked is whether the first Jesuit Pope in history, Francis, is following in the heavy footsteps of Pius XII? Is he deliberately trying to stir things up in Europe through his support of the huge influx of war refugees from Syria and North Africa in the past year?

Words are an essential form of human communication, quite complex in the energy they convey to others. Depending on the word and its context, it can convey negative energy, hate energy; it can convey neutral energy, neither here nor there; it can also convey love, harmony, peace energy. If there is any organized group on the face of this Earth that is master of such word use precision it is the Society of Jesus, Pope Francis’ mother organization. This is relevant in reading his numerous missives on the population disruptions of the Middle East and Africa and the EU in the past three years.

There are three words being loosely thrown about today in regard to the EU crisis, and crisis it is. There is the word, “refugee,” legally defined as “a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution, or natural disaster.” Then there is the related term, “asylum-seeker” defined as “a person who has left their home country as a political refugee and is seeking asylum in another.” Third there is the entirely different concept behind the word used both by Pope Francis and by the 2016 Bilderberg Meeting in Dresden, namely the word “migrant.” Migrant is precisely defined as “a person who moves from one place to another in order to find work or better living conditions.” Here there is no mention of war, political persecution or life-endangering calamity.

By calling it what it clearly is not, a migration into the EU from the south, the word completely blunts the causes behind that migration, namely a US-UK-France-instigated series of wars, wars for control of oil and now gas, wars in Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, Syria, initially called by Hillary Clinton the Arab Spring. The million-plus human beings streaming into the EU from Turkey over the past fifteen months are no migrants. They are refugees from wars.

In calling them migrants it implicitly makes either racist or bigot anyone questioning the legal procedures employed by the Merkel government and the German Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF). According to reliable investigative reports conveyed to this author, the German Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge (BAMF) since November 2014 has abandoned the rules and legal directives for refugees (not asylum seekers) for no public reason and without any notice to the public. Interesting.

“Structural Reality?”

In a Papal Message of January 17, 2016, the Pope declared, “In our time, migration is growing worldwide…Migration movements are now a structural reality, and our primary issue must be to deal with the present emergency phase by providing programmes which address the causes of migration and the changes it entails, including its effect on the makeup of societies and peoples.” He goes on, “Biblical revelation urges us to welcome the stranger; it tells us that in so doing, we open our doors to God, and that in the faces of others we see the face of Christ himself.” What if that stranger wants to kill you and to rape your daughters?

Nice words these are indeed. It ignores entirely the actual disruptive reality of the flood of war refugees into Germany and the rest of the EU. Rather than to focus his immense influence on bringing about peace and reconciliation of all domestic parties in Syria and condemning the terrorism of ISIS, Al Qaeda/Al-Nusra Front and the others destroying one of the oldest cultures in the world, a poly-religious one, Francis chooses to tell Europeans to open their hearts and even homes to the “migrants.” In this context, as I noted at the start, it is highly significant that this year’s Dresden Bilderberg Meeting referred in their discussion to “Migration” not Refugee Crisis. It appears both the Pope and Bilderberg planners are singing from the same sheet of music on this at least.

On January 6, in his message on the feast of Epiphany, the same Pope released a Papal video in which he called for creating a one world religion in effect: “Many think differently, feel differently, seeking God or meeting God in different ways. In this crowd, in this range of religions, there is only one certainty that we have for all: we are all children of God.”

Some days later, January 11, 2016 in an address to the Vatican diplomatic corps, Francis insisted that Europe has the means to absorb migrants without sacrificing its security or culture. He criticized the distinction made by the international community between refugees fleeing persecution and those fleeing poverty, referring to “the grave crisis of migration which we are facing.” He condemned various EU national attempts to find their own national solutions to this crisis of migration: “…there is no place for autonomous solutions pursued by individual states, since the consequences of the decisions made by each inevitably have repercussions on the entire international community. Indeed, migrations, more than ever before, will play a pivotal role in the future of our world.”

Unlike Francis, I firmly believe that borders DO matter, that national autonomy, like individual autonomy, does matter, is in fact, an essential component of our existence, our individual sovereignty our national sovereignty. We human beings are unique individuals every one. We are not some amorphous blob with no individuality. These differences are sacred in my view. Not according to the words of the Jesuit Pope. Our world with all its wars and deep disturbances is not at the state of nirvana which Pope Francis would like us to believe where peace and Christian charity overcome every obstacle. It well may be in the future but to pretend it already is belies in my view a hidden agenda.

David Rockefeller is an open partisan of a one world order where he and his ilk would sit atop all mankind, a disgusting idea. For such a one economic world, we must dissolve national borders. This, the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership is designed to do in large part, if, that is, EU leaders are suicidal enough to agree. Then to control an entire world, it needs a synthetic new religion. The forced refugee crisis is designed to blur national borders and historical ethnic or national culture. There is far more behind all the nice speeches of the Pope and the talks of Bilderberg than we are being told. It’s not without reason that the word “Jesuitical” in ordinary usage means “one using subtle or oversubtle reasoning; crafty; sly; intriguing.”

_______________________________________________________________

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”

Read More At: WillaimEngdahl.com

More Coming Out About The Coup In Turkey, & Sultan Erdogan’s…

 MORE COMING OUT ABOUT THE COUP IN TURKEY, AND SULTAN ERDOGAN’S ...
Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
July 18, 2016

The coup and its aftermath in Turkey have been so dominating the news that my plans for scheduled blogs this week has been all but upended, but in any case, there are more things to consider as the news keeps coming out of Ottoman Turkey as the nutty Ottomaniac Sultan Erdogan rolls the clock back on the heritage of Kamal Attaturk. But first a review:

In Saturday’s special News and Views from the Nefarium, I outlined four basic possibilities – which I also explicitly pointed out were not an exhaustive list – for the coup: (1) it was an internal affair staged by the Sultan himself, to strengthen his hand in Turkey, (2) It was an internal affair staged by other groups in Turkey, among which one might assume (a) the pro-secularizing camp, namely the military, which in Attaturk’s vision was to be the guarantor of Turkey’s Islamic secular republic, or (b) Fatullah Gulen’s network, which doubtless included some of the military (interesting how the American media is saying he’s simply a “cleric”, a wonderfully benign term that reminds one of Archbishop Fulton Sheen), or (c) some other internal network, perhaps like Turkey’s notorious “Grey Wolves”, a nationalist, neo-Fascist “Turkish supremacist” group with its own murky background, including connections to the assassination attempt on Pope John Paul II, and yes(here is comes) its own murky connections to Nazism and all of its wonderful throwback institutions.

Then there were two other basic possibilities(again not exhaustive, and in fact for an interesting take on things, see the YouTube comments on Saturday’s special News and Views, as one lady offered yet two more plausible ideas): (3) the coup was external and staged by some external power, perhaps unhappy with the Sultan’s sudden and sweeping reversal of policy by (a) apologizing to Russia and offering compensation to the family of the Russian pilot, (b) wanting to normalize relations with Assad’s Syria, and (3) restore the six year breach of relations with Israel.  Such an about face was bound to have provoked someone, someone who wanted to see the continued rise of jihadism in the Middle East, and/or someone who wanted to see continued chaos in that region; and finally (4) an external coup staged, not by some external power, but rather, by some external group.

With this context in mind, consider the following stories:

Continue Reading At: GizaDeathStar.com
_________________________________________________________________

Profile photo of Joseph P. Farrell
Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

THAT CLASSIFIED 9/11 REPORT HAS BEEN RELEASED (IN REDACTED FORM)

THAT CLASSIFIED 9/11 REPORT HAS BEEN RELEASED (IN REDACTED FORM)

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
July 16, 2016

Remember that classified 9/11 report that was ordered by the Bush White House to be classified and withheld from public view? Well apparently a great number of you did, for I received a veritable flood of articles and links to it, and I want to thank you all. Before getting into today’s high octane speculation, here’s the link to the actual pdf file of that document, and trust me, it’s well worth reading and pondering, especially in today’s world where most western leaders and media have their heads buried in the sand:

Declassified 9/11 file

A careful reading of the document discloses one overall, and unavoidable, conclusion: the fingerprints of the (Out)house of Saud are all over the 9/11 event, insofar as the hijackers are concerned.  And this, indeed, raises once again the question of why the Bush Jr administration would have insisted upon it being withheld from the public during the 9/11 Commission hearings, hearings which, you’ll recall, that administration was none too enthused about. The consistent pattern of hijacker association to the (out)house of Saud highlights once again that disturbing set of connections between the Bush family, its close associates, and members of the Saudi “government.”

Most regular readers of this website, and those familiar with my interviews or, for that matter, with my most recent book Hidden Finance, Rogue Networks, and Secret Sorcery also know that I believe, unlike most 9/11 researchers, that the whole operation was not merely a two-leveled operation, consisting of the hikackers/patsies at the outer or first, surface level, and a deeper level of a rogue network within the American national security/military/intelligence complex. Such views are fairly standard within the 9/11 community, and to that extent, I share them, and share also its fairly early determination that the (out)house of Saud played a role at both levels in some fashion.

But as most readers are also aware that I believe that 9/11 was a penetrated operation at that second deeper level, i.e., that there was a third player, neither a rogue neo-con network within the American deep state, nor simply the level of the Muslim hijackers. In that vein, I was intrigued by the statements of former US Senator Bob Graham during an American news show, when he indicated that he thought the report should be declassified, because its contents were “explosive” and because it indicated foreign “governments” were involved. This comment focused my attention like a laser, for it meant that someone else was involved other than the usual suspects, the miserable (out)house of Saud. It was the possibility of other unknown players that intrigued me, and I searched for whom I thought those other players might be… who was that third level? Of course there were the usual suspects – Israel from the “Jews are behind everything” crowd, but I dismiss this for the simple reason that geopolitically it has nothing to gain from the creation of such chaos.

My suspicions were fueled, as I wrote in Hidden Finance, Rogue Networks, and Secret Sorcery, by the post-9/11 statements of former Prime Minister Tony Blair, who indicated that Al-Qaeda was connected to a “global network”, but never specified what that network was. Russian economist Dr. Tatyana Koryagana also stated, before 9/11 that the USA would be the target of coordinated terrorist attacks on American soil, by a global network run by a few men with access to assets in excess of $300,000,000,000,000 dollars.  Statements like this indicated that something else, entirely, lay at the heart of that deepest players, something far exceeding the delusion of the (out)house of Saud or rogue neo-con networks in the American deep state.

Continue Reading At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________________________

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Dr. Joseph P. Farrell – Jay Dyer: Tragedy & Hope, Third Way & CERN [Half]

Source: JaysAnalysis.com
Jay Dyer
July 11, 2016

As an excellent complement to my Tragedy and Hope lecture series covering the entire text, Dr. Joseph P. Farrell joined me to cover his book, The Third Way. His book looks at the Nazi continental bloc model and how hidden history concerning the background to the founding of the European Union is quite surprising. The top-down, corporate-fascist model of technocracy was both an axis and allied plan, and Dr. Farrell’s research is a perfect addition to Dr. Quigley’s. In the second half, we look at what CERN might be a cover for, including hints of Tesla and hidden metaphysics and the possible association with the massive deep state underground base programs. Dr. Farrell’s books can be purchased here, while his recent updates and analyses can be found here, at the Giza Death Star.

Jay Dyer’s Website: http://www.jaysanalysis.com

Dr. Farrell’s Website:http://www.gizadeathstar.com

This is the first free half of the full interview which can be obtained by subscribing to JaysAnalysis at the PayPal links for $4.95 a month or $60.00 a year.