DailyKos - History: How the US Government Was Overthrown In Three Easy Steps

(Now, here's something you don't see on Kos everyday. -rep.)

History: How the US Government Was Overthrown In Three Easy Steps

by TocqueDeville - Sun Jul 27, 2008

So what if I told you that the powers of financial capitalism (bankers etc.), had a far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands, able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole.

This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations?

And what if I told you they had succeeded?

Wow! The most powerful bankers creating a world system of financial control, dominating the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole, with secret meetings. Surely you would think Tocque has fallen under the spell of a wild conspiracy theory.

But you can put away the cat in the tinfoil hat. Those are not my words. And it's not a theory. They are the words of one of the greatest, most eminent historians in modern times, the late Carroll Quigley - of Harvard, Princeton and the Georgetown Foreign School...


Hmmm . . a new world order . . . . sounds familiar


I knew it was your post even b4 scrolling down to see your handle.


As usual. Good stuff.

Lets get more Congressmen / women to visit 911 Blogger to understand the REAL State of the Union.

The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

new world order...

Obama or McCain will be the next president. We have no choice in the matter as 4 months is not enough to change a nation. I can only hope that Obama's view on the NWO and globalization is viewed through a Lennon-"imagine" perspective and not from a neocon martial law perspective. I somehow feel there is hope with this candidate, although I wish the MSM would have given other candidates fair time. Surprise, I know.

Che Guevara

Che Guevara also talked about a borderless South America, so the idea isn't always coming from a dark place of monetary and military control. I have my eye on Obama for that type of bullshit and I hope like you he can resist the powers and go in the John Lennon direction as well. He's our best bet as of now in my opinion. Change will be incremental until we shut down the federal reserve etc etc etc etc. Peace.

Obama makes me sick too!

He's a globalist! What is he doing trying to run for president of the world? The problem is almost none of our politicians are talking about PUTTING AMERICA FIRST! That's what I want to hear. Who is looking out for our country? No it's all about the NWO.

He's reading the script

he doesn't read other people's scripts with the same vigor as his own . . . listen for it.

he probably has gotten the message that if he derivates from the NWO program, he will face The Unspeakable.

(This book is a must read and it is beautifully written)

Here's a very good interview with the author

Thanks, I'll check it out.

And I hope your right.

Cynthia McKinney

I'm voting for the 9/11 Truth Candidate

Yeah, I think I will too!

Good idea.

Government is M.A.C.: Mutually-Assured Corruption

Government, whatever its de jure status, strongly tends toward oligarchy. The bigger the government the stronger this tendency will be, since then the stakes of exercising a disproportionate influence over government policy is raised (as big government has the ability to, e.g., make or break business fortunes via its policies and how it chooses to enforce them).[1] That is true every bit as much for formal democracies. Consequenty, under government, the strong inclination is a winnowing effect whereby those who rise to the top of the private sector and the government sector are those who are willing to "play along to get along," i.e., amenable to supporting the furtherance of the political establishment's power.

Such applies to media outlets and universities, as well; which, when combined with the government's own schooling and propaganda, inculcates the largest part of individuals' Weltanschauung from cradle to grave: the contents of that worldview being rather thoroughgoing, if muddleheaded and hodgepodge, forms of etatism, accompanying a high degree of political naïveté which such a position implies. Hence, the very intellectual tools which are prerequisite for sustaining an effective defense of liberty are absent most people.

So also due to that effect of winnowing, there tends to be a confluence of ideology at the top level, for accrument of power becomes its own purpose as the government moves toward its logical conclusion: the total state, and all the horrors that come with it. Distinctions such as Democrat and Republican, "liberal" and conservative, etc., are useful for providing hoi polloi with innocuous distractions, but they mean little at the top echelon.[2]

Since all governments (including totalitarian dictatorships) ultimately can only exist due to the "consent" of its subjects (at least "consent" in the sense of resignation), it's understandable why the oligarchic nature of government would not be widely publicized by the political establishment within a formal democracy.

The process of tendency toward oligarchy I've outlined above is intrinsic to government due to the inherent, perverse incentive structures which obtain under government (i.e., the internal logic of the system). Ultimately it doesn't matter how pure and good the intentions are of the people who set up the government, nor what type of government is nominally instituted: so long as the defining feature of government exists--that of a regional monopoly on ultimate control over the law--then this process cannot be avoided, since the inherent incentives of the system are such as to reward actors who bring about such outcomes (being that one who is able to inordinately influence the policies of a government can use that influence for his personal benefit and that of his friends, whereas liberty for society is a general benefit which accrues to no one in particular). All the good intentions in the world are no match against perverse incentives.

The foregoing is the political economy basis for understanding government's tendancy toward oligarchy. But I'll here provide extensive empirical evidence to further show that worldly praxis matches the analysis.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt noted in a private letter only published after his death:

The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson--and I am not wholly excepting the Administration of W.W. The country is going through a repetition of Jackson's fight with the Bank of the United States--only on a far bigger and broader basis.

(From President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in a letter to Col. Edward Mandell House, November 21, 1933; contained in F.D.R.: His Personal Letters, 1928-1945, edited by Elliott Roosevelt [New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce, 1950], pg. 373.)

Roosevelt in the above letter mentioned President Woodrow Wilson ("W.W."). Below is what Woodrow Wilson himself wrote concerning this same matter:

Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.


[A]nd we have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world--no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men.

(From Woodrow Wilson, The New Freedom: A Call for the Emancipation of the Generous Energies of a People [New York and Garden City: Doubleday, Page & Company, 1913] http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/14811 .)

Here's some choice quotes from David Rockefeller:

For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure--one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.

(From David Rockefeller, Memoirs [New York, N.Y: Random House, 2002], pg. 405.)

One is impressed immediately by the sense of national harmony. ... There is a very real and pervasive dedication to Chairman Mao and Maoist principles. Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community purpose. General social and economic progress is no less impressive. ... The enormous social advances of China have benefitted greatly from the singleness of ideology and purpose. ... The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao's leadership is one of the most important and successful in history.

(From David Rockefeller, in his article "From a China Traveler," New York Times, August 10, 1973, pg. 31.)

Edith Kermit Roosevelt, granddaughter of Theodore Roosevelt:

The word "Establishment" is a general term for the power elite in international finance, business, the professions and government, largely from the northeast, who wield most of the power regardless of who is in the White House.

Most people are unaware of the existence of this "legitimate Mafia." Yet the power of the Establishment makes itself felt from the professor who seeks a foundation grant, to the candidate for a cabinet post or State Department job. It affects the nation's policies in almost every area.

(From Edith Kermit Roosevelt, "Elite Clique Holds Power in U.S.," Indianapolis News, December 23, 1961, pg. 6.)

For the history on how the "capitalist" (i.e., mercantilist) elite in the U.S. bankrolled Communism as well as National Socialism, see the below scholarly books by libertarian Antony C. Sutton, Ph.D.:

Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, Antony C. Sutton, Ph.D. (New Rochelle, N.Y.: Arlington House Publishers, 1974) http://reformed-theology.org/html/books/bolshevik_revolution/index.html

(Note: Chapter I of the above book refers to a 1911 St. Louis Post-Dispatch cartoon illustration by Robert Minor. This can be viewed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Robert-Minor-Dee-Lighted-1911.png .)

Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler, Antony C. Sutton, Ph.D. (Suffolk, England: Bloomfield Books, 1976) http://reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/index.html

The Best Enemy Money Can Buy, Antony C. Sutton, Ph.D. (Billings, M.T.: Liberty House Press, 1986) http://reformed-theology.org/html/books/best_enemy/index.html

See also:

"Thyssen Funds Found in U.S.," International News Service (INS), July 31, 1941 http://www.infowars.com/print_prescott.htm

Vesting Order Number 248, Federal Register, November 7, 1942 http://www.mbpolitics.com/bush2000/Vesting.htm

"Bush-Nazi Link Confirmed," John Buchanan, New Hampshire Gazette, Vol. 248, No. 1, October 10, 2003

"'Bush-Nazi Dealings Continued Until 1951'--Federal Documents," John Buchanan and Stacey Michael, New Hampshire Gazette, Vol. 248, No. 3, November 7, 2003

"How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power," Ben Aris and Duncan Campbell, Guardian (U.K.), September 25, 2004 http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1312540,00.html

"How the Bush family made its fortune from the Nazis," Attorney John Loftus, former U.S. Department of Justice Nazi War Crimes prosecutor and current President of the Florida Holocaust Museum, September 27, 2000 http://www.tetrahedron.org/articles/new_world_order/bush_nazis.html

The Bilderberg group is the top-tier of the globalist ruling elite. Groups such as the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission are the Bilderberg group's more public organizational branches which help to enact the agenda of the Bilderberg group.

Reuters acknowledges that the Bilderberg group of European royalty and international central bankers groomed Bill Clinton and Tony Blair for the U.S. Presidency and British Prime Ministry, respectively:

"Secretive Bilderberg group to meet in Sweden," Peter Starck, Reuters, May 23, 2001 http://www.propagandamatrix.com/reuters_bilderberg.html

As the below BBC Radio report reveals from uncovered archived Bilderberg documents, the European Union and the euro European Union single-currency were both the brainchild of the Bilderberg group and secretly planned since the first Bilderberg group meeting in 1954:

"Club Class," Simon Cox, BBC Radio Four, July 3, 2003 http://www.propagandamatrix.com/bbc_radio_4_bilderberg.mp3

See also:

"Inside the secretive Bilderberg Group," Bill Hayton, BBC News, September 29, 2005 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4290944.stm

"Confessions of a Globalist: Bilderberger Admits Influence on World Decisions," James P. Tucker Jr., American Free Press, Issue #42, October 17, 2005 http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/confessions_of_a_globalist.html

"Elite power brokers' secret talks," Emma Jane Kirby, BBC News, May 15, 2003 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3031717.stm

"World government in action," Joseph Farah, WorldNetDaily.com, May 16, 2003 http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=32606

"The masters of the universe," Pepe Escobar, Asia Times, May 22, 2003 http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EE22Ak03.html

For more information on the Bilderberg group, see the below news archives:



For the most recent Bilderberg meeting, see:

"Castrated U.S. Media Remains Obediently Silent On Bilderberg: Not a single mention in corporate press of 125+ global power brokers meeting behind closed doors," Paul Joseph Watson, Prison Planet, June 9, 2008 http://prisonplanet.com/articles/june2008/060908_castrated_media.htm

As Lord Acton noted, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" (from a letter by Acton to Bishop Mandell Creighton, April 1887). One of the main pleasures and prerogatives of those who seek such power is the exercise of it. And when the world is one's oyster and one has grown tired of the usual thrills that money can buy, combined with effective legal impunity (so long as they remain servants of the establishment), the tastes of elites often seek out more bizarre and verboten thrills. For voluminous documentation on their more saturnalian escapades, see the below post by me:

"Documentation on Elitist Child Sex-Slavery, Snuff Films and Occultism," James Redford, September 3, 2007 http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=4468

Related to the previous item, in the below post by me, I provide massive amounts of documentation wherein the U.S. government itself admits it is holding innocent people indefinitely without charges (including children and U.S. citizens), torturing them, raping them--including homosexually anally raping them--and murdering them, and that the orders to do so came from the highest levels of the U.S. government:

"Crushing Children's Testicles: Welcome to the New Freedom," TetrahedronOmega, August 12, 2006 http://www.armleg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=59&mforum=libertyandtruth

On the matter of the intensive conditioning of the public by government to recoil from conspiracy charges which inculpate it (while at the same time accepting the mendacious, anti-veridical and self-serving conspiracy theories the government promulgates), the following passage by Prof. Murray N. Rothbard is quite edifying:

It is also important for the State to inculcate in its subjects an aversion to any "conspiracy theory of history"; for a search for "conspiracies" means a search for motives and an attribution of responsibility for historical misdeeds. If, however, any tyranny imposed by the State, or venality, or aggressive war, was caused not by the State rulers but by mysterious and arcane "social forces," or by the imperfect state of the world or, if in some way, everyone was responsible ('We Are All Murderers," proclaims one slogan), then there is no point to the people becoming indignant or rising up against such misdeeds. Furthermore, an attack on "conspiracy theories" means that the subjects will become more gullible in believing the "general welfare" reasons that are always put forth by the State for engaging in any of its despotic actions. A "conspiracy theory" can unsettle the system by causing the public to doubt the State's ideological propaganda.

(From Prof. Murray N. Rothbard, "The Anatomy of the State," Rampart Journal of Individualist Thought, Summer 1965, pp. 1-24. Reprinted in a collection of some of Rothbard's articles, Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature and Other Essays [Washington, D.C.: Libertarian Review Press, 1974]: http://www.mises.org/easaran/chap3.asp .)

The inherent, unchangeable nature of government is colossal conspiracy. If one accepts the validity of libertarian ethics, this conclusion is unavoidable. Recall that conspiracy is simply when two or more people take part in a plan which involves doing something improper to others (of which plan may or may not be kept secret, i.e., secrecy is not a necessary component for actions to be a conspiracy). But even aside from libertarian ethics, the mere fact that governments set for themselves double-standards is alone quite enough to logically demonstrate that governments themselves consider their own actions improper (i.e., if their same actions which they do to others were to be done to them). Thus, the conclusion that government itself is the largest corporeal conspiracy to ever exist or that could ever exist is logically unavoidable.

Since obviously more than one person was involved in planning the 9/11 attacks, then *by definition* the U.S. government's offical fairy tale is a conspiracy theory, as the U.S. government is putting forth a theory concerning the 9/11 attacks which involves a conspiracy.

Furthermore, conspiracies are ubiquitous (witness all the laws on the books against conspiracy, and how many people are routinely charged under said laws), and the most egregious perpetrators of murderously brutal conspiracies are governments upon their own innocent citizens. More than six times the amount of noncombatants have been systematically murdered for purely ideological reasons by their own governments within the past century than were killed in that same time-span from wars. From 1900 to 1923, various Turkish regimes murdered from 3.5 million to over 4.3 million of its own Armenians, Greeks, Nestorians, and other Christians. The Soviet government murdered over 61 million of its own non-combatant subjects. The communist Chinese government murdered over 76 million of it own subjects. And Germany murdered some 16 million of it own subjects in the past century. And that's only a sampling of governments mass-murdering their own noncombatant subjects within the past century. (The preceding figures are from Prof. Rudolph Joseph Rummel's website at http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/ .)

All totaled, neither the private-sector crime which government is largely responsible for promoting and causing or even the wars committed by governments upon the subjects of other governments come anywhere close to the crimes government is directly responsible for committing against its own citizens--certainly not in amount of numbers. Without a doubt, the most dangerous presence to ever exist throughout history has always been the people's very own government. (This is also historically true for the U.S. govermment, as no group has killed more U.S. citizens than the U.S. government. Viz, the Civil War; etc.)

Not only were all of these government mass-slaughters conspiracies--massive conspiracies, at that--but they were conspiracies of which the 9/11 attacks are quite insignificant by comparison.

Moreover, terrorism is the health of the state (indeed, government is itself a logical subset of terrorism, and the word terrorism originally referred exclusively to government actions: i.e., the Reign of Terror in France against critics of the state, which was done according to the law--and later on the word terrorism was used to refer to other governments), which is why so many governments throughout history have manufactured duplicitous terrorism in which to serve as a pretext in order to usurp ever more power and control. In the below post by me is contained voluminous amounts of documentation which refutes the U.S. government's mendacious, self-serving, anti-historical, anti-physical law, anti-factual, and provably false official fairy tale conspiracy theory concerning the 9/11 attacks, as well as documentation on many other government-staged acts of terrorism:

"Documentation on Government-Staged Terrorism," TetrahedronOmega, September 30, 2005 http://www.armleg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2&mforum=libertyandtruth



1. Witness the ridiculous legal persecution of Michael Milken and Martha Stewart, and the absurdist cases brought against Microsoft. Even the richest of moguls know that should the government, for whatever reason, take a disliking to them that it can trump up preposterous charges against them and a large portion of the public will cheer.

See also "Former CEO Says U.S. Punished Phone Firm: Qwest Feared NSA Plan Was Illegal, Filing Says," Ellen Nakashima and Dan Eggen with contribution from Richard Drezen, Washington Post, October 13, 2007; A01 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/12/AR200710...

Excerpt from the above article:

A former Qwest Communications International executive, appealing a conviction for insider trading, has alleged that the government withdrew opportunities for contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars after Qwest refused to participate in an unidentified National Security Agency program that the company thought might be illegal.

Former chief executive Joseph P. Nacchio, convicted in April of 19 counts of insider trading, said the NSA approached Qwest more than six months before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to court documents unsealed in Denver this week.

2. For example, Bill Clinton calls the Bushes his surrogate family, and vacations with them regularly. Hillary Clinton has long had regular private dinners with Rupert Murdoch and she was politically supported by Murdoch, who was helping her raise funds.

John Kerry and Bushes Sr. and Jr. are all Bonesmen in the occult sociey of the Brotherhood of Death (a.k.a. the Order of Skull & Bones at Yale), of which occult society was instrumental in the funding of Hitler and the Nazis. Bonesman Prescott Bush (Bush, Sr.'s father) had one of his banks and a number of his companies seized in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act for his financing of the Nazis even during wartime.

Below are some articles on the Clintons being exceedingly close family friends of the Bushes:

"Bill Clinton Talks Heart Surgery on 'Letterman,'" Associated Press, June 17, 2005 http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,159851,00.html

From the above article:

During a recent appearance together in Houston, Clinton noted that Barbara Bush had taken to calling Clinton "son."

"I told the Republicans in the audience not to worry, every family has one--you know, the black sheep, kind of drifts off," he said. "I told them, I said, 'This just shows you the lengths at which the Bushes would go to get another president in the family and I wish I could get them to adopt Hillary.' "

See also:

"Opposites attract," Julian Borger, Guardian (U.K.), July 1, 2005 http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1518633,00.html

"Inside Politics," transcript, CNN, June 17, 2005 http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0506/17/ip.01.html

"Verbatim," Time, June 20, 2005 http://www.time.com/time/asia/magazine/article/0,13673,501050627-1074169...

"Barbara Bush Calls Bill Clinton 'Son,'" Drudge Report, June 17, 2005 http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/clinton_barbara_bush_calls_clinton_s... , http://www.drudgereport.com/flash5.htm

Below are some articles on Rupert Murdoch's love for Hillary Clinton:

"Murdoch to host fundraiser for Hillary Clinton," Caroline Daniel, additional reporting by Aline Van Duyn, Financial Times, May 8, 2006 http://www.ft.com/cms/s/61faabde-deb8-11da-acee-0000779e2340.html

"Hillary Clinton defends link with Murdoch," Holly Yeager and Caroline Daniel, Financial Times, May 10, 2006 http://www.ft.com/cms/s/577ecd2e-dfc2-11da-afe4-0000779e2340,_i_rssPage=...


In the above analysis of state control over people in a given society (i.e., the means by which a relative handful of ruling elites can exercise control over a populace) I left off one of the major contributing factors. That major factor is what I term M.A.C.: which is an acronym that stands for Mutually-Assured Corruption, in analogy with the so-called "Cold War" doctrine of Mutually-Assured Destruction (M.A.D.): the official policy that should, e.g., the U.S.S.R. launch a nuclear first-strike against the U.S., nuclear I.C.B.M.s would be launched in retaliation, insuring that both countries end in nuclear holocaust. In such manner, thereby providing a strong deterrence to any country attacking with nuclear weapons.

So in addition to the fuller analysis which I have above provided, let me here expatiate on M.A.C.

How M.A.C. works is that the only way to get into the "club" (so to speak, i.e., to become a favored minion of the ruling elite) is to engage in activities which makes oneself liable to blackmail. But not blackmail to just any naïf, but blackmail whereby the evidence of the deed(s) is held by the masters.

This works on many levels, as Sibel Edmonds has in part detailed. It could be something as simple as doing standard practices within a given organization that everyone within the organization does, but which nevertheless are criminal actions which subject oneself to prosecution should the regime take a disliking to said. That is, such acts as billing time or expenses that one hadn't actually used as a part of one's work, which could be as simple as calling one's wife or husband on a cell-phone payed for by the agency (even if the call only lasts seconds); or, e.g., charging for lunches one hadn't actually bought. As Edmonds reveals, such activity is actually encouraged by the managers of government agencies--one reason being, since as it was explained to her, everyone does it. But the far more potent reason such activity is actually encouraged is that it makes their agents subject to criminal prosecution. Fortunately, Edmonds is a rare and particularly smart bird (to use a figurative term), so she saw the trap that was inherent in such activities, thus she refused to do what was standard practice.

If it hadn't been for that (i.e., her almost extra-human intelligence, since such a trap is so easy and natural to fall into; but perhaps merely her intelligence isn't at work here, since perhaps she took to heart and to mind the corruption in her birth country), we would have years ago heard of a discredited F.B.I. employee by the name of Sibel Edmonds who bilked the agency out of several-hundred dollars. Instead, we have in Edmonds a former F.B.I. employee who is under a court gag-order not to reveal what she knows, though she has explained that it concerns a network of very high-level U.S. politicians involved in drug-running in order to finance terrorism against the U.S. Yes, you likely read that correctly; if not, re-read it, as I didn't mistate anything.

That's merely one low-level permutation of M.A.C. But from this simple example one can see just how potent and effective M.A.C. can be. People can so easily fall into M.A.C. without them even realizing it until they are called to do something they rather not do. It is only then that they realize that they are (potentially literally) screwed every which-way from Friday and can can look forward to years of gang butt-rapings as a prison bitch lest they do their master's bidding.

My, my, the things people will do to avoid having numerous strange penises involuntarily impaled into their rectums without condoms or efficacious lubrication. Books could be written on it--and indeed have been. But due to space considerations, I'll here spare you the gory details. Needless to say, happy endings don't feature prominately, as besides the obvious pain, shame and self-loathing, there is also the issue of lethal diseases pursuant to such proceedings.

As I said, the above is a low-level permutation of M.A.C., yet even here we see just how amazingly strong its power can be. Yet M.A.C. can be practiced on higher levels, and indeed once someone has been caught in the clutches of M.A.C., even on a low level, they can then be compelled to engage in acts which are not necessarily to their liking and which further incriminates them. Hence, M.A.C. reinforces itself with compounding layers.

And so once one gets caught in the clutches of M.A.C., it can quite easily become a never-ending spiral into ever-greater levels of depravity, of which knows no end.

Governments have long ago figured all this out. M.A.C. is nothing new. It's just that the knowledge of the plebeians (of which I am a member) has expanded. Hence, I have here put a term to, and elaborated on, what had previously been only dimly understood--or rather, what had been intuitively grasped, but for which had not be articulated in a systematic manner.

At the higher levels of M.A.C., we come into the domain of such things as actual human sacrifice, including of children and infants. Of course, the rape of such little innocents can be included in this process.

I have often thought that all the power attributed to the ruling elite's practice of occultism can be perfectly explained by mere psychology. That is, elite occultism is little more than ancient techniques in manipulating people.

Many have spoken of such terms as "mind-control," and what is commonly thought by such a term is a human becoming a robot carrying out his master's wishes.

But really, in literal terms, all "mind-control" implies is that something has been impressed upon a subject's mind in order to gain control. This could be something as simple as the threat of force: i.e., the threat of physical punishment for noncompliance.

So really, all government law is based upon a process of mind-control: i.e., do this, or else.

The reason I even bring up the issue of mind-control is because logically it intercepts M.A.C. M.A.C. works because those who have been caught in its clutches realize that they have a hard road to travel (to put it in polite terms) lest they do their master's bidding. If they were not concerned with their own well-being, then M.A.C. could have no power. Hence, M.A.C. is a form of mind-control, as with state-law itself.

That is, it's a method of getting people to do things they may not be naturally inclined to do. In the case of M.A.C., this process is especially potent, as its captives realize that the establishement is going to railroad them based upon genuine evidence (the usual case, as of course charges can be trumped-up), and so they have little room to kid themselves as to their fate.

The above is the outline of M.A.C., as well as a rationalist description of what, at base, so-called "mind-control" really is. Of course, mind-control can take even more permutations than the above, as it can involve such things as the use of drugs, or torture, in order to "break" a person's mind in order to reshape it. But the above exposition suffices to make the point without the need to invoke further assumptions, so I will leave the above analysis on this matter as it rests.

There is much more to be said about M.A.C. The above analysis can be understood in economic terms, as well. For what we have at work here is incentives and disincentives. Or to reword it, rewards and punishements.

"Terrorism is the health of the State."--James Redford, author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist," June 1, 2006 http://praxeology.net/anarchist-jesus.pdf

Theophysics http://geocities.com/theophysics/

Rothbard's legacy disgraced by Rockwell and Raimondo

Great to see you quote extensively from one of Murray Rothbard's many discussions of the State's conspiracies against the people. What penetration and foresight!

Unfortunately, there are some highly visible websites out there that profess to be Rothbardian, yet routinely keep their readership in the dark about the real events on 9/11, or the Murrah Office Building bombing, etc.

Let's name some names: Lew Rockwell, and his pseudo-Rothbardian lewrockwell.com; and fellow obfuscating coward Justin Raimondo of "antiwar.com" fame.

(An amusing anecdote:

(When on a Yahoo discussion group I carefully substantiated how both lewrockwell.com and antiwar.com systematically black out all Paul Craig Roberts columns -- syndicated columns they subscribe to and pay reprint rights for, whether they post a particular column or not -- that in any way mention 9/11 truth issues, I got a very angry email out of the blue from Eric Garris, the webmaster for both lewrockwell.com and antiwar.com. This despite the fact that Garris had never been a member of that Yahoo group. Garris accused me of lying and demanded a retraction. I emailed him back, repeating my careful documentation, whereupon he emailed me again, this time unapologetically reversing himself by admitting that Roberts-on-9/11 had indeed been blacked out because Roberts didn't know what he's talking about. Then, for good measure, Garris instructed me that I was "a nut."

(So much for carrying on Rothbard's legacy.)

I liked this at Lew Rockwell

I don't know what else Lew Rockwell has or has not published, so I'm not trying to contradict you, but I really liked Butler Schaffer's 9/11 Was a Conspiracy.


It's a good argument for open thinking and "existential courage" to ask questions.

But there is another factor – what I call “existential courage” – that must remain at the forefront of our efforts to live as human beings, rather than as servo-mechanisms to the institutional order. What kind of people are we that we should lay our liberties, property, and lives – including the lives of our children – at the feet of rulers, to be disposed of in any manner that suits their momentary temperaments? What have we become that we regard any questioning of this arrangement as the products of “irresponsible” or “paranoid” minds? Why should free and energized minds be fearful of asking any questions, particularly those we have been told it is improper to ask?

"[N]o evidence"?

Shaffer is a charming man -- I've met him. In your link, he writes:

"I want to emphasize, again, that I am not even suggesting that persons other than Al Qaeda operatives were responsible for the 9/11 attacks. I know of no evidence sufficient to sustain such an accusation. I am, however, suggesting that a number of critics of the “official” explanation have offered enough thoughtful evidence and factual analysis to warrant a thorough investigation of these events. The inquiry should be conducted by competent men and women with no preconceived agenda – whether as defenders or critics of governmental behavior – and without fear of asking any and all empirically related questions."

Fair enough that he should be asking for a new inquiry -- I suspect that's as far as Rockwell will let his writers go with it on his website.

But notice the qualifications: "[...] I am not even suggesting that persons other than Al Qaeda operatives were responsible for the 9/11 attacks. I know of no evidence sufficient to sustain such an accusation," without further elaboration. Never mind the many well-known books and countless websites amassing such evidence: Shaffer, who writes endless articles and speaks to countless conferences about political controversy, knows of no evidence sufficient to sustain such an accusation, lah-dee-dah. Unfortunately, many good people will read this and think MIHOP is farfetched, when in fact the evidence is staring straight at us.

(Personally, I think Shaffer is just playing dumb: He doesn't want to risk his academic and journalistic careers by associating too much with 9/11 truth arguments.)

Thanks for sharing your experience, mcfrandy

Gee, I had little idea. You sound incredibly informed about these figures and websites. You've upped my awareness a full notch just by posting.


...don't believe them!


....especially this link: "Documentation on Elitist Child Sex-Slavery, Snuff Films and Occultism," James Redford, September 3, 2007 http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=4468

I'm close to vomiting after reading some of this. I had no idea it was this bad. What a sick perverted joke of a nation we have become.

JFK warned us....

John F. Kennedy spoke of this in a speech about "Secret Societies" to the American Newspaper Publishers Association in 1961:

"For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations."


Wasn't he talking about the USSR?

At least that's what I thought when I listened to that talk. Am I wrong? Tell me more of what he said that shows he meant our own Military Industrial Complex rather than "theirs".

Fred W

Yes he was

I had heard the audio of the speech this was excerpted from. With editing it sure looks like JFK is talking about the USA. So, I looked up the entire speech and discovered he was indeed speaking of the Communist menace. I was disappointed in knowing I had been deceived by the edit.


....speechless ....


He was talking about the Soviets, but it applies to the US now!

Maybe back then, the masses were so unaware of the secret societies' influence on American policy that he could speak of the Soviets as if the US didn't have similar problems. In retrospect, it appears to be hypocritical. He actually was assassinated by operatives of the CIA, the Corporate Intelligence Agency. Even though he may have been addressing the newspaper forum about the Soviets, it doesn't nullify the relevance of his speech when applied to the current US political landscape.

Uh Oh, Dana Houle (DHinMI) is on the trail of the writer now

Former staffer to Congressman Paul Hodes (D-NH) Dana Houle (aka DHinMI) is now on the trail of the writer of this article. Apparently started posting lies about him in the comments, and a flame war broke out.

I doubt the account of the writer of this diary survives the summer.

TocqueDeville, you will be welcomed among those "Banned By Kos."

I was lucky enough to be banned by Kos personally shortly after the 2004 Presidential election. I called Kos himself a "faith-based voter" on a comments thread. My account didn't last an hour.

Show "And your point is what?" by sullun